Iamp Two Eia Scoping Report

REPORT IAMP TWO EIA SCOPING REPORT

Submitted to: IAMP LLP

Submitted by: Golder Associates (UK) Ltd Golder House Tadcaster Enterprise Park, Station Road, Tadcaster, North Yorkshire, LS24 9JF, UK

+44 0 1937 837800

1895128.601/A.0

September 2018

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

Distribution List IAMP LLP - 1 pdf

Lichfields - 1 pdf

Golder - 1 pdf

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1

1.1 Background ...... 1

1.2 IAMP ...... 1

1.3 Evolution of IAMP ONE and TWO ...... 2

1.4 The Need for the Proposed Development ...... 4

1.5 Requirement for Environmental Assessment ...... 4

1.6 Objectives of Scoping ...... 4

2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 5

2.1 Description of the Proposed Site...... 5

2.2 IAMP Masterplan and Parameters ...... 7

2.3 Description of the Proposed Development ...... 8

3.0 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ...... 17

4.0 PLANNING POLICY ...... 19

4.1 National Policy...... 19

4.2 Local Policy ...... 19

5.0 POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ...... 20

5.1 Overview ...... 20

5.2 Air Quality ...... 20

5.3 Noise ...... 24

5.4 Landscape and Visual ...... 27

5.5 Cultural Heritage ...... 30

5.6 Waste ...... 32

5.7 Water Resources and Flood Risk ...... 33

5.8 Geology, Ground Condition and Groundwater ...... 35

5.9 Ecology and Biodiversity ...... 37

5.10 Access and Transport ...... 40

5.11 Socio-Economics ...... 49

5.12 Cumulative and Combined Effects ...... 53

6.0 STUDY AREA EXTENTS ...... 54

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

7.0 NON-SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ...... 55

7.1 Overview ...... 55

7.2 Health Effects ...... 55

7.3 Risks and Hazards ...... 56

7.4 Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change ...... 57

7.5 Issues Related to Tall Buildings (Aviation and Electronic Interference) ...... 57

7.6 Radiation ...... 58

8.0 SUMMARY OF SCOPE ...... 59

9.0 EIA PROCESS ...... 59

9.1 Methodology ...... 59

9.2 ES Structure ...... 60

10.0 SUMMARY ...... 61

11.0 ABBREVIATIONS ...... 62

TABLES Table 1: Schedule of Plans for IAMP TWO Scoping...... 7 Table 2: DEFRA estimated background pollutant concentrations for 2018 ...... 21 Table 3: Diffusion Tube Locations ...... 23 Table 4: Other Developments identified (to date) for potential inclusion in the cumulative assessment ...... 53 Table 5: Study Area Extent by Discipline ...... 54 Table 6: Non-significant Environmental Issues and Justification for Exclusion from Scope ...... 58 Table 7: Summary of Scope ...... 59

FIGURES Figure 1: Extent of micro-simulation traffic model ...... 42

APPENDICES DRAWINGS Drawing 1: IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary Drawing 2: IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary and Identified Environmental Receptors Drawing 3: Installed Diffusion Tube Locations Drawing 4: Landscape and Visual Study Area Drawing 5: Extent of Proposed Geophysical Survey

iii

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

Drawing 6: Ecology - Statutory Designated Sites within 10 km of IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary APPENDIX A Explanatory Plan Development Plots Highways England A19 DCO Projects and IAMP

Front image supplied under licence: Andrey Armyagov © 123RF.com

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background 1.1.1 Golder Associates (UK) Limited (Golder) has been commissioned by IAMP LLP (the Applicant) to produce an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Scoping Report to inform the scope and content of an EIA for the proposed IAMP TWO Development Consent Order (DCO) Application.

1.1.2 IAMP TWO forms part of the International Advanced Manufacturing Park (IAMP) being promoted in Sunderland and South Tyneside. The evolution of IAMP as a whole and its relationship with other nationally significant projects nearby are summarised in Section 1.3 below.

1.1.3 This Scoping Report:  Presents a detailed description of IAMP TWO and alternatives that have been considered;  Defines the planning context in which the IAMP TWO DCO Application is being made;  Outlines our current understanding of the existing environmental conditions at IAMP TWO (defined as all the land within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary); and  Identifies those environmental issues that are considered likely to have significant effects and that therefore need to be included within the scope of the EIA for IAMP TWO.

1.1.4 For each identified potentially significant environmental issue, the proposed scope of the EIA assessment and assessment methodology have been included.

1.1.5 This Scoping Report has been produced in line with the recommendations provided in The Planning Inspectorate Advice Note 71 and The Planning Inspectorate Advice Note 172.

1.1.6 EIA provides a means of drawing together the findings from a systematic analysis of the likely significant environmental effects of a scheme to assist the Planning Inspectorate (PINS), local authorities and officers, statutory consultees and other key stakeholders, including the public and nearby residents and businesses, in their understanding of the effects arising from the construction and operation of IAMP TWO.

1.1.7 EIA is an iterative process that informs and adapts the project’s design to ensure environmental effects are reduced as far as practicable. The final design iteration, and associated EIA findings, will be reported in an Environmental Statement (ES) in accordance with the Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 (the 2017 Regulations) and submitted with the DCO Application in accordance with Regulation 5(2)(a) of the Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009. 1.2 IAMP 1.2.1 The IAMP represents a unique opportunity to the automotive and advanced manufacturing sectors in the UK. Located next to the UK’s largest and most productive car manufacturing plant at Nissan, the IAMP will provide a bespoke, world class environment for the automotive supply chain and related advanced manufacturers. The IAMP will contribute significantly to the long-term economic success of the North East of England and the national automotive sector.

1 The Planning Inspectorate (2017). Advice Note Seven: Environmental Impact Assessment: Process, Preliminary Environmental Information and Environmental Statements. 2 The Planning Inspectorate (2015). Advice Note Seventeen: Cumulative effects assessment relevant to nationally significant infrastructure projects.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

1.2.2 The IAMP is located on approximately 300 ha of land to the north of Nissan within the administrative boundaries of Sunderland City Council (SCC) and South Tyneside Council (STC).

1.2.3 The IAMP Area Action Plan (AAP) 2017 - 2032 was adopted on 30 November 2017 and provides for the comprehensive development of IAMP. This includes employment development of approximately 392,000 sq m of floorspace, on 150 ha of the site, for uses that relate to the automotive and advanced manufacturing sectors. It also provides for an extensive ecological and landscape mitigation area (ELMA), which is of around 110 ha, to come forward alongside the employment development.

1.2.4 The location and extent of IAMP can be seen on the Explanatory Plan in Appendix A.

1.2.5 The IAMP is to be delivered through a joint venture between each council, known as IAMP LLP, in conjunction with its developer partner Henry Boot Developments Limited.

1.2.6 The focus of investment across the IAMP is for automotive and advanced manufacturing uses. Recent announcements by Nissan in respect of new model production at the Sunderland plant will increase output by approximately 20% and will require an extensive supplier base to be located in the UK and in close proximity to the existing Nissan plant. The Applicant is working closely with Nissan, the UK government at national and regional levels, and government agencies such as Highways England (HE) and the Environment Agency (EA), in the development of the IAMP.

1.2.7 The IAMP proposals are to create a world class location where automotive supply chain and advanced manufacturing businesses will innovate and thrive, benefiting from cluster colocation. The overall development will create around approximately 7,850 jobs from companies within these sectors that will benefit from being close to Nissan and from the infrastructure and skilled workforce that exists and will be trained for the future in this location.

1.2.8 It was originally intended that an application would be made for a DCO for the whole of IAMP. The following sections explain how and why that positon changed. 1.3 Evolution of IAMP ONE and TWO 1.3.1 A direction from the Secretary of State (SoS) under the Planning Act 2008 (PA2008) designating the IAMP as a project of national significance was issued in September 2015. The effect of the designation was that the IAMP needed to be consented by way of a DCO, pursuant to and in accordance with the PA2008. At that time, early in the design process, the boundary of IAMP (including the ELMA) was larger than it is today.

1.3.2 In August 2016 a scoping request was submitted by the Applicant for the whole (larger) IAMP site and the responding Scoping Opinion was received from PINS in September 2016. That Scoping Opinion remains on the National Infrastructure Planning website pages for IAMP.

1.3.3 Subsequently, it became apparent that there was an increased urgency for IAMP following the announcements from Nissan that additional car models, including the new generation Qashqai, X-Trail, and all-electric Leaf models, as well as the previously announced new generation Juke model, will be manufactured at Sunderland. Accordingly, a variation to the original direction was sought that would amend the designation of the IAMP, in order to allow development within a portion of the AAP boundary to be brought forward sooner pursuant to a planning application under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The varied direction was issued in December 2017. The first phase of development, known as IAMP ONE, received planning permission in May 2018 and the development is currently underway. The extent of IAMP ONE is shown on the Explanatory Plan in Appendix A.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

1.3.4 The second, larger, phase of the IAMP is known as IAMP TWO and will be brought forward by way of a DCO. IAMP TWO is the focus of this Scoping Report, which is being submitted to take into account the revisions to the IAMP Project. The initial Scoping Opinion provided by PINS in September 2016, including the consultation responses contained within it, has been used to inform this Scoping Report.

1.3.5 It will be noted that the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary currently includes land within IAMP ONE and that part of the ELMA related to it. That is to allow for any interface between IAMP TWO and IAMP ONE to be consented through the DCO as ‘associated development’. Potential examples include highway tie-ins and utility connections. Such interfaces are expected to be minimal. They will be defined further as the design process for IAMP TWO progresses.

1.3.6 IAMP ONE has already been the subject of an ES which was part of its planning application. We have had regard to that ES in preparing this Scoping Report.

A19 Junction Improvements 1.3.7 The A19 trunk road lies immediately to the east of IAMP.

1.3.8 To relieve congestion and improve road safety on the Strategic Road Network (SRN), HE is proposing improvements to the A19/A184 Testo’s Junction and A19 Downhill Lane Junction, which are adjacent to IAMP. These projects are also both classified as 'Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects' (NSIPs) under the PA2008 and, as such, these projects each require a DCO.

1.3.9 The DCO boundaries of both HE projects interact with the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary (as presented in Appendix A; Highways England A19 DCO Projects and IAMP), although the A19/A184 Testo’s Junction Improvement is currently anticipated by HE to be constructed and operational prior to the commencement of construction activities for IAMP TWO. There will be some cross-over during the construction phases of IAMP TWO and HE’s A19 Downhill Lane Junction Improvement scheme.

Interfaces with Identified Schemes 1.3.10 IAMP TWO will have an inter-relationship with the following development proposals in the surrounding area:  IAMP ONE Phase 1 – a scheme for automotive and advanced manufacturing units on 61 ha of land. The hybrid planning application for IAMP ONE, including detailed and outline elements, was granted planning permission in May 2018 and this development is currently under construction;  IAMP ONE Phase 2 – this is a development plot at the south-western corner of IAMP ONE which was not included in the IAMP ONE planning application boundary. Development of this land is to be brought forward via a planning application to be submitted during 20193. The extent of IAMP ONE Phase 2 is shown on the Explanatory Plan in Appendix A;  A19/A184 Testo’s Junction Improvement – the SoS granted development consent for HE’s NSIP on 12 September 2018; and  A19 Downhill Lane Junction Improvement – a separate DCO application will be made by HE in 2018.

3 The Secretary of State’s Variation to the existing S35 Direction dated 5 December 2017 confirmed that the IAMP ONE, including this development plot, was to be brought forward via planning applications.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

1.4 The Need for the Proposed Development 1.4.1 In lieu of a National Policy Statement, the need for the IAMP at a regional and national level has been established through the examination and adoption of the IAMP AAP.

1.4.2 The need for the IAMP is also demonstrated at a national and regional level through the signing of the City Deal. This was signed between Sunderland City Council, South Tyneside Council and the Government in 2014, with delivery of the IAMP one of the five key aims.

1.4.3 The IAMP proposals will create approximately 7,850 jobs for companies within the automotive and advanced manufacturing sectors. Businesses in the UK automotive and advanced manufacturing sector will benefit from cluster co-location, in addition to being close to Nissan and to the infrastructure and skilled workforce that will be trained for the future at the IAMP. The IAMP will contribute to achieving key objectives of the Government’s Industrial Strategy, its Northern Powerhouse agenda, and the North East Local Enterprise Partnership’s Strategic Economic Plan. This represents a significant step towards economic growth in the UK and the north of England. 1.5 Requirement for Environmental Assessment 1.5.1 IAMP TWO has been designated as nationally significant by the SoS under Section 35 of the PA2008 and will be delivered by a Development Consent Order (DCO) under the PA2008.

1.5.2 IAMP TWO is a ‘Schedule 2 industrial estate development project’ pursuant to Part 10 (a) of Schedule 2 of the 2017 Regulations. For such developments, and in accordance with Schedule 3, an EIA is required in situations where the development is likely to have significant effects on the environment by virtue of factors such as its nature, size or location.

1.5.3 An ES must therefore be prepared in accordance with the 2017 Regulations to accompany the DCO application. 1.6 Objectives of Scoping 1.6.1 This Scoping Report has been prepared as part of a request to PINS for a formal Scoping Opinion on what information should be provided in the ES pursuant to Regulation 10 of the 2017 Regulations. The objectives of the scoping process are to:  Consider baseline environmental conditions;  Identify receptors potentially sensitive to adverse effects as the result of the proposed IAMP TWO development;  Identify the potential significant adverse effects resulting from the proposed IAMP TWO development; and  Distinguish the priority issues to be addressed in the ES.

1.6.2 With due consideration to the recommendations made in PINS Advice Note 74 and Insert 2 on page 8 of the Advice Note: “Information to be provided with a scoping request” , the information provided in this Scoping Report (including its location within the document) is summarised below:  The proposed IAMP TWO development;

4 The Planning Inspectorate (2017). Advice Note Seven: Environmental Impact Assessment: Process, Preliminary Environmental Information and Environmental Statements.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

 An explanation of the design parameters that will be used to address uncertainty is presented in Section 2.2;  The plans presented in Appendix A, consisting of the Explanatory Plan and Development Plots, as well as Drawings 1 – 6, provide referenced plans that clearly convey the information and all known features associated with the site for IAMP TWO;  EIA Approach, Topic Areas and Information Sources;  Project alternatives are discussed in Section 3.0;  Local and national planning policy is defined in Section 4.0;  Details of those aspects to be scoped into the EIA, including assessment methodologies, are presented in Section 5.0;  Baseline information, where currently available, has been presented in Section 5.0;  Avoidance or mitigation measures that have been recommended, are presented in Section 5.0;  The proposed coverage of the study areas is summarised in Section 6.0;  Details and justification for those aspects to be scoped out of the EIA are presented in Section 7.0;  A summary table of those aspects scoped into and out of the EIA is presented in Section 8.0; and  The proposed structure of the ES is set out in Section 9.2.

1.6.3 The scoping exercise has been carried out by competent EIA professionals using currently available information on the proposed IAMP TWO Site, and the scale and nature of the proposed IAMP TWO development.

1.6.4 As noted previously, the EIA process is both iterative and integral to the overall final design of IAMP TWO. Whilst the Applicant has confidence in the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary (as shown in Drawing 1) and the parameters shown on the Explanatory Plan and Development Plots drawings (Appendix A), further detail of the design and layout of IAMP TWO will be addressed in the Applicant’s preliminary environmental information and consulted upon in due course.

2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 Description of the Proposed Site Location 2.1.1 IAMP TWO will be located on agricultural land to the north of the existing Nissan car manufacturing plant, to the west of the A19, to the south of the A184, as shown on Drawings 1 and 2. The Ordnance Survey grid reference for the centre point of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary is NZ 33382 59425 (433382 E, 559425 N) and encompasses an area of 297.5 ha (2,975,000 m2). This area is expected to reduce significantly prior to the DCO Application, once the extent of associated development for IAMP TWO, within IAMP ONE and the IAMP ONE ELMA, is defined.

2.1.2 The IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary straddles the administrative boundaries of Sunderland City Council (SCC) and South Tyneside Council (STC).

2.1.3 The site is bounded as follows:

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

 To the south by the A1290, with Nissan lying beyond. The land incorporating the North East Land, Sea and Air Museums (NELSAM) along the southern boundary is not included in IAMP TWO. The NELSAM will be retained as a visitor attraction in accordance with Policy S2 of the AAP;  To the east by the A19, except for an area of land to the east of the A19, which has been included for the purposes of the interaction between IAMP TWO and the adjoining A19 Downhill Lane Junction Improvement scheme. This area is also the landing point for the new bridge over the A19 to be provided by IAMP TWO. Beyond the A19, further to the east, are residential areas of Sunderland; and  To the west and north by agricultural land. The residential areas of Sulgrave and Usworth Hall, as well as the Stephenson Industrial Estate, lie beyond to the west. The Usworth Hall estate contains Usworth Hall, a Grade II listed building. Strother House Farm is located to the northwest of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. The A184 runs east-west to the north of IAMP TWO.

Land Use 2.1.4 The IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary contains multiple fields in arable cultivation, which are bounded by hedgerows and scattered trees. There are also small patches of woodland located throughout the northern area of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary, in particular around Elliscope Farm. The River Don, and a tributary to the River Don, are situated centrally within the IAMP TWO Site, orientated generally east-west. Most of the agricultural land within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary has been classified as Grade 3b, with small areas of Grade 3a and Grade 2 in the northwest area of the Site.

2.1.5 Follingsby Lane runs southeast to northwest through IAMP ONE, from its junction with the A1290 to Hylton Grove Bridge. North of Hylton Grove Bridge, Follingsby Lane turns westwards on an east-west orientation, through the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary and on towards the A194(M). Immediately south of Hylton Grove Bridge, Downhill Lane connects with Follingsby Lane and runs east-west to reconnect with the A1290 near the A19. Residential properties within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary include North Moor Farm, West Moor Farm, Usworth Cottages and the Chalet, the White House, Hylton Bridge Farm, Hylton Grove Farm, Elliscope Farm and Make-Me-Rich Farm. The Three Horse Shoes public house is located within The Hub area of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary, adjacent to the NELSAM. Access to residential buildings, farms and the public house is provided from the A1290, Follingsby Lane and Downhill Lane.

Cultural Heritage and Ecology 2.1.6 The IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary contains one cultural heritage asset that is subject to a statutory heritage designation of national or international importance. Hylton Grove Bridge, which crosses the River Don to the north of Hylton Bridge Farm, is a Grade II Listed Building and is located centrally within the IAMP TWO Site. There are no other statutory heritage designations within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary.

2.1.7 There are no statutory protected habitats within the IAMP TWO Site. However, there are three International/European designated sites within 10 km, five Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) within 3 km and two Local Nature Reserves within 2 km. There are two non-statutory Local Wildlife Sites (LWS), Elliscope Farm/Hylton Bridge and The River Don, East House, located within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. Both LWSs are located along the riparian corridor of the River Don, within the area of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary that is designated for ecological and landscape mitigation (the Ecological and Landscape Mitigation Area – ELMA).

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

Recreational Route 2.1.8 A section of the Great North Forest Heritage Trail runs along Follingsby Lane and Downhill Lane. This is a circular cycle and walking route which travels through the countryside of this former mining area in Tyne and Wear. The trail is 105 km (65 miles) long and travels along Follingsby Lane to West Boldon, South Shields, Whitburn, Witherwack, Herrington, Hetton-le-Hole, East Rainton, Picktree, Rickleton, Beamish, Kibblesworth and Springwell. The route passes the Penshaw Monument, Lumley Castle and Beamish Museum. 2.2 IAMP Masterplan and Parameters 2.2.1 To provide the Applicant with sufficient flexibility to accommodate the specific requirements of future occupiers, which at this stage are largely not known, the ‘Rochdale Envelope’ principles are being followed for this DCO application. As explained in PINS Advice Note 95, the three key principles of the Rochdale Envelope legal cases6 are that:  The assessment should be based on a cautious ‘worst case’ approach;  The level of information provided should be “sufficient to enable to the ‘main’ or ‘likely significant’ effects” to be assessed; and  The need for flexibility should not be abused.

2.2.2 In accordance with these principles, broad parameter plans have been established (presented in Appendix A) that provide as complete a description of the scheme as is possible at this stage, whilst still allowing the needs of as-yet-undetermined future occupiers to be met. It is based upon these design parameters that this report has been developed.

2.2.3 The Applicant is preparing a design code and indicative masterplan which will be the subject of statutory consultation in due course. Those documents will also inform the preparation of the Applicant’s PEIR. The Applicant would expect the DCO for IAMP TWO (if granted) to include requirements securing the delivery of IAMP TWO in accordance with approved parameters and the final design code.

2.2.4 The plans to be considered as part of this scoping process for IAMP TWO are included in Appendix A, with a summary in Table 1.

Table 1: Schedule of Plans for IAMP TWO Scoping.

Drawing Title Drawing Number Date Comments/Notes

Explanatory Plan 1072-URBED-Z2-00-DR-U- 18/09/2018 Identifies the ‘zones’ of Explanatory Plan development/other uses.

Development Plots 1072-URBED-Z2-00-DR-U- 18/09/2018 Considers the ‘natural Development Plots capacity’ of the northern and southern zones of development.

5 The Planning Inspectorate (2018). Advice Note Nine: Rochdale Envelope. 6 The ‘Rochdale Envelope’ principles emanate from two cases: R v Rochdale MBC ex part Milne (No.1) and R v Rochdale MBC ex parte Tew (1999) and R v Rochdale MBC ex parte Milne (No.2) (2000) that related to outline planning applications for a business park in Rochdale.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

2.2.5 Where there remains any variance within the defined parameters, the ‘worst case’ scenario will be assessed within the ES. For example, where the parameters provide for a maximum height for buildings, it is assumed that, unless specified otherwise, all buildings will be assessed using the maximum height, for the purposes of the EIA.

2.2.6 The IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary represents the worst-case scenario, in that it is the maximum envelope for the IAMP TWO project of national significance and any associated development.

2.2.7 Additionally, a plan that illustrates the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary and the boundaries of the adjacent DCO schemes being promoted by HE (A19/A184 Testo’s Junction Improvement and A19 Downhill Lane Junction Improvement) has been included within Appendix A (Highways England A19 DCO Projects and IAMP). 2.3 Description of the Proposed Development 2.3.1 This section provides a description of the proposed development within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary and for ease of reference is split into the following sub-sections:  Demolition of Existing Buildings;  Highways and Access: . Highways Works;

. Structures;

. Orders;

. Highway Lighting;

. Non-motorised Users;

. Public Transport; and

. Road Construction Proposals.  Floorspace and Land Uses: . Principal and Supporting Uses;

. The Hub and Ancillary Uses; and

. Floorspace and Development Zones.  Heights and Levels;  Design Code and Building Design;  Ecological and Landscape Mitigation Area (ELMA);  Other Infrastructure: . Drainage;

. Utilities; and

. General Green Infrastructure  Sustainability.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

Demolition of Existing Buildings 2.3.2 The following properties will require demolition during the construction phase of IAMP TWO (see Drawing 2):  Make-Me-Rich Farm, located to the west side of the A19 (Northern Employment Area);  Usworth Cottages and The Chalet, located to the east side of the A1290 (Southern Employment Area); and  The outbuildings and bridge at Elliscope Farm, north of the River Don (IAMP TWO ELMA).

2.3.3 The farmhouse at Elliscope Farm is to be retained and incorporated within the IAMP TWO design for non-residential uses. However, this structure and the buildings requiring demolition will all be unoccupied prior to the start of construction works and will not be considered as residential receptors in the assessment.

2.3.4 As part of the IAMP ONE Phase 2 proposals, West Moor Farm to the immediate north of Nissan will be demolished. This property is owned by the Applicant and vacant possession will be secured in the final quarter of 2018. This building will not be considered as a residential receptor in the assessment.

Highways and Access Highways Works7 2.3.5 The A1290 would be widened along its eastern side to form a dual carriageway, with the existing A1290 becoming the northbound lanes. The dual carriageway would tie-in with the A19 Downhill Lane Junction to the north and run southward before tapering back to a single carriageway near West Moor Farm. Widening to the western side of the A1290 is not feasible due to the presence of high voltage over-head utility lines.

2.3.6 From the A1290, two new spine roads will be created into IAMP TWO. To the east, this will be constructed on embankments to pass over the A19 to meet Washington Road on the eastern side of the A19. The existing road level on Washington Road to the east of the A19 would be raised by approximately 3.5 m to meet the new bridge and link road.

2.3.7 A new single carriageway road will also be constructed from this spine road to link the eastern end of the Nissan car park with the proposed IAMP TWO road network, with a new junction formed within Nissan.

2.3.8 To the west of the A1290, the junction that has been created at the A1290 by IAMP ONE will be extended and become traffic signal controlled. The partial spine road will be extended to the west and north, providing access to the IAMP TWO development area in the north of the site, across the River Don.

Structures 2.3.9 New embankments would be required to raise the level of Washington Road to the east of the A19 and for the new link road to the west, to support the new bridge which will pass over the A19. The new road level on Washington Road would be approximately 3.5 m higher than the existing and the new link road to the west would be approximately 7 m higher than the existing ground level.

7 The description given here represents the current highway layout proposals. Whilst the final scheme is expected to be very similar to that described, design development is on-going and as such, some aspects of the final scheme may vary.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

2.3.10 A new single span concrete bridge structure with steel beams will be constructed over the A19 to link Washington Road in the east with the new IAMP TWO highway network.

2.3.11 A new vehicular bridge will also be constructed over the River Don to allow connection of the northern employment area with the southern employment area.

Orders 2.3.12 IAMP TWO will necessitate the stopping-up of a section of Downhill Lane between Hylton Bridge Farm and the A1290. IAMP TWO may also require the restriction of vehicles heading north from the Northern Employment Area of the site along West Pastures Lane towards the A184.

Highways Lighting 2.3.13 The proposed new highway infrastructure will have street lighting in accordance with the Local Highway Authority design standards and the design code required by the IAMP AAP. As the road passes over the River Don bridge, low level lighting will be used.

Non-motorised Users 2.3.14 A section of the existing Great North Forest Heritage Trail crosses IAMP TWO and cannot be retained on its existing alignment. Options are being developed that consider a re-routing of this bridleway to connect back into the network.

2.3.15 New ground-level, signal-controlled crossings suitable for relevant non-motorised users (NMUs), including equestrians, are being considered on the A1290 and across the rest of the new highway infrastructure within IAMP TWO. NMUs will be able to cross the A19 via the new bridge forming part of the IAMP TWO development. The final design for NMU provision has not yet been completed; this final design will be informed, in part, by further baseline and options study, both during and as part of the EIA process, consultation with NMU groups and through ongoing discussions with HE on the A19 Downhill Lane Junction Improvement DCO.

Public Transport 2.3.16 A Public Transport Working Group (PTWG) has been established, chaired by IAMP LLP, to formulate a strategy for delivery of public transport improvements across IAMP to integrate the new job opportunities with existing communities. The PTWG includes representatives from the local authorities of Sunderland, South Tyneside and Gateshead, NEXUS (the Tyne and Wear Passenger Transport Executive) and IAMP LLP.

2.3.17 A key function of the PTWG is to progress the public transport debate and the necessary requirements to be included within the DCO for IAMP TWO. The key objectives of the PTWG will be:  For NEXUS to review and update the findings of its 2016 IAMP Public Transport Options Study. This will identify the appropriate bus service provision that is deliverable and viable for IAMP TWO, and is in accordance with Policy T3 of the IAMP AAP;  Develop an agreed position between IAMP LLP, the local authorities, bus operators and NEXUS on public transport provision for IAMP as a whole, to enable the preferred solution and governance structure to be included in the DCO application; and  Define the preferred solution that would form the basis of a signed ‘Statement of Common Ground’ between the various parties that can be presented to the Examining Authority for consideration at the DCO Examination.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

Road Construction Proposals 2.3.18 The construction works would be undertaken as a rolling programme of activity over a period of approximately 24 months. Subject to Development Consent being granted, construction work for the main infrastructure works could start on 1 January 2021 and be complete by 1 January 2023. Further construction information, including working hours, will be provided in the forthcoming Preliminary Environmental Information Report (PEIR).

2.3.19 Prior to any construction work commencing, there would be a mobilisation period, including discharge of DCO requirements and protective provisions, traffic management installation and site enabling works.

2.3.20 The Contractor will produce and manage a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).

2.3.21 A Transport Steering Group (TSG) will be established between HE (in relation to the A19/A184 Testo’s Junction Improvement and A19 Downhill Lane Junction Improvement projects) and the IAMP project team to ensure alignment and co-working as the projects are brought forward. The TSG will include Nissan and other key parties.

2.3.22 A balance will be made in the parameters plan for the development between those sections of road designed in detail (and delivered at an early stage) and those for which a zone will be identified with detailed design to be agreed at a later stage once clarification on where buildings will be located is confirmed.

Floorspace and Land Uses Principal and Supporting Uses 2.3.23 Policy S2 of the IAMP AAP requires that: “Development of the Employment Areas must be for the Principal Uses of the production, supply chain and distribution activities directly related to the Automotive and Advanced Manufacturing sectors and related Supporting Uses”.

2.3.24 Policy S3 of the IAMP AAP allocates land for up to 392,000 sq m of floorspace for the Principal and Supporting Uses as follows:  Up to 356,000 sq m of employment space for the Principal B1(c), B2 and B8 class uses; and  Up to 36,000 sq m of employment space for Supporting B1(a) and B1(b) class uses, only where this is related to the Principal Uses, as defined in Policy S2 of the AAP.

2.3.25 Of the above, planning permission has been granted for the following floorspace at IAMP ONE:  Up to 134,984 sq m gross (excluding Plot 3);  Plot 3 = 21,856 sq m gross consisting of 20,368 sq m of B2 and 1,488 sq m of offices; and  Total = 156,840 sq m.

2.3.26 Furthermore, IAMP ONE Phase Two contains a development plot which is to be brought forward via a planning application rather than through the DCO process.

2.3.27 However, it could be the case that schemes come forward for IAMP ONE which cumulatively total less than the approved amount of floorspace. Should this happen, the Applicant is seeking the flexibility for the amount of floorspace across IAMP TWO to be increased accordingly. This will ensure that the maximum amount of floorspace, as specified under Policy S3 of the IAMP AAP, is delivered across IAMP. The additional development area(s) will be identified on the parameter plans that will be assessed within the ES. Using the Rochdale Envelope approach in this way, balances the need for

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

some flexibility, whilst providing sufficient detail to allow the likely significant effects on the environment to be assessed.

2.3.28 The following ‘minimum’ and ‘maximum’ floorspace figures for IAMP TWO have been identified as follows:  Minimum floorspace – 195,000 sq m (2.1M sq ft);  Maximum floorspace – 232,300 sq m (2.5M sq ft); and  The Applicant will prepare its ES using the maximum floorspace figure, which represents the worst case. It is anticipated that a requirement in the IAMP TWO DCO will ensure that the floorspace delivered by IAMP TWO does not exceed the amount allocated by the AAP.

The Hub and Ancillary Uses 2.3.29 Policy S4 of the IAMP AAP allocates the following uses and floorspaces within The Hub:  Hotel (Use Class C) – up to 150 beds with associated leisure and conference facilities;  Gym (Use Class D2) – up to 1,000 sq m gross floorspace;  Education and training facilities (Use Class D2(c)) – to support the Principal Uses;  Managed workspace for micro and start-up businesses (Use Class B1a) – up to a cumulative total of 3,000 sq m, which is in addition to the total floorspace figures provided above;  Nursery and child-care facilities – up to a cumulative total of 1,000 sq m gross floorspace;  Small retail units (Use Classes A1 and A3) – up to a cumulative total of 1,500 sq m floorspace, with no single unit being greater in size than 250 sq m gross; and  Multi-modal transport interchange accommodating public transport, cycling and pedestrian access.

2.3.30 Additionally, to support the Northern Employment Area, small retail units are proposed (Use Class A1 and A3) up to a cumulative total of 300 sq m gross floorspace, with no single unit being greater than 100 sq m, in accordance with Policy S4 of the IAMP AAP.

2.3.31 Playing fields that are currently located to the north of the NELSAM (and within the Southern Employment Area) will be removed and relocated elsewhere within Sunderland. A football hub programme supported by a national grant scheme and local contributions for the Northern Area of Sunderland has secured planning permission and is currently progressing through the implementation phase. This project will address Sport England’s requirement to replace the pitches lost on IAMP.

2.3.32 The NELSAM is located outside of the DCO boundary but the integration of that site with IAMP TWO will be important as the design moves forward.

Floorspace and Development Zones 2.3.33 The Explanatory Plan (Appendix A) establishes a series of zones to assist in describing IAMP TWO. This is not a phasing plan. The following areas are shown:  Northern Employment Area;  Southern Employment Area;  The Hub;  IAMP TWO ELMA; and

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

 A19 Road Infrastructure.

2.3.34 The areas identified in the first three bullets above correspond with policy requirements in the IAMP AAP. The IAMP TWO ELMA is that part of the wider ELMA intended to mitigate the ecological and landscape impacts of IAMP TWO. The area for A19 road infrastructure principally relates to works to deliver a new bridge over the A19.

2.3.35 In addition, there are a range of ‘overlying’ features that affect the whole site including roads, green infrastructure, drainage, utilities, public transport strategy, green corridor, noise bunding etc. These may or will overlap with the other areas/zones identified above.

2.3.36 A floorspace schedule is being developed that will be shown on a parameters plan that will be the subject of statutory consultation on IAMP TWO and, in its final form, be included as part of the DCO application. This will include, for each zone, the following information:  Zone area (ha);  Use Classes;  Units (minimum and maximum);  Maximum development floorspace;  Minimum/maximum units size;  Minimum finished floor level; and  Maximum building height. Heights and Levels 2.3.37 No building will be greater than 25 m above ground level (AGL).

Design Code and Building Design 2.3.38 A draft IAMP design code has been prepared that contains:  The key Masterplan principles;  The key Interface principles;  The principles for the road typology;  Plot design principles; and  Building design principles.

2.3.39 The draft IAMP design code will form part of the material included in the statutory consultation for IAMP TWO in due course.

Ecological and Landscape Mitigation Area (ELMA) 2.3.40 In accordance with IAMP AAP Policy S1, the ELMA as a whole will comprise approximately 110 ha of land that will remain within the designated Green Belt. Its aim is to provide a focus for implementing any mitigation and/or compensation for the impacts of the IAMP development on the area’s habitats, species and landscape. Of the 110 ha total, it was agreed as part of the IAMP ONE planning application that 43.6 ha of ELMA land will be used to provide mitigation for IAMP ONE. The remaining ELMA land (66.4 ha) is available to provide ecological and landscape mitigation for IAMP TWO.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

2.3.41 A minimum 50 m wide buffer, in accordance with the AAP, from the riverbanks on both sides along the River Don (to maintain a total minimum 100 m wide corridor) will be provided. An appropriate buffer will be provided along the A19 corridor and along the northern edge of the site (to the north of the Northern Employment Area).

2.3.42 The following priorities for the ELMA have been identified by the Applicant:  Farmland Birds – to include the provision of sufficient mitigation areas to accommodate healthy breeding and wintering farmland bird assemblages; minimising disturbance, and not promoting additional public access/rights of way; use of sustainable farming practices of benefit to birds; and providing increased foraging opportunities in areas adjacent to development may help to support the wider breeding and winter survival successes of birds.  Landscape Character & Connectivity – taking advantage of opportunities for landscape scale ecological connectivity running both east - west, following the course of the River Don and tributary, and north-south but doing so to ensure that the land remains productive for agriculture. The addition of areas of trees and woodland would not be in keeping with existing character of the area.  Bats – to include retaining/replacing existing (where possible) and provision of new, roosting opportunities (e.g. bat boxes); retaining trees, hedgerows, watercourses, ponds and marshy areas where possible, especially key commuting and foraging areas, with buffers and enhancements, where possible; creation of new and enhancement of existing corridors linking potential roosting and foraging sites; and integrating with wider development design features (e.g. Sustainable Drainage System (SuDS) ponds, amenity landscaping, etc).  Great Crested Newts – to ensure development delivery does not adversely affect breeding ponds or habitat within 500 m (e.g. indirectly); maintain/enhance existing and create new pond features as close as possible to habitat within 500 m from breeding ponds to promote wider dispersal and colonisation; create/enhance suitable terrestrial habitat in a linear fashion between open water features (e.g. grassland, marshy grassland, woodland and scrub) to increase habitat connectivity between ponds and through the landscape; focus upon west/south-west of the site and promote links north-south.  Otter and Water Vole – to ensure IAMP TWO does not adversely affect water vole burrows (within 5 m of banks) or habitat (e.g. indirectly); to retain watercourses and in particular, connecting habitat between occupied water vole habitat; to create habitats such as ponds, wetland, scrapes and ditches adjacent to watercourses supporting water vole and to connect suitable habitats; to integrate with wider development design features (e.g. SuDS ponds); and to retain/create areas of woodland/scrub close to the River Don to provide cover for otter.  Barn Owl – to retain/enhance and extend rough grassland, woodland edge, arable field margins and riparian habitats; and provide potential nesting and roosting sites in the form of owl boxes/permanent provision within buildings.  Brown Hare – to retain/enhance field margins/set aside strips, particularly retaining/enhancing connectivity; and retain overwinter stubble; and diversify farming practices and establishment of more grassland.  Badger – to retain/enhance grassland, woodland, scrub and hedgerows; and retain/enhance connectivity between these habitats and water sources.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

 Invertebrates – to retain/enhance hedgerows and grassland particularly retaining/enhancing connectivity; and retain/create a diverse range of habitats to include varied topography with warm and sheltered microhabitats, a varied vegetation structure, shelter and nectar sources.  Water Shrew – to ensure IAMP TWO delivery does not adversely affect ponds with water shrew present (e.g. indirectly); retain ponds, watercourses and reedbeds; to create habitats such as ponds, wetland and ditches adjacent to watercourses and to connect suitable habitats; to integrate with wider development design features (e.g. SuDS ponds).  River Enhancements – willow spiling (a technique of weaving walls of live willow stems into embankments to reinforce substrates and direct water flows, thereby reducing bankside erosion and sediment loading); creation of back waters and online ponds; creation of areas of set aside grassland, marshy grassland, reedbed, scrub and small areas of woodland to buffer, extend and connect existing features; and installation of artificial otter holts.

2.3.43 The long-term management of the ELMA as a whole is currently the subject of a detailed analysis being undertaken by the Applicant. The Land Trust, an experienced long-term management delivery organisation, is developing this in conjunction with the Applicant.

2.3.44 The delivery of the ELMA will be monitored to ensure that the targeted outcomes in terms of habitat provision and supporting the population sizes, assemblages, distributions and long-term viability of target species are being achieved.

2.3.45 The ELMA also includes various existing farm buildings/other structures the future of which is to be determined. For example, and close to the southern boundary of the Northern Employment Area, is Elliscope Farm. The outbuildings and bridge at Elliscope Farm are to be demolished and the area around Elliscope Farm could be managed as an area of parkland for users of IAMP.

Other Infrastructure Drainage Strategy 2.3.46 The majority of the land to the south of the River Don drains to a culverted watercourse along Washington Road. This includes highway drainage serving the A1290 and the ditches which drain the fields. The land to the north of the River Don drains to the River Don at various locations.

2.3.47 The new drainage will respect the existing catchments and outfall points as closely as possible.

2.3.48 Development to the south of the River Don will be drained by a network of drains, swales and filter drains and attenuated to greenfield run off rates before connecting into the culverted watercourse at the north-east corner of Nissan at Washington Road. Surface water run-off will be attenuated by swales and attenuation tanks, and where possible, ponds.

2.3.49 Development to the north of the River Don will be also be drained by a network of drains, swales and filter drains and attenuated to greenfield run off rates before connecting into the River Don. Attenuation will be provided by swales and ponds.

2.3.50 The quality of surface water discharges will be carefully managed using a range of sustainable drainage treatment phases before discharging from the development.

2.3.51 Consideration is being given to the scale and degree of works to the River Don with reference to the River Don Feasibility Study that has been prepared by the River Restoration Centre on behalf of the EA in May 2017.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

2.3.52 A linear shaped north-south running pond is proposed in the south east corner of IAMP TWO within the landscape buffer area (associated with the A19 Downhill Lane Junction Improvement works) and a further attenuation facility is located adjacent to the NELSAM (associated with IAMP TWO).

River Don 2.3.53 A new road bridge will be provided over the River Don to connect the Northern and Southern Employment Areas. The bridge will be designed to ensure that there is no net loss in floodplain storage capacity nor an increase in maximum flood levels within adjoining properties as a consequence of the proposed works.

Utilities 2.3.54 The diversion of existing services affecting the development site and the provision of new service networks, including water, gas, electricity and telecommunications within the prospectively adoptable highway and up to the boundary of development plots will take place. This will enable occupiers to apply for and obtain service connections into their premises as required.

2.3.55 In order to provide sufficient electrical capacity to serve IAMP TWO, a new primary sub-station is required. It is anticipated that a 40 MVA capacity will be necessary to satisfy the electrical demands of IAMP TWO. The new primary sub-station will be located to the west of the A1290 and to the immediate north of the new spine road that serves IAMP ONE.

General Green Infrastructure 2.3.56 Existing mature trees, woodland and hedgerows around the edges of the development, along the River Don and to the east of Elliscope Farm, will be retained.

2.3.57 Green linkages along main roads will be provided, where appropriate.

2.3.58 A green buffer will be provided along the northern and eastern boundaries of IAMP TWO.

Sustainability 2.3.59 The IAMP AAP provides guidance on the sustainability principles and objectives for the design and development of IAMP TWO. A key objective of the IAMP is to: “Encourage design and development based on sound sustainability principles” (para 2.7). The IAMP AAP was subject to a Sustainability Appraisal (SA) that assisted in determining the selected location and spatial layout of the IAMP based on sustainability principles. These principles will be carried through into the design of IAMP TWO, encouraging sustainable development alongside the protection and enhancement of the ecological resources of the IAMP.

Construction and Phasing 2.3.60 The following timescales for the construction of IAMP TWO will be used for the purposes of assessment:  Construction works to commence on 1 January 2021; and  All main infrastructure works will be complete by 1 January 2023.

2.3.61 The likely sequencing of the main infrastructure works will be as follows:  A. Works east of the A1290 plus A19 bridge;  B. Works west of the A1290 plus River Don bridge;  C. A1290 southern junction improvement/connection; and  D. A1290 northern junction connection.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

2.3.62 It is likely that ‘A’ and ‘B’ will be carried out simultaneously. ‘A’ and ‘B’ are likely to take approximately 15 months to complete. ‘C’ and ‘D’ are likely to take 6 months each to complete. Further analysis is required to identify where any overlap in works can occur to fit into the 2-year programme of works that has been identified.

2.3.63 All ELMA works for IAMP TWO will be carried out between 1 January 2021 and 1 January 2023.

2.3.64 It is assumed that The Hub will be implemented and occupied by 2023 (i.e. when the majority of IAMP ONE is anticipated to be occupied).

2.3.65 All construction works for the individual plots at IAMP TWO will be complete by the end of 2032 (prior to the expiry of the AAP). The construction programme for the plots is therefore broadly 10 years.

2.3.66 It is assumed for the purposes of the assessment that buildings will be built and occupied from the A19 junction with construction then proceeding in a southerly and north-westerly direction. No buildings will be occupied prior to the completion of the main infrastructure works (i.e. prior to 1 January 2023) but buildings may be under construction in early phases.

2.3.67 It is assumed that the sub-station will be delivered and commissioned at the earliest opportunity. It is assumed that this will be prior to the commencement of construction works for IAMP TWO.

2.3.68 All site compounds will be provided within the DCO boundary. It is anticipated that two (possibly three) compounds will be required plus further areas for storage of materials.

2.3.69 It is assumed as a ‘worst case’ that spoil will need to be removed from the IAMP TWO Site as part of its remediation and taken to disposal sites that will be within 60 km of the IAMP TWO Site.

2.3.70 A CEMP covering matters including noise, traffic and dust during the construction phase will be prepared in respect of the site.

2.3.71 It should be noted that the proposed investment profile for the main infrastructure works at IAMP TWO is for a two year period of construction, following the securing of consent to start works on site. This period is therefore proposed for calendar years 2021 and 2022 as defined above, however, the exact phasing of those works may be subject to change and will depend on ongoing discussions with HE when the details and phasing of its investment at the A19 Downhill Lane Junction Improvements is confirmed and understood.

3.0 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 3.1.1 This section outlines the potential project alternatives that have been considered for the IAMP, for which IAMP TWO represents the second phase. Project alternatives, primarily in terms of the potential size and location of the IAMP, formed a key consideration in the formulation of the IAMP AAP.

Size and Scale 3.1.2 The ‘Strategic Employment Study’ (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2013), which assessed the potential market demand for strategic employment sites in the North East, considered three potential growth scenarios for the automotive and advanced manufacturing sectors; very optimistic, moderate and pessimistic. In each of these scenarios, the potential change in employment floorspace required to deliver that growth was estimated. This ranged from a reduction of approximately 49 ha as manufacturing moves elsewhere (pessimistic) to needing up to 300 ha (very optimistic). The moderate growth scenario was identified by SCC and STC as the most achievable and so was selected as the basis on which to form the City Deal and was used to inform the size requirements of the IAMP. The

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

moderate growth scenario predicted approximately 140 – 150 ha of employment land would be required over 20 years.

Location 3.1.3 The IAMP AAP describes the consideration that was given to project alternatives, primarily in terms of project location. The locational criteria for selecting a site at which to deliver the IAMP comprised:  Site size of 150 ha;  Site adjacent to industry;  Site with good transport links; and  Site that is available for development.

3.1.4 A summary of the potential sites considered is presented in the ‘Green Belt and Site Selection Options’ (GBSSO) report (Arup, 2015). A total of 14 options were considered in the assessment. Of these, six sites did not meet the locational criteria in terms of site size. A further six did not meet the locational criteria in terms of adjacency or availability of land for development, leaving two potential sites:  ‘Site A’ - Site to the east of the former Wardley Colliery disposal point; and  ‘Site B’ - Site to the immediate north of Nissan.

3.1.5 Of these, Site B was identified as the most suitable for the IAMP in terms of site size, adjacency, transport links and availability, and so was carried forward as the selected site for delivery of the IAMP.

Design of Development 3.1.6 The ‘AAP Statement of Compliance’ report (Arup, 2017) explains that, following the selection of Site B as the optimal site location, three initial development options were considered. These options considered three different spatial orientations that accounted for demand for employment land, the need for ecological mitigation and physical site constraints (e.g. the River Don). They included orientation along the A19 corridor (Option 1), a northwest to south east axis (Option 2) and an east to west axis (Option 3). Consultation on these options, as reported in the GBSSO, concluded that Option 1 was preferred, although it could be improved by incorporating elements of Options 2 and 3 (specifically moving the location of The Hub to the south, and shifting the proposed employment area at the north of the site to preserve the integrity of strategic gaps that prevent merging of settlements). The AAP boundary as it is presented in the IAMP AAP reflects the optimal IAMP site location based on this iterative process of considered alternatives. The IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary is based on the IAMP AAP Boundary8, and so represents the optimum location for delivery of the IAMP.

3.1.7 IAMP TWO has been designed to ensure the comprehensive delivery of the IAMP, as defined in the IAMP AAP, following delivery of the first phase through IAMP ONE. As such, IAMP TWO has been designed to interact and integrate with the designs approved for IAMP ONE. Following Nissan’s 2016 announcement and the resultant increase in urgency, it was decided to deliver IAMP in two phases as explained in Section 1.0.

3.1.8 A planning application that was made for commercial development within the footprint of IAMP TWO was refused planning permission by SCC because it did not comply with the IAMP AAP. As such, it is not considered a reasonable alternative.

8 The IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary does not exactly match the IAMP AAP boundary as it has been designed to account for interactions between the IAMP DCO Application and neighbouring DCO applications being promoted by HE at A19/A184 Testo’s Junction Improvement and A19 Downhill Lane Junction Improvement.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

‘No Project’ Alternative 3.1.9 If IAMP TWO was not developed (i.e. the ‘No Project’ Alternative), then it is considered that the potential negative environmental impacts of IAMP TWO would be nil and baseline conditions would prevail. The potential socio-economic and ecological benefits of the IAMP TWO development, however, would not be realised. IAMP ONE, as a separately permitted development scheme, would be developed in this ‘No Project’ scenario (the environmental impacts of which were assessed in the IAMP ONE Environmental Statement), but it is considered that this would be insufficient to address the full ‘Need for the Proposed Development’, as outlined in Section 1.4.

3.1.10 Delivering IAMP ONE alone would not be adequate to satisfy national and regional demand as outlined in Section 2.0 above, therefore a ‘No Project’ alternative is not considered to be a reasonable alternative.

4.0 PLANNING POLICY 4.1 National Policy 4.1.1 As a business and commercial project being brought forward under the DCO regime, paragraph 105 of the PA2008 is relevant. This relates to how DCO applications for developments that are not otherwise covered by a National Policy Statement (NPS) should be determined. As there is no NPS for business and commercial projects they should be considered with regard to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and the relevant development plan (see consideration of local policy below) as well as a Local Impact Report (LIR) prepared by the relevant local authority and any other material matters.

4.1.2 The current NPPF came into effect on 24 July 2018. Paragraph 7 confirms that the “purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development”. Paragraph 11 confirms that, for decision taking, this means that development proposals that accord with the development plan should be approved without delay.

4.1.3 Paragraph 80 relates to ‘Building a strong, competitive economy’ and states: -

4.1.4 “Planning policies and decisions should help create the conditions in which businesses can invest, expand and adapt. Significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and productivity, taking into account both local business needs and wider opportunities for development. The approach taken should allow each area to build on its strengths, counter any weaknesses and address the challenges of the future. This is particularly important where Britain can be a global leader in driving innovation, and in areas with high levels of productivity, which should be able to capitalise on their performance and potential”. 4.2 Local Policy 4.2.1 The IAMP Area Action Plan (AAP) was adopted on 30 November 2017 and provides the relevant and up-to-date planning policy framework for the comprehensive development of approximately 392,000 sq m of floorspace for uses that relate to the automotive and advanced manufacturing sectors. This would be delivered on a 150 ha site. An allocation of 110 ha of adjacent land would be required to facilitate or be incidental to that development providing replacement land relating to ecological and landscape mitigation (Ecological and Landscape Mitigation Area or ELMA) and would remain in the Green Belt.

4.2.2 The IAMP AAP states the following:

4.2.3 “The International Advanced Manufacturing Park (IAMP) represents a unique opportunity for the automotive and advanced manufacturing sectors in the UK. Located next to the UK's largest and most productive car manufacturing plant at Nissan, the IAMP will provide a bespoke, world class environment

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

for the automotive supply chain and related advanced manufacturers. The IAMP will contribute significantly to the long-term economic success of the North East of England and the national automotive sector” (para. 5).

4.2.4 “The development of the IAMP will underpin the continued success of the automotive and advanced manufacturing sectors in the UK and the North East of England. The North East of England is recognised internationally as a centre for the automotive industry due to Nissan's presence in the region since 1985. This has led to the expansion of an ‘automotive cluster’ centred on the Nissan plant northwest of Sunderland, with the nearby location of manufacturers linked to the Nissan supply chain” (para. 8).

4.2.5 Additionally, specific local policies contained in the current (and in the case of SCC emerging) Local Plans of SCC9 and STC10 that are relevant for the environmental topics detailed in Section 5.0 will be considered during the assessment process.

5.0 POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 5.1 Overview 5.1.1 The following sections present the baseline conditions and a discussion of the potential environmental effects associated with the proposed IAMP TWO development that will be considered as part of the EIA. The methodology and assessment criteria that will be used to assess the potential significance of the identified effects is also detailed, alongside any relevant identified mitigation measures for implementation following assessment.

5.1.2 IAMP TWO is a long-term project, with no definitive end point, and no defined plan for decommissioning. As such, it is not considered appropriate to assess decommissioning at this stage. As a guide, however, it is considered that all likely effects that will arise from the decommissioning of the IAMP TWO Site would be similar to, or less than, those resulting from construction. As such, construction effects can be seen as a worst-case indicator of decommissioning effects. It is understood that all decommissioning activity, whenever it takes place, would be undertaken in line with the best practice policy and guidance at that time, including appropriate mitigation to address effects identified at that time. 5.2 Air Quality Baseline Conditions 5.2.1 The Air Quality Standards11 (AQSs) – the background pollutant levels considered acceptable for human health and the environment – for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) when measured as annual mean concentrations, are as follows:

3  NO2 - 40 µg/m ;

3  PM10 - 40 µg/m ; and

3  PM2.5 - 25 µg/m .

5.2.2 A review of the information for SCC and STC shows that two Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) have been declared; Boldon Lane/Stanhope Road (AQMA 1) and Lindisfarne Roundabout/Leam Lane

9 City of Sunderland Unitary Development Plan (UDP) (adopted September 1998); Draft Core Strategy and Development Plan 2015-2033 (July 2017). 10 South Tyneside Local Development Framework (LDF) Core Strategy Final Adopted Version (June 2007). 11 http://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/air-pollution/uk-eu-limits

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

(AQMA 2). Both AQMAs were declared by STC in 2006 due to exceedances of the annual mean concentration for nitrogen dioxide (NO2); however annual mean concentrations have decreased in the subsequent years and are now recorded as being significantly below the AQS of 40 µg/m3. The AQMAs are located approximately 4.9 km and 3.7 km from the proposed IAMP TWO development.

5.2.3 Estimated background pollutant concentration levels for the 1 km grid squares that encompass the extent of micro-simulation traffic model for IAMP TWO (Figure 1) were obtained from the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) for 2018. These baseline data are presented in Table 2. The estimated background concentrations in the worst-case grid square (434500,558500 – emboldened in Table 2) will be used in the air quality assessment to ensure it is conservative.

Table 2: DEFRA estimated background pollutant concentrations for 2018

DEFRA Grid Square Centre (1 km x 1km) Annual Mean Concentration (µg/m3)

Easting Northing NO2 PM10 PM2.5

432500 561500 14.2 12.2 7.5

433500 561500 14.9 12.4 7.7

434500 561500 15.4 11.4 7.2

435500 561500 14.4 10.9 7.0

431500 560500 12.8 10.9 6.9

432500 560500 12.2 11.6 7.3

433500 560500 14.8 12.6 7.8

434500 560500 14.1 12.2 7.6

435500 560500 13.0 10.9 7.0

429500 559500 13.6 11.7 7.3

430500 559500 13.5 10.9 6.9

431500 559500 13.1 11.7 7.4

432500 559500 12.4 12.6 7.8

433500 559500 13.1 12.1 7.6

434500 559500 17.7 12.7 8.0

430500 558500 14.4 10.5 6.8

431500 558500 15.3 11.1 7.1

432500 558500 13.4 13.0 8.0

433500 558500 15.8 12.0 7.6

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

DEFRA Grid Square Centre (1 km x 1km) Annual Mean Concentration (µg/m3)

Easting Northing NO2 PM10 PM2.5

434500 558500 27.8 14.4 9.3

430500 557500 15.1 10.6 6.9

431500 557500 17.3 11.7 7.5

432500 557500 15.9 13.8 8.4

433500 557500 14.4 12.1 7.6

434500 557500 18.4 13.1 8.2

435500 557500 16.1 11.2 7.2

430500 556500 16.5 11.2 7.2

431500 556500 16.6 11.5 7.4

432500 556500 15.7 12.7 7.9

433500 556500 14.1 11.5 7.3

434500 556500 14.9 12.4 7.8

5.2.4 The estimated background concentration at the worst-case location (emboldened in Table 2) represents approximately 75% of the AQS for NO2 and less than 40% of the AQSs for PM10 and PM2.5.

5.2.5 There are no air quality monitoring locations within 3 km of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary where SCC undertake passive monitoring of NOx, NO2, PM10 or PM2.5. In the STC authority area, there are two tubes monitoring NO2 located within approximately 3 km from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. Due to the significant distance from IAMP TWO though, they are not considered to be representative of IAMP TWO background.

5.2.6 In order to provide project specific baseline data for IAMP TWO, baseline monitoring for NO2 using diffusion tubes is currently being undertaken at nine locations (one of which is a triplicate location) within and around the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary to inform the model verification process. The locations of the tubes are detailed in Table 3 and presented in Drawing 3. The monitoring plan, including the diffusion tube locations, was agreed with the Environmental Health Officers (EHOs) of SCC and STC prior to commencement of the monitoring. Monitoring has been undertaken since April 2018 and will have a minimum 6-month duration, in accordance with LAQM TG (16)12. The collected data will be assessed and discussed in relation to the AQSs as part of the baseline assessment.

12 DEFRA (2018). Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance (TG16).

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

Table 3: Diffusion Tube Locations

Tube ID Easting Northing

01 433885 559055

02A 433125 558453

02B 433125 558453

02C 433126 558453

03 431708 557569

04 434918 557435

05 434471 559369

06 434363 559577

07 433132 559768

08 429942 556592

09 430865 556958

Potential Impacts and Effects 5.2.7 The following potential effects may be associated with the IAMP TWO development:  Dust will be generated during construction of the IAMP TWO development which may have adverse effects on local sensitive receptors (e.g. residents living nearby); and  Traffic will be generated during construction and operation of the IAMP TWO development, giving rise to emissions of NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 which may lead to adverse effects on local air quality.

Scope of Assessment and Assessment Methodology 5.2.8 An air quality impact assessment will be undertaken using the Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM) guidance document, Land-Use Planning and Development Control: Planning for Air Quality (2017). The guidance contains a method of evaluating impact magnitude and determining significance of impacts and standard descriptors.

5.2.9 Given the fact that the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary is not located within or adjacent to the two identified AQMAs, it is considered unlikely that they will be adversely affected by the IAMP TWO development and therefore assessment of these areas will not be included in the assessment.

5.2.10 For the construction phase, a qualitative assessment of construction dust will be undertaken in line with the IAQM guidance document Guidance on the assessment of dust from demolition and construction (Version 1.1; 2016). The study area for this assessment will be 350 m from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary and/or within 50 m of the route(s) used by construction vehicles on the public highway, up to 500 m from the IAMP TWO site entrance(s).

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

5.2.11 The future air emissions from the individual proposed commercial and industrial units at IAMP TWO will be unknown at the time of assessment, and therefore we will consider the need for a requirement for a detailed atmospheric assessment prior to commissioning.

5.2.12 The road network realignment and changes to transport emissions during the operational phase may lead to adverse effects on local air quality due to the number of potential parking spaces included in IAMP TWO and the associated increase in local traffic around the area. Transport emissions during the operational phase will therefore be included in the impact assessment.

5.2.13 The assessment of transport emissions will follow the methodologies for assessment of operational traffic as set out by the Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM). Background NOx and NO2 concentrations will be further processed to determine annual mean NO2 concentrations, excluding major road sources, using the latest NOx to NO2 calculator available from DEFRA (version 6.1, released November 2017). Similarly, road sector data for PM10 and PM2.5 will be removed from the 2018 estimated background concentrations, in order that transport emissions are not double counted in the assessment

5.2.14 The modelling of road traffic emissions will be undertaken using ADMS-Roads with a focus on the pollutants nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and fine particulates (PM10). The proposed development includes the construction of new roads and junctions, and alterations, including widening, to existing roads and therefore a detailed traffic assessment will be undertaken. The following development scenarios will be considered:  Baseline scenario (2017);  Future year scenario (opening year - currently scheduled as 2023);  With development; and  Without development (assuming natural traffic growth).

5.2.15 The cumulative effects of IAMP TWO will be assessed in the road traffic assessment. The traffic associated with other proposed and current developments in the area will be combined with that from IAMP TWO, allowing a cumulative road traffic model assessment.

5.2.16 Where the need for mitigation or monitoring during the construction and operational phases is identified, appropriate measures will be specified, and residual effects considered accordingly. 5.3 Noise Baseline Conditions 5.3.1 Baseline noise monitoring was completed for IAMP ONE in 2017, and many of the closest identified Noise Sensitive Receptors (NSRs) considered for IAMP ONE will also be the closest NSRs to IAMP TWO. Furthermore, the baseline measurements undertaken for IAMP ONE will represent realistic baseline for IAMP TWO, prior to new noise sources associated with IAMP ONE being introduced.

5.3.2 Observations during baseline measurements for IAMP ONE indicated that the noise environment in the vicinity of IAMP TWO was predominantly influenced by road traffic on the A184 dual carriageway to the north, the A19 dual carriageway to the east and the A1290 to the south. Traffic flow on the A1290 was noted to be highly variable, with peak flows coinciding with shift changes at the adjacent Nissan car plant and substantially lower traffic flows outside of these times.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

5.3.3 At NSRs close to the Nissan plant some industrial noise was audible. At locations remote from busy roads and the Nissan plant, noise from natural sources, such as bird calls and wind-induced rustling of vegetation were audible contributors to the noise environment.

5.3.4 It is proposed to use the 2017 baseline noise measurements undertaken in support of the adjacent IAMP ONE development as foundation for establishing the IAMP TWO noise baseline. Additionally, based upon the IAMP TWO DCO Scoping Boundary, measurements will also be undertaken at supplementary monitoring locations defined in Section 5.3.7, the scope for which will be agreed with SCC and STC.

5.3.5 The 2017 baseline noise measurements were undertaken at the following locations:  West Moor Farm (433115,558505);  North Moor Farm (432990,559120);  Hylton Bridge Farm (433405,559545);  Houses on Washington Road, including Usworth Cottages and The Chalet (433950,559015); and  Travellers’ site on West Pastures Lane (433030,560745).

5.3.6 In the 2017 baseline survey, noise levels associated with the A1290 were characterised by 18-hour measurement in accordance with the procedure provided in “Calculation of Road Traffic Noise” (CRTN) guidance. The measurement was undertaken at a representative location, close to the entrance to the Nissan plant (433825,558962).

5.3.7 Additional baseline noise monitoring in support of IAMP TWO will comprise monitoring at up to a further three locations, representative of the following NSRs:  Baltimore Avenue, east of the proposed development (434525,559327);  Strother House Farm, to the west of the proposed development (432345,559949); and  Dwellings on Follingsby Lane, to the west of the proposed development (430567,560249).

5.3.8 Detailed consultation is currently underway with the Environmental Health departments of SCC and STC with regard to the use of previously-measured baseline data and the scope and approach of further baseline monitoring. Potential Impacts and Effects 5.3.9 The significance of noise effects will be determined with reference to the NPPF and the Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE).

5.3.10 The following potential impacts have been identified with the IAMP TWO development:  Noise from construction activities at neighbouring NSRs during the construction phase;  Increase in noise at NSRs close to the existing road network arising from increases in traffic flow due to development traffic, both during the construction phase and operational phase; and  Noise at neighbouring NSRs from the individual proposed commercial and industrial units at IAMP TWO during the operational phase, associated with the use of fixed and mobile plant.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

Scope of Assessment and Assessment Methodology Effects scoped out 5.3.11 Given the absence of NSRs within 450 m of the proposed bridge over the River Don, no vibration effects associated with this structure are anticipated, therefore the screening assessment (see Section 5.3.13) will consider the proposed bridge over the A19 only.

5.3.12 The future use of the individual proposed commercial and industrial units at IAMP TWO will be unknown at the time of assessment, and therefore we will consider the need for a requirement for a detailed vibration assessment prior to commissioning. Vibration effects during the operational phase will therefore be scoped out of the assessment.

Effects scoped in 5.3.13 It is noted that piling may be required during construction of the two proposed bridges; over the A19 and over the River Don. Where piling for the A19 bridge is proposed within close proximity (≤50 m) to NSRs a screening assessment in accordance with British Standard BS5228, Part 2 criteria will be undertaken. Where the potential for perceptible vibration is identified, a more detailed assessment of vibration will be undertaken.

5.3.14 Additional baseline measurements, at locations identified in Section 5.3.7, will be undertaken for a representative period, accounting for the Nissan shift changes, of at least 2 hours at each of the agreed monitoring positions during the daytime period (07:00 – 23:00), and at least 30 minutes per location during the night time (23:00 – 07:00). This approach and the measurements to be undertaken is in accordance with the requirements of BS4142.

5.3.15 Road noise characterisation measurements will be undertaken for a period of approximately 24 hours (minimum 18 hours) at up to two representative roadside locations and will be undertaken in accordance with CRTN guidance (Department of Transport, 1988). Siting of these locations will be agreed with the Environmental Health departments of SCC and STC prior to commencement of the baseline survey.

5.3.16 Following baseline characterisation, advice will be provided on any constraints to site development based on differing land class use (e.g. office space) in differing parts of the site, or the requirement for design mitigation.

5.3.17 Baseline noise levels will be used to derive target noise levels for the construction phase, in accordance with the “ABC” method provided in BS5228, and for the operations phase in accordance with the BS4142 method.

5.3.18 Noise levels for the construction phase will be predicted using noise modelling software for a series of representative scenarios, in accordance with the BS5228 prediction method, to determine the “worst case” noise levels at receptors. The predicted levels will be evaluated against derived target noise levels.

5.3.19 Noise levels for the operational phase will be predicted using noise modelling software for a series of representative scenarios, in accordance with the ISO9613 prediction method, to determine the “worst case” noise levels at receptors. Where available, detailed information on internal noise levels within proposed buildings will be used to determine the requirements for noise attenuation of the building facades. Where detailed information on the likely internal noise levels is not available, appropriate assumptions will be made. Such assumptions may include characterising internal noise levels within industrial units as meeting The Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005 exposure action levels.

5.3.20 In determining the effect of the development on road traffic noise, the projected change in traffic flows due to IAMP TWO and cumulative developments will be evaluated against screening criteria provided

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB). Where the projected increase in road traffic exceeds the DMRB screening criteria, future noise levels will be predicted in accordance with CRTN.

5.3.21 Where the need for mitigation or monitoring during the construction and operational phases is identified, appropriate measures will be specified, and residual effects considered accordingly. 5.4 Landscape and Visual 5.4.1 The landscape and visual impact assessment (LVIA) will identify potential significant effects on landscape character and existing views, which may arise as a result of the construction and operational phases of IAMP TWO.

5.4.2 Landscape effects relate to changes in the physical fabric and/or character of the landscape. They may include direct impact upon specific physical landscape elements (for example, loss of distinctive topography, woodland or hedgerows) or impacts on wider landscape character (for example, through the introduction of an alien feature, which may affect how the landscape is perceived).

5.4.3 Visual effects relate to specific changes in views and the effects of those changes on visual receptors (for example, residents, users of public rights-of-way or recreational facilities). Changes to the visual setting of protected cultural heritage features (for example Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings or Conservation Areas) are also considered where views experienced by visitors may be affected. Baseline Conditions 5.4.4 The IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary and the surrounding landscape that lies within the proposed study area (see Section 5.4.14) is not subject to any statutory or local landscape designations. The IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary is not within a National Park or Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and is not a ‘High Landscape Value’ local designation. The farmland outside the urban areas has been extensively modified by previous industrial activity and by current urban influences, including the highway network and frequent overhead electricity transmission lines. The landscape is dominated by the Nissan manufacturing facility and associated infrastructure located to the south of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary.

5.4.5 The proposed study area has some recreational value and contains a number of statutory designated cultural assets accessible to the public, comprising:  The Penshaw Monument (also known as The Earl of Durham’s Monument) – a Grade I Listed Building;  Bowes Railway – a Scheduled Monument with an associated museum; and  Hylton Castle – a Scheduled Monument containing two Grade I Listed Buildings (Hylton Castle and Hylton Chapel).

5.4.6 None of these assets lie within or adjacent to the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. There is a single Listed Building within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary, comprising the Grade II listed Hylton Grove Bridge (Drawing 2).

5.4.7 There are two Conservation Areas within the proposed study area, East and West Boldon, which lie to the northeast of IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary.

5.4.8 The NELSAM, a museum located on Washington Road with a focus on military history, is not a statutorily designated site but lies immediately adjacent to the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

5.4.9 A section of the Great North Forest Heritage Trail, a recreational cycle and walking route, passes though the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary, along Follingsby Lane and Downhill Lane.

5.4.10 The IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary lies within the following National Character Areas (NCAs) and Landscape Character Areas (LCAs):  NCA14: ‘Tyne and Wear Lowlands’ and NCA15: ‘Durham Magnesian Plateau’;  Sunderland LCA 2: ‘Coalfield Lowland Terraces’ and LCA 9: ‘Urban Limestone Plateau’; and  South Tyneside LCAs 31 and 32: ‘Urban Fringe’. Potential Impacts and Effects 5.4.11 Based on the preliminary studies the potential significant landscape effects of IAMP TWO are likely to include:  Increased urbanisation of semi-rural countryside and a reduction in openness of the landscape between Nissan and the A184 to the north;  Changes to the character, pattern and scale of the landscape within the NCAs and LCAs;  Loss of residential properties;  Diversion of a section of the Great North Forest Heritage Trail;  Loss of native hedgerow and native woodland (although in the longer-term there is the opportunity through the creation of the ELMA to increase the amount and diversity of vegetation compared to the existing situation); and  The loss of agricultural land from within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary.

5.4.12 Based on the preliminary studies the potential significant visual effects of IAMP TWO are likely to include:  Visual obstruction of views from properties;  Changes to views from the A19, A184 and A1290 road corridors;  Reduction in visual amenity for local residents within and adjacent to the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary, including Strother House Farm, Scots House, Hylton Grove Farm, Hylton Bridge Farm, and The White House;  Effects on the setting of designated heritage assets, including views from Listed Buildings at Hylton Bridge and Scots House. Based on preliminary studies the effects on the setting of the Penshaw Monument and Hylton Castle on Cranleigh Road are likely to be minimal; and  Changes to panoramic views from higher ground to the east and south of the development area. Scope of Assessment and Assessment Methodology 5.4.13 The landscape impact assessment will include a comprehensive desk-based review of relevant plans, planning policy and landscape character assessments. Information will be obtained from a number of sources, comprising:  IAMP ONE Environmental Statement;  IAMP Area Action Plan 2017 - 2032, adopted 30 November 2017;

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

 South Tyneside Council’s Local Development Framework;  City of Sunderland Unitary Development Plan (including adopted alteration no. 2);  Sunderland Local Plan: Core Strategy and Development Management Policies;  The Gateshead Local Plan;  National Character Area Profiles 14 and 15, Natural England;  South Tyneside Landscape Character Study, March 2012;  City of Sunderland Landscape Character Assessment, September 2015;  South Tyneside Landscape Character Study, March 2012;  1:250,000 Agricultural Land Classification Map - North East Region (ALC001);  Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) (www.magic.gov.uk); and  Details of Tree Preservation Orders, which will be obtained from SCC and STC.

5.4.14 The initial study area for the landscape and visual assessment will be defined by computer generated ‘zone of theoretical visibility’ (ZTV) mapping, limited to a distance of 4 km from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary (Drawing 4). The ZTV is likely to encompass Hebburn to the north, Penshaw Monument to the south, Southwick to the east and Heworth to the west. The final study area will be informed by site observations and consultation with the Local Authorities.

5.4.15 Site visits will be undertaken to assess the general setting of the proposed IAMP TWO development, identify the location and sensitivity of potential visual receptors, and undertake viewpoint assessments (including photographic recording) from vantage points to be agreed with the landscape officers at SCC, STC and Gateshead Council (GC), based upon the anticipated extent of the ZTV. Following initial consultations and following the completion of the viewpoint assessments, up to eight photomontages including 3D modelling will be prepared from selected viewpoints. The selected viewpoints for the photomontages will be agreed in consultation with the landscape officers at SCC, STC and GC. All viewpoint photography would be produced in accordance with Landscape Institute Advice Note 01/11 ‘Photography and photomontage in landscape and visual impact assessment’.

5.4.16 A comprehensive impact assessment will be undertaken in accordance with current best practice guidance, namely the ‘Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, 3rd edition’, published jointly by the Landscape Institute and the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (April 2013).

5.4.17 The assessment will include:  Identification of sensitive receptors and prediction of the magnitude of landscape and visual effects (during the construction and operation phases), considering residual effects when the proposed mitigation measures have been established; and  Identification of any significant landscape and visual issues.

5.4.18 The assessment will be accompanied by the following drawings:  Landscape planning designations and constraints;  Topography plan;

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

 Visual analysis plans showing the viewpoint locations and ZTV for the key components of IAMP TWO based upon the indicative masterplan layout (Appendix A; Indicative Masterplan);  Viewpoint photography and photomontage visualisations from key locations, showing the approximate height and potential massing of the proposed buildings using the indicative masterplan layout; and  Outline mitigation plan showing measures to minimise adverse effects identified, coordinated with the ecological mitigation proposals within the ELMA. 5.5 Cultural Heritage 5.5.1 For the purposes of this assessment, the term ‘cultural heritage’ is considered to include all aspects of the historic environment, including assets of archaeological, architectural and cultural importance. The cultural heritage assessment will comprise a fully detailed baseline study, effects analysis and impact assessment, and will conform to the guidelines set out by the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA, 201413; 201714). If required, an appropriate and proportionate mitigation strategy will be developed, with residual effects subsequently assessed. Baseline Conditions 5.5.2 There is one designated cultural heritage asset within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. Hylton Grove Bridge is a Grade II Listed Building located centrally within the IAMP TWO Site (Drawing 2). Nine other Listed Buildings (eight Grade II and one Grade II*) are known to lie within the proposed study area (defined in Section 5.5.7). There are no Scheduled Monuments located within the proposed study area. There is one Conservation Area (West Boldon) located within the proposed study area.

5.5.3 Penshaw Monument, a Grade I Listed Building formally known as The Earl of Durham’s Monument, is located on an elevated hilltop approximately 4 km south of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary.

5.5.4 The south eastern area of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary covers part of the former RAF Usworth site, and it is possible that buried remains from the former World War II site exist in this area.

5.5.5 Previous investigations were conducted in 2017 in close proximity to IAMP TWO for IAMP ONE to investigate the potential for buried archaeological remains, comprising desk-based studies (including air photo analysis and LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) mapping), geophysical surveys and trial trench evaluation. A small number of archaeological features were identified from this work and were assessed as low value. Potential Impacts and Effects 5.5.6 The following potential impacts may be associated with the IAMP TWO development:  Direct impacts to cultural heritage assets through ground disturbance and earthworks, in particular those that may exist within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary that are currently undiscovered; and  Indirect effects to the setting of cultural heritage assets through visual, noise and air quality impacts. Scope of Assessment and Assessment Methodology 5.5.7 In order to capture sufficient baseline data to robustly assess direct impacts to cultural heritage assets, a buffer area of 500 m from the proposed IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary will be used for non-designated assets. Designated assets within 1 km of the proposed IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary will be captured

13 CIfA (2014). Standard and guidance for commissioning work or providing consultancy advice on archaeology and the historic environment. 14 CIfA (2017). Standard and guidance for historic environment desk-based assessment.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

to allow assessment of indirect impacts (although the extent of this wider study area will be definitively determined using the ZTV mapping to be calculated by the Landscape and Visual specialist – see Section 5.4). Consideration will also be given to those designated assets specifically identified within the IAMP AAP, such as the Penshaw Monument.

5.5.8 The baseline study will comprise a comprehensive desk-based review of existing, remotely available heritage datasets, within the proposed study area. This review will establish a better understanding of the baseline cultural heritage conditions at and around the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. Sources of information that will be consulted include:  The National Heritage List for England (NHLE), including details of statutory designated assets (e.g. Listed Buildings and Scheduled Monuments);  The UNESCO World Heritage List;  The Tyne and Wear Historic Environment Record (HER);  The IAMP Area Action Plan 2017-2032, as well as other local development and planning policy documents (e.g. City of Sunderland Unitary Development Plan (UDP) and Draft Core Strategy and Development Plan 2015-2033);  Historic OS mapping (available in Landmark Envirocheck® report) and other remotely accessible cartographic sources (e.g. freely available satellite imagery);  Existing reports, including the IAMP ONE Environmental Statement, and available unpublished third party reports; and  Other, freely available heritage datasets (e.g. Archaeology Data Service (ADS), Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) and the FINDS database).

5.5.9 In consultation with the archaeological advisor to both SCC and STC, a programme of archaeological investigation work, including both intrusive and non-intrusive methods, has also been initiated within and around the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary to ensure that a full understanding of the cultural heritage baseline is ascertained. This programme of works comprises air photograph and LiDAR mapping and analysis, geophysical survey and archaeological evaluation through trial trenching (and is consistent with the approach for IAMP ONE). The extent of the geophysical survey is presented in Drawing 5. It has been initiated in parallel with this scoping exercise to avoid constraints on access as a result of crop growth and other issues relating to seasonality. To date, the air photo and LiDAR assessment is complete, and the geophysical survey is currently in progress. The archaeological trial trenching work will commence once the geophysical surveys have been completed, with the positioning of trial trench locations informed by the geophysical survey and air photo/LiDAR mapping results. The trial trenching coverage will be devised through consultation with the archaeological advisor to SCC and STC, who will also prepare the specification for this work.

5.5.10 The baseline study will also gather data that is not available online or otherwise remotely accessible, such as historic mapping that pre-dates OS maps (e.g. Tithe Maps). This will include visiting the Tyne and Wear Archives and the Durham County Record Office. A site walkover survey would also be undertaken at this stage, in order to ground truth, the collected data and to undertake a visual inspection for any other previously unidentified assets that are visible (as well as assessing the potential for undiscovered archaeological remains to exist at IAMP TWO). This opportunity would also be used to visit identified assets, in order to assess potential visual effects and consider setting issues.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

5.5.11 Following completion of the baseline study, impact assessment and effects analysis and will be undertaken. This assessment will be produced in accordance with national and local legislation and policy, as well as best practice guidance15. It is proposed to assess impacts, both direct (e.g. loss of archaeological remains) and indirect (e.g. effects on the setting of a heritage asset), during the construction and operation phases of the IAMP TWO development. Liaison with other specialists, in particular air quality, noise and landscape and visual, will ensure that combined effects are captured and provide a holistic assessment of impacts upon cultural heritage assets. Consultation with Tyne and Wear Archaeology Service (and Historic England, if required) will then be undertaken to discuss the results of the impact assessment and determine the most appropriate mitigation strategy. Once mitigation has been agreed, residual and cumulative effects will be considered. 5.6 Waste Baseline Conditions 5.6.1 The IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary is currently in agricultural use, no significant volumes of waste are currently produced.

5.6.2 There is currently available landfill void space in the North East England region to accommodate non- recyclable material derived from the construction and operation phases of the IAMP TWO development. Potential Impacts and Effects 5.6.3 The following potential significant effects may be associated with the IAMP TWO development:  Excavation – removal of soils and other materials, and demolition activities;  Construction – construction-related waste generation; and  Operation – operational phase waste generation. Scope of Assessment and Assessment Methodology 5.6.4 An assessment of the potential effects on the environment from waste generated during the construction and operation phases of IAMP TWO will be completed.

5.6.5 Specific details regarding the waste management strategy and the types and volumes of waste that will be generated during construction and operation of IAMP TWO are limited at this stage in the design process. It is anticipated, however, that more complete details on this strategy, specifically relating to construction waste and soil handling, will be available for inclusion in the impact assessment, as the design process progresses.

5.6.6 The soil produced during the construction phase at IAMP TWO is anticipated to be the primary waste product and estimates of volumes can only be calculated following the completion and reporting of the on-going site investigation work. It is expected that exact volumes of construction waste (e.g. packaging from construction materials) and operational waste will not be known until the detailed design stage, when the needs of specific occupiers have been established.

5.6.7 The assessment will be completed, however, on the basis that all waste generated during construction and operation will be managed in line with the ‘waste hierarchy’. It is proposed that an Outline Waste Management Plan will be included as an addendum to the waste assessment.

15 Department for Transport (2007). Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (Highways England).

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

5.6.8 To determine if the waste resulting from the proposed development that might require disposal off-site will have an effect on waste management in the region, the following sub-studies will be conducted:  Existing Waste Quantities Analysis and Trends;  Waste Disposal Analysis and Plans; and  Review of Alternative Strategies and Techniques. 5.7 Water Resources and Flood Risk Baseline Conditions 5.7.1 The River Don and an unnamed tributary flow west to east through the centre of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. Both watercourses are main rivers. The tributary joins the River Don upstream of Hylton Bridge Farm. Two other smaller watercourses or drainage features are noted, these both join the north bank of the River Don, one forms part of the northwest corner of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary and the other flows between Hylton Grove Farm and Elliscope Farm. Additionally, a network of field drains and ditches are evident, being generally located along field margins and boundaries.

5.7.2 For fluvial flooding considerations, the land adjacent to the two main rivers lies within Flood Zone 2 or 3; the remainder of the site lying within Flood Zone 1 (according to the latest flood map data16). No flood zones are associated with the smaller watercourses. Flood defences are indicated around the confluence of the two main rivers and upstream on the tributary.

5.7.3 Based on broad consideration of the site characteristics, several catchments are likely to exist, as follows:  To north side of the River Don, from near The Triple A Ranch (adjacent to Strother House Farm) to Make-Me-Rich Farm, likely draining southward to the main river;  An area of land northwest of Make-Me-Rich Farm, potentially draining northward, possibly to local surface water drainage;  Land between Downwhill Lane and A1290 and between A1290 and A19 draining to the south, to local surface water drainage infrastructure;  Land around the A19, associated slip road, and the road connecting A1290 to Washington Road, likely draining to local road drainage; and  The land between the two main rivers (draining to either watercourse).

5.7.4 For surface water flooding considerations, flood risk from surface water is also indicated to be at land adjacent to the main rivers but also shown along the course of the two smaller watercourses that join the north bank of the River Don and other isolated patches, these being around Downhill Lane between The Triple A Ranch and West Pastures, at West Pastures, land between the A1290 and A19, between the slip road from A1290 to A19 southbound and the road connecting A1290 to Washington Road, and the area between that road and the residential area to the east.

5.7.5 Based on a review of the strategic flood risk assessments for both South Tyneside and Sunderland, no information pertaining to historical flooding or areas of critical drainage were identified.

16 https://flood-map-for-planning.service.gov.uk/

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

Potential Receptors 5.7.6 The following potential receptors are associated with the IAMP TWO development:  Surface water in the River Don/tributary and smaller watercourses;  Local surface drains receiving site discharge;  Land at IAMP TWO;  Immediately adjacent land, including IAMP ONE; and  Land downstream of IAMP TWO. Potential Impacts and Effects 5.7.7 The following potential impacts may be associated with the IAMP TWO development:  Impacts on water from chemical/silt pollution;  Changes in flood risk;  Changes in surface water characteristics, catchments and run-off rates; and  Changes in water quality. Scope of the Assessment 5.7.8 The water resources and flood risk assessment will describe the existing surface water and drainage environment for the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary, based on existing collated data, available baseline information and site walkover; this being focused on:  The watercourses of the River Don plus tributary and associated fluvial flooding; and  Site drainage and catchments with regards surface water runoff.

5.7.9 The detailed site-specific Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) and incorporated Drainage Strategy (DS) for IAMP TWO will be prepared separately from the ES by Systra. These are currently being prepared based upon the indicative masterplan layout (Appendix A; Indicative Masterplan) and will be integral to inform the assessment process for the EIA.

5.7.10 The effects analysis and impact assessment will set the scene for the assessment by reviewing the relevant policy context for the development and the significance criteria will be established.

5.7.11 The impact analysis will identify potential receptors, likely those listed above, and assign a significance.

5.7.12 The impact analysis will evaluate the potential impacts and effects during construction and operation, likely those listed above, as a result of the IAMP TWO development. Effects are to be established by comparing the baseline to the design information for the IAMP TWO development.

5.7.13 The analysis will undertake a qualitative assessment of effects. This will consider which receptor is impacted and its sensitivity, the magnitude of the change and whether adverse or beneficial, whether the change is direct or indirect, short or long term and temporary or permanent and determine an effect significance. This determination will consider the embedded mitigation in the design. For this development, such mitigation may include:  Freeboard on design flood levels;  Finished floor levels and ground raising;

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

 Flood storage compensation;  Mimic of baseline catchments in development;  Attenuation of run-off rates and pollution hazard reduction using sustainable drainage; and  Good practice in construction environment management and pollution prevention.

5.7.14 Additional mitigation, monitoring and management will be proposed if effects are identified to be significant and are required to be reduced.

5.7.15 Following completion of the development assessment, the effects of development will be considered with a wider cumulative effects assessment. 5.8 Geology, Ground Condition and Groundwater Baseline Conditions 5.8.1 The geological maps provided as part of the Landmark Envirocheck® show that IAMP TWO is underlain by superficial deposits, predominantly clay, along with alluvium and glaciolacustrine deposits comprising clay, silt, sand and gravel. The maps do not indicate that IAMP TWO is underlain by Made Ground.

5.8.2 The maps indicate that the bedrock geology is characterised by coal measures including the Pennine Upper Coal Measures Formation and the Pennine Middle Coal Measures Formation. The Landmark Envirocheck® Bedrock and Faults map indicates that faults are located at the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. IAMP TWO is within an area that may be affected by coal mining.

5.8.3 IAMP TWO lies on bedrock classified by the Environment Agency as ‘Secondary A Aquifer’ which are capable of supporting water at a local scale. The superficial aquifer is designated as ‘Unproductive Strata’.

5.8.4 There are no Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) or other sensitive land use areas located within IAMP TWO.

5.8.5 IAMP TWO has been the subject of recent site investigations and the detailed logs and analytical records from these surveys will be utilised to refine the prevailing baseline ground conditions at the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary.

5.8.6 A list of publicly available information regarding IAMP TWO and the surrounding area is provided in the Landmark Envirocheck® report commissioned for the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. The report indicates the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary has historically comprised predominantly farms and agricultural land however the following are, or have previously been located within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary:  A waste management facility;  A railway line;  A historical landfill;  Electricity pylons; and  A gas valve compound. Potential Impacts and Effects 5.8.7 The IAMP TWO development will be required to incorporate appropriate drainage systems to prevent pollution and these will be managed in accordance with operational environmental management plans

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

for each development. As a result, IAMP TWO is not anticipated to have a significant adverse effect on the ground conditions of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary or the surrounding area during the operation of the strategic main infrastructure works.

5.8.8 Details of any potentially polluting materials that would be used during the operational phase at the individual commercial and industrial units at IAMP TWO will be unknown at the time of assessment. Therefore we will seek to agree that any proposed end-use giving rise to potential pollution will require the preparation of detailed pollution prevention and control management plans prior to commissioning.

5.8.9 It is considered likely the potential effects will be limited primarily to the construction phase. Effects during this phase may include impacts on groundwater or human health (e.g. construction workers) if contaminated land is encountered or disturbed during construction. Scope of Assessment and Assessment Methodology 5.8.10 Potential effects on the ground and groundwater during construction and the potential for contaminated land to affect human health during construction will be scoped into the EIA. Consideration will also be given to potential operational effects, but it is anticipated that any such potential effects will be avoided by the implementation and maintenance of an appropriate drainage system and pollution prevention measures in accordance with the detailed drainage strategy for IAMP TWO.

5.8.11 In order to define the baseline conditions for geology, ground condition and groundwater at the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary, existing reports and published information relating to the Site and the local area will be reviewed. This desk-based exercise will focus upon published data, design information and reports that have been produced by third parties for the IAMP TWO development, including the results of the site investigation work and associated laboratory testing of soils. The site investigation work is currently ongoing and the laboratory results will be made available once the analysis has been completed.

5.8.12 The framework that the baseline will follow comprises:  Geology and soils properties;  Identification of sensitive receptors;  Screening of risk to receptors by defining source-pathway-receptor relationships;  Historical land use;  Current land use;  Mining legacy;  Land quality, soils, agriculture and land use;  Landfill and waste;  Land classification; and  Hydrogeology, aquifer status and groundwater vulnerability.

5.8.13 On completion of the baseline desk study, receptors will be identified in relation to the proposed IAMP TWO development. Sensitive receptors are likely to include construction workers, construction plant, the IAMP TWO facilities, coal resources, land quality (in the context of soils) and groundwater quality.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

5.8.14 A Phase 1 Environmental Site assessment will be undertaken for contamination, unexploded ordnance (UXOs) and geotechnical conditions at the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. A preliminary Conceptual Site Model (CSM) will also be developed, including potential sources of contamination from both current and historical land uses and potential pathways to significant sensitive receptors located both on and off the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. If necessary, a walkover will be undertaken to obtain more information about the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary and potential sources of contamination.

5.8.15 The impact assessment will consider the results of the Phase 1 desk-based assessment when assessing the potential effects of the construction phase of IAMP TWO. The assessment will consider the potential magnitude and significance of effects on the identified receptors that could result from earthworks, foundation design and drainage schemes in the absence of any mitigation. Where appropriate, the EIA will identify measures for the remediation of the potentially impacted soil and/or groundwater encountered during the construction phase. In addition, mitigation measures will be proposed to eliminate the risk of mobilising contaminants during construction.

5.8.16 If, as a result of the assessment, mitigation and monitoring are considered necessary to minimise the likelihood of significant environmental effects, then a further assessment of these will be undertaken, and the likely residual effects presented. 5.9 Ecology and Biodiversity Baseline Conditions 5.9.1 There are no statutory designated nature conservation sites within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary, although there are a number that are known to lie within 10 km (including Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Special Protection Area (SPA), Ramsar and SSSI). Three International/European designated sites occur within 10 km of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary, as shown on Drawing 6. These are:  Durham Coast SAC – located 6.5 km northeast of the IAMP TWO Site, designated for the only example of vegetated sea cliffs on magnesian limestone exposures in the UK; and  Northumbria Coast Ramsar and SPA – located 6.4 km east of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary, designated as both a Ramsar site and an SPA for its populations of Little Tern Sterna albifrons, Purple Sandpiper Calidris maritima and Turnstone Arenaria interpres, which are species of European importance.

5.9.2 The ES for IAMP ONE considered these designated sites and no ecological pathways were identified. However, the potential for ecological pathways between IAMP TWO and the designated sites will be assessed as part of the EIA process.

5.9.3 There are no statutory (e.g. SSSI) protected sites within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. However, there are 21 SSSIs within 10 km of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary (Drawing 6). Of these, there are five SSSI’s situated within 3 km of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary, comprising:  Claxheugh Rock & Ford Limestone Quarry;  Hylton Castle Cutting;  West Farm Meadow, Boldon;  South Hylton Pasture; and  Wear River Bank.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

5.9.4 Twenty Local Nature Reserves (LNRs) occur within 10 km of the IAMP TWO Site, the two closest LNR’s (within 2 km) are:  Barmston Pond; and  Hylton Dene.

5.9.5 There are two non-statutory Local Wildlife Sites (LWS), Elliscope Farm/Hylton Bridge and The River Don, East House, located within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. In both cases, the Environmental Records Centre North East (ERIC NE) have provided citations for these sites:  Elliscope Farm East/Hylton Bridge cLWS17 “consists of two small woodlands and the linking section of the River Don, leading east from Hylton Bridge Farm. Elliscope Farm East is a linear, mature broadleaf plantation dominated by sycamore, with ash and elder. The understorey has bramble and species-poor neutral grassland”.  The River Don, East House cLWS “consists of a section of the River Don between East House Farm and Hylton Bridge Farm. In this stretch the Don has mostly unmodified riverbank with features such as meanders, eroding earth cliffs, riffles and pools, and dead wood. Substrates vary from coarse silts to gravel, cobbles and the occasional boulder. The aquatic and marginal vegetation within the river channel typically includes branched bur-reed, reed canary-grass, fool’s watercress and Himalayan balsam”.

5.9.6 As described by White Young Green (201518), land within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary is dominated by arable fields with species-poor and occasional species-rich hedgerows, as well as small pockets of plantation and semi-natural woodland. The River Don transects the Site. The majority of terrestrial habitat within the IAMP TWO Site is of low intrinsic ecological value, comprising large fields of arable crops flanked by hedgerows of generally varied quality. However, riparian habitat, the River Don and linear boundary features, comprised of dry ditches and hedgerows, provide varying levels of connectivity though the IAMP TWO Site and exhibit some intrinsic value as refuge, nesting and foraging resources for farmland bird species. Potential Impacts and Effects 5.9.7 The following potential effects may be associated with the IAMP TWO development:  Modification of terrestrial and aquatic habitat during construction;  Permanent loss of terrestrial habitat and ditch aquatic habitat during construction;  Increase in sediment loading to riparian receptors (River Don);  Increase in vehicular and pedestrian activity during construction (including noise effects);  Construction lighting effects;  Habitat connectivity (severance) effects during construction and operation (including riparian, River Don);  Permanent change in surface water drainage regimes; and

17 Candidate LWS, citations provided by ERIC NE

18 White Young Green (2015). Sunderland City Council Land North of Nissan Final Report December 2015

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

 Operational management, noise and lighting effects during operation. Scope of Assessment and Assessment Methodology 5.9.8 The ecology and biodiversity assessment will provide details of the protected sites, species or habitats at the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary or beyond that could be potentially affected by the development proposals.

5.9.9 The assessment will include an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey, with supporting desk study/literature review, analysis and Ecological Impact Assessment reporting. The assessment will be undertaken in accordance with the second edition of the Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland produced by the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM, 2016) and the British Standard BS42020:2013 Biodiversity – Code of Practice for Planning and Development.

5.9.10 It is not currently clear whether the IAMP TWO development proposals will trigger a Water Framework Directive (WFD) Compliance Assessment. As such, the potential scope of a WFD assessment is not included in this scoping report. The need for inclusion will be guided following initial consultation with the SCC and STC’s ecologists and in liaison with the EA, as required. In the event a WFD assessment is required, the scope will be agreed with the statutory bodies concerned and enacted; the results of this accompanying the application for consent.

5.9.11 Mitigation, compensation and enhancement measures will be fully detailed. The mitigation strategy would dovetail appropriately with the IAMP ONE biodiversity offset (part of the broader ELMA strategy), which is committed via the planning decision process for IAMP ONE.

5.9.12 Owing to the seasonal constraints regarding ecological baseline data collection, a suite of baseline surveys has already been commissioned in order to develop a robust ecological baseline for the IAMP TWO Site. This suite of surveys, which is currently underway, and was agreed with the SCC and STC ecologists, includes:  Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey - a survey to map all areas of habitat on and up to 50 m from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary (where access allows). The survey procedure and habitat plan produced will be at an appropriate scale and will follow the guidance provided in the ‘Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey’ (JNCC, 2007) and further developed in the ‘Guidelines for Baseline Ecological Assessment’ (Institute of Environmental Assessment). Target notes will be produced to accompany the Extended Phase 1 Habitat plan which will identify important ecological features;  Breeding Bird Surveys, including barn owl;  Great crested newt survey;  Initial bat surveys of buildings and trees, tree climbing assessment, transect and emergence and dawn re-entry survey;  A non-native invasive species survey to identify the presence of non-native invasive species listed on Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), such as Japanese knotweed;  Brown hare transects; and  Otter and Water Vole surveys.

5.9.13 Additionally, a desk study/literature review will be undertaken to include a review of any existing ecological data pertinent to the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary within a defined study area. This study area will extend up to 2 km from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary for local, non-statutory designated

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

ecological sites, and up to 10 km from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary for statutory (national and international) designated sites. To supplement the information collated from the review, the following will also be consulted:  Multi Agency Geographical Information for the Countryside (MAGIC online database);  A formal data request from the local biological records centre;  National Biodiversity Network (NBN online database);  The local Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP); and  Natural England (formerly English Nature) Natural Area Profile (NAP).

5.9.14 An impact assessment will be undertaken to consider the potential effects on the identified ecology baseline receptors during the construction and operational phases of the IAMP TWO development. An Extended Phase 1 Habitat Plan of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary and the immediate environs will be produced to accompany the assessment.

5.9.15 The Ecological Impact Assessment will consider the habitats present and details of any potential protected species that may be present within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. The assessment will address any key ecological constraints and propose mitigation recommendations that are commensurate with the level of ecological value apparent at the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary.

5.9.16 In accordance with the CIEEM guidance (2016), the value of habitats and species will be measured against published selection criteria, where available. Recognised site selection criteria are applied for the designation of sites of international importance, such as Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) (Brown et al., 1997) and nationally important sites such as SSSIs (Nature Conservancy Council, 1989).

5.9.17 Other selection criteria may be present at a regional or local level, most often prepared by the local authority or Wildlife Trusts in the form of Biodiversity Action Plans (BAP’s) or priority species lists to be used during the impact assessment process. Where such guidance exists, it forms a clearly defined starting point for the evaluation of sites that fail to meet the criteria set out for national sites. However, in the absence of such selection criteria guidance, it is possible to place ecological importance on recognised site features, based upon the criteria defined in Ratcliffe (1977) - naturalness, size, rarity and diversity.

5.9.18 Where, as a result of the assessment, mitigation and monitoring are considered necessary to minimise the likelihood of significant environmental effects, a further assessment of these will be undertaken, and the likely residual effects presented.

5.9.19 Mitigation measures will include provision within the ELMA for ecological habitat creation and enhancement based upon the results of the ecological impact assessment process. 5.10 Access and Transport 5.10.1 The access and transport assessment describes the potential impacts associated with IAMP TWO activities during the construction and operation phases. It describes the current environmental baseline for access and transport before assessing the additional traffic and transport movements that will be generated during the construction and operation phases, which have the potential to cause disruption.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

Baseline Conditions Highway Network 5.10.2 A micro-simulation traffic model of the existing road network has been produced and will be used to assist in the assessment of the baseline operations. The extent and scope of the micro-simulation model have been agreed with SCC, STC and HE.

5.10.3 The extent of the micro-simulation model is shown in Figure 1 and includes the following junctions:  A19 / A184 Testo’s Roundabout;  A19 / A1290 Downhill Lane Junction;  A19 / A1231 Wessington Way Junction;  A1231 / Nissan Way Junction;  A1231 / Spire Road Junction;  A1231 / A195 Junction;  A1231 / Windlass Lane Junction;  A194(M) / A195 / Follingsby Lane Junction;  Junctions along the A195 - between A1231 and the A194(M); and  Points of access into Nissan.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

Figure 1: Extent of micro-simulation traffic model

5.10.4 Comprehensive traffic data collection exercises were undertaken in May 2018 and June 2018 across the network, which included junction turning count surveys, queue length surveys, automatic number plate recognition surveys (to establish vehicle route choice and journey times) and automatic traffic count loops.

5.10.5 When considering existing and future operations of the road network, the impact of Nissan shift- operations will be included within assessments, as these notably influence traffic conditions locally. The shifts operated on Nissan’s Production Line 1 are:  Day Shift: Monday – Friday: 07.00 – 15.35 hrs;  Late Shift: Monday – Friday: 15.30 – 23.20 hrs;  Night Shift: Monday – Friday: 23.15 – 07.05 hrs; and  Employees working at the offices at Nissan work between the hours of 07.55 – 16.40 hrs (Monday – Thursday) and 07:55 – 14:25 hrs on Friday.

5.10.6 The A184 runs in a west-east direction to the north of the IAMP TWO development and forms part of the SRN. The A184 meets the A19 at the Testo’s roundabout, which is an at-grade junction. To the

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

west of the Testo’s roundabout, the A184 is a dual carriageway with two lanes in each direction, flaring to three lanes on the approach to Testo’s roundabout. This section has a central reserve and is subject to a derestricted speed limit. To the east of the Testo’s roundabout, the A184 is a single carriageway, flaring to three lanes on the westbound approach to the Testo’s roundabout. This section is subject to a 40 mph speed limit.

5.10.7 The Testo’s roundabout was subject to a separate DCO application by HE (A19/A184 Testo’s Junction Improvement), which proposes the creation of a new grade-separated junction. Development consent was granted in September 2018. The baseline assessment for IAMP TWO considers the operations of the junction in its existing form and future-year assessments will consider the proposed new layout being completed and in operation. Consideration will, however, be given to any overlap of the construction phases.

5.10.8 A footway is present along the northern edge of the A184 and pedestrians cross the Testo’s roundabout by using signal-controlled pelican crossings.

5.10.9 The A19 runs in a north-south direction to the east of IAMP TWO development and is also part of the SRN. It is a derestricted all-purpose dual carriageway route. It has two lanes southbound on the approach to the Downhill Lane junction. Northbound, there are two-lanes that widen to three lanes after the lane gain arrangement from the Downhill Lane junction. The road is subject to the national derestricted speed limit and there is a central reserve to segregate opposing traffic. Street lighting and footways are not present.

5.10.10 The A19/A1290 Downhill Lane Junction is a key node on the local network and will provide one of the main accesses into the proposed IAMP TWO development from the SRN. The junction currently operates as two signalised junctions on either side of the A19. The conflict in traffic flows resulting from the inbound and outbound flows to/from Nissan currently lead to both junctions experiencing high levels of queuing and congestion in both the morning and afternoon peak periods.

5.10.11 The Downhill Lane Junction will be subject to a separate DCO application by HE (A19 Downhill Lane Junction Improvement), which proposes the creation of a new three-lane bridge and a reconfiguration of the slip-roads. The baseline assessment for IAMP TWO considers the operations of the junction in its existing form and future-year assessments will consider the proposed new layout being completed and in operation. Consideration will, however, be given to any overlap of the construction phases.

5.10.12 To the east of the A19/Downhill Lane Junction, Downhill Lane is a single carriageway road with soft verges and no footway or street lighting provision. It meets Washington Road at a priority-controlled junction. Washington Road is a single carriageway road subject to a derestricted speed limit near the Downhill Lane junction. When it passes the residential community of Town End Farm after Ferryboat Lane, the speed limit is reduced to 40 mph. A central reserve is present as the road approaches Ferryboat Lane. After Ferryboat Lane, bus stops are present on Washington Road, as are footways and street lighting.

5.10.13 The A1290 dissects the IAMP TWO development and runs from the A19 / Downhill Lane Junction in a south-west direction before then heading directly west. The road is a single carriageway and is subject to a national speed limit. A T-junction provides access to Nissan from the A1290. The junction is signalised for right turns from Nissan and for eastbound traffic on the A1290. Vehicles turning into Nissan from the off-side lane of the A1290 east are required to give way, as are vehicles travelling west from Nissan. The Nissan access has two lanes for journeys into Nissan and three lanes for vehicles leaving. To the west of the IAMP TWO development and Nissan, this link has several junctions that lead to nearby commercial properties.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

5.10.14 Follingsby Lane, which runs from a north-west to south-east direction through the IAMP TWO development, is relatively rural in nature and is a narrow single carriageway with soft verge and/or hedgerow. Follingsby Lane narrows near the existing bridge structure over the River Don, which is also subject to a 2.5 tonne weight limit.

5.10.15 The A1231 runs in an east-west direction to the south of the IAMP TWO development, to the south of Nissan. To the east of the A19/Wessington Way roundabout, the A1231 is a dual carriageway with a derestricted speed limit.

5.10.16 Nissan Way is the main access to Nissan from the A1231. Nissan Way is a single carriageway road subject to a derestricted speed limit. For vehicles turning eastbound, there are a separate right turn pockets and central hatching. A footway is present on the eastern side of Nissan Way. This footway has a guard railing to separate pedestrians from the traffic. Street lighting and signalised pedestrian crossings with dropped kerbs and tactile paving are available on Nissan Way.

5.10.17 Cherry Blossom Way connects Nissan Way to commercial units and car parking adjacent to Nissan. It is a single carriageway road subject to 40 mph speed limits. Parking is prohibited with trief kerbs and double yellow lines used to enforce this prohibition. Access to units or car parks along Cherry Blossom Way is via priority junctions. A conventional roundabout is also situated on Cherry Blossom Way.

5.10.18 Footways and street lighting are present on both sides of the road and one footway is shared use for cyclists and pedestrians. Cherry Blossom Way forms part of a bus route and bus stops are present on both sides of the road.

5.10.19 To the west of the IAMP TWO development, the A195 runs in a north-south direction and connects the A1231 with the A194(M). It is a single carriageway and is subject to a derestricted speed limit.

5.10.20 During the lead up to the morning Nissan shift change-over period at approximately 06:30 – 07:00 hrs, congestion and delay typically occurs along the A1290, up to and including the A19 Downhill Lane Junction. Outside of the Nissan shift change-over period the local road network operates with traffic moving in generally free-flow conditions, however limited spare capacity remains, frequently leading to short periods of congestion and queuing. Walking 5.10.21 There is generally a good network of footways near the proposed IAMP TWO development, which offer a choice of suitable routes to nearby bus stops, car parking or other destinations. External pedestrian routes in and around the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary are well lit and generally in good condition.

5.10.22 Pedestrians can travel along Washington Road to access a footbridge over the A19. This route links to the residential area of Town End Farm. Residential communities to the west of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary can be accessed via pedestrian footways along the A1290. Cycling 5.10.23 Cycling offers a viable modal choice for IAMP TWO, with several residential areas within a 30-minute journey from the site, such as northwest Sunderland, Washington, Wardley, Hedworth and Boldon.

5.10.24 Currently, the provision of designated on or off-road cycle routes near the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary and in the surrounding area is generally good. Equestrians 5.10.25 Formal equestrian routes within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary and connecting in to the site are limited. The majority of bridleways, byways and restricted byways in the Tyne and Wear area are linear, limiting the opportunity for horse riding as a leisure pursuit. However, it should be noted that looking at

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

public rights of way (PROW) in isolation understates the opportunity for equestrians to access rights of way. Outside of the peak traffic periods, the minor road network within IAMP TWO has relatively low traffic levels and as such, offers equestrians the ability to connect into those routes that do exist beyond the site.

5.10.26 Horses are kept on land within the ownership of IAMP LLP at North Moor Farm, which is within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. The number of horses kept in the field does vary but is normally less than ten. The field occupied for grazing purposes is no longer under a formal tenancy agreement and work ongoing in relation to the ELMA will establish the extent to which the existing tenant may or may not be offered a new tenancy by IAMP LLP. The IAMP LLP has also been working closely with HE to ensure that connectivity for equestrians users across the A19, to be set out as part of HE’s A19 Downhill Lane Junction Improvement DCO scheme, will connect to the equestrian proposals on IAMP and these have been discussed with the Local Access Forum. Bus 5.10.27 Bus services are located on the A1290 and have regular services operating in both directions, which pass and stop at Nissan. The buses provide access to Chester-le-Street, South Shields, Sunderland, Durham, Gateshead and Newcastle. The potential for public transport trips is significant as a 30-minute journey from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary covers north Sunderland, Washington, parts of Pelaw, parts of Hebburn, South Shields, Southwick and Castletown. Potential Impacts and Effects 5.10.28 Sensitive receptors have been identified in the surrounding area. These include the existing employment area, schools and built up areas. The sensitive receptors located near to IAMP TWO, in relation to access and transport, are considered to be:  Nissan and surrounding employers;  Washington Community Fire Station;  Schools and nurseries (including Marlborough Primary School, Castle View Enterprise Academy, Elm Tree Farm Garden Nursery and Washington School);  Sites of ecological value (Barmston Pond Local Natural Reserve and Hylton Dene Local Nature Reserve);  Residential areas (Town End Farm, Hylton Castle, Castletown, West Boldon);  Travellers’ site on West Pastures Lane; and  Access to Nissan from the A1290. 5.10.29 The construction and operation of IAMP TWO will generate additional movements of cars, light goods vehicles, buses and HGVs on the surrounding road network, all of which may potentially effect the above identified receptors.

5.10.30 Potential effects could include issues associated with severance, pedestrian delay and amenity, fear and intimidation. There could also be potential effects on driver stress associated with changes in traffic speeds, flows, congestion, road layout and geometry, visibility, junction layout and frequency, road surface characteristics or carriageway widths; and an increased risk of accidents.

5.10.31 The prohibition of motor vehicles from a section of West Pastures Lane through the Northern Employment Area of IAMP TWO, and the eastern section of Downhill Lane from Hylton Bridge to A1290,

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

is currently being considered. The effect of these proposals will be assessed as the result of such measures would be to reduce route choice options for vehicular access.

5.10.32 The Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) guidelines (“Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic” [GEART]) will form the basis for the assessment of environmental impacts used in the assessment. These impacts are:  Severance;  Driver stress and delay;  Pedestrian amenity and delay;  Cyclist amenity and delay;  Fear and intimidation; and  Highway safety. Severance 5.10.33 Severance is defined in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) (Vol 11 Section 3 Part 8) as “the separation of residents from facilities and services they use within their community caused by new or improved roads or by changes in traffic flows.”

5.10.34 Several factors are considered in determining the existing level of severance. These include: road width; traffic flow and composition; traffic speeds; and the availability of pedestrian crossing facilities.

5.10.35 The DMRB provides a set of measures for the identification of community severance. Based on the level of two-way traffic flows on a link, the DMRB offers guidance as to the level of pedestrian diversion that may occur because of changes in the two-way traffic flow present on link. Driver Stress and Delay 5.10.36 Driver stress, as outlined in the DMRB (Vol 11, Sec 3 Part 9), comprises three principal elements: frustration; fear of potential collisions; and uncertainty relating to the route being followed. The weight of these factors varies depending on the driver, leading to a subjective assessment. For example, drivers commuting will frequently experience a higher stress threshold due to experience and knowledge of a route compared to those who may only drive occasionally for leisure or personal purposes. There is no information as to composition of each driver type, and so this requires consideration when judging the effects of a proposed development.

5.10.37 The GEART screening thresholds do not apply to this effect, as the potential impact is defined as significant when the network surrounding the development is at, or close to, capacity.

5.10.38 Driver stress incorporates qualitative elements, such as driver perceptions. It also incorporates quantitative assessments related to vehicle speeds and the ability for drivers to overtake slower vehicles, which in turn influences driver delay. Vehicle delay and queues will be determined from the results provided from the traffic modelling software and will be used to determine likely driver stress.

5.10.39 Delays usually occur at junctions, especially when they are operating close to, or at, capacity. Pedestrian and Cyclist Amenity and Delay 5.10.40 The quality of the pedestrian and cycle environment has been defined on a scale ranging from ‘poor’ to ‘very good’, based on a qualitative assessment involving the following aspects:  Levels of connectivity (routes providing a coherent network of links between primary land-uses);

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

 Safety;  Crossing (controlled and uncontrolled);  Lighting (presence of street lighting or light spill);  Footway and cycleway quality;  Barriers (obstruction to most convenient routes, including topography); and  Attractiveness. Fear and Intimidation 5.10.41 Fear and intimidation criteria are considered within GEART to be dependent on the volume of traffic, its HGV component and its proximity to people, or the lack of protection caused by such factors as narrow pavement widths. Highway safety 5.10.42 Where a development is expected to produce a change in the character of traffic, then data on existing accident levels may not be sufficient. Professional judgement is also required to assess the implications of a development on highway safety. The assessment should include local considerations or factors, which may impact the risk of accidents.

5.10.43 In accordance with the GEART guidance, a review of existing collisions in the study area will be undertaken. The purpose will be to establish if a pattern of collision types exists, by reviewing collision clusters. Cluster sites are sensitive receptors for this study as they could potentially be impacted by changes in traffic flows, therefore more detailed analysis of local factors will be undertaken at these sites.

5.10.44 Appropriate mitigation will be identified to address the potential environmental effects, key issues and constraints. Mitigation will likely focus on:  Connectivity for all modes;  Highway capacity;  Public transport;  Other sustainable transport measures; and  Construction Traffic Management Plan. Connectivity for all Modes 5.10.45 It is important that the proposed IAMP TWO development connects effectively to the surrounding areas and indeed be integrated with IAMP ONE. It will therefore be necessary to provide new, good standard access roads with pedestrian and cycleways along the main spine roads, along with a suitable bridging structure over the River Don to connect to the northern employment area.

5.10.46 A new bridge over the A19 will be required to provide a suitable connection between IAMP TWO and the local road network to the east of the A19. This bridge will cater for all modes of transport and will enable a greater route choice for all users.

5.10.47 Providing for all modes of transport and creating a sustainable development will be key to the success of the IAMP and as such, a permeable network for all modes of transport will be provided.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

Highway Capacity 5.10.48 A new bridge over the A19 will be important for connecting the proposed development to land to the east. It will also serve as an important link for the distribution of traffic on the road network, including that generated by Nissan and the proposed development. Providing this alternative route choice will contribute to alleviating congestion at the A19 Downhill Lane junction. From this new link over the A19, a new road will also be constructed to provide another direct access into Nissan for staff and potentially, goods.

5.10.49 The A1290 will experience high volumes of traffic movement when the proposed development is operational, and the current capacity of this single carriageway will be insufficient. It will therefore be necessary to upgrade this link to provide a dual carriageway, with two lanes in each direction.

5.10.50 The A19 junctions at Testo’s and Downhill Lane currently act as a network constraint for access to the proposed development and require improvement to their capacity. HE is progressing major project schemes to provide additional capacity at these junctions, which include the A19 Testo’s junction becoming grade-separated and a fully grade-separated junction to be provided at Downhill Lane junction. The design and implementation of these schemes are themselves the subject of separate DCO applications and independent of IAMP TWO. Public Transport 5.10.51 Options for improving accessibility to IAMP by public transport are being considered by the PTWG, including new bus services, re-routing of existing services and timetable changes.

5.10.52 The internal road layout within IAMP TWO will need to ensure that buses into the site can be accommodated. Other Sustainable Transport Measures 5.10.53 It is important that the proposed development promotes a sustainable travel ethos from the outset and to this end, each end user on the site will be part of an over-arching Travel Plan. Within the Travel Plan, a number of initiatives and measures will be identified to promote travel by sustainable means.

5.10.54 The proposed infrastructure to support the proposed development will also include a combination of shared-use cycleways and crossing points. Appropriate provisions will also be considered in the masterplan for equestrian users. Construction Traffic Management Plan 5.10.55 The purpose of the Construction Traffic Management Plan will be to set out the transport arrangements (such as the intended HGV routes) for the proposed development and to demonstrate how the impact of vehicles will be mitigated on the local road network so that existing users and residents are not adversely affected. Scope of Assessment and Assessment Methodology 5.10.56 The access and transport assessment will consider the potential access and transport effects of the proposed IAMP TWO development. The potential effects of IAMP TWO development traffic on the surrounding local and strategic transport network will be fully considered.

5.10.57 The assessment will consider the likely construction and operational effects arising from the IAMP TWO development and their duration. Mitigation measures required to prevent or reduce adverse impacts arising from the IAMP TWO development will be recommended.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

5.10.58 It is anticipated that during any decommissioning activities, the number of traffic movements would likely to be similar, or fewer than, the numbers during the construction phase and as such will not be assessed separately.

5.10.59 The Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) guidelines (“Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic” [GEART]) sets out a methodology for assessing potentially significant environmental effects where a proposed development is likely to give rise to changes in traffic flows.

5.10.60 The significance of each effect is considered against the GEART criteria, where possible. However, GEART states that: “for many effects, there are no simple rules or formulae which define the thresholds of significance and there is, therefore, a need for interpretation and judgement on the part of the assessor, backed-up by data or quantified information wherever possible. Such judgements will include the assessment of the numbers of people experiencing a change in environmental impact as well as the assessment of the damage to various natural resources.”

5.10.61 In the absence of established significance criteria for traffic and transport effects, professional judgement will be used to assess whether the effects on access and transport are significant. The scale and extent of this assessment will be determined using GEART. The significance falls into two categories – not significant and significant. The latter corresponds to significant effects in accordance with the IEMA regulations.

5.10.62 GEART states that projected changes in traffic of less than 10% create no discernible environmental effect, given that daily variations in background traffic flow may fluctuate by this amount, and that a 30% change in traffic flow represents a reasonable threshold for including a highway link within the assessment. The threshold for a detailed assessment will therefore be set at a 30% change in traffic flow and at 10% in sensitive areas. 5.11 Socio-Economics Baseline Conditions 5.11.1 Nissan Manufacturing UK (NMUK) in Sunderland represents a major employer in the North East of England and has been the largest car plant in the UK for 14 years, and the largest exporter for 12 years. The Nissan plant currently accounts for one third of all UK car production, with production surpassing 500,000 vehicles in 2013. This is set to expand further, with the clear majority of these manufactured for export. Sunderland's current trajectory will take it beyond 600,000 cars a year and is on track to become one of the world's largest car plant complexes. In addition, in the North East of England region there are 25 tier one automotive suppliers, with over 7,000 people employed in Sunderland's Nissan plant, which, in turn, underpins over 20,000 supplier jobs in the wider region.

5.11.2 NMUK, the European home of Nissan, is located to the south of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary.

5.11.3 Sunderland had a population of over 277,000 in 2017. Unemployment in the area in 2017 (6.2%) was marginally below the regional average (6.3%) but above the Great Britain average (4.5%).

5.11.4 Between 2009 and 2016, the total number of jobs in Sunderland rose by 3,000 (from 116,850 to 119,850). This represents an increase of 2.6%, marginally higher than the corresponding figure at the regional level (2.5%) but significantly below that recorded across Great Britain (8.8%). The industrial base in Sunderland is characterised by high proportions of employment in the following sectors:  Manufacturing: accounting for 16.7% of jobs at the local level, in comparison with 10.6% regionally and 7.9% nationally;

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

 Public Administration and Defence: accounting for 6.7% of jobs at the local level, in comparison with 6.2% regionally and 4.2% nationally; and  Finance and Insurance: accounting for 4.2% of jobs at the local level, in comparison with 2.0% regionally and 3.5% nationally.

5.11.5 South Tyneside had a population of just under 150,000 in 2017. Unemployment in the area in 2017 (8.5%) was above both the North East (6.3%) and Great Britain averages (4.5%).

5.11.6 Between 2009 and 2016, the total number of jobs in South Tyneside contracted by 410 (from 43,040 to 42,630). This represents a decline of 1.0%, whereas positive growth in employment was recorded at both the regional (2.5%) and national (8.8%) level over the same period. The industrial base in South Tyneside is characterised by high proportions of employment in the following sectors:  Health: accounting for 18.8% of jobs at the local level, in comparison with 16.2% regionally and 13.0% nationally;  Manufacturing: accounting for 11.7% of jobs at the local level, in comparison with 10.6% regionally and 7.9% nationally; and  Arts, Entertainment, Recreation & Other Services: accounting for 5.9% of jobs at the local level, in comparison with 4.7% regionally and 4.6% nationally. Potential Impacts and Effects 5.11.7 Given the scale and location of the proposed IAMP TWO development, it is anticipated that some of the socio-economic effects will be felt across a geographic area that extends beyond the Local Authority boundaries of Sunderland and South Tyneside. The following potential significant effects of the IAMP TWO development on socio-economics include:  Direct, indirect and induced employment;  Economic output;  Local Authority revenue;  Local amenities; and  Housing. Scope of Assessment and Assessment Methodology 5.11.8 In order to define the primary area of impact, available census data regarding travel to work patterns and the analysis presented in relation to IAMP ONE will be considered.

5.11.9 In identifying those effects to be scoped into the EIA, regard has been given to: a review of baseline conditions; the scale and nature of the proposed development; and the need to ensure consistency of approach with IAMP ONE.

5.11.10 The socio-economic assessment will be desk-based and will draw upon relevant guidance and best practice (including the 2014 Additionality Guide published by the Homes and Communities Agency). It will consider the likely effects of the development with respect to three distinct phases: during construction and operation.

5.11.11 Baseline conditions will be established for both the local authority areas and the primary area of impact (should the two differ). It is anticipated that the analysis of baseline conditions would include consideration of:

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

 Level of employment supported by Nissan (both directly and within the wider supply chain);  Job density (based upon the Office for National Statistics (ONS) Job Density data);  Historic employment change (based upon the ONS Business Register and Employment Survey);  Sectoral structure of employment (based upon the ONS Business Register and Employment Survey);  Historic business growth (based upon ONS Business Demography data);  Current economic output and changes over time (based upon data from ONS or Experian Business Strategies);  Unemployment (based upon ONS Claimant Count or Annual Population Survey data);  Skills and qualifications of the resident population (based upon ONS Annual Population Survey data);  Housing market indicators, including housing stock by type and tenure (based upon ONS Census data);  Projected future housing need (based upon the Council’s Strategic Housing Market Assessment) and any information regarding the potential impact of IAMP TWO in relation to future need; and  Deprivation (based upon the English Indices of Deprivation).

5.11.12 Where the availability of data permits, baseline conditions for Sunderland/South Tyneside and/or the primary area of impact will be benchmarked against national and regional averages.

5.11.13 Informal consultation for the assessment of this topic has not yet been undertaken with specific reference to the IAMP TWO development proposals. Based upon the approach adopted in relation to IAMP ONE, it is expected that consultation will be carried out with the IAMP Project Co-ordinator and the Economic Development and Housing Policy officers at both SCC and STC.

5.11.14 There are no generally accepted criteria for assessing the significance of socio-economic effects. As such, the proposed approach to assessing the significance of socio-economics effects is based upon:  The scale of the increase over the baseline position;  The nature and context of effects; and  The location and duration of the effect (where relevant).

5.11.15 The socio-economic assessment will identify the geographical areas within which most effects are expected to be observed. This will include the local impact area and the wider area of impact.

5.11.16 Effects will be identified as being beneficial or adverse, with the level of significance assessed on a sliding scale (substantial, moderate, minor and negligible).

5.11.17 The assessment will be informed by a review of baseline conditions in relation to the local economy, local labour market, local housing market, and demographics. In quantifying the potential effects of the development proposals, regard would be had to the principles of the Homes and Communities Agency Additionality Guide, 4th Edition (2014), where relevant.

5.11.18 When assessing effects during construction, consideration will be given to:

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

 Direct Employment - The direct employment effect of the construction phase of IAMP TWO will be estimated by applying a cost-per-job figure for the construction industry to the anticipated construction cost of the development. Consideration will also be given to the likely need for local and specialist construction labour, as well as opportunities for upskilling (apprenticeships and local labour sourcing etc.).  Indirect and Induced Employment - The wider (indirect and induced) employment effects of the IAMP TWO development will be considered by applying appropriate construction industry employment multiplier(s) to the direct employment effects.  Economic Output (Gross Value Added) - In estimating the economic output effect of the construction phase for IAMP TWO, regard will be had to both direct and indirect/induced effects. Direct economic output effects would be derived by applying an estimated Gross Value Added (GVA) per construction job to the direct employment effects. Appropriate construction industry GVA multiplier(s) will be applied to the direct economic output in order to estimate the wider (indirect and induced) effects.

5.11.19 When assessing effects during operation, consideration would be given to:  Direct Employment - The likely employment effect of the operational phase for IAMP TWO will be assessed by estimating the number of permanent jobs to be created as a result of the delivery of new employment floorspace at the site. This will be considered on the basis of both headcount and full-time equivalent jobs and estimated by applying appropriate employment densities to the quantum and mix of floorspace proposed, whilst also having regard to any existing employment estimates for the overall IAMP development site.  Adjustments will also be made to allow for any likely deadweight or displacement effects, in order to assess the employment effects in net additional terms. As part of this exercise, it is proposed to ‘net off’ any job losses associated with the closure or rationalisation of any farm holdings currently operating on the IAMP TWO Site. A qualitative assessment of the opportunities for local labour sourcing, training and upskilling would also be provided.  Indirect and Induced Employment - The indirect and induced employment effects will be calculated by applying appropriate multiplier(s) to the net direct employment effects.  Economic Output (Gross Value Added) - The direct economic output effects of the operational phase will be considered by applying sector-specific estimates of GVA per job to the net additional jobs to be created by the proposals. Analysis will be undertaken on the basis of direct employment effects only.  Wider Economic Contribution - A qualitative assessment of the development’s potential to contribute towards the Northern Powerhouse vision and the delivery of the North East Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) Strategic Economic Plan will be provided.  Housing - The assessment will consider the possible effects in relation to housing demand of the additional employment to be delivered through the development proposals. This will have regard to current housing market indicators and existing evidence-based documents (including the IAMP Housing Topic Paper). It is also proposed that discussions will be held with SCC and STC in order to understand how the employment effects of IAMP have been factored into their respective Strategic Housing Market Assessments.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

 Amenity - A commentary will be provided in relation to any changes to existing access to public open space or PROWs. This would be supported by a qualitative assessment of the scale of effect associated with the proposed development.

5.11.20 The socio-economic assessment will consider the need for any mitigation measures in order to avoid, reduce or compensate for any adverse socio-economic effects associated with the development proposals. This would reflect any relevant best practice guidance.

5.11.21 Where mitigation is proposed, the assessment will produce a clear summary of the residual effects of the development proposals, taking into account any relevant mitigation measures proposed. 5.12 Cumulative and Combined Effects 5.12.1 In accordance with guidance provided in PINS Advice Note 1719, the process of consulting on and identifying ‘other developments’ for consideration is underway, although a long list of ‘other developments’ to be is yet to be finalised. ‘Zones of Influence’ (ZOI) for each environmental aspect, as defined by the study area for each, are summarised in Section 6.0. ‘Other developments’ identified to date as Tier 1 (projects with the most certainty and level of available detail), Tier 2 (projects where a scoping report has been submitted) and Tier 3 (developments reasonably likely to come forward) for consideration in the cumulative assessment are presented in Table 4.

Table 4: Other Developments identified (to date) for potential inclusion in the cumulative assessment

Category Other Development

Tier 1 IAMP ONE – the main infrastructure component of IAMP ONE is scheduled for completion prior to the commencement of the IAMP TWO works. The construction of buildings within some of the plots, however, is expected to be ongoing.

A19/A184 Testo’s Junction Improvement – following consent this DCO project is currently expected to be constructed and operational prior to the commencement of the IAMP TWO works. Consequently, this could be excluded from the cumulative effects assessment and form part of the EIA baseline.

A19 Downhill Lane Junction Improvement – there is expected to be cross-over during the construction phases between this DCO project and IAMP TWO.

Sunderland Renewable Energy Centre – a planning application for a proposed energy recovery facility has been submitted to SCC by the applicant, Rolton Kilbride (SCC planning ref. no. 17/02085/MW4). The application site is located at Hillthorn Farm, approximately 1 km to the south-west of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary.

Unipres UK Ltd – a planning application has been submitted to SCC by the applicant, Unipres, for the erection of two extensions to their existing press and assembly shop buildings (SCC planning ref. no. 18/00459/FUL). The application site is located on the south side of the A1290 and opposite West Moor Farm, approximately 10 m south of the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary.

Tier 2 A1 Birtley to Coal House Improvement – a Scoping Report was submitted to PINS in 8 November 2017 for this HE promoted project seeking to widen the A1 between J65 and

19 The Planning Inspectorate (2015). Advice Note Seventeen: Cumulative effects assessment relevant to nationally significant infrastructure projects.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

Category Other Development

J67 (approximately 4.8 km to the south-west of IAMP TWO) in order to increase capacity. A Scoping Opinion was issued by PINS on 18 December 2017. It is unclear whether this scheme will be included in the ZOI.

Tier 3 IAMP ONE Phase 2 – a planning application, the details of which have not yet been finalised, is expected to be submitted during 2019 under PA2008 and, if approved, would be developed on land adjacent to IAMP ONE. Construction may be completed prior to the commencement of the IAMP TWO works. Consequently, this could be excluded from the cumulative effects assessment and form part of the EIA baseline.

5.12.2 The assessment of cumulative effects will be completed for each significant environmental topic that has been identified. This assessment will consider the cumulative effects of IAMP TWO on other developments under construction, as well as any approved developments yet to be constructed. Also to be included are other developments on the PINS Programme of Projects, and any other developments identified in relevant development plans that are reasonably likely to come forward.

5.12.3 The finalised list of other developments that will be included in the cumulative effects assessment will be compiled in consultation with the planning departments at SCC, STC and GC.

6.0 STUDY AREA EXTENTS 6.1.1 Table 5 summarises the extent of the study areas for each environmental discipline, beyond the IAMP TWO Site itself.

Table 5: Study Area Extent by Discipline

Environmental Topic Study Area Description

Air Quality Construction – Up to 350 m from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary and/or within 50 m of the route(s) used by construction vehicles on the public highway, up to 500 m from the site entrance(s). Operation – Up to 200 m from ‘affected roads’ (as described in Land-Use Planning and Development Control: Planning for Air Quality (2017)).

Noise Up to 500 m from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary.

Landscape and Visual Up to 4 km from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary.

Cultural Heritage Up to 500 m from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary for non-designated cultural heritage assets. Up to 1 km from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary for designated cultural heritage assets (with potential to extend up to 4 km, dependent upon ZTV).

Waste North East England (Tyne and Wear, Northumberland, Durham, Darlington, Hartlepool, Middlesbrough, Redcar and Cleveland, and Stockton-on-Tees) and respective waste receiving facilities.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

Environmental Topic Study Area Description

Water Resources and Derived from the extent of the FRA and DS (to be prepared separately); Flood Risk dependent upon the relevant catchments that are identified in the FRA.

Geology, Soil and Up to 1 km from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. Contaminated Land

Ecology and Up to 2 km from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary for non-statutory Biodiversity designated sites. Up to 10 km from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary for statutory designated sites.

Access and Transport Extent of micro-simulation traffic model shown in Figure 1.

Socio-economics Sunderland and South Tyneside, and potentially covering neighbouring authorities dependent upon census data regarding travel to work patterns and the analysis presented in relation to IAMP ONE, to determine the defined ‘area of impact’.

Cumulative Effects Appropriate distance from the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary based upon individual environmental topic threshold criteria.

7.0 NON-SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES 7.1 Overview 7.1.1 The aim of the scoping stage is to focus the environmental impact assessment on those issues that may be significantly affected by the proposed IAMP TWO development. This section presents those environmental issues that are considered to be non-significant, and that are not applicable to the proposed scope of the EIA for IAMP TWO. These comprise:  Health Effects;  Risks and Hazards (associated with industrial hazards);  Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change;  Issues relating to tall structures (e.g. aviation, electronic interference); and  Radiation.

7.1.2 The justification for scoping each of these issues out is presented below and summarised in Table 6. 7.2 Health Effects 7.2.1 A standalone Health Impact Assessment will be produced and submitted separately with the DCO application.

7.2.2 The scope of the Health Impact Assessment will comprise:  A literature review and strategy context for the local authority;

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

 A review of the baseline context including analysis of available population and health data, crime statistics, etc and a review of initial outputs from relevant inputs to the EIA process (e.g. air quality, noise). The baseline will be agreed with health stakeholders;  Identification of the priority groups for assessment in consultation with health stakeholders and based upon a review of the baseline context;  Agreement of the determinants of health with health stakeholders with an initial view of these comprising:

. Safe and attractive environment;

. Sense of place which encourages social interaction;

. Physical activity and access to a range of facilities including health and sport and leisure facilities;

. Improvements and accessibility to green and blue spaces and green infrastructure corridors;

. Air, noise and light pollution;

. Access to employment and education;

. Stakeholder engagement with the health stakeholders;

. Assessment of effects; and

. Identification of any revisions to the development and/or recommendations for improvements required as a result of assessment.

7.2.3 As such the Health Impact Assessment will not be duplicated and has therefore been scoped out of the ES for IAMP TWO. However, it should be noted that as applicable, potential effects on health from significant environmental issues (for example air quality, noise, and geology, ground condition and groundwater) will be considered and reported within the relevant environmental assessments. 7.3 Risks and Hazards 7.3.1 The description of the proposed IAMP TWO development included in the ES will provide a robust basis for identification of the key risks to health and safety throughout the construction phase of the project. All risks and hazards associated with construction will be considered and mitigated for through the development of the Construction Health and Safety Plan.

7.3.2 Accidental events such as spillage of potentially contaminating substances or abnormal noise events, and how the risk of such events will be minimised, will be considered and reported within the relevant environmental assessments. In addition, required environmental controls and mitigation measures will be documented and implemented through the development of the Construction Environmental Management Plan.

7.3.3 The future use of the individual proposed commercial and industrial units will be unknown at the time of assessment, and therefore we will seek to agree that any proposed end-use giving rise to significant risks and hazards will require a detailed risk assessment and management plan to be produced.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

7.4 Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change 7.4.1 Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change is not proposed to be included as a stand-alone environmental assessment within the ES but will be considered throughout the EIA process and reported as applicable within relevant environmental assessment chapters of the ES as set out below. Climate Change Resilience 7.4.2 Climate change resilience will be considered throughout the IAMP TWO design process which will, for example, take account of future flood risk and resilience to other extreme weather events. The surface water drainage strategy for the IAMP TWO development will be designed to take flood risk into account, with an allowance for climate change.

7.4.3 Details of how the proposed IAMP TWO development design builds in resilience to climate change will be included in the Project Description and Water Resources and Flood Risk chapters of the ES. Changes to Future Conditions 7.4.4 Where robust information is available at the time of assessment, consideration of the predicted changes in baseline conditions resulting from climate change will be set out within relevant environmental assessments within the ES.

7.4.5 Climate change projections will be sourced from information available from the UK Climate Projections project (UKCP09). Climate data from the UKCP09 database, based on a central estimate scenario, will be compiled for a 5 km2 grid square containing the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary. Projected mean air temperature and annual average precipitation data will inform the consideration of how environmental conditions may change in the future. Effects of the Project on Climate 7.4.6 There are no significant combustion processes included in the Description of Development. The amount of carbon generated from operational traffic will be estimated and discussed in the Air Quality assessment chapter of the ES. The future use of the individual proposed commercial and industrial units will be unknown at the time of assessment, and therefore we will seek to agree that any proposed end-use giving rise to significant carbon emissions will require a detailed assessment such that any impact on climate can be minimised.

7.4.7 Detailed information relating to embodied carbon within construction materials is not likely to be available at the time of assessment. However, the IAMP TWO development design will consider measures to minimise and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, where possible. The measures will be set out in the project description chapter.

7.4.8 Given the above approach, it is not considered that a stand-alone assessment of climate change is required and therefore it has been scoped out of the ES for IAMP TWO. 7.5 Issues Related to Tall Buildings (Aviation and Electronic Interference) 7.5.1 The proposed maximum building height within the IAMP TWO Description of Development is 25 m and is therefore significantly below the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) threshold of 91.3 m (300 ft) above ground level20.

20 https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/20120802GuidanceOnCAAPlanningConsultationRequirementsAug12Update.pdf

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

7.5.2 Given IAMP TWO’s distance from the nearest airfield (Newcastle Airport is located approximately 17 km to the north, Peterlee Airfield is located approximately 18 km to the south east of IAMP TWO and the fact that none of the proposed structures will be over the CAA threshold in height, an assessment of the potential impacts on aviation is not required and has therefore been scoped out of the EIA.

7.5.3 Similarly, given the proposed maximum building heights and the fact that analogue signals have now ceased to be transmitted, the potential for the proposed IAMP TWO development to interfere with television, radio and mobile phone reception is negligible and has therefore been scoped out of the EIA. 7.6 Radiation 7.6.1 There are no proposed sources of radiation included within the IAMP TWO Description of Development. Consequently, there is no impact pathway for this environmental issue and, as such, the effects of radiation cannot result in a significant impact or contribute cumulatively to other impacts. Therefore, radiation has been scoped out of the EIA.

Table 6: Non-significant Environmental Issues and Justification for Exclusion from Scope

Environmental Issue Justification for Exclusion from Scope

Health Effects Health Effects will be assessed separately and submitted as a standalone Health Impact Assessment document within the DCO application. As such this assessment has been scoped out of the ES for IAMP TWO. However, as applicable, potential effects on health from significant environmental issues (for example air quality, noise, and geology, ground condition and groundwater) will be considered and reported within the relevant environmental assessments.

Risks and Hazards All risks and hazards associated with construction will be considered and mitigated for through the development of the Construction Environment Management Plan. The future use of the individual proposed commercial and industrial units will be unknown at the time of assessment, and therefore we will seek to agree that any proposed end-use giving rise to significant risks and hazards will require a detailed risk assessment and management plan to be produced.

Greenhouse Gases Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change is not proposed to be included as and Climate Change a stand-alone environmental assessment within the ES but will be considered throughout the EIA process and reported as applicable within relevant environmental assessment chapters. Assessment of climate change resilience will include consideration of future flood risk and resilience to other extreme weather event. There are no significant combustion processes included in the Description of Development. The amount of carbon generated from operational traffic will be estimated and discussed in the Air Quality assessment chapter. The future use of the individual proposed commercial and industrial units will be unknown at the time of assessment, and therefore we will seek to agree that any proposed end-use giving rise to significant carbon emissions

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

Environmental Issue Justification for Exclusion from Scope

will require a detailed assessment such that any impact on climate can be minimised.

Issues relating to tall A maximum height for structures of 25 m is included in the Description of structures (e.g. Development. It is therefore considered that no tall structures will be aviation, electronic included as part of IAMP TWO. Therefore, no significant adverse effects interference) associated with tall structures are anticipated.

Radiation There are no sources of radiation included in the Description of Development. Consequently, there is no impact pathway and therefore the effects of radiation cannot result in a significant impact or contribute cumulatively to other impacts.

8.0 SUMMARY OF SCOPE Table 7: Summary of Scope

Scoped In Scoped Out  Air Quality  Health Effects  Noise  Risks and Hazards  Landscape and Visual  Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change  Cultural Heritage  Issues relating to tall structures (e.g. aviation, electronic interference)  Waste  Radiation  Water Resources and Flood Risk  Geology, Ground Condition and Groundwater  Ecology and Biodiversity  Access and Transport  Socio-Economics  Cumulative Effects

9.0 EIA PROCESS 9.1 Methodology 9.1.1 A detailed methodology for how the EIA is to be conducted will be provided in the ES, with each discipline defining the specific approach to be used for quantifying effects and identifying the sensitivity of receptors (in line with the respective legislation and guidance documents for each discipline). Any

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

assumptions that have been made in the completion of each assessment will be explicitly defined and, where necessary, justified.

9.1.2 The significance criteria for each discipline will also be described within the ES. Cumulative effects will be considered, as will combined effects, where applicable.

9.1.3 Development scenarios will be prepared to explore the various potential options for the sequencing and scheduling of construction works within the IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary, in conjunction with activities at neighbouring developments, including IAMP ONE, A19/A184 Testo’s Junction Improvement and A19 Downhill Lane Junction Improvement. In accordance with the ‘Rochdale Envelope’ principles, the approach to the EIA will be to assess the worst-case scenario.

9.1.4 As such, a screening of the different development scenarios will be undertaken to determine which represents the worst case for each discipline, and this will form the basis of the assessment for that discipline. It is expected that, for most disciplines, the sequencing of construction will not significantly alter the overall effect. 9.2 ES Structure 9.2.1 The findings of the EIA will be set out in an ES, comprising the following set of documents:  Non-Technical Summary (NTS): this document will provide a summary of the key findings of the EIA in non-technical language.  Volume I: Environmental Statement: this document will contain the full text of the EIA. It is proposed that the chapter headings will be as follows:

. A: Introduction and Background;

. B: Scope and Methodology;

. C: Site and Scheme Description;

. D: Air Quality;

. E: Noise;

. F: Landscape and Visual;

. G: Cultural Heritage;

. H: Waste;

. I: Water Resources and Flood Risk;

. J: Geology, Ground Condition and Groundwater;

. K: Ecology and Biodiversity;

. L: Access and Transport;

. M: Socio-Economics; and

. N: Cumulative Effects.  Volume II: Figures; and  Volume III: Technical Appendices.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

9.2.2 Each technical chapter will follow a similar structure, based on the following subheadings:  Introduction;  Legislative and Policy Context;  Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria;  Baseline Conditions;  Potential Effects;  Mitigation and Management (and/or Monitoring); and  Residual Effects.

10.0 SUMMARY 10.1.1 This Scoping Report has identified the potential for significant effects from the construction and operational phases of the proposed IAMP TWO development. The following specialist assessments are proposed to be undertaken:  Air Quality;  Noise;  Landscape and Visual;  Cultural Heritage;  Waste;  Water Resources and Flood Risk;  Geology, Ground Condition and Groundwater;  Ecology and Biodiversity;  Access and Transport;  Socio-Economics; and  Cumulative Effects.

10.1.2 The specialist assessments will be undertaken in line with discipline specific relevant best practice guidance and reported in the ES. Where significant effects are identified, appropriate mitigation measures will be proposed to minimise residual effects.

10.1.3 This EIA Scoping Report is submitted to PINS alongside a formal request for Scoping Opinion in accordance with Regulation 10(1) of the Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017.

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

11.0 ABBREVIATIONS µg/m3 micrograms per cubic metre

AAP Area Action Plan

ADS Archaeology Data Service

AGL above ground level

ALC Agricultural Land Classification

AQMA Air Quality Management Area

AQS Air Quality Standard

BAP Biodiversity Action Plan

BS British Standard

CAA Civil Aviation Authority

CEMP Construction Environmental Management Plan

CIEEM Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management

CIfA Chartered Institute for Archaeologists

cLWS Candidate Local Wildlife Site

CRTN Calculation of Road Traffic Noise

CSM Conceptual Site Model

DCO Development Consent Order

DEFRA Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

DMRB Design Manual for Roads and Bridges

DS Drainage Strategy

EA Environment Agency

EHO Environmental Health Officer

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

ELMA Ecological and Landscape Mitigation Area

ERIC NE Environmental Records Centre North East

ES Environmental Statement

FRA Flood Risk Assessment

ft feet

GBSSO Green Belt and Site Selection Options

GC Gateshead Council

GEART Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

GVA Gross Value Added

ha hectare

HE Highways England

HER Historic Environment Record

HGV Heavy Goods Vehicle

IAMP International Advanced Manufacturing Park

IAQM Institute of Air Quality Management

IEMA Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment

JNCC Joint Nature Conservation Committee

km kilometre

km2 square kilometre

LAQM TG Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance

LCA Landscape Character Area

LEP Local Enterprise Partnership

LiDAR Light Detection and Ranging

LIR Local Impact Report

LNR Local Nature Reserve

LVIA Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

LWS Local Wildlife Site

m metre

M million

MAGIC Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside

mph miles per hour

MVA Mega Volt Amp

NAP Natural Area Profile

NBN National Biodiversity Network

NCA National Character Area

NELSAM North East Land, Sea and Air Museums

NHLE National Heritage List for England

NMU non-motorised user

NMUK Nissan Manufacturing UK

NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

NOx Nitrogen Oxides

NPPF National Planning Policy Framework

NPS National Policy Statement

NPSE Noise Policy Statement for England

NSIP Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project

NSR Noise Sensitive Receptor

NTS Non-Technical Summary

ONS Office for National Statistics

PA2008 Planning Act 2008

PAS Portable Antiquities Scheme

PEIR Preliminary Environmental Information Report

PINS The Planning Inspectorate

PM10 Particles less than 10 µm

PM2.5 Particles less than 2.5 µm

PROW Public Rights of Way

PTWG Public Transport Working Group

SA Sustainability Appraisal

SAC Special Area of Conservation

SCC Sunderland City Council

SoS Secretary of State

SPA Special Protection Area

sq m square metre

SRN Strategic Road Network

SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest

STC South Tyneside Council

SuDS Sustainable Drainage System

UDP Unitary Development Plan

UKCP UK Climate Projections

UXO Unexploded Ordnance

ZOI Zone of Influence

ZTV Zone of Theoretical Visibility

September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

DRAWINGS

Drawing 1: IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary

Drawing 2: IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary and Identified Environmental Receptors

Drawing 3: Installed Diffusion Tube Locations

Drawing 4: Landscape and Visual Study Area

Drawing 5: Extent of Proposed Geophysical Survey

Drawing 6: Ecology - Statutory Designated Sites within 10 km of IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary

432500 433000 433500 434000 434500 435000 LEGEND IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary District Boundary 0 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 6 6 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 5 South Tyneside 5

Sunderland 0 0 0 0 5 5 9 9 5 5 5 5 M P

8 0 : 2 3 : 1

: T A

7 1 - 9 0 - 8 1 0 2

: N O

D E T N I R P

d 0 0 x 0 0 0 0 m . 9 9 1 5 5 0 5 5 0 _ 3 y r A a d O n S I u

: o B

0 250 500 M n O o i t R a F c i l D p E I p F A 1:10,000 METRES I - 0 D 9 O 0 - M

A I N E E - E 1 0 B

6 S _ 8 A 2 H

1 5 E 9 Z I 8

REFERENCE(S) S 1

\ T D

O E I NUMBER 100018385:2018. T H T C

, U N D W O O R P H _ S

2 S 0 I \ g 0 0 CLIENT T n 0 0 i A 5 5 p H 8 8 o 5 5 c IAMP LLP W 5 5

H -

C 1 T 0 A 6 \ M 2 e T s O a h N

P S _ E A I

PROJECT O E D _

T P N M IAMP TWO E A I M _ E 8 2 R 1 U 5 S 9 8 TITLE A 1 E \ M S

T S

IAMP TWO SCOPING BOUNDARY I C H E J T

O F I R P _ m 9 CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2018 SEP 17 9 m \ 5 d 2 n a l r DESIGNED CR e d n u S

\ PREPARED CR P L L _ REVIEWED P PW 0 0 M 0 0 A 0 0 I \ 8 8 a 5 5 t APPROVED PW 5 5 a D \ : E

PROJECT NO. CONTROL REV. DRAWING : H T

A 1895128 601-EIA-090 A.0

P 432500 433000 433500 434000 434500 435000 1 0 432500 433000 433500 434000 434500 435000 LEGEND Listed Building - Hylton Grove Bridge Local Wildlife Site 0 0 0 0 5 5

0 0 Watercourse 6 6 5 5 IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary

Strother House Make-Me-Rich Farm Farm 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 5 5

Elliscope Farm

Elliscope A Farm East / 1 Hylton Hylton Bridge 9 River Grove Don, East Farm House Downhill Lane

R Hylton Bridge 0 0 0 0

5 iv 5

9 Farm 9

5 e 5 5 r 5 D o The White n House Town End F Farm

M o P

l 6 li 5 n :

2 g 4 : s 1 b :

T y A

7 L 1

- a 9 n 0 - e 8 1 0 2

: N O 0 D

E 9 T

N 2 I

R 1 P

A d x The Chalet m . 2 0 0 _ s t n i

0 Usworth Cottages 0 a

0 North Moor Farm 0 r t 0 0 s 9 9 n 5 5 o 5 5 C _ 3 y r A a d

Hylton Castle Estate O n S I u

: o NELSAM B

0 250 500 M n O o i t R a F c i Three l D p E I p F A 1:10,000 METRES I - Horseshoes 8 D 8 O 0 - M

A I N E E - E 1 0 B

6 S _ 8 A 2 H

1 5 E 9 Z I 8

REFERENCE(S) S 1

\ T D

1. COORDINATE SYSTEM: BRITISH NATIONAL GRID E X E M \ 2. SERVICE LAYER CREDITS: SOURCE: ESRI, DIGITALGLOBE, GEOEYE, EARTHSTAR H N S

O E I GEOGRAPHICS, CNES/AIRBUS DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, GETMAPPING, AEROGRID, IGN, IGP, T H T C

SWISSTOPO, AND THE GIS USER COMMUNITY , U N D 3. BASE DATA SOURCED FROM ORDNANCE SURVEY UNDER THE OPEN GOVERNMENT W O O R P LICENSE 2018. CONTAINS OS DATA © CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2018. H _ S

2 S 0 I \ g 0 0 CLIENT T n 0 Nissan Car Plant 0 i A 5 5 p H 8 8 o 5 5 c West Moor Farm IAMP LLP W 5 5

H -

C 1 T 0 A 6 \ M 2 e T s O a h N

P S _ E A I

PROJECT O E D _

T P N M IAMP TWO E A I M _ E 8 2 R 1 U 5 S 9 8 TITLE A 1 E \ M S

T S

IAMP TWO SCOPING BOUNDARY AND IDENTIFIED I C H E J T

O F

ENVIRONMENTAL RECEPTORS I R P _ m 9 CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2018 SEP 17 9 m \ 5 d 2 n a l r DESIGNED CR e d n u S

\ PREPARED CR P L L _ REVIEWED P PW 0 0 M 0 0 A 0 0 I \ 8 8 a 5 5 t APPROVED PW 5 5 a D \ : E

PROJECT NO. CONTROL REV. DRAWING : H T

A 1895128 601-EIA-087 A.0

P 432500 433000 433500 434000 434500 435000 2 0 430000 430500 431000 431500 432000 432500 433000 433500 434000 434500 435000 LEGEND 0 0 0 0 5 5

0 0 Installed Diffusion Tube Location 6 6 5 5 IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 5 5 07 06 0 0 0 0 5 5 9 9 5 5 5 5 05 0 0

0 01 0 0 0 9 9 5 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 5 5 8 8 5 5 5 5 02A 02B M P

9 02C 2 : 7 0 0 2 0 0 : 0 0 1

8 8 : 5 5 T 5 5 A

7 1 - 9 0 - 8 1 0 2

: N O

D E T N I R P 03 d x m .

3 04 0 3 0 0 0 A _

0 0 s 5 5 O n 7 7 S o i I 5 5 t : 5 5 a c

0 750 1,500 M o O L R e F b u D T f E f i I F D 1:18,000 METRES I - 9 D 8 O 0 - M

A I N E E - E 1 0 B

6 S _ 8 A 2 H

1 5 REFERENCE(S) E 9 Z I 8 S 1

\ 1. COORDINATE SYSTEM: BRITISH NATIONAL GRID T 0 0 D 0 0 E X 2. SERVICE LAYER CREDITS: CONTAINS OS DATA © CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE 0 0

09 E M 7 7 \ H 5 5 N RIGHT 2018 S 5 5

O E I T H T C

, U N D W O O R P H _ S

2 S 0 I \

g 08 CLIENT T n i A p H o c IAMP LLP W

H -

C 1 T 0 A 6 \ M 2 e T s O a 0 0 h N

0 0 P S 5 5 _ 6 6 E A 5 5 I

PROJECT O 5 5 E D _

T P N M IAMP TWO E A I M _ E 8 2 R 1 U 5 S 9 8 TITLE A 1 E \ M S

T S

INSTALLED DIFFUSION TUBE LOCATIONS I C H E J T

O F I R P _ m 9 CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2018 SEP 17 9 m \ 5 d 2 n a 0 0 l r 0 0 DESIGNED CR e 0 0 d 6 6 n 5 5 u 5 5 S

\ PREPARED CR P L L _ REVIEWED P PW M A I \ a t APPROVED PW a D \ : E

PROJECT NO. CONTROL REV. DRAWING : H T

A 1895128 601-EIA-089 A.0

P 430000 430500 431000 431500 432000 432500 433000 433500 434000 434500 435000 3 0 4000m Legend

IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary

Distance from IAMP TWO 1000m Scoping Boundary 3000m Study Area Boundary

District Boundary

2000m

1000m

Gateshead District

South Tyneside District Sunderland District

1000m

&URZQFRS\ULJKWDQGGDWDEDVHULJKWV2UGQDQFH6XUYH\ Client

2000m

Client IAMP LLP Project 3000m IAMP TWO

Title LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL STUDY AREA Size Scale Date Created by Reviewer

4000m A3 As shown 17/09/18 RB NR Drawing No. Rev 004

Scale (m)

0 1km 2km 432500 433000 433500 434000 434500 LEGEND Proposed Geophysical Survey Area IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary IAMP ONE Development Boundary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 5 5 0 0 0 0 5 5 9 9 5 5 5 5 M P

5 5 : 0 3 : 1

: T A

7 1 - 9 0 - 8 1 0 2

: N O

D E T N I R P

d x m . 5 0 0 _ e 3 g A a r O e v S I o

: C 0 0 M

s 0 250 500 0 0 c i O 0 0 s R 9 9 y 5 5 F h

5 5 p D o E e I F G 1:8,000 METRES I - 7 D 8 O 0 - NOTE(S) M

A I N

E 1. GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY AREA TOTALS 133.8 HA (MAXIMUM). E - E 1 0 2. IAMP ONE DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY WAS SUBJECT GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY IN B

6 S _ 8 NOVEMBER 2017 (ARCHAEOLOGICAL SERVICES DURHAM UNIVERSITY; 2017). A 2 H

1 5 REFERENCE(S) E 9 Z I 8 S 1

\ 1. COORDINATE SYSTEM: BRITISH NATIONAL GRID T D E X 2. SERVICE LAYER CREDITS: SOURCE: ESRI, DIGITALGLOBE, GEOEYE, EARTHSTAR E M \ H N GEOGRAPHICS, CNES/AIRBUS DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, GETMAPPING, AEROGRID, IGN, IGP, S

O E I T SWISSTOPO, AND THE GIS USER COMMUNITY H T C

2 S 0 I \

g CLIENT T n i A p H o c IAMP LLP W

H -

C 1 T 0 A 6 \ M 2 e T s O a h N

P S _ E A I

PROJECT O E D _

T P N M IAMP TWO E A I M _ E 8 2 R 1 0 0 U 5 0 0 S 9 5 5 8 TITLE A 8 8 1 E 5 5 \ 5 5 M S

T S

EXTENT OF PROPOSED GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY I C H E J T

O F I R P _ m 9 CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2018 SEP 17 9 m \ 5 d 2 n a l r DESIGNED CR e d n u S

\ PREPARED CR P L L _ REVIEWED P PW M A I \ a t APPROVED PW a D \ : E

PROJECT NO. CONTROL REV. DRAWING : H T

A 1895128 601-EIA-087 A.0

P 432500 433000 433500 434000 434500 5 0 425000 430000 435000 440000 445000 0 0

0 0 LEGEND 0 0 0 0 7 7 5 Swallow Silverlink 5 Special Protection Area (SPA) Pond & Plantation Biodiversity Tynemouth Special Area of Conservation (SAC) Park to Seaton Sluice Ramsar Site Local Nature Reserve (LNR) Durham Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Coast IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary 10 km Buffer Wallsend Dene

Harton Down Hill Harton Down Hill Durham 0 0 0 0

0 Marsden 0

5 Coast 5 6 6 5 Old Quarry 5 The Kittiwake Tower Primrose Cleadon Hills Cleadon Hill Station Burn Whitburn Pelaw Tilesheds Point Northumbria Norwood Quarry West Farm Coast Nature Pond Meadow, (SPA and Ramsar) Park Fulwell Quarry Boldon Boldon Pastures Fulwell & Carley 0 0

0 Windy Nook Hill Quarries 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 5 Nature Park 5

M Hylton Castle Cutting P

8 5 : 9 2 : 1

T Hylton Dene A

7 1 - 9 0 - 8 1 0 2

: Wear River Bank N

O Claxheugh

D E T

N Rock & Ford I R P

d Barmston Pond

x Limestone Quarry m . 3 6 A 0 South Hylton 0 O _ S s I e : t i

0 2,500 5,000 M

S Pasture l O a c R i Tunstall Hills F g Tunstall o l D o E I c F E and Ryhope 1:80,000 METRES I - 1 Hills D 9 O 0 - Humbledon Hill Quarry M

A 0 0 I Cutting N 0 0 E E - 0 Dawson's 0 E 1 5 5 0 5 5 B

6 5 5 S _ 8 A

2 Plantation H

1 5 E 9 Z I 8

REFERENCE(S) S 1

\ Quarry T D

1. COORDINATE SYSTEM: BRITISH NATIONAL GRID E X E M \ 2. SERVICE LAYER CREDITS:SOURCE: ESRI, DIGITALGLOBE, GEOEYE, EARTHSTAR H N S

O E I GEOGRAPHICS, CNES/AIRBUS DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, GETMAPPING, AEROGRID, IGN, IGP, T Hastings Hill H T C

SWISSTOPO, AND THE GIS USER COMMUNITY , U N D 3. CONTAINS PUBLIC SECTOR INFORMATION LICENSED UNDER THE OPEN GOVERNMENT W O O R P LICENCE V3.0. H _ S

2 S 0 I \

g CLIENT T n i A p H o Gilleylaw c IAMP LLP W

H - Herrington

C 1 T 0

Quarry A 6 \ M 2 e Hill T s O a h N

P Cong S _ E A I

PROJECT O E D _

T P Burn High N M IAMP TWO E A I M _ E 8 Wood 2 Haining R 1 U 5 S 9 8 TITLE A 1 E \ Hill M S

T S

ECOLOGY - STATUTORY DESIGNATED SITES WITHIN 10 KM I C H E J T

O F

OF IAMP TWO SCOPING BOUNDARY I R P 0 0 _ m 0 0 9 CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD 2018 SEP 17 9 0 0 m \ 0 0 5 d 5 5 2 n 5 5

a Hetton Bogs l r Hetton Bogs DESIGNED CR e d n u S

\ PREPARED CR P L L _ REVIEWED P Joe's Pond RF M A I \ a t APPROVED RF a D \ : E

PROJECT NO. CONTROL REV. DRAWING : H T

A 1895128 601-EIA-091 A.0

P 425000 430000 435000 440000 445000 6 0 September 2018 1895128.601/A.0

APPENDIX A

Explanatory Plan

Development Plots

Highways England A19 DCO Projects and IAMP

Key:

IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary

IAMP One Phase 1

IAMP One Phase 2

HUB

IAMP Two Southern Employment Area

IAMP Two Northern Employment Area

IAMP Two A1290

IAMP Two Proposed Roads IAMP TWO A19 Road Infrastructure NORTHERN EMPLOYMENT AREA Washington Road Nissan Interface

IAMP One Ecological Landscape Mitigation Area

IAMP Two Ecological Landscape Mitigation Area

IAMP/A19 Landscape Buffer

AAP Greenbelt Boundary

A19 Road Infrastructure

IAMP TWO Ecological Landscape Mitigation Area

IAMP TWO SOUTHERN EMPLOYMENT AREA

IAMP ONE PHASE 1 IAMP ONE Ecological Landscape Mitigation Area

NELSAM

HUB

10 Little Lever Street t. +44 (0)161 200 5500 e. [email protected] Manchester M1 1HR f. +44 (0)161 237 3994 w. www.urbed.coop

Drawing Title: Explanatory Plan IAMP ONE Project Title: PHASE 2 IAMP TWO

Client: IAMP LLP

Project Number: Issue Status: 1072 For Information

Drawing Number: 1072-URBED-Z2-00-DR-U-Explanatory Plan

N Scale: Date: Revision: 1:2500@A0 / 1:5000@A2 24-09-2018

This drawing is to be read in conjuction with all related drawings. Do not scale from this drawing. this drawing is copyright and remains property of URBED (urbanism, environment and design) Ltd. Key:

IAMP TWO Scoping Boundary

IAMP One Phase 1

IAMP One Phase 2

IAMP Two Development Parcels

IAMP One Ecological Landscape Mitigation Area

IAMP Two Ecological Landscape Mitigation Area

IAMP/A19 Landscape Buffer N1

AAP Greenbelt Boundary

N4 N3

S6 S7

IAMP TWO S5 Ecological Landscape Mitigation Area

ETL S3

.94

CatL49

.48

CatL49 S4

IAMP ONE S1 PHASE 1 IAMP ONE Ecological Landscape Mitigation Area

ETL NELSAM

HUB

10 Little Lever Street t. +44 (0)161 200 5500 e. [email protected] Manchester M1 1HR f. +44 (0)161 237 3994 w. www.urbed.coop

Drawing Title: Development Plots IAMP ONE Project Title: PHASE 2 IAMP TWO

Client: IAMP LLP

Project Number: Issue Status: 1072 For Information

Drawing Number: 1072-URBED-Z2-00-DR-U-Development Plots

N Scale: Date: Revision: 1:2500@A0 / 1:5000@A2 24-09-2018

1. Do not scale from this drawing.

2. This drawing is for planning purposes only

KEY

IAMP TWO DCO layout and Red Line Boundary

Downhill Lane DCO layout and Red Line Boundary

Testos DCO layout and Red Line Boundary

Rev. Date Revision details Drawn Checked Approved Client © This drawing is the property of SYSTRA Limited and the information IAMP LLP can only be reproduced with their prior permission. Project Title www.systra.co.uk IAMP TWO HIGHWAYS ENGLAND A19 DCO PROJECTS Milburn House, Dean Street, AND IAMP Newcastle upon Tyne, T 0191 249 3816 NE1 1LE E [email protected]

Drawn Checked Approved Original drg. size Date Scale Drawing Status Drawing Number Rev. JP SE SP A3 31.08.18 NTS INFORMATION SK004 -

golder.com