Environmental Statement (Volume 1) Non Technical Summary Prepared by: The Environment Partnership
Haydock Point Environmental Statement (Volume 1): Non-Technical Summary March 2017
Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. EIA Process and Methodology 5 3. Summary of Environmental Effects 7 Appendix 1: [Insert appendix heading here] Error! Bookmark not defined. Contact Mark Worcester mark.worcester@turley.co.uk 3 Feb 2017
1. Introduction 1.1 This document is the non-technical summary [NTS] of the Environmental Statement [ES] which has been submitted as part of an application for outline planning permission to develop a logistics- led employment development on land to the west of Haydock. 1.2 Its purpose is to summarise the content and main findings of the ES in a clear and concise manner to assist the public in understanding what the environmental effects of the Proposed Development are likely to be. The full ES provides a more detailed description of the Proposed Development and the findings of the Environmental Impact Assessment [EIA] process. The Purpose of an Environmental Impact Assessment 1.3 The Proposed Development is of a scale which falls within Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 (as amended) [the EIA Regulations]. Not all development within Schedule 2 requires the completion of EIA. The completion of EIA and production of an ES has, in this case, been done on a voluntary basis. 1.3 The purpose of the ES is to assess the likely significant effects of the Proposed Development on the environment during the construction and operational phases. 1.4 It describes the baseline environmental conditions, the options for development which have been considered and discounted and the design of the Proposed Development. 1.5 Where it has not been possible to design the Proposed Development so as to avoid the occurrence of likely significant environmental effects, the ES describes the mitigation measures which have been identified and incorporated into the scheme. About the Applicant 1.6 Peel Investments (North) Limited is the landowner of the site and part of the Peel Land and Property Group of Companies. Peel is one of the foremost real estate, infrastructure and transport investment enterprises in the UK. It has a long-established track record of delivering major developments across the north-west and the rest of the UK. 1.7 The Proposed Development will be delivered and managed by Peel Logistics Property, a new specialist logistics joint venture made up of Peel Land and Property, Macquarie Capital and Evander Properties. The Proposed Development Site 1.8 The Proposed Development Site [PDS] is located within the borough of St Helens. The settlement of Haydock is to the west (2.5km), Ashton in Makerfield is to the north (1.5km) and Golborne is to the east (1.5km). 1
1.9 The site occupies the north-eastern quadrant formed by the junction of the M6 Motorway / A49 / A580. 1.10 It is irregular in shape, extends to 42.3 hectares and comprises agricultural land. There are some hedges and trees around the site boundaries. Access is obtained via Lodge Lane. 1.11 The wider surrounding area contains a mix of residential properties, industrial units, hotels. 1.10 An aerial photograph below shows the extent of the PDS. Figure 1.1: 1.1 Proposed Development Site. The Proposed Development 1.12 The planning application has been submitted in outline with all detailed matters reserved for subsequent determination except means of access from the A580 and A49. 1.13 In order to enable an assessment of the likely significant environmental effects to be undertaken a series of Development Parameters have been defined. These are shown in Plans 30926-FE-008H and 30926-FE-027E at Appendix 1 and described further below. 1.14 The Proposed Development comprises the following principle elements: Up to 1.8m sq ft (167,625 sq m) of employment floor-space of which a minimum shall be used for Class B8 purposes (logistics and distribution) and a maximum of 20% shall be used for general employment (Class B2). Ancillary facilities such as office accommodation and welfare facilities will also be provided. 2
Access (for HGV s and cars) from the A580 to the south of the site and from the A49 to the west (for emergency vehicles, public transport, cyclists and pedestrians). Internal access roads and areas of hard standing for vehicle parking and manoeuvring. Provision of a footway / cycleway within the verge of the A580 (northern side) 1.15 The proposed logistics / employment buildings will have a maximum height of 60.65 AoD. 1.16 A number of design features are embedded into the Development Parameters so as to ensure that adverse effects to sensitive receptors are avoided in the first instance and, where this is not possible, effects are minimised. 1.17 These embedded mitigation measures include the following elements of the green infrastructure: A new woodland of minimum width 15m will be planted around almost all the perimeter of the site and the total new woodland habitat will be at least 4.22ha; New wet grasslands will be created as part of the green infrastructure associated with the surface water management system and also new dry meadows will be created alongside woodland edges, in order to create a varied vegetation structure. These areas of grassland will total 4.51ha. The central watercourse will be protected and enhanced for wildlife within a corridor of minimum 16m width (other than at two new road crossing points (20m max each); At least 370m of new wet ditch and a reedbed will be created; A lighting strategy will ensure the perimeter woodland and the central watercourse corridor are not subject to direct light spillage. The retained and newly-created habitats will be subject to a Landscape and Habitat Management Plan which will apply for the period of time that the proposed development is in operation. 1.18 The application is also accompanied by three illustrative masterplans for the redevelopment of the site as follows: 30926-FE-042a presents an illustrative layout for a development comprising cross-dock buildings (i.e. buildings which can be serviced from two sides); 30926-FE-043a presents an illustrative layout which incorporates a singlesided dock building with a southern service yard in the southern part of the site. This represents the worst case scenario from a noise emission perspective given location of residential and other properties nearby; 3
30926-FE-044a which presents an illustrative layout which incorporates a single sided dock building with a northern service yard within the southern part of the site. This represents the worst case scenario from a visual impact perspective given the proximity of the building to the A580. 1.19 A Construction Environment Management Plan [CEMP] would be prepared prior to development commencing. 1.20 It is anticipated that development would commence in 2017 to be completed in 2022. 1.21 The completed development would operate on a 24 hour basis. Consideration of Alternatives 1.22 There is no requirement under the law relating to EIA for an applicant to consider alternatives. However, where an applicant has considered alternatives the EIA Regulations require that the ES contains an outline of the main alternatives which have been considered by the applicant and an indication of the main reasons for the applicant s choice. 1.23 Peel has given consideration to the availability of alternative sites. This is fully reported within the Planning Statement. 1.24 Peel has also given consideration to alternative, on site, configurations for the Proposed Development. This iterative design process has resulted in the incorporation: of a vertical no build zone ; parameters for landscape design / ecology; the incorporation of a principal access from the A580 and the strengthening of the landscape boundary around the periphery of the site, particularly along the A580 frontage. 4
2. EIA Process and Methodology 2.1 EIA is a process that identifies the likely significant environmental effects (both beneficial and adverse) of a proposed development and proposes mitigation to avoid, reduce or offset and potentially significant adverse environmental effects. 2.2 The ES has been prepared in accordance with the latest regulations and guidance on good practice including: TCPA EIA Regulations 2011 (as amended); National Planning Policy Guidance: Environmental Impact Assessment; Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment: The Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment. IEMA: The State of Environmental Impact Assessments in the UK: IEMA 2011 2.3 The EIA process involved a number of key stages as follows: Stage Description 1 Scoping An Environmental Statement Scoping Report [ESSO] was submitted to St Helens Borough Council [SHBC] in November 2016, together with a request that they adopted a Scoping Opinion [SO]. The ESSO identified the topics to be assessed within the ES and the proposed method for doing so. SHBC issued their SO in January 2017, following consultation with a range of stakeholders. 2 Baseline data Collection Various field and desk based surveys were undertaken to establish baseline environmental conditions against which the potential effects of the Proposed Development could be measured. 3. Iterative Design Initial development parameters were defined and the potential effects of the Proposed Development on baseline conditions tested. This allowed for further refinement of the design and incorporation of embedded mitigation measures. 4. Environmental Statement The results of the EIA process are reported in the ES in an objective and transparent way, to provide the information required to support the decision making process. 2.4 Each environmental topic within the ES has been assessed by relevant specialists in their field. The key subject areas addressed within the ES are: `Socioeconomic impacts (Turley Economics) 5
Transportation (Vectos) Ecology (TEP) Archaeology (TEP) Landscape character / visual amenity (TEP) Air Quality (Miller Goodall) Noise (Resound Acoustics) Geology, Soils and Contamination (SGI) Water Environment (SGI) 6
3. Summary of Environmental Effects 3.1 The ES records how the Proposed Development has been the subject of an iterative design process drawing upon the expertise of Peel s appointed advisors, Council Officers and the views of other stakeholders including the local community. 3.2 This, together with the sensitive approach to design, incorporation of embedded mitigation measures relating to landscape and ecology and the measures presented within the Landscape Habitat Management Plan and Water Vole Mitigation Strategy means that the occurrence of likely significant environmental effects has been avoided in many instances. Where this has not been possible additional mitigation measures are identified to reduce likely effects to non-significant levels. 3.3 The subsequent paragraphs present a summary of the key environmental effects in each topic area. Further in-depth information is presented within the ES. Socio Economics 3.4 The potential socio economic effects of the Proposed Development during the construction and operational (post completion) stages have been assessed. To inform the assessment, current baseline conditions were analysed in relation to the local business base, employment, productivity, labour force, unemployment and deprivation, skills and business rate revenue. 3.5 The assessment demonstrates that the Proposed Development will result in 127.5 million investment on construction, creating the following headline estimated socioeconomic impacts: 1,147 direct construction-based person years of employment (PYE) over the anticipated five year build period, equating to an average of 229 FTE gross direct jobs per annum 69 direct net additional FTE jobs supported annually within St Helen s, increasing to 112 FTE jobs within St Helen s and Wigan An additional 17 FTE indirect/induced jobs generated per annum in St Helen s, increasing to 28 FTE jobs across St Helen s and Wigan 5.3 million gross value added (GVA) contribution per annum to the St Helen s economy as a result of construction activity, increasing to 8.6 million within St Helen s and Wigan 3.6 The assessment further estimates that the operation of the Proposed Development would generate the following headline socio-economic impacts: 2,286 gross direct FTE jobs could be supported on-site, 823 net additional direct FTE jobs and 206 net additional indirect and induced FTE jobs could be supported in St Helens, increasing to 1,114 direct FTE jobs 7
and 279 indirect and induced FTE jobs when assessed at the St Helen s and Wigan scale 44.7 million GVA could be generated annually in St Helens ( 60.5 million in St Helens and Wigan) potential to improve economic activity and employment rates and reduce the claimant count and unemployment levels in St Helen s and Wigan through the generation of new employment opportunities within a range of occupation types and skill levels generate opportunities for higher qualified employees, with circa 240 FTE jobs requiring qualifications of Level 4 and above 3.4 million uplift in business rate income for St Helen s Council annually, of which 1.7 million could be retained until 2020 when circa 3.4 million could be retained. 3.7 Assessing the effects of the above impacts on current and likely future socio-economic conditions, the chapter concludes that the Proposed Development will not result in any significant adverse socio-economic effects. 3.8 Indeed, from a socio-economic perspective all of the effects are beneficial and the majority are significant in EIA terms e.g. by supporting job creation, increasing productivity and generating additional local authority revenue. 3.9 The chapter also considers the potential cumulative effects of other existing or planned developments nearby. Similarly, it concludes that the joint effects of these developments will not result in any significant adverse socio-economic effects, with the all effects being beneficial. Transport 3.10 An assessment of the likely significant environmental effects of the Proposed Development on local transportation and highway conditions has been completed. 3.11 The assessment has given due regard to the pertinent national and local planning policy guidance, which emphasizes the importance of ensuring a choice of travel by siting developments in sustainable locations, as well as providing a framework plan to encourage travel via sustainable modes by way of a Travel Plan. 3.12 The assessment has been prepared in accordance with industry standard guidance and following scoping discussions with St Helens MBC and Highways England and their consultants Mouchel. 3.13 The location of the PDS has been demonstrated to be accessible by walking, cycling and public transport modes of travel. It has also been demonstrated that the site is ideally located for a high quality logistics park, being sited adjacent to the A580 East Lancashire Road and the M6 motorway. 8
3.14 The accessibility of the site will be enhanced through the provision of a shared footway/ cycle along the northern side of the A580 between the site access and M6 Junction 23, together with controlled crossing facilities at the aforementioned A580 access junction. 3.15 The impact of construction traffic on local highway conditions during the construction phase has been assessed. This assessment has concluded that the development will have negligible / minor effect. 3.16 While there is the potential for the construction phase of other nearby committed developments to overlap with that of the Proposed Development, any such impact would only be experienced for a short period of time and would be expected to be short term minor or neutral. 3.17 An assessment of the impact of the development during the operational phase (assuming full occupation) has also been undertaken. 3.18 The assessment concludes that the effect on driver delay, public transport users, pedestrian delay, fear and intimidation, accident and highway safety and severance would be neutral, while the impact of the Proposed Development on pedestrian amenity would be beneficial by virtue of the improvements proposed along the A580. 3.19 It has further been described that a Construction Environment Management Plan, Delivery Management Plan, and Travel Plan will all be provided to further minimise the impact of the development during the construction and operational phases. These can be secured by Planning Condition. Ecology 3.20 The PDS consists of two large arable fields, separated by a ditch which flows from west to east. Neighbouring the site on the eastern boundary is Haydock Park Woods, designated as a Local Wildlife Site (LWS). Lady s Hill Plantation, also east of the site, is a potential Local Wildlife Site. The nearest Site of Special Scientific Interest is at Highfield Moss 2.7km south east. The nearest European protected site is the Manchester Mosses Special Area of Conservation, 9.5km east. 3.21 The central ditch supports water voles, a species protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981. There are no European protected species on site. Trees in the neighbouring LWS have features which support bat roosts; and bats forage over the site, particularly along woodland edges and the central ditch corridor. 3.22 The site has little botanical value or faunal value, other than for water voles. A boundary hedgerow lining the ditch is a s41 habitat for this reason and is given priority under s41 of the Natural Environments and Rural Communities Act (NERC). 3.23 The site is used by a range of farmland birds, some of which are s41 birds, but a preliminary ornithological assessment suggests that breeding species diversity and population numbers are relatively low. Overwintering bird surveys indicate that the site is regularly used by a flock of lapwing, which are s41 species. The lapwing population is of local significance, but the site is not linked to the Mersey Estuary Special Protetcion Area lapwing population. 9
3.24 The adjoining LWS woodlands, the central ditch corridor and parts of the A580 verge can be regarded as local components of the Liverpool City Region Ecological Framework. 3.25 The Proposed Development would result in the loss of about 40ha of farmland. This is mostly in arable use which is considered to be of negligible ecological value. Some field margins and areas of permanent neutral grassland would be lost. Some broadleaved trees would be lost at the A580 to form the new site access. There would be two road crossings over the central ditch corridor. A footpath/cycleway would be created in the existing A580 verge grasslands. 3.26 The Proposed Development includes several habitat creation measures which are embedded into the scheme design / development parameters which are intended to protect and enhance ecological features on the site and adjoining land. These are referenced in Section 1. 3.27 The water vole colony would be protected through a mitigation strategy which is outlined in the Environmental Statement. This includes construction-stage protection works, ditch habitat enhancements and longer-term habitat management and monitoring. 3.28 The overwintering lapwing population would be displaced from the site. In terms of the balance of ornithological interests, other bird species would benefit from the range of new woodland and grassland habitats to be created in the site. 3.29 The net effect of the habitat creation measures, including new woodland, meadow grassland, reedbeds and swales will be to significantly increase the extent and connectivity of habitats of local value, compared to baseline. These measures will also ensure the protection of the adjoining Local Wildlife Sites. The net residual effect of the Proposed Development on ecological features important in the context of the Liverpool City Region, will be positive. Archaeology 3.30 There are no designated heritage assets within the PDS and there would be no adverse effects (directly or indirectly) on designated heritage assets as a result of the Proposed Development. 3.31 A part of Haydock Park, a non-designated heritage asset (NDHA02), and former medieval hunting ground, is located within the PDS boundary, however. This former parkland has low heritage significance because it is not well preserved. 3.32 Although there are no surviving elements of the asset evident on the ground, construction phase activities do have the potential to affect as yet unknown surviving archaeological evidence associated with this asset, or with other as yet unknown heritage assets, that could be present within the PDS. That said, the site has a low potential for the presence of as yet unknown heritage assets. 3.33 The effect of the Proposed Development on Haydock Park is not predicted to be significant (even applying worst case scenario assumptions). 10
3.34 Nevertheless a programme of archaeological mitigation is proposed that would provide a record of any heritage assets that could be affected by construction. The residual effects would be negligible. Landscape character / visual amenity 3.35 The effects of the Proposed Development on landscape character and visual amenity have been considered through the preparation of a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment. The assessment was carried within a 2.5km radius study area, centred on the PDS. 3.36 Landscape effects result from changes to the physical landscape as a result of a proposed development which may give rise to changes in important characteristics and thus its character, and how this character is experienced. Visual effects relate to the changes that arise in the composition of available views as a result of a proposed development, people s responses to the changes, and the overall effects on visual amenity. 3.37 The PDS is on farmland between the M6 motorway, the A580 East Lancashire Road and Haydock Park racecourse. It is enclosed by mature woodland blocks to the north and east. 3.38 The Site is in the St Helens Council Local Character Area WFE2: Haydock Park and there would be a change to the landscape character in the landscape of the PDS as a result of the Proposed Development. However, the development would be in a wider landscape characterised by manmade elements including the nearby elevated section of the M6, the A580 dual carriageway and built form associated with the racecourse and the settlements of Ashton-in-Makerfield and Golborne. The design and layout of the Proposed Development, with its planted landscape corridors and benefitting from existing woodlands on adjacent land, would help to create a strong landscaped boundary treatment which would help to integrate the Site into the local landscape and enhance woodland connectivity. 3.39 The landscape assessment has concluded that there would be no significant residual effects from the Proposed Development in the wider landscape 3.40 The visual assessment has shown that there would be no significant residual effects from the Proposed Development on views. There are no dwellings or public footpaths near to the site and more distant views are limited by existing woodlands that would be unaffected by the Proposed Development. The closest views toward the Proposed Development would be open and oblique views from a section of the A580 East Lancashire Road, which would be experienced whilst travelling, and partially screened views which would be experienced by visitors to Haydock Park racecourse. All other views toward the Proposed Development would benefit, in the medium to longterm, from the proposed extensive woodland planting along landscape corridors at the Site boundaries. 3.41 A cumulative assessment, which considered the potential for combined effects from similar Development Sites within a 3km radius, concluded that there would not be any significant cumulative effects on landscape or views. 11
3.42 Overall, the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment has predicted that there will be no significant residual effects arising from the Proposed Development Site. Air Quality 3.43 The legislative and policy framework applicable to air quality is described alongside details of how the effects on local air quality of the construction and operational phases of the Proposed Development have been assessed. 3.44 Dust control measures will be utilised during the construction phase, deployed through a Construction and Environmental Management Plan. As a result the impact of dust associated with the construction phases of the Proposed Development will be Not Significant. 3.45 In relation to road traffic emissions associated with the Proposed Development, computer modelling of the effect of road traffic during the construction and operation of the development have been completed. The impacts of both construction traffic associated with the project and traffic associated with the operational phase of the project are considered to be negligible at all assessed receptor locations. The impacts of road traffic associated with the Proposed Development are considered to be Not Significant. Noise 3.46 The assessment of noise and vibration has considered the likely significant environmental effects from noise and vibration during both the construction and operation of the Proposed Development. The potential effects have been assessed at the noise-sensitive receptors closest to the PDS, taking account of the existing noise levels in the area. 3.47 The assessment has shown that: noise impacts from the construction phase of the Proposed Development are unlikely, however, a number of measures have been set out to manage the noise emissions; vibration impacts from the construction phase of the Proposed Development are unlikely. Mitigation should not be required as vibration is unlikely to be perceptible at distances of 200 metres or more from the PDS. operational noise impacts are possible, depending on the exact nature of the operations at the PDS. However, mitigation is available that is capable of reducing these potential impacts to acceptable levels. The exact form of the mitigation will depend on the precise form of development, and would be finalised at Reserved Matters stage. no significant effects are anticipated as a result of development-generated traffic noise, nor from building services plant installed at the Proposed Development Site, providing it meets the identified noise limits. 12
No significant cumulative effects are anticipated as result of noise from the Proposed Development combining with other consented schemes in the area. Geology, Soils and Contamination 3.48 The potential effects of the Proposed Development to and from ground conditions and contamination has been assessed for both the construction and operational phases. 3.49 The construction process with respect to ground conditions includes two principal elements: site enabling works and provision of foundation structures. 3.50 Desk based research to date, has not identified any significant on-site sources of contamination associated with historical site activities that may pose a risk to human health, groundwater or surface water. Therefore, completion of the enabling works is predicted to have a Negligible effect. 3.51 Similarly, the provision of a piled foundation, if required, is unlikely to pose a significant risk to controlled waters and the provision of foundation structures are therefore likely to have a Negligible effect. 3.52 A Construction Environment Management Plan will be implemented through the construction process which will contain a range of environmental protection safeguards. Construction in accordance with the CEMP will result in the Proposed Development having no effects to surface water and underlying Principal Aquifer. 3.53 As the Proposed Development will largely comprise hard standings and building the potential for contamination of the surface water and underlying acquifer will simailrly be Negligible. 3.54 The desk study report has identified that ground gas may be present and that this may pose a risk to the Proposed Development. Further investigations will be completed and appropriate mitigation measures will be designed into the development during the detailed design stage, as necessary. Water Environment (SGI) 3.55 The potential effects of the Proposed Development on the water environment have been assessed. 3.56 During construction and operation of the Proposed Development there is the potential for the water quality of the onsite watercourse to be adversely affected. The principle means of mitigating this is through the implementation of standard best practice construction methods and pollution prevention techniques. 3.57 The surface water strategy for the Proposed Development incorporates sustainable urban drainage techniques and as a result surface water run- off from the site will be restricted to Greenfield rates. This means the impact downstream from the PDS will be negligible. 13
3.58 The development of the proposed site will result in a loss of area which may have previously flooded in 1 in 100 year events. Therefore, a proposed flood compensation basin will be located within the site to compensate for the loss in flood water storage.. 3.59 United Utilities have stated that the existing sewer network has sufficient capacity for the potential increase in foul water effluent from the Proposed Development 3.60 Through the mitigation measures which are embedded into the scheme design and the implementation of measures contained within a Construction Environment Management Plan the effect of the Proposed Development during construction and operation will be neutral. 14
Appendix 1: Illustrative Masterplans
AREA SCHEDULE GIA 1 sqm sqft Unit 89,937 968,082 Offices 3,263 35,125 Sub total 93,200 1,003,207 2 sqm sqft Unit 25,912 278,915 Offices 2,063 22,205 Sub total 27,975 301,120 3 sqm sqft Unit 40,392 434,780 Offices 2,063 22,205 Sub total 42,455 456,985 sqm sqft TOTAL 163,630 1,761,312 Ha acres SITE AREA 42.339 104.62
AREA SCHEDULE GIA 1 sqm sqft Unit 89,937 968,082 Offices 3,263 35,125 Sub total 93,200 1,003,207 2 sqm sqft Unit 18,839 202,785 Offices 2,063 22,205 Sub total 20,902 224,990 3 sqm sqft Unit 31,309 337,010 Offices 2,063 22,205 Sub total 33,372 359,215 sqm sqft TOTAL 147,474 1,587,412 Ha acres SITE AREA 42.339 104.62
Turley Office 1 New York Street Manchester M1 4HD T 0161 233 7676