TRANSPORT AND WORKS ACT 1992 TRANSPORT AND WORKS (INQUIRIES PROCEDURE) RULES 20014

Transcription

1 CD/1.17 Network Rail (Felixstowe Branch Line Improvements Level Crossings Closure) Order TRANSPORT AND WORKS ACT 1992 TRANSPORT AND WORKS (INQUIRIES PROCEDURE) RULES The Network Rail (Felixstowe Branch Line Improvements Level Crossings Closure) Order Statement of Case for the Applicant Network Rail June 2017 lon_lib1\ \2 1

2 Contents Contents 1. General Introduction The Scheme Context The Order Scheme Purpose of this Statement Statement Structure Funding of double tracking and Order Scheme The Applicant Wider Scheme and Other Relevant Applications Introduction The existing TWA Orders of 2008 and Planning permission Works to be carried out by NR including level crossing closures and the case for double tracking and the omission of other works The proposed transfer to Network Rail of the powers under the 2008 and 2014 Orders 7 4 The Order Scheme and Application Scope of Application Request for Deemed Planning Permission Application Documents Other Consents The Case for the Order Scheme Modal shift of freight from road to rail Safety Case Operational Case (Network Rail Policy (CP5 double Felixstowe Branch Line)) Other Relevant Applications Order Scheme Description Level Crossings to be closed The Proposed Bridleway Bridge Proposed Permanent Diversions Environmental Mitigation Planning and Transport Policy Context Introduction Relevant Planning Policy Documents and Legislation Planning Policy Considerations The Proposed Bridleway Bridge Scheme Development and Alternatives Landscaping and Screening Approach to Public Right of Ways Introduction Affected PRoWs Diversions proposed and alternatives considered Conclusion lon_lib1\ \2 23 June 2017 whited

3 10 Scheme Construction Introduction Construction timescales Construction Access, Sites and Activities Temporary Closures of PRoWs and Temporary Diversions Environmental Effects Introduction Mitigation Summary of Environmental Effects Summary Landscape and Visual Impact including Setting of Heritage Assets Introduction Impact on AONB and Mitigation The Setting of and Views from the AONB Views from Grimston Hall Summary Land and Property Introduction Explanation of Existing Land Powers Proposed Land Acquisitions Introduction Proposed Permanent Acquisition for the Order Scheme Proposed Additional Temporary Powers for the Order Scheme Proposed Acquisition of Permanent Rights for Mitigation Extinguishment of Private Vehicular Rights Explanation of Approach - Neighbourhood Planning Act Compensation Code Schedule of Land/Rights Required Consultation and Engagement Legal Context Consultation Strategy Pre-application consultation Objections, Representations and Statements of Support Period for Making Representations Objector s Issues Representations Statements of Support Notice as Regards Core Documents APPENDICIES APPENDIX A LIST OF CORE DOCUMENTS APPENDIX B IMAGES OF BRIDGE OPTIONS APPENDIX C SCHEDULE OF LAND/RIGHTS APPENDIX D SUMMARY OF ENGAGEMENT APPENDIX E IMAGES OF UFTON NERVERT BRIDGE lon_lib1\ \2 23 June 2017 whited

4 1. General Introduction 1.1 The Scheme Context The Felixstowe Branch Line forms part of the Network Rail Anglia route in Suffolk and comprises a single railway track (with double track at Derby Road station) which connects Felixstowe and the Port of Felixstowe with the Great Eastern Mainline The Port of Felixstowe is the largest container port in the UK and handled million individual container boxes in 2015 (which equated to million standard container units). There are plans to increase the capacity of the Port which will help support UK economic growth The current rail network does not provide sufficient capacity for the forecast demand. As a result and to reduce pressure on the A14, Network Rail is proposing to carry out enhancement works to the Felixstowe Branch Line to allow more freight trains to operate without reducing the passenger service There are a number of level crossings along the Felixstowe Branch Line. Level crossings pose the greatest risk to safety on the railway network. Closure of level crossings will help improve safety, reduce the number of accidents and also help to increase capacity of the network and maintain a robust railway timetable The Felixstowe Branch Line works include: The dualling of 1.4km of the Felixstowe Branch Line at Trimley Upgrading a number of vehicular level crossings along the Felixstowe Branch Line and replacing the existing single barriers with double barriers to improve safety Closing six public footpath or bridleway level crossings, and one private vehicular user worked level crossing to improve safety and providing a replacement crossing point in the form of a public bridleway bridge at Gun Lane. The level crossings which are proposed to be closed are located along or in the vicinity of the section of the railway that it is proposed to dual The works set out in paragraph (referred to in this Statement of Case as the Felixstowe Branch Line enhancement works ) will increase the capacity of the Felixstowe Branch Line from 33 freight trains per day to 47 freight trains per day The enhancements proposed to the Felixstowe Branch Line are part of a wider, long-term plan to upgrade and increase capacity throughout the wider rail network. 1.2 The Order Scheme Powers to carry out the works referred to in paragraphs and and to acquire or lon_lib1\ \2 1

5 use land required for them have already been conferred by the Felixstowe Branch Line and Ipswich Yard Improvement Order 2008 ( the 2008 Order ) (CD/2.1) and Felixstowe Branch Line (Land Acquisition) Order 2014 ( the 2014 Order ) (CD/2.6). The 2008 Order also authorises other works and the totality of the works authorised by the 2008 Order are referred to in this Statement of Case as the Wider Scheme Further powers are required to close the six footpath and bridleway level crossings and provide a replacement bridleway bridge and ancillary works (Public Rights of Way diversions and upgrades and provision of environmental mitigation/landscaping). Those works are proposed to be authorised by the Network Rail (Felixstowe Branch Line Improvements Level Crossings Closure) Order (CD/1.2) and are referred to in this Statement of Case as the Order Scheme. 1.3 Purpose of this Statement On 6 March 2017, Network Rail Infrastructure Limited (Network Rail) applied to the Secretary of State for Transport for the Network Rail (Felixstowe Branch Line Improvements Level Crossings Closure) Order (( the Order ). The application was made under sections 1 and 5 of the Transport and Works Act 1992 (CD/3.1) The reason for submitting the application for the Order is to give Network Rail the necessary powers to implement the Order Scheme which, as explained in paragraph 1.1.6, is an essential part of the Felixstowe Branch Line enhancement works The period during which objections, representations and support could be made to the Order application ended on 19 April The Department for Transport (DfT) received seven letters of support, three representations and eleven letters of objection. As at the date of this Statement of Case, one of the eleven objections has been formally withdrawn As a consequence of the objections received, and in accordance with the Transport and Works (Inquiries Procedure) Rules 2004 (the TWA Inquiries Rules ) (CD/3.3), the Secretary of State for Transport announced on 17 May 2017 his intention to hold a public inquiry into the application. The inquiry is anticipated to take place later this year Rule 7 of the TWA Inquiries Rules requires Network Rail to serve a Statement of Case. This Statement is Network Rail s Statement of Case containing particulars of the case Network Rail proposes to put forward at the Inquiry in support of the Order application In Appendix A of this Statement, there is a list of the documents which Network Rail currently intends to refer to or submit in evidence at the Inquiry. These documents will be available for public inspection at the locations and times set out in Section Statement Structure This Statement is structured as follows: Section 1: sets out the Scheme Context and details of the Felixstowe Branch Line lon_lib1\ \2 2

6 enhancement works. Section 2: introduces Network Rail as the applicant for the Order and describes the Order application. Section 3: describes the existing TWA Orders and planning permissions for works along the Felixstowe Branch Line of which the Wider Scheme forms a part. Section 4: provides an overview of the Order Scheme and information that has been submitted in support of the application. Section 5: provides background and context to the Order Scheme and the requirement to make safety enhancements to the Felixstowe Branch Line. Section 6: presents detailed descriptions of the works required for the Order Scheme. Section 7: sets out the planning and transport policy context for the Order Scheme. Section 8: describes the proposed bridleway bridge and the scheme evolution. Section 9: explains the approach to mitigating impact on the Public Right of Way (PRoW) network. Section 10: explains the Order Scheme s construction arrangements. Section 11: summarises the environmental effects identified in the Environmental Statement including ecology, traffic and transport and cumulative effects. Section 12: summarises the landscape and visual impact effects and heritage settings that are identified in the Environmental Statement Section 13: describes the existing land powers under the Wider Scheme Section 14: describes the land and property requirements for the Order Scheme and how these relate to the Wider Scheme. Sections 15 and 16: summarise the consultation and engagement for the Order Scheme and the objections, representations and statements of support received to the Order Scheme application Section 17: gives notice of the arrangements for the inspection of the Core Documents (listed in Appendix A). 1.5 Funding of double tracking and Order Scheme The Felixstowe Branch Line enhancement works are fully funded jointly by Network Rail and Felixstowe Dock and Railway Company. Network Rail is funding the majority of the scheme and the funding is secured via the Strategic Freight Network (SFN). The SFN is a ring fenced lon_lib1\ \2 3

7 fund within Network Rail; the fund s key aim is to improve the rail network for the rail freight industry. This is predominantly achieved via infrastructure investments which increase capacity or the capability of the rail network. The SFN is governed by a steering group formed of representatives of all rail freight operators, Department for Transport, Office of Road and Rail, and a number of key industry bodies. 2 The Applicant Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd. (Network Rail) owns and operates the national rail infrastructure of Great Britain (the network). Network Rail s purpose is described in its Network Licence: to secure the operation and maintenance of the network; the renewal and replacement of the network; and the improvement, enhancement and development of the network, in each case in accordance with best practice and in a timely, efficient and economical manner so as to satisfy the reasonable requirements of persons providing services relating to railways and funders, including potential providers or potential funders, in respect of the quality and capability of the network; and the facilitation of railway service performance in respect of services for the carriage of passengers and goods by railway operating on the network. 3 Wider Scheme and Other Relevant Applications 3.1 Introduction As mentioned above in paragraph 1.1, the works referred to in paragraph and which form part of the Felixstowe Branch Line enhancement works have been authorised under previous TWA Orders. This section describes the existing TWA Orders and planning consents relevant to those works. 3.2 The existing TWA Orders of 2008 and Authorisation to construct an additional track along the Felixstowe Branch Line together with other works was obtained by the Felixstowe Dock and Railway Company ( the Port Company ) under the 2008 Order (CD/2.1). The 2008 Order also authorised the compulsory acquisition and use of land required to construct those works Deemed planning permission for the additional track and other works was also granted by the Secretary of State in connection with the 2008 Order. This was subsequently replaced by permission granted by the relevant local planning authorities (see paragraph 3.4 below) The powers of compulsory acquisition and use of land under the 2008 Order expired in October 2013 and the Port Company renewed those powers under the 2014 Order (CD/2.6). 3.3 Description of the works authorised by the 2008 Order The works authorised under the 2008 Order are: Work No. 1 the construction of a railway comprising a new marshalling yard (830m in length) by the reconfiguration of the existing railway, commencing at a realigned junction lon_lib1\ \2 4

8 50m east of London Road Bridge, continuing in a generally south easterly direction and terminating at a new junction at a point 200m west of the passenger railway platforms at Ipswich Station, the improvement of sidings and other railway infrastructure, the closure of the railway to Ipswich Lower Yard, and the relocation of railway plant and equipment within the Borough of Ipswich. Work No. 2 A railway (7150 metres in length) being a second railway line on a parallel alignment with the existing Felixstowe Branch Line railway commencing at a new junction with the Felixstowe Branch Line railway 140 metres west of mile post 78.5, continuing on the southern side of the existing railway and terminating 120 metres west of Trimley Level Crossing, including the replacement of the existing junction near Trimley Station with two crossovers within Suffolk Coastal District. Work No. 3 The realignment of the existing automatic half barrier level crossing at Levington (Strattonhall Drift) to accommodate a second railway line by extending the existing level crossing by 4.5 metres southwards, and the re-surfacing of the approaching roads on either side of the level crossing within Suffolk Coastal District. Work No. 4 The realignment of the existing automatic half barrier level crossing at Morston Hall (Morston Hall Road) to accommodate a second railway line by extending the existing level crossing by 4.5 metres southwards, and the re-surfacing of the approaching roads on either side of the level crossing within Suffolk Coastal District. Work No. 5 A road to be adopted by as a highway being a realignment of Grimston Lane commencing at a point 15 metres south of the existing junction of Thorpe Lane and Grimston Lane and continuing in an easterly direction towards a point on the existing alignment of Grimston Lane 60 metres east of the existing junction of Thorpe Lane and Grimston Lane including the resurfacing of Grimston Lane, to a point 180 metres from the existing junction within Suffolk Coastal District. Work No. 6 The realignment of the existing automatic half barrier level crossing at Thorpe Lane (adopted highway U3112) to accommodate a second railway line by extending the existing level crossing 4.5 metres southwards, and the re-surfacing of the approaching roads on either side of the level crossing within Suffolk Coastal District The 2008 Order also authorised: the alteration of a number of level crossings along the Felixstowe Branch Line including: o o Westerfield Level Crossing (B1077 Westerfield Road/Hurdle Road) in the Borough of Ipswich/Suffolk Coastal District, within the Parish of Westerfield. Levington Level Crossing (Strattonhall Drift) in Suffolk Coastal District within the Parish of Levington and Strattonhall lon_lib1\ \2 5

9 In Suffolk Coastal District within the Parish of Trimley St. Martin: o Grimston Lane Footcrossing o Morston Hall Level Crossing (Morston Hall High Road) o Trimley St Martin Level Crossing o Thorpe Lane Level Crossing In Suffolk Coastal District within the Parish of Trimley St Mary o Keeper s Lane Level Crossing (Bridleway 22) o Trimley St Mary Level Crossing (Station Road/Cordy s Lane) replacement Level Crossings to be provided in place of existing at: o o Levington Heath Footcrossing in Suffolk Coastal District Council in the Parish of Levington and Stratton Hall Trimley St Martin Footcrossing in Suffolk Coastal District Council in the Parish of Trimley St Martin Level Crossings to be stopped up without provision of a replacement: o Gun Lane crossing/restricted byway 28 (Gun Lane) in Suffolk Coastal District, within the Parish of Trimley St Martin o Croft Footcrossing, in Suffolk Coastal District, within the Parish of Trimley St Martin. This footcrossing has been closed 3.4 Planning permission As mentioned at paragraph 3.2.2, the Secretary of State granted deemed planning permission for the track and other works authorised to be constructed by the 2008 Order However, in 2010 an application for replacement planning permission subject to a new time limit (to 31 December 2018), was granted by Suffolk Coastal District Council for works to dual approximately 7km of the Ipswich to Felixstowe Branch Line and to carry out improvements to the Ipswich yard and Westerfield Level Crossing (CD/2.5) (Ref: C10/0544). 3.5 Works to be carried out by NR including level crossing closures and the case for double tracking and the omission of other works The powers obtained by the Port Company under the 2008 Order authorise the dualling of approximately 7km of the Felixstowe Branch Line and associated works. However, Network Rail can meet the forecast demand for the line through exercising those powers in part. Time lon_lib1\ \2 6

10 table modelling indicates that the best intervention is an extension to the existing Trimley Loop; this will provide capacity for up to 47 freight trains per day in each direction Network Rail therefore proposes to dual 1.4km of track near to Trimley and to carry out works to the public road level crossings at Westerfield, Levington, Morston Hall, and Thorpe Lane. The closure of Gun Lane crossing is included in the 2008 Order, with no substitute. Croft level crossing has already been closed under the powers conferred by the 2008 Order. 3.6 The proposed transfer to Network Rail of the powers under the 2008 and 2014 Orders As well as authorising works, the 2008 Order also authorised the compulsory acquisition and use of land required for the purposes of constructing those works. The powers conferred under the 2008 Order to construct the works are not time limited but the powers of compulsory acquisition expired five years after the coming into force of the Order on 14 October Through the Felixstowe Branch Line (Land Acquisition) Order 2014 ( the 2014 Order ), the Port Company renewed the compulsory acquisition and use of land powers conferred by the 2008 Order for the purposes of constructing the works authorised by the 2008 Order Article 39 of the 2008 Order (agreements with Network Rail) confers power for the Port Company and Network Rail to enter into agreements for the transfer to Network Rail of the powers under the 2008 Order to construct the works authorised by the 2008 Order. However the 2014 Order does not include similar powers in relation to the transfer of the land powers under the 2014 Order. The proposed Transfer Order On 28 September 2016 Network Rail submitted an application for a further TWA Order to enable the Port Company and Network Rail to enter into agreements for the transfer to Network Rail of the land powers under the 2014 Order (CD/2.7). No objections were made to the application for the Order and its determination by Secretary of State is awaited. The proposed Transfer Agreement The Port Company and Network Rail intend to enter into an agreement under article 39 of the 2008 Order so that Network Rail may construct the works forming part of the Felixstowe Branch Line enhancement works which are authorised by the 2008 Order. Subject to the Transfer Order mentioned in paragraph being made, the Port Company and Network Rail will also enter into an agreement for the transfer of the related powers of compulsory acquisition and use of land conferred on the Port Company by the 2014 Order. 4 The Order Scheme and Application 4.1 Scope of Application lon_lib1\ \2 7

11 4.1.1 Network Rail is seeking authorisation for the following: the closure of six level crossings along the Felixstowe Branch Line, to the west of the villages of Trimley St Martin and Trimley St. Mary and provision of a new bridleway bridge over the Felixstowe Branch Line at Gun Lane in substitution. The bridge is described in the Order as follows: A bridge incorporating ramps and stairs, over the Felixstowe Branch Line railway commencing on Restricted Byway 28 at a point 105m east of the junction of public footpath 29 with Restricted Byway 27 and terminating at a point 20m north-east of its commencement the closure of a number of Public Rights of Way (PRoW), on both a temporary and permanent basis and provision of permanent diversions and enhancements to the existing PRoW network. provision of landscape mitigation and screening including the planting of trees to the east and west of the railway, adjacent to the bridge as well as the reinstatement of a hedgerow along a field boundary to the east of the railway. powers to acquire land on a permanent basis, use land on a temporary basis and acquire rights of access The Order Scheme is described in more detail in Section 6 below. 4.2 Request for Deemed Planning Permission As part of the Order application, Network Rail has applied to the Secretary of State for Transport under section 90 (2A) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for deemed planning permission for the development proposed to be authorised by the Order (CD/1.8) The request for Deemed Planning Permission is intended to be granted subject to the proposed planning conditions which are appended to the request (at Appendix 1) submitted with the Order application. These planning conditions were prepared by Network Rail in consultation with Suffolk Coastal District Council and. 4.3 Application Documents The application for the Order and associated deemed planning permission comprises the documents required by the Transport and Works (Applications and Objections Procedure) (England and Wales) Rules 2006 ( the TWA Application Rules ) and the application is supported by certain additional documents. The documents submitted with the application are: Application (CD/1.1) Draft Order (CD/1.2) Draft Explanatory Memorandum (CD/1.3) Statement of Aims (CD/1.4) lon_lib1\ \2 8

12 Funding Statement (CD/1.6) Estimate of Cost (CD/1.7) Land, Works and Public Rights of Way Plans and Sections (CD/1.10) Book of Reference, which relates to the Order and the Land Plans (CD/1.12) Summary of Consultations Undertaken (CD/1.13) List of Consents, Permissions of Licences under Other Enactments (CD/1.5) Request for Deemed Planning Permission and Statement of Proposed Conditions (CD/1.8) Planning Direction Drawings (CD/1.11) Planning Statement (CD/1.15) Scoping Opinion (CD/1.9) Environmental Statement incorporating the Non-Technical Summary, Main Statement, Technical Appendices and Figures (CD/1.14.1, CD/1.14.2, CD/1.14.3, CD/1.14.4) Combination Drawings showing the land required under the proposed Order and authorised to be acquired or used under the 2008 Order (CD/1.16) 4.4 Other Consents Ecology surveys are currently ongoing at the site of the proposed bridleway bridge. These include dormice, bat and badger surveys. It is anticipated that applications for European Protected Species Licences will be made in respect of the dormice and bat and a badger licence sought to close the badger sett Network Rail has separately submitted a Screening Assessment (CD/7.1) under the Habitats Assessment Regulations which considers the impact of the proposed scheme on the Stour and Orwell Estuaries Special Protection Area (SPA) which is within 1km of the application site. Natural England and have confirmed that the project is not likely to have a significant effect on the Stour and Orwell Estuaries SPA and an Appropriate Assessment in terms of the Habitat Regulations is not required. 5 The Case for the Order Scheme 5.1 Modal shift of freight from road to rail The Port of Felixstowe is the largest container port in the UK accounting for 42% of all UK container trade. To put that into perspective in 2015, UK major ports handled million individual container boxes (which equated to million standard container units) Since 2007 throughput at the port has grown 21% and rail throughput has grown by 61%. The number of rail services per day has increased from 24 freight trains per day to 33 freight trains per day over the same period. The number of rail services able to leave the port is now at capacity because of constraints of Network Rail infrastructure The shipping industry has demand for more rail freight and rail freight companies have a need to grow their businesses. This is currently prevented by the limited capacity on Network Rail lon_lib1\ \2 9

13 infrastructure Whilst the route is known to be at full capacity, demand is there to operate additional rail freight services today. Network Rail has undertaken a study, the Freight Market Study (FMS) which forecasts unconstrained figures for all sectors of the rail freight market (CD/ 6.12) The unconstrained central case FMS forecasts published by Network Rail in 2013, forecasted demand from the Port of Felixstowe at 66 freight trains per day in 2023 and 80 freight trains per day in 2033 this is a significant increase from today s base of 33 freight trains per day Rail freight has many benefits over road freight; modal shift of freight from road to rail presents a faster, greener, safer and more efficient way of transporting loads across the UK Rail freight is safer than road because a freight train typically equates to 60 lorry journeys (CD/ 6.16). As lorries cause a disproportionate number of road casualties so reducing their numbers on our roads reduces the number of accidents and injuries every year By removing lorries from the road, rail freight reduces road congestion and pollution. It has been calculated that there is approximately a 76% reduction in CO2 emissions per tonne carried by rail freight over road freight The main benefits of the Felixstowe Branch Line enhancement works are the environmental and social benefits associated with transferring freight from road to rail the mode shift benefits highlighted above Currently rail freight services from the Port of Felixstowe cannot be increased because of the capacity constraints on the Felixstowe Branch Line (CD/2.8 and CD/ 2.9). The Felixstowe Branch Line enhancement works proposed by Network Rail outlined in paragraph will provide the capability to operate a greater number of train services on this Line Increasing the number of rail freight services from the Port of Felixstowe is critical both for the development of the Port of Felixstowe and the growth of intermodal freight traffic in the UK The current Network Rail infrastructure does not provide the capacity for the demand. Without the Order, the operation of additional freight services and the associated environmental and safety benefits cannot be realised, the result being that more containers would be transported on UK roads with the disbenefits this brings in environmental and safety terms Infrastructure enhancements to the Felixstowe Branch Line will increase the capacity on the rail network to allow greater rail freight services to operate without reducing the passenger service. The Felixstowe Branch Line enhancement works as outlined in paragraph will provide the capability to increase the number of rail freight trains per day from 33 (currently operating) to 47 freight trains per day (CD/ 2.8) Further analysis of the capacity constraints on the rail network beyond the Felixstowe Branch Line demonstrates that up to four additional freight trains will be able to operate beyond the lon_lib1\ \2 10

14 Branch Line using current infrastructure. In order to increase this number and realise the full benefits this scheme provides; further infrastructure enhancements are required along the line of route to Nuneaton. As part of Network Rail s long term freight strategy, enhancements along the route between the Port of Felixstowe to the West Midlands and the North will be required (CD/ 2.9) The Felixstowe Branch Line enhancement works will overcome the first constraint along this line of route. If this scheme is not delivered then further capacity schemes will not be viable as any increase in freight services achieved beyond the Felixstowe Branch Line would not have a route to the Port of Felixstowe. If that were the case the FMS forecasts would not be met, and a greater level of freight would need to be transported on the UK road network A full economic appraisal has been undertaken of the scheme which demonstrates that the scheme delivers very high value for money (CD/ 6.11). Using Department for Transport criteria, the scheme has a Net Present Value (NPV) of 180.5m and a Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) of 7.0 (based on the available paths beyond the branch, not the full capability of the scheme). This socio-economic appraisal was carried out in accordance with the Department for Transport s (DfT) appraisal guidance, in particular the web-based transport analysis guidance or WebTAG. Costs and benefits were assessed over a 60 year appraisal period. 5.2 Safety Case There are a number of level crossings along the Felixstowe Branch Line. Closure of level crossings will help improve safety, reduce the number of accidents and also help to increase capacity of the network and maintain a robust railway timetable Level crossings collectively pose the greatest risk to safety on the railway network. That is to say, almost half of non-suicide deaths (or injury equivalents) on the railway network are attributable to level crossings. The table below shows the fatalities and injuries on level crossings. Year Fatalities (nationally inc. Fatalities on Anglia route Major Injuries (nationally) Minor Injuries (nationally) Anglia route) 2016/ TBC 1 TBC TBC TBC 2015/ / / It is widely acknowledged that closure of level crossings is the most effective way to remove the risk. This is consistent with principals of prevention, namely Avoiding risks lon_lib1\ \2 11

15 Combating the risks at source Replacing the dangerous by the non-dangerous or the less dangerous: It is therefore Network Rail policy to close level crossings where possible, and this is set out in the document Transforming Level Crossings (CD/6.14). It is Office of Rail and Road (ORR) policy that Network Rail must work to reduce level crossing risk by 25% over CP5, including through closure of crossings In the nineteenth century, when the railways were constructed, many level crossings were provided because they were the cheapest form of making good the interruptions in land and public highways that resulted Level crossings were acceptable on a low speed steam-powered railway, but trains have become faster, quieter, and more frequent, and the law and society have rightly become more concerned with safety A railway being built today would only ever include a level crossing in exceptional circumstances. The ORR s level crossing policy (CD/ 6.1).makes clear that any new level crossings should not be authorised other than in exceptional circumstances The number of annual fatalities and injuries is expressed as a Fatalities and Weighted Injuries (FWI) figure. A FWI of 1.0 equates to 1 death per year. Some of the highest risk level crossings have (or had, until they were closed) a FWI of almost 0.2, meaning that a fatality is expected every 10 years The chart shows the FWI on the network. It can be seen that over a third of the risk is attributable to level crossings. lon_lib1\ \2 12

16 Depending on the type of crossing, the risks that exist are to those on the train, those crossing the railway, and those working on the railway, either operating crossings or maintaining them In Control Period 4 (CP4) from April 2009 to March 2014, Network Rail invested funding and commenced projects that would improve safety at level crossings. This included a focus on closing level crossings as well as asset enhancement schemes, installing technology to assist users in the safe use of level crossings At the start of CP4, the rail network had around 7500 level crossings. Funding was made available from the ORR to pursue level crossing closures nationally. This project was more successful than forecast, delivering 1070 closures and downgrades within CP4. Nationally, level crossing risk was reduced by 31%, measured by the reduction in FWI In Control Period 5 (CP5) from April 2014 to March 2019, Network Rail has continued to invest in the reduction of risk at, and the closure of, Level Crossings across the Network. Network Rail has submitted three Transport and Works Act Orders to the Secretary of State to close 114 level crossings along the Anglia Route (CD/ 6.13) Network Rail s long term strategy to improve safety at level crossings is outlined in Transforming Level Crossings (CD/ 6.14). This strategy has a vision for no accidents at level crossings and emphasises the continuing priority to close level crossings as the most robust form of risk reduction. Network Rail carries out regular risk assessments and maintenance to ensure that the risk at a level crossing is as low as reasonably practical. However, no level crossing can ever be completely safe. lon_lib1\ \2 13

17 Level crossings place crossings users in direct conflict with the moving trains and present a far greater level of safety and operational risk than do grade separated railway crossings. Given advances in risk reduction in other areas of railway operations, level crossings now present the largest source of train accident risk. The vast majority of incidents and accidents at level crossings are attributed to user behaviour, a factor that is clearly beyond the direct control of the railway. Network Rail seeks, so far as reasonably practicable, to eliminate the direct interface between members of the public and train movements that uniquely occurs at level crossings, thereby eliminating the safety hazard they create ORR performs the role of safety regulator in respect of the railway in Great Britain. ORR s Policy on Level Crossings (CD/6.1) states that other than in exceptional circumstances, there should be no new level crossings on any railway. The policy is mirrored in Network Rail s policy Our Approach to Managing Level Crossing Safety (CD/6.7), which states only in exceptional circumstances shall we permit new crossings to be introduced onto the network An important implication of this statement is that if the railway authorised by the Felixstowe Branch Line Improvements Order (2008) (CD/2.1) were being constructed entirely anew (rather than mainly utilising existing and former railway corridors), no level crossings would be permitted. But the scale of reconstruction of the existing and former sections of the railway comprised in the Felixstowe Branch Line Improvements Order is such that the completed railway will, in effect, be a new railway. It will not only involve a different design, with two tracks replacing the existing single line but it will also function very differently compared to the current passenger and freight operators that occupy the same railway corridors. In particular, the number of trains passing per day will increase by up to 14 trains per day in each direction, will operate on the railway bi-directionally and there will be a variation in the approach speeds for trains entering and existing the Trimley Loop. The rebuilt railway will comply in all respects with current technical and railway safety standards and it is therefore appropriate to apply current good practice in respect of the closures on this railway where the opportunity arises Network Rail s approach to level crossings is also compatible with the European Rail Agency and ORR s objectives to ensure safety levels are maintained, and, if reasonably practicable, improved. In order to maintain, if not improve, the safety levels for users of the railway in Trimley, the crossings need to close As well as the direct safety benefits, provided all traces of the crossings are removed and the railway boundary fence is properly secured, the closure of level crossings reduces the opportunity for trespassers to gain access to the railway. As trespassers account for a significant number of the fatalities that occur on the railway each year, a reduction in the opportunity to commit acts of trespass is likely to have a positive impact on railway safety In the Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) 2015/16 publication annual report on public safety (CD/ 6.8), it reported that, excluding suicide, the overall risk of injury at level crossings is 11.4 fatalities and weighted injuries (FWI) per year. Most of this risk is to pedestrians, 62%, with pedestrian members of the public accounting for 57% and passenger pedestrians on lon_lib1\ \2 14

18 station crossings accounting for the remaining 5%. There had been ninety one fatalities since October 2005, of recent years there were three in 2015/16, eleven in 2014/15, eight in 2013/14 and nine in 2012/ In order to identify how to minimise the risk at level crossings as a result of the proposed works to the Felixstowe Branch Line, Network Rail undertook level crossing risk assessments (CD/ 6.9). To do this the following were assessed; ALCRM score (All Level Crossing Risk Model), usage information, national level crossing risk data, event history at each of the level crossings and analysis of physical constraints on site. The project undertook risk assessments of the scheme modelling: The existing risk at the crossing The increase in freight traffic The new second track The bi-directional operation & variation in approach speeds Local growth forecasts of the area Existing Risk Level crossing risk is measured on Network Rail s All Level Crossing Risk Model (ALCRM). This is a system that ranks level crossings, and calculates the likelihood of a fatality (or injury equivalent) every year, a measure called FWI (fatality weighted index). Relative level crossing risk is expressed as a letter and a number. The letter represents the risk to an individual, with A being the highest and M being the lowest. The number represents the collective risk, being the risk to crossing users, rail staff, and passengers. 1 is the highest and 13 is the lowest. Projects must ensure the risk at each level crossing is as low as possible The ALCRM scores for the six level crossings the Order Scheme proposes to close range from B8 to C10. The ALCRM risk scores at 4 of the crossings proposed for closure would increase with the introduction of the capacity enhancement scheme Other issues other than ALCRM scores are considered in assessing the risk at a level crossing, including the angle of the crossing point, the sighting, sun glare and the topography of the crossing Network Rail records incidents at the level crossings; there are no recorded incidents at Thorpe Common, Trimley or St Martin. However there have been incidents at Grimston Lane, Gun Lane and Keepers Lane On 23rd February 2016 there was a fatal accident at Grimston Lane Foot Crossing, proposed to be closed under the order scheme. The Rail Accident Investigation Report advised that improvements should be made to this crossing; including reconfiguring the decision point so that users approached the railway at right angles, demarcating the danger area and assessing the risk to vulnerable users better. Only closure of this crossing will fully remove the risk of future fatalities (CD/6.10). lon_lib1\ \2 15

19 Network Rail has a record of a near miss incident at Grimston Lane footpath crossing on 29 December It also involved the 2R14 Ipswich to Felixstowe passenger train service. Network Rail s records state the user was an elderly male; Abellio Greater Anglia s log records that the user was a dog walker. Network Rail and Abellio Greater Anglia had no further details about what happened Between 2005 and 2015, the following incidents were recorded at Keepers Lane: One near miss with two youths on a motorbike; driver applied emergency brake Five near misses with pedestrians- an incident with two youths on a motorbike when driver applied the emergency brake, another where driver observed a person on a bike with a horse, two incidents with dog walkers, one with a cyclist and another with an elderly couple One report of children on the line One case of vandalism where ballast was placed on the line 19 incidents of failure to call back (users are required to call the signaller on both sides of a user worked crossing to confirm they have crossed safely; if they do not call on the other side, the signaller will not pass trains) 13 reports of faulty telephones One case of accidental damage caused by vehicle Between 2005 and 2015, the following incidents were recorded at Gun Lane: Two failures to call back after crossing Two failures to replace phone back on hook One incident of faulty telephones Second Track With the new track layout, a second track will be installed through Keepers Lane, Gun Lane and St Martins level crossing. By increasing the number of trains, the risk of an accident at any of the level crossings on the line increases The new track will tie back into the single line just short of Trimley level crossings. It is proposed to close and divert these crossings to a bridge due to increased risk at each of these crossings, contributed to by the fact that in times of perturbation trains could be waiting over these crossing points. If trains are waiting over a crossing, it offers the opportunity for people to climb through the train and pose a safety risk In addition, the presence of a second line of rails would increase the time taken to traverse the railway. This would necessitate users being able to see trains further away before they start to cross and the risk to the users would be increased. Bi-directional signalling and changing approach times of trains The new second track and existing track will be signalled so that trains can operate in both lon_lib1\ \2 16

20 directions; this is known as bi-directional operation. This introduces a risk to level crossings users, as they may be expecting a train to arrive from the other direction to which it does The Felixstowe Branch Line is both used by passenger services and freight services. Passenger services will operate at much higher speeds than the freight services. Therefore people may anticipate they have more time to cross than they actually do when a passenger service is approaching. In addition, by installing the loop, there is a new speed differential whereby sometimes trains may wait and have to accelerate from standing and other times they will maintain a steady speed. These factors may all influence how user s behaviours are influenced and they may cross the railway when they do not have enough time. Future growth of the area Increases in population in the Trimley area through planned residential developments will lead to more people using the rights of way network. Additionally there are ongoing campaigns to promote greater use of the public rights of way network for reasons of health and wellbeing. The Order Scheme will minimise risk to these future residents and provide additional circular walks in the Trimley area. 5.3 Operational Case (Network Rail Policy (CP5 double Felixstowe Branch Line)) Long term strategy for this line of route is to increase freight capacity from Felixstowe to the west midlands and North. The unconstrained Freight Market Study (FMS) forecasts were published by Network Rail in 2013, and forecast demand at 66 freight paths per day in 2023 and 80 freight paths per day in 2033 departing and arriving at Port of Felixstowe In order for Network Rail to deliver infrastructure capable of meeting this demand forecast there is a need for a series of infrastructure interventions between the Port for Felixstowe, the West Midlands and the North The current operations of the Felixstowe Branch Line are susceptible to large operational changes due to incidents and service disruption. The provision of a new loop at Trimley will increase the available infrastructure for Network Rail to manage the rail services providing greater capability to recover the services and resume normal operations (run as per the timetable) The increased capacity generated by the scheme will reintroduce timetable robustness that has been lost over the years as a result of greater numbers of freight trains operating on the Felixstowe Branch Line The closure of these level crossings will lead to a reduction in operational disruption to the railway. Such disruption occurs for a variety of reasons, including in reaction to accidents and incidents on the railway (including near misses ) A further operational benefit that will occur as a result of the closure of existing level crossing is a reduction in noise pollution resulting from the elimination of the requirement for the train horn lon_lib1\ \2 17

21 to be sounded on approach to certain level crossings. 5.4 Other Relevant Applications Reflecting a wider Network Rail strategy of seeking to improve safety and remove level crossings throughout the network three other Transport and Works Act Order applications have been submitted to close 114 level crossings along the Anglia Route. These are: The Network Rail (Cambridgeshire Level Crossing Reduction) Order submitted on 14 th March The Network Rail (Essex and Others Level Crossing Reduction) Order submitted on 31 st March The Network Rail (Suffolk Level Crossing Reduction) Order submitted on 24 th March Order Scheme Description 6.1 Level Crossings to be closed The Order scheme comprises the permanent closure of six level crossings along the Felixstowe Branch Line, within the Trimley area. It is proposed to close these level crossings for the reasons set out within Section 5 above. The level crossings are predominantly used by pedestrians although two (Gun Lane and Keepers Lane Level Crossings) are subject to private vehicular rights A description of the level crossings which are proposed to be closed is set out below. Thorpe Common Thorpe Common Level Crossing comprises a public footpath level crossing approximately 200m east of Thorpe Lane (a public road level crossing). Footpath 1 within the Parish of Trimley St Martin runs over the level crossing and is part of the Stour and Orwell circular walk. Grimston Lane Grimston Lane Level Crossing comprises a public footpath level crossing approximately 130m south of Thorpe Lane. There are a number of residential properties along Grimston Lane, to the west and the east of the level crossing. There were two fatalities on this level crossing in 2016 (February and September). An investigation by the Rail Accident Investigation Branch concluded that the level crossing could be reconfigured to improve safety. Trimley Trimley Level Crossing comprises a pedestrian level crossing approximately 350m west of Thorpe Lane. Public Footpath 33 crosses this Level Crossing. lon_lib1\ \2 18

22 St. Martins St. Martins Level Crossing comprises a public footpath level crossing approximately 600m west of Thorpe Lane and 200m east of Gun Lane. Public Footpaths 29 and 30 cross this Level Crossing. Gun Lane Restricted byway 28 (Gun Lane) crosses Gun Lane Level Crossing and is approximately 800m west of Thorpe Lane and 650m east of Gaymer s/keeper s Lane. The owners of the farmland adjacent to the Level Crossing (Trimley Estate) benefit from private motor vehicular rights over the railway track at Gun Lane. Gaymer s/keeper s Lane Level Crossing Gaymer s ( Keeper s ) Lane Level Crossing is approximately 650m west of Gun Lane Level Crossing and 500m west of the High Road within Trimley. Bridleway 22 in the Parish of Trimley St. Mary crosses the Level Crossing. To the west of the railway, BR22 extends around 500m, whereupon it connects with three public footpaths. The onward route for equestrians and cyclists is thus permissive in nature. A number of persons have private vehicular rights over the Level Crossing including the adjacent landowner, Trimley Estate. 6.2 The Proposed Bridleway Bridge It is proposed to construct a bridleway bridge at the location of the existing Gun Lane Level Crossing. The bridge comprises a steel main deck span of m between column supports which will provide a minimum of 5.1m headroom, steel access staircases to the east of the structure, and steel access ramps to the west. The ramps slope at a gradient of 1:15, with 2m long intermediate landings every 333mm vertical rise. The ramps have a total length of 148m. The ramps and staircases are to be aligned parallel with the track. It is proposed to paint all elements of the bridge holly green. 6.3 Proposed Permanent Diversions A number of diversions are proposed to mitigate the impact of the closure of the level crossings. The diversion for each level crossing is illustrated in the image overleaf: lon_lib1\ \2 19

23 6.3.2 The Thorpe Common diversion is shown in red on the above and comprises creating two new public rights of way parallel to the railway line. Pedestrians would be able to cross the railway at the existing level crossing at Thorpe Lane (it is proposed to upgrade this level crossing to create double barriers for vehicles). When a train is passing and the vehicular barriers are down, pedestrians would be able to wait within an area of footway adjacent to the road The Grimston Lane diversion is shown in navy blue on the above plan. The proposed diversion is along existing roads and pedestrians would be able to cross the railway at Thorpe Lane in the same way as in the case of Thorpe Common. lon_lib1\ \2 20

24 6.3.4 The Trimley diversion is shown in turquoise on the above plan and comprises the creation of a new public right of way along the western part of the railway which would connect to St Martins Level Crossing which is at the foot of the proposed bridleway bridge staircase, providing a crossing over the railway. On the eastern side of the railway, the diversion would continue along existing PRoWs; Public Footpaths 30 and 33 in the Parish of Trimley St Martin The St. Martins diversion is shown in pink on the plan and comprises a crossing over the proposed bridleway bridge. A new public right of way will be provided on the eastern part of the railway, parallel to the bridge that would link the stairs at the foot of the bridge to the ramp, connecting Public Footpath 30 to Restricted Byway 28 (Gun Lane) without the use of the bridge The proposed diversion at Gun Lane comprises a crossing over the bridleway bridge, which is proposed to be sited at Gun Lane The Keeper s Lane diversion comprises the creation of a new bridleway along the western part of the railway that will connect Keepers Lane (Bridleway 22) to Grimston Lane. A new bridleway will be created from Grimston lane to Restricted Byway 28 (Gun Lane). This is aligned, in part, along restricted byway 27 (Track) Gun Lane. The diversion follows Restricted Byway 28 (Gun Lane) and crosses over the proposed bridleway bridge. On the eastern side of the railway, users would continue along Restricted Byway 3 (Gun Lane) (track) to Public Footpath 2 in the Parishes of Trimley St. Martin and Trimley St. Mary, which is proposed to be upgraded from a footpath to a bridleway. The diversion continues along the upgraded bridleway to Keepers Lane (Bridleway 21 and 22) In addition to the proposed diversions described above, as part of the package of enhancement and mitigation, Network Rail is also proposing to upgrade Public Footpath 1 in the Parish of Trimley St Mary, also known as Cordy s Lane from a footpath to a bridleway to enhance circular routes for bridleway users in the area. 6.4 Environmental Mitigation Network Rail is proposing a package of environmental measures to mitigate the impact of the bridge. The environmental mitigation has been developed to provide landscape screening as well as enhance biodiversity in the area. This includes landscape screening on either side of the bridge and the reinstatement of a hedgerow along a field boundary to the east of the Felixstowe Branch line. lon_lib1\ \2 21

25 7 Planning and Transport Policy Context 7.1 Introduction The Felixstowe Branch Line Enhancement works will increase capacity along the Felixstowe Branch Line, providing much needed additional infrastructure which will support growth of Felixstowe Port and reduce pressure on the A This is entirely in accordance with national and local planning policies which encourages growth of the local and national economy as well as supports development that enables sustainable transport This section outlines the planning policy case for the Order Scheme. 7.2 Relevant Planning Policy Documents and Legislation National Planning Policy and Legislation The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (CD/4.1) was adopted in 2012 and sets out the Government s planning policies for the United Kingdom and how these are expected to be applied The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CD/3.10) requires local authorities to have regard to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the AONB (Section 85) The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (CD/3.8) requires local authorities to have regard to the impact of development on listed buildings and their settings (Section 66). Local Planning Policy The Local Plan The Local Plan is comprised of a number of Development Plan Documents including: The Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (July 2013) (CD/4.2) sets out the broad scale and distribution of new development across Suffolk Coastal District for a period up to 2027 The Site Allocations and Area Specific Policies (2017) (CD/4.4) aims to ensure that the right policies are in place to enable existing town centres and employment areas to evolve and flourish Area Action Plan for the Felixstowe Peninsula (January 2017) (CD/4.6) allocates land for development There are a number of saved policies from the previously adopted Suffolk Coastal Local lon_lib1\ \2 22

26 Plan (CD/4.3) and these should be read alongside the policies found in the Core Strategy, Site Allocations and Area Specific Development Plan Document and the Felixstowe Peninsula Area Action Plan. Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) There are a number of SPG documents that assist with the implementation of saved policies from the Suffolk Coastal Local Plan. The SPG documents relevant to this application include: SPG5 Nature Conservation and Designation Map (CD/4.8) SPG 6 Historic Parks and Gardens (CD/4.9) Other Material Considerations Other policy documents relevant to the Order Scheme application include: The Suffolk Local Transport Plan ( ) (CD/4.10, CD/4.11) which sets out Suffolk County Council s long term transport strategy, including proposals for improved rail freight Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB Management Plan ( ) (CD/4.22) sets out the management objectives for the AONB The National Infrastructure Delivery Plan (CD/4.12) sets out the Government s vision for the investment and delivery of infrastructure and improving its quality and performance. A pipeline of over 460 billion of planned public and private investment is proposed. Whilst the plan does not reference the Felixstowe Branch Line, it does refer to the A14 as a key access route to the Port of Felixstowe and identifies this as being a key congestion hotspot. 7.3 Planning Policy Considerations Felixstowe Branch Line The Felixstowe Branch Line provides a vital rail link from the Great Eastern Main Line to Felixstowe supporting communities along the railway as well as the Port of Felixstowe National and local planning policy supports the growth of sustainable transport with rail part of this mix At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, with the planning system performing a number of roles in respect of economic, societal and environmental matters (paragraph 14). Paragraph 12 of the NPPF states that local planning authorities should positively seek opportunities to meet the development needs of their area and development proposals that accord with the development plan should be approved without delay Paragraph 31 of the NPPF state that Local Authorities should work with neighbouring lon_lib1\ \2 23

27 authorities and transport providers to develop strategies for the provision of viable infrastructure necessary to support sustainable development, including transport investment necessary to support strategies for the growth of ports The following sections of the NPPF are also considered to be of particular relevance: Paragraphs 17 (Core Planning Principles) and (sections from Delivering Sustainable Development ) Chapters 1 (Sustainable Economic Growth), 3 (Supporting a Prosperous Rural Economy) and 4 (Promoting Sustainable Transport) In Table 6.1 of the Suffolk Coastal District Core Strategy, works along the Felixstowe Branch Line are identified as a project necessary for the delivery of the Core Strategy. This will support delivery of strategic employment linked to Felixstowe Port Strategic Policy SP5 (Employment Land) identifies Felixstowe Port has having regional significance and key economic drivers for the Haven Gateway and Strategic Policy SP11 (Accessibility) encourages the transfer of freight from road to rail Other relevant sections of the Core Strategy and Development Management Policies document include : Objective 4 (Economic Development, Objective 5 (The Rural Economy), Objective 8 (Transport) Policy SP1 Sustainable Development Policy SP1A Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development, Policy SP7 Economic Development in the Rural Areas Policy AP84 (Rail Services) of the Suffolk Coastal Local Plan states that the Council will actively encourage the enhancement of local rail infrastructure and services and will support measures designed to integrate rail services with other forms of public and private transport including the wider use of existing station facilities The Felixstowe Peninsula Area Action Plan states that access to the Peninsula is principally via the A14, the railway and the sea. Communities on the Peninsula have grown and developed over time and the AAP will seek to ensure that these communities (present and future) are provided with opportunities for future growth and development to meet their needs (paragraph 2.01). Policy FPP9 (Port of Felixstowe) states managing transport links on the A14 and railway line will need to be undertaken to ensure that the Port of Felixstowe continues to operate efficiently as a major contributor to local and national economies The upgrading and dualling of the Felixstowe Branch Line is identified within Suffolk Local Transport Plan ( ) as a strategic transport improvement to be delivered within the lon_lib1\ \2 24

28 medium term. It recognises the expansion of the Port of Felixstowe as a key area for growth and development within Suffolk The Felixstowe Branch Line plays an essential role in serving the Port of Felixstowe as well as passengers. Increasing the capacity of the railway line, plays a vital role in supporting the growth of the Port of Felixstowe. National and local planning policies support the principle of upgrade works to the Felixstowe Branch Line. Connectivity The NPPF recognises that planning can play an important role in facilitating social interaction and creating healthy, inclusive communities. This includes creating safe and accessible developments, containing clear and legible pedestrian routes, and high quality public space, which encourage the active and continual use of public areas (paragraph 69) Strategic Policy SP17 (Green Space) of the Core Strategy seeks to ensure that communities have well-managed access to green space within settlements and the countryside and coastal areas, in order to benefit health, community cohesion and greater understanding of the environment, without detriment to wildlife and landscape character The Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB Management Plan ( ) sets out objectives for the AONB and actions for implementing them. These including maintaining and enhancing public rights of way and wider access networks across the AONB and ensuring that highquality, sustainable, outdoor recreational opportunities, infrastructure and information is common place within the AONB As described in Section 4, the Order Scheme includes the provision of a replacement crossing point over the Felixstowe Branch Line which is suitable for footpath and bridleway users to maintain connectivity from the western to the eastern parts of the railway. Impacts on the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Landscape and Visual Impact Section 85 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 places a duty on any relevant authority, and therefore ultimately, Network Rail, to have regard to the AONB and protecting the AONB Paragraph 115 of the NPPF states that great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The conservation of wildlife and cultural heritage are important considerations in all these areas, and should be given great weight in National Parks and the Broads Chapter 11 of the NPPF (Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment) states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment Strategic Policy SP15 (Landscape and Townscape) states that the policy of the Council will be to protect and enhance the various landscape character areas within the district either through lon_lib1\ \2 25

29 opportunities linked to development or through other strategies. Strategic Policy SP7 (Economic Development in the Rural Areas) recognises that the countryside comprises an important economic social and environmental asset within the district which is important to sustain The Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB Management Plan sets the framework for any organisation or individual whose activities impact the AONB Some of the PRoW diversions proposed under the Order Scheme are located within the AONB. The impact of the PRoW diversions on the AONB is negligible. The proposed bridleway bridge is within the AONB setting (approximately 0.5miles east and north of the AONB) The bridleway bridge is sited at Gun Lane and not Keeper s Lane partly to reduce the impact on the AONB. It is recognised however that the bridleway bridge would give rise to impact and this is mitigated through the landscape and screening strategy discussed in Section 12. Public Rights of Way Paragraph 75 of the NPPF states that planning policies should protect and enhance public rights of way and access Objective 14 (Green Infrastructure) of the Core Strategy and Development Management Policies) states that opportunities for the local population to live and enjoy a healthy lifestyle will be encouraged through improved access to green infrastructure. Partnership working to identify and provide for missing links within the public rights of way network serving these areas will be encouraged The Suffolk Local Transport Plan states that our public rights of way network can play an important role in rural areas and on the fringes of towns in providing traffic-free and safe routes for walking and cycling journeys. The use of this network will become very important given the likely financial constraints on providing new facilities such as pavements alongside roads in rural areas Network Rail recognise that the closure of the six Level Crossings would give rise to an impact on users of the PRoW network. To mitigate this impact, it is proposing to create a new crossing point (a bridge over the railway) at Gun Lane, which is in a central location to the Level Crossings proposed to be closed, and make upgrades/enhancements to a number of existing PRoW routes to create circular routes for bridleway users. Design Chapter 7 of the NPPF (Requiring Good Design) states that the great importance is a key aspect of sustainable development and should contribute positively to making places better for people Policy AP19 of the Core Strategy and Development Management document emphasises that lon_lib1\ \2 26

30 proposals which comprise poor design and layout or otherwise seriously detract from the character of their surroundings will not be permitted Other relevant policies listed in the Core Strategy include: Policy DM21 Design: Aesthetics Policy DM22 Design: Function A number of options for the type of crossing have been explored and are discussed in Chapter 8 (The Proposed Bridleway bridge). Chapter 8 explains why alternative options were discounted and how a steel deck bridge, with steel ramps emerged as the proposed design solution. To summarise: Of primary importance is that the bridge serves a function, to enable users (footpath and bridleway) to cross the bridge. Secondly, a steel deck structure, in comparison to the alternatives is relatively slim-lined, involves a lesser land take, lesser impact on ecology and biodiversity and lesser visual impact. The residual landscape impact is mitigate through screening/planting. Transport Paragraph 29 of the NPPF states that transport policies have an important role to play in facilitating sustainable development but also in contributing to wider sustainability and health objectives Policy SP1 (Sustainable Development) of the Core Strategy and Development Management Policies states that policies will seek to reduce the overall need to travel but where travel is necessary, to better manage the transport network to enable it to function efficiently The Felixstowe Branch Line Enhancement works would increase the capacity of the Felixstowe Branch Line (from 33 freight trains per day to up to 47). Each additional train can carry the load of approximately 60 lorries, so helping to reduce congestion along the A14, which also serves the Port of Felixstowe. In addition, the works improves the reliability of passenger services, reducing the potential for delays It is clear that the Felixstowe Branch Line Enhancement works meet national and local planning policy objectives, facilitate sustainable development and contribute to health objectives In terms of local impacts, it is recognised that there will be impacts on users of the PRoW during the construction period although these impacts would be temporary and be mitigated through the provision of temporary diversions. During the operation period, the PRoW closures would affect some users as they would be required to use a lengthier, diverted route to cross the railway. However, the majority of current users of the PRoW network in the affected area are leisure users and therefore significance is placed on maintaining permeability rather than lon_lib1\ \2 27

31 reducing route lengths. The mitigation will retain and enhance users ability to permeate through the surrounding fields, and therefore the permanent impacts are not considered to be severe. Air Quality and Noise Impact Chapter 11 (Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment) of the NPPF states that 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 an unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of air or noise pollution Paragraph of the Core Strategy and Development Plan Policies states that an Air Quality Management Area has been declared at Felixstowe (south of the application site). Other pollution issues such as those relating to noise require management must comply with relevant policies of the Plan (relating to employment sites) The Felixstowe Branch Line enhancement works would help improve air quality through reducing the need to transport freight by road, thereby meeting wider sustainability objectives. The Order Scheme would also result in an overall reduction in noise as there would not be a need for trains to sound their horn on the approach to level crossings. Ecology & Biodiversity The NPPF states that pursuing sustainable development involves seeking positive improvements in the quality of the built, natural and historic environment including moving from a net loss of biodiversity to achieving net gains for nature (paragraph 9). The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by minimising impacts on biodiversity (paragraph 109) Objective 11 of the Core Strategy and Development Plan Policies seeks to protect and enhance the physical environment. Policy SP14 (Biodiversity and Geodiversity) outlines that all development proposals should protect the biodiversity and geodiversity value and minimise the fragmentation of habitats; maximise opportunities for restoration, enhancement and connection of natural habitats; and incorporate beneficial biodiversity conservation features where appropriate Network Rail has sought to reduce impact on the local wildlife features through proposing to construct a relatively slim line bridleway bridge structure. This would have a smaller footprint and therefore a smaller impact on local biodiversity. In developing the landscape and screening proposals, Network Rail has sought the advice of officers from the Suffolk Coastal District Council and is proposing to plant a range of native species which will enhance biodiversity value. In addition, Network Rail is proposing to plant a hedgerow along a field boundary further enhancing ecological connectivity. The Order Scheme is therefore entirely in accordance with National and Local Planning Policy. This is discussed in further detail in lon_lib1\ \2 28

32 Section 11. Historic Environment Paragraphs 134 of the NPPF sets out planning policy with regard to assessing a proposal s impact on a heritage asset. Objective 11 of the Core Strategy and Development Plan Policies seeks to conserve and enhance the quality of the distinctive historic and built environments Grimston Hall, a Grade II Listed Building is located approximately 340m south west of the proposed bridleway bridge. It is anticipated that the Order Scheme would not result in harm to the Listed Building. Impacts on heritage assets are discussed in further detail in Sections 11 and 12 and Chapter 9 of the ES (CD/1.14.1). Construction Policy DM24 (Sustainable Construction) of the Core Strategy and Development Management Policies states that it expects all developments to be carried out in a sustainable manner The activities that will be carried out during the construction phase are described in Section 10 below. The construction will be carried out in accordance with a Construction Environmental Management Plan and is entirely in accordance with local planning policy. Conclusion To conclude, it is clear that the Order Scheme will present substantial economic, environmental and societal benefits resulting in significant improvements to the Felixstowe Branch Line, the ability to transport a greater volume of material by freight and supporting the growth of Felixstowe Port. Whilst the Order Scheme would result in a number of closures of PRoWs, this will be mitigated through the provision of a replacement bridleway bridge which has been designed to be relatively slim-lined, reducing land take and impact on ecology as well as landscape and visual impact. Any residual impacts are mitigated through planting and screening. 8 The Proposed Bridleway Bridge 8.1 Scheme Development and Alternatives The proposed scheme has been developed following a thorough optioneering exercise which is described below. The optioneering exercise considered the need for a crossing, the type of crossing, and the location of the crossing. Need for a Crossing Network Rail considered whether it would be possible to close the level crossings without providing a replacement crossing. As part of this, the lengths of potential diversions and lon_lib1\ \2 29

33 associated journey times were considered. This is illustrated below: The below table sets out the increase in time taken to cross the railway without a replacement crossing. Level Current Usage Length of Route (m) Additional Crossing (daily total Journey Time users) (mins) Current Diversion Increase Keepers Lane Gun Lane St Martin s Trimley Grimston Lane Thorpe Common Note: Additional Journey Time calculated using the assumption of a walking speed of 80m per minute. Horse riders and runners would have a lower additional journey time. lon_lib1\ \2 30

34 8.1.4 A no crossing option would therefore result in a significant impact for users of the crossings at Gun Lane and St. Martin s Level Crossing (31 and 28 minutes added on to journey times respectively). Network Rail considered that this would result in a significant impact on leisure walkers together with residential properties to the west of the railway and is therefore proposing a crossing to mitigate the impact of closing the six Level Crossings. Type of Proposed Crossing To inform its decision on the type of crossing to be provided and users which the crossing should serve, Network Rail carried out a survey to obtain further information on the type of user and frequency at which the Level Crossings are used. The survey was carried between Thursday 22 September and Wednesday 28 September 2016 inclusive. In addition, Network Rail obtained census data over a 24 hour period on indiscriminate days in 2014 and The full results of the survey and the census data are available in Volume 3 of the ES (CD/1.14.3) submitted in support of the TWA Scheme application The census information indicated that Keepers Lane and Gun Lane were the most well-used Level Crossings with 45 and 32 users crossing the railway on average per day at these points respectively. Approximately 53 users cross the level crossings to the east (Thorpe Common, Grimston Lane, St. Martins and Trimley) of the site per day A summary of the survey results is set out in the Table below: Pedestrians Cyclists Farm Equestrian Visible Other Total Traffic User Disability Keeper s Lane Gun Lane St. Martin s Trimley Grimston Lane Thorpe Common Total The results of the survey indicate that the crossings are well used by pedestrians and some lon_lib1\ \2 31

35 cyclists and equestrian users. The crossings are not frequently used by farm traffic In addition to the survey and the census data, Network Rail also reviewed the information in its level crossings records. Drivers of vehicles wishing to cross the railway on this type of level crossing, are required to telephone Network Rail in advance of crossing the level crossing to check that it is safe. Network Rail keeps a record of telephone calls received and checked these to see if there is a record of calls made. The records date to 2013 and indicate that: one machine crossed Gun Lane Level Crossing in January 2017; and two vehicles crossed Keeper s Lane Level Crossing, both in May The results from the survey, census data and level crossing records indicate that farm vehicles do not cross the railway on a sufficiently regular basis to justify the provision of a new vehicular crossing. Providing a vehicular bridge would therefore not represent a cost effective solution or good value of public money. However, Network Rail considers that it is necessary to provide a bridleway crossing to serve pedestrians, cyclists and equestrian users. Network Rail is therefore proposing to extinguish the private vehicular rights over the railway and compensate the owner in accordance with the principles of the compensation code. Crossing Options Two types of crossings have been explored: Underpass Bridge Underpass Network Rail explored the feasibility of constructing an underpass. This included a review of the form of any proposed underpass structure and its dimensions to be able to accommodate end users. It also considered whether ground conditions would be suitable to construct an underpass In terms of the form of the structure, the underpass would need to be designed such that it is suitable for bridleway users. The minimum headroom would be 3.7m to allow equestrian use without the need for dismounting, and the clear width would be 5.5m, to allow for a 3m wide bridleway and 2m wide segregated footpath with a 0.5m margin between the underpass wall and bridleway. To accommodate pedestrian and equestrian users, the maximum permissible gradient for the ramps would be 1 in 15 with intermediary landings A review of the ground conditions indicated that the ground water table is approximately 4m below the base of the existing rail embankment. Any underpass structure would therefore be constructed below the water table. As such, the design would need to developed to deal effectively with potential water ingress. In addition, a robust and complex drainage system lon_lib1\ \2 32

36 would be required to prevent flooding during stormy weather, which may include the need for a dedicated pumping station and connected water storage system to accommodate flood waters Any underpass structure and approach ramps would require a full lighting design and associated power supply to be installed As a result of the above and the need to create a complex structure that responds to the groundwater issues, including the potential for flooding, together with the need to install a power supply, Network Rail concluded that an underpass does not represent a practical or cost-effective solution and was discounted as an option. Further considerations in ruling out the underpass option include the increased land take requirements over a bridge option and the added cost and environmental impacts due to the required excavations. Bridge Options The optioneering process is described in Volume 3 of the ES. A summary of the key points is set out below. Specification Similar to the underpass structure, the bridge would need to be designed to accommodate the needs of bridleway users. Whilst users with visible disabilities were not identified in the censuses of the level crossings, Network Rail has had regard to the public sector equality duty under the Equality Act 2010 and is proposing accessible gradients of 1 in 20 on the ramps, as well as steps. The bridge must be developed with regard to guidance published by the British Horse Society (BHS) (REF: Advice on Specifications for new Bridges for Equestrian Use in England and Wales). The bridge must also be in accordance with Network Rail standards: the trackside face of the bridge supports should be a minimum of 4.5m away from the nearest running rail to avoid the need to design for collision loading in case of any derailment there should be a minimum headroom clearance of 5.1m clearance from the railway track to the underside of the bridge deck the bridge deck and ramps must be at least 3.5m wide, which is the minimum width of a footbridge for combined pedestrian/equestrian use parapets should be a minimum of 1.8m high and of solid infill to avoid the startling horses using the structure by railway traffic passing below. BHS has also informally advised the project that the parapets on the track side approach ramp should also be 1.8m in height and solid infill, and so such parapets have been incorporated into the proposed structure. bridge ramps to be aligned parallel to the railway to minimise land requirements. ramps should be continuous without significant changes of direction to better accommodate equestrian users. The ramps will slope at a 1 in 15 gradient to accommodate both equestrian and pedestrian users, and will incorporate intermediate landings every 333mm vertical rise to provide resting areas for cyclists, mobility impaired users, or people with pushchairs. lon_lib1\ \2 33

37 Bridge Design Options The following table describes the bridge design options which were explored and lists some of the advantages and disadvantages of each option. Images of the bridges are available in Appendix B. Description Advantages Disadvantages Bridge Deck Steel The steel deck main span Durable structure Maintenance and ramps option comprises a deck, ramps and a staircase supported by columns, all of which Efficient construction programme interventions for repainting required (circa every 25 years) are made of steel. The structure would be supported on reinforced concrete piled foundations. Modular construction allows for segmental deliveries Requires piled foundations Relatively better value produce Fibre- An FRP structure could be Durable structure, The main span Reinforced used which is a durable typically offering 40 would likely be Plastic (FRP) but also slightly bulkier to 60 years formed of a truss option than a steel deck. between major arrangement which This option would be formed of either steel, concrete or earthwork approach ramps and staircases as the initial cost of FRP options are maintenance interventions Lightweight deck offers potential saving in transportation would be comparatively bulky and more difficult to screen than a shallower steel deck option. harder to justify for handling and FRP could be elements not directly over the railway. foundation design subject to some decolouration over time Costly structure lon_lib1\ \2 34

38 Description Advantages Disadvantages Concrete Reinforced concrete main Durable structure Heavy structure span with concrete approach ramps and Low maintenance and deeper piles would be required. staircases supported on The greater piled foundations. construction depth of the main span would increase the length of the ramps and overall height of the structure Bridge Ramps Steel A steel ramp would Durable structure Maintenance comprise a gradient of 1:15 with 2m long landings every 333mm vertical rise and steel staircases. Minimal earthworks required Minimal land take required (circa every 25 years) Aesthetically intrusive option Efficient construction programme Traditional Ramps formed of earth Durable low Significant Earth embankments would maintenance earthwork and Embankment comprise a gradient of structure lengthy 1:15 with 2m long landings every 333mm vertical rise. To limit the length of the main span and required land take, a retaining wall could be built adjacent to the railway to retain the embankment. This would Planting along the non-trackside face can be introduced to mitigate aesthetic impact construction period Additional land take required (could be mitigated to certain extent through the construction of a retaining wall) mean that the embankment would not be able to support significant planting on the trackside face, however the nontrackside faces of the embankment could still be Aesthetically the structure would appear like a mound on a relatively flat landscape lon_lib1\ \2 35

39 Description Advantages Disadvantages planted. The staircases to the east of the structure would be set into the embankment. Reinforced This option comprises a Reduced bridge Bulky structure. Earth Embankment variation of the traditional earth embankment ramps but reduces the footprint through attaching modular concrete panels to create an embankment block span as the reinforced earth wall can be designed to resist derailment loading and so can be Significant imported fill requirements and longer construction durations required which supports the ramp, staircases and the main bridge span. placed within 4.5m of the rails Reduced footprint in comparison with the traditional earth Landscape mitigation would be more challenging in comparison to a steel deck option embankment Additional land take Planting along the non-trackside face can be introduced over some alternatives required to mitigate aesthetic impact Aesthetically the structure would Durable low maintenance structure appear like a mound on a relatively flat landscape A further design option that was suggested by an objector for a vehicular access bridge was also considered. This structure considered a Network Rail Standard Design Con-Arch Bridge structure as an alternative to the proposed bridleway bridge. This is discussed further in Section 16 which considers the objections received in respect of the application. Conclusion Having considered the different options for the bridge, Network Rail is proposing a steel deck structure with steel ramps and stairs. Out of the options considered, it requires the least land lon_lib1\ \2 36

40 take and the least amount of earthwork. It also benefits from an efficient construction programme, requires fewer deliveries to site and less earth moving than other options. The steel bridge comprises a relatively lightweight structure which reduces foundation requirements, allows for lighter lifting plant to be used, and over time, could be screened by landscaping and vegetation. Location of the Crossing Network Rail has explored the siting of the bridge at a number of locations along the Felixstowe Branch Line It is not intended to close Thorpe Lane Level Crossing which is a vehicular crossing that is located to the east of the application site. This will serve as a diversion for users of both Thorpe Common and Grimston Lane Given that an existing level crossing would remain open to the east of the application site, Network Rail explored locating the crossing in the southern half of the application boundary. In addition, the crossings at Gun Lane and Keepers Lane are individually more frequently used than those to the east Keepers Lane is adjacent to a number of residential properties and Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB. Network Rail considered that siting the bridge at Keepers Lane would result in overlooking into the properties. By virtue of its proximity, it was also considered to have a greater impact on the Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB Objectors to the Order Scheme application have queried whether the landscape and visual impact of the bridge would reduce if it were to be located further south along the railway, where the railway is within cutting. Regardless of where the bridge is to be located, a clearance of 5.1m above rail level is required. The bridge would therefore still be visible, without screening if it were to be located further south However, the ground levels further south of the railway are slightly lower (circa 25.5m AOD as opposed to 26.2m AOD at Gun Lane). Locating the bridge in this location would result in a slightly lower deck (by less than 1m) and reduced ramp lengths If the bridge were to be sited further south, it is considered that there would be a greater impact on users of the PRoW network as diversions from St Martins, Trimley and Gun Lane Level Crossings would be lengthier. This is in addition to the impact on residential properties to the south at Keeper s Lane and closer proximity to Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB Network Rail has therefore concluded that siting the bridge at Gun Lane is the best solution for the area. 8.2 Landscaping and Screening It is recognised that the Order Scheme would give rise to environmental impact. Network Rail lon_lib1\ \2 37

41 has worked with Suffolk Coastal District Council and Natural England to develop a scheme which mitigates visual impact and seeks to enhance the ecology and biodiversity in the area. The landscape scheme includes planting adjacent to the bridge to screen the bridge, and replacing the trees that would need to be removed to enable construction and replanting a hedgerow along a field boundary to the east of the railway, providing additional screening for residential properties at the new Cavendish Grove development. 9 Approach to Public Right of Ways 9.1 Introduction The PRoW network in Suffolk is a valuable asset that provides a healthy, safe and sustainable way to access the countryside and other local services 1. The Suffolk Rights of Way Improvement Plan (CD/4.18) states that there are approximately 3,400miles (5,400kms) of PRoWs within Suffolk and that these provide a major recreational resource and asset to the rural economy attracting regular users and tourists Network Rail recognises the importance of the PRoW network and, recognising that the closure of Level Crossings would also lead to closure or stopping up of a number of PRoWs, has sought to divert, enhance and upgrade the PRoW network, connectivity and circular routes within the affected area. 9.2 Affected PRoWs The PRoWs which are proposed to be closed or stopped up currently connect the Trimley Villages to the Suffolk Countryside, including the Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB. The PRoWs are predominantly used for leisure and recreation purposes but also serve residential properties, community facilities, agricultural land and some businesses A plan illustrating the PRoWs which are proposed to be closed/ stopped up and the permanent diversions which will be put in place is set out below: 1 lon_lib1\ \2 38

42 9.2.3 The PRoWs that are proposed to be closed are set out below: PRoW Level Crossing Existing Features Footpath 1 (Parish of Trimley St Martin) Thorpe Common Footpath with stiles in railway boundary Links Trimley High Road and Thorpe Common Forms part of the Stour and Orwell Walk and High Road to Trimley Circular Walk Grimston Lane Grimston Lane Comprises footpath gates in railway boundary In close proximity to residential properties Footpath 33 (Parish of Trimley St Martin) Trimley Footpath with stiles in railway boundary Links Trimley High Road to Grimston Lane In close proximity to residential properties Footpaths 29 and 30 (Parish of Trimley St Martin) St Martins Footpath with stiles in railway boundary lon_lib1\ \2 39

43 PRoW Level Crossing Existing Features Restricted Byway 28 (Gun Lane) (Parish of Trimley St Martin) Gun Lane Restricted Byway with vehicular gated and pedestrian wicket gates in railway boundary Private vehicular rights Bridleway 22 (Parish of Trimley St. Mary) Keepers Lane (Gaymers Lane) Bridleway with vehicular gated and pedestrian wicker gates in railway boundary Private vehicular rights Close to residential properties On the boundary of Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB The PRoW and Level Crossings closures are within approximately a 1.4km stretch of railway A number of PRoWs are proposed to be closed/ stopped up on a temporary basis during the construction period. This is discussed in Section Diversions proposed and alternatives considered As part of the optioneering process, Network Rail explored the impact of providing no diversions and no bridge crossing. It considered that this would give rise to unacceptable impacts and that a crossing point is required To mitigate the impact of the closure of the Level Crossings on PRoWs, Network Rail developed proposals to divert PRoWs with regard to the below principles: - to reduce the lengths of diversions where possible - to keep diversions within a rural setting, away from vehicular highways where feasible. - To reduce and avoid unnecessary impact on existing landowners and farm operations where possible In addition to dedicated diversions to the PRoW network, Network Rail is proposing to construct a bridleway bridge with associated additional PRoW links and diversions. The need for and location of the bridge, is discussed in Section 8 above Network Rail has worked with and landowners to identify the proposed diversions. These are discussed below. Footpath 1 (Parish of Trimley St Martin) / Thorpe Common Level Crossing The Footpath 1 (Parish of Trimley St Martin) / Thorpe Common diversion comprises a 375m lon_lib1\ \2 40

44 footpath. The diversion would run south of the western side of the Level Crossing, parallel to the railway track to Thorpe Lane, across Thorpe Lane Level Crossing, which is a vehicular level crossing to be retained, and eastwards adjacent to the railway Network Rail explored the option of aligning the diverted PRoW along an existing farm track in the field to the east of the railway and discounted this option following discussions with the landowner as it would have resulted in severance of a farmers field. Grimston Lane Footpath / Grimston Lane Level Crossing The Grimston Lane diversion utilises existing highways and comprises a 110m diversion along the Grimston Lane road (eastwards) and Thorpe Lane. Owing to the proximity of Thorpe Lane Level Crossing, no further alternatives were considered. Footpath 33 (Parish of Trimley St Martin)/ Trimley Level Crossing The Footpath 33 / Trimley Level Crossing diversion measures 435m. It is proposed to create a new footpath, from the western side of Trimley Level Crossing to St. Martins Level Crossing which is at the foot of the proposed bridleway bridge. Users would be able to cross the bridge and use the existing PRoW network (Footpaths 30 and 33 in the Parish of Trimley St Martin) to connect to the eastern side of Trimley Level Crossing Network Rail explored the option of locating the diversion eastwards, over Thorpe Lane Level Crossing. This was discounted as it would have resulted in a lengthier diversion and the diversion would be along the existing road network. Footpaths 29 and 30 (Parish of Trimley St Martin) / St Martins Level Crossing The diversion for Footpaths 29 and 30 measures 70m in length and involves crossing the railway using the proposed bridleway bridge. A new footpath is proposed to the east of the railway, parallel to the bridge which would connect the foot of the ramps to the foot of the staircase Given the proximity of the proposed bridleway bridge, no alternatives were considered Restricted Byway 28 (Gun Lane) (Parish of Trimley St Martin) / Gun Lane Level Crossing The diversion for Restricted Byway 28 (Gun Lane) measures 260m in length and involves crossing the railway using the proposed bridleway bridge Given the proximity of the proposed bridleway bridge, no alternatives were considered. Bridleway 22 (Parish of Trimley St. Mary) / Keepers Lane (Gaymers Lane) Level Crossing The proposed Bridleway 22 diversion to the bridleway bridge results in an additional distance of 1,545m which is an additional walking time of 16 minutes (walking pace assumed) It should be noted that although this distance is approximately equal in length to users lon_lib1\ \2 41

45 travelling via Cordy s Lane (i.e. not via the proposed bridleway bridge) it is an off-road route comprising the creation of a new bridleway from the western side of Keepers Lane Level Crossing to Grimston Lane. The proposed new bridleway south of the railway is adjacent to the path of an existing farm track which is next to the railway and then cuts across a field towards Grimston Lane. The diversion follows and existing track to Restricted Byway 28. Part of this existing track is along Restricted Byway 27 (Gun Lane) The proposed diversion crosses the proposed bridleway bridge and is then follows existing PRoWs Restricted Byway 3 (Gun Lane), Public Footpath 2 and Bridleway 22. It is proposed to upgrade Public Footpath 2 to a bridleway as part of the Order Scheme A variation of the above diversion was considered and discounted. The variation comprised locating a longer section of the proposed new bridleway (from the west of Keeper s Lane Level Crossing to Grimston Lane). Following discussions with the landowner, it was agreed that the diversion would follow the farm track Access for pedestrians is also possible between Keeper s Lane and Cordy s Lane via Stennetts Close, St Mary s Close and the Avenue. A journey from the east side of the railway at Keeper s Lane level crossing to the junction of FP1 with Cordy s Lane will be 233 m longer than the route between the same points via BR22 and FP1. This is just over 3 minutes additional walk. Footpath 1 (Parish of Trimley St Mary) Network Rail is proposing to upgrade Footpath 1 in the Parish of Trimley St Mary from a footpath to a bridleway. It is understood that Footpath 1 is currently used as a permissive bridleway. Upgrading the footpath will enhance circular routes for bridleway users in the area and provide a permanent link, via Cordy s Lane, to BR12 and BR Conclusion The Order Scheme mitigates and enhances the PRoW network, upgrading existing PRoWs to minimise route diversionary lengths and provide circular routes for leisure users. It has sought to reduce impact through the provision of shorter diversions (the lengthiest diversion comprises 1.5km which equates to 16 minutes additional walk time spent crossing the route) and new circular routes. Impacts on landowners have been reduced through utilising the existing PRoW network and discussing and, where feasible, agreeing proposed diversions. 10 Scheme Construction 10.1 Introduction It is intended to carry out the construction works for the Order Scheme and the Wider Scheme at the same time. This will enable a more efficient construction programme with works being carried out in parallel. Construction facilities for both the Order Scheme and Wider Scheme will be shared, reducing the temporary land take, length of time any PRoWs would need to be stopped up on a temporary basis and disruption in the wider area. lon_lib1\ \2 42

46 10.2 Construction timescales Construction of the Felixstowe Branch Line Enhancement Scheme is anticipated to commence in November 2017 and conclude in Summer It is anticipated that it will take approximately 12 months to construct the Order Scheme. Subject to award and timescales for receiving the required consents, it is anticipated that construction works for the Order Scheme will commence in Spring/Summer 2018 and conclude in Winter/Spring The bridleway bridge will only be erected once the earthworks for the Wider Scheme have been installed Construction Access, Sites and Activities Some land, within the Limits of Land to be Acquired or Used (LLAU), will be required for construction compounds, laydown areas, welfare facilities, construction access and temporary PRoW diversions. This land will be required for a temporary period of time. Following construction, the land will be restored to its former condition Vehicular access will be required from the west and east side of the proposed bridleway bridge. The main vehicular access will be from the High Road / Howlett Way roundabout The 2014 Order for the Wider Scheme includes powers of temporary acquisition for some construction use. In order to construct the Order Scheme and Wider Scheme at the same time, a larger construction compound area and wider construction access road (to enable the transportation of pre-fabricated sections of the proposed bridleway bridge) than that authorised in the 2008 Order is required. The Order therefore seeks additional land powers to those which were authorised under the 2014 Order for the Wider Scheme Further information on the Construction Sites and Activities is available in Chapter 4 of Volume 1 of the Environmental Statement Temporary Closures of PRoWs and Temporary Diversions It will be necessary to temporarily close a number of PRoWs for both the Wider Scheme and the Order Scheme in order to enable a safe and efficient construction programme. Temporary closures will be kept to a minimum and to reduce disruption, PRoWs will only be closed where necessary in the interests of safety. Network Rail will notify, residents and users of the PRoW prior of the proposed works and any temporary closures of PRoW in advance Whilst the PRoWs will be closed on a temporary basis, to mitigate any impact generated, Network Rail is proposing a number of temporary PRoW diversions. These are illustrated in Figure 4.5 of Volume 2 of the ES (CD/1.14.2) The temporary diversions proposed as part of the Order Scheme include: lon_lib1\ \2 43

47 Footpath 1 (Thorpe Common), within the Parish of Trimley St Martin temporary footpath to the west of the railway line around a construction compound. Footpath 31, in the Parish of Trimley St Martin short diversion around the construction compound next to the roundabout on the High Road. Footpath 2 to Restricted Byway 3 (Gun Lane) in the Parish of Trimley St Martin connection maintained to the east of the Railway Keepers Lane to Grimston Lane in the Parishes of Trimley St Martin and Trimley St Mary connection provided to maintain circular routes in the area The temporary diversions proposed as part of the Wider Scheme include: Footpath 31, within the Parish of Trimley St Martin temporary footpath from the High Road around the construction compound. Keepers Lane around the construction worksite to Grimston Lane PRoWs will only be closed where necessary and for health and safety reasons. In the event when it is proposed to close the PRoWs, temporary diversions will be in place. 11 Environmental Effects 11.1 Introduction An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the Order Scheme was undertaken and is reported in the Environmental Statement (ES) (CD/1.14.1) and supporting figures (CD/1.14.2) and appendices (CD/1.14.3). The ES was prepared in accordance with Rules 4(1) and 11 of, and Schedule 1 to, the Transport and Works (Application and Objections Procedure) (England and Wales) Rules 2006 ( the Applications Rules 2006 ) (CD/3.2) The Applications Rules 2006 require an applicant for a TWAO to submit an ES in relation to any proposed works that constitute a project of the type mentioned in Annex 1, or in Annex 2 to the EIA Directive (2011/92/EU, as amended by 2014/52/EU) (CD/3.14, CD/3.16), if it may result in significant environmental effects. Following a screening exercise it was determined that the Order Scheme falls within the description of Annex 2 developments within paragraph 10(c): Construction of railways. As the Felixstowe Branch Line Improvements Level Crossings Closure works requiring authorisation are ancillary to the construction or operation of the transport system they require an EIA to be carried out The EIA was subsequently undertaken in accordance with Rules 4(1) and 11 of, and Schedule 1 to, the Applications Rules 2006, which set out the information required to be included in an lon_lib1\ \2 44

48 ES. EIA Scoping Scoping was the first stage of the EIA process for the Order scheme. It identified the spatial, temporal and technical scope of environmental topics to be included in the ES, the means by which baseline data would be obtained and the approach and methodology that would be used to assess the significance of predicted impacts. Scoping also identified environmental topics that would not be considered any further by the EIA because, on the basis of an appraisal, the construction and operation of the Order scheme was not deemed to result in significant impacts in relation to those topics The results of the scoping exercise were documented in an EIA Scoping Report (CD/1.14.3) (Appendix A1.1 of the ES, (CD/1.14.3)). Under Rule 8 of the Applications Rules 2006 a request, including the EIA Scoping Report, was submitted to the Secretary of State in October 2016 for a formal EIA Scoping Opinion on the issues to be addressed in the EIA and on the content and scope of the corresponding ES. In response a formal EIA Scoping Opinion was received from the Secretary of State on 5 December 2016 (CD/1.9) To be able to issue an EIA Scoping Opinion the Secretary of State is required to have regard to the views of statutory consultees. In this case the Secretary of State consulted with the Suffolk Coastal District Council,, Trimley St Mary Parish Council, Trimley St Martin Parish Council, Natural England, Historic England and the Environment Agency Subject to some clarifications set out in the EIA Scoping Opinion, the Secretary of State agreed with the scope of the EIA as set out in the EIA Scoping Report as to which topics should be further assessed and reported in the Order scheme ES. These topics are Ecology; Ground conditions and contamination; Historic environment; Landscape and visual impacts; People and communities; and Traffic and transport The EIA Scoping Report identified that assessment of Noise and Vibration, Air Quality and Flood Risk and Water Resources were scoped out from further assessment as no likely significant effects were considered in relation to the proposed works. Noise and Vibration As identified in the Scoping Report, assessment of noise and vibration impacts arising from the proposed works was scoped out of the EIA due to the large distance between the main bridge construction area and the nearest receptors The closest receptors to the proposed works are the properties at Grimston Lane and Keeper s lon_lib1\ \2 45

49 Lane level crossings (the closest is at approximately 14m). The closest receptors to the proposed bridge works are situated approximately 300m on Grimston Lane to the west of the railway. The new development at Cavendish Grove is directly adjacent to the access route and welfare compound at the roundabout on High Road. The care home on High Road is approximately 30m from the boundary of the proposed welfare compound Vegetation clearance and works at the and level crossings would not require more than hand tools to complete and include activities such as removal of timber level crossing deck panels and installation of new boundary fences. The duration of these activities will be very short scale, approximately two days each of work and no significant noise impacts are expected Given that the closest sensitive receptor is located at over 300m from the proposed location of bridge construction works, no significant noise or vibration impacts are anticipated. Potential impacts to noise receptors have been avoided and minimised where possible by best practice measures such as specification of rotary piling methods, programming and sub phasing of works, orientation and layout of welfare facilities and identifying access routes to the strategic road network away from village centres identified in the draft Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) (Appendix A4.1 of ES Volume 3, CD/1.14.3). The Contractor will obtain Section 61 consents from SCC under the Control of Pollution Act 1974 for the proposed works. These applications will include details of proposed working hours for specific construction activities, and engagement procedure with the local community and residents The nature of the proposed works is such that no significant operational noise or vibration impacts will be expected as a result of the proposed bridge and level crossing closures. Air Quality As identified in the Scoping Report, assessment of air quality impacts arising from the proposed works was scoped out of the EIA Monitoring data and background mapped data provided by Defra and Suffolk Coastal District Council indicate that existing air pollutant concentrations at the proposed works location are likely to be well below AQS objectives Potential impacts as a result of dust and emissions have been avoided and minimised where possible by best practice measures such as specification and good maintenance of construction equipment, suitable sheeting and dampening of materials and works and identifying access routes to the strategic road network away from village centres identified in the draft CEMP Once operational, the proposed works will not directly release any emissions to air, and are unlikely to change or generate vehicle activity, and therefore air quality impacts are not expected. Flood Risk and the Water Environment lon_lib1\ \2 46

50 As identified in the Scoping Report, assessment of Flood Risk and the Water Environment impacts arising from the proposed works was scoped out of the EIA There are no significant surface water bodies in the close vicinity of the proposed works. The proposed bridleway bridge is not located in any flood risk zones and the operation of the bridge will not result in any regular or planned discharges that may affect flood risk Standard construction site mitigation measures will be adopted to ensure effects are negligible The ES identified that few adverse significant environmental effects would arise from the proposed works. It concluded that only a limited number of significant adverse effects were likely to arise from construction activities over a temporary period. From year of opening, there would be moderate adverse significant effects on the landscape character and visual amenity of the area, reducing to negligible to minor beneficial as the proposed restoration and screening planting establishes. This is due to the incorporation of mitigation measures in the design and the inclusion of environmental control measures in construction planning Mitigation Mitigation measures and strategies have been incorporated in the design of the proposed works and form part of the management of the construction phase. A CEMP and a landscaping scheme will be implemented to avoid or limit potentially adverse environmental effects of construction activities A draft CEMP was submitted with the Felixstowe Branch Line Improvements Level Crossings Closure Order application. The CEMP details the adoption and use of the best practicable means to reduce the effects of noise, vibration, dust and site lighting. Network Rail s intention that the CEMP will also incorporate a Waste Management Plan in response to the requirements of a draft condition of the deemed planning consent (NR08) for the proposed works If the Order Scheme is approved it is proposed that a landscaping scheme will be prepared and submitted for approval by the Local Planning Authority no later than six months after the commencement of development. It will detail any proposed structures, and trees and shrubs to be planted, including the location, number, species, size and planting density. An indicative species list (A4.3 NR13d) was submitted with the Felixstowe Branch Line Improvements Level Crossings Closure Order application Summary of Environmental Effects The environmental effects of both the construction and operational phases of the Felixstowe Brach Line Improvements have been assessed in the ES as set out in each of the categories below. The construction phase effects are limited in duration: the proposed works will be completed within the construction programme of the wider scheme, which will take approximately two years. Some adverse effects are expected during the construction phase but in the operational phase of the proposed works, there are some beneficial effects. lon_lib1\ \2 47

51 Ecology Potential impacts to ecological features have been avoided and minimised where possible by embedding mitigation measures in the design through providing appropriate planting and enhancing biodiversity. In addition precautionary measures and best practice are identified in the draft CEMP Loss of habitat and disturbance or harm during clearance works to protected species will be mitigated by applications for European Protected Species Mitigation Licences (EPSML), and suitable methods of safe translocation and exclusion. A Precautionary Method of Working (PMW) will be implemented to protect species (great crested newts, reptiles, mammals and birds) during vegetation clearance and any soil stripping. This will include phased removal of vegetation in the presence of an ecologist or other suitable experienced personnel, and hand searches during the vegetation removal. Any reptiles found will be moved to areas of suitable habitat outside of the construction footprint. If great crested newts are found, works in that area will cease and further mitigation will be implemented which may include the need for an EPSML A separate Habitats Regulations Assessment Stage 1 Screening Report CD/7.1) identified that the proposed works, either alone or in-combination with any other scheme, will not result in any likely significant effects on the conservation objectives of the qualifying features of the Stour and Orwell Estuaries Special Protected Area (SPA) and Ramsar sites. This conclusion has been accepted by (SCC) and Natural England (NE) Overall, during construction, the residual effect on ecological features is assessed as minor adverse, and that biodiversity enhancement will result in a minor beneficial effect in the long term to the conservation status of habitats within the site. Protected Species The existing ecological baseline of the ES is based on desk study information and preliminary ecological surveys and hence potential impacts have been identified on the assumption that protected species are present due to the presence of suitable habitat and evidence from local desk study records. The woodland area to the east and west of the railway has potential to support dormice and bats, and there is an active badger sett in the woodland area to the west of the Felixstowe Branch Line Due to the seasonality of survey requirements for protected species surveys as detailed are currently being undertaken in spring and summer As identified in , loss of habitat and disturbance or harm during clearance works to protected species will be mitigated by application of EPSML and PMW, and suitable methods of safe translocation, exclusion, vegetation clearance and soil stripping. Results from the ongoing surveys will either confirm the worst case and/or confirm requirement of further mitigation; or that species are not present. lon_lib1\ \2 48

52 No development will commence in the woodland area to the west and east of the railway until the ongoing ecological surveys are completed, and the Local Planning Authority has confirmed, in consultation with NE, that the development would not affect any bats or dormice. This is a draft condition of the deemed planning consent (CD/1.8) for the proposed works. Hazel Dormice If hazel dormice, or evidence of their presence, are found during ongoing surveys, an EPSML will be completed and submitted to NE for approval. No development will commence until a EPSML is granted by NE; this is a draft condition of the deemed planning consent (CD/ 1.8) for the proposed works The licence application will detail the timing of the works and method of displacement/ translocation, in line with best practice guidance, and it will also include the mitigation required for habitat creation, to replace the lost habitat for the hazel dormouse population The proposed habitat creation, as provided by the landscaping scheme, will improve the existing connectivity for local and regional hazel dormouse populations. Due to the species-rich diversity of plants to be used, providing both foraging and nesting opportunities, it will also increase the suitability of habitat in the surrounding area for hazel dormouse If no hazel dormice are found to be present during the ongoing hazel dormouse tube surveys, an EPSML will not be needed to enable the construction works to go ahead. Bats - Tree Roost If bats are recorded as using the mature oak to the west of the railway, and it is confirmed the tree is required to be removed for the proposed works, an EPSML will be completed and submitted to NE for approval. No development will commence until a EPSML is granted by NE; this is a draft condition of the deemed planning consent for the proposed works The licence application will detail the timings of the works, methods to be used and will include the creation of artificial roosting features the most commonly used of which are bat boxes (as part of the mitigation works) within the retained area of the woodland as close to where the roost is currently located as possible. Depending upon the species identified as using the roost within the oak tree, the mitigation artificial roost will likely require a minimum of one visit, one year after the completion of the proposed works as monitoring of such features is a requirement of any bat licence application If, following the ongoing bat emergence and re-entry surveys, it is confirmed that the tree is not being used as a bat roost, an EPSML will not be required and the tree can be felled as part of the vegetation clearance works. Bats - Foraging and Commuting The proposed works will involve the loss of vegetation and disturbance (from temporary lon_lib1\ \2 49

53 construction lighting) A temporary corridor will be created along one side of the route during construction to maintain linear connectivity between habitats for echo-locating bats. A lighting scheme will be included in the final CEMP to minimise light spill during construction onto the surrounding habitats; this will include the use of cowled directional lighting Works will not take place in the woodland area to the east of the railway until specifications and location of the bat corridor have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with NE. This is a draft condition of the deemed planning consent (CD/ 1.8).for the proposed works The proposed habitat creation, as provided by the landscaping scheme, will improve the existing connectivity for local and regional foraging and commuting bats. Due to the speciesrich diversity of plants to be used that provide both foraging and commuting opportunities, it will also increase the suitability of habitat in the surrounding area for bats. Badgers The proposed works will involve the loss of an active badger sett, therefore, a mitigation licence will be completed and submitted to NE for approval to close the sett The licence application will detail timings of the works, methods to be used to close and remove the current sett, and will include details of the creation of an artificial badger sett (as part of the mitigation works) within the retained area of the woodland, as close as possible to where it is currently located This woodland area will not be removed until an EPSML is granted by NE; this is a draft condition of the deemed planning consent for the proposed works. Ground Conditions and Contamination With the incorporated mitigation, the construction of the proposed works will not increase the contamination risk presented at the site. This mitigation incorporated within the design, will result in an overall betterment of the land during the operational phase due to the removal / remediation of on-site contamination sources during construction. Removal or remediation of on-site contamination is a draft condition of the deemed planning consent for the proposed works. Historic Environment Potential impacts to archaeological features have been avoided and minimised, where possible, by embedding mitigation measures in the design and construction planning through methods such as building up ground levels/ no dig solutions, where practicable. Measures also include monitoring of general site preparation ground works by archaeological watching briefs lon_lib1\ \2 50

54 and more sensitive, intrusive ground works being subject to trial trench evaluation. A Written Scheme of Investigation and Geo-Archaeological Watching Brief will be submitted to the Local Planning Authority prior to construction of the bridge. This is a draft condition of the deemed planning consent (CD/ 1.8).for the proposed works. Overall, if buried archaeological resource is found the proposed works will result in minor to moderate adverse significant effect It is considered that the 15 listed buildings (identified in Table 9.5 of the ES (CD/1.14.1) (including Grimston Hall)) and the scheduled monument (anti-aircraft installation at Searson s Farm) identified within 500m of the proposed LLAU are screened from the proposed works and will not be subject to any change. Landscape and Visual Amenity The proposed works introduce new built infrastructure in the form of a bridleway bridge across the existing railway, within a semi-rural and agricultural setting. Potential impacts to landscape character and visual setting have been minimised, where possible, through the design of the structure, its layout, colour (Holly Green) and planting of vegetation and screening, where appropriate For the majority of receptors the visual effects of the proposed works are anticipated to be negligible to minor, due to the oblique or indirect views. However, for some receptors, such as residents and users of part of the Public Right of Way (PRoW) network (Figure 3.2 of ES Volume 2 (CD/1.14.2)), construction of the proposed works will result in significant moderate to major adverse temporary effects. Impacts are likely to arise from the construction compound and storage of materials and the construction of the bridleway bridge Following construction, initially the bridge will have a moderate to major significant effect on visitors and a minor to moderate effect on residents and the setting of the Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). However, as the planting and screening vegetation matures, the effect will reduce to negligible once fully established If the TWAO is approved a landscaping scheme will be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval no later than six months after the commencement of the development. This is a draft condition of the deemed planning consent for the proposed works Further consideration of the landscape and visual impacts to the AONB are addressed in Section 12 of this Statement of Case. People and Communities As identified in Section 6, Order Scheme Description, and Section 9, Public Rights of Way Strategy, the design of the proposed works, specifically the PRoW works, has been developed in consultation with SCC to improve safety, maintain access across the railway and connectivity to the PRoW network. Best practice measures, such as diversions routes, clear signage and notification procedures identified in the draft CEMP, will reduce disruption to users of the PRoW network and residential receptors. lon_lib1\ \2 51

55 During construction, reduced connectivity to the PRoW network and loss of amenity due to the works site and construction activities will result in temporary significant adverse effects on PRoW users, residential occupiers and agricultural business Once restoration planting has established, the amenity of the area surrounding will improve. Overall, the proposed works will improve connectivity in the PRoW network, and will have an inherent significant beneficial effect because the closure of the passive level crossings will improve safety. Traffic and Transport Potential disruption from construction vehicle impacts and access as well as temporary suspension of rail services during railway possessions have been avoided and minimised, where possible, by best practice measures such as access routing, and provision and notification of PRoW network diversions identified in the draft CEMP. A traffic management plan will be developed with the Local Planning Authority and will detail lorry routes, bus routes and interchanges, construction signage, safety measures for pedestrians, cyclists and other vulnerable users and any other construction traffic management measures required by the Local Highway Authority. The traffic management plan will be included within the CEMP A number of weekend track possessions on the Felixstowe Branch Line will be required during which rail services will not be able to operate between Trimley and Ipswich. Rail replacement bus services will be provided but journey times will be extended. This will have a minor adverse effect which is not significant The relatively low number of heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) generated by the proposed works will have a negligible effect on traffic flows on the strategic road network As identified in Section 9, Public Right of Way Strategy, temporary diversion routes to facilitate connectivity and to provide circular routes for leisure users will mitigate the temporary adverse effect on PRoW routes during construction Once the proposed works are complete, the closure of the level crossings will increase in route length for some users; however, the provision of the bridleway bridge will maintain connectivity of PRoW across the railway and to the wider network. Therefore, it is considered that there will not be a significant severance effect as a result of the proposed works Overall, the proposed works will have an inherent significant beneficial effect because the closure of the passive level crossings will improve safety. In-combination and Cumulative Effects As identified in Section 10.2, the construction of the proposed works will be completed within the construction programme of the wider scheme. The ES assessed the in-combination effects of the proposed works which can occur where there is more than one impact on a particular resource or receptor, as well as cumulative effects of the wider scheme, and other proposed lon_lib1\ \2 52

56 developments in the surrounding area. Although there is potential for cumulative effects, they will be limited to the construction phase and, therefore, temporary in nature. Such effects will be avoided and minimised, where possible, by best practice measures identified in the draft CEMP Once operational, there is potential for in-combination effects on visual, habitat and amenity receptors; largely as a result of the introduction of the structure and loss of vegetation to the local surroundings. However, once the restoration planting has established, there will be an overall beneficial in-combination effect During operation there are likely to be residual cumulative effects related to the objectives of the wider Felixstowe Branch Line Enhancement works including a cumulative beneficial effect in relation to safety for passengers and the local public and cumulative beneficial effect in relation to increased freight, and thereby, growth of operational capacity at the Port of Felixstowe Summary Through design development, a number of options and alternatives (as described in Section 8 of this Statement of Case) have been considered with an understanding of the potential environmental effects. This has resulted in a number of potential adverse effects being avoided or minimised It is acknowledged that some adverse effects will be experienced during the construction phase of the proposed works due to temporary construction disturbance. Adverse effects anticipated to arise will be reduced, as far as possible, through the implementation of mitigation measures (as detailed in the CEMP). Prior to construction, design specification and control measures will be detailed with respect to commitments under the TWAO to avoid or minimise environmental effects During operation, there are a number of beneficial effects in relation to safety and the expanded PRoW network. In the medium to longer term, as the native, species rich habitat reinstatement and screening planting establishes, there will be beneficial effects to the conservation status of habitats within the site and landscape character of the area Overall, in line with the primary aim of the proposed works, the operation of the scheme will provide long term beneficial effects to the local area, providing safe pedestrian, cyclist and equestrian access and connectivity across the railway. lon_lib1\ \2 53

57 12 Landscape and Visual Impact including Setting of Heritage Assets 12.1 Introduction An assessment of Landscape and Visual Impacts (LVIA) is included in the ES (CD/1.14.1) In this assessment, it is identified that a section of the proposed works, to the south-east of the bridleway bridge location (near to Keeper s Lane) is directly adjacent to the boundary of the Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). Footpath 1 (Cordy s Lane) to be upgraded to a bridleway lies within the AONB. The boundary of the AONB also runs within 250m of the proposed works along the south-eastern extension of Grimston Lane. This is shown in Figure 3.5 of the ES Volume 2 (CD/1.14.2) During the operation, it is assessed that until the proposed planting establishes, the loss of vegetation, as well as the presence of the bridleway bridge structure will result in a noticeable difference in landscape character and have an adverse effect. When considered in the context of the integrity of the AONB this is considered to result in a minor adverse effect As the proposed vegetation matures, and becomes established, it will provide screening of the proposed bridleway bridge and will reduce the impact of the proposed works. There may still be residual views of the bridleway bridge, and more so in winter. However, the setting of the AONB will be largely the same as the baseline condition estate farmlands, interspersed with blocks of woodland The following sections review the potential impact on setting and views from the AONB and the visual impacts at Grimston Hall Impact on AONB and Mitigation The Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB extends from the Stour Estuary in the south to Kessingland in the north and is a low lying coastal area characterised by a wide variety of landscape types. It is notable as it contrasts with the wider arable landscape that is typical of East Anglia. It includes shingle beaches, crumbling cliffs, marshes, estuaries, heathland, forests and farmland In the area surrounding the proposed works, the character of the AONB consists of estate farmland, with open views interspersed with farms and settlements, and woodland and hedges providing a strong feature within a largely rectilinear field structure. The Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Management Plan identifies that In some places views of the ports of Felixstowe and Harwich can be very prominent. (CD/4.22) The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (CD/4.1) sets out advice relating to the 12 core planning principles in the delivery of sustainable development. Paragraph 115 states that: Great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. lon_lib1\ \2 54

58 In developing the proposed works, consideration was given to the location and form of the bridge to avoid encroachment on the AONB boundary, as well as minimising the structure s footprint. This required the balancing of safety, operational and maintenance requirements. Provision of the bridge maintains access and connectivity between the Trimley villages and the AONB The LVIA concludes that landscape effects on the AONB will minor adverse during construction, minor adverse at Year 0 and negligible/minor adverse in Year 15. The effects identified at Year 0 are as a result of the loss of vegetation, as well as the presence of the bridleway bridge structure, outside the AONB boundary but in a location which forms some of the landscape setting from parts of the AONB within the zone of visual influence. By Year 15 the incorporated mitigation measures (outlined in Section 10.5 of the ES, CD/1.14.1) will provide effective screening of the proposed bridleway bridge and will reduce the impact of the proposed works as a whole, restoring the setting of the AONB to one which is largely the same as the baseline condition The Setting of and Views from the AONB Although not within the AONB, the proposed bridleway bridge will be visible from some locations within the designated area. As identified in , the Trimley villages and Port of Felixstowe are strong features either side of the existing railway. Views from the proposed bridleway bridge, and from various locations on the PRoW network in the surrounding area include these features when looking east and west respectively Guidance associated with planning and development on the Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB website identify development characteristics that could have a positive or negative impact on the primary purpose of the AONB (to conserve and enhance the area s natural beauty) 2. Those of sufficient scale, e.g. of a footprint and/or height that could detract from the landscape qualities of the area. Those that could significantly reduce the tranquillity of the area, through increased levels of noise and light. Those that could lead to a notable increase in disturbance, e.g. an increased number of visitors. Those that could lead to a change in landscape character, urbanisation of the countryside or an inappropriate change of use. Those that relate to changes to public rights of way or areas of public access. Those that seek to establish a precedent, move away from Development Plan policy or exception sites The proposed works are not considered to be of a sufficient scale to be captured by these criteria. The parapets of the proposed bridge at approximately 7m above the track level is a comparable height to a two storey building, such as the existing residential properties directly 2 lon_lib1\ \2 55

59 adjacent to the existing railway at Grimston Lane and Gaymers Lane. This localised scale of built form does not detract from the landscape quality of the AONB setting Once completed, it is not considered that the proposed works will result in reducing the tranquillity of the area by disturbance such as lighting and noise. The bridleway bridge is not proposed to be lit, and any future requirement for lighting would be subject to a new planning application, including appropriate assessment of potential impacts to the AONB. The surface material of the proposed bridleway bridge will be confirmed in accordance with Network Rail and British Horse Society guidance and specification The proposed works include the closure of six passive level crossings and construction of an alternative crossing over the existing railway to maintain connectivity. It is not considered that the proposed works, and in the context of the wider scheme, will increase visitors to the area As mentioned in Section 8, the permanent land take required for the proposed bridleway bridge is limited, and directly adjacent to the existing railway. It is not considered to result in a significant change in land use or land character in the context of the existing operational railway once proposed mitigation measures have established The proposed works have been developed to maintain and improve connectivity to the PRoW network, as well as improve the inherent safety of crossing the railway. These are included in the objectives of the proposed works, as identified in the ES and Planning Statement (CD/1.15). The proposed works include the closure of six passive level crossings, and the diversion and provision of new PRoW, as well as the proposed bridleway bridge as an alternative crossing. Temporary diversions maintaining circular routes for leisure use have also been included to maintain access to the PRoW network during construction The Suffolk Coastal Core Strategy and Development Management Policies identifies a vision embracing economic growth, accessibility and sustainability. The proposed works, in the context of the wider scheme, fully support this vision The visual effects on receptors within the study area are detailed in ES LVIA Section 10.6 and Appendix 10.1 (CD/1.14.3) ES Figures 10.3 and 10.4 (CD/1.14.2) illustrate existing and proposed summer and winter views from Viewpoint 3, which is located within the AONB and representative of the view from this location. Vegetation within the Year 15 photomontages is shown at the expected height by Year 15 based on the information presented in ES Table It is considered that the proposed work would not result in significant effects to the visual receptors within the AONB Views from Grimston Hall As identified in the ES, Grimston Hall is a Grade II listed building (Listing No ) of the early 18th Century that is located 340m to the south-west of the proposed bridleway bridge (as lon_lib1\ \2 56

60 illustrated on Figure 3.2 of ES Volume 2). From the Gazetteer, it was listed in 1983 with list entry details identifying it as an early eighteenth century house, possibly with an earlier core. The structure is timber framed and plastered with plain tiled roof, and brick stacks to gable returns. It is two storeys with dormers to the east roof slope. No significant features other than its age, and typical form are listed The Hall is within an active, semi-isolated, rural agricultural setting, with the field pattern, and of network of paths between fields and villages remaining largely unchanged since the construction of the railway in The direct line of sight from Grimston Hall to the proposed works is obscured by trees and shrubs along the driveway of the property. During construction, there will be impacts to the semi tranquil nature of the area; however, these will be temporary, and minimised by control measures included in the CEMP (A4.1 NR13d). Due to the distance, as well as the nature of the setting of Grimston Hall, the proposed works are not considered to affect elements of the setting which contribute to the significance of the heritage asset The visual effects on receptors within the zone of visual influence are detailed in ES LVIA Section 10.6 and Appendix For receptors on Grimston Lane (where Grimston Hall is located) the significance of effect is judged to be no higher than moderate adverse at Year 0 and minor adverse at Year 15. ES Figures 10.3 and 10.4 illustrate existing and proposed summer and winter views from Viewpoint 3, which is located to the north-east of Grimston Hall. This direct line of sight from Viewpoint 3 is in line with the views from Grimston Hall; however, vegetation along the access to Grimston Hall obscures the direct line of sight to the proposed works. Vegetation within the Year 15 photomontages is shown at the expected height by Year 15 based on the information presented in ES Table Summary As identified in section 12.2, the proposed bridleway bridge does not lie within the AONB and is not considered a sufficient scale to impact the designation. In the context of the surrounding estate farmland character, including an active rural setting interspersed with woodland, and with the strong features of the Trimley villages and Port of Felixstowe, it is considered that the location, scale and form of the proposed bridleway bridge is an appropriate structure crossing the existing railway. The works can be successfully mitigated through measures described within the ES resulting in no significant residual landscape and visual effects by Year In the context of the AONB, the proposals do not adversely affect the AONB in terms of the key criteria of scale, tranquillity, visitor numbers, change in land use and the PRoW network. 13 Land and Property 13.1 Introduction lon_lib1\ \2 57

61 This section explains the land powers under the 2014 Order which Network Rail intend to use to construct the Order Scheme and any additional land powers required and sought under the Order Scheme Explanation of Existing Land Powers The Port Company obtained authorisation to construct an additional track along the Felixstowe Brach Line together with other works in 2008 under the Felixstowe Branch Line and Ipswich Yard Improvement Order 2008 (CD/2.1). The Port Company renewed the land powers under the Felixstowe Branch Line (Land Acquisition) Order 2014 (CD/2.6). This included powers to acquire the land required to construct and operate the railway including: Temporary possession over land for worksite, access and materials storage Temporary possession for the provision of temporary footpath diversions Permanent acquisition of land shown within the Limits of Deviation It is intended to construct the double track, authorised under the 2008 Order and the Order Scheme at the same time. To enable an efficient construction, Network Rail intend to use the same facilities for both construction of the double track authorised under the 2014 Order and the proposed bridge, which is the subject to this application. Network Rail therefore intends to exercise powers under the 2014 Order to enable the construction of the Order Scheme Network Rail has submitted illustrative plans as part of the Order Scheme application which identifies land over which powers are conferred under the 2014 Order and any additional land and land powers required under the Order Scheme. 14 Proposed Land Acquisitions 14.1 Introduction The Order, if approved, would grant Network Rail the powers to compulsorily acquire land and rights over land needed to construct and maintain the bridge together with ancillary works e.g. manage landscaping Land and property will be acquired or used for the scheme in a number of different instances including: Temporary possession to provide a temporary right of way Temporary occupation of land to provide an access for construction / construction worksite Permanent acquisition to provide a permanent right of way Permanent acquisition for environmental mitigation (provision of landscaping) Creation of a right of access for maintenance works The Order limits the powers which are conferred in each of these cases to the category of interest which is required. All the areas of land and property rights which are sought in the draft lon_lib1\ \2 58

62 Order are necessary for the Order Scheme and no land will be acquired unless essential for the construction, operation and maintenance of the Order Scheme Network Rail is seeking to acquire the necessary land and rights by negotiation with the owners. Compulsory powers will only be used where it is not possible or practicable to reach agreement. Land parcels described in the Book of Reference (CD/1.12) are shown on the Deposited Plans (CD/1.10) which accompanies the draft Order Proposed Permanent Acquisition for the Order Scheme Permanent acquisition of certain land is required to construct the Order Scheme. The land required for the bridge is owned by Network Rail (where the bridge crosses the railway track) and Trinity College (the area adjacent to the railway line). Trinity College lease their land to agricultural businesses Network Rail is also seeking permanent powers to acquire the land required for environmental mitigation. This includes land owned by Trinity College and The Lime and Granges Trust. Landscape screening is proposed in the area immediately adjacent to the proposed bridge (on the east and west sides of the railway track). It is also proposed to reinstate a hedgerow along a field boundary to the east of the railway providing further landscape screening and ecological enhancement and connectivity. Trinity College own the land immediately adjacent to the railway line. The Lime and Granges Trust own the land where it is proposed to plant a hedgerow. The existing land is currently used for agricultural purposes Network Rail is seeking to divert a number of Public Rights of Way on a permanent basis. To enable this, it is seeking to permanently acquire the land required for the diversions. With the exception of one land parcel, the freehold for the land required for diversions belongs to Trinity College which has a number of different tenant farmers that operate over this land. Whilst it is not known who owns the land comprised in Parcel 53 which connects Cordy s Lane with Keepers Lane/Gaymers Lane (Bridleway 22) in the Parish of Trimley St Mary it is understood that Trinity College has an interest over this land Proposed Additional Temporary Powers for the Order Scheme Powers of temporary possession are required in relation to land which is needed for construction purposes. This includes worksites, construction access and temporary PRoW diversions Land required for temporary possession is owned by a combination of Trinity College and the Lime and Granges Trust. Both freeholders have a number of tenant farmers operating over the land Proposed Acquisition of Permanent Rights for Mitigation Network Rail is seeking rights of access over some land parcels in order to be able to maintain the proposed bridleway bridge and to manage environmental mitigation (landscaping) planted lon_lib1\ \2 59

63 as part of the Order Scheme The parcels of land over which Network Rail is seeking rights of access are owned by Suffolk County Council, Trinity College, the Lime and Granges Trust and an unknown owner own land comprised in parcels 16 and 17 shown on the plans which is part of Grimston Lane. However, whilst it is understood that this land is public highway, a private land sign has been erected adjacent to Grimston Lane and Network Rail has taken a cautious approach and sought a right of access over the land in the event of any dispute in ownership Trinity College owns land which Network Rail requires in order to access the bridge for maintenance purposes and the landscape screening proposed to be planted on the east and west sides of the railway track The Lime and Granges Trust owns land which Network Rail require in order to access the proposed hedgerow on the eastern side of the railway It is not fully known who owns land on the boundary of Restricted Byway 3 (Gun Lane) (land parcels 41, 42 and 43). This land is required to access both the eastern side of the railway to maintain the bridge and manage landscaping (adjacent to the bridge and along the proposed hedgerow). The freehold of part of land along Restricted Byway 3 (Gun Lane) belongs to the Lime and Granges Trust (land parcel 40) Extinguishment of Private Vehicular Rights Private vehicular rights over the level crossing at Gun Lane and Keepers Lane exist. Trinity College and its tenants benefit from rights over these crossings. Two other persons also benefit from rights over Keepers Lane Level Crossing. Network Rail is proposing to extinguish these rights and compensate those affected Explanation of Approach - Neighbourhood Planning Act Network Rail s preferred approach in relation to the land over which public rights of way are to be diverted under the Order is not to compulsorily acquire that land. Instead temporary powers would be exercised over the land to enable Network Rail to carry out any minor works required to provide the new footpaths and bridleways and for the Order to create the new public rights of way. However, this approach may be precluded or affected by the new regime for temporary possession under the Neighbourhood Planning Act 2017 (CD/ 3.17) and the regulations to be made under section 29 of that Act. The Regulations have not yet been made nor have any drafts been issued. Although article 28 of the Order seeks to disapply the relevant provisions of the 2017 Act, it is uncertain whether, as a matter of policy, the Secretary of State would make the Order to include article Given this uncertainly, as a precaution, the land needed for the diversion of the rights of way has been included in Schedule 2 to the Order as land authorised to be compulsorily acquired lon_lib1\ \2 60

64 (and not as temporary only land in Schedule 9). Article 14(1)(a)(ii) of the Order provides power to take temporary possession of any land within Order limits being all land shown within the limits of deviation and the limits of land to be acquired or used shown on the works and lands plans accompanying the application for the Order. This will enable the preferred approach to be adopted if that is not precluded by the new regime under the 2017 Act but, if it is, the land in question can be compulsorily acquired so that the new rights of way can be dedicated by Network Rail Compensation Code Those who have land or an interest in land taken from them either temporarily or permanently will be entitled to compensation. Landowners whose property is affected by the works may be entitled to compensation in certain circumstances The Order applies Part 1 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 which through its application has the effect of requiring Network Rail to pay compensation to qualifying parties under what is known as the Statutory Compensation Code. That Code as it now stands is an amalgamation of numerous Acts of Parliament and legal precedent that have evolved over the last 150 years Schedule of Land/Rights Required A full schedule of land/rights required for the Order is in Appendix C. 15 Consultation and Engagement 15.1 Legal Context Network Rail has held pre-application consultation on the Order Scheme. This includes formal consultation as required under the Transport and Works (Applications and Objections Procedure) (England and Wales) Rules 2006 ( the TWA Applications Rules ) (CD/3.1) Rule 10 (2) (d) of the TWA Applications Rules requires promoters to confirm that there has been consultation with the bodies and persons referred to in Schedules 5 and 6 of those Rules. Network Rail sent all statutory consultees a letter describing the proposals and inviting feedback (see Appendix C of the Summary of Consultations Undertaken (CD/1.13)) In addition, individual meetings were held with some of the statutory consultees including Suffolk Coastal District Council, the British Horse Society, Natural England, Trimley St Mary and Trimley St Martin Parish Council and affected landowners. A programme of pre-application activity, which includes meetings with some of the statutory consultees is set out in Appendix A to the Summary of Consultations Undertaken submitted in support of the application The formal consultation undertaken in accordance with legal requirements forms part of the wider pre-application consultation that was carried out in respect of the proposal which is described in detail in Section lon_lib1\ \2 61

65 15.2 Consultation Strategy Network Rail developed a consultation strategy which had regard to the best practice set out within A Guide to TWA Procedures and guidance for carrying out pre-application consultation including under other consenting regimes such as the Planning Act The level crossings and PRoW network is an important local asset and therefore considered that it would be necessary to go beyond the consultation requirements as set out within the TWA Rules and in addition to consulting with statutory consultees also engage with members of the community, landowners and local amenity groups Network Rail decided to hold a public information event so that members of the public could receive further information about the project and provide feedback which could be considered and potentially incorporated into the design of the scheme. Network Rail therefore decided to hold the public consultation at the same time that the request for Scoping Opinion was published, since environmental information relating to the proposal was then available. This was also at a sufficiently early stage in the project to be able to allow Network Rail to consult on the proposals, obtain feedback on the scheme, consider how the feedback could be potentially incorporated into the scheme and advise those who commented on how the feedback received has been addressed In addition to the public information event, Network Rail wrote to amenity groups and landowners to advise them of the proposal and invite feedback Pre-application consultation The pre-application consultation which took over nine months prior to the submission of the application. The consultation activities included: Meetings with key stakeholders Public Engagement/Consultation Event Letters to Amenity Groups Meetings with Stakeholders Network Rail met with a number of different stakeholders over the course of the development of the proposals. Details of the meetings held with stakeholders and a summary of the outcome of each meeting is set out in Appendix D. In summary: Four meetings were held with officers from Suffolk Coastal District Council (some of these meetings were held jointly with other parties) Six meetings were held with officers from (some of these meetings were held jointly with other parties) One teleconference was held with Natural England lon_lib1\ \2 62

66 One meeting was held with the Parishes of Trimley St Martin and Trimley St Mary One meeting was held with the British Horse Society Five meetings were held with representatives of Trinity College (some of these meetings were held jointly with other parties) One meeting was held with a representative from the Lime and Granges Trust Public Consultation / Engagement Event Network Rail held a public consultation in early November 2016, shortly after it submitted its request for Scoping Opinion. The event was held and Trimley College Sports and Social Club which is approximately 1km from the location of the proposed bridleway bridge In advance of the event, Network Rail sent invitations to over 2000 local residents. Invitations were also sent to local amenity groups and statutory consultees. Full details of the recipients of the invitations are available in the Summary of Consultations Undertaken. The event was also advertised along the level crossings which Network Rail is proposing to close Approximately 185 people attended the event which included representatives from the Ramblers Association, Trimley St Mary and Trimley St Martin Parish Councils, local residents and the Port of Felixstowe The information that was presented at the event included details of the proposed bridleway bridge, including images and information about the level crossings which Network Rail is proposing to close and proposed diversions. This information was also published on Network Rail s website following the event Network Rail requested comments to be made in respect of the scheme by early December The main issues raised in respect of the scheme included: Safety concerns for equestrian users wishing to cross the bridleway bridge Request for an underpass to be provided instead of the bridge Objections to the stopping up of some level crossings Visual appearance of the bridge and impact on the landscape Length of the diversion from Keepers Lane Level Crossing Network Rail considered the feedback received and reassessed some of the options that were discounted earlier in the optioneering exercise. This included the feasibility to provide an underpass. Network Rail also met with the BHS (described above) to review the design of the proposed bridge and features that are proposed to be incorporated into the design to make it safe for equestrian users Network Rail subsequently published further information in respect of the scheme on its website in January Network Rail notified individuals of the additional information where contact details of respondents were available. lon_lib1\ \2 63

67 Letters to Amenity Group Network Rail sent letters to local amenity groups to notify them of the Order Scheme and invite comments on the proposal. Full details of the recipients of letters are available in the Summary of Consultations Undertaken. Conclusion Network Rail has met its obligations under the TWA Rules with regard to carrying out statutory consultation. Network Rail has also consulted local amenity groups, landowners and key stakeholders and held a public engagement event with regard to the Order Scheme. Mixed feedback has been received with respect to this and as a result, Network Rail revisited the design and sought to address queries raised The Order Scheme has also benefitted from input from Suffolk Coastal District Council, Suffolk County Council and Natural England Some issues have not been resolved and Network Rail will continue to work with stakeholders to see if the outstanding items can be addressed. 16 Objections, Representations and Statements of Support 16.1 Period for Making Representations The application for the Order Scheme was submitted to the Department for Transport on 6th March A period for making comments on the application followed thereafter and closed on the 19th April The Secretary of State received eleven letters of objection, three representations and seven letters of support Objector s Issues Eleven letters of objection were originally received although one objection has since been withdrawn. Outstanding letters of objection have been received from the Parish of Trimley St Martin, the Ramblers Association (Ipswich), Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB officer, Trinity College, the Residents and Users of Trackside Park Cordys Lane and a number of residents/individuals. A summary of the issues raised by objectors is set out below. Closure and Diversion of Public Rights of Way Network Issues Raised Trimley St Martin Parish Council and the Ramblers Association (RA) (Ipswich) state that the plan to close six level crossings is considered to represent a significant loss of amenity for residents, walkers and cyclists The RA (Ipswich) states that no new paths are offered except those close to the railway The RA (Ipswich) state that it does not object to the closure of Thorpe Common, Grimston Lane lon_lib1\ \2 64

68 and Gun Lane Level Crossings but does object to the closure of Trimley and Keepers Lane Level Crossings A resident separately objected to the closure of Keepers Lane and the lengthy diversion that would be provided as a mitigation. The resident also queries whether the new footpaths are to be shared with farm traffic and Network Rail can confirm that this is not intended to be the case although a number of diversions are adjacent to farm tracks and along existing byways The RA (Ipswich) note that Network Rail has made no attempt to improve information about impending trains for walkers to cross In its objection, Trinity College states that building a bridge between Gun Lane and Keepers Lane would result in shorter diversion at Keepers Lane. Response The Order Scheme creates new PRoW adjacent to the railway as part of the diversion of Thorpe Common Level Crossing. This represents the shortest possible diversion and avoids severance of farmers fields. A new footpath is also provided connecting Bridleway 22 in the Parish of Trimley St Mary with Grimston Lane. The path is aligned partly adjacent to the railway and then through a field, adjacent to a farm track to Grimston Lane As noted above in Section 12, the level crossings which are proposed to be closed are passive and it is incumbent on the user of the level crossing to check that it is safe to cross before doing so. In addition, the most effective way to reduce the risk is to close the level crossing Whilst Network Rail agrees with Trinity College and that, siting the bridge further south would mean a shorter diversion for users of Keepers Lane Level Crossing, it would also give rise to a lengthier diversion for users of the level crossings users to the east of the application site. Usability of the Proposed Bridleway Bridge at Gun Lane Issues Raised A number of objections have been received in respect of the ability of equestrian users to use and cross over the Felixstowe Branch Line via the proposed bridleway bridge (two residents, Trimley St Martin Parish Council and the Residents and Users of Trackside Park Cordys Lane). The letters of objection state that the bridleway bridge structure is not fit for carrying horses, which could be startled by the trains. As a result, many equestrian users would make use of the main road instead In its objection, a local resident queried whether a phone system would be in place to ensure safe passage over the bridleway bridge; whether the views of a local representative of the BHS had been sought; and whether equestrian users of bridleways had been approached. lon_lib1\ \2 65

69 Response In response to the above queries: A phone system is not proposed as it is not deemed necessary. The design of the bridge has been developed with regard to guidance published by the BHS. The views of the Suffolk branch of the BHS on the proposal have been sought and a meeting with representatives was held on the7th December Equestrian users from the Trimley area also attended the meeting. Local equestrian users were approached as part of the public engagement event. It was made clear at the event that there is nervousness amongst local equestrian users regarding crossing a bridge over a railway with a horse. In response to discussions with the BHS, and in accordance with BHS guidance, all trackside parapets of the approach ramps, as well as parapets on the bridge deck are of solid infill to screen the railway from horses using the proposed bridge. The geometry of the proposed bridge has been developed in accordance with guidance provided in British Horse Society publications (CD/5.7). The proposed bridge is consistent with other examples of bridleway bridges on the national road and rail networks. Landscape and Visual Impact including Impact on the Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) Issues Raised A number of objections have been received in respect of the landscape impact generated by the Order Scheme and specifically the proposed bridleway bridge. This includes the impact on the Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB. Objections in this regard have been received from Suffolk Coastal District Council, the Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB, Trimley St Martin Parish Council, Trinity College and residents Trimley St Martin Parish Council recognise that landscape planting would screen the bridge to a certain extent but also highlight the visual impact on users of the bridleway bridge. It should be noted that the impact of the bridge on users of the bridleway is temporary to the extent of approaching and crossing the railway Queries have been raised by both the Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB and Suffolk Coastal District Council with regard to the length of time it will take for landscape mitigation planting to establish Trinity College has also objected to the Order Scheme on the basis of the views to the bridge from Grimston Hall. Trinity College also refers to the provision of lighting and a cage on top of lon_lib1\ \2 66

70 the bridge span. It should be noted that these items do not form part of the current proposal. Response The visualisation within the ES (CD/1.14.1, CD/1.14.2, CD/1.14.3) provides an indication at year of opening and as to screening at 5 years and 15 years. This has been prepared based on our experience of projects elsewhere and assumed growth rates provided at We will continue to liaise and discuss the screening strategy with SCDC as well as Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB Partnership to develop a strategy that reduces impact as much as practicable Grimston Hall is a Grade II listed building to the south west of the proposed bridleway bridge. The direct line of sight from Grimston Hall to the proposed bridleway bridge is obscured by trees and vegetation along the driveway of the property. The visual impacts on this property are discussed in Section The bridge has however been designed to include passive provision for a cage over the bridge span. If such a cage were to be built in the future, planning permission would be required. Landscape and Visual Impact Location of the Bridge Trinity College has objected to the scheme on the basis that bridge should be located between Keepers Lane and Gun Lane Further information on the optioneering process and why it has been chosen to locate the bridge at Gun Lane is described in Section 5 above. Vehicular Bridge Trinity College has objected to the scheme on the basis that bridge should be able to accommodate vehicles Further information on the optioneering process as well as the rationale for discounted a vehicular bridge is available in Section 5 above. Underpass In its objection, Trimley St Martin Parish Council and a resident has advised that an underpass would be preferable to a bridleway bridge An underpass has been discounted for the reasons discussed in Section 8 above. Con-Arch Bridge A resident has queried whether Trinity College s alternative, traditional bridge been discounted. The option put forward by Trinity College comprised a vehicular bridge of a Con-Arch design. The image understood to be shared amongst the community included a bridge of short ramps and a steep gradient. lon_lib1\ \2 67

71 It is not feasible to provide a Con-Arch bridge as, similar to the Order scheme the ramps would need to comprise a gradient of at least 1:15 in order to be suitable for equestrian users A Con-Arch bridge has been discounted as: Land take outside of the Network Rail boundary would be increased over the steel bridleway bridge option. Construction duration would be greater than the proposed bridge. Costs would be greater than the proposed bridge. due to the high amount of material that is required, the length of brick bridges tends to be very small making it more suitable for canals. the cost required to build and maintain a con-arch bridge are anticipated to be more significant than a steel deck bridge The closest comparable example of a recently constructed vehicular bridge over a railway is Ufton Lane, built to replace an Automatic Half Barrier level crossing at Ufton Nervet in Berkshire. The bridge carries a public road over the railway and comprises a pre-cast concrete deck, brick parapets, and earth raised approaches. The land take required for the construction of this bridge is greater than that required for the Order Scheme giving rise to additional ecological and landscape and visual impact. In addition, the cost of constructing the bridge at Ufton Nervet is greater than that proposed in the Order Scheme. Images of the Ufton Nervet bridge are available in Appendix E. Consultation / Informing the Public Issues Raised Two residents have queried whether the proposal should have been published more widely Trinity College has also objected on the basis of the lack of meaningful consultation A further objection was raised with regard to the deadline for responding to the pre-application consultation. Response As mentioned in Section 14 above, Network Rail held a public information event which involved distributing over 2000 flyers to local residents. Posters advertising the event were also displayed on the Level Crossings which Network Rail proposes to close, following a request by a member of the public. Following submission of the application notices were displayed and newspaper notices were published in accordance with the requirements of the TWA Rules. lon_lib1\ \2 68

72 Network Rail also displayed a notice on the Public Information Board on the High Street Network Rail has engaged with and consulted Trinity College in respect of the proposal since August Agreement between the parties has not been reached. As mentioned in Section 14 above, Network Rail will continue to work with Trinity College to try to address outstanding issues The Public Information Event was held on the 3rd November 2016 and feedback was requested by the 2 December This is a period of over four weeks for providing feedback which Network Rail considers is entirely acceptable and is in accordance with the duration of consultation required under the Planning Act 2008 for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects. Temporary Diversions A resident has queried the nature of temporary PRoW diversions Whilst necessary to stop up some PRoWs on a temporary basis during the construction period, it is intended to keep these closures to a minimum. Temporary diversions have been provided where feasible. Noise and Air Pollution A resident has queried the impact of the project on noise and air quality The Order Scheme would not generate an impact on noise and air pollution and these assessments have therefore been scoped out of the environmental assessment. Location of the Trimley Loop and Increasing Capacity of the Felixstowe Branch Line Issues Raised Whilst not part of the scheme a number of objections were raised with regard to increasing the capacity of the Felixstowe Branch Line and the location of the Trimley Loop. Trimley St Martin Parish Council advises that if the loop were positioned elsewhere (towards Ipswich), the impacts in the Trimley area would be reduced With regard to increasing the capacity of the Felixstowe Branch Line, two objectors were concerned of the impact increasing capacity would have on their properties including noise and air quality Specific queries raised include whether increasing services along the Felixstowe Branch Line would give rise to EU law and whether trains will run through the night A further objection was received from a resident as to whether he is entitled to receive any compensation as a result of doubling of the railway track. lon_lib1\ \2 69

73 Response Network Rail is proposing to dual the Felixstowe Branch Line to the west of the Trimley villages to benefit from the existing double track that runs through the port. If the track were to be doubled elsewhere along the line, the capacity enhancements would not be as great In respect of queries raised regarding the idling of trains, noise and air pollution, these were considered in the ES submitted in support of the 2008 Order application In respect of compensation, these matters will be managed in accordance with the compensation code Representations Representations were received from, Historic England and a local resident. A summary of the issues raised is below: Landscaping notes that the proposed level crossings closures and creation of a new PRoW will not have a significant adverse impact on the landscape or AONB. With regard to the proposed bridleway bridge, notes that there does appear to be a significant risk that the proposed design and scale of the new bridleway bridge is not sympathetic to its rural surroundings and as such will lead to landscape and visual impacts that could be reasonably mitigated by an alternative design approach For the reasons set out in Section 6 above, Network Rail consider that the proposed bridge would generate the least environmental impacts in terms of landscaping of the options considered. Network Rail recognise that there will be a residual impact and so is proposing landscape mitigation. Public Rights of Way Issues Raised raise a number of points of detail with regarding to the proposed PRoW including: Surfacing requirements Requests that temporary closures are kept to a minimum with advanced warning of temporary closures given to members of the public Recognition the significant aesthetic impact the bridleway bridge will have but acknowledges this meets standards for equestrian bridges Omission of reference to definitive maps in the draft Order and deposited Plans lon_lib1\ \2 70

74 Omission of Ordnance Survey grid references Response Network Rail will work with Suffolk Council on the above points and in response to the above, Network Rail will: Keep officers and informed of the proposals for PRoW surfacing Notify members of the public in advance of any temporary closures of PRoW. The duration that these will be closed will be reduced as far as practical Notes the comments with regard to the aesthetics of the bridleway bridge and will work with Suffolk Coastal District Council and Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB to try and address concerns raised in their objections Notes that there is no reference to definitive maps in the draft Order and deposited plans. The Order confers powers to stop up the footpaths and bridleways by reference to the accompanying plans showing the location of those footpaths and bridleways. Notes that there is reference to OS grid references on the deposited Plans and draft Order. The Order provides for the stopping up and diversion of footpaths and bridleways by reference to the accompanying plans produced in accordance with the requirements of the TWA Rules (CD/3.3) and using a system of lettered and numbered points which are defined in article 2(3) of the Order. The draft Order is based on the model clauses prescribed by the Secretary of State for Transport under the 1992 Act for incorporation in draft Orders and the relevant model clauses provide for stopping up by reference to letters and numbers shown on a plan. The Order also follows numerous precedent orders made under the 1992 Act (CD/3.1). Historic Environment Issues Raised has requested revised text to a draft Condition proposed in respect of archaeology Historic England states that based upon the information provided in the ES and accompanying document, we are satisfied that the impact from the proposed works upon the setting of the scheduled monument would be low and would not result in harm to its significance. We therefore have no objections to the proposed works. Response Network Rail will work with the Archaeology team at to agree appropriate wording for the Archaeology Condition. lon_lib1\ \2 71

75 Highways envisages that the closing of the rail crossings will not lead to significant safety concerns nor be of significant detriment to the functionality of the highway. Felixstowe Branch Line A resident queried whether there is any risk of trains idling behind residential properties along the Felixstowe Branch Line As part of the wider enhancement scheme, Network Rail will be removing signals to ensure that if trains have to wait, they are as far as reasonably practicable from residential dwellings Statements of Support Letters of support for the Order Scheme were received from: Suffolk Chamber of Commerce Port of Felixstowe Freightliner Hamburg Sud UK Branch GB Railfreight Ltd New Anglia LEP Mediterranean Shipping Company (UK) Limited Respondents welcomed the measures to enhance the capacity of the Felixstowe Branch Line and the positive impact this would have on UK and local economy In addition, many respondents emphasised the benefits of transporting freight by rail instead of road and highlighted the environmental benefits of this, reducing road congestion and carbon emissions. 17 Notice as Regards Core Documents The list of documents appended to this Statement at Appendix A is a list of those documents which Network Rail currently intends to refer to or put in evidence at the inquiry. Those documents are available for public inspection free of charge until the commencement of the Inquiry at the venues and at the times specified in the table below. ADDRESS TIMES FOR INSPECTION lon_lib1\ \2 72

76 ADDRESS TIMES FOR INSPECTION Trimley Sports and Social Club Tuesday 10:30am 11pm High Road, Wednesday 10:30am 11pm Trimley, Thursday 10:30am 11pm Felixstowe IP11 ORJ Friday 10:30am 12am Saturday 10:30am 12am Sunday 10:30am 10:30pm Monday 10:30am 11pm Felixstowe Library Tuesday 9am 5:30pm Crescent Road, Wednesday 9am- 7:30pm Felixstowe IP11 7BY Thursday 9am- 5:30pm Friday 9am- 5:30pm Saturday 9am- 5pm Sunday 10am 6pm Monday 10am- 4pm Copies of the Statement of Case, or other documents which may be served on or by Network Rail in accordance with Rule 7 of the TWA Inquiries Rules may be inspected free of charge and, where practicable and subject to the payment of a reasonable charge, obtained between the hours of 9:00am and 5:00pm Monday to Friday at Network rail, Floor 12, One Stratford Place, Stratford, London E20 1EJ (telephone / ). lon_lib1\ \2 73

77 APPENDICIES Appendix A List of Core Documents Appendix B Images of Bridge Options Appendix C Schedule of Land/Rights Appendix D Summary of Engagement Appendix E Images of Ufton Nervert Bridge lon_lib1\ \2 74

78 APPENDIX A LIST OF CORE DOCUMENTS ORDER SCHEME CD/1.1 CD/1.2 CD/1.3 CD/1.4 CD/1.5 CD/1.6 CD/1.7 Application Draft Network Rail (Felixstowe Branch Line Improvements - Level Crossings Closure) Order Explanatory Memorandum Statement of Aims List of permissions or licences under other enactments Funding Statement Estimate of Costs CD/1.8 Request for a direction under Section 90 (2A) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 that planning permission be deemed to be granted, conditions to be attached to the Direction and matter to be reserved for subsequent approval by local planning authority CD/1.9 CD/1.10 CD/1.11 CD/1.12 CD/1.13 CD/ CD/ CD/ CD/ CD/1.15 CD/1.16 CD/1.17 Scoping Opinion Land and Works Plans and Public Rights of Way Plans and Sections Planning Drawings in Support of Request for Planning Direction Book of Reference Report Summarising Consultations Undertaken Volume 1 of the ES Volume 2 of the ES Volume 3 of the ES Non Technical Summary Planning Statement Plans and Sections including Planning Direction and Combination Drawings Statement of Case of Network Rail WIDER SCHEME CD/2.1 Felixstowe Branch Line and Ipswich Yard Improvement Order 2008 CD/2.2 CD/2.3 Felixstowe Branch Line and Ipswich Yard Improvement Order 2008 Land and Works Plans Felixstowe Branch Line and Ipswich Yard Improvement Order 2008 PRoW Plans lon_lib1\ \2 75

79 CD/2.4 Felixstowe Branch Line and Ipswich Yard Improvement Order 2008 Planning Direction Drawing Plans CD/ Planning Permission CD/2.6 The Felixstowe Branch Line (Land Acquisition) Order 2014 CD/2.7 The Network Rail (Felixstowe Branch Line Land Acquisition) (Agreements for Transfer) Order (Draft) CD/2.8 CD/2.9 Felixstowe Branch Line Phase 1 Capacity Analysis Report Felixstowe Branch Line Phase 2 Capacity Analysis Report LEGISLATION AND GOVERNMENT CIRCULARS CD/3.1 CD/3.2 Transport and Works Act 1992 Part Transport and Works (Applications and Objections Procedure) (England and Wales) Rules 2006 CD/3.3 Transport and Works (Inquiries Procedure) Rules 2004 CD/3.4 CD/3.5 CD/3.6 CD/3.7 CD/3.8 CD/3.9 CD/3.10 CD/3.11 CD/3.12 CD/3.13 CD/3.14 CD/3.15 CD/3.16 CD/3.17 DfT Guide to Transport and Works Act Procedures TWA Order Unit TWA Good Practice Tips for Applicants Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 Part Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Part Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 Part Equality Act 2000 Part Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 Part Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Part Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 Part Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 Part EIA Directive 2011/92/EU DCLG Guidance on Compulsory Purchase Process and the Crichel Down Rules Part EIA Directive 2014/52/EU Neighbourhood Planning Act 2017 (Part) lon_lib1\ \2 76

80 REGIONAL AND LOCAL POLICY CD/4.1 National Planning Policy Framework 2012 CD/4.2 Suffolk Coastal District Local Plan (Core Strategy adopted July 2013) CD/4.3 Suffolk Coastal Local Plan remaining 'Saved Policies' - January 2017 CD/4.4 District Policies Map CD/4.5 Site Allocations and Area Specific Policies Development Plan Document (January 2017) (excludes Appendix 6) CD/4.6 Felixstowe Peninsula Area Action Plan (January 2017) CD/4.7 CD/4.8 CD/4.9 Felixstowe Area Action Plan Inset Map SPG 5 - Nature Conservation SPG 6 - Historic Parks and Gardens CD/4.10 Suffolk Local Transport Plan Part 1 CD/4.11 Suffolk Local Transport Plan Part 2 CD/4.12 National Infrastructure Delivery Plan CD/4.13 CD/4.14 CD/4.15 JNCC (2008): Information sheet on Ramsar Wetlands for Stour and Orwell Estuaries JNCC (2016): Stour and Orwell Estuaries SPA Natura 2000 Standard Data Form The National Association for Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB CD/4.16 Natural England. National Character Area Profile 82: Suffolk Coast and Heaths. CD/4.17 Natural England, Agricultural Land Classification Map Eastern Region, ALC008 (2010) CD/4.18, Suffolk Rights of Way Improvement Plan (2006) CD/4.19 Suffolk Rail Prospectus () March 2015 CD/4.20 AONB Partnership (2015) Development in the Setting of the Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB. CD/4.21 LDA Design (2016) Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) Natural Beauty and Special Qualities Indicators CD/4.22 Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Management Plan BRITISH STANDARDS AND OTHER CIRCULARS CD/5.1 Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 11, Section 2, Part 5 CD/5.2 Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 2, Section 2 Part 8 lon_lib1\ \2 77

81 CD/5.3 Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 11, Section 3, Part 2 CD/5.4 Department for Transport, Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 11, Section 3, Part 6 CD/5.5 Department for Transport, Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 11, Section 3, Part 8 CD/5.6 British Horse Society Advice on Specifications and Standards Recommended for Equestrian Routes in England and Wales CD/5.7 British Horse Society Advice on Specifications for new Bridges for Equestrian Use in England and Wales CD/5.8 Photography and photomontage in landscape and visual impact assessment. Advice Note 01/11, guidance provided by the Landscape Institute CD/5.9 Highways Agency, (2010), Interim Advice Note 135/10, Landscape And Visual Effects Assessment. CD/5.10 Landscape East. Landscape Character Types, Plateau Estate Farmlands. ORR AND NETWORK RAIL STANDARDS AND STRATEGIES CD/6.1 CD/6.2 CD/6.3 Office of Rail and Road (ORR) Level Crossings Policy NR Standard NR/L3/CIV/020 Issue 1 Design of Bridges; NR Standard NR/CIV/TUM/400 Rev A April 2008, Technical User Manual for Non-station Footbridges and Non-mainline-station Footbridges; CD/6.4 CD/6.5 NR Standard NR/L2/TRK/2049 Issue 13, Track Design Handbook; NR Standard NR/L2/ENV/015 (Design Environmental Management Plan) CD/6.6 NR s Sustainable Development Strategy CD/6.7 Our approach to managing level crossings CD/6.8 Annual Report on Public Safety (2015/2016) CD/6.9 CD/6.10 CD/6.11 CD/6.12 CD/6.13 Felixstowe Level Crossings Risk Assessments Rail Investigation Report Grimston Lane Felixstowe Project Business Case Felixstowe Client Requirements Document Anglia Level Crossings Client Requirements Document CD/6.14 Transforming Level Crossings ( ) lon_lib1\ \2 78

82 CD/6.15 CD/6.16 Strategy for regulation of health and safety risks 4: Level crossings Keeping the Lights on and Traffic Moving CD/6.17 Network Rail, A Better Railway for a Better Britain 2013 CD/6.18 CD/6.19 Network Rail Standard NR/L1/XNG/100 Level crossing asset management policy Network Rail Standard NR/L2/SIG/19608 Level crossing asset inspection and implementation of minimum actions codes CD/6.20 Anglia Route Study March 2016 ORDER SCHEME DEVELOPMENT CD/7.1 Atkins (2017) Proposed Network Rail (Felixstowe Branch Line Improvements - Level Crossings Closure) Order Information for Habitat Regulations Assessment Stage 1: Screening CD/7.2 Atkins. Felixstowe Branch Capacity Enhancement, Option 4 Grip 3c, Trimley Loop Ground Investigation Report. VolkerFitzpatrick. June CD/7.3 Atkins. Felixstowe Branch Capacity Enhancements Geotechnical Desk Study. VolkerFitzpatrick. June 2015 CD/7.4 Atkins, Underpass Technical Note Rev 2 Issue CD/7.5 CD/7.1 Atkins, Technical note Rev03 (Vehicular Bridge) Atkins (2017) Proposed Network Rail (Felixstowe Branch Line Improvements - Level Crossings Closure) Order Information for Habitat Regulations Assessment Stage 1: Screening CD/7.2 Atkins. Felixstowe Branch Capacity Enhancement, Option 4 Grip 3c, Trimley Loop Ground Investigation Report. VolkerFitzpatrick. June lon_lib1\ \2 79

83 APPENDIX B IMAGES OF BRIDGE OPTIONS Steel Deck and Ramp: Fibre-Reinforced Plastic (FRP): Concrete: Earth Embankments: lon_lib1\ \2 80

84 Reinforced Earth Embankments and Earth Slopes: lon_lib1\ \2 81

85 lon_lib1\ \2 82

86 APPENDIX C SCHEDULE OF LAND/RIGHTS Plot No Location Acquisition Type 1 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 2 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 3 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 4 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 5 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 6 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 7 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 8 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 9 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 10 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 11 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, Limits of Deviation Yes Work No. 1 Yes Work No. 1 Yes Work No. 1 Limits of Land to be Acquired or Used Permanent Acquisition Yes provision of a new highway Yes provision of a new highway Yes provision of a new highway Yes provision of a new highway Yes provision of a new highway Yes provision of environmental mitigation Temporary Acquisition Yes provision of a temporary right of way Yes construction worksite and access Rights Other lon_lib1\ \ June 2017 whited

87 Plot No Location Acquisition Type 12 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 13 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 14 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 15 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 16 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 17 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 18 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 19 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 20 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 21 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, Limits of Deviation Limits of Land to be Acquired or Used Permanent Acquisition Yes provision of environmental mitigation Yes provision of a new highway and access for maintenance works Yes provision of a new highway Yes provision of environmental mitigation Yes provision of environmental mitigation Yes provision of environmental mitigation Temporary Acquisition Yes construction worksite and access Rights Yes access for maintenance works Yes access for maintenance works Yes access for maintenance works Other lon_lib1\ \ June 2017 whited

88 Plot No Location Acquisition Type 22 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 23 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 24 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 25 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 26 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 27 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 28 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 29 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 30 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 31 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 32 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, Limits of Deviation Yes Work No. 1 Yes Work No. 1 Limits of Land to be Acquired or Used Permanent Acquisition Yes provision of environmental mitigation Yes provision of a new highway Yes provision of a new highway Yes provision of a new highway Yes provision of a new highway Yes provision of environmental mitigation Temporary Acquisition Yes construction worksite and access Yes construction worksite and access Yes construction worksite and access Rights Yes access for maintenance works Other lon_lib1\ \ June 2017 whited

89 Plot No Location Acquisition Type 33 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 34 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 35 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 36 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 37 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 38 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 39 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 40 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 41 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 42 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, Limits of Deviation Limits of Land to be Acquired or Used Permanent Acquisition Yes provision of environmental mitigation Temporary Acquisition Yes construction worksite and access Yes construction worksite and access Yes construction worksite and access Yes construction worksite and access Yes construction worksite and access Rights Yes access for maintenance works Yes access for maintenance works Yes access for maintenance works Yes access for maintenance works Yes access for maintenance works Yes access for maintenance works Yes access for maintenance works Yes access for maintenance works Other lon_lib1\ \ June 2017 whited

90 Plot No Location Acquisition Type 43 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 44 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 45 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 46 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 47 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 48 Parish of Trimley St. Martin, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 49 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 50 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 51 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, 52 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, Limits of Deviation Limits of Land to be Acquired or Used Permanent Acquisition Yes provision of a new highway Yes provision of environmental mitigation Yes provision of a new highway Yes provision of a new highway Temporary Acquisition Yes construction worksite and access and provision of a temporary right of way Yes construction worksite and access Yes construction worksite and access Yes construction worksite and access Rights Yes access for maintenance works Other Extinguish private rights of way lon_lib1\ \ June 2017 whited

91 Plot No Location Acquisition Type 53 Parish of Trimley St. Mary, Suffolk Coastal District Council, Limits of Deviation Limits of Land to be Acquired or Used Permanent Acquisition Yes provision of a new highway Temporary Acquisition Rights Other lon_lib1\ \ June 2017 whited

92 APPENDIX D SUMMARY OF ENGAGEMENT Date Meeting Purpose Suffolk Coastal District Council September 2016 Introduce the scheme proposal and review optioneering exercise and bridge designs which were discounted Outcome Summary: Alternative bridge options presented to Suffolk Coastal District Council. No objective received in respect of the optioneering approach. Viewpoints to be assessed as part of the Order Scheme agreed. December 2016 Discuss and agree the landscape mitigation that should be provided as part of the Order Scheme (joint meeting with ) Outcome Summary: Landscape mitigation/enhancement agreed. The provision of the hedgerow was included within the Order Scheme January 2017 Discuss feedback from the public engagement/consultation Event and proposed planning conditions (joint meeting with ) Outcome Summary: Draft planning conditions refined February 2017 Joint meeting with and Trinity College representatives to see if outstanding issues with regard to the scheme could be resolved. Outcome Summary: Network Rail and Trinity College have fundamental areas of disagreement with regard to the type of bridge proposed and location of the bridge. June 2016 Present the proposals to close level crossings. Outcome Summary: A new crossing will be required as mitigation for the Level Crossings proposed to be stopped up. August 2016 Present the proposals for the bridleway bridge and review the changes to the PRoW network Outcome Summary: Refinement of the PRoW diversions October 2016 Review changes proposed to the PRoW Network (joint meeting with Trinity College representatives) lon_lib1\ \ June 2017 whited

93 Date Meeting Purpose Outcome Summary: Areas of disagreement between Trinity College and Network Rail remain December 2016 Discuss and agree the landscape mitigation that should be provided as part of the Order Scheme (joint meeting with Suffolk Coastal District Council) Outcome Summary: Landscape mitigation/enhancement agreed. The provision of the hedgerow was included within the Order Scheme January 2017 Discuss feedback from the public engagement/consultation Event and proposed planning conditions (joint meeting with Suffolk Coastal District Council) Outcome Summary: Draft planning conditions refined February 2017 Joint meeting with Suffolk Coastal District Council and Trinity College representatives to see if outstanding issues with regard to the scheme could be resolved. Outcome Summary: Network Rail and Trinity College have fundamental areas of disagreement with regard to the type of bridge proposed and location of the bridge. Natural England November 2016 Review of the scope and strategy for ecology surveys Outcome Summary: Scope and strategy for ecology surveys agreed Parishes of Trimley St Martin and Trimley St Mary February 2017 Meeting to discuss the proposed scheme Outcome Summary: Concerns raised with regard to the usability of the bridge (for equestrian users) and the landscape and visual impact of the bridge. British Horse Society December 2016 Meeting to discuss feedback received from the public consultation. Included a visit to Great Barton Bridleway bridge Outcome Summary: BHS satisfied that the bridge meets BHS guidance. Trinity College lon_lib1\ \ June 2017 whited

94 Date Meeting Purpose August 2016 Meeting held to discuss the Felixstowe Branch Line enhancement project and the proposed Order Scheme Outcome Summary: Trinity College agreed to review the proposals and provide comments. September 2016 Meeting held to discuss the proposed bridleway bridge scheme and proposed changes to the PRoW network. Outcome Summary: Some amendments to the proposed PRoW diversions agreed October 2016 Review changes proposed to the PRoW Network (joint meeting with Trinity College representatives) Outcome Summary: Consider feedback in light of scheme proposals January 2017 Teleconference to discuss Trinity College s response to the public consultation Outcome Summary: Network Rail agreed to look at comparable bridge proposals and associated costs February 2018 Joint meeting with Suffolk Coastal District Council and Trinity College representatives to see if outstanding issues with regard to the scheme could be resolved. Outcome Summary: Network Rail and Trinity College have fundamental areas of disagreement with regard to the type of bridge proposed and location of the bridge. Lime and Granges Trust January 2018 Proposals for the Order Scheme presented to and discussed Outcome Summary: Face-to-face contact made. Network Rail responded to queries regarding the programme and duration of works. lon_lib1\ \ June 2017 whited

95 APPENDIX E IMAGES OF UFTON NERVERT BRIDGE lon_lib1\ \ June 2017 whited

96 lon_lib1\ \ June 2017 whited

97 lon_lib1\ \ June 2017 whited