Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One

Home , Craigneuk, Motherwell, Ravenscraig, Ravenscraig steelworks, South Calder Water, Strathclyde Country Park

PROPOSED RAVENSCRAIG RAIL HEAD AND LOGISTICS HUB: PHASE ONE

Environmental Impact Assessment Report

10 March 2021

PROPOSED RAVENSCRAIG RAIL HEAD AND LOGISTICS HUB: PHASE ONE

Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Client: John G Russell (Transport) Limited Document number: 9333 Project number: 173423 Status: Final Author: Various Reviewer: Dr Campbell Fleming and Dr Ian Buchan Date of issue: 10 March 2021

Glasgow Aberdeen Inverness Craighall Business Park Banchory Business Centre Alder House 8 Eagle Street Burn O’Bennie Road Cradlehall Business Park Glasgow Banchory Inverness G4 9XA AB31 5ZU IV2 5GH [email protected] 01330 826 596 01463 794 212 www.envirocentre.co.uk

This report has been prepared by EnviroCentre Limited with all reasonable skill and care, within the terms of the Contract with John G Russell (Transport) Limited (“the Client”). PREFACE

This Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) has been prepared under the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017 (“the TCP EIA Regulations”). It accompanies an application for planning permission to North Lanarkshire Council in respect of a proposed new rail head and logistics hub at the site of the former Ravenscraig steelworks. The site is located approximately 2km to the east of Motherwell town centre. The site is north of Wishaw Golf Club, at an elevation of 86m above sea level, centred at NS 77940 56683, and is approximately 86ha.

The proposed development will be subject to two planning applications. This EIAR supports Phase 1 of the development but will refer to Phases 2 and 3. Phases 2 and 3 will be which will be subject to a separate planning application, and it must be noted that Phases 2 & 3 are subject to change.

The primary components of the three phases of the proposed development include:

• 4-track intermodal terminal served by overhead crane; • Trailer parking for 200 vehicles moving goods to and from the site by road: • Welfare facilities for lorry drivers and site personnel; • Car parking for staff; • Office space for site management; • 37,674ft2 Office space for a company HQ for Russell Group and industry education/ training • facilities; • A vehicle maintenance shed; • Distribution centre; and • Landscaping and Green Lung habitat creation to provide a visual buffer to the development and preserve the area’s ecology.

Phase 2 and 3 will be subject to separate planning applications but will likely comprise

• Two retail distribution Hubs (Phases 2 and 3 which are subject to a separate planning application).

This application for full planning permission concerns the first of the three phases of development which will deliver the intermodal terminal, a 300,000sqft distribution centre (150,000sqft will be delivered initially, with scope to extend to provide a further 150,000sqft), a new office HQ for Russell Group, landscaping/habitat creation and other ancillary development. The Proposed Development description is:

Erection of distribution centre (Class 6), 4-track intermodal terminal with two cranes and HQ office building (Class 4) with ancillary development, including: vehicular and pedestrian access; car and trailer parking; lorry drivers welfare building; site and security office; vehicle maintenance shed; soft landscaping and habitat creation; hard landscaping and pathways; drainage; boundary treatments, and; external lighting at Land to the East and West of the Wishaw Deviation Line, Ravenscraig

This EIAR reports the findings of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) which has been coordinated and written by EnviroCentre Ltd, with specialist input from the consultants as noted in Table 1 below. All authors contributing to this EIAR are competent experts in the context of the EIA Regulations. Further information verifying the expertise of the project team is found within section 1.7 of this EIAR.

i Table 1: Project Team

Organisation/Consultant Project Role

John G Russell (Transport) Limited Client Colin Smith (John G Russell Chartered surveyor and project lead (Transport) Limited) Austin-Smith Lord Architects GL Hearn Planning and Consultation

EnviroCentre Ltd EIA Co-Ordination, Ecology, Air Quality, Noise and “Topics Not Requiring Full EIA i.e. Ground Conditions, Water Environment, Archaeology and Cultural Heritage, Population and Human Health, Climate Change, Major Accidents and Natural Disasters” Blyth & Blyth Consulting Engineers Project Engineers, Drainage Douglas Harman Landscape Planning Landscape & Visual Appraisal Burro Happold Lighting Strategy SWECO Traffic and Transport

This EIAR comprises the following elements:

• Volume 1: Environmental Impact Assessment Report o Providing a detailed description of the proposed development and its potentially significant environmental effects, detailing alternative options where applicable, reporting the findings of the EIA, as well as any proposed mitigation measures and providing other relevant background information • Volume 2: Figures · Including figures and plans relating to individual chapters of Volume 1 • Volume 3: Technical Appendices · Containing detailed technical reports and baseline studies which act as background reports to Volume 1.

The following documents have also been prepared to support the application. These form part of the overall submission:

• Non-Technical Summary (NTS) – this provides an overview of the proposed development and summarises the findings of the EIA and any key mitigation measures proposed, in an easily accessible format.

ii John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Contents

PREFACE i INTRODUCTION 1 Introduction ...... 1 The Applicant ...... 1 Regulatory Context ...... 2 Objectives and EIA Context ...... 2 Key Terms ...... 3 Structure of the EIAR ...... 4 The Project Team ...... 5 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 8 Site Location and Description...... 8 Description of the Proposed Development: ...... 8 Phasing ...... 9 Phase 1 ...... 10 Phases 2 and 3 ...... 11 Summary of Component Parts ...... 11 Construction Methods ...... 12 Operational Activities ...... 13 Alternatives Considered ...... 13 EIA METHODOLOGY AND CONSULTATION 17 Introduction ...... 17 General EIA Methodology ...... 17 EIA Regulations 2017 ...... 18 The EIA Process ...... 18 Consultation as part of the EIA Process ...... 21 Final Content and Structure of the EIA Report...... 28 ECOLOGY 29 Introduction ...... 29 Consultation ...... 30 Policy, Legislation and Guidance ...... 32 Methodology ...... 32 Baseline ...... 41 Prediction of Future Baseline ...... 45 Evaluation ...... 46 Impact Assessment ...... 47 Operational Phase ...... 55 Mitigation ...... 56 Residual Effects ...... 58 Assessment of Cumulative Effects ...... 64 Statement of Significance ...... 64 NOISE 66 Introduction ...... 66 Consultation ...... 66 Policy, Legislation and Guidance ...... 67 Methodology ...... 69 Baseline ...... 70 Impact Assessment ...... 73

iii John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Mitigation ...... 76 Residual Effects ...... 77 Assessment of Cumulative Effects ...... 77 Statement of Significance ...... 77 AIR QUALITY 78 Introduction ...... 78 Policy, Legislation and Guidance ...... 78 Methodology ...... 81 Baseline Conditions ...... 85 TOPICS NOT REQUIRING FULL EIA 88 Introduction ...... 88 Ground Conditions ...... 88 Water Environment ...... 90 Drainage ...... 92 Landscape and Visual ...... 93 Lighting ...... 95 Traffic and Transport ...... 96 Archaeology and Cultural Heritage ...... 97 Population and Human Health ...... 100 Climate Change ...... 101 Major Accidents and Natural Disasters ...... 103 SCHEDULE OF MITIGATION 104 Introduction ...... 104 Mitigation Measures ...... 104 SUMMARY OF EFFECTS 111 REFERENCES 113

iv John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

INTRODUCTION

Introduction

John G Russell (Transport) Limited (‘The Applicant’) have appointed EnviroCentre Ltd to undertake an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of their proposed development, which is located at the site of the former Ravenscraig Steelworks site, which is located approximately 2km to the east of Motherwell town centre and north of Wishaw Golf Club.

This Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIAR) comprises the written findings of the EIA process. The EIAR has been prepared to support an application under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 (as amended), following which consent will be sought from North Lanarkshire Council.

The relevant Regulations which underpin this EIAR are:

• The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017 (‘the TCP EIA Regulations’).

This EIAR discusses the associated environmental effects related to the redevelopment of the site into a new rail head and logistics hub. The development is expected to comprise of the following at Phase 1;

Phase 2 and 3 will be subject to separate planning applications but will likely comprise

• Two retail distribution Hubs (Phases 2 and 3 which are subject to a separate planning application).

A full description of the proposed development is contained within Chapter 2: Proposed Development of this EIAR, with the methodology and consultation detailed within Chapter 3: EIA Methodology and Consultation.

The Applicant

John G Russell (Transport) Limited was founded in 1969 by current Chairman, John Russell. The company operate with over 250 vehicles, 14 depots and 6 rail terminals. The comprehensive network of transport and warehousing depots has been strategically selected to provide the most efficient and effective service to clients. This forward- thinking approach provides innovative logistics solutions executed by our loyal and experienced teams.

Russell Logistics offer a range of services and solutions, including Contract Packing, Self-Storage, Container Leasing, in addition to an Internal Tank Wash, a Vehicle Maintenance & Repair Centre, and a Supply Chain Training Centre. Russell Logistics also have an International business which handles our global and European movements.

1 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Due to rail's environmental benefits, many manufacturers and retailers are keen to develop their use of rail freight throughout the UK and Europe. Russell promote and encourage, where viable and sustainable, the transfer of freight from road to rail.

However, rail cannot operate in isolation from other transport modes, therefore, all Russell rail linked depots are road connected with an on-site distribution fleet enabling the smooth transfer of goods for onward delivery.

Russell's rail linked sites include Daventry, Edinburgh (Leith), Glasgow (Hillington), Coatbridge, Inverness, and Aberdeen. These terminals, alongside the 3rd party terminals in use, provide our customers with national coverage.

The development at Ravenscraig will create a new rail head and logistics hub which provides:

• Capacity to accommodate trains of 775m in length; • Direction of travel north and south onto the rail network without the need to loop back or for shunting and splitting trains; and • Access to the main Scottish goods market going south and to goods from the rail hubs from the south.

Regulatory Context

Schedule 2 of the TCP EIA Regulations lists developments for which an EIA must be undertaken where there are likely to be significant effects on the environment by virtue of factors such as the nature, size or location of a proposed development. It is noted that formal EIA Scoping remains voluntary, and as such is a non-binding tool. As such, and due to timescales, a formal Scoping exercise was not undertaken.

As described within Chapter 3: EIA Methodology and Consultation, North Lanarkshire Council and Statutory Bodies were consulted with at various points throughout the formation of development plans and their assessment. The consultation undertaken is described within Chapter 3: EIA Methodology and Consultation, as well as the corresponding sections of each technical chapter.

Objectives and EIA Context

The purpose of an EIA is to identify and evaluate the likely significant effects of a proposed development on the environment and to identify measures to mitigate or manage any significant adverse effects before a planning application is determined. The EIA process provides an opportunity to ‘design out’ adverse effects wherever possible. Where adverse effects cannot be designed out, mitigation measures can be proposed to avoid, compensate or reduce significant environmental effects to an acceptable level. EIA is an iterative process which allows feedback from stakeholder consultation and the results from baseline studies to be fed into the design process of the development.

The EIA carried out in relation to the proposed development has been undertaken by specialist environmental and technical consultants on the basis of project information supplied by the Applicant and their engineers and following consultation with statutory consultees, other bodies and members of the public.

The objectives of the EIAR are:

• To establish a robust environmental baseline upon which to base environmental assessment, incorporating field surveys, desk study and consultation; • To provide an assessment of the potential environmental impacts of the proposed development and to determine which of these, if any, are likely to result in a significant effect on the receiving environment; and

2 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

• Where significant effects are predicted, to determine mitigation measures to reduce the residual effects to acceptable levels.

The results and findings of the EIA are presented in this EIAR. The environmental information presented is derived through a systematic process of identification, prediction and evaluation of the likely significant environmental effects of the proposed development.

Schedule 4 of the TCP EIA Regulations requires that the following information is provided:

• A description of the location of development, its physical characteristics and land-use requirements during construction and operation; • A description of the main characteristics of the operational phase of the development; • An estimate of residues and emissions produced during the construction and operation phases; • A description of reasonable alternatives, and an indication of the main reasons for selecting the chosen option, including a comparison of the environmental effects; • A description of the relevant aspects of the current state of the environment and an outline of the likely evolution thereof without implementation of the development as far as reasonable; • A description of environmental receptors likely to be significantly affected by the development; • A description of the likely significant effects of the development on the environment; • A description of the forecasting methods or evidence used to identify and assess the significant effects; • A description of the measures envisaged to mitigate significant effects; • A description of expected significant adverse effects deriving from the vulnerability of the development to risks of major accidents and/or disaster; and • A non-technical summary of the aforementioned information.

This EIAR meets these requirements.

Key Terms

To ensure clarity and consistency through the EIAR, the following key terms have been used:

• ‘The proposed development’ refers to the construction of the proposed development as described in Chapter 2: Proposed Development; • ‘The site’ is located on land previously occupied by Ravenscraig Steelworks bound by the redline boundary in which the proposed development lies, and is illustrated within Volume 2 of this EIAR, Drawing Number RLH-ASL-00-XX-DR-A-0001 (Location Plan as Existing); • The ‘Study area’ is the area over which desk based or field assessments have been undertaken and are identified within each chapter. The core study area varies depending on the nature of the potential effects within each discipline, as informed by professional guidance and best practice regarding EIA. All of the core study areas cover the site and are described within the methodology section of the relevant chapters within this EIAR.

3 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Structure of the EIAR

The EIAR is presented within three volumes, the contents of which are set out within Table 1:1 below:

Table 1-1: Structure of the EIAR

Item Description

Volume 1: EIAR Volume 1 comprises the overall written statement of the EIAR, including the following chapters:

Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 1 sets the context for the EIA and introduces the development in a broad context

Chapter 2: Proposed Chapter 2 sets out the development description upon which the environmental Development assessment is based, as well as examining design and alternatives considered.

Chapter 3: EIA Chapter 3 introduces the EIA methodology by which the proposed development Methodology and was designed, along with an outline of how the EIAR has responded to comments Consultation throughout consultation.

Chapter 4: Ecology Chapter 4 assesses effects upon woodland and bats from the works

Chapter 5: Noise Chapter 5 deals with airborne noise as a result of the proposed development with regards to construction and operational noise.

Chapter 6: Air Quality Chapter 6 deals with air quality as a result of the proposed development with regards to construction and operational noise.

Chapter 7: Topics Not Chapter 7 covers areas of the environment which are important to note but have Requiring Full EIA not been identified as having potentially significant effects (as detailed within Chapter 3: EIA Methodology and Consultation).

Chapter 8: Schedule of Chapter 8 sets out a summary of all mitigation measures proposed within the Mitigation EIAR within a schedule which can then be used to inform planning conditions.

Chapter 9: Summary of Chapter 9 summarises the key findings of the EIAR, discusses environmental Effects principles, and provides a Statement of Significance in relation to the proposed development.

Volume 2: Figures Volume 2 provides the figures relevant to each chapter within Volume 1 and is provided as a standalone volume to aid comparative assessment.

Volume 3: Technical Volume 3 provides the relevant technical background papers and studies which Appendices have informed each chapter.

4 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

The Project Team

The EIAR has been undertaken by a team of competent experts as per Regulation 5(5) of the TCP EIA Regulations. As per the guidance contained within Planning Circular 1/2017, the EIA Report must be accompanied by a statement outlining relevant expertise or qualifications sufficient to demonstrate this is the case.

Accordingly, Table 1-2 details those with responsibility for undertaking this EIA Report, along with their relevant qualifications and expertise.

Table 1-2: Competence Expertise

Item / Role Name Number of Qualifications and years’ Professional Memberships experience

Project Lead

Project Lead Colin Smith 45 FRICS and MAPM

Inputs to EIA Process

EIA Project Director/ Dr. Campbell PhD, Chartered Geologist, 30 Reviewer Fleming Fellow of the Geological Society

BSc (Hons), PhD, Chartered Member of the EIA Project Manager / Institute of Logistics and Transportation, Dr Ian Buchan 20 Co-ordinator Member of the Institution of Environmental Sciences

BSc (Hons), Chartered Engineer, Engineering Input Jim Travers 35 Member of Institution of Civil Engineers

Architecture and BArch (Hons), DipArch ARB Registered. Andrew McCafferty 30 Design Input RIBA, ARIAS

Volume 1: Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Chapter 1: Introduction

BSc (Hons), PhD, Chartered Member of the Chapter 2: Proposed Institute of Logistics and Transportation, Development Dr. Ian Buchan 20 Member of the Institution of Environmental Chapter 3: EIA Sciences Methodology and Consultation

Chapter 4: Ecology Douglas Blease 21 BSc (Hons), Member of the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management and Member Association of Environmental Clerk of Works AEECOW

Natalie Hooton 5 BSc (Hons), Member of the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management

Ben Kelly 4 BSc (Hons), GradCIEEM

5 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Item / Role Name Number of Qualifications and years’ Professional Memberships experience

Chapter 5: Noise Ashley Leiper 9 MSc, Corporate member of the Institute of Acoustics (MIOA)

Craig Cloy 10 MA, Corporate member of the Institute of Acoustics

Chapter 6: Air Quality Emma Cormack 17 BSc (Hons), Member of the Institution of Environmental Sciences

Andrew Hood 5 MSc, MEng (Hons)

Emma Quinn 1 BSc (Hons), MSc, Associate Member of the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment

Chapter 7: Topics Not Requiring Full EIA

Ground Conditions, Graeme Duff 18 BSc (Joint Hons), MSc, Fellow of the Geological Society and Chartered Scientist

Water Environment, Neil Gordon 19 BEng (Hons), MSc and Chartered Civil Engineer

Douglas 7 MEng, Member of The Chartered Swinbanks Institution of Water and Environmental Management

Drainage Impact Jim Travers 35 BSc (Hons), Chartered Engineer, Assessment Member of Institution of Civil Engineers

Landscape & Visual, Douglas Harman 18 MSc, Chartered Member of the Landscape Institute

Lighting Farhad Rahim 30 Member of the City of London Livery, The Worshipful Company of Light Mongers, Member of the Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers

Traffic and Transport Graeme Kelly 23 BEng (Hons). Member of the Chartered Institution of Highways and Transportation.

Archaeology & Dr. Ian Buchan 20 BSc (Hons), PhD, Chartered Member of the Cultural Heritage Institute of Logistics and Transportation, Member of the Institution of Environmental Population and Health, Sciences Climate Change

Major Accidents and Natural Disasters

6 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Item / Role Name Number of Qualifications and years’ Professional Memberships experience

Chapter 8: Schedule of Dr. Ian Buchan 20 BSc (Hons), PhD, Chartered Member of the Mitigation Institute of Logistics and Transportation, Member of the Institution of Environmental Sciences

Chapter 9: Summary of Dr. Ian Buchan 20 BSc (Hons), PhD, Chartered Member of the Effects Institute of Logistics and Transportation, Member of the Institution of Environmental Sciences

7 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Site Location and Description

The application Site lies approximately 2km east of Motherwell town centre and immediately north of Craigneuk, which is a suburb of Wishaw. The Site encompasses an area of circa 65.48Ha, the majority of which is made up of brownfield land within the development envelope of the former Ravenscraig Steel Works. The northern and eastern portion of the site is made up of greenfield land in the vicinity of the former Wishaw House and the South Calder Water. The site also encompasses a section of the Wishaw Deviation Line.

The northern boundary of the Site is formed by the southern bank of the South Calder Water which sits within a dramatic ravine, known as Ravenscraig Gorge. The boundary follows the southern bank of the river westwards until it enters a culvert. At this point the site boundary extends northwards to meet the roundabout at the junction of New Craig Road and Plantation Road. It is here that a new vehicular and pedestrian access is proposed connecting the distribution centre site to New Craig Road and the trunk road network to both the north and south. The southern boundary of the site is formed by a combination of the rear boundaries of properties on Meadowhead Road, the northern boundary of a bicycle pump track and the north-western boundary of Wishaw Golf Club. The western and eastern boundaries of the Site do not follow any particular features on the ground but run approximately parallel to the Wishaw Deviation Line – the western boundary lies approximately 129m from the railway line, while the eastern boundary lies approximately 483m from the railway line. The northern, eastern and south-eastern extents of the site are partially covered by trees and woodland, some of which forms part of the Scotland Ancient Woodland Inventory (Refer to Volume 2: Figures).

RLH-ASL-00-XX-DR-A-0001 Location Plan as Existing RLH-ASL-00-XX-DR-A-0002 Site Plan as Existing RLH-ASL-00-XX-DR-A-0003 Aerial View of Existing Site RLH-ASL-00-XX-DR-A-0004 Topography of Existing Site RLH-ASL-00-ZZ-DR-A-0006 Site Sections as Existing

Description of the Proposed Development:

The first of the three phases of development will deliver the intermodal terminal, a 300,000sqft distribution centre (150,000sqft will be delivered initially, with scope to extend to provide a further 150,000sqft), a new office HQ for Russell Group, landscaping/habitat creation and other ancillary development. The development description is:

Whilst this Application only concerns Phase 1, a significant amount of detail is known about Phases 2 and 3 and reference is made to these subsequent phases as background to the proposed development as a whole.

The proposed development would consist of a 4 track intermodal terminal served by overhead cranes and 3 distribution centres (warehouses) which would receive and despatch goods by road and rail. Initially, the promoter anticipates traffic building up to 10 trains per day departing to locations in England and Scotland. Intermodal trains consist of skeletal wagons carrying containers that can be lifted between trains or between

8 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

trains and road trailers. The use of electrically hauled intermodal trains employing modern traction combined, in the future, with electrically or hydrogen powered road traction will also help facilitate zero carbon transport policies.

The proposed development will comprise:

• 4-track intermodal terminal served by overhead crane; • Trailer parking for 200 vehicles moving goods to and from the site by road: • Welfare facilities for lorry drivers and site personnel; • Car parking for staff; • Office space for site management; • 37,674ft2 Office space for a company HQ for Russell Group and industry education/ training • facilities; • A vehicle maintenance shed; • Distribution centre; • Two retail distribution Hubs (Phases 2 and 3 - subject to a separate planning application); and • Landscaping and Green Lung habitat creation to provide a visual buffer to the development and preserve the area’s ecology.

Refer to Volume 2: Figures

RLH-ASL-00-XX-DR-A-0100 Site Plan as Proposed RLH-ASL-00-XX-DR-A-0101 Site Plan as Proposed within Environmental Context RLH-ASL-00-XX-DR-A-0102 Site Plan as Proposed within Masterplan RLH-ASL-00-ZZ-DR-A-0103 Site Sections as Proposed (Sheet 01) RLH-ASL-00-ZZ-DR-A-0104 Site Sections as Proposed (Sheet 02) RLH-ASL-00-XX-DR-A-0110 Proposed Site Plan (JG Russell Site) RHL-ASL-XX-XX-VS-A-1100 3D Visualisation (Sheet 1) RHL-ASL-XX-XX-VS-A-1101 3D Visualisation (Sheet 2) RHL-ASL-XX-XX-VS-A-1102 3D Visualisation (Sheet 3) RHL-ASL-XX-XX-VS-A-1103 3D Visualisation (Sheet 4) RHL-ASL-XX-XX-VS-A-1104 3D Visualisation (Sheet 5) RHL-ASL-XX-XX-VS-A-1105 3D Visualisation (Sheet 6) RHL-ASL-XX-XX-VS-A-1106 3D Visualisation (Sheet 7) RHL-ASL-XX-XX-VS-A-1107 3D Visualisation (Sheet 8) RHL-ASL-XX-XX-VS-A-1108 3D Visualisation (Sheet 9) RHL-ASL-XX-XX-VS-A-1109 3D Visualisation (Sheet 10) EC22449 007 Section A-A EC22449 008 Section B-B EC22449 009 Section C-C EC22449 011 Sections D-D, E-E AND F-F EC22449 012 Cut and Fill EC22449 013 Section G-G EC22449 014 Long Sections Roads 1-3 EC22449 015 Long Section Roads 4-5

Phasing

The site is split into 3 phases for development. Phase 1 is allocated to JG Russell (Transport) Ltd as it is anticipated that this will be the first site to be developed and will act as a gateway to the logistics hub development. This

9 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

application includes the works illustrated in the Phase 1 site, enabling works to phase 2 and 3, the new railhead including the adjoining concrete roadway to support the cranes, the “green lung” and the access road.

Should the development be consented in 2021, the construction and opening proposed timetable would be:

• Full site clearance (outwith the bird nesting season) 2021-2022; • Rail head and crane 2022; • Green lung 2022; • Marshalling yard 2022; • Distribution centre opens 2023; • Head office opens 2023;

Phase 1

The site is split into 3 phases for development. Phase 1 is allocated to JG Russell (Transport) Ltd as this will be the first site to be developed and will act as a gateway to the logistics hub development.

The automated distribution unit is the largest building proposed for this site and is orientated east to west to suit the process on loading/unloading at gable ends. Provision is made for 100% expansion of this building to the south (Refer to Volume 3 Technical Appendix 2-1: Design & Access Statement).

The west perimeter of the site is designed to accommodate the space associated with specialist crane installation, container stacking and vehicle movement associated with the process of loading/unloading train rolling stock.

The Office and Training Facility is located towards the more prominent boundary to increase brand visibility for the client and for staff/building users to benefit from the views to the nearby ancient woodland. The office is provided with its own dedicated parking and surrounding landscape. An enclosed pedestrian bridge is provided between office and distribution building to allow the client to showcase the facility to customers segregating them from risks associated with vehicle movement.

The maintenance vehicle workshop is located on the eastern boundary of the site as it is separate from the distribution facility process. The Lorry Drivers welfare building is also located in this location to be in proximity to the lorry parking area.

Whilst landscaping is maximised along the more prominent north boundary, the remaining part of the site for Phase 1 will receive a concrete finish to accommodate loadings associated with vehicle movements, vehicle parking container storage and crane movement.

Quiet asphalt (low noise) will be used during construction of the access road to absorb HGV tyre noise, with concrete used within the yard area.

To construct the rail fright hub, a portion of woodland will be lost. However, to compensate for this, it is proposed that a large area of woodland habitat creation would occur to the west of the rail line. This would include translocation of soils and woody material (containing seed and fungal communities) and that the new woodland, or ‘Green Lung’, would benefit from an infusion of planted native broadleaf species.

The proposed ‘green lung’ will also, over time, provide a degree of screening in views from the west, helping reduce the visual impact and providing a buffer between the logistics centre and future phases of the Ravenscraig masterplan (Refer to Volume 3: Technical Appendix 4-4).

10 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Phases 2 and 3

This application includes for site enabling works and formation of the crane’s concrete roadway to the rail head perimeter.

As negotiation with occupants for stages 2 and 3 is still ongoing, the approach to the layout for Phases 2 and 3 follow the design principles followed for phase 1. It is therefore anticipated that there will be an element of design refinement once occupiers are confirmed. Phases 2 and 3 will be subject to a sperate planning application but are discussed here to provide background to the overall development plans.

Summary of Component Parts

Automated Distribution Unit

The proposed distribution unit is 292,412ft2 (27,166m2) in area. The form of what is the principal building in phase 1 is generated by the functional spatial arrangement associated with the process of delivery, sorting, storage, product retrieval, packaging and distribution. A 33m high rectilinear automated storage and packaging system is to be accommodated within the high bay portion of the building with incoming goods and sorting undertaking in the 9m low bay area. The steel roof structure increases the height of the high bay area to a maximum of approximately 37m. A services deck is proposed on the low bay area roof increasing the low bay height to approximately 17m.

The roof form is a shallow pitched roof with a parapet created at edges to ensure safe access for maintenance. Level access at sectional overhead door locations is provided at the low bay entrances on the eastern elevation. Dock levellers are proposed within the west elevation. The flat roof will allow for the introduction of solar cells to charge vehicles (Refer to Volume 2: Figures).

RLH-ASL-01-GR-DR-A-0120 Automated Distribution Store - Ground Floor Plan RLH-ASL-01-01-DR-A-0121 Automated Distribution Store - Roof Plan RLH-ASL-01-ZZ-DR-A-0122 Automated Distribution Store - Elevations (Sheet 1) RLH-ASL-01-ZZ-DR-A-0123 Automated Distribution Store - Elevations (Sheet 2) RLH-ASL-01-ZZ-DR-A-0124 Automated Distribution Store - Sections RLH-ASL-01-ZZ-DR-A-0125 Automated Distribution Store - 3D View

Office Building & Training Facility

The proposed design for the office and Training Facility is 37,674ft2 (3,500m2) in area. The aim is to create an exemplar in best workplace design that is bespoke to JG Russell (Transport) Ltd’s operational requirements.

The building is organised on 2 levels and includes provision for reception/waiting, a combination of open and cellular plan offices, toilets and welfare facilities, ancillary accommodation including stairs, lift and plant space.

The building form is designed to maximise the use of natural daylight and ventilation in order to reduce reliance on artificial lighting and mechanical ventilation thereby reducing operational costs.

The proposals also seek to maximise views to the ancient woodland, historic railway structure and views of business operations. A glazed and fully enclosed pedestrian bridge connects the upper floor of the office to the distribution unit which enables customers to safely view operations (Refer to Volume 2: Figures)

RLH-ASL-02-GF-DR-A-0130 HQ & Training Building - Ground Floor Plan RLH-ASL-02-01-DR-A-0131 HQ & Training Building - First Floor Plan RLH-ASL-02-02-DR-A-0132 HQ & Training Building - Roof Plan

11 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

RLH-ASL-02-ZZ-DR-A-0133 HQ & Training Building - Elevations RLH-ASL-02-ZZ-DR-A-0134 HQ & Training Building - Sections RLH-ASL-02-ZZ-DR-A-0135 HQ & Training Building - 3D View

Vehicle Maintenance Workshop

The vehicle maintenance workshop located to the eastern edge of phase 1 is approximately 18,148ft2 (1,868m2) in area and accommodates facilities for vehicle repair, toilets, showers, locker area and an office. The building is 9m high and is single storey with overhead sectional doors providing entry to vehicle maintenance bays.

Staff Welfare Building

A 4,489ft2 (417m2) two storey welfare facility is provided for staff, visiting drivers and site personnel. This building includes mess area, toilets, shower areas, locker rooms, offices and ancillary accommodation. This is attached to the vehicle maintenance workshop (Refer to Volume 2: Figures)

RLH-ASL-03-GF-DR-A-0140 Vehicle Maintenance & Welfare Building - Ground Floor Plan RLH-ASL-03-01-DR-A-0141 Vehicle Maintenance & Welfare Building - First Floor Plan RLH-ASL-03-ZZ-DR-A-0142 Vehicle Maintenance & Welfare Building - Roof Plan RLH-ASL-03-ZZ-DR-A-0143 Vehicle Maintenance & Welfare Building - Elevations RLH-ASL-03-ZZ-DR-A-0144 Vehicle Maintenance & Welfare Building - Sections RLH-ASL-03-ZZ-DR-A-0145 Vehicle Maintenance & Welfare Building - 3D View

Construction Methods

• J G Russell is committed to good management practices that minimise any potential negative environmental effects of its building activities. • J G Russell is working to address energy and carbon efficiency within its operations and to reducing energy usage at its offices and sites. Upgrades are planned to the haulage fleet with a move to electric and hydrogen fuelled HGVs. • J G Russell has experience in successfully delivering sustainable buildings and strives to maximise opportunities for environmental and sustainable improvements, enabling it to deliver cost benefits to clients and to help meet low-carbon objectives. • J G Russell plays its part in reducing the impact of construction on natural resources through its environmental purchasing policy, which will be incorporated into subcontract documentation, encouraging the principles of responsible sourcing and minimising the use of damaging chemicals. • The Contractor for the Ravenscraig development will be required to pursue the sustainable use of natural resources, thereby minimising environmental pollution, reducing waste and encouraging recycling. • The EIAR Schedule of Mitigation will be reviewed prior to any works commencing on site and will be reviewed regularly to ensure that mitigation measures are implemented and effective. • The monitoring of construction waste will be undertaken through robust site waste management procedures. • The Design Team and appointed Contractor for the development will be committed to identifying all activities that have the potential to cause an environmental impact, as well as to providing adequate resources to help minimise or prevent any negative impact. In order to achieve this, they will: · Identify environmental impacts and establish environmental management procedures; · Regularly measure and evaluate environmental performance and improve this where necessary; · Demonstrate an understanding of J G Russell operations and ensure that all are performed with due consideration of the environment; · Use products that have a negligible environmental impact, where possible options exist; · Reduce the consumption of resources (energy, materials, packaging), where feasible; and

12 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

· Make sure that all aspects of design and construction embrace best practice to ensure energy efficient construction, recycled materials and a reduction in waste disposal.

Operational Activities

The fundamental aim is to truly integrate Road, Rail and Warehousing provision allowing the transition towards optimal service offering to Scottish manufacturers and the retailers serving the Scottish consumer. There will be domestic and Port rail services to and from the Hub with a full load to single pallet collection & delivery offering for Scotland.

There will be a workshop on site to support servicing and repair needs as well as suitable rest facilities for employees. The J G Russell (Transport) Ltd HQ office will be built on site with a training school to aid development for all.

In the first year it is anticipated that there will be 7 trains per day in each direction growing to 10 trains over a number of years.

Alternatives Considered

J G Russell enjoy close, long-term working relationships with many major operators within the food and drink sectors. These relationships include working in partnership with operators, thereby giving insight into each individual operator’s ethos and standards.

This insight forms one of the four ‘litmus’ tests that has been applied to all sites reviewed.

The four tests are:

• Capacity to accommodate trains of 775m in length; • Direction of travel north and south onto the rail network without the need to loop back or for shunting and splitting trains; • Access to the main Scottish goods market going south and to goods from the rail hub from the south; and, • The operational requirements of the retailers.

A detailed examination of the physical constraints of each of the 14 sites was undertaken by Kenneth Russell, Aecom and Hg Consulting, together with a review of the ‘litmus’ tests. In the process period, 14 sites were reviewed, namely:

• Gartcosh Triangle, Kilgarth; • Former fuel depot, Bishopbriggs; • Concrete plant at Newmains; • Former Leyland plant, Bathgate; • Law Junction; • Cambuslang steel works; • Bellshill steel works; • Cadder; • St Rollox works, Glasgow; • Air Products terminal, Bellshill; • New terminal (Peter D Stirling), Bellshill; • Freightliner site, Coatbridge; • DB Schenker site, Mossend; and

13 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

• Ravenscraig site.

The review concluded that only four sites were worthy of further technical analysis before moving to examine additional technical and planning application requirements.

The four sites were

• New terminal (Peter D Stirling), Bellshill; • Freightliner site, Coatbridge; • D B Schenker site, Mossend; and • Ravenscraig site.

The four remaining sites were the subject of a workshop on 15th January 2020 for J G Russell’s appointed consultants. This workshop was led by Kenneth Russell, facilitated by Colin Smith (Hg Consulting), and attended by Mike Garratt of MDS Transmodal and David Herron and Gordon Hope of Aecom, all of whom have expertise in the field of logistics and heavy rail.

In addition, within the workshop, a site analysis was carried out, including utilising rail tracking software promoted and designed by Network Rail.

This further analysis demonstrates that the Ravenscraig site is the only one that can be designed in such a way and can provide the criteria to match the forecast logistics demand in the most efficient manner, meeting national transport policy as well as the needs of national food and drink operators (Table 2-2).

Table 2-1: Matrix to Compare Shortlisted Sites

Rail Hub Location

Criteria Bellshill New Coatbridge Mossend Ravenscraig Terminal (Freightliner) (DB (JG Russell) (Peter D Schenker) Stirling)

1. Labour availability

2. Network Rail path access and line capacity

3. Optimum north/south rail direction of travel

4. 775m train length

5. Suitable road access

6. Ability for access to motorway network

7. Ample provision of land area

8. Support from warehouse users (co-development) 9. Compliance with national transport policy

10. Adequate cranage capacity for 775m trains 11. Suitable topography

14 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Criteria Bellshill New Coatbridge Mossend Ravenscraig Terminal (Freightliner) (DB (JG Russell) (Peter D Schenker) Stirling)

12. Public transport - rail/bus

13. Spare capacity in rail network to accommodate freight 14. No detrimental impact on rail passenger services 15. Integrated rail terminal with high bay warehousing

Legend 'Traffic light' colour coding system: Green - Available/Satisfactory/Capable Amber - Possible with additional investment/Limited Capacity/Third Party agreement required Red - Not possible The assessment also shows that road access to surrounding strategic road networks at Ravenscraig is feasible in all directions. Average journey times are shown in Figure 2-1.

Figure 2-1: Average Journey Times to the Strategic Road Network

15 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

The proposed Pan Lanarkshire Orbital Route Corridor will considerably improve linkages to the strategic network, and the supporting Transport Statement prepared taking cognisance of the transport modelling being undertaken for this infrastructure (Volume 3: Technical Appendix 7.5).

Refer also to Volume 3: Technical Appendix 2-2 ‘The case for a rail terminal at Ravenscraig’.

16 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

EIA METHODOLOGY AND CONSULTATION

Introduction

In determining the requirement for an EIA, Schedule 1 of the TCP EIA Regulations sets out the types of development for which EIA is a mandatory requirement, whilst Schedule 2 lists the projects where the need for EIA is judged on a case-by-case basis, depending on whether a proposal is likely to cause significant environmental effects or is located in a sensitive area as defined by the EIA Regulations.

In this instance, the proposed development is considered to constitute Schedule 2 development as defined by the EIA Regulations as it falls under Schedule 2 (10)(c) (Column 1: Description of development) of The Town And Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017, ‘Construction of intermodal transhipment facilities and of intermodal terminals (unless included in schedule 1);’. And in column 2: Applicable thresholds and criteria ‘The area of the development exceeds 0.5 hectare.’

At the steering group meeting (held via Microsoft Teams) on Wednesday 23rd September 2020, the North Lanarkshire Council Planning Manager advised that the Ravenscraig site is an EIA development.

General EIA Methodology

Whilst each environmental topic discussed within the EIAR establishes its own methodology based upon relevant industry guidance and good practice, there is a basic methodological framework which is applied to EIA chapters.

This EIAR identifies, describes, and assesses the likely significant impacts and their effects of the proposed development on the environment, both direct and indirect. The EIA process involves the following key stages:

• Baseline Studies – identification of existing environmental conditions through review of existing information, monitoring and field studies as required, to provide a baseline against which to assess the likely impacts of the proposed development; • Potential impacts – identification of potential impacts and their resulting effects across the construction and operational phase, in relation to the design mitigation already implemented and where applicable, taking alternatives into account; • Significance Assessment – evaluation of the effects, resulting from the identified potential impacts, to determine their significance, both positively and negatively, and incorporating cumulative effects; • Mitigation and Monitoring – the identification of measures to avoid, reduce or compensate likely significant effects and the steps taken to monitor these potential environmental effects; and • Residual Effects – identification of residual effects assuming successful implementation of mitigation.

For consistency where possible, the same headings have been used within the technical sections of this EIAR.

17 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

EIA Regulations 2017

Following guidance set out in the Scottish Government’s Planning Circular 1/2017, this EIAR follows the amendments and additions to the 2017 EIA Regulations. Notable additions to the EIA Regulations include:

• The requirement for the EIA to be based upon the Consultation with North Lanarkshire Council and Statutory Consultees; • A requirement to consider a comparison of environmental effects when considering alternatives (Regulation 5(2) (d)); • A replacement of the environmental factors to be considered as been amended from ‘human being’ to ‘population and human health’, and ‘flora and fauna’ replaced by ‘biodiversity’ (Schedule 4(4)). • Discussion of the relevant baseline and predicted evolution of that baseline in the absence of the proposed development (Schedule 4(3)); • Cumulative assessment should take place in relation to existing and/or approved development (Schedule 3(1)(b)); and • The requirement for the Competent Authority (i.e. North Lanarkshire Council) to include a ‘reasoned conclusion’ on the significant effects upon the environment within any Decision Notice published (Regulation 29(2)).

This EIAR addressed each of these points within the relevant assessments, where applicable. It is the aim of the EIAR to allow sufficient information to allow North Lanarkshire Council to meet a ‘reasoned conclusion’ on the significance of effects.

The EIA Process

Introduction

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process is an interdisciplinary and multistep procedure to ensure that environmental considerations are included in decisions regarding projects that may impact the environment. Simply defined, the EIA process helps identify the possible environmental effects of a proposed activity and how those impacts can be mitigated. EIA is therefore, a process that identifies the likely significant environmental effects (both beneficial and adverse) of a proposed development. The process aims to prevent, reduce and mitigate any adverse significant environmental effects, where these are identified.

The EIAR should be a clear and concise summary of the proposed development and its likely environmental effects - including direct, indirect and cumulative effects - on the natural, built and human environments. The EIAR is submitted to the relevant competent authority in support of an application for planning permission. It provides the competent authority, statutory consultees and the wider community with sufficient information to make an objective judgement as to the proposed development’s acceptability within the context of national, regional and local planning and environmental policy.

Sensitivity/Importance of Receptors

This section provides a description of the location of the project, with particular regard to the environmental sensitivity of geographical areas likely to be affected, i.e. the potential of a receptor to be significantly affected. It involves the collection and analysis of information on the condition, sensitivity and significance of relevant environmental factors and receptors which are likely to be significantly affected by the project.

18 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

The sensitivity of the baseline conditions/receptors was defined according to the relative importance of existing environmental features on or in the vicinity of the site, or by the sensitivity of receptors which would potentially be affected by the proposed development.

Criteria for the determination of sensitivity (e.g. high, medium or low) or of importance (e.g. international, national, regional or authority area) were established (where appropriate) for each topic assessment based on prescribed guidance, legislation, statutory designation and/or professional judgement. The criteria for each environmental parameter are provided in the relevant specialist chapters of this EIAR and may differ between technical topics dependent upon guidance which defines that approach (e.g. Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management).

Magnitude of Impact/Change

The impacts of the proposed development have been assessed, using a range of subjective and objective measures by which the significance of the impacts can be identified. Each chapter sets out the terminology used, together with an explanation of each term used to describe the key attributes listed as follows:

• Magnitude of impact upon the identified environmental receptor; • Sensitivity of the identified environmental receptor; • Significance of effect on the identified environmental receptor; • The level of effect considered ‘significant’ in EIA terms; and • Methodology used for the identification of mitigation measures.

The methods for predicting the nature and magnitude of potential impacts vary according to the subject area. Quantitative methods of assessment can predict values that can be compared against published thresholds and indicative criteria in Government guidance and standards. However, it is not always possible to ascribe values to environmental assessments and therefore qualitative assessments are sometimes used. Such assessments rely on previous experience and professional judgement. The methodologies used for assessing each topic area are described within the specialist chapters of this EIAR.

In general terms, the magnitude of impact on environmental baseline conditions was identified through detailed consideration of the proposed development, taking due cognisance of any legislative or policy standards or guidelines, and/or the following factors:

• The degree to which the environment is affected, e.g. whether the quality is enhanced or impaired; • The scale or degree of change from the existing situation; • Whether the impact is temporary or permanent, indirect or direct, short-term, medium-term or long- term; and • Any in-combination effects and potential cumulative effects.

In some cases, the likelihood of impact occurrence may also be relevant and, where this is a determining feature of the assessment, this is clearly stated.

Significance of Effect

Significance of effects is generally understood to mean the importance of the outcome of the effects (the consequences of the change). Significance is determined by a combination of (objective) scientific and subjective (social) concerns. The criteria for determining the significance of an effect has been developed giving due regard to the following, where applicable:

• Sensitivity, importance or value of the resource or receptor;

19 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

• Extent and magnitude and duration of the impact; and • Performance against environmental quality standards.

The criteria and assessment methodology used for each topic considered within this EIAR are set out within the ‘Methodology’ section of the respective EIAR chapter.

Unless otherwise stated, reported effects are considered to be adverse. It is however possible that some effects may be positive, and these are stated and explained where appropriate.

Design Mitigation and Residual Effects

There is a widely accepted strategy for mitigation outlined in Planning Advice Note (PAN) 1/20131 (Environmental Impact Assessment) and continued within Planning Circular 1/20172 (Environmental Impact Assessment regulations) which has been followed when considering the environmental effects of the proposed development. This comprises (in order of preference): avoidance, reduction and offsetting. Through the evolution of the design, the Applicant has sought to identify appropriate mitigation measures and strategies as part of the proposed development.

Design mitigation is integral to providing an environmentally robust development whereby suggestions for mitigation have been taken into the design prior to ‘design freeze’. This in-built mitigation represents, where applicable, environmental good practice and places a responsibility upon the Applicant to provide environmentally sustainable design solutions. Design rationale is further discussed within each EIAR chapter that comments on design mitigation incorporated into the development, and therefore individual assessments, before assessment is carried out. Therefore, where design mitigation has been employed, the impact assessment is carried out with this design mitigation in place as it forms a constituent part of the proposed development. Residual effects are generally then the effects that follow the assessment of proposed development with design incorporated.

Where complete avoidance of significant effects was not feasible during refinement of the site design, additional measures are identified in the relevant specialist chapters to reduce or offset effects where practical to do so. If no design mitigation has been identified, the assessment assumes no design mitigation and therefore effects are prior to any mitigation.

Residual effects of the proposed development are those that remain, assuming successful implementation of the identified mitigation measures. All remaining effects of the proposed development, following the application of mitigation measures, are summarised clearly and their significance stated, within the ‘Residual Effects’ section of each specialist chapter.

Where applicable, the EIAR also reports measures for enhancement which would be enshrined by planning condition.

Cumulative Impact Assessment

Consideration of cumulative effects is a requirement of the EIA Regulations. By definition these are effects that result from incremental changes caused by past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions together with the proposed development. There are different types of cumulative effects (such as incombination and sequential effects) and typically cumulative impact assessment is a key part of the EIA process which are assessed throughout

1 www.gov.scot/publications/planning-advice-note-1-2013-environmental-impact-assessment/ (Accessed 19/10/2020) 2 www.gov.scot/publications/planning-circular-1-2017-environmental-impact-assessment-regulations-2017/ (Accessed 19/10/2020)

20 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

each chapter. The sites which are incorporated into cumulative assessment are clearly highlighted within each technical chapter.

Consultation as part of the EIA Process

A Pre-Application Meeting was held (held via Microsoft Teams) on Wednesday 23rd September 2020, the North Lanarkshire Council Planning Manager advised that the Ravenscraig site is an EIA development.

The meeting provided guidance upon EIA procedure and associated timescales; clarification of the planning consenting regime and boundaries.

At this Microsoft Teams meeting the North Lanarkshire Council Planning Manager advised that the Ravenscraig site is an EIA development.

Public Consultation

In light of restrictions on public gatherings due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Town and Country Planning (Miscellaneous Temporary Modifications) (Coronavirus) (Scotland) Regulations 2020 temporarily suspends the requirement for a public event. However, alongside this, the Scottish Government has published Coronavirus (COVID-19): planning guidance on pre-application consultations for public events. The guidance provides advice on alternative means of engaging with the public through a web-based consultation.

In accordance with Regulation 7 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2013, it was proposed to advertise the events within the Motherwell Times and Wishaw Press at least 7 days in advance of the first event. Reflecting the guidance contained within the Coronavirus (COVID-19): planning guidance on pre-application consultations for public events, the adverts contained the URL for the consultation website. The adverts were published on 18 November.

To further promote the consultation, a leaflet drop was undertaken in the Ravenscraig area in advance of the first event. Four-thousand leaflets were printed with distribution covering the Ravenscraig area and surrounding neighbourhoods. A copy of the leaflet and the area covered in the circulation, which was agreed with NLC. The events were also promoted via Craigneuk Community Council’s Facebook page and a press release, which was printed in several local and national publications, further raised awareness.

The online consultation website, www.craigneuklogistics.com, was launched on the 17th of November to coincide with the circulation of leaflets to local residents. Through the website, interested parties could provide comments on the proposals up to the 20th of December via an interactive online form (giving just under 5 weeks to provide comments) and a separate form was provided so that questions could be submitted. An email address was also provided so comments or questions could be sent in via email, along with a dedicated phone number and details of GL Hearn’s office at Morrison Street in Edinburgh. The website URL, email address, telephone number and postal address were also noted within the leaflet and press advert.

The consultation website incorporated information boards covering the following:

• The public consultation process; • Background information on the Russell Group; • Details of the proposal; • Why the Russell Group is making the proposal, including sustainability and operational advantages; • The employment, training and economic impact of the development; • Roads and transportation; • Environmental impacts;

21 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

• Noise, air quality and visual/landscape impacts; • Application and construction timetable; and • How to respond to the consultation.

As it became available during the consultation period, the following additional information was added to the consultation website:

• 3D visuals of the proposed development; • Images comparing the site before and after the development; and • A video flyover of the development

Three interactive online exhibitions were undertaken – the first on Wednesday 25th November 2020, the second on Wednesday 9th December 2020 and the third on Wednesday 16th December 2020. The three exhibitions started at 4pm and finished at 7.30pm. Each event provided members of the public an opportunity to view information about the application, ask questions of the project team “live” and provide comments either via the consultation room or alternatively by phone, email or post. The online consultation room remained live for a minimum of 21 days to allow members of the public to view the information and submit comments and questions.

All three events took place using the video conferencing facility Zoom, with a link to the meeting posted on the consultation website. The format for each meeting involved a series of presentations at set times, followed by question and answer sessions with representatives of the project team from Hg Consulting, Austin Smith Lord, Envirocentre, GL Hearn and Sweco. Given the large number of attendees, and the volume of questions posed, at the first meeting, the question and answer session was managed solely via the Zoom chat facility with questions being read out by the host and answered by the project team. However, this approach was refined for the second meeting by providing a fixed period when attendees could ‘raise their hand’ and speak direct to the team. The third meeting was less well attended and thus a more flexible approach was taken depending on the preference of individuals on the call.

Statutory Consultee Requests and Reponses

A formal scoping exercise was not undertaken, however, EnviroCentre issued a Regulation 19 Notification to North Lanarkshire Council, as required by The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 2017 (Refer to volume 3: Technical Appendix 3-1: Regulation 19 Notification and Consultee Responses).

Table 3.2 provides a summary of Statutory Consultee Responses

22 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Table 3.2: Summary of Statutory Consultee Responses

Environmental Topic Organisation Consultation comment How and where addressed?

General EIA Issues / Engineering

[email protected]; No response to date [email protected]; [email protected]

The proposal to carry out habitat enhancement in the area called ‘Habitat Creation Area’ and depicted on the ‘Site plan as proposed’ on p7 is welcomed. The final design should include areas from which the public are excluded; have good coverage of native species; ponds designed with wildlife in mind (not just water storage) and dark areas. Chapter 4: Ecology sets out the impacts of the proposed development of Ecology Furthermore, some reptile habitat should be provided as these animals are likely to be displaced from the dry the receptor designations, and their associated important ecological grassland areas which would be lost to the development. SEPA features. Green corridors connecting all the green spaces within the development area to other nearby wild spaces such as the Volume 3: Technical Appendix 4-1 Preliminary Ecological Appraisal South Calder riverbanks should be included in the design (e.g. under the railway bridges). Volume 3: Technical Appendix 4-2 Otter Survey Report The EIA should include an assessment of the likely success of the habitat creation plan to deliver improved biodiversity. There should also be a commitment to carry out habitat enhancement before any destruction of Volume 3: Technical Appendix 4-3 Elevated Tree Inspection (Roosting Bats) existing habitat begins. Volume 3: Technical Appendix 4-4 Green Lung: Woodland Creation

NatureScot No response to date

Any INNS present on site must be dealt with in line with our guidance. SEPA Waste Policy provides guidance3 on the Invasive Non-Native SEPA disposal of invasive non-native species and contaminated soils. Species (INNS) Further information on invasive non-native species is available on our website.4

1. Construction work associated with this development shall conform to BS-5228, Noise from Construction and Open Sites. 2. Due to the close proximity of the development to noise sensitive dwellings during the period of construction working hours should be limited to: • 8.00am to 7.00pm Monday to Friday NLC Environmental Health • Chapter 5: Noise assesses construction and operational noise impacts Noise 8.00am to 1.00pm Saturdays. Officer (EHO) associated with the proposed development. • No noise to be audible from the site on Sundays or Bank Holidays. 3. A noise impact assessment requires to be carried out for this development. The findings of the assessment should be submitted to the Local Authority in the form of a report which details the extent of any associated impact and any mitigation measures proposed. I would therefore request that the application is not determined until the report submitted and any proposed mitigation are approved by the Local Authority. On site visits have been made and methodology discussed with EnviroCentre.

3 http://www.sepa.org.uk/waste/waste_regulation/guidance__position_statements.aspx 4 http://www.sepa.org.uk/environment/biodiversity/invasive-non-native-species/

23 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Environmental Topic Organisation Consultation comment How and where addressed?

Best practicable means shall be adopted to control site generated dust and prevent dust emission beyond the site boundary. If site generated dust is found to be impacting upon property/residents out with the site the operation responsible shall be suspended until suitable dust suppression measures are put in place. During preparation of the site and construction no waste materials may be burned on site. NLC EHO There is a strong likelihood that this development will significantly increase road traffic in the local area. In line with Air Quality North Lanarkshire Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance on Air Quality this proposed development requires an Refer to Chapter 6 Air Quality Impact assessment (AQIA). The applicant will require to submit AQIA in both hard copy and electronic format before the Local Authority can finalise the consultation. I would therefore request that the application is not determined until such time as the assessment has been submitted and approved by this Authority. Discussions have been held with E Crossan EnviroCentre on the scope.

SEPA We note that Air Quality will be addressed as part of the EIA.

To ensure potential risks arising from previous land uses around the site have been fully assessed, before the development starts, a comprehensive site investigation requires to be submitted to the satisfaction of the Local Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with the British Standard Code of Practice BS 10175: 2001 “The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites”. The report must include a site specific risk assessment of NLC EHO all relevant pollution linkages, be carried out in accordance with the Environment Agency publication, Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination CLR11, and be submitted in both hard copy and electronic format. Depending on the results of this investigation a detailed remediation strategy may be required. Any remediation work required must be completed and verification provided by the developer to the satisfaction of the Local Authorities before development begins

We have previously been consulted by North Lanarkshire Council with regards to contamination present in mines in deeper groundwater as a result of historical works at the site. Works are ongoing to address this across the wider Ground conditions are addressed within Chapter 7: Topics Not Requiring Ground Conditions Ravenscraig Site, including the footprint of the current application. Further information can be sought from North Lanarkshire Council's Contaminated Land Function. Full EIA - Section 7.1 Ground Conditions. SEPA has a particular interest in pollution of the water environment arising from any land contamination at the site. It is for the Council to decide whether the site is suitable for the proposed use or can be made suitable for use in the context of any land contaminated at this location. This may include, or be informed by, the preparation of SEPA appropriate site investigation and risk assessments. An objective of any investigation should be to determine whether or not any contamination present would constitute pollution of the water environment (including groundwater) so that any required remedial action can be undertaken prior to redevelopment. It is desirable that any investigation and remediation works should be at least sufficient to ensure that the site conditions, once developed, would not constitute contaminated land under Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. We would only expect to be consulted when, after evaluation of all available information (including appropriate site investigations and risk assessments), the local authority has determined that there is the potential for the site to impact on the Water Environment.

Our records indicate that there are 6 mine entries within the site identified, for which we hold no treatment details. The site is also in an area of recorded and likely unrecorded coal workings at shallow depth. It is noted that the submission is supported by a letter dated 24 November 2020 and prepared by EnviroCentre Ltd. This letter briefly refers to ground conditions and contamination and comments that a significant amount of work has been carried out for this topic, including outline remedial measures. Based on this the authors of the letter (Ground Conditions Ground conditions are addressed within Chapter 7: Topics Not Requiring Coal Authority conclude that they do not propose to revisit this topic. continued…) Full EIA - Section 7.1 Ground Conditions. We would expect any formal submission to include the findings of any site investigations which have been carried out to locate and assess the mine entries in order to inform the remedial works necessary. The extract location of these features should also inform the development layout to ensure that adequate separation is provided between these features and any buildings proposed. We would also expect consideration to be given to the potential risks posed by shallow coal workings beneath the site.

24 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Environmental Topic Organisation Consultation comment How and where addressed?

The Coal Authority is of the opinion that building over the top of, or in close proximity to, mine entries should be avoided wherever possible, even after they have been capped, in line with our adopted policy:

In response to your email dated 26 October 2020 we offer the following comments. We are satisfied with the approach you are proposing for scoping the FRA and EIA with regards to flood risk. We do not hold any historical flooding information for this location. Finally, we can confirm that there are no known or specific issues at this location / on this stretch of the South Calder Water that we would expect the FRA to account These items are addressed within Chapter 7: Topics Not Requiring Full EIA - Hydrology SEPA for or focus on. Section 7.2 and 7.3 and Volume 3: Technical Appendix 7.1 and 7.2 The FRA will need to adhere to our standard technical and reporting requirements. These are set out in our Technical Flood Risk Guidance for Stakeholders. We also request that when the FRA is submitted you complete our Flood Risk Assessment Checklist.

We understand that a flood risk assessment will be submitted as a standalone assessment as part of the planning application. The site should be assessed for flood risk from all sources in line with Scottish Planning Policy (Paragraphs 254-268). These items are addressed within Chapter 7: Topics Not Requiring Full EIA - Flood Risk Assessment SEPA The Flood Maps for Scotland are available to view online and further information and advice can be sought from Section 7.2 and 7.3 and Volume 3: Technical Appendix 7.1 and 7.2 your local authority technical or engineering services department and from our website. The Flood Risk Assessment should be carried out following the guidance set out in the document Technical flood risk guidance for stakeholders.

In the information submitted a statement is made that there is a deep groundwater table on site. It is not clear what data this statement is based on and this should be clarified in the EIA. It should be noted that groundwater in Chapter 7: Topics Not Requiring Full EIA - Section 7.2 and 7.3 and Groundwater SEPA superficial deposits in the wider Ravenscraig Site has been encountered at depths of less than 10 metres below Volume 3: Technical Appendix 7.1 and 7.2 ground level and in some locations as shallow as 1.5metres below ground level.

Taking the size and history of the site into account SEPA consider that surface water drainage comprising construction drainage and SUDS should be an integral part of the EIA. We understand that drainage for other parts of the site has been agreed and the information submitted with this application should detail how proposals for this Surface water drainage SEPA development will tie in with existing agreed infrastructure. A construction site licence (CSL) under the Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011 (CAR) will be required for a site of this size.

The foul drainage from the site must be discharged to the public sewerage system. The applicant should consult with Scottish Water in this regard. Waste water drainage SEPA We confirm that it is the responsibility of Scottish Water to ensure that the additional flow arising from this These items are addressed within Chapter 7: Topics Not Requiring Full EIA. development will not cause or contribute to the premature operation of consented storm overflows Refer to Section 7.3 Drainage and Volume 3: Technical Appendix 7.2

In order to meet the objectives of the Water Framework Directive5 of preventing any deterioration and improving the water environment, developments should be designed to avoid engineering activities in the water environment wherever possible. As such we encourage applicants to seek such opportunities to avoid or offset environmental impacts. We would therefore welcome any proposal to de-culvert watercourses, create buffer strips and provide Water Environment SEPA fencing along the watercourses on site. Fencing off watercourses and creating buffer strips both helps reduce the risk of diffuse water pollution and affords protection to the riparian habitat. Further guidance on buffer zones to water bodies is included within our Planning Guidance on the Water Framework Directive including River Basin Planning.6

5 http://www.sepa.org.uk/environment/water/river-basin-management-planning/ 6 http://www.sepa.org.uk/media/143208/lups-gu7-planning-guidance-on-the-water-framework-directive-including-river-basin-planning.pdf

25 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Environmental Topic Organisation Consultation comment How and where addressed?

One of our key interests in relation to major developments is pollution prevention measures during the periods of construction, operation, maintenance, demolition and restoration. The construction phase includes construction of access roads, borrow pits and any other site infrastructure. We advise that the applicant should, through the EIA process or planning submission, systematically identify all aspects of site work that might impact upon the environment, potential pollution risks associated with the proposals and identify the principles of preventative measures and mitigation. This will establish a robust environmental management process for the development. A draft Schedule of Mitigation should be produced as part of this process. This should cover all the environmental sensitivities, pollution prevention and mitigation measures Pollution prevention and identified to avoid or minimise environmental effects. Please refer to the Pollution prevention guidelines.7 environmental SEPA A Construction Environmental Management Document is a key management tool to implement the Schedule of These items are addressed within Chapter 8 Schedule of Mitigation management Mitigation. We recommend that the principles of this document are set out in the ES outlining how the draft Schedule of Mitigation will be implemented. This document should form the basis of more detailed site specific Construction Environmental Management Plans which, along with detailed method statements, may be required by planning condition or, in certain cases, through environmental regulation. This approach provides a useful link between the principles of development which need to be outlined at the early stages of the project and the method statements which are usually produced following award of contract (just before development commences). Best practice advice developed by The Highland Council (in conjunction with industry and other key agencies) on the Construction Environmental Management Process is available in the guidance note Construction Environmental Management Process for Large Scale Projects8.

1. Detail should be provided for the planting of trees species eventual size/spread including root zones. Detail is also required for the proposed planting pits and root containment of trees planted in areas where hard surfaces, foundations or buried services will be within the Critical Root Zone. This should be calculated based on the These items are addressed within the following diameter of the tree at maturity as per Table A.1 in BS 5837 and take account for the allowance for future growth. 1. Technical Appendix 4-4 Green Lung: Woodland Creation 2. Refer to Volume 2: Figures Landscape NLC Landscape 2. Opportunities for screening through earth mounding and bunding should be tested across the site, including the land adjacent to the main entrance road. 3. Chapter 7: Topics Not Requiring Full EIA. Refer to Section 7.3 3. Details of Sustainable urban Drainage proposals, ponds, swales and associated planting including along the main Drainage and Technical Appendix 7.2 vehicle access road. Refer to Volume 2: Figures 4. Hard landscaping plan(s) to include, details of paving types, finishes to carparking areas, edge details, location of surface drains and construction details for all boundary treatments.

Should external lighting be provided as part of this development it is recommended that specifically designed lighting equipment is used which minimises the upward spread of light near to and above the horizontal. Care should be taken when selecting luminaries to ensure that appropriate units are chosen and that their location will reduce spill Lighting is addressed within Chapter 7: Topics Not Requiring Full EIA - Lighting NLC EHO light and glare to a minimum. Glare should be kept to a minimum by ensuring that the main beam angle of all lights Section 7.6 Lighting and Volume 3: Technical Appendix 7.4: Lighting directed towards any potential observer is not more than 70°. Higher mounting heights allow lower main beam Statement angles, which can assist in reducing glare. In areas with low ambient lighting levels, glare can be very obtrusive and extra care should be taken when positioning and aiming lighting equipment.

7 http://www.sepa.org.uk/regulations/water/guidance/ 8 http://www.highland.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/485C70FB-98A7-4F77-8D6B-ED5ACC7409C0/0/construction_environmental_management_22122010.pdf

26 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Environmental Topic Organisation Consultation comment How and where addressed?

1a. EXISTING ROADS – The applicant proposes to locate the proposed development within Ravenscraig. This proposed use was not included as part of the mixed use development granted planning consent in principle in November 2020. The proposed use is likely to generate significant volumes of traffic which was not taken into account when the impact of the consented mixed-use development was considered. The applicant should therefore provide a Transport Assessment (TA) to demonstrate the proposed development site is located where it can be accessed by a number of transport modes and does not rely solely on the private car. In addition, the TA should demonstrate the impact the traffic generated by the proposed development can be accommodated on the existing road network or by the mitigation identified to support the consented development These items are addressed within Chapter 7: Items not Requiring Full NLC Roads and or where further mitigation will be necessary taking into account the level of traffic likely to be generated by the Section 7.7 Traffic and Transport and Volume 3: Technical Appendix 7.5 Transportation consented development. Transport Statement 2a. NEW ROADS - The proposed road connecting the proposed development site to New Craig Road should be Traffic and Transport designed and constructed in accordance with the standards currently applied in North Lanarkshire and should include walking and cycling facilities along its full length to tie into the existing facilities which exist along New Craig Road. Proposed roads should also comply with the Area Planning Brief appropriate to this area of Ravenscraig 3a. SERVICING AND PARKING - Servicing and parking facilities to be provided in accordance with the standards currently applied in North Lanarkshire. RECOMMENDATION – ‘I have no objections subject to conditions noted in 1a), 2a), 3a) above.’

We would strongly suggest that reference to the issues below are included in the Environmental Impact Assessment Report to ensure that potential impacts of both the construction and completed development on the current and These items are addressed within Section 2.7 Construction Methods and Network Rail future safe and efficient operation of the railway are assessed: Technical Appendix 7.5 Transport Statement Details of construction and engineering works in the vicinity of the existing railway.

While there are no known significant archaeological sites obviously at risk from physical impact by this development, the precise nature of the ground is such that we cannot have confidence in this being a balanced reflection of the potential of this ground. In keeping with PAN 02/2011 I would recommend that baseline studies are undertaken to Archaeology and Cultural inform the EIA process within the proposed development area with regard to the archaeological aspects of the Archaeology and Cultural Heritage impacts are considered in Chapter 7: NLC Archaeology Service Heritage Historic Environment encompassing: Topic Not Requiring Full EIA. Section 7.8 Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Desk-assessment and walkover survey to inform physical impact with a focus on clarifying the potential for currently unknown sites; and All works should address both undesignated sites and designated sites - the scope of designations should reflect that adopted by SHEA.

With Reference to your recent correspondence regarding the above, I can confirm the presence of a High Pressure Gas Transmission Pipeline, Pipeline E45 Motherwell to Wishaw in the vicinity of the proposed development. The building proximity distance for the pipeline is 17 metres in accordance with the recommendations of The Institution of Gas Engineers document TD/1 Edition 5. A site meeting must be arranged with us to identify the location of the pipeline and discussions should take place with the developer to discuss which measures would be necessary and could be undertaken in order to safeguard the security of the pipeline. In the meantime, please treat this letter as a formal objection to this planning application until such time as a Scottish Gas Networks Utilities detailed consultation has taken place. Refer to Volume 2: Figures Please find enclosed an extract from our mains records in the location of the area covered by the proposed development for guidance. This plan only shows those pipes owned by SGN in its role as a Licensed Gas Transporter (GT). It should be noted that gas pipes owned by other GTs or privately owned may be present in this area and information regarding such pipes should be obtained from the owners. Where SGN knows this, they will be represented on the plans as a shaded area and/or a series of x’s. The information shown on this plan is given without obligation or warranty and the accuracy cannot be guaranteed. Service pipes, valve siphons, stub connections etc. are not shown but their presence should be anticipated. Your attention is drawn to the information disclaimer on these plans. The information included on the plan is only valid for 28 days.

27 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Final Content and Structure of the EIA Report

Accordingly based on the above meeting and initial baseline collection, it was possible to complete the EIA with a clear focus on the main topics requiring full and detailed impact assessment. These topics are listed below, and this Volume contains a chapter for each:

• Ecology (Woodland and Bats); • Noise; • Air Quality; and • Topics Not Requiring Full EIA.

The chapters which are included in the EIAR are supported by technical assessment reports where necessary and which ae contained within Volume 3: Technical Appendices of the EIAR. Those environmental topics which are not considered at EIA level given the either the level of project information available at this stage, or based upon an unlikely event of significant effects, are included for information within Chapter 7: Topics Not Requiring Full EIA. This includes:

• Ground Conditions • Water Environment; • Drainage; • Landscape and Visual; • Lighting: • Traffic and Transport; • Archaeology & Cultural Heritage; • Population and Human Health; • Climate Change; and • Major Accidents and Natural Disasters

The EIAR also contains chapters on the schedule of mitigation associated with the EIA (Chapter 8: Schedule of Mitigation) and a brief chapter which summarises the EIA and contains a statement of significance (Chapter 9: Summary of Effects).

28 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

ECOLOGY

Introduction

EnviroCentre Ltd was commissioned to undertake an Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) of the Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub proposal in order to identify and describe any likely significant effects to be anticipated upon the site’s ecology and that of the wider area. This chapter lists the specialist studies undertaken and utilised to inform this assessment.

The EcIA has been completed according to guidance produced by the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM) by experienced and competent ecologists who are all Members of CIEEM and follow its Code of Professional Conduct. The primary author of the chapter is Douglas Blease, Principal Ecologist for EnviroCentre Ltd.

This baseline appraisal and the outcomes of these targeted studies have informed this chapter. These studies are presented in Volume 3 of this EIAR as the following Technical Appendices:

• Technical Appendix 4.1: ECRPT9286 Ravenscraig Wishaw PEA_v7; • Technical Appendix 4.2: ECRPT9377 Ravenscraig Rail Hub Otter Survey Report; • Technical Appendix 4.3: ECRPT9379 Ravenscraig Rail Hub Tree Inspection - Bats; and • Technical Appendix 4.4: Green Lung: Woodland Creation.

Site Details

Figure RLH-ASL-00-XX-DR-A-0001 within Volume 2 of this EIAR shows the site boundary, which is referred to as ‘the site’ throughout this chapter.

For a description of the site refer to Chapter 2 of this EIAR.

Proposed Development

A description of the proposed development can be found in Chapter 2.

Objectives

The purpose of this chapter is to:

• Identify and describe all potentially significant ecological effects associated with the proposed development; • Set out the mitigation measures required to ensure compliance with nature conservation legislation and to address any potentially significant ecological effects; • Identify how mitigation measures will be secured; • Provide an assessment of the significance of any residual effects; and • Set out the requirements for post-construction monitoring.

29 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Consultation

Local Authority and Nature Scot

An invitation for consultation was made by email9 to the greenspace, landscape and arboriculture teams at North Lanarkshire Council, on the 7th December 2020, to open discussion regarding the survey effort completed to date. It was also asked whether it could be ascertained whom the contact may be within Nature Scot (formally Scottish Natural Heritage) regarding the wider Ravenscraig development masterplan.

No response was forthcoming. However, allowance for reduced working in these organisations may be made in relation to COVID-19 tier restrictions. It is assumed that, as the surveys suggested at a preliminary stage had in fact been undertaken, then the approach would not be lacking.

Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA)

Consultation response regarding ecology was received from SEPA on the 17/12/20:

Green corridors connecting all the green spaces within the development area to other nearby wild spaces such as the South Calder riverbanks should be included in the design (e.g. under the railway bridges).

The EIA should include an assessment of the likely success of the habitat creation plan to deliver improved biodiversity. There should also be a commitment to carry out habitat enhancement before any destruction of existing habitat begins.

It is noted, at the time of writing, that the proposed habitat creation is likely to be conducted in combination with, rather than before, destruction of habitat occurs. This strategy is designed in order that woody material and woodland soils may be transferred from the development area to the new habitat creation to provide resources for invertebrate and fungal activity.

Zone of Influence

The CIEEM Guidelines identify the zone of influence as the area over which ecological features may be subject to significant effects as a result of the proposed development and associated activities. This is likely to extend beyond the project site, for example where there are ecological or hydrological links beyond the site boundaries. Activities associated with the construction, operation (best and worst-case operating conditions), decommissioning and restoration phases should be separately identified. The zone of influence will vary for different ecological features depending on their sensitivity to an environmental change. It may be appropriate to identify different zones of influence for different features. The features affected could include habitats, species, and ecosystems and the processes on which they depend.

9 Email from Douglas Blease to: [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected]; dated 7th December 2020.

30 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Key Potential Ecological Impacts

The proposed development could potentially have a significant negative impact on ecology in the absence of effective mitigation. Table 4-1 lists the key potential ecological impacts which would need to be considered when designing construction and operational phase mitigation.

Table 4-1: Phase of Works and Potential Impact

Phase Potential Ecological Impact

Construction • Removal of habitats which support flora and fauna; • Spread of invasive species (plants); • Pollution to a water body (fuel leaks and spills/ sediment runoff/ erosion); • Access and travel on/off-site, including temporary access routes for construction vehicles plus vehicle/plant movement within the site; • Acoustic disturbance and vibration to fauna from construction activities; • Pollution from the storage/use of oils, fuels and chemicals; and • Temporary and permanent illumination of habitats used by crepuscular and nocturnal fauna.

Operational • Increased on/off site vehicle movements risks traffic collision with local fauna; • Permanent artificial lighting risks disruption of crepuscular and nocturnal faunal activity; • Increased noise and vibration emanating from rail movements risks disruption of faunal activity.

Important Ecological Features

The ecological features scoped into this assessment and those that are predicted to be affected by the proposed development are termed Important Ecological Features (IEFs) The IEFs and their respective Zones of Influence are listed in Table 4-2 below.

Table 4-2: IEFs and Respective Zone of Influence

IEF Zone of Influence

Ancient Woodland Site plus adjacent habitats

Birds Site plus adjacent habitats

Otter Adjacent habitats leading to (and inclusive of) the South Calder Water

Badger Site plus adjacent habitats

Bats Site plus adjacent habitats

Invasive species Site plus adjacent habitats

Reptiles Site

West European Hedgehog Site

Brown Hare Site

31 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Policy, Legislation and Guidance

The compilation of this chapter has taken cognisance of the following legislation, planning policies, conservation initiatives and general guidance

• Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive (2014/52/EU) on assessing the potential effects of projects on the environment; • Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Flora and Fauna (The Habitats Directive); • The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Amendments (Scotland) Regulations 2007 (The Habitats Regulations); • The Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC); • The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) (WCA); • The Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004; • The Wildlife and Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2011 (WANE); • The Protection of Badgers Act 1992; • The British Standard for Biodiversity; • The UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP); • The Scottish Biodiversity Strategy; • Scottish Planning Policy (2014); • The North Lanarkshire Biodiversity Action Plan (NLBAP)(2015)10; and • The North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (NLDP)11. • BS 42020:2013: Biodiversity Code of Practice for Planning and Development 2013 • CIEEM (2016) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland: Terrestrial, Freshwater and Coastal, 2nd edition.

Methodology

A review of historic ecological study pertaining to the wider area of the Former Ravenscraig Steelworks and an existing Woodland In And Around Towns (WIAT) Management Plan12 has been used in conjunction with targeted studies to provide an accurate ecological baseline in relation to the proposed development. In 2020 a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA), inclusive of Phase 1 Habitat and Protected Species Survey, was undertaken. The results of this appraisal suggested the following further studies:

• Targeted otter (Lutra lutra) survey of the South Calder Water; and • Targeted search and inspection of potential bat roosts in tree cavities.

All survey efforts encapsulate an area larger than the proposed development. Survey and reporting was conducted by members of CIEEM. Methods of each study met the relevant guidelines and are detailed in each respective Technical Appendix. The following limitations have been listed as pertinent to the survey effort:

10 North Lanarkshire Biodiversity Action Plan (NLBAP): Available from https://www.northlanarkshire.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=34222 (Accessed September 2020) 11 North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (NLDP): Available from https://www.northlanarkshire.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=16016 (Accessed September 2020) 12 WIAT: Urban Woodland Management Plan Ravenscraig (August 2020).

32 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

PEA

• Multiple areas throughout the site were inaccessible due to steep banks or cliffs adjacent to the South Calder Water which posed health and safety concerns or dense impassable vegetation. • The PEA fieldwork noted a range of birds present on the site and the potential for reptiles to be present, however due to the time of year which the study was commissioned, breeding birds and reptile data from site could not be accumulated.

Otter

• Some of the watercourse embankments in the survey area were inaccessible or assessed unsafe to access due to the presence of dense vegetation and steep embankments. However, it is considered enough access and visibility using binoculars was gained along the watercourses adjacent to the development area to ascertain robust results. • The survey was undertaken following some days of rainy weather, which may have contributed to higher than normal water levels and could have potentially washed away evidence left by otter prior to the rain. • This survey, combined with the recent ecological baseline, comprise a short window of gathering field evidence, in Autumn 2020, on otter activity in the survey area and may not fully represent how otter utilise this landscape at varying times of the year.

Bats

• Bats are highly dynamic and can use different roost features for a wide variety of reasons ranging from long term summer maternity or hibernation roosting, to transitionary roosting and rapid roost changes to achieve thermoregulation throughout the year. Thus this inspection gives a snapshot of how bats may use tree roosts at Ravenscraig in October 2020. • Trees are also dynamic and new roost features can be created rapidly from storm events, natural tree decline, wounding and repair, the processes of decay and anthropogenic factors such as vandalism or installation of artificial roosts. The PEA and this study aimed to identify individual trees presenting cavities worthy of detailed inspection and monitoring in autumn 2020.

Evaluation of Important Ecological Features (IEFs)

European, national and local governments and specialist organisations have together identified a large number of sites, habitats and species that provide the key focus for biodiversity conservation in the UK and Ireland, supported by policy and legislation. These provide an objective starting point for identifying the IEFs that need to be considered.

Table 4-3 shows a procedure for determining the geographical level of importance of IEFs. Where a feature is important at more than one level in the table, its overriding importance is that of the highest level. Usually only the highest level of legal protection is listed.

33 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Table 4-3: Geographical Level of Importance to be Applied to Ecological Features

Level of Sites Habitats Species Importance

International Designated, candidate or A viable area of habitat A European Protected proposed SAC, SPAs and included in Annex I of the Species; an IUCN Red Data EC Habitats Ramsar sites; UNESCO Book species that is globally (Ecological) World Directive; a habitat area Vulnerable, that is critical for a part of Heritage Sites; UNESCO Endangered or Critically the life cycle of an Biosphere Reserves; Endangered; a Category An internationally important internationally important Biogenetic Reserves. species. bryophyte assemblage13.

National (UK) SSSI/Areas of Scientific A viable area of priority An IUCN Red Data Book Interest (ASSI); National habitat listed in the UK species that is Vulnerable, Nature Reserves (NNR); Biodiversity Action Plan Endangered or Critically (UKBAP)14; an area of Endangered in the UK; a Nature Conservation habitat fulfilling the criteria species that is Rare in the UK Review Sites; Marine for designation as an (<15 10km grid squares); a Conservation Zones SSSI/ASSI or MCZ; a habitat priority species in the (MCZ) (UK offshore). area that is critical for a UKBAP15; a Schedule 5 part of the life cycle of a (animal) or Schedule 8 (plant) nationally important species included in the species. Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981; a Category A nationally important bryophyte assemblage16.

National National Parks; MPA; Habitats of principal Species of principal (Scotland) Marine Consultation Areas importance for biodiversity importance for biodiversity in in Scotland17. Scotland18.

13 Averis, A.B.G, Genney, D.R, Hodgetts, N.G, Rothero, G.P. & Bainbridge, I.P. 2012. Bryological assessment for hydroelectric schemes in the west highlands – 2nd edition. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 449b (available online at www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/publications/commissioned_reports/449b.pdf) 14 The UK BAP lists of priority habitats and species have been superseded by the country biodiversity lists, but they are a useful reference source. 15 The UK BAP lists of priority habitats and species have been superseded by the country biodiversity lists, but they are a useful reference source. 16 Averis, A.B.G, Genney, D.R, Hodgetts, N.G, Rothero, G.P. & Bainbridge, I.P. 2012. Bryological assessment for hydroelectric schemes in the west highlands – 2nd edition. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 449b (available online at www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/publications/commissioned_reports/449b.pdf) 17 These are all the habitats that were identified as requiring action in the UKBAP and continue to be regarded as conservation priorities in the subsequent UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework, including any additions. 18 These are all the species that were identified as requiring action in the UKBAP and continue to be regarded as conservation priorities in the subsequent UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework, including any additions.

34 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Level of Sites Habitats Species Importance

Regional Regional Parks Regional Local Biodiversity A species that is Nationally Action Plan (LBAP)19 Scarce in the UK (present in habitats noted as requiring 16-100 10km grid squares); a protection. species that is included in the Regional LBAP13; an assemblage of regionally scarce species.

County / Local Nature Reserves; Regional LBAP13 habitats A species that is included in Metropolitan Wildlife Trust Reserves; noted as requiring the Regional LBAP13; an Woodland Trust Sites; protection; semi-natural, assemblage of species that are Royal Society for the ancient woodland >0.25ha scarce at the county level. Protection of Birds Sites; in extent. Local Wildlife Sites.

Local Semi-natural, ancient Species as defined by Local woodland <0.25ha in Authority lists. extent; diverse or ecologically valuable hedgerow network; semi- natural habitats that are unique or important in the local area; flushes, springs and base rich rock that support bryophyte assemblages that are widespread but localised to these habitats.

Ornithology The importance of each species is determined through consideration of three factors. Firstly, its legal protection; secondly, its conservation status; and finally, the population size at the site as a percentage of the European and national population sizes.

These three factors are described in more detail below.

Legal Protection of Bird Species

Wild birds within the UK are protected under both European and national legislation. On a European scale, The Birds Directive, or European Directive 2009/147/EC (the codified version of EEC Directive 79/409/EEC as amended), relates to the conservation of all species of naturally occurring birds in the wild state. It covers the protection, management and control of these species and applies to birds, their eggs, nests and habitats.

It requires measures to be taken to address the factors that may affect the numbers of birds, namely, the repercussions of man’s activities and, in particular, the destruction and pollution of their habitats, in order to maintain populations at a level that corresponds to ecological, scientific and cultural requirements. The Directive

19 North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan (NLDP): Available from https://www.northlanarkshire.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=16016 (Accessed September 2020)

35 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

requires, in particular, that species mentioned in Annex 1 shall be the subject of special conservation measures concerning their habitat in order to ensure their survival and reproduction in their area of distribution. Those species that are the subject of special conservation measures under the Directive are referred to as Annex 1 species.

Part I of Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) lists those birds that are protected by special penalties at all times and provides the highest level of protection in the UK. Part II lists birds that are protected by special penalties during the close season. Those species that are protected by special penalties under the Act are referred to as Part I of Schedule 1, or Part II of Schedule 1 species.

Conservation Status of Bird Species

Wild birds may be listed as Priority Species in Biodiversity Action Plans at national (UK BAP) and local (LBAP) levels. These plans are non-statutory but aim to describe the biological diversity of the UK, and to set out detailed measures for their conservation, in order to contribute to fulfilling the UK’s international and national obligations.

The global conservation status of birds is defined in the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria20. The general aim of this system is to provide an explicit, objective framework for the classification of species according to their extinction risk. This is the world's most comprehensive inventory of the global conservation status of species and those categorised as Threatened may be further categorised on a decreasing scale as Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable.

Those species not considered as Threatened may be categorised as Near Threatened when close to qualifying, or if likely to qualify in the future. A species at the lowest level of threat is categorised as Least Concern, and widespread and abundant species are included in this category. When there is inadequate information to make an assessment, a species may be categorised as Data Deficient.

The European conservation status of birds is determined by Birdlife International in their European Red List of Birds21, which identifies priority species in order that conservation action can be taken to improve their status taken from the IUCN Red List assessment of regional extinction risk. Such birds are described as European Red List of Birds Species (ERLOB).

The national conservation status of birds is determined by their listing on the Red, Amber and Green lists of Birds of Conservation Concern (BoCC), as defined by Eaton et al.22. The criteria used to assign a species to one of these lists reflect each species’ global, European and UK status and measure the importance of the UK populations in international terms.

BoCC Red List species are either globally Threatened using IUCN criteria; have suffered a severe decline since 1800 without substantial recent recovery; have suffered a severe decline in breeding or nonbreeding population of more than 50% over 25 years; or suffered a severe decline in breeding range of more than 50%, measured by birds present in 10 km squares, over 25 years.

BoCC Amber List species must have been identified as an ERLOB; or have been Red listed for historical decline in a previous review, but with a substantial recent recovery; or have a moderate (25%-50%) decline in breeding or non-breeding populations or breeding range over the past 25 years; or have a UK breeding population of fewer

20 IUCN. (2001). IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. IUCN. Species Survival Commission. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. ii + 30 pp. 21 BirdLife International (2015). European Red List of Birds. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. 22 Eaton MA, Aebischer NJ, Brown AF, Hearn RD, Lock L, Musgrove AJ, Noble DG, Stroud DA and Gregory RD (2015). Birds of Conservation Concern 4: the population status of birds in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man. British Birds 108, 708–746. Available online at http://www.britishbirds.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/BoCC4.pdf

36 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

than 300 pairs, non-breeding population of fewer than 900 individuals; or have at least 50% of the UK breeding or non-breeding population found in 10 or fewer sites; or be species of international importance with at least 20% of the European breeding or non-breeding population found in the UK.

BoCC Green List species comprise all regularly occurring species that do not qualify under any of the Red or Amber criteria. The Green list also includes those species listed as recovering from historical decline in the last review that have continued to recover and do not qualify under any of the other criteria.

Population Size at the Site

To establish the importance of the population size at the site, the size of the European and national populations need to be estimated. In determining the size of the UK population, reference is made to the websites of three organisations: the RSPB23, the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO)24 and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC)25. Scottish populations are determined using The Birds of Scotland26. Where there is variation between the estimates provided by these organisations, the range of estimates is provided.

Table 4-4 shows a procedure for determining the geographical level of importance of bird species. Where a feature is important at more than one level in the table, its overriding importance is that of the highest level. Usually only the highest level of legal protection is listed.

Table 4-4: Geographical Level of Importance of Ecological Features (Ornithology)

Level of Assessment Criteria Importance Legal protection Conservation status Population size

International Any species within Annex Any species which is listed as Supporting greater than 1 of the EU Birds Critically Endangered or 1% of EC population Directive 27 Endangered on the IUCN Red List28

National (UK) Any species within Any species that is listed as a Supporting greater than Schedule 1 of the Wildlife Priority Species in the UKBAP30; 1% of UK population and Countryside Act29 any species on the BoCC Red List

National Any species on the Scottish Supporting greater than (Scotland) Biodiversity List31 5% of the Scottish population

Regional Any species on the BoCC Amber Supporting greater than List 0.5% of UK population

23 RSPB (2012). http://www.rspb.org.uk/wildlife/birdguide/name. (Accessed on 16/12/2020 ) 24 BTO (2012). http://www.bto.org/about-birds/birdfacts/find-a-species. (Accessed on 16/12/2020) 25 JNCC (2012). http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-1419. (Accessed on 16/12/2020) 26 Forrester, R.W., Andrews I.J., McInerny C.J., Murray R.D., McGowan R.Y., Zonfrillo B., Betts M.W., Jardine D.W. & Grundy D.S. (eds). 2012. The Birds of Scotland. Digital Version. The Scottish Ornithologists Club, Aberlady. 27 Birds Directive http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32009L0147&from=EN (Accessed on 16/12/2020) 28 IUCN Red List http://www.iucnredlist.org/ (Accessed on 16/12/2020) 29 WCA 1981 Schedule 1 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/69/pdfs/ukpga_19810069_en.pdf (Accessed on 16/12/2020) 30 Insert UKBAP reference and weblink if appropriate https://jncc.gov.uk/our-work/uk-bap/ (Accessed on 16/12/2020) 31 Scottish Biodiversity List http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Environment/Wildlife-Habitats/16118/Biodiversitylist/SBL

37 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Level of Assessment Criteria Importance Legal protection Conservation status Population size

County Any species that is listed as a Supporting greater than Priority Species in the LBAP 0.05% of UK population

Local BoCC Green List; or species with Supporting less than 0.05% no conservation concern; of UK population common and widespread throughout the UK

Impact Assessment

The assessment of impacts accounts for the avoidance and mitigation measures which have been embedded within design and describes how the baseline conditions would change as a result of the project and its associated activities and from other developments.

The term ‘impact’ is used commonly throughout the EIA process and is usually defined as a change experienced by a receptor (this can be positive, neutral or negative). The term ‘effect’ is commonly used at the conclusion of the EIA process and is usually defined as the consequences for the receptor of an impact after mitigation measures have been taken into account.

The EIA Regulations specifically require all likely significant effects to be considered. Therefore, impacts and effects are described separately and the effects for the IEFs are assessed as being either significant or not according to the importance of the IEF.

Assessment Criteria - Magnitude

The CIEEM guidance states that when describing changes/activities and positive or negative impacts on ecosystem structure and function, reference should be made to the following parameters:

• Magnitude; • Extent; • Duration; • Reversibility; and • Timing and frequency.

Magnitude: refers to the size, amount, intensity and volume of an impact, determined on a quantitative basis if possible, but typically expressed in terms of relative severity, such as major, moderate, low or negligible. Extent, duration, reversibility, timing and frequency of the impact can be assessed separately but they tie in to determine the overall magnitude.

Extent: the area of which the impact occurs. When the IEF is the habitat itself, magnitude and extent may be synonymous.

Duration: the time for which the impact is expected to last prior to recovery or replacement of the IEF. This is defined in relation to ecological characteristics, rather than human timeframes. The duration of an activity may differ from the duration of the resulting impact caused by the activity and this is taken into account.

Reversibility: an irreversible (permanent) impact is one from which recovery is not possible within a reasonable timescale or for which there is no reasonable chance of action being taken to reverse it. A reversible (temporary)

38 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

impact is one from which spontaneous recovery is possible or for which effective mitigation is possible and an enforceable commitment has been made.

Timing and frequency: the number of times an activity occurs will influence the resulting impact. The timing of an activity or change may cause an impact if it happens to coincide with critical life-stages or seasons.

Criteria for describing the magnitude of an impact are presented in Table 4-5 below:

Table 4-5: Criteria for Describing Magnitude of Impact

Magnitude Description

Major Total or major loss or alteration to the IEF, such that it will be fundamentally changed and may be lost from the site altogether; and/or loss of a very high or high proportion of the known population or range of the IEF.

Moderate Loss or alteration to the IEF, such that it will be partially changed; and/or loss of a moderate proportion of the known population or range of the IEF.

Low Minor shift away from the existing or predicted future baseline conditions.

Change arising from the loss or alteration will be discernible but the condition of the IEF will be similar to the pre-development conditions; and/or having a minor impact on the known population or range of the IEF.

Negligible Very slight change from the existing or predicted future baseline conditions. Change barely discernible, approximating to the ‘no change’ situation; and/or having a negligible impact on the known population or range of the IEF.

Assessment Criteria – Significance

Significance is a concept related to the weight that is attached to effects when decisions are made. For the purposes of EcIA, a ‘significant effect’ is an effect that either supports or undermines biodiversity conservation objectives for IEFs. In broad terms, significant effects encompass effects on the structure and function of defined sites, habitats or ecosystems and the conservation status of habitats and species (including extent, abundance and distribution).

Significant effects are quantified with reference to an appropriate geographic scale (see Table 4-4 above). The CIEEM guidance has one ‘level of importance’ and a geographical ‘scale of significance’. This is to deal with the fact that the geographical scale at which the effect is significant is not necessarily the same as the geographic level of importance of the IEF.

Professional judgement is used to determine the significance of effects.

39 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Assessment Criteria – Confidence in Predictions

CIEEM does not cover levels of confidence in predictions, therefore an approach has been adopted based on river conservation evaluation32 which provides a simple, qualitative index which can be assigned to each predicted effect as follows:

A. high confidence. B. intermediate confidence. C. low confidence.

Factors influencing confidence include:

• The frequency and effort of field sampling; • Constraints to the field survey; • The completeness of the data (field and desk); • The age of the data (although recent data are not necessarily always more reliable than old data); • The state of scientific knowledge relating to the predicted effects of development activities on the IEF (the accuracy of the magnitude assessment); and • The accuracy of the assessment of significance.

Cumulative Assessment

Significant cumulative effects can result from the individually insignificant but collectively significant effects of actions taking place over a period of time or concentrated in a location, for example:

• Additive / incremental: multiple activities/projects (each with potentially insignificant effects) added together to give rise to a significant effect due to their proximity in time and space; or • Associated / connected - a development activity ‘enables’ another development activity e.g. phased development as part of separate planning applications. Associated developments may include different aspects of the project which may be authorised under different consent processes.

The combined magnitude of impact and significance is assessed for each IEF if construction events take place simultaneously.

Assessment Criteria – Success of Mitigation

The word ‘mitigation’ has developed a wider meaning and common usage in environmental assessment than its strict meaning related to reducing the severity of something. Mitigation can sometimes be used as a generic term for a wide range of counter-acting measures, all of which, as the Directive and Regulations prescribe, are intended to prevent, reduce and where possible offset any significant adverse effect on the environment. Mitigation can be used to encompass measures intended to avoid, cancel or reduce adverse effects (this is the ‘mitigation hierarchy’).

32 SERCON: System for Evaluating Rivers for Conservation, Version 2, Technical Manual. Scottish Natural Heritage (2001).

40 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Mitigation and compensation measures often carry a degree of uncertainty. The following objective scale is used for the success of mitigation:

• Certain/near certain: probability estimated at 95% chance or higher. • Probable: probability estimated above 50% but below 95%. • Unlikely: probability estimated above 5% but less than 50%. • Extremely unlikely: probability estimated at less than 5%.

Baseline

The following sections summarise the baseline data gleaned from the PEA and targeted studies. Further detail can be found in the Technical Appendices.

Designated Sites

No statutory designated sites are present within the site boundary. Multiple statutory designated sites are present within a 5km radius of the site boundary, as detailed in Table 4-6, which are ecologically connected to the site via the South Calder Water, grassland and woodland.

Table 4-6: Statutory Designated Sites

Site Name Designation33 Distance and Designated Features Orientation

Cambusnethan LNR 2.2km SE NatureScot Site Code 10472 Woodland

Hamilton Low Parks SSSI 2.4km, W NatureScot site code 761, 105.9 ha. Designated for grey heron (Ardea cinerea) breeding.

Greenhead Moss and LNR 2.8km, SE NatureScot Site Code 8130 Perchy Pond

Hamilton High Parks SSSI 3.9km, SW NatureScot Site Code 760, assigned SSSI status due to beetle assemblage and wood pasture and parkland

Clyde Valley LNR 4.0km SE NatureScot Site Code 5016 Woodlands

Clyde Valley SAC 4.0km SE NatureScot Site Code 8224, mixed woodland on Woodlands base rich soils associated with rocky slopes

Clyde Valley NNR 4.0km SE NatureScot Site Code 5016, mixed woodland on Woodlands base rich soils associated with rocky slopes

Garion Gill SSSI 4.0km SE NatureScot Site Code 673, assigned for upland mixed ash woodland

Braedale Hill LNR 4.0km, E NatureScot Site Code 10407

33 LNR (Local Nature Reserve), SSSI (Site of Special Scientific Interest), SAC (Special Area of Conservation), NNR (National Nature Reserve)

41 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

One non-statutory designated site, the South Calder Water: Carfin/Templehall Plantation Site of Importance to Nature Conservation (SINC), is present within the site boundary. Multiple non-statutory designated sites are present within a 2km radius of the site boundary as detailed in Table 4-7 which are ecologically connected to the site via the South Calder Water, grassland and woodland.

Table 4-7: Non-Statutory Designated Sites

Site Name Designation34 Distance and Orientation

South Calder Water: SINC On site Carfin/Templehall Plantation

Unnamed SINC 100m south west

Unnamed SINC 500m north east

Unnamed SINC 900m east

Unnamed SINC 1.4km south west

Unnamed SINC 1.9km north east

Three areas of ancient woodland are located within or directly adjacent to the site boundary. One area of ancient woodland is located in the south east of the site and the other two are adjacent to the east and south east boundaries of the site. Multiple areas of ancient woodland (many are compartments within the wider wooded landscape of Ravenscraig and the South Calder Water) are present within a 2km radius of the site boundary as detailed in Table 4-8, these are ecologically connected to the site via the South Calder Water, grassland and woodland.

Table 4-8: Ancient Woodland Inventory

Woodland Name Distance and Orientation Designation35

Garden Wood/Stable Within site boundary in the south east section of the LEPO 12.66 ha Wood site

Garden Wood Adjacent to the northern site boundary and ASNO 41.33 ha following the South Calder Water.

Wishawhill Wood 200m south of the site boundary LEPO 10.6 ha

Templehall Plantation 600m south east of the site boundary LEPO 1.92 ha

N/A 400m east of the site boundary LEPO 7.4 ha

N/A 300m south east of the site boundary LEPO 9.67 ha

N/A 620m north east of the site boundary ASNO 9.52 ha

N/A 900m north west of the site boundary ASNO 2.26 ha

N/A 900m south east of the site boundary LEPO 9.83 ha

34 SINC (Site of Important Nature Conservation) 35 LEPO: (Long-Established of Plantation Origin), ASNO: (Ancient of Semi-Natural Origin

42 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Woodland Name Distance and Orientation Designation35

N/A 1.42km south west of the site boundary LEPO 3.74 ha

N/A 1.46km south west of the site boundary ASNO 4.26 ha

N/A 1.45km north west of the site boundary ASNO 12.37 ha

Adders Gill Wood 1.4km south of the site boundary LEPO 2.17 ha

N/A 1.55km north east of the site boundary ASNO 9.33 ha

Mossneuk & Branchal Plantation 1.68km south east of the site boundary LEPO 4.11 ha

Habitats

Broadleaved Woodland

Semi-mature broadleaved, semi-natural, woodland takes up a large percentage of the site, the largest section of which is a portion of the Garden Wood/Stable Wood (LEPO), in the east of the site.

Semi mature broadleaved is present in smaller extents throughout the north and south of the site and bordering the train line running through the centre of the site as well as small patches where natural regeneration began to occur after demolition of the steelworks in 1992. The major areas of broadleaved woodland on site consist of semi-mature to mature trees made up of dominant silver birch (Betula pendula) and willow (Salix spp.) abundant ash (Fraxinus excelsior), frequent oak (Quercus spp.), historically planted examples of beech (Fagus sylvatica), occasional alder (Alnus glutinosa), sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus) and areas of dense regenerating hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna) and rare examples of rowan (Sorbus aucuparia), horse chestnut (Aesculus hippocastanum), yew (Taxus baccata) and blackthorn (Prunus spinosa).

It is evident that the woodland, although semi natural in characteristic, has been influenced by planting of individual trees over time. These, now mature trees, may at one time have formed a more formal landscape, or ‘managed’ woodland. However natural regeneration is prolific, thus presenting a seminatural broad habitat type.

Semi-Improved Neutral Grassland

Semi-improved neutral grassland is present centrally through the site. These areas are a central point of a valley, which surface water runs into causing the ground to be seasonally wet. The grassland appears to undergo minimal management but has likely been used for landscaping or agricultural purposes in the past.

Birds

Suitable habitat for nesting birds is present within individual trees, woodland and grassland habitats within the site boundary.

Bird species encountered during the PEA fieldwork included:

• Herring Gull (Larus argentatus) which is included as a Priority Species on the UKBAP and on the Scottish Biodiversity List and therefore is considered of national importance; • Mistle Thrush (Turdus viscivorus) which is on the Birds of Conservation Concern (BoCC) amber list and therefore are of regional importance; and • Woodpigeon (Columba palumbus), Sparrowhawk (Accipiter nisus), Magpie (Pica pica), Dipper (Cinclus cinclus), Chaffinch (Fringilla coelebs), Grey Heron (Ardea cinerea), Long-tailed Tit (Aegithalos caudatus),

43 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Jay (Garrulus glandarius) and Rook (Corvus frugilegus) which are on the BoCC green list and all are of local importance.

Otter

No records of otter were returned during the desk study. Otter are present in the landscape, evident by the discovery of otter spraint and prints associated with the South Calder Water.

No holts were identified during the survey however the banks of the watercourse and the woodland surrounding it have areas of sloped sand and soil that could provide suitable habitat for holt creation and offer multiple opportunities for resting sites, via exposed roots and shallow crevices underneath rocks.

Given the nearby freshwater habitat connects to Strathclyde Loch and in turn the River Clyde, it is likely that otter are regularly active in the vicinity of the development.

Badger

Six records of badger were within a 2km radius was returned during the desk study. One active badger sett was identified approximately 95m east of the site.

Primary foraging habitat for badger is present within and adjacent to the site in the broad-leaved woodland. Vegetation present within the woodland will seasonally offer berries which are commonly utilised by badger as a food source as well as the wide variety of invertebrates, small mammals, and birds’ eggs that can be found.

In addition, secondary foraging habitat is present via the rough grassland within the east of the site.

The woodland and riparian habitats provide suitable linear features for commuting badger and offer connectivity to habitats in the wider landscape.

Bats

One record of a soprano pipistrelle (Pipistrellus pygmaeus) within a 2km radius was returned during the desk study approximately 1km south west of the site. A targeted search and elevated inspection of tree cavities was undertaken.

No presence of roosting bats was identified during the survey, the following was observed:

• Six of the trees surveyed (1, 2, 4, 5, 7, and 8) have been classed as being of moderate suitability for roosting bats: “A tree with one or more potential roost features that could be used by bats due their size, shelter, protection, conditions and/or surrounding habitat but unlikely to support a roost of high conservation status”; • One tree (3) is considered to be of low suitability: “A tree with features seen with only very limited roosting potential”; and • Three trees (6, 9 and 10) presented features but were found to offer negligible suitability.

Trees numbered 9 and 10 are located within the Phase 1-3 site boundary. The remaining trees are located outside the Phase 1-3 boundary but within the wider redline boundary and thus are not expected to be affected by construction.

The site and surrounding area contain several features such as mature broadleaved woodland, open and running water and riparian habitats which offer typically high-suitably for a variety of commuting and foraging bat species.

44 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Invasive Species

Rhododendron (Rhododendron ponticum) is present in abundance throughout the woodland in the east of the site.

Three stands of Japanese knotweed (Reynoutria japonica) are present within the woodland to the east outwith the survey buffer in association with the South Calder Water, upstream of the site.

Reptiles

No records of reptiles were returned during the desk study. A deforested area of grassland in the east of the site, surrounded by woodland offers moderate habitat for reptiles in the small southern facing slopes with exposed rocks that can be used for shelter and basking.

Hedgehog and Brown Hare

No records of hedgehog were returned during the desk study. The woodland and rough grassland habitats on site offer suitable foraging and resting resources for hedgehog present in the locale.

No records of brown hare were returned during the desk study. The grassland and woodland edge habitats within the site and adjacent offer suitable foraging, commuting or resting resources for brown hare.

Prediction of Future Baseline

If development does not occur then it is predicted that the ecological baseline shall continue with changes only occurring based on continued regeneration of birch (Betula pendula) and willow (Salix sp.) upon the bare earth footprint of the former steelworks.

It is important to note that there is already planning permission for development at the site (Ravenscraig Masterplan), so there is expected to be an impact whether the Russell’s development goes ahead or not.

Climate Change

As the dominant habitat feature of the site and its surrounds is woodland, much of it plantation and some with semi-natural characteristics. The following statement from Scottish Forestry clarifies the position of woodland in relation to climate change36:

To help to mitigate the effects of climate change, Scotland has a target to reach net zero by 2045 and forestry has a significant role to play by:

• locking up carbon in growing trees and creating more woodlands; • supporting the use of wood fuel and renewable energy as a substitute to fossil fuels; • promoting the use of wood in place of more carbon-intensive materials; and • promoting sustainable forest management.

36 Scottish Forestry; Climate Change. Available from: https://forestry.gov.scot/forests-environment/climate-change (accessed 17/12/2020)

45 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

The following extracts were taken from Report Card 9: Forest Ecosystems and Climate Change37 and considered relevant to the habitats present on and surrounding the site:

• The continued ability of trees, woodlands and forests to provide specific ecosystem services determined by management objectives is very much dependent on where they are located, how they are managed into the future, their species and genetic diversity, and the interaction with changes in site condition caused by climate change; • Biodiversity in semi-natural and managed woodlands, and associated ecosystem services, are expected to reduce due to climate change; • Under climate change, deer and squirrel numbers will increase through milder winters leading to reduced natural regeneration success, more bark stripping, and reduced timber quality in sycamore, beech and oak woodlands; • In a warmer and drier climate, the public attitude to forests and woodlands as places for recreation and relaxation will strengthen; • People will increasingly value green space with trees as being an important part of urban infrastructure which helps maintain lower ambient peak summer and improves the quality of air in towns and cities; and • Climate change projections will continue to drive forest and land use policy objectives for woodland expansion. Native and ancient woodland will be managed with thinning interventions to stimulate a sequence of tree cohorts regenerated from seed which may be better adapted to changing site and climate conditions.

Evaluation

The evaluations have been applied only to those IEFs which have been scoped in to the assessment and those where there is the potential for impacts that could result in significant adverse ecological effects as a result of the proposed development. The IEFs and the evaluations are presented in Table 4-9 below.

Table 4-9: Evaluation of Important Ecological Features

IEF Present in Present in Present in Level of Justification wider site Phase 1,2,3 wider Importance boundary? boundary? landscape?

Broadleaved Yes No Yes County Ancient Woodland woodland Inventory of Scotland Ancient Woodland (ASNO)

Broadleaved Yes Yes Yes County/Local Woodland which has woodland been significantly Ancient Woodland changed over time by (LEPO) plantation strategy.

South Calder Yes Yes Yes County SINC Water: Carfin/Templehall Plantation

37 Ray D., Sing L., and Nicoll B. (2016), Report Card 9: Forest Ecosystems and Climate Change. Forest Research. Available at: https://nerc.ukri.org/research/partnerships/ride/lwec/report-cards/agriculture-source09/ (accessed 17/12/2020)

46 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

IEF Present in Present in Present in Level of Justification wider site Phase 1,2,3 wider Importance boundary? boundary? landscape?

Semi-improved Yes Yes Yes National UKBAP neutral grassland (UK)

Otter Yes No Yes International European Protected Species

Bats Likely Likely Likely International European Protected Species

Herring Gull Yes Yes Yes National SBL listed species. (Scotland)

Other birds Yes Yes Yes Regional BoCC Green and Amber listed species

Reptiles Unknown Unknown Likely National Partial protection under (UK) Schedule 5 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981

Badger No No Yes National UK Protection of Badgers Act 1992

West European Likely Likely Likely National Wildlife and Countryside Hedgehog (UK) Act 1981

Brown Hare Unknown Unknown Unknown National UKBAP (UK)

Invasive species Yes Yes Yes n/a Not evaluated due to negative biodiversity importance.

Impact Assessment

The following assessment takes account of all avoidance and mitigation measures embedded within the design proposal as well as proven or standard mitigation included as recommendations following baseline study presented within the Technical Appendices of this document and aims to describe the impacts to be expected from both construction and operational phases.

Broadleaved Woodland

Nature of impact

It is anticipated that the ancient woodland of semi-natural origin (ASNO), found in the north of the site boundary and continuing through the South Calder Water riparian zone, will not be encroached as part of the design as the vehicular access to the proposed rail hub is depicted outside of this woodland habitat.

The design suggests removal of 14.1ha of broadleaved woodland will be removed from within the site boundary during construction. 6.3Ha of this habitat is designated as ancient woodland of long established plantation origin (LEPO). As its designation suggests, this woodland appears to have been manipulated over time with planted trees

47 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report suggesting past woodland removal, some made ground features indicating groundworks associated with the former steel works, and subsequent tree planting and then natural regeneration of colonising tree species. In the wider PAN boundary, less than 1ha of ancient woodland of semi natural origin falls within the redline boundary however this is not anticipated to be affected.

This woodland loss is proposed to be compensated for by habitat creation (known as a green lung) 17ha in size, to be situated directly to the west of rail line, designed as a native broadleaved woodland with varied topography, deadwood habitats open water and wetland habitats which will function as a new and developing ecosystem during the operational phase of this development (Refer to Volume 3: Technical Appendix 4-4).

Duration of impact

The loss of the existing LEPO woodland would be permanent.

The replacement of the IEF through habitat creation would be immediate. Based on the fact that the existing LEPO woodland has been subject to manipulation of its structure over recent decades, it is anticipated that establishment of new woodland, to meet the type of woodland being lost, would also be a matter of some decades yet with increased tree species diversity. This woodland is expected to remain in perpetuity.

Importance of IEF

The LEPO woodland is of county/local importance.

Magnitude

Low. A proportion of the IEF will be lost and then subject to replacement with the aim of creating an enhanced native plantation woodland habitat, thus having a minor effect on the known range of the IEF.

Significance of effect

The effect of construction works on the LEPO woodland are not significant as compensatory habitat creation should ensure no net loss of woodland ecosystems.

Confidence in assessment

Through the completeness in the data gathered and the mitigation proposed, the confidence in predictions is A: High.

South Calder Water: Carfin/Templehall Plantation SINC

Nature of impact

Grassland,woodland, short ephemeral vegetation leading to the edge of the bare ground habitat falls within the South Calder Water: Carfin/Templehall Planation SINC. Thus development of Phase 1,2 and 3 of the Rail Hub would require removal of 29.8ha these habitats, leading to partial removal of the SINC which otherwise extends throughout the wider woodland and river habitats.

Duration of impact

The duration of the impact to this area of the SINC would be permanent. Habitat replacement would be outside the SINC boundary and could in theory be re-designated as a SINC, should the local authority desire.

48 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Importance of IEF

The SINC is of county level importance.

Magnitude

Moderate. The IEF will be lost. Habitat creation may be considered as partially changed, however the SINC designation may, or may not, transfer to new habitats.

Significance of effect

The effect of construction works on the SINC woodland are not significant as compensatory habitat creation should balance no loss of habitat type. SINC designation may be applied to the compensatory habitat to balance loss of original SINC area.

Confidence in assessment

The confidence in predictions is A: High.

Semi-Improved Neutral Grassland

Nature of impact

Semi improved grassland has developed upon land between the extents of broadleaved woodland and the footprint of the former steelworks. 13.05ha of this habitat would be removed to facilitate development of Phase 1,2 and 3.

Duration of impact

The removal of this grassland from its current location would be permanent. Grassland of this nature is expected to develop rapidly within the proposed habitat creation.

Importance of IEF

Semi improved grassland is of national (UK) importance.

Magnitude

Low. Change arising from the loss will be discernible but the condition of the IEF as it establishes in habitat creation will be similar to the pre-development conditions.

Significance of effect

The effect of construction works on the grassland are not significant as compensatory habitat creation should balance no net loss of habitat type.

Confidence in assessment

The confidence in predictions is A: High.

49 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Otter

Nature of impact

Otter are known to habit the South Calder Water and its riparian zone, which passes close to the northern extent of the site boundary. Thus it is expected that otter have the ability, should they choose, to cross open ground between sections of the South Calder Water should they wish, and this would include habitats within the site boundary.

The nature of impact to otter is expected to be the risk of disturbance to otter crossing overland, potential road traffic collision, on-site injury, pollution of watercourses. These risks have been addressed in mitigation included in Technical Appendices.

Duration of impact

The duration of impact would be temporary, only during construction, assuming that otter will adapt to the presence of the operational site over time.

Importance of IEF

Otter are of international importance.

Magnitude

Negligible. Change barely discernible.

Significance of effect

Not a significant effect as the core habitat known to support otter will not be encroached or affected.

Confidence in assessment

Based on the completeness and age of the data pertaining to otter, the confidence in predictions is A: High.

Bats

Nature of impact

It is not likely that trees presenting cavities suitable to host roosting bats will be lost to development. It is likely that bats will be active throughout the landscape in terms of foraging and commuting. Disruption to normal bat foraging and commuting which may occur during the summer activity season in the area of the Phase 1,2 and 3 development can be expected.

Duration of impact

The duration of impact is temporary. Most disruption is likely during construction and new habitat creation to the west of the rail line would provide replacement resource and one which increases structural diversity and thus should increase invertebrate diversity also.

Importance of IEF

Bats are of international importance.

50 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Magnitude

Low. Change arising from the alteration will be discernible but the condition of the IEF will be similar to pre- development conditions.

Significance of effect

The effect is deemed not significant based on the designed habitat creation with biodiversity in mind which would result in an increase of habitat diversity which would benefit bats.

Confidence in assessment

Whilst a snap-shot of tree cavity roosts has been gleaned recently, the assessment is based on a strong assumption of typical habitat use by bats. Confidence in assessment is therefore B: Intermediate.

Herring Gull

Nature of impact

Herring Gull was noted during site survey and can be expected to be active on or around site during construction and operation of the development. Nesting birds may be affected by works during the spring-autumn months however mitigation for this constraint has been addressed in the PEA. It is anticipated that sufficient habitat remains in the wider landscape for continued Herring Gull activity.

Duration of impact

Temporary. Nesting birds may be subject to disruption of normal behaviour during construction.

Importance of IEF

Herring gull is of National (Scotland) importance.

Magnitude

Negligible. Change barely discernible approximating to the ‘no-change’ situation.

Significance of effect

Not a significant effect based on the availability of habitat in the immediate landscape.

Confidence in assessment

There is a lack of dedicated breeding bird data, but based on recent sightings of this species at the site the confidence in assessment is A: High.

Other Birds

Nature of impact

The habitats present on site, which would be removed to facilitate development of Phase 1, 2 and 3, are likely to provide nesting, loafing and foraging resources for a range of bird species. Removal of this habitat would reduce this resource until compensatory habitat creation establishes.

51 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Nesting birds may be affected by works during the spring-autumn months however mitigation for this constraint has been addressed in the PEA. It is anticipated that sufficient habitat remains in the wider landscape for continued activity. Habitat creation would increase diversity and structure.

Duration of impact

Temporary. Nesting birds may be subject to disruption of normal behaviour during construction.

Importance of IEF

Bird assemblage is considered to be of regional importance.

Magnitude

Negligible. Change barely discernible approximating to the ‘no-change’ situation when considering habitat creation.

Significance of effect

Not a significant effect based on the availability of habitat in the immediate landscape.

Confidence in assessment

There is a lack of dedicated breeding bird data limiting knowledge to only the species observed on site during Autumn 2020, therefore confidence in assessment is B: Intermediate.

Reptiles

Nature of impact

Groundworks and habitat removal may remove resources for reptiles in the form of shelter, basking spots, foraging habitat. Mitigating strategies for habitat removal are included within the PEA and habitat creation is likely to recreate resources, aiming for enhanced habitat through structural diversity.

Duration of impact

Temporary. Disturbance is limited to construction activities and habitat creation provides long term future resource.

Importance of IEF

Reptiles are considered of National (UK) importance.

Magnitude

Negligible. Change barely discernible, approximating on the ‘no-change’ situation.

Significance of effect

Not significant based on commitment to mitigated habitat removal and compensatory habitat creation.

52 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Confidence in assessment

No targeted reptile studies have been undertaken other than a preliminary appraisal, therefore the confidence in assessment is B: Intermediate.

Badger

Nature of impact

Badger are resident in the woodland habitats to the east of the proposed development. No badger setts are expected to be disturbed or damaged during construction or operation. Initial habitat removal will remove foraging and commuting resources for Badger. Mitigating strategies for habitat removal are included within the PEA and habitat creation is likely to recreate resources, aiming for enhanced habitat through structural diversity.

Duration of impact

Temporary. Disturbance is limited to construction activities and habitat creation provides long term future resource.

Importance of IEF

Badger is considered of National (UK) importance.

Magnitude

Negligible. Change barely discernible, approximating on the ‘no-change’ situation.

Significance of effect

Not significant based on commitment to mitigated habitat removal and compensatory habitat creation.

Confidence in assessment

Survey for badger was undertaken during the preliminary appraisal. Therefore, the confidence in assessment is A: High.

West European Hedgehog

Nature of impact

Initial habitat removal may remove resources for West European Hedgehog in the form of shelter and foraging habitat. Mitigating strategies for habitat removal are included within the PEA and habitat creation is likely to recreate resources, aiming for enhanced habitat through structural diversity.

Duration of impact

Temporary. Disturbance is limited to construction activities and habitat creation provides long term future resource.

Importance of IEF

West European Hedgehog is considered of National (UK) importance.

53 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Magnitude

Negligible. Change barely discernible, approximating on the ‘no-change’ situation.

Significance of effect

Not significant based on commitment to mitigated habitat removal and compensatory habitat creation.

Confidence in assessment

No targeted searches for West European Hedgehog have been undertaken other than a preliminary appraisal, however well connected woodland and grassland habitats can be reasonably expected to host this species. Therefore, the confidence in assessment is A: High.

Brown Hare

Nature of impact

If present on site, then habitat removal may remove resources for Brown hare in the form of grassland shelter and foraging habitat. Mitigating strategies for habitat removal are included within the PEA and habitat creation is likely to recreate resources, aiming for enhanced habitat through structural diversity.

Duration of impact

Temporary. Disturbance is limited to construction activities and habitat creation provides long term future resource.

Importance of IEF

Brown hare is of National (UK) importance.

Magnitude

Negligible. Likely to be a negligible impact on the population or range of the IEF.

Significance of effect

Not significant based on habitat availability in the near landscape and that which is proposed to be recreated.

Confidence in assessment

No targeted study on Brown Hare has been conducted other than preliminary habitat appraisal and it is unknown if this species is present in the immediate landscape. Therefore, the confidence in this assessment is B: Intermediate.

Invasive Species

Nature of impact

Any invasive species present within the Phase 1,2 and 3 development boundary would be removed as part of initial groundworks. There is the opportunity for species such as Rhododendron to spread as a result of soil movement around site.

54 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Duration of impact

The risk of this impact is current, will continue to be a risk in the landscape during construction and operation.

Importance of IEF

Invasive species are not an ecological receptor.

Magnitude

If the site becomes a host to invasive species, then the magnitude would be Moderate.

Significance of effect

If the site becomes a host to invasive species, then conservation objectives would be undermined and the effect would be significant.

Confidence in assessment

Invasive species were noted during recent field survey and therefore the assessment is made with A: High Confidence.

Operational Phase

During operation it is expected that the frequency of rail traffic would increase, and vehicular access to the rail hub would also increase however well-constructed road networks and applicable speed limits can be expected.

Increased lighting is expected however a design aiming to avoid illumination of habitats surrounding the rail hub is also anticipated, thus reducing effects on crepuscular and nocturnal fauna.

Public already access the woodland habitats informally and the WIAT management plan, as well as proposed habitat creation, aims to reduce anti-social behaviour and increase positive countryside access which should reduce existing negative effects on the woodlands surrounding the rail hub.

The main impacts of development are expected at construction phase as described in the sections above. Once complete, the rail hub would see an increase in the passage of trains, the arrival and egress of road traffic. Despite the reduction in formally designated LEPO and SINC habitat area, the establishment, and ongoing development, of new woodland, grassland, wetland and open-water habitats and increased responsible public access and is expected to bring permanent positive environmental effects.

Increased lighting is expected however a design aiming to avoid illumination of habitats surrounding the rail hub is also anticipated, thus reducing possible effects on crepuscular and nocturnal fauna.

The creation of sheltering resource for species such as reptiles, birds, bats and West European Hedgehog is expected to have a positive effect on populations and opportunities for dispersal in the wider landscape.

55 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Mitigation

The following good practice mitigation was suggested during the PEA:

• The design process should pay cognisance of any requirement to mitigate or compensate for woodland removal; • Habitat creation has been proposed in concept to compensate for said loss, as referred to by the client as the ‘Green Lung’; • The broadleaved woodland at the east of the site, scattered trees, the South Calder Water and linear or connective green infrastructure should be maintained and managed to promote ecological connectivity to the wider landscape primarily to the north of the site. • Suitable tree root protection areas should be determined and barriers installed prior to any works commencing. • Measures should be in place to preserve water quality and prevent pollution of the South Calder Water following SEPA Guidelines for Pollution Prevention (GPPs) and maintenance of a 5m buffer of works from the top of the banks of the watercourse. • Retain and protect appropriate vegetative margins between works and areas of running water should be implemented to reduce risk of pollution to running water and reduce impacts to potential commuting otter present in the locale. • An invasive species management plan should be produced and implemented to prevent the spread of Japanese knotweed and rhododendron. All site personnel should be made aware of the INNS present on site and briefed on the importance of preventing its spread via a toolbox talk. • A pre-works check of the site for bats, otter, badger, hedgehog, brown hare, reptiles and birds, should be completed prior to any site works, by a suitably qualified ecologist. • All contractors should be made aware of the potential presence of protected species via a toolbox talk (i.e. bats, otter, badger, hedgehog, brown hare, reptiles and birds) on site and in the wider landscape. • Maximum 15mph speed restriction, within the site, to avoid otter and badger road traffic accidents (RTAs) should be implemented during and post works. • Any works causing high levels of noise or vibration should be limited to daylight hours to reduce disturbance nocturnal or diurnal species. • Any excavations created during works should not be left open for mammals to become trapped. Appropriate covers should be fitted at the end of every working day. At the very least, a shallow sloping edge or some form of ramp should be created within the excavations to allow any trapped animals to climb out. • If destruction of reptile habitat cannot be avoided then an ECoW watching brief should be undertaken during the works. Should any reptiles be identified they should be translocated out of the habitat by a competent ecologist. • Any vegetation clearance should be scheduled to occur outside of the nesting bird season (March to August inclusive). • Temporary lighting required during works and permanent exterior lighting in future developments should not illuminate the adjacent habitats (woodland and the South Calder Water) and should maintain dark corridors, which can affect the foraging of nocturnal and diurnal species. Bat friendly lighting is available at: https://www.theilp.org.uk/documents/guidance-note8-bats-and-artificial-lighting/

56 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

The following mitigation was suggested in the targeted otter report to inform the design, construction and operation of a proposed Rail Hub at Ravenscraig:

• Primarily the retention, protection and avoidance of the South Calder Water and its riparian woodland will afford otter the continued resource to forage, commute and rest in this habitat; • Maintain a vegetated buffer between development works and the watercourse; • A pre-works check of the site and its surrounding habitats for any field evidence of otter should be undertaken to highlight any unforeseen ecological constraints; • All site staff should be made aware, through the induction process, that otter are present in the • South Calder Water habitats and can be expected to frequent the associated riparian woodland; • Additionally, site staff should be informed that it is possible otter may be encountered on site and/or the surrounding habitats and road network; • Should an otter be seen on site all works should cease in that area until the otter has dispersed naturally; • No excavations should be left without a means of escape (i.e. a shallow sloping edge or access plank) to avoid inadvertently trapping otter; • Stored pipes (i.e. conduit/drainage) where ends cannot be capped should be checked daily and again before movement of stored pipes, for any otter trapped within; • Pipes used within the construction process should not be left uncapped if unattended. Uncapped and unattended pipe work should be checked before any such pipe connections recommence; • Should a trapped otter be discovered then an ecologist and/or the Scottish Society for the Prevention or Cruelty to Animals (https://www.scottishspca.org/) should be contacted immediately to aid in rectifying the situation; • Robust pollution prevention measures to avoid degradation of the aquatic environment and riparian habitats should be implemented prior to and during construction; • Temporary and permanent artificial lighting should illuminate the South Calder Water and its riparian woodland habitat; • A speed limit of 15mph should be implemented on site during construction to minimise the risk of collision with otter; and • During operation of the completed development the local authority may approve wildlife warning signs and around nearby road network to reduce collision risk with animals such as otter.

The following mitigation was suggested to ensure that trees remain a viable option for roosting bats in the future and to avoid disturbing any bats which may take up residence:

• Trees on and adjacent to the site should be subject to regular monitoring to provide the earliest highlight of a bat roost constraint as possible during the design and construction phases; • If for any reason design changes require removal of any of the known moderate-suitability trees a further inspection should be carried out prior to the proposed works to confirm the absence of bats. If bats were found a protected species licence would need to be sought; • The loss of natural cavities through the action of tree removal to facilitate this development can be mitigated through the installation of artificial roosting provision in retained woodland; • All staff on site should be made aware of the possible presence of bats within the trees and surrounding areas via a toolbox talk; • Should any bats be seen flying during the daylight hours, throughout the construction period, an ecologist should be contacted immediately for advice; • Any artificial lighting used during the construction should be fitted with hoods and should be positioned so that the trees identified with moderate PRFs and the mature woodland to the north and east, likely to be used by commuting and foraging bats, are not illuminated; and • Permanent lighting in the proposed development should also be designed so that the trees identified with moderate PRFs and the woodland to the north and east are not illuminated.

57 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Residual Effects

The residual effects of this development are considered to be the removal of existing habitats which are currently designated as SINC and a proportion of LEPO ancient woodland. Despite proposed habitat creation aimed at overcompensating the loss, which will likely lead to increased habitat diversity and longevity, these conservation designations are not expected to be transferred to new habitats. Thus, a loss of overall area size of SINC and LEPO are expected.

However, the proposed compensatory measure of habitat creation aims to replicate the size and improve the diversity of habitat to be lost, plus the design aims to establish a woodland with high social and environmental opportunities as well as biodiversity net-gain.

Table 4-10 identifies a summary of the residual effects of the proposed development.

58 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Table 4-10: Summary of Effects on Importance Ecological Features

Significance of Characterisation effect of Importance Type of of unmitigated Effect without Success of IEF Description of mitigation Duration Magnitude residual Confidence of IEF impact impact on the mitigation mitigation impacts (after feature mitigation) Construction Reduction in area Large habitat creation of Long established Negative of the site's Permanent loss of native woodland, water, Near plantation origin County/Local Permanent Low Not significant High construction ancient woodland 6.3ha of LEPO habitat wetland and grassland certain woodland designation habitat South Calder Large habitat creation of Reduction in area Permanent loss of Water: Carfin/ Negative native woodland, water, Near County of the site's SINC 29.8 ha of SINC Permanent Moderate Not significant High Templehall construction wetland and grassland certain designation habitat Plantation SINC habitat Large habitat creation of Permanent loss Permanent loss of 13 Semi improved Negative native woodland, water, Near National of 13 ha of ha of grassland Permanent Low Not significant High neutral grassland construction wetland and grassland certain grassland habitat habitat habitat Reduction in use of Appropriate site speed the South Calder limits, wildlife warning Risk of Water riparian road signs, no illumination disturbance / RTA habitat by otter, Negative of nearby woodland Near Otter International / pollution of reducing hunting Temporary Negligible Not significant High construction habitats, avoidance of certain nearby resources and high intensity noise and watercourses. possibly dispersal vibrating works between through the dusk and dawn. catchment. Disruption to Large habitat creation current likely with provisions for Loss of habitat within behaviour in the roosting and increased Negative which a range of bat Near Bats International habitat which diversity of habitat types Temporary Low Not significant Intermediate construction species may utilise certain would become to increase foraging for foraging purposes the construction resources for a range of site bat species

59 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Significance of Characterisation effect of Importance Type of of unmitigated Effect without Success of IEF Description of mitigation Duration Magnitude residual Confidence of IEF impact impact on the mitigation mitigation impacts (after feature mitigation) Pre-works checks for bird Disruption to Reduction of land constraints, habitat Negative current area by which Herring creation which will Near Herring gull National Negligible Not significant High construction behaviour in the gull currently increase resources for a certain habitat frequent range of wildlife including Temporary Herring gull Reduction in the Pre-works checks for bird Disruption to ability for birds to constraints, habitat Other birds Negative current nest and breed Near Regional creation which will Temporary Negligible Not significant Intermediate (nesting) construction behaviour in the successfully at the certain increase resources for a habitat site during range of wildlife construction Disruption of Pre-works checks to avoid Loss of habitat potential current Negative injury/death, habitat Near Reptiles National during behaviour and Temporary Negligible Not significant Intermediate construction creation which will certain construction displacement of increase resources reptiles, if present Pre-works checks to avoid Loss of foraging Negative Reduction in available injury/death, habitat Near Badger National habitat during Temporary Negligible Not significant High construction habitat creation which will certain construction increase resources Disruption of Pre-works checks to avoid Loss of habitat potential current West European Negative injury/death, habitat Near National during behaviour and Temporary Negligible Not significant High Hedgehog construction creation which will certain construction displacement of W.E. increase resources Hedgehog, if present Disruption of potential current Pre-works checks to avoid Loss of habitat Negative behaviour and injury/death, habitat Near Brown hare National during Temporary Negligible Not significant Intermediate construction displacement of creation which will certain construction Brown hare, if increase resources present

60 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Significance of Characterisation effect of Importance Type of of unmitigated Effect without Success of IEF Description of mitigation Duration Magnitude residual Confidence of IEF impact impact on the mitigation mitigation impacts (after feature mitigation) Positive/ Removal/Spread Possibly Invasive species Negative of invasive plant Temp/perm Moderate High Probable significant construction species Operational Long term management of Reduction in area Long established retained ancient Positive of the site's Permanent loss of 6.3 Near plantation origin County/Local woodland plus an area of Permanent Low Not significant High operation ancient woodland ha of LEPO habitat certain woodland increased native designation woodland cover Increased area of native South Calder County Reduction in area Permanent loss of woodland which could be Water: Positive Near of the site's SINC 29.8 ha of SINC assigned a SINC Permanent Moderate Not significant High Carfin/Templehall operation certain designation habitat designation resulting in Plantation SINC increased SINC area. Re-establishment of SING Reduction of within habitat creation, grassland species with additional inclusion Semi improved Positive Reduction of area Near National diversity and the of wildflower assemblage Moderate Not significant High neutral grassland operation of SING habitat certain ecosystem associated leading to an increase of Permanent with SING habitats. grassland area and species richness. Operational speed limits and wildlife road signage. Risk of RTA No illumination of nearby through Possible reduction in Positive woodland habitats and an Near Otter International increased traffic population of otter at Permanent Negligible Not significant High operation increase in habitat certain adjacent to a local level diversity through habitats woodland, wetland and water creation.

61 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Significance of Characterisation effect of Importance Type of of unmitigated Effect without Success of IEF Description of mitigation Duration Magnitude residual Confidence of IEF impact impact on the mitigation mitigation impacts (after feature mitigation) Woodland and Large habitat creation grassland with provisions for Loss of habitat within removal, change roosting and increased Positive which a range of bat Locally Near Bats International in woodland edge diversity of habitat types Permanent Moderate High operation species may utilise significant certain character, to increase foraging for foraging purposes altering foraging resources for a range of behaviour bat species Loss of habitat The area may Large habitat creation frequented by become less which will increase habitat Positive Herring gull attractive to this Locally Near Herring gull National diversity and the range of Permanent Moderate High operation resulting in species and reduced significant certain resources available to reduced resources may effect birds including Herring gull resources survival at this site Large habitat creation Reduction in which will increase habitat Other birds Positive Reduction in successful breeding Locally Near Regional diversity and the range of Permanent Moderate High (nesting) operation nesting resources by a range of bird significant certain resources available to species birds Large habitat creation with specific reptile Reduction in Reduction in local Positive refugia resource included Locally Near Reptiles National habitat population, if Permanent Moderate High operation will increase opportunity significant certain availability present. for local population to establish or expand. Reduction of foraging Increased habitat diversity Reduction in opportunity with Positive and sheltering opportunity Locally Near Badger National habitat possible relative Permanent Moderate High operation will increase resources significant certain availability reduction in social available to badger locally clan size

62 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

63 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Assessment of Cumulative Effects

Cumulative Effects - Construction Phase

Cumulative impacts will only occur during the construction phase if the construction of other Ravenscraig masterplan projects coincide with that of the proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub development. If this is the case, even greater attention should be paid to the mitigation measures outlined in Chapter 8 to ensure any cumulative impact from the construction works on ecology and nature conservation is avoided. The green lung and habitat creation proposals will create a connected network of habitats comprising new-native broadleaved woodland, hedgerows, species rich grassland, and wetland areas through the centre of the Ravenscraig area, acting as a buffer to future development projects or activities. Green/Blue infrastructure design which might be associated with wider masterplan projects would provide a cumulative net gain of such factors as tree canopy cover and habitat connectivity.

It should be noted that the Ravenscraig Masterplan development is consented (Planning Permission in Principle, 18/00463/PPP Mixed Use Development), but construction is unlikely to proceed before, or simultaneously with, construction of Phase 1 of the rail halt and logistics hub.

Prior to construction commencing on site a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) will be prepared. Prior to commencement works a search will be undertaken to identify consented development within the wider area to ensure the CEMP takes cumulative effects into consideration where applicable. The CEMP will provide specific management measures and is a dynamic document which will be reviewed if activities or conditions onsite change that may influence management measures.

The CEMP will be developed and updated as the project evolves and used as a continuous link for environmental issues between the design, construction and the maintenance and operational stages of the project. The CEMP is a practical tool and provides a clear roadmap of the key roles and responsibilities during the construction works. Consideration will also be given to potential impacts that could arise by construction activities outlined in the Construction Method Statement (CMS) which will be prepared by the Principal Contractor.

Cumulative Effects - Operational Phase

There may be some cumulative impacts on ecology as a result of the interaction of the rail head and logistics hub with the wider Ravenscraig Masterplan. As development is brought forward it is assumed that appropriate surveys and assessment will be carried out, in consultation with North Lanarkshire Council and environmental regulators, and mitigation will be included where required. Therefore overall, and with consideration to the North Lanarkshire Council "Decision Notice" associated with 18/00463/PPP (dated 18 November 2020), the cumulative impacts are not considered to be significant.

Statement of Significance

The development proposal will undermine the conservation objectives of the LEPO woodland and SINC habitats of local/county level importance by reduction in their mapped extents. However, for the grassland and woodland ecosystems, the compensatory habitat creation is likely to result in a positive change regarding increased area, structure and diversity, ecological function and a long-term additional opportunity within the Urban Forestry Management Plan (WIAT) for Ravenscraig; as well as provide resources for increases in population and viability for a range of flora and fauna.

64 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Remaining potential impacts will be avoided or mitigated through the strategies outlined in the Technical Appendices and Schedule of Mitigation (Chapter 8).

65 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

NOISE

Introduction

The Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Hub and Logistics Head includes a number of noise generating activities, all of which have the potential to adversely affect existing and forthcoming noise sensitive receptors (NSRs). The operation of the site itself, through transportation noise and freight handling activities will generate noise which could be audible at NSRs. Increases in road and rail traffic on the local networks have the potential to adversely affect NSRs.

A noise impact assessment (NIA) is being produced which seeks to predict noise levels associated with the operation of the proposed site. The magnitude of impact of noise on NSRs will be predicted in line with adopted policy, legislation and guidance. Where any significant adverse impacts, which could be determining factors in the decision making process, are identified, mitigation will be proposed to attenuate predicted noise levels. Input data is outstanding to complete the findings of the NIA. In the interim period the baseline data is presented herein. A technical chapter outlining the findings and recommendations of the NIA will follow.

Consultation

In order to determine the scope of the NIA, a consultation document was issued to the North Lanarkshire Council (NLC) Environmental Health Department. A copy of the consultation document and response will be provided in the forthcoming Technical Appendix. Following a response, a site visit with an NLC Environmental Health Officer (EHO) was conducted to discuss the response. A summary of the consultation and scoping responses relevant to noise are shown in Table 5-1.

Table 5-1: Summary of Noise Consultation

Organisation Consultation Response How and Where Addressed

EnviroCentre issued a consultation document, Assessment methodology and criteria 173423/AJL/002, detailing the proposed agreed are presented in Section 5.4. assessment methodology and criteria. The assessment methodology and criteria were confirmed as acceptable. It was confirmed that operational noise, change in road traffic noise and change in railway noise would be assessed. It was agreed that construction noise impact assessment would be assessed as part of the construction noise management plan. North Lanarkshire The EHO sought clarification on the background All but one of the additional requested Council sound measurement location. Additional noise NSRs have been included. Discussion sensitive receptors were requested to be regarding the additional NSRs is considered in the assessment. presented in Section 5.6.1.

During a site visit with the EHO, the additional The unattended background sound noise sensitive receptor locations were discussed measurement location and additional and confirmed. The background sound attended background sound measurement location was agreed as acceptable, measurement locations are presented although the EHO requested an additional spot in Section 5.5.1. background sound measurement on Meadowhead Road.

66 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Policy, Legislation and Guidance

Policy, legislation and guidance relevant to the assessment of noise impact from the proposed development is contained herein.

National Planning Framework 3

The purpose of the National Planning Framework 338 is to outline plans for spatial growth in Scotland. The document focuses on sustainable growth with an emphasis on place making. Noise is only explicitly referred to in reference to cities, with an aspiration to reduce congestion, air pollution and noise.

Scottish Planning Policy

The purpose of Scottish Planning Policy39 (SPP) is to set out national planning policies which reflect Scottish Ministers priorities for the operation of the planning system and the development / use of land.

Paragraph 106 details the importance of the consideration of noise generating activities with respect to the management of business and employment related developments.

North Lanarkshire Council Local Development Plan

North Lanarkshire Council’s adopted Local Development Plan40 details the intentions of the local authority with regards to development over the designated period.

Policy DSP4 states that noise impact should be mitigated to represent good quality development. The local development plan highlights the importance of safeguarding national and international freight links and promotes sustainable development for industrial purposes.

PAN 1/2011 Planning and Noise

Advice on the role of the planning system in helping to prevent and limit the adverse effects of noise is provided in Planning Advice Note (PAN) 1/2011 – Planning and Noise41. PAN 1/2011 promotes the principles of good acoustic design and a sensitive approach to the location of both noise sensitive and noise generating developments. PAN 1/2011 promotes the avoidance of significant adverse noise impacts from new development while supporting sustainable economic growth. The input of environmental health officers and professional acousticians from an early stage is recommended to avoid unreasonable effects on quality of life. PAN 1/2011 promotes the application of reasonable criteria to assess noise impact but does not suggest specific target levels, allowing for consideration of contextual and non-acoustic factors.

38 The Scottish Government (June 2014), National Planning Framework: A Plan for Scotland: Ambition, Opportunity, Place. 39 The Scottish Government (June 2014), Scottish Planning Policy. 40 North Lanarkshire Council (2012), North Lanarkshire Local Plan Policy Document. 41 The Scottish Government (2011), PAN 1/2011 Planning and Noise.

67 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Technical Advice Note (TAN) – Assessment of Noise

The Technical Advice Note (TAN) – Assessment and Noise42 provides guidance to accompany PAN 1/2011 on appropriate methodology to assess the impact of noise. The recommended assessment method includes an initial identification of noise sensitive receptors and their sensitivity, a quantitative assessment, a qualitative assessment, a determination on the level of significance and recommendations for the decision process based on the predicted magnitude of impact. It is stated in TAN that rating sound from industrial activities with an excess of less than 5 dB over background results in a low likelihood of complaint, and that industrial noise does not become sufficiently significant to warrant mitigation at exceedances of less than 10 dB.

BS 4142:2014+A1:2019, Methods for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound

BS 4142:2014+A1:201943 provides methods for rating and assessing sound of an industrial and/or commercial nature. The methods described use outdoor sound levels to assess the likely effects of sound on people who might be inside or outside a dwelling or premises used for residential purposes upon which sound is incident.

The measured specific sound source is corrected for acoustic features (if present) of intermittency, impulsivity and tonality to give the rated noise level. The assessment considers the impact of the specific sound by subtracting the measured background sound level from the rating level, and considering the following;

a) Typically, the greater this difference, the greater the magnitude of impact. b) A difference of around +10dB or more is likely to be an indication of a significant adverse impact, depending on the context. c) A difference of around +5dB(A) is likely to be an indication of an adverse impact, depending on the context. d) The lower the rating level is relative to the measured background sound level, the less likely it is that the specific sound source will have an adverse impact, or a significant adverse impact. Where the rating level does not exceed the background sound level, this is an indication of the specific sound source having a low impact, depending on the context.

Context is a key factor in determining the impact, and this could include a range of aspects including non-acoustic factors or the effects of the existing soundscape.

BS 8233: 2014 Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings

BS 8233:201444 provides guidance on the control of noise from outside buildings, noise from plant and services within buildings and room acoustics for non-critical situations. It provides suggested internal noise levels which should not give rise to sleep disturbance during night time periods or living room disturbance during daytime periods, as detailed in Table 5-2.

Table 5-2: Indoor Ambient Noise Levels for Dwellings

Activity Location 07:00 to 23:00 23:00 to 07:00

Resting Living Room 35 dB LAeq,16h -

Dining Dining room / area 40 dB LAeq,16h -

Sleeping Bedroom 35 dB LAeq,16h 30 dB LAeq,8h

42 The Scottish Government (2011), TAN 1/2011 Technical Advice Note. 43 British Standards Institution (2019), BS 4142:2014+A1:2019 – Methods for Rating and Assessing Industrial and Commercial Sound. 44 British Standards Institution (2014), BS 8233:2014 – Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings.

68 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

If relying on closed widows to meet the guide values, there needs to be an appropriate alternative ventilation that does not compromise the facade insulation or the resulting noise level. If applicable, any room should have adequate ventilation (e.g. trickle ventilator should be open) during assessment. Where development is considered necessary or desirable, despite external noise levels above WHO guidelines, the internal target levels may be relaxed by up to 5 dB and reasonable internal conditions still achieved.

BS 8233 suggests it desirable for external noise levels not to exceed 50 dB LAeq,T, with an upper guideline value of

55 dB LAeq,T which would be acceptable in noisier environments. It is further recognised the upper guideline value might not always be achievable where development is desirable, and a compromise should be struck between elevated noise levels and other factors.

ISO 9613-2:1996 – Acoustics – Attenuation of Sound during Outdoor Propagation – Part 2: General Method of Calculation

ISO 9613-2:199645 presents a standardised methodology to calculate the propagation of outdoor sound levels based on source characteristics, environmental conditions and intervening features.

Calculation of Road Traffic Noise

CRTN46 is the standard UK procedure which defines measurement and calculation methods for assessing road traffic noise.

Calculation of Railway Noise

CRN47 is the standard UK procedure which defines measurement and calculation methods for assessing railway noise. The standard prescribes a methodology through which to determine the acoustic energy associated with each railway pass-by event and the resultant continuous equivalent sound level over daytime and night time periods.

Methodology

The noise impact assessment has been conducted according to the agreed methodology:

• Consultation with the North Lanarkshire Council EHO to agree scope, methodology and assessment criteria. • Conduct unattended baseline noise survey at one location representative of forthcoming residential units to the east of the proposed development. Conduct attended spot measurements at existing NSRs to the south of the proposed developments. Measurements conducted in accordance with BS 4142:2014+A1:2019. Background noise levels for NSRs to the north informed by measurements taken previously by AECOM and NLC in support of the wider Ravenscraig Masterplan, as these measurements were conducted prior to any lockdown and were found to be in good agreement.

45 International Organization for Standardization (1996), ISO 9613-2:1996 – Acoustics – Attenuation of Sound during Outdoor Propagation – Part 2: General Method of Calculation. 46 The Department for Transport (1988), The Calculation of Road Traffic Noise. 47 Department of Transport (1995), Calculation of Railway Noise.

69 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

• Construct 3D digital noise propagation model for operational activities in accordance with ISO 9613- 2:1996. • Assess the impact of operational noise for existing and proposed noise sensitive receptors, as discussed above, in accordance with BS 4142:2014+A9:2019. • Determine the change in noise level for key roads along the defined access route. Change in noise level will be determined through the change in source level due to the elevated traffic on the road network and increased proportion of HGVs in accordance with CRTN. Baseline traffic flows will consider year of opening traffic projections including committed developments where appropriate. • Determine the change in noise level on the rail line due to the increase in freight movements. Existing passenger and freight noise levels will be determined from data published in support of the Ravenscraig Masterplan application. The number of additional freight movements to be added to the year of future baseline rail movements, with the corresponding change in noise level calculated in accordance with CRN. • The magnitude of impact of the operational noise and the change in road traffic noise will be assessed in accordance with PAN 1/2011 and the associated TAN, using the agreed criteria. • Mitigation to be recommended, if necessary.

The impact of noise will be assessed against the agreed criteria shown in Table 5-3.

Table 5-3: Agreed Criteria

Magnitude of Impact Operational Noise Change in Road Traffic Change in Road Traffic Noise, dB LAeq,T Noise, dB LAeq,T Target = +5 dB Excess in (after – before) (after – before) accordance with BS

No adverse impact 0 0 0

Negligible ≥0 but <3 >0 but <1 >0 but <1

Minor adverse ≥3 but <5 ≥1 but <3 ≥1 but <3

Moderate adverse ≥5 but ≤10 ≥3 but <5 ≥3 but <5

Major adverse >10 ≥5 ≥5

Baseline

The following section details the existing noise environment.

Operational Noise Baseline

Background Sound Levels

Due to programme constraints measurements were necessarily conducted during periods of Covid-19 related lockdown measures. Previously conducted measurements in support of the wider Ravenscraig Masterplan area were agreed through consultation to be representative for properties at the edge of urban conglomerations to the north-west, north and north-east of the proposed development. However, additional measurements were necessary to characterise the acoustic environment of other nearby areas. These additional measurements are subject to a degree of uncertainty due to the effects of lockdown conditions on anthropogenic noise. A comparison between pre- and during-lockdown background sound levels will inform how the effects of lockdown are considered in the assessment.

70 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Background sound measurements were conducted in four locations and are supplemented by historic data in two further locations. The locations are shown in Figure 173423-018 (Refer to Volume 2: Figures). Location BGN-1 was chosen to as being in the approximate location of the future housing to be brought forward as part of the wider Ravenscraig Masterplan area. The measurement location was chosen to in the vicinity of the most exposed future properties, at a location where noise from the nearby BOC site and the urban dwellings to the south were minimised. However, it should be noted that background sound levels at these locations will be closer to those for other nearby suburban areas once the hypothetical NSRs are occupied. The current baseline is representative of open land, and at the time which the receptors will be occupied, the land will be significantly different, with the curtilage being primarily suburban. There will, therefore, be a resultant change in background conditions, and it is expected that measurements at suburban locations are more likely to be representative of the future housing than current background sound levels at this location. It was agreed in discussions with the EHO that measurements conducted at this location would also serve as a proxy for the standalone NSRs located to the east of the proposed development, due to their being situated in an isolated location. Location BGN-2 was chosen to represent the urban conglomeration to the south and south east of the proposed development. Measurements at this location were requested by the EHO, and attended measurements were conducted. Measurements at locations BGN-5 and BGN-6 were conducted as part of a previous application. The provided representative levels were measured by AECOM, with night time levels subsequently verified within 1 dB by North Lanarkshire Council. Measurement positions BGN-3 and BGN-4 were conducted in the vicinity of BGN-5 and BGN-6 in support of this application to comment on the impact of Covid-19 related lockdown conditions. The same location as BGN-5 and BGN-6 could not be measured as previous measurements were conducted during a planned shutdown of the BOC plant. It was found that levels at these locations were 2 – 3 dB lower than in normal times. It should be noted that measurement positions BGN-3, BGN-4, BGN-5 and BGN-6 are considered to be more representative of forthcoming residential properties in the Ravenscraig Masterplan area due to their being situated at the boundary of suburban and open land.

The measurement locations and representative background sound levels are detailed in Table 5-4.

Table 5-4: Background Sound Measurement Locations and Representative Levels

Measurement ID Coordinates Attended / Unattended Measured Background Sound Level Daytime Night Time

BGN-1 277764 656732 Unattended 39 dB LA90,T 31 dB LA90,T

BGN-2 278065 655930 Attended 46 dB LA90,T 37 dB LA90,T

BGN-3 277331 657938 Attended N/A 36 dB LA90,T

BGN-4 277703 657440 Attended 46 dB LA90,T N/A

BGN-5 277405 657522 Attended (historic) 49 dB LA90,T N/A

BGN-6 277576 657854 Attended (historic) N/A 38 dB LA90,T

Change in Road Traffic Noise Baseline

As the Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub will increase the number of HGV movements on the surrounding road network, the impact of any change in road traffic noise will be assessed. Key routes have been identified on which the majority of the traffic movements associated with the proposed development will take place. These routes link to the M8, the M74, the A73, the A71 and the A721. The change in road traffic noise is being assessed for a range of noise sensitive receptors on these key routes summarised in Table 5-5 and shown in Figure 173423-010 (Refer to Volume 2: Figures).

71 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Table 5-5: Change in Road Traffic Noise Sensitive Receptors

ID Road Easting Northing

CiR-1 B799 - Bo’Ness Road 277017 660885

CiR-2 A723 277093 660029

CiR-3 A723 276895 658970

CiR-4 B7029 276874 658380

CiR-5 Newcraigs Road 277198 657902

CiR-6 Future access road to Ravenscraig Rail 277501 657224 Hub

CiR-7 Robberthall Road 276970 656602

CiR-8 Craigneuk Street 276601 656028

CiR-9 Windmillhill Street 275941 656116

CiR-10 B745 – Airbles Road 274841 656164

CiR-11 A723 – Hamilton Road 273840 656329

CiR-12 A721 – Glasgow Road 277729 655521

CiR-13 A721 – Glasgow Road 279169 655390

CiR-14 A722 – Kirk Road 280126 655367

CiR-15 A722 – Cambusnethan Street 271341 655580

CiR-16 B7066 – Carfin Road 277673 658952

CiR-17 B7066 – High Street 278537 659620

CiR-18 Alexander Street 279025 654901

CiR-18 A721 – Stewarton Street 279969 654718

CiR-20 A71 – Wishaw Road 280928 653913

CiR-21 Proposed City Deal Link Road 276609 656736

Baseline and future year traffic data relating to the proposed assessment locations is currently outstanding.

Change in Rail Noise Baseline

Train movements have altered to some degree due to the ongoing Covid-19 related lockdown. It was agreed with NLC that data included in the Ravenscraig Masterplan EIA which has not been subject to change (outwith the lockdown) can be used in the assessment of the Ravenscraig Rail and Logistics Hub. Therefore, the number of

72 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report train movements used to inform the baseline is taken to be that presented in the Ravenscraig Masterplan EIA report, presented in Table 5-6. The location of the assessment positions are shown in Figure 173423-019 (Refer to Volume 2: Figures), noting that the assessment relates to a change in source level, which translates to a corresponding change in level at NSRs.

Table 5-6: Daily Existing and Predicted Train Movements

Period Number of Existing Rail Movements per Period

Passenger Freight

Day 39 14

Night 6 9

The SEL values for each train type measured in support of the wider Ravenscraig Masterplan area are presented in Table 5-7 for the two measurement locations provided by AECOM, S5 and S6-1. The exact distance of the SEL measurements from the rail line is not provided in the report, however as the assessment considers the changes to source levels, the distance from the rail line is inconsequential.

Table 5-7: Previously Measured SEL Values for each Train Type

Measurement Location Train Type Average SEL (dB)

S5 Passenger 73

Freight 83

S6-1 Passenger 73

Freight 86

Impact Assessment

The following section provides information relating to the baseline noise impact assessment. Note that operational and traffic data are still required, and therefore the assessment of operational noise and road traffic noise is forthcoming.

5.6.1 Operational Noise Impact Assessment

Noise Sensitive Receptors

Noise levels are being modelled at 12 NSRs agreed with the EHO, as detailed in Table 5-8 and shown in Figure 173423-020 (Refer to Volume 2: Figures). The modelled noise levels at these NSRs represent specific sound levels.

73 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Table 5-8: Industrial Noise Sensitive Receptors

NSR ID Easting Northing

OP-1 277689 657441

OP-2 278472 657846

OP-3 279401 657678

OP-4 278687 656438

OP-5 279096 655860

OP-6 278485 655799

OP-7 278045 655954

OP-8 277820 656415

OP-9 277756 656772

OP-10 277719 656983

OP-11 277563 657206

OP-12 277360 657255

It should be noted that the EHO requested that the impact of noise be also assessed for a proposed residential scheme directly north of the site. However, in the approved Ravenscraig Masterplan this area is safeguarded as open space. The land is also not allocated for housing in either the extant or emerging development plans and no planning application has been submitted. Furthermore, it is understood that there is a reasonable likelihood that existing noise issues from BOC Ltd plan to the north will impact the ability of this development to progress. Given these circumstances, further analysis of noise affecting this residential scheme is not considered justified and has not been taken forward

Source Levels and Noise Impact Assessment

The remainder of the operational noise impact assessment will be presented following receipt of necessary input data.

Change in Road Traffic Noise Impact Assessment

The assessment of the change in road traffic noise will be presented on receipt of forthcoming transport data.

Change in Rail Noise Impact Assessment

Table 5-9 shows the additional number of freight movements per day, which have been assumed to be equally distributed throughout the day. Also shown in Table 5-9 are the cumulative rail movements, i.e. the sum of the existing and development generated rail movements.

74 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Table 5-9: Daily Existing and Predicted Train Movements

Period Number of Proposed Freight Number of Existing Rail Movements per Period Movements per Period Passenger Freight

Day 7 39 21

Night 3 6 9

Table 5-10 compares the existing and future railway noise levels. It can be seen that for both locations the change in noise level is less than 2 dB for both daytime and night time periods.

Table 5-10: Change in Railway Noise Levels

Assessment Location Period Existing Level Future Level Difference (dB LAeq,T) (dB LAeq,T) (dB LAeq,T)

S5 Day 48.0 49.3 1.3

Night 48.2 49.4 1.2

S6-1 Day 50.5 52.0 1.5

Night 51.0 52.3 1.3

The results presented in Table 5-10 suggest a minor adverse impact at both assessment locations. No other relevant contextual elements require consideration in the qualitative assessment, and therefore the qualitative impact is considered to be equal to the quantitative impact. This results in a Slight / Moderate level of significance in accordance with TAN for both assessment locations, which is considered Not Significant in EIA terms, summarised in Table 5-11.

Table 5-11: Assessment of Significance

Assessment Period Quantitative Qualitative Level of EIA Significance Location Magnitude of Magnitude of Significance Impact Impact

S5 Day Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Slight / Moderate Not Significant Impact Impact

Night Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Slight / Moderate Not Significant Impact Impact

S6-1 Day Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Slight / Moderate Not Significant Impact Impact

Night Minor Adverse Minor Adverse Slight / Moderate Not Significant Impact Impact

75 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Mitigation

It is anticipated that mitigation may be required to address any significant effects. Mitigation will be recommended following the principles of good acoustic design. It should also be noted that a number of good acoustic design principles have been adopted within the site design. Discussion regarding adopted and potential mitigation strategies is provided in Table 5-12.

Table 5-12: Good Acoustic Design Mitigation Options

Good Acoustic Design In Relation to Site Included / Principle Recommended?

Reduce / relocate Due to the location of the existing railway line and crossing Included where existing sources under the railway line for site entrance, a number of key noise practicable sources cannot be moved. However, measures have been taken to reduce noise levels at source. The crane will be powered electrically, rather than from diesel generators, with a significant resultant reduction in noise levels, particularly low frequency noise. Freight movements will run on electric power outside of the site boundaries, with a resultant reduction in change in railway noise levels.

Increase distance to The site design includes a green lung. This green lung extends Included in the source approximately 100 metres into the Ravenscraig Masterplan Area design and provides significant additional distance, over which noise levels are attenuated. This has been included as a principle design of the Ravenscraig Rail and Logistics Hub.

Use topography / The topography of the site, including the elevated railway line Included in the existing features to effectively attenuates noise from sources close to the ground. design screen noise There are a number of sources, such as the cranes and locomotive engines, which will not benefit from topographic screening.

Less sensitive elements This principle of good acoustic design typically refers to the use Not feasible of development screen of employment buildings to screen noise levels for residential more sensitive buildings in a mixed use development. While the wider elements Ravenscraig area including the Rail and Logistics Hub does comprise a mixed use development, the position of the existing railway line and land associated with the Rail and Logistics Hub mean that it is not feasible to use less sensitive elements of the proposed development to screen future residential properties, other than existing topography.

Use of layout to reduce Due to the location of key noise sources such as the crane and Not practicable propagation the railway line, the layout cannot be used to control throughout the site propagation throughout the site.

Use of housing This means of good acoustic design is not appropriate for a Not appropriate orientation to reduce noise generating development. exposure of noise sensitive rooms

76 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Good Acoustic Design In Relation to Site Included / Principle Recommended?

Acoustic barriers It is anticipated that acoustic barriers might be required, Potential to be although this will be confirmed in the full assessment. recommended, based on findings of full noise impact assessment

Building envelope The primary means of reducing noise through building envelope Not appropriate is to specify or upgrade glazing. However, for a new noise generating development, PAN 1/2011 states that specifying acoustic or secondary glazing is unlikely to be an appropriate response, and enhanced glazing should not be a means to legitimise higher noise levels. It is stated that other means of mitigation should be explored.

Residual Effects

Following the assessment of baseline noise impact and the design of an appropriate mitigation scheme, the residual effects will be quantified and presented.

Assessment of Cumulative Effects

The full Technical Appendix which is in preparation will assess the impact of changes to road traffic noise, changes to railway noise and operational noise. Any cumulative impacts identified will be assessed with the findings presented.

Statement of Significance

A statement of significance will be provided following the completion of the full noise impact assessment, which will be conducted upon receipt of all necessary data.

77 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

AIR QUALITY

Introduction

This EIAR chapter considers the site in terms of local air quality for the proposed development and the potential for the proposed development to adversely affect local air quality. The assessment is based on the characteristics of the site and surrounding area and the key parameters of the proposed development detailed in Chapter 2. This chapter has been prepared by EnviroCentre Ltd.

The aims of this chapter are to:

• Identify the relevant context in which the air quality assessment has been undertaken; • Describe the methods used to undertake the assessment; • Outline the relevant baseline conditions currently existing at the site and surroundings; • Identify the potential direct and indirect air quality impacts of the proposed development; and, • Identify mitigation and enhancement measures were required to address identified effects.

This EIAR chapter will be supported by an Air Quality Assessment report provided once the traffic model has been finalised.

Policy, Legislation and Guidance

National Planning Policy

National Planning Framework 3

National Planning Framework 3 (NPF3) outlines Scotland’s strategy for development and investment in infrastructure. The NPF3 provides a framework for the spatial development of Scotland as a whole over the next 20-30 years. NPF3 identifies the reduction of car use in city and town centres as being central to improving Air Quality.

Scottish Planning Policy

Scottish Planning Policy (SSP) was published in 2014 and replaces the previous SSP which was published in 2010. The SPP, which is non-statutory, sets out the Scottish Governments Policy on how nationally important land use planning matters should be addressed.

Annex A - Town Centre Health Checks & Strategies states that town centre strategies should identify how green infrastructure can enhance air quality, open space, landscape/settings, reduce urban heat island effects, increase capacity of drainage systems and attenuate noise.

PAN 51 Planning Environmental Protection and Regulation

Planning Advice Note (PAN) 51: Planning and Environmental Protectioni (revised October 2006) provides advice on the role of the planning system in relation to the environmental protection regimes.

78 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Local Planning Policy

North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan

The Development Plan for North Lanarkshire states in DPS4 Quality of Development (which applies to all applications for planning permission) that proposed developments would “achieve a high quality Development in terms of … mitigating any likely air quality, noise, or air pollution impacts particularly in or adjacent to Air Quality Management Areas”.

Legislative Context

National Legislation

Part IV of the Environment Act 1995 places a duty on the Secretary of State for the Environment to develop, implement and maintain an Air Quality Strategy with the aim of reducing atmospheric emissions and improving air quality. The latest Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland was published in 2007, and provides a framework for ensuring the air quality limit values are complied with based upon a combination of international, national and local measures to reduce emissions and improve air quality. The Air Quality Strategy includes a statutory duty, also under Part IV of the Environment Act 1995, for local authorities to regularly and systematically review and assess air quality within their boundaries against a series of objectives and appraise development and transport plans against these assessments.

The Air Quality Strategy sets out national air quality objectives in order to improve air quality in the UK. These air quality objectives have been used for comparison in this assessment, and are detailed in Table 6-1 below.

Table 6-1: Summary of Objectives of the UK Air Quality Strategy

Pollutant Objective Measured as To be achieved by

Benzene (All Authorities) 16.25 µg/m3 Running Annual 31 December 2003 Mean

Benzene (Scotland and Northern 3.25 µg/m3 Running Annual 31 December 2010 Ireland Only) Mean

1,3 Butadiene 2.25 µg/m3 Running Annual 31 December 2003 Mean

Carbon Monoxide (Authorities in 10.0 µg/m3 Running 8-Hour 31 December 2003 Scotland Only) Mean

Lead 0.5 µg/m3 Annual Mean 31 December 2004

0.25 µg/m3 Annual Mean 31 December 2008

Nitrogen Dioxide 200 µg/m3 1 Hour Mean 31 December 2005 Not to be exceeded more than 18 times per year

40 µg/m3 Annual Mean 31 December 2005

79 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Pollutant Objective Measured as To be achieved by

3 Particles (PM10) 50 µg/m 24 Hour Mean 31 December 2004 (gravimetric) Not to be exceeded more All authorities than 35 times per year

40 µg/m3 Annual Mean 31 December 2004

3 Particles (PM10) 50 µg/m 24 Hour Mean 31 December 2010 (gravimetric) Not to be exceeded more Scotland Only than 7 times per year

18 µg/m3 Annual Mean 31 December 2010

3 Particles (PM2.5) 25 µg/m (target) Annual Mean 2020 (gravimetric)* All authorities 15% cut in urban Annual Mean 2010 – 2020 background exposure

3 Particles (PM2.5) 10 µg/m (Limit) Annual Mean 2020 (gravimetric) Scotland Only

Sulphur Dioxide 350 µg/m3 not to be 1-Hour Mean 31 December 2004 exceeded more than 24 times a year

125 µg/m3not to be 24 Hour Mean 31 December 2004 exceeded more than 3 times a year

266 µg/m3 not to be 15-Minute Mean 31 December 2005 exceeded more than 35 times a year

PAH * 0.25 ng/m3 Annual Mean 31 December 2010

Ozone * 100 µg/m3 8 hourly running or 31 December 2005 hourly mean *

* not currently assessed by Scottish Local Authorities

Guidance

Technical Guidance (LAQM.TG(09))ii was issued on behalf of the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) in February 2009 (DEFRA, 2009a). A Policy Guidance (LAQM.PG09) was also issued at the same time (DEFRA, 2009b)iii. This guidance is designed to guide local authorities through the Review and Assessment process and will also be adhered to for the purpose of this air quality assessment.

DEFRA and the Scottish Government have recently updated LAQM Technical Guidance (LAQM.TG16) (The Scottish Government, 2018)iv. The main change is in the approach with a greater emphasis on action planning to bring forward improvements in air quality and to include local measures as part of EU reporting requirements. The

80 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report reporting requirements for Local Authorities also changed with the adoption of an Annual Progress Report. Local

Authorities continue to appraise pollutant concentrations of Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Particulate Matter (PM10) and Sulphur Dioxide (SO2). Local Authorities are also required to work towards reducing levels of PM2.5.

Land-Use Planning & Development Control: Planning for Air Quality

The document ‘Land-Use Planning & Development Control: Planning for Air Quality’ produced by Environmental Protection UK and Institute of Air Quality Management (EPUK & IAQM, 2017)v provides guidance on dealing with air quality issues within the development control process. This guidance provides an assessment approach to defining whether the impact on air quality associated with the proposed development should be of material concern.

The methodology uses the change in pollutant concentrations taking into account the air quality objectives to assess the impacts of proposed developments on air quality. It also states that the effects on the residents of a proposed development need to be assessed as significant if the air quality objectives at the façade are not met. The assessed effect can be reduced if provision is made to reduce the exposure.

Air Quality Management Areas

The process of review and assessment has raised the profile of air quality assessment as a material planning consideration in development-related projects. For example, where it is known through the review and assessment process that problems in the achievement of air quality standards and objectives exist, the declaration of an AQMA can conflict with permissions to develop. That is, the local authority is under a duty to improve air quality within an AQMA due to further breaches of air quality standards and objectives.

The Council have declared 4 AQMA’s within their boundary, the closest being Motherwell Town Centre, declared for Particulate Matter (PM₁₀). This AQMA is circa 1.5km south-west of the development site and encompasses the town’s Civic Centre and Windmillhill Street.

Methodology

Air Quality Impacts

The primary long-term concern in relation to air quality are the emissions generated by traffic and the subsequent impact on the local ambient air quality at residential areas located within the vicinity of the main road network, and within Motherwell AQMA. The main pollutant concentrations of concern from this source are NO , PM and PM ․ . ₂ ₁₀ ₂ ₅ Consultation

The potential scope and indicative methodology of the Air Quality Assessment was discussion between EnviroCentre and North Lanarkshire Council EHO on 9th December 2020. It was agreed that further consultation would be conducted once traffic data was available to inform the scope of the assessment. Table 6-2 provides a summary of Air Quality issues raised during the initial consultation.

81 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Table 6-2 Summary of Consultation – Air Quality

Environmental Organisation Consultation comment Topic

Air Quality NLC EHO • Best practicable means shall be adopted to control site generated dust and prevent dust emission beyond the site boundary. If site generated dust is found to be impacting upon property/residents out with the site the operation responsible shall be suspended until suitable dust suppression measures are put in place. • During preparation of the site and construction no waste materials may be burned on site. • There is a strong likelihood that this development will significantly increase road traffic in the local area. In line with North Lanarkshire Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance on Air Quality this proposed development requires an Air Quality Impact assessment (AQIA). The applicant will require to submit AQIA in both hard copy and electronic format before the Local Authority can finalise the consultation. I would therefore request that the application is not determined until such time as the assessment has been submitted and approved by this Authority.

Assessment Criteria

The document ‘Land-Use Planning & Development Control: Planning for Air Quality’ produced by Environmental Protection UK and Institute of Air Quality Management (EPUK & IAQM, 2017) provides guidance on dealing with air quality issues within the development control process. This guidance provides an assessment approach to defining whether the impact on air quality associated with the proposed development should be of material concern.

The magnitude of the impact is determined by assessing the amount that a pollutant concentration at a sensitive receptor which is predicted to change, through comparison of the ‘without development’ scenario against the ‘with development’ scenario (see Table 6-3 for impact descriptors). These criteria will be used for assessment purposes.

Table 6-3: Impact Descriptors for Individual Receptors

Long term average % Change in concentration relative to Air Quality Assessment Level (AQAL) Concentration at receptor in assessment year ≤ 1 2 – 5 6 – 10 > 10

≤ 75% of AQAL Negligible Negligible Slight Moderate 76 – 94% of AQAL Negligible Slight Moderate Moderate 95 – 102% of AQAL Slight Moderate Moderate Substantial 102 – 109% of AQAL Moderate Moderate Substantial Substantial ≥ 110% of AQAL Moderate Substantial Substantial Substantial

82 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Explanation

1. AQAL = Air Quality Assessment Level, which may be an air quality objective, EU limit or target value, or an Environment Agency ‘Environmental Assessment Level (EAL)’. 2. The Table is intended to be used by rounding the change in percentage pollutant concentration to whole numbers, which then makes it clearer which cell the impact falls within. The user is encouraged to treat the numbers with recognition of their likely accuracy and not assume a false level of precision. Changes of 0%, i.e. less than 0.5% will be described as Negligible. 3. The Table is only designed to be used with annual mean concentrations. 4. Descriptors for individual receptors only; the overall significance is determined using professional judgement. For example, a ‘moderate’ adverse impact at one receptor may not mean that the overall impact has a significant effect. Other factors need to be considered. 5. When defining the concentration as a percentage of the AQAL, use the ‘without scheme’ concentration where there is a decrease in pollutant concentration and the ‘with scheme;’ concentration for an increase. 6. The total concentration categories reflect the degree of potential harm by reference to the AQAL value. At exposure less than 75% of this value, i.e. well below, the degree of harm is likely to be small. As the exposure approaches and exceeds the AQAL, the degree of harm increases. This change naturally becomes more important when the result is an exposure that is approximately equal to, or greater than the AQAL. 7. It is unwise to ascribe too much accuracy to incremental changes or background concentrations, and this is especially important when total concentrations are close to the AQAL. For a given year in the future, it is impossible to define the new total concentration without recognising the inherent uncertainty, which is why there is a category that has a range around the AQAL, rather than being exactly equal to it.

For the purposes of this EIA Report it has been concluded that Negligible and Slight impact magnitudes and the associated effects arising from these impacts shall be considered not significant, and moderate and substantial impact magnitudes and the associated effects arising from these impacts shall be considered significant.

ADMS-Roads Dispersion Modelling

The ADMS Dispersion model is approved for use in detailed assessment dispersion modelling studies in technical guidance LAQM.TG16 (DEFRA, 2016). The model has been subject to extensive validation and inter-model comparison studies.

Assessed Years and Scenarios

The air dispersion modelling exercise will consider the impact on future and existing residents in areas where traffic movements will alter. The model will be verified against the Council’s monitoring data to ensure its accuracy. Air pollutant concentrations recorded in 2020 are considered to be unrepresentative as a result of the influence of the COVID-19 lockdown measures that occurred during that year therefore 2019 will be used as the ‘baseline scenario’ in which the model will be validated against.

Two further models will then be built to represent the ‘without’ and ‘with’ development scenarios for the year of opening. The assessment will consider the opening year for Phase 1 of the development to be 2025. As agreed between the Council and the project team, no committed development or the proposed infrastructure improvements on Airbles Road, the A723 or the Windmillhill Link Road will be considered in both future year scenarios. The pollutant concentration outputs from the ‘without’ and ‘with’ development scenario models will then be compared to determine the magnitude of impact as discussed in Section 6.3.3.

83 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Sensitive Receptors

The proposed development will alter traffic movements on the road networks surrounding the Site. As traffic data is currently unavailable it is anticipated the sensitive receptors to be included within the assessment are likely to be those listed in Table 6-4 and shown on Figure 173423-009 (Refer to Volume 2: Figures). Once traffic data becomes available the sensitive receptors will be confirmed with North Lanarkshire Councils EHO.

Table 6-4: Anticipated Sensitive Receptor Locations

SR Eastings, Location: Justification: No: Northings

Captures north-bound flows to M8; access/egress flows A721 North-bound, 276904, from the proposed site; northern residential flows i.e. 1 north-east of RC at 658343 Chapelknowe, and flows through Carfin/New Chapelknowe Stevenson from the proposed site;

277274, Captures east-bound flows towards Wishaw Town Centre. 2 A721 Craigneuk St 655963

276604, Captures south-bound flows to/from Ravenscraig and 3 B754 Shields Road 655676 proposed site.

Windmillhill St (south) 276149, In proximity to proposed road upgrades via WCML 4 656021 overbridge route (*future receptor)

B754 Airbles Road 275688, Captures town-centre bound flows; located within AQMA 5 (junction-bound) 656192 and Motherwell Town Centre.

Windmillhill St / Civic 275716, Key link road within the AQMA and Motherwell Town 6 Centre (north) 656454 Centre.

Captures accessing and egressing flows from Ravenscraig 267707, 7 Merry Street (north) and north-bound traffic from Merry Street (inc. flows 658096 destined for M8)

276961, In proximity to proposed residential development within 8 Robberhall Road 656672 the wider Ravenscraig Masterplan Area (*future receptor)

275178, Key link road within AQMA and Motherwell Town Centre. 9 West Hamilton Street 656859 (*optional)

Menteith Road / Merry 275336, Key link road within AQMA and Motherwell Town Centre. 10 Street Junction 657221

B754 Airbles Road 274936, Captures flows accessing/exiting Motherwell; also flows 11 (M74-bound) 656215 bound for M74 via A723;

In proximity of proposed road upgrades; captures flows 12 273807, A723 Nr Junction 6 accessing/egressing M74 from Motherwell (*future 656313 receptor)

In proximity of proposed road upgrades (north A723 at Silver Firs, 27694, 13 infrastructure access) and Newarthill residential area, Newarthill 659321 captures flows bound for M80.

84 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Modelled Roads

For local impact assessments, the roads included within the calculations should be all those expected to make a significant contribution to pollution at the receptor locations in question. As per LAQM technical guidance, roads more than 200m away from the receptor can be excluded due to dispersion of pollutants over this distance. Minor roads can also be excluded, even when they are closer than 200m to receptors, due to their relatively small pollutant contributions. As stated in Section 6.3.6, once traffic data is available the road links to be included in the models will be confirmed through further consultation with the EHO. Our current thinking on which roads are likely to be included in the models are listed below:

• A721 north-bound, north-east of Ravenscraig at Chapelknowe; • A721 Craigneuk Street; • B754 Shields Road; • A721 Windmillhill Street (south); • B754 Airbles Road (junction-bound); • A721 Windmillhill Street / Civic Centre; • A723 Merry Street (north); • Robberhall Road; • West Hamilton Street; • A723 Menteith Road/Merry Street Junction; • B754 Airbles Road (M74-bound); and • A723 near Junction 6.

The traffic data will be provided by SWECO for input to the ADMS-Roads model. Full details of the traffic data utilised in the air dispersion models, will be provided as an addendum Technical Appendix.

Limitations and Assumptions

As the assessment will be verified against monitored data it is anticipated it will be a good representation of the likely impact of the proposed development on Air Quality.

Baseline Conditions

Background Air Quality

Background conditions were assessed using data available from the Air Quality Scotlandvi and DEFRAvii websites using the methods set out in LAQM.TG(16). The background concentrations of nitrogen oxides (NOx), NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 are available for a base year of 2018 and for all other years up to 2030. The concentrations are all available in OS 1 kilometre grid squares.

For NOX, PM10 and PM2.5 these background pollutant concentrations are split into contributions from various sectors and therefore background levels can be obtained and the risk of “Double Counting” concentrations can be avoided. As only primary roads were modelled as part of the assessment, contributions attributed to motorways and minor roads were removed during the adjustment process.

The proposed development is located in OS 1km Grid Square 278500, 656500. The background pollutant concentrations for this square are outlined in Table 6-5 below.

85 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Table 6-5: Development Site Background Air Quality Concentrations (278500 656500)

Pollutant Concentration (µg/m3)

Year NO2 NOx PM10 PM2.5

Total Adjusted Total Adjusted Total Adjusted Total Adjusted

2019 7.67 7.22 10.90 9.21 9.70 9.68 5.71 5.70 2025 5.94 5.86 8.38 7.40 9.12 9.12 5.29 5.28

Monitored Pollutant Concentrations

The Council monitor pollutant concentrations within their boundary area, those in proximity of the proposed development are outlined in Table 6-6 below.

Table 6-6: Pollutant monitoring sites in proximity to the proposed development

Site ID Site Location Site Type OS Grid 2019 Annual 2019 Annual 2018 Annual Reference Mean NO2 Mean PM10 Mean PM2.5 Concentration Concentration Concentration (µg/m³) (µg/m³) (µg/m³)

NL6 Menteith Road and Roadside / 275541 - 10 6 Brandon St Junction AMS 656789

New Plantation Road / Kerbside / 277282 14 - - DT115 Ravenscraig Bypass DT 657607

DT100 Civic Centre (Airbles Roadside 275820 37 - - Rd / Windmillhill St 656208 Junction)

Measured Nitrogen Dioxide (NO ) concentrations at these locations were within the objective level of 40µg/m³ for this parameter (annual mean). Concentrations of Particulate Matter (PM & PM ․ ) are also shown to be well ₂ within the respective annual mean objective levels of 18µg/m³ and 10µg/m³ respectively. ₁₀ ₂ ₅

Weather Conditions

Meteorology data purchased from ADM Ltd specifically for use in ADMS-Roads will be utilised in this assessment. The data is for the year 2020 and was obtained from the nearest meteorological weather station to the Site recording a full suite of meteorological parameters which is located at Bishopton.

This weather station has an altitude of 59m and is located in a rural area approximately 37km north-west of the Site. The data provided for the meteorological station was fully ratified and validated for the year 2020 and included all of the meteorological parameters required by the dispersion model comprising hourly sequential recordings of:

• Surface temperature;

86 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

• Precipitation; • Wind speed; • Wind direction; • Relative humidity; and • Cloud cover.

The corresponding wind rose for this year is provided in Figure 6-1 below:

Figure 6-1: Wind-rose for 2020 from Bishopton, Glasgow Weather Station

The wind rose indicates four prominent wind directions: 100-110°, 210-230°, 250-280°, and 310°. It also indicates the greatest percentage wind speed lies between 6-10 knots.

Model Verification

The model will be verified against the pollutant concentrations outlined in Table 6-6 above. Verification refers to the process of comparing model predicted concentrations to measured pollutant concentrations. It provides a means of determining how the model is performing at locations and can allow for a reduction of model uncertainty.

87 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

TOPICS NOT REQUIRING FULL EIA

Introduction

This chapter provides a summary and assessment where applicable of additional potential environmental effects or features which are relevant to the proposed development but have not been scoped into the full EIA given significant effects were not deemed to be likely or are readily mitigated through good practice or design: these include effects or information associated with ground conditions, water environment, landscape and visual, lighting, traffic and transport, archaeology and cultural heritage, population and human health, climate change and major accidents and natural disasters.

It is not the purpose of this chapter to draw conclusions on the level of significance based upon detailed methodology (as per the other chapters outlined throughout this EIAR), but instead offer a synopsis of relevant information, alongside a relevant level of assessment specific to each feature of this chapter.

Ground Conditions

Introduction

An initial screening exercise and review of previous reports was undertaken by EnviroCentre in order to determine whether or not the proposed development was likely to have issues associated with ground conditions.

The 2018 Sweco report Ravenscraig Masterplanning – Desk Study and Contamination Assessment (Rev. 1) summarises the site history, previous site investigations, remediation and likely residual risk. As part of a previous planning submission for the entire Ravenscraig Masterplan site. Chapter 4 of the Sweco (2018) report refers to the “Residential (East) Area”, which broadly covers the area now proposed to be occupied by the new Railhead & Logistics Hub. The key points from the Sweco review are provided in the sections to follow.

Historical Land Uses

Previous uses of the site are considered likely to have had an impact on ground conditions on the site. The site was primarily occupied by woodland and open ground between 1898 and 1939, with several collieries and coal its present to the east of the area. The Ravenscraig Steel Works was operational by 1954, with an Iron Ore Stockyard and Iron Ore Blending Yard present within the current development site. Basic Oxygen Steel (BOS) filter cake was also stockpiled on the site. The steelworks were decommissioned in 1992.

Ground Conditions Observations

According to the Sweco (2018) report, the extent of made ground in the area is “limited”, but consists of reworked glacial till with ash, slag and burnt shale, where present.

Made ground is said to be underlain by sandy gravelly clay up to 15m in thickness, with some of these deposits extracted and used as fill material on other parts of the Ravenscraig site during previous remediation and construction projects.

Bedrock is noted to be present at up to ~18m depth (shallower in the south) and comprises the Middle Coal Measures of Upper Carboniferous Age (sandstones, siltstones, mudstones and coal).

88 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Previous Site Investigations & Risk Assessment

At least six site investigations are noted to have been undertaken in the “Residential (East)” area, which now cover the current proposed development site. Some reports note contamination issues in soil as a legacy of previous land uses. A record of the previous investigation reports is given in Table 7-1.

Table 7-1: Previous Site Investigations (Sweco, 2018)

Author Date Report Title

Aspinwall & Co. 1992 1992 Ravenscraig Management Plan Environmental Audit, Volume 1

Aspinwall 1994 Site Investigation Interpretive Report, Volume 3

Aspinwall & Co. 1995 Ravenscraig: Selected Fill Material Suitability

Terra Tek 1999 Report on Ground Investigation – Ravenscraig bulk earthworks assessment Stage B

Thorburn Colquhoun 2000 Ravenscraig Bulk Earthworks Strategy Factual Report on Preliminary Ground Investigation

Grontmij (now Sweco) 2011 Contamination Assessment and Outline Options Appraisal

The Sweco (2018) report concluded that made ground associated with the former steelworks and former railway embankments was the primary contaminant source. An overall “low/moderate” risk was estimated to identified receptors as a result of contamination on site. Given that this conclusion was reached with a proposed residential end use, the risk classification is now likely to be lower given that a less sensitive commercial/industrial end use is proposed.

In addition to the identified contamination issues there are 6 known previous mine entries located on the site and associated shallow mine workings, these will require to be assessed as part of the development design works with appropriate mitigation measures in place with respect to ground condition requirements.

Potential Effects

A review of previous ground investigation findings compiled as part of the previous planning submission for the Ravenscraig Masterplan concluded that ground conditions have historically been impacted by historic land use (i.e. Ravenscraig Steel Works). Previous intrusive assessment and risk assessment identified that on the basis of a proposed former residential development the site was considered to have a Low/Moderate risk ranking. On the basis of the site being developed for a commercial use and therefore a less sensitive end-us the development is considered likely to have a lower risk ranking (i.e. Low).

The site is known to have shallow mine workings and mine entries present. As part of the development design these will be appropriately assessed with mitigation measures put in place to address the risks associated with the ground conditions.

A review of the NatureScot SiteLink map viewer found that no Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) of any kind are noted on site or in the vicinity (including those designated for geological interest). In addition, no Geological Conservation Review sites are present on site or in the vicinity.

89 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Therefore, the proposed Railhead and Logistics Hub development is considered unlikely to have a significant issue associated with ground conditions.

Water Environment

Introduction

An initial screening exercise was undertaken by EnviroCentre in order to determine whether or not the proposed development was likely to have a significant impact on the water environment and therefore whether or not a full EIAR chapter would be required. Table 7-1 below lists the water environment receptors assessed, key considerations and assumed level of impact of the development upon them.

Table 7-1: Water Environment Receptors Screening

Receptor Key Considerations Assumed Level of Impact Groundwater Deep groundwater table at site and no significant impacts Not significant on groundwater flows and levels assuming the proposed development does not include any abstraction and no significant barriers to infiltration are introduced Surface Water Pollution prevention likely to be key interest from SEPA. Not significant Proposed development layout shows buffers/green corridors to be maintained between development and main watercourses. It is assumed that no direct works that will physically alter existing watercourses are proposed. Water Supplies No Private Water Supplies or abstractions were identified Not significant in the previous EIA, however SEPA and the council will be consulted for the most up to date records to consider any potential impacts on these receptors Water Quality Construction phase SuDS or equivalent for drainage Not significant water quality control, pollution prevention and erosion control measures to control construction phase drainage, then SuDS compliance for the operational phase. Drainage SuDS provision, sewer incapacity (considered as part of Not significant Drainage Impact Assessment) Flooding South Calder Water, and hydraulic constraints within it, Not significant potentially pose a potential fluvial risk to the northern (pending conclusions edge of the site. The watercourse is situated within a of flood risk valley approximately 20m deep so risk of flooding from it assessment) or impact of development on floodplain is considered to be low. This will need to be confirmed through a flood risk assessment. Aside from that, surface water flood risk considerations

The conclusion of the screening exercise was that the proposed development would not have a significant impact upon the Water Environment and a full EIAR Chapter was therefore not required. However, it was considered that a flood risk assessment (FRA) would be required. This was required in order to confirm the fluvial (river) floodplain extent of the South Calder Water, the flood risk posed to the proposed development, and whether or not any development was proposed within the functional floodplain.

90 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

The scope undertaken for the FRA was as follows:

• Review of desk-based information sources including Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) Flood Maps, Ordnance Survey mapping, Scottish Government LiDAR digital terrain model, previous relevant technical assessments and current development plans; • Consultation with North Lanarkshire Council (NLC) and SEPA to obtain up-to-date information on historic flooding in the area; • Walkover survey of the development site and wider area to observe potential flood mechanisms and areas of risk from the South Calder Water; • Hydrological assessment to establish design flows for the South Calder Water using 3 recognised industry methods (Including cognisance of the latest regional climate change guidance as specified by SEPA in April 2019); • Construction of a hydraulic model of the watercourse and floodplain to determine the 0.5% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) functional floodplain extent. • Determination of 0.5% AEP plus climate change flood levels and extents; • Scenario testing to assess model sensitivity to variation in roughness; • Simulate a blockage scenario of the New Craig Road Culvert, located approximately 300m west of the north western corner of the site, to determine if this will have any impact on the development; and • Completion of the SEPA Flood Risk Assessment Checklist.

Potential Effects

Modelling results indicated that even with a 50% blockage of the New Craig Road Culvert, peak water levels for the 0.5% AEP storm event (including 44% increase in flow for climate change) were between 5 to 6m below existing site levels and the development extent is situated entirely outwith the maximum predicted flood extents. A small portion of the PAN boundary extent (northern boundary and north western corner) is inundated during this storm event, however, but no development is to be situated within this area.

The FRA therefore confirmed that the development will not have a significant impact upon flood extents and similarly will not be impacted by fluvial flooding. More detailed information is included in Technical Appendix 7.1 (Volume 3) of the EIAR and photographs of the culvert are shown below.

Inlet Outlet

Illustration 7.1: New Craig’s Road Culvert Inlet and Outlet

The conclusion of the water environment assessment is that the development will not have a significant impact on water features or flood risk.

91 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) will be developed to include surface water management and pollution prevention measures (e.g. Pollution Prevention Plan) and will be in place during construction and operation. The CEMP will remain a live document and will be continually updated as the work progresses. The CEMP is a practical tool to facilitate the management of environmental mitigation measures and to provide a clear roadmap of the key roles and responsibilities during construction.

An Operational Environmental Management Document (OEMD) will be in place throughout the operational phase. Best practice will be followed throughout the operational phase, with reference to the SEPA Guidance for Pollution Prevention (GPPs), and best practice guidance.

Refer to Volume 3: Technical Appendix 7-1

Drainage

Introduction

A gravity fed surface water drainage solution has been analysed, designed and adopted which discharges to swales, filter trenches, detention basins and ponds which in turn provides the required surface water treatment for 200 year events plus an allowance for climate change. The drainage has been designed using Flood Estimation Handbook Rainfall Data modelled with storm events up to 8 days. The surface water is then attenuated via the use of a Hydrobrake flow control device and stored in online below and above ground storage. The below ground system is a tanked system and does not allow for any infiltration into underlying soils. The attenuated surface water then outfalls to the South Calder Water via the upgraded headwall to be fitted with a non return valve to prevent backing up of the drainage system in the event of elevated South Calder Water river levels. The surface water discharge will not exceed greenfield runoff.

The drainage network has been future proofed to facilitate future phase developments.

Potential Effects

The drainage impact assessment confirmed there was sufficient space on site to accommodate surface water attenuation when surface water discharge was limited to 2 a year greenfield runoff rate.

Scottish Water (SW) confirmed there an no capacity constraints within the foul network to enable the development to be serviced. SW requires a 12 hour emergency storage provision should be allowed for in the event of a temporary power outage of the main SW pumping station, this has been incorporated into the design.

The required surface water treatment provision has been provided to satisfy SEPA and the legal requirements.

The drainage impact assessment concluded that the development is not restricted by matters of drainage capacity or flood risk.

Refer to Volume 3: Technical Appendix 7.2

92 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Landscape and Visual

Introduction

In support of the Planning Application, a detailed Landscape and Visual Appraisal (LVA) has been undertaken (see Volume 3, Technical Appendix 7-3). The primary purpose of this is to identify any likely significant effects (in context of material considerations) that are predicted during the construction and operational phases of the proposed development, on the landscape and visual resources of the site and surrounding study area. The LVA has been undertaken by Douglas Harman Landscape Planning, on behalf of EnviroCentre Ltd.

Overview of Approach

Although Landscape and Visual interests have been scoped out of the Environmental Impact Assessment Report, the approach to this LVA broadly follows that of a typical EIA development. As such, the methodology (see Section 3 of the LVA) is primarily based on the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment48 and other current best practice guidance where relevant.

As an overview, the objectives of the assessment to:

• describe the assessment methodology and criteria used to inform the assessment process; • identify any relevant landscape related policy, legislation and guidance; • identify and assess the landscape and visual baseline conditions; • identify design principles and other mitigation measures embedded into the design of the project to help minimise any likely significant adverse effects; and • identify and evaluate any residual landscape and visual effects, including direct and indirect, based on the worst-case parameters as currently known.

Summary of effects

As evidenced in the LVA, the following table sets out a summary of all landscape and visual effects that are predicted during the construction and operational phases of the proposed development. Any adverse effects judged to be significant in context of material considerations are highlighted in bold.

VIEWPOINT ASSESSMENT

Viewpoint Construction Operational (visual effect/landscape magnitude of effect) (visual effect/landscape magnitude of effect)

1: Plantation Road Road users: moderate Road users: moderate-major Incised River Valleys LCT: small–medium Incised River Valleys LCT: Medium–large 2: Regional Sports Visitors: moderate Visitors: moderate-major Facility Urban Fringe Farmland LCT: small–medium Urban Fringe Farmland LCT: medium

48 Landscape Institute and the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (2013), The Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, version 3.

93 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

3: McTaggart Crescent Residents: moderate-minor Residents: moderate Incised River Valleys LCT: small Incised River Valleys LCT: small– medium 4: New College Road users: moderate Road users: moderate–major Urban Fringe Farmland LCT: small–medium Urban Fringe Farmland LCT: medium 5: Glen Noble Residents: moderate Residents: moderate-major Urban Fringe Farmland LCT: small–medium Urban Fringe Farmland LCT: Medium–large 6: Cleland Townhead Recreational users : minor–moderate Recreational users: moderate Urban Fringe Farmland LCT: small Urban Fringe Farmland LCT: Small–medium 7: Bellside Road users: minor Road users: moderate-minor Plateau Farmland LCT: very small Plateau Farmland LCT: small 8: B7078, nr. Larkhall Road users: negligible-none Road users: negligible–none Broad River Valley LCT: negligible-none Broad River Valley LCT: Negligible–none

GENERAL ASSESSMENT

Landscape receptor Construction effect Operational effect

Site moderate N/A

Urban Fringe Farmland LCT minor Minor–moderate

moderate to moderate– Incised River Valleys LCT moderate major

Plateau Farmland LCT negligible Negligible–small

Broad River Valley LCT negligible Negligible–small

Chatelherault GDL/Country Park negligible Negligible–minor

Proposed Clyde Valley Special Landscape Area negligible Negligible–minor

Barncluith GDL none none

Dalzell GDL none none

Strathclyde Country Park none none

Phase 1 effects

As this LVA has focused on providing an overview of the landscape and visual effects of all three phases of the proposed development, the effects of phase 1 would in most instances, be slightly less than those summarised in Table 11. In considering the worst-case scenario however, the moderate-major visual effects predicted at viewpoints 1, 2 and 5 for all three phases, would also apply to phase 1.

94 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Statement of significance

As evidenced throughout this LVA, no significant effects are predicted on any landscape character types or landscape designations. Of particular relevance, former and current industrial sites are a key characteristic of the Urban Fringe Farmland LCT and in association with the visual influence of the urban edge and transport infrastructure, much of the landscape exhibits a damaged and fragmented character. As such, the proposed development would be typical to the landscape, with often little change to its key characteristics.

Significant visual effects (in context of material considerations) are however predicted during the operational phases at viewpoints 1 (Plantation Road), 2 (Regional Sport Facility) and 5 (Glen Noble). From these locations, the proposed development would be prominent, occupying a relatively large proportion of the view. It would introduce a new visual focus above the woodland, contrasting with the intervening composition of largely undeveloped woodland and open fields/rough ground.

However, it important to recognise that any significant visual effect would be very localised. The Viewpoint Assessment reflects the worst-case scenario (the locations were carefully selected to ensure these provide the most open views towards the site) and due to the screening effect of nearby intervening built development and/or vegetation, the experience of any significant visual effect is generally restricted to a very small part of a locality. Despite the very large nature of the hubs, the dense surrounding woodland provides an important physical separation and screening function to nearby sensitive receptors.

Lighting

Introduction

An initial exercise was undertaken by Buro Happold in order to determine if the proposed development was likely to have a significant impact on the existing environment and surrounding areas.

A Lighting Statement has been provided to evaluate the existing base line lighting conditions and potential impact of the lighting requirements for the proposed development (Refer to Technical Appendix 7.4). An outline lighting strategy and application of mitigation measures have been included.

The existing area of proposed development is predominantly unilluminated by artificial lighting during the hours of darkness. It is envisaged that the inclusion of external lighting requirements to cater for the operational and health and safety requirements for the proposed development, would impact on the existing conditions.

Whilst a change in the current character is expected, the area of proposed development has previously been utilised for industrial and manufacturing purposes. The proposed development and its lighting would therefore be reinstating a previously accepted environmental lighting zone.

Whilst the introduction of external lighting shall have an impact on unilluminated existing areas, it is considered to be low to moderate. The lighting strategy and the design criteria proposed will ensure the night-time safety and operation in the relevant site areas and limit use of light unnecessarily to prevent being a nuisance to neighbouring properties or be of a detrimental effect on the local ecology.

It is therefore deemed that a suitable level of detail and information is provided within the Lighting Strategy for a design team to complete lighting installations that meet the requirements of the site both in terms of safe use of the site and the protection of the local ecology.

95 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Potential Effects

The existing area of proposed development is identified as a lighting environmental classification of Zone 2, Rural, low district brightness (ILP GN01:20), and would change to a classification of Zone 3, Suburban, Medium District brightness upon incorporation of the proposed development.

The area of woodland to the East of the development, the South Calder Water and residential developments to the south are noted as sensitive receptors. Appropriate lighting applications and mitigation measures are included in the lighting strategy to ensure that any undue light spill or obtrusive light, is limited and within those of the recommended by the Institute of Lighting Professionals (ILP).

An area of land as noted on the masterplan is to be enhanced and maintained for the preservation and promotion of wildlife in the strategy this area is noted as an area to be kept dark and the strategy limits light spill onto this area, The classification is maintained at zone 2 Rural, low district brightness (ILP GN01:20) as per the current conditions.

Light sources with controlled distribution are used to illumination task specific areas on and around the crane for safety and operational requirements. Glare shielding is recommended in the strategy to limit visibility of light sources and reduce the potential impact from crane mounted lighting.

Traffic and Transport

Introduction

Sweco have produced a Transport Statement to provide more detail on existing transport infrastructure, proposals and predicted trip generation (Refer to Volume 3: Technical Appendix 7.5).

The development will be accessed by an additional arm added to the New Craig Road / Planation roundabout to the north west of the site. Alongside the access road, a new active travel route will be implemented linking to the existing high-quality walking and cycling infrastructure on New Craig Road. All surrounding roads have footways, dropped kerbs and are lit. The closest bus stop is at Ravenscraig sports centre, a 15-minute walk from the development.

The development will come forward ahead of the Pan Lanarkshire Orbital Transport Corridor.

Staff will be split into three separate shift times which will be coordinated to ensure they do not start and end during network peak hours. HGV movement will be spread evenly over the 24-hour period with a minor increase between 04:00–06:00.

Potential Effects

The site is well located to encourage journeys by active travel, and these will further be supported by the implementation of Travel Plan and facilities on site. Future discussions with both North Lanarkshire Council and local bus operators will agree improvements to the public transport provision to the site to ensure sustainable travel is supported.

The development will complement the work undertaken on the Pan Lanarkshire corridor, which will bring forward upgrades to the M8 and Motherwell from the development.

As the site will operate 24 hours a day 7 days a week, staff shift times will avoid starting and ending during network peak hours therefore having a limited effect on the road network. The HGV movements spread evenly throughout

96 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report the day means there will be approximately 1 HGV either arriving or leaving every 2 minutes, again, causing minimal impact on the local network. A Transport Statement currently being prepared will quantify any impact on the surrounding road network.

Following the Transport Statement, an addendum report will be produced setting out the result of the traffic modelling being undertaken by Amey to quantify the traffic impact of the surrounding road network.

Archaeology and Cultural Heritage

Introduction

Scheduled Monuments

There are no Scheduled Monuments within proximity to the Craigneuk site.

Conservation Areas

There are no Conservation Areas within the vicinity of the proposed development. The closest conservation area is Hamilton Road Conservation Area located to the west of the site (Figure 7-1).

Figure 7-1: Hamilton Road Conservation Area

Hamilton Road Conservation Area

Historic Environment Scotland Records (HER)

There are two Historic Environment Scotland Records (HER) including;

1. Roman Road (WoSASPIN: 12158) which runs across the immediate south of the application site boundary for 2.5km from north-west to south-east through Wishaw, the road comprises Wishaw Main Street but is now obscured by residential building development (Figure 7-2).

97 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Figure 7-2: Roman Road

Roman Road

2. Bathgate to Newarthill Pipeline Study (WoSASEventID: 3190) approximately 0.6km north of the site. Archaeological evaluation conducted prior to laying of a pipeline. Several areas of archaeological interest were found within a 1 km area of the proposed line. Mitigation strategy is included within the Pipeline Study report (Figure 7-3).

Figure 7-3: Bathgate to Newarthill Pipeline Study

Pipeline Study Area

Historic Environment Scotland’s Interactive PastMaps Viewer indicates the presence of several Canmore ID records within 1km of the site, the closest of which are:

98 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

• An Unassigned Period Building ‘Watershaugh’ at South Calder Water; • 17th Century Wishaw House, associated coach house and farmstead; and • Wishaw Golf Course, Cleland Road, Wishaw.

The relative proximity of these to the disused workings are shown on Figure 7-4.

Figure 7-4: Canmore Records

South Calder Water

Wishaw House

Wishaw House, Coach House

Wishaw House, Home Farm

Wishaw Golf Course

Listed Buildings

Two listed buildings were identified within the vicinity of the proposed development including:

• Calder Bridge, Wishaw Low Road and Glen Road, Wishaw · Cat C - Mid 19th century. High and broad single span segmental-arch cart-bridge. Predominantly yellow ashlar sandstone rusticated chamfered wing walls and abuttments; arch ring, low parapets. Modern steel railings. • The Coach House Glen Road, Belhaven Estate, Wishaw. · Cat C - Mid 19th century. 2-storey, 6-bay, coach house with single storey rectangular projection to semi-enclosed main elevation, forestair leading to main entrance at 1st floor; stables and tackrooms at ground living quarters above; sandstone coursers; plain base course, dividing band between ground and 1st floor and eaves course; projected ashlar margins and quoins. Piended roof with projecting eaves (Figure 7-5).

99 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Figure 7-5: Listed Buildings

The Coach House Glen Road, Belhaven Estate, Wishaw

Calder Bridge, Wishaw Low Road a nd Glen Road, Wishaw

Potential Effects

There are no listed buildings, conservation areas of Scheduled Ancient Monuments within the site boundary. The closest site of note (on the National Monuments Record49) are understood to be the remains of Wishaw House (name as used in 2001 Environmental Statement) to the east of the proposed development. There will be no direct impact on this feature and there is not expected to be any line of sight to the development from Wishaw House.

Based upon the potential effects of the proposed development, it is considered there will be no significant Archaeology and Cultural Heritage effects.

Construction contractors will be required to adopt best practice techniques and apply a watching brief to ensure that the area of Wishaw House and key remaining features are not affected by construction activity. In the event of material of potential archaeological or historic significance being unearthed during construction North Lanarkshire Council Archaeological Services will be contacted immediately for further advice.

Population and Human Health

Introduction

In accordance with the EIA Regulations, population and human health factors are now required to be considered within EIAs. Within the UK, the standard definition of health is defined by the World Health Organisation (WHO)50 which defines health as, “a state of complete physical, mental and social wellbeing”. Many factors affect health and wellbeing. The physical and social conditions in which people live can positively or negatively impact health. Socio-economic factors include, but are not limited to, local cultural environment, education opportunities, accessibility of transport, availability of housing, employment opportunities, levels of crime, income and leisure.

49 https://canmore.org.uk/ (Accessed 20/10.2020) 50 https://www.who.int/en (Accessed 09/12/2020)

100 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

In order to improve the overall health and wellbeing of the surrounding population, it is important to recognise opportunities for improvement of health and well-being.

Whilst a history of Health Impact Assessment exists in Scotland extolled by organisations such as the Scottish Health and Inequalities Impact Assessment Network (SHIIAN)51, its crossover into EIA has not yet been tested. The development as proposed will afford employment opportunities to the local population. Given its nature and location are not expected to be any direct effects on the local population in terms of density or distribution and potential indirect effects on the local population are consider elsewhere within this EIAR (matters such as noise or air quality impacts). The only potential effect on human health arising from the development is that associated with the operations at the site which is a Health and Safety consideration rather than to be addressed through environmental assessment.

Potential Effects

The anticipated risk to human health is that associated with works at the site and possible effects (accidents) involving site workers or visitors to the site. These risks are addressed through normal health and safety procedures and risk assessments which are in place at the site and would be applied to the new development area and activities there also. Therefore, no significant environmental risks to human health are expected to result from the proposed development.

Climate Change

Introduction

There is a requirement within the EIA Regulations to incorporate factors relating to climate change. Schedule 4 (5). requires ‘A description of the likely significant effects of the development on the environment resulting from, inter alia:

(f) the impact of the project on climate (for example the nature and magnitude of greenhouse gas emissions) and the vulnerability of the project to climate change; …’

EIA Directive 2011/92/EU

The EIA Directive 2011/92/EU (as amended by EIA Directive 2014/52) states that as of May 2017, an environmental impact assessment (where relevant) must include assessment of the impact of a proposed development on climate change (for example, the nature and magnitude of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions), an assessment of the interaction between environmental impacts and climate change (in-combination assessment), and information on the vulnerability of the project to climate change.

Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009

The Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 sets a legally binding target for the Scotland by setting an interim 42% reduction target for 2020, with the power for this to be varied based on expert advice, and an 80% reduction target for 2050. Unlike the UK as a whole, which has five yearly carbon budgets, Scotland has yearly targets, set by parliament, to reach this goal.

51 Scottish Health and Inequalities Impact Assessment, SHIIAN, http:// scotphn.net

101 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

The Climate Change Plan update, which covers the period 2018 to 2032, is the third to be published since Scotland’s Climate Change Act was passed in 2009.

The carbon plan (Securing a green recovery on a path to net zero: climate change plan 2018–2032-

Update) sets Scotland’s strategy for reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by 66% compared to 1990 levels by 2032. This target, set by the Scottish Parliament in accordance with the Scottish Climate Change Act, means greenhouse gas emissions in 2032 should be no more than 26.4m tonnes CO2e (MtCO2e), including Scotland’s share of international aviation and shipping.

Annual targets

To help ensure delivery of the long-term targets, Scotland’s climate change legislation also includes annual targets for every year to net-zero. The levels of these targets (expressed as percentage reductions from the 1990/1995 baseline) are set out below:

Year Target Year Target Year Target Year Target Year Target

2020 56% 2026 67.4% 2031 76.5% 2036 84.0% 2041 92.0% (interim target)

2021 57.9% 2027 69.3% 2032 78.0% 2037 85.5% 2042 94.0%

2022 59.8% 2028 71.2% 2033 79.5% 2038 87.0% 2043 96.0%

2023 61.7% 2029 73.1% 2034 81.0% 2039 88.5% 2044 98.0%

2024 63.6% 2030 75% 2035 82.5% 2040 90% 2045 100% (interim (interim (net-zero target) target) emissions)

Potential Effects

Shifting freight from road to rail can result in significant GHG emission savings, as well as economic and safety co- benefits. The Rail Freight Strategy, published in September 2016, highlights the GHG abatement potential from modal shift from road to rail. The Strategy was supported by an assessment from Arup of the likely scale of GHG emission savings out to 2030 from shifting freight from road to rail. The study suggests that savings could be significant52.

The Arup study53 notes that each tonne of freight transported by rail reduces carbon emissions by 76 per cent compared to road and each freight train removes 43 to 76 lorries from the wider road network - meaning rail freight has significant potential to contribute to reducing UK emissions as well as building a stronger economy and improving safety by reducing lorry miles. However, achieving GHG abatement on this scale would be

52 Rail Freight Strategy: Moving Britain Ahead https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/552492/rail-freight- strategy.pdf 53 Future Potential for Modal Shift in the UK Rail Freight Market https://www.arup.com/-/media/arup/files/publications/f/future_potential_for_modal_shift_in_the_uk_rail_freight_market.pdf

102 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report contingent upon implementing major infrastructure projects, such as the proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub.

The Arup study also notes that in addition to delivering environmental benefits, increased use of rail freight could create a range of co-benefits in terms of road congestion relief and improvements to road safety reductions, as well as wider economic benefits through cheaper logistics for customers.

It is considered that the proposed development would result in a significant positive effect upon climate given the nature of the development (i.e. the removal of freight from the road network for part of the trip).

Major Accidents and Natural Disasters

The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 require an investigation of the vulnerability of the proposed development to natural disasters. The proposed development is not located within an area of significant seismic activity, nor are climatic factors prone to creating disasters such as tsunamis, hurricanes or catastrophic flooding.

Potential Effects

Given the proposed design and operational measures, which are considered and reported in the assessment, it is not anticipated that the Scheme is vulnerable to major accidents and/ or disasters which could result in significant effects on the environment.

It is recognised that existing legislation and health and safety requirements already identify risks and help protect human beings and the environment54. It is not considered that natural disasters are applicable to the proposed development and accordingly are not considered further.

54 Examples include the Construction Design and Management (CDM) 2015 Regulations

103 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

SCHEDULE OF MITIGATION

Introduction

This chapter presents a summary of the mitigation and enhancement measures identified by the specialist environmental studies throughout the EIA process. It indicates how these mitigation measures have or would be implemented. In addition to summarising mitigation, enhancement measures identified in the topic specific chapters of this EIAR are also highlighted.

The mitigation and enhancement measures included in this EIAR would be implemented during one or more of the following three broad phases of the proposed development:

• Measures incorporated during the design process; • Measures required through the construction phase; • Measures likely to be required during post-construction

Table 8-1 below provides a summary of the mitigation measures proposed for each issue identified by the EIA process. The measures are divided into the categories outlined above. It should be noted that the tables present a summary only; further details on the mitigation and enhancement measures are included within each chapter and the associated reports are included within Volume 3: Technical Appendices of this EIAR.

The Schedule is designed to provide a comprehensive summary of all construction or physical mitigation measures that would require to be carried through into the construction and operation of the proposed development, to ensure that the environmental assessment outcomes discussed throughout this EIAR are reached, e.g. to ensure that significant adverse effects are avoided where applicable and possible.

It should be noted that enhancement measures which have been suggested where appropriate throughout this EIAR have been included within the Schedule. Whilst they are actions or features which are encouraged, they are not mitigation which is required to alleviate potentially significant effects.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation detailed in each technical chapter has been summarised below.

104 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Figure 8-1: Schedule of Mitigation

Feature / Topic Mitigation Timing

Chapter 4: Ecology

A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) would be prepared post-consent and from an Construction ecological point of view contain the following measures. The CEMP may be phased, in order to concentrate directly on construction impacts in relation to specific phases of development and would be kept up to date.

All contractors should be made aware of the potential presence of protected species via a tool box talk Construction (i.e. bats, otter, badger, hedgehog, brown hare, reptiles and birds) on site and in the wider landscape.

A pre-works check of the site for bats, otter, badger, hedgehog, brown hare, reptiles and birds, should be Construction completed prior to any site works, by a suitably qualified ecologist.

Where vegetation (including woodland, grassland, shrubs and trees) clearance would be undertaken Construction during the nesting season (March to August inclusive), a pre-start nesting bird check would be carried out Construction Environmental by a suitably qualified ecologist. If nesting birds are found an appropriate buffer would be set-up and no Management Plan works can take place within this buffer until the young have fledged. (CEMP) Where the removal of woodland or vegetation is necessary, these areas would first be checked by a Construction suitably qualified ecologist to ensure that no resting mammals, in particular hedgehogs, are present.

If destruction of reptile habitat cannot be avoided then an ECoW watching brief should be undertaken Construction during the works. Should any reptiles be identified they should be translocated out of the habitat by a competent ecologist.

Retain and protect appropriate vegetative margins between works and areas of running water should be Construction implemented to reduce risk of pollution to running water and reduce impacts to potential commuting otter present in the locale.

Maximum 15mph speed restriction, within the site, to avoid otter and badger RTAs should be implemented during and post works. Construction

105 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Feature / Topic Mitigation Timing

(CEMP continued…) In the event that a protected species is discovered on site, the contractor would comply would the Construction relevant legislation and guidance. Where necessary all work in that area would stop immediately and an appropriate person contacted. Details of the NatureScot Area Officer, local police Wildlife Crime Officer and Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SSPCA) relevant Officer would be held in the site emergency procedure documents

Incidental losses of habitat may be avoided by minimising the footprint of the construction activity. This Construction would be achieved by operating machinery and storing materials within the footprint of permanent construction features wherever practicable. This would also be achieved through appropriate training of the site staff and by ensuring that vehicles and their operators do not inadvertently stray onto adjacent habitat areas

Site compounds/material or plant storage areas would be located as far as practically possible from Construction woodland and linear habitats, to reduce disturbance, effects on trees and pollution risk

Any trenches or pits made during construction (for example that may be present to lay infrastructure) Construction would be covered at the end of each working day or a wooden plank placed inside to allow any protected faunal species to escape, should it enter the hole. Any temporarily exposed open pipe system would be capped in such a way as to prevent wildlife gaining access.

Woodland and trees to be retained on site would be adequately protected to prevent damage to canopy Construction or root structures and works in their vicinity would be undertaken in accordance with Stirling Council’s standards and requirements and habitat protection measures for retaining existing woodland from construction activities i.e. Tree Protection to British Standard BS5837:2012. In brief, trees to be retained would be fenced off to prevent inappropriate access and any damage to the trees and fragile soils by heavy plant machinery.

Any works causing high levels of noise or vibration should be limited to daylight hours to reduce Construction disturbance nocturnal or diurnal species.

Measures should be in place to preserve water quality and prevent pollution of the South Calder Water Construction following SEPA Guidelines for Pollution Prevention (GPPs) and maintenance of a 5m buffer of works from the top of the banks of the watercourse.

106 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Feature / Topic Mitigation Timing

An invasive species management plan should be produced and implemented to prevent the spread of Invasive Species Japanese knotweed and rhododendron. All site personnel should be made aware of the INNS present on Construction Management Plan site and briefed on the importance of preventing its spread via a toolbox talk.

For each phase of work, an ECoW would be required to ensure that the above measures are being carried Ecological Clerk of Works (ECoW) Construction out by the contractor.

Landscaping schemes such as the ‘Green Lung’ will provide a variety of native species and habitat structure for the benefit of invertebrate species, which will support foraging opportunities for bird and Operation Landscaping and Habitat mammal species. Creation The tree lines which are being retained and also those which are to be planted (including any hedgerows) would be subject to ongoing maintenance post-construction in order to maintain the wildlife corridors Operation across the site.

Chapter 5: Noise

Due to the location of the existing railway line and crossing under the railway line for site entrance, a number of key noise sources cannot be moved. Reduce / relocate existing sources However, measures have been taken to reduce noise levels at source. The crane will be powered Design (Included where practicable) electrically, rather than from diesel generators, with a significant resultant reduction in noise levels, particularly low frequency noise. Freight movements will run on electric power outside of the site boundaries, with a resultant reduction in change in railway noise levels.

The site design includes a green lung. This green lung extends approximately 100 metres into the Increase distance to source Ravenscraig Masterplan Area and provides significant additional distance, over which noise levels are Design attenuated. This has been included as a principle design of the Ravenscraig Rail and Logistics Hub.

The topography of the site, including the elevated railway line effectively attenuates noise from sources Use topography / existing features to close to the ground. There are a number of sources, such as the cranes and locomotive engines, which will Design screen noise not benefit from topographic screening.

107 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Feature / Topic Mitigation Timing

Acoustic barriers It is anticipated that acoustic barriers might be required, although this will be confirmed in the full assessment. (Potential to be recommended, based Design on findings of full noise impact assessment)

It is recommended that best practice construction noise management techniques should be employed Construction Environmental following guidance provided in BS5228-1:2009, and that the general principles of the Considerate Construction Management Plan Constructors Scheme be incorporated into the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).

Chapter 6: Air Quality

To be confirmed following modelling and assessment

Chapter 7: Topic not Requiring Full EIA

Ground Conditions No Mitigation is proposed N/A

Water Environment A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) will be developed to include surface water management and pollution prevention measures (e.g. Pollution Prevention Plan) and will be in place during construction and operation. The CEMP will remain a live document and will be continually updated Construction as the work progresses. The CEMP is a practical tool to facilitate the management of environmental Construction Environmental mitigation measures and to provide a clear roadmap of the key roles and responsibilities during Management Plan construction.

A suitably qualified Environmental Clerk of Works (EnvCoW) will monitor the construction works to ensure Construction that the CEMP and associated mitigation measures are being implemented effectively.

Best practice will be adopted throughout all phases of development, following current guidance. The programme of works, including timing, direction and construction methods, will be planned, monitored Construction and managed to minimise the potential negative environmental impacts.

108 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Feature / Topic Mitigation Timing

(Water: CEMP continued…) A Pollution Incident Response Plan will be developed relating to the construction of the proposed development, statutory requirements and identification of areas of highest sensitivity. This will provide site spill response procedures, emergency contact details and equipment inventories and their location. Construction All staff will be made aware of this document and its content during site induction. A copy will be available in the site office at all times.

An Operational Environmental Management Document (OEMD) will be in place throughout the Operational Environmental operational phase. Best practice will be followed throughout the operational phase, with reference to the Operation Management Document (OEMD) SEPA Guidance for Pollution Prevention (GPPs), and best practice guidance.

Drainage The most onerous classification within the SEPA SIA Tool in relation to the site is “Highly frequented lorry approaches to industrial estates”. The required mitigation involves a combination of filter drains and Design detention basins (or ponds). Areas wherever possible will also be treated via roadside swales to further supplement treatment.

Landscape and Visual To help minimise any adverse landscape and visual effects on the surrounding landscape, the building Design heights have been designed as low-lying as feasibly possible. Protection of the woodland to the north and east perimeters through sensitive siting and to help secure the long-term retention and good management of surrounding woodland, creation of a “green lung” that acts as a physical buffer between the rail line and the land adjacent to the west (proposed designated for residential development). This would over-compensate for woodland loss resulting from the development of the rail hub and details of the proposed planting are set out in Green Lung: Woodland Creation Plan. Other objectives of the plan include: • Achieve biodiversity net gain within the development design and operation; • Increase native woodland cover to contribute to national targets and climate change • mitigation; Design • Increase the number of permanent open water habitats in the area; • Increase habitat for flora and fauna, including reptiles (to meet the requirements of a consultee • response1); • Increase habitat connectivity where recent land use was industrial; • Promote regenerating woodland alongside new planting; and • Increase high quality countryside access in respect to an existing Woodland In and Around Towns (WIAT) management plan2.

109 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

Feature / Topic Mitigation Timing

(Landscape and Visual continued…) The proposed landscape strategy within Phase 1 is to enhance the setting for the HQ Office and training facility located towards the northern perimeter. This also acts as an attractive frontage to the gateway development when viewed from the access road of by pedestrians accessing the surrounding woodland areas. SUDs ponds are integrating into the landscape design within this development frontage Design to provide new standing water habitat within the area. Other native tree and shrub planting throughout the site will encourage wildlife and help to soften the appearance of large buildings and other infrastructure. It is expected that other relevant landscape mitigation measures would also be considered as part of a Construction Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) to be provided post-consent Traffic and Transport No Mitigation is proposed at this time, however, an addendum Transportation Assessment will be produced to support the application

Lighting The proposed lighting strategy would mitigate the possibilities of undue light spill and obtrusive light Construction/ Operation within the dedicated Lighting Environmental Zones proposed. Benefits would include the accessibility to areas within the Ravenscraig development which are currently limited with no illumination and lack of way finding or signage to assists the public in navigation within this area.

Archaeology & Cultural Heritage Apply a watching brief. Construction

Population and Human Health No Mitigation is proposed

Climate Change No Mitigation is proposed

Major Accidents and No Mitigation is proposed Natural Disasters

110 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

SUMMARY OF EFFECTS

The predicted environmental effects related to the construction and operation of the proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub have been considered throughout the design and subsequent assessment of the development layout. The views of statutory consultees have been taken into account as presented in Chapter 3: EIA Methodology and Consultation.

The final design of the proposed development has been subject to a detailed EIA and design iteration process which has sought to minimise the effects resulting from the proposed development whilst ensuring the maximum benefits to the environment, the proposed and nearby communities, and future generations can be made. Where appropriate, additional mitigation measures have been proposed as well as opportunities for enhancement. Both mitigation and enhancement measures are detailed within their respective specific chapters of this EIAR and summaries within Chapter 8: Schedule of Mitigation of this EIAR.

Due to the iterative design process undertaken for the proposed development, where possible ecological features have been retained, protected and incorporated into the design of the proposed development. Examples of this includes the “Green Lung” within the proposed development as compensation for the loss of ancient woodland areas. During the construction phases of the proposed development, locally significant effects are predicted in relation to badgers and western European hedgehog through disturbance of habitat, displacement from habitat, injury/fatality, and potential contamination of fresh water drinking sources. Appropriate site design measures have been applied and precautionary working methods would be implemented to minimise the potential impacts of the proposed development upon ecological interests.

As detailed within Chapter 4: Ecology of this EIAR no significant effects/ local significant effects were predicted upon designated areas or their qualifying Important Ecological Features (IEFs); subject to the mitigation measures identified throughout the chapter being applied, primarily through a Construction Environmental Management Plan. The proposed mitigation measures are assessed as having a certain/near certain level of success and have been devised with reference to academic literature, best practice and further supporting evidence from similar developments. Following this mitigation, adverse effects will therefore not be significant.

The forthcoming full technical assessment will assess the impact of changes to road traffic noise, changes to railway noise and operational noise. Any cumulative impacts identified will be assessed with the findings presented.

A statement of significance will be provided following the completion of the full noise impact assessment, which will be conducted upon receipt of the transport model which is still being consulted upon.

The forthcoming air quality assessment will assess the impact of changes to road traffic on air quality. Any cumulative impacts identified will be assessed with the findings presented.

A statement of significance will be provided following the completion of the air quality assessment, which will be conducted upon receipt of the transport model which is still being consulted upon.

Chapter 7: Topics not Requiring Full EIA, covers topics including ground conditions, water environment, drainage, landscape and visual, lighting, traffic and transport, archaeology and cultural heritage, population and human health, climate change, and major accidents and natural disasters. None of these aspects are considered significant in terms of the EIA Regulations.

Subject to the mitigation measures specified within Chapter 8: Schedule of Mitigation there are anticipated to be no significant effects across topics currently assessed, with exception of landscape and visual effects.

111 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

As evidenced throughout the LVA (Volume 3: Technical Appendix 7.3), no significant effects are predicted on any landscape character types or landscape designations. Of particular relevance, former and current industrial sites are a key characteristic of the Urban Fringe Farmland LCT and in association with the visual influence of the urban edge and transport infrastructure, much of the landscape exhibits a damaged and fragmented character. As such, the proposed development would be typical to the landscape, with often little change to its key characteristics.

Subject to the mitigation measures specified within Chapter 8: Schedule of Mitigation (where required) there are anticipated to be no significant effects across the topics currently considered. Further appraisal of noise and air quality effects is ongoing and shall be reported as Supplementary Environmental Information for consideration in due course.

112 John G Russell (Transport) Limited March 2021 Proposed Ravenscraig Rail Head and Logistics Hub: Phase One; Environmental Impact Assessment Report

REFERENCES

The Scottish Government (2006). Planning Advice Note PAN 51 (Revised 2006): Planning, Environmental Protection and Regulation. The Scottish Government.

DEFRA (2009a). Local Air Quality Management; Technical Guidance (TG09) (No. LAQM.TG(09)).

London: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

DEFRA (2009b). Local Air Quality Management; Policy Guidance (PG09) (No. LAQM.PG(09)). London: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

DEFRA (2018). Local Air Quality Management - Technical Guidance (TG16). London: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

EPUK, & IAQM (2017). Land-Use Planning & Development Control: Planning For Air Quality. London:

Environmental Protection UK and Institute of Air Quality Management

Air Quality in Scotland (2019, August). Data for Local Authority Review and Assessment Purposes. Air

Quality in Scotland. Retrieved from http://www.scottishairquality.co.uk/data/mapping?view=data

DEFRA (2019, August) Background Maps. Retrieved from https://laqm.defra.gov.uk/review- andassessment/tools/background-maps.html

113