Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
HAMBLETON DISTRICT COUNCIL
LEEMING BAR – ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF ISSUES FROM EXISTING DATA SOURCES June 2017
Author Ian Hopley
Date 29th June 2017
Revision 1
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
Contents
1. Executive Summary 2. Introduction 3. The Proposed Development 4. Organisations Contacted During The Desk Review 5. Potential Environmental Issues To Be Addressed
5.1 Community and Private Assets 5.2 Cultural Heritage 5.3 Historical Building Review 5.4 Surface Water Flood Risk, Groundwater, Hydrology and Surface Water Quality and Highway Drainage. 5.5 Nature Conservation 5.6 Landscape and Visual Amenity 5.7 Contamination 5.8 Utilities 5.9 RAF Leeming 5.10 Noise and Vibration, Air Quality/ Dust and Construction Impacts
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
1. Executive Summary
These are the key summary points from the high level review:
There are not believed to be any planning issues that would prevent development of Site 1 Leeming Bar. Site 1: Lends itself to the development of larger employment units; A significant landscape buffer zone varying from 15m to 30m in width will be created. Retention of existing hedgerows and trees can in the main be accommodated by the development. 16 properties are directly affected by the proposals and abut the red line boundary for the site, further work will be required to design into the scheme appropriate mitigation for these properties. There are not believed to be any Cultural Heritage or Historic Building issues, although it is recommended that further surveys are undertaken; A solution for dealing with the generated surface water, which would be acceptable to the Environment Agency and the Internal Drainage Board, is technically possible based around a SuDS solution. The solution would not be abnormal and would be low cost. Future hydraulic modelling of Terry House Drain would be required to develop this solution. There are no statutory or non statutory designated sites, ancient woodlands or known ‘irreplaceable’ habitats present on site or in the immediate vicinity. From BALB bypass surveys we know that there are badger populations, water voles and possibly bats which will require more detailed surveys but should not prevent development taking place. The landscape and visual impact effects associated with the proposed Aiskew Site 1 Employment development will need to be assessed in terms of likely impacts on landscape elements and character, views and visual amenity. This will require further investigation but because of the sites size there is ample opportunity to design the scheme to mitigate it’s impact. All main utilities border the site , but are predominantly outside the boundaries. Accordingly few service diversions will be required. Their capacity is unknown and further work will be required to establish this from the utility companies. Further investigations will be required in relation to Noise and Vibration, Air Quality/ Dust and Construction Impacts. All of these can be dealt with and would not prevent development taking place.
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
2. Introduction
2.1 Leeming Bar is within the A1/A19 Growth Corridor identified by the LEP and is recognised as a key location for employment development, particularly in the food sector, within Hambleton. 2.2 Hambleton District Council is considering including an additional 31.2 Ha of employment land at Leeming Bar in the new Local Plan to facilitate employment needs up to the period 2035. The site in question is known as “Aiskew Moor Site 1 Leeming Bar “ and is shown below.
Plan 1 - Aiskew Moor Site 1 Leeming Bar
It is bounded by BALB to the north, the Wensleydale Railway Line to the south and extends to Low Street in the west.
2.3 Site 1: Lends itself to the development of larger employment units, but would require a reasonably significant land take for drainage purposes and structural planting to allow the scheme to sit comfortably within the landscape context. Potential uses are B1 but predominantly B2 and B8 uses. 2.4 The site is generally relatively flat but slopes up to the west toward Leeming. It is highly visible from BALB, and the A684, Northallerton Road into Leeming. BALB has been built at an elevated level, due to the increase in levels required to get over the railway line. Western Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
parts of the site are likely to be more visible in longer views. Access would have to come from BALB or from Leases Road to the west of the site.
Photo 2 – Site 1 Looking Towards BALB And The Bridge Over Wensleydale Railway
2.5 The centre of the site appears low lying and there is a question about drainage of the site as a result. Further investigation would be needed. 2.6 Due to the large scale of the site, there are a number of design and landscape mitigation opportunities. 2.7 The purpose of this report is to undertake a desk based audit of known data sources concerning environmental issues, predominantly based on:
the research prepared by North Yorkshire County Council for the adjacent Bedale, Aiskew and Leeming Bar Bypass; through discussions with NYCC’s archaeologist and ecologist; a review of flood plane maps held by the Environment Agency.
2.8 Through this work we are trying to highlight any potential “show stopper environmental issues” which may affect the viability of the site in relation to it’s nature, location or size. These may need to be considered as part of more detailed investigations, should a decision be made to progress further with more detailed investigations.
2.9 This report will help to scope future environmental investigations, which could include detailed consultation, seeking scoping opinions and the preparation of any future detailed Environmental Impact Statement associated with the development.
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
3. The Proposed Development
3.1 The key features of the new development include:
A new access road from either Leases Road, almost opposite the Conney Garth Way junction with Leases Road, or directly from BALB immediately east of the roundabout junction between Leases Road with BALB.
Photo 3 – Access Point To Leases Road Photo 4 – Access Point To BALB
The development site is greenfield land, predominantly agriculture with mature trees and hedgerows.
Photo 5 – Mature Hedgerows Photo 6 – Mature Trees
The site will be used for future B1/B2/B8 employment uses. It will include the crossing of the Terry House Drain, which runs in a north / south direction across the site and this will be bridged by a small structure to facilitate development of the full site. Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
An internal road network will need to be established to open up the site to service individual development plots and utilities may need to be reinforced or brought to the site to facilitate development. Existing utilities including electricity, water, sewerage, gas and telecommunications border the site.
Photo 7 - Water and Gas Photo 8 – 11Kv Overhead Electricity Cable
Surface water drainage generated from the site would be attenuated onsite with discharge being made to the Terry House Drain at greenfield runoff rates. Dry storage ponds, gravity drainage in the form of Swales will facilitate the onsite storage and the scheme will include pollution prevention measures.
Photo 9 – Terry House Drain Which Crosses The Site
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
The SABIC underground high pressure ethylene pipeline crosses the study area from east to west. In an endeavour to prevent the need for a diversion plot locations will be located to comply with zonal development restrictions imposed by the owner of the apparatus.
Photo 10 – SABIC Etheylene Pipeline
A significant landscape buffer zone of varying from 15m to 30m width will be created around the periphery of the site to provide separation between this and existing development. Retention of existing hedgerows can be accommodated by the site layout. Where the impact on native tree and hedgerows and loss of habitat occurs this will need to be considered in detail and mitigation will need to be designed into the scheme. The objectives of the scheme are to: i. Stimulate growth in the local economy ii. Provide an appropriate supply of employment land for the Local Plan period up to 2035. iii. Facilitate growth of existing businesses at Leeming but also to attract new inward investment. iv. Take advantage of the strategic location of the employment site close to the A1(m).
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
Plan 2 – Outline Masterplan
Plan 3 – Possible Phasing Plan
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
4. Organisations Contacted During The Desk Review
As part of the desk review the following organisations were identified. At this stage contact has only been made with the organisations highlighted below. More detailed consultation and investigations would need to take place as part of detailed scoping and preparation of the Environmental Impact Assessment for this project.
Organisation Responded
Environment Agency English Heritage No contact Natural England No contact Environment Agency No contact, but intelligence has been gathered by a review of BALB and through the WSP Feasibility Study NYCC Highways Services Yes response provided NYCC Ecological Services Yes response provided NYCC Archaeological Services Yes response provided North and East Yorkshire Ecological Data Centre No contact (NEYEDC); RAF Leeming Consultation Zone and Airfield Sage No contact but intelligence has been gathered by Guarding Zone through the WSP Feasibility Study DP44 Noise Zone No contact Yorkshire Wildlife Trust, No contact Yorkshire Amphibian and Reptile Recorder, Bird No contact Recorder, Badger Group and Bat Group Hambleton District Council Yes response provided Government Office for Yorkshire and Humber No contact Aiskew Parish Council No contact Leeming Parish Council No contact Bedale Town Council No contact Bedale and Upper Swale Internal Drainage Board No contact, but intelligence has been gathered by a review of BALB and through the WSP Feasibility Study Highways Agency Yes response provided Forestry Commission No contact British Horse Society No contact Organisation Responded
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
5. Potential Environmental Issues To Be Addressed
Through our discussions with the organisations identified in Section 3.0 above we have identified the following potential issues, these are explored in the following chapters of this desk review.
5.1 Community and Private Assets
The term ‘Community and Private Assets’ was introduced by the August 2008 amendment to Section 1 of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 111.
This covers:- Properties affected by the development - The demolition of private property, i.e. the demolition of property or any associated loss of land which may result in the loss of facilities, quality of life, services or employment. Public Rights of Way The effects on development land, i.e. future land-use changes that are likely to occur independently of the proposed road improvement, including land covered by land use planning designations and any planning proposals lodged with the planning authorities. The effects on agricultural land and farms, including agricultural land take, type of husbandry, severance of agricultural holdings, access, water supply and drainage.
The topic areas that have been assessed include effects on:-
• Impact On Private Property.
The following private property abuts directly the red line boundary for the employment site , Site 1 Aiskew Moor, and could be affected by the development.
1. Lowlands
If the preferred access to the new employment site needed to be from Leases Road opposite Coney Garth Way, this would result in a new east west road passing the property Lowlands either to the north or south.
Photo 11 – Showing The Property Lowlands
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
2. Low Street , Lowland Drive, Ashlands Drive and Northallerton Road
There are 9 properties along Low Street, 3 properties in …………, 3 properties in Lowland Drive and 3 in Ashlands Drive. All of these will need a carefully designed landscape buffer zone which would need to be provided to minimise the visual and noise impact.
• Loss of Community Land.
There is no loss of community land as a result of the development of Site 1 Aiskew Moor.
• Community Severance.
All the land proposed for the new employment site is private agricultural land. There are no Public Rights of Way into the employment site and there is no existing highways access.
One issue for consideration should the east west access to the site from Leases Road be the preferred access option, would be the need to maintain north south access along Low Street as a result of this road connecting or crossing Low Street.
Photo 12 – Low Street
It is not envisaged that Community Severance would not be an issue. Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
• Development Land
The site is currently agriculture. The viability of the farm business may be impacted by the acquisition of this site and this will be reflected in the acquisition costs.
Plan 4 – Additional Sites That came Forward As Part Of The Call For Sites
In addition 3 sites have come forward as part of the Local Plan call for sites which are in the vicinity of the potential east west access road from Leases Road. The impact of the access road will need to consider how the viability of these sites is impacted. These sites include both proposed housing and employment uses.
• Agricultural Land.
The Agricultural Land Classification (ALC) is Grade 2 and 3.This is defined as the ‘best and most versatile land’ in the ALC.
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
Phot 13 - Agricultural Land To Be Lost As A Result Of Development For Employment Uses.
Public Rights of Way (PROW)
Footpath 10.4/2 runs from Aiskew Moor Farm off Back Lane, passes through Leeming Bar Industrial Estate to emerge onto Leases Road south of Coney Gath Way and opposite the caravan parks site entrance.
Bridleway 10.125/1 crosses fields to the east of Stone Mole House north of Roughly Corner. Mill Lane at Spring House on the A684 Northallerton Road is also designated as an ‘other route with public access’ on OS mapping, as is a short section of Leases Road in the vicinity of Leases Farm.
There are no public rights of way (PROW) (public footpaths, bridleways or byways) directly affected by the proposals.
Plan 5 – Public Rights of Way In The Vicinity of Site 1
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
Recommendations
The following further investigations and potential mitigation will be required:
A carefully designed landscape buffer zone would need to be provided to minimise the visual and noise impact for those properties which abut the red line boundary of the site. Final positioning of the east west access to Leases Road would need to be carefully considered to establish and ensure compensation under ………….. is minimised. Section 237 of The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 gives local authorities power to appropriate land for planning purposes; however, it is important to Investigate whether the development will interfere with Rights of Light and consider possible insurance issues. The land acquisition costs for all land required to facilitate the development will need to be assessed by the District Valuer. The impact of the employment site and access road will need to investigated further in relation to the impact on the viability of the farm business and development land which may be included in the Local Plan.
5.2 Cultural Heritage
Archaeology
Qualitative consultation was carried out with Peter Rowe , Principal Archaeologist Growth, Planning and Trading Standards Heritage Services, North Yorkshire County Council;
NYCC confirmed that there are no known archaeological sites or finds within Site 1 and nothing significant was found on the length of the BALB by-pass bordering the site. The wider environs include the course of Dere Street Roman Road and associated evidence for a settlement at Leeming Bar. As this is a large greenfield area a case could easily be made for archaeological potential (NPPF para. 128), particularly for prehistoric to Roman period remains.
Extract From BALB Environmental Statement
Leases Road is believed to follow the route of a Roman Road known as Dere Street (Site 94) which linked York with the Firth of Forth. A skeleton and pieces of armour were recovered during levelling works in Leeming Lane (now Leases Road) in 1834 and this has been attributed to the Roman period. As Leases Road is an active public highway, it has not been possible to examine this site to establish if any remains of the Roman road survive beneath the modern surface. The value of this site has therefore been assessed as Unknown. Please note that no archaeological remains were identified by the evaluation in the area immediately to the east of Leases Road.
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
Photo 14 - Leases Road Is Believed To Follow The Route Of A Roman Road Known As Dere Street
Other sites include a group of allotments situated immediately east of the railway line and north of Aiskew Grange Farm (Site 56), and the Northallerton to Leyburn Railway (later known as the Wensleydale Railway; Sites 43 and 110).
Recommendation
NYCC recommend undertaking an archaeological field evaluation (geophysical survey and trial trenching) of Leeming Bar Site 1 Aiskew Moor to assess the significance of this potential and the impact of the proposal upon it. This should be done prior to a planning decision being made. There is some debate currently about whether this should be done pre-allocation and it does recommend this in the recent Historic England publication ‘The Historic Environment in Local Plans’.
This work should include:
A Geomagnetic survey which is likely to cost around £400-£600 per hectare, so costs of around £18,000 for the 31.2Ha would be appropriate.. Trial trenching would normally be targeted on the results of the geophysical survey. As a general rule of thumb this is likely to be a 2% sample minimum. If the geophysics is really barren and shows evidence of heavy disturbance e.g. cross ploughing then the trenching might not be needed but I suspect it would on a site of this size. The requirement and design of the trial trenching would be based entirely on the results of the above so any estimate would be much less certain. Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
5.3 Historic Buildings Review
Clare-Louise Booth, Planning Policy and Conservation Officer, Hambleton District Council.
There are no historic buildings within the boundary of the site. The closet historic building is km away and would not be impacted by this development.
5.4 Surface Water Flood Risk, Groundwater, Hydrology and Surface Water Quality and Highway Drainage.
The existing flood risk to the site has been established through a review of the Environment Agency flood maps, along with detailed OS mapping of the site. The assessment principally covers fluvial and surface water flood risks.
5.4.1 Surface Water Flood Risk - The site is intersected by a series of land drains which flow in a predominant southerly direction, eventually outfalling into Bedale Beck. The drains, due to their relative size have not been modelled for fluvial flood risk as part of the national Environment Agency flood modelling programme and as such there are no indicated areas of fluvial flood risk located on the site.
A review of the OS mapping indicates that whilst these drains extend northwards beyond the A684 BALB bypass, they do not drain a significant catchment area in terms of size.
The Environment Agency’s indicative flood plain maps show 8 minor areas that are at risk of flooding across the site, with an anticipated flood depth of below 300mm.
Immediately west of the Terry House Drain, the flood plain map shows a more extensive area with a maximum depth of 300 to 900mm depth of flooding.
Although these require further investigation, the most likely scenario is that they are caused by either: 1. a throttle on the SW drain that comes from Lowlands Drive and discharges into the Terry House Drain and as a result this ponds adjacent to the drain or 2. these are simply low lying areas which pond as a result of surface water overland flow , which then seeps into the ground.
In either case, the solution to this is to get the volume of water held in these flood plain areas into the Terry House Drain without causing either upstream or downstream flooding from the Terry House Drain. This will need investigating further.
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
Plan 6 – Environment Agency Flood Planin Map For Site 1
5.4.2 Groundwater - No highway drainage is to be discharged to groundwater.
5.4.3 Hydrology and Surface Water Quality - The key risks to water quality in sensitive water- related receptors include pollution from contaminants contained in routine rainwater run- off from the new employment site and pollution from accidental spillages on the highway. For aquatic life, the risk of harm is related to the concentration of pollutants within the receiving water.
The drainage design for the proposed development will need to include pollution prevention measures. Runoff from the development site in these locations would pass through two dry ponds planted with reeds, and the outfalls would also need to be fitted with oil interceptors. The reeds which would provide a degree of water treatment but are primarily intended to ensure that no large open water bodies would be created close to RAF Leeming. Open water could attract geese, which could cause operational problems for the RAF facility. These ponds would receive runoff from the development.
5.4.4 Highway Drainage
The development of the site, currently greenfield site, will see the introduction of impermeable areas and so an increase in the volume of surface water generated, and the rate at which the will runoff the site. In order to a) manage the risk of surface water flooding to the site itself and b) to prevent increased flood risk elsewhere as a result of runoff from the site, a strategy for managing surface water will be required. It is also important, due to the nearby airfield, that the drainage system avoids permanently wet basins.
The most suitable method of disposal would be to the existing drains, assuming infiltration will not be viable. Because the bed level of the Terry House Drain is not much lower than the surrounding ground and because of the need to have a gravity solution, the most suitable Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
method would be for a surface level drainage system, whereby surface water is discharged via a series of swales to a main site storage pond which discharges to the drains
The current site configuration, topography and need for possible phasing lends itself to being two separate systems which drain independently of each other. These would roughly correlate to the east and west side of the Terry House Drain. Within each, a number of separate plots or surface water catchments will operate separately, but drain into the main system for surface water removal. This will allow each plot and the drainage therein to be developed on a piecemeal basis, rather than requiring the whole system to be operational ahead of the building out of the site.
In summary, the surface water drainage and SuDS would primarily consist of the following:
1. Discharge to the existing Terry House Drain through the site at greenfield rate. 2. Surface water storage to be provided through a hierarchy of SuDS located at each stage of the development 3. All storage to be ‘dry’ with no permanently wet surface water feature
Photo 15 – Terry House Drain Which Runs In A North South Direction
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
5.4.5 Issues To Consider
In summary, there are no significant constraints to the site which relate flooding which can’t be mitigated through strategic site master planning. However, a full and detailed strategy for mitigating flood risk will be required to support any onward development of the site.
The following issues will need to be considered:
• If the site is progressed further a more detailed assessment of the Terry House Drain will be required. This will include a detailed assessment of the upstream catchment area, and an assessment of expected peak flows and velocities vs channel capacity. The construction of a bridge across the Terry House Drain is likely to have minimal affect on fluvial flood risk, if designed carefully and ensuring it does not create any throttling affects, but would need to be considered. • More detailed investigations will need to consider the loss of flood plain storage. • The provision of attenuation ponds would allow water draining from the new road to be discharged at rates agreed with the Environment Agency and the Bedale and Upper Swale IDB. The discharges from these catchments are to IDB drains and would be limited to a maximum of 1.4 l/s/Ha and detailed design would need to factor in these design criteria. • Fluvial Flooding - As part of the site development a ‘standoff’ area should be included either side of the drains to allow for seasonal variations in the drain extent and periods of localised flooding. Surface Water Flooding – Alterations to the vertical alignment of the site to accommodate future development will produce cut and fill. The fill can be used to remove the low spots within the site. The impact of removal of flood plain and the volume of storage accommodated will need to be investigated to ensure that their connection to the Terry House Drain, would not cause any upstream or downstream flooding. This would not be the case if in all cases discharge to Terry House Drain is limited to discharge rates of 1.4l/s/Ha .
5.5 Nature Conservation
Qualitative consultation was carried out with Julia Casterton, Principal Ecologist Heritage Services Growth, Planning and Trading Standards
Ecological features are the subject of a wide variety of legislation and policy. Some potential impacts would constitute an Offence under legislation and would not be acceptable without suitable mitigation and/or (where necessary) Natural England licences. Other potential impacts are a material consideration within the planning system, including proposals under the Highways Act. Such potential impacts would therefore come under the scrutiny of statutory consultees and other interested parties as well as the consenting authorities.
Nature Conservation Setting
The Aiskew Moor Site 1 begins at its intersection with the existing A684 northeast of Leeming Bar village. From here the site progresses westwards through a landscape dominated by arable fields of barley. The fields in this section are generally large and enclosed by species-poor hedgerows with trees. The Wensleydale railway line (TN22) bisects the arable fields in this section. The railway line forms a linear corridor in the landscape, dominated by dense scrub and rough grassland with Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
occasional standard trees growing on embankments. The site continues west through uniform arable fields of oilseed rape, maize and barley until the site reaches Low Street.
NYCC Comments On The Aiskew Moor Site 1
NYCC confirmed the following:
There are no statutory or non statutory designated sites, ancient woodlands or known ‘irreplaceable’ habitats present on site or in the immediate vicinity. There are no trees with Tree Preservation Orders.
Plan 7 – Tree Preservation Orders
From BALB bypass surveys we know that there are badger populations associated with the Wensleydale railway line and there are mammal tunnels under the bypass to allow the passage of badgers within their territories. More detailed badger surveys would be required in order to understand where the current setts are and how many social groups are active in the area. This would then help in determining the size and location of their territories and therefore whether badgers could be accommodated within the within the site or if a Natural England licence would be required in order to exclude them from the site. Terry House Drain had historic records for water vole but none were found during the bypass surveys. The watercourse is also used as a commuting route by bats, and otter certainly pass through. Part of the mitigation for the bypass was to put a large box culvert over Terry House Drain with mammal ledges to allow passage by otter and hopefully allow bats to pass through to avoid them being hit by large sided vehicles on the bypass.
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
Photo 16 – Terry House Drain Box Culvert With Mammal Bypasses
Low Street was a good foraging/commuting route for bats, although there are not likely to be features on site that support roosting bats (assuming none of the trees are mature/over mature – this would be picked up by a preliminary survey). In terms of the fields themselves, from the aerial it appears to be a mix of large arable fields and some smaller pasture with boundary hedges and trees. Species supported here could include brown hare, farmland birds and badger. Impacts are likely to be of local significance (again a survey and assessment would confirm this). The NPPF requires that the mitigation hierarchy is followed i.e. avoid impacts first, mitigate what can’t be avoided, compensate as a last resort and always provide enhancement. NPPF also requires that mitigation, compensation and enhancement is reasonable and proportionate to the impact. Ideally it would be important to retain the most important features on site. Because the site is large, planning for ‘green corridors’ at this early stage is certainly beneficial. For example retaining a good buffer along the railway line, Terry House Drain and potentially along the side of the bypass could avoid impacts on badger and retain ‘green’ corridors for foraging bats. Indirect impacts also need to be taken into account and here dealing with nocturnal species sensitive lighting design will be very important – for example keeping any corridors along the railway or bypass dark would again help to mitigate impacts on species. Water/drainage is also an important indirect consideration – water quality, prevention of pollution into water courses. Mitigation for the bypass is secured by condition and NYCC we will need to ensure that this development does not compromise the ability to meet those requirements – badger and bats being the key species. The alternative to on site retention of features (habitats and species) is compensation off site. This is considered less favourable in the NPPF but could be used either wholly or Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
in part to deal with impacts. This might take the form of habitat creation (close to the development site – maybe north of the bypass?) but if needed would require the purchase of land or a long term legal agreement with a landowner (at least 30 years).
Extract From BALB Environmental Statement
All arable fields in the study area are considered to be of value for ground nesting birds. Positive evidence of water vole were recorded in Terry House Drain over 200m downstream of the crossing point of the bypass. The tall emergent vegetation on the banks of these watercourses provides suitable refuge and foraging resources for water vole. In addition, these linear features are key features water voles use for dispersal, linking to water vole colonies outside the study area but within the same catchment. .As such, these watercourses should be considered to be of value for water vole.
Further Actions / Issues To Consider
Need to undertake a Phase 1 Habitat Survey Any tree confirmed to be used by bats is a legally protected roost site. To enable the destruction of a bat roost a licence must be obtained from Natural England, which will detail the strict methodology and mitigation measures to be followed. As a general precaution, tree felling would only be undertaken in autumn, between late August and October/early November. At this time bats do not have dependent young and are not hibernating, and would therefore be active enough to escape harm if proper precautions are taken. All vegetation and hedgerow removal would be carried out between September and February (inclusive) to avoid the bird breeding and nesting season. Surveys and subsequent monitoring will be required to determine the presence of badgers and their setts. It is believed there is a badger presence onsite, if active then a Natural England licence will be required to close any setts before they can be relocated or destroyed. The licence issued by Natural England would permit works to exclude the sett between July and November inclusive only.
5.6 Landscape and Visual Amenity
Introduction
Landscape character and visual effects are two distinct but related areas. Landscape (or townscape) impacts may result from the physical effects of development on landscape elements such as trees, hedges or buildings and the consequent effects on setting and landscape character. Visual impacts relate to the effects on views experienced by people within the landscape and the overall effect on visual amenity (the value of a view) of a viewing location or area.
The new Aiskew Moor Employment Site will be located in a predominantly open agricultural landscape and would include new roads, building structures , earthworks and infrastructure such as lighting and attenuation ponds. There would be the loss of individual trees and hedgerows. Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
Changes to the elements in the landscape would alter the landscape and townscape character of the area. Views of the changes from the surrounding area would be possible with a consequent effect on visual amenity.
Landscape Character and Impacts
The Hambleton District Council Landscape Assessment (Woolerton Truscott, 1992) defines a range of landscape character types of which Type 5 ‘Intensively Farmed Lowland (Simple Topography)’ would be the setting for the new employment site.
The character of the landscape around Leeming Bar is, effectively divided by the A1M. East of the A1M, existing development – industrial, commercial and residential, significantly impacts on the rural landscape character rendering it more urban than rural within 1.2Km of the A1M. This effect is evident whether travelling on the A1M, A roads or B roads in the locality. This impact on the landscape character diminishes travelling east as local topography, field and roadside hedges gradually obscure views of the built areas.
At Aiskew there is distinct minor eastwest ridgeline at an elevation of 50-60m AOD, which eventually turns north to form a higher distinctive ridgeline at between approximately 50-75m AOD along which runs the A1(M) north of Leeming Bar.
The ridgeline beneath the A1(M) north of Leeming Bar falls away sharply to the west, from Leases Road to Low Street in the east beyond which the topography becomes undulating at an elevation around 30-38m AOD. East of Low Street Terry House Drain flows from north to south across Aiskew Moor, passing beneath the A684 Northallerton Road to the east of Leeming Bar.
Visual Amenity
Travellers on the road network – motorway, A roads and B roads, will be visually impacted by development. However, those travelling on the A1M and east of the motorway are already visually impacted by employment development due to the presence of the large industrial estate between the A684 and the northern bypass.
The proposal will impact on users of the Wensleydale Railway but, again there is an existing impact on these people as it already passes the southern boundary of the industrial estate within Leeming Bar.
Residents on the east side of Leeming Bar – Low Street, Lowlands Drive, Ashlands Drive and on the north side of Northallerton Road, overlook site 1. However, most of these properties do not have a direct view over the site due to the orientation of the properties or intervening trees and hedgerows.
Generally visual amenity is higher in the west beyond Leeming Bar around Bedale where there are more pleasing views, some of which are enclosed by positive elements such as mature trees, with the focus on character features such as St. Gregory’s Church, and away from detractors such as the A1(M) and the Leeming Bar Industrial Estate. In the east the visual amenity is lower due to the lower incidence of positive landscape elements, and the greater dominance of the A684 corridor. Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
Further Actions / Issues To Consider
1. The landscape surrounding Leeming Bar, Aiskew and Bedale is generally fairly open with hedgerow field boundaries with irregularly spaced hedgerow trees. In the wider landscape, narrow belts and small blocks of woodland are present. Mitigation using belts of planting would not, therefore, be out of character if utilised on the various potential employment sites. Such belts could be effectively used to screen future developments from road users and those local residents that would have of view of the potential developments. 2. A robust policy of using dark cladding and roofing materials on all the future buildings, would have a significant beneficial effect in mitigating the visual impact of the building on any of the employment sites. 3. The landscape and visual effects associated with the proposed Aiskew Site 1 Employment Site will need to be assessed in terms of likely impacts on landscape elements and character, views and visual amenity. 4. Landscape and environmental design will need to be an integral part of the proposed scheme development. Where a quick effect is required larger tree and shrub planting stock can be used but this is not practical for the whole scheme. 5. Site visits will be needed to be undertaken during April, July and September to confirm information obtained from the desktop survey, check site features such as existing vegetation, localised screening, or the extent of existing night-time lighting and to establish the potential landscape and visual receptors for the assessment. Surveys will need to be undertaken from the public highway, public rights of way and open spaces, and other publicly accessible locations. 6. Photomontages will need to be prepared for both the Winter Year 1 and Summer Year 15 situations to illustrate how the development is likely to appear in the landscape when first open and when landscape treatments have become established.
5.7 Contamination
There are no records of contamination within Site 1 at Leeming Bar
Plan 8 – Records Of Contamination In The Vicinity Of Site 1
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
5.8 Utilities
The majority of the existing main utilities are located outside of the site boundary, so costly diversions should be mostly be avoided in this area. However, for those services that do enter the site the required easements or diversions will need to be determined with the relevant utility companies.
Public utility searches identified that the following utility companies have infrastructure within the vicinity of the site:
Yorkshire Water (Water Supply) – have an up to 4” water main in Low Street and Northallerton Road and an over 4” main in Northallereton Road and along Leases Road Yorkshire Water (Sewerage) – have a surface water sewer in Lowlands Drive which is believed to outfall via a ditch into the Terry House Drain and a foul water sewer which rins north to south through Lowlands and Ashlands Drive and into Northallerton Road. Yorkshire Water (Trade Effluent) Northern Powergrid (Electricity Supply) – several 11Kv cables runs north to south along the western boundary of the site. Northern Gas Networks (Natural Gas Supply) – there are low and medium pressure gas pipes along western boundary of the site. BT Openreach (Telecommunications) have supplies to the south in Northallerton Road and immediately to the west of the site. SABIC (Ethylene Pipeline) the main transpennine pipeline runs east to west across the northern part of the site.
Records provided by utility companies show that the development has the potential to significantly benefit from the existing utility supplies. It has not at this stage been possible to thoroughly understand capacity constraints.
Plan 9 – Combined Service Drawing
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
5.9 RAF Leeming
At the point of writing this report ongoing attempts were being made to establish contact with RAF Leeming to understand whether they had any concerns about the approach being taken to manage surface water runoff generated from Site 1.
We are very much aware that RAF Leeming would be very concerned about the creation of large open water bodies, which could attract large birds and cause operational problems for the RAF facility.
The drainage system being proposed consists of
1. Discharge to the existing Terry House Drain at a greenfield rate. 2. Surface water storage to be provided through a hierarchy of SuDS located at each stage of the development 3. All storage to be ‘dry’ with no permanently wet surface water feature
This approach was approved through the planning process for the BALB highway drainage which operates in much the same way. Accordingly, although we have not yet received endorsement by RAF Leeming we believe that the approach would be acceptable.
5.10 Noise and Vibration, Air Quality/ Dust and Construction Impacts
5.10.1 Noise and Vibration
To date no investigation shave proceeded in this area. Future work will need to cover the potential for noise disturbance and vibration damage to sensitive receptors due to construction activities and construction traffic and the potential for disturbance from employment activities on the site.
Legislation
British Standard 5228 Part 1 (Noise) and Part 2 (Vibration) This standard contains guidance and recommendations on noise and vibration control from the operation of fixed and mobile vibration sources found on construction sites. It also contains information pertaining to mitigation of noise and vibration from a construction site. This standard provides sound level data for various machinery and tasks associated with the construction phase of a development. It contains guidance on the prediction of noise levels at sensitive receptors from the operation of fixed and mobile noise sources found on construction sites.
The Control of Pollution Act provides guidance relating to the control of noise and vibration from construction sites to surrounding residents (Section 60, Part III, Chapter 40 – Control of noise on construction sites).
Future Work Required
Future work will need to be undertaken to establish typical noise and vibration levels for plant and equipment related to both the construction phase of the project and developed scheme. This could involve the following tasks:
Leeming Bar Site 1 Environmental Review June 2017 Ian Hopley
i. Identification of representative receptors located closest to the operating areas of the construction works and developed scheme; ii. Monitoring of existing noise levels at those representative receptors; iii. Calculation of predicted noise levels at the same sensitive receptors for the plant and machinery that is intended to be used; iv. Comparison of the predicted levels with the recorded noise levels to assess potential noise impacts; v. Description of proposed mitigation measures that could be adopted to reduce impacts, where necessary and appropriate, during construction.
5.10.2 Air Quality / Dust
To date no investigation shave proceeded in this area. The construction of the proposed scheme may result in short term release of dust emissions to the atmosphere. A future qualitative assessment of the main potential sources of emissions and their impacts will need to be carried out together with the identification of potential mitigation measures
5.10.3 Construction Impacts
To date no work has been undertaken in this area.
Construction impacts will need to be managed and will need to be agreed with Hambleton District Council’s Development Management Team and covered in the Environmental Statement if a future planning application to be made. Issues which would need to be addressed include:
i. Working hours on site; ii. Location of site compound and welfare facilities iii. The parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors; iv. Loading and unloading of plant and materials; v. Construction traffic management; vi. The routing of HGV and other construction related traffic to and from the site; vii. Timing of deliveries and other construction related traffic to and from the site; viii. A programme for the delivery of works; ix. Details and programme of all traffic management (temporary signs and controls) proposed; x. Details of construction accesses to be used during the works; xi. Storage of plant and materials used in the works to avoid any potential ground contamination; xii. The erection and maintenance of security hoarding where appropriate; xiii. Wheel washing facilities and road cleaning to prevent mud and grit being deposited on public highways; xiv. Measures to control the emission of dirt and dust during construction; xv. Measures to control noise and vibration during construction; xvi. Means of protection of trees and hedgerows during site preparation and construction; xvii. A scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition, excavation and any other construction works. xviii. Measures to be taken if flooding occurs during the works.