Submitted to: Submitted by: IC-Astaldi JV AECOM Ankara, Turkey Turkey AECOM-TR-R599-01-00 2 August 2013
Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) of the Third Bosphorus Bridge and Connected Motorways
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 Submitted to: Submitted by: IC-Astaldi JV AECOM Ankara, Turkey Turkey AECOM-TR-R599-01-00 2 August 2013
Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) of the Third Bosphorus Bridge and Connected Motorways
Brian A Cuthbert PhD, Associate Director ______Prepared By
AECOM Mustafa Kemal Mahallesi, Dumlupınar Bulvarı No: 266 Tepe Prime B Blok Suite: 51 Çankaya 06800 Ankara Turkey
T: +90-312-442-9863 F: +90-312-442-9864 www.aecom.com
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment
Abbreviations
Bhp-hr Brake-horsepower-hour BOT Build-Operate-Transfer CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CO Carbon monoxide
CO2 Carbon dioxide DF Draft Final (Report) DSI General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works EA Environmental Assessment EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development EHS Environment, Health and Safety EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EP Equator Principles ESAP Environmental and Social Action Plan ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan EU European Union FHWA Federal Highways Authority GIS Geographic Information System Gr Gram HC Hydrocarbons HDPE High Density Poly-Ethylene HDV Heavy Duty Vehicle Hr. Hour HWCR Hazardous Wastes Control Regulation IAPCR Industrial Air Pollution Control Regulation IBB Istanbul Greater Metropolitan Municipality IEEM Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management IEMA Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment IFC International Finance Corporation ISKI Istanbul Water and Sewage Administration JV Joint Venture Kg Kilogram KGM General Directorate of Roadways LDV Light-Duty Vehicle NEQS National Environmental Quality Standards.
NH3 Ammonia NMVOC Non-methane volatile organic compounds
NO2 Nitrogen dioxides
NOX Nitrogen oxides
O3 Ozone PM Particulate Matter
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment
RAMAQ Regulation on Assessment and Management of Air Quality RF Revised Final (Report) SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District‟s Sec. Second
SO2 Sulfur dioxide TNR Turkish Noise Regulations TURKSTAT Turkish Statistical Institute USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency VOC Volatile Organic Compound WB World Bank WHO World Health Organisation WMP Waste Management Plan YEGM General Directorate of Renewable Energy (formerly known as EIE)
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 0-1
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (ESIA) OF THE THIRD BOSPHORUS BRIDGE AND CONNECTED MOTORWAYS
0.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
0.1 Background
AECOM has been commissioned by IC İçtaş İnşaat Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. and Astaldi S.p.A. (ICA) to undertake an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) of the proposed Northern Marmara Motorway, including the Third Bosphorus Bridge.
The owner of the proposed project is the General Directorate of Roadways (KGM). The ESIA report will be shared with the lenders to be used in their financing process.
The motorway element of the project will extend to a length of some 60 km between Odayeri and Paşaköy and will include various side roads and connections to the existing road infrastructure on both the European and Asian shores of the Bosphorus. The bridge will have a span of approximately 1.4km and the bridge will cross the northern end of the Bosphorus near to the Black Sea between Garipçe on the European side and Poyraz on the Asian side. It will have capacity for a 2 x 4 lane motorway and two high speed railway tracks and the total length of the project is estimated at approximately 114 km.
Much of the route passes through areas of forestry and the loss of trees and habitat represents one of the main impacts associated with the Project, as well as one of the main areas of opportunity for mitigation in terms of tree planting and habitat enhancement.
0.2 Study Objectives
The aim of this study was to carry out an environmental and social assessment of the Project, document the potential environmental and social impacts associated with its construction and operation and provide mitigation measures to prevent, avoid, reduce or compensate for any adverse impacts. The scope of the ESIA was defined by AECOM (Report No: AECOM-TR-R590-03-00, November 2012) and mutually agreed with ICA and the Lenders.
The approach to this preliminary assessment refers to the guidance contained within the IFC Guidelines, Turkish Environmental Law and also the Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment (Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA), 2004). Criteria for the determination of sensitivity or of importance or value of receptors, in order to determine significance of impacts, have been broadly established based on approved guidance, legislation, statutory designations and/or professional judgment.
In undertaking this assessment we were advised by ICA that the average construction corridor width is likely to be approximately 60.5m wide; however, wider assessment corridors (up to 500m wide, in the case of ecology and 1,000m wide, in the case of land use) centered on the proposed route have been used for this study, in order to understand the potential for wider impacts including indirect effects of the scheme.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 0-2
All of the actions identified as mitigation relating to construction and operation of the Project have been collated and presented in a separate document as an Environmental and Social Action Plan (ESAP). This includes a short Afforestation Plan, which deals directly with the actions required to mitigate the identified impacts on the forestry areas through which the Project passes. The following sections of this Executive Summary briefly summarise the findings of the ESIA, following the same structure as the main document.
0.3 Summary of Findings
Chapter 4: Ecology and Biodiversity
An assessment was undertaken to determine the impacts of the Project on ecology and biodiversity in the project area. Preliminary information was based on a desk study which provided information on habitats and species both within the route corridor and in the vicinity of the corridor. Field surveys were undertaken in March and April 2013.
The study found that there are no national parks, nature monuments or nature reserves within the Project alignment and its vicinity. However, there are several Nature Parks at the European and Asian side of İstanbul. The closest nature park to the Project is Şamlar Nature Park located on the European side and about 880 m to the west of the route.
Approximately 2.8 km of the route will pass directly through the namely Sarıyer Feneryolu a Wildlife Improvement Area (WIA) at the European side and there is an area forbidden for hunting in accordance with the 2012-2013 period CHC decisions in the vicinity of Polonezköy, where approximately 5.5 km of the route passes through this area.
In accordance with the Forestry Law, there are no seed stands or biogenetic reserve areas (gene courts) within the Project site and its vicinity. However, there are some conservation forests, seed garden and recreation areas such as urban forest and picnic along the route including:
Belgrad Conservation Forest: The route just passes through the northern border of the forest which is located at the European side of İstanbul. Elmalı Bendi Conservation Forest: Part of the route passes through this forest located at the Asian side. Kuzey Boğaziçi (Upper Bosphorus) IPA (which includes the Belgrad forest) Other sites include: a Seed Garden located between Reşadiye and Alemdağ Nişantep; an urban forest in Ümraniye near the existing İstanbul Highway (E-80); and various picnic areas.
The majority of the route (nearly 35 km) passes through the Bosphorus Key Biodoversity Area (KBA) which lies along the length of the Bosphorus strait and extends from European side to the Asian side. The KBA comprises a wide range of habitats including sand dunes at the coastline, rocks, maquis communities, pasture lands, forests and lakes. The area also includes an Important Plant Area (IBA) in forested areas west and east of the strait. There are several vulnerable habitats supporting rare plant species within this KBA and some of these areas have been identified as IPA.
Other KBA include the West İstanbul Pasture Lands Key KBA at the European side. The KBA has a total area of 9,612 ha between Bağcılar at the south and Pirinççi at the north. Approximately 11.4 km of the route passes through this KBA. Located within this is the Batı İstanbul Meraları (West İstanbul Pasturelands) IPA, close to Esenler, which comprises the last remaining fragments of limestone grassland, rock outcrops and dry acid heath grass-land located immediately north-west of İstanbul.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 0-3
In terms of habitats the main impacts will be on broadleaf woodland. Approximately 345 hectares of oak dominant forest will be lost within the 60.5m wide construction corridor of the Project. In addition, approximately 284 hectares of conifer plantation will be lost. Significant mitigation measures will be needed including the requirement to:
Protect old growth forest habitat and individual trees as much as possible; Collect seeds and seedlings from those areas for planting/transplantation; Change forestry management of adjacent coppiced or more intensively managed oak woodlands to allow them to revert to „old growth‟ forests, thus increasing their ecological value; Reduce or avoid tree felling in more extended woodland areas to enable older growth to occur; Leave fallen trees to decompose to increase variety of habitats and to improve habitats for invertebrates; Thin or clear-fell conifer and non-native plantations and replace with locally sourced broadleaf seed and saplings; Allow natural regeneration where possible, including natural succession of scrub habitats; Create new woodlands on agricultural or other land – for example on scrub habitats or where rhododendrons and other invasive species have taken over. Ensure that all construction related landscaping ties as seamlessly as possible into the local landscape and that only locally sourced native trees and plants are used to seed these; Enable habitats to connect under viaducts, over tunnels and by using ecological bridges; Connect separated areas of habitat to create a network of habitat corridors, particularly in relation to the remnants of the old growth forests.
Based on the calculation of habitat areas lost due to the construction of the Project, overall 345 hectares of oak forest will be lost and have to be compensated for to be created to compensate for the loss of this type of habitat. Of that total, just over 9 hectares represents the area of old growth that will be lost and that will have to be replaced as mitigation, preferably through management changes in existing coppiced oak dominated woodland in adjacent areas. In addition 284 hectares of conifers will be lost, as well as 112.5 hectares of other less dense habitats containing other dominant tree species (acacia, lime and willow). This gives a total area of oak and conifer dominant areas, as well as other species such as acacia, combined, of 740 hectares.
It is very difficult to calculate the exact number of trees that will be lost when a given area of forest habitat is cleared as the tree density can vary enormously. However, it is recommended that a ratio of four-to-one in terms of new tree planting be implemented in order to compensate for tree loss due to the construction of the Project.
Chapter 5: Land Use
The existing land uses in the immediate vicinity of the Project will change due to direct and/or indirect effects related to the development of the Project. The main objectives of this section of the report are to:
Identify land use patterns in the Project Area; Assess both long term and short term impacts on land use (the comprehensiveness and precision of which has depended on data availability); and Recommend appropriate mitigation measures to minimise the adverse impacts caused by the proposed Project.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 0-4
The assessment found that there will be loss of agricultural land, forest land and private land as a result of the Project. The existing land use of the project area will be affected by the construction of the bridge, motorway, access roads, and construction camps.
Permanent acquisition of lands will be required for the project. The proposed alignment of the motorway will mainly pass through forest lands; however; there are some settlements close to the route. In addition, the main impact of the new motorway will be the fragmentation of forest lands as approximately 80 % of the route goes through land that is currently forest. It is also anticipated that some forest and agricultural land may be subject to long term land use changes by implementation of the Project. However, the design of the route includes limited number of interconnections and is therefore not considered to open up currently undeveloped areas to landuse change and urbanisation.
Land use patterns affect community cohesion in various ways. Village and suburban areas are often considered highly livable because they are physically segregated from disruptive activities, traffic, poverty and crime. However, the car journeys they generate tend to reduce community cohesion overall, by increasing vehicle traffic impacts through neighbourhoods, degrading walking conditions, and reducing opportunities for neighborhood interaction.
The permanent land take of the scheme has been minimized as much as practicable to ensure no unnecessary loss of land. The majority of scheme is on existing road, with minor realignment and widening in places; however, there are areas of open space that will be affected which is either identified as agricultural land or forestry.
Once construction is complete, full access would be restored for recreational uses where these opportunities remain. Subsequent land use and urban design studies should be undertaken to address the most appropriate use for lands and to identify the urban design along the motorway route.
Chapter 6: Air Quality
An assessment of air quality associated with construction and operation of the Project was undertaken. The assessment reviewed key policies and guidelines and described the existing air quality in Istanbul. Baseline conditions were established using existing data provided on air quality on Turkey websites (monitoring data), in local authority Air Quality Review and Assessment Reports, and from the results of an additional monitoring survey undertaken as part of this assessment.
The assessment was undertaken for a base year (2014) for construction for Do-Minimum (controlled emissions) and Do-Something (uncontrolled emissions). For the operational scheme, traffic flow data for the future year (2023) were selected for modeling purposes.
Air dispersion modeling was then carried out for the construction phase and for the future traffic situation. The results of the assessment were evaluated with reference to the Turkish ambient air quality standards and IFC/WB guideline concentrations. The construction studies considered dust and traffic-related air pollutants including nitrogen oxides and particulate matter.
In general, construction activities have the potential to generate fugitive dust emissions as a result of demolition, construction, earth works or trackout of material. For the proposed project, the concentrations of any airborne particulate matter generated by these activities would be controlled using on-site management practices to the extent that the proposed project should give rise to moderate to negligible effects at the nearest sensitive receptors. The impact of fugitive emissions of PM10 at these receptors, with proposed mitigation applied, would be negligible. Overall the effect of fugitive emissions of particulate matter (dust and
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 0-5
PM) from the proposed works is considered to be not significant with respect to potential effects on health and amenity.
The modeling shows that the proposed project would have a negligible effect on the total emissions of pollutants on a regional scale, with increases of less than 0.1% for all pollutants for both the opening year and 15 years after opening.
The operation of the project will result in changes in traffic flows and related air emission along the approach roads and on the wider road network. There will also be point source emissions from the tunnel portals. These emissions will affect local air quality, with possible impacts on human health and welfare, fauna and flora, and materials around affected roads. There may also be wider changes in regional air quality. In general, overall traffic levels are likely to increase as a result of the project although there is likely to be less of an increase in some areas and actual traffic flow reductions in other areas.
Based on modeling results, the overall impact of this new traffic in the northern part of Istanbul District will be the increase in emission levels of pollutants (PM, NOx, VOC and CO). However, the overall potential impact is expected to be minor to negligible in the northern part of the District along the proposed Project route.
There will be also some beneficial impact in the southern part of Istanbul District since some of the traffic that uses the existing bridges and the motorway will be using the new bridge and the new motorway instead. Thus, the current emission levels in the southern section will mostly likely reduce. Thus, during the initial years of the operation, we will see the shift of current emission levels from southern to northern parts of the District. However, since the detailed vehicular data for the southern part was not available for this study, the emission levels cannot be estimated and quantified.
A greenhouse gas assessment was performed for the proposed project during the operation phase. The principal greenhouse gas emission during vehicle transport is carbon dioxide (CO2). Total annual emissions were estimated to be around 0.27 Million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (Mt CO2-e). A comparison of greenhouse gas emissions from the Northern Marmara Motorway with national greenhouse gas inventories was made. Emissions from the project were estimated to be around 0.06% of the national inventory for the year 2011. Also, emissions from the project were estimated to be around 0.68% of road transport emissions from national inventory.
Chapter 7: Traffic Noise and Vibration
This part of the assessment considered potential noise impacts resulting from the construction and operation of the proposed Project. It assessed the noise climate along the proposed route, and predicted changes from the existing noise levels (2012) with the Do-Minimum in the Future Year (2023), and Do-Something noise levels in The Future Year (2023). These noise level differences, in conjunction with the noise sensitivity of individual properties, were used to determine the likely noise impacts associated with the introduction of the scheme.
The noise and vibration impacts of the scheme were determined using the guidance contained within the Regulation on the Assessment and Management of Environmental Noise - (Turkish Noise Regulation – (TNR)) submitted by the Official Gazette Date and Number: 10.06.2010/27601.
The noise model was developed with the commercial noise modeling software IMMI v2011-2. The calculations were carried out using the XPS31-133 French Standard which is recommended by the Turkish Noise Directive and European Commission for the Assessment of environmental noise caused by sources such as highway, bridges, and tunnels.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 0-6
Baseline noise levels at 98 (ninety eight) locations along the motorway were measured and impact assessments were determined using the requirements of the TNR and impact magnitudes were determined against measured baseline noise levels.
Mitigation needs were assessed and the proposed mitigation implemented in the model to improve noise impacts at 10 (ten) locations where noise levels exceeded limiting value as defined in the TNR. Residual impacts remain at 6 (six) of the receivers after mitigation and construction of noise barriers for noise control mitigation measure is required at certain locations
Chapter 8: Water Quality
This chapter of the ESIA presented the findings of the assessment of impacts on water quality and hydrology. It provided a detailed description of the existing water conditions including surface water courses, and water quality.
It predicted the potential construction activity impacts and operation and development activities impacts. It also identified mitigation measures, which were developed taking into account current best practice and all related regulations and rules. Application of mitigation measures will decrease potential impacts on water quality during both construction, operational and development activities.
However, there may be residual impacts that will remain after mitigation measures have been put in place. There are a large number of watercourses in the vicinity that may be directly or indirectly affected by the Project during construction and operational activities. These receptors range from various watercourses to a number of reservoirs that are drinking water sources for Istanbul and surrounding areas. The water quality for most watercourses is quite low and this has been confirmed by sampling activities undertaken for this assessment. These receptors are considered to be less sensitive than the reservoirs which have a very high sensitivity due to their being used for drinking water.
The project will be conducted in accordance with all relevant legislation for the protection of surface water and groundwater resources. In the area, during construction activities, there may be impacts because of working without scheduling or programming and not undertaking the required activities at the right time. However, the scheduling of the works and working in accordance with all project plans and schedules will prevent the negative effect of this impact.
A noted, the project and some parts of it cross over some surface water resources and part of the project lies within the catchment of some reservoirs, which supply drinking water to Istanbul. However, there are measures that include implementation of the regulations, good practice guidelines and mitigation measures, so that the impacts can be minimized. For example, there may be untreated contaminated water or runoff from various facilities, and leakage, dispersion and spill of chemicals, fuels, oils, etc., used for construction and operational activities. However, use of the most appropriate drainage and culvert systems will prevent impacts on water quality during construction activities, as well as operational and development activities.
Although mitigation measures have been developed, before the commencement of construction and operational activities, all the site workers should be trained in mitigation measures and procedures. As part of this, training should be given about all potential contaminants, spillage or leakage of any polluting material such as fuel, oil etc., and the impacts these may have, as well as contingency and clean-up procedures, so the mitigation measures will be implemented correctly.
Overall there will be a minor impact from construction, operational and development activities of the project on water resources. The activity that has the highest risk on the water quality will be the permanent works associated with the project sections crossing surface water resources. All required controls will have to be
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 0-7
implemented regularly. In addition, according to related regulations, on-going mitigation measures will be required. Therefore, the negative impacts will be minimized during Project construction, operational and development activities.
Chapter 9: Geology and Soils
This section dealt with environmental issues associated with geology, soils and waste management conditions relating to the Project. The current conditions within the route corridor were described and likely effects of the development on potentially sensitive receptors assessed. The potential impacts during construction and operational activities and mitigation measures proposed for each parameter were described.
In the Project area there are no geological heritage sites, important geological structures or active mining areas. Therefore, there will be no direct or indirect impact caused by the Project site during construction and operational activities and no mitigation measures will be required in terms of geology, soils or mining. In terms of soil structure, there will be loss of soil on forest land and other type of lands, but although public interest in this Project is very important and soils will be lost, overall the impacts on the soil resource will not be significant.
On the route of the Project, there are hydrogeological resources within or close to the site. There are river beds close to the route and drinking water protection zones relating to reservoirs close to the route. Necessary mitigation techniques will be implemented in accordance with the Water Pollution Control Regulation (WPCR) and risks and impacts will be minimized.
Residual Impacts that are likely to remain after mitigation measures have been put in place, have been identified and assessed and range from Negligible to Minor. Therefore none of these impacts relating to geology, soils, mineral resources, waste management and hydrogeology are assessed as being significant.
Chapter 10: Waste Management
This chapter considered each of the main waste streams generated by the construction and operation of the Project and assesses the significance of environmental impacts associated with waste management issues. In each case the assessment was based on a consideration of potential impacts and how these will be managed, reduced or avoided through the use of appropriate mitigation. Further recommendations for mitigation are discussed below.
A detailed Waste Management Plan (WMP) should be prepared and appropriate mitigation measures should be identified. The mitigation measures should be considered and addressed in the project design including temporary waste storage sites, structures, waste collection and transportation infrastructure, etc. Improper waste management procedures or lack of mitigation measures during construction, as well as maintenance and operations phases of the Project may result in adverse environmental impacts on: storm-water quality and thus water quality in the creeks and dams/reservoirs located in the catchment area; soil quality; sea water quality; groundwater quality; and ecological receptors or human health.
The Project management is expected to prepare a WMP as a requirement of the ESAP. The WMP will include strategies and procedures to eliminate potential adverse impacts of waste that will be generated during the construction, maintenance and operation of the proposed Bridge and motorways. The WMP will include management of construction site excavation materials according to Turkish legislation.
The WMP will include procedures to segregate waste as domestic, non-hazardous, biological and hazardous waste and disposal will be carried out as described in Turkish waste legislation with licensed transporters and disposal/treatment facilities.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 0-8
Assuming preparation of a comprehensive WMP and proper implementation of the mitigation measures included in the WMP, adverse impacts will be minor to negligible during the construction phase and negligible during the maintenance and operation of the proposed Project.
Chapter 11: Visual Impacts
The impact that the Project may have on visual amenity (defined as the pleasantness of the view or outlook of an identified receptor or group of receptors) was assessed. The likely changes at certain defined viewpoints were assessed and mitigation proposed where it was considered necessary.
During the construction period receptor groups which directly face the proposed route and bridge, in close proximity or with immediate views towards it will experience significant adverse visual impacts as a result of the loss of visual amenity and the visually intrusive construction activity associated with the construction of a road bridge, road carriageway, road junctions or associated infrastructure.
However, mitigation measures will reduce the landscape and visual impacts of the proposed route with proposed planting of native trees and shrubs (and as part of the Afforestation Plan), so that in time some of the newly introduced elements will be screened from view and assimilated into the local townscape setting reducing the long term disruption of the overall landscape and visual character of the area.
Nevertheless, high quality landscape designs for roadside verges and interchanges within areas of residential settlement could, over time, contribute to the townscape visual amenity and provide visual screening and filtered views of the proposed development.
Dependent on the restoration landscape design proposals intended for the landing of bridge footings either side of the Bosphorous along with a commitment to high quality design of the proposed Bosphorous bridge, the residual effects could be considered Moderate beneficial as opposed to Moderate adverse, by summer of year 15 operation.
However, there will be significant adverse effects on the visual amenity afforded from many locations from within the immediate area following the development route corridor. Nevertheless, it is considered that the landscape and visual resource of the wider study area will not deteriorate to a significant degree and the overall impact upon landscape and visual amenity in general is therefore restricted to those receptors/areas within close proximity to the proposed route.
Chapter 12: Socio-Economics
The ESIA identified the potential social impacts associated with the construction and the operation of the proposed Project. The social impact assessment (SIA) determined whether the proposed project has positive or adverse effects on individuals, households and institutions. It also explored the unintended consequences, whether positive or negative on the local people. The key objectives of the SIA were to:
Identify existing social and economic condition of the households around the project area; Identify and assess potential project-related social impacts across the whole operational life cycle, from exploration through to decommissioning phases; Describe, where appropriate, the general mitigation measures that have been incorporated into the Project.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 0-9
A settlement questionnaire was issued villages to gather background information was gathered through discussion with headmen. These surveys mainly served for gathering information on the settlement as a whole.
In addition, a household survey interview with households in the project area was conducted. The survey used the face-to-face interview method. The survey involved a formal visit to families and individual interviews with the adult member of the family using a standard questionnaire. The survey focused on a number of specific issues, including the main sources of livelihood, problems in the project area and attitudes towards the proposed project. The study comprised four phases: pre-field studies, field implementation, coding and data entry, and data analysis.
Secondary data sources were mainly based on government records including the population census and other relevant records of governmental institutions. Other, secondary, sources that were used included: geographical data (including maps), local government statistics, documentation from non-governmental organizations and community-based organizations and newspaper reports.
Significant adverse impacts during construction will relate to land expropriation issues and disruption of local resources and infrastructure. Beneficial impacts include employment opportunities and diversification of economic activities in the region.
Significant adverse impacts during the lifetime of the Project may include: potential indirect effects resulting in long term land use changes in forest and rural areas; the potential for uncontrolled in-migration, linked to land use changes; and an increase in traffic and pollution issues.
Beneficial impacts including the overall improved traffic flow and enhancements to the local economy that this and other developments enabled by the Project would bring to the area.
Chapter 13: Archaeology
A field scoping study and field survey on the evaluation of archaeological were conducted in May 2013. The field walkover was undertaken in certain sections of the project route for a total of 26.43 km and three areas containing archaeological features were observed. In addition to these observations, registers of inventory of four Regional Boards (No II, III, IV and VI) were obtained while records of other Boards were not available during the study.
The literature and the inventory records of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism refer to many archaeological and historical sites in the regions where the construction activities will be carried out. Since it was not possible to walk the entire construction area in the time available, a predictive model was built and regions bearing archaeological potential were identified. The field walkover was conducted in limited sections as vegetation allowed, for the purpose of verification of the existence of historical sites in the areas, as indicated to be carrying archaeological potential by the predictive model. Two of the sites identified were within the construction corridor and its impact area while one other was about 1.5 km away from the project route.
Based on the findings described above, it is recommended that an intensive field survey is conducted after deforestation of the construction areas in coordination with the relevant Regional Boards of Conservation.
It is further recommended that, considering the archaeological potential of the region, it is imperative that all activities involving physical intervention should be conducted under the observation of experienced archaeologists.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 0-10
It is strongly recommended that all these activities are be conducted in compliance with the Cultural Heritage Management Plan and Chance Find Procedures to be adopted by the constructor.
0.4 Conclusions
The findings of the ESIA show that the most significant adverse impacts associated with the Project relate to:
Ecology and biodiversity, particularly relating to protected sites, loss of trees, forest habitats, fragmentation and connectivity reduction between habitats. Land use changes – some of which will occur as an indirect consequence of the Project. Operational noise impacts at certain locations on the route; Visual impacts from certain viewpoints; Socio-economic impacts, particularly relating to land use changes and the consequence of uncontrolled in-migration; and The potential for currently unknown archaeological remains to be uncovered or damaged during construction operations.
Potentially beneficial impacts include:
The opportunity for ecological enhancements, habitat creation and mitigation particularly in relation to creating new forest and changing management practices in existing forest; Visual benefits from an interesting bridge design and sensitive and high quality landscape treatments; and Increased employment, economic activity and national connectivity associated with the new infrastructure and access to the northern areas of Istanbul.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment
CONTENTS
Executive Summary
1 Introduction
1.1 Background………………………………………………………………………………… 1-1 1.2 Objectives………………………………………………………………………………….. 1-1 1.3 General Approach to Assessment………………………………………………………. 1-2 1.4 Report Structure and Authors……………………………………………………………. 1-2
2 Scheme Description
2.1 General Description………………………………………………………………………. 2-1 2.2 Project Aim…………………………………………………………………………………. 2-2 2.3 The Third Bosphorus Bridge……………………………………………………………... 2-3 2.4 The Northern Marmara Motorway……………………………………………………….. 2-4 2.5 Route Amendments……………….………………………………………………………. 2-8 2.6 Other Project information………..……………………………………………………….. 2-11
3 Approach to the Assessment
3.1 Introduction…..…………………………………………………………………………….. 3-1 3.2 Methods……………………………………………………………………………………. 3-1 3.3 Regulatory Framework……………………………………………………………………. 3-4 3.4 Study Limitations………………………………………………………………………….. 3-9
4 Ecology and Biodiversity
4.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………… 4-1 4.2 Ecological Impact Assessment…………………………………………………………... 4-1 4.3 Methods……………………………………………………………………………………. 4-1 4.4 Ecological Baseline………………………………………………………………………. 4-11 4.5 Field Survey Results……………………………………………………………………… 4-25 4.6 Identification and Evaluation of Ecological Receptors………………………………… 4-34 4.7 Potential Impacts………………………………………………………………………….. 4-37 4.8 Mitigation…………………………………………………………………………………… 4-41 4.9 Residual Impacts………………………………………………………………………….. 4-44 4.10 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………… 4-47
5 Land Use
5.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………..…….. 5-1 5.2 Methods…………………………………………………………………………….………. 5-1 5.3 Existing Conditions………………………………………………………………………... 5-4 5.4 Impact Assessment……………………………………………………………………….. 5-8 5.5 Mitigation…………………………………………………………………………………… 5-11 5.6 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………… 5-12
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment
6 Air Quality
6.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………… 6-1 6.2 Policy Context/Framework……………………………………………………………….. 6-2 6.3 Existing Air Quality………………………………………………………………………… 6-5 6.4 Methodology……………………………………………………………………………….. 6-13 6.5 Results……………………………………………………………………………………… 6-25 6.6 Mitigation Measures and Residual Impacts…………………………………………….. 6-41 6.7 Conclusions and Summary………………………………………………………………. 6-42
7 Traffic Noise & Vibration
7.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………… 7-1 7.2 Objective………………………………………………………………………………….... 7-1 7.3 Definition of Noise and Vibration...... 7-2 7.4 General Approach to Assessment………………………………………………………. 7-2 7.5 Baseline……………………………………………………………………………………. 7-35 7.6 Predicted Impacts………………………………………………………………….……… 7-40 7.7 Mitigation…………………………………………………………………………….…….. 7-44 7.8 Summary………………………………………………………………………………..….. 7-49
8 Water Quality
8.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………….. 8-1 8.2 Approach and Methods…………………………………………………………………… 8-1 8.3 Baseline Conditions………………………………………………………………………. 8-5 8.4 Value (Sensitivity) of Resources………………………………………………………… 8-15 8.5 Potential Impacts………………………………………………………………………….. 8-16 8.6 Mitigation Measures………………………………………………………………………. 8-19 8.7 Residual Impacts………………………………………………………………………….. 8-24 8.8 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………… 8-26
9 Geology and Soils
9.1 Introduction……………………………………………….………………………………. 9-1 9.2 Approach and Methods……………………………….…………………………………. 9-1 9.3 Baseline Conditions………………………………….………………….……………….. 9-4 9.4 Value (Sensitivity) of Resources…………………….………………………………….. 9-15 9.5 Potential Impacts………………………………………………………………………….. 9-15 9.6 Mitigation Measures……………………………………………………………………… 9-20 9.7 Residual Impacts…………………………………………………………………………. 9-24 9.8 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………… 9-26
10 Waste Management
10.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………….. 10-1 10.2 Methods…………………………………………………………………………………… 10-1 10.3 Baseline Conditions……………………………………………………………………… 10-2 10.4 Impact Assessment………………………………………………………………………. 10-5 10.5 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………… 10-13
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment
11 Visual Impacts Appraisal
11.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………….. 11-1 11.2 Visual Methods…………………………………………………………………………… 11-2 11.3 Visual Baseline…………………………………………………………………………… 11-6 11.4 Potential Impacts…………………………………………………………………………. 11-9 11.5 Visual Mitigation……………………………………………………….…………………. 11-11 11.6 Visual Impacts…………………………………………………………………………….. 11-12 11.7 Significance of Impacts…………………………………………………………………… 11-33 11.8 Summary of Impacts…………………………………………………………………….... 11-33 11.9 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………. 11-38
12 Socio-Economics
12.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………….…………….. 12-1 12.2 Assessment Scope………………………………………………………….……………. 12-1 12.3 Methods……………………………………………………………………….…………… 12-2 12.4 Baseline Conditions……………………………………………………….……………… 12-7 12.5 Potential Impacts of the Project………………………………………….………………. 12-28 12.6 Residual Impacts………………………………………………………………………….. 12-37 12.7 Mitigation…………………………………………………………………………………… 12-37 12.8 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………… 12-40
13 Archaeology and Cultural Heritage
13.1 Introduction…………………………………….………………………………………….. 13-1 13.2 Project Scope……………………………………………………………………………… 13-3 13.3 Methods……………………………………………………………………………………. 13-3 13.4 Baseline Conditions………………………………………………………………………. 13-7 13.5 Potential Impacts………………………………………………………………………….. 13-12 13.6 Mitigation Measures………………………………………………………………………. 13-17 13.7 Results and Recommendations…………………………………………………………. 13-19
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 1-1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
AECOM has been commissioned by IC İçtaş İnşaat Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. and Astaldi S.p.A. (ICA) to undertake an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) addressing potential environmental and social impacts associated with the proposed Northern Marmara Motorway, which will also include the planned Third Bosphorus Bridge, (the “Project”) under a Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) structure.
The owner of the proposed project is the General Directorate of Roadways (KGM). The ESIA report will be shared with the lenders to be used in their financing process.
The motorway element of the project will extend to a length of some 60 km between Odayeri and Paşaköy and will include various connection roads and connections to the existing road infrastructure on both the European and Asian shores of the Bosphorus. The total length of the project is estimated at approximately 114 km.
Although we understand that the average construction corridor width is likely to be approximately 60.5 m wide, wider assessment corridors (up to 500m wide, in the case of ecology and 1,000 m wide, in the case of land use) centered on the proposed route have been used for this study, in order to understand the potential for indirect effects of the scheme. A more detailed project description is provided in Chapter 2 of this report.
1.2 Objectives
This ESIA has been requested by the consortium of banks lending to the ICA (“Lenders”). The aim of this study is to carry out an environmental and social assessment of the Project and document the potential environmental and social impacts and provide mitigation measures to reduce or prevent adverse impacts.
The scope of the ESIA study has been prepared by AECOM (Report No: AECOM-TR-R590-03-00, November 2012) and mutually agreed by ICA and the Lenders.
The objective of this document is to therefore provide the findings of the ESIA undertaken for the Project. This document includes the current proposed route and description of the project and identifies the major environmental issues likely to be associated with the construction and operation of the Project. .
All of the actions identified as mitigation relating to construction and operation of the Project have been collated and presented in a separate document as an Environmental and Social Action Plan (ESAP). This includes an Afforestation Plan, which deals directly with the actions required to mitigate impacts on the forestry areas through which the Project passes.
The Project will result in the loss of large areas of woodland and forests of various types and importance and mitigation will be required in order to restore these woodlands and forests and to maintain and improve biodiversity and the ecological value of the remaining habitats.
However, this is not an impossible task because this assessment has identified which habitats are affected by the project and evaluates those habitats. For example, long-established undisturbed deciduous forest (of which there is not very much in the area) is more „valuable‟, in an ecological sense, than recently created pine plantation or heavily managed woodlands. This is because the former is more diverse and is therefore hard to mitigate for, whilst the latter is easier to recreate or improve. These issues will be discussed in more detail in the Afforestation Plan, which will be included as an Appendix to the ESAP.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 1-2
Finally, a Draft Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) has been prepared and this has already been submitted to ICA.
1.3 General Approach to Assessment
The approach to this assessment refers to the guidance contained within the IFC Guidelines, Turkish Environmental Law and also the Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment (Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA), 2004). Criteria for the determination of sensitivity or of importance or value of receptors, in order to determine significance of impacts, have been broadly established based on approved guidance, legislation, statutory designation and/or professional judgment.
Based on the information obtained from the ICA, the route has been determined by the KGM and ICA has no significant influence over the alignment or the consideration of alternatives. Nevertheless, in the design development process some minor alterations to the route have been proposed due to environmental constraints, geotechnical findings, expropriation issues, etc., and some of these changes have been accepted. These are discussed further in Chapter 2 Scheme Description.
AECOM has not therefore assessed alternatives to the scheme, as ICA has no control over the choice or implementation of any alternatives, including the “no action” alternative. In addition, the Project will be operated by ICA for 10 years 2 months 20 days (including 30 months of construction period) as a BOT project.
Furthermore, ICA will not have any control over any future or consequential impacts that may arise from the development of the Project, such as changes in land use or development patterns that may result from the existence of the road, and as such these impacts and mitigations have not been considered in detail in this assessment, although where appropriate such potential future changes have been referred to.
We have therefore focused on potential impacts associated with the Project specifically within the context of the developments proposed in the existing 1:100,000 Istanbul Environmental Plan. The assessment has considered construction and operational effects of the Project up to the end of the concession period.
Details of the general approach to the assessment are given in Chapter 3 of this ESIA report.
1.4 Report Structure and Authors
ESIA is a process and this report presents the findings of that process. Overall management of the ESIA has been undertaken by AECOM, but a significant number of sub-consultants have been used to deliver this assessment. The ESIA has been prepared in four volumes
The Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) Report (this report) The ESIA Appendices and Figures The Environmental and Social Action Plan (ESAP), including the Afforestation Plan The Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP)
The structure of the main ESIA report is summarized below and the principle authors of each chapter are identified. It should be noted that for each chapter prepared by a sub-consultant the structure and approach of the assessment has been directed by AECOM.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 1-3
Chapter Title Prepared by
Executive Summary AECOM
Chapter 1 Introduction AECOM
Chapter 2 Scheme Description AECOM
Chapter 3 Approach to Assessment AECOM
Chapter 4 Ecology AECOM
Chapter 5 Land Use Associate Professor Dr. Feryal Turan
Chapter 6 Air Quality Professor Dr. Gülen Güllü. Baseline monitoring and air quality modeling by ARTEK Mühendislik Çevre Ölçüm ve Danışmanlık Hizmetleri Ltd. Şti.
Chapter 7 Traffic Noise & Vibration Professor Dr. Gülen Güllü. Baseline monitoring and noise modeling by Frekans Çevre Ölçüm Mühendislik Danışmanlık Tic. İth. İhr. Ltd Şti.
Chapter 8 Water Quality AECOM. Baseline monitoring by ARTEK Mühendislik Çevre Ölçüm ve Danışmanlık Hizmetleri Ltd. Şti.
Chapter 9 Geology and Soils AECOM
Chapter 10 Waste Management AECOM
Chapter 11 Visual Impacts AECOM
Chapter 12 Socio-Economics Associate Professor Dr. Feryal Turan
Chapter 13 Archaeology REGIO Consultancy and Training Inc.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 2-1
2.0 SCHEME DESCRIPTION
2.1 General Description
The proposed Project includes a bridge that will cross the Bosphorus (or Istanbul Strait) and a motorway on both sides of Europe and Asia, with associated connection and side roads. It will also include an „area of influence‟ encompassing quarries, concrete plants worker‟s compounds and other facilities necessary for the construction of the project.
The overall requirements for the bridge and motorway design are given in the Technical Requirements issued for “The North Marmara Motorway (incl. the Bosphorus 3rd Bridge) Design and Construction Requirements” prepared by the KGM. Figure 2-1 shows an aerial view of the Project and includes the locations of the viaducts, tunnels and the „ecological bridge‟. In addition, Figure 2.2 shows the main route changes that occurred during the assessment process. These are discussed further in section 2.5 below.
Figure 2.1 Route Plan
(Note that a much higher resolution version of this figure at A3 size is included in Appendix 2 of this report)
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 2-2
Figure 2.2 Route Alternatives
(Note that a much higher resolution version of this figure at A3 size is included in Appendix 2 of this report)
2.2 Project Aim
The aim of the Project is to provide a new crossing ofthe Bosphorus well away from the main conurbation of Istanbul. The two current bridges across the Bosphorus are located within the city itself and are often heavily congested. In addition, for want of an alternative, these existing bridges comprise the main strategic route from Anatolian Turkey (and much further afield) to European Turkey and on to Europe directly.
As these routes carry local traffic as well as strategic traffic, the strategic transport element of this is forced to travel through the city increasing urban congestion and causing issues such as local air pollution, increases in accident rates and a reduction in economic efficiency due to increased commuting and transportation times for heavy goods vehicles (HGVs).
Therefore, it was considered by the Turkish Government that a new strategic route be created that would not pass through the city itself and that would be capable of accommodating the significant amounts of HGVs and long distance journeys that are currently forced to pass directly through Istanbul itself. In addition, the projkect would be able to link to other proposed projects such as the proposed new Istanbul Airport as well as accommodating a new strategic high speed rail link across the Bosphorus.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 2-3
2.3 The Third Bosphorus Bridge
The bridge will cross the Bosphorus near to the Black Sea between Garipçe on the European side and Poyraz on the Asian side. The purpose of the bridge is to carry a 2 x 4 lane motorway and two high speed railway tracks. The bridge will be located near to the entrance of the Bosphorus with the Black Sea. It is anticipated that 135,000 vehicles will use the bridge in each direction per day. Anticipated traffic flows are shown on Table 2-1.
Table 2-1 Anticipated Traffic Flows
SourceID/ Project Road Type Traffic Flow* %HDV (Heavy duty Section vehicle)
1 Urban 79335.12 16.18
2 Motorway 75874.41 16.79
3 Motorway 116004.44 27.97
4 Urban 94175.35 25.98
Data from Northern Marmara Motorway including 3rd Bosphorus Crossing: Traffic and Revenue Forecasts Mott MacDonald (Dec 2012).
The Technical Requirements reference document prepared by KGM contains most of the project objectives and design and operational requirements. KGM‟s main principle requirements can be restated as below:
Conformance of the proposed Bosphorus Bridge 3 design to recognized international bridge design standards. Conformance of the bridge design to the overall design parameters outlined in these Bosphorus Bridge 3 Design and Construction Requirements. Being of the proposed Bosphorus Bridge 3 safe, practical, constructible and durable. Being of the design not likely to inflict more impact on the environment than envisaged.
KGM requires that all materials, substances, labour and design conform to the applicable KGM and/or national standard and/or other equivalent recognized international standards that provide the appropriate guarantees for the purposes of safety, eligibility and suitability. It is expected that all of the bridge and viaduct structures will have a design life of 100 years.
As set out by the KGM Technical Specification, the horizontal geometry of the Bosphorus Bridge 3 will be consistent with the corridor set forth in the North Marmara Motorway Design and Construction Requirements defined by KGM. The bridge crossing over the navigational channel will have a minimum vertical clearance of 64 m from the national maximum tidal level to the soffit of the deck under maximum service loads. This vertical clearance will be provided along a minimum width of 400 m over the usual navigational channel of the Bosphorus.
The length of the main span was increased to 1,408 m to place the towers on either shore to adapt to site conditions and to avoid significant construction works directly within the Bosphorus. As a result of this, it is
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 2-4
envisioned that there will be no impact on navigation within the Bosphorus, no significant risk of pollution during the construction of piers in the Bosporus and no influence on the environment (currents, fishing, water quality, etc). In addition to these advantages, there will be also less construction and maintenance risks than with foundations at sea.
The bridge will also be designed to carry two railway tracks that will be installed in the future, with 25kV overhead electrification. According to the KGM data requirements, the preliminary design allows for:
freight trains up to 400 metres in length, restricted to travelling at 80 km per hour, and passenger trains up to 400 metres in length restricted to travelling at 160 km per hour.
The proposed bridge is designed as a single level box girder. The two railway tracks will be located in the middle of the bridge and there will be a four lane road both sides of the railway tracks..
As discussed previously, both pylons will be located on-shore and thus there will be no activities in the marine environment during the construction period. Thus, no potential environmental impact on marine environment is foreseen for the proposed bridge project. The only activity in the marine environment during the construction period will be the transportation of the bridge segments via barges and lifting of the segments. The length and the weight of each segment will be approximately 24 m and 840 tons, respectively. The lifting activity will, however, result in temporary interruption of the marine traffic in the Bosphorus.
2.4 The Northern Marmara Motorway
2.4.1 Roads
The proposed Northern Marmara Motorway includes approximately 60 km long motorway from Odayeri to Paşaköy and approximately 54 km of connection roads, including the third Bosphorus bridge. The total length of the road construction will be approximately 114 km. Table 2-2 lists some of the basic information about the scheme, which is divided into four sections.
Table 2-2 Northern Marmara Motorway Scheme Summary
Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4
TOTAL (km) 19.44 24.66 26.50 20.70
Number of Viaducts 8 11 9 8
Max-Min-Total L (m) Max L: 894 m, Max L: 979 m, Max L: 894 m, Max L: 467 m,
Min L: 211 m Min L: 168m Min L: 125 m Min L: 168m
Total L: 5,901 m Total L: 7,736 m Total L: 8,815 m Total L: 3,469 m
Number of Tunnels 0 1+1 RW 1 1
Total L Total L: Total L: 1,180 m Total L: 1380 m 1,1165m+700m
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 2-5
Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4
Amount of concrete (m3) 416,714 622,561 666,274 440,091
Amount of cut (m3) 9,934,730 15,200,490 13,525,009 10,116,700
Amount of fill (m3) 5,398,195 6,962,548 7,213,731 9,796,158
The four route sections are:
Section 1 from “ISTOC OSB (in the Başakşehir District)” to “Odayeri (in the Eyüp District)”
Section 2 from “Odayeri” to “Garipçe (in the Sarıyer District)”
Section 3 from “Poyraz (in the Beykoz District)” to “Reşadiye (Çekmeköy)”
Section 4 from “Reşadiye” to “Çamlık (in the Ümraniye District-left side)” and “Paşaköy (in the Sancaktepe District-right side)”
The KGM requirement also includes all necessary bridges, junctions, tunnels, viaducts, retention walls and drainage systems. In addition, ICA will also construct service and rest areas, parking areas for hazardous materials transporting vehicles, toll booths and structures, maintenance and operations buildings for the third
Table 2-2 provides the overall information about the proposed project. There are a total of 36 viaducts and three road tunnels, plus one ecological bridge.
2.4.2 Service Facilities
As a KGM requirement, ICA will construct services facilities, which include maintenance and operations facilities and parking and resting areas, as part of the Northern Marmara Motorway project. The proposed service facility locations and layout are shown in Figure 2-3.
2.4.3 Toll Collection Facilities
ICA will also construct toll collection facilities on the motorway. The locations of the toll collection booths and the type of booths proposed as part of this project are given in Figure 2-4 and Figure 2-5.
2.4.4 Construction Facilities and Area of Influence
During the construction period of the proposed Project, there will be a number of facilities that will be constructed temporarily near the project site. These facilities are: two motorway construction camps (one on each side), two bridge construction sites (one on each side), ten concrete plants, four asphalt plants and eight mechanics plants. The exact locations of these facilities are not known yet and will be subject to change; however, approximate locations are shown in Figure 2-6.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 2-6
Figure 2-3 Representative Service Facilities
Figure 2-4 Representative Toll Collection Facilities
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 2-7
Figure 2-5 Representative Open and Closed Type Collection Systems (Options)
ICA also plans to use a number of existing rock quarries in close proximity of the project site for the road construction. The project does not intend to supply a significant amount of filling material from existing or new quarries since the project will generate approximately 49 million cubic metres of cut material and will need about 29 million tons of fill material. The approximate locations of these proposed five rock quarries are shown in Figure 2-11.
Figure 2-6 Representative Schematic of Facilities during Construction
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 2-8
2.5 Route Amendments
A number of route changes were implemented during the development of the Project for a variety of reasons, including for purposes of environmental mitigation. On Figure 2-7 the original route is shown in red with the amended alignments shown in yellow. The four main areas where changes were made are discussed below.
Figure 2-7 Main Route Changes
2.5.1 Point 1
This is shown on Figure 2-8. The initial route, shown in yellow (rather than red as per Figure 2-7), was shifted Southwards by 1.5 km to avoid clashing with land reserved for the proposed Third International Airport of Istanbul on one side and to facilitate access and appropriate connections through the KMO Project on the other side.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 2-9
Figure 2-8 Route Change near Odayeri
2.5.2 Point 2
The initial route near the Uskumruköy intersection had to be moved southwards by 80 metre to avoid a martyrs' cemetery. This helped to protect part of the Belgrad Forest, as the shifted route has constituted a barrier to the forests.
Figure 2-9 Route Change near Uskumruköy
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 2-10
2.5.3 Point 3
Figure 2-10 Route Change near Riva Valley
The initial alignment passed through part of the migration and roosting route used by storks. The new alignment is shown in yellow. In addition, the initial route was a threat to floodplain and open land around the Riva River in the Riva Valley.
Figure 2-11 The Riva Valley
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 2-11
2.5.4 Point 4
This change is referred to as the “Taşdelen Variant” and the new alignment is shown in yellow. The initial route was shifted by 400 m to the south, to prevent any possibility of damaging the historical Taşdelen Spring Water.
Figure 2-12 “Taşdelen Variant”
The Taşdelen Spring Water Plant, which has operated since 1582, has 6 galleries today. Flow rate of wells is 140-145 m3 / day. A flow rate of 90-95 m3 / day is processed in plant, whilst the rest is in use by both the Taşdelen Spring Water Plant in their production facilities and by the public, especially during the summer months. The results of investigations made by İstanbul Technical University are presented in the contents of “Vakıf Taşdelen Natural Spring Water Report” in January 2013.
2.6 Other Project Information
2.6.1 Permits and Licences
The regulation regarding Permits and Licenses that must be obtained for the Project pursuant to the environmental law (the “Regulation”) was published in the Official Gazette No. 27214, dated 29 April 2009 and coming into force on 1 January 2010. In accordance with the regulation, the companies which have high impact on environmental pollution, as listed in Annexes 1 and 2 of the Regulation, are under obligation to get an environmental permit or an environmental permit and licence. All facilities and activities associated with the Project are governed by the regulation.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 2-12
The facilities listed in Annex 1 of the Regulation should apply to the Ministry of Environment and Urbanization (MoEU) of an environmental permit or environmental permit and licence to be issued. In addition, the facilities listed in Annex 2 should apply to the Provincial Department of Environment and Urbanization for an environmental permit or environmental permit and licence to be issued.
With reference to this regulation, ICA will obtain an environmental permit or an environmental permit and licence for facilities listed under Annex 2 of the regulation, which includes asphalt plants, concrete plants, crushing plants, quarries and wastewater treatment plants.
2.6.2 Project Programme
The proposed Project plans to construct the bridge pylons in 16 months and the bridge and the motorways in 36 months. The work programme based on three-month periods is given in Table 2-3 below.
Table 2-3 Project Programme
2.6.3 Employment
It is currently estimated that approximately 7200-7500 people will be employed during peak construction periods (approximately 3 years from 2013 to 2016) for the construction of the Project and in management of the construction camps and sites. The Project is likely to require around 300 support staff and engineers and 1500 unskilled workers. This includes a combination of skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled workers.
Approximately 1000 or 500 workers will be employed at the potential construction camps at peak periods in the bridge and motorway construction process. Estimated employment opportunities in the construction camps are given in Table 2-4: Likely start and end dates for each section are currently not known.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 2-13
Table 2-4. Estimated Employment Numbers
Construction camps Workers Odayeri 1000 Garipçe 1000 Poyraz 500 Hüseyinli 500 TOTAL 3000
2.6.4 Other Projects in the Area
There are a number of other major developments in the area that may interact with the Project. These include general urban expansion in the Istanbul area but principally the proposed development of the Third Istanbul Airport located to the northwest of Odayeri (see Figure 2-8). This will be constructed in a number of phases, the first of which will create an airport with three runways, associated infrastructure and capacity for 70 million passengers per annum. This is intended to rise to 150 million passengers per annum. The airport is currently in the planning stage and construction could start in 2017.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 3-1
3.0 APPROACH TO THE ASSESSMENT
3.1 Introduction
This chapter describes the broad approach that has been used in undertaking the ESIA and sets out the key stages that have been followed throughout this ESIA.
This chapter also provides a section on the assumptions made during the ESIA process and defines any general study limitations.
3.2 Methods
3.2.1 Overview
The objective of this report is to review baseline environmental information and to identify the potentially significant environmental impacts that may arise through development of the project. The general approach to the assessment of impacts as set out below has been used in this report.
The method draws on the guidance contained within the IFC Guidelines, Turkish Environmental Law and also the Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment (Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA), 2004).
The approach is qualitative and is broadly similar across all of the guidance and for all specialist topic areas, although there may be some variation in the descriptions of assessment criteria.
For each topic the assessment of significance has been informed mainly by the sensitivity of the existing or baseline environmental conditions or character and the magnitude of the impact or change to the existing baseline which is likely to occur as a result of the proposed development. In addition, the likelihood of the impact or change is taken into account when assessing significance.
Note that the tables below are for guidance only and professional judgment has been exercised during the completion of each assessment chapter.
3.2.2 Sensitivity of Receptors
The sensitivity of baseline conditions within each topic has been determined according to the relative importance of existing environmental features on or near to the route, or by the sensitivity of receptors which would potentially be affected by the development.
Criteria for the determination of sensitivity or of importance or value of receptors have been broadly established based on approved guidance, legislation, statutory designation and/or professional judgment. Table 3-1 provides general definitions of the sensitivity criteria used within the assessment.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 3-2
Table 3-1 Sensitivity Criteria
Sensitivity Definition
The receptor has little or no ability to absorb change without fundamentally altering its present Very High character, is of very high environmental value, or of international importance.
The receptor has low ability to absorb change without fundamentally altering its present character, is High of high environmental value, or of national importance.
The receptor has moderate capacity to absorb change without significantly altering its present Medium character, has some environmental value, or is of national importance.
The receptor is tolerant of change without detriment to its character, is of low environmental value, Low or local importance.
Negligible The receptor is resistant to change and is of little environmental value.
3.2.3 Magnitude of Impact
The magnitude of potential impacts on environmental baseline conditions has been defined by considering the scale or degree of change the proposed development will have on the existing baseline, the duration and reversibility of the impact and has taken into account relevant legislative or policy standards or guidelines. Table 3-2 provides general definitions of impact magnitude.
Table 3-2 Magnitude of Impact
Magnitude Definition
Total loss or major alternation to key elements /features of the baseline conditions such High that post development character/composition of baseline condition will be fundamentally changed.
Loss or alteration to one or more key elements/features of the baseline conditions such Medium that post development character/composition of the baseline condition will be materially changed.
Minor shift away from baseline conditions. Changes arising from the alteration will be Low detectable but not material in that the underlying character /composition of the baseline condition will be similar to the pre-development situation.
Very little change from baseline conditions. Change is barely distinguishable, Negligible approximating to a “no change” situation
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 3-3
3.2.4 Significance of Impacts
The approach to the assessment of significance has taken into account the sensitivity of the receiving environment and the magnitude of change. Table 1-3 below provides an indication of how significance has been determined, although it should be noted that this is meant to be a general approach and has not been treated as a strict matrix.
Table 3-3 Assessment of Impacts
Sensitivity Magnitude Very High High Medium Low Negligible High Major Major Moderate Moderate Minor Medium Major Moderate Moderate Minor Negligible Low Moderate Moderate Minor Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor Minor Negligible Negligible Negligible
The significance of the potential impacts arising from the proposed development can therefore be reported using a seven-point scale, as follows:
Major Adverse Moderate Adverse Minor Adverse Negligible Minor Beneficial Moderate Beneficial Major Beneficial
Potential impacts predicted to be Minor or Negligible are considered to be „Not Significant’.
Potential impacts assessed as being Moderate or Major are considered to be „Significant'.
It should be noted that at this stage the assessment takes into account mitigation and therefore “residual” impacts have been determined, which can be defined as any impact that would remain following the implementation of proposed mitigation measures.
3.2.5 Development Phases
Potential impacts have been separated into two main types based on different phases of development, i.e. construction effects and operational (or permanent) impacts.
Construction impacts are temporary, short-term impacts that occur during the construction phase only. This will include impacts resulting from construction of the road and bridge as well as any impacts resulting from other temporary works such as access tracks, working areas, compounds or quarries specifically opened to provide material for the construction.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 3-4
Operational impacts are those long-term impacts that will occur as a result of the development, such as the land take associated with permanent infrastructure as well as impacts resulting from operation of the road (e.g. noise, air quality, drainage issues and fragmentation of habitats).
3.2.6 Impact Types
In addition to the direct impacts of the development associated with construction works and operation of the development, other types of impact may arise. These are discussed below.
Indirect or Secondary Impacts: the inter-relationship between subject areas such as water quality and ecology means that impacts cannot always be considered in isolation since changes affecting one factor may often have secondary implications for other areas. Under some circumstances, it is possible for the secondary or indirect impacts to be more significant than the changes that triggered them. Where there is the potential for secondary or indirect impacts this is highlighted and discussed in the Preliminary Assessment.
Cumulative and In-Combination Impacts on specific resources or receptors are described, where relevant, in each of the specialist sections of this report.
3.2.7 Uncertainty and Assumptions
The assessment process aims to assist good decision-making based on information about the potential environmental impacts of the proposed development. However, there will be some uncertainty as to the exact scale and nature of the environmental impacts, particularly at this early stage. This uncertainty arises because of the level of detail and information about the project available at the time the assessment is being undertaken and/or due to the limitations of the prediction process itself. Where assumptions have been made these are set out in each specialist section.
3.3 Regulatory Framework
3.3.1 Overview
A number of standards and guidelines are available for environmental assessments of large scale projects. These are provided by the Turkish environmental legislation, Equator Principles (EP), the International Finance Corporation (IFC) and European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). In defining the approach to the assessment and what standards were referred to, an important point is that as this is not a statutory assessment as such, this Project has been exempted from the Turkish Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process. The assessment is therefore a voluntary exercise and we selected what we consider to be the most appropriate environmental standards to undertake the assessment. Thus, our approach uses the local Turkish standards where possible but these are informed by EP and IFC guidelines where appropriate.
In addition, this approach to selection of standards was adopted because the JV does not have full control of the alignment or design parameters of the project, including choice of alternative routes, expropriation/ resettlement issues, or have responsibility for longer term potential impacts of the development associated with future land-use master plans.
AECOM has reviewed and identified the Turkish environmental laws and regulations, Equator Principles, and IFC Guidelines that apply to the proposed project. The regulatory framework and guidelines review include, but are not limited to, the issues related to industry-specific standards, air emissions and quality, water quality, soil, noise, hazardous chemicals, solid waste, and hazardous waste issues and also general permit/licence issues.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 3-5
3.3.2 Relevant National Legislation
The Environmental Law (No. 2872), which was published in Turkish Official Gazette No. 18132 dated August 11, 1983 and revised in Turkish Official Gazette No. 26167 dated May 13, 2006 (Law No. 5491) provides the legislative framework for the regulation of industries and infrastructure projects and their potential impact on the environment.
The Environmental Law authorized the promulgation of a number of regulations. Those related to the 3rd Bosphorus Bridge and Connected Motorways Project including the construction and operation periods are the following:
Air Quality Assessment and Management Regulation, Official Gazette No. 26898 dated June 6, 2008; Industrial Air Pollution Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 27277 dated July 3, 2009; Exhaust Gases Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 27190 dated April 4, 2009; Regulation on Control of Air Pollution Caused by Heating Installations, Official Gazette No. 25699 dated January 13, 2005; Regulation on Reduction in Ozone Depleting Substances, Official Gazette No. 27052 dated November 12, 2008; Regulation on Tracking of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Official Gazette No. 28274 dated April 25, 2012; Regulation on Inventory and Control of Chemicals, Official Gazette No. 27092 dated December 26, 2008; Statute for the Measures to be Taken at Work Sites and Works Utilizing Explosive, Flammable, Hazardous and Detrimental Materials, Official Gazette No. 14752 dated December 24, 1973; Regulation on Soil Pollution Control and Contaminated Sites by Point Sources, Official Gazette No. 27605 dated June 8, 2010; Water Pollution Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 25687 dated December 31, 2004 and revised in Official Gazette No. 27537 dated March 30, 2010; Regulation on Assessment and Management of Environmental Noise, Official Gazette No. 27601 dated June 4, 2010; Regulation on General Principles of Waste Management, Official Gazette No. 26927 dated July 5, 2008; Hazardous Wastes Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 25755 dated March 14, 2005; Solid Waste Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 20814 dated March 14, 1991; Waste Oil Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 26952 dated July 30, 2008; Waste Batteries and Accumulators Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 25569 dated August 31, 2004; Medical Waste Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 25883 dated July 22, 2005; Regulation on Landfills, Official Gazette No. 27533 dated March 26, 2010; Packaging Waste Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 26562 dated June 24, 2007; Excavation, Construction and Demolition Wastes Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 25406 dated March 18, 2004; Communiqué on Recovery of Some Non-Hazardous Wastes, Official Gazette No. 27967 dated June 17, 2011; Waste Tires Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 26357 dated November 25, 2006; Regulation on Recovery of Lands Deteriorated by Mining Activities, Official Gazette No. 27471 dated January 23, 2010; Regulation Related to Workplace Opening and Operation Permits, Official Gazette No. 25902 dated August 10, 2005;
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 3-6
Environmental Permit and Licenses Regulation, Official Gazette No. 27214 dated April 29, 2009; Environmental Impact Assessment Regulation, Official Gazette No. 27214 dated July 17, 2008; and Regulation on Environmental Officers and Consultancy Firms, Official Gazette No: 27757, dated November 12, 2010.
3.3.3 International Conventions Adapted by Turkey
Turkey is a signatory to several regional and international conventions that are relevant to the 3rd Bosphorus Bridge Project. Those related to the proposed Project are listed as follows:
Convention on Biological Diversity, approved by 4177 numbered Law dated August 29, 1996 and published in the Official gazette No. 22860 and dated December 27, 1996, Ratified 1997; Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES), published in the Official Gazette No.22672 and dated June 20, 1996, Ratified 1996; Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife And Natural Habitats (Bern), published in the Official Gazette No. 18318 and dated February 20, 1984, Ratified 1984; Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar), published in the Official Gazette No. 21937 and dated May 17, 1994, Ratified 1994; International Convention For the Protection of Birds, published in the Official Gazette No. 12480 and dated December 17, 1966, Ratified 1967; and Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, published in the Official Gazette No. 17959 and dated February 14, 1983.
3.3.4 World Bank/IFC Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines
The proposed Project is assessed in accordance with the IFC guidelines, performance standards and their related guidance notes.
Guidelines
IFC Environmental, Health, and Safety General Guidelines (2007); Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines for Toll Roads (2007); and Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines for Construction Materials Extraction (2007).
The IFC EHS Guidelines for toll roads defines the environmental issues specific to the construction and operation of toll roads projects. Environmental issues specific to construction and operation of roads include habitat alteration and fragmentation, stormwater, waste, noise, air emissions and wastewater. In addition, EHS Guidelines for Construction Materials Extraction will be applicable to the Project since quarries will be used during the construction period. Environmental issues specific to quarries include air emissions, noise and vibrations, water, waste and land conversion. Furthermore, these industry sector EHS guidelines are designed to be used together with the General EHS Guidelines document providing guidance to users on common EHS issues. Thus, the General EHS Guidelines will also be applicable to the Project.
Performance Standards
IFC Performance Standards on Social and Environmental Sustainability (2012), o Performance Standard 1 – Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 3-7
o Performance Standard 2 - Labor and Working Conditions o Performance Standard 3 – Resource Efficiency and Pollution Prevention o Performance Standard 4 - Community Health, Safety and Security o Performance Standard 5 - Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement o Performance Standard 6 - Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources o Performance Standard 7 - Indigenous Peoples o Performance Standard 8 - Cultural Heritage IFC Guidance Notes: Performance Standards on Social and Environmental Sustainability (2007).
The IFC‟s Performance Standards and related guidance notes have been followed in this study. Guidance notes for Performance Standard 2 to 8 were addressed when applicable. Performance Standards 5 and 7 will not be addressed in this Project.
3.3.5 Equator Principles
The Project will be assessed in accordance with the Equator Principles when applicable. The “Equator Principles” is a financial industry benchmark for determining, assessing and managing social and environmental risk in project financing. The Principles apply to all new project financings globally with total project capital costs of US$10 million or more, and across all industry sectors.
The Equator Principles are based mostly on the IFCs Environmental and Social Safeguard Policies. The Equator Principles (2006) that are adopted by the Equator Principles Financial Institutions (EPFIs) are listed below:
Principle 1: Review and Categorization
The project is categorized based on the magnitude of its potential impacts and risks in accordance with the environmental and social screening criteria of the International Finance Corporation (IFC).
Principle 2: Social and Environmental Assessment
A Social and Environmental Assessment is prepared to address the relevant social and environmental impacts and risks of the proposed. The Assessment should also propose mitigation and management measures relevant and appropriate to the nature and scale of the proposed project.
Principle 3: Applicable Social and Environmental Standards
The Social and Environmental Assessment refers to the applicable IFC Performance Standards and the applicable IFC Industry Specific EHS Guidelines.
Principle 4: Action Plan and Management System
The Action Plan describes and prioritizes the actions needed to implement mitigation measures, corrective actions and monitoring measures necessary to manage the impacts and risks identified in the Social and Environmental Assessment. Borrowers establish a Social and Environmental Management System that addresses the management of these impacts, risks, and corrective actions required to comply with applicable host country social and environmental laws and regulations, and requirements of the applicable IFC Performance Standards and EHS Guidelines, as defined in the Action Plan.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 3-8
Principle 5: Consultation and Disclosure
Project affected communities are consulted with in a structured and culturally appropriate manner. For projects with significant adverse impacts on affected communities, the process ensures their free, prior and informed consultation.
Principle 6: Grievance Mechanism
Grievance mechanism allows the borrower to receive and facilitate resolution of concerns and grievances about the project‟s social and environmental performance raised by individuals or groups from among project- affected communities.
Principle 7: Independent Review
For all Category A projects and, as appropriate, for Category B projects, an independent social or environmental expert not directly associated with the borrower reviews the Assessment, Action Plan and consultation process documentation in order to assist EPFI's due diligence, and assess Equator Principles compliance.
Principle 8: Covenants
For Category A and B projects, the borrower covenants in financing documentation; a) to comply with all relevant host country social and environmental laws, regulations and permits in all material respects, b) to comply with the Action Plan during the construction and operation of the project in all material respects, c) to provide periodic reports in a format agreed with EPFIs, d) to decommission the facilities, where applicable and appropriate, in accordance with an agreed decommissioning plan.
Principle 9: Independent Monitoring and Reporting
For all Category A projects, and as appropriate, for Category B projects, in order to ensure ongoing monitoring and reporting over the life of the loan, EPFIs require appointment of an independent environmental and/or social expert, or require that the borrower retain qualified and experienced external experts to verify its monitoring information which would be shared with EPFIs.
Principle 10: EPFI Reporting
Each EPFI adopting the Equator Principles commits to report publicly at least annually about its Equator Principles implementation processes and experience, taking into account appropriate confidentiality considerations
As stated in previous sections, during the environmental assessment of this Project, we will use the local Turkish standards where possible but these will be informed by Equator Principles (EP) and IFC guidelines where appropriate.
3.3.6 Equator Principles III
It is worth noting that a third version of the Equator Principles (EP III) has been recently published and took effect from 4 June 2013. EP III will apply to all new transactions from 1 January 2014 and therefore does not affect this Project directly.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 3-9
3.4 Study Limitations
Based on the information obtained from ICA, and as noted above, the route has been determined by the KGM and ICA has had no direct influence over the alignment or the consideration of alternatives, other than in relation to details based on technical or other considerations. In addition, the ESIA study has assumed the following limitations, exceptions and assumptions:
AECOM has not assessed legal and political issues associated with the Project. Targeted ecological baseline surveys were completed in March and April 2013. As this project is exempted from the statutory EIA process AECOM has not request official opinions, from any governmental or municipal agency during the preparation of this ESIA.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-1
4.0 ECOLOGY AND BIODIVERSITY
4.1 Introduction
This chapter describes the ecological features on the route and in the immediate vicinity of the Bosphorus Third Bridge and Northern Marmara Motorway and identifies the potential effects that the scheme will have on ecological receptors in the area. Proposals for mitigation are described and the residual impacts of the Project are discussed.
4.2 Ecological Impact Assessment
This chapter provides an assessment of the potential effects on sensitive ecological receptors of the Project. It identifies and assesses the potential construction and operational impacts of the development and formulates an appropriate mitigation strategy. In summary, the scope of this assessment is to:
Provide baseline ecological data on the proposed road alignment corridor; Examine and analyse these data with regard to the proposed development; Identify the significance of any potential direct/indirect impact on the ecology of the proposed development site and its immediate environs; and Identify appropriate and effective means of mitigating the potential adverse impacts arising from the construction and operation of the proposed Bosporus Third Bridge and Northern Marmara Motorway and associated infrastructure.
Impacts have been evaluated and assessed through using information derived from desk based studies and from site specific field surveys. Loss and/or fragmentation of habitats, focusing on potential impacts on important habitats and species has been considered within this assessment.
4.3 Methods
4.3.1 Scope of Assessment
This section summarizes the methods adopted for ecological desk study, habitat and protected species surveys. The general approach taken is a modified version of the guidelines published by the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM), July 2006. In addition, reference has also been made to the Turkish Environmental Legislation, Equator Principles (EP) and the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Environmental Performance Standards.
4.3.2 Ecological Surveys
Phase 1 Habitat Survey
In order to determine the habitat characteristic of the total route of Third Bosphorus Bridge and Connected Motorways project two field surveys were conducted in 12-21 March 2013 and 14-20 April 2013 by an AECOM team composed of a wildlife ecologist, environmental scientist and botanist from AECOM.
The Phase 1 Habitat Survey method was used to undertake the field surveys. This covered a survey corridor of 500m centered on the proposed route and was carried out following the method set out in the Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC 2010). Target notes were made
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-2
to pinpoint features of interest, or locally occurring communities including particularly good habitats or where additional information was deemed necessary.
In order to navigate the route, particular points were assigned along the daily route and these points were located using Google Earth and a hand held GPS. The survey buffer zone was determined as 250 metres on either side of each of these points. These points and the habitat types in these buffer zones were defined, noted and marked on the 1:25000 scale maps.
The surveys started from the European side of the Bosphorus at the eastern most point in the vicinity of the bridge foundations at the edge of the strait. Construction activities were observed to have already started at these points and therefore it was not possible to determine what the habitat types had been at those points before works commenced, and therefore what habitats and plants had already been lost. The survey was then were conducted from east to west along the route on the European side. The survey was subsequently continued and completed on the Anatolian section.
Aquatic and Marine Habitats
The Project crosses or comes close to a number of watercourses, ponds and wetland, and where these were present within the 500m corridor, these were surveyed, habitats identified and any significant species noted. We were advised by ICA that no permanent works were proposed within the Bosphorus itself and that all structures would be positioned on the banks. However, it was noted that some temporary filling close to the shore had been undertaken, which will be removed once construction is complete. Therefore, no field surveys were planned or carried out in the aquatic environment although potential impacts on the marine environment are discussed in the ESIA. .
Other Species Surveys
Due to significant time constraints, no other dedicated species surveys were conducted during the Phase 1 survey. However, incidental species sightings, including signs of species, such as footprints, droppings, burrows and other signs were noted where relevant.
4.3.3 Consultations
Contact was made with the Forestry Department and useful information on the forests and woodland of Istanbul, and how they are currently managed was obtained.
4.3.4 Conditions of Survey and Survey Limitations
There were certain limitations that applied to the surveys and to this assessment. The main issues were:
The first Phase 1 Habitat survey was undertaken quite early in the season, although the second survey was late enough to identify most common herbaceous species and early flowering species; Access to some areas was restricted periodically due to, dense vegetation and/or heavy rain and the resulting mud affected safe access on some of the forest roads; Some parts of the route pass through military zones and in one case we were not permitted to enter and survey within a site. However, it was possible to view this site from its perimeter in order to identify the habitats present; Hand held GPS was used to aid in locating areas of interest. The accuracy of GPS varies depending on the terrain in which it is used. Under trees or in highly urbanized areas the accuracy of the GPS can be adversely affected. This effect was minimized through the use of paper field maps to complement GPS.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-3
4.3.5 Impact Assessment Methods
The stages in the impact assessment are outlined below. In summary, the process involved:
Identification and evaluation of ecological receptors; Consideration of the types of potential impacts on these receptors; Description of the changes that these activities would have on receptors; and Identification of the significance of the impact talking into account the effectiveness of mitigation measures.
Evaluation of Ecological Receptors
The assessment methodology is based on both experience gained by the consultants and guidance produced by such bodies as the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) and the (recently) Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM).
For a full assessment it is necessary to have some concept of the value of the habitats present within the Project area as well as its value in context of the ecological receptors that it supports. The value or potential value of an ecological resource or feature is determined within a defined geographical context as follows (refer to CIEEM Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment, 2006):
International; Turkey; Istanbul; Local; and Within zone of influence only.
Designated sites and features are taken into account where relevant. There are several designations which are relevant to Bosphorus Third Bridge and Northern Marmara Motorway; these are discussed below.
The biodiversity value of ecological resources and features is assessed on a range of criteria which take into account potential value, secondary or supporting value, social value and economic value. The CIEEM Guidelines advocate an approach to evaluation and impact assessment with less emphasis on conforming to tables such as 4-1 below and recommends an approach to valuation that involves teasing apart the different values that can be attached to the ecological receptors under consideration. The assessment has done this, therefore, whilst these tables offer a framework to rationalize evaluations in the first instance, professional judgment may vary from the criteria.
Table 4-1 Resource Evaluation Criteria
Value of Selection Criteria Resource
Very high Habitats or species that are cited as interest features associated with an internationally (International) protected site, such as those designated under the Bern Convention, Ramsar Convention, etc. An internationally designated site or candidate site (Ramsar sites, SPA, pSPA, SAC, cSAC or SCI) or an area that it has determined meets the published criteria for such designations, irrespective of whether or not it has yet been notified (e.g. IBA and IPA).
A viable area of a habitat listed in Annex I of the Habitats Directive or smaller areas of
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-4
Value of Selection Criteria Resource
such habitat which are essential to maintain the viability of a larger whole.
Turkish Red data book species or listed as occurring in 15 or fewer 10 km squares in Turkey, or of uncertain conservation status or global conservation concern in the Turkey.
A feature (e.g. habitat or population) which is either unique or sufficiently unusual to be considered as being one of the highest quality examples in an international/national context, such that the site is likely to be designated at an international level.
A regularly occurring, nationally significant population/number of any internationally important species.
A nationally designated site or a discrete area that meets the selection criteria for national designation irrespective of whether or not it has yet been notified. Habitats or species that are cited as interest features associated with a nationally designated site, such as a National Parks and Nature Parks. High (Turkey) A viable area of an identified priority habitat identified or smaller areas of such habitat, which are essential to maintain the viability of the whole.
Any regularly occurring population of a nationally important species that is threatened or rare in the area. A regularly occurring, regionally significant population/number of any nationally important species. Sites that exceed the regional area level designations but fall short of national selection guidelines, where these occur.
Viable areas of key habitat or smaller areas of such habitat, which are essential to maintain the viability of the whole.
Medium – Viable areas of key habitat identified as being of Regional Value in the appropriate Natural High Area profile. (Istanbul)
Any regularly occurring, locally significant population of a species listed as being nationally scarce which occurs in 16-100 10km squares in Turkey or relevant Natural Area on account of its regional rarity or localization.
A regularly occurring, locally significant number of a regionally important species.
Locally important sites and other sites that the designating authority has determined meet the published ecological selection criteria for designation, including local nature reserves or protected areas. Sites/ features which are scarce within the locality or which appreciably enrich the local habitat resource. Semi-natural ancient woodland greater than Medium 0.25 ha. (Local)
A regularly occurring, locally significant number of a locally important species or any regularly occurring, locally significant population of a species that is listed in a local „red data book‟ on account of its regional rarity or localisation. Areas of habitat considered to appreciably enrich the habitat resource within the context of Low the neighbourhood. (Within zone of influence only) Habitats or species that are cited as interest features associated with a local-level designated site and may be designated as a non-statutory.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-5
Value of Selection Criteria Resource
A feature (e.g. habitat or population) that is of nature conservation value in a local context only, with insufficient value to merit a formal nature conservation designation. No significant ecological value. Negligible Common place feature of little or no significance. Loss of such a feature would not be seen as detrimental to the ecology of the area.
Impact Significance
Determining the significance of an identified impact is not always straightforward. The significance of the impacts of this scheme has been determined by considering the value of the resource affected and the following potential impact parameters:
Positive or negative – positive impacts as a result of the development are also identified; Magnitude – determined quantitatively where possible; Extent – the area over which the impact will be felt; Duration – time until recovery or replacement; Reversibility – permanent or temporary impact; and Timing and frequency.
The most recent guidelines produced by the CIEEM advocate a less rigid approach to the assessment of impacts than was previously the case, with more emphasis on expert opinion and the merits of each ecological receptor in its own context. This is because the rigid use of matrices widely used until now can actually devalue the significance of local biodiversity, which has been recognized to lead to a gradual erosion of the local biodiversity resource which consequently affects national biodiversity.
The approach used in this assessment is therefore to describe the impacts and state if the impacts are significant or not significant on each particular receptor. Where residual impacts are predicted to be absent, the distinction is made by determining a neutral impact.
4.3.6 Regulatory Framework
Prior to undertaking ecological field surveys it is essential to understand the regulatory framework within which the assessment should take place and also to find out what protected or important habitats and species may be present in a particular area and therefore what should be looked for during a survey. Therefore, baseline information on legislation, protected habitats and important species recorded as being present in the Istanbul area has been collated.
The following sections set out the legal and policy designations and protection afforded to ecological sites and protected species in the national and local context.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-6
International Conventions Adopted by Turkey
Turkey has signed many international conventions and agreements to protect its environment and biodiversity. International conventions related to the Project are given below:
Convention on Biological Diversity, approved by 4177 numbered Law dated August 29, 1996 and published in the Official gazette No. 22860 and dated December 27, 1996, Ratified 1997; Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES), published in the Official Gazette No.22672 and dated June 20, 1996, Ratified 1996; Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife And Natural Habitats (Bern), published in the Official Gazette No. 18318 and dated February 20, 1984, Ratified 1984; Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar), published in the Official Gazette No. 21937 and dated May 17, 1994, Ratified 1994; International Convention For the Protection of Birds, published in the Official Gazette No. 12480 and dated December 17, 1966, Ratified 1967; and Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, published in the Official Gazette No. 17959 and dated February 14, 1983.
Habitats
Legislation relating to the identification and management of the protected areas in Turkey is mainly the responsibility of the Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs (MoFWA) and Ministry of Environment and Urbanization (MoEU). The main laws and regulations related to identification and management of protected areas in Turkey are discussed below.
National Parks Law No. 2873
The National Parks Law No. 2873 (MoFWA, General Directorate of Nature Conservation and National Parks) was issued in the Official Gazette No. 18132, dated August 11, 1983. This is one of the major laws which provide protection to particular protected areas such as National Parks, Nature Parks, Nature Monuments and Nature Reserves. Descriptions of these different designations are given below:
National Park (Milli Park): A National Park is a reserve of natural or semi-natural land, declared or owned by the government, set aside for human recreation and enjoyment, animal and environmental protection and restricted from most development. National Park defines the nature components for the national and international natural and cultural resource values and protection, recreation and tourism areas, from a scientific and aesthetic perspective. National Parks are extensive tracts of country that are protected by law for future generations because of their natural beauty and for the opportunities they offer for open air recreation. Nature Park (Tabiat Parkı): A Nature Park is defined as a natural area containing characteristic vegetation and wildlife features, integrity of the landscape and is suitable for recreational activities. These sites receive protection because of their recognized natural, ecological and/or cultural values. There are several kinds of protected areas, which vary by level of protection. Nature Monument (Tabiat Anıtı): Natural sites and assets with extraordinary characteristics and scientific value resulting from natural events. These assets may also possess unique or rare geological and geomorphological formations as a result of natural events and flora species of national importance. Nature Reserve (Tabiatı Koruma Alanı): Nature Reserves are described as "natural areas that contain rare, threatened or vulnerable ecosystems and species of significance for scientific and educational purposes. Nature Reserves refer to areas which contain rare, endangered or vulnerable ecosystems,
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-7
species and outstanding examples produced by natural events. Nature reserves designated as particularly important for nature conservation including special protection areas and sites of special scientific interest.
Terrestrial Hunting Law No. 4915
The Terrestrial Hunting Law No. 4915 (MoFWA, General Directorate of Nature Conservation and National Parks) was issued in the Official Gazette No. 25165, dated July 11, 2003. The areas protected under Terrestrial Hunting Law are Wildlife Improvement Areas.
Wildlife Improvement Area (Yaban Hayatı Geliştirme Sahası): These areas are reserved in order to protect the wildlife whose populations are decreasing in their natural habitats and to avoid adversely influencing the area‟s ecosystem. In some sites there are breeding areas for the endangered species. These protected areas have defined boundaries and receive protection under the law.
In addition, through annual Central Hunting Commission (CHC) Decisions which provide protection for some species and areas, sites can be permanently or temporarily closed to hunting. CHC declares “Areas prohibited for Hunting” annually.
Forestry Law No. 6831 (as amended)
The Forestry Law No. 6831 (MoFWA, General Directorate of Forestry) was issued in the Official Gazette No. 9402, dated September 8, 1956 and subsequently amended by the Revision in Forestry Law No. 5192 in the year 2004. The Forestry Law defines and regulates the use of forests. Through Forestry Law and its related regulations, forests are managed and protected under the following categories:
Conservation Forests National Parks (already described under National Parks Law) Seed Gardens Seed Stands Biogenetic Reserve Areas (Gene Courts) such as Gene Conservation Areas, Clone Parks and Trial Areas Recreation Areas (Urban Forests, Picnic Areas)
Conservation Forests (Muhafaza Ormanı)
Conservation forests are intended to prevent natural disasters such as landslides, erosion; to protect human health from dust emissions, and to regulate surface water regime such as dam reservoirs, lakes and streams.
Seed Gardens (Tohum Bahçesi)
Seed gardens are areas where a seed supply system is used to enhance seed source security and conservation of agri-biodiversity. These areas contain selected clones or families and are isolated from undesired sources of pollen. These plantations enable frequent and extensive seed production. The seed gardens can also generate high quality seeds through grafting with host trees.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-8
Seed Stands (Tohum Meşceresi)
Seed stands are intended to produce seeds for forest trees and shrubs. The selection and establishment of seed stands represents a quick and inexpensive method of obtaining seeds of improved genetic quality.
Biogenetic Reserve Areas (Gene Courts) (Gen Sahaları)
Biogenetic reserves are protected areas enjoying legal status which are characterized by one or more typical, unique, endangered or rare habitats, biocenosis (a balanced community of plants and animals inhabiting a given environment and their interaction) or ecosystems.
Gene Protection and Management Zones (GMZ) are defined as being "the natural and semi-natural areas protected with the purpose of maintaining genetic diversity in target species". GMZ's are in-situ gene conservation areas where the evolutionary processes take place in populations of endangered or economically important plant species as well as species with high potential for genetic diversity and differentiation. Gene Conservation Areas (Gen Koruma Alanı): For forest plants, the applicable technique for in-situ conservation is genetic reserve conservation that includes the location, management and monitoring of genetic diversity in natural populations within defined areas designated for active long-term conservation. The majority of forest genetic resources can be protected in managed natural forests, specifically designated genetic conservation areas. Clone Parks (Klon Parkı): A method of seed breeding/harvesting programs. They consist of pure plant strains. Trial Areas (Deneme Alanı): Trials Areas comprise gene conservation plantations (nurseries). They are used in assessing the performance of different tree species, determining the appropriate treatments to enhance tree growth, especially in degraded areas.
Recreation Areas (Mesire Yerleri)
These are picnic areas within forests and urban forests with recreational and aesthetic values, intended to utilize social, cultural and aesthetic functions of the forests. There are two kinds of recreation areas in accordance with the Turkish legislation that are managed by the General Directorate of Forestry: Picnic areas (Type C) and Urban Forests (Type D).
Picnic Areas (Orman İçi Dinlenme Yeri, Piknik Alanı): Areas in the countryside where people can have picnics and go for day trips due to the scenery and natural resources. Urban Forests (Kent Ormanları): Forests in the vicinity of the settlements which can be used for social functions such as health, sports and cultural activities as well as to introduce the public to technical forestry issues and local flora and fauna elements.
Regulation on the Protection of Wetlands
The Regulation on Protection of Wetlands (MoFWA, General Directorate of Nature Conservation and National Parks) was issued in the Official Gazette No. 25818, dated May 17, 2005. The legal basis of the regulation is the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention, see below).
Wetlands are defined as areas of marsh, fen, peat lands or open water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-9
water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six metres. Wetlands constitute a resource of great economic, cultural, scientific, and recreational value, the loss of which would be irreparable.
The regulation also sets buffer zones restricting the projects to be developed around these wetlands. According to this regulation, all surface waters (lakes, streams, rivers and creeks) are defined as wetlands and the 2,500 m area from a wetland is defined as a buffer zone. If a facility/activity is planned to be carried out within this buffer zone, the project owner is required to secure a wetland permit for the operation of the facilities.
Ramsar Sites
Ramsar sites are wetlands of international importance designated under The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (the Ramsar Convention). This convention is an intergovernmental treaty that provides the framework for national action and international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources.
Desiring to stem the progressive encroachment on and loss of wetlands now and in the future, the first Ramsar convention was held in 1971. The mission of the convention was “the conservation and wise use of all wetlands through local and national actions and international cooperation, as a contribution towards achieving sustainable development throughout the world”.
The Convention uses a broad definition of the types of wetlands covered in its mission, including lakes and rivers, swamps and marshes, wet grasslands and peat lands, oases, estuaries, deltas and tidal flats, near- shore marine areas, mangroves and coral reefs, and human-made sites such as fish ponds, rice paddies, reservoirs, and salt pans.
Turkey became a contracting party of the convention in 1994 and currently 13 wetlands are listed in the conservation list of Ramsar. However, none are located within or close to the Project route.
Sensitive Areas
In addition to the protected areas given in the previous section, there are other areas not designated by national legislation but considered to be sensitive and ecologically important. These areas have generally been identified and described by Turkish conservation organizations in coordination with the international environmental organizations.
Key Biodiversity Areas
Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) are places of international importance for the conservation of biodiversity at the global level. The concept of KBAs has been developed by conservation organizations including BirdLife International, Conservation International, and PlantLife International. The scientific studies used to determine the KBAs in Turkey were carried out by Nature Society (Doğa Derneği) with the support of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and Birdlife International.
In 2006, the Nature Society published the book “Key Biodiversity Areas of Turkey” which is also available in the Official Website of the Nature Society. This book identifies 305 KBAs which cover 20,280,149 hectares, equivalent to Turkey‟s 26% surface area. However, of these only 19% of KBAs are under protection.
These KBAs are the outcome of scientific studies carried out within the scope of the Natura 2000 network for Turkey‟s EU accession process. The Natura 2000 is an ecological network of protected areas in the territory of the European Union (EU). There are two EU Directives that form the basis of the Natura 2000 network. These are the Birds Directive (Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds) and the
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-10
Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora).
In order to meet the potential future requirements of these directives, Doğa Derneği and the MoEU are carrying out studies in cooperation. The revision of the book “Important Bird Areas in Turkey” and the publication of the book “Key Biodiversity Areas of Turkey” by Doğa Derneği can be considered within this context.
Important Plant Areas
Important Plant Areas (IPA) are defined as "areas very rich in plant diversity, rare and / or endemic species, rich communities and habitats (natural habitats)". The concept of the IPA was developed under the leadership of three-organizations co-operating in order to protect the natural flora in Turkey: DHKD (Nature Conservation Society), FFI (Fauna & Flora International) and ISTE (Istanbul University, Faculty of Pharmacy, Department of Botany) in the early 1990s. In the same period, it gained an international dimension with PlantLife International's coordination in the UK and the criteria were established.
IPAs provide a very important infrastructure that will contribute to the implementation of international conventions, strategies and programs to which Turkey is a party. IPAs include botanical and scientific data about protecting nature which will be used for compliance and implementation of international environmental protection conventions, networks of protected areas, biodiversity conservation strategies and policies.
IPAs within Turkey were first promoted at the first Planta Europe conference held in 1995. Turkey is the first country to have completed the IPA survey in accordance with the IPA criteria and has identified 122 candidate IPA, where an IPA is defined as “a natural or semi-natural site exhibiting exceptional botanical richness and/or supporting an outstanding assemblage of rare, threatened and/or endemic species and/or vegetation of high botanic value.” (Byfield et al., 2010).
Important Bird Areas
The European Important Bird Area (IBA) Programme is implemented through national IBA Programmes in 29 countries with the support and co-ordination of the European Division of the Bird Life Secretariat. The IBAs in Turkey were identified by the Society for the Protection of Nature (Doğal Hayatı Koruma Derneği) and BirdLife International and are described in a book called “Important Bird Areas in Turkey” in 1997. This book was revised in 2004 by the Doğa Derneği and Birdlife International with additional support from the RSPB.
IBAs are therefore key sites for ornithological conservation that meet one or more of the following criteria:
They hold significant numbers of one or more globally threatened species. They are one of a set of sites that support a suite of restricted-range species or biome-restricted species. They have exceptionally high numbers of migratory or congregator species.
A site is recognized as an IBA only if it meets these criteria, based on the occurrence of key bird species that are vulnerable to global extinction or whose populations are otherwise irreplaceable. An IBA must be amenable to conservation action and management.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-11
Protected Species
In addition to statutory and non-statutory sites of importance to biodiversity, a number of species have now become so rare that they are afforded protection, or at least recognition, through international conventions and national law. Other species are considered to contribute to our „quality of life‟.
Although these species do not benefit from legal protection, and may not be directly associated with identified or protected sites, they can be key considerations in the planning process. Proposed development must be able to show that all reasonable measures have been taken to ensure that protected species are not subject to disturbance. A list of the international conventions which apply in Turkey is given in Appendix 4.
Invasive Species
When non-native species become invasive they can transform ecosystems, causing a variety of problems including seriously threatening native and endangered species. These problems are acknowledged in several international treaties, European Union Directives and also in domestic legislation. However, on the basis of the surveys undertaken no invasive species other than feral dogs was observed to threaten native species and therefore this issue is not discussed further in this assessment.
Forestry Management Plans
The Habitat Action Plans and Species Action Plans can be used to aid the impact assessment. In the first instance, they assist in evaluating ecological receptors that are not protected. Secondly, they can assist in assessing potential impacts, both negative and positive against national targets.
The project route passes from Alemdağ, Kanlıca, Beykoz, Sultanbeyli, Kurtboğazı, Ömerli, Sarıyer, Kemerburgaz, Fenertepe and Riva sectors of Istanbul Forestry Department. The latest management plans General Directory of Forestry which were prepared by the Ecosystem Based Multifunctional Forest Management Plan approach are used in the evaluations.
4.4 Ecological Baseline
4.4.1 Introduction
The section describes the potential ecology and biodiversity receptors that may be affected by the Project. These are based on the results of the desk studies undertaken and on the result so the field surveys carried out in March and April 2013.
4.4.2 Statutory Sites
The following Statutory Protected Sites are located either on or close to the project route and may be subject to environmental impact as a result. These sites are shown in Appendix 4 (Figures C-1 and C-2).
National Parks Law No. 2873
There are no national parks, nature monuments or nature reserves within the Project alignment and its vicinity in accordance with the National Parks Law. However, there are several Nature Parks on the European and Anatolian side of Istanbul that may be affected by the Project.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-12
The closest nature park to the Project is Şamlar Nature Park located on the European side and 880 m to the west of the route. The area was designated as a nature park on July 11, 2011 and has an area of 335 ha. It is the largest Nature Park on the European side and includes middle aged coniferous trees such as black pine (Pinus negra), stone pine (Pinus pinea) and Turkish pine (Pinus brutia) (also called Calabrian pine). It is mostly used for recreational purposes (Official Website of Istanbul Provincial Directorate of Forestry and Water Affairs, 2012).
Due its location and distance from the Project, Şamlar Nature Park is not expected to be adversely impacted by the Project either during the construction or operational phases.
Terrestrial Hunting Law No. 4915
The route will pass directly through a Wildlife Improvement Area (WIA) on the European side, namely Sarıyer Feneryolu WIA. Approximately 2.8 km of the Project route passes through this WIA. The area was designated to protect roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) in 2005 and has an area of 1,440 ha. It is forbidden to hunt game animals within this WIA (Official Website of Istanbul Provincial Directorate of Forestry and Water Affairs, 2012).
The main threat to the WIA is urban development nearby: for example, although the WIA is protected, a university campus has recently been constructed within the WIA.
In addition, there is an area forbidden for hunting in accordance with the 2012-2013 period CHC decisions in the vicinity of Polonezköy. Approximately 5.5 km of the route passes through this area. The area covers a large region and located between Reşadiye at the east, Polonezköy at the north, Çekmeköy at the west and Sarıgazi at the south.
Forestry Law No. 6831
In accordance with the Forestry Law, there are no seed stands and biogenetic reserve areas (gene courts) such as gene conservation areas, clone parks and trial areas within the Project site and its vicinity.
However, there are some conservation forests, seed garden and recreation areas such as urban forest and picnic along the route. These are briefly discussed below:
Belgrat Conservation Forest: The route passes through the northern border of the forest which is located at the European side of İstanbul. The main tree species of the forest is oak (Quercus sp.) covering 75% of the whole forest. There are beech trees (Fagus sp.) in the northern parts, hornbeam trees (Carpinus betulus) in the inner parts and chestnut trees (Aesculus hippocastanum) (in the southern parts). Elmalı Bendi Conservation Forest: A part of the route passes through this forest located at the Anatolian side. It should be noted that İstanbul Highway (E-80) connecting to the Fatih Sultan Mehmet Bridge already passes through Elmalı Bendi Conservation Forest. Seed Garden: There is a seed garden at the Anatolian side located between Reşadiye and Alemdağ Nişantep. The seeds of Black pine are produced in this seed garden. It should be noted that the black pine is the most abundant species in Turkey and forms large communities in the western Anatolia. Urban Forest (Recreation Area): There is an urban forest in Ümraniye nearby the existing İstanbul Highway (E-80). There tree species within the forest are walnut, elm, stone pine, acacia and oak. Picnic Areas (Recreation Area): There are several picnic areas located within the route and its vicinity. These are briefly given below: o Picnic area at the northeast of Şamlar: The route is located 1.6 km east of the picnic area. o Picnic area at the southeast of Poyraz: The route is located 210 m north of the picnic area. o Picnic area at the north of Alibahadır: The route is located 1170 m north of the picnic area.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-13
o Picnic area at the south of Bozhane: The route passes through the picnic area. o Picnic area at the north of Alemdağ Nişantep: The picnic area is surrounded by the routes. The closest point is 60 m to the picnic area. o Picnic area in Çekmeköy: The route passes 230 m to the south of the picnic area. o Picnic area in Taşdelen: The route passes 640 m to the north of the picnic area. o Picnic area in Ümraniye: The route passes through the picnic area.
Approximately 3,320m of the route passes through areas of a Conservation Forests, 184m through seed gardens and 94m through recreational areas.
Regulation on the Protection of Wetlands
In accordance with the Regulation of Protection of Wetlands (issued in the Official Gazette No. 25818 and dated May 17, 2005) all surface waters (lakes, streams such as rivers and creeks) are defined as wetlands. There are several water bodies within the vicinity of the route. The details of these are presented in the Hydrology section of the report; however, such water bodies may have ecological importance so they are mentioned below:
There is a small pond at the north of Habibler at the European side. The pond is located 1.4 km to the east of the route. There are several small artificial and natural ponds located in northern and northeastern parts of Odayeri and south of Çiftealan at the European side. Some of these were formed in former quarries which is highly common in this region. The closest one is 100 m to the north of the route. On the Anatolian side, the most significant water body is Ömerli Dam Lake. Although the main part of the lake is nearly 6 km east of the reservoir, the branches of the lake extents to 2 km close to the route.
None of these wetlands are designated as Ramsar sites in accordance with the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance.
4.4.3 Non-Statutory Sites
The following Non-Statutory Sites are located either on or close to the project route and may be subject to environmental impact as a result. These sites are shown on Appendix 4 (Figure C-3).
Key Biodiversity Areas
The Bern Convention represents one of the most significant international legal instruments for the protection of species and habitats within Turkey. This is particularly important where habitats and species are not protected directly through Turkish Environmental legislation. Therefore particular emphasis has been placed on Bern Convention species and the habitats they depend on (which may not be designated or protected themselves) in this assessment.
A number of sites in the Istanbul area have been identified as Key Biodiversity Areas (KBA). This non- statutory designation covers habitats, plants and other areas important for certain species, particularly birds. As the KBA cover a wide range of biodiversity interest features, there are therefore other areas, which could be regarded as sub-sets of the KBA, which are identified as being Important Plant Areas (IPA), Important Bird Areas (IBA) or both. These areas are located within the wider KBA and may overlap to a greater or lesser extent.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-14
Details of the KBA present in the Istanbul Area and the IPA and IBA within them that may be affected by the Project are discussed below.
Bosphorus Key Biodiversity Area
The majority of the route (nearly 35 km) passes through the Bosphorus Key Biodoversity Area (KBA) which lies along the length of the Bosphorus strait and extends from European side to the Asian side.
The KBA comprises a wide range of habitats including sand dunes at the coastline, rocks, maquis communities, pasture lands, forests and lakes. The area also includes an IBA due to forested areas west and east of the strait which are known to be important for migratory birds. There are good view points to observe the massive migration in spring and autumn at the hills in Sarıyer (on the European side) and the two hills at Çamlıca (on the Anatolian side). The details of this IBA are discussed below.
There are several vulnerable habitats supporting rare plant species within this KBA and some of these areas have been identified as IPA, which are discussed further below. These are (from west to east for the IPA):
Ağaçlı Kumulları (Dunes) IPA Kuzey Boğaziçi (Upper Bosphorus) IPA Kilyos Kumulları (Dunes) IPA Ömerli Havzası (Basin) IPA Bosphorus IBA
The main threat to this KBA is the rapid expansion of İstanbul. Several thousand houses are built annually as the city expands. In addition large industrial areas are being constructed. Other loss to natural habitat is caused by mining and road building and large tracts of Istanbul forest and other habitats have disappeared during recent decades. This has resulted in migrating birds being forced to find other routes several kilometres away from the strait. The conservation of the current forests on both sides of the Bosphorus is very important in order to conserve raptor roosting sites.
Ağaçlı Kumulları (Dunes) IPA
This is a composite site comprising three surviving fragments of sand dune on the Black Sea coast between Terkos and Kilyos. It covers a total area of 484 ha and is located approximately 1.2km north of the Project alignment and is therefore unlikely to be directly impacted by the Project.
Vegetation includes localized example of rare dune vegetation types. It supports populations of 14 locally and nationally rare species and large populations of three Bern Convention Appendix I species as well as four globally threatened species.
At one time these habitats comprised a largely uninterrupted stretch of mainly Quercus (oak) coppice forest, grassland and sand dune. However, more than 60km2 has been lost to opencast lignite mining in this area in the last 25 years. Further loss of habitat is likely due to various development pressures including sand
Bern Convention Endangered Natural Habitats, in this context principally 16.2113 Pontic embryonic dunes; 16.2124 Pontic white dunes; 16.22B11 South-western Pontic fixed dunes.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-15
Kuzey Boğaziçi (Upper Bosphorus) IPA
This IPA lies within the Bosphorus Heritage Area (defined under the Boğaziçi (Bosphorus) Law of 1983) and comprises the remaining undeveloped shoreline, sand dunes and forests immediately north of Istanbul. It covers a total of 16,645 ha divided into three main areas, two of which are located on the European side with the other on the Anatolian side of the Bosphorus: this extends for a considerable distance inland.
The Project route passes directly through two of the three areas that comprise this IPA, one on either side of the Bosphorus.
Of these habitat types and their important flora, the shoreline and sand dune habitats are considered to be the most significant and the most vulnerable. However, the woodlands of the Belgrat Forest are also considered to be valuable due to their relatively rich flora. The area is considered to be vulnerable to various development pressures including residential developments. The main habitat types within the IPA are discussed briefly below.
Cliff slopes – dominated by a mosaic of sea maquis, coastal grassland and dry rock communities. There is unlikely to be significant areas of this habitat type within the footprint of the proposed development, apart possibly from close to the location of the Bosphorus Crossing.
Shingle vegetation – limited areas in some of small bays along the rocky coastline including small populations of a number of rare plant species. Again, there is unlikely to be significant areas of this habitat type within the footprint of the proposed development.
Sand Dune system vegetation is located at the mouth of the Çayağzi Deresi and therefore unlikely to be affected by the proposed development.
Forest vegetation is found particularly within sheltered coastal valleys and particularly within the Belgrat forest. Typical forest biotopes include:
Carpinus betulus-Quercus Hornbeam-Oak forest, found in warmer and dryer situations. Carpinus-Fagus – Hornbeam-Beech forest, found in cooler conditions such as north facing slopes. Alnus glutinosa-Carpinus – Alder-Hornbeam woodlands confined to fertile wooded valley bottoms with a rich spring woodland flora.
Much of the forests are actually under a 20 year coppice regime (apart from in the Belgrat forest) and the forest now comprises one of the few extensive areas of high forest in the Istanbul region. These forests therefore represent a valuable and diminishing ecological resource. Other designations that cover the IPA include:
Important Bird Area No. 5 Boğaziçi covering some 55,000 ha - of importance as a „bottleneck‟ for migrating birds, principally storks and raptors (discussed further below). Bern Convention Endangered Natural Habitats, in this context principally 41.H21 Thracian oak- hornbeam forests, referring to the woodland biotope. This is equivalent to the Natura 2000 priority habitat 91AA Eastern White Oak Woods.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-16
Kilyos Kumulları (Dunes) IPA
This IPA lies on the Black Sea shore on the European side, near Gümüşdere, and covers 351 ha of sand dunes partly bordered by heath, grazing pasture and acid coppiced forests. It is located approximately 350m north of the Project route at its closest point.
There are at least 15 nationally rare species in this site. Two species are listed in Appendix I of the Bern Convention. These habitats have been well studied over the last century. This area receives no formal protection and has been subject to significant damage from housing developments, development of college facilities, lignite mining, afforestation and market gardening production. Other designations that include the IPA comprise:
Bern Convention Endangered Natural Habitats, in this context principally 16.2113 Pontic embryonic dunes; 16.2124 Pontic white dunes; 16.22B11 South-western Pontic fixed dunes; 16.27 Dune juniper thickets and woods.
Ömerli Havzası (Basin) IPA
This IPA comprises an extensive mosaic of heath, phrygana (open dwarf scrub habitat) and acid coppice forest with a wide range of associated habitats such as grassland, seepage mire on peat and seasonally flooded trackways and pools. It is located at least 1km from the Project route.
There are at least 37 nationally rare species occurring in this IPA and here are six species listed in Appendix I of the Bern Convention. The heathlands are of exceptional importance as they are perhaps the only remaining extensive area of heathland vegetation in the entire region.
Part of the site and the area closest to the Project alignment is designated as a National Park (at Polonezköy) or where it lies within the water catchment of the Ömerli Reservoir. However, the IPA is under threat from afforestation and urban encroachment. Other designations that include the IPA are:
Important Bird Area No. 5 Boğaziçi covering some 55,000 ha - of importance as a „bottleneck‟ for migrating birds, principally storks and raptors. Bern Convention Endangered Natural Habitats, 31.22C Pontic ling heaths; 41.H21 Thracian oak- hornbeam forests; 42.66 Banat & Pallas‟ pine forest.
Bosphorus Important Bird Area
The Bosphorus IBA (No. 5 Boğaziçi) is one of the main European routes for migratory birds, regularly passing in spring and autumn. The area includes the forested areas west (Belgrade forest) and east (Polonezköy Nature Park) of the strait, which are known to be of importance to roosting migrants.
According to the counts made in the mid-1960s and early 1970s and covering the entire autumn migration period, principal bird species are as follows: Black Stork (Ciconia nigra, 8,318), White Stork, (Ciconia ciconia, 338,353), European Honey-buzzard (Pernis apivorus, 25,751), Black Kite (Milvus migrans, 2,707), Common Buzzard (Buteo buteo, 32,895) and Lesser Spotted Eagle (Aquila pomarina, 18,898). The Bosphorus also qualifies for the large numbers of Yelkouan Shearwater (Puffinus yelkouan) that fly up and down the strait in groups of up to several hundred throughout the year.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-17
The main threat to the IBA is the rapid urban and industrial expansion of Istanbul. The conservation of forested areas on both sides of the strait is crucial in order to preserve raptor roosting sites (Official Website of Birdlife International, 2012).
West İstanbul Pasture Lands Key Biodiversity Area
The route passes through West İstanbul Pasture Lands Key KBA on the European side. The KBA has a total area of 9,612 ha between Bağcılar at the south and Pirinççi at the north, and comprises the pasture lands located at the north of Esenler. It also covers Alibeyköy Dam Lake and the hills located at the north of the dam. Approximately 11.4 km of the route passes through this KBA.
There are pasture lands used for grazing and shrubs on the karstic rocks in these areas. There are some endemic and rare flora species such as Bupleurum pendikum (Turkish name: Pendik sarıotu, Local Red Data Book category: EN) and Linum tauricum ssp. bosphori (Turkish name: Boğaziçi ketene Local Red Data Book category: CR). The KBA is under serious threat related to urbanization (Eken, G., 2006).
Batı İstanbul Meraları (West Istanbul Pasturelands) IPA
This IPA comprises the last remaining fragments of limestone grassland, rock outcrops and dry acid heath grass-land located on the low undulating hills immediately north-west of Istanbul, close to Esenler, within the KPA. Woodland is largely absent from the site, which covers an area of 14,900 ha in total although it is broken up into various areas separated by major roads and housing and industrial developments. The Project route passes directly through the centre of this IPA.
The areas support a rich and distinctive flora including five species listed on Appendix I of the Bern Convention; however, although the site is of high value and has been much studied, most of the site receives no formal protection and is under continuing and significant threat from direct loss to urban development as well as gradual fragmentation and degradation. Other designations that cover the IPA include:
Important Bird Area No. 4 Küçükçekmece Gölü covering some 1,500 ha – identified on account of the significant numbers of waterfowl in winter. Bern Convention Endangered Natural Habitats, in this context principally 34.3 Dense perennial grasslands and Middle European steppe.
Marine Habitats
The design of the bridge does not require any permanent construction works within the marine environment, specifically the Bosphorus Strait. A brief summary of the marine environment is given below, based on desk study sources.
The Bosphorus Strait links the Black Sea to the Sea of Marmara and its depth varies from 36 to 124 m in midstream with an average of 65 m. The deepest location is between Kandilli and Bebek (110m deep) and the most shallow locations in the northern section are off Kadıköy İnciburnu with a depth of 18 m. The ecology of the straight reflects the shallow ecology of the southern Black Sea continental shelf where the major benthic species comprising polychaete worms (annelids), molluscs and amphipods.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-18
There are three species of cetacean (includes dolphins, and porpoises) known to inhabit the Black Sea. These comprise Delphinus delphis, the common dolphin, Tursiops truncatus, the bottlenose dolphin and Phocoena phocoena, the harbour porpoise. These are identified in various conventions and are protected (in European waters) under the Habitats Directive.
In addition, there is one species of pinniped (seal), Monachus monachus or the Mediterranean monk seal, that historically inhabited the Black Sea. However, the monk seal is now considered extinct in the Black Sea..
The common dolphin and harbour porpoise can be seen in almost every area along the coasts of the Black Sea while the bottlenose dolphin becomes abundant especially in the western Black Sea. The common dolphin is more commonly found in open waters well away from the coast, whereas the bottlenose dolphin and the harbour porpoise are generally found in inshore waters. There are no known species of marine turtle in the Black Sea.
According to the Black Sea Red Data Book there are a number of species of conservation importance within the southern Black Sea. These species are listed in Table 4-2 along with their distributions and likelihood of occurrence within the project area. In general, it can be seen that the majority of species are concentrated within the coastal zone and may therefore be found within the Bosphorus.
Table 4-2 Fish Species of Conservation Interest in the Western Black Sea
Distribution and Presence in the Project Spawning Period and Importance/ Genus / Species Area Throughout the Year Location IUCN Status Acipenser Mainly inhabits coastal waters of the sea and Enters the Don, Kuban, Vulnerable guldenstaedti rivers. Dnieper, Danube and Species under (Russian sturgeon) rivers of the Caucasian protection in coasts in spring to Turkey since spawn in May and 1997. June. Development of artificial reproduction. Acipenser stellatus Inhabits waters close to the bottom in summer in Enters the Kuban, Don, Vulnerable. (Starry sturgeon) the coastal zones, coming up to the surface for Dnieper, Danube and Species under feeding at night. other rivers flowing into protection in the Black Sea between Turkey since April and October to 1997. spawn.
Coryphoblennius Steep rocks in the surf zone, or on stony shelly May-August. Vulnerable galerita (Montague‟s ground. blenny) Aidablennius sphinx Inshore, rocky, shelly, sea-grass ground. Reproduces April-July. Vulnerable (Sphinx blenny)
Mesogobius Brackish water fish inhabiting usually sand and April-May migrates to Lower Risk batrachocephalus shell grounds in inshore waters down to depths shore for reproduction. Stocks (flat head goby) of 40 m. Spends winter in deeper waters. endangered by periods of hypoxia.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-19
Distribution and Presence in the Project Spawning Period and Importance/ Genus / Species Area Throughout the Year Location IUCN Status Proterorhinus Rivers and estuaries of Black Sea. On sand April-May, benthic eggs Endangered marmoratus near sea grass. (tubenose gobie) Belone belone Coastal waters. Young specimens are most Occurs from May to Endangered. euxini (garfish) common near the Cystoseira and Zostera belts. September. Eggs Proposed for attached to Cystoseira entry in the Black and Zostera Sea Red Data Book. Diplodus annularis Shallow zones of the continental shelf, on July-September, small Vulnerable (Annular seabream) muddy-sand bottoms and on vegetated bottoms pelagic eggs. close to the shore, as well as in deeper waters down to 50 m, but it is most common between 5-20 m. Liza ramada (thin lip Schools occur mostly in shallow water, Spawns spring and Vulnerable grey mullet) especially in brackish and coastal lagoons of early in summer and varying salinity. Enters estuaries and rivers for again in summer and feeding but spawns in the sea. autumn. Pelagic eggs. Mullus barbatus Shallow sands and mud bottoms, but may occur Reproduce between Endangered ponticus (Red down to depths between 20-200 m. Small June-September at 9- mullet) schools live in deeper water during summer, 23 degrees C. coming to coast in spring before sinking to deeper waters again. Nerophis ophidion Inhabits marine coastal zone among filaments of Females spawn on Endangered (straight-nosed algae and Zostera. Also have a pelagic life in male abdomen during pipefish) brackish waters. June-July. Sarda sarda Pelagic migratory species often schooling in Spawning in many Critically (Atlantic bonito) inshore waters, mainly over the continental areas from May to mid endangered. shelf. Thermophile and stenohaline, the majority July. Proposed to start of individuals spend winter in the Marmara and a recovery Aegean Seas. In April, small schools enter the program. Black Sea, staying there up to late October. Scomber scombrus A schooling pelagic fish inhabiting cold and Spawning late in Endangered (Atlantic mackerel) temperate waters. Species spends winter in the winter-early in Spring in Marmara Sea, entering the Black Sea during the the Marmara and spring they move northward, reaching the Aegean Sea. Romanian coast in April-May. In October- November they move southward and leave the Black Sea. Some individuals stay in the Black Sea in winter but they do not reproduce and move down to greater depths. Scorpaena porcus Sedentary and solitary species inhabiting littoral Summer Vulnerable (scorpionfish) waters amongst rocks and seaweeds. Solea nasuta Benthic species, sandy bottoms, estuaries, Reproduction in spring, Vulnerable (Snouted sole) continental shelves. Lives on sandy bottoms eggs pelagic. down to 150 m. Spicara smaris Benthic species preferring offshore water, Spawns during May- Data deficient (Picarel) especially in the winter, over muddy and June near the coast on vegetated bottoms from the littoral zone to algae or seabed depths of 15-170 m. Rare in the Black Sea due to the anoxic conditions of its deeper waters. Syngnathus typhle Marine pelagic fish able to endure freshened March-August. Vulnerable (deep-smoted waters. Lives only between plants, especially Females lay eggs in pipefish) Zostera. Littoral zones. incubation pockets of males.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-20
Distribution and Presence in the Project Spawning Period and Importance/ Genus / Species Area Throughout the Year Location IUCN Status Thunnus thynnus A pelagic species, immature individuals are At the end of Summer Endangered (bluefin tuna) found in warm waters only, while adults also it spawns, pelagic No catch on the enter cold waters in search of food. eggs. Turkish coast for Young form schools, enter Black Sea in spring at least the last 5 and stay until October-November. years Trachinus draco Littoral and benthic, on sandy, muddy or gravel June-September, eggs Critically (greater weaver) bottoms. and larvae pelagic. endangered Trigla lucerna Bottom species occurring over sand, muddy- December – July (max Vulnerable (scorpionfish) sand or gravel at depths from 5-200 m, but more intensity June-July). common between 50-100 m. Pelagic eggs. Hippocampus Coastal waters, adult fishes are most common May-September. Eggs Endangered guttulatus among Zostera beds. Restricted mobility. develop in the male Proposed for microstephanus brood pouch. entry in Black Sea (Sea horse) Red Data Book Source: Adopted from Birkun, 2006
4.4.4 Internationally Important Species
The main way that species are valued in Turkey is through their inclusion on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red list. Through regular survey the species included on the list have been categorized according to their vulnerability and how threatened they are. The IUCN‟s categorization system relating to status and vulnerability of Red List species is shown in Table 4-3 below:
Table 4-3 IUCN Red List Categories
IUCNs Code Definition
EX Extinct. No reasonable doubt that the last individual has died. Extinct in the wild. Known only to survive in captivity or as a naturalized population well EW outside its previous range. CR Critically Endangered. The species is in imminent risk of extinction in the wild. EN Endangered. The species is facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild. VU Vulnerable. The species is facing a high risk of extinction in the wild. Near Threatened. The species does not meet any of the criteria that would categorise it NT as risking extinction but it is likely to do so in the future. LC Least Concern. There are no current identifiable risks to the species. Data Deficient. There is inadequate information to make an assessment of the risks to DD this species.
IUCN Red List Species
The Red List species known or likely to be present in the Istanbul area are included in Table 4-4 below. This list covers plants as well as all of the main animal groups. Plant species highlighted in bold are listed in Appendix I of the Bern Convention.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-21
Table 4-4 IUCN Red List Species Present in Istanbul
Red List Taxon Name Global Regional/ Local Plants Alcea lavateriflora - VU Asperula littoralis - VU Aubrieta olympica - EN Aurinia uechtritziana - VU Centaurea hermanii - EN Centaurea kilea - EN Cirsium polycephalum - CR Erysimum aznavourii - - Erysimum degenianum - EN Heptaptera triquetra - EN Hieracium noeanum - VU Isatis arenaria - EN Jurinea kilaea – Eastern Thrace - VU Lathyrus undulatus - VU Linum tauricum ssp. bosphori - CR Ornithogalum euxinum – Eastern Thrace - EN Peucedanum obtusifolium – Eastern Thrace - VU Ranunculus thracicus - EN Symphytum pseudobulbosum - CR Tanacetum heterotomum - VU Taraxacum aznavourii - DD Taraxacum pseudobrachyglossum - NT Trifolium pachycalyx - DD Verbascum degenii - CR Birds Accipiter brevipes - Europe LC VU Aquila pomarina LC LC Ciconia ciconia – Eastern Europe LC LC Ciconia nigra – Eastern Europe LC LC
Circaetus gallicus – Europe LC LC
Dendrocopos leucotos LC LC
Dendrocopos medius LC LC
Dendrocopos syriacus LC LC
Emberiza hortulana LC LC
Ficedula semitorquata LC LC
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-22
Red List Taxon Name Global Regional/ Local
Garrulus glandarius hansguentheri LC LC
Gavia arctica LC -
Hieraaetus pennatus – Europe LC LC
Lanius collurio LC LC
Larus cachinnans michahellis LC LC
Larus melanocephalus LC LC
Larus ridibundus – Mediterranean Sea LC LC
Milvus migrans – Europe LC VU
Phalacrocorax aristotelis desmarestii LC LC
Phalacrocorax carbo – Black Sea & Mediterranean LC LC
Picus canus LC LC
Sitta krueperi NT NT
Sylvia nisoria LC LC
Mammals Talpa levantis - Thrace LC LC
Tursiops truncates – Black Sea and Marmara DD VU
Amphibians Triturus karelinii LC LC
Reptiles Emys orbicularis NT NT
Testudo graeca VU NT
Zamenis situla DD LC
Butterflies Anthocharis damone - Anatolia - VU
Archon apollinus nikodemusi - EN
Glaucopsyche alexis - Anatolia - VU
Glaucopsyche arion – Northern & Eastern Anatolia NT EN
Pseudophilotes bavius – Anatolia - EN
Pseudophilotes vicrama – Anatolia - VU
Scolitantides orion – Anatolia - VU
Thymelicus action – Anatolia - VU
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-23
4.4.5 Protected Species
Focusing further in on the Project area, records of rare species in the Belgrad forest, where 1.8 km of the total route passes through are listed as follows.
Table 4-5 Rare Species present in the Belgrad Forest
Red Data Book Endemic/Rare Family Specific Name Category (Ekim et al., (E/R) 2000) Leguminosae Lathyrus undulatus Boiss E Vu Compositae Centaurea consanguinea DC. E LR (LC) Taraxacum turkikum van Soest E LR (LC) Campanulaceae Campanula lyrata Lam. subsp. lyrata E LR (LC) Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia amygdaloides L. var. E LR (LC) robbiae (Turnill) Radeliffe-Smith Boraginaceae Symphytum tuberosum L. subsp. R Vu Nodosum (Schur) Soo Liliaceae Lilium martagon L. R Vu Umbelliferae Ferrulago confusa Velen R Vu Urticaceae Parieteria officinalis L. R DD DD : Data Deficient Vu : Vulnerable LC : Least Concern
In addition, the endemics of Istanbul are listed below according to the data gathered from Turkish Plant Information Service (TÜBİVES), which is prepared by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK).
Table 4-6 Endemic Species of Istanbul
Bern Family Species Convention Appendix I Ranunculaceae Consolida thirkeana Brassicaceae Isatis arenaria Erysimum degenianum Erysimum sorgerae Erysimum aznavourii Caryophyllaceae Dianthus andronakii Dianthus cibrarius Silene sangaria App I
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-24
Bern Family Species Convention Appendix I Guttiferae Hypericum aviculariifolium alttür byzantinum Fabaceae Astragalus vulnerariae Lathyrus undulatus Trifolium pachycalyx App I Trifolium pannonicum alttür elongatom Trifolium apertum varyete kilaeum Trigonella cephalotes Apiaceae Ferulago thirkeana Dipsacaceae Knautia degenii Knautia byzantina Asteraceae Senecio castagneanus Tripleurospermum conoclinium Onopordum anatolicum Cirsium polycephalum Carduus nutans alttür trojanus Carduus nutans alttür falcato-incurvus Centaurea kilaea Centaurea consanguinea Centaurea hermannii App I Uechtritzia armena Geropogon hybridus Hieracium noeanum Pilosella hoppeana alttür lydia Taraxacum aznavourii Taraxacum pseudobrachyglossum Taraxacum turcicum Campanulaceae Campanula lyrata alttür lyrata Jasione heldreichii varyete papillosa Asclepiadaceae Vincetoxicum fuscatum alttür boissieri Boraginaceae Onosma proponticum App I Onosma bracteosum Onosma bornmuelleri Symphytum pseudobulbosum
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-25
Bern Family Species Convention Appendix I Scrophulariaceae Verbascum bithynicum Verbascum degenii App I Scrophularia cryptophila Lamiaceae Lamium purpureum varyete aznavourii Wiedemannia orientalis Ballota nigra alttür anatolica Sideritis romana alttür romana Stachys sosnowskyi Thymus aznavourii App I Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia amygdaloides varyete robbiae Rubiaceae Asperula littoralis Liliaceae Allium peroninianum Allium rhodopeum alttür turcicum Bellevalia clusiana Colchicum micranthum App I Colchicum lingulatum alttür rigescens Amaryllidaceae Galanthus plicatus alttür byzantinus Iridaceae Crocus sieheanus Crocus pestalozzae Crocus olivieri alttür istanbulensis
Species highlighted in bold in Table 4-6 represent the endemic species listed as being present in the Belgrad Forest (as shown on Table 4-5 above). Of the species recorded above, seven are included in Appendix I of the Bern Convention. None of the Appendix I species is thought to be present in the Belgrad Forest.
4.5 Field Survey Results
4.5.1 Overview
Having established the habitats and species that may be present in the study areas it was essential to undertake a field survey of the route, within a suitable buffer zone.
The Phase 1 Habitat survey covered the entire Bosphorus Third Bridge and Northern Marmara Motorway route to a distance of approximately 250m either side of the proposed alignment (providing a 500m wide buffer zone in total). Detailed field notes, which include representative photographs, are presented in the Appendix to Chapter 4, including a series of maps (Figures 1.1 to 1.6) showing where the survey points were located.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-26
Habitats encountered along the route were identified based on plant species composition and recorded. Comprehensive mapping showing a detailed breakdown of species present is presented in Appendix to Chapter 4, series Figure 3.1 to 3.11. The broad habitat types based on dominant species are presented in Appendix 4, in the series Figure 5.1 to 5.10.
4.5.2 Summary of Survey Area
The habitats found along the route of the proposed motorway include both broadleaf and conifer woodland, heathland, ponds, streams and wetland habitats, dense and scattered scrub as well as open grassland and agricultural habitats.
Moving north through the urban areas of Istanbul the landscape becomes increasingly hilly and undulating and urbanization becomes less intensive. In this zone open heath makes way to broadleaf and conifer woodland.
Woodland in Turkey is intensively managed for timber and firewood production. This includes both broadleaf and coniferous woodland.
Conifer woodlands are generally planted whilst the broadleaf woodlands utilize natural regeneration of broadleaf species, in areas that at one time had been natural and un-managed forest. As part of the coppice management of the broadleaf forests, trees species are periodically cleared, with the stumps allows to re-grow with multiple stems. These stems are then thinned to allow the best timber possible to be grown. The stumps are then further thinned to 1 or 2 stems.
When the timber reaches a desired size, the compartment is once more clear felled. As a result of this process, most of the woodlands around Istanbul are actually “young” woodlands but with very old stumps. This method produces timber without the need to replant the tree after clear felling. However, this process also arrests the development of the flora community within the woodlands, confines the age range of trees within the forest and thereby limits biodiversity.
However, there are some restricted areas of the woodlands around Istanbul that are not so intensively managed where there are older trees, a great level of biodiversity is present and therefore these area are more ecologically valuable. These areas comprise the most important woodlands in the Belgrad forest, comprising the oldest natural deciduous forests.
Most of the route passes through areas of coniferous woodlands and the majority of the coniferous woodland is plantation woodland, although a few areas have turned into semi-natural woodland as these have been left or are less intensively managed. Although there is a dense structure within a number of these coniferous plantation woodlands, the important habitats here in terms of biodiversity are actually the shrub layer beneath the trees (the under-storey). The principal habitat types are described below and shown on Figures 3.1 to 3.11 and 5.1 to 5.10.
4.5.3 Coniferous Plantation
The proposed road alignment runs through the conifer plantations which are composed of Pinus brutia, Pinus nigra, Pinus pinea, Pinus maritime and Pinus radiate species.
Most of the coniferous woodlands have three layers. The pines form the upper layer, with regenerating oak and hornbeam species together with the shrub layer form the middle layer and a ground layer. The ground layer is generally present where grazing pressures are not serious.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-27
The main scrub species comprise strawberry tree (Arbutus unedo), heath shrubs (Erica arborea and E. manipuliflora), kermes oak (Quercus coccifera), (Phillyrea latifolia), terebinth (Pistacia terebinthus), Cistus salvifolius, Cistus creticus, juniper (Juniperus oxycedrus), Sarcopoterium spinosum, firethorn (Pyracantha coccinea), Phyllarea latifolia, Rubus sp., Smilax excels, Prunus mahalep and laurel (Laurus nobilis).
The ground layer is mainly dominated by grasses with Cistus and Rubus sp., Gagea sp., Primula vulgaris, Hedera helix, Crataegus sp, Ruscus aculeatus, R. hypoglossum, Viola sp. and Robinia pseudo.
4.5.4 Broadleaf Woodland
Beech, oak, hornbeam and chestnut dominate the canopy of the broadleaved plantation woodland habitats with occasional poplar. The age structure shows significant diversity in broadleaf woodlands, which is determined by the management regime applied by the foresters to each parcel of woodland. For the purposes of this assessment we have determined the age structure of the woodland according to trunk diameter. Management plans are regularly prepared according to the Ecosystem Based Multifunctional Forest Management Plan approach by the General Directory of Forestry.
In these management plans age structure codes a, b, c, d and e are used, which actually represent the average diameter of trees in a certain area. Although during site surveys no tree measurements were taken due to time constraints, the approximate age ranges were noted in each area of habitat. The approximate age structure of the broadleaf woodlands along the project route (within the wider 500m corridor) and the area (ha) that each covers is shown in Table 4-7 below.
Table 4-7 Tree Age Structure and Distribution
Age Structure Approximate Age Trunk Diameter European Side Anatolian Side Code (to nearest year)
a 1.3cm - 7.9cm 3 to 16 years 1,183.98ha 694.67ha
b 8cm - 21.9cm 16 to 44 years 466.16ha 131.94ha
c 22cm - 35.9cm 44 to 72 years 129.88ha 1.25ha
d 36cm -51.9cm 72 to 104 years 74.20ha 0ha e 52cm + 104 years plus
Calculation is based on a ratio for oak of approximately diameter in cm times a factor of 2 to reach the tree’s age in years
In addition, species typically observed species in the shrub layers comprised Ostrya carpinifolia, Phillyrea, Erica arborea, Erica mediteranis, Crataegus monogyna, Ulmus minor, Arbutus unedo, Cistus cretigus, Carpinus betulus, Phillyrea latifolia, Cistus salvifolius, Tilia argentea, Coryllus avellana, Coryllus avellana, Cornus mas, Archetus durupecea, Laurus nobilis, Similax excels, Rubus tracticaccus, Vaccinium myrtillus, Hedera helix, Ruscus aculeatus, Ruscus hypoglossum and Spartium junceum.
Ivy, primrose, honeysuckle, violets, Daphne pontica, Asparagus, Viola, Cerastium, Hypericum calycinum were observed in the ground layer of this type of woodland
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-28
Ancient Woodland
The project route directly passes through part of the Kuzey Boğaziçi (Upper Bosphorus) IPA – where Belgrad forest is located. The Belgrad forest includes the oldest Hornbeam-Oak-beech and alder populations in Istanbul and therefore probably represents the most valuable ecological resource along the route of which replacement is hardest. These areas represent the areas of old growth shown on Table 4.7 above. Figure 4 in Appendix to Chapter 4 shows the area of oldest growth oak woodland along the route (trees of diameter 36cm or greater – see Table 4.7 above).
Mixed Woodland
There are some mixed woodlands with more than 10% coniferous plantation in the predominantly deciduous areas or vice versa. The species composition is not very different from the each type of woodland already described.
4.5.5 Heath
Heathland includes vegetation dominated by ericoids or dwarf gorse species, as well as 'heaths' dominated by lichens and bryophytes, dwarf forbs, Juncus trifidus, Erica arborea and Erica manipuliflora, Erica mediteranis Crataegus monogyna, Ulmus minor, Arbutus unedo, Cistus cretigus dominates such habitats
4.5.6 Ponds, Streams and Wetland
A number of small streams, rivers, ponds and wetlands are located either on or close to the proposed route of the motorway. Water quality within the streams and ponds appeared to be generally poor with high sediment loading being evident in almost all water bodies encountered.
Streams in the vicinity of urban areas have been particularly badly affected by the influence of people with poor water quality and high levels of waste materials being dumped around the water body as well as litter and other debris being washed downstream. In one instance a dead dog was found within a stream. Larger ponds, appear well used recreational areas. An unfortunate result of this is significant amounts of litter, damage due to off road vehicles and the remains of small fires.
Areas of herbaceous vegetation dominated by grasses and certain wet communities dominated by rush species (Juncus) species, and other marsh herbs are present. Typha latifolai, Sparginum neglectum and Phragmites australis dominate such areas.
The habitats on the coastal areas on the edges of the Bosphorus Strait are typically rocky with mainly scrub present. However, as noted above on both side of the strait clear felling and site clearance work had already commenced at the time of our field surveys. Therefore any vegetation that had been present had already been cleared from the coastal strip.
4.5.7 Marine Habitats
Marine habitats comprise the shallow coastal areas at the edge so of the Bosphorus Strait where the footings of the bridge are being constructed.
It was observed during our field surveys that work had started on infilling these inshore areas with excavation materials which will cause the coastal and marine habitat in these areas to be damaged, as well as by temporarily increasing turbidity in the strait.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-29
The photographs below show the extent of the works in March/April 2013.
4.5.8 Other Habitats
Dense and Scattered Scrub
Pockets of scrub are present throughout the corridor. The main species are listed in describing the scrub layers of the woodland.
Improved Grassland
Some areas of species poor grassland consisting of common grass species are present as include species such as clover, Graminea, and typical grassland flowers (e.g. daisies).
Buildings
This category includes all buildings, in use or unoccupied and small areas of hardstanding, such as parking bays immediately adjacent to the property. Such habitat has no particular ecological value, although some buildings may provide opportunities for bat roosts and nesting birds.
Agricultural Habitats
There are various areas of agricultural land along the route. Due to the survey period it was not always clear what the fields were being used for although the İstanbul İli Tarim Masterplan (Agricultural Master Plan of İstanbul) indicates that the main the agricultural areas are given over to field crops, vegetables, ornamental plants and citrus fruit production.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-30
4.5.9 Endemic Plant Species
Table 4-8 lists the endemic species that were observed during the Phase 1 Habitat Survey, with an indication of the certainty of identification.
Table 4-8 Species of Endemic Plant Observed
Bern Family Species Convention Survey Result Appendix I Ranunculaceae Consolida thirkeana No Plants Identified Brassicaceae Isatis arenaria No Plants Identified Erysimum degenianum No Plants Identified Erysimum sorgerae No Plants Identified Erysimum aznavourii No Plants Identified Caryophyllaceae Dianthus andronakii Possible Dianthus cibrarius No Plants Identified Silene sangaria App I Possible Guttiferae Hypericum aviculariifolium alttür byzantinum No Plants Identified Fabaceae Astragalus vulnerariae No Plants Identified Lathyrus undulatus Possible Trifolium pachycalyx App I Possible Trifolium pannonicum alttür elongatom No Plants Identified Trifolium apertum varyete kilaeum No Plants Identified Trigonella cephalotes No Plants Identified Apiaceae Ferulago thirkeana No Plants Identified Dipsacaceae Knautia degenii No Plants Identified Knautia byzantina No Plants Identified Asteraceae Senecio castagneanus No Plants Identified Tripleurospermum conoclinium Possible Onopordum anatolicum Possible Cirsium polycephalum Possible Carduus nutans alttür trojanus Possible Carduus nutans alttür falcato-incurvus Possible Centaurea kilaea Possible Centaurea consanguinea Possible Centaurea hermannii App I Possible Uechtritzia armena No Plants Identified Geropogon hybridus Possible
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-31
Bern Family Species Convention Survey Result Appendix I Hieracium noeanum No Plants Identified Pilosella hoppeana alttür lydia No Plants Identified Taraxacum aznavourii No Plants Identified Taraxacum pseudobrachyglossum Possible Taraxacum turcicum Possible Campanulaceae Campanula lyrata alttür lyrata No Plants Identified Jasione heldreichii varyete papillosa No Plants Identified Asclepiadaceae Vincetoxicum fuscatum alttür boissieri No Plants Identified Boraginaceae Onosma proponticum App I No Plants Identified Onosma bracteosum No Plants Identified Onosma bornmuelleri No Plants Identified Symphytum pseudobulbosum Possible Scrophulariaceae Verbascum bithynicum No Plants Identified Verbascum degenii App I No Plants Identified Scrophularia cryptophila Possible Lamiaceae Lamium purpureum varyete aznavourii Yes Wiedemannia orientalis Possible Ballota nigra alttür anatolica Possible Sideritis romana alttür romana No Plants Identified Stachys sosnowskyi Possible Thymus aznavourii App I No Plants Identified Euphorbiaceae Euphorbia amygdaloides varyete robbiae Yes Rubiaceae Asperula littoralis No Plants Identified Liliaceae Allium peroninianum Possible Allium rhodopeum alttür turcicum Possible Bellevalia clusiana Possible Colchicum micranthum App I No Plants Identified Colchicum lingulatum alttür rigescens No Plants Identified Amaryllidaceae Galanthus plicatus alttür byzantinus Yes Iridaceae Crocus sieheanus Possible Crocus pestalozzae Possible Crocus olivieri alttür istanbulensis Possible
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-32
Note that it was not always possible to identify species precisely due to various factors including whether or not the species was in flower at the time of survey and also other issues such as weather conditions and restrictions on access to certain areas. In addition, several of the endemic plant species identified above are sub-species or variants of species within the same family of plants, many of which are not in themselves endemic to Turkey. As such, field identification can be complex and difficult and can depend on very small differences. In several cases several very similar species of plant were found which may be endemics but due to identification being from the plant leaves and character of the plant only, these species are characterized as being possible endemics only. This includes the Iridaceae and Asteraceae families found in the Table above.
4.5.10 Mammals
Turkey has 127 mammal species. Of these 2 are endangered, 14 are vulnerable with a further 3 being near threatened according to The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species: Mammals of Turkey. During the Phase 1 Habitat Survey no specific species surveys were carried out; however, sign of mammals were recorded when encountered. Sightings are detailed in Table 4-9 below.
Table 4-9 Mammal Species Identified
Species Scientific IUCN Distribution Sign Found Name Status Golden Jackal Canis aureus Least Native to Turkey. Footprints and scat were found Concern Widespread throughout the proposed route of distribution however the motorway especially around the population may ponds, streams, rivers and wetland be declining areas.
Wild Boar Sus scrofa Least Native to Turkey. Footprints, scrapes and digging Concern Widespread found throughout both the distribution European and Asian sides of the proposed motorway.
Red Fox Vulpes vulpes Least Native to Turkey. Footprints and scats. concern Widespread distribution
Eurasian Meles meles Least Native to Turkey. A singe entrance sett, considered Badger concern Widespread to be an outlying sett found at GPS distribution point 143. A well used latrine with multiple dung pits found adjacent to the set entrance. Other digging was evident in the area of the sett. No well used paths were found in the vicinity of the sett. Badger hairs were found within the spoil heap at the sett entrance.
Roe Deer Capreolus Native to Turkey. Found at isolated areas on both the capreolus Widespread European and Asian sides f the distribution Bosporus
Levant Mole Talpa levantis Native to Turkey. Mole corpse found at Nkt 205.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-33
Otter
No evidence for the presence of otter (Lutra lutra) was found at any of the streams, ponds or wetland areas. Many of the streams had poor water quality which is considered to contribute to the lack of sign of otters (which are listed in Appendix II of the Bern Convention).
Golden Jackal
Signs of golden jackal were found frequently along the proposed route of the motorway. This included footprints and a potential scat: signs appeared to be most prevalent around water bodies. The golden jackal is classified as being of least concern by the ICUN.
Wild Boar
Wild boar is regularly hunted throughout Turkey. Sign of wild boar activity, including footprints, scrapes, a skull fragment and digging were found throughout the proposed route of the motorway. Wild boar is classified as being of least concern by the ICUN.
Small Mammals
A dead Levant mole was found on the edge of a forest road.
Table 4-10 Small Mammals Observed
Species Common Name Common Name IUCN Category Bern Convention (Turkish) (English) Talpa levantis Karadeniz Levant mole Least Concern (LC) - köstebeği
Martes foina Sansar Stone marten Least Concern (LC) Appendix-III
Mustela nivalis Gelincik Weasel Least Concern (LC) Appendix-III
Bats
Bats are a European Protected Species (i.e. all are listed in Appendix II of the Bern Convention (apart from Pipistrellus pipistrellus) and individual bats and their roosts are therefore highly protected in EU countries. However, bats are afforded no particular protection under Turkish law. Nevertheless, there are numerous bats species present in Turkey and signs of bat roosts were looked for. However, although there was potential for bats, particular in old trees no signs of bats were recorded or bats observed. It is very likely that various species of bats will be present at various locations along the route.
4.5.11 Amphibians and Reptiles
As the first field surveys started in the early March, and although it is unusual for İstanbul, it snowed during the survey period, amphibian and reptile species were rarely observed. However, there were some occasional sightings including a green lizard observed near the ponds and wet areas. In addition, a tortoise was observed in woodland areas (at Nkt 172).
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-34
Table 4-11 Amphibians Observed
Species Common Name Common Name IUCN Category Bern Convention (Turkish) (English)
Hyla arborea Ağaç kurbağası European Tree Least Concern (LC) Appendix II (orientalis) Frog
Bufo bufo Siğilli kurbağa Common Toad Least Concern (LC) -
Rana dalmatina Çevik kurbağa Agile Frog Least Concern (LC) Appendix II
Rana temporaria Bayağı kurbağa Common frog Least Concern (LC) -
Table 4-12 Reptiles Observed
Species Common Name Common Name IUCN Category Bern Convention (Turkish) (English)
Lacerta trilineata İri Yeşil Balkan Green lizard Least Concern (LC) Appendix II Kertenkele Roughtail Rock Laudakia stellio Dikenli Keler Least Concern (LC) - Agama Spur- thighed Testudo graeca Vulnerable (VU) Appendix II Tosbağa Tortoise (note Laudakia stellio = Stellagama stellio)
4.5.12 Other Species
Butterflies
Turkey is a large country with a wide variety of habitats. As a result of this diversity Turkey has approximately 411 species of butterfly of which 40 are endemic. During the site survey 11 species were encountered. It should be noted that the weather during much of the survey was cold and therefore not ideal for butterfly activity. See field notes in Appendix 4 for photographs of species found.
4.6 Identification and Evaluation of Ecological Receptors
The following table (Table 4.13) outlines the evaluation of the ecological features that may be affected by the Project considered in this assessment. Value has been determined taking into consideration the categories described in Table 4.1 above and through professional judgment by evaluating each feature‟s level of designation, distance to the Project and importance to the area as a whole.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-35
Table 4-13 Evaluation of Receptors
Ecological Receptor Distance Reasoning Value from Project
Statutory Sites Designated under the National Parks Law No. Şamlar Nature Park 880m 2873. Main use is recreational. Mainly Medium coniferous plantations. Designated under the Terrestrial Hunting Law Directly on No. 4915, to protect roe deer for hunting. Sarıyer Feneryolu Wildlife Medium Improvement Area (WIA) Route Approximately 2,673m of the route passes through this site. Designated under Forestry Law No. 6831. Route passes through the northern border of Directly on the forest. Main tree species is oak (Quercus Belgrat Conservation Forest Route sp.) covering 75% of the whole forest. High (European) Approximately 1,837m of the route passes through this site.
Designated under Forestry Law No. 6831. Directly on Route passes through the border of the forest. Elmalı Bendi Conservation Route High Forest: Approximately 1,483m of the route passes (Anatolian) through this site. Designated under Forestry Law No. 6831. Picnic Areas (8 no. identified) Various Route passes through two of these and close Low to the other 6). Non-Statutory Sites
Ağaçlı Kumulları (Dunes) IPA 1,200m Sand dunes High Contains important forests such as Carpinus betulus-Quercus Hornbeam-Oak forest, Kuzey Boğaziçi (Upper Directly on Carpinus-Fagus – Hornbeam-Beech forest, High Bosphorus) IPA the route and Alnus glutinosa-Carpinus – Alder- Hornbeam woodlands.
Kilyos Kumulları (Dunes) IPA 350m Sand dune habitats. High
Extensive mosaic of heath, phrygana (open 1,000m High Ömerli Havzası (Basin) IPA dwarf scrub habitat) and acid coppice forest
Bosphorus Important Bird Crossed by One of the main European routes for migratory High Area (IBA) the route birds. The last remaining fragments of limestone grassland, rock outcrops and dry acid heath Directly on Batı İstanbul Meraları (West grass-land located on the low undulating hills High Istanbul Pasturelands) IPA the route immediately north-west of Istanbul, close to Esenler. Habitats
Directly on Conifer Plantations Extensive conifer plantations Low the route
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-36
Ecological Receptor Distance Reasoning Value from Project
Directly on Beech, oak, hornbeam and chestnut dominate. Broadleaf Woodland Medium the route Usually under 20 year coppicing regime. Mixed woodlands with either conifers or Directly on Mixed Woodland broadleaf species dominating. Semi-natural Medium the route habitats. Main tree species is oak (Quercus sp.) Directly on covering 75% of the whole forest. Alos, Ancient Woodland High the route hornbeam, alder and chestnut. Includes best preserved areas of the Belgrad forest. Directly on Includes the Batı İstanbul Meraları (West Heath High the route Istanbul Pasturelands) IPA Directly on or Ponds, streams and close to the Water quality is generally poor. Low wetlands route Directly on or Small areas of shallow coastal habitats Low Marine habitats close to the beneath the bridge footings will be lost. route Directly on There are pockets of this habitat on the route. Low Dense and Scattered Scrub the route Common.
Directly on Improved Grassland Species poor grasslands. Low the route
Close to the Buildings Bat roost and nest bird habitat. Negligible route
Directly on Agricultural Habitats Agricultural land. Heavily modified. Negligible the route
Species Directly on or A variety of species are represented. None of Endemic Plants close to the the species identified are Bern Convention Medium route Appendix I species. Directly on or A variety of species are represented. Some Mammals close to the are listed in Appendices II and III of the Bern Medium route Convention. Directly on or Various common species. Some are listed in Amphibians and Reptiles close to the Medium Appendices II and III of the Bern Convention. route Directly on or Invertebrates (butterflies) close to the Various common species. Low route Three species of cetaceans may be present in Directly on or and around the Bosphorus. These are Cetaceans close to the Medium European Protected Species and are protected route in Turkey. Directly on or Some species are of significant commercial Marine fish close to the Medium importance or may be under threat. route
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-37
4.7 Potential Impacts
4.7.1 Overview
Having undertaken baseline desk studies and field surveys we have a clear understanding of the designated sites, habitats and species present along the route of the Project and it is important to consider what the potential impacts on these receptors may be.
This discuss provides an opportunity to briefly consider what might happen to these identified receptors if mitigation is not put in place. Note however that this section does not conclude the assessment but rather has two main functions: it allows potential impacts to be thought through (however unlikely) and it enables ideas about mitigation to be developed, where these are not already included in the design.
The following sections therefore briefly discuss the potential impact on each receptor group without mitigation. Both construction and operational impacts are considered here for each receptor group as noted in Table 4-13 above.
4.7.2 General Impacts
Potential impacts on ecological resources in the vicinity of the Project during construction include:
Dust, noise and movement caused by humans and machinery throughout the proposed Project route and associated areas that disturbs or otherwise impacts on flora and fauna; Direct or indirect damage to trees and woodland habitats and loss of trees and habitats; Disturbance and/or pollution of surface water resulting from construction activities next to watercourses resulting in entry of polluting matter, such as grease or oils, to sensitive habitats and watercourses; Disturbance to birds if vegetation clearance takes place within bird breeding season; Disturbance to deer and other animals in the area; and Potential destruction of reptile and other species‟ habitats or refuges.
Potential operational impacts include:
Permanent land take and reduction or loss of habitat areas; Increased noise and human disturbance, including forest fires; Permanent severance issues and fragmentation of habitats; Increased lighting and noise pollution, to formerly dark and quiet areas; Potential for restriction on mammal and other species‟ movements across the road; and Future pressures for development due to increased access to the area.
One important consideration is the area of each habitat that will be permanently lost under the footprint of the road and bridge. We have been advised that the average construction corridor of the Project will be 60.5m wide and we have used that to calculate the loss of habitats (based on dominant species recorded), and therefore the minimum areas of habitat that will have to be recreated through the mitigation measures. These areas are summarized in Table 4-14 below.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-38
Table 4-14 Areas of each Habitat Type within 60.5m Corridor
Habitat Type (by Dominant Species) Area Beneath 60.5m Corridor (ha)
Acacia 108.64
Agricultural land 251.02
Erosion 0.46
Conifer (Fir) 29.83
Lime 3.33
Not planted 8.39 Oak 344.49
Old Growth Woodland (subset of Oak) 9.35
Conifer (Pine) 253.91
Rhododendron 50.36
Exposed rock 0.60
Willow 0.60
Total Tree Habitats (Highlighted) 740.8
This table shows that approximately 345 hectares of oak dominant forest will be lost within the 60.5m wide construction corridor of the Project. This will include approximately 9.35 hectares of old growth oak forest. In addition, approximately 284 hectares of conifer plantation will be lost. Approximately 112.5 hectares of other woodland dominated by species such as acacia, lime and willow will also be lost, giving a total area of woodland lost as around 741 hectares.
4.7.3 Statutory Sites
Potential impacts include temporary damage and loss of parts of the statutory protected areas during construction and permanent loss during the operation of the Project. In addition, there could be severance issues where parts of the statutory sites are separated from each other during construction and operation, limiting public access as well as ecological connectivity.
Construction and operation could result in loss of habitats of significant ecological value, trees, vegetation, endemic species and animals and the habitats upon which they depend. Particularly during construction activities there could be indirect damage caused by release of pollutants, sediments, dust and the introduction of people (workers) and the public into areas that hitherto and been less assessable and therefore less disturbed.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-39
4.7.4 Non-Statutory Sites
There are a significant number of non-statutory sites in the area mainly defined as IPA. These include particularly the Kuzey Boğaziçi (Upper Bosphorus) IPA covering the Belgrad forest and the Batı İstanbul Meraları (West Istanbul Pasturelands) IPA.
Some of these are non-statutory areas overlap the statutory protected sites, but others do not. Potential impacts on these sites are similar to statutory sites, except that such sites are not afforded the same level of legal protection as statutory sites. This means that there is likely to be greater pressure to develop these sites in future as they are not afforded the same level of protection as statutory sites.
The main potential impact would be loss and fragmentation of rare habitats that will be difficult to recreate, as well as loss and damage to individual species and populations. Such loss could reduce the value of the remaining habitat meaning that it reduces in value and will eventually be lost.
With regard to the Bosphorus IBA and migrating birds, some species prefer to migrate over forested areas. Construction of the Project will destroy some forest areas and lighting of the area will increase. This would affect the migration of the birds.
4.7.5 Coniferous Plantation
Potential impacts on conifer plantation will be similar to other woodland habitats as discussed above in relation to statutory and non-statutory sites.
4.7.6 Broadleaf Woodland
Potential impacts on broadleaf plantation will be similar to other woodland habitats as discussed above. However, there is a greater variety of value of these habitats as it ranges from intensively managed coppiced woodland, from mixed woodland to the most valuable old growth woodlands of the Belgrad forest where trees are not coppiced and the level of biodiversity is high.
4.7.7 Heath
Potential impacts include complete loss or damage to habitats, changes in drainage patterns altering soils and vegetation structures and the increased disturbance form humans. The main area of heathland habitat is the Batı İstanbul Meraları (West Istanbul Pasturelands) IPA.
4.7.8 Ponds, Streams and Wetland Habitats
Works within and immediately adjacent to water bodies may disturb sediments and dislodge aquatic invertebrates. This may result in changes to the food chain in the immediate area of the works through increased predation on invertebrates and competition with other species. In addition, dislodging sediments may change the suitability of the area for invertebrates and plant species alike, temporarily leading to changes in the biodiversity of the area.
Works adjacent to water bodies have the potential to generate dust, either dislodged during dry periods or from the transportation of materials. This dust has the potential to enter water bodies resulting in an increase in turbidity. Such changes could affect the productivity of the plant species and have an indirect impact on macro and micro fauna.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-40
The clearance of surface vegetation and soils from areas adjacent to water bodies has the potential to increase soil erosion leading to increased sediment loading of the water body. This could affect both flora and fauna for a considerable distance downstream of the works.
Vehicle leaks such as oils and fuels can result pollution episodes while mechanical failures can result in unexpected pollution especially if occurring next to water bodies.
4.7.9 Marine Habitats
There is potential for short term loss of shallow coastal habitats due to the temporary infilling adjacent to the bridge. In addition, there could be smothering of benthic habitats due to release of sediments and other materials.
4.7.10 Other Habitats
There is the potential for impacts on a variety of other habitats including dense and scattered scrub, improved grassland, buildings and agricultural habitats. All of these habitats have to potential to support a variety of species. Construction works may affect these sites in the same way as for other sites and the permanent effects will include loss of habitat, severance issues, increased disturbance and future long term development pressures.
4.7.11 Endemic Plant Species
Potential impacts on endemic species include damage or loss of individuals and communities of species during construction activities and permanent loss of habitats which support such species as result of development of the Project. In addition, ground conditions, drainage changes, contamination and air pollution could cause degradation of soils and habitats and the greater human presence could damage or cause the loss of endemic plant species.
4.7.12 Mammals
Potential impacts on mammals could include damage to habitats or features upon which they depend, disturbance of prey species, loss of territories and territory ranges, increased competition between individuals due to loss of territory, disturbance due to the presence of humans, and direct harm to species due to road kill or increased hunting pressures. In addition, the Project could open up previously undisturbed areas for development which will result in even greater loss of the habitat upon which these species depend.
4.7.13 Amphibians and Reptiles
Potential impacts on amphibians and reptiles will be similar to that for mammals. In addition, there could be impacts due to loss of wetlands or damage to these due to changes in water quality or drainage patterns.
4.7.14 Other Terrestrial Species
Other species include invertebrates (e.g. butterflies) and potentially fish species. Invertebrates will be dependent on habitats so any loss or damage to these could affect invertebrate numbers overall. Fish depend on water quality which is generally poor in the area so there are potential impacts from loss of habitat or changes to water quality and drainage issues.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-41
4.7.15 Cetaceans
There are two species of dolphin and one porpoise species in the Black Sea and these could be directly affected by the construction works, or as a result of underwater noise, vibration and indirect effects on prey fish species which may change their behavior and feeding success.
4.7.16 Marine Fish
There are numerous species of fish present in the Black Sea and these tend to be concentrated in coastal areas and therefore species may be present in the Bosphorus. As with cetaceans these could be directly affected by the construction works, or as a result of underwater noise, vibration and indirect effects on prey species.
4.8 Mitigation
4.8.1 Overview
This section summarises the mitigation that will be or should be implemented for the Project to counter potential construction and operational impacts on ecology and biodiversity.
In a normal assessment process all mitigation is developed and agreed before the assessment of impacts stage. This is to enable mitigation to be taken into account when assessing the significance of the residual impacts, in order to provide a realistic and controlled appraisal of the impacts of the project. Such mitigation is usually included as specific design elements or commitments made by the Client. Such elements include the 36 viaducts and three road tunnels, plus one ecological bridge that will be constructed along the route (see Figure 2.2 for their locations). These will allow connectivity between habitats under or over the road in certain places. In addition, a number of significant route realignments have been made which will have a beneficial effect on habitats, either by avoiding them or by minimising fragmentation and severance issues.
All mitigation measures defined in this report will be implemented by the ICA. These mitigation measures are also summarized in the ESAP. The following sections set out the agreed or proposed mitigation in relation to the ecological and biodiversity receptors identified above.
4.8.2 Statutory Sites
The main mitigation that will be implemented in relation to construction impacts is for there to be appropriate control of construction activities, including site clearance issues, materials sourcing and storage, waste management, control of run-off and pollution.
A significant effort should be made to recreate similar habitats to that lost in areas where vegetation has been removed to enable construction. This will include planting trees of the same species and ideally from stock of local provenance. The lenders have required that a four-to-one ratio for the replacement of trees lost should be implemented. Where possible, ecological connectivity should be maintained and restored by re-vegetation of cut and cover tunnels, improving habitat connectivity underneath viaducts and in some cases construction of specifically designed ecological bridges.
In addition, particularly sensitive or important habitats such as areas of old growth woodland should be ring- fenced and specifically protected. In these cases adjacent younger growth woodlands, should be managed differently so that coppicing and felling is reduced or eliminated and these woodlands are allowed to evolve naturally into old growth forests, connecting the remaining areas of old growth in the Belgrad forest.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-42
In the longer term there should be clear guidance on allowing development to take place in these statutory areas such that the integrity and connectivity of habitats is not compromised. However, this level of mitigation is beyond the remit of ICA.
4.8.3 Non-Statutory Sites
The same mitigation opportunities exist for non-statutory sites. Good construction management will be expected as defined in the ESAP. In terms of the Kuzey Boğaziçi (Upper Bosphorus) IPA, which contains important forests such as Carpinus betulus-Quercus Hornbeam-Oak forest, Carpinus-Fagus – Hornbeam- Beech forest, and Alnus glutinosa-Carpinus – Alder-Hornbeam woodlands, where there is old growth forest that is not intensively managed. The following long term mitigation and management measures will be required:
Protect old growth forest habitat and individual trees as much as possible; Collect seeds and seedlings from those areas for planting/transplantation; Change forestry management of adjacent coppiced or more intensively managed oak woodlands to allow them to revert to „old growth‟ forests, thus increasing their ecological value; Reduce or avoid tree felling in more extended woodland areas to enable older growth to occur; Leave fallen trees to decompose to increase variety of habitats and to improve habitats for invertebrates; Thin or clear-fell conifer and non-native plantations and replace with locally sourced broadleaf seed and saplings; Allow natural regeneration where possible, including natural succession of scrub habitats; Create new woodlands on agricultural or other land – for example on scrub habitats or where rhododendrons and other invasive species have taken over. Ensure that all construction related landscaping ties as seamlessly as possible into the local landscape and that only locally sourced native trees and plants are used to seed these; Enable habitats to connect under viaducts, over tunnels and by using ecological bridges; Connect separated areas of habitat to create a network of habitat corridors, particularly in relation to the remnants of the old growth forests.
Other important non-statutory habitats include the Batı İstanbul Meraları (West Istanbul Pasturelands) IPA, which comprise the last remaining fragments of limestone grassland, rock outcrops and dry acid heath grass- land located on the low undulating hills immediately north-west of Istanbul, close to Esenler. The main mitigation will be to minimize land take here and to ensure that access to the open heath is restricted to prevent damage caused by construction vehicles and other human activity.
4.8.4 Coniferous Plantation
Conifer plantation is man-made and can be easily recreated and therefore general mitigation relating to construction should be followed. Recreation of these habitats will be implemented in the operational phase.
4.8.5 Broadleaf Woodland
Mitigation for broadleaf woodlands will be the same as for the non-statutory habitats described above. Apart from the areas of old woodland, most of the broadleaf woodland is under a coppicing management regime, which means that although old stumps are retained, the 20 year growth is felled. These woodlands can be easily restored and/or created as they do not contain substantial old growth.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-43
4.8.6 Heath
This habitat comprises the Batı İstanbul Meraları (West Istanbul Pasturelands) IPA and the same mitigation will apply here as discussed above.
4.8.7 Ponds, Streams and Wetland and Marine Habitats
Standard construction mitigation in relation to water bodies and water courses should be implemented to ensure that runoff is controlled, that sediments do not enter such habitats and that pollution is prevented. During construction this will require appropriate environmental management measures being put in place. During operation adequate drainage that prevents polluted run-off from the road and other infrastructure entering water bodes should be included in the design.
4.8.8 Other Habitats
Mitigation relating to construction management should be followed. Recreation of these habitats will not be necessary in the operational phase.
4.8.9 Endemic Plant Species
It is not practical to undertake a detailed survey of the route and to identify every endemic plant along it for protection and/or transplantation as necessary. Therefore, the main mitigation recommended is that during vegetation clearance that soils are protected, stored and re-used to ensure that the seeds that they contain survive and that this soil is used in such as way that native plants, including endemics, are allowed to re- establish themselves naturally. In addition, particularly important habitats such as the IPA listed about should be avoided and protected where possible and as discussed above.
4.8.10 Mammals
Care should be taken during vegetation clearance to allow animals to escape. No hunting or other activities will be permitted. All pollutants and substances harmful to animals will be securely stored on site and pollution incidents will be avoided.
Assuming that connectivity of habitats and the maintenance of the habitat network is encourage through planting and landscaping then this will help to mitigate the loss of territories and potential severance issues with regard to mammal species in the area. Where necessary, road underpasses and other means of safe- passage for animals should be included in the design.
4.8.11 Amphibians and Reptiles
Mitigation for amphibians and reptiles will be include the measures described above for mammals as well as mitigation relating to protection of the aquatic habitat.
4.8.12 Other Species
The main mitigation for other species such as invertebrates is to recreate and maintain suitable habitats through planting, use of seeds and saplings of local provenance and enhancing connectivity of habitats.
4.8.13 Cetaceans
The main mitigation is to avoid direct impacts on these species. Therefore during works within the marine coastal environment a watch for dolphins and porpoises should be made and measures taken to avoid damaging these species or disturbing them unduly.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-44
4.8.14 Marine Fish
Standard construction mitigation in relation to water should be implemented to ensure that runoff is controlled, that sediments do not enter such habitats and that pollution is prevented. During construction this will require appropriate environmental management measures being put in place. During operation adequate drainage that prevents polluted run-off from the road and other infrastructure entering water bodes should be included in the design.
4.9 Residual Impacts
4.9.1 Summary of Impacts
A summary of the residual impacts, i.e. those remaining after mitigation has been implemented, on each ecological receptor are set out in Table 4.15 below. The assessment of residual impacts takes into account the value of the receptor (see Table 4.13) and the effectiveness of the mitigation that will be implemented. Note that this assessment does not take into account any future development pressure outside the control of ICA.
Table 4-15 Summary of Residual Impacts
Ecological Value Distance Reasoning Residual Receptor from Impact (after Project Mitigation)
Statutory Sites
Is not on or close to the project route and Medium 880m Negligible Şamlar Nature Park will not be directly affected. The site will be severed by the protect route Sarıyer Feneryolu Directly and its function is to protect deer from Wildlife Improvement Medium Low on Route hunting. Approximately 2,673m of the route Area (WIA) passes through this site. Areas of the forest will be lost and there will Directly be severance and other impacts. However, Belgrat Conservation on Route mitigation, such as tree planting, will assist Medium High Forest (Europea in reducing the level of impact but it will still n) be significant. Approximately 1,837m of the route passes through this site. Areas of the forest will be lost and there will Directly be severance and other impacts. However, on Route mitigation, such as tree planting, will assist Elmalı Bendi High Medium Conservation Forest (Anatolian in reducing the level of impact but it will still side) be significant. Approximately 1,483m of the route passes through this site.
Such areas can be easily recreated if Picnic Areas (8 no. Low Various damaged or compromised. Low identified)
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-45
Ecological Value Distance Reasoning Residual Receptor from Impact (after Project Mitigation)
Non-Statutory Sites
Is not on or close to the project route and Ağaçlı Kumulları High 1,200m Low (Dunes) IPA will not be directly affected. Areas of the forest will be lost and there will Kuzey Boğaziçi Directly be severance and other impacts. However, (Upper Bosphorus) High on the mitigation, such as tree planting, will assist Medium IPA route in reducing the level of impact but it will still be significant.
Is not on or close to the project route and Kilyos Kumulları High 350m Negligible (Dunes) IPA will not be directly affected.
Is not on or close to the project route and Ömerli Havzası High 1,000m Negligible (Basin) IPA will not be directly affected. There may be some loss of habitats and lighting effects but construction activities Crossed and operation of the route are unlikely to Bosphorus Important High by the significantly affect this IBA. The Low Bird Area (IBA) route construction of the bridge is unlikely to obstruct migrating birds as they do not often collide with such structures. Areas of the habitat will be lost and there will be severance and other impacts. Although it is not a forest it is an important and rare habitat that is internationally Batı İstanbul Meraları Directly recognised. However, it is under severe (West Istanbul High on the pressure from various developments and is Medium Pasturelands) IPA route likely to disappear in the near future. As it fulfills the same criteria as the Kuzey Boğaziçi (Upper Bosphorus) IPA the residual impact on this habitat is medium overall. Habitats Directly Extensive conifer plantations which are not Conifer Plantations Low on the Low ecologically unique or difficult to recreate. route Areas of the forest will be lost and there will Directly be severance and other impacts. However, Low- Broadleaf Woodland Medium on the mitigation, such as tree planting, will assist Medium route in reducing the level of impact but it will still be significant. Directly Mixed woodlands that can be easily Mixed Woodland Medium on the Low recreated. route Areas of the habitat will be lost and there Directly will be severance and other impacts. Note Ancient Woodland High on the Medium that this assessment does not take into route account any future development pressure
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-46
Ecological Value Distance Reasoning Residual Receptor from Impact (after Project Mitigation) outside the control of ICA.
Directly Areas of the habitat will be lost and there Heath High on the Medium will be severance and other impacts. route Directly Ponds, streams and on or Low Water quality is generally poor. Low wetlands close to the route Directly Low on or Very limited encroachment into this habitat, Marine Habitats Low close to which will be temporary. the route Directly Dense and Scattered Low There are pockets of this habitat on the on the Low Scrub route. Common. route Directly Improved Grassland Low on the Species poor grasslands. Common. Low route Close to Buildings Negligible Bat roost and nest bird habitat. Common. Low the route Directly Agricultural Habitats Negligible on the Agricultural land. Heavily modified. Low route Species Directly Retention of soils/seed-banks and reuse of on or soils such that natural regeneration and re- Endemic Plants Medium Low close to establishment of endemic species can take the route place. Directly Habitat creation and reduction of severance on or Mammals Medium through connecting habitats will mitigate Low close to impacts. the route Directly Habitat creation and reduction of severance Amphibians and on or Medium through connecting habitats will mitigate Low Reptiles close to impacts. the route Directly Habitat creation and reduction of severance Invertebrates on or Low through connecting habitats will mitigate Negligible (butterflies) close to impacts. the route Directly Dolphins and porpoises are likely to avoid on or Cetaceans Medium the works as they can easily access the Low close to Black Sea. the route Directly There are unlikely to be significant on or populations of marine fish in the area and Marine Fish Medium Low close to any impacts will not have a significant effect the route on fish populations.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-47
4.9.2 Significant Impacts
After mitigation significant impacts (medium) remain for the following receptors.
Belgrat Conservation Forest (including broadleaf and ancient woodlands). Elmalı Bendi Conservation Forest (including broadleaf woodland) Kuzey Boğaziçi (Upper Bosphorus) IPA (including the Belgrad forest, broadleaf woodland) Batı İstanbul Meraları (West Istanbul Pasturelands) IPA (comprising heath habitats)
4.10 Summary
An ecological assessment was undertaken to determine the impacts of the Project on ecology and biodiversity in the project area. Preliminary information was based on a desk study which provided information on habitats and species both within the route corridor and in the vicinity of the corridor. Field surveys were undertaken in March and April 2013.
The study found that there no national parks, nature monuments or nature reserves within the Project alignment and its vicinity in accordance with the National Parks Law. However, there are several Nature Parks at the European and Asian side of İstanbul that may be affected by the Project. The closest nature park to the Project is Şamlar Nature Park located on the European side and about 880 m to the west of the route.
In addition, approximately 2.8km of the route will pass directly through the namely Sarıyer Feneryolu a Wildlife Improvement Area (WIA) at the European side and there is an area forbidden for hunting in accordance with the 2012-2013 period CHC decisions in the vicinity of Polonezköy, where approximately 5.5 km of the route passes through this area.
In accordance with the Forestry Law, there are no seed stands and biogenetic reserve areas (gene courts) within the Project site and its vicinity. However, there are some conservation forests, seed garden and recreation areas such as urban forest and picnic along the route including:
Belgrad Conservation Forest: The route just passes through the northern border of the forest which is located at the European side of İstanbul. Elmalı Bendi Conservation Forest: Part of the route passes through this forest located at the Asian side. Kuzey Boğaziçi (Upper Bosphorus) IPA (which includes the Belgrad forest) Other sites include: a Seed Garden located between Reşadiye and Alemdağ Nişantep; an urban forest in Ümraniye near the existing İstanbul Highway (E-80); and various picnic areas.
The majority of the route (nearly 35 km) passes through the Bosphorus Key Biodoversity Area (KBA) which lies along the length of the Bosphorus strait and extends from European side to the Asian side. The KBA comprises a wide range of habitats including sand dunes at the coastline, rocks, maquis communities, pasture lands, forests and lakes. The area also includes an Important Plant Area (IBA) in forested areas west and east of the strait. There are several vulnerable habitats supporting rare plant species within this KBA and some of these areas have been identified as IPA.
Other KBA include the West İstanbul Pasture Lands Key KBA at the European side. The KBA has a total area of 9,612 ha between Bağcılar at the south and Pirinççi at the north. Approximately 11.4 km of the route
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 4-48
passes through this KBA. Located within this is the Batı İstanbul Meraları (West İstanbul Pasturelands) IPA, close to Esenler, which comprises the last remaining fragments of limestone grassland, rock outcrops and dry acid heath grass-land located immediately north-west of İstanbul. Although it is not a forest it is an important and rare habitat that is internationally recognised. However, it is under severe pressure from various developments and is likely to disappear in the near future. As it fulfills the same criteria as the Kuzey Boğaziçi (Upper Bosphorus) IPA the residual impact on this habitat is medium overall.
Approximately 345 hectares of oak dominant forest will be lost within the 60.5m wide construction corridor of the Project. This will include approximately 9.35 hectares of old growth oak forest. In addition, approximately 284 hectares of conifer plantation will be lost. Approximately 112.5 hectares of other woodland dominated by species such as acacia, lime and willow will also be lost.
Significant mitigation measure will be required including the requirement to:
Protect old growth forest habitat and individual trees as much as possible; Collect seeds and seedlings from those areas for planting/transplantation; Change forestry management of adjacent coppiced or more intensively managed oak woodlands to allow them to revert to „old growth‟ forests, thus increasing their ecological value; Reduce or avoid tree felling in more extended woodland areas to enable older growth to occur; Leave fallen trees to decompose to increase variety of habitats and to improve habitats for invertebrates; Thin or clear-fell conifer and non-native plantations and replace with locally sourced broadleaf seed and saplings; Allow natural regeneration where possible, including natural succession of scrub habitats; Create new woodlands on agricultural or other land – for example on scrub habitats or where rhododendrons and other invasive species have taken over. A ratio of four-to-one for habitat creation in terms of trees planted (not necessarily in terms of area) is assumed. Ensure that all construction related landscaping ties as seamlessly as possible into the local landscape and that only locally sourced native trees and plants are used to seed these; Enable habitats to connect under viaducts, over tunnels and by using ecological bridges; Connect separated areas of habitat to create a network of habitat corridors, particularly in relation to the remnants of the old growth forests. This will be aided by the use of viaducts, tunnels and the ecological bridge in the road design.
Based on the calculation of habitat areas lost due to the construction of the Project, overall 345 hectares of oak forest will be lost and have to be compensated for to be created to compensate for the loss of this type of habitat. Of that total, just over 9 hectares represents the area of old growth that will be lost and that will have to be replaced as mitigation, preferably through management changes in existing coppiced oak dominated woodland in adjacent areas. In addition 284 hectares of conifers will be lost, as well as 112.5 hectares of other less dense habitats containing other dominant tree species (acacia, lime and willow). This gives a total area of oak and conifer dominant areas, as well as other woodland species combined, of 740 hectares.
It is very difficult to calculate the exact number of trees that will be lost when a given area of forest habitat is cleared as the tree density can vary enormously. However, it is recommended that a ratio of four-to-one in terms of new tree planting be implemented in order to compensate for tree loss due to the construction of the Project. Further details of the mitigation for loss of forest habitats are included in the Afforestation Plan appended to the ESAP.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 5-1
5.0 LAND USE
5.1 Introduction
This Chapter describes the existing land uses in the immediate vicinity of the Project and identifies the potential effects of the Project. The main objectives of this section of the report are to:
Identify land use patterns in the Project Area; Assess both long term and short term impacts on land use (the comprehensiveness and precision of which has depended on data availability); and Recommend appropriate mitigation measures to minimise the adverse impacts caused by the proposed Project.
5.2 Methods
5.2.1 Scope of Assessment
The study area is based on the route of the Project and 500m either side of the alignment. From west to east the scheme extends from between Odayeri and Paşaköy, as distance of some 60 km, although the length of route will be approximately 114 km altogether including connection and connection roads (see Figure 5.1 below).
Figure 5-1 Project Route Corridor (500m)
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 5-2
5.2.2 Desk Study and Consultations
Data for the land use study were obtained from secondary data sources. Secondary data sources used in this study include census data, geographical data (including maps review of 1:25,000, 1:5,000 and 1:1,000 scale base-mapping), and national and local government statistics, articles, documentation from non-governmental organizations and community-based organizations, and newspaper reports.
5.2.3 Legislative Framework
The 1:100,000 scale İstanbul Environmental Development Plan was prepared and approved by the İstanbul Greater Metropolitan Municipality on June 15, 2009 (at the time of writing it is not yet approved). During the preparation phase of the plan, firstly the regional development diagram was created and planning decisions were defined in accordance with this plan. In addition, harmonization with the Trakya and Kocaeli Environmental Development Plans was also included.
The plan aimed to strengthen İstanbul on a global scale; achieve sustainable development by activating the local potential of the Marmara Region; manage spatial development and functional integration of İstanbul; enrich quality of life; strengthen social capital objective and achieve a sustainable urban management system.
After approval of the plan, the plan implementation provisions were amended on June 16, 2010 and clauses were added, stating that “transportation systems that are not shown in the plan will be assessed during the preparation of sub-plans considering the integrity and principles of the 1:100,000 scale İstanbul Environmental Development Plan” and “additional crossing and routes of strait will be assessed during the preparation of sub-plans”.
A number of legal court cases were filed calling for cancellation of the approved 1:100,000 scale İstanbul Environmental Development Plan after this amendment. Several professional chambers have opposed these statements and stated that the plan is not in compliance with the several laws and regulations such as the Construction Law (No. 3194), the Regulation on Environmental Development Plans and the Regulation on Principles of Preparation of Plans. Some of these court cases are still on-going and the plan is still in force.
The Department of Spatial Planning for the Greater Municipality of the city of Istanbul, proposed land use policies and estimated the course of developments accordingly, for the target year of 2010. The latest comprehensive study of transportation in the city, “Istanbul Transportation Master Plan” (1997), was a collaborative challenge of local authorities and academicians of the spatial and transport planners. It primarily aimed at taking strategic transportation decisions that will support environmentally and economic sustainable development of Istanbul.
The major objectives supported by major transport improvements, for well managed and balanced growth, are summarised below. This was named “Land use Scenario I” and was the source for the transport model as input data required for future estimations of trip patterns.
1. Necessary policies will be followed and measures will be taken to control physical growth of the city in order to moderate and maintain a well balanced urban development. 2. In order to support the multi central growth on a linear corridor from east to west, the distribution of new residential areas together with business and commercial centres will be planned accordingly. 3. The urban plans together with necessary measures will be applied in order to restrict urban sprawl towards the north which are seen as the „lungs of the city‟. 4. The distribution of employment and population between east and west sides will be balanced in order to lessen the crossings of Bosporus especially during peak hours.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 5-3
5.2.4 Land Use Categories
There is no one ideal classification of land use and land cover. There are different perspectives in the classification process, and the process itself tends to be subjective, even when an objective numerical approach is used. The purposes for which lands are commonly used have associated types of cover, whether they are forest, agricultural, residential, or industrial. Table 5.1 shows the land use categories that will be used in the study.
Table 5-1 Land Use Categories
Type Description of Land Use Category
Facilities used for recreational purposes and local amenity areas, for outdoor relaxation and Amenity Areas enjoyment, have been put into this category. For example, playing fields, golf courses and associated clubhouses, allotments, cycle ways, parkland, open green space.
Forestry Land Land given over to forestry, including commercial forestry and other protected areas.
All types of residential properties and their land boundaries. This includes bungalows, semi- Residential detached, detached, terraced houses, multi-storey flats and tenements including hotels and their associated facilities and grounds e.g. gardens, driveways etc.
Commercial Retail, office, industrial areas and business areas including restaurants.
Community Use Land used by the community including cemeteries, libraries, doctor‟s surgeries etc.
Education University buildings and schools, and associated grounds.
Military Use Land designated as military areas.
Transportation Roads and other transport infrastructure
Watercourses Watercourses, streams and reservoirs.
It should be noted that there might be some unavoidable discrepancies for particular land use descriptions where, for example, commercial properties may be included in residential areas and some commercial premises may have been classed as industrial (particularly if located in a predominately residential or industrial area respectively).
5.2.5 Impact Criteria
The criteria listed in the table below have been used when assessing the significance of the potential effects of the Project.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 5-4
Table 5-2 Impact Significance Criteria
Impact Description Criteria Land-take to the extent that it precludes existing or intended use. Major Adverse Impact Activity to the extent that it permanently precludes use. Loss of amenity to an extent that deters use.
Land-take to the extent that it compromises but does not preclude use. Moderate Adverse Impact Activity to the extent that it precludes use for an extended period of time. Loss of amenity to an extent that it compromises but does not deter use.
Land-take peripheral to use. Minor Adverse Impact Activity to the extent that it temporarily precludes use. Loss of amenity that does not compromise use.
No land-take. Existing or intended land use can continue Neutral Impact No discernible loss of amenity
5.3 Existing Conditions
5.3.1 Route Overview
Land ownership of the Project is distributed as shown below
Private real estate 7.18% Corporate real estate 0.43% Disputed land 0.24% 2B land 0.52% Forest area 79.21% Treasury 8.94% Parking areas 3.49%
The project description can be summarized as follows:
The proposed Northern Marmara Motorway includes approximately 60 km long motorway from Odayeri to Paşaköy and approximately 54 km of connection roads, including the third Bosphorus bridge. The total length of the road construction will be approximately 114 km. Table 5-3 lists some of the basic information about the scheme, which is divided into four sections.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 5-5
Table 5-3 Northern Marmara Motorway Scheme Summary
Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4
TOTAL (km) 19.44 24.66 26.50 20.70
Number of Viaducts 8 11 9 8
Max-Min-Total L (m) Max L: 894 m, Max L: 979 m, Max L: 894 m, Max L: 467 m,
Min L: 211 m Min L: 168m Min L: 125 m Min L: 168m
Total L: 5,901 m Total L: 7,736 m Total L: 8,815 m Total L: 3,469 m
Number of Tunnels 0 1+1 RW 1 1
Total L Total L: Total L: 1,180 m Total L: 1380 m 1,1165m+700m
Amount of concrete (m3) 416,714 622,561 666,274 440,091
Amount of cut (m3) 9,934,730 15,200,490 13,525,009 10,116,700
Amount of fill (m3) 5,398,195 6,962,548 7,213,731 9,796,158
The four route sections are:
Section 1 from “ISTOC OSB (in the Başakşehir District)” to “Odayeri (in the Eyüp District)”
Section 2 from “Odayeri” to “Garipçe (in the Sarıyer District)”
Section 3 from “Poyraz (in the Beykoz District)” to “Reşadiye (Çekmeköy)”
Section 4 from “Reşadiye” to “Çamlık (in the Ümraniye District-left side)” and “Paşaköy (in the Sancaktepe District-right side)”
The KGM requirement also includes all necessary bridges, junctions, tunnels, viaducts, retention walls and drainage systems. In addition, ICA will also construct service and rest areas, parking areas for hazardous materials transporting vehicles, toll booths and structures, maintenance and operations buildings for the Third. Bosphorus Bridge and The Motorway Project.
There are a total of 36 viaducts and 3 road tunnels, plus one ecological bridge.
The Figure 5-2 shows general land use pattern surrounding the Third Bosphorus Bridge and The Motorway.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 5-6
Figure 5-2 Generalised Land Use Pattern
As pointed out before, there are some residential areas in the project area. The most populated villages within 500 metres of either side of the alignment are Nişantepe, Poyraz, Uskumruköy, Ishaklı and Hüseyinli (see Figure 5.3).
The construction of the motorway would stimulate residential population growth the area, and in turn stimulate development, local commerce and demand for other transport services.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 5-7
Figure 5-3 The Most Populated Settlements within 500 m Either Side of the Alignment
5.3.2 Agricultural Land
The most dramatic loss in recent years has been observed in the agricultural areas in Istanbul. The agricultural areas have decreased from about 95,000 hectares in 1945 to 37,000 hectares in 2000. The housing areas have increased 7.4 times whilst the population has increased 9.3 times in the same period.
Table 5-4 Land Use Pattern by Years (Hectares)
Years Housing Agricultural Industry Natural Urban Rivers Total Sea General Land Commerce Areas Green and (excluding Total Transportation Areas Lakes Sea) (including Sea) 1945 6,537 94,991 5,534 111,190 723 3,058 222,033 88,721 310,754
1968 14,392 94,133 13,659 95,758 90 3,267 222,189 88,565 310,754
1988 36,886 62,580 31,749 31,749 2,180 6,618 222,025 87,729 310,754
2000 48,506 38,811 36,965 36,965 2,025 7,465 223,499 87,263 310,762
Source: Gerçek, H. and Demir, O., 2008, Urban Mobility in Istanbul. French Development Agency.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 5-8
The land use pattern in Istanbul began to change dramatically just after the opening of the first Bosphorus Bridge in 1973. After the approval of the first 1 / 50,000 scale Land-Use Master Plan of Istanbul, new industrial and housing areas have been developed both in the west and the east peripheries of the city and the new settlements spread towards Büyükçekmece in the European Side and Kartal on the Anatolian Side
5.4 Impact Assessment
There will be loss of agricultural land, forest land and private land as a result of the Project. The existing land use of the project area will be affected by the construction of the bridge, motorway, access roads, and construction camps.
Based on the existing information, permanent acquisition of lands will be required for the project. The proposed alignment of the motorway will mainly pass through forest lands; however; there are some settlements in close vicinity to the route. One of the impacts of the new motorway will be the fragmentation of forest lands. Approximately 80 % of the route goes through land that is currently used for forest. These will be lost due to the construction of the highway.
These lands will need to be expropriated by the KGM according to the Turkish Expropriation Law. Expropriation refers to the taking of the possession of ownership belonging to private person or establishing a right of servitude by the State and public legal persons for public interest. The decision is taken by authorities in accordance with the procedures set out in the Expropriation Law, numbered 2942, which forms the legal basis for expropriation.
Involuntary resettlement in Turkey is regulated by the expropriation law and the resettlement law. According to Article 46 of the Turkish constitution, the state has the right to expropriate totally or partially immovable assets for public benefit with the condition that cash payment must be made the basis of existing laws. Only public agencies can carry out expropriation for “public benefit.” The expropriation payment is supposed to be in cash, but the Expropriation Law also specifies other forms of payment where agricultural reform, big irrigation and resettlement projects are involved.
The first step is to obtain ministerial approval from the state institution for expropriation. The second step is to define the actual size and boundaries of areas to be expropriated with a cadastral survey. After the registration and ownership of assets have been established, the value of assets are determined on the basis of Article 10 of the Expropriation Law (Law 2942).
A Valuation Commission, which has five permanent members and three technical experts such as agricultural and construction engineers, determines the amount of compensation to be paid based on the following factors (Altinbilek et al. 1999:293):
“The nature and size of the land or building; All qualities and compounds of the land or building; Taxes paid for the land or building; Previous amounts awarded in compensation for expropriation; The net income the land or building would probably bring in if it continued to be used without any change, taking into account the location and conditions of lands, buildings and resources at expropriation time, and calculated according to the following formula: K=R/F (Where K=value expropriation compensation; R=net income; F=capitalization rate). For house plots, the amount for which similar and (house plot) has been sold, without any change in the use to which it is put, prior to the date of expropriation;
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 5-9
For buildings, the official unit prices at expropriation date, estimates the costs of rebuilding and depreciation for wear and tear; Finally, any other objective measurements which could affect the valuation.”
After a site visit and investigation, the Valuation Committee should provide a report on the expropriation value for the administration in fifteen days. The state institution has also established a committee to provide them with the expropriation value (Bayram, 1995). If there is a big difference in evaluation between these two committees, the institution has the right to take legal action for re-evaluation of the assets in sixty days. At the same time, the owner of the assets has a right to object to the evaluation within 30 days of the original date of official notice.
Resettlement activities are regulated by the Resettlement Law, Law 2510. According to Article 10 of this law, “resettlement is the provision to a family of a home or a land plot sufficient to meet its needs given household population size; providing to artisans and traders workshops and shops as well as credit to make a living; and making available to farmers sufficient land, livestock, staples, farm equipment, seeds, storage units”. Potential ecological impacts on these lands are discussed in Chapter 4 of the ESIA, and a detailed socio- economic assessment is provided in Chapter 12.
Table 5-5 shows the amount expropriated land and type required for the Project.
Table 5-5 Type and Amount of Land
Type of land Amount of expropriated area (m2) %
Private real estate 2,422,268.96 7.18%
Corporate real estate 145,922.58 0.43%
Disputed land 79,391.17 0.24%
2B land 174,557.43 0.52%
Forest area 26,725,744.25 79.21%
Treasury 3,015,727.20 8.94%
Parking areas 1,176,668.85 3.49%
Total 33,740,280.45 100.00%
Note: 2B Land comprises land that was designated as forest but where the land use has been changed (including construction of buildings) without any formal deeds, planning permission or payment of rent or fees to the state.
The proposed Project is not included and assessed in the current 1:100,000 scale Istanbul Environmental Development Plan. However, ICA has stated that Istanbul Greater Metropolitan Municipality has approved the 1:25,000 scale zoning plan, which includes the Project, on 8 August 2010.
According to the information provided by ICA, the approval of the 1:5,000 and 1:1,000 scale zoning plans are in progress and under evaluation by the Istanbul Greater Metropolitan Municipality and the district municipalities. KGM will also initiate additional and revised plans in order to finalize both the 1:5,000 and 1:1,000 scale zoning plans.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 5-10
Thus, zoning plans for the Istanbul Province will be prepared.. The current zoning plans in all scales will be revised and the new developments will be realized according to the new zoning plans after their approvals.
At present, AECOM has not seen and thus not reviewed the proposed zoning plans to provide an assessment of the impacts of news plans on the land use of around the project area. In addition, we have not considered longer term impacts beyond the extent of the concession, for example urban sprawl, as we cannot speculate on any developments that may arise that are not identified and not permitted in the approved and current master/zoning plans. However, we have used some scientific articles to predict the land use changes related to the Project.
Ayazlı, Batık and Kelinschmit (2010) have tried to predict the influence of a 3rd Bridge on urbanization processes in İstanbul and protected areas. In this article, “the historical land use maps were generated by automatic classification of Landsat satellite imagery for the years 1972, 1987, 2002 and 2009 using ERDAS software. Classified satellite imagery and master plans were used to create urban and excluded areas. Water bodies, military zones and airports were selected as Excluded Areas.
Note that the location of the third bridge used in their model is actually further south than the bridge proposed as part of the Project.Ayazlı, et al. (2010) stated that after constructing thje 3rd Bridge, a minimum of 28 % forest and 71 % agricultural areas and open spaces will be transformed to urban area. To work out transition lands from forest and agricultural and open spaces (Agr + OS) to urban area, change detection analysis was made between land use map for the year 2009 and sprawling map for the year 2030 (see Table 5-6).
Table 5-6 Transition Lands from 2009 to 2030
Year 2030(%) Transformed area (ha) % Area Urban area Urban area 67,738.68 - Agr+OS Agr+OS 18,007.92 Forest area Forest area 71,249.76 Agr+OS 50-60 31.32 0.17 Agr+OS 60-70 39.96 0.22 Agr+OS 70-80 68.04 0.38 Agr+OS 80-90 119.52 0.66 Agr+OS 90,95 120.96 0.67 Agr+OS 95-100 12,863.16 71.43 Forest area 50-60 700.56 0.98 Forest area 60-70 738.00 1.10 Forest area 70-80 883.08 1.24 Forest area 80-90 1,239.00 1.74 Forest area 90,95 1,142.64 1.60 Forest area 95-100 20,580.12 28.88
Source: Source: Ayazli I. E., F. Batuk, F., Kleinschmit, B. Simulating Landuse Changes Driven By A 3rd Bosphorus Bridge. A special joint symposium of ISPRS Technical Commission IV & AutoCarto in conjunction with ASPRS/CaGIS 2010 Fall Specialty Conference November 15-19, 2010 Orlando, Florida.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 5-11
Ayazlı, et al. (2010) in their study, aimed to find out the effects of Istanbul Bosphorus Bridges on urbanization through processes by classifying satellite images into four time periods and to create a simulation model for the year 2030. Landsat images, DEM, master plans and digitized route and motorways were used to determine transition lands from natural areas to urban areas.
According to change detection analyses between the years 2009 and 2030, if the 3rd Bridge is built on the Bosphorus, the most important natural areas will encounter significant urbanization threats. For them, the transition will result in population growth.
Ayazlı, et al. (2010) projected changes in land use pattern related to urbanization from 2009 to 2030. However, it is important to note that since this study was undertaken, urbanization has increased and several agricultural and forest areas have already been transformed into urban and built-up areas in Istanbul. The city population has been affected because of huge immigration, the city population was around 1 million in 1900s, and it had reached 13 million by 2010.
According to Kubat et al. (2007), the effects of the proposed third bridge display a distinct feature by being twofold; it passes through the central area that is bounded by the two existing bridges and thus increases the pressure in the centre, while continuing through the northern side of the TEM highway in the inner parts. By this way it will possibly result on the expansion of the settlement areas to the northern peripheries, disturbing forests and water basins. However, as pointed out in article, it was intended for the south of the current proposed route in 2007.
The second bridge on the Bosphorus that was constructed on the northern side of the city brought with itself the integration of its zone of influence, and in a short period of time caused those areas to become new settlements. The land values within the influence zone of the TEM highway have also increased proportionally with the increase in integration values. They concluded that the proposed third bridge on the Bosphorus and related transportation proposals will affect the land use pattern in the domain of these routes.
In addition, the TMMOB Istanbul Urban Planners Chamber‟s report (2010) stated that the city will expand to the north because of the Project and thus the protected and ecologically important and sensitive areas will be impacted adversely and irreversibly by the future developments in these areas.
Such stakeholders concerns, and the potential risks they raise about the future land use and development plans, are important and should be addressed seriously by the central and local government authorities. However, further discussion on potential impacts of future development/zoning plans is not included in this report since the ICA does not have any authority for developing future plans for Istanbul Province.
Land use patterns affect community cohesion in various ways. Village and suburban areas are often considered highly livable because they are physically segregated from disruptive activities, traffic, poverty and crime.
However, the automobile journeys they generate tend to reduce community cohesion overall, by increasing vehicle traffic impacts through neighbourhoods, degrading walking conditions, and reducing opportunities for neighborhood interaction.
5.5 Mitigation
In specific relation to the impacts on land use during construction the following mitigation measures will be implemented:
As far as possible, construction compounds would be located in areas that would cause the least disturbance to existing land uses; Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 5-12
All land used for temporary construction works, and outside the area to be developed for the road, would be reinstated; and During construction, where necessary, topsoil should be stripped and stored for re-use to prevent soil structure damage.
The following mitigation measures should be implemented:
A list of all the affected persons by type of losses and extent of damages has been prepared. Land acquisition plans are at an advanced stage. Valuation of the actual figures for compensation for affected parcels of land is being done by the experts. Compensation of the affected persons will follow due process.
The impact on agricultural soils and land will be minimized by limiting the use of agricultural land outside of the works area, measures to reduce the potential for contamination of soil due to contaminated run-off, and the requirement for temporary plant and waste to be stored only on land of low quality soils.
The permanent land take of the scheme has been minimized as much as practicable to ensure no unnecessary loss of land. The majority of scheme is on existing road, with minor realignment and widening in places; however, there are areas of open space that will be affected which is either identified as amenity grassland or plantation woodland.
Once construction is complete, full access would be restored for recreational uses where these opportunities remain.
Land use and urban design studies should be undertaken to address the most appropriate use for lands and to identify the urban design at along the motorway route.
5.6 Summary
The following table summarises the main land use impacts associated with the proposed Project.
Table 5-7 Impact Significance
Impact Description Criteria There will be loss of agricultural land, forest land and private land. The proposed alignment of motorway will mainly pass through forest lands, The main impact of the new motorway will be the fragmentation of forest lands. Major Adverse Impact Approximately 80 % of the route goes through land that is currently used for forest. These will be lost due to the construction of the highway.
Urban sprawl. Some forest and agricultural land may be transformed to urban area. The most important natural area in Istanbul will encounter with Major Adverse Impact urbanization threats.
Longer travel distance, more total vehicle travel, increased vehicle traffic Moderate Adverse Impact
Automobile travel generated tends to reduce community cohesion overall. Minor Adverse Impact
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 5-13
The existing land uses in the immediate vicinity of the Project will change due to direct and/or indirect effects related to the development of the Project. The main objectives of this section of the report were to:
Identify land use patterns in the Project Area; Assess both long term and short term impacts on land use (the comprehensiveness and precision of which has depended on data availability); and Recommend appropriate mitigation measures to minimise the adverse impacts caused by the proposed Project.
The assessment found that there will be loss of agricultural land, forest land and private land as a result of the Project. The existing land use of the project area will be affected by the construction of the bridge, motorway, access roads, and construction camps.
Permanent acquisition of lands will be required for the project. The proposed alignment of the motorway will mainly pass through forest lands; however; there are some settlements close to the route. In addition, the main impact of the new motorway will be the fragmentation of forest lands as approximately 80 % of the route goes through land that is currently forest. It is also anticipated that some forest and agricultural land may be subject to long term land use changes by implementation of the Project. However, the design of the route includes limited number of interconnections and is therefore not considered to open up currently undeveloped areas to landuse change and urbanisation.
Land use patterns affect community cohesion in various ways. Village and suburban areas are often considered highly livable because they are physically segregated from disruptive activities, traffic, poverty and crime. However, the car journeys they generate tend to reduce community cohesion overall, by increasing vehicle traffic impacts through neighbourhoods, degrading walking conditions, and reducing opportunities for neighborhood interaction.
The permanent land take of the scheme has been minimized as much as practicable to ensure no unnecessary loss of land. The majority of scheme is on existing road, with minor realignment and widening in places; however, there are areas of open space that will be affected which is either identified as agricultural land or forestry.
Once construction is complete, full access would be restored for recreational uses where these opportunities remain. Subsequent land use and urban design studies should be undertaken to address the most appropriate use for lands and to identify the urban design along the motorway route.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 5-14
References
Altinbilek, Dogan, M. Bayram and T. Hazal, 1999, “The New Approach to Development Project-Induced Resettlement in Turkey,” Water Resource Development, Vol.15, No.3, p.291-300.
Ayazli I. E., F. Batuk, F., Kleinschmit, B. Simulating Land Use Changes Driven By A 3rd Bosphorus Bridge. A special joint symposium of ISPRS Technical Commission IV & AutoCarto in conjunction with ASPRS/CaGIS 2010 Fall Specialty Conference November 15-19, 2010 Orlando, Florida.
Bayram, Mumtaz, 1995, “Kamulastirma Kanunu Uygulamasi,” in Bayram, M., Hazar, T & Kudat (eds.), Yeniden Yerlesim Planlamasi, Uygulamasi, Izleme ve Rehabilitasyonu. Ankara: Demircioglu Maatbaacilik.
Kubat, A. S. et al, The Effects Of Proposed Bridges on Urban Macroform of Istanbul: A Syntactic Evaluation. Proceedings, 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, Istanbul, 2007.
Musaoglu N, Coskun M, Kocabas V. Land Use Change Analysis of Beykoz-Istanbul by Means of Satellite Images and GIS. Water Science & Technology; 2005, Vol. 51 Issue 11.
UCTEA Chamber of Urban Planners, 2010, The 3rd Bridge Project Evaluation Report. Alpkokın, P. and Hayashı, Y. Istanbul Transportation Master Plan Study Towards More Integrated Transportation and More Sustainable City. Proceedings Of The Eastern Asia Society For Transportation Studies, Vol.4, October, 2003
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-1
6.0 AIR QUALITY
6.1 Introduction
This chapter of the ESIA presents the findings of the assessment of impacts of the Project on air quality as a result of the construction activities and operation of the proposed route due to the traffic movements on the road network. Development of the North Marmara Motorway including the 3rd Bosphorus Bridge will also cause changes in the flows of traffic on other roads connecting to the approach roads and elsewhere around the city, with increases in flows on some and decreases on others. These changes will lead to increases and decreases in air pollution around these roads.
The principal pollutants from road traffic are:
NOX– Nitrogen oxides including NO2 - nitrogen dioxide and NO –nitric oxide;
PM10 – fine particulate matter including soot/black carbon and particles from abrasion of brakes, wheel rubber and the road surface;
CO – Carbon monoxide;
HC – unburned hydrocarbons generated through combustion processes and fugitive fuel evaporation, including benzene, a known carcinogen;
CO2 - Carbon dioxide.
The first four are of concern because they may cause adverse effects on human health, crops and natural ecosystems in the local environment around roads.
Carbon dioxide is important because it is a greenhouse gas and increasing emissions can contribute to climate change.
The assessment of impacts on local air quality from the Project focuses on NO2 and PM10, as the other pollutants do not cause a significant impact on air quality, and therefore it is likely that levels of SO2, CO and unburned HCs generated by the project will also be acceptable. Where significant impacts are identified for NO2 and PM10, mitigation measures for these pollutants will also address impacts from other traffic emissions if they arise.
Emissions of these pollutants and of CO2 are also considered at a city-wide level as contributors to regional air pollution and climate change. Sulfur dioxide (SO2) and lead used to be significant components of traffic emissions but are generally not a problem today since SO2 and lead emissions from modern traffic are very low. They are not therefore considered here. In addition to effects of traffic on air quality during operation of the Project, the assessment also considers short term effects during construction. Adverse effects can be caused by emissions from construction vehicles carrying materials and spoil to and from the site and construction equipment (earthmovers, etc.), but also from activities generating dust (earthmoving, storage of dusty materials, vehicles moving over dusty surfaces).
As well as affecting health, dust can lead to unsightly and potentially harmful deposits on property, vegetation, etc.
The remainder of this chapter is structured as follows:
Section 6.2 outlines the key policy and guidelines;
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-2
Section 6.3 describes existing air quality in Istanbul; Baseline air quality conditions were established using existing data provided on the Air Quality in Turkey website (monitoring data), in local authority Air Quality Review and Assessment Reports, and the results of an additional monitoring survey undertaken as part of this assessment.
Section 6.4 describes the methodology followed within this assessment; the assessment has been undertaken for a base year 2014 for construction for Do-Minimum (controlled emissions) and Do- Something (uncontrolled emissions). For the operational scheme, traffic flow data for the future year (2023) were chosen for modeling purpose.
Section 6.5 presents the results of air dispersion modeling for the construction phase and for the future traffic situation; the results of the assessment have been evaluated with reference to the Turkish ambient air quality standards and IFC/WB guideline concentrations. The construction studies related pollutant considered dust and traffic-related air pollutants including nitrogen oxides and particulate matter.
Section 6.6 recommends and discusses mitigation; and
Section 6.7 concludes the assessment.
The appendices are given at Appendix-6 of the ESIA report.
6.2 Policy Context/Framework
6.2.1 Overview of Recent Air Quality Legislation and Policy
Air pollution is a significant problem in Turkey as a result of the rapid increase of population, energy consumption from industry and households, and vehicle emissions. Pollution concentrations are highest in major urban areas (Istanbul, Ankara) and cities where industry has continued to expand. In rural areas air quality is typically good.
An important impetus to strengthen air management policy in Turkey came when Turkey adopted its European Union (EU) Integrated Environmental Strategy which called for the full harmonization of the Turkish legal framework with the EU Air Quality Framework Directive (and its four sister Directives), the EU Fuel Quality Directive, and other Directives related to climate change and the availability of consumer information on fuel economy and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from new vehicles. The local legislation related to emissions and air quality is listed below:
Air Quality Assessment and Management Regulation, Official Gazette No. 26898 dated June 6, 2008; Industrial Air Pollution Control Regulation (IAPCR), Official Gazette No. 27277 dated July 3, 2009; Exhaust Gases Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 27190 dated April 4, 2009; Regulation on Control of Air Pollution Caused by Heating Installations, Official Gazette No. 25699 dated January 13, 2005; Regulation on Reduction in Ozone Depleting Substances, Official Gazette No. 27052 dated November 12, 2008;
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-3
6.2.2 Pollutants of Concern
6.2.2.1 Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
NO2 and nitric oxide (NO) are both oxides of nitrogen, and are collectively referred to as NOX. All combustion processes produce NOX emissions, predominantly in the form of NO, which then undergoes conversion in the atmosphere to NO2, mainly as a result of its reaction with ozone (O3). It is NO2 that has been most strongly associated with adverse effects upon human health. Nitrogen dioxide can irritate the lungs and lower resistance to respiratory infections such as influenza. Continued or frequent exposure to concentrations, that are typically much higher than those normally found in the ambient air, may cause increased incidence of acute respiratory illness in children.
The main products of the combustion of motor fuels are carbon dioxide and water, but inefficiencies and high temperatures inherent in engine operation encourage the production of many other pollutants of varying effects. NOX is the one of major pollutants of significance to roadside air quality in vehicle emissions.
The main goal of almost all the major national and international air quality standards and guidelines produced over the last two decades has been to protect human health. Some countries have also produced guidelines and standards for nitrogen oxides to protect vegetation and sensitive ecosystems, such as wetlands. Table 6.1 presents Turkish, EU, USEPA, and IFC/WB and WHO reference standards and guidelines for ambient levels of nitrogen dioxide.
3 Table 6-1 Ambient NO2 Guidelines (µg/m )
Standard or guideline Annual Average 24-hour average 1-hour average
Turkish IAPCR 60 300 - Turkish RAMAQ 40 2001 2001 2 EU limit values (2008) 40 - 200 USEPA standards (1992) 100 - - IFC/WB guidelines (2007) 40 - 200 WHO guidelines for Europe (2000) 40 - 200 (1) Turkish RAMAQ target limit value for 2024 (2) Not to be exceed 18 times in a year
6.2.2.2 Sulfur Dioxides (SO2)
The emission rate of SO2 is directly linked to the sulfur content of fuel. Diesel engines produce more SO2 than do gasoline engines. In conjunction with NOX, SO2 is involved in the formation of acids in the atmosphere.
The main goal of almost all the major national and international standards and guidelines produced over the last two decades has been to protect human health. Early research appeared to indicate a threshold or ―no- effects‖ level below which health impacts were negligible for even the most vulnerable groups, such as asthmatics and smokers. Standards were then set below this level to provide a margin of safety. Table 6.2 presents Turkish, EU, USEPA, and IFC/WB and WHO reference standards and guidelines for ambient levels of sulfur dioxide.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-4
3 Table 6-2 Ambient SO2 Guidelines (µg/m )
Standard or guideline Annual Average 24-hour average 1-hour average
Turkish IAPCR 60 (target value) 250 (till 31.12.2013) 900 (till 31.12.2014) 125 (Not to exceeded three 350 (as of 1.1.2019 - not Turkish RAMAQ 20 (as of 1.1.2014) times in a year, as of to be exceeded 24 times a 1.1.2019) year) 350 (not to be exceeded 125 (not to be exceeded EU Limit values (2008) - more than 24 times a more than 3 times a year) year) 197 (not to be exceeded 4 times a year) USEPA Standards (1992) 80 367 1310 (avg. of 3 hours, not to be exceeded once per year) 500 (avg. Period is 10 IFC/WB Guidelines (2007) - 125 minutes) 500 (avg. period is 10 WHO Guidelines for Europe (2000) 50 125 minutes)
6.2.2.3 Particular Matter (PM)
Airborne particulate matter, which includes dust, dirt, soot, smoke, and liquid droplets emitted into the air, is small enough to be suspended in the atmosphere. Airborne particulates may be a complex mixture of organic and inorganic substances. They can be characterized by their physical attributes, which influence their transport and deposition, and their chemical composition, which influences their effect on health. The physical attributes of airborne particulates include mass concentration and size distribution.
Ambient levels of mass concentration are measured in micrograms per cubic metre (µg/m3); size attributes are usually measured in aerodynamic diameter. Particulate matter (PM) exceeding 2.5 microns (µm) in aerodynamic diameter is generally defined as coarse particles, while particles smaller than 2.5 microns (PM2.5) are called fine particles. Particles interact with various substances in the air to form organic or inorganic chemical compounds.
The most common combinations of fine particles are those with sulfates. The smaller particles contain the secondarily formed aerosols, combustion particles, and recondensed organic and metal vapors. The carbonaceous component of fine particles—products of incomplete combustion—contains both elemental carbon (graphite and soot) and non-volatile organic carbon (hydrocarbons emitted in combustion ex-Airborne Particulate Matter exhaust, and secondary organic compounds formed by photochemistry). These species may be the most abundant fine particles after sulfates. Additionally, atmospheric reactions of nitrogen oxides produce nitric acid vapor (HNO3) that may accumulate as nitrate particles in both fine and coarse forms. The most common combination of coarse particles consists of oxides of silicon, aluminum, calcium, and iron.
6.2.2.4 Construction Dust
Dust is defined as all particulate matter up to 75 µm in diameter and comprising both suspended and deposited dust, whereas PM10 is a mass fraction of airborne particles of diameter 10 µm or less. Samples taken from construction sites showed that about 35% of particulate matter was in the PM10 fraction (Watson and Chow, 2000). The health impacts associated with dust include eye, nose and throat irritation in addition to the nuisance caused by deposition on cars, windows and property. Dust and PM10 emissions arise from a number of sources, so both construction activities and emissions from vehicles associated with the construction site need to be considered.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-5
Table 6.3 presents Turkish, EU, USEPA, and IFC/WB and WHO reference standards and guidelines for ambient PM10 levels.
3 Table 6-3 Ambient PM10 Guidelines (µg/m )
Standard or guideline Annual Average 24 hour average Turkish IAPCR 60 (till 31.12.2013) 100 (till 31.12.2013) 50 (as of 1.1.2019-not to be exceeded Turkish RAMAQ 40 (as of 1.1.2019) more than 35 times a year) 50 (not to be exceeded more than 35 EU Limit values (2008) 40 times a year) 150 (not to be exceeded once per year USEPA Standards (1992) - averaged over 3 years) IFC/WB Guidelines (2007) 20 50 WHO Guidelines for Europe (2000) - -
For deposition of dust, the limit value has been identified only at Turkish IAPCR. For short term value (monthly limit value) of total deposition is 390 mg/m2/month and for long term limit value (annual limit value), it should be below 210 mg/m2/day.
6.3 Existing Air Quality
6.3.1 Emissions of Current Local Air Quality (Background)
Most of the project area is almost free from high density residential areas and industrial pollution sources. According to the results of a study performed in the scope of the LIFE Third Countries Programme, ―Development of a GIS Based Decision Support System for Urban Air Quality Management in the City of İstanbul Project‖ which was carried out for the period of February 1, 2007 and January 31, 2009, the emissions are very low at the project area.
In the scope of this study, a detailed emission inventory was prepared based on a number of pollution sources. In addition, ambient air quality maps were prepared by using air quality dispersion models and subsequent corrective actions were determined to improve the ambient air quality in the whole İstanbul area covering also the area for the proposed Northern Marmara Motorway including the Third Bridge.
The study included three different emission sources; industrial, vehicular and residential sources which are classified as point, line and area sources, respectively. Particulate matter (PM10), sulfur oxides (SOX), nitrogen oxides (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO) and non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs) parameters were included in the study. The study did not include the contribution from natural sources, fugitive emissions from industrial facilities, on road fugitive and non-road vehicular emissions.
Since the proposed Northern Marmara Motorway including the Third Bridge is located inside the study area, the finding and results of the LIFE program can be used to determine emissions and air quality baseline in the Project area.
Emission inventory results are tabulated in Table 6.4. As seen in the table, annual NOX, NMVOCs and CO emissions from traffic are estimated at 138,000 tons, 38,500 tons and 395,224 tons, respectively. Traffic is the most polluting source for NOX, NMVOC and CO emissions. Thus, about 90% of NOX emissions in Istanbul originate from vehicular sources. About 68% of the total NMVOCs and CO emissions are also due to vehicular sources. Thus, vehicular emissions are quite significant in the Istanbul metropolitan area.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-6
Table 6-4 Total Emissions in the Study Area
Emissions (ton/year)
PM10 SO2 NOx NMVOC CO Industry 7,630 58,468 9,394 117 1,714 Residential Heating 13,631 10,983 7,014 18,351 123,510 Traffic 5,200 1,016 138,000 38,500 270,000 Total 26,461 70,467 154,408 56,968 395,224 Source: Official Website of İstanbul Metropolitan Municipality (http://www.ibb.gov.tr/sites/airqualistanbul/Documents/emission.htm)
The distribution of emissions for PM10 and NOX are shown on the maps in Figures 6-1 to 6-2. As seen in the maps, the highest emissions were situated at the centre of Istanbul where the traffic congestion is the highest.
The emissions were significantly lower at areas where the proposed Project will be constructed. This result is expected since there is either no traffic or very little traffic at the proposed Project area at present. Table 6-5 lists annual emissions amounts in the proposed Project area.
Table 6-5 Estimated Vehicular Emissions in the Proposed Project Area
Pollutant Emissions (tons/year)
PM10 0-5 SO2 0-1 NOX 0-50 VOCs 0-10 CO 0-50
Figure 6-1 Annual PM10 Emissions Due to Traffic Source: Official Website of İstanbul Metropolitan Municipality (http://www.ibb.gov.tr/sites/airqualistanbul/Documents/emission.htm)
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-7
Figure 6-2 Annual NOX Emissions Due to Traffic Source: Official Website of İstanbul Metropolitan Municipality (http://www.ibb.gov.tr/sites/airqualistanbul/Documents/emission.htm)
6.3.2 Ambient Air Quality (Background)
The İstanbul Metropolitan Municipality monitors ambient air quality continuously via air quality monitoring stations. There are ten air quality monitoring stations operated by the İstanbul Metropolitan Municipality. The closest air quality monitoring stations to the proposed Project areas and monitored pollutants are given in Table 6-6. Major pollutants in the atmosphere due to vehicular emissions are NOX, VOC, CO and PM10. Ozone (O3) also forms in the atmosphere with photochemical reactions of NOX and VOC caused by sunlight. Thus, only NOX, PM10, CO and O3 concentrations gathered from the monitoring stations and the related local limits are given in Table 6-7. Ambient VOC concentrations are not monitored at these stations.
The 24-hr pollutant concentrations recorded between November 26, 2011 and November 26, 2012 are used to calculate annual averages to determine ambient air quality of İstanbul Province.
Table 6-6 Closest Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Stations to the Proposed Project and Monitored Parameters
Monitoring Station Monitored Parameters
Beşiktaş SO2, PM10, CO, NOx Yenibosna SO2, PM10, CO Esenler SO2, PM10, CO, NOx Kadıköy SO2, PM10, CO, NOx, O3 Sarıyer SO2, PM10 Ümraniye SO2, PM10, NOx Üsküdar SO2, PM10, CO, Inversion Source: Official Website of Air Quality Monitoring Stations (www.havaizleme.gov.tr),
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-8
Table 6-7 Ambient Air Quality in Istanbul
Long Term Measurement Result Long Term Limit (Annual) 3 (1) 3 (µg/m ) Monitoring (µg/m ) Station CO NO2 PM10 O3 CO NO2 PM10 O3
Beşiktaş 655 90 53 - Esenler 775 77 76 -
Kadıköy 866 54 51 26 (2) Sarıyer - - 38 - 10,000 68 78 120 Ümraniye - 45 51 - Üsküdar 725 - 38 - Yenibosna 802 - 53 - (1) According to Turkish legislation, ambient air quality limits are defined in the Regulation on Assessment and Management of Air Quality (RAMAQ) which was published on June 6, 2008. This Regulation defines ambient air quality limits for two periods. The first period is transitional period which covers the period between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2013, whereas the limit values after transitional period is valid after January 1, 2014. In both periods, limits decrease gradually. Limits defined for 2012 are given in this table. (2) In accordance with RAMAQ, currently, no limit value is defined for ozone. The limit value for ozone will be 120 µg/m3, starting from 2022. Source: Official Website of Air Quality Monitoring Stations (www.havaizleme.gov.tr),
As seen in Table 6-7, measurement results for PM10 were in-compliance with the current air quality limits for all monitoring stations. On the other site, NO2 has not been monitored at the three of seven monitoring stations. In addition, NO2 measurement results at the Beşiktaş and Esenler monitoring stations were not in compliance with the current NO2 air quality limits.
In addition, O3 concentrations have been monitored only at Kadıköy monitoring station. According to the one- 3 year monitoring data, annual O3 concentration is 26 µg/m . Currently, there is no limit value defined for O3 in accordance with the local legislation, but it will be set to 120 µg/m3 by 2022.
The closest ambient air quality stations to the proposed Project area are the Sarıyer and Ümraniye monitoring stations. The Sarıyer station can represent less populated area of the proposed Project site and the Ümraniye station can represent more populated area. According to the ambient air quality monitoring stations, the project area can be considered as relatively less polluted near Sections 1 and 4 and relatively clean in Sections 2 and 3.
Ambient Air Quality (AAQ) Modeling (Background)
As mentioned previously, an air quality modeling study was performed in the scope of the LIFE Third Countries Programme. The dispersion of vehicular emissions and resulting ambient air quality concentrations of five pollutants (PM10, SO2, NOX, NMVOCs and CO) were determined in the scope of this study. Dispersion maps for PM10, SO2 and NOX pollutants resulting from the traffic load are available and shown in Figure 6-3 and Figure 6-5.
According to the modeling results, the ambient air quality in the proposed Project area ranges from <1 to 3 3 3 3 g/m for PM10, 6 to 10 g/m for SO2 and <5 to 10 g/m for NOx. These modeling results are consistent with the ambient monitoring results obtained at the project site with passive sampling tubes. Thus, air quality in the proposed project area is clean in terms of PM10, SO2 and NOx due to lack of emission sources at present.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-9
Figure 6-3 PM10 Concentrations according to Modeling Study Source: Official Website of İstanbul Metropolitan Municipality (http://www.ibb.gov.tr/sites/airqualistanbul/Documents/modeling.htm)
Figure 6-4 NOx Concentrations according to Modeling Study Source: Official Website of İstanbul Metropolitan Municipality (http://www.ibb.gov.tr/sites/airqualistanbul/Documents/modeling.htm)
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-10
Figure 6-5 SO2 Concentrations according to Modeling Study Source: Official Website of İstanbul Metropolitan Municipality (http://www.ibb.gov.tr/sites/airqualistanbul/Documents/modeling.htm)
6.3.3 Baseline Air Quality Monitoring Study
In order to determine the existing ambient air pollutant concentration around the Project site, ambient monitoring studies were conducted for PM10, SO2, NO2 and dust deposition during the preparation of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) report. However, because most of the proposed roadway is located away from residential areas and the proposed roadway will be constructed in a forest area, there will be negligible amounts of CO emissions from the proposed roadway during the construction phase, and therefore CO monitoring was not performed.
The SO2 and NO2 sampling technique is based on the property of molecular diffusion of gases (EN13528- 1:2002). The gas molecules diffuse into the sampler where they are quantitatively collected on an impregnated filter or an absorbent material. Thus they achieve a time-integrated (or average) concentration. No electricity, pumps or other supporting equipment are needed.
Inorganic gases are absorbed by chemical reaction on a filter, impregnated with a solution specific to each pollutant measured. The reaction product, which is washed out of the filter prior to analysis, is specific to the particular gas in question. When species do not react sufficiently fast with other chemicals (e.g., organics) they are instead trapped on an absorbent material. Such gases are then desorbed from the adsorbent during analysis.
Standard gravimetric method (TS EN 12341:2002) has been used for PM10 monitoring. Dust deposition monitoring has been performed based on gravimetric method (TS 2341).
The monitoring study consisted of determining background SO2 and NO2 concentrations at six locations (3 Europe, 3 Asia) for 20 days in 10 days internal between April 24, 2013 to May 3, 2013 and May 3, 2013 to May 13, 2013 using a passive sampling method and PM10 concentrations at 6 locations. The coordinates of the passive sampling, dust deposition locations and also PM10 monitoring location are given in Table 6-8
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-11
below. In addition, the map showing the passive samplings, PM10 and dust deposition monitoring locations is given in Figure 6-6.
Table 6-8 Passive Sampling (SO2 and NO2), Dust Deposition and PM10 Monitoring Locations
Parameters Location Name Easting Northing S2S2 (Europe) 654816.52 m E 4567664.23 m N S1S3 (Europe) 655016.59 m E 4557876.01 m N SO NO , Dust 2, X S2S5 (Europe) 676896.87 m E 4566285.61 m N Deposition and S4S3 (Asia) 689462.91 m E 4555809.30 m N PM 10 S3S1 (Asia) 680484.01 m E 4565020.77 m N S5S1 (Asia) 691569.88 m E 4546239.63 m N
Figure 6-6 Passive Sampling (SO2 and NO2), Dust Deposition and PM10 Monitoring Locations
The assessment of the passive sampling studies performed to determine background SO2 and NO2 concentrations and also PM10 concentration monitoring are given in the following sections. In addition to the detailed assessment of the monitored pollutant concentrations, the comparison with the values given in relevant Turkish regulation and the IFC/WB Guidelines are also included.
Sulfur Dioxide
Sulfur dioxide (SO2) and sulfur trioxide (SO3) are the types of sulfur oxides that are commonly present in the atmosphere. SO2 is mainly discharged to atmosphere via exhaust gases of reciprocating engines and flue gases formed from combustion of fossil fuels like oil and coal. SO2 in the atmosphere goes into photochemical or catalytic reaction and is partially converted to SO3 or H2SO4.
The results of the SO2 passive sampling studies performed between 24 April, 2013 and 13 May, 2013 are given in Table 6-9. As it can be seen in the table, SO2 concentrations are quite low except at location S3S1 (near to Anadolu Feneri) and do not show high variations among the other monitoring locations.
Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-12
Passive sampling‘s analyses were performed by Gradko Environmental International Ltd.; the laboratory analysis report for nitrogen oxide and sulphur dioxide is given in Appendix 6-1.
Table 6-9 Passive Sampling Results – Average SO2 Concentration
SO Concentration (µg/m3) Sample Name 2 24/4/2013-3/5/2013 Results 3/5/2013-13/5/2013 Results Average S2S2 (Europe) 8.63 The monitoring results show that the existing SO2 background concentration in the region is in compliance with the Turkish RAMAQ limit values. In addition, SO2 background concentrations are well below the limit values and the target limit values given in the Turkish RAMAQ. Particulate Matter (PM10) In terms of potential to harm human health, PM is one of the most important pollutants as it penetrates into sensitive regions of the respiratory system, and can cause or aggravate cardiovascular and lung diseases. PM is emitted from many sources and can comprise a complex mixture of both primary and secondary PM. Primary PM is the fraction of PM that is emitted directly into the atmosphere, whereas secondary PM forms in the atmosphere following the release of precursor gases (mainly SO2, NOX, NH3 and some volatile organic compounds (VOCs)). The background PM10 concentration levels were determined by a 24 hr period monitoring study performed at each station between April 25, 2013 and May 1, 2013. The results of the monitoring study are given in Table 6-11. PM10 concentrations do not show high variations between sampling periods. The background monitoring results show that PM10 concentration in the region is below the limit values and in compliance with the Turkish RAMAQ and IAPRC; however, the measured values are above the IFC/WB guidelines. Dust deposition sampling was performed at the background sampling locations for 2 consecutive 10 days sampling intervals between 24 May 2013- 3 May 2013 and 3 May 2013-13 May 2013. The monitoring results are given in Table 6-10. The measured dust deposition values are below the short term (monthly) and long term (annual) limit values stated in Turkish IAPCR. Table 6-10 PM10 and Dust Deposition Monitoring Results 3 2 Sampling Locations PM10 Concentration (µg/m ) Dust Deposition (mg/m /day) 24/4/2013- 3/5/2013 3/5/2013- 13/5/2013 S2S2 (Europe) 33 45 59 S1S3 (Europe) 30 52 60 S2S5 (Europe) 25 57* 79.5 S4S3 (Asia) 35 48 83 S3S1 (Asia) 36* 50 89* S5S1 (Asia) 34 53 68 *The highest values Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-13 Nitrogen Oxides Nitrogen oxides are emitted from fuel combustion, such as from power plants and other industrial facilities. NOX contributes to acidification and eutrophication of waters and soils, and can lead to the formation of particulate matter and ground-level ozone. Of the chemical species that comprise NOX, it is NO2 that causes adverse effects on health as high concentrations can cause airway inflammation and reduced lung function. The results of the NO2 passive sampling studies performed between April 24, 2013 and May 13, 2013 are given in Table 6-11. As it can be seen in the table, NO2 concentrations are quite low at the project locations. 3 The mean NO2 concentrations are around 16 µg/m , and do not show high variations among the other monitoring locations. The background NO2 concentrations determined with the performed passive sampling studies are below the limit values given in the Turkish RAMAQ. Table 6-11 Passive Sampling Results – Average NO2 Monitoring Results NO Concentration (µg/m3) Sample Name 2 24/4/2013-3/5/2013 Results 3/5/2013-13/5/2013 Results Average S2S2 (Europe) 29.09 8.48 18.79 S1S3 (Europe) 33.69* 10.78 22.24 S2S5 (Europe) 20.61 10.67 15.64 S4S3 (Asia) -* 8.48 8.48 S3S1 (Asia) 8.42 5.78 7.10 S5S1 (Asia) 32.12 18.08* 25.10* *The highest values **The analysis could not be performed because of the tube is damaged 6.4 Methodology This Section sets out the methods followed to assess the air quality effects from the Project. In order to assess the impacts of the Project both at construction and operation phases on local air quality around roads, the steps outlined in Section 6.4.1 to 6.4.5 were followed. The approach to assessment of impacts on regional air quality is described in Section 6.5. 6.4.1 Establishing the Baseline Due to the lack of air quality monitoring undertaken by İstanbul Metropolitan Municipality and the Ministry of Environment and Urbanization in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development site, additional PM10, dust deposition and SO2, NO2 diffusion tube monitoring was undertaken between 24 April 2013 and 13 May 2012 at locations near the project route. Details of the diffusion tube sites are given in Section 6.3.3, the locations of which are shown on a plan in Figure 6-6. Existing information on background air quality was collected from air monitoring stations operated by Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality situated near the project area, the results of the air quality modeling study that was performed in the scope of the LIFE Third Countries Programme. In addition, new measurements were also taken for the assessment. Together these data were used to establish the baseline for predicting impacts of the Project. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-14 6.4.2 Calculating Emissions 6.4.2.1 Air Pollutant Emissions during Construction Activities The main sources of air emissions from construction works on the Project will be: Dust emitted from excavation, earth moving, loading, handling and transportation of excavated material; Emissions of combustion gases from construction machinery and the vehicles. Construction vehicles are generally fueled with diesel, and thus, SO2, PM, NOX, VOC and CO emissions are expected to occur along the route of the motorway and access road construction. In addition to these mobile source emissions, there will be also stationary emissions from the activities in the main and secondary camp sites, and at the concrete and asphalt plants. These emissions will be mostly due to heating and power generations in diesel generators. For heating, it is most likely that fuel-oil will be used at the camps. Thus, SO2, PM, NOX, VOC and CO emissions are expected to occur at camp sites. At the asphalt plants and concrete sites, there will be VOC, SO2 and PM emissions. The locations of the camp sites, construction facilities, concrete and asphalt plants and crushing units are shown in Figure 6-7. In addition, quantities of material to be loaded and unloaded, number and type of construction equipment and machinery are listed in Table 6-2.1 for the project in Appendix 6-2. Figure 6-7 Locations of the camp sites, construction facilities, concrete and asphalt plants and crushing units Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-15 Construction will be take place in three stages along the route as described above. The duration of construction in each section is expected to be 30 months with works being carried out in parallel in several sections in order to limit the overall construction time. During the construction phase of the proposed motorway, 3rd Bosphorus Bridge and connected roads, top soil removal, ground leveling and foundation excavation works will be carried out at the project sites. The amount of excavated material resulting from the site leveling works will be 10.000.000,00 m3 for Section 1, 15.000.000,00 m3 for Section 2 and 14.000.000,00 m3 for Section 3 and 10.000.000,00 m3 for Section 4. Thus, the total amount of excavated material will be approximately 49.000.000,00 m3. During construction, topsoil will be separated from sub-soil. Topsoil will be stored on an area having a slope not more than 5% and the quality of top soil will be protected. At the end of the construction, the topsoil will be used for landscaping. Dust Emission Dust emissions will be caused mainly by excavation, loading, transportation and unloading works. Uncontrolled and controlled dust emission factors stated in Turkish IAPCR Annex-1 (given in Table 6-12) were used in determining dust emission from each construction activity mentioned above. Table 6-12 Uncontrolled and Controlled Dust Emission Factors Dust Emission Factors (kg/ton) Sources Uncontrolled Controlled Excavation 0.025 0.0125 Loading 0.010 0.005 Transportation (total distance) 0.7 0.35 Unloading 0.010 0.005 Source: Industrial Air Pollution Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 27277 dated July 3, 2009 and revised in Official Gazette No. 27537 dated March 30, 2010 Dust emissions calculation for the total excavation works during both site leveling and foundation excavation works are presented in Table 6-2.1 for the controlled case and Table 6-2.2 for the uncontolled case in Appendix 6-3. In the dust modeling studies, it has been assumed that, 35% of particulate matter will be in the PM10 fraction, and for the rest of the particles the mean diameter will be 30µm. Exhaust emissions Construction machinery and vehicles use mainly diesel engines that can lead to emissions of nitrogen oxides and particulates (see Section 6.1). Most site equipment (bulldozers, diggers, etc) can be considered as similar to medium or heavy duty trucks. Vehicles are used for the transport of materials and equipment on and off site as well as carriage of personnel to and from site using minibuses and cars. Offsite transport will include spoil, concrete, road aggregates, asphalt, and prefabricated concrete tunnel segments. Since the project construction phase duration will be 2 years long, consisting of different construction activities, air quality impact generated from these activities will not be static. Although the general terms of the construction of phases are similar, their application locations will follow each other. For these reasons air quality model were calculated for the whole project route including the 4 construction camp area locations (Odayeri, Third Bridge, Garipçe and Hüseyinli Camp Areas). In order to evaluate the air quality impact of construction activities it is necessary to define the various activities to be undertaken and the equipment to be used. The construction schedule and progress chart are presented in Table 6-13. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-16 Table 6-13 The construction schedule and progress chart Month 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 Earth Works Engineering Works (Tunnel &Viaduct) Super Structures Works Machines and equipment quantities that will be used for different construction activities at different locations defined on Table 6-14. Table 6-14 Machines and equipment quantities that will be used for different construction activities for all project sections Construction Activity Machines & Equipment Excavator Dozer Loader Cylinder Earth Works Greyder Sprinkler Low bed-Trailer Truck Asphalt plant Mechanical Plant Finisher Cylinder Cylinder (Iron bandaged) Wobble wheel roller Superstructure Works Greyder Sprinkler Generator Grooving machine Compressor Motor sweeper Distributer Loader - CAT 950 Trans mixer Concrete Pump Engineering Works Generator Water Pump Launching Girder Mobile crane Excavator Jumbo Loader Tunnel & Viaduct Shot Crete Works JCB Fan Truck Compressor Emission factors for construction equipment exhaust were taken from the South Coast Air Quality Management District‘s (SCAQMD) California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Handbook (1993). These factors are in units of grams of each pollutant emitted per brake-horsepower-hour (bhp-hr) of work produced by the equipment‘s engine. These emission factors were converted to units of kg per hour by multiplying them by the equipment engine horsepower rating and the load factor for the type of equipment, which is the Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-17 average percentage of the rated output at which the engine typically operates. Average horsepower ratings and load factors for the types of equipment anticipated to be used during project construction, which were also taken from the SCAQMD‘s CEQA Handbook, are listed in Table 6-3.1 for Section 1 and 2 Table 6-3.2 for Section 3 and 4 in Appendix 6-4 along with the emission factors in both gr/hp-hr and in kg/hr. Calculated total hourly emissions from the construction equipment at different phases of the construction activities are given in Table 6-15. According to the Turkish IAPCR (2009), where if a mass flow rate of emissions from area sources below parameter specific limit values, there is no need to perform a modeling study for those pollutants. However, the emission amount caused by construction activities exceeds the limit value given in Table 6-16 and PM was modeled during construction phase of the project. Table 6-15 Emissions caused by vehicle and equipment during the contruction activities at different sections of the proposed route Emissions caused by vehicle & equipment during the construction phase (kg/hr) Earth Works Superstructure Works Engineering Works Tunnel Parameters Limit Section Section Section Section Section Section Section Section Value* 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 & 2 3 & 4 1 & 2 3 & 4 NOX 3.59 3.01 0.55 0.56 0.70 0.96 0.45 0.45 4 HC 1.70 1.43 0.26 0.27 0.33 0.46 0.21 0.21 3 CO 44.03 37.11 6.42 6.40 8.57 11.79 5.49 5.49 50 SO2 1.70 1.43 0.34 0.34 0.33 0.46 0.21 0.21 6 *Source: Industrial Air Pollution Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 27277 dated July 3, 2009 and revised in Official Gazette No. 27537 dated March 30, 2010 Table 6-16 The Amount of emissions caused by contruction activities at different sections of the proposed route The Emission Amount caused by Construction Activities Limit Project (kg/hr) Sources Value** Section (kg/hr) Uncontrolled Total Controlled Total Excavation 25,52 12,76 Loading 10,21 5,10 Section 1 183,33* 91,67* Transportation 137,40 68,70 Unloading 10,21 5,10 Excavation 39,04 19,52 Loading 15,62 7,81 Section 2 140,25* 140,25* Transportation 210,22 105,11 Unloading 15,62 7,81 1 Excavation 34,74 17,37 Loading 13,90 6,95 Section 3 249,59* 124,79* Transportation 187,05 93,53 Unloading 13,90 6,95 Excavation 25,98 12,99 Loading 10,39 5,20 Section 4 186,69* 93,34* Transportation 137,91 69,96 Unloading 10,39 5,20 *Mass flow rate limit values stated in Turkish IAPCR to be considered for modeling studies (kg/hr) **Source: Industrial Air Pollution Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 27277 dated July 3, 2009 and revised in Official Gazette No. 27537 dated March 30, 2010 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-18 6.4.2.2 Air Pollutant Emissions during the Operational Phase Information on traffic flows was obtained from the Report named ―Northern Marmara Motorway including 3rd Bosphorus Crossing, Traffic and Revenue Forecasts‖ prepared by Mott MacDonald, (December 2012). Based on the Traffic Report, predicted traffic flows at peak hours (08:00-09:00 and 17:00-18:00) and forecasted 2023 annual hourly average road traffic load were used in determining emissions due to traffic flow at the year 2023. The forecasts for the future took into account the effect on traffic of other changes in the transport system in Istanbul which are either underway or committed, for example the Marmaray Metro Tunnel and privatization of the bridges, and also improvements in the emissions characteristics of the vehicle fleet over time as fuels and engine technology improve. Further details of these calculations are provided below. The quantity of pollutant emissions by vehicles depends on a variety of factors, such as type and power of engine, date of construction, type and composition of fuel, efficiency of combustion (e.g. age, wear), presence of emission control equipment (i.e. catalyser), actual speed of the vehicle, traffic flow (number of vehicles per hour or day), composition of vehicle types (e.g. abundance of trucks, average age and actual performance of engine types), traffic flow characteristics on a specific road section (average speed, free flow, or congested traffic), road characteristics (i.e. incline). Factors taken into consideration for the ESIA are as follows: Overall traffic data for the year 2023 were taken from the traffic study undertaken by Mott MacDonald (average number of vehicles per hour or day and peak and inter-peak hourly flows) The vehicle fleet on the subject roads was assumed to comprise 16% heavy vehicles (of more than 3.5 tons) at Section 1 and 2 and 26% at Section 3 and 4 based on Mott MacDonald Report. Air emissions in grams per vehicle per km for today and 2023 were taken from the EMEP/EEA Air Pollutant Emission Inventory Guidebook (1), Part B: Sectoral Guidance, Chapter 1.A.3.b on Road Transport published by the European Environment Agency (EMEP/EEA 2009). This source accounts for the effect of changes in fuels and engine technology on emission levels in future years. For estimating the age composition of the vehicle fleet in Istanbul, it was assumed that vehicles on average are 5 years older than in Western European countries Driving speed on the major roads was set to 90 km/h for passenger cars and trucks (this is a conservative approach for trucks which at some sections might drive 10-20 km/h slower) Slope or incline of the roads up to about 2% have not been taken into consideration given an only small effect on emissions in this case (this is important only for the tunnel). These assumptions are generally considered to lead to over-prediction of traffic emissions and therefore to provide a conservative assessment of the impact of the Project. The calculated total hourly traffic emissions during operation phase is given in Table 6-4.1and relevant data and calculation spreadsheets are given in Appendix 6-5. According to the Turkish IAPCR (2009), if a mass flow rate of emissions from area sources below parameter specific limit values, there is no need to perform a modeling study for those pollutants. Since the calculated mass flow rate of PM10 and NO2 only exceeds the limit value as given in Table 6-17, only PM10 and NO2 were modeled during the construction phase of the project. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-19 Table 6-17 Emissions caused by traffic activities during operation phase at different sections of the proposed route Emissions (kg/hr) Limit Value* Parameter (kg/hr) Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 NOX 32.42 42.37 45.37 30.52 4 PM10 1.83 1.83 1.96 1.68 1 HC 2.89 2.68 2.75 2.88 3 *Source: Industrial Air Pollution Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 27277 dated July 3, 2009 and revised in Official Gazette No. 27537 dated March 30, 2010 6.4.3 Modeling the Effect of the Project on Air Quality An atmospheric dispersion model was used to predict pollutant concentrations at existing sensitive receptors in proximity to roads likely to be affected by construction activities and development traffic. The most recent version of the EPA-promulgated AERMOD dispersion model (version 12345) was used for the modeling analysis. AERMOD was run in regulatory default mode and deposition was only considered for assessing the final PM10 modeled ambient air impacts. Deposition was not considered for any other pollutants. The BREEZE (Trinity Consultants, version 7.7) graphical modeling interface was used to set up the near-field modeling runs including the camp sites and road layout. The AERMOD model is based on the Gaussian plume, its concentration estimates are based on a steady- state plume approach with significant improvements over commonly applied regulatory dispersion models. Complex terrain influences are provided by combining a horizontal plume state and a terrain-following state. Dispersion algorithms are specified for convective and stable conditions, urban and rural areas, and in the influence of buildings and other structures. In convective conditions (typically experienced during calm, hot summer periods), the effects of random vertical updraft and downdraft velocities are simulated with a bi- Gaussian probability density function. In both convective and stable conditions, the mean vertical wind speed is assumed equal to zero. Detailed modeling of NO2, and PM10 was carried out at 400 specific receptor points by using the AERMOD modeling system. Besides the 400 Cartesian grid receptors, additionally 40 sensitive receptors were identified at the places that have populations or land uses that are considered to be particularly affected by air quality including, residential, commercial areas, forests, industrial areas etc. Meteorological Parameters for Modelling The Kumköy station surface meteorological data and Kireçburnu station upper air data for the most complete year 2009 were combined into AERMOD ready surface and upper air input files using the EPA AERMET computer program (User‘s Guide for the AERMOD Meteorological Pre-processor (AERMET), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Emissions, Monitoring, and Analysis Division, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, EPA-454/B-03-002, November 2004). The AERMET program serves as the meteorological pre-processor for AERMOD. AERMET is designed to combine and quality control on-site and NWS surface and upper air data for use by AERMOD. Site specific parameters like surface roughness coefficient, Bowen ratio and albedo has been defined at this stage. The wind rose derived from aero meteorological measurements at surface and upper air on site from 1/1/2009- 31/12/2009 is given in Figure 6-8. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-20 Figure 6-8 The Wind rose of Kumköy-İstanbul station for the period 1/1/2009-31/12/2009 Estimated Accuracy of Modelling Results The accuracy of modelling results is about 20-25% for the annual mean concentrations and up to 50-60% for the 1-hour maximum of the year. This is in conformance with the requirements of EU Air Quality Directive 2008/50/EC. The Northern Marmara Motorway is divided into four segments which are given on following sections (from west to east). Section 1: ISTOC OSB-Odayeri; Section 2: Odayeri-Garipçe; Section 3: Poyraz-Reşadiye; Section 4: Paşamandıra-Paşaköy+Reşadiye-Çamlık The modeling studies were performed in two parts a. The first part consists of Section 1 and 2 and represents the Europe side. The second part consists of Section 3 and 4 and represents the Asian side. The study area of Air Quality Modeling which is given on Table 6-18 will be also referred in this chapter (Figure 6-9). Table 6-18 The Air Quality Modeling Sections The Northern Marmara Air Quality Location Motorway Project Route Modelling Sections Section 1 ISTOC OSB-Odayeri 1st Part Section 2 Odayeri-Garipçe Section 3 Poyraz- nd Reşadiye 2 Part Section 4 Reşadiye – (Ümraniye-left side) & Paşaköy (Sancaktepe-right side) Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-21 Figure 6-9 Air Quality Study Area including Sensitive Points Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-22 Three scenarios were modeled and the results are presented in Sections 6.5.1 and 6.5.2: - Construction phase with uncontrolled emissions - Construction phase with controlled emissions - Year 2023 with implementation of the Project Air Quality Sensitive Receptors The sensitivity of receptors to air pollution has been determined based on the criteria provided in Table 6-10. Table 6-19 Sensitivity Criteria Sensitivity Description Examples of Receptors Receptors where people or operations are Educational, cultural, health institutes or summer High particularly susceptible to air pollution residential, recreational and camping areas Commercial area Receptors moderately sensitive to air Agricultural areas Medium pollution, where it may cause some Forest distraction or disturbance Offices Restaurants Receptors where distraction or disturbance Industrial areas with existing high air pollution. Low from air pollution is minimal Mining/old areas The properties of usages have been categorized as follows: - Industrial Area, mining areas (IA) - Forest fields, agricultural area (F) - Commercial area where workplaces are predominant (CRA) - Commercial area where residential buildings are predominant (RCA) - Educational, cultural, health institutes or summer residential, recreational and camping areas (RA) Pollutant concentrations have been predicted at forty individual receptors along the proposed route. The selected sensitive receptors were the closest sensitive receptors to the roads expected to experience the largest changes in air quality as a result of the Project, and are illustrated on Figure 6-9. These receptors have the potential to experience impacts of greater magnitude due to dust generated by the construction works or nitric oxides generated by the traffic, when compared with other more distant receptors, or less sensitive receptors, and as such represent examples of worst-case exposure. The identification of sensitive receptors considers residential properties and other potentially sensitive properties such as schools and hospitals or industrial premises. The selected sensitive receptors, which are representative of residential properties and other air quality sensitive receptors in their vicinity, are described in Table 6-20. Table 6-20 Coordinates and Area Properties of Selected Sensitive Receptors Coordinates Name of Location Selected Receptor Codes Easting Northing Loc 1_E IA 651367.76 m E 4549601.38 m N Loc 2_E RCA 651666.00 m E 4553107.00 m N Loc 3_E IA 652502.23 m E 4555784.25 m N Loc 4_E F 651157.21 m E 4557957.60 m N Loc 5_S1S3_E F 655016.59 m E 4557876.01 m N Loc 6_E F 653368.65 m E 4561087.82 m N Loc 7_E F 652338.21 m E 4564093.04 m N Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-23 Coordinates Name of Location Selected Receptor Codes Easting Northing Loc 8_E F 653241.77 m E 4564751.03 m N Loc 9_Camp Odayeri_E F 653942.58 m E 4565854.85 m N Loc 10_S2S2_E IA 654816.52 m E 4567664.23 m N Loc 11_E RCA 655665.16 m E 4566517.44 m N Loc 12_E F 658357.82 m E 4566837.31 m N Loc 13_E CRA 666032.07 m E 4566711.18 m N Loc 14_E RCA 667859.35 m E 4565931.79 m N Loc 15_E F 670561.41 m E 4566234.50 m N Loc 16_E RCA 672367.81 m E 4566507.80 m N Loc 17_E F 674618.00 m E 4565880.00 m N Loc 18_E F 675742.36 m E 4564510.38 m N Loc 19_S2S5_E RCA 676896.87 m E 4566285.61 m N Loc 20_E RCA 676896.25 m E 4564565.48 m N Loc 1_A F 677999.77 m E 4563081.92 m N Loc 2_S3S1_A RCA 680484.01 m E 4565020.77 m N Loc 3_A F 679705.48 m E 4563247.59 m N Loc 4_A RCA 681945.40 m E 4563235.35 m N Loc 5_A F 685439.51 m E 4562656.21 m N Loc 6_A RCA 687342.77 m E 4561889.72 m N Loc 7_A RCA 690470.30 m E 4558765.82 m N Loc 8_S4S3_A RCA 689462.91 m E 4555809.30 m N Loc 9_A RA 691404.86 m E 4555470.15 m N Loc 10_Camp Huseyinli_A IA 691357.86 m E 4554248.93 m N Loc 11_A F 692796.44 m E 4553044.61 m N Loc 12_A CRA 691604.58 m E 4551938.25 m N Loc 13_A RCA 691067.23 m E 4546429.27 m N Loc 14_S5S1_A RCA 691569.88 m E 4546239.63 m N Loc 15_A RCA 690839.96 m E 4542224.49 m N Loc 16_A F 693789.65 m E 4539765.25 m N Loc 17_A CRA 694257.00 m E 4536506.00 m N Loc 18_A RCA 688216.14 m E 4546577.35 m N Loc 19_A RCA 683688.46 m E 4546780.18 m N Loc 20_A RCA 680798.00 m E 4546123.00 m N 6.4.4 Evaluating Significance of Predicted Impacts The significance of predicted impacts was evaluated by determining the locations where the thresholds discussed above were exceeded, i.e. where: the Project contributed more than 10% to attainment of the relevant long term standard for NO2 or PM10 based on the difference between with-Project and without-Project modeling results; or the traffic contribution exceeded the short term standard minus background concentration, in the ‗with Project‘ situation; and then estimating the sensitivity of the receptors. The valuation matrix is presented in Table 6-22. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-24 Table 6-21 Sensitivity valuation matrix Magnitude: Based on the difference in contribution of Traffic to ambient Sensitivity concentrations with and without the Project Short term Long Term standard NO & 2 standard Low Medium High PM10 (1) (2) NO2 PM10 Small 10-25% 150 30 Not sign. Minor Moderate Medium 25-50% 175 40 Minor Moderate Major Magnitude Large >50% 200 50 Moderate Major Critical (1) 1 hour with 18 exceedances (2) 24 hour average with 35 exceedances 6.4.5 Impact Assessment Criteria The magnitude of impact was determined by using the model results to calculate the difference in concentrations of NO2 and PM10 with and without the Project in 2023 at various distances from the road. In the absence of data enabling the future development of underlying background air quality in Istanbul away from roads to be predicted, background concentrations were assumed to stay at the same level as today. The difference in concentrations with and without the Project could therefore be calculated from the difference in the modeled contribution of traffic to ambient air quality (where ambient air quality equals the underlying background plus the contribution of local traffic). The significance of these predicted changes in air quality was then evaluated by considering the extent to which the Project contributed to the possibility that air quality would exceed Turkish and International air quality standards (given in Table 6-9) and if so, sensitivity of the sensitive receptors might be affected. Air Quality Standards Relevant air quality standards are set under Turkish law and in various international standards and guidelines. As Turkey is a candidate for accession to the EU, the EU Council Directive 2008/50/EC on ambient air quality is considered to be the most useful and relevant reference. This sets strict standards for air quality which are generally equivalent to IFC and WHO targets and to the Republic of Turkey legal standards which are due to come into force by the early years of operation of the Project. As given in Table 6-9, EU air quality standards for NO2 and PM10 are established for various averaging periods from 1 hour to 1 year. Standards for annual average concentrations are designed to protect health from the cumulative effects of low level exposure to air pollution over the long term, whilst daily and hourly averages are designed to avoid acute effects caused by short term exposure to high levels of pollution. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-25 6.5 Results 6.5.1 Construction Phase Assessment To assess the potential air quality impacts during construction activities, calculated daily, annually PM10 concentrations and dust deposition amounts were compared with the Turkish IAPCR, Turkish RAMAQ and the IFC/WB Guideline limit values (Table 6-23). Table 6-22 PM Modeling Results for Construction Phase and Limit Values Coordinates Highest Results of Pollutant: PM10 The 18th Highest 24- Monthly Total The Annual Total The Annual Max. Side Hour of Easting Northing Deposition Deposition Concentration 2 Average 2 3 (mg/m /day) (mg/m /day) (µg/m ) Concentration 3 (µg/m ) UNCONTROLLED European 667625.00 4564765.90 238 48.45 100.11 12.2 Asian 689359.90 4558856.30 250.0 44.90 159.7 19.54 CONTROLLED European 668625.00 4564765.90 196 44.9 83.6 10.3 Asian 689359.90 455856.30 220.0 40.35 136.2 16.6 Turkish IAPRC Limit Value1 390 100 210 60 Turkish RAMAQ Limit Value2 - 50 - 40 IFC/WB Guidance Limit Value - 50 - 20 1 Turkish IAPCR Limit values for 2013 2 Turkish RAMAQ Limit value for 2019 According to the AERMOD modeling results, the maximum 95 percentile of PM10 concentration for 24 hr averaging period is calculated as 43.41 µg/m3 with emission control application. The result is lower than the limit values of 50 µg/m3 given in the IFC/WB Guideline, 100 µg/m3 given in the Turkish IAPRC for 2013 and 50 3 µg/m given in the Turkish RAMAQ for 2019. The 24-hr PM10 concentration contours along the Project route are presented in Figure 6-10 below. As can be seen in Figure 6-10, the receptors at which maximum concentration values calculated are located near to where the crushing plants will be present on the route. 24- 3 hr PM10 concentrations are below 15 µg/m at a distance of 500 m from the proposed project crushing plant location. The modeling results of uncontrolled emissions are almost 10 percent higher than controlled emissions. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-26 Figure 6-10 The 18th Highest 24-Hour Average Concentration Contours during Construction Phase 3 As is shown in Table 6-23, the annual maximum PM10 concentration is calculated as 16.63 µg/m . The value is much lower than the limit value of 60 µg/m3 given in the Turkish IAPCR for 2013 and 40 µg/m3 given in the Turkish RAMAQ for 2019. In addition, it is also below the limit value of 20 µg/m3 stated in the IFC/WB Guideline. The annual PM10 concentration contour map is presented in Figure 6-11. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-27 Figure 6-11 The Annual PM10 Concentration Contours during Construction Phase Monthly dust deposition contours are presented in Figure 6-12 below. Monthly dust depositions are below 0.1 mg/m2-day at a distance of 500 m from the proposed project crushing plant site. Annual dust deposition contours are presented in Figure 6-13 below. Annual dust depositions are below 60 mg/m2-day at a distance of 500 m from the proposed project crushing plant location. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-28 Figure 6-12 Maximum Monthly Dust Deposition Contours during Construction Phase Figure 6-13 Maximum Annual Dust Deposition Contours during Construction Phase Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-29 According to the results of AERMOD modeling, in order to determine PM10 concentrations and dust deposition resulted the construction activities will be in compliance with both short term and long term limit values given in the Turkish IAPCT, RAMAQ and IFC/WB Guidelines. The uncontrolled emissions are almost 10 percent higher than the controlled emissions and the majority of the emissions originated from the crushing plants located at each side, the effect of other activities (e.g. excavation, filling etc.) appear to be minimal. Predictions for Receptor Locations Predictions of long and short term concentrations of PM10 and dust deposition at predetermined sensitive locations close to the route are presented in Table 6-24 and Table 6-25. Predictions for residential areas are for the closest buildings to the route; values at homes further away within these areas are likely to be lower. Where the thresholds for significant impact are exceeded these are highlighted. Only at the receptor LOC 14_E located at the European site near to Arıköy, moderate impact is expected during construction activities due to the topographical feature of the location. At this location, the crushing plant of the European side is located. At the other sensitive areas, the long and short term thresholds are never exceeded. The maximum levels are shown in bold in Table 6-23 and Table 6-24. The receptor points area shown in Figure 6-9 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-30 Table 6-23 Impacts of construction activities on sensitive areas (PM10) LONG TERM SHORT TERM Annual Average PM 3 3 Limit value of 50 µg/m (Limit value of 40 µg/m ) Difference The 18th Selected With Contribution Without with and Highest 24- Name of Location Receptor Sensitivity Project of traffic to Project without Sensitivity of Hour of Without Sensitivity of Codes (controlled) ambient Project the Average Project + the concentration (10% Receptors Concentration Model -50 Receptors in 2023 with threshold 4 of PM10 Project µg/m3) (µg/m3) Loc 1_E RCA H 30 31.99 6 1.99 Not Sign. 4.78 -15.22 Not Sign. Loc 2_E RCA H 30 31.99 6 1.99 Not Sign. 4.42 -15.58 Not Sign. Loc 3_E RCA H 30 30.41 1 0.41 Not Sign. 1.15 -18.85 Not Sign. Loc 4_E IA L 30 31.78 6 1.78 Not Sign. 3.90 -16.10 Not Sign. Loc 5_S1S3_E F M 30 30.27 1 0.27 Not Sign. 0.65 -19.35 Not Sign. Loc 6_E F M 30 30.92 3 0.92 Not Sign. 2.33 -17.67 Not Sign. Loc 7_E F M 33 34.32 4 1.32 Not Sign. 3.02 -13.98 Not Sign. Loc 8_E F M 33 34.48 4 1.48 Not Sign. 3.36 -13.64 Not Sign. Loc 9_Camp Odayeri_E F M 33 35.87 8 2.87 Not Sign. 6.37 -10.63 Not Sign. Loc 10_S2S2_E IA L 33 35.58 7 2.58 Not Sign. 6.46 -10.54 Not Sign. Loc 11_E RCA H 33 35.06 6 2.06 Not Sign. 4.87 -12.13 Not Sign. Loc 12_E F M 33 35.57 7 2.57 Not Sign. 6.22 -10.78 Not Sign. Loc 13_E CRA M 25 26.28 5 1.28 Not Sign. 3.08 -21.92 Not Sign. Loc 14_E RCA H 25 30.29 17 5.29 Moderate 15.13 -9.87 Not Sign. Loc 15_E F M 25 26.51 6 1.51 Not Sign. 3.87 -21.13 Not Sign. Loc 16_E RCA H 25 25.93 4 0.93 Not Sign. 2.37 -22.63 Not Sign. Loc 17_E F M 25 25.64 2 0.64 Not Sign. 1.44 -23.56 Not Sign. Loc 18_E F M 25 25.96 4 0.96 Not Sign. 2.62 -22.38 Not Sign. Loc 19_S2S5_E RCA H 25 25.19 1 0.19 Not Sign. 0.47 -24.53 Not Sign. Loc 20_E F M 25 25.31 1 0.31 Not Sign. 0.75 -24.25 Not Sign. Loc 1_A RCA H 36 38.17 6 2.17 Not Sign. 5.97 -8.03 Not Sign. Loc 2_S3S1_A RCA H 36 36.38 1 0.38 Not Sign. 1.03 -12.97 Not Sign. Loc 3_A F M 36 37.71 5 1.71 Not Sign. 4.33 -9.67 Not Sign. Loc 4_A RCA H 36 37.89 5 1.89 Not Sign. 4.72 -9.28 Not Sign. Loc 5_A F M 36 37.16 3 1.16 Not Sign. 3.30 -10.70 Not Sign. Loc 6_A RCA H 35 36.51 4 1.51 Not Sign. 4.31 -10.69 Not Sign. Loc 7_A RCA H 35 38.57 9 3.57 Not Sign. 7.77 -7.23 Not Sign. Loc 8_S4S3_A RCA H 35 35.75 2 0.75 Not Sign. 1.63 -13.37 Not Sign. Loc 9_A CRA M 35 38.35 9 3.35 Not Sign. 7.37 -7.63 Not Sign. Loc 10_Camp Huseyinli_A F M 35 37.21 6 2.21 Not Sign. 4.71 -10.29 Not Sign. Loc 11_A F M 35 36.18 3 1.18 Not Sign. 3.22 -11.78 Not Sign. Loc 12_A CRA M 35 38.14 8 3.14 Not Sign. 6.79 -8.21 Not Sign. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-31 LONG TERM SHORT TERM Annual Average PM 3 3 Limit value of 50 µg/m (Limit value of 40 µg/m ) Difference The 18th Selected With Contribution Without with and Highest 24- Name of Location Receptor Sensitivity Project of traffic to Project without Sensitivity of Hour of Without Sensitivity of Codes (controlled) ambient Project the Average Project + the concentration (10% Receptors Concentration Model -50 Receptors in 2023 with threshold 4 of PM10 Project 3 µg/m3) (µg/m ) Loc 13_A RCA H 34 36.03 6 2.03 Not Sign. 5.16 -10.84 Not Sign. Loc 14_S5S1_A RCA H 34 34.75 2 0.75 Not Sign. 3.24 -12.76 Not Sign. Loc 15_A RCA H 34 36.15 6 2.15 Not Sign. 6.28 -9.72 Not Sign. Loc 16_A F M 34 34.26 1 0.26 Not Sign. 0.95 -15.05 Not Sign. Loc 17_A CRA M 34 34.11 0 0.11 Not Sign. 0.35 -15.65 Not Sign. Loc 18_A RCA H 34 35.83 5 1.83 Not Sign. 4.67 -11.33 Not Sign. Loc 19_A RCA H 34 36.60 7 2.60 Not Sign. 5.79 -10.21 Not Sign. Loc 20_A RCA H 34 35.16 3 1.16 Not Sign. 3.11 -12.89 Not Sign. Table 6-24 Impacts of construction activities on sensitive areas (Dust Deposition) LONG TERM SHORT TERM (Limit value of 210 mg/m2/month) (Limit value of 390 mg/m2/month) Difference Contribution with and The Monthly Selected Sensitiv Without With Project of traffic to without Average Name of Location Recepto Sensitivity of Without Sensitivity of ity Project (controlled) ambient Project Concentratio r Codes the Project + the concentration (10% n of Dust Receptors Model -390 Receptors in 2023 with threshold Deposition Project 21 (mg/m2/day) mg/m2/day) Loc 1_E RCA H 56 66.50 16 10.50 Not Sign. 15.79 -318.22 Not Sign. Loc 2_E RCA H 56 65.56 15 9.56 Not Sign. 12.48 -321.52 Not Sign. Loc 3_E RCA H 56 58.54 4 2.54 Not Sign. 3.66 -330.34 Not Sign. Loc 4_E IA L 56 66.42 16 10.42 Not Sign. 18.20 -315.80 Not Sign. Loc 5_S1S3_E F M 56 57.32 2 1.32 Not Sign. 1.66 -332.34 Not Sign. Loc 6_E F M 56 60.93 8 4.93 Not Sign. 5.74 -328.26 Not Sign. Loc 7_E F M 52 58.66 11 6.66 Not Sign. 8.84 -329.16 Not Sign. Loc 8_E F M 52 58.95 12 6.95 Not Sign. 8.81 -329.19 Not Sign. Loc 9_Camp Odayeri_E F M 52 66.34 22 14.34 Not Sign. 19.25 -318.76 Not Sign. Loc 10_S2S2_E IA L 52 63.71 18 11.71 Not Sign. 18.09 -319.91 Not Sign. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-32 LONG TERM SHORT TERM (Limit value of 210 mg/m2/month) (Limit value of 390 mg/m2/month) Difference Contribution with and The Monthly Selected Sensitiv Without With Project of traffic to without Average Name of Location Recepto Sensitivity of Without Sensitivity of ity Project (controlled) ambient Project Concentratio r Codes the Project + the concentration (10% n of Dust Receptors Model -390 Receptors in 2023 with threshold Deposition Project 21 (mg/m2/day) mg/m2/day) Loc 11_E RCA H 52 61.23 15 9.23 Not Sign. 12.68 -325.32 Not Sign. Loc 12_E F M 52 64.02 19 12.02 Not Sign. 17.54 -320.46 Not Sign. Loc 13_E CRA M 68 73.37 7 5.37 Not Sign. 8.65 -313.35 Not Sign. Loc 14_E RCA H 68 90.96 25 22.96 Moderate 43.61 -278.39 Not Sign. Loc 15_E F M 68 74.09 8 6.09 Not Sign. 10.07 -311.94 Not Sign. Loc 16_E RCA H 68 71.73 5 3.73 Not Sign. 6.67 -315.33 Not Sign. Loc 17_E F M 68 71.24 5 3.24 Not Sign. 5.60 -316.40 Not Sign. Loc 18_E F M 68 73.81 8 5.81 Not Sign. 9.43 -312.57 Not Sign. Loc 19_S2S5_E RCA H 68 68.78 1 0.78 Not Sign. 1.14 -320.86 Not Sign. Loc 20_E F M 68 69.39 2 1.39 Not Sign. 1.98 -320.02 Not Sign. Loc 1_A RCA H 69 77.49 11 8.49 Not Sign. 10.75 -310.25 Not Sign. Loc 2_S3S1_A RCA H 69 70.36 2 1.36 Not Sign. 2.37 -318.63 Not Sign. Loc 3_A F M 69 76.37 10 7.37 Not Sign. 10.79 -310.21 Not Sign. Loc 4_A RCA H 69 77.71 11 8.71 Not Sign. 13.59 -307.41 Not Sign. Loc 5_A F M 69 73.31 6 4.31 Not Sign. 7.45 -313.55 Not Sign. Loc 6_A RCA H 66 71.66 8 5.66 Not Sign. 10.02 -313.98 Not Sign. Loc 7_A RCA H 66 85.24 23 19.24 Not Sign. 27.34 -296.66 Not Sign. Loc 8_S4S3_A RCA H 66 69.26 5 3.26 Not Sign. 3.78 -320.22 Not Sign. Loc 9_A CRA M 66 81.77 19 15.77 Not Sign. 19.28 -304.72 Not Sign. Loc 10_Camp Huseyinli_A F M 66 79.19 17 13.19 Not Sign. 22.04 -301.96 Not Sign. Loc 11_A F M 66 72.29 9 6.29 Not Sign. 8.50 -315.50 Not Sign. Loc 12_A CRA M 66 83.41 21 17.41 Not Sign. 22.02 -301.98 Not Sign. Loc 13_A RCA H 61 72.74 16 11.74 Not Sign. 17.16 -311.84 Not Sign. Loc 14_S5S1_A RCA H 61 65.00 6 4.00 Not Sign. 5.60 -323.40 Not Sign. Loc 15_A RCA H 61 70.42 13 9.42 Not Sign. 13.73 -315.27 Not Sign. Loc 16_A F M 61 62.42 2 1.42 Not Sign. 1.85 -327.15 Not Sign. Loc 17_A CRA M 61 61.55 1 0.55 Not Sign. 0.92 -328.08 Not Sign. Loc 18_A RCA H 61 69.25 12 8.25 Not Sign. 12.74 -316.26 Not Sign. Loc 19_A RCA H 61 75.72 19 14.72 Not Sign. 19.15 -309.85 Not Sign. Loc 20_A RCA H 61 67.58 10 6.58 Not Sign. 9.63 -319.38 Not Sign. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-33 6.5.2 Operational Phase Assessment The impact of traffic emissions on air quality around the proposed route was modeled as described in Section 6.4.3 above. Dispersion modeling was carried out for the maximum flow of vehicles per day and the results compared with the situation in 2023 and without the Project. 2023 has been selected as the forecast year as the traffic forecasts indicate that the road capacity will reach maximum at around this time. Emissions sources include vehicles moving along the motorway (Section 2 and 3) and the main connecting roads (Section 1 and 4). As discussed in Section 6.4.2.2, it is assumed that the emissions characteristics of vehicles in Istanbul will improve with changing fuel and engine technology. This is assumed to occur at a rate some 5 years slower than in the EU vehicle fleet. The effect of other planned changes in Istanbul‘s transport system between now and 2023 is not taken into account in both with and without Project scenarios. The detailed emission calculations in Appendix 6-5 and a summary of the modeling results are presented in Appendix 6-6. The soft copies of model outputs for each pollutant both for construction and operation phases are given in Appendix 6-7, in CD format. In this chapter, summary of modeling results and illustrative findings are presented and discussed. Table 6-26 presents the result of modeling for the NOx and PM10 parameters during the operational phase of the proposed project. In addition to showing the contribution of traffic to average annual concentrations with and without the Project, the difference between these values is shown for comparison with the 10% threshold for significant impact. Where predicted values exceed the thresholds for significant impact these are highlighted in bold. Table 6-25 Modeling results for operation phase and limit values for the year 2023 Coordinates Highest Results of Pollutant NO2 PM10 Annual The 18th The 18th The 18th max. Highest 24- Highest 24- The Annual Side Highest Conc. Easting Northing Hour of 3 Hour of Max. Hourly Max. (µg/m ) Average Average Concentration Concentration 3 3 Concentration Concentration (µg/m ) (µg/m ) 3 3 (µg/m ) (µg/m ) European 654702.0 4566716.3 108.5 22.3 10.4 1.0 0.5 Asian 691404.9 4555470.1 62.0 9.9 4.0 0.4 0.2 Turkish IAPRC Limit Value2 - 300 60 100 60 Turkish RAMAQ Limit Value3 2003 2004 403 504 404 IFC/WB Guidance Limit Value1 200 - 40 50 20 1 The IFC/WB Guideline values are provided for comparison purposes only although the project will only be required to meet the Turkish limit values as per the IFC/WB guidelines which states that local standards should be met unless they are not available. 2 Turkish IAPCR target limit value for 2013. 3 Turkish RAMAQ target limit value for 2024. 4 Turkish RAMAQ target limit value for 2019. According to the AERMOD modeling results, the maximum 95 percentile of PM10 concentration for 24 hr averaging period is calculated as 1.0 µg/m3. The result is significantly lower than the limit values of 50 µg/m3 given in the IFC/WB Guideline, 100 µg/m3 given in the Turkish IAPRC for 2013 and 50 µg/m3 given in the Turkish RAMAQ for 2019. The 24 hr PM10 concentration contours along the Project route are presented in Figure 6-14 below. As can be seen in Figure 6-14, the receptors at which maximum concentration values 3 calculated are located near to Odayeri Camp site. 24-hr PM10 concentrations are below 12 µg/m at a distance of 500 m from the proposed project route. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-34 Figure 6-14 24-hr PM10 Concentration Contours during Operation Phase for the year 2023 3 As it is given in Table 6-26, the annual maximum PM10 concentration is calculated as 0.5 µg/m . The value is much lower than the limit value of 60 µg/m3 given in the Turkish IAPCR for 2013 and 40 µg/m3 given in the Turkish RAMAQ for 2019. In addition, it is also below the limit value of 20 µg/m3 stated in the IFC/WB Guideline. The AERMOD modeling results of the NOx (as converted to NO2) are given as maximum predicted concentrations for 1 hr, 24 hr and annual averaging periods in Table 6-26. The highest annual average NO2 impact from the proposed motorway is 10.4 µg/m3. This concentration is predicted to occur at the road surface near to Işıklar-Odayeri site. The average background NO2 concentration determined from the monitoring study 3 is 16.2 µg/m . Thus, cumulative concentration (NO2 impact plus background value) is calculated as 26.6 µg/m3. This concentration is lower than the target limit of 60 µg/m3 for 2013 stated in the Turkish IAPCR. In addition to the Turkish IAPCR limit value for NO2, Turkish RAMAQ sets a target limit value for NO2 for the 3 2024 as 40 µg/m . Thus, the long term predicted NO2 impact of the traffic on the proposed motorway to the ambient air will be negligible. Figure 6-15 presents the distribution of the predicted NO2 impacts for the annual averaging period. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-35 Figure 6-15 Maximum Predicted NO2 Impact for the annual averaging period The maximum prediction for the 24 hr averaging period is 22.3 µg/m3. This concentration is predicted to occur on the road. The background NO2 concentration measured at the closest background sampling location is 18.7 µg/m3. Thus, the cumulative concentration is calculated as 41 µg/m3. The concentration is much lower than the target limit value of 300 µg/m3 for 2013 stated in the Turkish IAPCR. There is no value for NO2 for 24-hr averaging period in both Turkish RAMAQ and IFC/WB Guidelines. The daily predicted NO2 impact of the vehicle transport on the background air is almost negligible. Figure 6-16 present the distribution of the predicted maximum NO2 impacts for the 24-hr averaging period. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-36 Figure 6-16 Maximum Predicted NO2 Impact for the 24-hour averaging period The maximum 1 hr impact from the proposed motorway is 108.5 µg/m3. It is predicted to occur on the road surface. This concentration is below both the IFC/WB Guideline. Figure 6-17 presents the distribution of the predicted maximum NO2 impacts for the 1-hr averaging period. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-37 Figure 6-17 Maximum Predicted NO2 Impact for the 1-hour averaging period In summary, the cumulative concentrations calculated from the summation of predicted long-term and short- term NO2 impacts from the Project and the monitored background NO2 concentrations are below the limit values given in both Turkish Regulations and the IFC/WB Guidelines. Predictions for Receptor Locations Predictions of long and short term concentrations of NO2 and PM10 at specific locations where residents live close to the route are presented in Table 6-26 and 6-27. This also presents predictions for concentrations at other sensitive receptor locations such as hospitals and schools. Predictions for residential areas are for the closest buildings to the route; values at homes further away within these areas are likely to be lower. Where the thresholds for significant impact are exceeded these are highlighted. There are exceedances of the 10% threshold in sensitive areas. The short term threshold is exceeded at ―minor‖ significance levels at some residential receptors and at forest. The affected locations are identified in Table 6-17. In each case a narrow strip of residential land varying in width from zero to at most about 75 metres from the roadside will be affected. The maximum levels are shown in bold in Table 6-26 and Table 6-27. The receptor points area shown in Figure 6-9 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-38 Table 6-26 Impacts of operation on sensitive areas (NO2) LONG TERM SHORT TERM 3) 3 Annual Average NO2 ( Limit value of 40 µg/m Limit value of 150 µg/m With Contribution Difference Selected The 18th Highest Name of Without Project of traffic to with and Receptor Sensitivity 1-Hour of Without Location Project (contro ambient without Sensitivity of Sensitivity of the Codes Average Project + lled) concentration Project (10% the Receptors Receptors Concentration of Model -150 in 2023 with threshold 4 3 NO (µg/m ) Project µg/m3) X Loc 1_E RCA H 22.24 25 12 3.1 Not.sign. 30.96 -96.8 Not Sign. Loc 2_E RCA H 22.24 25.85 14 3.6 Not.sign. 24.15 -103.6 Not Sign. Loc 3_E RCA H 22.24 23.09 4 0.9 Not.sign. 12.12 -115.6 Not Sign. Loc 4_E IA L 22.24 26.24 15 4.0 Not.sign. 45.99 -81.8 Not Sign. Loc 5_S1S3_E F M 22.24 22.99 3 0.8 Not.sign. 7.32 -120.4 Not Sign. Loc 6_E F M 22.24 24.1 8 1.9 Not.sign. 19.66 -108.1 Not Sign. Loc 7_E F M 18.79 21.11 11 2.3 Not.sign. 20.32 -110.9 Not Sign. Loc 8_E F M 18.79 22.59 17 3.8 Not.sign. 27.47 -103.7 Not Sign. Loc 9_Camp F M 18.79 5.6 48.96 Not Sign. Odayeri_E 24.43 23 Minor -82.3 Loc 10_S2S2_E IA L 18.79 22.79 18 4.0 Not.sign. 84.12 -47.1 Not Sign. Loc 11_E RCA H 18.79 23.02 18 4.2 Moderate 45.85 -85.4 Not Sign. Loc 12_E F M 18.79 24.76 24 6.0 Minor 51.52 -79.7 Not Sign. Loc 13_E CRA M 15.64 17.72 12 2.1 Not.sign. 15.96 -118.4 Not Sign. Loc 14_E RCA H 15.64 18.08 13 2.4 Not.sign. 23.32 -111.0 Not Sign. Loc 15_E F M 15.64 18.23 14 2.6 Not.sign. 28.8 -105.6 Not Sign. Loc 16_E RCA H 15.64 17.8 12 2.2 Not.sign. 18.63 -115.7 Not Sign. Loc 17_E F M 15.64 17.12 9 1.5 Not.sign. 18.68 -115.7 Not Sign. Loc 18_E F M 15.64 17.47 10 1.8 Not.sign. 35.95 -98.4 Not Sign. Loc 19_S2S5_E RCA H 15.64 16.1 3 0.5 Not.sign. 7.71 -126.7 Not Sign. Loc 20_E F M 15.64 16.31 4 0.7 Not.sign. 13.91 -120.5 Not Sign. Loc 1_A RCA H 7.1 7.81 9 0.7 Not.sign. 5.62 -137.3 Not Sign. Loc 2_S3S1_A RCA H 7.1 7.66 7 0.6 Not.sign. 12.15 -130.8 Not Sign. Loc 3_A F M 7.1 7.53 6 0.4 Not.sign. 4.94 -138.0 Not Sign. Loc 4_A RCA H 7.1 8.26 14 1.2 Not.sign. 28.32 -114.6 Not Sign. Loc 5_A F M 7.1 8.68 18 1.6 Not.sign. 33.05 -109.9 Not Sign. Loc 6_A RCA H 8.48 9.76 13 1.3 Not.sign. 29.4 -112.1 Not Sign. Loc 7_A RCA H 8.48 9.53 11 1.1 Not.sign. 22.02 -119.5 Not Sign. Loc 8_S4S3_A RCA H 8.48 8.96 5 0.5 Not.sign. 4.5 -137.0 Not Sign. Loc 9_A CRA M 8.48 12.53 32 4.1 Moderate 48.04 -93.5 Not Sign. Loc 10_Camp F M 8.48 1.1 11.47 Not Sign. Huseyinli_A 9.59 12 Not.sign. -130.1 Loc 11_A F M 8.48 9.79 13 1.3 Not.sign. 37.43 -104.1 Not Sign. Loc 12_A CRA M 8.48 9.59 12 1.1 Not.sign. 9.02 -132.5 Not Sign. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-39 LONG TERM SHORT TERM 3) 3 Annual Average NO2 ( Limit value of 40 µg/m Limit value of 150 µg/m With Contribution Difference Selected The 18th Highest Name of Without Project of traffic to with and Receptor Sensitivity 1-Hour of Without Location Project (contro ambient without Sensitivity of Sensitivity of the Codes Average Project + lled) concentration Project (10% the Receptors Receptors Concentration of Model -150 in 2023 with threshold 4 3 NO (µg/m ) Project µg/m3) X Loc 13_A RCA H 25.1 25.38 1 0.3 Not.sign. 4.32 -120.6 Not Sign. Loc 14_S5S1_A RCA H 25.1 25.25 1 0.2 Not.sign. 2.75 -122.2 Not Sign. Loc 15_A RCA H 25.1 25.57 2 0.5 Not.sign. 4 -120.9 Not Sign. Loc 16_A F M 25.1 25.18 0 0.1 Not.sign. 1.77 -123.1 Not Sign. Loc 17_A CRA M 25.1 25.16 0 0.1 Not.sign. 1.86 -123.0 Not Sign. Loc 18_A RCA H 25.1 25.37 1 0.3 Not.sign. 2.06 -122.8 Not Sign. Loc 19_A RCA H 25.1 25.46 1 0.4 Not.sign. 3.34 -121.6 Not Sign. Loc 20_A RCA H 25.1 25.34 1 0.2 Not.sign. 2.97 -121.9 Not Sign. Table 6-27 Impacts of operation on sensitive areas (PM10) LONG TERM SHORT TERM Annual Average PM 3 3 Limit value of 50 µg/m (Limit value of 40 µg/m ) With Selected Contribution Difference Name of Without Project The 18th Highest Receptor Sensitivity of traffic to with and Location Project (contro 24-Hour of Without Codes ambient without Sensitivity of Sensitivity of the lled) Average Project + concentration Project (10% the Receptors Receptors Concentration of Model -50 in 2023 with treshold 4 3 PM10 (µg/m ) Project µg/m3) Loc 1_E RCA H 30 30.17 1 0.17 Not Sign. 0.36 -19.64 Not Sign. Loc 2_E RCA H 30 30.20 1 0.20 Not Sign. 0.41 -19.59 Not Sign. Loc 3_E RCA H 30 30.05 0 0.05 Not Sign. 0.12 -19.88 Not Sign. Loc 4_E IA L 30 30.22 1 0.22 Not Sign. 0.46 -19.54 Not Sign. Loc 5_S1S3_E F M 30 30.04 0 0.04 Not Sign. 0.10 -19.90 Not Sign. Loc 6_E F M 30 30.10 0 0.10 Not Sign. 0.23 -19.77 Not Sign. Loc 7_E F M 33 33.13 0 0.13 Not Sign. 0.27 -16.73 Not Sign. Loc 8_E F M 33 33.20 1 0.20 Not Sign. 0.42 -16.58 Not Sign. Loc 9_Camp F M 33 33.29 1 0.29 Not Sign. 0.57 -16.43 Not Sign. Odayeri_E Loc 10_S2S2_E IA L 33 33.21 1 0.21 Not Sign. 0.44 -16.56 Not Sign. Loc 11_E RCA H 33 33.19 1 0.19 Not Sign. 0.39 -16.61 Not Sign. Loc 12_E F M 33 33.26 1 0.26 Not Sign. 0.53 -16.47 Not Sign. Loc 13_E CRA M 25 25.09 0 0.09 Not Sign. 0.20 -24.80 Not Sign. Loc 14_E RCA H 25 25.11 0 0.11 Not Sign. 0.22 -24.78 Not Sign. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-40 LONG TERM SHORT TERM Annual Average PM 3 3 Limit value of 50 µg/m (Limit value of 40 µg/m ) With Selected Contribution Difference Name of Without Project The 18th Highest Receptor Sensitivity of traffic to with and Location Project (contro 24-Hour of Without Codes ambient without Sensitivity of Sensitivity of the lled) Average Project + concentration Project (10% the Receptors Receptors Concentration of Model -50 in 2023 with treshold 4 3 PM10 (µg/m ) Project µg/m3) Loc 15_E F M 25 25.11 0 0.11 Not Sign. 0.26 -24.74 Not Sign. Loc 16_E RCA H 25 25.09 0 0.09 Not Sign. 0.22 -24.78 Not Sign. Loc 17_E F M 25 25.06 0 0.06 Not Sign. 0.13 -24.87 Not Sign. Loc 18_E F M 25 25.08 0 0.08 Not Sign. 0.19 -24.81 Not Sign. Loc 19_S2S5_E RCA H 25 25.02 0 0.02 Not Sign. 0.04 -24.96 Not Sign. Loc 20_E F M 25 25.03 0 0.03 Not Sign. 0.07 -24.93 Not Sign. Loc 1_A RCA H 36 36.03 0 0.03 Not Sign. 0.06 -13.94 Not Sign. Loc 2_S3S1_A RCA H 36 36.02 0 0.02 Not Sign. 0.07 -13.93 Not Sign. Loc 3_A F M 36 36.02 0 0.02 Not Sign. 0.04 -13.96 Not Sign. Loc 4_A RCA H 36 36.05 0 0.05 Not Sign. 0.13 -13.87 Not Sign. Loc 5_A F M 36 36.07 0 0.07 Not Sign. 0.20 -13.80 Not Sign. Loc 6_A RCA H 35 35.05 0 0.05 Not Sign. 0.15 -14.85 Not Sign. Loc 7_A RCA H 35 35.04 0 0.04 Not Sign. 0.10 -14.90 Not Sign. Loc 8_S4S3_A RCA H 35 35.02 0 0.02 Not Sign. 0.04 -14.96 Not Sign. Loc 9_A CRA M 35 35.18 0 0.18 Not Sign. 0.38 -14.62 Not Sign. Loc 10_Camp F M 35 35.05 0 0.05 Not Sign. 0.09 -14.91 Not Sign. Huseyinli_A Loc 11_A F M 35 35.06 0 0.06 Not Sign. 0.20 -14.80 Not Sign. Loc 12_A CRA M 35 35.05 0 0.05 Not Sign. 0.07 -14.93 Not Sign. Loc 13_A RCA H 34 34.01 0 0.01 Not Sign. 0.04 -15.96 Not Sign. Loc 14_S5S1_A RCA H 34 34.01 0 0.01 Not Sign. 0.02 -15.98 Not Sign. Loc 15_A RCA H 34 34.03 0 0.03 Not Sign. 0.05 -15.95 Not Sign. Loc 16_A F M 34 34.00 0 0.00 Not Sign. 0.02 -15.98 Not Sign. Loc 17_A CRA M 34 34.00 0 0.00 Not Sign. 0.01 -15.99 Not Sign. Loc 18_A RCA H 34 34.01 0 0.01 Not Sign. 0.03 -15.97 Not Sign. Loc 19_A RCA H 34 34.02 0 0.02 Not Sign. 0.04 -15.96 Not Sign. Loc 20_A RCA H 34 34.01 0 0.01 Not Sign. 0.03 -15.97 Not Sign. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-41 6.6 Mitigation Measures and Residual Impacts 6.6.1 Construction Phase The Turkish Regulation on Control of Excavated Soil, Construction and Demolition Wastes requires that measures are taken to minimize dust emissions from excavations. The Contractor will adopt the following measures to control the release of dust and other emissions from constructions: Dust generating areas will be controlled by water spraying, particularly under dry weather conditions. Stockpiles will be planned and sited to minimize the potential for dust generation taking into account prevailing wind directions and the locations of sensitive receptors. They will be protected against wind erosion (e.g. by wind shield, water spraying in dry periods). The drop height of potentially dust generating materials will be kept as low as possible. Where practicable, stockpiles will be located away from sensitive receptors. If crushing of construction materials is required, crushers will be located away from sensitive receptors. On-site speed limits will be applied and enforced for trucks travelling on unpaved surfaces (10 km/h); Trucks transporting spoil or other dusty materials off-site will be covered before leaving the sites. Construction vehicles will not be permitted to keep engines running while waiting to enter the sites or waiting on-sites. Wheel washing facilities will be available and used so that trucks leaving the site do not spread dust onto neighboring roads. Public roads used by site traffic will be swept regularly to prevent accumulation of dirt. Construction machines will not be left running in periods between work, or will be throttled down to a minimum. Maintenance procedures will be implemented in order to keep equipment in good working condition to minimize exhaust emissions caused by poor performance. Successful implementation of the above measures will be supported by provision of training for the operators of equipment and truck drivers regarding the air pollution potential of their activities. Dust levels around construction sites will be monitored using dust deposit gauges. The Contractor will adopt the value of 0.39 grams per square metre per month as stipulated by the Turkish Industrial Air Pollution Control Regulation for the protection against dust nuisance. If this level is exceeded at sensitive areas near the construction sites, the Contractor will take additional measures for dust control including preventing recurrence during further stages of construction work. Significance of Residual Impacts (after Mitigation) The assessment of dust emissions from construction phase activities has assumed the application of standard dust control measures on site (as detailed above) are capable of providing the required level of control of potential dust emissions during the construction works. It is considered unlikely that emissions of dust associated with the construction of the proposed project would be capable of having a significant effect on nearby sensitive receptors. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-42 6.6.2 Operational Phase The Project shall work with the municipal traffic authorities (Istanbul Traffic Control Centre (IBB)) and take other initiatives to encourage drivers to minimize emissions, e.g. regular vehicle inspections, appropriate driving behavior. Electronic traffic signs shall be used to provide information to drivers to facilitate smooth traffic flow to reduce noise and emissions, e.g. advice on driving speed, upcoming traffic, and general tips for minimizing vehicle emissions. The impact of emissions from tunnels can be mitigated by careful design of the ventilation system including the location, form and operation of the vent shafts. Emissions from traffic are more difficult to mitigate and the key will be to ensure that traffic flows do not cause air quality standards to be exceeded along the approach roads or elsewhere on the wider network. Maintenance of fuel efficient vehicle speeds and avoidance of congestion by good traffic management will be important. Speeds will be limited to 80 km/hr reducing the risk of emissions from high speeds. An increase in overall traffic as a result of the project has the potential to cause an increase in regional greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector with consequences for climate change. Significance of Residual Impacts (after Mitigation) No additional mitigation measures are proposed for the operation phase of the project, therefore the magnitude of the impacts and significance of the effects therefore remain unchanged from that detailed in section 6.5. 6.7 Conclusions and Summary 6.7.1 Construction Phase Dust Assessment In general, construction activities have the potential to generate fugitive dust emissions as a result of demolition, construction, earth works or trackout of material. For the proposed project, the concentrations of any airborne particulate matter generated by these activities would be controlled using on site management practices to the extent that the proposed project should give rise to moderate to negligible effects at the nearest sensitive receptors. The impact of fugitive emissions of PM10 at these receptors, with proposed mitigation applied would be negligible. Overall the effect of fugitive emissions of particulate matter (dust and PM) from the proposed works is considered to be not significant with respect to potential effects on health and amenity. The proposed project would have a negligible effect on the total emissions of pollutants on a regional scale, with increases of less than 0.1% for all pollutants for both the opening year and 15 years after opening. 6.7.2 Operational Phase Local Air Quality Assessment The operation of the proposed project will result in changes in traffic flows and related air emission along the approach roads and on the wider road network. There will also be point source emissions from the tunnel portals. These emissions will affect local air quality, with possible impacts on human health and welfare, fauna and flora, and materials around affected roads. There may also be wider changes in regional air quality. In general overall traffic is likely to increase as a result of the project although there are likely to be less in some areas and decreases in others. Based on modeling results, the overall impact of this new traffic in the north part of Istanbul District will be the increase in emission levels of pollutants (PM, NOx, VOC and CO). However, the potential impact is expected to be minor to negligible in the northern part of the District along the proposed Project route. However, there will be also some beneficial impact in the southern part of Istanbul District since some of the traffic that uses the existing bridges and the motorway will be using the new bridge and the new motorway. Thus, the current emission levels in the southern section will mostly likely to reduce. Thus, during the initial years of the operation, we can see the shift of current emission levels from south to north Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 6-43 parts of the District. Since the detailed vehicular data for the southern part was not available, the emission levels cannot be estimated and quantified. 6.7.3 Operational Phase Regional Air Pollutant and Greenhouse Gases Assessment A greenhouse gas assessment has been performed for the proposed project during operation phase. The principal greenhouse gas emission during vehicle transport is carbon dioxide (CO2). Total annual emissions were estimated to be around 0.27 Million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (Mt CO2-e). A comparison of greenhouse gas emissions from the Northern Marmara Motorway to national greenhouse gas inventories was made. Emissions from the project were estimated to be around 0.06% of the national inventory for the year 2011. Also, emissions from the project were estimated to be around 0.68% of road transport emissions from national inventory. REFERENCES (1) Nitrogen Oxides / Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook WORLD BANK GROUP Effective July 1998 (2) Koji Tsunokawa, Christopher Hoban, Roads and the Environment, 1997, The World Bank Washington, D.C. (3) Stern, Arthur C., et al. 1984. Fundamentals of Air Pollution. Orlando, Fla.: Academic Press. (4) DIRECTIVE 2008/50/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 21 May 2008 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe (5) Air Quality Guidelines for Europe, 2nd Edition, WHO Regional Publications: European Series No:91, 2000 (6) Watson and Chow, 2000, Reconciling Urban Fugitive Dust Emissions Inventory and Ambient Source Contribution Estimates: Summary of Current Knowledge and Needed Research, Deser Research Institute, Document No. 6110.4F. (7) SCAQMD (1993). CEQA Air Quality Handbook, South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-1 7.0 TRAFFIC NOISE AND VIBRATION 7.1 Introduction This assessment considers potential noise impacts resulting from the construction and operation of the proposed Project. It assesses the noise climate along the proposed route, and predicts changes between the existing noise levels (2012) with the Do-Minimum in the Future Year (2023), and Do-Something noise levels in The Future Year (2023). These noise level differences, in conjunction with the noise sensitivity of individual properties, are used to determine the likely noise impacts associated with the introduction of the scheme. The noise and vibration impacts of the scheme have been determined using the guidance contained within the Regulation on the Assessment and Management of Environmental Noise - (Turkish Noise Regulation – (TNR)) submitted by the Official Gazette Date and Number: 10.06.2010/27601. In this study, potential „do-something‟ noise impacts will be assessed for the: 2023 Base Case with Truck Ban on FSM Bridge and Toll Adjustment scenario provided from the Traffic forecast report of The Northern Marmara Motorway including the 3rd Bosphorus Crossing. The calculated noise levels will be compared against a Do-Minimum scenario. The Do-Minimum scenario describes the existing background noise levels without either proposed route. In the scope of project, background noise monitoring survey and noise modeling study for the construction and operation phases have been undertaken with Frekans Çevre Ölçüm Mühendislik Danışmanlık Tic. İth. İhr. Ltd Şti. as subcontractor. 7.2 Objective The objective of this chapter is to asses the potential noise and vibration impacts resulting from the construction and operation from the 3rd Bridge and North Marmara Highway project. In order to predict a wider "do something" scenario, all project fields were defined as a study area for 2023 traffic forecast. These can be viewed in Figure 7.1. Mitigation requirements for transportation noise originating from the 3rd Bridge and North Marmara Highway project were analyzed with respect to future projected operation conditions in 2023. The assessment of noise and vibration impacts has been undertaken in accordance with the TNR. In addition, this chapter provides the baseline noise levels in the area where construction of the new highway is planned. The developed noise model will be a tool for the city and General Directorate of Highways authorities in making decisions for planning, as it allows the prediction of the noise impact of future development projects on the highway and the surroundings. The purpose of this study is to predict and model the noise due to constructing operations and highway with the following specific objectives: Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-2 To determine, using noise mapping, the levels of noise which will be produced by construction activities. To determine, using noise mapping, the levels of noise which will be produced by vehicles during operation of the highway. To assess whether the noise level in any area exceeds the criteria in the relevant noise regulation or guideline. To determine the needed barrier volume and locations to mitigate the environmental noise to desired levels. 7.3 Definition of Noise and Vibration? Noise: The simplest definition of noise is 'unwanted sound' which can be produced by many sources such as; construction equipment, vibrating loudspeakers, operating machine tools, friction between road surfaces and vehicles. There are two important characteristics of sound or noise: frequency and loudness. Sound/Noise is a mechanical wave that results from the vibration of particles of the medium through which the sound/noise wave is moving. Either mechanical waves such as sound or electromagnetic waves such as infrared have a value of frequency. The number of repeated event occurrences per unit time can be stated as a definition of frequency. Vibration: Vibration is a mechanical phenomenon whereby oscillations occur about an equilibrium point. Vibration is usually an undesirable situation. For example, the vibrational motions of engines, trucks, construction equipment and tools in an operation are typically unwanted. A certain level of noise is an inevitable side effect of aggregates production required for road building, for example. The exposure of the aggregates by mechanical stripping of soil and rock, extraction by digging or blasting, loading of the aggregate onto trucks or conveyors, and processing, all generate noise. Most of these activities take place in the open, increasing the potential for noise to be heard beyond site boundaries. The most significant source of vibration is blasting with explosives, as ground vibration from other sources (such as mobile plant and heavy fixed equipment) is generally not felt outside the site (Walker, A. 2004. “Environmental Noise”. ISBN 0-538003-4-2.). Blasting prior to excavation is rarely needed at sand, gravel or clay operations but is common at hard rock quarries, where it is used to reduce the rock mass to fragments that can be easily excavated using standard machinery. During blasting, energy is „lost' in the form of noise and ground vibration. In general, the level of vibration increases with the amount of explosive used, and decreases with the distance between the blast and receptor. Noise can seriously affect people in noise sensitive locations and interfere with their ability to relax, sleep, or communicate, causing stress and annoyance, with consequences for psychological wellbeing. Blasting may also give rise to „air overpressure' – airborne pressure waves – that can have similar effects to ground vibration (Maslen, A. 2004. “Environmental effects of quarry blasting”. ISBN 0-9538003-4-2.). 7.4 General Approach to Assessment 7.4.1 Introduction This chapter presents the assessment of the noise impact caused by the construction and operation of the project. During the construction of the highway and bridge, construction activities and traffic flow will increase Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-3 the sound emissions and cause additional noise in neighborhood. These effects are also compared with the existing baseline noise levels which were measured in April,2013. The noise model were developed with the commercial noise modeling software IMMI v2011-2. The calculations were carried out using the XPS31-133 French Standard which is recommended by the Turkish Noise Directive and European Commission for the Assessment of environmental noise caused by sources such as highway, bridges, and tunnels, by using the emission values mentioned on “Guide du bruit des transports terrestres, fasciculeprevision des niveaux sonores CETUR 1980” document. 7.4.2 Legislation and Guidance The significance of predicted changes in environmental noise caused by construction and highway is evaluated by reference to the Turkish Noise Regulations and IFC Health and Safety Guidelines for Toll Roads. 7.4.2.1 Turkish Noise Regulation Environmental noise and vibration is controlled by the Regulation on the Assessment and Management of Environmental Noise - CGDYY (Official Gazette Date and Number: 10.06.2010/27601). Noise Criteria For New Roads Noise emission from construction sites is regulated by noise criteria specified by Regulation 18. Noise limits applicable to transportation noise from highways are provided in App VII-Table 1 of the above mentioned regulation. Noise abatement measures should achieve the levels given in Table 7.1 at the nearest off-site receptor location. Table 7-1 Highway- Environmental Noise Limits , Turkey (Leq dBA) New Road Upgrading of Existing Road Land Use Type Day (07- Evening Night (22- Day (07- Evening Night (22- 19) (19-22) 07) 19) (19-22) 07) Industrial Area (Heavy Industries) 67 62 57 72 67 62 Commercial area with noise- sensitive area where workplaces 63 58 53 68 63 58 are predominant (commercial area) Commercial area with noise- sensitive area where residential 65 60 55 70 65 60 buildings are predominant (mixed commercial / residential area) Noise-sensitive areas where educational, cultural, health institutes, or summer residential and camping areas are 60 55 50 65 60 55 predominant (residential areas for recreational purpose, educational, hospitals) Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-4 Noise and Vibration Criteria for Construction Noise emission from construction sites is at the nearest off-site receptor location regulated by noise criteria specified by Regulation 23 of the TNR and provides maximum allowable noise levels indicated in App VII- Table 5. The limiting values were submitted on Table 7.2. Table 7-2 Construction Noise Limits , Turkey (Leq dBA) Operation Lday (dBA) Building 70 Road 75 Other Sources 70 Vibration criteria from blasting sites is at the nearest off-site receptor location specified by Regulation 25 of the TNR and provides maximum allowable noise levels indicated in App VII-Table 6. The limiting values are shown on Table 7.3. Table 7-3 Blasting Vibration Limits , Turkey Frequency Peak Particle Velocity (mm/s) 1 5 4-10 19 30-100 50 Limiting peak particle velocity values changes linear between ranges. For frequencies between 1Hz – 4 Hz, PPV changes 5 mm/s to 19 mm/s, 10 Hz – 30 Hz, PPV changes 19 mm/s to 50 mm/s linearly. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-5 7.4.2.2 IFC Health and Safety Guidelines for Toll Roads As is mentioned on the document of “IFC Health and Safety Guidelines for Toll Roads”, applying the Fedaral Highways Administration (FHWA) Noise Abatement Criteria is recommended. FHWA requires assessment at affected existing activities, developed lands, and undeveloped lands for which development is planned, designed and programmed. At critical locations, traffic noise is computed for the project's design year, which is often 20 years from the onset of environmental studies. This computation uses the traffic for the hour with the worst impact “on a regular basis.” In practice, traffic engineers often predict traffic volumes and speeds at several times during an average design-year day, and then noise computations decide the “worst” hour. Because assessment is for a single hour rather than for a 24-hour period, the noise metric is an hourly one, Leq(h). Table 7-4 Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC), FHWA Hourly A-weighted Sound Level (dBA) Activity L (h) L (h) Description of Activity Category Category eq 10 Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary 57 60 significance and serve an important public need and A Exterior Exterior where preservation of those qualities is essential if the area if to contine to servie its intended purpose. Picnic area, recreation areas, playgrounds, active 67 70 B sports areas, partk, residences, motels, hotels, Exterior Exterior schools, churches, libraries and hospitals. 72 75 Developed lands, properties, or activities not included C Exterior Exterior in Categories A and B above. -- Undeveloped Lands. D -- Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, 52 55 E schools, churches, libraries and hospitals and Interior Interior auditoriums. 7.4.3 The Study Area The study area extends along the 3rd Bridge and Northern Marmara Highway Project and is shown in Figure 7.2. The project area is located in Northern side of Istanbul in a densely forest highland area which starts from Mahmutbey at the European side and extends to to Reşadiye at Asia. The baseline survey area for the noise and vibration assessment is defined along the route in a 1 km wide corridor and it focus mainly on residential areas and undeveloped habitats. The Calculation Area extendsto a minimum 2km wide corridor along the route within the study area. The project, located in Istanbul's outer northern metropolitan area, will pass through three main residential areas which are Başakşehir,Ümraniye, Sultanbeyli. The project route also passes fifteen small towns; Işıklar, Odayeri, Gümüşdere, Uskumruköy, Demirci, Garipçe, Poyraz, Kaynarca, Alibahadır, Paşamandıra, Öğümce, İshaklı, Reşadiye, Alemdağ, Paşaköy. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-6 The project area has been zoned into four sub sections shown in Table 7.5 to facilitate the design, planning and assessment of the corridor. Sections 1 and 2 of the project are located on the European side and the rest of the sections are in Asia. Section 1 - Mahmut Bey - Odayeri; Relatively high population in Mahmutbey -Başakşehir region and densly forest area between Başakşehir and Odayeri. Section 2 - Odayeri - Bridge; Densly forests,P only residential area is Uskumruköy region. Section 3 - Bridge - Paşaköy ; Densly forests and with a small resident population on semi-rural land. Section 4- Çamlık - Reşadiye ; Relatively high population in Alemdağ and urban forests. Table 7-5 Project Sub-Sections Sections From (WGS 84) To (WGS 84) Section 1 Mahmutbey (654062 E, 4548268 N) Odayeri (654984 E, 4566097 N) Section 2 İhsaniye (652215E, 4566739 N) Bridge (676466 E, 4563808 N) Section 3 Bridge (678619 E, 4562805 N) Paşaköy (693259 E, 4539872 N) Section 4 Reşadiye (691349 E, 4546887 N) Çamlık, Ümraniye (678279 E, 4546456 N) As the project route pass through different regions, the height of the residences in the study area changes. In Başakşehir the residences are predominantly 10 - 12 storey buildings. They are situated in an average of 100 metres distance adjacent to the road corridor on the west of the proposed route. The other residential parts of the project predominantly consist of 1-2 storey buildings. They are situated at the periphery of the road corridor. The minimum distance to the route at the European side is 50 metres. However closer residential properties are situated on the Asian Side. The heights of the buildings peripheral to the project route are shown on Figures 7.2 to 7.13 below. Other noise sensitive receptors within the project area in Section 1 of the route comprise: Ahmet Kabaklı Primary School at Başakşehir, Aydoğdu Kindergarden, Oyakkent Primary School, Işıklar Town Primary School; in Section 2 such receptors include Koç University and in Section 3 Bozhane Primary School and İshaklı Primary School. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-7 Figure 7-1 Study Area Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-8 Figure 7-2 Başakşehir Building Heights Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-9 Figure 7-3 Odayeri Building Heights Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-10 Figure 7-4 Uskumruköy Building Heights Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-11 Figure 7-5 Demirciköy Building Heights Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-12 Figure 7-6 Poyraz Building Heights Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-13 Figure 7-7 Paşamandıra Building Heights Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-14 Figure 7-8 Ögümce Building Heights Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-15 Figure 7-9 Hüseyinli Building Heights Figure 7-10 Alemdağ Building Heights Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-16 Figure 7-11 Paşaköy Building Heights Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-17 Figure 7-12 Ümraniye Building Heights Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-18 Figure 7-13 Çamlık Building Heights Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-19 7.4.4 Baseline Methods The baseline noise monitoring was conducted along the proposed route by following ISO 1996-2 : Acoustics – Description and measurement of environmental noise. In the TNR, the noise from transport systems is described in terms of the equivalent continuous sound pressure level of LAeq. In addition to LAeq values, LA90 and LA10 and LCmax values were also noted. LAeq is the equivalent continuous sound level. It is a type of average and is used to describe a fluctuating noise in terms of a average noise level over the sample period. LA10 is the sound level that is exceeded for 10% of the sample period. It is typically used as a descriptor for traffic noise. LA90 is the sound level that is exceeded for 90% of the sample period. It is typically used as a descriptor for background noise. All monitoring was undertaken using a fully calibrated Svantek 957 and Svantek 949 automatic recording environmental noise analyzers, which is classed as a Type 1 meter according to IEC 61712. Field calibrations were conducted with Svantek SV 30 A calibrator. The weather at all times during the monitoring period was within the limits specified in ISO 1996-2. The wind speed was below 5 m/s and meteorological conditions of each location are presented in the measurement forms submitted in Appendix B to this assessment chapter. Measurements at all three locations were made „free field‟ at a height of 1.5 m. above ground level. To obtain an overview of the existing background noise levels, 15 minute attended noise measurements were conducted at 91 locations, representing typical background conditions at locations and presented in Appendix B. Measurements of noise levels of LA10, LA90, LCmax and LAeq have been sampled. Unattended 24 hour noise measurements were conducted from 7 noise sensitive residential along the project route. In addition to the measurement locations, all properties within the study area have been defined as usage for assessment. The properties of usages have been categorized as follows: Industrial Area (IA) Commercial area with noise sensitive area where workplaces are predominant (CRA) Commercial area with noise sensitive area where residential buildings are predominant (RCA) Noise sensitive areas where educational, cultural, health institutes or summer residential, recreational and camping areas are predominant. (RA) In addition to these categories also forest fields (F) exists in project route which have no limiting values in the TNR. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-20 Table 7-6 Baseline Monitoring Locations ID USAGE Coordinates (WGS84) Coordinates (ED50) Loc 1 RCA 35T E 0652114, N 4549796 E 0652162, N 4549476 Loc 2 RCA 35T E 0652180, N 4551188 E 0652228, N 4551369 Loc 3 RCA 35T E 0652127, N 4552077 E 0652176, N 4552258 Loc 4 RCA 35T E 0652010, N 4553323 E 0652059, N 4553504 Loc 5 RA 35T E 0651624, N 4554053 E 0651673, N 4554234 Loc 6 IA 35T E 0634538, N 4553987 E 6545878, N 4554168 Loc 7 CRA 35T E 0651242, N 4556314 E 0651291, N 4556495 Loc 8 F 35T E 0651744, N 4557451 E0651790, N 4557632 Loc 9 F 35T E 0651721, N 4558897 E 0651770, N 4559075 Loc 10 F 35T E 061409, N 4959449 E 0615145, N 4559632 Loc 11 F 35T E0651893, N 4559793 Loc 12 F 35T E 0650935, N 4564816 E 0650984, N 4564997 Loc 13 F 35T E 0651139, N 4564434 E 0651188, N 4564615 Loc 14 F 35T E 0651501, N 4564880 E 0651737, N 4565061 Loc 15 F 35T E 0651689, N 4564367 E 0651737, N 4564548 Loc 16 F 35T E 0652167, N 4563825 E 0652215, N 4564006 Loc 17 F 35T E 0653029, N 4563958 E 0653075, N 4564006 Loc 18 F 35T E 0653222, N 4565544 E 0653271 , N 4564823 Loc 19 F 35T E 0655199, N 4566233 E 0654879, N 4566414 Loc 20 F 35T E 0655199, N 4566535 E 0655248, N 4566716 Loc 21 RCA 35T E 0655662, N 4566478 E 0655711, N 4566659 Loc 22 F 35T E 0656035, N 4565931 E 0656085, N 4566112 Loc 23 F 35T E 0657997, N 4565715 E 0658046, N 4565896 Loc 24 F 35T E 0658404, N 4566104 E 0658452, N 4566284 Loc 25 F 35T E 0658333, N 4566640 E 0658382, N 4566544 Loc 26 F 35T E 0658589, N 4566640 E 0658638, N 4566821 Loc 27 F 5T E 0659325, N 4566765 E 0659284, N 4566946 Loc 28 F 35T E 0661336, N 4566355 E 0661385, N 4566536 Loc 29 F 35T E 0661705, N 4566071 E 0661752, N 4566252 Loc 30 F 35T E 0665302, N 4565213 E 0665351, N 4565394 Loc 31 CRA 35T E 0666119, N 4566601 E 0666168, N 4566782 Loc 32 RCA 35T E 0667700, N 456014 E 0667749, N 4566193 Loc 33 F 35T E 0668889, N 4565693 E 0668938, N 4565874 Loc 34 RCA 35T E 0669662, N 4565588 E 0669711, N 4565769 Loc 35 F 35T E 0670682, N 4565934 E 0670732, N 4566115 Loc 36 RCA 35T E 0670941, N 4565934 E 0670990, N 4565793 Loc 37 F 35T E 0668962, N 4566355 E 0669010, N 4566535 Loc 38 F 35T E 0672167, N 4566381 E 0672156, N 4566562 Loc 39 F 35T E 0673003, N 4566501 E 0673052, N 4566682 Loc 40 F 35T E 0674621, N 4563886 E 0674669, N 4564289 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-21 ID USAGE Coordinates (WGS84) Coordinates (ED50) Loc 41 F 35T E 0675457, N 4563886 E 0675506, N 4564067 Loc 42 F 35T E 0676837, N 44564622 E 0676886, N 4564803 Loc 43 RA 35T E 0677027, N 4566699 E 0677076, N 4566880 Loc 44 Not measured Loc 45 CRA 35T E 0694550 , N 4536974 E 0694639, N 4537155 Loc 46 F 35T E 0693758, N 4538458 E 0693807, N 4538638 Loc 47 F 35T E 0693396, N 4539517 E 0693445, N 4539697 Loc 48 F 35T E 0692328, N 4540159 E 0692377, N 4540340 Loc 49 CRA 35T E 0691651, N 4541602 E 0691700, N 4540340 Loc 50 F 35T E 0691302, N 4541602 E 0691351, N 4542277 Loc 51 RA 35T E 0690816, N 4541536 E 0690865, N 4541717 Loc 52 RCA 35T E 0685924, N 4541660 E 0689973, N 4541841 Loc 53 CRA 35T E 0691422, N 4543028 E 0691471, N 4543209 Loc 54 RCA 35T E 0691078, N 4546047 E 0691127, N 4546228 Loc 55 RCA 35T E 0691325, N 4546683 E 0691284, N 4546863 Loc 56 CRA 35T E 0689683, N 4546102 E 0689732, N 4546283 Loc 57 RCA 35T E 0688112, N 4546134 E 0688161, N 4546315 Loc 58 F 35T E 0686456, N 4545977 E 0686505, N 4546158 Loc 59 F 35T E 0686049, N 4545947 E 0686098, N 4546128 Loc 60 RCA 35T E 0684109, N 4546522 E 0684158, N 4546703 Loc 61 RCA 35T E 0683821, N 4546522 E 0683870, N 4547069 Loc 62 RCA 35T E 0682552, N 4546889 E 0682601, N 4547071 Loc 63 RCA 35T E 0680720, N 4546172 E 0680769, N 4546352 Loc 64 F 35T E 0680107, N 4546535 E 0680156, N 4546715 Loc 65 F 35T E 0691559, N 4547551 E 0691608, N 4547732 Loc 66 RCA 35T E 0690663, N 4550378 E 0690711, N 4550559 Loc 67 RCA 35T E 0690704, N 4551037 E 0690753, N 4551218 Loc 68 CRA 35T E 0691420, N 4552061 E 0691469, N 4552242 Loc 69 RCA 35T E 0691918, N 4554049 E 0691967, N 4554230 Loc 70 F 35T E 0692769, N 4553782 E 0692818, N 4553963 Loc 71 RCA 35T E 0691700, N 4554818 E 0691749, N 4554999 Loc 72 CRA 35T E 0691803, N 4555537 E 0691849, N 4555716 Loc 73 F 35T E 0691897, N 4556526 E 0691945, N 4556707 Loc 74 F 35T E 0690606, N 4557053 E 0690655, N 4558134 Loc 75 RCA 35T E 0690373, N 4558180 E 0690422, N 4558361 Loc 76 RCA 35T E 0690325, N 4558438 E 0690284, N 4558619 Loc 77 RCA 35T E 0689601, N 4559323 E 0689650, N 4559505 Loc 78 F 35T E 0688118, N 4561448 E 0688167, N 4561673 Loc 79 RCA 35T E 0687265, N 4561448 E 0687314, N 456625 Loc 80 F 35T E 0685072, N 4562152 E 0685121, N 4562333 Loc 81 RCA 35T E 0684683, N 4562536 E 0684732, N 4562717 Loc 82 F 35T E 0684888, N 4562848 E 0684937, N 4563029 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-22 ID USAGE Coordinates (WGS84) Coordinates (ED50) Loc 83 F 35T E 0682344, N 4563041 E 0682393, N 4563221 Loc 84 RCA 35T E 0617481, N 4562942 E 0682393, N 4563221 Loc 85 F 35T E 0680588, N 4562941 E 0680637, N 4563122 Loc 86 F 35T E 0679086, N 4563290 E 0679675, N 4563471 Loc 87 F 35T E 0678710, N 4562710 E 0678759, N 4562891 Loc 88 RCA 35T E 0678980, N 4563831 E 0679029, N 4564012 Loc 89 RCA 35T E 0679086, N 4563192 E 0679135, N 4563373 Loc 90 Not Measured Loc 91 RCA 35T E 0692294, N 4554277 E 06923443, N 4554458 Loc 92 RCA 35T E 0653212, N 4565544 E 0653261, N 4565725 Loc 93 CRA 35T E 0652009, N 4566101 E 0652058, N 4566283 7.4.5 Impact Assessment Methods To assess the potential noise impacts, calculated day, evening and night traffic noise levels were compared with the TNR limit values and FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria mentioned in the IFC Guidelines for planned/new roads according to building usage. In addition calculated construction noise levels were compared with the construction noise limits submitted in the regulations. In order to decide impact amount and mitigation needs, calculated levels were also compared with the exiting background noise levels. The limit value of noise which is set out in the TNR may be lower than the existing baseline noise. For this reason, impact assessments should be determined according to existing baseline limits, which the TNR does not contain. If we try to compare the noise criteria on a site which has a background noise of 70 dBA and calculated traffic noise impact of 67 dBA, the traffic noise will be masked by the existing background noise. However it will exceed TNR limiting values. For that reason the impact level on existing background was also assessed at the baseline noise survey locations, althoughmitigation requirements was only decided according to TNR limits. 7.4.6 Noise Assessment Traffic noise is the main source of noise pollution caused in urban areas. With the ever-increasing number of vehicles on road and construction of new roads, the sound caused by the cars and exhaust system of autos, trucks, buses and motorcycles is the chief reason for noise pollution. To keep environment peaceful; society mentally and physically healthy, it is important to follow the noise and regulations criteria. The aim of the followed regulation is mentioned in the first subject of the document that: "This Regulation takes preventive measures for the negative effects of noise pollution on the peace and comfort, physical and mental health of the society. The regulation further contains topics such as; informing the public about the negative effects of environmental noise, building up an action plan to prevent and reduce high level of noise and to determinate degrees of exposure according to the reports and noise maps". Impact magnitude of road traffic noise in the mentioned regulation can be defined as "allowed" and "not- allowed" according to the limit values mentioned in Appendix-VII Table 1 of the document. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-23 7.4.7 Sensitivity of Noise Receptors The sensitivity of receptors to traffic noise and vibration has been determined based on the criteria provided in Table 7.7. Table 7-7 Sensitivity Criteria Sensitivity Description Examples of Receptors Residential Receptors where people Quiet outdoor areas used for recreation or operations are Conference facilities High particularly susceptible to Auditoria/studios noise Schools in daytime Hospitals/residential care homes Offices Receptors moderately Restaurants sensitive to noise, where Medium Sports grounds when spectator or noise is not a normal part it may cause some of the event and where quiet conditions are necessary (e.g. distraction or disturbance tennis, golf ) Residences and other buildings not occupied during working hours. Receptors where Factories and working environments with existing high noise Low distraction or disturbance levels. from noise is minimal Sports grounds when spectator or noise is a normal part of the event. 7.4.8 Impact Magnitude and Significance of Road Traffic and Construction Noise The perception of sound changes due to noise level increase. Also individuals‟ response to noise varies widely. The amount of impact due to noise level increase given in Environmental Noise Measurements and Assessment Guide of Turkish Ministry of Environment are set out in Table 7.8. Table 7-8 . Perception of Noise Level Increase Noise Level Increase (dBA) Significance Impact of Noise 0 No significance No impact 3 Slightly Noticed Neglible 3 -5 Easily Noticed Minor 5 -7 Rare Complaints Moderate 7 Disturbing Moderate + 7 -10 Complaints Major 10 - 15 Extensive complaints Major + 15 - 20 Group Reaction Major ++ Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-24 7.4.9 Traffic Noise Prediction All predictions were made by using Wölfel, IMMI V2011-2 noise modeling software referenced to XPS31-133 French Standard, which is recommended by the EU and Turkish Noise Directive. All calculations are based on the predicted traffic flows and quantities of vehicle types as mentioned in "Northern Marmara Motorway including 3rd Bosphorus Crossing, Traffic and Revenue Forecasts, December, 2012". Annual average speeds are assumed as the highest limits mentioned in related subject in Turkish Traffic Regulations. Detailed terrain levels, city plan, alignment of the road are registered in to the modeling software. In addition meteorological parameters are determined and referenced from the article, including meteorological information from the previous 30 years for Istanbul, published by "Meteorology Head Office of Republic of Turkey". The TNR sets out the limits for new roads in App-VII Table-1 for each different time period, which are "Day time (07:00-19:00), Evening time (19:00-23:00), Night time (23:00-07:00)". For that reason prediction results are given in Lday, Levening. Each of time periods are calculated and noise maps are presented in Appendix B to this chapter. According to guidance contained in the "Northern Marmara Motorway including 3rd Bosphorus Crossing, Traffic and Revenue Forecasts, December, 2012" document, predicted traffic flows at peak hours (08:00-09:00 and 17:00-18:00) were registered to the day time period. Forecasted 2023 annual hourly avarage road traffic load were used in determining Levening noise levels. Noise maps for night time periods were not determined due to lack of night time traffic flow data. While predicting night time noise levels the European Union document "Good Practice Guide For Strategic Noise Mapping and Production Of Associated Data On Noise Exposure" was used for predicting night period noise impact. .For road traffic, the methodology uses hourly light and heavy vehicle traffic data input, road surfacing and average speeds of light and heavy vehicles. In order to be on the safe side, forecasted peak hour (08:00 - 09:00) traffic flow for one direction added to the forecasted hourly average traffic flow for other direction. The speed of light and heavy vehicles was considered to be 100 km /h and 70 km/h respectively. The ground attenuation(G) factor was taken as 0.7 and all screening, topography, distance propagation factors were considered in the modeling. The topography of the project field was submitted on Figure 7.14. Peak hour traffic flow data per one direction is incl,uded in Table 7.10, where Class 1 represents the light vehicles, and Classes 2,3,4 and 5 represent heavy good vehicles. On the other hand opposite direction traffic flow data were calculated from the annual daily average traffic flow assumptions of the Northern Marmara Motorway including 3rd Bosphorus Crossing, Traffic and Revenue Forecasts Report. The total values of traffic flow data used in noise modeling software are presented in Tables 7.11 and 7.12. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-25 Figure 7-14 . Terrain Model The document "Good Practice Guide For Strategic Noise Mapping and Production Of Assosiated Data On Noise Exposure", prepared by WG - AEN ( European Commission Working Group Assessment of Exposure to Noise), states that "WG-AEN recommends that special long-term flow, composition and speed measurements are used to obtain real data or to develop conversion factors to obtain long-term day, evening and night data. In the case of agglomerations it may be necessary to derive separate factors for different types of roads. An example to obtain day flow (Qd), evening flow (Qe) and night flow (Qn) from a peak hour flow (Qpeak) is provided below". Table 7-9 WG - AEN Recommendations on Traffic Flow Road Traffic Flows Metropolitan / Main Roads Inter-District Roads Q -Flow for the 8 hour night = Q * 0.2 * 8 = Q * 0.1 * 8 night peak peak According to Table 7.9, for inter-district roads; it is expected that noise levels of night traffic would be 10 dBA lower than the peak hours. For that reason only noise maps of day and evening periods were generated and night period levels levels were predicated from peak hour figures. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-26 Table 7-10 Peak Hour Traffic Flow Per Direction (08:00 - 09:00) Mahmutbey - odayeri Peak hour (08:00-09:00) one way flow Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Total 2015 1.925 343 210 236 3 2.717 2016 2.757 491 164 184 2 3.598 2017 3.650 650 217 244 3 4.764 2018-23 4.137 737 246 277 3 5.400 Odayeri - Bridge Peak hour (08:00-09:00) one way flow Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Total 2015 1.529 272 280 315 4 2.400 2016 2.290 408 219 246 3 3.166 2017 3.023 538 289 325 4 4.179 2018 3.602 641 344 387 4 4.978 2019-23 3.906 696 373 420 5 5.400 Bridge Paşamandıra Peak hour (08:00-09:00) one way flow Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Total 2015 1.581 282 296 332 4 2.495 2016 2.363 421 232 261 3 3.280 2017 3.106 553 305 343 4 4.311 2018 3.699 659 364 409 5 5.136 2019-23 3.890 693 382 430 5 5.400 Paşamandıra Paşaköy Peak hour (08:00-09:00) one way flow Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Total 2015 603 107 312 351 4 1.377 2016 816 145 423 475 6 1.865 2017 1.559 278 322 362 4 2.525 2018 1.820 324 376 423 5 2.948 2019 2.125 378 439 494 6 3.442 2020 2.480 442 513 576 7 4.018 2021-23 3.333 594 689 775 9 5.400 Çamlık Reşediye Peak hour (08:00-09:00) one way flow Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Total 2015 784 140 370 416 5 1.715 2016 1.035 184 489 550 6 2.264 2017 1.846 329 382 430 5 2.992 2018 2.154 384 446 501 6 3.491 2019 2.515 448 521 585 7 4.076 2020 2.935 523 608 683 8 4.757 2021-23 3.332 593 690 776 9 5.400 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-27 Table 7-11 Peak Time( Day time) Two Directional Traffic Flow, Lday Day Period Peak Time Hourly Two Direction Total Sections Light Vehicle Heavy Vehicle Mahmutbey - odayeri 4.773 1.425 Odayeri - Bridge 4.506 1.674 Bridge Paşamandıra 4.506 1.674 Paşamandıra Paşaköy 4.488 1.691 Çamlık Reşediye 3.845 2.293 Table 7-12 Evening Period Traffic Load Evening Period Hourly Two Direction Traffic Flow Sections Light Vehicle Heavy Vehicle Mahmutbey - odayeri 1.272 323 Odayeri - Bridge 1.201 360 Bridge Paşamandıra 1.196 363 Paşamandıra Paşaköy 1.025 453 Çamlık Reşediye 1.024 453 Figure 7-15 Sample 3D Model from Study Area Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-28 7.4.10 Predicting Noise Levels The traffic noise assessment was undertaken to the guidance specified Turkish and European Union Noise directive. The noise maps calculated at 4 metres elevation from the ground level with 10 metres x 10 metres grid size. The traffic noise propagation model, IMMI was used to calculate traffic noise levels for the traffic flows shown on Table 7.11 and Table 7.12. The noise contour maps, representing the changes in noise levels resulting from the project were included in Appendix B. Presented noise maps represent environmental noise impacts without mitigation. Figure 7-16 Sample Noise Map 3D 7.4.11 Operational Vibration It has been found that ground vibrations produced by road traffic are unlikely to cause perceptible structural vibration in properties located near to well-maintained and smooth road surfaces. The Authority does not therefore consider it necessary to set limits for vibration during the operational phase of a road scheme. 7.4.12 Constructional Noise – Impact Assessment Methodology This section presents details of the model input parameters including noise sources used for the noise propagation model of construction activities, which are basically explicated in three main phases. Before starting to give information about input parameters, actions in the phases of the project should be explained. Since the project duration will be 2 years long, consisting of different construction activities, noise impact generated from these activities will not be static. Although the general terms of the construction of phases are similar, their application locations will follow each other. For these reasons noise models were calculated for 26 different locations where the proposed project passes near to noise-sensitive locations such as residential, schools etc. In addition to these locations, 4 construction camp area locations were also modeled. In order to evaluate the noise from construction it is necessary to define the various activities to be undertaken and the equipment to be used. The construction schedule and progress chart were presented in figure 7.15. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-29 Construction Schedule Months 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 Earth Works Engıneerıng Works ( Tunnels & Vıaducts) Superstructure Works Figure 7-17. Construction Schedule & Progress Machines and equipment quantities that will be used for different construction activities at different locations are defined on table 7.13. The noise emission characteristic and sound power levels of the machines are submitted on table 7.14. As the construction activities would be distributed in the field concerned, construction noise sources were defined as an area source in the noise modeling. The total sound power level of construction activities is shown on Tables 7.15 - 7.20. The machine and equipment noise levels were taken from Roadway Construction Noise Model User‟s Guide (RCM) of the U.S. Federal Highway Administration. and IMMI noise modeling software database. Table 7-13 Construction Equipment Construction Phases Earthwork Superstructure Engineering Machine & Section 1- Section 3- Section 1- Section 3- Section 1- Section 3- Equioments 2 4 2 4 2 4 Compressor 4 2 Concrete Batch Plant 3 3 Concrete Pump 4 5 Crane 4 6 Distributer 1 1 Dozer 14 8 Excavator 35 16 4 4 Fan 4 4 Finisher 7 7 Generater 9 9 4 2 Greyder 7 5 2 2 Grooving Machine Jumbo 2 2 Loader 6 6 Low Bed Trailer 7 4 Roller 14 12 11 14 Shotcrete 2 3 Sprinkler 14 8 4 4 Transmixer 16 24 Truck 91 1 5 4 1 Water Pump 2 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-30 Table 7-14 Sound Power Level Calculations of Construction Machines LAmax % Operation Time Machine /Equipment Impact Lw (dBA) @ 15m (UF) Excavator No 85 40 104,5 Loader No 80 40 99,5 Truck No 84 40 103,5 Grooving Machine No 85 40 106,2 Distributer No 84 40 103,5 Generater No 82 40 102,5 Roller No 83 40 101,0 Sprinkler No 84 40 103,5 Dozer No 85 40 104,5 Greyder No 85 40 104,5 Concrete Pump No 82 40 98,5 Compressor No 80 40 99,5 Concrete Batch Plant No 83 15 98,3 Finisher No 75 40 116,7 Transmixer No 83 40 98,3 Shotcrete No 85 20 101,5 Crane No 85 16 100,6 Water Pump No 70 100 93,5 Maximum A weighted levels LAmax at 15 metres from the machines were sholwn on Table 7.15. Noise power levels were calculated by using LAmax, usage factor in the period and distance of measurement (15 metres). Impact positive equipment have impulsive noise characteristics. Usage factor (% operational time) accounts for the fraction of time that the equipment is in use over the specified time period. The sound power levels were calculated by using the formula: Lw=LAmax+10log (U.F) + 20*log(15) Table 7-15 Total Sound Power Level of Construction Equipment used in Earth Works at Section 1 & 2 Lw (dBA) Section 1& 2 Earth Work Equipment Per one Machine Total Quantity at 15 m dBA Excavator 104,5 35 119,9 Loader 99,5 14 111,0 Truck 103,5 91 123,1 Roller 101,0 14 112,5 Sprinkler 103,5 14 115,0 Dozer 104,5 14 116,0 Greyder 104,5 7 113,0 LowBed Trailer 103,5 7 112,0 Total (dBA) 126,4 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-31 Table 7-16 Total Sound Power Level of Construction Equipment used in Earth Works at Section 3&4 Section 3 & 4 Lw (dBA) Earth Work Equipment Per one Machine Total Quantity at 15 m dBA Excavator 104,5 16 116,5 Loader 99,5 4 105,5 Truck 103,5 105 123,7 Roller 101,0 12 111,8 Sprinkler 103,5 8 112,5 Dozer 104,5 8 113,5 Greyder 104,5 5 111,5 LowBed Trailer 103,5 4 109,5 Total (dBA) 125,6 Table 7-17 Total Sound Power Level of Construction Equipments used in Superstreucture Works at Section 1&2 Section 1 & 2 Lw (dBA) Superstructure Work Equipment Per one Machine Total Quantity at 15 m dBA Roller 101,0 11 111,4 Greyder 104,5 2 107,5 Sprinkler 103,5 4 109,5 Generater 102,5 9 112,0 Compressor 99,5 1 99,5 Finisher 116,7 7 125,2 Grooving Machine 106,2 1 106,2 Distributer 103,5 4 109,5 Total (dBA) 125,9 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-32 Table 7-18 Total Sound Power Level of Construction Equipments used in Superstreucture Works at Section 3&4 Section 3 & 4 Lw (dBA) Superstructure Work Equipment Per one Machine Total Quantity at 15 m dBA Roller 101,0 4 107,0 Greyder 104,5 16 116,5 Sprinkler 103,5 4 109,5 Generater 102,5 9 112,0 Compressor 99,5 1 99,5 Finisher 116,7 7 125,2 Grooving Machine 106,2 2 109,2 Distributer 103,5 1 103,5 Total (dBA) 126,2 Table 7-19 Total Sound Power Level of Construction Equipments used in Engineering Works at Section 1&2 Section 1 & 2 Lw (dBA) Engineering Work Equipment Per one Machine Total Quantity at 15 m dBA Concrete Batch Plant 98,3 3 103,1 Loader 99,5 6 107,3 Transmixer 98,3 24 112,1 Concrete Pump 98,5 5 105,5 Generater 102,5 4 108,5 Water Pump 93,5 2 96,5 Crane 100,6 6 108,3 Excavator 104,5 4 110,5 Jumbo 104,5 2 107,5 Truck 103,5 4 109,5 Compressor 99,5 6 107,3 Shotcrete 101,5 3 106,3 Fan 100,0 4 106,0 Total (dBA) 119,1 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-33 Table 7-20 Total Sound Power Level of Construction Equipments used in Engineering Works at Section 3&4 Section 3 & 4 Lw (dBA) Engineering Work Equipment Per one Machine Total Quantity at 15 m dBA Concrete Batch Plant 98,3 3 103,1 Loader 99,5 6 107,3 Transmixer 98,3 16 110,3 Concrete Pump 98,5 5 105,5 Generater 102,5 4 108,5 Water Pump 93,5 2 96,5 Crane 100,6 4 106,6 Excavator 104,5 4 110,5 Jumbo 104,5 2 107,5 Truck 103,5 4 109,5 Compressor 99,5 6 107,3 Shotcrete 101,5 2 104,5 Fan 100,0 4 106,0 Total (dBA) 118,6 When the total amounts of construction activity noise levels were examined, the highest construction levels were observed during „Earthworks‟ for section 1 and 2 and „Superstructure‟ for sections 3 and 4. For that reason earthworks noise levels were the only registered entries for construction phase at section 1 & 2. Similarly only superstructure noise levels were modeled for section 3 and 4 as a worst case scenario. The construction noise assessment was undertaken using the guidance specified in the Turkish Noise directive. The noise maps were calculated at 4 metres elevation from the ground level with 10 metre x 10 metre grid size are shown in Appendix C to this chapter. The noise maps presented show the environmental noise impacts without mitigation. 7.4.13 Constructional Vibration Impact Tunnelling can cause a vibration impact as ground borne noise. This is a low frequency noise which could be perceived in buildings above the tunnel in a manner similar to vibration. The land sections of the tunnel are located mostly under woodlands and some sensitive buildings above the route. Some impacts from this source may occur at the beginning of the Bridge at European part where Koç University is located above of the tunnel. The TNR establishes limit values for vibration (see Section 7.4.2.1). The Contractor will be required to monitor vibration on the commencement of relevant activities to ensure these requirements are met and if the standards are exceeded measures will be taken to reduce vibration. Any su'ch locations will be identified by the contractor and discussions held with the relevant parties to ensure construction is managed to avoid adverse effects on use of the equipment. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-34 The vibration monitoring results of pervious blasting operations at Poyraz and Garipçe are shownon Tables 7.21 and 7.22 below. The results were monitored by the contractor and all the measured levels are in the vibration limits. Table 7-21 Garipçe Vibration Monitoring Results (m) (kg) (kg) (kg) (Hz) (Hz) (Hz) (Hz) Date Hour Blast No Blast No Total Charge Total Charge Frequency (f) Frequency (f) Frequency (f) Frequency (f) Distance ( R ) Distance ( R ) z (PVV) (mm/s) x (PPV) (mm/s) x (PPV) (mm/s) y (PPV) (mm/s) Max. Peak Particle Max. Particle Peak Velocity (mm/s) Charge (W) Per Latency 1 01.04.2013 16:07 2,16 21 1,27 24 2,29 19 2,29 19 3170 40 858,42 2 03.04.2013 15:40 Below 1mm /s 385 20 998,96 3 05.04.2013 16:23 Below 1mm /s 410 27 998,96 4 09.04.2013 19:48 Below 1mm /s 300 7 999,57 5 10.04.2013 19:36 Below 1mm /s 1915 25 603,86 6 11.04.2013 16:57 0,762 85 0,635 100 1,52 85 1,52 85 1120 32 617,69 7 12.04.2013 19:18 Below 1mm /s 2105 25 614,01 8 13.04.2013 21:00 Below 1mm /s 1730 11 991,12 9 15.04.2013 18:18 Below 1mm /s 1120 22,5 603,32 10 16.04.2013 18:30 Below 1mm /s 1870 14,5 603,42 11 17.04.2013 18:58 Below 1mm /s 1890 11 617,29 12 18.04.2013 20:00 Below 1mm /s 1220 30 1051,96 13 19.04.2013 19:50 5,59 47 15,4 100 5,84 100 15,4 100 1820 10 81,16 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-35 Table 7-22 Poyraz Vibration Monitoring Results (m) (kg) (kg) (kg) (Hz) (Hz) (Hz) (Hz) Date Hour Blast No Blast No stance ( R ) stance ( R ) Total Charge Total Charge Frequency (f) Frequency (f) Frequency (f) Frequency (f) Frequency (f) Di z (PVV) (mm/s) z (PVV) (mm/s) x (PPV) (mm/s) x (PPV) (mm/s) y (PPV) (mm/s) Max. Peak Particle Max. Particle Peak Velocity (mm/s) Charge (W) Per Latency 1 02.04.2013 12:21 2,29 43 1,78 43 1,9 37 2,29 43 126,5 785 25 2 04.04.2013 11:38 2,41 21 1,52 28 2,16 21 2,41 21 117,5 630 28,6 3 05.04.2013 12:24 6,48 20 4,06 24 4,32 19 6,48 20 124,7 1520 95 4 06.04.2013 18:17 10,4 30 11,6 27 13,8 18 13,8 18 139,1 1670 170 5 09.04.2013 14:03 9,78 47 8,64 34 7,87 22 9,78 47 131,2 590 120 6 13.04.2013 12:19 4,19 11 2,41 18 4,95 13 4,95 13 118,6 1040 55 7 16.04.2013 19:50 5,84 16 3,94 23 4,7 20 5,84 16 137,3 2510 60 7.5 Baseline Noise monitoring for 15 minutes results of previously planned 93 locations are presented in Table 7.23, and monitoring for 24 hours are presented in Table 7-24. Noise measurements could not be conducted at locations 44 and 90. The details of baseline noise survey with background noise sources, location photos and data logging results are presented in Appendix E. . Table 7-23 Attended Baseline Noise Measurements Elapsed ID Usage Coordinates (WGS84) Time Leq A LA 10 LA 90 LC Max (Minutes) Loc 1 RCA 35T E 0652114, N 4549796 15 64,9 67,7 57,5 89,1 Loc 2 RCA 35T E 0652180, N 4551188 15 68,3 72,6 54,1 86,6 Loc 3 RCA 35T E 0652127, N 4552077 15 64,4 66,9 54,3 86,0 Loc 4 RCA 35T E 0652010, N 4553323 15 60,7 65,3 43,7 89,6 Loc 5 RA 35T E 0651624,N 4554053 15 55,3 59,7 46,2 82,5 Loc 6 IA 35T E 0634538, N 4553987 15 73,9 77,5 64,3 96,7 Loc 7 CRA 35T E 0651242, N 4556314 15 54,2 57,0 43,9 80,6 Loc 8 F 35T E 0651744, N 4557451 15 51,0 50,6 35,2 82,2 Loc 9 F 35T E 0651721, N 4558897 15 51,3 47,1 33,1 81,1 Loc 10 F 35T E 061409, N 4959449 15 46,2 46,3 33,3 81,0 Loc 11 F 35T E0651893, N 4559793 15 36,8 38,9 30,5 81,4 Loc 12 F 35T E 0650935, N 4564816 15 52,2 53,6 43,6 85,5 Loc 13 F 35T E 0651139, N 4564434 15 47,0 48,9 44,2 71,0 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-36 Elapsed ID Usage Coordinates (WGS84) Time Leq A LA 10 LA 90 LC Max (Minutes) Loc 14 F 35T E 0651501, N 4564880 15 46,5 48,2 41,2 92,7 Loc 15 F 35T E 0651689, N 4564367 15 44,4 45,9 38,3 74,6 Loc 16 F 35T E 0652167, N 4563825 15 40,8 43,5 35,0 87,4 Loc 17 F 35T E 0653029, N 4563958 15 47,2 48,7 38,4 90,1 Loc 18 F 35T E 0653222, N 4565544 15 50,7 51,5 43,4 105,5 Loc 19 F 35T E 0655199, N 4566233 15 63,4 66,3 53,6 93,9 Loc 20 F 35T E 0655199, N 4566535 15 51,8 53,6 47,0 95,2 Loc 21 RCA 35T E 0655662, N 4566478 15 45,3 48,6 40,6 85,4 Loc 22 F 35T E 0656035, N 4565931 15 45,7 48,7 39,5 91,3 Loc 23 F 35T E 0657997, N 4565715 15 46,9 50,2 36,9 86,9 Loc 24 F 35T E 0658404, N 4566104 15 42,8 44,9 38,5 83,8 Loc 25 F 35T E 0658333, N 4566640 15 42,4 44,5 39,0 85,2 Loc 26 F 35T E 0658589, N 4566640 15 47,4 50,1 41,6 93,6 Loc 27 F 5T E 0659325, N 4566765 15 46,7 48,8 42,0 83,3 Loc 28 F 35T E 0661336, N 4566355 15 41,1 47,9 38,3 79,8 Loc 29 F 35T E 0661705, N 4566071 15 43,8 46,0 40,6 80,2 Loc 30 F 35T E 0665302, N 4565213 15 43,8 46,5 37,0 83,5 Loc 31 CRA 35T E 0666119, N 4566601 15 55,0 52,8 43,6 87,5 Loc 32 RCA 35T E 0667700, N 456014 15 58,6 60,4 47,6 95,2 Loc 33 F 35T E 0668889, N 4565693 15 42,8 45,7 39,0 87,2 Loc 34 RCA 35T E 0669662, N 4565588 15 53,6 55,5 41,6 82,7 Loc 35 F 35T E 0670682, N 4565934 15 66,2 70,9 46,6 89,3 Loc 36 RCA 35T E 0670941, N 4565934 15 53,3 51,6 38,0 85,9 Loc 37 F 35T E 0668962, N 4566355 15 49,4 52,0 43,4 92,8 Loc 38 F 35T E 0672167, N 4566381 15 61,7 65,7 38,7 87,3 Loc 39 F 35T E 0673003, N 4566501 15 45,8 47,9 42,1 78,9 Loc 40 F 35T E 0674621, N 4563886 15 46,0 48,5 41,6 67,2 Loc 41 F 35T E 0675457, N 4563886 15 53,0 53,9 43,2 87,6 Loc 42 F 35T E 0676837, N 44564622 15 60,1 63,4 56,0 92,1 Loc 43 RA 35T E 0677027, N 4566699 15 55,0 56,6 49,6 92,3 Loc 45 CRA 35T E 0694550 , N 4536974 15 50,3 52,8 42,5 80,7 Loc 46 F 35T E 0693758, N 4538458 15 40,7 43,3 27,6 69,7 Loc 47 F 35T E 0693396, N 4539517 15 41,3 44,1 28,9 85,1 Loc 48 F 35T E 0692328, N 4540159 15 54,0 58,6 46,1 85,1 Loc 49 CRA 35T E 0691651, N 4541602 15 61,3 63,0 48,2 88,5 Loc 50 F 35T E 0691302, N 4541602 15 57,6 60,5 45,6 85,6 Loc 51 RA 35T E 0690816, N 4541536 15 60,3 60,4 44,9 93,5 Loc 52 RCA 35T E 0685924, N 4541660 15 61,9 64,8 56,6 86,2 Loc 53 CRA 35T E 0691422, N 4543028 15 55,4 58,7 40,9 90,1 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-37 Elapsed ID Usage Coordinates (WGS84) Time Leq A LA 10 LA 90 LC Max (Minutes) Loc 54 RCA 35T E 0691078, N 4546047 15 53,1 55,2 49,4 81,3 Loc 55 RCA 35T E 0691325, N 4546683 15 41,1 41,5 36,5 68,7 Loc 56 CRA 35T E 0689683, N 4546102 15 67,8 70,9 53,7 95,3 Loc 57 RCA 35T E 0688112, N 4546134 15 74,2 77,5 65,6 99,2 Loc 58 F 35T E 0686456, N 4545977 15 43,8 47,3 32,3 70,1 Loc 59 F 35T E 0686049, N 4545947 15 37,8 38,8 33,2 63,7 Loc 60 RCA 35T E 0684109, N 4546522 15 54,1 3,9 32,4 88,6 Loc 61 RCA 35T E 0683821, N 4546522 15 47,8 50,2 38,9 81,4 Loc 62 RCA 35T E 0682552, N 4546889 15 47,9 50,6 39,7 79,0 Loc 63 RCA 35T E 0680720, N 4546172 15 40,0 41,8 36,3 83,8 Loc 64 F 35T E 0680107, N 4546535 15 42,1 43,8 40,0 85,8 Loc 65 F 35T E 0691559, N 4547551 15 43,0 43,3 36,2 83,3 Loc 66 RCA 35T E 0690663, N 4550378 15 38,6 41,3 30,6 79,7 Loc 67 RCA 35T E 0690704, N 4551037 15 47,2 47,9 34,0 85,8 Loc 68 CRA 35T E 0691420, N 4552061 15 42,9 46,4 31,2 87,4 Loc 69 RCA 35T E 0691918, N 4554049 15 47,8 49,8 43,8 84,5 Loc 70 F 35T E 0692769, N 4553782 15 45,8 48,9 36,8 78,3 Loc 71 RCA 35T E 0691700, N 4554818 15 46,8 45,9 34,3 77,1 Loc 72 CRA 35T E 0691803, N 4555537 15 48,3 51,3 38,7 82,4 Loc 73 F 35T E 0691897, N 4556526 15 65,8 69,2 49,7 94,7 Loc 74 F 35T E 0690606, N 4557053 15 34,1 35,4 33,1 61,9 Loc 75 RCA 35T E 0690373, N 4558180 15 48,4 51,6 33,7 92,5 Loc 76 RCA 35T E 0690325, N 4558438 15 43,3 43,8 33,4 73,4 Loc 77 RCA 35T E 0689601, N 4559323 15 42,9 46,4 31,2 87,4 Loc 78 F 35T E 0688118, N 4561448 15 39,5 41,4 33,2 73,2 Loc 79 RCA 35T E 0687265, N 4561448 15 57,8 46,2 33,3 97,1 Loc 80 F 35T E 0685072, N 4562152 15 58,3 55,8 36,0 89,8 Loc 81 RCA 35T E 0684683, N 4562536 15 46,2 49,2 37,9 89,3 Loc 82 F 35T E 0684888, N 4562848 15 46,8 41,1 33,2 78,9 Loc 83 F 35T E 0682344, N 4563041 15 41,2 42,8 33,1 68,4 Loc 84 RCA 35T E 0682344, N 4563041 15 48,5 49,2 39,6 79,6 Loc 85 F 35T E 0680588, N 4562941 15 47,8 42,0 33,2 81,9 Loc 86 F 35T E 0679086, N 4563290 15 56,4 53,3 33,4 89,0 Loc 87 F 35T E 0678710, N 4562710 15 44,0 43,7 39,1 70,6 Loc 88 RCA 35T E 0678980, N 4563831 15 52,2 54,6 40,4 88,7 Loc 89 RCA 35T E 0679086, N 4563192 15 44,7 43,1 33,5 79,2 Loc 91 RCA 35T E 0692294, N 4554277 15 49,2 50,4 36,1 83,8 Loc 92 RCA 35T E 0653212, N 4565544 15 55,4 58,2 48,3 96,6 Loc 93 CRA 35T E 0652009, N 4566101 15 63,4 65,4 48,1 98,8 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-38 Table 7-24 Unattended 24 hour Baseline Monitoring USA Coordinates Elapsed LA eq ID Leq A LA 10 LA 90 LC Max GE (WGS84) Time Day Evening Night 35T E Location 1 - 24 0691100, N hours-Alemdag RCA 4546519 24:00:00 44,2 42,5 32,2 97,1 52,69 51,17 52,12 Location 2 - 24 35T E hours -Alemdag 0687972, N Center CRA 4546210 24:00:00 54,9 56,8 35,4 92,3 57,4 51,4 43,6 35T E Location 3 - 24 0692303, N hours-Huseyinli RCA 4554478 24:00:00 51,8 55,2 35,8 82,5 53,21 52,48 43 35T E Location 4 - 24 0672991, N hours-Demirci RCA 4566514 24:00:00 61,9 55,7 44,5 88,7 60,77 47,38 61,12 Location 5 - 24 35T E hours- 0671115, N Uskumrukoy RCA 4565453 24:00:00 69,6 50,3 35,1 112,4 72,66 46,29 44,30 Location 6 - 24 35T E hours 0655276, N Odayeri RCA 4566546 24:00:00 71,9 51,9 38,6 121,9 74,24 64,44 58,86 Location 7 - 24 35T E hours- 0652105, N Basaksehir RCA 4551702 24:00:00 54,9 58,1 39,5 92,7 58,45 56,97 50,34 7.5.1 Measured and Predicted Noise Levels at Sample Properties Predicted noise levels in measurement locations are presented in Table 7.25. Table 7-25 Calculated Road Traffic Noise Levels at Baseline Measurement Locations Predicted Noise Levels ID Usage Coordinates (WGS84) Day Eve Night Loc 1 RCA 35T E 0652114, N 4549796 58,27 52,18 52,18 Loc 2 RCA 35T E 0652180, N 4551188 71,55 64,91 64,91 Loc 3 RCA 35T E 0652127, N 4552077 59,06 53,84 53,84 Loc 4 RCA 35T E 0652010, N 4553323 54,01 49,38 49,38 Loc 5 RA 35T E 0651624,N 4554053 50,53 46,57 46,57 Loc 6 IA 35T E 0634538, N 4553987 62,32 56,61 56,61 Loc 7 CRA 35T E 0651242, N 4556314 54,55 49,79 49,79 Loc 8 F 35T E 0651744, N 4557451 74,05 67,58 67,58 Loc 9 F 35T E 0651721, N 4558897 66,57 60,12 60,12 Loc 10 F 35T E 061409, N 4959449 56,99 52,71 52,71 Loc 11 F 35T E0651893, N 4559793 63,77 57,73 57,73 Loc 12 F 35T E 0650935, N 4564816 59,63 53,53 53,53 Loc 13 F 35T E 0651139, N 4564434 63,95 58,43 58,43 Loc 14 F 35T E 0651501, N 4564880 69,19 62,87 62,87 Loc 15 F 35T E 0651689, N 4564367 66,63 60,53 60,53 Loc 16 F 35T E 0652167, N 4563825 54,99 49,12 49,12 Loc 17 F 35T E 0653029, N 4563958 64,84 58,31 58,31 Loc 18 F 35T E 0653222, N 4565544 70,63 63,92 63,92 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-39 Predicted Noise Levels ID Usage Coordinates (WGS84) Day Eve Night Loc 19 F 35T E 0655199, N 4566233 68,26 61,23 61,23 Loc 20 F 35T E 0655199, N 4566535 57,69 52,18 52,18 Loc 21 RCA 35T E 0655662, N 4566478 51,54 45,26 45,26 Loc 22 F 35T E 0656035, N 4565931 85,84 78,67 78,67 Loc 23 F 35T E 0657997, N 4565715 39,84 34,65 34,65 Loc 24 F 35T E 0658404, N 4566104 55,53 49,55 49,55 Loc 25 F 35T E 0658333, N 4566640 63,11 56,25 56,25 Loc 26 F 35T E 0658589, N 4566640 61,18 55,38 55,38 Loc 27 F 5T E 0659325, N 4566765 84,69 77,53 77,53 Loc 28 F 35T E 0661336, N 4566355 69,63 62,72 62,72 Loc 29 F 35T E 0661705, N 4566071 62,76 56,31 56,31 Loc 30 F 35T E 0665302, N 4565213 72,11 65,04 65,04 Loc 31 CRA 35T E 0666119, N 4566601 55,81 49,01 49,01 Loc 32 RCA 35T E 0667700, N 456014 50,67 45,38 45,38 Loc 33 F 35T E 0668889, N 4565693 77,16 70,06 70,06 Loc 34 RCA 35T E 0669662, N 4565588 61,43 54,62 54,62 Loc 35 F 35T E 0670682, N 4565934 72,73 65,60 65,60 Loc 36 RCA 35T E 0670941, N 4565934 70,53 63,42 63,42 Loc 37 F 35T E 0668962, N 4566355 42,17 37,65 37,65 Loc 38 F 35T E 0672167, N 4566381 54,51 49,11 49,11 Loc 39 F 35T E 0673003, N 4566501 51,81 45,15 45,15 Loc 40 F 35T E 0674621, N 4563886 64,86 58,04 58,04 Loc 41 F 35T E 0675457, N 4563886 73,23 66,18 66,18 Loc 42 F 35T E 0676837, N 44564622 29,51 22,52 22,52 Loc 43 RA 35T E 0677027, N 4566699 40,82 35,39 35,39 Loc 45 CRA 35T E 0694550 , N 4536974 29,42 21,07 21,07 Loc 46 F 35T E 0693758, N 4538458 29,07 20,64 20,64 Loc 47 F 35T E 0693396, N 4539517 38,50 29,97 29,97 Loc 48 F 35T E 0692328, N 4540159 74,83 64,44 64,44 Loc 49 CRA 35T E 0691651, N 4541602 66,16 57,32 57,32 Loc 50 F 35T E 0691302, N 4541602 66,81 57,26 57,26 Loc 51 RA 35T E 0690816, N 4541536 51,89 43,61 43,61 Loc 52 RCA 35T E 0685924, N 4541660 42,49 34,98 34,98 Loc 53 CRA 35T E 0691422, N 4543028 52,42 41,67 41,67 Loc 54 RCA 35T E 0691078, N 4546047 59,01 50,51 50,51 Loc 55 RCA 35T E 0691325, N 4546683 63,48 54,51 54,51 Loc 56 CRA 35T E 0689683, N 4546102 46,63 39,01 39,01 Loc 57 RCA 35T E 0688112, N 4546134 73,80 65,91 65,91 Loc 58 F 35T E 0686456, N 4545977 79,96 71,75 71,75 Loc 59 F 35T E 0686049, N 4545947 80,38 72,98 72,98 Loc 60 RCA 35T E 0684109, N 4546522 57,75 51,25 51,25 Loc 61 RCA 35T E 0683821, N 4546522 60,55 54,64 54,64 Loc 62 RCA 35T E 0682552, N 4546889 63,83 56,57 56,57 Loc 63 RCA 35T E 0680720, N 4546172 57,89 51,86 51,86 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-40 Predicted Noise Levels ID Usage Coordinates (WGS84) Day Eve Night Loc 64 F 35T E 0680107, N 4546535 62,55 56,79 56,79 Loc 65 F 35T E 0691559, N 4547551 82,43 71,63 71,63 Loc 66 RCA 35T E 0690663, N 4550378 49,93 41,09 41,09 Loc 67 RCA 35T E 0690704, N 4551037 47,13 38,82 38,82 Loc 68 CRA 35T E 0691420, N 4552061 43,19 34,68 34,68 Loc 69 RCA 35T E 0691918, N 4554049 50,87 42,74 42,74 Loc 70 F 35T E 0692769, N 4553782 65,75 56,08 56,08 Loc 71 RCA 35T E 0691700, N 4554818 75,46 64,60 64,60 Loc 72 CRA 35T E 0691803, N 4555537 64,48 58,44 58,44 Loc 73 F 35T E 0691897, N 4556526 55,96 48,96 48,96 Loc 74 F 35T E 0690606, N 4557053 79,94 72,74 72,74 Loc 75 RCA 35T E 0690373, N 4558180 63,09 55,96 55,96 Loc 76 RCA 35T E 0690325, N 4558438 61,73 54,75 54,75 Loc 77 RCA 35T E 0689601, N 4559323 63,74 56,90 56,90 Loc 78 F 35T E 0688118, N 4561448 60,37 54,67 54,67 Loc 79 RCA 35T E 0687265, N 4561448 60,51 53,32 53,32 Loc 80 F 35T E 0685072, N 4562152 64,42 57,34 57,34 Loc 81 RCA 35T E 0684683, N 4562536 54,44 48,34 48,34 Loc 82 F 35T E 0684888, N 4562848 77,91 70,77 70,77 Loc 83 F 35T E 0682344, N 4563041 72,01 65,21 65,21 Loc 84 RCA 35T E 0682344, N 4563041 65,98 58,85 58,85 Loc 85 F 35T E 0680588, N 4562941 63,04 57,22 57,22 Loc 86 F 35T E 0679086, N 4563290 72,74 65,54 65,54 Loc 87 F 35T E 0678710, N 4562710 73,77 66,81 66,81 Loc 88 RCA 35T E 0678980, N 4563831 28,10 20,92 20,92 Loc 89 RCA 35T E 0679086, N 4563192 49,42 43,47 43,47 Loc 91 RCA 35T E 0692294, N 4554277 68,32 61,26 61,26 Loc 92 RCA 35T E 0653212, N 4565544 43,29 38,07 38,07 Loc 93 CRA 35T E 0652009, N 4566101 44,74 39,52 39,52 7.6 Predicted Impacts Impact assessment was determined only for the locations which are mentioned and where there were set limit values in the TNR and IFC Guidelines. For that reason only residential properties were taken into consideration. The magnitude of impacts was assessed according to differences between measured baseline and calculated noise levels. The rest of the locations were in the non-residential areas. Determined assessment results are presented in Table 7.26 (for attended monitoring) and Table 7.27 (24 hour measurements) for road traffic noise and Table 7. 28 for construction. 7.6.1 Operational Impacts In consequence of the night and evening period traffic load data was not mentioned in traffic forecast report, same traffic load values were registered to the traffic noise propagation model for these time periods as annual hourly average traffic values. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-41 Table 7-26. Impact Assessment of Road Traffic Noise Predicted IFC TNR Limits TNR Impact Assessment ID IFC Day Evening Night Limits Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Loc 1 58,27 52,18 52,18 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 2 71,55 64,91 64,91 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Not Allowed Not Allowed Not Allowed Major Moderate Major+ Loc 3 59,06 53,84 53,84 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Not Allowed No Impact No Impact Neglible Loc 4 54,01 49,38 49,38 57 Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 5 50,53 46,57 46,57 67 Allowed 60 55 50 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 6 62,32 56,61 56,61 72 Allowed 67 62 57 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 7 54,55 49,79 49,79 67 Allowed 65 60 55 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 21 51,54 45,26 45,26 57 Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 31 55,81 49,01 49,01 67 Allowed 65 60 55 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 32 50,67 45,38 45,38 57 Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 34 61,43 54,62 54,62 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Not Allowed No Impact No Impact Neglible Loc 36 70,53 63,42 63,42 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Not Allowed Not Allowed Not Allowed Major Moderate Major+ Loc 43 40,82 35,39 35,39 67 Allowed 60 55 50 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 49 66,16 57,32 57,32 67 Allowed 65 60 55 Not Allowed Allowed Not Allowed Neglible No Impact Neglible Loc 51 51,89 43,61 43,61 67 Allowed 60 55 50 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 52 42,49 34,98 34,98 57 Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 53 52,42 41,67 41,67 67 Allowed 65 60 55 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 54 59,01 50,51 50,51 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 55 63,48 54,51 54,51 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Not Allowed Allowed Not Allowed Neglible No Impact Neglible Loc 56 46,63 39,01 39,01 67 Allowed 65 60 55 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 57 73,80 65,91 65,91 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Not Allowed Not Allowed Not Allowed Major+ Major+ Major+ Loc 60 57,75 51,25 51,25 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 61 60,55 54,64 54,64 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Not Allowed No Impact No Impact Neglible Loc 62 63,83 56,57 56,57 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Not Allowed Allowed Not Allowed Neglible No Impact Minor Loc 63 57,89 51,86 51,86 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-42 Table 7-26. Impact Assessment of Road Traffic Noise (Continue) Predicted IFC TNR Limits TNR Impact Assessment ID IFC Day Evening Night Limits Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Loc 66 49,93 41,09 41,09 57 Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 67 47,13 38,82 38,82 57 Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 68 43,19 34,68 34,68 67 Allowed 65 60 55 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 69 50,87 42,74 42,74 57 Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 71 62,46 56,89 52,16 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed Major+ Moderate Major+ Loc 72 64,48 58,44 58,44 67 Allowed 65 60 55 Allowed Allowed Not Allowed No Impact No Impact Minor Loc 75 63,09 55,96 55,96 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Not Allowed Allowed Not Allowed Neglible No Impact Neglible Loc 76 61,73 54,75 54,75 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Not Allowed No Impact No Impact Neglible Loc 77 63,74 56,90 56,90 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Not Allowed Allowed Not Allowed Neglible No Impact Minor Loc 79 60,51 53,32 53,32 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Not Allowed No Impact No Impact Neglible Loc 81 54,44 48,34 48,34 57 Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 84 65,98 58,85 58,85 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Not Allowed Not Allowed Not Allowed Neglible Neglible Moderate Loc 88 28,10 20,92 20,92 57 Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 89 49,42 43,47 43,47 57 Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 91 68,32 61,26 61,26 57 Not Allowed 63 58 53 Not Allowed Not Allowed Not Allowed Moderate Moderate Major Loc 92 43,29 38,07 38,07 57 Allowed 63 58 53 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Loc 93 44,74 39,52 39,52 67 Allowed 65 60 55 Allowed Allowed Allowed No Impact No Impact No Impact Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-43 Table 7-27 Impact Assesment of Road Traffic Noise by using 24 Hour Baseline Noise Measurements Measured Predicted Impact Assessmnt TNR Day Eve Night Day Eve Night Day Eve Night Day Eve Night Location 1 - Not Not 24 hours- RCA 52,6 51,1 52,1 63,4 54,5 53,4 Major+ Minor Neglible Allowe Allowed Allowed Alemdag d Location 2 - Not 24 hours - Major Modera Not Not CRA 57,4 51,4 43,6 69,5 61,9 59,5 Major+ Allowe Alemdag + te Allowed Allowed d Centre Location 3 - Not Major+ Not Not 24 hours- RCA 53,2 52,4 43 68,3 61,2 58,3 Major+ Major Allowe + Allowed Allowed Huseyinli d Location 4 - No No No Allowe 24 hours- RCA 60,7 47,3 61,1 51,8 45,1 41,8 Allowed Allowed Impact Impact Impact d Demirci Location 5 - 24 hours- No No No Allowe RCA 76,4 55,4 53,2 55,3 49,2 45,3 Allowed Allowed Uskumruko Impact Impact Impact d y Location 6 - No No No Allowe 24 hours RCA 74,8 64,4 58,8 57,7 52,1 47,6 Allowed Allowed Impact Impact Impact d Odayeri Location 7 - No No Allowe 24 hours- RCA 58,4 56,9 50,3 59,0 53,8 49,0 Neglible Allowed Allowed Impact Impact d Basaksehir 7.6.2 Construction Impacts Table 7-28 Impact Assesment for Construction TNR Allowenc Backgroun Predicte e d Impact ID USAGE Coordinates (WGS84) Section d Limit 75 Day Magnitute dBA Loc 1 RCA 35T E 0652114, N 4549796 1 48,099 Allowed 58,27 No Impact Loc 2 RCA 35T E 0652180, N 4551188 1 61,385 Allowed 71,55 No Impact Loc 3 RCA 35T E 0652127, N 4552077 1 51,981 Allowed 59,06 No Impact Loc 16 F 35T E 0652167, N 4563825 1 41,488 Allowed 54,99 No Impact Loc 17 F 35T E 0653029, N 4563958 1 49,369 Allowed 64,84 No Impact Loc 19 F 35T E 0655199, N 4566233 1 45,961 Allowed 68,26 No Impact Loc 20 F 35T E 0655199, N 4566535 1 41,832 Allowed 70,63 No Impact Loc 92 RCA 35T E 0653212, N 4565544 1 37,744 Allowed 43,29 No Impact Loc 93 CRA 35T E 0652009, N 4566101 2 55,75 Allowed 44,74 Major+ Loc 19 F 35T E 0655199, N 4566233 2 70,08 Allowed 68,26 Neglible Loc 20 F 35T E 0655199, N 4566535 2 51,33 Allowed 57,69 No Impact Loc 21 RCA 35T E 0655662, N 4566478 2 43,81 Allowed 51,54 No Impact Loc 30 F 35T E 0665302, N 4565213 2 47,76 Allowed 72,11 No Impact Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-44 TNR Allowenc Backgroun Predicte e d Impact ID USAGE Coordinates (WGS84) Section d Limit 75 Day Magnitute dBA Loc 31 CRA 35T E 0666119, N 4566601 2 62,61 Allowed 55,81 Moderate Loc 32 RCA 35T E 0667700, N 456014 2 56,21 Allowed 50,67 Moderate Loc 34 RCA 35T E 0669662, N 4565588 2 58,29 Allowed 61,43 No Impact Loc 38 F 35T E 0672167, N 4566381 2 49,68 Allowed 54,51 No Impact Loc 39 F 35T E 0673003, N 4566501 2 56,84 Allowed 51,81 Moderate Loc 86 F 35T E 0679086, N 4563290 3 65,11 Allowed 72,74 No Impact Loc 87 F 35T E 0678710, N 4562710 3 63,99 Allowed 73,77 No Impact Loc 88 RCA 35T E 0678980, N 4563831 3 42,64 Allowed 28,10 Major+ Loc 83 F 35T E 0682344, N 4563041 3 58,58 Allowed 72,01 No Impact Loc 84 RCA 35T E 0682344, N 4563041 3 46,55 Allowed 65,98 No Impact Loc 81 RCA 35T E 0684683, N 4562536 3 52,73 Allowed 54,44 No Impact Loc 82 F 35T E 0684888, N 4562848 3 51,17 Allowed 77,91 No Impact Loc 79 RCA 35T E 0687265, N 4561448 3 67,2 Allowed 60,51 Moderate Loc 74 F 35T E 0690606, N 4557053 3 58,34 Allowed 79,94 No Impact Loc 75 RCA 35T E 0690373, N 4558180 3 65,18 Allowed 63,09 Neglible Loc 76 RCA 35T E 0690325, N 4558438 3 69,5 Allowed 61,73 Major+ Loc 72 CRA 35T E 0691803, N 4555537 3 53,62 Allowed 65,75 No Impact Loc 73 F 35T E 0691897, N 4556526 3 70,96 Allowed 55,96 Major+ Loc 63 RCA 35T E 0680720, N 4546172 4 39,52 Allowed 57,89 No Impact Loc 64 F 35T E 0680107, N 4546535 4 37,33 Allowed 62,55 No Impact Loc 62 RCA 35T E 0682552, N 4546889 4 48,65 Allowed 63,83 No Impact Loc 61 RCA 35T E 0683821, N 4546522 4 51,26 Allowed 60,55 No Impact Loc 58 F 35T E 0686456, N 4545977 4 60,35 Allowed 79,96 No Impact Loc 56 CRA 35T E 0689683, N 4546102 4 64,55 Allowed 46,63 Major++ Loc 57 RCA 35T E 0688112, N 4546134 4 46,87 Allowed 73,80 No Impact 7.7 Mitigation When operation and construction noise levels were compared with the TNR‟s limiting values, mitigation will be needed only during operation case at 10 critical points on project route, as noted on Table 7.26 above. Construction of noise barriers for noise control mitigation measure is required at certain locations The presence of noise barriers with a height of 4 metres has been modeled with a transmission loss rating of Rw=50 dB along in order to the motorway to meet Turkish Noise Directive. The locations of the proposed noise barriers are shown in Figures 7-17 to 7-24 below. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-45 Figure 7-17 Location 2 Noise Barrier Figure 7-18 Location 2 Noise Barrier 3D View Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-46 Figure 7-19 Location 49 Noise Barrier Figure 7-20 Location 49 Noise Barrier 3D View Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-47 Figure 7-21 Location 62 Noise Barrier Figure 7-22 Location 62 Noise Barrier 3D View Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-48 Figure 7-23 Location 75 Noise Barrier Figure 7-24 Location 75 Noise Barrier The locations where barriers should be constructed and the effects of barriers when in place are shown in Table 7-29. Modeled noise barriers are effective on 4 of 10 critical locations. The noise barrier models are included in appendix D for this chapter. Residual impacts will unfortunately remain for a number of Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 7-49 locations 36 (major ++), 55 (negligible), 57 (no impact) , 77 (major ++) , 84 (negligible) and 91(major ++). When impact magnitudes of these locations are considered, mitigation on locations 36, 77 and 91 should be assessed further. Table 7-29 Impact Assessment with Noise Barriers NB Positions Limit Predicted Impact Start End after Noise Barrier Nigh Allowence ID x(m) y(m) x(m) y(m) Day Eve Night Day Eve t According to TNR Loc 2 400301 4552243 400296 4551699 63 58 53 61,8 57,4 51,8 Allowed Loc 49 439445 4541278 439047 4541659 65 60 55 60,5 51,5 50,5 Allowed Loc 62 430439 4546790 430349 4546739 63 58 53 60,4 52,9 50,4 Allowed Loc 75 438407 4558135 438716 4557686 63 58 53 60,1 53,0 50,1 Allowed 7.8 Summary Noise impacts associated with the proposed Northern Marmara Motorway including the 3rd Crossing project have been predicted and assessed against the Turkish Noise Regulation (TNR). Noise level predictions have been based on traffic data projected to 2023. Baseline noise levels at 98 locations along the motorway were measured. Impact assessments were determined using the requirements of the TNR and impact magnitudes were determined against measured baseline noise levels. Mitigation needs were assessed and the proposed mitigation implemented in the model to improve noise impacts at 10 locations where noise levels exceeded limiting value as defined in the TNR. Residual impacts remain at 6 of the receivers. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-1 8.0 WATER QUALITY 8.1 Introduction This chapter of the ESIA presents the findings of the assessment of impacts of the Project on water quality and hydrology. It provides a detailed description of the existing water environment conditions including surface water courses, and water quality. In addition, it predicts the potential impacts of construction and operation of the scheme may have on water quality features and identifies mitigation to be incorporated into the construction and design of the scheme. The potential impacts during construction activities are generally short – term impacts, on the other hand, the impacts during operational and development activities may be permanent. There are mitigation measures that decrease the impact or prevent the impact and these are discussed in this chapter. Residual Impacts, that are likely to remain after mitigation measures have been put in place, have been identified and assessed. In the scope of project, water quality sampling study and survey has been realized with ARTEK Mühendislik Çevre Ölçüm ve Danışmanlık Hizmetleri Ltd. Şti. as subcontractor. Following a preliminary desktop study by AECOM, ARTEK officials were accompanied by AECOM‟s engineers for the water sampling study. The field activities during this visit include identification of potentially important locations for the baseline study and collection of water samples from identified sampling locations. During this study, a total of 20 locations were sampled. Note that only terrestrial (freshwater) impacts are discussed in this chapter. Impact on the marine environment including the Bosphorus itself is not considered as the Project is not intended to impinge directly on marine waters. 8.2 Approach and Methods 8.2.1 Scope of Assessment The geographical scope of the assessment is based on the route of the proposed scheme and any water courses it may impact in the vicinity of the works, which includes sections up and downstream of each water course discussed. The magnitude and significance of impacts on the surface water environment that are predicted both during the construction period and, in the longer term, during the operational period are evaluated in this chapter. The impacts predicted during the operational period of the project are referred to as long term or “permanent”, for the purposes of this project. In summary, this chapter: Identifies all surface water bodies near to the proposed route; Considers the potential for impacts on the surface water environment arising from the proposed development; and Describes options for the mitigation of impacts on the surface water environment. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-2 8.2.2 Subcontractor Services In the scope of baseline surface water monitoring program, ARTEK was charged with conducting the sampling study and preparing a factual report presenting the analysis of the sampling survey. Following a preliminary desktop study by AECOM, ARTEK officials were accompanied by AECOM engineer Mert Onursal Çatak in water sampling study. The field activities during this visit include identification of potentially important locations for the baseline study and collection of water samples from identified sampling locations. Also during the site activities, identified locations are photographed and some of them are presented in photolog which is available in the Appendix 8-2. During surface water monitoring studies, a total of 20 locations are sampled by ARTEK under the guidance of AECOM. Each sampling locations were sampled with 5 HDPE containers (a total of 3.75 liters for each sample) for the mentioned analyses. The detailed report and table regarding the sampling bottle and preservations and the field equipment list which was used during the field activities is given in Appendix 8-3 and Appendix 8-4. 8.2.3 Identification of Baseline Conditions Baseline conditions have been established via a detailed desktop study and review of relevant subject reports; including Hydrologic Survey Report (Emay International Engineering Cons. & Trd. Co. Ltd. and Protek Proje Danışmanlık Mühendislik Bilgi İşlem İnşaat Turizm San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.) (2012), Geology and Geotechnical Reports (prepared by Emay International Engineering Cons. & Trd. Co. Ltd. and Protek Proje Danışmanlık Mühendislik Bilgi İşlem İnşaat Turizm San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.) (2012-2013). Where such information has been available, the desktop study has included the following: Hydrological Survey Study which includes the details of water quality and sensitivity of any surface water bodies which may be influenced by the site or activities on the site, Culvert Sizing, Planned Culvert Types, Existing Infrastructures, Hydrogeological Survey which includes the details of aquifers in the vicinity of the site and their level of vulnerability, Istanbul Environmental Plan, Hydrology Map of the Project. There are no monitoring activities for surface water at this level; however, after the desktop study and site reconnaissance it was decided that the monitoring study for existing surface water bodies should be conducted within the scope of this report. Hence, surface water locations, which were defined as the first priority for the project site, were sampled. This sampling study was carried out in 3rd – 4th of April 2013. 8.2.4 Approach to Assessment The assessment follows the guidance set out in the related regulations listed in Section 8.3.1. and IFC General EHS Guidelines. In assessing the significance of potential impacts on the water environment the following key factors are considered: Identification of the water environment attributes that could be affected by the scheme and an evaluation of their importance or sensitivity; Identification of potential impacts and estimation of their magnitude; Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-3 The likelihood of a potential impact occurring based on a scale of certain, likely or unlikely; and The significance of the predicted effects. The significance of impacts on surface watercourses has been assessed using the impact definitions as discussed below. The methodology used to assign impact scores has been based upon a qualitative assessment approach. Effects have been assessed by predicting the changes that would be caused by the construction and operation of the scheme in relation to the baseline situation. 8.2.4.1 Receptors Surface water receptors along the Project alignment include rivers and water courses, ponds and catchment areas associated with dams (Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Elmalı II) supplying drinking water to the Istanbul area. All of these receptors are vulnerable to physical disturbance, for example from construction of the road and any river crossings, introduction of pollutants, including sediment, to rivers that will affect their water quality, which in turn will affect their ecology and economic importance, or contamination of runoff that may eventually reach drinking water supplies. In terms of this assessment the most vulnerable surface water resource are those that the Project route crosses directly. In addition, where the route passes through the catchment areas of rivers and lakes then these water bodies may be vulnerable during construction and operational phases. The criteria used to define the importance or sensitivity of water environment attributes are described below. Table 8-1 Receptor Sensitivity Criteria Importance Criteria Typical Examples Very High Attribute has a high quality Water quality is Class I, High quality water and/or the and rarity on regional or water body forms part of the regional drinking water national scale supply. Site is designated under a national level designation of protection. High Attribute has a high quality Water quality is Class II, slightly contaminated water and rarity on local scale and/or the water body forms part of the local drinking water supply. Site is designated under a local level designation of protection Medium Attribute has a medium Water quality is Class III, contaminated water. quality and rarity on local scale Low Attribute has a low quality Water quality is Class IV, highly contaminated water. and rarity on local scale. 8.2.4.2 Impact Magnitude The impact magnitude considers the scale of the predicted change to baseline conditions resulting from a given effect, for example a major change in water quality. It also takes into account the duration of the effect; whether it is temporary, permanent or reversible. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-4 Table 8-2 Impact Magnitude Criteria Magnitude Criteria Highly Adverse Results in loss of attribute and/or quality and integrity of the attribute. Moderately Adverse Results in effect on integrity of attribute, or loss of part of attribute. Slightly Adverse Results in some measurable change in attributes quality or vulnerability Negligible Results in effect on attribute but of insufficient magnitude to affect the use or integrity. Slightly Beneficial Results in some beneficial effect on attribute or a reduced risk of negative effect occurring. Moderately Beneficial Results in a moderate improvement of attribute quality. Highly Beneficial Results in a major improvement of attribute quality. 8.2.4.3 Assessing Impact Significance A predominantly qualitative approach has been taken to the determining the significance of the potential effects. The significance of effects is assessed on a seven point scale as shown below. Table 8-3 Criteria for Assessing Impact Significance Outcome Criteria for Assessment of Impact Significance The proposal is predicted to result in very or highly significant improvements to Major Beneficial Impact water attribute(s) with insignificant adverse impacts on other water attributes. The proposal provides an opportunity to enhance the water environment, Moderate Beneficial because it results in a moderate improvement for an attribute. Impact All other situations where the proposal provides an opportunity to enhance the Minor Beneficial water environment or provide an improved level of protection to an attribute. Impact The net impact of the proposal is neutral, because it has no appreciable effect, Negligible either positive or negative, on the identified attributes. Where the proposal may result in a degradation of the water environment Minor Adverse Impact because it results in a predicted slight impact on one or more attributes. The proposal may result in a degradation of the water environment, because it Moderate Adverse results in predicted moderate adverse impacts on at least one attribute. Impact Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-5 Outcome Criteria for Assessment of Impact Significance The proposal may result in a degradation of the water environment, because it results in predicted highly significant adverse impacts on a water attribute Large Adverse Impact and/or on several water attributes. Adverse effects may be predicted where the scheme is considered to negatively affect the water environment baseline conditions, for example a reduction in water quality or an increase in flood risk. Adverse residual effects identified as minor or negligible are considered to be environmentally acceptable whilst residual impacts assessed as moderate or higher are considered to be significant. Beneficial effects may be predicted where the proposed development is considered to result in an improvement to baseline conditions, for example a reduction in existing flood risk or an improvement in water quality. The significance of an effect is based on a combination of the sensitivity or importance of the receptor and the magnitude of that effect, as illustrated in the table below. Table 8-4 Impact Assessment Matrix Impact Sensitivity Magnitude Very High High Medium Low Negligible High Major Major Moderate Moderate Minor Medium Major Moderate Moderate Minor Negligible Slight Moderate Moderate Minor Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor Minor Negligible Negligible Negligible The results of this assessment are presented as residual impacts; i.e. the impact remaining taking into account the mitigation measures that would be adopted through construction and operation of the Project. A hierarchical approach has been taken to developing mitigation measures i.e. to avoid, reduce or offset the impact. Mitigation has been developed based on current best practice and established standards and construction techniques. 8.3 Baseline Conditions 8.3.1 Relevant Legislation The State Hydraulic Works (DSI) structured under the Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs is the state agency responsible for the planning, management, development and operation of all water resources. The freshwaters in Turkey are regulated by the laws and regulations listed below: Environmental Law (No:2872) published in Official Gazette No: 18132, dated August 11, 1983; Groundwater Law (No:167) published in Official Gazette No:10688, dated December 23, 1960; Aquatic Products Law (No:1380) published in Official Gazette No:13799, dated April 4, 1971; Water Pollution Control Regulation published in Official Gazette No. 25687, dated December 31, 2004; Management of Surface Water Quality Regulation, Official Gazette No. 28483 dated 30.11.2012; Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-6 Communiqué on Procedures and Principles for Determination of Special Provisions in Basins published in Official Gazette No. 27274, dated June 30, 2009; and Aquatic Products Regulation published in Official Gazette No. 22223, dated March 10, 1995. Management of Surface Water Quality Regulation (MSWQR) defines surface water quality classes and utilization purposes, planning principles and prohibitions concerning protection of water quality. According to the MSWQR, the surface water resources are classified into four classes. Class I, High quality water: A water source regarded as a potential water supply for drinking after disinfection, recreational use (including body contact), trout propagation, animal production, and farming needs. Class II, Slightly contaminated water: A water source regarded as a potential water supply for drinking after proper treatment, recreational use, propagation of fish other than trout, irrigation water if meets the irrigation water quality criteria. Class III, Contaminated water: A water source that could be used for industrial water uses after appropriate treatment, except for those industries that require high quality water like food and textile industry. Class IV, Highly Contaminated Water. The Water Pollution Control Regulation (WPCR) sets protection zones for the drinking water reservoirs; The absolute protection zone is a 300 m wide zone extending from the maximum water level of a drinking water reservoir. Housing and industrial activities are not allowed in this zone and expropriation shall be carried out in this zone. The short-range protection zone is a 700 m wide zone extending from the boundaries of absolute protection zone. No residential areas, tourist and industrial facilities are allowed in this zone. The medium-range protection zone is a 1,000 m wide zone extending from the boundaries of the short-range protection zone. No residential areas are allowed, yet summer houses with a maximum height of 6.5 m and total construction area of 250 m2 shall be permitted. No mining operations and industrial facilities are allowed in this zone. The long-range protection zone is the ultimate watershed above the dam. In a 3,000 m wide zone extending from the boundaries of medium-range protection zone; industrial facilities producing no hazardous wastes and industrial waste waters are allowed in this zone. When the boundaries of above mentioned protection zones cut across a catchment area of a drinking water reservoir, the protection zone ends at the catchment area boundary. The boundary of the protection zone then coincides with the catchment area boundary. 8.3.2 Surface Watercourses 8.3.2.1 Basins and Rivers As described by the General Directorate of Renewable Energy (YEGM formerly known as EIE), Turkey has been divided into 25 major surface water basins and according to the Istanbul Environmental Status Report (2009), Istanbul District is located on two major basins called the Black Sea Basin to the north and the Marmara Basin to the south. The district does not have a major river basin system, but instead of that there are numerous small river basins. The Istranca River drains into Terkos Lake, the Karasu and Çakıl Rivers drain into Büyükçekmece Lake; the Sazlıdere, Nazlıdere, Nakkaş Rivers drain into Küçükçekmece Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-7 Lake; the Çırpıcı, Ayamama Rivers drain into the Marmara Sea; the Alibey and Kağıthane Rivers drain into the Golden Horn; the Göksu and Küçüksu Rivers drain into the Bosphorus; the Riva, Türknil, Kabakoz, Göksu, ve Ağva (Yeşilçay) Rivers drain into the Black Sea. Thus; there are four different types of micro-basins in these two major basins: The Marmara Sea Basin that includes small rivers flowing towards the Marmara Sea. The Black Sea Basin that includes small rivers flowing towards the Black Sea. The Bosphorus Basin that includes small rivers flowing towards the Bosphorus. Lake and Dam Basins that include small rivers flowing towards different lakes and dams. Therefore there are large numbers of rivers that flow towards the Marmara Sea, the Black Sea, the Bosphorus, and natural lakes or dams. Flow rates of these rivers are irregular and some of the rivers dry up in summer seasons. For example, the Riva River Basin shows dendritic drainage pattern whereas the Çakıl River Basin has fault related linear drainage. Furthermore, eastern tributaries of Küçükçekmece Lake Basin reveal parallel drainage while the Ağva River Basin shows distorted karstic drainage pattern. Each side of the Bosphorus displays an asymmetrical catchment area in terms of elevation differences and distribution of their disturbances. However, the overall tendency of the Çatalca-Kocaeli Plateau resembles a concave shape that has a major depression at the Bosphorus. Higher elevation points of the western side like Kocataş Hill and Belgrade Forest Region are located at the Black Sea Coasts while Çamlıca Hills, Kayış Hills, and Aydos Hills are located on the Marmara Sea coast. These conditions result partly because of young deformations and partly due to lithological dissimilarities. In fact, Çatalca Kocaeli Plateau was affected by young Alpine tectonism in a NW-SE direction and it formed an arch shape structure from the Belgrade Forest towards Aydos Hill. This arch shape structure affects slope and eventually flow regimes of rivers. Furthermore, most rivers in Çatalca Peninsula flow towards the Marmara Sea while significant amount of rivers in Kocaeli Peninsula flow towards the Black Sea. Substantial rivers starting from west to east are the Istranca River, Karasu River, Çakıl River, Sazlıdere River, Nazlıdere River, Nakkaş River, Alibey River, Kağıthane River, Göksu River, Küçüksu River, Riva River, Türknil River, Kabakoz River, Göksu River and Ağva (Yeşilçay) River. Although these rivers have river bottom deposits the geography does not allow them to form large flat areas or plains. Disregard of the district hydrological cycle and drainage networks for unplanned urbanization has caused periodic floods and overflows. According to the Municipality of Istanbul, drainage problems in the Istanbul district can be defined within two main categories comprising area problems and point problems. Area problems originate by over flow of excessive rainfall towards the outside of river beds. Point problems, however, originate from inadequate construction of bridge and highway cross sections, waste materials, sedimentation, or illegal urbanization in river beds that restrict floodplain capacity. There are different laws which try to organize flood control systems in the Büyükyalı, Küçükyalı, Esenyurt, Pendik, Sarıyer, Çırpıcı and Ayamama rivers since1970‟s. Although the production rate of the drinking and potable water of Istanbul District is not quite redundant, there are large numbers of small river systems that feed surface water basins and groundwater systems. These rivers are often used as waste discharge areas or sewerage systems by industrial facilities and settlement areas. Even though some of the discharges to rivers are controlled and orientated by pre- treatment methods, some of river discharges are unauthorized and represent illegal procedures. Lakes, ponds, dams, rivers, streams, creeks, natural springs, caisson wells, and drilled water wells are formed hydrological structures in Istanbul District. Rainfall which initiates the hydrologic cycle is an important parameter that may have impact on water resources in the district and according to Turkish Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-8 State Meteorological Service annual average rainfall is 787 mm (IBB Report, December 2011). 760 million m3 of this annual rainfall amount is gathered in lakes, ponds and dams and it fulfils 76.3% of the water demand. Residual water demand, which is about 245 million m3 is provided from outside of the district. Although only 23.7% of water demand is provided from other districts, this amount is planned to increase in the future. 8.3.2.2 Lakes, Ponds and Dams There are 19 lakes within Istanbul District‟s boundary according to ISKI (IBB Report, December 2011) (see Table 4-14 of that report, reproduced below). 16 of them are fed from different rivers and they are formed by using concrete structures whereas Terkos, Büyükçekmece, and Küçükçekmece lakes are naturally formed lagoon lakes. Although these three lakes are not fed from rivers today, their boundaries were built and their water amounts are used for different purposes. Total area of lakes, ponds, and dams is 127, 86 km2 and Terkos Lake has the largest surface area of 31.77 km2. Table 8-5 Lakes, Ponds, and Dams in Istanbul District Lakes, Ponds, Dams Area (km2) Terkos Lake 31.77 Ömerli Dam Lake 21.07 Küçükçekmece Lake 19.57 Büyükçekmece Lake 15.14 İsaköy Dam Lake 11.38 Sazlıdere Dam Lake 9.91 Darlık Dam Lake 5.93 Sungurlu Dam Lake 5.32 Kabakoz Dam Lake 2.30 Alaçalı Dam Lake 2.09 Alibeyköy Dam Lake 1.66 Elmalı Dam Lake 1.13 Büyük Pond 0.21 Kömürcü Pond 0.13 Valide Sultan Pond 0.087 Ayvat Pond 0.06 II. Mahmut Pond 0.05 Kirazlı Pond 0.05 Topuzlu Pond 0.033 (Taken from IBB Report December 2011) 8.3.2.3 Important Surface Water Bodies at the Project Site The following watercourses are present in the project area. These are described in order from west to east, starting on the European side of the Bosphorus. Siyavuşpaşa Creek This is the first surface water body that could be affected by the proposed Project. The Siyavuşpaşa Creek flows from north to south. The length of the creek is approximately 3-5 km and it emerges from Sultançiftliği District, passes through Ataköy and finally reaches the Marmara Sea at Bakırköy shores. It is vulnerable to any effect from pollution because of its presence inside the metropolitan area. Although this Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-9 creek is not located inside the Project area, the southern part of the proposed project route will be inside the catchment area of the creek. There is no information of the water quality of the creek according to the MSWQR, however; almost ninety percent of the creek is located inside the metropolitan area and due to this condition it is believed that water quality of the creek is relatively low. Ayamama Creek The Ayamama Creek emerges from Esenler – Baştabya Kışlası and flows from north to south. The length of the creek is approximately 2.2 km and it drains north of İkitelli towards the west of Ataköy where it reaches the Marmara Sea. In fact, the creek has been located inside the metropolitan area for almost 50 years. The pollution level measurements show that there are significant exceedances of water quality parameters, and thus a stream remediation and rehabilitation program is being conducted by the municipality. Regardless of the fact that the creek is located outside of the Project area, the water catchment area of the creek may be affected from activities related with the Project if proper mitigation measures are not implemented. According to the bacteriological pollution level study by Gurun, S. and Erdem, K. A. (2013), Ayamama Creek is the source for the pollution due to Fecal Coliform, Total Coliform, Fecal Streptococci, Salmonella Spp. and total mezophilic aerobic heterotrophic bacteria. Hence, the water quality of the creek is relatively low due to proximate metropolitan area. Pirinççi Dam Lake Pirinçci is a village that is located between Habipler and Kemerburgaz. According to the Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs database, a dam will be constructed near the village and this dam will be an upstream continuation of Alibeyköy Dam and Alibey River Valley. The Pirinçci Dam will be located in close proximity to the Project area and if the dam is planned to provide drinking and potable water, the buffer zone and water catchment area may be impacted by the proposed Project. However, this dam is in the project development phase and further interaction between proposed dam area and the project route need to be evaluated according to Water Pollution Control Regulation (WPCR). Taşlı River This river emerges from the north-western part of Belgrade Forest and after 7-8 km of flow it joins one of the tributaries (Kağıthane River) of the Golden Horn and eventually discharges into the Bosphorus. The river, which flows parallel to and to the south of the Alibey River, flows from northwest to southeast. Although it drains to a distant location from the Project Site, the spring locations of the river are close to the Project area at the north westernmost part. Odayeri – Kömürcüpınar Villages Ponds This major water basin system changes from the Marmara Sea to the Black Sea at the northern part of the Project area. The surface water flow regime changes drastically and the direction of the river alters from south to north. Terkos Lake, which has been used for drinking and potable water purposes more than 100 years, is located approximately 15 km northwest of the Project area. Although Terkos Lake may not be directly affected by the Project, small ponds that are related to the Terkos Lake arrangement are located in the south-eastern part of Terkos Lake near the project site. According to the Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs Database some of these ponds are actually old quarries that have flooded, so they are artificial. Although these ponds are not used for drinking and potable water purposes they are important as wetland areas for migrating wildfowl. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-10 Sulu Creek This creek emerges from 3 km north of Ayvat Pond which is a small historical pond located inside Belgrade Forest. It flows from south to north and it reaches to the Black Sea at Kısırkaya Village. According to proposed Project plan, it crosses this watercourse. Belde (Orhaneli) - Gümüşdere Creek The creek emerges from a location between the northern boundary of Belgrade Forest and Bahçeköy- Gümüşdere Road. It flows from south to north and it reaches to the Black Sea from an area between Adile Sadullah Mermerci Police Training Center and Bosphorus University Sarıtepe Campus. According to the proposed Project plan, it crosses this watercourse. Tatlısu Creek This watercourse emerges from near a quarry which is located to the south of Gümüşdere – Uskumruköy Road. It flows from south to north and although the creek is quite short (1-2 km), it forms a small scale delta structure at the Black Sea coast. Küçükhavza Creek This creek emerges from the Belgrade Forest area which is located between Bahçeköy and Zekeriyaköy districts. It flows from the south to the north and it reaches to the Black Sea at Kumköy Village. According to proposed Project plan, it crosses this watercourse. Sazlıdere Creek This creek emerges from south of Zekeriyaköy district and flows from south to north and eventually it reaches the Black Sea at east side of Demirci Village. Moreover, the creek forms an important surface water way that drains the region. Ketendere Creek Ketendere Creek is located parallel with Tatlısu Creek and Küçükhavza Creek and it also reaches the Black Sea coast. It drains south and west of Rumelifeneri and Garipçe villages and it is the last surface water body that is located inside the Project area. Poyrazköy Creek This is the first surface water structure on the Asian side that is affected by the project and it drains the southern forestry areas towards Poyraz Village. Moreover, it has 2-3 km in length and it is observed that significant amount of sedimentary material is carried by the creek. Halayık Creek This creek emerges from south of Kaynarca Village and flows from south to north. Additionally it is observed that Halayık Creek is the main reason for a small delta plain that is located east of Anadolu Feneri Village. Milko Creek This is formed by two small tributaries called Şirindere and Yeniçiftlik and it drains near Mahmut Şevket Paşa Village. It flows from south to north and it forms a significant tributary of Riva River. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-11 Riva River This river emerges from Tepecik Village of Gebze District and reaches the Black Sea coast in Beykoz District. Generally, the river flows in a south to north direction and forms the Ömerli Dam Lake in Pendik District. After the Ömerli Dam Lake, forestry, agricultural plains and meadow areas are drained by the Riva River towards the Black Sea. It has sufficient surface and flow rate to support local fishery. However, although it is one of the important surface water courses in Kocaeli Peninsula, it is reported that industrial facilities and residential areas have polluted the river. Alibeyköy Dam Alibey Dam River is also called as Alibeyköy Dam. It was built in Istanbul over the Brook Alibey (also called Alibeyköy Brook or Malova Brook) between the years 1975-1983, in order to supply potable, usable and industrial water. The dam volume of this earth fill dam is 1.930.000 m³, the height of its stream bed is 30,00 meters, its reservoir volume at normal water level is 66,80 hm3 and its lake area at normal water level is 4,66 km². It supplies 39 hm3 of potable-usable water per year. This surface water body is located on the European side and it collects water from the Alibeyköy River. Ömerli Dam The Ömerli Dam is the most significant and the largest existing water body that is close to the Project alignment. According to the General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works (DSI), it was built during 1968- 1973 for drinking water supply purposes. It is an earth fill embankment type dam and the dam volume is 2,198,000 m3. The height of the dam is 52 m and the lake volume is 386.50 hm3 whereas the lake area is 23.10 km2. Annual water supply of the dam is 180 hm3. Even though it is not directly located in the Project area, the buffer zone of the water catchment is in vicinity of the proposed Project area. The Ömerli Dam is the most significant and the largest existing water body that is close to the Project alignment and therefore, any impact possibility to water quality from the Project Site must be carefully considered. Elmalı – II Dam This is the second surface water body located on the Asian side and it collects water from the Çavuşbaşı River. According to the General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works DSI, it was built during 1952 - 1955 for drinking water supply and industrial supply purposes. It is a concrete fill embankment type dam and the dam volume is 103,000 m3. The height of the dam is 42.5 m and the lake volume is 10 hm3 whereas the lake area is 2.80 km2. Annual water supply of the dam is 10 hm3. Even though it is not directly located close to the Project alignment, the buffer zone of the water catchment is in close proximity to the project area. Therefore, any impact possibility to water quality from the Project Site should be investigated in detail. 8.3.2.4 Surface Water Sampling Locations During surface water monitoring studies, a total of 20 locations are sampled by ARTEK under the guidance of AECOM. Each sampling locations were sampled with 5 HDPE containers (a total of 3.75 liters for each sample) for the mentioned analyses. The detailed report and table regarding the sampling bottle and preservations and the field equipment list which was used during the field activities is given in Appendix 8-3 and Appendix 8-4. Detailed information about the surface water sampling locations (see Appendix 8-5) can be found in the following items. These samples have been analyzed and classified according to Management of Surface Water Quality Regulation (MSWQR) detailed in Section 8.3.1. Classifications of samples are given after water sampling location. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-12 S1S1 The first sampling point of the project route is located in the proximity of Mahmutbey Junction. It is located on Ayamama Creek which is already known due to seasonal flooding and industrial pollution problems according to ISKI. S1S1 is located at 1 km south of the project starting point. Thus, baseline conditions of the creek could be determined and potential impacts due to the project could be followed in the future. S1S2 This second sampling point is located in the southern tributary of the Alibeyköy River in the proximity of Pirinççi District. According to the database of Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs there is a planned dam (Pirinççi Dam) within the water catchment area of existing Alibeyköy Dam. Furthermore, this potential dam will be constructed in order to control flooding towards Alibeyköy Dam. On the other hand, Alibeyköy Dam is used as the source of drinking water according to DSI. Therefore, baseline condition and future impacts in this location should be determined and followed in a regular basis to assess and avoid creating any adverse impacts. S1S3 This third sampling point is located in the northern branch of the Alibeyköy River and it is also located in the proximity of Pirinççi District. Conditions designated for second sampling point are also valid and effective for S1S3. Therefore, baseline condition and future impacts in this location should also be determined and followed in a regular basis to assess and avoid creating any adverse impacts. S1S4 The fourth sampling point is located in the proximity of Odayeri and on the Taşlı Dere Creek. This creek, which is flow in NW-SE direction, is one of the largest surface water courses converging with the project route. Therefore, baseline condition of the creek in the downstream side of the project route should be determined and due to this necessity this location was sampled. Sampling locations in the place which is starting from Odayeri Junction towards the end point in the European Side, are located on relatively shorter creeks flowing in S-N direction. Although these creeks are shorter and not used as source for drinking purposes, they are valuable for their environmental significance as wetland areas. Therefore, sampling study was maintained in this part of the project. S2S1 Sampling point is located on Sulu Creek and it was chosen at the downstream side of the creek due to determine the baseline condition in the location. S2S2 S2S2 sampling point is located on Belde Creek and it was chosen at the downstream side of the creek due to determine the baseline condition in the location. S2S3 S2S3 sampling point is located on Tatlısu Creek and it was chosen at the downstream side of the creek due to determine the baseline condition in the location. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-13 S2S4 S2S4 sampling point is located on the other tributary of Tatlısu Creek and it was chosen at the downstream side of the creek due to determine the baseline condition in the location. S2S5 S2S5 sampling point is located on the other tributary of Küçükhavza Creek and it was sampled due to determine the baseline condition in the location. S2S6 S2S6 sampling point is located on the other tributary of Ketendere Creek and it was chosen at the downstream side of the creek due to determine the baseline condition in the location. S2S7 S2S7 sampling point is located on the Sazlıdere Creek and it was chosen at the downstream side of the creek due to determine the baseline condition in the location. It is the last sampling location in the European Side. S3S1 S3S1 sampling point is located on the Poyrazköy Creek and it was chosen at the downstream side of the creek due to determine the baseline condition in the location. S3S2 S3S2 sampling point is located on the Halayık Creek and it was chosen at the downstream side of the creek due to determine the baseline condition in the location. S3S3 This is located on Milko Creek which was formed by Yeniçiftlik and Şirindere creeks. Besides, Milko Creek is one of the two main branches of Riva River. It was sampled at the downstream side of the creek due to determine the baseline condition in the location. S3S4 This is the first junction and sampling location of the Riva (Çayağzı) River and it was sampled at the downstream side of the creek due to determine the baseline condition in the location. S4S1 This is the second junction and sampling location of the Riva (Çayağzı) River and it was sampled in the northern side of Öğümce which will be passed by a tunnel and therefore it was sampled in order to determine the baseline condition in this location. S4S2 This is the last junction and sampling location of the Riva (Çayağzı) River and it was sampled at the downstream side of the creek and proximity of Cumhuriyet District due to determine the baseline condition in the location. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-14 S5S1 This is located in the proximity of the Çekmeköy District and the position of the sampling location coincides with the downstream side of planned viaduct construction. Therefore, it was sampled to determine baseline condition of that specific location. Although there is no specified name for this sampled watercourse, it is one of the small tributaries Çayağzı (Riva) River which flows from west to east direction. S5S2 This sampling point is located on the tributary of the Ömerli Dam in the proximity of Sancaktepe and Sultanbeyli Districts. According to DSI database, this dam is used as the source of drinking water and this sampling point is located in the water catchment area of Ömerli Dam. Therefore, baseline condition and future impacts in this location should be determined and followed in a regular basis to assess and avoid creating any adverse impacts. S5S3 This sampling point is located on the tributary of the Elmalı II Dam in the proximity of Ümraniye and Beykoz Districts. According to DSI database, this dam is used as the source of drinking water and this sampling point is located in the water catchment area of Elmalı II Dam. Therefore, baseline condition and future impacts in this location should be determined and followed in a regular basis to assess and avoid creating any adverse impacts. Table 8-6 Water Classification According to MSWQR Sample Ref. Name of Watercourse Classification according to MSWQR S1S1 Ayamama Creek Class IV S1S2 Alibeyköy River (southern tributary) Class III S1S3 Alibeyköy River (northern tributary) Class III S1S4 Taşlı Dere Creek Class III S2S1 Sulu Creek Class IV S2S2 Belde Creek Class IV S2S3 Tatlısu Creek Class III S2S4 Tatlısu Creek (tributary) Class III S2S5 Küçükhavza Creek Class IV S2S6 Ketendere Creek Class IV S2S7 Sazlıdere Creek Class IV S3S1 Poyrazköy Creek Class III S3S2 Halayık Creek Class III S3S3 Milko Creek Class III S3S4 Riva (Çayağzı) River Class IV S4S1 Riva (Çayağzı) River Class IV S4S2 Riva (Çayağzı) River Class III S5S1 tributary of Çayağzı (Riva) River Class IV S5S2 tributary of the Ömerli Dam Class IV S5S3 tributary of the Elmalı II Dam Class IV The results show that all watercourses sampled are classified as either „contaminated‟ or „highly contaminated‟. This includes those watercourses that drain into the Ömerli Dam and the Elmalı II Dam. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-15 8.4 Value (Sensitivity) of Resources The following table provides a summary of the water environment features within the study area and their sensitivities. The sensitivity takes into account the quality and status of the water environment feature, where: Class I Water Quality = Very High Sensitivity Class II Water Quality = High Sensitivity Class III Water Quality = Medium Sensitivity Class IV Water Quality = Low Sensitivity Note that water bodies used for drinking water supply are automatically defined as being of very high sensitivity. Table 8-7 Sensitivity of Identified Receptors Water Resource/Receptor Receptor Sensitivity Siyavuşpaşa Creek Low Ayamama Creek Low Pirinççi Dam Lake (to be constructed) Very High Taşlı Dere Creek Medium Odayeri – Kömürcüpınar Villages Ponds High Sulu Creek Low Belde (Orhaneli) - Gümüşdere Creek Low Tatlısu Creek Medium Küçükhavza Creek Low Sazlıdere Creek Low Ketendere Creek Low Poyrazköy Creek Medium Halayık Creek Medium Milko Creek Medium Riva River Medium Alibeyköy Dam (and catchment) Very High Ömerli Dam (and catchment) Very High Elmalı – II Dam (and catchment) Very High Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-16 8.5 Potential Impacts 8.5.1 Construction The construction of the project may cause temporary disturbances and negative effects on surface water resources. These negative impacts could increase without proper scheduling or programming of the works or particular activities. In other words, there are likely to be impacts of construction of the project on water quality where required mitigation activities are not implemented correctly. The proposed project includes bridges, viaducts and tunnels on various sections of the route that will cross some surface water resources. Therefore flows and beds of small river systems near or within the project site could be physically affected, for example watercourse may have to diverted or altered, or catchments may change. There may therefore be direct or indirect impacts on flows and courses of small river systems near to project route and shoreline of the Bosphorus, during the construction phase. Untreated contaminated leaking water from the excavation area, stockpile area and other construction areas may enter rivers or any other surface water resources near to the Project site where there are inadequate containment measures. Such leakage of waters and surface runoff may carry sediments or harmful wastes and these may collect in rivers or any other surface water resources and therefore there will be negative impacts of leakage waters on water quality. Moreover, during the construction activities temporary plant will be constructed and machinery will be used. Pollution may occur because of these. Some concrete wastes, materials and chemicals may cause contamination, and wash water from the facilities may cause pollution of the surface water resources. In other words, construction site runoff from plant and machinery can cause pollution. Therefore, plant and machinery may have impacts on water quality. In addition, in the project site there will be storage areas for chemicals, fuels, oils, etc., used for construction activities including refueling of plant and other vehicles. These materials should be stored according to the regulatory requirements, including the related regulation. Otherwise, there may be risk of leakage of all chemicals to the surface water resources, and so there may be impact on water quality In addition, all chemicals, fuels, oils etc used for construction activities should be handled, transported and used according to related regulation and procedures. Otherwise there may be risk of spill of these by accidents etc. Therefore, there may be impact on water quality. According to the Hydrologic Survey Report (Emay International Engineering Cons. & Trd. Co. Ltd. and Protek Proje Danışmanlık Mühendislik Bilgi İşlem İnşaat Turizm San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.) (2012), culverts are planned to be constructed. These culverts will be made to allow water to flow safely under the project road, connection road and junctions. These culverts should be designed on suitable sized; otherwise drainage system may work correctly. Therefore, there may be impact on water quality. Final designs have not been completed for drainage systems but it has been assumed that the drainage main pipe will be connected to the main drainage system of Istanbul or to a proper collector that leads to water treatment facilities. The proposed project crosses a number of water catchment areas (Alibeyköy Dam, Ömerli Dam, and Elmalı II Dam) and in a close proximity of drinking water protection areas (i.e. Elmalı II and Ömerli Dam) mentioned in section 8.2.4.3. This situation .is stated on hydrogeology section of the Geological, Hydrogeological, and Engineering Geological Survey report prepared by Emay and Protek (2013). This report claimed that the project site coincides with all of the above mentioned water reservoir basins; however; according to the Map of the Istanbul Environmental Plan the project site crosses over the Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-17 catchment area of Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Elmalı II Dams. Hence, there may be impact on the water quality during either the construction or operational activities, which may affect water quality within these reservoirs and therefore the drinking water supply to Istanbul. During the construction activities, wastewater will be generated at the camp sites and plant areas. It is expected that the JV will require the contractors to have proper wastewater collection and treatment systems as described in the relevant Turkish legislation and also the recommendation provided in the IFC General EHS Guidelines. With proper implementation of the collection and treatment structures and wastewater management procedures, the proposed Project should not discharge any wastewater without treatment to receiving media. Thus, a negligible adverse impact is expected during the construction phase of the proposed Project. Construction of paved roads increases the amount of impermeable surface area which increases the rate of surface water runoff. High stormwater flow rates can lead to stream erosion and flooding. Stormwater may be contaminated with oil and grease, metals (e.g. lead, zinc, copper, cadmium, chromium, and nickel), particulate matter and other pollutants released by vehicles on the roadway, in addition to deicing salts (e.g. sodium chloride and magnesium chloride) and their substitutes (e.g. calcium magnesium acetate and potassium acetate) from road maintenance facilities. Stormwater may also contain nutrients and herbicides used for management of vegetation in the rights-of-way. Ditches, berms, dikes and swales are used to intercept and direct surface runoff to an over side/slope drain or stabilized watercourse, away from the road. Ditch treatments can be used on roadsides, trails, parking areas, urban and rural settings, and any other place where managing runoff is important. The JV is expected to prepare a detailed Stormwater Management Plan for the proposed Project that will be implemented during the construction and operations periods. It is also expected that the project design will include stormwater management issues and mitigation measures. The proposed Project crosses a number of water catchment areas (Alibeyköy Dam, Ömerli Dam, and Elmalı II Dam) and in a close proximity of drinking water protection areas (i.e. Elmalı II and Ömerli Dam). Thus, it is very crucial that the proposed Project design will include sound stormwater management measures and procedures. The IFC EHS Guidelines recommend: Use of stormwater management practices that slow peak runoff flow, reduce sediment load, and increase infiltration, including vegetated swales (planted with salt-resistant vegetation); filter strips; terracing; check dams; detention ponds or basins; infiltration trenches; infiltration basins; and constructed wetlands; Where significant oil and grease is expected, using oil /water separators in the treatment activities; Regular inspection and maintenance of permanent erosion and runoff control features. Depending on the type of crossing, its size, method of installation, and maintenance, a road crossing may have many or relatively few adverse impacts on surface water quality and therefore river or stream ecosystems. It is generally believed that culverts are more detrimental to streams than are bridges; consequently, wildlife biologists routinely recommend installation of bridges instead of a culvert and it is recommended that this design element is incorporated where possible. According to Impact on Water Resources Section of World Bank Technical Paper No 376, planning and construction of water crossings needs to be coordinated with local aquatic conditions such as flow regimes, fish movement, and human use. Lack of planning can have severe long-term effects; for Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-18 example, an improperly sized bridge culvert could cause flooding, leading, in turn, to interruption of fish migration, erosion, and siltation. Construction activities can have significant effects on surface water resources and good environmental management, including control of runoff, sediments, storage of fuels and good practice (such as not driving across watercourses with construction vehicles) should be followed. If these practices are followed the impacts on watercourses should be minor. 8.5.2 Permanent and Operational According to the Hydrologic Survey Report (Emay International Engineering Cons. & Trd. Co. Ltd. and Protek Proje Danışmanlık Mühendislik Bilgi İşlem İnşaat Turizm San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.) (2012), permanent culverts are planned for the project. These culverts will build to allow the safe flow of water under the project road, connection road and junctions. These culverts should be designed on suitable sized; otherwise drainage system cannot work correctly. Therefore, there may be impact on water quality. With further reference to the hydrogeology section of Geological, Hydrogeological, and Engineering Geological Survey Report prepared by Emay and Protek (2013), the project site is located on some of the important drinking water basins. Although this report claimed that the project site coincides with all of the water catchment areas, according to the Map of the Istanbul Environmental Plan the project site only crosses over the catchment areas of Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Elmalı II Dams. However, there may be a long term impact on the water quality during the operational activities. There will be impacts associated with maintenance and repair of project components. Maintenance and repair process can increase local pollution, if adequate measures are not put in place. In addition, amounts of materials that may cause pollution and the concentrations of some chemicals may increase, including leakage and scattering of these into watercourses so as to affect water quality. Furthermore, in the project site there will be storage areas for chemicals, fuels, oils etc used for operational and development activities. These materials should be stored according to the regulatory requirements, including the related regulation, otherwise, there may be risk of leakage of all chemicals to the surface water resources, and so there may be impact on water quality. Finally, all chemicals, fuels, oils, etc., used for operational and development activities should be handled, transported and used according to related regulation and procedures. Otherwise there may be risk of spill of these by accidents etc. Therefore, there may be impact on water quality. Wastewater will also be generated during the maintenance and operations periods. Wastewater discharges from maintenance facilities and from service and rest areas should be managed according to the Turkish legislation and also the recommendations provided in the IFC General EHS Guidelines. Some of the mitigation measures should be addressed in the design and may include connection to centralized wastewater collection and treatment systems and/or use of properly designed and operated septic systems. With proper implementation of wastewater management procedures, negligible impact is anticipated for the proposed Project. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-19 8.6 Mitigation Measures 8.6.1 Approach to Mitigation Mitigation has been developed taking into account current best practice and all relevant legislation. The local legislation does not contain interrelation tables for impacts and mitigations. However, this is needed to develop such an evaluation table due to follow international guidance. The proposed mitigation methods seek to control or reduce the impact at the source as much as possible. This includes incorporating mitigation into the construction and design of the road to reduce the risk of impacting on the water environment. The project components such as water crossings and road drainage have been developed iteratively through the design process in order to reduce impacts. 8.6.2 Construction 8.6.2.1 General Measures The project will be conducted in accordance with all relevant legislation for the protection of surface and resources. In order to mitigate potential impacts during the construction phase, all works will be conducted regarding to related regulations. Furthermore, an Environmental and Social Management System (ESMS) will be implemented by ICA in order to ensure adequate protection of water resources. This EMP should include delivering of all the mitigation measures presenting in the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment. As part of the site ESMS construction works will carefully phased to: Reduce the periods for which soils are exposed and stockpiled thereby reducing the risk of generating silt laden runoff; Avoid undertaking specific activities such as earthworks during prolonged and heavy rainfall thereby reducing the risk of sediment or pollutants becoming entrained or suspended in excess runoff; and Develop permanent elements of the proposed drainage mitigation in early phases to allow for their use during the construction period as part of the temporary drainage system. A temporary construction drainage system will be developed in order to manage surface runoff and prevent it draining directly to adjacent ditches and field drains. All untreated and potentially contaminated drainage from the temporary site compound and construction site including pumped water resulting from dewatering of excavations will be prevented from directly entering drains, ditches and rivers. Provision will be made to collect and treat drainage and to remove any sediment and other contaminants prior to discharging the treated water. This will include the use of temporary ditches or channels and temporary settlement pond. Silt traps will also be installed during the construction period in order to ensure the effective removal of silt. Stockpiled soils and rock from earthworks arisings will appropriately stored away from known drainage pathways and will be contained within an appropriately bunded area. This will include the use of silt traps and geotextile mats in order to prevent the potential suspension of sediment within runoff. Temporary access tracks shall be designed and constructed to prevent surface water ponding and drain surface runoff into appropriately sized trenches. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-20 In order to prevent pollutants leaking from static plant, such as pumps and generators, contaminating the ground and being washed into the drainage system and potentially surface waterbodies, static plant will be placed on drip trays. Similarly, in order to prevent materials leaking from parked or stored vehicles or plant these will be stored on impermeable areas in order to collect and appropriately manage any leakages of fuels or oils. Refueling will be similarly controlled. Facilities for washing plant and equipment contaminated with concrete or other chemicals will be provided. Wash water from the facilities will be managed so as to prevent pollution of surface water and groundwater. Waste water will be collected and taken off site for disposal. Emergency procedures to be implemented in the event of a spillage or leakage of any polluting material such as fuel, oil or silt-laden drainage, will be in place on-site and incorporated into the ESMS. Provision for containment and clean-up of the material will be made. 8.6.2.2 Watercourse Crossings The main issues associated with watercourse crossing will include control of: Silt and other runoff; Cement and concrete Chemicals, paints, solvents and herbicides; Fuel and lubricants and vehicle washings; Buildings materials, packaging, waste and general litter Physical disturbance of banks and the river bed due to vehicles or personnel entering watercourses. Most of these issues will be controlled by ensuring that temporary construction site drainage is put in place that does not discharge directly into adjacent watercourses. This will include provision of cut-off drains, settlement tanks, oil traps, bunded storage areas, correct control stockpiled soils, impermeable refueling areas, washing facilities, site offices and accommodation, adequate water and waste disposal facilities and other measures. Works on river banks and within watercourses will be strictly controlled by the ESMS – particularly in terms of vehicles and personnel entering such watercourses and damaging banks and river beds, as well as introducing pollutants into them. Where possible temporary bridges should be put in place and work should where at all possible be undertaken from the bank rather than in the watercourse itself. 8.6.2.3 Other Measures As a first step, before commencement of site activities, all the site workers will be trained about mitigations and procedures. As part of this, training will be given about all potential contaminants, spillage or leakage of any polluting material such as fuel, oil, etc., and impacts of these, so the mitigation measures of the impacts will be implemented correctly. The impacts of construction of the project on water quality can be greatly reduced through the scheduling or programming of the works or particular activities. Works can be timed to avoid periods of low flow within watercourses, where dispersal and dilution rates will also be low. Works can also avoid periods of high flow where there will be an increased risk of flooding. The scheduling of the works can also account for the development of mitigation. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-21 At the construction phase, temporary works required during the construction activities will be designed to minimize disruption to flows and disturbance to watercourse beds, adjacent small river systems, and shoreline of the Bosphorus with associated ecosystems. The construction and removal of all temporary works will be undertaken in accordance with good practice guidelines and the mitigation measures outlined in the ESIA. All untreated contaminated drainage from site compounds and construction areas (including pumped water from excavations) will be prevented from entering the rivers adjacent to the Project site, or any other surface water drains and sewers. Provision will be made to collect and treat the drainage from all construction areas and compounds and to remove any sediment and other contaminants before discharging the clean water under an appropriate permit. In order to prevent materials leaking from plant, such as pumps and generators, contaminating the ground and being washed into the drainage system, plant will be placed on drip trays. Facilities for construction and equipment contaminated with concrete or other chemicals will be provided. Wash water from the facilities will be managed so as to prevent pollution of surface water. Construction site runoff from plant and machinery will be prevented by suitable management systems. Chemicals will be stored in secure designated storage areas and in accordance with the appropriate regulatory requirements, including the related regulation. Re-fuelling of vehicles and machinery will be undertaken in accordance with a specified procedure that will include the designation of refuelling areas. Spill contingency plans will be drawn up and included in the procedures. Stockpiles of dry materials will be stored in locations that prevent contamination of surface waters. They must be located away from the banks of the any surface water courses that the Project site will be crossing over. Materials would not be stockpiled within areas vicinity of water resources. Chemicals will be handled, transported and used suitably for preventing of spills of fuel, all chemicals used for project construction. According to the Hydrologic Survey Report (Emay International Engineering Cons. & Trd. Co. Ltd. and Protek Proje Danışmanlık Mühendislik Bilgi İşlem İnşaat Turizm San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.) (2012), culverts are planned to be constructed. These culverts will be made to ensure the safe flow of water under the project road, connection roads and junctions. These culverts will be designed on suitable sized for working of drainage system correctly. In addition, according to the Map of Istanbul Environmental Plan given in Appendix 8-1, the project site crosses over the catchment area of Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Elmalı II Dams. There may be impacts during construction activities however there are no mitigation measures described in the Water Pollution Control Regulation (WPCR) for the catchment areas. However, extra attention will be paid in these areas and water quality studies will be done regularly in theses catchments and no discharging of any liquid will permitted. Some elements of the project are located on the protection areas of Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Elmalı II Dams according to WPCR. Therefore, the mitigation measures described in WPCR will be applied at these areas. Some parts of the project are located on the long – range protection zones of the Alibeyköy Dam. There are no mitigation measures defined in the related clause of the regulation (clause 20 of the WPCR). On the other hand, some parts of the project are located within the medium-range protection zone of the Ömerli Dam. According to (h) article of clause 19 of the same regulation, in the sections of the roads that will situated in such areas as per zoning plans and at obligatory cases, only transportation – related Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-22 functions shall be allowed, but construction of any facilities such as way station, fuel station etc., will not be permitted. Moreover, some parts of the project are located on short-range protection zone of Elmalı II Dam. According to article (ı) of 18 clause of the same regulation, for obligatory roads, the same permits are applied. Therefore for the part of the project located on the protection zones, any facility except roads will not be constructed. Apart from of all mitigation measures, emergency procedures to be adopted in the event of a spillage or leakage of any polluting material such as fuel, oil or any drainage will be in place on-site. 8.6.3 Permanent and Operational 8.6.3.1 General According to Hydrologic Survey Report (Emay International Engineering Cons. & Trd. Co. Ltd. and Protek Proje Danışmanlık Mühendislik Bilgi İşlem İnşaat Turizm San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.) (2012), culverts are planned to be constructed permanently. These culverts will be done to allow the unimpeded flow of water under the project road, connection road and junctions. These culverts will be designed to a suitable size to enable the drainage system to function correctly. In addition, according to Map of Istanbul Environmental Plan given in Appendix 8-1 the project site crosses over the catchment area of Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Elmalı II Dams. There may be impacts on these very sensitive receptors during operational activities and project development; however, there is no mitigation measures described in Water Pollution Control Regulation (WPCR) for the catchment areas. Therefore, extra attention will be needed and water quality studies will have to be done regularly and no discharging of any liquid will have to occur. Some parts of the project are located on the protection areas of Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Elmalı II Dams according to WPCR. Therefore, the mitigation measures described in the WPCR will be applied in these areas. Furthermore, some parts of the project are located within the long – range protection zones of Alibeyköy Dam. There are no mitigation measures in the related clause of the regulation (clause 20) of the WPCR. Conversely, some parts of the project are located on medium-range protection zone of Ömerli Dam. According to article (h) of clause 19 of the same regulation, in these sections of the roads, which will be situated in such areas as per zoning plans only certain permitted development, comprising transportation – related functions shall be allowed, but construction of any facilities such as way station, fuel station etc. will not be permitted. Furthermore, some parts of the project will be located on short-range protection zone of Elmalı II Dam. According to article (ı) of clause 18 of the same regulation, for obligatory roads, the same permits are applied. Therefore for the parts of the project located on the protection zones, any facility other than road will not be constructed. During operational and development activities, maintenance and repairing processes will be undertaken. In order to prevent the negative impacts of these processes, drainage systems will be developed and culverts will be constructed. These culverts will be designed to be suitably sized for ensuring that the drainage system works correctly. All calculations and plans are available in the Hydrologic Survey Report (Emay International Engineering Cons. & Trd. Co. Ltd. and Protek Proje Danışmanlık Mühendislik Bilgi İşlem İnşaat Turizm San. Ve Tic. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-23 Ltd. Şti.) (2012). The best designed drainage and culvert systems will prevent leakage to the water resources. In addition required materials used for maintenance and repairing processes will be stored in secure designated storage areas and will be used carefully to prevent indiscriminate release into the environment. All chemicals, fuels, oils, etc., used for operational and development activities will be stored in secure designated storage areas and in accordance with the appropriate regulatory requirements, including the related regulation. In addition, these will be handled, transported and used appropriately in order to prevent spills of fuel and all chemicals used during operational and development activities. 8.6.3.2 Stormwater Management Preparation and implementation of Stormwater Management Plan is in the responsibility of ICA. Thus any stormwater drainage plan or map can be provided only after a detailed Stormwater Management Plan has been prepared. However, measurements and standards are given IFC EHS Guidelines published in April 30, 2007 as: Stormwater should be separated from wastewater streams in order to reduce the volume of wastewater to be treated prior to discharge. Surface run-off from plant sites and camp sites or potential sources of contamination should be prevented. Where this approach is not practical, run-off from plant sites and camp sites and storage areas should be segregated from potentially less contaminated run-off. Run-off from areas without potential sources of contamination should be minimised (e.g. by minimising the area of impermeable surfaces) and the peak discharge rate should be reduced (e.g. by using vegetated swales and retention ponds). Priority should be given to managing and treating the first flush of stormwater run-off where the majority of potential contaminants tend to be present. When water quality criteria allow, stormwater should be managed as a resource, either for groundwater recharge or for meeting water needs at the facility. Oil-water separators and grease traps should be installed and maintained as appropriate at refuelling facilities, parking areas, fuel storage and containment areas. Sludge from drains or treatment systems may contain elevated levels of pollutants and should be disposed of in compliance with local regulatory requirements. Motorway drainage design and implementation works will be in accordance with KGMs technical requirements. 8.6.3.3 Construction and Decommissioning Measurements and standards relating to Construction and Decommissioning are given IFC EHS Guidelines published in April 30, 2007 as: Segregating or diverting clean water runoff to prevent it mixing with water containing a high solid content, to minimize the volume of water to be treated prior to release. Discharges of process wastewater, sanitary wastewater, wastewater from utility operations or stormwater to surface water should not result in contaminant concentrations in excess of local ambient water quality criteria or, in the absence of local criteria, other sources of ambient water quality. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-24 Receiving water use and assimilative capacity, taking other sources of discharges to the receiving water into consideration, should also influence the acceptable pollution loadings and effluent discharge quality. Additional considerations that should be included in the setting of project-specific performance levels for wastewater effluents include: Process wastewater treatment standards consistent with applicable Industry Sector EHS Guidelines. Projects for which there are no industry-specific guidelines should reference the effluent quality guidelines of an industry sector with suitably analogous processes and effluents; Compliance with national or local standards for sanitary wastewater discharges or, in their absence, the indicative guideline values applicable to sanitary wastewater discharges; Temperature of wastewater prior to discharge does not result in an increase greater than 3°C of ambient temperature at the edge of a scientifically established mixing zone which takes into account ambient water quality, receiving water use and assimilative capacity among other considerations. 8.7 Residual Impacts 8.7.1 Construction The follow sections describe the significance of residual impacts on the water environment, taking into account the mitigation measures that will be implemented during construction of the project. Table 8-8 Description of Impacts Description of Impacts Residual Significance Impact because of working without scheduling or programming and not doing of Negligible required activities on right time (Not significant) Impact because of crossing of the route of the project or parts on some surface Minor water resources (Not significant) Impact because of untreated contaminated leaking water from the excavation Negligible area, stockpile area and other construction area (Not significant) Negligible Impact because of runoff from plant and machinery in project site (Not significant) Impact because of leakage of all chemicals fuels, oils etc used for construction Negligible activities to the surface water resources (Not significant) Impact because of spill of all chemicals, fuels, oils etc used for construction Negligible activities by accidents etc. (Not significant) Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-25 Description of Impacts Residual Significance Impact because of not designing of culverts on suitable sized, and not working of Negligible drainage system correctly. (Not significant) Impact because of crossing over on the catchment area of Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Minor Elmalı II Dams. (Not significant) Overall there will be a Negligible to Minor impact on water resources, taking mitigation into account, from construction of the scheme. The activities posing the highest risk to deterioration in the surface water environment would be the temporary works associated with the construction of Project, particularly associated with culvert construction and release of contaminants, sediment loading and other runoff into watercourses. There is also the potential for the major catchments associated with a number of dams and reservoirs important for Istanbul‟s drinking water supply to be affected. However, overall, the impacts during construction are likely to be Negligible to Minor and therefore Not Significant. 8.7.2 Permanent and Operational Table 8-9 Description of Impacts Description of Impacts Residual Significance Impact because of not designing of culverts on suitable sized, and not working of Negligible drainage system correctly. (Not significant) Impact because of crossing over on the catchment area of Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Minor Elmalı II Dams. (Not significant) Negligible Impact because of pollution associated with maintenance and repairing process (Not significant) Impact because of leakage of all chemicals fuels, oils etc used for operational and Negligible development activities to the surface water resources (Not significant) Impact because of spill of all chemicals, fuels, oils etc used for operational and Negligible development activities by accidents etc. (Not significant) Overall it is considered that there would be a potential Negligible to Minor impact from the operation of the scheme. The potential operational impacts on water quality should be minimal. Impacts from vehicular emissions and related pollution of surface water runoff are considered to be low. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-26 Any runoff entering surface watercourses would likely be subject to high dilution and dispersal resulting in low concentrations with negligible impact to surface waters. In addition, increased surface runoff rates will be mitigated through the drainage design, reducing potential impacts. The overall impact on water resources during operation of the scheme is therefore considered to be Not significant. 8.8 Summary This chapter of the ESIA presents the findings of the assessment of impacts of the Project on water quality and hydrology. It provides a detailed description of the existing water conditions including surface water courses, and water quality. It predicts the potential construction activities impacts and operation and development activities impacts. It also identifies mitigation measures. Mitigation has been developed taking into current best practice and all related regulations and rules. Applying of the mitigation measures will decrease potential impacts on the water quality during both construction, operational and development activities. In addition there may be residual impacts that are likely to remain after mitigation measures have been put in place, have been identified and assessed. There are a large number of watercourses in the vicinity of the Project that may be directly or indirectly affected by it during construction and operational activities. These receptors range from various watercourses to a number of dams that a drinking water reservoirs for Istanbul and surrounding areas. The water quality for most watercourses is quite low and this has been confirmed by sampling activities undertaken for this assessment. These receptors are considered to be less sensitive than the dams which have a very high sensitivity due to their use as drinking water reservoirs. The project will be conducted in accordance with all relevant legislation for the protection of surface and resources. In the area, during construction activities, there may be impacts because of working without scheduling or programming and not undertaking the required activities at the right time. However, the scheduling of the works and working in accordance with all project plans and schedules will prevent the negative effect of this impact. in addition, the project and some parts of it cross over some surface water resources and part of the project lies with the catchment area of some dams, which supply drinking water to Istanbul. However, there are measures that include implementation of the regulations, good practice guidelines and mitigation measures outlined in the ESIA, so the impacts can be minimized. For example, there may be untreated contaminated water or runoff from various facilities, and leakage, dispersion and spill of chemicals, fuels, oils, etc., used for construction and operational activities. However, use of the most appropriate drainage and culvert system will prevent the impacts on water quality during construction activities, as well as operational and development activities. The mitigation measures have been developed, but before the commencement of construction and operational activities, all the site workers will be trained about mitigations and procedures. As part of this, training will be given about all potential contaminants, spillage or leakage of any polluting material such as fuel, oil etc and impacts of these, as well as contingency and clean-up procedures, so the mitigation measures of the impacts will imply correctly. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 8-27 As a conclusion, overall there will be a minor impact from construction, operational and development activities of the project. The activity that has the highest risk on the water quality will be the permanent works associated with the project parts crossing of the surface water resources. Extra attention will be needed during the operational project time. All required controls will require to be done regularly. In addition, according to related regulations, on-going mitigation measures will be implemented. Therefore, the negative impacts will be minimized during Project construction, operational and development activities. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-1 9.0 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 9.1 Introduction This section discusses environmental issues associated with geology, soils, hydrogeology (groundwater) and waste management conditions relating to the Project. The current conditions within the route corridor are described below and likely effects of the development on potentially sensitive receptors assessed. These impacts have been divided into two categories: • Short-term construction impacts; and • Permanent and operational impacts. The potential impacts during construction and operational activities and mitigation measures proposed for each parameter are described. Some of the impacts are indirect impacts; some of them are direct impacts. For direct impacts, the Project site and development of the Project affect the issue directly. For indirect impacts, the Project site and development of the Project do not affect the issue directly, in the other words, if mitigation measures do not apply for these issues, there will be possible negative consequences and these cause negative impacts on the environmental issues. Note that some of the conditions and effects described, particularly with regard to contamination and hydrogeology, may interact with other parameters such as ecology and surface water. Such interactions are described where appropriate. 9.2 Approach and Methods 9.2.1 Baseline Methods This section explains the potential impacts on ground (Geology & Soil, Hydrogeology and Waste Management) conditions with the proposed Project. Potential impacts within the Project sites as well as adjacent receptors have been considered. In addition, potential impacts associated with the construction phase of the Project have been considered as well as potential impacts associated with permanent infrastructure and operational activities. In addition, mitigation ways are given based on these impacts. This section will be based on available and accessible desktop studies and geotechnical reports prepared for this Project and it will include qualitative assessments, anticipated major risks and potential impacts, and mitigation ways of these impacts. During this integration study, Istanbul Environmental Condition Report (2009), Directorate of Ground and Earthquake Analysis of Istanbul Municipality Reports (September 2005 & December 2011), MTA Istanbul Mineral and Energy Resources Report (2012) and Environmental Plan from Istanbul City Guide Web Site (2012) and Geotechnical Reports (prepared by Emay International Engineering Cons. & Trd. Co. Ltd. and Protek Proje Danışmanlık Mühendislik Bilgi İşlem İnşaat Turizm San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.) (2012-2013) have been reviewed and interpreted in detail. Although previous studies regarding geology were not prepared specifically undertaken for the Project site, the level of geological study can be expanded to scale. Therefore, the actual level of geological information of reference reports is adequate for this stage of the assessment. Information on hydrogeology was collected from reports prepared for the Hydrologic Survey Report (Emay International Engineering Cons. & Trd. Co. Ltd. and Protek Proje Danışmanlık Mühendislik Bilgi İşlem İnşaat Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-2 Turizm San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.) (2012) and maps prepared by AECOM using Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs database with Istanbul Environmental Plan from Municipality of Istanbul. 9.2.2 Assessment Methods After necessary the information was collected to evaluate the impacts in relation to the Project, the assessment procedures have been conducted with the guidance set out in Water Quality and Drainage, Geology and Soils sections, below. 9.2.2.1 Geology and Soil The main issues for impacts on geology and soils include damage to the Project site designated for their geological interest or zones where the development of the Project may affect active or potential mineral extraction activities. In addition, potential issues associated with loss or damage to soils, have been considered. Assessment of the impact of the scheme on geology and soils is based on the criteria shown in Table 9-1 below. Table 9-1 Criteria for Assessing Impact on Geology and Soils Criteria for Assessing Impact on Geology and Soils Impact Definition Assessment An internationally or nationally designated site of geological interest, located within or immediately adjacent to the Project and that will be damaged or destroyed by the proposed development. Also, important area of high quality or rare soil type that will be destroyed or damaged Major by the development. A significant or active mineral resource or mining area, that lies within the site that will be sterilized by the proposed development. A locally important site of geological interest, located within or near to the Project and that will be damaged or destroyed by the proposed development. In addition, an area of high quality or rare soil type that Moderate will be destroyed or damaged by the development. Inactive mineral resource or un-mined area that will be sterilized by the proposed development. Any site of geological interest, located within or near to the Project and that will not be damaged or destroyed by the proposed development. But, the poor soil type can be destroyed or damaged by the Minor development Any mineral resource or un-mined area can be affected by the development Negligible Any geological feature, soil type or any mineral resource or un-mined area will not be affected by the Project. 9.2.2.2 Hydrogeology The significance of potential impacts on hydrogeological resources, which comprises groundwater sources and dependent surface water sources, which can be affected by the Project development, is based on the criteria given in the table below. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-3 Table 9-2 Criteria for Assessing Impact on Hydrogeology Criteria for Assessing Impact on Hydrogeology Impact Definition Assessment The construction or operation will pollute, damage or destroy water Major supplies that are important for drinking water or industry, or are a particularly rare or valuable resource. The construction or operation will pollute or give a damage or Moderate destruction to water supplies that may be used for local drinking water or for industry The construction or operation may pollute, damage or destruction water Minor supplies that are not used for public usage or where impermeable units overlie the aquifer The construction or operation will not pollute, damage or destroy water Negligible supplies and/or there is no hydrogeological resource near or within the Project site. 9.2.2.3 Waste management There are two classes of waste management issues associated with the development. These include: • The presence of licensed waste management sites within or in the vicinity of the site (Solid Waste Disposal Facilities in Istanbul); • Issues associated with disposal of waste material as part of the construction and operation of the planned route (İZAYDAŞ (İzmit Metropolitan Municipality, İzmit Waste and Residue Treatment and Incineration and Recycling Co. Inc.), ERDEMİR (Ereğli Iron and Steel Manufacturing Inc.), and İSKEN (İskenderun Energy Production and Trade Company). The following table sets out the assessment criteria used in this chapter for assessing the impact of waste management issues associated with this Project. Table 9-3 Criteria for Assessing Impact on Waste Management Criteria for Assessing Impact on Waste Management Impact Definition Assessment In the Project area, there is disposal of Hazardous Waste, or large Major quantities of Non-Hazardous waste during construction or operation, where the wastes cannot be re-used In the Project area, there is disposal of Non-Hazardous Waste, or Inert Moderate waste during construction or operation, where the wastes cannot be re- used In the Project area, there are disposal of Inert waste during construction Minor or operation; the wastes may be re-used Negligible In the Project area, there are minimum quantities disposal of Hazardous Waste, during construction or operation; the wastes may be re-used Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-4 9.3 Baseline Conditions 9.3.1 Geology and Soil Istanbul District is located on Çatalca Peninsula in the west, the Kocaeli Peninsula in the east separated by a waterway (the Bosphorus) between these peninsulas. Furthermore, the region is one of the two linking points of Asia and Europe. It only covers 0.7% of the country’s territories and the shape of the district resembles a rectangle with the long edge in the E-W direction (approximately 100 km) and short edge in the N-S direction (approximately 50-60 km). Stratigraphy The general geology of the Istanbul District is formed by Paleozoic, Mesozoic, Cenozoic, Quaternary and actual sedimentary materials with soils, according to the Istanbul Environmental Condition Report (2009). Boundary relations of these rock formations are mostly unconformities that are sourced from tectonic activities. Paleozoic deposits are observed in Çatalca Peninsula, the Bosphorus shores, and the Asian (Kocaeli Peninsula) continuation of linked formations, whereas Cenozoic and Quaternary deposits are examined mostly in the western side of the district. Alluvial formations are mostly encountered at the Bosphorus coast and valley bottoms. Antique and actual artificial fillings (made ground) can be seen at the Marmara Sea coasts apart from these natural deposits. In the northern side of Çatalca Peninsula a rock unit called the “Istranca Group” is observed in vast areas. The Istranca Group is composed of metamorphic rocks such as schist, quartzite and magmatites. The group is located in large areas between Tekirdağ and Edirne and it enters the Istanbul District from the west and northern side. Outcrops of this metamorphic group are observed in the Çatalca region with names such as Kızılağaç Metagranites, Şermat Quartzites, and Mahya Schists. The other main unit which can be observed at both sides of the Bosphorus is called as the “Istanbul Group”. This group does not show any metamorphism related with Paleozoic and Mesozoic times. The oldest rock formation in this group is Lower Ordovician continental rock and it is present at the near side of the metropolitan area. The basal part of this Lower Ordovician stacks is called the Kurtköy Formation but it is not observed in the district. These units are located with unconformities in Infracambrian aged schists, gneisses, and meta-magmatites at Armutlu Peninsula. In the Early-Middle Ordovician, the Istanbul region accumulated quartzite from a beach environment named the “Aydos Formation” and this accumulation was sourced due to transgression. The region was covered with a tectonically stable and deepening sea in Silurian and Devonian periods. In this process, deposition of Yayalar Formation (Sandstone – Lower Ordovician), Pelitli Formation (shelf type reef and shallow sea carbonate deposit – Lower Ordovician – Silurian), Kartal Formation (low energy deep-sea environment representative limestone & mica schist intercalation containing large amount of macrofossils - Lower – Middle Devonian), and Denizli Village Formation (deep sea shelf deposit representative nodular limestone – Upper Devonian & Lower Carboniferous) occurred. The Denizli Village Formation member called Baltalimanı, which has Lower Carboniferous siliceous deposits, is thought to be the reason for the presence of large amount siliceous material due to volcanic activity around this marine basin. The region is presented as a tectonically stable period from the Ordovician to the start of the Carboniferous and it shows the characteristic behavior of turbidity current deposits. Therefore, turbiditic flysch type sandstone shale intercalation called as “Trakya Formation” have been deposited with more than 1,000 m thickness. North-South strike and East-West dip low angle reverse faults are developed in the region due to tectonic activities which occurred in the Carboniferous – Permian period. To illustrate this, the Çamlıca Thrust, which is the reason of Aydos Quartzites movement over younger formations and eventually forming of Çamlıca Hills, is Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-5 believed to have developed throughout this period. Magmatic intrusions present within the Sancaktepe Granite (Permian) west of Gebze are also thought to have formed in this period and finally this region formed the continental surface. This continental transformation period in the Permian – Early Triassic is represented with reddish sandstone and pebblestone called the “Kapaklı Formation”. Basaltic volcanic rock intercalations in Kapaklı Formation could be interpreted as the starting of rift formations in the region. In the Middle – Late Triassic, a transgressive sea formed a secondary marine environment and this transgression was followed by deposition of Demirciler Formation (tidal deposits), Ballıkaya Formation (shelf carbonates), and Tepeköy Formation – Bakırlıkıran Formation (slope deposits). There is no indication or outcrop of any rock units from Jurassic – Early Cretaceous within the Istanbul District boundaries and this condition is the sign of erosion in this time interval. In the Late Cretaceous, another transgressive movement occurred in whole region and deposition of Sarıyer Formation (Upper Cretaceous volcano sediments) and Akveren Formation (Upper Cretaceous – Paleocene clastics with shallow carbonates) occurred in this marine environment. Andesitic volcanic rocks of the Sarıyer Formation, which are believed to be indicative of island arc volcanism in the closure of the Tethys Ocean, covered the northern side of the region. Upper Cretaceous Çavuşbaşı Granodiorites and volcanic dykes in Paleozoic successions also developed in this period. There was intense folding and faulting in the Marmara Basin at Lutetian due to major compressive impacts on Anatolia during the Eocene and this folding and faulting genesis becomes effective in Istanbul District. During deposition of Paleozoic and Mesozoic rock units in the Early Eocene, the Sarıyer-Şile Fault with NNW-SSE strike intruded into the Upper Cretaceous – Early Eocene rock units. Another transgressive movement occurred in the Middle Eocene in the region. In the Middle Eocene – Early Oligocene interval, deposition of beach and reefal units (Koyunbaba Formation, Yunuslubayır Formation, Soğucak Formation) near coasts and clayey mud (Ceylan Formation) in deeper sides occurred and spread. The region became a continental depositional field again due to tectonic activities affecting Trakya Basin starting from the Middle – Late Oligocene to the present day. In this interval, deposition of river deposits representing Late Oligocene – Late Miocene (Kıraç Formation) and lagoon – lake deposits (Danişmen Formation & Çekmece Formation) developed. Within these formations intensive shear fault and joint systems can be observed with NW-SE and NE-SW orientations, developed with N-S direction compaction. These shear zone fractures developed weak zones and these weak zones are the explanation for the zigzag geometry of the Istanbul and Çanakkale Strait coasts as well as the large river valleys and Golden Horn coasts. Tectonism and Paleogeography Istanbul District is situated in a tectonically active and intricate region. The northern branch of the North Anatolian Fault (NAF) is located to the south of the proposed Project area. This branch is the reason for a deformation zone that includes NE-SW directed normal faults and similar basin series development to 30-40 km width. In addition, some of these fault segments’ northern parts reach south of the metropolitan area. Here there exists a normal fault system in the north and this system could be the continuation of the Srednogorie zone of Bulgaria. Furthermore, there exists a NE-SW directed Trakya (Istranca) Fault parallel to the Black Sea coasts in the northwest part of the region and this fault reaches closer to Lake Terkos. There is an assumption that this fault may split into small parts to the east of Lake Terkos. In addition to that, there are smaller scale faults between the main fault zones. Büyükdere Fault becomes prominent in these smaller faults and it is an E-W trending fault to the north of Aydos Mountain. There is another indication of a NE-SW direction lineament defined by air photography. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-6 Istanbul and the surrounding area was affected by numerous and different tectonic activities between the Carboniferous and Neogene. This tectonism relates to folds, faults or joints triggering complicated geology throughout the region; therefore only the important fault systems are discussed and defined in this section. It can be observed that there are different sizes of faults oriented E-W, N-S, NE-SW, and NW-SE within Paleozoic aged rock units in the region. Although some faults have been determined by excavation studies or natural slopes, they appear to be developed only at a regional scale. However, there are map scale formations in some other faults. Primary river systems such as the Alibey River, Kağıthane River, Riva River, Ömerli Dam Lake and water bodies like the Bosphorus and Golden Horn have a NE-SW & NW-SE direction zigzag geometry. This geometric development can be observed clearly especially within the coastal morphology of the Bosphorus. For example, valleys that include Büyükçekmece Lake and Küçükçekmece Lake and metamorphic units of Çatalca District represent the NW-SE directional orientation. There is a general consensus about the existence of severe compression movements in the Trakya Basin in the Early Eocene and Middle-Late Oligocene. Şile-Sarıyer Fault is a good example of these Early Eocene tectonic activities and it is a strike-slip fault that lies on both peninsulas at the Black Sea coasts. Furthermore, N-S direction Oligocene movements have produced shear zone fractures in the NE-SW and NW-SE orientations. Although there are numerous fault systems in the Istanbul District due to the complicated geology, NE-SW and NW-SE elongated shear faults are the most prominent fault structures in the region. These faults not only designate the routes of river systems but they also help to explain the coastal zigzag morphology. The Sarıyer-Şile Fault indicates elongation from the Şile District at the Black Sea coast of the Kocaeli Peninsula to the west of Gümüşdere Village in the Çatalca Peninsula. It shows no interruption in the E-W direction. Paleozoic and Triassic rock units interact with Cretaceous and Paleocene rock formations along this fault. Moreover, the fault plane is almost vertical or at a steeper slope to the south whereas it has lower angle slope in Sarıyer neighborhood. The Maltepe-Beykoz Fault is only observed on the Asian side and it shows NW-SE elongation. Although the characteristics of the fault are not fully understood, most geologists consider that it is a low angle reverse fault with small fractions. Pelitli, Kartal, and Denizli Formations come across with Kurtköy Formation. The Yakacık Fault is developed and observed from the west of hills such as Yakacık Hill, Deliklikaya Hill, Kurfalı Hill, Orta Hill, and Gözdağ Hill. These hills are 200-380 m in height and the fault separates the Aydos Formation quartzite and Kartal Formation shale with macrofossils. The fault has low angle thrust fault characteristics. Some geologists claim that the Çatalca Fault is a normal fault with a NW-SE elongation. Furthermore, they asserted that the fault develops at the eastern and western boundaries of the Çatalca Massive Unit and the fault spreads around Eocene and Oligocene deposits. However, after detailed study of outcrops throughout the fault location, it can be clearly seen that Eocene – Oligocene aged Soğucak Limestone, Pınarhisar, and Danişmen formation are transgressive over the Çatalca Massive. This transgressive overlapping of Tertiary Units upon Çatalca Massive has an undulating morphology and this boundary relation is hard to observe. Therefore, there is no direct evidence of horst forming effective tension forces in the region. The Eastern side of the massive has high slopes and there is an important amount of height difference in tertiary deposits over the massive and tertiary deposits at the western side of Büyükçekmece Lake. This height difference could be an indication of an almost horizontal strike-slip fault called the Çatalca Fault. There is no proof that this fault is active and the height difference originates from weak zone of the fault that formed in a former glacial period. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-7 The Alibeyköy Fault is located in the Alibey River valley and it is a continuation of the Pirinçci valley with a NW-SE elongation. This morphological appearance can be seen from drainage patterns and this appearance also has uniformity with the Bosphorus and other significant river morphology. This drainage pattern developed from compression during the Oligocene with N-S elongation and it is controlled by weak zones due to conjugated faults and joints. The Sazlıdere Fault developed in the Sazlıdere River Valley and its upstream tributaries (Dursunköy, Boyalık, and Çiftlik rivers). All of these rivers are elongated in a NW-SE direction and the main river valley elongates in the same direction with the Alibey River and Çatalca Fault. The Kurna Village – Emirli Village Fault is located to the east of Ömerli Dam Lake and also the eastern side of Kurna and Emirli villages. It is thought to be a strike-slip fault and it separates the Ordovician Kurtköy and Yayalar Formation from the Lower-Middle Devonian Kartal Formation. It is located between Kurtköy and Ömerli and it breaks into smaller parts with NW-SE elongated shear faults. Project Area Tectonics According to the Prime Ministry Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency, the proposed Project site is located on the secondary and tertiary level earthquake zones (See in Figure 9-1). The North Anatolian Fault (NAF) which is a major active right lateral moving strike-slip fault throughout the boundary between Eurasian Plate and Anatolian Plate is believed to present some 20-50 km south of the Marmara Sea coasts. Although the fault is still active and may form high magnitude earthquakes with epicenters close to the metropolitan area, the proposed Project has been designed with the necessary strength to dilute and diminish any impacts resulting from possible earthquakes. Figure 9-1 Seismicity Map of Istanbul This Geology section of this report mostly explains the stratigraphic and tectonic structure of the Istanbul region. Although the geology of the district is described as a general distribution, it is beneficial to understand different units throughout the proposed Project site. Furthermore, some of the faults discussed above may coincide with the proposed Project site. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-8 The Sazlıdere and Alibeyköy Faults are located in the Çatalca Peninsula and these faults may overlap with the south-western part of the proposed Project site. In addition, the Kurna Village – Emirli Village and Maltepe – Beykoz Faults are located in the Kocaeli Peninsula and they also overlap with the proposed Project site. Furthermore, the Kurna Village – Emirli Village Fault crosses the south-eastern part of the Project site whereas the Maltepe – Beykoz Fault encounters the north-eastern part of the Project site. Lastly, the Şile- Sarıyer Fault coincides with the proposed Project site in a parallel direction when it crosses the Bosphorus. According to Ambraseys and Finkel (1991), there were several destructive earthquakes happened throughout the history. Between 4th and 19th centuries number of these type earthquakes are 32. In every 300 year, there is an intense earthquake. Most effective earthquakes developed in the region are shown in Figure 9-2. Furthermore 20th century earthquake activities are also shown in the same figure. Figure 9-2 Historical earthquakes in Istanbul Region based on macro-seismic data (Geological, Hydrogeological, and Engineering Geological Survey report prepared by Emay and Protek (2013).) Apart from this, there are not any geological heritage sites according to Turkish Geological Heritage Protection Association (Jemirko Inventory List, 2012) near to the proposed Project site. It is significant to understand that the sources of these geological surveys are different from each other and also that the purpose of each of the source studies are likely to differ. 9.3.2 Land Use and Soil Type Land ownership of the Project is distributed as shown below: • Private real estate 7.18% • Corporate real estate 0.43% • Disputed land 0.24% • 2B land 0.52% • Forest area 79.21% • Treasury 8.94% • Parking areas 3.49% Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-9 9.3.3 Hydrogeology Different aquifer zone characteristics are classified into two main groups defined as grain related aquifers and rock related aquifers in Istanbul District. Figure 9-3 The Hydrogeology Map Shows Aquifer Groups Istanbul District (Modified from Emay and Protek (2013)) Grain related aquifer zones are generally located in vast areas at Çatalca Peninsula and these aquifers develop inside Quaternary Alluviums and Neogene – Paleogene sands or gravels. Furthermore, grain related aquifers are observed as unconfined or confined in different locations and shallow to middle depth drilling activities could be seen for groundwater supply. According to the General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works (DSI) studies, the aquifer group is exposed to potential pollution activity and also water yields or quality of water from these wells are in medium to low quality. Rock related aquifer zones, however, are mostly located in the Kocaeli Peninsula in the Asian side. These aquifers develop in cracks and voids within Paleozoic and Mesozoic aged rock formations (see Table 9-4). Siliceous rock materials such as quartzite, granite, greywacke form the host rock for recharge for different springs throughout the region. The common features of siliceous rock originated water sources are low hardness level and low flow rate. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-10 Table 9-4 General Distribution of Hydrogeological Groups in Istanbul District Hydrogeological Groups Features Area Area (km2) (%) Widespread and Rich Aquifer Groundwater yield is efficient. 672.2 12.8 Host Unconsolidated Formations (specific flow > 2 lt/s/m) Inconsequent Aquifer Host Groundwater yield is medium. (0.5 lt/s/m specific 156 2.9 Unconsolidated Formations flow > 2 lt/s/m) Inconsequent Aquifer Host Plenteous spring containing, groundwater yield is 24.8 0.5 Consolidated Formations medium. (0.5 lt/s/m specific flow > 2 lt/s/m) Widespread and Rich Aquifer Generally deep groundwater level. Groundwater 43.3 0.8 Host Consolidated Formations yield is efficient. (specific flow > 2 lt/s/m) Impermeable Formations Groundwater yield is insufficient. 2,752.9 52.3 (specific flow < 0,1 lt/s/m) Permeable Formations Groundwater yield is insufficient. 1,615.9 30.7 (0,1 lt/s/m Total 5,265 100 (Retrieved from DSI Maps – Istanbul Environmental Condition Report, 2009) Kocaeli Peninsula has a lower degree of groundwater productivity than Çatalca Peninsula. In particular, Silivri, Çatalca and Bakırköy districts are important. However, the Bakırköy aquifer has lost its artesian water supply property of in the last 50 years. In fact, the water level of this aquifer has been lowered to 250 m due to excessive consumption, so that it no longer has any storage or transport capacity. The DSI 14th Regional Office has the authority to distribute search and usage certificates in the Istanbul District within this framework (Table 9-5). However, unplanned and rapid urbanization of the district has generated significant deficiencies in the water network and this inadequacy has created severe burdens on groundwater sources. Excessive utilization of groundwater sources can lead to irreversible loss of capacity and eventually the groundwater level has been lowered to 350 to 400 m according to the Istanbul Municipality. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-11 Table 9-5 Groundwater Licence Areas Licence Area Groundwater Allocation Situation Reserve (106 m3/year) (106 m3/year) Çatalca – Yalıkavak 0.50 - Open (Since Jul 25 1970) Karacaköy – Terkos Plains 4.00 0.90 Open (Since Jul 25 1970) Kağıthane Valley 7.00 7.20 Closed (Since Nov 281972) Riva Village – Alaçalı 2.00 - Open Coastal Plain (Since Oct 24 1970) Topkapı – Küçükçekmece 13.50 65 Closed Plain (Since Mar 10 1966) Küçükköy – Paşaçayırı Plain 0.66 0.90 Closed (Since Feb 15 1967) Coastal Plain of Kartal 1.50 - Open District (Since Mar 16 1972) Tavşanlı River Coastal Plain 5.50 6.85 Open (Since Jul 19 1968) Büyükdere Coastal Plain 1.5 - Open (Since Sep 25 1972) Tuzla Plain 1.50 - Open (Since Feb 29 1972) TOTAL 37.16 80.85 (Retrieved from DSI Maps – Istanbul Environmental Condition Report, 2009) Groundwater well distribution has shown an increase especially in developing industrial and construction fields. Therefore, the level of groundwater consumption has also risen in these areas. Moreover, inefficiencies in the water network of the district, the high cost of waterworks production, and groundwater usage preference in some sectors (for example, construction) has induced a new business line development for groundwater distribution. Although there are laws and regulations prohibit this type of consumption, the groundwater resource which could be used during any extraordinary conditions such as severe drought seasons, possible war conditions, disasters or earthquakes has been reduced rapidly. There are nine groundwater operation fields allowed by DSI in Istanbul District. The operational fields have 37.19 million m3 reserves per year. In fact, there are 315 permits and the total annual water allocation amount is 6,820,027 tonnes (DSI, 2008). However, groundwater consumption is quite common in both metropolitan and rural areas. Therefore, unauthorized usage of groundwater wells significantly influence the accuracy of the gathered data. In addition to this, spring water usage has been widespread in Istanbul and surrounding areas for more than 100 years (Table 9-6). Hamidiye is important for springs in the Çatalca Peninsula whereas Taşdelen and Yakacık springs have importance in the Kocaeli Peninsula. According to the Hydrogeological Interaction Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-12 Report (Yüzer, E., January 2013) which explains the Potential Impact of the Project on Taşdelen Spring; the tunnel construction of the project located between Çamlık-Reşadiye KM: 0+000 - 12+998 will create an effect on jointed quartzite aquifer. Therefore, an alternative route, shifted 400 m to the south, was suggested to Emay – Protek joint venture according to this report. This alternative route, which is referred to as the “Taşdelen Variant”, has been accepted and the tunnel construction is being planned taking account of this fact. Thus, any possible adverse impact on the historical Taşdelen Spring will be eliminated. Aydos and Alemdağ Hills and proximate regions become important for groundwater sources in the east while Kemerburgaz region holds the significance in the west. Table 9-6 List of Operating Water Springs in Istanbul District Spring Name District Location Altınpınar Spring Çatalca Gümüşpınar Village Akçapınar Spring Çatalca Karamandere Village Gümüşpınar Spring Çatalca Gümüşpınar Village Mispak Spring Çatalca Karamandere Village Yalı Spring Çatalca Yalı Village Mimella Spring Çatalca Çiftlik Village Ayazma Spring Çatalca Akalan Village İmren Spring Çatalca İhsaniye Village Ulupınar Spring Çatalca Karaca Village Mega İçme Çatalca Çakıl Village Güzelpınar Spring Gaziosmanpaşa Cebeci Village Özpınar Spring Gaziosmanpaşa Oğaz Village Mercan Spring Eyüp Pirinçci Village Kum Spring Eyüp Kemerburgaz Kemer Spring Eyüp Kemerburgaz Hamidiye Spring Eyüp Kemerburgaz Hamidiye Burgaz Spring Eyüp Kemerburgaz Fındık Spring Eyüp Kemerburgaz Hisar Spring Eyüp Kemerburgaz Çobanpınar Spring Eyüp Göktürk Village Binbaşı İçme Eyüp Kemerburgaz Başpınar Spring Eyüp Kemerburgaz Güvenpınar Spring Eyüp Kemerburgaz Kestane Spring Sarıyer Eski Sular Yolu Sırmakeş Spring Beykoz Dereseki Village Beypınar Spring Beykoz Akbaba Village Akasya Spring Beykoz Dereseki Village Çubuklu Spring Beykoz Çubuklu District Haznedar Spring Beykoz Akbaba Village Taşdelen Spring Ümraniye Taşdelen Özkayışdağı Spring Maltepe Büyükbakkalköy Çamlıbel Gözleri Spring Maltepe Büyükbakkalköy Çamoluk Spring Kartal Yakacık District Beys Spring Pendik Göçbeyli Village Vakıf Karakular Beykoz Dereseki Village Kayla Spring Beykoz Dereseki Village Florist Spring Maltepe Büyükbakkalköy Taşeren Spring Kartal Aydos Aquanet Spring Şile Yeniköy Village Turkish Red Crescent Spring Şile Bıçkıdere Village Nisa Spring Şile Bıçkıdere Village Akpınar Spring Şile Bıçkıdere Village Kırkpınar Spring Şile Ulupelit Village Kervansaray Spring Şile Kervansaray Village Saray Spring Şile Kervansaray Village Taşpınar Spring Şile Bıçkıdere Village Emirdağ Spring Şile Kömürlük Village Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-13 Spring Name District Location Kovanpınar Spring Şile Kurna Village Özlempınar Spring Şile Kurna Village İpekpınar Spring Şile Kurna Village Beyza Spring Şile Bıçkıdere Village Zambak Spring Şile Yeşilvadi Village Şadırvan Spring Şile Bıçkıdere Village (Retrieved from Istanbul Environmental Condition Report, 2009) 9.3.4 Waste Management There are three hazardous waste landfills located in Turkey, which are İZAYDAŞ (İzmit Metropolitan Municipality, İzmit Waste and Residue Treatment and Incineration and Recycling Co. Inc.), ERDEMİR (Ereğli Iron and Steel Manufacturing Inc.), and İSKEN (İskenderun Energy Production and Trade Company). Because İzaydaş is located the closest to the Project area, it will be highly likely that any hazardous waste generated by the Project will be transported via certified trucks to İzaydaş. There are also domestic waste and non-hazardous waste disposal sites and landfills and waste oil recovery facilities either in Istanbul or in close proximity within Istanbul Province. Istanbul Municipality has designated excavation/debris and waste storage areas in Istanbul District. These facilities are located in close proximity to the proposed Project area and the construction camp and plant sites. Table 9-7 shows the solid waste disposal facilities in Istanbul (Istanbul Environmental Development Plan, 2009). Table 9-7 Solid Waste Disposal Facilities in Istanbul Facility Name Capacity (tons/day) Baruthane Aktarma İstasyonu 1,500 Halkalı Aktarma İstasyonu 2,500 Yenibosna Aktarma İstasyonu 2,500 Hekimbaşı Aktarma İstasyonu 2,500 Küçükbakkalköy Aktarma İstasyonu 1,500 Aydınlı Aktarma İstasyonu 2,500 Silivri Aktarma İstasyonu 1,600 Odayeri Düzenli Depolama Sahası 8,000 Kömürcüoda Düzenli Depolama Sahası 3,500 Kompost Tesisi 700 Tıbbi Atık Yakma Tesisi 24 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-14 Figure 9-4 Solid Waste Disposal Facilities in Istanbul 9.4 Value (Sensitivity) of Resource 9.4.1 Geology and Soils There are no geological heritage sites in the area, according to data used for the Project. In addition, there are no important mineral resources, active mining operation or exploration activities. Geological resources are not therefore a sensitive resource in the Project area. 9.4.2 Hydrogeology Groundwater resources are therefore a sensitive resource, because they are under very significant pressure and there has been rapid draw down of aquifers throughout the region. Increasing urbanization and unlicensed extraction continues to put pressure on limited supplies of groundwater. Therefore, it is important that the Project does not affect groundwater supplies in the area. In addition, surface waters within / close to the area are a sensitive resource. If suitable mitigation techniques are not applied, there are contamination risks of this water. Furthermore, some dams close to the Project route are a sensitive resource. The Project site crosses over the catchment areas of some dams and some parts of the Project route are located within the protection zones of these dams. Therefore it is important to apply mitigation measures according to related regulations. 9.4.3 Waste Management The hazardous wastes will have to be disposed of appropriately following the necessary regulations in order to avoid impacts on the environment. Other wastes that can be re-used will be re – used as filling materials etc. It is expected that appropriate mitigation measures will be applied for minimizing of wastes. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-15 9.5 Potential Impacts 9.5.1 Construction 9.5.1.1 Geology and Soils There are no geological heritage sites according to Turkish Geological Heritage Protection Association (Jemirko Inventory List, 2012) in the vicinity of the proposed Project site and therefore there are no impacts associated with the development on geology. In addition, there is no information on localized ground conditions including the presence of quarries, excavations or other mineral extraction activities that could be affected by or possibly obstructed by the Project. However, there are explored mining locations for industrial minerals such as clay, quartzite, bentonite and dolomitic limestone (See in Mineral Map of Istanbul in Appendix 9-1). Although these mining areas are known, there are no actual mining operations in the vicinity of the Project site according to the General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration (MTA). This inferred information is also consistent with the Geological, Hydrogeological, and Engineering Geological Survey Report prepared by Emay International Engineering Cons. & Trd. Co. Ltd. and Protek Proje Danışmanlık Mühendislik Bilgi İşlem İnşaat Turizm San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.) (2013). Thus, there will be no direct impact on the Project site during construction activities, nor impacts on these mineral reserves. Nevertheless, this report also indicates that route of the Project at Odayeri Junction, (see Appendix 8-1), is located within the old mining quarries and these areas are being used as dumping area of excavation materials. It is observed that these areas include open pits of old quarries and uncontrolled landfills and due to these unstable conditions, visible surface tension cracks and mass movements are examined. In addition, open pit areas were filled with storm water and ponds with 20 to 100 m depth occur in this location. Therefore, there could be some indirect constraints on the Project site during the construction activities. According to the results of the Geological, Hydrogeological, and Engineering Geological Survey Report prepared by Emay and Protek (2013); geotechnical studies throughout the Project site shows that route of the proposed Project is in proximity to the Black Sea and it is located on first, second, and third degree of zones in the earthquake zoning map prepared by Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency of Turkey (AFAD). Hence, there will be indirect impact on the Project site during either the construction or operational activities. In addition, according to the same report, quartzite, dolomitic limestone, quartz wacke-quartz arenite, arkose- sandstone, sandy loam with mica schists, reefal limestone, volcanics, grey wacke – sandstone – shale, clay stone, loam with unconsolidated gravel, clayey limestone – shale, sandy loam debris, sandy loam intercalated clay, clay - coal intercalated sand, and alluvium form the geological units in the route of the Project with respect to rock strength quality. Thus, there will be no impact on the Project site during construction activities. Furthermore, there is sandstone, clay stone, and shale that have high bearing capacity between Başakşehir and Odayeri. In addition, tension cracks due to massive movement of unconsolidated clay are observed in this part. Gümüşdere region, has rigid to moderate sandstone shale layers. This geological settling changes in the proximity of Garipçe Village as there are volcanic rocks, and debris comprising a sand and loam mixture. Between Poyraz Village and Riva River located in the Asian side, there are rigid to moderate volcanic rocks and clay stone and siltstone layers. Although these geological settlings continue towards Riva River and Öğümce, there is an alluvium layer that has total length of 6-7 km with partials in between volcanic rocks. There are rigid to moderate arkose – sandstone unit located between Öğümce and Reşadiye. Finally, route of the Project is located on sandstone, limestone, and quartzite rock units. Hence, there will be no direct impact on the Project site during construction activities, but there may be indirect impact. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-16 According to the geological settling observed between Riva River and Öğümce, alluvium units has low bearing capacity and this unit has potential for subsidence. Therefore, there will be indirect impact on the Project site during the construction activities. The loss of soil will be happen the Project site during construction activities, which is unavoidable. Most of this soil is of the forest type as mentioned before.. 9.5.1.2 Hydrogeology There could be a risk to water sources from construction activities. There are risks to groundwater resources and recharge areas from spills of pollutants, such as hydrocarbons, during the construction and operation of the Project that may result from drainage design issues or accidents that release unforeseen levels of pollutants into the environment. According to the Geological, Hydrogeological, and Engineering Geological Survey Report prepared by Emay and Protek (2013); there are six (6) different hydrogeological units, defined as impermeable units, semi- impermeable units, semi-permeable units, permeable units, granular and permeable units, and permeable rock units. According to the Istanbul Hydrogeological Map (Emay and Protek-2013) from the same report it could be observed that the European part, is mostly located on an impermeable unit. Approximately 75 % of the Project appears to be located on an impermeable unit whereas 20 % of the Project is located on a semi- impermeable unit. The rest (approximately 5%) of the Project is located on granular and permeable units on this side of the Bosphorus. Furthermore, it could be observed that the Asian part, is mostly located on semi-impermeable rock units with 85 % proportion. The residual part (15%) of this side is mostly located on granular-permeable and semi- permeable units which were shown as bedding strata of the Riva River’s main tributaries. Therefore, these proportions of the Project will need extra attention for accidental spillage from the road, comprising hydrocarbons, herbicides, salt and other substances that could enter this potential aquifer. According to the hydrogeology section of Geological, Hydrogeological, and Engineering Geological Survey Report prepared by Emay and Protek (2013); the Project site is located on some of the important drinking water basins of Istanbul Districts such as Alibeyköy Dam, Historical Dams constructed between 1620-1839 in the Belgrade Forest (Kömürcü Dam, Valide Sultan Dam, Büyük Dam, Topuzlu Dam, Ayvad Dam, Kirazlı Dam, and Yeni Dam), Ömerli Dam, and Elmalı II Dam. This report claimed that the Project site coincides with all of the above mentioned water reservoir basins; however; according to Map of Istanbul Environmental Plan the Project site crosses over the catchment area of Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Elmalı II Dams. Therefore, the Project site has not share common areas with the catchment areas of historical dams in the Belgrade Forest. Hence, there will be impact on the Project site during either the construction or operational activities and there could be impacts on the groundwater elements of the catchments for Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Elmalı II Dams. In addition, last part of the Project site is mostly (95 %) located in the protection areas described in the Water Pollution Control Regulation (WPCR). However, this section is also coincides with the existing Trans European Motorway (TEM) and this development could be accepted as a precedent. Hence, there will be impact on the Project site during either the construction activities as well as impacts on the WPCR protection areas.. Furthermore, according to the hydrogeology section of Geological, Hydrogeological, and Engineering Geological Survey Report prepared by Emay and Protek (2013); the flood plain of Riva River is located on the route of the Project. Therefore, these proportions of the Project will need an extra attention due to flood behavior of this portion, where the Project may affect flood plain capacity and characteristics. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-17 According to the preliminary environmental assessment study prepared by AECOM (December 2012); groundwater resources in the area are under very significant pressure and there has been rapid draw down of aquifers throughout the region. Increasing urbanization and unlicensed extraction continues to put pressure on limited supplies of groundwater. Groundwater resources are therefore a sensitive resource and it is important that the Project does not affect groundwater supplies in the area. In this level it is difficult to determine the impacts of the Project on hydrology and groundwater supplies but we have to assume that receptors are sensitive to change caused by the Project. 9.5.1.3 Waste management During construction there will be the requirement to dispose of material from within the development area as required by the detailed design. In general, waste material generated by the development is likely to comprise Inert and Non- Hazardous waste, although there is the possibility of encountering material that could be classed as Hazardous Waste, for example drums of chemicals or paint, etc. Appropriate handling and disposal of this waste will be required. In addition, construction activities themselves will generate waste. Most of this will be Inert Waste, however, small quantities of Hazardous Waste including waste oils, solvents, etc., might also be generated. These wastes will have to be disposed of appropriately following the necessary regulations in order to avoid impacts on the environment. 9.5.2 Permanent and Operational This section assesses the potential permanent and operation impacts of the proposed development. 9.5.2.1 Geology and Soils No permanent or operational effects on designated geological sites are predicted as none are present within or vicinity to the Project site. According to the Turkish Geological Heritage Protection Association (Jemirko Inventory List, 2012) there are no geological heritage sites close to the Project site and hence there are no permanent or operational effects associated with the development on geology. Furthermore, there is no information on localized ground conditions including the presence of quarries, excavations or other mineral extraction activities that could be affected by or possibly obstructed by the Project. Nevertheless, according to the Mineral Map of Istanbul in Appendix 9-1 prepared by General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration (MTA), there are explored mining locations for industrial minerals such as clay, quartzite, bentonite and dolomitic limestone. Although these mining areas are known, there are no currently active mining operations close to the Project site. This information is also consistent with the Geological, Hydrogeological, and Engineering Geological Survey Report prepared by Emay International Engineering Cons. & Trd. Co. Ltd. and Protek Proje Danışmanlık Mühendislik Bilgi İşlem İnşaat Turizm San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.) (2013). Thus, there will be no permanent or operational effects on the Project site during operational activities, nor are there likely to be any impacts on mineral resources as a result of the development and operation of the Project. However, this report also shows that route of the Project at Odayeri Junction, (Appendix 8-1) is located within the old mining quarries and these areas are being used as dumping area of excavation materials. It is observed that these areas include open pits of old quarries and uncontrolled landfills and visible surface Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-18 tension cracks and mass movements have been examined due to these unstable conditions. In addition, open pit areas were filled with storm water and ponds with 20 to 100 m depth were occurred in this location. Therefore, there could be indirect impacts on the Project site during the operational activities. According to the results of the Geological, Hydrogeological, and Engineering Geological Survey Report prepared by Emay and Protek (2013); geotechnical studies throughout the Project site shows that the route of the proposed Project site is in the proximity of the Black Sea and it is located within the first, second, and third degree of zones in the earthquake zoning map prepared by Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency of Turkey (AFAD). Hence, there will be indirect impact on the Project site during either the construction or operational activities. In addition, according to the same report there are geological formations throughout the Project site mentioned in Section 9.5.1.1. These geological formations will have no direct impact on the Project site during operational activities. Furthermore, there are sandstone, clay stone, and shale that have high bearing capacity between Başakşehir and Odayeri. In addition, tension cracks due to massive movement of unconsolidated clay have been observed in this part. Gümüşdere region, has rigid to moderate sandstone shale layers. This geological settling changes in the proximity of Garipçe Village as there are volcanic rocks, and debris comprising a sand and loam mixture. Between Poyraz Village and Riva River located in the Asian side, there are rigid to moderate volcanic rocks and clay stone and siltstone layers. Although these geological settlings continue towards the Riva River and Öğümce, there is an alluvium layer that has a total length of 6-7 km with partials in between volcanic rocks. There are rigid to moderate arkose – sandstone unit located between Öğümce and Reşadiye. Finally, route of the Project is located on sandstone, limestone, and quartzite rock units. Hence, there will be no direct impact on the Project site during operational activities, but there may be indirect impact. According to the geological settling observed between Riva River and Öğümce, alluvium units have a low bearing capacity and therefore there is the potential for subsidence. Consequently, there will be indirect impact on the Project site during the operational activities. Permanent loss of soils will occur in some parts of the Project site during operational activities, which is unavoidable. The type of this soil is forest soil as mentioned before. 9.5.2.2 Hydrogeology During operation of the scheme there may be a risk to groundwater. This includes run-off or accidental spillage from the road, comprising hydrocarbons, herbicides, salt and other substances that could enter a local aquifer. In addition, the design of drainage for the Project site which has been prepared by Emay International Engineering Cons. & Trd. Co. Ltd. and Protek Proje Danışmanlık Mühendislik Bilgi İşlem İnşaat Turizm San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.) (2012) will determine risks to groundwater; for example, if there is extensive use of culverts or other similar measures. According to the Geological, Hydrogeological, and Engineering Geological Survey Report prepared by Emay and Protek (2013); there are six (6) different hydrogeological units are determined and mentioned in Section 9.5.1.2. According to the Istanbul Hydrogeological Map (Emay and Protek (2013)) (from the same report) the European part is mostly located on an impermeable unit. Approximately 75 % of the Project is located on an impermeable unit whereas 20 % of the Project is located on semi-impermeable unit. The rest (approximately 5%) of the Project is located on a granular and permeable unit on this side. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-19 Furthermore, it can be observed that the Asian part is mostly located on semi-impermeable rock units (85 % proportion). The residual part (15%) of this side is mostly located on granular-permeable and semi-permeable units which are shown as bedding strata of the Riva River’s main tributaries. Therefore, this 15 % proportion of the Project will need extra attention for accidental spillage from the road, comprising hydrocarbons, herbicides, salt and other substances that could enter this potential aquifer. According to the hydrogeology section of Geological, Hydrogeological, and Engineering Geological Survey Report prepared by Emay and Protek (2013); the Project site is located within a number of important drinking water basins. Although this report claimed that the Project site coincides with all of the water catchment areas, according to Map of Istanbul Environmental Plan the Project site only crosses over the catchment areas of Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Elmalı II Dams. Therefore, the Project site does not share common areas with the catchment areas of historical dams in the Belgrade Forest. Hence, there will be impact on the Project site during the operational activities and there could be impacts on the groundwater elements of the catchments for Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Elmalı II Dams. In addition, last part of the Project site is mostly (95 %) located in the protection areas described in the Water Pollution Control Regulation (WPCR). However, this section is also coincides with the existing Trans European Motorway (TEM) and this development could be accepted as precedent. It is recommended that the impact of the Project on these water catchment areas could be followed by regular surface and groundwater sampling studies. Hence, there will be impact on the Project site during operational activities as well as impacts on the WPCR protection areas Furthermore, according to the hydrogeology section of Geological, Hydrogeological, and Engineering Geological Survey Report prepared by Emay and Protek (2013); the flood plain of Riva River is located on the route of the Project. Therefore, these proportions of the Project will need an extra attention due to flood behavior of this portion, where the Project may affect flood plain capacity and characteristics. Groundwater resources in the area are under very significant pressure and there has been rapid draw down of aquifers throughout the region due to uncontrolled residential and industrial usage. Increasing urbanization and unlicensed extraction continues to put pressure on limited supplies of groundwater. Therefore groundwater resource is a sensitive receptor and it is important that the Project does not affect groundwater supplies in the area. 9.5.2.3 Waste Management During the operation of the development there will be no significant waste management issues associated with the road, other than during road repair works, road sweepings, gully cleaning, etc. Any waste generated is likely to comprise Inert and Non-Hazardous waste, although there is the possibility of material that could be classed as Hazardous Waste, such as tar or other chemicals. Appropriate handling and disposal of this waste will be required. The only source of Hazardous waste would be caused by incidents such as collisions involving transported chemicals or other substances. However, such incidents are unlikely and contingency plans should be in place to deal with these in any case. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-20 9.6 Mitigation Measures 9.6.1 Construction Activities 9.6.1.1 Geology and Soils No mitigation measures will be required during construction activities, as there are no geological heritage sites within the development area. In addition, it is unlikely that construction of the scheme will impact on any mineral resources, according to the Mineral Map of Istanbul prepared by General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration (MTA) mentioned above and therefore no mitigation is required. Mitigation of soils will include ensuring that soils are adequately protected and/or temporarily removed during construction works, then restored/replaced after construction works have been completed in appropriate areas. Topsoil will be separated from sub-soil. Topsoil will be stored on an area having a slope not more than 5% and the quality of top soil will be protected. At the end of the construction, the topsoil will be used for landscaping. There are some mitigation measures for the part of the route of the Projects located on Odayeri Junction. Geotechnical studies will be detailed and new precautions such as, ground reinforcement, using of supporting wall, construction of barrages and protective concrete walls; will be taken according to results of studies. In addition, there are other mitigation measures for the last parts of the Project. The route of the Project is located on first degree of zones of the earthquake zoning map prepared by the Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency of Turkey (AFAD). Thus, extra structure reinforcement will be applied. Geotechnical studies (investigation of ground investigations) will be done regularly. Ground sliding and changing of ground conditions resulted because of ground mass movements and fault zones will be controlled and recorded regularly. No mitigation measures will be required during construction activities in terms of geological formations throughout the Project site mentioned in Section 9.5.1.1. However, according to the geological settling observed between Riva River and Öğümce, there are alluvium units that have low bearing capacity and this unit has potential for subsidence. In addition, tension cracks due to the massive movement of unconsolidated clay have been observed for the first parts of the Project. Therefore, for these parts, the best soil improvement techniques will be selected and applied. Extra soil improvement and soil and ground strengthening will be applied for subsidence on alluvium strata. These mitigation measures coincides with the results of the report prepared by Emay International Engineering Cons. & Trd. Co. Ltd. and Protek Proje Danışmanlık Mühendislik Bilgi İşlem İnşaat Turizm San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.) (2013). 9.6.1.2 Hydrogeology Mitigation of hydrogeological risk during construction activities will comprise ensuring effective environmental management of these activities. Firstly; suitable adequate bunding and storage arrangements will be constructed for preventing of spills of fuel and all chemicals used for the Project construction etc. In addition, there are different hydrogeological units in the Project sites. In the Asian Part, there is the part of the Project on granular-permeable and semi-permeable units which were shown as bedding strata of the Riva Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-21 River’s main tributaries. These proportions of the Project will need an extra attention for accidental spillage from the road, comprising hydrocarbons, herbicides, salt and other substances that could enter this potential aquifer. Furthermore, according to the Map of Istanbul Environmental Plan given in Appendix 8-1, the Project site crosses over the catchment area of Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Elmalı II Dams. There could be impacts during construction activities; however, there is no need of mitigation measures described in the Water Pollution Control Regulation (WPCR) for the catchment areas. However, extra attention will be paid and water quality sampling studies will be done regularly and no discharging of any liquid will permitted. Some sections of the Project are located on the protection areas of Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Elmalı II Dams according to WPCR. Therefore, mitigation measures described in the WPCR will be applied in these areas. Some parts of the Project are located on long – range protection zones of Alibeyköy Dam. There are no mitigation measures required in the relevant clause of the regulation (20) of the WPCR. On the other hand, some sections of the Project are located in the medium-range protection zone of Ömerli Dam. According to clause 19 of the same regulation, in the sections of the roads that will situated in such areas as per zoning plans and at obligatory cases, only transportation – related functions shall be allowed, but construction of any facilities such as way stations, fuel stations, etc, will not be permitted. Moreover, some parts of the Project are located in the short-range protection zone of Elmalı II Dam. According to clause 18(ı) of the same regulation, for obligatory roads, the same permits apply. Therefore for the part of the Project located on the protection zones, any facility other than roads will not be constructed. According to the hydrogeology section of the Survey Report prepared by Emay and Protek (2013); the flood plain of Riva River is located on the route of the Project. Therefore, these proportions of the Project will need extra attention due to flood behavior of this section. Some mitigation measures such as, dewatering applications; stream remediation, concrete embankment construction and rising of road level will be applied. Groundwater resources in the area are under very significant pressure and there has been rapid draw down of aquifers throughout the region already mentioned. No mitigation measures will be required during construction activities if groundwater resources are not be used and the appropriate mitigation measures are implemented to prevent pollution of groundwater resources Although some studies were conducted to undertake this hydrogeological impact assessment, more specific study are likely to be required for the effects of hydrological and hydrogeological properties of the Project site. However, the intention will be that the Project activities will not affect groundwater supplies in the region. 9.6.1.3 Waste Management Material to be disposed of will be assessed and where required tested to confirm its chemical characteristics so that it can be categorized as Inert, Non-Hazardous or Hazardous Waste as appropriate. Measures will be put in place to ensure that as much of the excavated material as possible generated through construction is re-used on other areas of the development. Where possible, alternative uses for extracted material will be sought, e.g. as fill for other construction Projects in the area. Where material has to be disposed of this will be carried out in accordance with the related regulations. For construction sites, waste minimization measures will be put in place. Where waste material will be generated this will be handled and disposed of according to current legislations. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-22 9.6.2 Permanent and Operational Activities 9.6.2.1 Geology and Soils Mitigation measures that will be applied during permanent and operational activities are similar to measures during construction activities. Because the impacts are almost the same and so, recommended mitigation measures are similar. No mitigation during operation of the route is required in terms of geological heritage sites within the development area. Also, there are no .any mineral resources according to Mineral Map of Istanbul prepared by MTA, so no mitigation measures will be required. Where areas of soil are retained and/or created there should be designed to avoid erosion or run-off affecting soils off site. In addition, there should be some mitigation measures for the Project section located at Odayeri Junction, because the reason for this is that this part is located within the old mining quarries and these areas have been used as dumping areas for excavation materials. Some structural conditional effects are likely observed. Therefore, new geotechnical studies will be done, reports will be prepared and new precautions such as, ground reinforcement, use of supporting walls, construction of barrages and protective concrete walls, will be taken according to the results of studies. In addition, other mitigation measures will be applied for last part of the Project. This part of the Project is located on first degree of zones of the earthquake zoning map prepared by the Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency of Turkey (AFAD). Thus, extra structure reinforcement will be applied. Geotechnical studies (investigation of ground investigations) will be done regularly. Ground sliding and changing of ground conditions resulted from ground mass movements and fault zones will be controlled and recorded regularly. No mitigation measures will be required during construction activities in terms of geological formations detailed in Section 9.5.1.1 throughout the Project site. Nevertheless, according to the geological settling alluvium units are present between the Riva River and Öğümce and these units have low bearing capacity and therefore this unit has potential for subsidence. In addition, tension cracks due to massive movement of unconsolidated clays are observed for the part of the Projects. Therefore, the mitigation measures will be applied for these parts of the Project will include selecting and applying of the best soil improvement techniques. Furthermore, extra soil improvement and soil and ground strengthening will be applied for subsidence on alluvium strata. These mitigation measures coincide with the results of the report prepared by Emay International Engineering Cons. & Trd. Co. Ltd. and Protek Proje Danışmanlık Mühendislik Bilgi İşlem İnşaat Turizm San. Ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.) (2013). 9.6.2.2 Hydrogeology Mitigation measures that will be applied during permanent and operational activities are similar to measures during construction activities, as the impacts are almost the same and so, recommended mitigation measures are similar. Mitigation of hydrogeological risk during operational activities and Project development will comprise ensuring effective environmental management of these activities. Firstly; suitable adequate bund and storage and drainage arrangements will be constructed in order to prevent the spills of fuel, chemicals etc used for Project development. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-23 In addition, different hydrogeological units are present in the Project sites. In the Asian Part, there are granular-permeable and semi-permeable units which constitute bedding strata of the Riva River’s main tributaries. These proportions of the Project will need particular attention for accidental spillage from the road, comprising hydrocarbons, herbicides, salt and other substances that could enter this potential aquifer. It is expected that, as part of the detailed design, dewatering studies, culvert design for preventing of mixture of rain water and groundwater will be done on these zones. In addition, according to the Map of Istanbul Environmental Plan given in Appendix 8-1, the Project site crosses over the catchment area of Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Elmalı II Dams. There could be impacts during operational activities and during Project development; however, there are no mitigation measures described in the WPCR for the catchment areas. However, particular attention will be needed in this area and water quality sampling studies will be done regularly. In addition, no discharging of any liquid will permitted. Some parts of the Project are located in the protection areas of Alibeyköy, Ömerli, and Elmalı II Dams according to WPCR. Therefore, mitigation measures described in WPCR will be applied in these areas. Other parts of the Project are located within the long – range protection zones of the Alibeyköy Dam. However, there are no mitigation measures defined in clause 20 of the regulation. On the other hand, parts of the Project are located within the medium-range protection zone of Ömerli Dam. According to clause 19 of the same regulation, in this section, roads will be situated in such areas as per zoning plans and at obligatory cases only and only transportation–related functions will be permitted. Construction of any facilities such as way station, fuel station etc. will not be allowed. Furthermore, some parts of the Project are located within the short-range protection zone of Elmalı II Dam. According to clause 18 of the same regulation, for obligatory roads, the same permits are applied. Therefore, for the part of the Project located within the protection zones, any facility other than the road will not be constructed. The flood plain of Riva River is located on the route of the Project and therefore these proportions of the Project will need extra attention due to flood behavior of this portion. Some mitigation measures such as dewatering applications; stream remediation, concrete embankment construction and raising of the road level will be applied. Groundwater resources in the area are under very significant pressure and there has been rapid draw down of aquifers throughout the region as mentioned. No mitigation measures will be required during operational activities and Project development if groundwater resources would not be used and the appropriate mitigation measures are implemented to prevent pollution of groundwater resources. Although some studies have already been conducted to as part of this assessment, more specific study will be required for the effects of hydrological and hydrogeological properties of the Project site. It is expected that more field surveys will be undertaken for this reason during operational activities and during Project development. 9.6.2.3 Waste Management Mitigation measures for waste management during operation will include development of management systems with the objective of minimizing waste. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-24 9.7 Residual Impacts Residual impacts associated with the construction and operational phases, comprising those impacts that are likely to remain after mitigation measures have been put in place, are discussed and assessed below. 9.7.1 Construction 9.7.1.1 Geology and Soils There are no geological resources, such as geological heritage sites, in the vicinity of the proposed Project and therefore there are no impacts associated with the development on geology. Therefore there will be no residual impacts on geological resources within or near to the sites. The impact is therefore is Negligible. In addition, there are no active quarries, mining excavations or other mineral extraction activities that could be affected by or possibly obstructed by the Project. Therefore, there will be no effect because of the construction facilities. The impact due to construction is therefore is Negligible. However, there are mining locations for industrial minerals such as clay, quartzite, bentonite and dolomitic limestone in the vicinity of the Project; however, although these mining areas are known they are currently not in operation, so there will be no impact and therefore this is defined as Negligible. Damage to the soils during the construction facilities is unavoidable. However, additional attention will be paid to areas where the Project will be developed, particularly where there are issues of public interest (for example in relation to forest soils) The impacts on soils will therefore be Minor. 9.7.1.2 Hydrogeology Mitigation measures will be applied to minimize hydrogeological risk during construction activities, in addition standard environmental management measures will apply. The Project site is located on different hydrogeological units. In the Asian Part, art of the Project is located on granular-permeable and semi-permeable units which were shown as bedding strata of the Riva River’s main tributaries. Extra attention will be paid for accidental spillage from the road, comprising hydrocarbons, herbicides, salt and other substances that could enter this potential aquifer. Necessary mitigation techniques will be applied for minimizing of impacts. The overall impacts will be Minor. In addition suitable necessary arrangements will be constructed for preventing of all kinds of harmful materials, chemicals etc. Therefore negative impacts will be prevented on environmental hydrogeological resources, so the impacts will be Negligible. The route of the Project crosses over the protection zones of some dams. Necessary mitigation measures will be applied according to the appropriate regulations set out in the WPCR. The impact is therefore is Minor. Groundwater resources in the area are under very significant pressure and there has been rapid draw down of aquifers Groundwater resources will not be used during construction activities. The impact for this aspect is therefore is Negligible. 9.7.1.3 Waste management Wherever chemically suitable, excavated materials will be reused on site in the formation of embankments, screening and landscaping bunds, etc. However, there may be the requirement to dispose of excess or contaminated material, which cannot be used in the construction of the development. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-25 In addition, the construction process will generate other waste, although the majority of this will be classed as Inert Waste. Assuming that the proposed mitigation measures are put in place and that waste is identified and handled appropriately, according to related regulations, it is likely that the potential impact in terms of waste management during construction will be Minor. 9.7.2 Permanent and Operational Residual impacts associated with the operational and development phase, comprising those impacts that are likely to remain after mitigation measures have been put in place, are discussed and assessed below. 9.7.2.1 Geology and Soils No residual impacts on geology and geological structures are predicted. The impact during operation of the Project route is therefore assessed as Negligible. There are no significant mining activities, extraction, excavations and important mineral resources in the area as mentioned before that will be affected by the operation of the Project. Impacts are therefore assessed as Negligible. Impacts on soils will be permanent and negative; however, public interest of this Project is very important and therefore the impact is assessed as Minor. 9.7.2.2 Hydrogeology There will be mitigation measures and effective environmental management to minimize of hydrogeological risk during operational and development activities. There are different hydrogeological units in the Project site. In the Asian Part granular-permeable and semi- permeable units are present which were shown as bedding strata of the Riva River’s main tributaries. Extra attention will be paid with regard to accidental spillage from the road, comprising hydrocarbons, herbicides, salt and other substances that could enter this potential aquifer. There will be suitable mitigation techniques for minimizing of impacts, so the impacts will be Minor. In addition, suitable necessary arrangements will be implement to prevent all kinds of harmful materials, chemicals etc., entering groundwater. Therefore negative impacts will be prevented on environmental hydrogeological resources, so the impacts will be. The route of the Project crosses over the protection zones of some dams. Necessary mitigation measures will be applied according to related regulations. The impact is therefore is Minor. Groundwater resources in the area are under very significant pressure and there has been rapid draw down of aquifers However, groundwater resources will not be used during operational activities. The impact is therefore is Negligible. 9.7.2.3 Waste management During the operation of the Project wastes will be generated etc. There will be mitigation measures for waste management during operations including implementation of management systems with the objective of minimizing waste and disposing of it appropriately. The impact is therefore is Negligible. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-26 9.8 Summary This section deals with environmental issues associated with geology, soils and waste management conditions relating to the Project. The current conditions within the route corridor are described and likely effects of the development on potentially sensitive receptors assessed. These impacts have been divided into two categories: • Short-term construction impacts; and • Permanent and operational impacts. The potential impacts during construction and operational activities and mitigation measures proposed for each parameter are described. Some of the impacts are indirect impacts, some of them are direct impacts. For direct impacts, the Project site and development of the Project affect the issue directly. For indirect impacts, the Project site and development of the Project do not affect the issue directly, in the other words, if mitigation measures do not apply for these issues, there will be possible negative results and these cause negative impacts on the environmental issues. In the Project area there are no geological heritage sites, important geological structures or active mining areas. Therefore, there will be no direct or indirect impact caused by the Project site during construction and operational activities and no mitigation measures will be required in terms of geology, soils or mining. Although some geological structures affect the environment, there will be indirect impact, so during development of the Project, precautions will be taken and mitigation measures will be implemented.. In terms of soil structure, there will be loss of soil on forest land and other type of lands, but although public interest of this Project is very important and soils will be lots, overall the impacts on the soil resource will not be significant. On the route of the Project, there are hydrogeological resources within or close to the site. There are river beds close to the route and drinking water protection zones relating to dams on the route. Necessary mitigation techniques will b implemented in accordance with the Water Pollution Control Regulation (WPCR) risks and impacts are minimized. During operational and construction activities wastes will be generated. The wastes will be classified according to related regulations, they will be minimized. If possible, they are reused for filling etc. Residual Impacts, that are likely to remain after mitigation measures have been put in place, have been identified and assessed and range from Negligible to Minor. Therefore none of these impacts relating to geology, soils, mineral resources, waste management and hydrogeology are assessed as being significant. Table 9-8 Summary of Residual Impacts Issue Construction Operation Geology Negligible Negligible Soil Minor Minor Mineral Negligible Negligible Resources Mining Negligible Negligible Activities Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 9-27 Issue Construction Operation Hydrogeology Minor Minor Waste Minor Negligible Management Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 10-1 10.0 WASTE MANAGEMENT 10.1 Introduction This section discusses environmental issues associated with waste management relating to the Project. The likely waste management issues associated with the Project are described below and the effects of the development on potentially sensitive receptors is assessed. These impacts have been divided into two categories: Short-term construction impacts; and Permanent and operational impacts. The potential impacts and mitigation measures proposed for each parameter are described below. Residual Impacts, that are likely to remain after mitigation measures have been put in place, have been identified and assessed. Note that some of the conditions and effects described, particularly with regard to contamination and hydrogeology, may interact with other parameters such as ecology and surface water. Such interactions are described where appropriate. 10.2 Methods 10.2.1 Assessment Scope The proposed Project includes a bridge that will cross the Bosphorus (or Istanbul Strait) and a motorway on both sides of Europe and Asia, with associated connection and side roads. The project is referred to as the North Marmara Motorway including the 3rd Bosphorus Bridge. The proposed Northern Marmara Motorway includes approximately 60 km long motorway from Odayeri to Paşaköy and approximately 54 km of connection roads, including the third Bosphorus bridge. The total length of the road construction will be approximately 114 km. 10.2.2 Baseline Methods Information was collected by undertaking a desk study combined with a walkover survey to visually inspect the site and surrounding area. Note that no fieldwork was carried out to confirm the findings of the desk study. A ground investigation has been undertaken on the route on behalf of ICA primarily for geotechnical purposes. Relevant sections of this report have been reviewed as part of the assessment. 10.2.3 Assessment Methods Once the information had been collected it was necessary to assess the impact of the proposed development on each of the parameters in a consistent way. This section sets out how these impacts have been assessed with regard to waste management. There are two classes of waste management issues associated with the development. These include: The presence of licensed waste management sites within or in the vicinity of the site; Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 10-2 Issues associated with disposal of waste material as part of the construction and operation of the new route. The following table sets out the assessment criteria used in this EIA for assessing the impact of waste management issues associated with this project. Table 10-1 Criteria for Assessing Impact from Waste Management Issues Impact Definition Assessment Where a site licensed under waste management legislation is present within or close to the boundary of the development. Also where disposal of Hazardous Waste, or large Major quantities of Non-Hazardous Waste, will be required as a consequence of its construction and/or operation. Where a closed waste management site is present within or close to the boundary of the Moderate development and/or where disposal of Non-Hazardous Waste, or large quantities of Inert Waste, will be required as a consequence of its construction and/or operation. Where there are closed and unlicensed waste management sites and/or unlicensed sites within or adjacent to the boundary of the development. This will include areas of fly tipping Minor within the site. Also, where there will be a requirement to dispose of Inert Waste as a consequence of its construction and/or operation. Where there are no waste management sites within or close to the boundary of the new Negligible development and/or where minimal waste disposal will be required as a consequence of its construction and/or operation. It should be noted that this assessment is qualitative and is based on the level of knowledge of the proposed construction activities and the finalized designed known at the time of the assessment. 10.3 Baseline Conditions 10.3.1 Landfills and Potentially Contaminated Land There are three hazardous waste landfills are located in Turkey, which are İZAYDAŞ (İzmit Metropolitan Municipality, İzmit Waste and Residue Treatment and Incineration and Recycling Co. Inc.), ERDEMİR (Ereğli Iron and Steel Manufacturing Inc.), and İSKEN (İskenderun Energy Production and Trade Company). Because İzaydaş is located the closest to the Project area, it will be highly likely that any hazardous waste generated by the Project will be transported via certified trucks to İzaydaş. There are also domestic waste and non-hazardous waste disposal sites and landfills and waste oil recovery facilities either in Istanbul or in close proximity to Istanbul Province. Istanbul Municipality has designated excavation/debris and waste storage areas in Istanbul District. These facilities are located close to the proposed Project area and the construction camp and plant sites. Table 10-2 shows the solid waste disposal facilities in Istanbul (Istanbul Environmental Development Plan, 2009). Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 10-3 Table 10-2 Solid Waste Disposal Facilities in Istanbul Facility Name Capacity (tons/day) Baruthane Aktarma İstasyonu 1,500 Halkalı Aktarma İstasyonu 2,500 Yenibosna Aktarma İstasyonu 2,500 Hekimbaşı Aktarma İstasyonu 2,500 Küçükbakkalköy Aktarma İstasyonu 1,500 Aydınlı Aktarma İstasyonu 2,500 Silivri Aktarma İstasyonu 1,600 Odayeri Düzenli Depolama Sahası 8,000 Kömürcüoda Düzenli Depolama Sahası 3,500 Kompost Tesisi 700 Tıbbi Atık Yakma Tesisi 24 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 10-4 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 10-5 10.3.2 Waste Management Sites As stated above, there will be four different construction site locations during the construction period, which are Odayeri, Poyraz, Hüseyinli and Garipçe. Each construction site will have waste storage areas where all types of waste will be stored temporarily. ICA has stated that these sites will be divided into parts for different types of waste and the types of waste will be labeled with different colors as indicated below. Hazardous Waste Waste Plastic Waste Metal Waste Wood Contaminated Waste Domestic Waste Waste Paper 10.3.3 Waste Disposal Issues Under the current Turkish Environmental Legislation, there are many different regulations for different waste types. These are: Water Pollution Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 25687 dated December 31, 2004 and revised in Official Gazette No. 27537 dated March 30, 2010; Regulation on General Principles of Waste Management, Official Gazette No. 26927 dated July 5, 2008; Hazardous Wastes Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 25755 dated March 14, 2005; Solid Waste Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 20814 dated March 14, 1991; Waste Oil Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 26952 dated July 30, 2008; Waste Batteries and Accumulators Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 25569 dated August 31, 2004; Medical Waste Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 25883 dated July 22, 2005; Regulation on Landfills, Official Gazette No. 27533 dated March 26, 2010; Packaging Waste Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 26562 dated June 24, 2007; Excavation, Construction and Demolition Wastes Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 25406 dated March 18, 2004; Communiqué on Recovery of Some Non-Hazardous Wastes, Official Gazette No. 27967 dated June 17, 2011; Waste Tires Control Regulation, Official Gazette No. 26357 dated November 25, 2006. 10.4 Impact Assessment 10.4.1 Non-Hazardous Waste The Solid Waste Control Regulation (SWCR) was published in the Official Gazette No. 20814 dated March 14, 1991 and most recently revised in Official Gazette No. 27533 dated March 26, 2010. The aim of the SWCR is to prohibit the disposal of any kinds of wastes and residues to receiving bodies directly or indirectly in a manner harmful for the environment. In addition, the storage, transportation and removal of the waste should be conducted such that damages of pollutants which make permanent effects in air, water, earth and on animals, plants, natural resources and ecological balance should be prevented. 10.4.2 Domestic Waste Construction Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 10-6 According to the Turkish Statistical Institute Regional Statistics (2010), the average waste generation rate per person in İstanbul Province is 1.20 kg/day-person. ICA has informed AECOM that the number of personnel to be working on each construction site and staying in each campsite is as follows in Table 10- 3. Table 10-3 Construction Personnel Construction Site Personnel Campsite Personnel A-1 1800 Odayeri Campsite 1000 A-2 1800 Garipçe Campsite 1000 E-1 1800 Poyraz Campsite 500 E-2 1800 Hüseyinli Campsite 500 Maximum 7500 Total 3000 Thus, for a maximum of 1800 personnel, daily total solid waste generation is estimated to be 2160 kg/day on site. For 500 and 1000 person capacity campsites, daily total solid waste generation is estimated to be 600 and 1200 kg/day per campsite, respectively. ICA has stated that the domestic waste to be generated on all sites will be collected and stored in containers placed at appropriate points and all domestic waste will be disposed of periodically by the related Municipality. All domestic waste will be disposed of according to the Turkish Solid Waste Control Regulation. As a summary, it is anticipated that the impact significance of domestic waste that will be generated during construction will be minor as the waste generated will be collected by the municipality and disposed of according to the requirements of the SWCR. The residual impact after taken all necessary measures can be defined as Minor. Permanent and Operational Domestic waste generated from the operational phase of the project is likely to be restricted to small volumes associated with maintenance works and the upkeep of landscaped areas. Provided that appropriate waste handling, storage and disposal procedures are adopted no significant impacts are considered likely and the residual impact will be Negligible. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 10-7 10.4.3 Recyclable and Reusable Waste Construction ICA has projected that recyclable and reusable wastes to be generated on site during the construction period are: Waste metal Waste plastic Waste cables Waste glass Waste paper (packaging material) Clean air filters Clean containers, drums, bins etc. Crushed stone, floatstone etc. ICA stated that these wastes will be collected and stored separately from the other types of waste in the waste storage areas. Then recyclable waste will sent to the licensed recycling facilities for eventual recycling process and reusable wastes will be used for another purpose properly. In summary, it is anticipated that the impact significance of recyclable and reusable waste that will be generated during construction period will be minor as the waste generated will be managed properly. Permanent and Operational During operation period, it is not expected that recyclable waste will be generated in substantial amounts continuously. It is possible to recycle materials generated by maintenance and repair works – concrete, tarmac, metal, cables, etc. These wastes will be collected in an appropriate way and will be sent to a licensed facility for eventual recycling process. It is anticipated that the impact significance of recyclable waste that will be generated during operation will be minor as the waste generated will be collected and transported properly. 10.4.4 Excavation Waste The Excavation, Construction and Demolition Waste Control Regulations were published in the Official Gazette No. 25406 dated March 18, 2004 and revised by the Official Gazette No.27533 dated March 26, 2010. The aim of this regulation is to set the principles and procedures firstly to minimize excavation, construction and demolition wastes at the source of generation and to collect, temporarily store, transfer, recycle, reuse and dispose of them in a manner not to cause harm to the environment. In accordance with Article 9 of the regulations, excavation, construction and demolition generating facilities are obliged to provide the waste management in a way that will minimize the adverse effects of wastes on the environment and human health. The facilities must acquire the necessary permissions that concern the generation, transportation and storage operations of the wastes. The facilities are not allowed to dump construction wastes at sites/locations and facilities other than the ones permitted by the municipal or other authorities. The regulation also stipulates that the project owner is responsible for having precautions in order to minimize noise or visual impacts and dust emissions during removal of excavation soil and for closing the sides of the operation area. In addition, planning should be done in a way that the amount of excavation soil is equalized to the filling volume and excavation soils are utilized within the operation area. Excavation Waste Management is discussed within the scope of Chapter 9 - Geology and Soils. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 10-8 Construction The greatest volume of excavated material will arise from the construction activities of the Project. There are a considerable number of cuttings and tunnels to be constructed along the whole of the route and these will generate very large quantities of excavated material. Wherever possible, excavated material from the earthworks will be re-used on site as structural fill or for landscaping purposes. This will maximize the utilization rate of materials on site and reduce the requirement for offsite disposal. The Project must acquire the necessary permits that concern the generation, transportation and storage operations of such wastes. The Project owner and the subcontractors are not allowed to dump construction wastes to any areas other than the permitted ones by the municipal or other authorities. Related documents regarding transportation and storage of excavation waste will be copied and kept by the Environmental Management Systems Specialist for the Project. As expressed above, Excavation Waste Management is discussed in detail within the scope of Chapter 9 - Geology and Soils. It is anticipated that the impact significance of excavation waste that will be generated during construction will be minor as the excavation waste generated will be collected and used in accordance with the requirements of the Excavation, Construction and Demolition Waste Control Regulation. Permanent and Operational Excavation waste is not expected to arise during operation of the Project and therefore the impact is Negligible 10.4.5 Wastewater The Water Pollution Control Regulation (WPCR) was published in Official Gazette No. 25687, dated December 31, 2004 and most recently revised in Official Gazette No. 28483 dated November 30, 2012. The aim of the WPCR is to determine the necessary legal and technical principles in order to protect surface and groundwater resources, provide sustainable water use and prevent water pollution in harmony with sustainable development objectives. The WPCR covers water quality classes and utilization purposes, planning principles and prohibitions concerning protection of water quality, wastewater discharge principles and discharge permits, applications for wastewater infrastructure facilities and monitoring and auditing principles in order to prevent water pollution. Industries are categorized according to their sectors in the WPCR. The WPCR presents “sector-specific” discharge limits for numerous types of wastewater discharges. The WPCR also sets the discharge limits for domestic wastewaters according to pollution load. For facilities located in an area where a sewer system is not available and with a complement of less than 84 employees, the WPCR allows the construction of an impervious septic tank or basin for disposal of domestic wastewaters. The Project is located in an area where a sewerage system is not available. In case the personnel level is less than 84 employees, wastewater to be generated from the Project will be collected into a septic tank, pumped out with a vacuum truck and will be transported to a wastewater infrastructure system/wastewater treatment plant. In addition, the wastewater generators will comply with the protocol defined by the Wastewater Administration. Receipts of disposal of wastewater by vacuum truck will be retained for five years and made available to officials during audits. If the population exceeds 84 employees, wastewater to be generated from the Project will be collected and sent to the package type biological treatment plant, which will be constructed in the project area. After the treatment process, domestic wastewater can be discharged to an appropriate receiving environment. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 10-9 Construction Water will be required for the construction works, dust suppression and washing of construction equipment. ICA has stated that the domestic water will be supplied from the wells to be drilled on site and the well exploration and drilling activities are still going on for all the camp sites (May 2013). It is assumed that a single person requires about 200 litres/day of water, and this water will return as wastewater completely. For a maximum of 1800 personnel, the daily wastewater generation during construction period can be calculated as below Total number of personnel : 1800 Water required : 200 litres/person/day = 0.2 m3 / person / day Total water requirement : 0.2 m3/person/day x 1800 persons = 360 m3/day. Since the number of the personnel number exceeds 84 employees, wastewater to be generated from the Project will be collected and sent to the package treatment plant which will be constructed in the project area. During the Project it is intended that the domestic wastewater produced from the offices and the camp sites will be treated by the package type biological treatment plants (SBR System). After the treatment process, domestic wastewater will be sent to a suitable receiving environment to be approved by the Provincial Directorate of Environment and Urbanization. According to the document which includes technical details of the package type wastewater treatment plants, it is stated that the treated wastewater will provided limit values specified in the Turkish Water Pollution Control Regulation and Table 10-4 below. Table 10-4: Domestic Wastewater Discharge Limits to Receiving Environment WPCR Table 21.1 Domestic Wastewater (BOD load 5-120 kg/day; Population 84-2000) Parameter Unit Composite Sample (2 hr) Composite Sample (24 hr) BOD mg/l 50 45 COD mg/l 180 120 TSS mg/l 70 45 pH - 6-9 6-9 ICA has stated that the quality of inlet and outlet water will be analyzed monthly and compared with the discharge standards specified in the Turkish WPCR. After the required quality of treated wastewater is achieved, the wastewater will be discharged to the appropriate point which Governorship of Istanbul Provincial Directorate of Environment and Urbanization will determine. As a summary, it is anticipated that the likelihood and magnitude of the potential impact of wastewater during construction will be definite and low to medium, respectively. The impact significance of the wastewater generated during the construction will be minor to moderate since the wastewater generation will be limited to domestic wastewater. The residual impact will be Minor after mitigation measures have been implemented. Permanent and Operational During the operational period, the project will not need process water. However, two types of wastewater will be generated which will comprise run-off from the road and any domestic wastewater (from toilets associated with service stations and toll booths, etc.) The proposed project will comply with the Turkish WPCR and the IFC/WB Guidelines and will not have any negative impact on the local environment. Thus, the project will not have any adverse impact on the local water resources and the potential impact significance will be negligible. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 10-10 10.4.6 Hazardous Waste According to the Hazardous Wastes Control Regulation (HWCR), producers of hazardous waste are obliged to take the required precautions in order to minimize hazardous waste generation and to provide waste management in a way that minimizes the adverse affects of wastes on human health and the environment. According to the HWCR, facilities are required to secure a permit from the local Governorate in case of temporary onsite storage of hazardous wastes. However, facilities that produce less than 1,000 kg/month of hazardous waste may store the waste temporarily onsite for up to 180 days without obtaining a permit from the local Governorate. In this situation, the total amount of the collected waste must not exceed 6,000 kg at any time. In case of temporary on-site storage of hazardous wastes, the hazardous wastes should be stored in containers that are non-damaged, leak-proof and safe and that meet international standards. They should be placed on concrete within the facility site, and away from construction plant and buildings. "Hazardous waste" labels should be placed on the containers and the labels should also indicate the amount of stored waste as well as the storage time of the hazardous waste. Transportation of the wastes should be carried out by the licensed companies with licensed waste transportation vehicles. The HWCR also contains a list of hazardous materials, their properties and their recommended method of disposal. Thus, this proposed project will not create any adverse impact on the local environment due to the handling, storage, transport and disposal of the hazardous waste generated during the construction and will comply with the requirements of the Turkish Regulations and the IFC/WB Guidelines. 10.4.7 Waste Oil The Waste Oil Control Regulation (WOCR) was published in the Official Gazette No. 26952 dated June 30, 2008 and lately revised in the Official Gazette No. 27744 dated March 30, 2010. The purpose of the WOCR is to prevent direct and indirect disposal of waste oils to the receiving environment; to ensure temporary storage, transportation and disposal thereof without causing harm to environment and human health; to set up necessary technical and administrative standards in management of waste oils; to determine the required principles and programs in order to establish temporarily storage, handling and disposal facilities and manage these facilities in an environmental friendly manner. According to Article 9 of the WOCR, waste oil producers are obliged to take required measures to minimize the generation of waste oils including waste motor oils and residues resulting from processing of waste oils. Waste oil producers must conduct waste oils analyses once at licensed laboratories in case there is no change in the oil type used, and declare the results to the Ministry of Environment and Urbanization. Waste oils of different categories should not be mixed with each other, PCB and other hazardous wastes. The waste producers must obey the conditions of HWCR for disposal and for transporting waste oils by licensed transporters to the licensed processing and disposal facilities. The National Waste Transportation Form in the case of transporting the waste oil out of the facility and Waste Oil Declaration Form annually must be prepared and submitted to the competent authority before the end of February each year. All records including waste oil declaration forms, analyses report and national waste transportation form should be kept for at least five years. Waste oil should be collected in tanks/containers placed on a impermeable ground whose thickness is at least 25 cm and covered by epoxy, geo-membrane and similar insulation materials and waste accumulation areas should be protected from the rain. Furthermore it is required to store waste oils in red colored tanks/ containers with a label of "Atık Yağ" (“Waste Oil”) on it. Waste oils of different categories Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 10-11 should not be mixed with each other. Any foreign substance like water, gasoline, fuel-oil, dye, detergent, solvent, antifreeze and diesel oil should not be mixed with the oil in these tanks/containers. During the construction, the main hazardous waste will be the waste oil. It is anticipated that the potential impact significance of the waste oil is moderate to major if proper mitigation measures are not implemented. However, the residual impact will be negligible after the mitigation measures are implemented. The Project should comply with the requirements stated in the WOCR. Construction During the construction period, waste oil will result from the maintenance of machines, equipment and construction vehicles. ICA has stated that maintenance activities such as oil change of machine and equipment are planned to be performed on the project site; therefore drip pans should be used during the maintenance activities in order to prevent soil pollution. Generated waste oil will be collected in safe leak-proof containers, stored in an area with a concrete surface and a proper secondary containment to prevent potential spills and leakages reaching to the soil and groundwater. Proper labels such as “Hazardous Waste” will be placed onto the containers and this label will also indicate the amount of stored waste as well as the storage time of the hazardous waste. In case the containers are damaged, wastes will be transferred to other container with the same properties and kept closed. It is recommended that waste oil containers are retained in bunded areas, such that there is an impermeable wall around the oil storage areas sufficient to contain any spills. Ideally this should be able to contain 110% of the oil stored there. This system is useful for storing fuel oils (i.e. non-waste oils also). Transportation of the wastes will be done by the persons and organisations that are licensed for this work and by the vehicles appropriate for the properties of the transported waste. Finally these hazardous wastes will be sent to a licensed facility. All health and safety precautions regarding for staff responsible for activities such as transport and temporary storage of wastes will be taken in the facility. As a summary, during the construction, the main hazardous waste will be the waste oil. It is expected that the impact significance of the waste oil is negligible if proper mitigation measures are implemented. For this reason the proposed project will not create any adverse impact on the local environment due to the handling, storage, transport and disposal of the hazardous waste generated during the construction and will comply with the requirements of the Turkish Regulations and the IFC/WB Guidelines. Permanent and Operational Waste oil will be generated due to periodical maintenance of the bridge and the motorways. The oil to be used for the maintenance activities will not contain PCBs or any other carcinogenic chemicals. Waste oils resulting from maintenance works will be collected and disposed in an appropriate way by the licensed company. These wastes will be handled from the project site in accordance with the Turkish WOCR. It is anticipated that the impact significance of the waste oil is moderate to high if proper mitigation measures are not implemented. However, the residual impact will be negligible after the mitigation measures are implemented. Thus, this proposed project will not create any adverse impact on the local environment due to the handling, storage, transport and disposal of the hazardous waste generated during the operation and will comply with the requirements of the Turkish Regulations and the IFC/WB Guidelines Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 10-12 10.4.8 Medical Waste The Medical Waste Control Regulation (MWCR) was published in Official Gazette No. 25883 dated July 22, 2005 and revised in Official Gazette No. 28131 dated December 3, 2011. The purpose of the MWCR is to establish principles, policies, and programs along with legal, administrative, and technical fundamentals to prevent direct or indirect discharge of medical waste into receiving environment in any way that could harm the environment or human health. The Regulation also requires that medical waste must be collected separately at source and be transported, temporarily stored and disposed of without causing harm to environment or human health. The Project will comply with the Medical Waste Control Regulation during the construction and operation phases. Construction ICA has stated that during the construction the health services management will be carried out on the construction site and these services will be outsourced. However, medical wastes are likely to be minimal and therefore the impact during construction activities will be negligible. Permanent and Operational Since there will be no healthcare services on the project site during operational period, medical waste generation is not expected during operation of the Project. 10.4.9 Waste Batteries and Accumulators The Waste Batteries and Accumulators Control Regulations were published in the Official Gazette No. 25569 dated August 31, 2004 and most recently amended in Official Gazette No. 27537 dated March 30, 2010. The purpose of these Regulations is to determine principles, policies and programs for used batteries and accumulators from their production to their final disposal; to ensure production of batteries and/or accumulators with certain criteria and basic conditions and characteristics in terms of the environment; to prevent the discharge to the receiving environment directly or indirectly damaging human health and the environment; to ensure technical and administrative standards necessary in their management; to establish a collecting system for the recovery and final disposal of used batteries and accumulators and compose a management plan. According to Article 13 of the Waste Batteries and Accumulators Control Regulations, battery and accumulator consumers are obliged to collect used batteries separately from household wastes, and deliver used batteries to the collection points to be established by enterprises engaged in the distribution and sale of battery products, or by municipalities; to deliver old accumulators when replacing their vehicles’ accumulators to the temporary storage places established by the enterprises engaged in the distribution and sale of accumulator products and enterprises operating vehicle maintenance/repair sites free of charge; and pay a deposit if a new accumulator is to be purchased when delivering the old one and not to keep accumulators of benches, facilities, forklift, tractors and other motor vehicles, power supplies and transformers used in the production processes of consumer industrial facilities after the accumulators become a waste longer than 90 days on impervious ground within the factory site until they are delivered to the producer. Article 15 of the Regulations stipulates that the transportation of waste accumulators from the point of collection to the temporary storage or to the disposal facility by the highway should be carried out using an appropriate vehicle according to the type of waste by real and legal entities who have obtained a transportation licence from the Governorate. Construction Waste battery and accumulators will be generated during construction period. These wastes will be collected separately from household wastes and will be delivered to the collection points to be established Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 10-13 by enterprises engaged in the distribution and sales of battery products, or by municipalities within six months after they are generated. The impacts associated with this waste stream will be Negligible. Permanent and Operational Waste battery and accumulators will be generated during maintenance activities in the course of the operation period. These wastes will be collected and disposed in accordance with Waste Batteries and Accumulators Control Regulation. The impacts associated with this waste stream will be Negligible. 10.5 Summary This chapter considers each of the main waste streams generated by the construction and operation of the Project and assesses the significance of environmental impacts associated with waste management issues. In each case the assessment is based on a consideration of the potential impacts and how these will be managed, reduced or avoided through the use of appropriate mitigation. Further recommendations for mitigation are discussed below. A detailed Waste Management Plan (WMP) should be prepared and appropriate mitigation measures should be identified. The mitigation measures should be considered and addressed in the project design including temporary waste storage sites, structures, waste collection and transportation infrastructure, etc. Improper waste management procedures or lack of mitigation measures during construction, as well as maintenance and operations phases of the Project may result in adverse environmental impacts on: Stormwater quality and thus water quality in the creeks and dams/reservoirs located in the catchment area; Soil quality; Sea water quality; Groundwater quality; and Ecological receptors or human health. Without mitigation measures, it is anticipated that there will be potential major to moderate adverse impacts during construction and moderate adverse impacts during the maintenance and operations periods on these receptors. The proposed Project is expected to prepare a WMP as a requirement of the Environmental and Social Action Plan. The waste management plan will include strategies and procedures to eliminate potential adverse impacts of waste that will be generated during the construction, maintenance and operation of the proposed Bridge and motorways. The plan will include management of construction site excavation materials according to Turkish legislation. The waste management plan will include procedures to segregate the waste as domestic, non-hazardous, biological and hazardous waste and disposal will be carried out as described in Turkish waste legislation with licensed transporters and disposal/treatment facilities. Upon the preparation of the comprehensive WMP and proper implementation of the mitigation measures included in the WMP, the adverse impacts foreseen prior to mitigation measures will change and minor to negligible adverse impacts will be expected during the construction phase and negligible adverse impact during the maintenance and operation of the proposed Project will be likely. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-1 11.0 VISUAL IMPACT APPRAISAL 11.1 Introduction 11.1.1 Background This chapter describes the existing visual resource of the study area. It considers how the Project, as described in Chapter 2 Project Description may have an impact on visual amenity (defined as the pleasantness of the view or outlook of an identified receptor or group of receptors) and where possible, advises on mitigation and compensation measures that should be implemented to avoid, reduce or offset potential visual impacts. The visual assessment aims to identify the significance of the potential visual impacts of the proposed Project upon the site and surrounding area. Visual assessment is concerned with people’s perception and response to changes in visual amenity. Visual impacts can be positive (beneficial) or negative (adverse). A development may have no significant visual impacts but result in an adverse impact on the landscape character; conversely, a development may have significant visual impacts, but insignificant landscape impacts. The development will include a new bridge crossing, road improvements to existing carriageways, new sections of connecting carriageway and new junctions. The assessment determines the degree of anticipated change to visual amenity, considering buildings, areas of public open space, roads and footpaths that would occur as a result of the proposed scheme 11.1.2 Potential Impacts Development can change people’s direct experience of townscape depending on existing context, the scale, form, colour and texture of the proposals, the nature of activity associated with the development, and the distance and angle of view. The principal scheme elements would comprise; the road bridge; the road carriageways; viaducts, embankments, earthworks; road junctions; bridges, tunnels, signage and lighting columns. The proposed carriageway will have an impact on the landscape and due to their vertical dimension the proposed road viaducts, cuttings, tunnels the bridge and lighting columns would have a significant impact on the wider landscape. There are two key concerns relating to visual impacts: the extent to which the road bridge, new carriageway and associated infrastructure would intrude into existing views experienced by residents and day to day users of the area, and the extent to which residents and commuters would be subjected to the new impact in this landscape. The assessment recommends implementation of adopted mitigation measures and subsequent management of the anticipated landscape design for the proposed route. Assuming that mitigation measures are adopted, it is predicted that the magnitude of the visual impact would progressively diminish after the construction stages to a reduced level. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-2 After 15 years, mitigation measures, such as tree planting, would be relatively more evident and would reduce the magnitude of adverse visual impacts, counterbalancing the erosion of the visual baseline. They would, thereby, reduce the significance of the impact of the proposed route on local visual amenity. 11.2 Visual Methods 11.2.1 Overview The visual assessment was undertaken in general accordance with the following documents: The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11, Section 3, Part 5 taking into account the Supplementary Guidance for Landscape and Visual Assessment by the Scottish Executive (February 2002); and Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (GLVIA), Third Edition (edited by the Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment: IEMA, 2013). The guidelines in GLVIA suggest that visual impacts are assessed from a clear understanding of the development proposed and any landscape mitigation measures which are being adopted. It further requires an understanding of the visual form of the existing townscape, its quality, its sensitivity to change in terms of the development proposed, and the magnitude of the change proposed. In these guidelines visual impacts are assessed with regard to their degree of visual intrusion on receptors which are residents, visitors, travellers and other groups of viewers. The assessment has involved three key stages Selection of viewpoints through desk based research. Field assessment of affected receptors; and Visual evaluation and impacts assessment. 11.2.2 Identification of Viewpoints Viewpoints Viewpoints have been selected from key visual receptors within the study area. The viewpoint locations are listed in section 11.3.2 of this report These viewpoints have been photographed to provide an indication of the view experienced at the selected locations and the existing visual character within the landscape surrounding the development site. Reference photography was taken for each the viewpoints during a field trip in May 2013 and captured on a Full Frame Canon EOS 450D Digital SLR. The viewpoint photographs are shown in appendices of this part. The assessment of visual effects is influenced by the following factors which have been considered at each of the agreed viewpoint locations: Receptor type (dwelling / road / footpath / open space etc.); Relative elevation to the development; Existing views (composition and quality); Distance of viewpoint to nearest proposed development; Angle of view (narrow/wide/view up/ view down/ level); Type and nature of view (foreground/midground/background/direct/oblique/screened/partial screening); Duration of view i.e. continuous such as a house, or as a pedestrian/vehicular traveller; and Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-3 Analysis of potential visual effects. The analysis relates to each of the identified receptors and concludes with an evaluation of the significance of effects related to each receptor/groups of receptors. 11.2.3 Receptors For there to be visual impacts there is the need for a viewer (receptor). Receptors include residential properties, workplaces, recreational facilities, road users, pedestrians and other outdoor sites used by the public which would be likely to experience a change in existing views as a result of the construction and operation of the Project. A desk based map exercise identified proposed viewpoints for the assessment. Those points identified were then validated through site survey, which additionally verified the elements of the proposed scheme, which would be visible from the various view points. 11.2.4 Visual Impact Assessment The evaluation and impacts assessment has involved consideration of the extent to which the proposals would change the composition of the existing view (magnitude of change) and the sensitivity to change based on the information gathered through site survey of defined view points and analysis of the proposals. Both criteria are represented utilizing thresholds of magnitude or sensitivity: High, Medium, Low and Negligible (magnitude only). 11.2.5 Sensitivity to Change Visual Sensitivity to Change Sensitivity to change considers the nature of the receptor, for example a residential dwelling, is generally more sensitive to change than a factory unit. The importance of the view experienced by the receptor also contributes to an understanding of how sensitive that receptor is to change and the quality and value of the view are therefore considered. The visual sensitivity to change is based on interpretation of a combination of all or some of the criteria outlined in Table 11.1 below. Table 11.1: Visual Sensitivity Criteria Class Criteria Description Users of outdoor recreational facilities, on recognised national cycling or walking routes or in High nationally designated landscapes. Dwellings with views orientated towards the proposed development. Users of outdoor recreational facilities, in locally designated landscapes or on local recreational routes that are well publicised in guide books. High-Medium Road and rail users in nationally designated landscapes or on recognised scenic routes, likely to be travelling to enjoy the view. Users of primary transport road network, orientated towards the Development, likely to be Medium travelling for other purposes than just the view. Dwellings with oblique views of the proposed development. People engaged in active outdoor sports or recreation and less likely to focus on the view. Medium-Low Primary transport road network and rail users likely to be travelling to work with oblique views of the Development or users of minor road network. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-4 Class Criteria Description People engaged in work activities indoors, with limited opportunity for views of the Development. Low Road users on minor access roads travelling for other purposes than just the view. 11.2.6 Magnitude of Change Magnitude of Change to Visual Receptors The magnitude of change of the visual effect resulting from the proposed development at any particular viewpoint or receptor is based on the interpretation of a combination of a range of factors, set out in Table 11.2 (visual magnitude criteria). Some of these are largely quantifiable, and include: The distance between the visual receptor and the development; generally, the greater the distance, the lower the magnitude of change as the development will constitute a smaller and generally less apparent external influence or component of the view; The extent of the receptor that will be affected by visibility and, therefore, the influence of the development; if the development influences a very limited part of the visual receptor, such as a road route, the magnitude of change will generally be lower; The extent of the development that will be seen; visibility of the development may range from part of to the whole development. The implication of this on the visual character receptor can vary, and is largely dependent on distance. While an outlook over the majority of the development will generally increase its influence on the receptor, a long view in which the whole development is visible can have a more limited influence and, therefore, a lower magnitude of change than a close view where only part of the development is seen due to intervening landform or existing built form. Views may be glimpsed, partial, filtered or open; The position of the development in relation to the principal orientation of the visual receptor or in relation to any existing focus of views from the receptor; if the development is seen in a specific, directional vista from a receptor such as a route, the magnitude of change will generally be greater; if the development is seen in the context of an existing external influence or eye-catching external feature the magnitude of change may be greater; The context within which the development will be seen; this is important as it will determine the contrast that the development will have on the existing outlook. The scale and patterns of the landscape, the existing land uses, and the degree and type of development and settlement seen in the view will all be relevant; and The proportion of the view that is affected by visibility of the development; where an elevated viewpoint may offer views of the entire development it may be seen in the context of a wide panorama or a long depth of field thus reducing its importance within the view. Other factors may also modify the visual effect and are therefore taken into account in the viewpoint assessments. Some are related to human perception and some related to the physical environment, and include – sky-lining, back-grounding, visual clues, focal points, context and colour. Table 11.2: Visual Magnitude of Change Class Criteria Very High The development would dominate the existing view. The development would cause a considerable change to the existing view over a wide area or an High intensive change over a limited area. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-5 Class Criteria The development would cause minor changes to the existing view over a wide area or noticeable Medium change over a limited area. The development would cause very minor changes to the existing view over a wide area or minor Low changes over a limited area. No real change to perception of the view Negligible Weak, not legible, hardly discernible 11.2.7 Significance of Impacts The degree of significance of potential visual impacts, both negative and positive, is determined from a combined evaluation of the landscape sensitivity and the magnitude of change. The findings are represented using a descriptive scale ranging from major - moderate - minor adverse through neutral to ascending scale of minor - moderate - major beneficial. This is summarised in Table 11.3, which also illustrates the degree of significance for intermediate classes of magnitude of change. The assessment reports on the impacts for each receptor / groups of receptors during the construction phase, winter year of scheme opening and fifteen years after construction has been completed. Table 11-3 Significance of Visual Impacts Matrix Magnitude of Change Significance High Medium Low High Major Moderate-Major Moderate Medium-High Moderate-Major Moderate Minor-Moderate Medium Moderate Moderate Minor Low-Medium Moderate Minor-Moderate Minor-Negligible Low Moderate Minor Negligible Negligible-Low Minor-Moderate Minor-Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor Negligible Negligible Explanation of the visual impacts ratings is provided below: Major impact: Major/substantial alteration to elements/features of the baseline (pre-development) conditions. Where the proposed development would cause a very noticeable alteration in the existing view. This would typically occur where the proposed development closes an existing view of a landscape of regional or national importance and the proposed development would dominate the future view. Moderate impact: Alteration to one or more elements/features of the baseline conditions such that post development character/attributes of the baseline will be materially changed. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-6 This would typically occur where the proposed development closes an existing view of a local landscape and the proposed development would be prominent in the future view. Minor impact: A minor shift away from baseline conditions. This would typically occur where change arising from the alteration would be discernible but the underlying character / composition / attributes of the baseline condition will be similar to the pre- development. It would also occur where the proposed development newly appears in the view but not as a point of principal focus or where the proposed development is closely located to the viewpoint but seen at an acute angle and at the extremity of the overall view. Negligible: Where there is no discernible improvement or deterioration in the existing view. No effect: The Development would not affect the view. Visual impacts of moderate and above are considered to be significant, as this is the level at which changes would be clearly perceived. In terms of ratings for sensitivity, magnitude and impacts the thresholds represent points on a continuum. Where appropriate intermediate ratings have been used, to indicate impacts at the higher or lower end of a particular threshold. 11.2.8 Limitations of the assessment The assessment of effects has been undertaken by a combination of desk and field survey. The assessment site visit including summer photography has been carried out in May 2013. The assessment of visual effects has been undertaken from publicly accessible locations and when assessing potential visual effects from private properties, assumptions have been made about the types of room existing and about the types and importance of views obtained from these rooms. This assessment is based on the schematic alignment shown in this report, the finer details of which would be developed later as part of the design process. 11.3 Visual Baseline 11.3.1 Over view of study area The 5 km study following the proposed corridor of the Project comprises a number of visually distinct areas. The densely populated suburbs of western Istanbul follow steeply ascending contours which are covered with a mix of medium of traditional pan tile roofed residential properties adjacent to multi-storey high rise residential towers. Centres of population are located amidst a network of motorways, elevated highways, interchanges and commercial areas. The focus of views northwards is to a horizon broken by residential and business towers, minarets, transportation infrastructure and energy and communication towers. The settlement of Esenler, lies adjacent to military land comprising plains of rough unimproved pasture occupying gently rolling hills. Between Esenler and Odayeri the study area includes more scattered suburbs, connected by the motorway network which passes through further broad expanses of military land. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-7 Distant suburbs are visible on the horizon, which to the north leads into a landscape of rolling hills and ridges, densely covered by predominantly deciduous forestry. Between Odayeri and Garapice, the landscape comprises deep forest on hillsides, with some agricultural land located on the lower slopes following shallow valley floors. There are settlements clustered in the valleys which include the village of Gumusdere and small towns, Usmurkoy and Demirici. Views from settlements are contained by the topography and the horizon is often comprised of forested hills. Beyond the elevated forest to the north, the Black Sea can be glimpsed and there are occasional views to the Bosphorus in the east. The coastal settlement of Garipice to the west of the Bosphorus is located at a rocky coastal headland which descends steeply from forest land to the channel. The Anatolian shoreline is visible to the east. The Bosphorus is contained between the two headlands of Istanbul by rolling densely forested topography. The focus of the view is of the busy shipping channel and the eye is drawn north to where the Bosphorus meets the Black Sea and south, where the steeply incised headland at Anadolukavagi divert the Bosphorus out of view. On the Anatolian side of Istanbul much of the landscape comprises rolling topography covered with dense forest. Small farm settlements are scattered throughout. The road network comprises local roads connecting the towns of Paşamandıra, Öğümce and Cumhuriyet nestled in valleys between vast areas of forest To the south of the study area, the agricultural land gradually concedes to the urban sprawl of Anatolian Istanbul. The motorway network, high rise residential flats and commercial towers gradually replace the forest corridor. Green leafy suburbs occupy the hinterland between forest and city centre. The spread of construction activity, associated with large areas of new development, introduces moving cranes into a skyline dominated by vertical elements of the urban fabric. 11.3.2 Selection of viewpoints The selected viewpoints are representative of a range of views and viewer types, including settlements, transport routes, recreational routes, main visitor locations and a variety of distances, aspects, elevations, extents, and sequential routes. Twenty viewpoints across the study area have been identified. These viewpoints represent the typical views that people who live in the area, visitors to the area, and people passing through are likely to experience. A detailed description of the baseline view currently experienced by visual receptors along with the sensitivity of receptors at each of the 20 viewpoint locations is described in Section 11.6 The viewpoint list is set out in below . Viewpoint 1:Esenler Basakşehir Ahmet Yesevi Caddesi 34306 Viewpoint 2: Fentepe School Viewpoint 3: Isiklar Kemerburgaz Yolu 34075 Viewpoint 4: Odayeri 34075 Viewpoint 5: Gumusdere Viewpoint 6: Uskumrukoy Sehit Tevfik Inan Sokak. 34450 Viewpoint 7: Kumkoy Iman Ali Sokak 18. 34450 Viewpoint 8: Demirici Sazlidere Caddesi 34450 Viewpoint 9: Mezarlik Yolu, Garipce Bridge foundation, West Istanbul Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-8 Viewpoint 10: Poyraz Zamkinoz Niyazi Sokagi 2-6 35829 Viewpoint 11: Muhtar Semsettin 22-2 Poyraz Viewpoint 12: Riva Highway Caddesi 3 34829 Viewpoint 13: Cement Works Viewpoint 14: Yonka Ck nr Kavagi Viewpoint 15: Yoros Castle Anadolu Kavagi Mh 34825 Viewpoint 16: Esenler Basaksehir Ahmet Yesevi Caddesi 34306 Viewpoint 17: Samandra Pasakoy Yolu – Pasakoy Junction off D19 - 34916 Viewpoint 18: Kelebek Sokak Pasakoy - 34794 Viewpoint 19: Alemdag Sile Yolu. Highway Viewpoint 20: Urban Fringe. Turgut Ozal Caddesi - 34794 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-9 11.4 Potential impacts A full project description is provided in Chapter 2 and is illustrated by Figure 2.1 A brief summary of the route and the study area that it passes through is provided below. Roadway Section 1 The proposed roadway will start at the ISTOC (İstanbul Wholesalers Area) area and will pass between an industrial and a residential area from south to north. Right after the ISTOC area, the proposed motorway will pass through a military zone. The remaining section from the military area to Odayeri will pass through extensive areas of forestry. The roadway in this section will pass over the Pirinççi Creek on a viaduct. The proposed roadway will be situated to the north of Odayeri rural settlement area. There will be 8 viaducts and no tunnels in this section of the roadway. Roadway Section 2 The proposed roadway will start at Odayeri Village to the west and will pass through the forest land all the way to the critically important area in terms of environmental sustainability. Right after this area, the roadway will continue through the forestry land and pass the north of the Uskumru rural settlement area. In addition, the roadway will pass over the Tatlısu Creek by a viaduct within this forestry land. After the rural settlement, the roadway will again pass through forest until it reaches the Bosphorus protection area in the vicinity of Garipçe Village on the Bosphorus shore. In this section, there will be 11 viaducts, 1 tunnel and 1 ecological bridge. Roadway Section 3 The proposed roadway will start at south of Poyraz Village and firstly pass through the Bosphorus protection area to the west. Right after this area, the roadway will pass through forestry land until it reaches an agricultural area. Then, the roadway will pass through forestry land again and end with Öğümce rural settlement area. The proposed roadway will contimue through the Göllü village settlement area to the north and will pass through the Bozhane village settlement area, forest land and agricultural land, respectively. Right after the agricultural land, the roadway will pass the Dedepınar Creek, continue to the south of the Hüseyinli village settlement area and reach an ecological agricultural area. After this area, the roadway will pass through forestry land up to the residential area near Reşadiye (Çekmeköy). In this section, there will be 9 viaducts and 1 tunnel. Roadway Section 4 This section comprises two branches. One section turns west from “Reşadiye” to “Çamlık (in the Ümraniye District-left side)”. The proposed roadway will start within forestry land to the east and will pass through a military zone and military security zone just south of the Alemdağ settlement area. Right after the military zone and military security zone, the roadway will pass through more forestry land and a military zone and military security zone again until it reaches the Çekmeköy settlement area. After this area, the roadway will continue in forestry land and will end in this area. The southern road section will stretch from “Reşadiye” to “Paşaköy (in the Sancaktepe District-right side)”. Overall in Roadway Section 4 there will be 8 viaducts and 1 tunnel. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11 -10 Potential Construction impacts of the roadway corridor The construction impacts will include construction activity including Widening of existing road carriageway network Removal of forestry and existing landform Removal of existing areas of soft landscape Loss of agricultural land Tunneling Construction movement including cranes Increased volume of heavy plant delivering supplies including concrete and road construction material Temporary construction compounds Potential Operational impacts of the roadway corridor The introduction of new built structures into the landscape, including viaducts, tunnels, road carriageways and associated infrastructure including lighting. Alteration of topography and landform Introduction of increased traffic levels to the study area Potential Construction impacts of the Bosphorus crossing Activity on the Bosphorus including movement of parts by barges Alteration of contours and land profiles at landfalls either side of the Bosphorus Loss of mature forestry woodland Potential Operational impacts of the Bosphorus crossing Site compounds Movement of cranes Movement of construction material on existing road network. Potential operational impacts of the Bosphorus crossing Bridge, towers, footings and ramps along with associated new infrastructure create new focus of view on Bosphorus. Introduction of moving traffic above Bosphorus. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11 -11 11.5 Visual Mitigation Visual impacts resulting from the Project would arise from the new road bridge, the carriageway layout itself, viaducts, tunnels, vehicular traffic and from associated infrastructure in particular the lighting columns. Visual impacts on individual receptors / receptor groups could be mitigated by specific measures identified by the proposal as landscape mitigation commitments. This section summarises the mitigation that will be or should be implemented for the Project to counter potential construction and operational impacts on visual receptors. In a normal assessment process all mitigation is developed and agreed before the assessment of impacts stage. This is to enable mitigation to be taken into account when assessing the significance of the residual impacts, in order to provide a realistic and controlled appraisal of the impacts of the project. Such mitigation is usually included as specific design elements or commitments made by the Client. However, for this assessment, because the design of the project has been in flux and certain mitigation has not yet been agreed, we have in some cases made recommendations for mitigation and have assumed that such mitigation will be implemented by the Client. All mitigation measures are also summarized in the ESAP. The following sections set out the agreed or proposed mitigation in relation to the visual receptors identified above. The sympathetic design of the horizontal and vertical alignment of the proposed road will include measures to: Achieve the best environmental fit with existing landform and landscape elements along the alignment of the proposed route, particularly in terms of its horizontal and vertical alignment, setting the road into, rather than imposing it onto, the landform and, through the use of cuttings and existing features, particularly in the vicinity of residential property; Retain, so far as is practical, existing tree cover, vegetation, walls and linear woodland; and Conserve appropriate existing and visually characteristic architectural and heritage features affected by the Project. At construction stage, it is recommended that visual mitigation should include the following measures Screen or partially screen construction activities where possible Careful position of site compounds within the landform Retention and protection of existing woodland, earthwork features and other key elements within the proposed development corridor. At detailed design stage, it is recommended that mitigation measures to assimilate the Project back into the landscape include the following measures Positioning of structures to minimise impacts on skylines and vistas To minimise visual impacts a landscape buffer should be created between the proposed development and residential amenity The implementation of a comprehensive planting scheme, could reduce the potentially adverse direct impacts on the visual amenity of local residents. High quality landscape proposals for verges of road carriageway and interchanges within urban areas are recommended. In areas of forestry planting, proposals should be developed to compensate for the loss of vegetation which will enhance the wildlife corridor and visual amenity. Provide compensation (wherever possible) for removal of sites of ecological interest Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11 -12 Create naturalistic earthwork revetments at bridge footings in the vicinity of the bridge crossing point, to reinstate a complementary coastal edge at the Bospohrous channel. Commitment to high quality design, materials and specification for the Bosphorus crossing. 11.6 Visual Impacts The likely impacts of the proposed scheme on each receptor or group of receptors are presented in detail in the following section. These tables also consider assessment of impacts on receptors during construction and summer 15 years after completion. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-13 Viewpoint Name / Number VP1 Esenler Basakşehir Ahmet Yesevi Caddesi 34306 Grid Ref Lat: 41.130993; Long: 29.264145 View Direction North Landscape Character Type Urban area, residential – medium density Designations Distance to Site 0.5km Visual Baseline: Urban fringe comprising a mix of commercial and residential settlement occupies the eastern edge of this view, separated from military land by a 6 lane carriageway. There is an elevated view north towards the highly densely populated suburbs of Istanbul. An elevated flyover, slip roads, interchanges and lighting columns contribute to the urban scene which is large in scale. The topographical influence is evident in the built development which sits above the carriageway. The military land comprises upland heath and rough unimproved grassland covered with gorse. The slopes of the military ground partially obscure views of the lower floors of the distant high rise buildings occupying both the foreground and central middle distance of the view. Parallel transmission lines carried on pylons create a strong horizontal influence as they traverse the view west to east. Beneath the power lines, commercial sheds aligned alongside another elevated major highway are visible above the military zone. The horizon is broken repeatedly with tall structures including buildings, minarets, cranes and towers. Elevation Elevated / High X Medium Level Low Level Nature of View Direct X Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down Horizontal View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) X Framed (90 ) Width o o Distance Short Distance Medium Distance Long Distance X Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened X Partial Substantial Scenic Quality High Medium X Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Moderate Residents High Medium Expansion of existing highway infrastructure adverse Pedestrians / Cyclists Low Construction activity Careful siting of compound areas Medium Minor adverse Vehicle users Low Medium Minor adverse Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Moderate Moderate Residents High Medium Low Negligible Minor adverse adverse adverse Expansion of existing highway infrastructure Soft landscape proposals to Increased traffice assimilate the proposals into the urban fringe Pedestrians / Minor Low Medium Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Cyclists adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-14 Minor Vehicle users Low Medium Low Negligible Negligible Negligible adverse Viewpoint Name / Number VP2 Fentepe School Grid Ref Lat: 41.139817; Long: 28.792033 View Direction Landscape Character Type Suburban residential area – high population density Designations Distance to Site Approx 2km Visual Baseline: From this elevated viewpoint the eye is drawn to the military occupied land in the middle distance. This comprises a rolling topography of rough unimproved grassland with low level forest planting. The landscape has a broad horizontal scale, with long distance views north west towards high density high rise flatted suburbs of Istanbul. An existing highway and associated infrastructure, including concrete revetments and lighting columns, is visible as it curves downhill in the middle of this viewpoint. In the foreground, the view is framed by recent new build high rise housing and commercial office development. Fentepe School occupies the west facing slope set in a tarmaced playground, contained by security fencing. Construction activity is evident in the foreground located at the bottom of the slope, in a large dished channel which forms part of the urban fabric. The view is traversed by multiple vertical elements including towers carrying communication and power lines and distant chimneys and stacks of commercial development. Elevation Elevated / High X Medium Level Low Level Nature of View Direct X Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down X Horizontal X View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) X Framed (90 ) X Width o o Distance Short Distance X Medium Distance Long Distance Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened X Partial Substantial Scenic Quality High Medium X Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Moderate Residents High Medium Compounds adverse Road Construction Moderate Pedestrians / Cyclists Medium Interchange Siting of compounds Medium adverse Viaduct Minor Vehicle users Low Loss of vegetation Medium adverse Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Moderate Moderate Moderate Residents High Medium Low Low adverse adverse adverse Introduction of new road carriageway and Screen planting. associated infrastructure; Concrete Revetments Pedestrians / Moderate Minor Minor Medium Creation of interchange to periphery of view Medium Replacement vegetation Low Low Cyclists adverse adverse adverse Increased traffic Soft landscape design to interchange road verges Minor Vehicle users Low Medium Low Negligible Low Negligible adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-15 Viewpoint Name / Number VP3 Isiklar Kemerburgaz Yolu 34075 Grid Ref Lat: 41.226442; Long: 28.82688 View Direction SOUTH Landscape Character Type Urban fringe Designations Distance to Site Approx. 1.5km Visual Baseline: Minor Road – Rural argricultural settlement. Dominated by heavy Industy associated with Brick works, Sand quarry . Tree/ Hedgerows line local minor access road. Main highway sits above settlement to East partially screened by fruit/ olive trees. To the west – interloping forested ridges from horizon. The view is dominated by commercial traffic, tipper lorries, dust and vertical elements including steel towers for overhead transmission lines which create a wirescape and contribute to the urban fabric. Existing t junction interchange sits in centre of view, in the middle distance. Tree canopies and roadside planting frame view. Elevation Elevated / High Medium Level Low Level Nature of View Direct X Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down Horizontal View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) Width o o Distance Short Distance X Medium Distance Long Distance Contained (45 ) x Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened Partial X Substantial Scenic Quality High Medium Low X Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Moderate Residents High Introduction of construction activity Low New carriageway adverse Retention and protection of woodland wherever possible New viaduct Pedestrians / Cyclists Low Low Negligible Potential loss of vegetation Vehicle users Low Low Negligible Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Moderate Minor Residents High Low Negligible Negligible Minor adverse adverse adverse New carriageway New viaduct Replacement woodland planting Pedestrians / Low Loss of screen planting Low Negligible Soft landscape proposals to Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Cyclists Increased traffic carriageway and verges. Vehicle users Low Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-16 Viewpoint Name / Number VP 4 Odayeri 34075 Istanbul Grid Ref Lat: 41.236237; Long: 28.853874 View Direction N NW Landscape Character Type Rural residential – low-medium population density Designations Distance to Site Visual Baseline: Rural settlement comprising low density 2 Storey residential properties. Village shop/cafe and church. The viewpoint is slightly elevated, with mature hedgerows and woodland setting. View North looks directly onto forest landscape with attractive glades/clearings. Small scale telecommunications structures are seen in the foreground. Mature trees in gardens provide filtered views. Existing local access road is quiet with low levels of traffic. In the middle distance an apparently disused shack occupies the otherwise intact woodland with little other man made influence. Elevation Elevated / High Medium Level X Low Level Nature of View Direct Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down Horizontal View Up X Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) X Width o o Distance Short Distance X Medium Distance Long Distance Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened Partial X Substantial Scenic Quality High Medium X Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Moderate Residents High Medium adverse New carriageway heavy tree loss. Retention of existing trees wherever possible Moderate Pedestrians / Cyclists Medium Contractors compound Medium Sensitive siting of contractors compound adverse Construction activity Minor Vehicle users Low Medium adverse Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Moderate Moderate Moderate Residents High Medium Low Low adverse adverse adverse Pedestrians / New carriageway and associated infrastructure Moderate Replacement woodland planting. Minor Minor Medium Medium Low Low Cyclists Increased traffic adverse Screen planting, earthworks adverse adverse Minor Vehicle users Low Medium Low Negligible Low Negligible adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-17 Viewpoint Name / Number VP 5 Gumusdere Grid Ref Lat: 41.236769; Long: 29.985109 View Direction South Landscape Character Type Rural village Designations Distance to Site Approx. 0.9km Visual Baseline: View south from edge of small town, is contained by well vegetated gently undulating hills to horizon. In the foreground, unkempt unimproved grass land with mature trees, riparian planting, overgrown vegetation and occasional shrubby trees form urban fringes of Gumusdere and filter view south. Polytunnels occupy the foreground. Typical residential properties are 2-3 storey houses (occ. 4) and simple farm steadings. The visual envelope is contained by heavily forested hills and views filtered by field and boundary planting. In the central focus of the view, on an elevate position on a wooded hillside sits an overgrown and abandoned village comprising simple single storey concrete structures. This, combined with low level wires carried on single poles and distant, just seen occasional rooftops, extends the urban fringe into an otherwise predominantly rural scene. Elevation Elevated / High Medium Level Low Level X Nature of View Direct X Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down Horizontal View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) Width o o Distance Short Distance Medium Distance X Long Distance Contained (45 ) X Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened Partial Substantial X Scenic Quality High ? Medium X Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact High Moderate Residents High – – Medium Major adverse - New viaduct Minor High – Pedestrians / Cyclists Low - Construction activity Retention of woodland wherever possible – Moderate Medium - Deforestation Sensitive location of compounds adverse Minor High – Vehicle users Low – Moderate Medium adverse Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Minor - Moderate Moderate Low- Residents High Medium Medium Moderate Adverse Adverse Negligible Viaduct will skyline above forestation oh hillside adverse Introduction of increased moving traffic Infrastructure associated with the proposed Pedestrians / Minor Replacement forest planting Minor Low Low development Medium Medium – Negligible Cyclists adverse adverse Negligible Loss of woodland Increased traffic Minor Minor Low Vehicle users Low Medium Medium – Negligible adverse adverse Negligible Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-18 VP 6 Uskumrukoy Sehit Tevfik Inan Sokak. 34450 Instanbul 11.00am Viewpoint Name / Number – Grid Ref View Direction North Overcast Landscape Character Type Residential (Sub-urban) – Low Density Designations Distance to Site Approx. 1km Visual Baseline: View north is of relatively shallow valley with grazed pastoral fields and wooded upper slopes with residential settlement in the middle distance. The valley West in the view contains dense riparian deciduous trees filtering views of the valley floor. The hillside sits below undulating ridges of coniferous woodland. Traditional 2 storey pan tile roof residential settlement occupies the south facing slopes in the foreground and lighting columns and power lines add to the urban fabric. To the distant ridge in the North east of the view, the tree filled skyline is broken by further 2-3 storey high residential suburban development . Existing local access roads and highways are visible. Moving traffic on the lower slopes of the village to the West create a focus in this view. The ribbon of residential development and infrastructure which occupies this shallow valley floor introduces an urban influence on the view, which is otherwise of rural slopes framed by forestry. Elevation Elevated / High X Medium Level Low Level Nature of View Direct Oblique Multi-directional X o o o Orientation View Down X Horizontal X View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) X Width o o Distance Short Distance X Medium Distance X Long Distance Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened Partial X Substantial Scenic Quality High X Medium X Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Residents High - Removal of forestry Very High Major adverse - Construction activity Retention of existing woodland and riparian planting where Pedestrians / Cyclists Medium - Viaduct Very High Major adverse possible. - Interchange Vehicle users Medium - Carriageway Very High Major adverse Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Major Moderate Low Moderate Residents High High Medium – adverse – Major Medium adverse Limited opportunity for replacement adverse Permanent loss of forestry planting of woodland Replacement of rural fringe with carriageway Moderate Visual screening by planting to Minor – Pedestrians / Introduction of viaduct as new horizontal elevated Low – Medium High – Major carriageway verges Medium Moderate Moderate Cyclists element in the view Medium adverse Soft landscape design to assimilate adverse adverse New interchange interchange into urban fabric Increased traffic Moderate Minor Moderate Low – Vehicle users Medium High Major Medium – Moderate – adverse Medium adverse adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-19 Viewpoint Name / Number VP 7 Kumkoy Imam Ali Sokak 18. 34450. 9.45am Grid Ref Lat: 41.24292; Long: 29.038668 View Direction South Landscape Character Type Urban Area – residential, medium-high density Designations Distance to Site Approx. 0.9km Visual Baseline: The viewpoint is situated in the settlement of Uskumrukoy . Traditional 2 storey house nestle in a deep valley located in wooded hillside. The view south comprises overlapping hills – each heavily forested with forested ridge and peaks prominent on the horizon. In the middle distance, in the centre of the view another neighbouring settlement, Demerici , is visible. Occasional telecommunications masts and towers along with minarets, introduce vertical elements of the view. To the west and in the foreground, high quality residential properties with well maintained gardens, containing mature trees and vegetation are located around a visually attractive village recreational area. The focus of the view is toward the successive rolling slopes as they recede into the horizon. Garden vegetation and amenity planting create contribute to the visual amenity Elevation Elevated / High X Medium Level Low Level X Nature of View Direct Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down X Horizontal X View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) X Width o o Distance Short Distance Medium Distance Long Distance Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened X Partial Substantial X Scenic Quality High Medium Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Moderate Residents High Medium adverse Removal of forestry in the distance Moderate Pedestrians / Cyclists Medium Construction activity on the horizon. Retention of forestry wherever possible Medium adverse Vehicle users Low Medium Minor adverse Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Moderate Moderate Residents High Low Low Negligible Minor adverse adverse adverse New carriageway viaduct will be seen as horizontal Pedestrians / element in the view Minor Minor Medium Low Replacement forest planting. Low Negligible Negligible Cyclists Introduction of increased traffic adverse adverse Vehicle users Low Low Negligible Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-20 Viewpoint Name / Number VP 8 Demirci Sazlidere Caddesi. 34450 Grid Ref View Direction South Landscape Character Type Open Land – wetland (lake) area Designations Distance to Site Approx 0.7km Visual Baseline: Minor road local road on elevated position at southern edge of Demirici. To the south, the view is of lush tree topped horizon of mature forest area on gently rolling hills. View North behind the viewpoint is toward the Black Sea. The scene is dominated by visually attractive intact woodland. Pond in tranquil setting offers recreational and amenity value which contributes to the rural scene. The existing road is contained by earth embankments approximately 3m high with woodland edge and wild flowers along the western edge of carriageway. Along the opposite verge a metal crash barrier separates the elevated road from glade below. Elevation Elevated / High X Medium Level Low Level Nature of View Direct X Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down Horizontal X View Up X Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) X Width o o Distance Short Distance X Medium Distance Long Distance Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened X Partial Substantial Scenic Quality High Very X Medium Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Major adverse Residents High - Complete removed of sections of mature woodland High - Removal of screen planting Moderate Pedestrians / Cyclists Low High - Construction activity None adverse - Introduction of new carriageway horizontally across Moderate Vehicle users Medium existing view High – Major adverse Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Moderate - Major Moderate Residents High High Medium Major Medium adverse adverse adverse Replacement of woodland planting Pedestrians / New carriageway and associated infrastructure Moderate Minor Low High Soft landscape treatment to road Medium Medium Minor adverse Cyclists Increased traffic adverse adverse verges including screen planting Moderate Moderate Moderate Vehicle users Medium High Major Medium Medium – adverse adverse adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-21 Viewpoint Name / Number VP 9 Mezarlik Yolu, Garipce Bridge Foundation West Istanbul Grid Ref Fortress View Direction East Landscape Character Type Costal headland, residential settlement and archaeological feature Designations Distance to Site Approx. 0.6km Visual Baseline: Elevated view across Bosphoros to Anatolian side of Istanbul. The settlement of Poyrazkoy is visible in the centre of the view with pantiled roofed dwelling cascading to Bosphorus. Marina occupies the foreshore. Behind the elevated and ancient ramparts of the fortress, lies Garipce, a low key residential settlement at coastal edge , with signs of dilapidation evident in abandoned buildings, roofs and walks in poor repair and unsurfaced roads. Popular destination for day trippers with tourist cafes looking out across water towards Anatolian Istanbul The view west comprises rolling contours of heavily forested deeply incised banks which fall steeply to water’s edge. There are views south towards a large communication tower on the horizon. Views north are toward the Black Sea. From this location, the Bosphorus is a heavily trafficked shipping channel. Construction on Anatolian bridge landing location already begun and creates new focus on opposite shore of Bospohorous. Scarring at bridge footing includes exposed rock, deforestation, and prominent soil heaps. Elevation Elevated / High Medium Level Low Level Nature of View Direct Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down Horizontal View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) Width o o Distance Short Distance Medium Distance Long Distance Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened Partial Substantial Scenic Quality High Medium Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Residents High High Major adverse Detail design and finish of bridge Construction of road Compound layout Moderate – Pedestrians / Cyclists Medium Construction of bridge and associated infrastructure on Bosphorus High Protection and retention of forest wherever possible Major adverse Construction activity on Anatolian land fall side Moderate Vehicle users Low High adverse Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Moderate Moderate Moderate Residents High Medium Medium Medium adverse adverse adverse Detail design of bridge Mitigation planting Increased traffic Pedestrians / Moderate Replacement forest planting Moderate Moderate Medium Introduction of new visually dominant focus in view Medium Medium Medium Cyclists adverse Restoration of naturalistic contours to adverse adverse of Bosphorus bridge landfalls. Minor Minor Vehicle users Low Medium Medium Medium Minor adverse adverse adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-22 Viewpoint Name / Number VP10 Poyraz Zamkinoz Niyazi Sokagi 2-6 35829 Grid Ref Lat: 41.206265; Long: 29.132888 View Direction South east Landscape Character Type Urban area – residential, low-medium density Designations Distance to Site Approx 1km Visual Baseline: Small settlement located on elevated coastal headland. Incised coastal escarpments which are heavily forested plunge towards Bosphorus on both sides of the channel. In the foreground a marin and piers are visible. The shipping channel beyond is heavily trafficked in this view where the straits meet the Black Sea. Open views south east across roof tops focus on a headland comprising dense forest. Spoil heaps and construction activity of the Anatolian footing of the proposed Bopshorous Crossing are visibly dominant. To the south and west, construction activity for the European landing of the proposed development is visible. Here, sections of forest have been cleared felled, and the earthwork terraces formed during construction introduce an unnatural stepped landscape at odds with the nautral coastal headlands associated with the Bosphorus. In the middle distance, construction compounds and traffic, create a new point of focus in the larger view, which is of a dramatic coastal setting. Elevation Elevated / High Medium Level Low Level Nature of View Direct Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down Horizontal View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) Width o o Distance Short Distance Medium Distance Long Distance Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened Partial Substantial Scenic Quality High Medium Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Major adverse Residents High Construction of bridge, footings, towers and ramps High Construction of carriageway Sensitive siting of compounds Moderate Pedestrians / Cyclists Medium Clear felling of forestry High adverse Construction compounds Moderate - Vehicle users Low Exposed terrace earthworks High adverse Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Major Moderate Moderate Residents High High Medium Medium adverse adverse adverse Restoration of naturalistic contours New bridge and associated infrastructure Replacement tree planting Pedestrians / Moderate Moderate Moderate Medium New carriageway and associated infrastructure High Soft landscape to road verges and Medium Medium Cyclists adverse adverse adverse bridge embankments Detail design of bridge Moderate Minor Vehicle users Low High Medium Medium Minor adverse adverse adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-23 Viewpoint Name / Number VP11 Muhtar Sillimetin 22-2 Poyraz Grid Ref View Direction South West Landscape Character Type Urban area – coastal village, medium density Designations Distance to Site Approx. 1km Visual Baseline: From the edge of this settlement the view is of rural fringe comprising heavily wooded hills and coastal headland ridges. In the south west, the foundation of the Antatolian footing of the bridge construction area is prominent on the horizon. A prominent power line breaks the horizon in the West. The local access road forms a junction in the foreground. A highway follows steeply descending contours to the south. A single residence facing south is located at the T junction. Sharply undulating topography & forestation, provides some screening. A military forest observation tower & building on top of adjacent ridge to the South East breaks the skyline. Elevation Elevated / High X Medium Level Low Level Nature of View Direct X Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down Horizontal X View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) X Width o o Distance Short Distance Medium Distance X Long Distance Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened Partial X Substantial Scenic Quality High X Medium Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Moderate Residents High Medium - Construction activity adverse - Tree felling Moderate Pedestrians / Cyclists Medium Retention of existing vegetation where possible Medium - Construction compound adverse - Bridge construction Minor Vehicle users Low Medium adverse Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Moderate Moderate Residents High Low Low Negligible Minor adverse adverse adverse Top of Bridge rampart and towers may be visible Oblique view of bridge. Bridge towers, Replacement forest planting Pedestrians / Viaduct will occupy a portion of the view to the Minor Screen planting Low Minor Medium Low – Negligible Negligible Cyclists south east in the middle distance & form a new adverse High quality design of bridge and negligible adverse development focal point. towers Introduction of moving traffic Low Vehicle users Low Low Negligible – Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-24 Viewpoint Name / Number VP12 Riva Highway Caddessi 3 34829 Grid Ref Lat: 41.197418; Long: 29.209943 View Direction South Landscape Character Type Rural fringe – Coastal village, medium density Designations Distance to Site Visual Baseline: The baseline is formed by a broad river valley, of large to medium scale with the valley floor comprising pastures grazed by cattle, sheep and horses. Arable fields are traversed by riparian planting and dotted with mature trees, which filter views available from the road. The horizon to the south is formed by rolling contours of hills, heavily afforested. Scattered settlement includes private farms and large residences, obscured with mature estate planting . The Riva Highway creates a strong linear feature in the landscape with fast moving traffic. Elevation Elevated / High Medium Level X Low Level Nature of View Direct Oblique X Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down Horizontal X View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) X Width o o Distance Short Distance Medium Distance Long Distance X Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened Partial X Substantial Scenic Quality High X Medium Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Minor- Low- Residents High Moderate Negligible adverse Construction of Viaduct. Selection of site compounds Low - Pedestrians / Cyclists Low Negligible Forest clearance Retention of woodland where possible Negligible Low - Vehicle users Low Negligible Negligible Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Minor Minor Low - – Low - – Residents High Moderate Moderate Negligible Minor adverse Negligible Negligible adverse adverse Pedestrians / Viaduct will occupy small section of view in the Low - Low - Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Cyclists distant South West. Screened by trees, riparian Negligible Re-forest platation to edges of route. Negligible planting and topography Viaduct will still be visible. Potential view of moving traffic Low - Low - Vehicle users Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-25 Viewpoint Name / Number VP13 Cement Works Grid Ref Lat: 41.130993; Long: 29.264145 View Direction East Landscape Character Type Rural fringe Designations Distance to Site Approx 100m Visual Baseline: Local access road in river valley bottom. Arable fields with simple low field boundaries are located at the foot of steeply incised escarpments covered with dense forest. Scattered development, comprising sometimes single storey residential properties is present along the road corridor. To the east, the rolling contours of the landscape are heavily wooded on the upper slopes. Intervening field trees, hedgerows and understorey planting filter and contain views. In the foreground a derelict abandoned 2 storey house fronts the carriageway. The view immediately east is curtailed by intervening contours of a dense forest which dominates the hill. The view to south is truncated by the industrial boundary fence to a concrete works. Elevation Elevated / High Medium Level Low Level X Nature of View Direct X Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down Horizontal X View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) Width o o Distance Short Distance X Medium Distance Long Distance Contained (45 ) X Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened Partial X Substantial Scenic Quality High Medium X Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Moderate Residents Medium Medium Construction of viaduct adverse Clear felling of forest Pedestrians / Cyclists Low Demolition of house Retention of trees where possible Medium Minor adverse Contractor compounds Vehicle users Low Construction activity Medium Minor adverse Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Moderate Moderate Residents Medium Medium Medium Low Minor adverse adverse adverse Viaduct Pedestrians / Minor Soft landscape proposal Minor Low Forest clearance Medium Medium Low Negligible Cyclists adverse Replacement planting of forest adverse Increased traffic Minor Minor Vehicle users Low Medium Medium Low Negligible adverse adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-26 Viewpoint Name / Number VP14 Yonka Ck nr Kavsagi Grid Ref View Direction North west Landscape Character Type Coastal headland – road Designations Distance to Site Approx. 0.4km Visual Baseline: From the road to Anadolukavagi there are glimpsed views down steeply plunging coastal headland s to the Bosphorus. From this vantage point, there is clearance from the screening provided by trees and scrub understorey vegetation to gain an elevated view that is channelled North and North West. The coastal headlands of both the European and Anatolian sides of the Bosphorus are visible. Heavily forested headlands frame view towards the Black Sea. The horizon formed by heavily forested headlands is punctuated by forestry observation towers, also visible are the lighthouse and large scale flag pole flying the Turkish flag. At the edge of the Bosphrous there is occasion settlement and associated jetties. This is a large scale horizontal view, heavily influenced by the coastal environment and busy shipping channel. Construction sites for the Proposed Development bridge foundations is already evident on both sides of the Bosphorus. In the foreground to the north east the construction works on an exposed prominantory break they sky line. To the north west, forest clearance, major earthworks and contractors compound create a new focus in the view. Elevation Elevated / High Medium Level Low Level Nature of View Direct Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down Horizontal View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) Width o o Distance Short Distance Medium Distance Long Distance Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened Partial Substantial Scenic Quality High Medium Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Residents n/a Focus of the view is the Bosphorus n/a n/a Construction activity will create new focus in the view Retention of forestry wherever possible Moderate - Pedestrians / Cyclists Medium Bridge foundations, ramps, interchange High Careful siting of contractors compound Major adverse Forest clearance Moderate - Vehicle users Medium Major earthworks High Major adverse Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Residents n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Bridge and bridge towers will form a new focus in Earthworks to create naturalistic the view contours New carriageway and ramparts Moderate - High quality design of bridge Pedestrians / Introduction of increased moving traffic Moderate - Medium High Major Replacement planting of woodland Medium Low Minor adverse Cyclists Infrastructure associated with the proposed adverse adverse Soft landscape proposals to development assimilate Proposed Development to Loss of woodland receiving environment Moderate - Moderate - Vehicle users Medium High Major Medium Low Minor adverse adverse adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-27 Viewpoint Name / Number VP15 Yoros Castle Anadolu Kavagi Mh 34825 Grid Ref View Direction North Landscape Character Type Urban area, residential – low density Designations Distance to Site Visual Baseline: High quality elevated viewpoint which is a popular landmark and destination for tourists. The primary reason for visiting this location is for the enjoyment of the broad expansive view northwards of where the Bosphorus meets the Black Sea. Elevation Elevated / High Medium Level Low Level Nature of View Direct Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down Horizontal View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) Width o o Distance Short Distance Medium Distance Long Distance Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened Partial Substantial Scenic Quality High Medium Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Residents n/a Focus of the view is the Bosphorus n/a Construction activity will create new focus in the view Retention of forestry wherever possible High – Moderate – Pedestrians / Cyclists High Bridge foundations, ramps, interchange Careful siting of contractors compound Medium Major adverse Forest clearance High - Moderate Vehicle users High Major earthworks – Medium Major adverse Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Residents n/a Bridge and bridge towers will form a new focus in Earthworks to create naturalistic the view contours New carriageway and ramparts Moderate High quality design of bridge Moderate Pedestrians / Introduction of increased moving traffic High High – Major Replacement planting of woodland Medium Major Low Moderate Cyclists Infrastructure associated with the proposed Medium – – adverse Soft landscape proposals to adverse adverse development assimilate Proposed Development to Loss of woodland receiving environment Moderate Moderate High - Vehicle users High Major Medium Major Low Moderate Medium – – adverse adverse adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-28 Viewpoint Name / Number VP16 Esenler Basaksehir Ahmet Yesevi Caddesi Grid Ref View Direction North East Landscape Character Type Agricultural Land/ Residential/ Urban Fringe Designations Distance to Site 1KM Visual Baseline: This viewpoint is representative of low density housing on the rural fringe of Istanbul. Foreground view is of 2-3 storey residential properties on edge of low grade cultivated land associated with small holdings and arable fields, punctuated with mature stands of trees. Garden plants, hedgerows and trees within fields provide partial screening of middle distance. The D19 highway transects the view horizontally and is also partially filtered by roadside screen planting. The horizon is formed by an arrangement of hills, the upper reaches of which are afforested. Pylons and overhead transmission lines break the horizon. High density residential developments occupy elevated position in middle of view eastwards. A commercial zone sits in the middle distance view behind the D19 highway and in front of densely populated area. Transmisison towers and vertical poles puncture the skyline with residential development adding to urban fringe. A pocket of mature woodland planting screens views from the periphery of the village to the highway and urban settlement to the east. Elevation Elevated / High X Medium Level Low Level Nature of View Direct Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down X Horizontal View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) X Width o o Distance Short Distance Medium Distance X Long Distance Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened Partial X Substantial Scenic Quality High Medium Low X Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact High - Moderate Residents High – Medium Major adverse High - Moderate Pedestrians / Cyclists Medium Proposed Development would be located in valley parallel to D19. Sensitive siting of compounds and plant medium adverse Construction of road, viaduct and interchange will be visible. Minor - High - Vehicle users Low Moderate medium adverse Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Moderate Moderate Moderate Residents High Medium Medium Low adverse adverse adverse The new carriageway would be carried on a viaduct forming a new element in the mid distance. This would be exert large, vertical and horizontal Pedestrians / influences on the visual envelope. The proposed Moderate Moderate Medium Medium Screen planting to highway verges Medium Low Minor adverse Cyclists interchange may be visible, although grey depot adverse adverse building and built environment of other neighbouring industry would provide partial screening. Minor Minor Vehicle users Low Medium Medium Low Negligible adverse adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-29 Viewpoint Name / Number VP17 - Samandra Pasakoy Yolu – Pasakoy junction off D19 - 34916 Grid Ref View Direction South Landscape Character Type Reclaimed land Designations Distance to Site Close Visual Baseline: Representative of road users. Rough pasture formed from reclaimed land in foreground with unsrufaced dirt tracks leading to landfill site and wasteland. To the South East the horizon is formed by a dominant wooded hill. The lower slopes of which are traversed by wetland. Overhead transmission lines and towers along with communication masts, break the horizon and timber pole mounted lines traverse the view in the middle distance.. In the far distance, settlement is visible on horizon. The lower slopes of the foothills north of the D19 highway are occupied by grazing sheep. Elevation Elevated / High Medium Level X Low Level Nature of View Direct X Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down Horizontal X View Up Panoramic (360 ) X Wide (180 ) X Framed (90 ) Width o o Distance Short Distance X Medium Distance Long Distance Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened X Partial Substantial Scenic Quality High Medium Low X Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Vehicle users Low High Moderate Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Minor Minor Vehicle users Low Medium Medium Low Negligible adverse adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-30 Viewpoint Name / Number VP 18 Kelebek Sokak Pasakoy - 34794 Grid Ref View Direction East Landscape Character Type Urbanised area – Industrial/ Low density residential Designations Distance to Site 0.2km Visual Baseline: Scattered settlement low density housing settled on south facing slope. Moving traffic on D19 carriageway elevated in hillside distance just seen between residential properties. Topography, buildings and existing mature shelter planting provide visual screening. Horizon formed by densely forested hills. Look out tower and overhead transmission and communication lines break the skyline. Commercial development and amenity space occupy the foreground to the North East. Elevation Elevated / High X Medium Level Low Level Nature of View Direct Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down Horizontal View Up X Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) Width o o Distance Short Distance X Medium Distance Long Distance Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened Partial Substantial X Scenic Quality High Very Medium Low X Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Residents Medium Low Minor adverse Potential construction activity including movement of cranes Pedestrians / Cyclists Low None Low Negligible Vehicle users Low Low Negligible Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Residents Medium Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Pedestrians / Glimpse/ filtered view of new carriageway Low Negligible Negligible Screen planting to carriageway Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Cyclists Vehicle users Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-31 Viewpoint Name / Number VP19–Alemdag Sile Yolu. Highway Grid Ref Lat: 41.038966; Long: 29.267406 View Direction South East Landscape Character Type Urbanised area – Industrial/ Low Density residential Designations Distance to Site 0.2km Visual Baseline: Broad horizontal agricultural landscape traversed by vehicular transportation network with distant horizon of forested ridge lines. Foreground dominated by busy carriageways running east – west. Elevated north – south highway. In the distance to the West – settlement comprising high rise urban dwelling occupies 50% of the view. Overhead transmission power lines and towers punctuate the broad horizontal view and add to man’s influence on the urban setting. 2-3 Storey high densely populated residential settled urban fringe occupies Eastern edge of view. Elevation Elevated / High X Medium Level Low Level Nature of View Direct X Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down X Horizontal View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) X Framed (90 ) Width o o Distance Short Distance X Medium Distance Long Distance Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened X Partial Substantial Scenic Quality High Medium X Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Residents Medium Low Minor adverse Earthworks, construction activity, contractors compounds, Pedestrians / Cyclists Low cranes. Retention of existing vegetation where possible Low Negligible Loss of trees Vehicle users Low Low Negligible Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Residents Medium Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible New Interchange. Construction of new carriageway Soft landscaping including grass Pedestrians / Low and associated infrastructure Negligible Negligible seeding, ornamental and screen Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Cyclists Increased traffic planting Vehicle users Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-32 Viewpoint Name / Number VP20– Urban Fringe. Turgut Ozal Caddesi - 34794 Grid Ref View Direction Landscape Character Type Low density residential/ forest Designations Distance to Site 0.1km Visual Baseline: This viewpoint is representative of urban fringe and local road corridor. Residential properties, generally 3 storeys in height are located on the southern side of road. To the North/North West the view opens onto forest, comprising mixed deciduous and conifer species at various stages of growth ranging from immature – mature. Views of the road are contained by roadside planting and garden trees. A wirescape is created by Low Voltage overhead power lines and towers running parallel to the carriageway and road crossing High voltage pylons and transmission wires. Rooftops of high rise flatted residential settlement can be seen in the distance. Elevation Elevated / High Medium Level X Low Level Nature of View Direct X Oblique Multi-directional o o o Orientation View Down Horizontal X View Up Panoramic (360 ) Wide (180 ) Framed (90 ) Width o o Distance Short Distance X Medium Distance Long Distance Contained (45 ) Narrow (<45 ) Fragmented Screening Not Screened X Partial X Substantial Scenic Quality High Medium X Low Construction Receptor Sensitivity Construction Change and Effect Construction Mitigation Magnitude Impact Residents High High Major adverse Moderate Pedestrians / Cyclists Medium Construction activity, contractor’s compound. New road. Retention of existing vegetation wherever possible High – Protection/diversion of transmission lines. Forestry clearance. Sensitive siting of contractor’s compound Major adverse Moderate- Vehicle users Medium High Major adverse Residual Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Magnitude Impact Receptor Sensitivity Operational Change and Effect (year of (year of Mitigation (summer (summer (summer (summer year opening) opening) year 5) year 5) year 15) 15) Moderate Moderate Moderate Residents High Medium Medium Medium adverse adverse adverse Introduction of new road and associated Pedestrians / Moderate Moderate Moderate Medium infrastructure Medium Replacement forestry planting Medium Medium Cyclists adverse adverse adverse Increased traffic. Moderate Moderate Moderate Vehicle users Medium Medium Medium Medium adverse adverse adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-33 11.7 Significance of Impacts During the construction period some receptor groups which directly face the proposed route and bridge, in close proximity or with immediate views towards it will experience significant adverse visual impacts as a result of the loss of visual amenity and the visually intrusive construction activity associated with the construction of a road bridge, road carriageway, road junctions or associated infrastructure. Receptors that will experience residual impacts of Moderate and higher, have for the purposes of this assessment, been considered significant. This is by virtue of their sensitivity (expectation and importance of the changed landscape to the receptor), the expected magnitude of change, their immediate orientation and the visual proximity towards the proposed route. 11.8 Summary of Impacts Table 11-1 Summary of Impacts CONSTRUCTION OPERATION (Year1) OPERATION (Year15) Viewpoint Sensitivity Significance Magnitude of Magnitude of Magnitude of Impact Impact Impact Change Change Change 1. Esenler Residential Moderate Moderate High Negligible Not significant Basaksehir adverse adverse Ahmet Yesevi Pedestrian Caddesi Low Medium Minor adverse Medium Minor adverse Negligible Negligible Not significant 34306 Road user Low Minor adverse Minor adverse Negligible Not significant Residential Moderate Moderate Moderate High Significant 2. Fentepe adverse adverse adverse School Pedestrian Moderate Moderate Medium Medium Medium Low Minor adverse Not significant adverse adverse Road user Low Minor adverse Minor adverse Negligible Not significant 3. Isiklar Residential Moderate Moderate High Low Low Negligible Minor adverse Not significant Kemerburgaz adverse adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-34 CONSTRUCTION OPERATION (Year1) OPERATION (Year15) Viewpoint Sensitivity Significance Magnitude of Magnitude of Magnitude of Impact Impact Impact Change Change Change Yolu 34075 Pedestrian Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Not significant Road user Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Not significant Residential Moderate Moderate Moderate High Significant adverse adverse adverse 4. Odayeri Pedestrian Moderate Moderate Medium Medium Medium Low Minor adverse Not significant 34075 adverse adverse Road user Low Minor adverse Minor adverse Negligible Not significant Residential Minor - Moderate – Moderate High Moderate Not significant Major adverse Adverse 5. adverse Gumusdere Low - Pedestrian High -Medium Minor- Medium Low Minor adverse Negligible Negligible Not significant Moderate Road user Minor – Low Minor adverse Negligible Not significant Moderate Residential High Major adverse Major adverse Moderate Significant 6. Pedestrian Minor – Uskumrukoy Moderate – Medium Major adverse Moderate Not significant Sehit Tevfik Very High High Major adverse Low Medium – adverse Inan Sokak. Road user Minor – 34450 Moderate – Medium Major adverse Moderate Not significant Major adverse adverse Residential Moderate Moderate 7. Kumkoy High Minor adverse Not significant Imam Ali adverse adverse Medium Low Negligible Sokak 18. Pedestrian Moderate Medium Minor adverse Negligible Not significant 34450 adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-35 CONSTRUCTION OPERATION (Year1) OPERATION (Year15) Viewpoint Sensitivity Significance Magnitude of Magnitude of Magnitude of Impact Impact Impact Change Change Change Road user Low Minor adverse Negligible Negligible Not significant Residential Moderate High Major Major adverse Significant 8. Demirci adverse Sazlidere Pedestrian Moderate Moderate Low High High Medium Minor adverse Not significant Caddesi adverse adverse 34450 Road user Moderate – Moderate – Moderate Medium Significant Major adverse Major adverse adverse Residential Moderate Moderate High Major adverse Significant 9. Mezarlik adverse adverse Yolu, Garipce Pedestrian Moderate – Moderate Moderate Bridge Medium High Medium Medium Significant Major adverse adverse adverse foundation Road user Moderate Not significant West Istanbul Low Minor adverse Minor adverse adverse Residential Moderate Moderate High Major adverse Significant 10. Poyraz adverse adverse Zamkinoz Pedestrian Moderate – Moderate Moderate Medium High Medium Medium Significant Niyazi Sokağı Major adverse adverse adverse 2-6 35829 Road user Moderate Not significant Low Minor adverse Minor adverse adverse Residential Moderate Moderate High Minor adverse Not significant adverse adverse 11. Muhtar Pedestrian Moderate Sillimetin 22-2 Medium Medium Low Minor adverse Negligible Negligible Not significant adverse Poyraz Road user Low Minor adverse Negligible Negligible Not significant 12. Riva Residential Low – Minor- Low – Minor- High Negligible Minor adverse Not significant Highway Negligible Moderate Negligible Moderate Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-36 CONSTRUCTION OPERATION (Year1) OPERATION (Year15) Viewpoint Sensitivity Significance Magnitude of Magnitude of Magnitude of Impact Impact Impact Change Change Change Caddesi 3 Pedestrian Low – Low – Low – Not significant Low Negligible Negligible Negligible 34829 Negligible Negligible Negligible Road user Low – Low – Low – Not significant Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Residential Moderate Moderate Medium Minor adverse Not significant 13. Cement adverse adverse Works Pedestrian Not significant Low Medium Minor adverse Medium Minor adverse Low Negligible Road user Not significant Low Minor adverse Minor adverse Negligible Pedestrian Moderate Moderate 14. Yonka Ck Medium Minor adverse Not significant nr Kavagi adverse adverse High High Low Road user Moderate Moderate Medium Minor adverse Not significant adverse adverse 15. Yoros Pedestrian High – Moderate – High – Moderate – Moderate High Significant Castle Medium Major adverse Medium Major adverse Medium adverse Anadolu Road user High – Moderate – High – Moderate – Moderate Kavagi Mh High Significant 34825 Medium Major adverse Medium Major adverse adverse Residential Moderate – Moderate Moderate 16. Esenler High Significant Major adverse adverse adverse Basaksehir Ahmet Yesevi Pedestrian High – Moderate – Moderate – Not significant Medium Medium Low Minor adverse Caddesi Medium adverse adverse 34306 Road user Minor - Not significant Low Moderate Minor adverse Negligible adverse 17. Samandra Road users Pasakoy Yolu Low Medium Minor adverse Medium Minor adverse Low Negligible Not significant – Pasakoy Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11-37 CONSTRUCTION OPERATION (Year1) OPERATION (Year15) Viewpoint Sensitivity Significance Magnitude of Magnitude of Magnitude of Impact Impact Impact Change Change Change junction off D19 - 34916 Residential Medium 18. Kelebek Minor adverse Negligible Negligible Not significant Sokak Pasakoy - Pedestrian Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Not significant 34794 Low Negligible Negligible Road user Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Not significant Residential Negligible Negligible Not significant 19. Alemdag Medium Minor adverse Sile Yolu. Pedestrian Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Not significant Highway Low Negligible Negligible Road user Low Negligible Negligible Negligible Not significant Residential Moderate Moderate High Major adverse Significant adverse adverse 20. Turgot Pedestrian Moderate – Moderate Moderate Ozal Caddesi - Medium High Medium Medium Significant major adverse adverse adverse 34794 Road user Moderate – Moderate Moderate Medium Significant major adverse adverse adverse Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 11 -38 11.9 Conclusion Mitigation measures will reduce the landscape and visual impacts of the proposed route with proposed planting of native trees and shrubs (and as part of the Afforestation Plan), so that in time some of the newly introduced elements will be screened from view and assimilated into the local townscape setting reducing the long term disruption of the overall landscape and visual character of the area. High quality landscape designs for roadside verges and interchanges within areas of residential settlement could, over time, contribute to the townscape visual amenity and provide visual screening and filtered views of the proposed development. Dependent on the restoration landscape design proposals intended for the landing of bridge footings either side of the Bosphorus along with a commitment to high quality design of the proposed Bosphorus bridge, for receptors at viewpoints 9, 10 and 15 the residual effects could be considered Moderate beneficial as opposed to Moderate adverse, by summer of year 15 operation. There will be significant adverse effects on the visual amenity afforded from many locations from within the immediate area following the development route corridor. However it is considered that the landscape and visual resource of the wider study area will not deteriorate to a significant degree and the overall impact upon landscape and visual amenity in general is therefore restricted to those receptors/areas within close proximity to the proposed route. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-1 12.0 SOCIO-ECONOMICS 12.1 Introduction This section of the report identifies the social impact of The Third Bosphorus Bridge and Connected Motorways Project on surrounding communities. The main objective of the study is to identify the potential social impacts associated with the construction and the operation of the proposed Project. This social impact assessment (SIA) intends to determine whether the proposed project has positive and adverse effects on individuals, households and institutions. It also explores the unintended consequences, whether positive or negative on the local people. The key objectives of the study on The Third Bosphorus Bridge and Connected Motorways Project are to: Identify existing social and economic condition of the households around the project area; Identify and assess potential project-related social impacts across the whole operational life cycle, from exploration through to decommissioning phases; Describe, where appropriate, the general mitigation measures that have been incorporated into the Project. 12.2 Assessment Scope The Third Bosphorus Bridge and Connected Motorway Project includes a bridge that will cross the Bosphorus (or Istanbul Strait) and a motorway on both sides of Europe and Asia, with associated connection and connection roads. The project is referred to as the Northern Marmara Motorway including the 3rd Bosphorus Bridge. The overall requirements for the bridge and motorway design are given in the Technical Requirements issued for ―The Northern Marmara Motorway (incl. the 3rd Bosphorus Bridge) Design and Construction Requirements‖ prepared by the KGM. The proposed bridge will cross the Bosphorus near to the Black Sea between Garipçe on the European side and Poyraz on the Asian side. The purpose of the bridge is to carry a 2 x 4 lane motorway and two high speed railway tracks. The proposed Northern Marmara Motorway includes approximately 60 km long motorway from Odayeri to Paşaköy and approximately 54 km of connection roads, including the third Bosphorus bridge. The total length of the road construction will be approximately 114 km. When the affected communities are examined, the range of possible affected groups or categories is very wide. Settlements affected by the Project include those who live nearby; those who will be affected by the Project activities and those who have interest in a new project or policy change but may not live in proximity. Others affected include those who might use the land on which the project is located. The following residential areas will be directly affected by the Project: Göllü Village, Bozhane Village, Ishaklı Village, Paşamandıra Village, Poyraz Village, Bozhane Village, Hüseyinli Village, Reşadiye Village,Işıklar Village, Odayeri Village, Paşaköy Village, Demirci Villge, Garipçe Village Uskumruköy Village, Alibahadır Village, Kısırkaya Village, Çiftalan village, Rumelifeneri Village, Gümüşdere Village, Anadolufeneri, Nişantepe Village, and Çatalmeşe Village. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-2 The map in Figure 12.1 shows the settlements likely to be affected by the Project, including their population. Figure 12.1 Affected Settlements 12.3 Methods 12.3.1 Baseline Methods Baseline data collection is not a single method but a collection of tools and approaches. A wide range of social science methods can be used in carrying out social baseline and a variety of data-gathering techniques is employed, depending on purpose and context. Data for the social impact assessment were obtained from the following sources: Secondary data, Quantifiable sample survey (settlement questionnaire and household questionnaire) Participant observation Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-3 12.3.2 Secondary Data Secondary data sources used in this study include census data, geographical data (including maps), and national and local government statistics, documentation from non-governmental organizations and community-based organizations. Many of the data included in this report are from the Turkish Statistical Institute (TÜİK). The population data in Turkey are updated periodically as new data become available. Although the data provided from TÜİK are the latest, they have some limitations. The information obtained from TUİK is mostly based on the data of İstanbul Province. 12.3.3 Quantifiable Sample Surveys Settlement Questionnaire Village background information was gathered through questionnaire and discussion with headmen. These surveys mainly served for gathering information on the settlement as a whole. Household Questionnaire A household survey interview with households in the project area was conducted. The survey used the face-to-face interview method. The survey involved a formal visit to families and individual interviews with the adult member of the family using a standard questionnaire. The survey focused on a number of specific issues, including the main sources of livelihood, problems in the project area and attitudes towards the proposed project. The size of the sample in each community depended on the number of residents of the neighbourhood. Several types of considerations and criteria were taken into account in the choice of villages in which to implement the survey. The study was composed of four phases: pre-field studies, field implementation, coding and data entry, and data analysis. 12.3.4 Phase One: Pre-Field Studies Collection of Secondary Data Secondary data sources were mainly based on the government records including population census and other relevant records of governmental institutions. Other, secondary, sources used included geographical data (including maps), local government statistics, documentation from non-governmental organizations and community-based organizations and newspaper reports. Selection of settlements The total population of the settlements in the Project area is 37,343. It is estimated that there are 9,336 households in the area. The sample size was determined with 0.95 confidence level and plus or minus 0.01 margin of error. On the basis of this, 652 households' members were interviewed. At least 10 interviews with members of households in each settlement were undertaken. The sample size was determined using the following formula: Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-4 N * t 2 * p * q n ((N *)1 d 2 ) (t 2 * p * q) n= sample size N= population d= margin of error p= estimated prevalence in the project area t= confidence level at 95% q= 1-p Surveys were carried out in all identified settlements. The population of settlements and the number of interviews are presented in the Table 12-1. Table 12-1 Survey Sample Size Number of District Settlements Population 2012 Household interviews BEYKOZ Alibahadir 783 196 13 BEYKOZ Anadolu Feneri 1,157 289 19 BEYKOZ Bozhane 452 113 10 BEYKOZ Göllü 229 57 10 BEYKOZ İshakli 1,235 309 22 BEYKOZ Paşamandira 925 231 15 BEYKOZ Poyraz 888 222 15 ÇEKMEKÖY Çatalmeşe 7,446 1,862 124 ÇEKMEKÖY Hüseyinli 747 187 12 ÇEKMEKÖY Nişantepe 5,413 1,353 90 ÇEKMEKÖY Reşadiye 2,004 501 33 EYÜP Çiftalan 150 38 10 EYÜP Işiklar 550 138 10 EYÜP Odayeri 252 63 10 SANCAKTEPE Paşaköy 1,686 422 30 SARIYER Demirciköy 1,162 291 19 SARIYER Garipçe 448 112 10 SARIYER Gümüşdere 2,751 688 46 SARIYER Kisirkaya 417 104 10 SARIYER Rumeli Feneri 3,571 893 59 SARIYER Uskumru 5,077 1,269 85 Total 37,343 9,336 652 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-5 12.3.5 Phase Two: Field Implementation Training of the Survey Team The training of the surveying team took one day. Training was more the form of orientation rather than intensive training. The training consisted of the following: Introduction to the research and its objectives; Distribution of the materials; Discussion of the questionnaire; Review of the questionnaire; Review of note taking; and Familiarization with the reading materials provided. Interviews The social field survey team consisted of 7 surveyors. One surveyor was expected to interview 7 household members in a day (total 49 household interviews). Supervisor checked each survey during evenings and informed the surveyors about any errors. Thus, repetition of errors was prevented. 12.3.6 Phase Three: Coding and Data Entry Data entry activities were carried out in İstanbul. Coding was undertaken together with interviewing. After each questionnaire was coded, it was sent to a data entry team. In this survey, SPSS for statistical analyses and Power Point for graphics were used. 12.3.7 Phase Four: Data Analysis The analysis of the data as accomplished through interpretation of statistical results and comparative analysis of data collected from surveys, observations and documents. Briefly, the collected data for this study was analysed by simple descriptive statistical techniques. A ―Social Baseline Report‖ was based on the evaluation of the primary data collected from the project- affected area. 12.3.8 Participant Observation Participant Observation is a field technique to develop in-depth understanding of peoples' motivations and attitudes. It is based on looking, listening, asking questions and keeping detailed field notes. 12.3.9 Assessment Methods Social impacts can be characterized and defined in many ways. Social impact assessment can play an important role in understanding the impacts of any project and the distribution of these impacts among different groups in the project areas. Inter-organisational Committee on Principles and Guidelines for Social Impact Assessment (2003) defines social impacts as follows: Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-6 “By social impacts we mean the consequences to human populations of any public or private actions that alter the ways in which people live, work, play, relate to one another, organize to meet their needs and generally cope as members of society. The term also includes cultural impacts involving changes to the norms, values, and beliefs that guide and rationalize their cognition of themselves and their society.” SIA is the process of analyzing, monitoring and managing the social consequences of policies, programmes and projects. As Vanclay (2003) has pointed out, ―Social impact assessment is the process of analyzing (predicting, evaluating and reflecting) and managing the intended and unintended consequences on the human environment of interventions (policies, plans, programs, projects and other social activities) and social change processes so as to create a more sustainable biophysical and human environment‖. In general, SIA can be understood as a framework for evaluation of all impacts on humans and on all the ways in which people and communities interact with their socio-cultural, economic and environmental surroundings. The term also embodies all human impacts including cultural impacts, community impacts, infrastructural impacts, gender impacts, resource issues, political impacts etc. As Adams (2000) pointed out, social impacts include both positive and negative impacts and have to be assessed over a time frame that includes all the various stages in planning, construction and after construction. Social impacts depend on many factors like ethnicity, gender, caste or class groupings and so on. Social impacts can be experienced as direct or indirect impacts, which have several direct and indirect consequences. All these factors lend complexity to an assessment of social impacts at any given time period. It is known that the positive and negative social and economic impacts/costs of projects are rarely distributed evenly and impacted communities are themselves heterogeneous: there can be significant disparities in impacts, particularly among different groups/categories. It is reasonable to assume that projects affect men and women in very different ways. All potential impacts; negative/positive, long term/short term, planned/unplanned, expected/unexpected, cumulative and perceived should be taken into consideration together. Interdependency and mutual interaction among all sorts of impact complicates impacts to be separately assessed. When we deal with social impacts, it is not always easy to measure them or explain them in numerical terms. For example, an increase in local population, an increase in employment opportunities or the numbers of resettled people are conceived in numerical terms. However, some losses and their consequences such as social and cultural impoverishment because of resettlement, loss of habitat and archaeological sites, and damage to health, cannot be easily represented in numerical terms. In defining and assessing the social impacts, numerical expression of these impacts is significant but other consequences of the project, which are not expressed in quantitative terms, should be considered. It should be noted that each criterion will be ranked with using Significance Criteria (See Table 12-2). Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-7 Table 12-2 Significance Criteria Impact Assessment Criteria Major Irreversible and significant negative change to current amenity, lifestyle and community Adverse activities and functioning. Considerable adverse change to current amenity, lifestyle and everyday community High Adverse activities with limited scope for mitigation. Moderate Noticeable adverse change to current amenity, lifestyle and everyday community Adverse activities, but with scope for some mitigation. Minor Localized or limited noticeable change to current amenity, lifestyle and everyday Adverse community activities, which can be largely mitigated. Some residual effects will still arise. Very little change in the current situation. No appreciable impact on local amenity, resident Negligible lifestyle and everyday community activities. Imperceptible changes to the amenity of nearby residences. Moderate Minor improvements to current amenity, lifestyle and everyday community activities. Beneficial High The creation of strong communities which are socially inclusive, with high level of social Beneficial capital, access to employment and appropriate services and facilities. 12.4 Baseline Conditions 12.4.1 Socio-Demographic Characteristic of the Settlements This section provides social and demographic characteristics of the households in the nearest villages located around the proposed Project. Of the people interviewed in the households, 52% are males, while 48% are females. 48% 52% Female Male Figure 12-2 Figure Gender Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-8 As to the age groups of the people in the households interviewed, it can be seen that the highest proportion (16, 1%) is in the age group of 20-29. The proportion of age groups of 10-19 and 50-59 is 15.1%. The proportion of the population aged 60 and over is 16%. That is, 59, 8% of the people living in these households are in the age group of 20-59. It is therefore possible to say that the population is young and economically active. 18.0 16.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 0 - 9 10 - 19 20 - 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60 - 69 70 and İnter İnter İnter İnter İnter İnter İnter above Figure 12-3 Age Group Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 There was a total of 2053 people in surveyed households and the average household size is 4.32 persons per household and is higher than the national average of 3.7 (TÜİK, 2012). In this survey, the smallest household had only 1 member whereas the largest one had 9 persons. The proportion of the households with 4 people is 27.47 % and the proportion of the households with 5 people is 18.75%. The nuclear family is generally common in the settlements covered by the project. With the increase of urbanization, there is proportionate decrease in the extended families and a rise in the nuclear families in Turkey. Household size distribution is given in Table 12-3. Table 12-3 Household Size NUMBER OF PERSONS İN THE HOUSEHOLD N % 1 Person 87 4.24 2 Persons 362 17.63 3 Persons 360 17.54 4 Persons 564 27.47 5 Persons 385 18.75 6 Persons 186 9.06 7 Persons 91 4.43 9 Persons 18 0.88 TOTAL 2,053 100.00 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-9 Most of the members of households were primary school graduates (53.65%); secondary school graduates consisted of 16% percent but there were still some illiterate people in these villages (5.31%). While the percentage of graduates of high/vocational schools is 12.01%, this rate drops to 3.61% considering university graduates (Figure 12-4). Most of the people living in the rural areas of Turkey are graduates of elementary schools. Women are at a disadvantage compared with men. Girls, particularly in rural areas, are not sent to schools due to various reasons. Although the number of the girls that attend schools has been on the increase in recent years, it cannot be considered as a major success. Even though the literacy rate of females has increased more than that of the males, the gap between genders still exists. Traditional values are still strong and families still do not want to send their daughters to the school, especially in rural areas. School age children living in peripheral villages have started to be transported to the schools of central towns and cities and this has resulted in disadvantage for the girls. High University Higher Level Illiterate School/Equival Graduate 0% 5% Literate but ent Vocational 4% did not School graduated Graduate from any 12% schooll Secondary 11% School/Equival Primary School ent Vocational Graduate School 52% Graduate 16% Figure 12-4 Educational Level Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Most of the people interviewed have been living in the area for a long time. Of the people interviewed, around 49% stated that they have been living in this area since they were born, while 23.31% of the respondents stated that they have been living for more than 16 years. It is assumed that these people had information about the problems of villages/towns where they live. Table 12-4 Number of Years in the Village/Town N COLUMN % Since he/she was born 317 48.62 1 - 5 years 38 5.83 6 - 10 years 80 12.27 11 - 15 years 65 9.97 More than 16 years 152 23.31 TOTAL 652 100.00 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-10 12.4.2 Migration There is an outward population movement within the last 5 years. According to the information provided by headmen, a total of approximately 872 households left their original settlements in the last five years. The motives for this settlement include retirement and economic difficulties. There are 1811 households who have newly settled in within the last 5 years. Table 12-5 In and Out Migration Out Migrated household? In migration TOTAL migration GÜMÜŞDERE ÇİFTALAN KISIRKAYA DEMİRCİ + 430 430 ALİBAHADIR + 100 100 IŞIKLI + 2 25 27 ODAYERİ USKUMRU + 1,100 1,100 ANADOLU FENERİ + 30 50 80 GÖLLÜ + 2 2 BOZHANE PAŞAMANDIRA + 20 20 HÜSEYİNLİ + 18 18 İSHAKLI + 6 6 NİŞANTEPE + 15 40 55 PAŞAKÖY + 20 75 95 ÇATALMEŞE + 500 250 750 GARİPÇE RUMELİ FENERİ TOPLAM 1,811 872 2,683 Source: SIA Settlement Questionnaire, 2013 12.4.3 Employment and Income The survey also studied the number of people in each family who earn some income and contribute to household subsistence. In the study area, the person who makes a living, which is 53.1% of households, consists of only one person. 12% of the households have two such members (see Table 12-6). The survey results revealed that there was a significantly smaller share of households that had three or four employed individuals. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-11 Table 12-6 Number of Employed People N % No person have regular income 205 31.4 1 person 346 53.1 2 person 78 12.0 3 person 16 2.5 4 people and more than 4 people 7 1.1 TOTAL 652 100.0 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 As widely-known, unemployment is one of the important issues throughout the country. In this study unemployed people are defined as follows: unemployed persons were not employed and had actively sought work during the last six months. 4.4% of the households interviewed stated that there was a person or there were people that looking for a job in their households. Table 12-7 Unemployment Rate in the Project Area N COLUMN % Yes 29 4.4 No 623 95.6 TOTAL 652 100.0 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 A total of 44,2 % of the respondent stated that there was a retired person in their households. Yes 44% No 56% Figure 12-5 Retired Persons in the households Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-12 The most important source of income in the area covered by the project is salaries of permanent jobs (77.7%), commerce (%9,66) and salaries/wages of temporary work (%6.2). Some of the households within the scope of the project make a living through agricultural production (%1.6). Table12-7 Sources of Income N % Agricultural production 11 1.69 Wage / salary work continuously 507 77.76 Trade 63 9.66 Livestock 7 1.07 Rent 4 0.61 Wage / salary temporary jobs 41 6.29 Tourism 0 0.00 Help relatives 11 1.69 State aids (foundations, municipalities, etc.) 4 0.61 Other 4 0.61 TOTAL 652 100.00 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 The average monthly income of the study area is 1,888 TL. Income disparities among households are quite significant in the study area. For example, the highest average monthly income is 100.000 TL; while the lowest income is 300 TL in Sarıyer District. Table 12-8 Average Monthly Income by District DISTRICT Mean Maximum Minimum BEYKOZ 1,378 3,500 300 ÇEKMEKÖY 1,547 10,000 300 EYÜP 1,551 5,000 500 SANCAKTEPE 1,530 5,000 300 SARIYER 2,593 100,000 300 Total 1,888 100,000 300 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 There are not any households with income level below 250 TL. The proportion of the households with a level of income between 251-500 TL is 4.9%, and the proportion of the households with a level of income between 501-750 TL is 6.3%. The incomes of 30.1% of the households are between 1001-1500 TL. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-13 Table 12-9 Monthly Income N % 1 - 250 0 0.00 251 - 500 32 4.95 501 - 750 39 6.03 751 - 1000 167 25.81 1000 - 1500 195 30.14 1501 - 2000 97 14.99 2001 - 2500 41 6.34 2501 - 3000 34 5.26 3001 and above 42 6,49 TOTAL 647 100.00 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 66.41% of the households stated that their incomes met their expenses. The solutions provided by the respondents stating that their incomes did not meet their expenses can be summarized as follows: Finding a second job, reducing the expenses, getting help from the municipalities, getting help from the relatives or acquaintances. Table 12-10 Income and Expenses N % 433 66.41 Yes 219 33.59 No 652 100.00 TOTAL Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 42,02% of the households have debts. The reasons for these debts are: low income (39.86%) purchasing household goods (18.2%) purchasing a house (14.13%) Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-14 Yes 42% No 58% Figure 12-6 Households’ Debt Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 While the amount of income of the households is important, local people's self-assessments should also be taken into consideration. When they compare themselves with others in the neighborhood, understanding how they evaluate their own households is important in terms of stratification. The proportion of those claiming that their status is better is 10%, while the proportion of those saying that it is worse is 16%. 74% of the households do not believe that they are in a different position in terms of income and think that they are similar to others. Worse than Better than them them 16% 10% at the same level with them 74% Figure 12-7 Comparison of Income Level Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-15 12.1.1 Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 2.9% of the households interviewed have land used for agricultural production. The average land size is 9.74 acres. 68.4% of the land used for agricultural production is owned by the state. In other words, they do not have the ownership of this land used for agricultural production. Peppers, tomatoes, and eggplants are the major crops. These basic crops are sold at the market and also consumed by households. Table 12-11 Agricultural Land N % Yes 19 2.9 No 633 97.1 TOTAL 652 100.0 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Table 12-12 Status of Land Used for Agriculture N % State owned 13 68.4 Rented land 0 0.0 Public property 0 0.0 Used free of charge (belongs to a relative/friend etc.) 6 31.6 Other 0 0.0 TOTAL 19 100.0 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 The common character of all produce is their contribution for the subsistence needs of the households. When the crops are cultivated, part of it is kept for subsistence and the rest are sold at the market. None of the respondents stated that they sell their entire agricultural product at market. Table 12-13 Agricultural Production N % Sell at market 0 0.0 Consume at home 9 47.4 Both sell and consume 10 52.6 TOTAL 19 100.0 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Approximately 6.6 % of the households have animal stock. Animal stock of the households in the project area is composed of cattle, sheep, goat, and poultry. 34 households have 466 cattle and 17 households have a total of 207 sheep. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-16 Table 12-14 Livestock Property N % Yes 43 6.6 No 609 93.4 TOTAL 652 100.0 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Table12-15 Number of Animals Total Number of Households Animals Cattle 34 466 Small Cattle 17 207 Poultry 17 669 Beehive 5 316 Load-carrying animals 1 2 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 All of the households with animals stated that they grazed their animals in the meadows or the grasslands near the place where they lived. 28.6% of the respondents stated that they consume their entire production in their households and 9.5 % of them sell the entire production. Most of the products obtain through the animal husbandry are both consumed in the households and sold at market (%61.9). Animal products contribute significantly to the subsistence food needs for these households. Table 12-16 Animal Products N % Sell at market 4 9.5 Consume at home 12 28.6 Both sell and consume 26 61.9 TOTAL 42 100.0 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-17 12.4.5 Houses 86.4% of the households have live in houses made of concrete; 32% of the stone, and 9.9% in wooden houses (See Table 12-17). It can be said that reinforced concrete buildings dominate in these places 40.0% of the households have 3 rooms in their houses; 37% have 4 rooms. The dominant pattern is houses with 3 or 4 rooms. Table 12-17 Types of Houses N COLUMN % Sun dried brick 27 4.1 Stone 17 2.6 Wood 26 4.0 Reinforced concrete 576 88.3 Other 6 0.9 TOTAL 652 100.0 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 53.5% of the households interviewed own the houses, and 17.5% live in rented houses. 11.7% of the respondents stated that the houses belong to a relative, and 12.7% stated that they own the houses; however, they also added that they did not the certificate of ownership. Table12-18 Residential Property N % Own house 349 53.5 Deedless property 83 12.7 Rent 114 17.5 Belongs someone outside of 10 1.5 the family Belong to a relative 76 11.7 Other 20 3.1 TOTAL 652 100.0 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Availability of some modern household equipment and appliances is an indicator of standard of living as well as tendency and openness to new attitudes and practices. Again, the majority of houses in the survey area had major electrical appliances. In the great majority of the households, there is a refrigerator (99.1%), washing machine (97.7%), a vacuum cleaner (94.3%), and a satellite system (88.2%). The proportion of households with a dishwasher is relatively low (69.1%). It can be said that items such as refrigerators, washing machines, and vacuum cleaners are considered as the basic need and the majority of the households have these tools. 47.2% of households have a computer; the proportion of the households using the Internet is 39.3%. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-18 Internet access Satellite Vacuum cleaner Computer Yes Telephone No Dishwasher Washing machine Refrigerator 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 Figure 12-8 Home Appliances and Goods Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 12.4.6 The Most Important Problems Unemployment (45.4%) and low income (22.1%) are regarded as the most important problems in this area by the interviewees. It is reasonable that unemployment is considered the most important problem due to the high unemployment rate in Turkey. Other important problems are the insufficient health services, poor transport and road conditions, and lack of sewage system. Table 12-19 The Most Important Problem Problem N % Unemployment 296 45.4 Low income 144 22.1 Marketing problem 0 0.0 Low income from agricultural products 3 0.5 Poor roads, inadequate access 91 14.0 Inadequate health care 48 7.4 Inadequate drinking water 4 0.6 Insufficient irrigation water 0 0.0 Inadequate energy supply 3 0.5 Lack of sewage 21 3.2 Unhealthy housing 8 1.2 Tourism-related issues 1 0.2 Lack of educational opportunities 2 0.3 Inadequate waste disposal 16 2.5 Other 15 2.3 TOTAL 652 100.0 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-19 12.4.7 Health 56% of the respondents answered positive to the question of whether anyone in their household had seen a doctor in the last 6 months. There is a person that needs constant treatment in 57.5% of the household. Asthma is the most common chronic disease in children, while diabetes, high blood pressure and heart disease are suffered by adults. 73.8% of the respondents stated that they could not solve their health problems in the area where they lived and therefore had to go to a larger town. 87.6% of the households have health insurance. The majority of households depend on Social Security Institution (SSI). 8 households have a green card – a green card is a document that allows people who are in need of help and without health insurance to benefit from free health services in Turkey in accordance with the Law No. 3816. Yes No 12% 88% Figure 12-9 Health Insurance Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 12.4.8 Infrastructure and Community Services In the last few decades there has been a strong push to improve infrastructure in Turkey. The electricity network has been expanded, roads have been upgraded for all-season access and there has been widespread investment in telecommunication networks. The findings of the household and settlement surveys suggest that energy and water facilities are comparatively more available and of a better quality than sanitary facilities (sewerage, toilet) in the surveyed settlements. All settlements have electricity and drinking water. Six surveyed settlements do not have access to a public sewerage system. These headmen stated that the sewerage system is poor and required upgrading at both the community and household levels. Settlements in Paşamandıra has a lower provision of infrastructure (particularly in terms of insufficient and water sewerage system) (see Table below). All settlements have telephone connection and are located inside the GSM operating areas. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-20 Table 12-20 Infrastructure in the Settlements Drinking water Sewage system GÜMÜŞDERE + + ÇİFTALAN + - KISIRKAYA + + DEMİRCİ + - ALİBAHADIR + + IŞIKLI + + ODAYERİ + - USKUMRU + but insufficient + ANADOLU FENERİ + + GÖLLÜ + + BOZHANE + - PAŞAMANDIRA + but insufficient - HÜSEYİNLİ + but insufficient + İSHAKLI + + NİŞANTEPE + + PAŞAKÖY + but insufficient + ÇATALMEŞE + but insufficient + GARİPÇE + - RUMELİ FENERİ + + Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Eight of the surveyed villages have a medical centre (See Table 12-21). Although there is a health centre in these villages, these centres do not provide enough health care for patients. Insufficiency of health centres and personnel are the main problems. Table12-22 Health Center in the Settlements Health Personnel Personnel Personnel Personnel Personnel Center 1 2 3 4 5 Health GÜMÜŞDERE Health house Doctor Nurse Midwife officer Specialist ÇİFTALAN KISIRKAYA DEMİRCİ ALİBAHADIR Health center Doctor Nurse IŞIKLI ODAYERİ Health USKUMRU Health center Doctor Nurse Midwife officer ANADOLU FENERİ Health center Doctor Other GÖLLÜ BOZHANE Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-21 Health Personnel Personnel Personnel Personnel Personnel Center 1 2 3 4 5 PAŞAMANDIRA HÜSEYİNLİ İSHAKLI Health center Doctor Nurse NİŞANTEPE Health center Doctor Nurse PAŞAKÖY ÇATALMEŞE Health GARİPÇE cabinet Doctor RUMELİ FENERİ Health center Doctor Nurse Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 There are 15 primary schools in the project area. ―Condition of the schools‖ and ―inadequate number of classrooms and teacher‖ are the main problems of schools in the project area. It is important to note that primary education is compulsory in Turkey and most villages have had one primary school for a long period of time. However, very few primary school graduates could continue their education in secondary schools, mainly due to the lack of these schools in the villages and their long distance from such villages. 17 settlements have a grocery store and only one settlement has a post office. All of the settlements have at least one mosque. Table 12-23 School and Other Services School Grocery store Bank Post Office + + ALİBAHADIR ANADOLU + + FENERİ BOZHANE + + + + + ÇATALMEŞE ÇİFTALAN + + DEMİRCİ + GARİPÇE GÖLLÜ + + GÜMÜŞDERE + + HÜSEYİNLİ + + IŞIKLI + + İSHAKLI KISIRKAYA + + + + NİŞANTEPE + ODAYERİ + + PAŞAKÖY + + PAŞAMANDIRA RUMELİ + + FENERİ USKUMRU + + TOTAL 15 17 0 1 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-22 12.4.9 Opinions About the Project 97% of the people respondents had heard about the project. Of the households that had heard about the project, 39% stated that they were informed of the project by their friends or relatives, while 56.7% were informed by the media. Table 12-24 Heard About the Project N % Yes 632 96.9 No 20 3.1 TOTAL 652 100.0 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Table 12-25 Source of Information about the Project N % Friends / immediate surroundings 250 39.6 Newspapers / media 371 58.7 Government officials 6 0.9 Headman 3 0.5 Company officer 0 0.0 Other 2 0.3 TOTAL 632 100.0 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 The proportion of those responding yes to the question of ―Do you know that this project is close to the area where you live?‖ was that 91.3%. 94.5% of them stated that they were not provided with any information related to the project. During the field research, respondents state that their information sources are very limited and irregular. Providing information for the villagers have major role. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-23 No 9% Yes 91% Figure 12-10 Project is Close to the Your Area Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 Table12-26 Provided Information about the Issue N % Did not inform anyone 616 94.5 Informed by village headmen 23 3.5 Government officials 7 1.1 Project workers 3 0.5 Other 3 0.5 TOTAL 652 100.0 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 84.7% of the respondents support the Project to be started in the area where they live. Many agree that the Project is important and will bring important economic benefits to their area. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-24 No 15% Yes 85% Table 12-11 Support the Project Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 The people interviewed believe that the project will help resolve the transportation problem in İstanbul (33.1%). 33.1% respondents believe that the project would provide no direct benefit for them but would be useful for our country (see Table 12-27). Table 12-27 Positive Effects of the Project N % It helps country’s development 503 33.1 Job opportunities 354 23.3 Solve the transportation problem in Istanbul 510 33.5 I have no idea 60 3.9 Our land are valued 91 6.0 Other 3 0.2 TOTAL 1,521 100.0 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 According to the households, pollution (21.3%), the degradation of the natural environment (14.85) and dust (10.1%) are the most important adverse effects of the Project (see Table 12-28). It is necessary to inform the local people of what positive and negative effects of the project will be and how to cope with or minimize these effects. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-25 Table12-28 Negative Effects of the Project N % Pollution can be 226 21.3 Deteriorated Roads 100 9.4 Dust 107 10.1 Increased traffic jam 77 7.3 Security 49 4.6 Degradation of natural environment 157 14.8 Negative effect on agricultural products and land 24 2.3 No Idea 75 7.1 I don’t think that there will be a problem 246 23.2 Other 1 0.1 TOTAL 1,062 100.0 Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 The Third Bosphorus Bridge and Connected Motorways Project has brought about various arguments. The related parties—local people, government institutions which have decided on the construction of the Project and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have different viewpoints and demands. It is obvious that this will bring about new discussions and conflicts about the Project. The Project is designed to relieve serious congestion in Istanbul, home to more than 15 million people. The Government Authority claims that the third Bosphorus Bridge will be constructed for solving the problems of in-city traffic and public mass transportation. Planned since the 1990’s, the bridge is expected to usher in new urban development north of İstanbul, and relieve traffic congestion from the Bosphorus and Fatih Sultan Mehmet bridges. However, the Project has been questioned by national environmental and social NGOs for its potentially serious long-term impacts on the forest and natural environment. Turkish concerned NGOs have expressed their opposition to the Project. 52 NGOs come together under ―Platform for Life Instead of 3. Bosphorus Bridge‖ and expressed their opposition to the Project. The platform gave a letter to the members of UNESCO-ICOMOS WHC on May 10th, 2008 at Sarıyer and 52 member civil societies and organizations of the "Platform For Life Instead of 3. Bosphorus Bridge" signed the letter (See Annex 2). The common characteristics of those against the Project can be listed as the protection of nature history, and culture and taking responsibility for the future. For instance, the following ideas were presented in the "press release issued to the Turkish and International Media on May 10th, 2008 at Sariyer - Bosphorus, Istanbul". ―To protect our forests, our water resources, our atmosphere, Our lands, our districts, our past, our Bosphorus. We call all the people of Istanbul, of Turkey and of the World to join our campaign Against the third bridge across the Bosphorus which is endangering our lives. Not the Bridge but human life!‖ Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-26 Although the third bridge is expected to relieve traffic congestion, some NGOs claim that the third bridge will likely increase traffic. They believe that the third bridge would, as it is with the previous two bridges, not solve the traffic problems of Istanbul, but instead that it would just produce new unsolvable problems. For example, Yıldız Uysal, head of the urbanization and planning committee of the Chamber of Architects of Turkey, dismissed claims that a third Bosporus bridge will solve İstanbul’s traffic congestion problems, which makes life very difficult for the 13 million residents of the city (Today’s Zaman, 2011). It is claimed that the Project will pose a tremendous threat to the city’s forests and natural resources. Environmental activists argue that several animal and plant species native to the region would be wiped out, and water reservoirs supplying the city would be at risk of drying out or become too contaminated to use. Additionally, the highway and the third bridge would lead to the rapid acceleration of urban sprawl, and migration to Istanbul would increase substantially, negatively impacting on the social fabric of the city (Guardian, 2012). The Turkish Environmental and Woodlands Protection Society (TÜRÇEK) chairman, Associate Professor Barbaros Gönençgil from İstanbul University’s geography department, fears that a third bridge over the Bosporus will greatly damage the city’s ecosystem and rich flora that have resulted from the dual climates (Mediterranean and Black Sea) afforded by its location (Today’s Zaman, 2011). As discussed above, Environmental organizations, urban planners and many İstanbul residents have voiced serious concerns about the construction of a third bridge over the Bosporus. They claim that project will damage the city's remaining green areas, make the city's traffic even worse and lead to a boom in the city's already dense population. According to Doğa Derneği (Nature Association) General Manager Engin Yılmaz state authorities need to ask themselves how much more they want Istanbul and its population to expand. He said that ―we believe that even a single nail should not be hammered in İstanbul from now on and every nail hammered is treason to this city.‖ He told that Istanbul’s traffic problem cannot be resolved through construction of new bridges. The Turkish Foundation for Reforestation, Protection of Natural Habitats and Combating Soil Erosion (TEMA) also voiced its criticisms about the construction of the third bridge. The representative of TEMA expressed their ideas as follows: ―As TEMA, we see the issue of the third bridge not as an issue to do with Istanbul’s traffic problem but about how we dream of Turkey in the future. With rapid transformation projects, Istanbul is fighting against very serious urban problems. Unplanned development leads to the destruction of water basins, which are the life-support systems of the city, agricultural fields, forests and meadows. It should not be forgotten that the third bridge, whose foundation has been laid, will mean more carbon emission, deforestation and less carbon sequestration.‖ Çare Olgun Çalışkan, from the İstanbul office of the Chamber of Urban Planners -- part of the Union of Chambers of Turkish Engineers and Architects (TMMOB) -- told that the route of the third bridge, which is on the northern side of Istanbul, is a major problem in itself and runs contrary to the 1/100,000 scale Istanbul Provincial Environmental Plan and the 1/25.000 scale İstanbul Master Development Plan. Source: Fatma Dişli Zıbak, 2013, “Third Bridge A Threat To Istanbul’s Future, Say Environmental Bodies”, Today’s Zaman, 29 May 2013. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-27 12.4.10 Vulnerable People The various groups are considered vulnerable due to their ability to cope with and participate in decision making with regards to the Project. In this SIA study, the elderly, single mothers, female heads of households, and the poor are considered the most vulnerable in the project area. These groups also include the disabled, widows, the unemployed people, and the terminally ill. The information was obtained through the implementation of household questionnaires. The ratio of vulnerable households is given Table 12-29. Table12-29 Vulnerable Households Vulnerability Number of Households Percentage Female Headed Household 71 10.9 Elderly Household 44 6.7 (65 years old and +) Poor Household (monthly income 11 1.7 is less than 500 TL) Source: SIA Household Questionnaire, 2013 12.4.11 ICA’s Labour and Working Conditions Recruitment Policy ICA’s Recruitment policy in set out in the ―Recruitment Procedure‖. Project based recruitment is created according to the employee requests in the beginning of the projects to be reviewed on an annual and three-monthly basis. In addition, short term (unforeseen & temporal) requirements are inserted into the plan As necessary. Possible candidates for a vacant position are determined in accordance with the resources below respectively: 1. Internal Resources (Completed projects’ teams, ICA & İçtaş & Astaldi personnel) 2. Former Interns, Employees and Scholarship Holders 3. CV Database (Job applications made, recommended candidates, position based shortlists) 4. Outsources (relevant portals, social media, headhunters, print media) The assessment process of the candidates focuses on the interviews’ outputs. Depending on the position requirements and title level, a variety of assessment tests can be used for the candidates. Worker Grievance Mechanisms ICA’s Grievance Mechanism is defined and clarified in the relevant corporate documents (Employee Handbook, HS & Environment Handbook) and workers are encouraged to express themselves through the responsible departments’ (Health & Safety, Environment & Sustainability, Human Resources, Quality Assurance, Corporate Communications). Meetings and trainings continually and are supported by an open door policy. Most grievance consultation decisions are responded to promptly. Training is planned yearly based regarding to the demands, results of the training needs analysis and standards to be observed. Corporate and departmental (Environment, Health & Safety, Quality Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-28 Assurance, Quality Control, Project Control, Human Resources) trainings are scheduled and budgeted for 2013 & 2014 as shown in Table 12-29 below: Table 12-29 ICA Employee Training 2012-2014 Dept. # of Training # of Session Person x Hour HS 43 270 309,780 Environment 10 36 7,200 QA 16 53 10,080 QC 2 4 480 HR 25 25 1,976 Project Control 90 180 6,020 Child Labour, Forced Labour and Non-Employee Workers Based on the requirements of IFC PS2, ICA is subject to the relevant Turkish Laws (Law of Social Insurance, Labor Law) and carries these requirements into practice. 12.5 Potential Impacts of the Project The potential social impacts of the Project are diverse. The positive impacts of the project contribute to the national economy, and extend in time for many years. However, there are some negative social impacts as well. Therefore, it is important to understand the meaning of social impact and what kind of impact will be experienced by local communities in the project area. This section of the report provides social impacts associated with the construction and operation of the Project. Although the project area is not homogenous in terms of social and economic conditions, majority of impacts might be applied the whole Project area. However, there are some site specific impacts that need to be analyzed differently. In this report site-specific potential impacts cannot be analyzed deeply because necessary data are not available for the research team. 12.5.1 Construction Phase Demographic Impacts It is considered that construction or operation of the project may affect the demographic structure of local communities. Indirectly results of the development activities might affect population growth. It is predicted that the following demographic processes will take place: In-migration: People from other areas will move to the area in search of new opportunities. Presence of temporary workers: There will be a short-term influx of construction workers during the construction phase of the project. Another important factor to consider is that in Turkey, with its high levels of unemployment, any new project will lead to an influx of people to the area. It is therefore most likely that the area will experience an influx of people looking for jobs and new opportunities. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-29 Young population: Especially population at working age, can become much easily part of any potential population movement. In brief, the need for unskilled or semi-skilled labor force increases the possibility of employment, and thus, leads to in-migration. Increase in population: Due to the arrival of workers from outside near to the settlements close to major and minor camp sites, total population in these settlements will increase, even temporarily. Change in population structure in favor of male ratio: This is the potential increase in male population as a result of in-migration for seeking a job. It is assumed that male immigration will be temporary. Positive Impacts Employment opportunities: The work will be a source of manual labour employment for the nearby area. This should be particularly helpful to unskilled persons as at least some of them should be able to find work. Diversification of economic activities: The construction phase also will stimulate the economic activity of the adjacent communities near the highway and the services that these communities provide. Negative Impacts Change in population structure in favor of male ratio: This impact is evaluated as negative on the local community because it may bring about an adverse cultural impact on rural women’s daily life. That is to say, social integration of new male comers who are young and single with local communities might lead to increase in oppression of the family or community over women. Economic Impacts Impacts on Employment: It is currently estimated that approximately 7200-7500 people will be employed during peak construction periods (approximately 3 years from 2013 to 2016) for the construction of the Project and in management of the construction camps and sites. The Project is likely to require around 300 support staff and engineers and 1500 unskilled workers. This includes a combination of skilled, semi- skilled and unskilled workers. Approximately 1000 or 500 workers will be employed at the potential construction camps at peak periods in the bridge and motorway construction process. Estimated employment opportunities in the construction camps are given in Table 12-30: Likely start and end dates for each section are currently not known. Table 12-30. Estimated Employment Numbers Construction camps Workers Odayeri 1,000 Garipçe 1,000 Poyraz 500 Hüseyinli 500 TOTAL 3,000 Unskilled workers will probably be hired for shorter periods as construction passes through their area. It is currently estimated that local people should be able to fill a proportion of these jobs. This will be dependent upon whether a suitable number of local people are found to possess the necessary skills for certain jobs. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-30 Positive impacts Provide job opportunities for many people Negative impacts There are a number of potential negative impacts related with the employment of local people during the construction period. These potential impacts can be summarized as follows; Other family members such as children and women may take over work (especially agricultural work) during the construction period. Another important negative impact is related with wage levels that could potentially be pushed up where there is a shortage of labor, making for example the contracting of seasonal cultivators too expensive for local landowners. Impacts on Business Opportunities, Trade and Accommodation: The project will provide direct service opportunities for companies at the national and regional level, and also to some extent for communities along the route. The types of local contracts that are anticipated during construction and operation phase are shown in Table 12-31 below. A large proportion of these services are most appropriate for the construction camps. In addition there will be secondary employment and local development of small supporting businesses. Table 12-31 Goods and Services with Potential to be Procured Locally Business Opportunities Goods and Services Communication Telephone, satellite, internet, cable TV. Accommodation and related Apartments, hotels, motels, restaurants, dry-cleaning, taxi, services laundry. Construction Building trades, building materials and services, crane services, heating, ventilation, on-site safety services. Fuel and fuel storage Diesel, gasoline, grease, lubricate oil, anti-freeze and chemicals. Logistic Safety equipment, materials management, freight transport, vehicle sales, rentals, repairs and service. Office Janitorial service, Office supplies, furniture, computers and other equipments, accounting, bookkeeping, banking services. Remote site services Camps, camp catering, camp supplies, retail and wholesale grocery supply, water delivery, sewage treatment, snow removal and garbage disposal, security services. Safety and medical Emergency, medical facilities, ambulance, dentistry, optometry and prescription of drugs, occupational health services. Source: Adapted from Imperial Oil (2004) The proposed construction period would result in significant short-term construction employment. This would result in a significant increase in the demand for workforce accommodation. Various forms will be possible including rental of existing vacant housing in provinces, districts or villages. Hotel/motel accommodation would be highly desirable; with occupancy levels likely to significantly increase, particularly in off season/winter months. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-31 It is expected that with such short-term employment there would be investment in additional restaurant/bar/entertainment facilities. Moreover, during construction, the impact of construction salaries on the local area economy is expected to be significant. Expenditures on food, entertainment, clothes, health services, motor vehicles, air travel would generate significant additional retailing and services income, employment and investment stimulus. Positive impacts Diversification of economic activities. Negative impacts The major negative impacts would be associated with accommodating the construction workforce, particularly, the impact of the increased demand on housing availability and rentals in the region, which would be expected to rise. This would affect low-income households most significantly. Impact on House and Land Values: While a review of the likely impacts of the highway project on house land prices in the area indicated that there may be a change in sale prices or ―salability‖ of land, this factor represents a capital item, which it was not possible to quantify. Thus, this possible impact was not incorporated into the impact analysis. However, it is possible to say that impact on local house prices and land prices in the area of influence of the project are expected to be positive (increase). Land Expropriation: It is known that the project requires temporary and permanent acquisition of lands. Permanent loss includes the transfer of legal title from the original owners to the Project. The landowners cannot use the lands, that is, a lifetime of permanent restriction in land use. Based on the existing information, permanent acquisition of lands and houses will be required for the project. The Table 12-32 show the amount expropriated land and type required for the Project. Table 12-32 Type and Amount of Land Type of land Amount of expropriated area (m2) % Private real estate 2,422,268.96 7.18% Corporate real estate 145,922.58 0.43% Disputed land 79,391.17 0.24% 2B land 174,557.43 0.52% Forest area 26,725,744.25 79.21% Treasury 3,015,727.20 8.94% Parking areas 1,176,668.85 3.49% Total 33,740,280.45 100.00% Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-32 When the existing social and economic conditions of the people living in the project area are taken into consideration, the land use is very important for the households. The Social Baseline Assessment Report shows that approximately 73% of respondents use state owned lands for agricultural production. It is important to note that often these respondents do not have an official title deed. It is possible to say that there will be unavoidable disruption due to the use of agricultural land. Since some of the residents rely on the land for subsistence, their educational level is low and there is generally high level of unemployment rate in Turkey, temporary or permanent loss of the agricultural land may cause major potential impacts on the villagers. Some plots in all settlements/villages will be affected but certain areas are impacted significantly more than others. The number of affected people and the number of affected plots vary from settlement to settlement. Detail data are needed about the distribution in number of affected plots across all involved settlements. Some settlements may have high number of affected plots while there are some settlements with relatively fewer plots affected. The number of owners who will have to be compensated per plot should be taken into consideration. In some situations more than one person may use the same plots. In other words, the number of owners is not identical with the number of households. Particularly in rural areas several person may have title deeds for the same plot. Based on the existing data it is not possible to give exact numbers of the affected plots. The Project’s impacts on plots owned by single persons will be greater in terms of lost income per owner. In addition, the impacts of the Project on multiple owners may be less in income lost but will also be less in individual compensation received. Detail analyze is necessary about the following points: Project Affected Plots and Owners Project Impacts on Types of Land: Publicly Owned Lands and Private Ownership Number of Privately Owned Plots by settlements The status of women should be taken into consideration. Although women and men have equal rights to land under civil law, women cannot use their right because of traditional values and norms. In this reason the percentage of women land owner will be smaller. Other land related impacts can be summarized as follows: Land Affected by Construction Camps Lands for construction camps will not be expropriated; rather, they will be rented from landowners. Agreement on compensation will be reached with landowners through negotiations Impacts on Grazing Land and Pasture: There may be some impacts on State or community owned pastures and privately owned grazing lands. There will be disruption to livestock activity during construction and potentially causes loss of income. Impacts on Irrigation Systems: Some irrigation canals or system can be affected by the construction of the Project. Loss of Trees / Perennial Crops: The project may have some impacts on trees/perennial crop. Loss of Annual / Seasonal Crops: Most of the private land subject to expropriation for the Project is under cultivation. Crop production will be interrupted. Injury to Livestock: The construction of the Project may potentially cause injury to livestock due to livestock falling into trenches, being injured by vehicles or eating dangerous wastes. Impacts on Forestland: The project has some impacts on forestland (see Environmental Impacts Assessment). Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-33 Negative impacts The main impacts of the Project related to land use can be categorized as follows: Loss of land for agricultural cultivation; Loss of grazing and pasture land; Reduced livelihoods or productivity loses; Loss of forest and, Reduced access to pastures and forests. Disruption of Local Infrastructure and Private Property: Based on the existing information, private houses and commercial infrastructure will be impacted by the construction of the bridge and highway. However, there is not data about this issue. The type and number of building will be affected by the Project are given in Table 12-33. It should be important to note that the number of buildings is based on a preliminary GIS assessment of a 500 m corridor. These numbers and places will need to be confirmed. Table 12-33 Affected Buildings Building Number Barn 7 Mosque 1 Factory 2 Ramshackle building 7 Building/houses in construction phase 288 Houses 3,749 Green house 1 Commercial buildings 18 Porch 23 Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-34 Legend Barn Mosque Factory Vegetable Glasshouse Commercial Bridge & C. Motorways Sphere Influence (500 m.) The Figure 12-12 Locations of Affected Buildings Detail analysis is necessary about the following points: Project affected houses and buildings Types of building: publicly owned lands and private ownership Number of privately owned houses Positive impacts The project will require the construction of new infrastructure and may require the enhancement of some existing infrastructure. Improvement to infrastructure, either temporary or permanent, will be beneficial for local communities. Negative impacts Disruption of Local Infrastructure and private property Community Relations: Socio-cultural processes are those that affect the culture of a society, that is, all aspects of the way that people live together. Some factors influence the daily life of the individuals and families, including attitudes, perceptions, family characteristics and friendship networks. These changes range from attitudes toward the policy to an alteration in family and friendship networks to perceptions of risk, health, and safety. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-35 There may be tensions/disputes between local resident and workers. The main reasons for tension are impacts of project activities, damage land/property, different cultural values, use of alcohol, gambling, communicable diseases, etc. It is obvious that good relations with local residents are essential to the success of the project during both construction and operational phases. Therefore, the construction company will try to establish good relations with local residents and avoid any disputes between project Contractors and local residents. The residents in settlement close to these camps expect additional project benefits. In the project area, main and temporary camps will be used to meet the requirements of the Project. Some of these camps will be operational throughout the construction period and will be used to house for non- local workers. Positive impacts The construction camp will stimulate the economic activities. Negative impacts There may be tension/dispute between local resident and workers. Difference in socio-cultural values may be source of conflict. Community Safety: During the construction phase, the project could affect amenity and lifestyle including air quality (i.e. dust, plant and vehicle pollutants), noise (on-site from plant and vehicles and off-site from vehicles), aesthetics or increases in traffic levels. Particularly children and livestock will be under risk and special consideration should be given to children and animals. At the same time open trenches and other excavations, structures or activities may causes accidents. Existing management and safety practices will be implemented during the construction and operation of the project. Community or passenger safety would not be affected by the construction phase of the project. During the construction phase, the project could affect amenity and lifestyle including air quality (i.e. dust, plant and vehicle pollutants), noise (on-site from plant and vehicles and off-site from vehicles), aesthetics or increases in traffic levels. Existing management and safety practices will be implemented during the construction and operation of the project. Community or passenger safety would not be affected by the construction phase of the project. Negative impacts Noise and dust: Emissions of dust and polluting particles are generally characterized as environmental impacts, but they have a social component too. Generation of excessive noise also has both an environmental and a social aspect. Environmental impact assessment may provide detail information about these impacts. Safety risk to people and livestock An increase in traffic. Resettlement: There is no data about this issue. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-36 12.5.2 Permanent and Operational Impact Impacts on North of Istanbul: It is expected that this impact will be revealed as a result of uncontrolled in-migration movement to the project region. This is a significant but, negative impact for the region in case of a potential lack of controlling mechanism and a settlement plan for the new comers. Therefore, impact of any unplanned settlement will last a long time and may be permanent. The master plan has not to let the city grow into the northern areas. However, it may be impossible to apply the master plan following the construction of the Project. With the construction of the third Bosphorus Bridge between Garipçe and Poyrazköy, the metropolis may find itself at risk of spilling over its borders and sprawling northbound into forest lands. The UCTEA rd Chamber of Urban Planners’ Report on the 3 Bridge Project (2010) claims that the project could push the metropolis over the edge and send it sprawling into forested areas. The Report indicates that ―The third bridge, which is planned to be erected on the North boundaries of Istanbul, threatens the only natural areas left in the city. These ecological areas at the north of the city will be deeply influenced by the urban sprawl and eventually the city residential areas will shift to the northern [Black] Sea shoreline.‖ The construction of the 3rd Bridge may cause unplanned urbanization and the development of the city will sprawl northbound into the forest areas. In general, transportation systems have two important effects: they can improve the public’s access to many forms of opportunity, but they can also result in problems related to greater traffic levels within or near a corridor area. Positive Impacts Improved traffic flow and improved local economy. Fuel savings for users of the improved road due to less congestion and travel times. Negative Impacts Unplanned urbanization; An increase in the speed of the vehicles on the highway; The increase of exhaust emissions as traffic increases, with adverse consequences on the respiratory health of the population; Increased noise levels as a result of the increase in speed of the vehicles. Demographic Impact: It is considered that construction or operation of the project may affect the demographic structure of local communities. Based on the previous experience of the first and second bridges, it is estimated that such growth will not involve the continuation of pre-existing trends. It is predicted that the following demographic processes may take place: The population of settlements in the Project area or in the vicinity of the new roads and/or the bridge may expand substantially. The spread towards the north of Istanbul may cause environmental degradation (forests, water basins and agriculture areas) in north of Istanbul. Economic Impacts: The number of workers during operation will be very limited. Operational activities of the Project will be limited to activities related to inspection and maintenance of the road and bridge. The project may generate some local business opportunities. There will be important spin-offs as demand rises for support industries and services. The major long-term impact will be felt through what is known as Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-37 the multiplier effect. As more jobs are created, as more money is invested, new businesses and services open up. 12.6 Residual Impacts The Project may have a negative influence on the north part of the city and project may have a significant negative impact on the protected natural environment and landscape. The potential negative impacts of the Project on the natural environment and urbanization process were evaluated. At the SIA level it would not be possible to eliminate these potential negative effects completely. 12.7 Mitigation The assessment tries to understand and minimize the negative impacts of the project and necessary mitigation measures will be taken into consideration. The purpose of adopting and/or employing mitigation measures is to remove, minimize and/or compensate for adverse effects to a reasonably feasible extent. Table 12-34 shows the suggested mitigation measures: Table 12-34 Mitigation Measures SOCIAL IMPACTS MITIGATION MEASURES Employment Construction Phase Job opportunities Recruitment / hiring of workers from the Project area by applying local and national recruitment policy with the contractor: How contractor will implement the job advertising and recruitment which is including; o Plan to advertise jobs in local newspapers o Consultation local employment authorities / agencies Methods by which information on local jobs needed, skills, application timing and locations are made available to communities and dissemination of information to local communities. Transparency of recruitment / hiring procedure: Interactions with local employment authorities to develop / create transparent lists of suitable qualified individuals from communities most affected by the project. Management of job expectations at both local and national levels: Process to be used to ensure that clear and specific details of the estimated number and duration of employment opportunities to Government, media, and other interested parties prior to and during the construction process. All contractors will comply with relevant requirements of the Labour issues International Labour Organization. The Contractor shall develop and implement a grievance mechanism for workers. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-38 SOCIAL IMPACTS MITIGATION MEASURES Construction phase Business opportunities The contractor is required to identify and pursue opportunities to procure of goods and services from the region Methods by which information on local goods/services needed, timing and locations be made available to communities for dissemination. Expropriation of Land and Houses Construction Phase Expropriation of private Preparation of detail Land Acquisition and Resettlement Plan. property (land, trees, Where acquisition cannot be avoided, carry out land acquisition and houses, etc.) resettlement in accordance with the laws and regulations of Turkey and World Bank/International Finance Corporation. Compensate in accordance with the compensation norms set out in the legislation and regulations of Turkey. Pay special attention to vulnerable and disadvantaged groups including those without formal title to land Monitor the full and effective implementation of the Resettlement Action Plan. Compensation will be paid for temporary acquisition of land. Owners/users will be compensated based on the discounted net income of temporarily acquired land. Loss of Trees / For the duration of construction, payments will be made for these Perennial Crops lands based on their discounted net income. Loss of Annual / Affected farmers will be compensated for the duration of Seasonal Crops construction (approximately 1 year) plus an additional year to allow for the proper reinstatement of land. Injury to Livestock Compensation for loss Operation Phase Land Use Inspection and maintenance Awareness of safety issues for settlements activities Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-39 SOCIAL IMPACTS MITIGATION MEASURES Impact on Community Relations Construction Phase Tension/dispute between Provide regular information on the progress of the project and local resident and workers works, Manage any disputes between the Contractors and local residents Respect for local people and customs An alcohol and drug policy Zero tolerance of illegal activities by construction personnel Cultural awareness training Problems with community Developing a Community Relation Program relations Safety and Risk Construction Phase Temporary increases in The Contractor shall develop a Road Safety Management Plan. This traffic flows plan shall include provision for education and awareness training for the workforce in relation to traffic/road safety The road must meet appropriate safety standards required by Turkish legislation, where appropriate the standards given in the IFC Guidelines for Toll Roads, particularly in relation to: o Installation and maintenance of signs, signals, markings and other devices used to regulate traffic. o The setting of speed limits appropriate to the road and traffic conditions. o Maintenance of the road to prevent mechanical failure of vehicles due to road conditions. o The use of real time warning systems with signage to warn drivers of congestion, accidents, adverse weather or road conditions. Open trench No access to open trench area for non-authorized personnel. Impact on Safety Risk for Local Community Operation Phase Temporary increases in Provide information about the traffic flow for local residents traffic flows Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-40 12.8 Summary Table 12-35 Social Impacts Summary Impact Definition Assessment Construction phase In-migration and presence of temporary workers in the project area: There may be Minor tension/dispute between local resident and workers. Difference in socio-cultural values adverse may be source of conflict. Change in population structure in favour of male ratio: This impact is evaluated as negative on the local community because it may bring about an adverse cultural impact on Negligible rural women’s daily life. Employment opportunities: The work will be a source of manual labour employment for the nearby area. This should be particularly helpful to unskilled persons as at least some of them should be able to find work. Moderate beneficial Diversification of economic activities: The construction phase also will stimulate the economic activity of the adjacent communities near the highway and the services that these communities provide. Land expropriation: the project requires temporary and permanent acquisition of lands including forest areas, private forests, 2B areas and agricultural areas. Some plots in all High adverse settlements/villages will be affected but certain areas are impacted significantly more than others. Total 33.740.280,45 m2 land will be required for the Project. Disruption of local infrastructure and private property: Private houses and commercial infrastructure will be impacted by the construction of the bridge and highway. However, High adverse the exact numbers of these houses and commercial building is not known by public. Minor Community safety: heavy traffic and dust, noise in the Project area. adverse Operation phase Impacts on North of Istanbul: The metropolis may find itself at risk of spilling over its Major borders and sprawling northbound into forest lands. These ecological areas at the north of adverse the city may be influenced by the urban sprawl. Uncontrolled in-migration: It is expected this impact to be revealed as a result of uncontrolled in-migration movement to the project region. This is significant but, negative High adverse impact for the region in case of a potential lack of controlling mechanism and a settlement plan for the new comers. High Improved traffic flow and improved local economy. beneficial An increase in the speed of the vehicles on the highway and the increase of exhaust Moderate emissions as traffic increases, with adverse consequences on the respiratory health of the adverse population in the project area. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-41 The ESIA identified the potential social impacts associated with the construction and the operation of the proposed Project. The social impact assessment (SIA) determined whether the proposed project has positive or adverse effects on individuals, households and institutions. It also explored the unintended consequences, whether positive or negative on the local people. The key objectives of the SIA were to: Identify existing social and economic condition of the households around the project area; Identify and assess potential project-related social impacts across the whole operational life cycle, from exploration through to decommissioning phases; Describe, where appropriate, the general mitigation measures that have been incorporated into the Project. A settlement questionnaire was issued villages to gather background information was gathered through discussion with headmen. These surveys mainly served for gathering information on the settlement as a whole. In addition, a household survey interview with households in the project area was conducted. The survey used the face-to-face interview method. The survey involved a formal visit to families and individual interviews with the adult member of the family using a standard questionnaire. The survey focused on a number of specific issues, including the main sources of livelihood, problems in the project area and attitudes towards the proposed project. The study was comprised four phases: pre-field studies, field implementation, coding and data entry, and data analysis. Secondary data sources were mainly based on government records including the population census and other relevant records of governmental institutions. Other, secondary, sources that were used included: geographical data (including maps), local government statistics, documentation from non-governmental organizations and community-based organizations and newspaper reports. The study found that the Project may have a negative influence on the north part of the city. and project may have a significant negative impact on the protected natural environment and landscape. The potential negative impacts of the Project on the natural environment and urbanization process were evaluated. At the SIA level, it was considered that it would not be possible to eliminate these potential negative effects completely. Significant adverse impacts during construction will relate to land expropriation issues and disruption of local resources and infrastructure. Beneficial impacts included employment opportunities and diversification of economic activities in the region. Significant adverse impacts during operation included: the potential for uncontrolled in-migration (linked to the increased urbanization of formerly forest and rural areas); and an increase in traffic with associated severance and pollution issues. Beneficial impacts including the overall improved traffic flow and enhancements to the local economy that this and other developments enabled by the Project would bring to the area. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 12-42 References Adams, W. 2000, The Social Impacts of Large Dams: Equity and Distribution Issues. Thematic Review I.1 prepared as an input to the World Commission on Dams, Cape Town. Fatma Dişli Zıbak, 2013, ―Third Bridge A Threat To Istanbul’s Future, Say Environmental Bodies‖, Today’s Zaman, 29 May 2013. Frankfort-Nachmias, C. and Nachmias, D. 1992, Research Methods in the Social Sciences. St. Martin Press, New York. Guardina, 2012, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/08/bosphorus-bridge-row-istanbul-turkey Imperial Oil (2004 ) http://www.limperiale.ca Reflections Turkey, The Ecological Threats Concerning the Third Bridge http://www.reflectionsturkey.com/?p=518 May 2012. Rappaport, R. A. 1994, ―Human Environment and the Notion of Impact‖ in Who Pays the Price? Socio- cultural Context of Environmental Crisis, Barbara Rose Johnston (ed.), Washington, D.C. & Covelo, California: Island Press. TÜİK, Adrese Dayalı Nüfus Kayıt Sistemi 2012, www.tuik.gov.tr Today’s Zaman, 2011, http://www.todayszaman.com/newsDetail _getNewsById. action?newsId= 236104 20 February 2011 UCTEA Chamber of Urban Planners, 2010, The 3rd Bridge Project Evaluation Report. U.S. Principles and Guidelines for Social Impact Assessment (2003) Interorganizational Committee on Principles and Guidelines for Social Impact Assessment (IOCPG). Vanclay F., 2003, "Social Impact Assessment", Environmental and Social Assessment of Large Dams, Working Paper of the World Commission on Dams. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-1 13.0 ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE 13.1 Introduction 13.1.1 Background This scoping study aims to provide an overall review of the archaeological assets on the North Marmara Motorway (including the 3rd Bridge over Bosphorus) Project route and proposed construction sites (Figure 13-1). The study was conducted pursuant to both legal requirements of the Republic of Turkey and the “Performance Standards of Social and Environmental Sustainability” of the International Finance Corporation (IFC) / World Bank Group (WBG). All studies are based on visual observations and literature review and do not cover marine archaeological sites and unknown or intangible cultural heritage. This archaeology section was prepared by REGIO Consultancy and Training Inc. The study area extends covers the 3rd Bridge over the Bosphorus and Northern Marmara Motorway Project as shown in Figure 13-1. The project area is located at Northern side of Istanbul in a densely forest highland area starting from Mahmutbey on the European side and extends to ReĢadiye in Asia. For the purposes of this study, the baseline survey area is defined along the route in a 200 m wide corridor. Figure 13-1 North Marmara Motorway (including the 3rd Bridge over the Bosphorus) Project Route. 13.1.2 Study Limitations The Northern Marmara Motorway mainly runs through the forestland known as Belgrad, Alemdag, Tasdelen, and Sultancifitligi Taslitepe Forests as shown in Figure 13-2. The area covered by the Istanbul province is very suitable for forest formations due its geographical, topographical and, climate characteristics and the soil type. In places where the project route does not crossing a forested areas, it Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-2 goes through areas heavily covered by shrubs (Figure 13.3). Because of the vegetation, it was not possible to conduct an intensive survey for observation of archaeological materials on the surface and identifying potential archaeological sites and their possible areas of expansion. Figure 13-2 Forest and woodland areas on the route Figure 13-3 Shrub Areas Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-3 In addition to forestland and shrubby zones, informal urbanisation due to fast population growth in Istanbul and the presence of a vast military zone negatively affected the scope of the study (Figure 13-4). Figure 13-4 Irregular Urbanization and Military Zones 13.2 Project Scope The project route, located in Istanbul's outer northern metropolitan area, will pass through three main residential areas which are BaĢakĢehir, Ümraniye, and Sultanbeyli. It will also cross fifteen vilages; IĢıklar, Odayeri, GümüĢdere, Uskumruköy, Demirci, Garipçe, Poyraz, Kaynarca, Alibahadır, PaĢamandıra, Öğümce, Ġshaklı, ReĢadiye, Alemdağ, PaĢaköy. The project area has been zoned into four sub sections in order to facilitate design, planning and assessment of the corridor. Sections 1 and 2 of the project are located at the European side while the rest is in Asia. The sections are: Section 1 - Mahmut Bey - Odayeri; Relatively high population in Mahmutbey -BaĢakĢehir region and dense forest area between BaĢakĢehir and Odayeri. Section 2 - Odayeri - Bridge; Densly forests, the only residential area is Uskumruköy. Section 3 - Bridge - PaĢaköy; Densly forests with a small residential population on semi-rural land. Section 4 - Çamlık - ReĢadiye; Relatively high population in Alemdağ and urban forests. 13.3 Methods This chapter starts with a reference to local and international standards and best practices followed during the studies. It then describes the methodology used and presents the findings of the desktop study and the field survey. 13.3.1 Legal Regulations and Standards In Turkey, movable and immovable cultural and natural assets are protected and should be conserved following the Law on Conservation of Cultural and Natural Assets numbered 2863, published in the Official Gazette numbered 18113 and dated July 23rd, 1983. According to this law, essential assets which are identified as cultural and natural heritage requiring legal protection are identified as follows: Natural and immovable assets dated from the 19th century and before; Any immovable cultural asset constructed after the end of 19th century but categorized as “an important asset which requires preservation” by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism; Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-4 Immovable cultural assets located within identified Protection Sites. In the legislation, Protection Sites are defined as ancient sites and city ruins which reflect the main social, economic or architectural characteristics of their era. Protection Sites can also be locations where fundamental historical events took place or areas containing considerable natural or cultural assets having natural or cultural features requiring preservation; Structures, buildings or places that have witnessed significant historical events during the Turkish Independence War or the foundation of the Turkish Republic, regardless of time and registration; and All dwellings and buildings that have been used by Mustafa Kemal ATATURK without considering their time of construction or registration. Within the scope of this law, the Ministry of Culture and Tourism is responsible to take decisions at the national level and to provide necessary legal actions in order to protect cultural and natural assets listed above. The Ministry also has power to make decisions regarding the use of land and project areas which have the potential to affect cultural or natural heritage. Generally, the implementation of the decisions and regulation determined by the Ministry are maintained by the local administrations. At the local level, Regional Boards for Conservation of Cultural and Natural Assets are responsible for registering and classifying the sites related to cultural and natural heritage, to inspect and make decisions about their use and to manage these sites located within their regional boundaries. According to the Law on Conservation of Cultural and Natural Assets numbered 2863, all the natural and cultural assets bearing the conditions requiring legal preservation are the property of the State. Therefore, regional boards have the power and the authority to provide necessary and legal measures for the conservation of sites and to approve or reject all activities such as construction, destruction, cut or excavation which are a potential threat to these sites located within their area of responsibility. In the current case, the Ġstanbul Regional Boards for Conservation of Cultural and Natural Assets are the only responsible bodies for taking decisions about the Northern Marmara Motorway Project In addition to the Law on Preservation of Cultural and Natural Assets, there are several Principle Decisions relevant to the protection and preservation of cultural and natural assets. First of all, the Principle Decision numbered 658 and dated November 5th, 1999 states that all archaeological sites need be classified and protected according to their significant features. In this respect, three main categories were determined as the 1st, 2nd and 3rd degree for the archaeological as follows: 1st Degree Archaeological Sites: Highest Level of protection is needed. All kinds of construction, excavation, modification activities are prohibited within the site. Any project activities need to be approved by the Museum Administration and by the head of the excavation. 2nd Degree Archaeological Sites: Moderate level of protection is needed. All construction or excavation activities have to be approved by the Conservation Boards. Working standards regarding the basic maintenance on existing structures will be set by the Conversation Boards. 3rd Degree Archaeological sites: Low level of protection is needed. For construction activities, working standards will be determined based on the site features and the final decision will be taken by the Conversation Board. All necessary mitigation measures to protect the sites should be taken into consideration. In addition to the above mentioned regulations, the following guidelines were taken into account during the study: International Finance Corporation-IFC, Performance Standard 8 Department for Transport UK, Design Manual For Roads and Bridges Part 2 HA 208/07 Cultural Heritage Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-5 13.3.2 Methods used in the Archaeological Studies The Archaeological Study conducted for the Motorway Project is composed of three phases. a) Pre- Field Work Study (Desktop Study) The archaeological publications on the area of interest were reviewed. Consequently, an academic background on the archaeological potential of the field was established. By establishing contacts with local museums and regional conservation boards, the list of formerly recorded areas of cultural assets were collected. In addition, previous reports on archaeological sites in the region were compiled and finally all known archaeological sites were located on the map. Desktop studies were completed before starting the archaeological field survey. Resources used during the desktop studies were: Academic Publications Historical maps Reports on previous Cultural Heritage Works and Field Survey Results Inventory Archives of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism. b) Field Walking Field walking was conducted on limited sections of the Northern Marmara Motorway route since the majority of the route is on forestland, shrubby areas or inhabited zones, where access was limited. A corridor of 200 m was surveyed. The field walking was conducted by two senior archaeologists1 having in- depth knowledge and experience on cultural heritage management in infrastructure construction projects. During the field walking, by taking into account the geological and archaeological characteristics of the region, visible archaeological traces on the surface (ceramic pieces, architectural remains and/or traces, tombs and/or their traces, mounds, tumuli, etc.) were observed, recorded and evaluated. The sections of the motorway studied by field walking is given in Table 13-1 below. Table 13-1. Sections on the project route where field walking was conducted Sections From To Field Walking Area (from kp. to kp.) Section 1 Mahmutbey Odayeri 0+000-9+000 66+500-68+100, 78+000-78+500 Section 2 Ġhsaniye Bridge 105+000-105+500, 107+000-107+500 Section 3 Bridge PaĢaköy 103+000-103+200, 98+500-99+000 96+000-96+500 117+300-130+435 Section 4 Çamlık, ReĢadiye Ümraniye 26,430 km. Total surveyed km. by “field walking” c) Extensive Survey A great part of the survey completed towards the identification of the archaeological and tangible cultural heritage sites, was carried out by extensive survey and spot checks along the project route encompassing the 200 m wide impact zone. Extensive Survey method is used where field walking was not possible due to obstacles like flood plains, private properties, agricultural lands, thickets and bushes and forested areas. In order to inspect the presence of archaeological assets, the perimeter of these areas was surveyed to observe geographical indications and to determine the possibility of archaeological assets that might be visible on the surface. Desktop study data were taken into consideration during the extensive survey and spot checks along the project route. 1 Gökhan MUSTAFAOĞLU Ph.D., H.Uğur DAĞ M.A. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-6 Subject to restrictions imposed by the above mentioned conditions, the kilometre points of the section evaluated by using extensive survey method and spot checks are given in Table 13-2 below: Table 13-2. Sections on the project route evaluated by extensive survey Extensive Survey Spot Check Sections From To Area Points (from kp. to kp.) 9+500-11+900 14+500-14+000 Section 1 Mahmutbey Odayeri 12+500 15+000-16+427 17+817-18+000 74+000 74+700 75+500 Section 2 Ġhsaniye Bridge 83+800-84+500 77+360 79+000 84+800 85+650 96+000-96+500 88+800 98+500-99+000 89+000 103+000-103+200 Section 3 Bridge 90+100 PaĢaköy 107+000-107+500 91+650 105+000-105+500 93+600 Section 4 ReĢadiye Çamlık, Ümraniye - - d) Prediction Model for Archaeological Potential The results have been used to inform the assessment of the potential impacts of the project on, as yet, unknown archaeology and to inform the development of mitigation plans for the Project. Therefore Annex I, describes a predictive model to assess the potential for discovery of archaeological findings during construction along the project route. A comprehensive archaeological survey has not been carried out in this stage due to time constraints and physical and geographical limitations such as vast forestland on the project route and its impact zones. The model has therefore been developed as a defensible basis on which to prioritize future investigations and effort. The model was developed using ESRI ArcGIS software for evaluating the project corridor and its impact area. Five parameters were taken into consideration during the modelling. These considered were: hydrology or proximity to water sources, slope of land, land classification (forest area, grassland, irrigated area etc.), proximity to ancient/rural roads and proximity to mountain bases. Each parameter were divided several sub-categories of information each with associated weighted values. Positive weighted values have a positive influence on the assessment of potential while negative weighted values have a negative influence. For example, within the land classification, “forest area” category has an assigned value of –2, fruit grove areas have an assigned value of +2. The model assumes that modern environmental conditions are similar to ancient conditions. After the description of parameters and sub-categories, the parameters (and associated sub-categories) were set to overlay one another. Where sub-categories from different parameters overlapped, the positive or negative weighted values were then summed together. In areas where many positive sub-categories overlapped, a very high-summed value was created. In areas where many negative sub-categories overlapped, a low-summed value was created. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-7 In the this model, the higher the summed value the more archaeological potential an area is considered to have; and the lower the summed value, the lower the archaeological potential. The predictive parameters, their sub-category and predictive weights corresponding to critical values are given in Table 13-3. Table 13-3. Predictive parameters and the weights as used in the modelling study. Predictive Parameters Predictive Sub-category Critical Value Predictive Weight Stream Order 1 750 m 2 Stream Order 2 1000 m 2 Stream Order 3 1000 m 1 Hydrology/ Proximity to Water Stream Order 4 1000 m 2 Stream Order 5 1500 m -1 Stream Order 6 1750 m -2 Lake/Sea Order 7 2 km 3 Slope 0-10o 0 Slope 10-90o -5 Patch Agriculture Yes 2 Olive Grove Yes 2 Arable Non-Irrigated Yes 2 Arable Irrigated Yes -2 Forest Area Yes -2 Land Classification Grasslands Yes -2 Barren Land Yes -2 Wetlands or Water Yes -4 Industry/Built Area Yes -4 City Area Yes -4 Proximity to wetlands 1 km 2 Proximity to rural and or ancient Proximity to Rural/Ancient Roads 1 km 2 roads Proximity to Mountain Base Proximity to mountain base 2 km 2 13.4 Baseline Conditions 13.4.1 Historical Background of İstanbul Ġstanbul is the largest city in Turkey, constituting the country's economic, cultural, and historical centre. With a population of approximately 13.6 million, the city forms one of the largest urban agglomerations in Europe and is among the largest cities in the world by population within city limits. Istanbul's vast area of 5,343 square kilometers (2,063 sq mi) is coterminous with Istanbul Province, of which the city is the administrative capital. Istanbul is a transcontinental city, straddling the Bosporus - one of the world's busiest waterways - in northwestern Turkey, between the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea to the north. Its commercial and historical centre lies in Europe, while a third of its population lives in Asia. From the prehistoric period to ancient Byzantion (Byzantium) The history of Istanbul goes back to 30,000years ago. The first traces of human culture were discovered in the excavations carried out in Yarımburgaz Cave on the banks of Küçükçekmece Lake. It is thought that Neolithic and Chalcolitic people had been living around the region. In the excavations made in various Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-8 periods, some instruments belonging to the Epi-paleolithic period were found within reach of Dudullu and a few instruments and materials belonging to the Middle and Upper Paleolithic Period have been found near Ağaçlı. It is estimated that starting from 5,000 B.C a concentrated settlement activity started in Çatalca, Dudullu, Ümraniye, Pendik, DavutpaĢa, Kilyos and Ambarlı, led by Kadıköy Fikirtepe. One of the earliest known settlement dates to 6,700 BC, discovered in 2008, during the construction works of the Yenikapı subway station and the Marmaray tunnel at the historic peninsula on the European side. Cape Moda in Chalcedon was the first location which the Greek settlers from Megara chose to colonize in 685 BC prior to colonizing Byzantion on the European side of the Bosphorus under the direction of King Byzas in 667 BC. Byzantion was established on the site of an ancient port settlement named Lygos, founded by Thracian tribes between the 13th and 11th centuries BC, along with the neighbouring Semistra of which Plinius had mentioned in his historical accounts. Only a few walls and substructures belonging to Lygos have survived to date, near the Seraglio Point (Turkish: Sarayburnu), where the famous Topkapı Palace now stands. During the period of Byzantion, the Acropolis used to stand where the Topkapı Palace stands today. After siding with Pescennius Niger against the victorious Septimius Severus the city was besieged by Rome and suffered extensive damage in AD 196. Byzantium (the latinised form of the original Byzantion) was rebuilt by the Roman Emperor Septimius Severus and quickly regained its previous prosperity, being temporarily renamed Augusta Antonina by the emperor, in honour of his son. Late Roman period and the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire The location of Byzantium attracted Constantine the Great in 324 after a prophetic dream was said to have identified the location of the city; but the true reason behind this prophecy was probably Constantine's final victory over Licinius at the Battle of Chrysopolis (Üsküdar) on the Bosphorus, on September 18, 324, which ended the civil war between the Roman Co-Emperors, and brought an end to the final vestiges of the Tetrarchy system, during which Nicomedia (present-day Ġzmit, 100 km east of Istanbul) was the most senior Roman capital city. Byzantium (now renamed as Nova Roma which eventually became Constantinopolis, i.e. The City of Constantine) was officially proclaimed the new capital of the Roman Empire in 330. Following the death of Theodosius I in 395 and the permanent partition of the Roman Empire between his two sons, Constantinople became the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire. The combination of imperialism and location would play an important role as the crossing point between two continents (Europe and Asia), and later as a magnet for Africa and others as well, in terms of commerce, culture, diplomacy, and strategy. It was the centre of the Greek world and for most of the Byzantine period, the largest city in Europe. Constantine‟s conversion to Christianity in 312, had set the Roman Empire on the path to Christianization, and in 381, during the reign of Theodosius I, the official state religion of the Roman Empire became Christianity, which turned Constantinople into a thriving religious centre. After the end of his reign in 337, Constantine declared his three sons as joint heirs of the Roman Empire in a system of co-emperorship. Unfortunately, the sons couldn‟t govern together peacefully and their war-ravaged rivalry split the empire on the north-south line along the Balkan Peninsula. The territory was officially split in 395 when Theodosius I (ruled, 379-395) died leaving his son Arcadius emperor of the eastern half of the empire and his other son Honorius emperor of the western half. Throughout the fifth century, the western half of the Roman Empire lost most of its power through decline in political, economic and social situations, the last western emperor being deposed by Germanic mercenaries in AD 476. The eastern half, however, was flourishing. According to historians this flourishing Eastern Roman Empire was then classified as the Byzantine Empire to distinguish it from the Roman Empire. This empire was distinctly Greek in culture, and became the centre of Greek Orthodox Christianity Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-9 after an earlier split with Rome, and was adorned with many magnificent churches, including Hagia Sophia, once the world's largest cathedral. The seat of the Patriarch of Constantinople, spiritual leader of the Eastern Orthodox Church, remains. Figure 13-4 Late Roman and Byzantine Settlements The most famous Byzantine emperor was Justinian (527-565). During his reign he extended the Byzantine Empire to its largest boundaries spreading from Palestine to the tip of Spain. His other achievements include the famous Hagia Sophia church and the organized law system called the Codex which was completed in 534. Overall, Justinian‟s reign was the greatest influence of the Byzantine Empire. Starting in the 600‟s warfare kept Constantinople‟s power alternating between decline and progression. Connections with Europe slowly began to weaken between the seventh-eighth centuries when the Byzantine and Roman churches disagreed on various subjects. For example, the distinguishing gap placed between the two churches involved the use of icons in the church. Icons, being images of Christian holy personalities such as Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary and the saints, to Byzantine Christians were more than representations they were believed to possess holy power that affected people‟s daily lives. While many Byzantines worshiped icons many others opposed them because they tested the authority of the emperor. Finally in 726, Emperor Leo III (ruled, 717-741) ordered all icons to be destroyed. The destruction of icons reorganized and reoriented the Byzantine rulers in imperial power. The fierce opposition to icons clashed with the pope‟s tolerance of images. The pope was unwilling to permit sacred images and icons to be destroyed and this caused eventual separation. Their separation caused hatred between the two churches and cooperation between the two was a struggle. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-10 From around the 800s to 1200 Constantinople developed complex relationships with an emerging and later the largest and most advanced state of that time in Europe - Kiev Rus. Constantinople played a significant role in the Kiev Rus development, culture, and politics. Many of the Kiev Princes were married to daughters of the Byzantine Emperors, and because of this connection Eastern Europe became Orthodox, after it was Christianized by Vladimir the Great of Kiev. However these relationships were not always friendly. Constantinople was sacked several times over those 400 years by Kiev Princes, forcing Constantinople to sign increasingly favourable treaties with Kiev, the texts of which were preserved in the Primary Chronicle and other historical documents. However, the Byzantine rulers constantly manipulated Kiev, Poland, Bulgaria, and other European Nations of that time, against each other. Around 1204 Constantinople began to decline in power. Following the failure of the Third Crusade, the subsequent Crusaders tried to capture the Holy City of Jerusalem in the Fourth Crusade; but this time their plan was to capture the Byzantine Empire as well. In 1204, Constantinople was captured and the treasures were ransacked. The Pope decried the sacking of Constantinople but ordered the crusaders to consolidate their gains in the city for a year. The crusaders chose Baldwin of Flanders to be the new Byzantine Emperor; he along with other princes and the Venetians divided the Empire amongst themselves; they never made it to Jerusalem. This new Latin Empire at Constantinople lasted until 1261, when the Byzantines under the command of Michael VIII Palaeologus recaptured the city and some outlying territory. After this period, Constantinople never regained its former glory. Rather than a thriving metropolis, Constantinople transformed into a collection of villages. The Ottoman Empire In 1453, Sultan Mehmed II "the Conqueror" entered Constantinople after a 53–day siege during which his cannon had torn a huge hole in the Walls of Theodosius II. Istanbul became the third capital of the Ottoman Empire. Suleiman the Magnificent's reign over the Ottoman Empire from 1520 to 1566 was a period of great artistic and architectural achievements. The famous architect Mimar Sinan designed many mosques and other grand buildings in the city, while Ottoman arts of ceramics and calligraphy also flourished. Many tekkes survive to this day; some in the form of mosques while others have become museums such as the Cerrahi Tekke and the Sünbül Efendi and Ramazan Efendi mosques and shrines in Fatih, the Galata Mevlevihanesi in Beyoğlu, the Yahya Efendi tekke in BeĢiktaĢ, and the BektaĢi Tekke in Kadıköy, which now serves Alevi Muslims as a cemevi. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-11 13.4.2 Archaeological Potential of the Project Area The literature indicates that many historic aqueducts are located in the forest areas of Istanbul and they are covered by vegetation. A study reveals many architectural structures located in the region (see Figure 13-5). Figure 13-5. Anastasian Wall and Byzantine Water System Throughout the ages, geological formation of the region where Istanbul is located has been transformed into a plateau with smoothed topography. The valleys, plains and areas with gentle slopes are very suitable for settlements and therefore impose risks for the motorway project in terms of encountering archaeological sites during construction. The areas where the bridge pillars are to be constructed also carry a high potential in terms of historical assets. In the literature, many historical settlements are mentioned to exist in the area but they are yet to be discovered. Figure 13-4 above indicates the location of historical settlements identified by scientists which are located on the both banks of the Bosphorus. Among those is the Zeus Ourios temple which is supposed to be located on one of the hilltops between Anadolu Kavağı and Poyrazköy. The temple was believed to have assisted sailors by providing favourable winds. Existence of a Kybele temple is also mentioned in the literature. An altar dedicated to Kybele was discovered in excavations at Yenikapi. Historical records indicate the existence of an ancient bridge built by Persian King Dareios I in 512 BC during his fight with Iskits. Its location is believed to be between Anadolu Feneri and Rumeli Feneri. Ancient resources also mention the existence of a religious region dedicated to the God Hermes in the area where Rumeli Hisari is currently located. A stele with inscriptions dedication to the God of Air which also bears names Zeus Kinbelaios Brontaios was located in Haraçcı village near Eyüp. Discovery of another stele with inscriptions and reliefs dedicated to Zeus in the same location supports the existence of a religous area around Haraçcı vilage. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-12 In light of the information given above, it is inevitable that historical or archaeological assets in Istanbul which has played a key role in history will be encountered. However, due to informal urbanisation and industrialisation it was not possible to construct an archaeological inventory of the region. The information at hand is restricted with accessible areas and the north of Istanbul province still needs to be studied. 13.5 Potential Impacts Desktop studies constitute an important part of the study for the identification of potential archaeological and immovable cultural assets that are located within the project route and its impact area. During the desktop studies all known archaeological or immovable cultural assets so far identified within the vicinity of the project route were reviewed. As the result of the studies, 9 archaeological sites on the route and its impact zone or in the vicinity (not more than 15 km form the route axis) were identified in the inventory records of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism or as mentioned in scientific publications. The data collected in desktops studies are given in Appendix II Coincidence of the motorway project with extensive forestlands and densely vegetated areas makes it necessary to develop new strategies for mitigation. Due to reasons stated in Section 13.3.2, it is highly likely that architectural structures with historical value will be encountered during the construction activities within the sections located at the European side. Figure 13-7 Architectural structures observed during the field study On the Anatolian side, the existence of remains such as Bizansköy has been recorded. These settlements were established at distant locations which can be easily defended rather than on the trade routes and they are fully integrated with natural topography. Therefore, on the Anatolian side, it is also likely that archaeological sites which are not yet registered in the inventory of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism will be uncovered. The pictures above which were taken during the field study away from the construction area supports the possibility of encountering unexpected historical sites during construction activities. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-13 During the field walkover conducted on the section with total length of 26.430 km due to inconvenient field conditions, three important points were identified. Two of these potential archaeological sites have been identified on the project route and its impact area (Appendix II), and one was located about 1.5 km off the motorway route. The existence of archaeological assets on the forestland and shrub areas was evaluated by conducting extensive surveys and spot checks. As mentioned above, a great percentage of the area was not suitable for field walking and the scientific documents at hand were not sufficient to make a conclusion. Therefore, “Archaeological Potential Modelling” was used for preliminary assessment of the area in question. The outcome of the modelling study constructed on 5 km blocks is presented in Appendix I. The model is constructed over 5 km blocks which covers the construction corridor and its impact area and uses the average value of parameters mentioned in Table 13-3 above. In order to verify the outcomes of the model, field walking was conducted on the section between 77-82 km points which was indicated to carry “high potential”. Ceramic tiles belonging to Byzantine period and possible architectural remains were observed in Mandiratepe located in this section (Annex III) which supports the soundness of the model that has been constructed. All data collected on the field were analysed on a GIS platform and the potential archaeological sites and their interaction with the construction corridor is presented below. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-14 Area of Archaeological Density Figure 13-7 Archaeological Potential at Mandıratepe Site Name: Mandıratepe Location: Sarıyer/Uskumruköy KP: 78+500 Importance / Sensitivity of Archaeological Assets: Receptor Importance/ Sensitivity Ranking Explanations-Examples Medium C Registered or unregistered assets that may regionally important or contribute to regional research objectives Poor preservation and poor survival of contextual associations Ranking of Magnitude of Predicted Impacts on Archaeological Heritage Assets: Receptor Importance/ Sensitivity Ranking Explanations-Examples Minor 3 Changes to key archaeological materials such that the asset is slightly altered (Guide: 10-30% surviving deposits damaged or destroyed) Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-15 Area of Archaeological Density Figure 13-8 Archaeological Potential at Garipçe Site Name: Garipçe Location: İstanbul/Kilyos-Garipçe KP: 87+000 Importance / Sensitivity of Archaeological Assets: Receptor Importance/ Sensitivity Ranking Explanations-Examples Medium C Registered or unregistered assets that may regionally be important or contribute to regional research objectives Poor preservation and poor survival of contextual associations Ranking of Magnitude of Predicted Impacts on Archaeological Heritage Assets: Receptor Importance/ Sensitivity Ranking Explanations-Examples No Change 1 No material change to the site or feature Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-16 Area of Archaeologica l Density Area of Archaeological Density Figure 13-9 Archaeological Potential at Zirvetepe Site Name: Zirvetepe Location: Sultanbeyli /Battalgazi Mahallesi KP: 125+500 Importance / Sensitivity of Archaeological Assets: Receptor Importance/ Sensitivity Ranking Explanations-Examples Medium C Registered or unregistered assets that may regionally be important or contribute to regional research objectives Poor preservation and poor survival of contextual associations Ranking of Magnitude of Predicted Impacts on Archaeological Heritage Assets: Receptor Importance/ Sensitivity Ranking Explanations-Examples No Change 1 No material change to the site or feature Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-17 13.6 Mitigation Measures The mitigation measures to be followed for the minimisation of impact on historical or cultural assets are presented for the two phases of the project. 13.6.1 Pre Construction Period The protection of immovable cultural assets and their management are under the responsibility of Regional Boards for Conservation of Cultural and Natural Assets. There are 7 Boards responsible for the province of Istanbul (please see, Table 13-4). Table 13-4. Regional Boards for Conservation of Cultural and Natural Assets in Istanbul and their areas of responsibility. No Conservation Board Districts of Responsibility Related Districts in the Project Impact Area 1 Istanbul Regional Board for GaziosmanpaĢa, Silivri, GaziosmanpaĢa Conservation of Cultural and Avcılar, Çatalca, Natural Assets No I Büyükçekmece 2 Istanbul Regional Board for Beyoğlu, Eyüp, ġiĢli, Eyüp Conservation of Cultural and Kâğıthane Natural Assets No II 3 Istanbul Regional Board for BeĢiktaĢ, Sarıyer, Sarıyer Conservation of Cultural and Natural Assets No III 4 Istanbul Regional Board for Eminönü, Fatih, Zeytinburnu - Conservation of Cultural and Natural Assets No IV 5 Istanbul Regional Board for Kadıköy, Maltepe, Sultanbeyli, Conservation of Cultural and Ümraniye, Çekmeköy, Çekmeköy, Natural Assets No V Sancaktepe, Pendik, Kartal, Sancaktepe, Sultanbeyli, Ümraniye. Tuzla, Adalar 6 Istanbul Regional Board for ġile, Beykoz, Üsküdar Beykoz Conservation of Cultural and Natural Assets No VI 7 Istanbul Regional Board for Bağcılar, Bahçelievler, BaĢakĢehir Conservation of Cultural and Bakırköy, BaĢakĢehir, Natural Assets No VII BayrampaĢa, Esenler, Güngören, Küçükçekmece During the preparation phase of the survey it was noticed that the Contractor had contacted Conservation Boards No II, III, IV and VI while it was not possible for them consult other Regional Boards. It is absolutely necessary to obtain official opinions of all Regional Boards responsible for the districts where the project route and its impact area cross. Additionally, many architectural structures and archaeological immovable assets on the project route and its impact areas might have remained under the earth or be covered by vegetation. Therefore, on the forestlands and shrub areas of the project zone a systematic field surveying should be carried out by experienced archaeological teams after the deforestation phase of the project route. Depending on the outcomes of the survey, archaeological test trenches or salvage excavations may be necessary for further investigation or for conservation of archaeological assets. On the areas where the Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-18 thickness of the earth filling is high, it may be necessary to use archaeo-geophysical methods for identifying potential archaeological remains. The field survey should cover all of the Construction Impact Area, which should not only be the motorway construction corridor and its surroundings, but also in and around the stone and sand quarries from where filling material will be provided, the areas where access roads will be built or modified etc., which are all defined as the construction impact area. Considering the archaeological potential of the region, the whole of the impact areas should be subject to detailed archaeological survey. Furthermore, procedures should be developed for Building Archaeological Watching Brief Teams and Training should be delivered to all staff involved in construction activities. These are: All procedures describing how to preserve, record, extract, and move finding/s to the relevant museum, in case of encountering an archaeological finding during construction works (chance find) should be prepared by experienced archaeological experts. Independent Archaeological Watching Brief Teams that will work in harmony with the construction teams should be mobilized in order to minimize damage of construction works on cultural assets. These teams should definitely monitor all the physical construction works like excavation, cut and fill, earth removal and drilling. Before the start of the construction works, all construction teams should be trained about archaeological potential of the project and the surrounding area, obligations on preservation of cultural assets, and procedures to follow in case of encountering any objects. 13.6.2 During Construction Archaeological Watching Brief Teams mobilized before the construction phase should monitor the works on a daily basis, by accompanying the construction machinery. Daily monitoring results should be reported on a template created specifically for the project and these reports should be provided to project executives on regular basis. Archaeological Monitoring (Watching Brief) should be performed on potential zones throughout the project route and its surroundings by archaeologists, who should be affiliated to the consultant firm mandated by the project for the construction period or included in the project management team and subcontractors. Where an archaeological find is made during construction works, the archaeological watching brief expert should have the power to stop the work following the procedures and facilitate all necessary works for preservation or unearthing, and transportation to the relevant museum. Depending on the request of the museum administration, it is important that all reporting studies would be realized by Archaeological Watching Brief Teams. If there is information for archaeological potential in a specific area, briefings on the sensitivity of the subject pertinent to these sites shall be organized for all construction teams a few days before the construction work and the preparations necessary for construction activities should be done by using suitable equipment (toothless bucket machinery, etc). The daily fieldwork form, which must be prepared before the commencement of the construction works, monitoring report and other forms relevant to the documentation of the sensitive areas shall be filled in by expert archaeologist/s during all activities. Moreover, during the archaeological monitoring works every expert field archaeologist shall carry out his/her duty in the field by using suitable equipment. Every expert field archaeologist shall as a minimum be equipped with one camera, measurement tools, scrapper, brush, hoe, etc, and the necessary report forms shall also be available for the initial registrations in case of finding archaeological evidences. Other facilities such as storage containers, packing, cleaning and preservation materials, secure storage as well as appropriate transportation should be provided. The planned mitigation for cultural heritage impacts of the Motorway consists of several interrelated components: Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-19 Appointment of an Archaeological Consultant Team to work with the Project team and the cultural heritage authorities to supervise implementation of the mitigation strategy during the next stages of the Project; Further investigation of known sites and areas of high and medium archaeological potential to support avoidance and minimization of impacts through detailed design development; Mitigation of impacts to known resources by avoiding or minimizing direct and indirect impacts during detailed project design; Operation of a Chance Find Programme to address construction phase heritage impacts in accordance with Turkish law and international norms and best practices. 13.7 Result and Recommendations A field scoping study and field survey on the evaluation of archaeological were conducted in May 2013. The field walkover was undertaken in certain sections of the project route for a total of 26.43 km and three areas containing archaeological features were observed. In addition to these observations, registers of inventory of two Regional Boards (No II, III, IV and VI) were obtained while records of other Boards were not available during the study. In addition to these observations, registers of inventory of two Regional Boards (No III and VI) were obtained while records of other Boards were not available during the study. The literature and the inventory records of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism refer to many archaeological and historical sites in the regions where the construction activities will be carried out. Since it was not possible to walk the entire construction area in the time available, a predictive model was built and regions bearing archaeological potential were identified. The field walkover was conducted in limited sections as vegetation allowed, for the purpose of verification of the existence of historical sites in the areas, as indicated to be carrying archaeological potential by the predictive model. Two of the sites identified were within the construction corridor and its impact area while one other was about 1.5 km away from the project route. Based on the findings described above, it is recommended that an intensive field survey is conducted after deforestation of the construction areas in coordination with the relevant Regional Boards of Conservation. It is further recommended that, considering the archaeological potential of the region, it is imperative that all activities involving physical intervention should be conducted under the observation of experienced archaeologists. It is strongly recommended that all these activities are be conducted in compliance with the Cultural Heritage Management Plan and Chance Find Procedures to be adopted by the constructor. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-20 REFERENCES Algan,O., M.Özdoğan vd. (2007) “Antik Theodosius Yenikapı Limanı‟nın Jeoarkeolojik önemi: Geç- Holosen ortam değiĢimleri ve Ġstanbul‟un son 10 bin yıllık kültürel tarihi”, Z. Kızıltan (yay.) Gün IĢığında: Ġstanbul‟un sekizbin yılı. Marmaray, Metro ve Sultanahmet kazıları, Vehbi Koç Vakfı Yayını, Ġstanbul, s. 242-245. Akyürek,.E. (2008) “Palamutdüzü: A Medieval Byzantine Village Settlement in the Bey Mountains”, ADALYA, XI (2008), 295–319. Baynes, Norman H. (1949). In Baynes, Norman H.; Moss, Henry S. L. B. Byzantium: An Introduction to East Roman Civilization. Oxford, Eng.: Clarendon Press. Bayliss, R. and Crow, J. (2000). "The fortifications and water supply systems of Constantinople", Cantor, Norman F. (1994). Civilization of the Middle Ages. New York: Harper Collins. Crow, J. and Ricci, A. (1997a). “Investigating the hinterland of Constantinople: interim report on the Anastasian Long Wall”, Journal of Roman Archaeology 10, 253-288. Crow J. and Bayliss R. 2004 “Reflections on the water supply of Byzantine Istanbul”, in International Byzantine and Ottoman Symposium, 550th Anniversary of Istanbul University 2003 ed S. Atasoy Crow J. and Bayliss R. 2005 “Water for the Queen of Cities: a review of recent research in the Byzantine and early Ottoman water supply of Constantinople”, Basilissa 1 (2005) Crow J., Bardill J and Bayliss R. (2008). „The Water Supply of Byzantine Constantinople', JRS Monograph 11 Crow J and Turner S, (2009). „Silivri and the Thracian hinterland of Istanbul: an historic landscape‟, Anatolian Studies Gregory, Timothy E. (2010). A History of Byzantium. Oxford, Eng.: John Wiley and Sons. Özdoğan,M. (1994). “The Second Millennium of the Marmara Region: The Perspective of a Prehistorian on a Controversial Historical Issue”, Istanbuler Mitteilungen 43, s. 151-163. Özdoğan,M. (1982). “Doğu Marmara ve Trakya Bölgesi AraĢtırmaları” Türk Arkeoloji Dergisi XXVI, s. 37- 49. Özdoğan, M. (2007). “Marmara Bölgesi Neolitik Çağ Kültürleri”, M. Özdoğan ve N. BaĢgelen (yay.) Anadolu‟da Uygarlığın DoğuĢu ve Avrupa‟ya Yayılımı. Türkiye‟de Neolitik Dönem: Yeni Kazılar, Yeni Bulgular, Arkeoloji ve Sanat Yayınları, Ġstanbul, s. 401-426 (metin), 405-430 (levhalar). Özdoğan,M., Y,Miyake, N.ÖzbaĢaran-Dede (1991). " An Interim Report on the Excavations at Yarımburgaz and Toptepe in Eastern Thrace", Anatolica XVII, s. 59-121. Leusen, M., H., Kamermans (eds). (2005). “Predictive Modelling for Archaeological Heritage Management: A research agenda”. Leusen, M., H., Kamermans and P. Verhagen (2010). Archaeological Prediction and Risk Management, Leiden University Press, Leiden, Wescott, L., J. Brandon (2000). Practical Applications of GIS for Archaeologists: A Predictive Modelling Toolkit, Taylor and Francis, London Talbert R.J.A (Ed). (2000) Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World. Princeton University Press. Final ESIA 2 August 2013 AECOM Final Report Environment 13-21 WEB BASED REFERENCES http://tayproject.org/search.html http://tayproject.org/Bizanssearch.html http://tayproject.org/Neosearch.html http://tayproject.org/DCsearch.html http://tayproject.org/ITCsearch.html http://www.kultur.gov.tr/EN,33069/the-topography-of-istanbul.html http://www.istanbulkulturenvanteri.gov.tr http://www.kultur.gov.tr/ http://www.istanbul.gov.tr/ http://www.shc.ed.ac.uk/projects/longwalls/Water http://www.arkeologlardernegist.org/istanbul1.php Final ESIA 2 August 2013