Greenpark Energy Ltd
Proposed Coal Bed Methane (CBM) Gas Extraction at Holehouse Plantation
Environmental Statement
The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 1999
Prepared by: Reviewed by: Chris Gray David Harper
First Floor Norham House 15 Walkergate Berwick-upon-Tweed Northumberland TD15 1DS
Tel: 01289 334590 Fax: 01289 332691 Email [email protected]
Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
STATUS: FINAL
DATE: 21 SEPTEMBER 2009
PROJECT MANAGER:
PROJECT REVIEWER:
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Contents
1. Executive Summary ...... 1-1
2. Introduction ...... 2-1
2.1 Background ...... 2-1 2.2 The Need for Further Indigenous Energy Sources ...... 2-1 2.3 The Benefits of Extracting Coal Bed Methane...... 2-2 2.4 Overview of the proposed development in the Canonbie area .....2-2 2.5 Environmental Impact Assessment...... 2-2 2.6 Environmental Statement Structure ...... 2-3
3. Planning Policy Context ...... 3-1
4. Site Selection, Description and Proposed Development ...... 4-1
4.1 Site Selection ...... 4-1 4.2 Site Description ...... 4-1 4.3 Proposed Development ...... 4-1
5. Landscape and Visual ...... 5-1
5.1 Summary ...... 5-1 5.2 Introduction ...... 5-2 5.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines ...... 5-2 5.4 Methodology ...... 5-2 5.5 Baseline Conditions ...... 5-7 5.6 Impact Assessment ...... 5-9 5.7 Mitigation ...... 5-20 5.8 Statement of Significance ...... 5-21
6. Ecology ...... 6-1
6.1 Summary ...... 6-1 6.2 Introduction ...... 6-1 6.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines ...... 6-1 6.4 Methodology ...... 6-2 6.5 Baseline Conditions ...... 6-8 6.6 Impact Assessment ...... 6-14
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
6.7 Mitigation ...... 6-15 6.8 Statement of Significance ...... 6-16
7. Hydrology ...... 7-1
7.1 Summary ...... 7-1 7.2 Introduction ...... 7-1 7.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines ...... 7-2 7.4 Methodology ...... 7-2 7.5 Baseline Conditions ...... 7-10 7.6 Impact Assessment ...... 7-12 7.7 Mitigation ...... 7-14 7.8 Statement of Significance ...... 7-15
8. Hydrogeology and Land Contamination ...... 8-1
8.1 Summary ...... 8-1 8.2 Introduction ...... 8-1 8.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines ...... 8-2 8.4 Methodology ...... 8-2 8.5 Baseline Conditions ...... 8-9 8.6 Impact Assessment ...... 8-12 8.7 Mitigation ...... 8-16 8.8 Statement of Significance ...... 8-18
9. Noise and Vibration ...... 9-1
9.1 Summary ...... 9-1 9.2 Introduction ...... 9-1 9.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines ...... 9-2 9.4 Methodology ...... 9-7 9.5 Baseline Conditions ...... 9-7 9.6 Impact Assessment ...... 9-10 9.7 Mitigation ...... 9-14 9.8 Statement of Significance ...... 9-16
10. Transport and Traffic ...... 10-1
10.1 Summary ...... 10-1 10.2 Introduction ...... 10-1 10.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines ...... 10-2 10.4 Methodology ...... 10-2 10.5 Baseline Conditions ...... 10-2 10.6 Impact Assessment ...... 10-4 10.7 Mitigation ...... 10-4
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
10.8 Statement of Significance ...... 10-5
11. Air Quality ...... 11-1
11.1 Summary ...... 11-1 11.2 Introduction ...... 11-1 11.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines ...... 11-2 11.4 Methodology ...... 11-5 11.5 Baseline Conditions ...... 11-9 11.6 Impact Assessment ...... 11-12 11.7 Mitigation ...... 11-15 11.8 Statement of Significance ...... 11-16
12. Archaeology/Cultural Heritage ...... 12-1
12.1 Summary ...... 12-1 12.2 Introduction ...... 12-1 12.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines ...... 12-2 12.4 Methodology ...... 12-2 12.5 Baseline Conditions ...... 12-8 12.6 Impact Assessment ...... 12-9 12.7 Mitigation ...... 12-9 12.8 Statement of Significance ...... 12-10
13. Socio-Economic Impacts ...... 13-1
13.1 Summary ...... 13-1 13.2 Introduction ...... 13-1 13.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines ...... 13-1 13.4 Methodology ...... 13-1 13.5 Baseline Conditions ...... 13-3 13.6 Impact Assessment ...... 13-7 13.7 Mitigation ...... 13-9 13.8 Statement of Significance ...... 13-9
14. Amenity Issues ...... 14-1
14.1 Summary ...... 14-1 14.2 Introduction ...... 14-1 14.3 Relevant Legislation, Policy and Guidance ...... 14-1 14.4 Methodology ...... 14-1 14.5 Base Conditions ...... 14-2 14.6 Impact Assessment ...... 14-5 14.7 Mitigation ...... 14-5 14.8 Statement of Significance ...... 14-5
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
15. Cumulative Impacts ...... 15-1
15.1 Summary ...... 15-1 15.2 Introduction ...... 15-1 15.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines ...... 15-1 15.4 Methodology ...... 15-1 15.5 Baseline Conditions ...... 15-2 15.6 Impact Assessment ...... 15-2 15.7 Mitigation ...... 15-2 15.8 Statement of Significance ...... 15-2
16. Overall Conclusion ...... 16-1
Appendix 1 – List of Abbreviations ...... 16-2 Appendix 2 – Landscape Character Areas...... 16-4 Appendix 3 – Ecology ...... 16-10 Appendix 4 – Hydrology ...... 16-13 Appendix 5 – Noise Definitions ...... 16-20 Appendix 6 – Archaeology HER Data ...... 16-21 Appendix 7 – Figures ...... 16-22
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
1. Executive Summary
Greenpark Energy Ltd (Greenpark) was established in 2003 to exploit methane from disused coal mines and generate electricity from it. The main aim of the Company now is to extract methane from unworked coal seams in order to export it directly into the National Grid’s Gas National Transmission System (NTS). The gas captured from unworked coal seams is called Coal Bed Methane or "CBM gas".
Greenpark has identified a site 0.25 km west of the route of the A7 trunk road and 0.78km south west of the village of Hollows (‘Holehouse Plantation’), which has the potential to produce CBM gas. The site is currently a commercial plantation of Sitka spruce which is now mature with a closed canopy.
The proposal is to drill boreholes down to a depth of up to 1000m and then along target coal seams.
Should CBM gas occur in sufficient quantities and quality, a CBM gas production hub would be established. A production hub is a site where CBM gas is extracted commercially. It would mainly be underground with an underground pipeline leading to the National Grid’s Gas NTS. It would last as long as the gas continues to flow which may be up to 15-20 years. Sometimes there is a need to extract water from the borehole. If necessary, water handling equipment would be placed within the site but would be no higher than 1.5 m high, therefore obscured by the perimeter timber post and rail fencing. Abstracted groundwater would be stored and removed by tanker.
An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has been undertaken to determine potential effects of the proposed development in terms of landscape, ecology, hydrology, hydrogeology, noise, traffic, air quality, archaeology and socioeconomic characteristics. The EIA covers potential impacts that might arise from the site preparation, drilling, production and capping and restoration phases. This is particularly relevant considering that the site lies within an Area of Great Landscape Value, designated by Dumfries & Galloway Council.
The findings revealed that there are no designations regarding ecology or archaeological interests at or adjacent to the site. No significant adverse impacts were identified in the studies relating to landscape, ecology, hydrology, hydrogeology, noise, traffic, air quality, archaeology, recreation or tourism.
The socio-economic assessment identified that the income provided to the owner of the land from this development will be a significant benefit with further benefits to any local construction contractors or suppliers. The socio-economic impact from this proposed CBM gas development at Holehouse Plantation is therefore assessed as significantly beneficial to the local area.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 1-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
2. Introduction
2.1 Background
Greenpark Energy Ltd (Greenpark) is a private company, formed in 2003 to exploit natural gas from disused coal mines known as Coal Mine Methane or “CMM gas”. More recently, the Company has concentrated on the exploitation of natural gas contained in unworked coal seams, which is known as Coal Bed Methane or “CBM gas”.
Activities to explore for and exploit CMM and CBM gas in the UK can only be carried out by holders of petroleum licences issued under the Petroleum Act 1998 by the UK Government’s Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC). As of 2008, Greenpark holds licences (more recently called Petroleum Exploration and Development Licenses, PEDLs) covering 2,923km2 of onshore mineral rights across the UK. This makes the Company the leading developer in the extraction of CMM and CBM gas.
Greenpark has developed and is operating seven CMM electricity sites in South Yorkshire and Staffordshire which together have a generating capacity of approximately 24MW.
Methane is a natural product arising out of the decay of organic matter. When coal deposits were formed millions of years ago, a proportion of the methane from this decaying matter was absorbed by the coal. In a natural gas reservoir, the gas is held in voids (pockets) within the rock. However, CBM gas is retained on the surface of the coal within the micropore structure much like water is held within a sponge. Such absorption is maintained by the lithostatic pressure (the pressure exerted on the coal by the surrounding rocks) and the hydrostatic pressure (the pressure from water).
Releasing the lithostatic and hydrostatic pressures allows the gas to escape from the coal. The release of significant amounts of methane during mining operations is well known because it is a highly reactive gas and has caused explosions. In such instances, the methane is released from the coal as a result of an uncontrolled relaxation of pressure and fracturing of the strata. CBM gas extraction involves drilling into unworked coal seams and releasing the natural gas in a carefully controlled operation. Whilst natural gas is typically called “methane”, its actual composition also includes smaller amounts of ethane, propane, carbon dioxide, nitrogen, helium and hydrogen. It is therefore also important that the quality of the natural gas is assessed for its suitability for introduction into the National Grid’s Gas National Transmission System (NTS).
2.2 The Need for Further Indigenous Energy Sources
Since 1990, consumption of natural gas in the UK has more than doubled, mainly due to its growing use for electricity generation1. Since 2000, UK gas production has fallen by 11.5% as UK reserves deplete. By 2004, the UK imported 12% of its gas supply2. The Energy White Paper 2007 predicted that the UK would be a net importer of gas for a third or more of its gas supply by 2010 and that by 2020 the UK could be dependent on imported energy for over 80% of its total primary energy needs2.
1 http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file19265.pdf 2 Energy White Paper 2007: Our Energy Future - Meeting the Energy Challenge. Department of Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 2-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
In order to ensure that the UK is protected against the interruption of gas supplies as well as potential sudden price rises, the Energy White Paper 2003 stated that the UK should diversify its energy sources. CBM gas is one such source that exists within Britain. Currently, CBM gas is not being exploited in the UK in contrast to the United States where approximately 13% of national gas production comes from such sources.
This development therefore contributes to the Government's aims of diversifying and increasing indigenous energy sources in the UK.
2.3 The Benefits of Extracting Coal Bed Methane
As outlined above, the development of indigenous energy sources reduces the need for the UK to rely upon expensive and energy-consuming transportation of natural gas from elsewhere in the world. The extraction of CBM gas does not detrimentally affect the physical properties of the coal nor result in any form of surface subsidence. Indeed, the de-gassing of the coal significantly improves safety conditions underground should there be any opportunity to exploit the coal in the future.
Once in the production phase when wells, now called Production Hubs, are extracting CBM gas, there is no need for the facilities to be manned. This means that very little traffic generation is associated with the operation of CBM gas facilities. Production Hubs are also visually discreet and have no emissions unlike many other sources of energy exploitation.
In terms of rural development, the project will also contribute to local employment opportunities with the need for highly skilled, maintenance engineering jobs. Similarly, the income and investment resulting from the project will have a significant positive impact on the local economy.
2.4 Overview of the proposed development in the Canonbie area
Greenpark successfully obtained the Petroleum Exploration and Development Licence (PEDL) 159 for the Canonbie-Longtown area. In early 2009, Greenpark submitted planning applications to develop eight sites in the area. Greenpark is proposing to determine whether it is feasible to commercially extract CBM gas at 10 further sites and to submit a planning application in respect of a compressor station as shown on the attached plan (Figure 2.1).
Should CBM gas exploitation be found to be viable, a gas gathering pipeline system would be used to connect the sites to deliver the gas into the National Grid’s Gas NTS.
This is described in greater detail in Chapter 4 of this Environmental Statement.
2.5 Environmental Impact Assessment
The Legislation with Regard to Coal Bed Methane Production
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is legislated for under The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations 1999. These regulations implement the European EIA Directive (85/337/EEC, as amended by 97/11/EC). The Regulations state that certain classes of development, i.e. those listed in Schedule 1, require an assessment of the environmental impacts of the development to be submitted as a precondition of any planning application;
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 2-2 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
developments listed under Schedule 2 may or may not require an assessment, this being the decision of the Local Planning Authority.
Specific to CBM gas production, Schedule 1 lists developments requiring an EIA to be undertaken “where 500,000 cubic metres of natural gas were to be produced a day and/or pipelines for the transport of gas have a diameter of more than 800 millimetres and a length of more than 40 kilometres”. Under Schedule 2, an EIA may be required where surface industrial installations for the production of natural gas exceed an area of 0.5 ha. During the drilling phase, the proposed development site would cover an area of approximately 0.8 ha but this would reduce to no more than 0.5 ha during the production phase.
As a result of a screening procedure, Dumfries and Galloway Council requested that an EIA be undertaken in order to demonstrate that the potential environmental impacts from the proposed development are not significant.
The EIA Process
EIA is a process which identifies the potential environmental effects of a development and then seeks to avoid, reduce or offset these impacts. A series of stages are followed which, are outlined below – the stages covered by this report are shown in bold:
• site selection and project initiation; • screening to determine whether an EIA is required; • pre-application discussions; • scoping – consultation on proposed scope and methodology; • environmental baseline studies; • assessment of potential impacts; • where necessary, an outline of appropriate mitigation measures including redesign; • preparation of an Environmental Statement; • submission of a planning application with Environmental Statement to the Local planning Authority; • consideration of the application and environmental information by the Local planning Authority and statutory and other consultees; • decision to refuse or grant consent (with or without conditions); and • implementation and monitoring.
Pre-application discussions have been undertaken with Dumfries & Galloway Council and other relevant consultees. Feedback from the discussions has confirmed the scope and methodology used in this ES.
The aim of the EIA is therefore to avoid, reduce or mitigate wherever any potential adverse impacts may arise as a result of this development. The results of the EIA are presented in this ES.
2.6 Environmental Statement Structure
This ES reports on the results of the EIA and assesses the significance of any potential impact of the proposed development for a number of technical topic areas. These technical topic areas are:
• Landscape and Visual; • Ecology;
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 2-3 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• Hydrology; • Hydrogeology and Land Contamination; • Noise and Vibration; • Transport and Traffic; • Air Quality; • Socio-economic impacts; • Amenity Issues; and • Cumulative Impacts.
The planning policy context is outlined in Chapter 3, with Chapter 4 describing how the sites and this particular site were selected along with details of the proposed development. The results of the individual topic areas are then outlined in Chapters 5 to 14. Cumulative impacts are considered within Chapter 15 and an overall conclusion to the assessment is provided within Chapter 16.
A Non-Technical Summary accompanies this ES.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 2-4 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
3. Planning Policy Context
The planning policy context considers the policies listed below, the full details of which are described within the Planning Statement accompanying the Planning Application.
Scottish Planning Policy
• SPP2: Economic Development (2002) • SPP4: Planning for Minerals (2006) • SPP7: Planning and Flooding (2004) • SPP15: Planning for Rural Development (2005) • SPP17: Planning for Transport (2005) • NPPG14: Natural Heritage (1999)
The Dumfries & Galloway Structure Plan Approved (December 1999)
• Policy D7: Employment Creation • Policy D32: Mineral Workings • Policy D38: Environmental Assessment and Monitoring • Policy E2: Regional Scenic Area • Policy E3: Landscape Character • Policy E6: Conservation of Habitats and Species • Policy S2: Development Affecting Groundwater Resources • Policy S3: Development in Flood Risk Areas • Policy S23: Non Renewable Power Generation Facilities
Annandale & Eskdale Local Plan – Adopted (October 2006)
• General Policy 1 – Development principle • General Policy 2 – Development Considerations • General Policy 3 – Settlement Boundaries • General Policy 7 – Siting and Design • General Policy 12 – Potentially Polluting Development • General Policy 37 – Public Rights of Way • General Policy 38 – Access Routes • General Policy 42 – Regional Scenic Areas • General Policy 58 – Flood Risk and Development • General Policy 65 – Traffic Management and Road Safety • General Policy 66 – Local Road Network
Planning Advice Notes
• Note 51: Planning, Environmental Protection and Regulation (revised 2006) • Note 56: Planning and Noise (1999) • Note 58: Environmental Impact Assessment (1999) • Note 60: Planning for Natural Heritage (2000) • Note 73: Rural Diversification (2005) • Note 75: Planning for Transport (2005)
Other Material Considerations
• Dumfries and Galloway Supplementary Planning Guidance No. 8 Flooding
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 3-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• National Planning Policy Guideline 4: Landform Mineral Working (2005) • Dumfries and Galloway Landscape Assessment (1995).
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 3-2 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
4. Site Selection, Description and Proposed Development
4.1 Site Selection
The selection of specific drill site locations was determined by a number of factors. These included:
• Local geological conditions (such as depth and dip of the coal seam as well as faulting) as determined by seismic data and information from previous boreholes; • An initial assessment of planning constraints, for example policies contained in Statutory Development Plans etc covering landscape, ecology, hydrology, hydrogeology, archaeology and other issues; • The proximity and sensitivity of nearby residents; • The willingness of the landowner/tenant to accommodate drilling/development on their land; • The suitability of local roads to allow for site access; and • A preliminary assessment of the potential impact on the landscape, ecology, hydrology, archaeology etc.
The identification of the sites has therefore been an iterative process between the various specialists within Greenpark, the landowner, the local community and the planning and highways departments within Dumfries & Galloway Council.
4.2 Site Description
Proposed Site Location
The proposed site is located within the plantation at Holehouse Flow, on the northern perimeter, about 350 m to the east of the B720 at its closest point. This is shown in Figure 4.1.
The proposed site boundary and access is shown in Figure 4.2. The length of the proposed access would be about 501 m.
Site Land Cover and Land Use
The site is currently a commercial plantation of Sitka spruce which is now mature with a closed canopy.
4.3 Proposed Development
The proposal is to develop a CBM gas project in southern Dumfries & Galloway and northern Cumbria. The proposed development would last circa 20 years. During the drilling phase, the proposed development site would cover an area of approximately 0.8 ha which would be reduced to no more than 0.5 ha during the production phase.
4.3.1 Phases of Development
This CBM gas development will be undertaken in four phases:
1) Site preparation;
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 4-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
2) Drilling; 3) Production (where CBM gas is extracted commercially); and 4) Capping and restoration.
Site Preparation
Site preparation normally takes around six weeks.
This phase prepares the site for drilling. If the site is situated away from the highway, an access road would be built. Sometimes there may be a need to improve visibility at the junction to the highway. For both the access road and site, preparation involves the removal of the topsoil which is either stored along one side of the track or in a perimeter bund around the site. The height of the bund around the site would be no more than 3 m.
A geo-textile would be laid to protect the subsoil and to aid with the stability of the site, and a layer of compacted stone (hardcore) would be laid on top. The hardcore would be sourced locally.
If required, temporary fencing would be positioned around the site to prevent unauthorised access.
As soon as preparation is complete, equipment would be brought on to the site. A typical site contains a drilling rig, cabins for the drilling crew etc, and associated equipment such as water handling equipment, drilling mud screens and tanks, pipes and stores with parking for up to 20 vehicles provided away from the area where the drilling rig would be operated. Fuel for the rig would also be stored on site in accordance with the appropriate oil storage regulations; for example, within double skinned containers.
The Drilling Phase
The proposed layout of the site for the drilling phase is shown in Figure 4.3.
Figure 4.4 is a photograph of a modern drilling rig. When transported, the rig is 2.5 m wide and 24.75 m long. The height of the mast when in operation is circa 30 m.
During this phase a number of boreholes (1-4) are drilled vertically downwards and into and along the coal seams. The horizontal sections of the boreholes are termed “production laterals" (Figure 4.5).
The drilling incorporates a closed drilling fluid system whereby the use of a drilling mud (with an additive such as bentonite) circulates down hole, through the drill bit and brings the cuttings back to the surface. This system prevents the production of any drilling dust.
It is anticipated that with modern equipment, the drilling of the boreholes/laterals will be completed within 6 weeks. The drilling rig then leaves the site.
If the coal is not ‘gassy’ or the gas does not flow readily from the coal, the boreholes would be plugged and the site restored (see below).
During drilling, safety is of paramount importance. A blow-out preventer is installed at the top of each borehole. This is a device that seals the borehole in the event of a rush of gas. In addition, all staff and visitors must wear high visibility and protective
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 4-2 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
clothing and are not allowed to carry any equipment that would cause any ignition of any fugitive methane gas. This includes mobile phones.
Production
If the results from the laterals are favourable, the site would become a full "Production Hub" and the boreholes would be connected to the National Grid’s Gas NTS.
The site would now be circa 0.5 ha.
The gas from the well is expected to reach the surface under its own pressure but if that is not sufficient, a suction fan may be used. A condenser would be installed at the site to separate out the water and it may be necessary in some cases to install small pumps to drain water from the boreholes. Abstracted groundwater would be stored and taken away by tanker.
After passing through the condenser, the gas would be passed along underground pipelines to a Compressor station prior to introduction to the National Grid’s Gas NTS. The Production Hubs would not produce significant amounts of noise.
Similarly, all equipment would be appropriately sized and designed and the site would be screened either by bunding or tree/hedgerow planting. Any temporary fencing would be replaced by appropriate timber post and rail fencing.
A schematic diagram of the production equipment is shown in Figure 4.6.
The access would remain and the parking area would be reduced in size. However, the width of the site access would be reduced to minimise its visual impact.
The rest of the site would be restored to the original land use.
Capping and Restoration
If the site does not become a Production Hub, or when all CBM gas from the coal seams has been exhausted, the site would be restored. This means that all equipment would be removed and the boreholes plugged to the safety standards required by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Mines (HMI) as shown in Figure 4.7.
Restoration would be undertaken in accordance with a scheme submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. In essence, it would consist of the removal of the stone and the geo-textile, the subsoil being ripped to alleviate any compaction, the topsoil replaced and the site returned to a condition suitable for forestry use. Any damaged field drains would be repaired or replaced following best practice guidelines.
In practice, restoration would take no more than six weeks but due to seasonal considerations (e.g. suitable weather for the pouring of concrete, the handling of soils and sowing of grass seed etc), a maximum restoration period of 18 months is anticipated.
The site would be monitored over a five-year period to ensure that restoration is complete and to identify any requirements for further remedial action.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 4-3 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
4.3.2 Grid Connection
CBM gas will be exported via underground pipes from the Production Hubs to a compressor station at which it will be compressed to a suitable pressure for introduction into the National Grid’s Gas NTS.
The size of the pipes would vary; for example, at the extremities of the system (such as at a site), pipes may be as small as 250 mm (8 inches) diameter whilst at the main compressor station the pipe may be as large as 500 mm (20 inches) diameter. Such pipes would be laid in the public highway (typically the grass verges or footpaths) rather than across open land in order to reduce the impact on open countryside and individual landowners.
The proposed route of the pipelines will be designed to ensure that disturbance is kept to a minimum, distances are kept as short as possible, and that there are as few valleys as possible because these could act as water traps which would prevent the free flow of gas.
The proposed compressor station will be designed and located so as to prevent a nuisance from noise and visual intrusion whilst ensuring suitable access to the National Grid’s Gas NTS and for service vehicles. The compressor station will be subject to a separate planning application and EIA.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 4-4 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
5. Landscape and Visual
5.1 Summary
This chapter assessed the effects of the alteration of landform associated with the introduction of a CBM gas development at Holehouse Plantation. This included assessing how the introduction of a drilling rig, associated equipment and new access track and soil bunds might alter the character of the landscape of the area during the initial drilling phase.
The aim of the visual impact assessment was to determine whether there might be any unacceptable visual impacts associated with this development, in particular the drilling rig during the drilling phase.
This landscape and visual assessment was especially important for this site because it is situated within an Area of Great Landscape Value (a landscape designation by Dumfries & Galloway Council).
The location of the proposed CBM gas development has been carefully selected to take advantage of the screening effects of the mature coniferous tree planting which makes up the Holehouse Flow plantation.
Given the rural location of the proposed CBM site there are very few landscape receptors within close proximity to the development site and those who will have direct landscape and visual impacts are limited by the nature of the landform and vegetative cover.
The site is enclosed to the south by tree planting, to the east by the route of the A7 road and mature tree planting associated with the River Esk valley corridor and to the north and west by landform.
Views for resident’s, workers and travellers are therefore restricted to a very small area immediately to the north of the site upon the B720, to the east for road users upon the A7 travelling south only and to the west upon elevated points along the B6318 where vegetative cover permits views of the site.
The use of straw bales and soil bunds seeded with grass along the northern boundary of the site and the location of the proposed access track along the western side of the mature hedgerow would further minimise visual impact from the north and east respectively.
Road users would need to be looking in the right direction at the right time to experience views of the rig which when seen would be perceived as a minor visual element within a panoramic view. Furthermore, the duration of the visual effect of the rig when seen from these routes would be short and transient in nature.
It is concluded that the proposed CBM gas development would represent a temporary moderate/minor impact during the site preparation and drilling phases. Thereafter, the CBM gas development at Holehouse Plantation would be discreet enough not to affect the landscape character of the area and not give rise to any unacceptable long term visual impact.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
5.2 Introduction
The landscape and visual assessment examined whether there might be an effect upon the landscape character in terms of quality, value and sensitivity as well as any specific potential visual intrusion.
The main objectives were to:
• describe the landscape character areas and types present in the area in order to identify significant landscape features that may be affected by the project; • ensuring no transgression of the local planning policies, such as areas designated for their landscape value; • identify key viewpoints and viewers likely to be affected by the project; • predict the effect of the project on landscape resources and character and on visual amenity; • evaluate the significance of these impacts; and • Identify measures that will be taken to mitigate significant adverse impacts.
5.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines
The following assessment was undertaken in accordance with:
• Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (2002). Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment. Second revised edition. Taylor & Francis Ltd;
• Countryside Agency in conjunction with Scottish Natural Heritage (2002). Landscape Character Assessment Guidance for England and Scotland. Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage; and
5.4 Methodology
The baseline landscape and visual assessment comprised a desktop study of appropriate data sources followed by a field survey.
Baseline Study
Desktop study
In acknowledgement of the general topography of the district, which constrains the potential for more extensive views, the study area is limited to an area no greater than 15 km radius from the site.
A preliminary appraisal of the baseline landscape and visual characteristics of the site and study area was carried out through desktop study. The following sources were reviewed in this process:
• Baseline technical information supplied by Greenpark relating to the proposal; • Ordnance Survey Mapping, at scale of 1:50,000 for the detailed study area; • SNH Landscape Character Assessments, Dumfries and Galloway Landscape Assessment No 94. Land Use Consultants. 1998, provides a detailed Assessment of the Landscape Character areas. • A review of The Dumfries & Galloway Structure Plan Approved (Dec 1999) was carried out to identify all relevant landscape designations relating to the local area and assessed as potential sensitive receptors.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-2 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• A draft Visual Envelope Map was produced as part of the desk study to assess the extent of potential visibility of the proposals and to identify key receptors that were subsequently checked on site.
Visibility Maps
A computer generated Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) map has been prepared to assist in viewpoint selection and to illustrate the potential influence of the proposed 30m height drilling rig in the wider landscape.
However, the use of this map needs to be qualified by the following constraints:
• the ZTV map is based on a bare ground model (Ordnance Survey (OS) Landform Profile data based on a 10 m grid terrain model derived from 1:50,000 scale mapping) which is limited by the detail of the digital terrain model data used and does not take account of local topographic variations or screening from built form or vegetation; • substantial areas are shown which suggest there is theoretical visibility from these locations, but as they are woodland, moorland or agricultural land, there is effectively no public presence within these areas and the likelihood of views being experienced is consequently low; and • the ZTV maps do not take account of the likely orientation of a viewer, such as the direction of travel and there is no allowance for attenuation of visibility with distance, weather or light.
These limitations mean that the ZTV maps tend to overestimate the extent of the visibility, both in terms of the area from which the proposal is visible and the extent of the proposal which is visible. It should be considered as a tool to assist in assessing the theoretical visibility of the proposal and not a measure of the visual impact.
Field Study
The baseline landscape and visual assessment comprised a desktop study of appropriate data sources followed by a field survey.
The site was visited on Monday the 13th of July 2009.
Field survey was used to:
• further understand the nature of the landscape around the study area and verify the important landscape and visual characteristics of the area highlighted by the desk review; • identify the principle components that make up the character of the landscape; • analyse the landscape structure of the study area; • analyse the views and visual influences around the study area, including principle topographic features and woodland blocks that obscure views, and the principle views to and from the study area; • assess the sensitivities (to development) and capacity (for development) of different parts of the landscape; • static and sequential views were surveyed representative of the range of views and viewer types likely to experience the proposal.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-3 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Assessment Criteria
The objective of the assessment process is to identify and evaluate the predicted significant effects arising from the proposed development.
To provide the assessment with a level of consistency and transparency, and to allow comparisons to be made between the various landscape and visual receptors subject to assessment, the assessment of significance is based on predefined methodology and criteria.
Sensitivity of Receptor
The sensitivity of a landscape or a view to change varies according to the nature of the existing resource and the nature of the proposed change. Value, integrity and capacity are all relevant when considering and assessing sensitivity. For this purpose, these terms are defined as follows:
• value: the value or importance attached to a landscape for its scenic or aesthetic qualities, or cultural associations, can be recognised through national, regional or local designation. Views tend not to be designated, but can be recognised through a name, or shown on a map, or through the creation of a parking lay-by or location of a bench;
• integrity: the degree to which the value has been retained, the condition and integrity of the landscape or the view; and
• capacity: the ability of a landscape or view to accommodate the proposed change while retaining the essential characteristics that defines it.
The sensitivity of the landscape to change is reflected in the degree to which a landscape is able to accommodate change without adverse effects on its character. The capacity of the landscape to accommodate development is quite different from the importance or value of the landscape.
Sensitivity is not generally graded in bands. However, in order to provide both consistency and transparency to the assessment process, the following table defines the criteria that have guided the judgement as to the Sensitivity of the Receptor.
TABLE 5.1 – SENSITIVITY OF RECEPTOR Landscape Effects Visual Effects Low Landscape value is low, with no Small number or low sensitivity of viewers designations; landscape integrity is low, assumed. Viewers' attention not focused on with a landscape in poor condition and a landscape, e.g. workers. degraded character; and the landscape has the capacity to potentially accommodate significant change. Medium Landscape value is recognised locally, Viewers' attention may be focused on and may have a local designation landscape, such as road or rail users, users (AGLV), but are not designated either at of secondary footpaths, and people engaged a national or regional level; the in outdoor sport or recreation. e.g. fishing, landscape is relatively intact, with a water sports, golf distinctive character; and the landscape is reasonably tolerant of change. High Landscape value recognised by existing Landscape value recognised by existing or or proposed national (NSA) or regional proposed designation. Large number or high designation (RSA). Sense of tranquillity sensitivity of viewers assumed. or remoteness specifically noted in Viewers' attention very likely to be focused on Landscape Character Assessment. High landscape. sensitivity to disturbance specifically e.g. Residents experiencing views from
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-4 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 5.1 – SENSITIVITY OF RECEPTOR Landscape Effects Visual Effects noted in Landscape Character dwellings; users of strategic recreational Assessment. footpaths and cycleways; The qualities for which the landscape is people experiencing views from important valued are in a good condition, with a landscape features of physical, cultural or clearly apparent distinctive character. historic interest, beauty spots and picnic This distinctive character is susceptible areas. to relatively small changes.
Magnitude of Change
Magnitude of Change
The effect of the proposed CBM gas development on each landscape or visual receptor is referred to as the magnitude of change. The following considerations are relevant when evaluating the magnitude of change:
• distance: the distance between the receptor and the development. Generally, the greater the distance, the lower the magnitude of change;
• extent: the extent of the development that is visible;
• proportion: the arc of view occupied by the proposed CBM gas development in proportion to the overall field of view. A panoramic view, where the facility takes up a small part of it, will generally be of lower magnitude than a narrow, focussed view, even if the arc of view occupied by the proposal is similar;
• duration: the duration of the effect. An effect experienced in a single location over an extended period of time is likely to result in a higher magnitude of change than an effect which of a short duration, such as a view from a road;
• orientation: the angle of the view in relation to the main receptor orientation, where there is a dominant direction to the vista;
• context: the elements that combine to provide the setting and context to the proposal. In particular, vertical man-made structures within the context can decrease the magnitude of change; and
• background: the colour and cladding of the development should be selected to reflect the predominant background colours in the locality. Where the landform forms the background to the view, this can have an effect on the magnitude of change.
The magnitude of change has been assessed according to these parameters and is largely quantifiable. The following table defines the categories that have been used within the assessment to provide consistency and transparency to the process:
TABLE 5.2 – MAGNITUDE OF CHANGE Landscape Effects Visual Effects Negligible/No The effect of change on the There is either no view or the character of Change perception of the landscape, the the view will not be altered by the proposed physical landscape or the landscape development. The development is at such character is minimal or there is no a distance as to be imperceptible, and may change. only be discernible in clear conditions. May go unnoticed. Low Changes to the physical landscape, Visible but not prominent. its character and the perception of the
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-5 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
landscape are minor.
Long distance to affected landscape type (10-20km) and/or intervening transitional types.
Effect reduced by presence of many built elements. Medium The proposed development forms a Prominent. Has an important but not visible and recognisable feature in the defining influence on view; is a key element landscape. in the view.
Development some distance from affected Landscape Type (5 - 10km). Other built elements or human activities in views.
Scale of Development fits with existing features. High Where there are major changes Dominant. Has a defining influence on affecting the character of the view. landscape, or the important elements.
Development within or close to affected landscape type.
Size of the development out of scale with existing elements.
The duration of the impact is described using the following terms:
• Long-term – 15 years + • Medium-term – 5-10 years • Short-term – 0-5 years
Nature of Effects
Effects can be negative (adverse) or positive (beneficial) or neutral; direct, indirect, secondary or cumulative and be either permanent or temporary (short, medium or long term).They can also arise at different scales (local, regional or national) and have different levels of significance (local, regional or national).
A change to the landscape or visual resource is not necessarily adverse or beneficial, simply because it is a change: this is dependent on the attitude of the individual. By adopting a neutral perspective, the assessment avoids making a distinction between beneficial and adverse effects.
Significance of Effect
The significance of the landscape and visual effects are assessed through a combination of the sensitivity of the receptor with the magnitude of change. The categories cannot be applied in a formulaic manner and must be determined through professional judgement, but the following table provides guidance on defining the categories for significance of effect:
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-6 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 5.3 – SIGNIFICANCE OF EFFECT Magnitude of Change Landscape High Medium Low Negligible and Visual Sensitivity High Major Major/Moderate Moderate Moderate/Minor Medium Major/Moderate Moderate Moderate/Minor Minor Low Moderate Moderate/Minor Minor Minor/negligible
The landscape and visual effects classified as Major or Major/Moderate are considered by the assessor to be equivalent to the likely significant effects referred to in the Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999.
5.5 Baseline Conditions
Site Location
The proposed Holehouse Plantation site is located approximately 0.25km west of the route of the A7 Trunk road and 0.78km south west of the village of Hollows.
The site itself sits within the Holehouse Flow coniferous plantation woodland at an elevation of 87m AOD at (NY 338234). The site location is shown on Figure 4.1.
Site Description
Holehouse Flow Plantation is located upon the northern boundary of a large stand of mature coniferous plantation woodland.
The actual site area itself is approximately mid way along the length of this boundary and cuts into the stand of trees to the south for approximately 100m.
The site is accessed via the B720 and a new access track is proposed along the southern side of the existing field hedgerow to the west which descends from 95m AOD upon the B720 to the Holehouse Flow plantation. At the junction of the proposed access track with the plantation woodland the proposed road turns abruptly north-east for 0.16km parallel to the outline of the woodland through a second improved grassland field.
The site itself is blanket woodland which straddles a gently ascending landform to the west of the A7 road corridor. The topography to the north west of the site ascends more abruptly to a high point at Newbie 99m AOD. The site access road will dissect the route of the Cross Burn which issues within the Holehouse Flow plantation to terminate to the east within the River Esk.
Landscape Character
The site lies upon the threshold of the Flow Plateau character type with the Intimate Pastoral Valleys character type and is characterised by rough or improved pasture on higher ground with neglected hedgerows and tree lined enclosures or shelterbelts. The area is mostly flat and gently rolling with a south facing incline towards the Solway. Where the landscape merges with the Intimate Pastoral Valleys character strong woodland tree planting and steep topography create a strong contrast and definitive change from the Flow plateau type.
A Landscape Character Plan is shown in Figure 5.1.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-7 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
There are 17 character areas identified within the study area, these are listed within Appendix 2.
Landscape Designations
The application site falls within the area of Regional Scenic Area as defined on the Policies and Proposals Map of the adopted Annandale & Eskdale Local Plan (Oct 2006).
There are a number of landscape designations indicated by the Dumfries & Galloway Structure Plan Approved (December 1999). These are illustrated on the Landscape Designations Plan figure 5.2.
There are no Historic Gardens and Designed Landscapes identified within the study area.
Scheduled Ancient Monuments & Listed Buildings
A small number of Scheduled Ancient Monuments & Listed Buildings indicated on the Landscape Designation Plan (figure 5.2) are likely to be affected. These include the roman fort at Broomholm Knowe (NY 379814), a settlement south of Burian Hill (207m AOD, NY 365816), Gilnockie Castle (NY 387784), Gilnockie Tower (NY 384786) and Liddel Strength Motte and Bailey (NY 403742). Potential impacts on these are considered within Chapter 12.
National Scenic Areas
An area of the Solway Basin is designated a National Scenic Area. This area is south-west of the A74(M) 10.86km from the proposed CBM gas development. It is extremely unlikely to be affected by the proposed site because a combination of distance, screening vegetation (roadside embankments and vegetation, woodland etc) and the existing built form of Longtown which combine to form a lattice of landscape components which effectively reduce the influence and visibility of the proposed CBM gas development.
Regional Scenic Areas
A Regional Scenic Area is identified on the Dumfries and Galloway Structure Plan. This is situated along the A7 transport corridor including Bentpath (NY 312902) to the west and Black Edge (446m AOD) to the east. The ZTV (Figure 5.3) indicates the proposed CBM may have an influence on higher ground (southernmost slopes of Crumpton Hill 480m AOD, Black Edge 446m AOD, and southern slopes of Whitta Hill 355m AOD and Warb Law (275m AOD) and Burian Hill (207m AOD) although views from the A7 north of Holehouse Flow (NY 387770) are unlikely.
In reality a combination of distance, screening vegetation particularly along the River Esk, burns (roadside embankments and shelterbelts, woodland, hedgerows etc) and the existing built form combine to form a lattice of landscape components which effectively reduce the influence and visibility of the proposed CBM gas development.
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
An Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty is identified within the Solway Basin called The Solway Coast Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. This area is south-west of the A74(M) 10.86km from the proposed CBM development. It is extremely unlikely to
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-8 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
be affected by the drilling rig because of a combination of distance, screening vegetation (roadside embankments and vegetation, woodland etc).
All above named sensitive attributes within the study area were considered as possible sensitive receptors and were checked during the field studies.
5.6 Impact Assessment
Source of Effects
The impact assessment was undertaken for the site preparation, drilling, production and restoration phases.
Site Preparation
The phase is proposed to take circa 6 weeks with the stripping of topsoil, formation of soil bunds, access and site development pad. The required infrastructure will also be brought onto site, including site cabins, the drilling rig etc. A schematic diagram site layout is provided within Figure 4.3.
Impact: Over the preparation phase, the ground preparation works and machinery movements will be visible.
The above described change will introduce new elements to the landscape such as 3m height screening bunds. The bunds would be placed along the site boundary and shaped to minimise any visual impact and seeded with grass. The visual impact will be in the immediate locality, affecting only receptors close by.
The significance of the predicted impact in selected viewpoints is assessed and described below.
Drilling Phase
The drilling rig is illustrated in Figure 4.4. When transported, the rig is 2.5 m wide and 24.75 m long. The height of the mast when in operation is circa 30 m.
It is anticipated that the drilling of the boreholes/laterals will be completed within 6 weeks. The drilling rig then leaves the site.
Impact: The proposed screening mounds to the west and north east will combine to screen views of the ancillary plant associated with the drilling rig which will be seen as a new industrial element within the landscape.
Due to the complimenting industrial elements the existing landscape character will become more fragmented and no longer form a distinct landscape character zone. The height of the additional industrial elements will extend the visual impact of the development in the study area. The magnitude of the impact will increase significantly but remains short term.
The significance of the predicted impact in selected viewpoints is assessed and described below.
Production Phase
Within a Production Hub plant and equipment will largely be buried. All that will be seen from the surface is an area of hardcore and manhole covers. This area will be
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-9 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
surrounded by a timber post and rail fence. There will also be a generator and water handling equipment to pump surplus water extracted with the gas; however these will be no more than 1.5 m high, therefore obscured by the fence.
Impact: The Production Hubs are purposely designed to be visually discrete with most of the equipment located underground with the exception of any water handling equipment. Despite this, the Production Hubs will introduce a new element within the context of the field for the lifetime of the development (estimated at 20 years), but in the agricultural setting, not out of place within the location.
The significance of the predicted impact in selected viewpoints is assessed and described below.
Capping and Restoration Phase
The foundations will be removed to a depth of 1m, the boreholes filled with concrete and the site restored to its original appearance. The site will be covered with the original topsoil and reseeded with an appropriate tree mix suitable for its location and forestry context.
Impact: The site will be restored to its existing agricultural state. This impact is considered beneficial by its nature.
Static Effects – Assessment of Viewpoints
The landscape and visual effects of the proposed CBM gas development have been assessed in detail from a range of viewpoints. These have been selected following consultation with Dumfries and Galloway Council to represent the range of views and viewer types likely to be affected by the proposed CBM gas development. Receptors include settlements, transport routes, recreational routes, visitor destinations; landscape character types and landscape designations; and cover a variety of distances, aspects, elevations and extents.
Seven viewpoints throughout the study area have been included within the assessment. The viewpoint locations are shown on Figure 5.4.
TABLE 5.4 – VIEWPOINT LOCATIONS
Viewpoint Distance to View Location Grid Ref. Elevation No. Site From
Birchtimber Hill PROW NY 445 6.86km SE 135m AOD 1 746 Highmoat PROW NY 403 4.27km SE 75m AOD 2 736 B720 Trunk Road NY 379 0.39km NW 102m 3 776 AOD A7 Trunk Road South NY 384 0.63km N 72m AOD 4 779 5 Cross Burn Cottage NY 382 0.61km N 76m AOD 779 6 Gilnockie Tower, NY 382 1.23km N 64m AOD Gilnockie 786 7 Tait House NY 387 2.47km N 129m AOD 797
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-10 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Viewpoint 01: Birchtimber Hill PROW (Figure V.01)
Long elevated views are possible from his public right of way north west towards the site and beyond to the Lowther Hills. Views towards the site from the public right of way are long distance and elevated. The site itself forms a small component within a wider panoramic landscape setting and the site is seen against a background of mature tree planting and undulating landform.
It is representative of:
• settlement (Birch Timber Farm); • residents, recreational walkers, travellers and farm workers; and • landscape character type (Solway Basin).
Sensitivity
The landscape sensitivity of this area is considered to be low because there are no landscape designations and the landscape has the capacity to accept significant change.
The landscape is a managed mixed agricultural landscape that remains relatively undisturbed and tranquil but does have evidence of development.
The visual sensitivity at this location is considered to be medium. It is an aesthetically pleasing long distance panorama with a variety of landscape features. Viewers are mostly recreational walkers using the provided footpath.
Effects on Landscape Character
No views to the proposal site will be possible over the site preparation and production phases therefore there will be no impact on the landscape from this receptor.
During the short term drilling phase the upper fraction of the drilling rig will be visible from this viewpoint. No landscape character features will be lost or affected by the development.
The landscape has the capacity to accommodate this temporary change.
The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible and the level of significance is considered to be minor/negligible.
Effects on Visual Amenity
No views to the proposal site will be possible over the site preparation and production phases therefore there will be no impact on the landscape from this receptor.
The large stands of tree planting make the drilling rig difficult to discern within the landscape and against the backdrop of the woodland and distant hills.
The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible and the level of significance is considered to be minor.
Viewpoint 02: Highmoat PROW (Figure V.02)
This view is taken from the crest of the hill upon the public right of way which connects the Mount with Lowmoat Farm and illustrates an elevated panoramic view
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-11 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
orientated to look north west over the site at an elevation of 75m A.O.D. and beyond to the Lowther Hills.
The viewpoint location is 4.20km from the site boundary and is representative of the panoramic views experienced by recreational walkers and agricultural workers.
The view from this vantage point is panoramic over the gently undulating agricultural landscape that contains improved grazing pasture and deciduous woodland, coniferous tree planting and field boundaries defined by both hedgerow and hedgerow tree planting.
The dark outlines of coniferous tree plantations are discernible against the backdrop of open grazing pasture and sporadic mature hedgerow trees help to unite the landscape which is framed by the undulating profile of the crests of the Lowther Hills.
The communications tower located within the Graystone Flow Plantation is a prominent visual detractor within this viewpoint, similarly the route of the electricity pylons which bridge the eastern and western slopes of the River Esk Valley 1.6km to the east of the site are discernible human interventions within the view.
It is representative of:
• recreational walkers; and • landscape character area (Solway Basin).
Sensitivity
The landscape sensitivity of this area is considered to be medium. The landscape is a managed mixed agricultural landscape that remains relatively undisturbed and tranquil but does have evidence of development.
The visual sensitivity at this location is considered to be medium because the view has depth and the variety of landscape features are present. Viewers are mostly recreational walkers using the footpath.
Effects on Landscape Character
No views to the proposal site will be possible over the site preparation and production phases therefore there will be no impact on the landscape from this receptor.
During the short term drilling phase the upper fraction of the drilling rig will be visible from this viewpoint. No landscape character features will be lost or affected by the development.
The landscape has the capacity to accommodate this temporary change.
The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible and the level of significance is considered to be minor.
Effects on Visual Amenity
No views to the proposal site will be possible over the site preparation and production phases therefore there will be no impact on the landscape from this receptor.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-12 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
The screening effect of the existing coniferous tree planting in which the site is set will limit the extent of the site visible to the upper section of the drilling rig only, which will be seen as a minor element above the canopy line.
The proportion of the development which would be visible from this viewpoint would be barely perceptible when seen against its landscape context.
The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible and the level of significance of the drilling rig is considered to be minor.
Viewpoint 03: B720 Trunk Road (Figure V.03)
This view is taken from the junction of the proposed access track into the site and the B720, 0.39km to the north of Holehouse Plantation at 102m AOD.
The view illustrates the elevated open view south east towards the site experienced by road users travelling east upon the B720.
Views from this point are contained to the north and east by landform and to the south by the canopy line of the Holehouse Plantation.
It is representative of:
• Road users (B720); • residents, recreational walkers, travellers and farm workers; and • landscape character type (Flow Plateau).
Sensitivity
The landscape sensitivity of this area is considered to be high because it is located within a Regional Scenic Area. The landscape is a managed mixed agricultural landscape that remains relatively undisturbed and tranquil but does have evidence of development.
The visual sensitivity at this location is considered to be low. The view is contained by the dense woodland plantation.
Effects on Landscape Character
No views to the proposal site will be possible over the site preparation and production phases therefore there will be no impact on the landscape from this receptor.
During the short term drilling phase the upper fraction of the drilling rig will be visible from this viewpoint. No landscape character features will be lost or affected by the development.
The landscape has the capacity to accommodate this temporary change.
The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible and the level of significance is considered to be moderate/minor.
Effects on Visual Amenity
No views to the proposal site will be possible over the site preparation and production phases therefore there will be no impact on the landscape from this receptor.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-13 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
The screening effects of Holehouse Flow plantation woodland will effectively limit the visual extent of the proposed CBM gas development to the upper sections of the rig only which will compete with the canopy line of the trees.
The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible and the level of significance is considered to be minor/negligible.
Viewpoint 04: A7 Trunk Road South (Figure V.03)
This view is taken from the grassed verge of the A7 trunk road at an elevation of 74m AOD looking south west for 0.63km towards the site.
The A7 road is in cutting as it passes to the east of Holehouse Flow Plantation and topography gently rises from this point to reflect gentle undulations in landform associated with the slopes of the River Esk to the east of this point.
Views south are contained by the mass planting contained within Holehouse Flow Plantation whilst views to the west are contained by topography which rises to a high point at the junction of the proposed access track with the B720 Road.
The view is representative of:
• Road users (A7 trunk road); • residents, recreational walkers, travellers and farm workers; and • landscape character type (Intimate Pastoral Valleys).
Sensitivity
The landscape sensitivity of this area is considered to be high because it is located within a Regional Scenic Area. The landscape is a managed mixed agricultural landscape that remains relatively undisturbed and tranquil but does have evidence of development.
The visual sensitivity at this location is considered to be low. The view is contained by the dense woodland plantation. Telegraph poles are a visual detractor within this view.
Effects on Landscape Character
No views to the proposal site will be possible over the site preparation and production phases therefore there will be no impact on the landscape from this receptor.
During the short term drilling phase the upper fraction of the drilling rig will be visible from this viewpoint. No landscape character features will be lost or affected by the development.
The landscape has the capacity to accommodate this temporary change.
The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible and the level of significance is considered to be moderate/minor.
Effects on Visual Amenity
No views to the proposal site will be possible over the site preparation and production phases therefore there will be no impact on the landscape from this receptor.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-14 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
The screening effects of Holehouse Flow plantation woodland will effectively limit the visual extent of the proposed CBM gas development to the upper sections of the rig only which will compete with the canopy line of the trees.
The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible and the level of significance is considered to be minor/negligible.
Viewpoint 05: Cross Burn Cottage (Figure V.04)
This view is taken from garden boundary of Cross Burn Cottage located at 76m AOD, 0.61km north from the Holehouse Plantation CBM site boundary.
It illustrates the broad view for residents, recreational walkers and farm workers over a well managed arable and grazing pastoral landscape with gently ascending landform bounded to the east by the route of the A7 trunk road, to the west by the route of the B720 and to the south by the distinct profile of the Holehouse Flow Plantation.
The site is located approximately mid way within the view and the hedgerow which demarcates the route of the proposed access track to the site is prominent upon the horizon.
It is representative of:
• settlement (Cross Burn Cottage); • residents, recreational walkers, travellers and farm workers; and • landscape character type (Flow Plateau).
Sensitivity
The landscape sensitivity of this area is considered to be high because it is located within a Regional Scenic Area. The landscape is a managed mixed agricultural landscape that remains relatively undisturbed and tranquil but does have evidence of development in the form of the A7, B720 and Holehouse Plantation woodland.
The visual sensitivity at this location is considered to be low. The view is contained by the dense woodland plantation.
Effects on Landscape Character
Views to the proposal site will be possible during the site preparation and production phases therefore there will be impact on the landscape from this receptor.
During the short term drilling phase the upper fraction of the drilling rig will also be visible from this viewpoint.
The landscape has the capacity to accommodate this temporary change.
The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible and the level of significance is considered to be moderate/minor.
Effects on Visual Amenity
Views to the site would be possible, particularly during the six week site preparation phase. However, the use of soil bunds seeded with grass along the northern boundary of the site and the location of the proposed access track along the western
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-15 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
side of the mature hedgerow would minimise any visual impact and the site would be seen in the context of the Plantation location.
Although the prominent profile of the Holehouse Flow plantation forms a backdrop to the site and access road, the drilling rig profile will be seen above the canopy line and thus introduce a prominent but not defining element within the context of the view.
The magnitude of change is considered to be medium and the level of significance is considered to be minor.
Viewpoint 06: Gilnockie Tower, Gilnockie (Figure V.05)
This view is taken from the car park of Gilnockie Tower which is the Clan Armstrong Centre and museum in the village of Gilnockie. The view is located at 64m AOD and faces south from the site which is 1.23km from this point.
Views towards the site are contained to within the short range by the abrupt topography which rises from the village to the route of the A7 road 0.20km to the west.
Views outwith this corridor are only possible where there are breaks within the canopy line but again these are limited by the outline of the Holehouse Plantation.
It is representative of:
• settlement (Gilnockie); • residents, recreational walkers, travellers and farm workers; and • Landscape character area (Intimate Pastoral Valleys).
Sensitivity
The landscape sensitivity of this area is considered to be high because it is located within a Regional Scenic Area. The landscape is a managed mixed agricultural landscape that remains relatively undisturbed and tranquil but does have evidence of development in the form of the A7 and B720.
The visual sensitivity at this location is considered to be low. The view is contained by topography and dense vegetation. Existing visual detractors are close proximity verticals include telegraph poles.
Effects on Landscape Character
No views to the proposal site will be possible over the site preparation and production phases therefore there will be no impact on the landscape from this receptor.
During the short term drilling phase the upper fraction of the drilling rig will be visible from this viewpoint. No landscape character features will be lost or affected by the development.
The landscape has the capacity to accommodate this temporary change.
The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible and the level of significance is considered to be moderate/minor.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-16 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Effects on Visual Amenity
No views to the proposal site will be possible over the site preparation and production phases therefore there will be no impact on the landscape from this receptor.
The proportion of the proposed CBM site which will be visible from this vantage point will be reduced by the screening effects of the large stands of mature tree planting located along the elevated eastern carriageway of the A7 road.
The magnitude of change is considered to be low and the level of significance is considered to be minor.
Viewpoint 07: Tait House (Figure V.06)
This view is taken from the northern garden boundary of a two storey residential property located upon the B6318 road at an elevated position of 129m AOD looking 2.47km south west towards the site. The view illustrates a strongly wooded landscape which extends at right angles up the eastern and western slopes of the River Esk valley floor. Woodland cover is broken by pockets of arable and grazing pasture through which strong lines of hedgerows form a distinct element in the landscape and sporadic field hedgerow tree planting break the skyline to the south west.
It is representative of:
• settlement (Tait House); • transport route (B6318); • residents, recreational walkers, travellers and workers; and • landscape character type (Upland Fringe).
Sensitivity
The landscape sensitivity of this area is considered to be high because it is located within a Regional Scenic Area.
The visual sensitivity at this location is considered to be medium because viewers who have an interest in their immediate environment are road users who have a transient experience of the landscape.
Effects on Landscape Character
No views to the proposal site will be possible over the site preparation and production phases therefore there will be no impact on the landscape from this receptor.
During the short term drilling phase the upper fraction of the drilling rig will be visible from this viewpoint. No landscape character features will be lost or affected by the development.
The landscape has the capacity to accommodate this temporary change.
The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible and the level of significance is considered to be moderate/minor.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-17 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Effects on Visual Amenity
No views to the proposal site will be possible over the site preparation and production phases therefore there will be no impact on the landscape from this receptor.
The proportion of the development which would be visible will be barely perceptible when seen against its landscape context of mature coniferous and broadleaf tree planting and as such only views of the rig might be registered within the view above the canopy line of the trees.
The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible and the level of significance of the drilling rig is considered to be minor.
Views from Properties within Close Proximity of the Site
Residential properties not listed as viewpoints within the report have been assessed on site and a judgement made based upon the orientation of the property and distance of the residence in relation to the proposed CBM site. This has been assessed in conjunction with an analysis of the nature of the landscape context in which they sit.
Due to the nature of the topography and intervening vegetation in and adjacent to the site no additional properties have been deemed necessary to be included within the assessment.
Views from Footpaths and Public Rights of Way
The landscape designations plan has highlighted that there is an existing network of public rights of way and bridleways within the wider context of the site.
Those with views towards the Holehouse Plantation site are the:-
• Renton public right of way located to the east of the site which connects High Plains with Riddling Mains Farm. Views towards the site from the public right of way are long distance and elevated.
Although Views from this elevated position are prolonged the site itself forms a small component within a wider panoramic landscape setting with the site being seen against a background of mature tree planting and undulating landform.
• The Hilltop to Scuggate and Birchtimber hill public right of way. Long elevated views are possible from his public right of way west towards the site and beyond to the Lowther Hills. Views towards the site from the public right of way are long distance and elevated. The site itself forms a small component within a wider panoramic landscape setting and the site is seen against a background of mature tree planting and undulating landform.
• The Evertown to Torbeck Hill public right of way. The public right of way ascends from Evertown 80m A.O.D to a high point at Torbeck Hill 134m A.O.D. The route of the footpath has been aligned to follow the route of the Grainie Sike and Saddlers Sike burns which have steep banks along their route. Landform generally ascends from their banks and where the public right of way is parallel to the water body views are restricted towards the site.
At Chapelhills Farm the public right of way deviates from the route of the Saddlers Sike Burn to straddle an open area of ascending grass pasture.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-18 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Elevated views are possible towards the site from this point however the effects of these are diminished by distance. Additionally the extent of the development that is visible is limited to the rig only by topography and will be seen as a minor element within a broad and panoramic view.
Views from Roads and Railways
The A7 trunk road is the primary communication corridor to the east of the site and links Carlisle to the south with Hawick to the north east. The route of the road has been aligned to reflect the River Esk corridor and integrated into the landscape to respond to the undulating nature of the topography
The route of the A7 road is in cutting as it passes to the east of the proposed CBM site and views are therefore obscured. To the north east of the plantation woodland views are open towards the site area however these views are oblique and therefore the viewer needs to be looking in the right direction at the right time to register the site as an element within their view which will be transient in nature.
The B6720 is the main secondary road within the context of the site which links to the B6357 connecting the route of the A7 to the east with the M74 Motorway to the west. The route of this road reflects local undulations in topography and dense hedge planting lines the road corridor and as such views east or south east towards the site are effectively contained to the road corridor to all but the most elevated positions but will be transient in nature.
Views towards the site from the M74 are not possible as the road is orientated within a north west to south eastern direction. The interaction of topography with the physical form of the Scots Dike plantation restricts views towards the site from the M74.
Views from the Wider Landscape Setting
Views from the south are restricted by the screening effects of the Holehouse Flow Plantation, Scots Dike (NY 380733) and the built from of Longtown as well as intervening vegetation.
East of the site the significant woodland planting associated with the route of the River Esk valley corridor restricts views to elevated positions only. Views of the site from Gilnockie are restricted by landform and to the North and west views are contained by a combination of topography and plantation woodland.
Summary
Outside the site area, the quiet rural character of this Intimate Pastoral Valleys may gain a degree of ‘industrialisation’ in the short term and a slight potential for increased use of the roads by operators accessing the site.
The sensitivity of a landscape receptor is based on the character and quality of the landscape and its ability to accommodate change. It should be noted that the proposal site sits on the edge of the Regional Scenic Area which is defined as high sensitivity. As the site location is on the edge of the Regional Scenic Area this area should be dealt with more as a threshold. There is only one identified sensitive receptor situated in the Intimate Pastoral Valleys, all other receptors fall within the less sensitive landscape character areas.
The LVIA assessed the CBM gas development phases separately:
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-19 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• the site preparation and drilling phases (including the 30m high drilling rig); and, • the production phase when the drilling rig and acoustic barrier were removed and only 3m high soil bunds remain.
This was determined by the expected differences of the magnitude of impact during the above phases.
It was verified that the magnitude remains moderate/minor in the case of receptors in close proximity where the proposals may form a visible and recognisable new element within the overall view and may be readily noticed by the observers.
In the case of the drilling rig the expected increase in the magnitude of change due to the height of the rig which will become visible in a wider area, proved to be wrong. Conversely, the magnitude of the change decreases due to distance as only a very small part of the proposed development will be discernable and at such a distance that it would be scarcely appreciated. Consequently the appearance of the upper sections of the rig will have very little effect on the visual envelope.
The study concludes that the development respects the inherent characteristics of the landscape character type, and local landscape character, in terms of location, scale, and duration.
5.7 Mitigation
In order to minimise the landscape and visual impact of the development the following measures have been identified.
Site Preparation and Drilling Phases
• The topsoil will be stripped back and used to create 3m high bunding mounds around the western, northern and north eastern site boundaries in order to reduce visual impact of the site and the car park. All soil bunds will be seeded with perennial ryegrass should the site go into production.
Production
• No mitigation proposed.
Capping and Restoration
• All site equipment will be removed.
• When the CBM gas has been exhausted, the production hub will be 'capped' by filling the boreholes with concrete.
• The site will be covered with the original topsoil to allow forestry operations to resume as per the original land use. It will be replanted with an appropriate tree mix and returned directly to the previous land-use.
• The access road will be restored to its former condition unless requested otherwise by the landowner.
• An Aftercare Programme will be agreed with the Local Planning Authority, which also takes into account the objectives of the Regional Landscape
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-20 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Priorities for Dumfries and Galloway3. The site will be monitored for five years to ensure that the restoration is successful.
• Remedial works to trees and shrubs will be carried out in accordance with BS3998; 1989, Recommendations for Tree Work4 if the need is identified.
5.8 Statement of Significance
Due to associated topography and screening vegetation within the wider landscape setting, the development will be partially integrated into the landscape.
Significance of the impact was established for the production site and drilling rig separately. It was predicted that the height of the drilling rig will extend the visual impact of the development in the study area. The magnitude of the impact will increase significantly during its operation but will only be short term.
The magnitude of the impact will be reduced significantly following removal of the drilling rig. The impact on the landscape character is confined to the immediate vicinity of the development site as the 3m height soil bund (on the southern boundary) will remain visible until the end of the production phase.
The overall impact of the proposed development will last for up to 20 years and is therefore considered as long term impact.
The long term impact is related to the production site but the magnitude of change associated with it is limited to within the immediate vicinity. The significance of the site compound impact is considered minor/negligible.
The short term impact is related to the site preparation and drilling phases of approximately 12 weeks. The level of significance of the drilling rig is considered to be moderate/minor in the case of some of the closest receptors with the impacts on the remaining receptors considered minor/negligible due to the effects of distance.
The assessment confirms that the proposed development will only temporarily affect the integrity of the area’s rural character.
In the longer term the landscape character will not be adversely affected to any significant extent by the development. Impacts in the long-term will be limited due to the removal of the drilling rig and the impact remains localised.
Following restoration the site will be returned to its previous land use and character.
3 Scotland Rural Development Programme 2007 – 2013, Dumfries and Galloway Regional Priorities, Scottish Government 2009. 4 British Standard BS3998: 1989. Recommendations for Tree Work.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 5-21 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
6. Ecology
6.1 Summary
This chapter assessed the effects of the CBM gas development upon the habitats and species at Holehouse Plantation in order to ensure that the development would not adversely affect the biodiversity at or adjacent to the site.
The site proposed for development is a closed canopy Sitka spruce plantation. Access would be across two improved grassland fields and crossing Cross Burn, a very small burn whose channel has been greatly modified.
There are no designated areas for nature conservation within 3 km of the site. The closest ancient woodland, of plantation origin is within Holehouse Flow about 250m to the south-east: this is connected to the forestry at the site by extensive plantings of closed canopy Sitka spruce and Douglas fir.
No evidence of badger was found and there was no habitat for otter or great crested newt. No evidence of water vole was seen in Cross Burn which is not suitable habitat. However, a large oak at the northern boundary of the site has characteristics suitable for bat roost habitat. Therefore, the position of the site has been located and site layout planned to protect the tree and allow a continuous bat foraging route along the edge of the plantation. The additional planting of oak trees along the northern perimeter is also suggested.
Taking account of appropriate mitigation and enhancement measures, the impact upon current ecological interests of this proposed CBM gas development at Holehouse Plantation is assessed as not being significant and potentially beneficial for future roosting and foraging bats as well as other species such as invertebrates and birds.
6.2 Introduction
This chapter assesses the potential impacts on ecology of the proposed CBM gas development at the Holehouse Plantation. The aim of this assessment was to:
• define the nature conservation interest of the proposed development site as it currently stands, including identifying areas or features within or adjacent to the site that has been designated for their nature conservation interest; • identify the main habitat types across and immediately adjacent to the site and potential usage by protected species; • identify the presence of protected species; • predict any potential impact upon habitats and species; and • identify mitigation measures that might be required to ensure minimal impact upon any ecological receptors.
6.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines
The following legislation, regulations and other guidance have been taken into account in this assessment:
• Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and Wild Flora and Fauna (the "Habitats Directive");
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• Council directive 79/409/EEC on the Conservation of Wild Birds (the "Wild Birds Directive"); • The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2007; • The Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004; • The Protection of Badgers Act 1992; • The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended); • National Planning Policy Guideline 14: Natural Heritage; and • Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom by IEEM5.
6.4 Methodology
6.4.1 Desk Study
Nature Conservation Designations
Statutory areas designated for nature conservation were obtained from the SNH website. Locally designated areas for wildlife, such as Sites of Important for Nature Conservation and Local Wildlife Sites were obtained from the Dumfries & Galloway Environmental Resources Centre. DGERC hold all the records from the Dumfries Bat Group.
Existing Ecological Records
Existing records were obtained from the National Biodiversity Network (NBN) online database and by contacting several organisations for information regarding specific taxonomic groups and/or the area.
The NBN database was investigated for the presence of protected species in an area of up to 3 km from the site, depending on the land/habitat cover and the species. For example, the presence of badger in an adjoining woodland would be noted rather than a record in a separate woodland 2-3 km away although the presence of otter in a contiguous watercourse would still be relevant even if several kilometres away because otters are known to travel up to 30-35 km.
Several organisations were contacted for any existing data, in particular for protected areas, habitats and species, to contribute to the baseline information. Their responses are summarised in Table 6.1.
TABLE 6.1 - CONTACTS FOR EXISTING ECOLOGICAL DATASETS AND THEIR RESPONSES Consultation Consultees and their Responses Dumfries and Galloway Environmental Record Centre Date: 14 July 2009 Mark Pollitt replied by e-mail on 24 July 2009:
An e-mail was sent to Mark Pollitt There are no Local Nature reserves, no Local Wildlife Sites and no requesting up-to-date information on records of protected habitats or species within 500m of the site. protected habitats and species. The only record held within a 500 m radius from this site is a record at the 1 km scale of Atlantic salmon. Dumfries and Galloway Badger Group Date: 29 January 2009 Pete Dale replied by email on 16 March 2009:
An e-mail sent to Pete Dale. Locations of badger setts in the area and number of holes, activity and date last seen.
5 Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2006). Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK. IEEM, Winchester.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-2 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 6.1 - CONTACTS FOR EXISTING ECOLOGICAL DATASETS AND THEIR RESPONSES Consultation Consultees and their Responses RSPB and Raptor Study Group Date: 29 January 2009 Chris Rollie replied on 6 February 2009:
An e-mail was sent to Chris Rollie • He has no records of goshawks sites; requesting any records of protected bird • He has no records of any other Schedule 1 raptors in the area; species in the area. • The area is not noted for wintering geese.
The UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP)
The UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP) lists 65 priority habitats and 1149 species for conservation action. The UKBAP allows for local biodiversity partnerships to produce more regionally specific priorities.
Therefore, the Dumfries & Galloway Council Biodiversity Officer (Peter Norman) was contacted about the Dumfries & Galloway Local Biodiversity Action Plan (LBAP). A CD-ROM of the latest LBAP was received from the Council in order to ensure that any ecological impact assessment took account of the most relevant list of priority habitats and species as defined by the Dumfries & Galloway Biodiversity Partnership.
6.4.2 Baseline Surveys
A number of baseline surveys undertaken to inform this assessment. These were:
• a phase 1 habitat survey to map the extent of the various habitats at the site this included checking for invasive non-native species; • bats - a habitat suitability survey to identify any potential roost habitat; • badger survey; • otter survey; • water vole; • great crested newt – presence of suitable water bodies within 500 m; and • breeding birds – a habitat suitability survey to identify any potential breeding habitat.
Phase 1 Habitat Survey
The extents of the different habitats at the site were mapped using the JNCC 2005 field manual6.
Bat Habitat Suitability Assessment
Suitable roost sites are a key habitat requirement. These are often within cavities in man-made structures, such as buildings, bridges and underground structures. Maternity roosts, formed in summer by breeding females, are mainly in houses but males and non-breeders use a variety of crevice types, including hollows in trees, under slates, gaps in masonry and bridges. Winter hibernation sites include hollow trees, caves, crevices in buildings and bridges and old, rubble-filled stone walls.
During their active season (April-October), bats require a reliable source of insect food. Preferred feeding habitats include open woodland, woodland edge, water courses, water bodies, and hedgerows, because these provide shelter for flying insects.
6 Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2005). Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey: a Technique for Environmental Audit. JNCC, Peterborough.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-3 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
During the survey, a note was made of any potential bat roosting habitats and foraging routes. Where potential for bat roosts was identified (e.g. trees with loose bark, rot holes, crevices and/or ivy) which would be directly affected as a result of this development, a follow-up survey was undertaken by a licensed bat surveyor using an endoscope to verify the existence of any bat roosts.
Badger Survey
Badger setts are often located in woodland, hedgerows or amongst dense patches of scrub on steep banks close to fields, in areas with relatively loose soil that the animals are able to burrow into. They are, however, quite adaptable and may also excavate setts in disused railway cuttings, embankments, old quarries, open fields and even landfill sites. They use a wide range of rural and suburban habitats for feeding, basically anywhere they can find earthworms and other invertebrates.
All ground within and adjacent to the site was inspected for badger. Field signs of badger are described in Neal & Cheeseman (1996)7, Bang & Dahlstrøm (2001)8 and SNH (2001)9. Field evidence searched for included:
• Holes (i.e. setts, single and groups of burrows); • Prints; • Latrines (and dung pits used as territorial markers); • Hairs; • Feeding signs (snuffle holes); and • Paths.
Otter
Habitat suitable for otter includes any watercourse likely to have fish for feeding, areas of open water suitable for bathing, as well as vegetated banks with open areas useful for foraging, breeding and resting such as tree roots and boulder areas.
3 Signs indicating presence of otter are described in Bang and DahlstrØm (2001) and Sargent & Morris (2003)10. These include:
• Holts – below ground resting places; • Couches – above ground resting places; • Prints; and • Spraints – faeces used as territorial markers.
It is often not possible to identify couches with confidence unless other field signs are also present. Spraint is the most reliably identifiable evidence of presence of otter.
Water Vole
In lowland areas, water voles are most likely to be found along relatively narrow slow- flowing or static watercourses including ditch systems, even within intensively-farmed areas. Ideal watercourses for the species are less than 3 m wide and 1 m deep and do not show extreme fluctuations in water level. Water voles prefer sites with steep densely vegetated banks (incline greater than 35°) into which they can burrow and create nest chambers above the water table.
7 Neal, E. & Cheeseman, C. (1996). Badgers. Poyser Natural History, London. 8 Bang, P. & Dahlstrøm, P. (2001). Animal Tracks and Signs. Oxford University Press, Oxford. 9 Scottish Natural Heritage (2001). Scotland’s Wildlife: Badgers and Development. SNH, Battleby. 10 Sargent, G. & Morris, P. (2003). How to Find & Identify Mammals. The Mammal Society, London.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-4 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
A water vole survey was undertaken following the methodology prescribed in Strachan (1998)11. This involved searching any suitable watercourse for the following field signs:
• faeces – recognisable by their size, shape, and content, and (if not too dried- out) also distinguishable from rat droppings by their smell; • latrines – faeces are often deposited at discrete locations known as latrines; • feeding stations – food items are often brought to feeding stations along pathways and haul out platforms, recognisable by neat piles of chewed vegetation up to 10cm long; • burrows – appear as a series of holes along the waters edge distinguishable from rat burrows by size and position; • lawns – may appear as grazed areas around land holes; • nests – where the water table is high, above ground woven nests may be found; • footprints – tracks may occur at the waters edge and lead into vegetation cover, may be distinguishable from rat footprints by size; and • runways in vegetation – low tunnels pushed through vegetation near the waters edge, less obvious than rat runs.
Great Crested Newt Habitat Assessment
Great crested newts favour medium-sized ponds (50-250 m2) for breeding, especially those with a mosaic of dense aquatic vegetation for egg laying and more open, non- vegetated areas where courtship can take place. Extensively vegetated ponds with submerged plants covering about two thirds of the bottom and emergent/floating vegetation covering about one quarter to one half of the surface seem to be optimal. Breeding ponds may be located within a wide variety of habitats, including open woodland, marshes, reedbeds and grasslands (including grazed pasture). They do not necessarily require permanent ponds.
The survey therefore identified any standing water body at the site or adjacent to the site.
Breeding Bird Habitat Suitability Assessment
Practically every habitat is used by species of birds afforded some form of statutory protection. The most protected species as those listed on "Annex 1" (Birds Directive) and "Schedule 1" (Wildlife and Countryside Act) which includes species such as raptors. Information on such rare and scarce species, as well as overwintering grounds, is very likely to be held by the organisations consulted.
Most other birds are given general protection under the Wildlife and Countryside Act during the breeding season, March-July.
The survey recorded the presence/absence of woodland and scrub areas and their extents and connectivity to other similar habitats; the greater the extent and connectivity the greater the potential for use by breeding birds.
11 Strachan, R. (1998). The Water Vole Conservation Handbook. Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford .
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-5 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
6.4.3 Assessment Methodology
This assessment methodology has been taken from the Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK by the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management8.
Assessing the significance of the impact upon the ecological interests involves determining the nature conservation value of features at the site before defining the likely type, degree and scale of impact. However, the zone of influence upon these ecological interests arising from the project will vary according to the specific characteristics of each species, and this may be more extensive than the site.
The value of the ecological receptors may be defined according to geographical coverage of the legislation and policies relevant to it. This may be international, national, regional, local or negligible, as shown in Table 6.2.
TABLE 6.2 – APPROACH TO VALUING THE ECOLOGICAL RECEPTORS AT A SITE Conservation Value Examples International Habitats or species that are in the cited interest of an internationally protected site, such as those designated under the Habitats Directive (Special Areas of Conservation - SACs), the Birds Directive (Special Protection Areas - SPAs) or other international convention (e.g. Ramsar site).
Considerable extents of a priority habitat type listed in Annex I of the Habitats Directive.
A regularly occurring, nationally significant population of any internationally important species, e.g. Annex II of the Habitats Directive or a bird species listed on Annex 1 of the Birds Directive.
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 that the site is likely to be designated as an SAC/ SPA. This includes a regularly occurring bird population meeting criteria for international significance (for birds usually 1% of European population). National Habitats or species that are in the cited interest of a nationally designated site, such as a Special Site of Scientific Interest (SSSI) or a National Nature Reserve (NNR).
A feature (e.g. habitat or population) listed in UK legislation, that occurs in sufficient numbers or extent to be considered as being one of the highest quality examples in a national/ regional context, and for which the site could potentially be designated as an SSSI. This includes breeding birds listed on Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981).
Presence of UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority habitats or species. Regional Habitats or species that are in the cited interest of a Local Nature Reserve or some local-level designated sites. Bird populations forming part of a regional designation such as a Wildlife Trust Site or Local Authority Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC).
A feature (e.g. habitat or population) which is either unique or sufficiently unusual to be considered as being of nature conservation value up to a district or county context. This includes bird species where more than 1% of the regional population is subject to special conservation measures, such as Birds of Conservation Concern Red-list12.
12 Gregory, R.D., Wilkinson, N.I., Noble, D.G., Robinson, J.A., Brown, A.F., Hughes, J., Procter, D., Gibbons, D.W. and Galbraith, C. (2002). The population status of birds in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man: an analysis of conservation concern 2002-2007. British Birds 95: 410-448.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-6 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 6.2 – APPROACH TO VALUING THE ECOLOGICAL RECEPTORS AT A SITE Conservation Value Examples
A population of a species that is listed in a Local BAP because of its rarity in the locality. Local Habitats or species that are in the cited interest of a local-level designated site and may be designated as a non-statutory Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) or the equivalent, e.g. a Local nature reserve, Local Wildlife Site, Ancient Woodland designation. This may include Local Biodiversity Action Plan habitats or species. 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. Negligible Commonplace feature of little or no habitat/historical significance. Loss of such a feature would not be seen as detrimental to the ecology of the area.
How the development (construction, operation and restoration) is likely to affect the ecological receptors is determined by assessing how the extent of the habitat might be affected. This is considered in the light of other trends currently affecting the habitat and/or species. The UK Biodiversity Action Plan and the Species of Conservation Concern defined by the British Trust for Ornithology is useful in that habitats and species have been afforded a priority level for protection because of currently unfavourable trends.
Ecologically significant impact (whether positive or negative) can be determined by considering the integrity of a defined site or ecosystem along with the conservation status of habitats or species within a given geographical area.
The integrity of a site is the coherence of its ecological structure and function, across its whole area that enables it to sustain the habitat, complex of habitats and/or the levels of populations of the species for which it was classified.
Therefore, the following questions are considered for each of the ecological receptors valued at international, national, regional or local:
• Will any site/ecosystem processes be removed or changed? • What will be the effect on the nature and extent, structure and function of component habitats? • What will be the effect on the average population size and viability of component species?
This is defined is summarised in Table 6.3.
TABLE 6.3 – DEFINING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE IMPACT/EFFECT ON VALUED ECOLOGICAL RECEPTORS Magnitude Definition Negatively Would cause: significant a) the loss of all or a major proportion of a habitat or numbers of a species' population, or cause sufficient damage to immediately affect long-term viability; or
b) major effects on the habitat/population which would have a sufficient effect to alter the nature of the feature in the short-long term and affect its long-term viability. This includes the operation being undertaken at a sensitive time of the year (e.g. breeding season).
These would be measured for:
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-7 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 6.3 – DEFINING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE IMPACT/EFFECT ON VALUED ECOLOGICAL RECEPTORS Magnitude Definition • a habitat: as a loss in extent or damage that adversely affects its long-term integrity; and • a species population: as a loss in abundance and/or geographical range that adversely affects its long-term integrity.
Temporarily Effects that are detectable in the short and medium-term (these terms are specific significant for different habitats for species) but which should not alter the long-term viability of the feature/population.
These would be measured for: • a habitat: as a loss in extent or damage with effects in the short and medium- term but should not adversely affect its long-term integrity; and • a species population: as a loss in abundance and/or geographical range in the short and medium-term but should not adversely affect its long-term integrity. Not significant Minor effects, either of sufficiently small-scale or of short duration to cause no long- term adverse impact on the integrity of the habitat/ population. Neutral A potential impact that is not expected to affect the habitat/population in any way. Positively Would improve or reverse a negative trend such that for: significant • a habitat: there would be an increase in extent or quality so that its long-term integrity is assured; and • a species population: there would be an increase in abundance and/or geographical range such that its long-term integrity is assured.
6.5 Baseline Conditions
This section identifies the site's ecological importance in the international, national, and regional context, describing statutory and non-statutory designated sites, habitat types and the potential presence of protected species and the use of the site by these species.
6.5.1 Nature Conservation Designations
There are no statutory or local nature conservation sites within a 3 km radius of the site. However, an area of ancient woodland of plantation origin occurs about 250m south-east from the site in the southeast corner of Holehouse Flow, as shown in Figure 6.1. This is connected to the site through an extensive area of mature closed canopy Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) and Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) plantation.
It is known that SNH intend to restore a large area of Holehouse Flow to a peatland habitat. A high number of common spotted marsh orchid (Dactylorhiza fuschii) populations and possibly some heath orchid (Dactylorhiza maculata), were seen along the eastern side of the flow (adjacent to the A7). However, this site is external to the area intended for return to peatland habitat and no orchid population was seen at or adjacent to the site.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-8 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
6.5.2 Priorities within the UK and Local Biodiversity Action Plans
UKBAP
Habitats defined as being priority UK habitats that occur within the Canonbie area include:
• ancient and species-rich hedgerows; • lowland wood pasture and parkland; • wet woodland; • fens; • reedbeds; • lowland meadows; and • lowland raised bogs.
Species listed as priority UK species that may occur in the Canonbie area because of the type of habitats that exist include: • great crested newt; • otter; • brown hare; • red squirrel; and • a number of birds including: tree sparrow, bullfinch, turtledove and song thrush.
Of the 56 species of vascular plants, none of the UK priority species are found within intensively managed grassland although some may be found in arable field margins (such as purple ramping fumitory and cornflower, although these are rare). The majority of the UK priority species are associated with upland, wetland or heathland habitats.
Dumfries & Galloway LBAP
The Dumfries & Galloway LBAP (April 2009) lists local priority habitats and local priority species as a result of identifying strategic and/or pan Dumfries & Galloway biodiversity issues. Each priority habitat and priority species therefore has a list of objectives and actions. Local priority habitats that occur around Canonbie include:
• lowland rivers and backwaters; • lowland burns and ditches; • native woods (wet woods, ash woods, oak woods and birch woods); • scrub woods; • veteran trees; • coniferous plantations; • broadleaved and mixed plantations; • forest roads and rides; • agriculturally improved grasslands; • traditional field boundaries; • farm woods and shelterbelts; and • roads and verges.
However, these are local priorities to ensure improvement in the management of these habitats to increase species diversity as opposed to being an inherent protection of the habitat per se.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-9 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Similarly, there are a number of species statements taking account of species listed in the Scottish Biodiversity List, the UKBAP and European Protected Species. These cover:
• Fungi (15 species); • Lichens (43 species); • Mosses (20 species); • Vascular plants and ferns (118 species); • Invertebrates (164 species); • Fishes (15 species); • Birds (54 species, including barn owl Tyto alba); • Reptiles (2 species); • Amphibians (2 species); and • Mammals (18 species).
There are an additional 8 species also included as being important to the Scottish public but are generally widespread and common in Dumfries & Galloway and not considered to be locally threatened. These include:
• Oak (Quercus spp.); and • Badger (Meles meles).
6.5.3 The Results of Searching Existing Records
National Biodiversity Network
The National Biodiversity Network (NBN) had records within the NY37 10 km2 for:
• otter in the River Esk, the closest being about 900 m away; • pipistrelle species of bats were recorded in the 1 km OS grid square within which the site is situated; and • badger records in the 1 km OD grid square to the north.
At the 10km2 level, there are records of protected bird species, namely:
• barn owl (Tyto alba); and • kestrel (Falco tinnunculus).
There are no records of great crested newt, water vole or red squirrel.
Local Badger Group Records
Badger records exist in two adjacent OS grid squares, to the northwest and northeast. However, the site is not connected to any of the northern sites due to the presence of the B720 and A7 roads.
6.5.4 The Results of the Field Surveys
The surveys were undertaken on 8 July 2009. This was a warm and dry day.
Phase 1 Habitat Survey Results
The phase 1 habitat map is shown in Figure 6.2 showing the habitat types up to a 100 m radius from the proposed site. Specific notes taken to provide extra information for any given location and/or habitat are shown by red circled numbers
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-10 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
(target notes) on this figure. Detailed information for each target note given in Appendix 3.
A summary of the habitats is outlined below.
Coniferous Plantation
The site is situated within a closed canopy, Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) plantation. There is no groundflora. The forest breaks are species-poor neutral grassland. Closed canopy plantations of Sitka spruce and Douglas fir surround three of the sides of the site.
Improved Grassland
The access track crosses two large fields of improved grassland of perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) grown for silage. Aftermath grazing is by both sheep and cattle.
Neutral Grassland
The forest breaks are species-poor grasslands mainly dominated by Yorkshire fog (Holcus lanatus) (target note 14 and 15), with patches of soft rush (Juncus effusus), occasional nettles (Urtica dioica) and infrequent marsh thistle (Cirsium palustre). In some areas, bent grasses (Agrostis spp.) and red fescue (Festuca rubra) occur as well as patches of common haircap moss (Polytrichum commune) and, in other places, the moss Rhytidiadelphus squarrosus.
Marsh Grassland
Within the second field there is an area of raised land that is not obviously peaty. There is a mix of soft rush (predominantly) and Yorkshire fog with acid grassland species in drier patches, such as red fescue (Festuca rubra), sweet vernal grass (Anthoxanthum odoratum) and tormentil (Potentilla erecta).
Individual/Scattered Trees
To the north of the site there is a large mature sessile oak (target note 11). Other individual trees include self-sown downy birch (Betula pubescens) between the edge of the Douglas fir plantation and the ditch leading to Cross Burn (target note 16).
Planted Deciduous Trees
To the west of the closest stretch of access track to the site, an area of planted trees of various ages occurs (target note 9). These include alder (Alnus glutinosa), rowan (Sorbus aucuparia) and ash (Fraxinus excelsior). To the north of the site boundary, another area of planted trees (target note 13) surrounds the mature oak (target note 11). These include ash, alder and oak.
Hedgerows
These are mainly hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna) with some beech (Fagus sylvatica) and crab apple (Malus sylvestris), cut to about 1.5m high. The only one adjacent to the access track is non-stockproof (target note 3) and reinforced by fencing whereas the one perpendicular to the site entrance is stockproof (target note 10).
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-11 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Running water
Cross Burn originates in an area about 250m to the southwest of the site (according to the OS map). The original channel has been greatly modified (target note 6). The water level was extremely low at the time of the survey and no running water was observed in the channel. However, the OS map indicates that the flow is northwards reaching the River Esk almost 1 km away to the northeast. The channel adjacent to the forestry has been deepened to about 0.5m. The banks and sides of the channel are overgrown with soft rush Yorkshire fog and tufted hair grass (Deschampsia cespitosa)
A shallow ditch along the western boundary of the site is a narrow spade-dug channel, dry and covered in grasses, mainly Yorkshire fog.
Valuation of the habitats at the site: The habitats are assessed as having negligible status (as defined in Table 6.2) expecting the mature sessile oak tree (target note 11) which is given local status.
Bat habitat suitability assessment results
Roosting habitat
There are no records of bat roosts within 500 m of the site.
The mature sessile oak tree at the northern boundary of the site contains characteristics suitable for bat roost habitat.
Foraging habitat
The edge of the forestry including the firebreaks, would provide good foraging habitat.
Value of the site for bats: The site is categorised as having local value for roosting bats (as defined in Table 6.2) and edge of the forestry as having local value for foraging bats.
Badger survey results
No signs of badger were observed within the site or within a 30 m margin.
Value of the site for badger: none.
Otter and water vole survey results
Cross Burn does not have any otter or water vole potential at the location of the site.
Value of the site for otter and water vole: none.
Great crested newt habitat assessment results
No ponds were found on or adjacent to the site.
Value of the site for great crested newt: none.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-12 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Breeding bird habitat suitability assessment
The edge of the woodland is likely to provide greater breeding habitat for birds than in the forestry, especially in the self-seeded birch trees, the sessile oak and planted alder, rowan and ash. However, the spruce will also provide some limited breeding habitat. The intact hedgerow north of the site will also provide some limited breeding habitat.
Value of the site for birds: This site is regarded as having negligible status as breeding bird habitat (as defined in Table 6.2).
6.5.5 Valued Ecological Receptors
A mature sessile oak tree, and roosting and foraging bats have been identified as Valued Ecological Receptors (VERs) at this site. However, consideration will also be given to breeding birds given the need to remove trees, with the reasoning outlined in Table 6.4.
TABLE 6.4 - SUMMARY OF THE SPECIES TO BE CONSIDERED DURING THE PLANNING OF OPERATIONS AT THE SITE Ecological Conservation status Value within the Receptor study area (defined in Table 6.2) Mature oak tree This tree does not attain the ‘Veteran tree’ status as Local described in the Dumfries & Galloway LBAP but, due to its listing on the Scottish Biodiversity List, is categorised as a ‘Local Priority Species for Dumfries & Galloway’. Roosting and All species of bat are listed in Annexes II and IV of the Local Foraging bats Habitats Directive. They are protected under the Conservation (Natural Habitats etc) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2007 from any deliberate or reckless capturing, injuring or killing, disturbance in a structure or place used for shelter or protection, while rearing or otherwise caring for young, or obstructing access to breeding site or resting place etc. A more limited number of bats (Barbastelle, Bechstein's, greater horseshoe bat, lesser horseshoe bat and soprano pipistrelle) are regarded as priority species and therefore have Species Action Plans within the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP)13. The Dumfries & Galloway LBAP also specifically includes common pipistrelle (Pipistrellus pipistrellus), soprano pipistrelle (Pipistrellus pygmaeus), brown long- eared bat (Plecotus auritus), whiskered bat (Myotis mystacinus), Noctule bat (Nyctalus noctula), Daubenton's bat (Myotis daubentii), Natterer's bat (Myotis nattereri) and Leisler's bat (Nyctalus leisleri) because they (excepting Leisler's) occur on the Scottish Biodiversity List.
The 1991 EU Agreement on the Conservation of Bats in Europe (under the 1982 Bonn Convention) extends protection to feeding habitat. Breeding birds Part 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 makes it Negligible an offence to wilfully or recklessly kill, injure or take any wild bird; take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird whilst that nest is in use or being built.
13 www.ukbap.org.uk
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-13 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
6.6 Impact Assessment
In this section, potential impacts that may affect the ecological interests within the survey area are described and assessed to determine whether they are potentially significant. Where applicable, mitigation measures for each of the impacts are described and the residual impact and its significance reported.
This includes the results of the review of existing ecological data (such as obtained from the National Biodiversity Network and local interest group records) as well as results from the field surveys.
6.6.1 Potential impacts
Site Preparation and Drilling
Potential effects during site preparation and drilling include, the removal of hedgerow to form access to the site, the removal of spruce trees, damage to a mature oak tree, noise from the drilling rig and generators which would be operating for 24 hours, seven days a week, and light disturbance at night from the lights on the drilling rig and separate lighting towers. Together, these phases would last around 12 weeks.
Production and Restoration
During gas extraction and restoration, the site will be an area of hardstanding approximately 70 by 100 metres within which there are manhole covers allowing access to underground structures. There will be no noise or lighting. The area will be surrounded by a timber post and rail fence and most, if not all, the soil bunds will have been removed. Restoration will restore the groundcover to forestry.
Specific potential impacts on ecological interests at this site
The potential impacts on the ecological interests during various phases of the project are summarised in Table 6.5.
TABLE 6.5 - POTENTIAL IMPACTS DURING THE VARIOUS PHASES OF THE PROJECT ON THE ECOLOGICAL RECEPTORS Potential effects during site preparation and drilling Significance of the effect (see Table 6.3 for the definition of significance) Mature The roots of this oak tree may be damaged. This would not only Negatively Oak Tree affect the tree itself but populations of invertebrates, fungi and Significant lichens associated with the tree, as well as bats and birds. Roosting There may be the removal of 1-3 planted deciduous trees for the Negligible and access track at the entrance of the site which have no bat roosting Foraging potential. The removal of the spruce, leaving deciduous tree bats species (including larch) along the northern boundary retains any bat foraging. However there will be loss of foraging along the western perimeter but the edge of the adjacent forestry across the firebreak will continue to provide alternative foraging potential. Breeding It is likely that some of the trees will contain breeding birds during Temporarily birds March-July inclusive as might the intact hedgerow to the north of significant the site. Potential effects during gad extraction Significance of the effect Mature None Neutral Oak Tree Roosting None. Neutral and
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-14 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 6.5 - POTENTIAL IMPACTS DURING THE VARIOUS PHASES OF THE PROJECT ON THE ECOLOGICAL RECEPTORS Foraging bats Breeding None. Neutral birds Potential effects during restoration Significance of the effect Mature Damage to the roots by heavy machinery and therefore Temporarily oak tree consequential to a part or all of the tree. significant Roosting Any damage to the tree may impact upon any roost and/or affect Temporarily and the quality of habitat for invertebrates and therefore upon foraging significant foraging bats. bats Breeding Indirect damage to roots may result in the loss of habitat. Temporarily Birds significant
6.6.2 Potential cumulative impacts
This site is one of eleven sites that Greenpark are including within this second phase of CBM development in this area. This follows a first phase of eight sites which have already been submitted to Dumfries & Galloway Council for determination. In total, there would be eighteen drill sites/Production Hubs and one Compressor Station in the area. Whilst the CBM gas developments would be developed sequentially, one site may be prepared over a period when drilling may be taking place at another site. Therefore, efforts would be made to undertake site preparation and drilling phases outside the immediate area of the other. On this basis, a cumulative impact would be unlikely.
With the Production Hubs being mainly underground, visually non-intrusive and of small area, there would be no cumulative impact from the production phase overall.
Lastly, there are no other similar operations in the area. Therefore, no cumulative impacts on ecological interests in this regard are predicted to occur.
6.7 Mitigation
In order to ensure that any impact from the development is nullified or reduced, a number of mitigation measures are proposed. These are outlined in Table 6.6.
TABLE 6.6 – MEASURES TO MITIGATE ANY POTENTIAL IMPACTS Mitigation during site preparation and drilling Significance of the effect (see Table 6.3 for the definition of significance) Mature A root protection area would be established around the tree in Neutral Oak Tree accordance with BS5837:2005. Roosting The line of deciduous trees (including larch) would be retained Positively and along the northern boundary. In addition, a further five sessile significant Foraging oak trees would be planted along the northern boundary of the bats site. Noise Plant and equipment will be silenced. Lighting Lights will be mounted on lighting towers and their height altered according to the level required so that all lighting will be directed downwards towards the area of working. Breeding One of two options will be adopted to ensure compliance with Neutral birds legislation. These are:
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-15 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 6.6 – MEASURES TO MITIGATE ANY POTENTIAL IMPACTS a) Any removal of hedgerow or felling of trees would be undertaken outside the breeding season (March-July inclusive); or b) an experienced ornithologist will be appointed to establish the location of any occupied nests on the site or adjacent to the site before work begins. If known nests are identified, then work will proceed. Should active nests be identified, then these will be cordoned off with a buffer zone of approximately 10-20m (depending on the species) and this area left undisturbed until chicks have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Mitigation during gas extraction Significance of the effect Mature None required Neutral Oak Tree Roosting None required. Neutral Foraging bats Breeding None required Neutral Birds Mitigation during restoration Significance of the effect Mature A root protection area would be established around any mature Neutral Oak Tree tree in accordance with the latest British Standard. Roosting Mature trees would be protected as described above. Neutral and Foraging bats Breeding Mature trees would be protected as described above. Neutral birds
6.8 Statement of Significance
This chapter has assessed the likely significance of effects of the CBM gas development at Holehouse Plantation on habitats and species. There were no ecological resources valued as being of international national or regional importance although the presence of an old oak tree was identified as potentially being of local importance to roosting and foraging bats. Mitigation measures are suggested to protect the tree, roosting bats, foraging bats and breeding birds.
This CBM gas development at Holehouse Plantation is therefore assessed as not significantly affecting ecological interests.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 6-16 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
7. Hydrology
7.1 Summary
This chapter assessed the effects of the CBM gas development upon hydrological conditions and drainage within the Holehouse Plantation site and its catchment area.
The aim of the chapter was to address the following issues:
• current risk of flooding; • effects of CBM gas development on surface water storage and conveyance; and, • stormwater design proposals for the site.
The site is currently a Sitka Spruce Plantation and information collected during the desk study indicated that the site is not an area:
• with critical drainage problems identified by the SEPA and notified to the Local Planning Authority; or, • where the Local Planning Authority has identified drainage problems through a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment.
The rate of runoff from the site to the receiving Cross Burn – 35m north-west of the boundary of the site - would be attenuated by a network of perimeter ditches and limited to similar rates of maximum discharge as to that which took place before the site was developed (using an estimated greenfield runoff rate) by an existing swale located at the other side of the 1m high wooden post and wire fence close to where the proposed access road meets the site.
Other than recommendations to mitigate the short term potential for pollution of surface water due to the temporary use of fuels, excavators, sanitation facilities and unforeseen ground conditions encountered, the net impact of the proposed CBM gas development is considered neutral because there are no appreciable effects identified, either positive or negative, on the environmental attributes identified in this chapter.
As the CBM gas development has no significant impacts on surface water related objectives for the study area, it is concluded that the proposal has an insignificant impact on identified valuable attributes within the site and its catchment area.
7.2 Introduction
The aim of this chapter is to address the following issues:
• current risk of flooding; • effects of CBM gas development on surface water storage and conveyance; and, • stormwater design proposals for the site.
Therefore, the key objectives of this chapter are to determine:
• the probability of a flood occurring and the severity of any impact; • stormwater design constraints imposed by the catchment area; and,
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 7-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• the proposed design for stormwater storage including detailed design of drainage components i.e. Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS) and pipe network.
The general principle behind the use of SUDS for any site is to comply with the following objectives:
• runoff volumes should be minimised; • runoff rates should be minimised; • the stormwater effluent is treated appropriately before discharge from the site bearing in mind the requirements of the receiving watercourse; • groundwater must be protected.
In addition, it is desirable to maximise the amenity potential and ecological benefits where there is an opportunity to provide this.
The SUDS components are not treated as individual options, but are intended to provide a set of appropriate drainage features (a treatment train). Where possible a mixture of SUDS components has been adopted to take opportunity of their respective benefits14.
7.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines
This chapter has been produced with reference to the following legislation, polices and guidance:
• The Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) (WFD), and the Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2005; • Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) 7, 2004. Planning and Flooding. SPP7 provides guidance To prevent further development which would have a significant probability of being affected by flooding or which would increase the probability of flooding elsewhere; • Department for Communities and Local Government, 2006. Environmental Impact Assessment: A guide to good practice and procedures – A Consultation Paper; • SEPA, 2008. The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2005, A Practical Guide, Version 5 (CAR Practical Guide); • Defra/Environment Agency, 2005. R&D Technical Report W5-074/A/TR/1 Revision D; • http://www.multimap.com/clients/places.cgi?client=sepa; • Environment Agency. Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS). An introduction; • CIRIA C697, (2007). The SUDS Manual; • Department of Transport, 2003. The Water Environment Sub-Objective; and, • JBA Consulting, 2007. Dumfries and Galloway Council Strategic Flood Risk Appraisal (SFRA).
7.4 Methodology
Fieldwork
A site walkover was undertaken on the 23rd June 2009 to determine hydrological conditions and site drainage with regards to the following:
14 http://www.uksuds.com/information/SUDS_Guidance_Extended_Version_02.pdf
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 7-2 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• conveyance of surface water runoff; • treatment of surface water runoff; and, • control of surface water runoff using storage.
Desk Study
General information regarding Flood Zones within the site and its catchment area was obtained from the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) Flood Map. Reference was also made to the Dumfries and Galloway Council Strategic Flood Risk Appraisal (SFRA) for locally specific guidance and information.
General information used to calculate stormwater storage volumes for the CBM gas development was obtained from the EA R&D Technical Report W5-074/A.
Lastly, SEPA was consulted concerning water features, their attributes and indicators of quality within the site and its catchment area (Table 7.1).
TABLE 7.1 – WATER FEATURES, THEIR ATTRIBUTES AND INDICATORS OF QUALITY Feature Attribute/Service Indicator of Possible Measure quality River Water Supply Use for water • Location and number of abstraction points supply (potable, industrial or • Volume of water agricultural) abstracted • Use of water (potable most important)
Chemical water • Existing chemical GQA quality grade (A/B=good, C/D=fair, and E=poor, F=bad) • Likelihood of a change in grade arising (+ve or -ve) Transport and Presence of • Location and number of dilution of waste surface water discharge points products discharge points • Volume of effluent discharged Contribution of • Proportion of flow made up discharges to by effluent at different total river flow times of the year
Biodiversity Biological water • Existing chemical GQA quality grade (A/B=good, C/D=fair, and E=poor, F=bad) • Likelihood of a change in grade arising (+ve or -ve) Fisheries quality • EC Fishery designation (Salmonid, Cyprinid or undesignated) Recreation Riverside access • Presence of route and importance (i.e. is it a nation or strategic route, such as the Thames Path) Use of river for • Presence of facilities and recreation clubs for using the river environment • Use for angling (number of clubs / membership)
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 7-3 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 7.1 – WATER FEATURES, THEIR ATTRIBUTES AND INDICATORS OF QUALITY Feature Attribute/Service Indicator of Possible Measure quality Value to Value of the uses • Value to local economy economy of the river (e.g. (e.g. employment, relative commercial property prices, cost of fishing, alternatives, etc.) abstractions, discharges, navigation, leisure and riverside development land)
Conveyance of Presence of • Number and size of flow and material watercourses watercourses • Existing flood risk
Floodplain Conveyance of Presence of • Number and size of flood flows floodplain watercourses • Existing flood risk Flood flow routes • Location / importance of flood flow routes Groundwater Water Supply Use for water • Location and number of supply (potable, abstraction points
industrial or • Volume of water agricultural) abstracted • Use of water (potable most important)
Groundwater • Location and grade of vulnerability source protection zone • Classification of aquifer vulnerability
Transport and Presence of • Location and number of dilution of waste discharge points discharge points products • Volume of effluent discharged Value to Value of the uses • Value to local economy economy of the (e.g. employment, cost of groundwater (e.g. alternatives, etc.) abstractions and discharges)
Conveyance of Flow routes • Location and importance of flood flows flow routes Groundwater • Changes in levels and levels recharge
Sea and Water Supply Use for water • Location and number of Estuaries supply abstraction points • Volume of water abstracted Transport and Presence of • Location and number of dilution of waste discharge points discharge points products • Volume of effluent discharged
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 7-4 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 7.1 – WATER FEATURES, THEIR ATTRIBUTES AND INDICATORS OF QUALITY Feature Attribute/Service Indicator of Possible Measure quality Biodiversity Water quality • Chemical and biological quality (data availability will be variable) Fisheries quality • Results of surveys etc (numbers / biomass of species and individuals) Invertebrate • Results of surveys etc populations (numbers / biomass of species and individuals) Recreation Bathing beaches • Compliance with EC water bathing standards Other recreation • Presence of facilities and uses clubs • Use for angling (number of clubs / membership) Value to Value of the uses • Value to local economy economy of the (e.g. employment, relative sea/estuary (e.g. property prices, cost of commercial alternatives, etc.) fishing, abstractions, discharges, navigation, leisure and waterside development land)
Stillwaters Biodiversity Fisheries quality • Results of surveys etc (Lakes and (numbers / biomass of Ponds) species and individuals) • Results of surveys etc Invertebrate populations (numbers / biomass of species and individuals) Recreation Use of stillwater • Presence of facilities and for recreation clubs for using lake/pond • Use for angling (number of clubs / membership)
Analysis
SEPA’s flood map does not provide enough detail to accurately estimate the flood risk associated with individual properties or specific point locations. Local factors such as flood defence schemes, structures in or around river channels such as bridges, buildings and other local influences, which might affect a flood, have not been included. Furthermore, the flood map only shows flooding from rivers or the sea and does not account for flooding from other sources such as surface water runoff, surcharged culverts (where rivers which have been channelled underground flood) or drainage systems15.
It is accepted that for development proposals which may be at risk from flooding, the criteria identified in SEPA’s Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) – Checklist should be provided and attached within the front cover of any flood risk assessment16.
15 http://www.sepa.org.uk/flooding/flood_map/view_the_map.aspx 16 http://www.sepa.org.uk/flooding/flood_risk/planning__flooding/fra_checklist.aspx
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 7-5 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Assessment of Significance
Table 7.2 provides guidance on the magnitude criteria for potential impacts, with some examples. The magnitude of the potential impact is completely independent of the value of the attribute affected and therefore gives no indication of significance when considered alone.
TABLE 7.2 – CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING IMPACT MAGNITUDE Magnitude Criteria Example Major Results in loss of attribute • loss of EC designated Salmonid fishery • change in GQA grade of river reach • compromise employment source • loss of flood storage/increased flood risk • pollution of potable source of abstraction Moderate Results in impact on • loss in productivity of a fishery • contribution of a significant integrity of attribute or loss of part of attribute proportion of the effluent in the receiving river, but insufficient to change its GQA grade • reduction in the economic value of the feature Minor Results in minor impact on • measurable changes in attribute, attribute but of limited size and/or proportion Negligible Results in an impact on • discharges to watercourse but no significant loss in quality, fishery attribute but of insufficient magnitude to affect the productivity or biodiversity use/integrity • no significant impact on the economic value of the feature • no increase in flood risk
Table 7.3 provides guidance for estimating the importance of an attribute based on criteria such as quality, scale, rarity and consideration of whether water attributes are replaceable over a given time frame.
TABLE 7.3 – GUIDELINES FOR ESTIMATING THE IMPORTANCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ATTRIBUTES Importance Criteria Example Very High attribute with a high quality Aquifer providing potable water to a large and rarity, regional or population EC designated Salmonid national scale and limited fishery potential for substitution
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 7-6 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 7.3 – GUIDELINES FOR ESTIMATING THE IMPORTANCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ATTRIBUTES Importance Criteria Example High attribute with a high quality GQA Grade A reach of river aquifer and rarity, local scale and providing potable water to a small limited potential for population EC designated Cyprinid fishery substitution, attribute with a medium quality and rarity, regional or national scale and limited potential for substitution
Medium Attribute with a medium GQA Grade B / C reach or river Aquifer quality and rarity, local scale providing abstraction water for agricultural and limited potential for or industrial use substitution, attribute with a low quality and rarity, regional or national scale and limited potential for substitution
Low attribute with a low quality Floodplain with limited existing and rarity, local scale and development limited potential for substitution
The significance of a potential impact is estimated by its magnitude (Table 7.2) and the importance (Table 7.3) of the affected attribute. Table 7.4 provides guidance for determining the significance of a potential impact based on its magnitude and the importance of the attribute.
TABLE 7.4 – CRITERIA FOR ESTIMATING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS Importance of attribute Magnitude of Impact Very High High Medium Low
Major Very Highly Significant Low Significant Significant Significance
Moderate Highly Significant Low Insignificant Significant Significance
Minor Significant Low Insignificant Insignificant Significance
Negligible Low Insignificant Insignificant Insignificant Significance
Where the predicted potential impact is highly uncertain as a result of lack of information or insufficient design details or a more significant, but less probable impact is identified, the impact assessment has determined whether the potential risks identified justify invoking the precautionary principle, or whether it is sufficient to flag them up as issues for more detailed consideration at a later stage, based on the relative probability of the possible outcomes and their significance.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 7-7 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Appraisal of the Potential Impacts of the Proposal on Valuable Attributes
The indicative criterion below has been used to estimate the effects of the CBM gas development upon hydrological conditions and drainage within the site and its catchment area.
The qualitative comments box in Table 8.5 provides further information on the basis for estimating the significance of potential impacts.
• Significant Positive Contribution - where the proposal may result in a positive impact on the water environment, because it either:
supports the water relevant objectives which apply to the study area; or has mixed positive and negative impacts, but the positive impacts are much more significant than the negative impacts (this requires justification criteria in the impact assessment section);
• Significant Negative Contribution - where the proposal may result in a negative impact on the water environment, because it either:
contradicts the relevant objectives which apply to the study area; or has mixed positive and negative impacts, but the negative impacts are much more significant than the positive impacts (this requires justification criteria in the impact assessment section);
• Mixed Contribution - this score should be used where the project has positive and negative impacts, which cannot be considered insignificant, but which do not clearly indicate that the overall impact will be significantly positive or negative; and,
• Insignificant Contribution - where the project has no significant impacts on water related objectives for the study area.
TABLE 7.5 – WATER ENVIRONMENT – DEFINITIONS OF OVERALL ASSESSMENT SCORES Score Comment Large Beneficial Impact It is extremely unlikely that the proposed CBM gas development would fit into this category. However a proposal could have a large positive impact if it is predicted that it would result in a very or highly significant improvement to a water attribute(s), with insignificant adverse impacts on other water attributes.
Moderate Beneficial Where the proposed CBM gas development provides an Impact opportunity to enhance the water environment, because it results in predicted: • significant improvements for at least one water attribute, with insignificant adverse impacts on other attributes;
• very or highly significant improvements, but with some adverse impacts of a much lower significance.
The predicted improvements achieved by the proposal should greatly outweigh any potential negative impacts.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 7-8 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 7.5 – WATER ENVIRONMENT – DEFINITIONS OF OVERALL ASSESSMENT SCORES Score Comment Slight Beneficial Impact Where the proposed CBM gas development provides an opportunity to enhance the water environment, because it provides improvements in water attributes which are of greater significance than the adverse effects.
Neutral Where the net impact of the proposed CBM gas development is neutral, because:
• it has no appreciable effect, either positive or negative, on the identified attributes;
• the proposal would result in a combination of effects, some positive and some negative, which balance to give an overall neutral impact. In most cases these will be slight or moderate positive and negative impacts. It may be possible to balance impacts of greater significance, however, in these cases great care will be required to ensure that the impacts are comparable in terms of their potential environmental impacts and the perception of these impacts.
Slight Adverse Impacts Where the proposed CBM gas development may result in a degradation of the water environment, because the predicted adverse impacts are of greater significance than the predicted improvements.
Moderate Adverse Where the proposed CBM gas development may result in a Impacts degradation of the water environment, because it results in predicted:
• significant adverse impacts on at least one attribute, with insignificant predicted improvements to other attributes;
• very or highly significant adverse impacts, but with some improvements which are of a much lower significance and are insufficient positive impacts to offset the negative impacts of the proposal.
Large Adverse Impact Where the proposed CBM gas development may result in a degradation of the water environment, because it results in predicted:
• highly significant adverse impacts on a water attribute;
• significant adverse impacts on several water attributes.
Very Large Adverse Where the proposed CBM gas development may result in a Impact degradation of the water environment because it results in predicted:
• very significant adverse impacts on at least one water attribute;
• highly significant adverse impacts on several water attributes.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 7-9 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
7.5 Baseline Conditions
Fieldwork
The site is currently a Sitka Spruce Plantation. The land gradient slopes gently down from the site to the north-west.
The site connects to a swale via ditches adjacent to the south-western and north- western boundaries of the site.
The swale connects to Cross Burn 35m north-west of the boundary of the site.
Desk Study
A summary of the potential sources of flooding and a review of the potential risk posed by each source at the site is presented in Table 7.6.
TABLE 7.6 – POTENTIAL RISK POSED BY FLOODING SOURCES Potential Flood Risk at proposed CBM Potential Source Data Source gas development site Flooding from rivers and the sea with a 0.5% (1 in 200) or No SEPA greater chance of happening each year Flooding from land No See Analysis below
Flooding from No See Desk Study below groundwater Flooding from See Desk Study above and reservoirs, canals and No Analysis below other artificial sources Flooding from surcharged culverts See Desk Study above and (where rivers which No Analysis below have been channelled underground) Flooding from See Desk Study above and No drainage systems Analysis below
General information used to calculate stormwater storage volumes for the CBM gas development is presented in Appendix 4. A conservative approach was adopted when determining the rain acceptance potential of soil at the site i.e. soil type 4. According to the WRAP classification scheme17 these soils have low winter rain acceptance potential.
Additional measures of attribute quality obtained from SEPA for the site and its catchment area were:
• SEPA is not aware of any relevant information pertaining to the site or its immediate environment.
17 D.B. Boorman, J.M. Hollist & A. Lilly, 1995. Report No. 126, Hydrology of soil types: a hydrologically-based classification of the soils of the United Kingdom
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 7-10 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Analysis
Current risk of flooding
A review of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency flood map indicated that the site does not lie within a medium to high risk area, i.e. a less than 1 in 200 chance of flooding from rivers and the sea in any one year.
SFRA information was viewed on Dumfries and Galloway Council’s Strategic Flood Risk Appraisal page18. Although SEPA’s flood map data has also been used to provide flood risk information in Dumfries and Galloway Council’s SFRA, information held by the Council on flood occurrence and operations has also been incorporated.
Existing surface water storage and conveyance
Information collected during the desk study indicates that the site is not an area:
• with critical drainage problems identified by the SEPA and notified to the Local Planning Authority; or, • where the Local Planning Authority has identified drainage problems through a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment.
A location map that includes geographical features, street names and shows watercourses or other bodies of water in the vicinity is provided in Figure 4.2.
Site levels - existing and indicative - referenced to Ordnance Datum are provided in Figure 7.1.
Proposed design for stormwater storage
The main flood risk and water quality issue to consider is the management of surface water run-off. Drainage from the development must not increase flood risk either on- site or elsewhere and must not result in potentially unacceptable risks either on-site or elsewhere.
The rate of runoff from the site to the receiving Cross Burn – 35m north-west of the boundary of the site - would be attenuated by a network of perimeter ditches and limited to similar rates of maximum discharge as to that which took place before the site was developed (using an estimated greenfield runoff rate) by an existing swale located at the other side of the 1m high wooden post and wire fence close to where the proposed access road meets the site.
Preliminary sizing of existing stormwater storage volumes has been undertaken with reference to EA R&D Technical Report W5-074/A.
Worksheets ASV1 to ASV4 in EA R&D Technical Report W5-074/A have been used to estimate stormwater Attenuation Storage Volumes. Three values are determined which represent the 1 year, 30 year and 100 year storage requirements together with their respective limits of peak discharge to the receiving water. Worksheets TV and LTV EA R&D Technical Report W5-074/A have been used to estimate Long Term and Treatment Storage Volume requirements respectively (Appendix 4).
18 http://www.dumgal.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4702
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 7-11 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Based on a 100 yr peak discharge rate of runoff per unit area of 22.10 l/s/ha for the site and access track, initial sizing of Attenuation Storage Volume indicates a storage requirement of 270 m3 for the site and 175 m3 for the access track.
A plan showing the existing site, development proposals and any structures (e.g. embankments), which may influence local flood flow overland or in any watercourses (e.g. culverts) present on the site is shown in Figure 7. 2.
7.6 Impact Assessment
Surface Water Drainage
Site Preparation Phase
When calculating stormwater Attenuation Storage Volumes a conservative approach was adopted when determining the rain acceptance potential of soil at the site i.e. soil type 4. The British Geological Survey (BGS), 1968, Sheet 11, One Inch Series19 also indicates that the superficial deposit in this location could comprise of both peat and stony, sandy and silty till with very compact clasts. The net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development could be considered slight adverse.
Drilling Phase
Compacted hardcore over a geogrid separator would be used to form the surface of the CBM gas development and the access track. This would allow some surface water to drain through to the underlying soils but an increase in surface run-off can be expected. This additional volume of runoff would be attenuated by the drainage features shown in Figure 7.1. Therefore the net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
The runoff rate would be minimised to that which took place before the site was developed (Greenfield runoff rate) by the network of perimeter ditches and swales detailed above. Therefore the net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is also considered neutral.
Production Phase
During the production phase the site compound would remain largely as for the drilling phase, only smaller (circa 0.5 ha), with localised concrete chambers. Therefore the net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is again considered neutral.
Capping and Restoration Phase
There would be no residual impacts following capping and restoration of the surrounding landscape as boreholes would be decommissioned in agreement with Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Mines (HMI) and the site would be restored to its original condition with original field drainage. Therefore the net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
19 British Geological Survey (BGS). 1968. Langholm. Scotland Sheet 11, Drift Edition. One Inch Series.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 7-12 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Surface Water Quality
Site Preparation Phase
During the site preparation phase, the potential for pollution of surface water may exist depending on spillage/leakage of fuel, hydraulic fluid from excavators, unforeseen ground conditions encountered and spillage of foul water should temporary sanitation facilities be emptied in an unsatisfactory manner. The nearest surface drainage feature is a swale located at the other side of the 1m high wooden post and wire fence close to the proposed access road meets the site and the nearest surface water feature is the Cross Burn 35m north-west of the boundary of the site. The net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development could be considered slight adverse.
Access to the site will require crossing Cross Burn. As authorisation for this crossing will depend on the type of crossing involved and the impact on the watercourse, the method of crossing would be agreed with SEPA before works commence on site. Therefore the net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
Drilling Phase
During the drilling phase, the potential for pollution of the surface water drainage system may exist in the short term due to the spillage/leakage of fuel and spillage of foul water should temporary sanitation facilities be emptied in an unsatisfactory manner. The net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development could be considered slight adverse.
There is the potential for pollution of the surface water drainage system from the storage and transfer of groundwater abstracted from the gas bearing strata which may be of poor quality compared to local surface waters. However, storage and removal by tanker will limit leakage or spillage. Therefore the net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
Production Phase
During the production phase, there is the potential for pollution of the surface water drainage system from the storage and transfer of groundwater abstracted from the gas bearing strata which may be of poor quality compared to local surface waters. However, storage and removal by tanker will limit leakage or spillage. Therefore the net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
Capping and Restoration Phase
There would be no residual impacts following capping and restoration of the surrounding landscape as boreholes would be decommissioned in agreement with HMI and the site would be restored to its original condition with original field drainage. Therefore the net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is also considered neutral.
The potential for pollution of surface water may exist from spillage or leakage of foul water should temporary sanitation facilities be emptied in an unsatisfactory manner. The net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development could be considered slight adverse.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 7-13 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
7.7 Mitigation
Where adverse effects have been identified, practical and cost-effective mitigation measures are recommended to reduce the risk to acceptable levels.
Surface Water Drainage
Site Preparation Phase
This phase would be limited in duration to around six weeks, reducing the potential risk of increased flooding by intense rainfall at a time when the existing drainage may be disrupted, leading to increased volumes of surface runoff. By the end of this phase, proposed site drainage would be in place.
Surface Water Quality
Site Preparation Phase
To ensure that work does not cause mud, silt or concrete to be washed away during the construction stage or as a result of subsequent erosion, small check dams made from graded broken stone will be constructed to encourage deposition of solids. As the check dam is made of stone, it will allow the ponded water to discharge slowly towards the outlet and improve the efficiency of the swale.
An incident response plan would be prepared and maintained following best practice set out in Pollution Prevention Guideline ‘Incident response planning’: PPG 21 before works commence on site.
This would ensure, for example, that fuel storage facilities would be designed in accordance with SEPA guidelines and fully bunded to allow for a minimum of 110% of stored volume, equipment and materials would be on site to deal with pollution incidents and sewage from temporary sanitation facilities would be stored in sealed tanks and emptied at regular intervals by licensed service providers.
It is acknowledged SEPA strongly discourage the storage and use of loose drums of fuel on site. Greenpark will forward the incident response plan to SEPA before works commence on site, and take into account any relevant comments.
Drilling Phase
An incident response plan would be prepared and maintained following best practice set out in Pollution Prevention Guideline ‘Incident response planning’: PPG 21 before works commence on site.
This would ensure, for example, that a detailed description of how facilities operate would be prepared, fuel storage facilities would be designed in accordance with SEPA guidelines and fully bunded to allow for a minimum of 110% of stored volume, surface drainage system would include features such as pollution prevention equipment and sewage from temporary sanitation facilities would be stored in sealed tanks and emptied at regular intervals by licensed service providers.
It is acknowledged SEPA strongly discourage the storage and use of loose drums of fuel on site. Greenpark will forward the incident response plan to SEPA before works commence on site, and take into account any relevant comments.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 7-14 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Capping and Restoration Phase
An incident response plan would be prepared and maintained following best practice set out in Pollution Prevention Guideline ‘Incident response planning’: PPG 21 before works commence on site.
This would ensure, for example, that fuel storage facilities would be designed in accordance with SEPA guidelines and fully bunded to allow for a minimum of 110% of stored volume, equipment and materials would be on site to deal with pollution incidents and sewage from temporary sanitation facilities would be stored in sealed tanks and emptied at regular intervals by licensed service providers.
It is acknowledged SEPA strongly discourage the storage and use of loose drums of fuel on site. Greenpark will forward the incident response plan to SEPA before works commence on site, and take into account any relevant comments.
7.8 Statement of Significance
The assessment considered the impact of the CBM gas development on the hydrology of the Holehouse Plantation site and its catchment area.
Other than recommendations to mitigate the short term potential for pollution of surface water due to the temporary use of fuels, excavators, sanitation facilities and unforeseen ground conditions encountered, the net impact of the proposed CBM gas development is considered neutral because there are no appreciable effects identified, either positive or negative, on the environmental attributes identified in this chapter.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 7-15 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
8. Hydrogeology and Land Contamination
8.1 Summary
This chapter assessed the effects of the CBM gas development upon hydrogeological conditions and future site use within the Holehouse Plantation site and its catchment area.
The aim of this chapter was to address the following issues:
• risk of pollution to groundwater • risk of over abstraction of groundwater; and, • potentially unacceptable risks to future site users.
The site is currently a Sitka Spruce Plantation and is situated on peat and till of unknown thickness underlain by Upper Carboniferous Coal Measures. The bedrock aquifer productivity rating for the Coal Measures is Moderate (1-10 l/s).
A private groundwater abstraction borehole is located 5km south-east of the site. The source of the groundwater is the Upper Liddesdale Group of the Carboniferous Limestone Series and the aquifer productivity is 23 l/s. The licensed rate of abstraction is 4.43m³/hour, 36m³/day and12, 592m³/year.
Coal seams in direct contact with thick, highly permeable aquifers would not release CBM gas due to hydrostatic pressure exerted. However, the prevalence of faulting and the lateral impersistence of sandstones in the Coal Measures affect the interconnectivity of aquifers and can significantly reduce yields. Furthermore, Coal Measures mudstones are normally highly impermeable and fractures will tend to seal due to the natural swelling properties of clay minerals.
Other than recommendations to mitigate the short term potential for pollution of groundwater and ingestion, inhalation and dermal contact of organic substances by future site users, the net impact of the proposed CBM gas development is considered neutral because there are no appreciable effects identified, either positive or negative, on the environmental attributes identified in this chapter.
As the CBM gas development has no significant impacts on groundwater and future site use related objectives for the study area, it is concluded that the proposal has an insignificant impact on identified valuable attributes within the site and its catchment area.
8.2 Introduction
The aim of this chapter is to address the following issues:
• risk of pollution to groundwater • risk of over abstraction of groundwater; and, • potentially unacceptable risks to future site users.
Therefore, the key objective of this chapter is to determine:
• the significance of any potential impact based on its magnitude and the importance of the receptors’ attributes.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
8.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines
This chapter has been produced with reference to the following legislation, polices and guidance:
• The Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) (WFD), and the Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2005; • The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2007 (SSI 219/2007), The Stationary Office Limited; • Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (the 1990 Act) as inserted by section 57 of the Environment Act 1995; • The Contaminated Land (Scotland) Regulations 2000 (SSI 178/2000), The Stationary Office Limited; • The Contaminated Land (Scotland) Regulations 2005 (SSI 658/2005), The Stationary Office Limited; • Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA), Groundwater Protection Policy for Scotland, Environmental Policy Number 19, 2003; • Planning Advice Note PAN33 Development Of Contaminated Land, 2000; • SEPA, 2008. The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2005, A Practical Guide, Version 5 (CAR Practical Guide); • Scottish Executive Rural Affairs Department, Circular 1/2000, Environmental Protection Act 1990: Part IIA Contaminated Land, 2000; • Scottish Executive, Statutory Guidance: Edition 2, Environmental Protection Act 1990: Part IIA Contaminated Land, 2006; • DEFRA, 2004 Model Procedures for Management of Land Contamination (CLR11); • Department for Communities and Local Government, 2006. Environmental Impact Assessment: A guide to good practice and procedures – A Consultation Paper; • Department of Transport, 2003. The Water Environment Sub-Objective; • British Standard, Investigation of potentially contaminated sites – Code of Practice, BS10175:2001; • CIRIA C665, 2007. Assessing risks posed by hazardous ground gases to buildings; and, • http://www.glossary.oilfield.slb.com/
8.4 Methodology
Fieldwork
A site walkover was undertaken on the 23rd June 2009 to determine current land use, setting and site condition.
Desk Study
Specific environmental information regarding the history and condition of the site and its catchment area was obtained from Dumfries and Galloway Council’s Contaminated Land Technician.
Reference was also made to the SEPA’s CAR Practical Guide for guidance and information.
Lastly, the SEPA was consulted concerning water features, their attributes and indicators of quality within the site and its catchment area (Table 8.1).
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-2 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 8.1 – WATER FEATURES, THEIR ATTRIBUTES AND INDICATORS OF QUALITY Feature Attribute/Service Indicator of Possible Measure quality River Water Supply Use for water • Location and number of abstraction points supply (potable, industrial or • Volume of water agricultural) abstracted • Use of water (potable most important)
Chemical water • Existing chemical GQA quality grade (A/B=good, C/D=fair, and E=poor, F=bad) • Likelihood of a change in grade arising (+ve or -ve) Transport and Presence of • Location and number of dilution of waste surface water discharge points products discharge points • Volume of effluent discharged Contribution of • Proportion of flow made up discharges to by effluent at different total river flow times of the year
Biodiversity Biological water • Existing chemical GQA quality grade (A/B=good, C/D=fair, and E=poor, F=bad) • Likelihood of a change in grade arising (+ve or -ve) Fisheries quality • EC Fishery designation (Salmonid, Cyprinid or undesignated) Recreation Riverside access • Presence of route and importance (i.e. is it a nation or strategic route, such as the Thames Path) Use of river for • Presence of facilities and recreation clubs for using the river environment • Use for angling (number of clubs / membership) Value to Value of the uses • Value to local economy economy of the river (e.g. (e.g. employment, relative commercial property prices, cost of fishing, alternatives, etc.) abstractions, discharges, navigation, leisure and riverside development land)
Conveyance of Presence of • Number and size of flow and material watercourses watercourses • Existing flood risk
Floodplain Conveyance of Presence of • Number and size of flood flows floodplain watercourses • Existing flood risk
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-3 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 8.1 – WATER FEATURES, THEIR ATTRIBUTES AND INDICATORS OF QUALITY Feature Attribute/Service Indicator of Possible Measure quality Flood flow routes • Location / importance of flood flow routes Groundwater Water Supply Use for water • Location and number of abstraction points supply (potable, industrial or • Volume of water agricultural) abstracted • Use of water (potable most important)
Groundwater • Location and grade of vulnerability source protection zone • Classification of aquifer vulnerability
Transport and Presence of • Location and number of dilution of waste discharge points discharge points products • Volume of effluent discharged Value to Value of the uses • Value to local economy economy of the (e.g. employment, cost of groundwater (e.g. alternatives, etc.) abstractions and discharges)
Conveyance of Flow routes • Location and importance of flood flows flow routes Groundwater • Changes in levels and levels recharge
Sea and Water Supply Use for water • Location and number of Estuaries supply abstraction points • Volume of water abstracted Transport and Presence of • Location and number of dilution of waste discharge points discharge points products • Volume of effluent discharged Biodiversity Water quality • Chemical and biological quality (data availability will be variable) Fisheries quality • Results of surveys etc (numbers / biomass of species and individuals) Invertebrate • Results of surveys etc populations (numbers / biomass of species and individuals) Recreation Bathing beaches • Compliance with EC water bathing standards Other recreation • Presence of facilities and uses clubs • Use for angling (number of clubs / membership)
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-4 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 8.1 – WATER FEATURES, THEIR ATTRIBUTES AND INDICATORS OF QUALITY Feature Attribute/Service Indicator of Possible Measure quality Value to Value of the uses • Value to local economy economy of the (e.g. employment, relative sea/estuary (e.g. property prices, cost of commercial alternatives, etc.) fishing, abstractions, discharges, navigation, leisure and waterside development land)
Stillwaters Biodiversity Fisheries quality • Results of surveys etc (Lakes and (numbers / biomass of Ponds) species and individuals) • Results of surveys etc Invertebrate populations (numbers / biomass of species and individuals) Recreation Use of stillwater • Presence of facilities and for recreation clubs for using lake/pond • Use for angling (number of clubs / membership)
Analysis
The potential for pollution of groundwater, over abstraction of groundwater and unacceptable risks to future site users has initially been assessed against the framework for qualitative risk assessment provided in CIRIA publication C665. This method is intended to provide a preliminary estimate of risk - based on the likelihood of risk in combination with the potential severity of the risk - to define the scope of the subsequent assessment of significance.
Assessment of Significance
Table 8.2 provides guidance on the magnitude criteria for potential impacts, with some examples. The magnitude of the potential impact is completely independent of the value of the attribute affected and therefore gives no indication of significance when considered alone.
TABLE 8.2 – CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING IMPACT MAGNITUDE Magnitude Criteria Example Major Results in loss of attribute • loss of EC designated Salmonid fishery • change in GQA grade of river reach • compromise employment source • loss of flood storage/increased flood risk • pollution of potable source of abstraction
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-5 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 8.2 – CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING IMPACT MAGNITUDE Magnitude Criteria Example Moderate Results in impact on • loss in productivity of a fishery • contribution of a significant integrity of attribute or loss of part of attribute proportion of the effluent in the receiving river, but insufficient to change its GQA grade • reduction in the economic value of the feature Minor Results in minor impact on • measurable changes in attribute, attribute but of limited size and/or proportion Negligible Results in an impact on • discharges to watercourse but no significant loss in quality, fishery attribute but of insufficient magnitude to affect the productivity or biodiversity use/integrity • no significant impact on the economic value of the feature • no increase in flood risk
Table 8.3 provides guidance for estimating the importance of an attribute based on criteria such as quality, scale, rarity and consideration of whether water attributes are replaceable over a given time frame.
TABLE 8.3 – GUIDELINES FOR ESTIMATING THE IMPORTANCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ATTRIBUTES Importance Criteria Example Very High attribute with a high quality Aquifer providing potable water to a large and rarity, regional or population EC designated Salmonid national scale and limited fishery potential for substitution
High attribute with a high quality GQA Grade A reach of river aquifer and rarity, local scale and providing potable water to a small limited potential for population EC designated Cyprinid fishery substitution, attribute with a medium quality and rarity, regional or national scale and limited potential for substitution
Medium Attribute with a medium GQA Grade B / C reach or river Aquifer quality and rarity, local scale providing abstraction water for agricultural and limited potential for or industrial use substitution, attribute with a low quality and rarity, regional or national scale and limited potential for substitution
Low attribute with a low quality Floodplain with limited existing and rarity, local scale and development limited potential for substitution
The significance of a potential impact is estimated by its magnitude (Table 8.2) and the importance (Table 8.3) of the affected attribute. Table 8.4 provides guidance for
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-6 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
determining the significance of a potential impact based on its magnitude and the importance of the attribute.
TABLE 8.4 – CRITERIA FOR ESTIMATING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS Importance of attribute Magnitude of Impact Very High High Medium Low
Major Very Highly Significant Low Significant Significant Significance
Moderate Highly Significant Low Insignificant Significant Significance
Minor Significant Low Insignificant Insignificant Significance
Negligible Low Insignificant Insignificant Insignificant Significance
Where the predicted potential impact is highly uncertain as a result of lack of information or insufficient design details or a more significant, but less probable impact is identified, the impact assessment has determined whether the potential risks identified justify invoking the precautionary principle, or whether it is sufficient to flag them up as issues for more detailed consideration at a later stage, based on the relative probability of the possible outcomes and their significance.
Appraisal of the Potential Impacts of the Proposal on Valuable Attributes
The indicative criterion below has been used to estimate the effects of the CBM gas development upon both hydrogeological conditions and future site use within the site and its catchment area.
The qualitative comments box in Table 8.5 provides further information on the basis for estimating the significance of potential impacts.
• Significant Positive Contribution - where the proposal may result in a positive impact on the water environment, because it either:
supports the water relevant objectives which apply to the study area; or has mixed positive and negative impacts, but the positive impacts are much more significant than the negative impacts (this requires justification criteria in the impact assessment section);
• Significant Negative Contribution - where the proposal may result in a negative impact on the water environment, because it either:
contradicts the relevant objectives which apply to the study area; or has mixed positive and negative impacts, but the negative impacts are much more significant than the positive impacts (this requires justification criteria in the impact assessment section);
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-7 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• Mixed Contribution - this score should be used where the project has positive and negative impacts, which cannot be considered insignificant, but which do not clearly indicate that the overall impact will be significantly positive or negative; and,
• Insignificant Contribution - where the project has no significant impacts on water related objectives for the study area.
TABLE 8.5 – ENVIRONMENT – DEFINITIONS OF OVERALL ASSESSMENT SCORES Score Comment Large Beneficial Impact It is extremely unlikely that the proposed CBM gas development would fit into this category. However a proposal could have a large positive impact if it is predicted that it would result in a very or highly significant improvement to an attribute, with insignificant adverse impacts on other attributes.
Moderate Beneficial Where the proposed CBM gas development provides an Impact opportunity to enhance the environment, because it results in predicted: • significant improvements for at least one attribute, with insignificant adverse impacts on other attributes;
• very or highly significant improvements, but with some adverse impacts of a much lower significance.
The predicted improvements achieved by the proposal should greatly outweigh any potential negative impacts.
Slight Beneficial Impact Where the proposed CBM gas development provides an opportunity to enhance the environment, because it provides improvements in attributes which are of greater significance than the adverse effects.
Neutral Where the net impact of the proposed CBM gas development is neutral, because:
• it has no appreciable effect, either positive or negative, on the identified attributes;
• the proposal would result in a combination of effects, some positive and some negative, which balance to give an overall neutral impact. In most cases these will be slight or moderate positive and negative impacts. It may be possible to balance impacts of greater significance, however, in these cases great care will be required to ensure that the impacts are comparable in terms of their potential environmental impacts and the perception of these impacts.
Slight Adverse Impacts Where the proposed CBM gas development may result in a degradation of the environment, because the predicted adverse impacts are of greater significance than the predicted improvements.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-8 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 8.5 – ENVIRONMENT – DEFINITIONS OF OVERALL ASSESSMENT SCORES Score Comment Moderate Adverse Where the proposed CBM gas development may result in a Impacts degradation of the environment, because it results in predicted:
• significant adverse impacts on at least one attribute, with insignificant predicted improvements to other attributes;
• very or highly significant adverse impacts, but with some improvements which are of a much lower significance and are insufficient positive impacts to offset the negative impacts of the proposal.
Large Adverse Impact Where the proposed CBM gas development may result in a degradation of the environment, because it results in predicted:
• highly significant adverse impacts on an attribute;
• significant adverse impacts on several attributes.
Very Large Adverse Where the proposed CBM gas development may result in a Impact degradation of the environment because it results in predicted:
• very significant adverse impacts on at least one attribute;
• highly significant adverse impacts on several attributes.
8.5 Baseline Conditions
Fieldwork
The site is currently a Sitka Spruce Plantation. The land gradient slopes gently down from the site to the north-west.
The site connects to a swale via ditches adjacent to the south-western and north- western boundaries of the site.
The swale connects to Cross Burn 35m north-west of the boundary of the site.
Desk Study
A summary of information sources gathered on the history and condition of the site and its catchment area from an environmental point of view is presented in Table 8.6.
TABLE 8.6 – SUMMARY OF INFORMATION SOURCES Topic Possible Measures of Attribute Quality Data Source British Geological Survey (BGS). 1968. Superficial geology Peat and boulder clay. Langholm. Scotland Sheet 11, Drift Edition. One Inch Series.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-9 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 8.6 – SUMMARY OF INFORMATION SOURCES Topic Possible Measures of Attribute Quality Data Source The BGS Map confirms the presence of the Coal Measures and Limestone Series of Carboniferous age. The Rowanburn fault is located 190m north BGS. 1968. of the boundary of Holehouse Plantation, with the Langholm. Scotland site located on the downthrown side. Sheet 11, Drift Edition.
One Inch Series & Bedrock geology Knottyholm borehole data indicates Six Foot Coal British Geological at a depth of 445mbgl. Survey 1954-55
Knottyholm Borehole Knottyholm borehole data also indicates that (NY37NE). strata of the Lower Coal Measures overlie the Upper Liddesdale Group at the Rowanburn fault contact (541mbgl depth). The site is located in the Solway Sub-District (Area).
All Carboniferous Formations except mudstones and Passage Formations combine both http://gis.sepa.org.uk/r intergranular and fracture flow. In these rock bmp/MapViewer.aspx types intergranular flow occurs and can be & A GIS of aquifer important, but typically much of the groundwater productivity in Hydrogeology flow is through fractures. Scotland: explanatory notes20 The bedrock aquifer productivity rating for the Carboniferous Formations except mudstones and Passage Formation is Moderate (1-10 l/s). The productivity rating refers to the estimated typical long-term yield from a single, properly sited and constructed borehole. Proposed compacted hardcore indicates surface Hydrological Regime Figure 7.2 run-off can be expected. The main river and coastal catchment is the River http://gis.sepa.org.uk/r Surface Hydrology Esk. bmp/MapViewer.aspx Public Water - SEPA Supplies Based on the information held by the EA, a private groundwater abstraction borehole is located at High Plains (NY 4203 7423) 5km south-east of the site. The source of the groundwater is the Upper Liddesdale Group of the Carboniferous Limestone Series and the aquifer EA & Dumfries and Private Water productivity is 23 l/s. The potential rate of Galloway Council’s Supplies abstraction is 4.43m³/hour, 36m³/day Contaminated Land and12,592m³/year. Technician
Based on the information Dumfries and Galloway Council’s Contaminated Land Technician holds, no private groundwater abstraction boreholes are located within 1km of the site. Industrial and Agricultural - SEPA Abstractions No licensed discharges within 1km. Discharges SEPA
Wastewater - SEPA Infrastructure
20 MACDONALD A M, BALL D F and Ó DOCHARTAIGH B É. 2004. A GIS of aquifer productivity in Scotland: explanatory notes. British Geological Survey Commissioned Report, CR/04/047N. 21pp.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-10 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 8.6 – SUMMARY OF INFORMATION SOURCES Topic Possible Measures of Attribute Quality Data Source SEPA categorise River Esk (Black Esk to National Boundary) as mid-altitude in size. The overall status of SEPAs 2007 quantitative classification of this waterbody is good.
Pressures on this waterbody are from point SEPA & Water Quality source pollution as a result of sewage disposal http://gis.sepa.org.uk/r Surface Water and morphological alterations i.e. physical bmp/MapViewer.aspx alterations to a river causing habitat damage or loss that result in a loss or decline of species21.
SEPAs overall target objective for this waterbody is for its overall status to remain quantitatively classified as good. The overall status of SEPAs 2007 quantitative classification of the Liddlesdale bedrock and localised sand and gravel aquifers is good.
Water Quality http://gis.sepa.org.uk/r Pressure on this waterbody - none. Groundwater bmp/MapViewer.aspx
SEPAs overall target objective for this waterbody is for its overall status to remain quantitatively classified as good. Fisheries and An associated protected area is the River Esk SEPA Recreation (Border) of type Freshwater Fish (existing). Dumfries and Galloway Council’s Contaminated Dumfries and Land Technician would not place any Galloway Council’s Land Contamination contaminated land conditions or directives on this Contaminated Land site. Technician
Analysis
The potential for pollution of groundwater could result from spillage/leakage of fuel, hydraulic fluid and foul water (should temporary sanitation facilities be emptied in an unsatisfactory manner), unforeseen ground conditions encountered and creation of hydraulic fractures and cross aquifer contamination during borehole construction. There is also the potential for pollution of groundwater from spillage/leakage of groundwater dewatered from the Coal Measures strata which may be of poor quality compared to local surface waters.
The potential for over abstraction of groundwater could result from water influx during borehole drilling, hydrogeological factors (the response of the system to the abstraction and the importance of that resource to associated surface waters or wetlands) and other factors (e.g. the rate of abstraction or the proximity of other users).
The potential for unacceptable risks to future site users – if present – could result from ingestion, inhalation and dermal contact of organic substances and ground gases due to the use of fuels and the potential release of CBM gas.
Radon information was viewed on the Indicative Atlas of Radon in South-western Scottish Borders22. Interrogation of Map 2 indicated that the site is located in a 0-1% band 1km square that contains no affected areas as defined by the HPA. The Health Protection Agency recommends that people in Affected Areas should test their
21 SEPA, 2005. Solway Tweed River Basin District. Characterisation and impacts analyses required by Article 5 of the Water Framework Directive. Summary Report. 22 B M R Green, J C H Miles, D M Rees 2009. HPA-RPD-051. Radon in Dwellings in Scotland (ISBN 978-0- 85951-634-1).
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-11 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
homes for radon23. The radon level at the site has been assessed as low and further assessment is therefore not required to further clarify risk.
Risk of Pollution to Groundwater – Moderate Risk
In the absence of criteria for estimating the significance of potential impacts, pollution of a sensitive water resource is considered likely. Preparation of an Impact Assessment and - where appropriate - Risk Mitigation Measures is, however, required to further clarify risk.
Risk of Over Abstraction of Groundwater – Moderate/Low Risk
In the absence of criteria for estimating the significance of potential impacts, it is considered that there is a low likelihood of over abstraction of a sensitive water resource. Preparation of an Impact Assessment and - where appropriate - Risk Mitigation Measures is, however, required to further clarify risk.
Risk to Future Site Users – Moderate Risk
In the absence of criteria for estimating the significance of potential impacts, it is considered that there is a low likelihood of short term (acute) risk to human health. Preparation of an Impact Assessment and - where appropriate - Risk Mitigation Measures is, however, required to further clarify risk.
8.6 Impact Assessment
Risk of Pollution
Site Preparation Phase
During the site preparation phase, the potential for pollution of groundwater may exist depending on spillage/leakage of fuel, hydraulic fluid from excavators, unforeseen ground conditions encountered and spillage of foul water should temporary sanitation facilities be emptied in an unsatisfactory manner. The net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development could be considered slight adverse.
Drilling Phase
During the drilling phase, the potential for pollution of groundwater may exist in the short term due to the spillage/leakage of fuel and spillage of foul water should temporary sanitation facilities be emptied in an unsatisfactory manner. The net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development could be considered slight adverse.
There is the potential for pollution of groundwater from the spillage and leakage of groundwater abstracted from the gas bearing strata which may be of poor quality compared to local waters. However, storage and removal by tanker will limit leakage or spillage. Therefore the net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
The boreholes are designed to be drilled from the surface to the Coal Measures before being steered to run along target gas bearing strata. Coring may be undertaken at depth to provide information about the characteristics of the various strata.
23 http://www.ukradon.org/article.php?key=radonaffected
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-12 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Excessive pressure must be avoided during drilling to prevent the creation of hydraulic fractures in the geological formations encountered, which would cause lost circulation fluid. For example, there is the potential for hydraulic fractures in the Coal Measures aquifers unless the hydrostatic pressure of the drilling fluid is monitored and adjusted to always stay within the limits.
The boreholes would be drilled using a circulation fluid that gives hydrostatic pressures in balance with the anticipated formation pressures, mitigating short term pollution of groundwater. Hydrostatic pressure is calculated from mud weight and true vertical depth. Mud weight is the mass per unit volume of a drilling fluid, synonymous with mud density. Mud weight controls hydrostatic pressure in a wellbore. The weight of the mud also prevents collapse of casing and the openhole. Mud weight (density) test procedures using a mud balance have been standardised and published by the American Petroleum Institute (API). The true vertical depth is the vertical depth of the wellbore independent of its path. In the case of a vertical well, measured depth is the same as true vertical depth. The net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered slight adverse.
The boreholes would be cased with conductor pipe which would be cemented from the surface and this prevents the sides of the hole from collapsing into the wellbore. The borehole would then be cased throughout to avoid longer term pollution and cross aquifer contamination of groundwater and again this would be cemented to the surface.
Finally, the boreholes would be lined with casing and cemented above the shallowest coal bed and all casing within the target gas bearing strata would be constructed of HMI approved material. The net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
Production Phase
The site compound would now be smaller (circa 0.5 ha), with localised concrete chambers.
There is the potential for pollution of groundwater from the spillage and leakage of groundwater abstracted from the gas bearing strata which may be of poor quality compared to local waters. However, storage and removal by tanker will limit leakage or spillage. Therefore the net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
Capping and Restoration Phase
There would be no residual impacts following capping and restoration of the surrounding landscape as boreholes would be decommissioned in agreement with HMI and the site would be restored to its original condition with original field drainage. Therefore the net impact of this aspect of CBM gas development is also considered neutral.
The potential for pollution of groundwater may exist from spillage or leakage of foul water should temporary sanitation facilities be emptied in an unsatisfactory manner. The net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development could be considered slight adverse.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-13 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Risk of Over Abstraction of Groundwater
Site Preparation Phase
During the site preparation phase, the potential for over abstraction of groundwater does not exist. Therefore the net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
Drilling Phase
The boreholes are designed to be drilled from the surface to the Coal Measures before being steered to run along target gas bearing strata. Coring may be undertaken at depth to provide information about the characteristics of the various strata.
Sufficient hydrostatic pressure (mud weight) is necessary to prevent water influx during drilling. As described above, boreholes would be drilled using a circulation fluid that gives hydrostatic pressures in balance with the anticipated geological formation pressures. The net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
The boreholes would be cased with conductor pipe which would be cemented from the surface and this prevents the sides of the hole from collapsing into the wellbore. During drilling the borehole would be fitted with a Blowout Preventer to control any fluid loss. The borehole would then be cased throughout to avoid water influx and again this would be cemented to the surface.
Finally, the boreholes would be lined with casing and cemented above the shallowest coal bed and all casing within the target gas bearing strata would be constructed of HMI approved material. The net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
Production Phase
The site compound would be smaller (circa 0.5 ha), with localised concrete chambers.
A useful definition of over-abstraction can be found in SEPA’s Groundwater Protection Policy for Scotland24. ‘Over-abstraction of groundwater is where abstraction leads to saltwater or other intrusion into an aquifer, detrimental impacts to ecosystems which are dependent on groundwater or where abstraction exceeds the available groundwater resource’. ‘The impact of abstraction will be dependent on hydrogeological factors (the response of the system to the abstraction and the importance of that resource to associated surface waters or wetlands) and other factors (e.g. the rate of abstraction or the proximity of other users). For a given abstraction, certain environments will be more susceptible than others’.
The bedrock aquifer productivity rating for the Coal Measures is Moderate (1-10 l/s).
In order to encourage CBM gas to flow to a well, pumping is carried out to reduce the hydrostatic pressure in the coal seam. CBM gas desorbs from the coal as the pressure is lowered and gas production increases. Coal seams in direct contact with thick, highly permeable aquifers would not release CBM gas due to hydrostatic pressure exerted. However, the prevalence of faulting and the lateral impersistence
24 SEPA2003. Groundwater Protection Policy for Scotland, Environmental Policy Number 19.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-14 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
of sandstones in Coal Measures affect the interconnectivity of aquifers and can significantly reduce yields25. Furthermore, Coal Measures mudstones are normally highly impermeable and fractures will tend to seal due to the natural swelling properties of clay minerals. There will be exceptions to this, such as very hard shales that have low percentages of swelling clay minerals (mainly illite and montmorillonite), but this reasonably uncommon26. Non-potable water is anticipated in the gas bearing strata.
Lastly, Greenpark operates a database management system for each development which identifies regulatory requirements and impacts of borehole dewatering as they arise.
The net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
Capping and Restoration Phase
There would be no residual impacts following capping and restoration of the surrounding landscape as boreholes would be decommissioned in agreement with HMI and the site would be restored to its original condition with original field drainage. Therefore the net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
Risk to Future Site Users
Site Preparation Phase
Prior to the site preparation phase, the potential for risk to future site users would be assessed as part of a dedicated Health and Safety Plan for the development to ensure proper protection of the health and safety of employees and others who may be affected by such work. Therefore the net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
Drilling Phase
During the drilling phase there is the potential for ingestion, inhalation and dermal contact of organic substances. The net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development could be considered slight adverse.
The boreholes are designed to be drilled from the surface to the Coal Measures before being steered to run along target gas bearing strata. Coring may be undertaken at depth to provide information about the characteristics of the various strata.
The boreholes would be cased with conductor pipe which would be cemented from the surface and this prevents the sides of the hole from collapsing into the wellbore. During drilling the borehole would be fitted with a Blowout Preventer to control any gas or fluid loss. The borehole would then be cased throughout and again this would be cemented to the surface. The Blowout Preventer would be connected to the casing to act as a diverter following cementing.
25 Waters, C.N.; Davies, S.J.. 2006 Carboniferous: extensional basins, advancing deltas and coal swamps. In: Brenchley, P.J.; Rawson, P.F., (eds.) The geology of England and Wales. London, England, Geological Society of London, 173-223. 26 Taylor R K 1988, Coal Measures Mudrocks: Composition, Classification and Weathering Processes, Qtly Jnl Eng Geology Vol 21, The Geological Society pp 85-89.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-15 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Finally, the boreholes would be lined with casing and cemented above the shallowest coal bed and all casing within the target gas bearing strata would be constructed of HMI approved material. The net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
Production Phase
The site compound would be smaller (circa 0.5 ha), with localised concrete chambers. The net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
Capping and Restoration Phase
There would be no residual impacts following capping and restoration of the surrounding landscape as boreholes would be decommissioned in agreement with HMI and the site would be restored to its original condition with original field drainage. Therefore the net impact of this aspect of the CBM gas development is considered neutral.
8.7 Mitigation
Where adverse effects are identified, practical and cost-effective mitigation measures are recommended to reduce the risk to acceptable levels.
Risk of Pollution
Site Preparation Phase
To ensure that work does not cause mud, silt or concrete to be washed away during the construction stage or as a result of subsequent erosion, small check dams made from graded broken stone will be constructed to encourage deposition of solids. As the check dam is made of stone, it will allow the ponded water to discharge slowly towards the outlet and improve the efficiency of the swale.
An incident response plan would be prepared and maintained following best practice set out in Pollution Prevention Guideline ‘Incident response planning’: PPG 21 before works commence on site.
This would ensure, for example, that fuel storage facilities would be designed in accordance with SEPA guidelines and fully bunded to allow for a minimum of 110% of stored volume, equipment and materials would be on site to deal with pollution incidents and sewage from temporary sanitation facilities would be stored in sealed tanks and emptied at regular intervals by licensed service providers.
It is acknowledged SEPA strongly discourage the storage and use of loose drums of fuel on site. Greenpark will forward the incident response plan to SEPA before works commence on site, and take into account any relevant comments.
Drilling Phase
An incident response plan would be prepared and maintained following best practice set out in Pollution Prevention Guideline ‘Incident response planning’: PPG 21 before works commence on site.
This would ensure, for example, that a detailed description of how facilities operate would be prepared, fuel storage facilities would be designed in accordance with
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-16 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
SEPA guidelines and fully bunded to allow for a minimum of 110% of stored volume, surface drainage system would include features such as pollution prevention equipment and sewage from temporary sanitation facilities would be stored in sealed tanks and emptied at regular intervals by licensed service providers.
It is acknowledged SEPA strongly discourage the storage and use of loose drums of fuel on site. Greenpark will forward the incident response plan to SEPA before works commence on site, and take into account any relevant comments.
Drilling mud would be kept on the site to seal off any loss zone, which is generally a fractured or high-permeability section.
Capping and Restoration Phase
An incident response plan would be prepared and maintained following best practice set out in Pollution Prevention Guideline ‘Incident response planning’: PPG 21 before works commence on site.
This would ensure, for example, that fuel storage facilities would be designed in accordance with SEPA guidelines and fully bunded to allow for a minimum of 110% of stored volume, equipment and materials would be on site to deal with pollution incidents and sewage from temporary sanitation facilities would be stored in sealed tanks and emptied at regular intervals by licensed service providers.
It is acknowledged SEPA strongly discourage the storage and use of loose drums of fuel on site. Greenpark will forward the incident response plan to SEPA before works commence on site, and take into account any relevant comments.
Risk to Future Site Users
Drilling Phase
The Borehole Sites and Operations Regulations 1995 is the key document specifically relating to the drilling phase of CBM wells.
Greenpark always prepares a full health and safety document together with a drilling plan which is provided to the HSE (Offshore Safety Division) in advance of drilling, as well as advising the Environment Agency and the Coal Authority. This document details plans for prevention of fire and explosions and detection and control of flammable / toxic gas.
A site specific emergency escape plan is drawn up and informed to all staff, showing escape routes and muster points, together with fire precautions and first aid provisions.
All staff and visitors are inducted with site specific information, procedures and rules together with general health and safety information.
Suitable and sufficient members of staff are provided with appropriate training in health and safety matters.
General and specific risk assessments are carried out and communicated as appropriate.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-17 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
8.8 Statement of Significance
The assessment considered the impact of the CBM gas development on the Hydrogeology and Future Site Use of the Holehouse Plantation site and its catchment area.
Other than recommendations to mitigate the short term potential for pollution of groundwater and ingestion, inhalation and dermal contact of organic substances by future site users, the net impact of the proposed CBM gas development is considered neutral because there are no appreciable effects identified, either positive or negative, on the environmental attributes identified in this chapter.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 8-18 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
9. Noise and Vibration
9.1 Summary
This chapter assessed the impact and significance on nearby noise sensitive receptors of noise generated by the preparation, drilling, production and restoration phases of the proposed CBM gas development at Holehouse Plantation.
Vibration has not been considered within the assessment as the drilling methods employed would ensure that no vibration occurs.
A baseline noise survey was conducted to establish the existing ambient noise climate at noise sensitive receptors around the proposed CBM site and calculations undertaken to establish the impact of the development. It has been concluded that noise from the site preparation and capping and restoration phases of the development is unlikely to have a significant effect on nearby sensitive receptors.
No significant noise would be produced during the production phase of the development and as such it is expected that there would be no effect on nearby sensitive receptors.
With regard to the drilling phase of the development it has been found that noise levels during the night meet the ‘good’ internal; sleeping conditions criterion of BS8233. It has also been found, taking into account the relatively short duration of ‘noisy’ works, that daytime noise levels are unlikely to have a significant impact on nearby noise sensitive receptors.
This noise impact assessment has concluded that the proposed CBM gas development at Holehouse Plantation is unlikely to have a significant effect on nearby sensitive receptors.
9.2 Introduction
This chapter identifies the noise impacts associated with the proposed development at Holehouse Plantation. Full details of the development proposed are presented within Chapter 4.
The main receptors that have the potential to be affected by noise from the site are considered to be the residential properties at Newbie, Brockwoodlees and Bogle Gill.
Broadly, the assessment of the potential noise impacts associated with the site has involved the following:
• identification of appropriate standards and guidance for use in the assessment of noise impacts; • collection of daytime and night time background noise level data in order to determine the existing baseline noise climate at potentially sensitive properties within the vicinity of the site; • quantitative/qualitative prediction and assessment of noise levels at potentially sensitive local receptors during the site preparation and capping and restoration phases of the development; and • quantitative/qualitative prediction and assessment of noise levels at potentially sensitive local receptors during the drilling operations associated with the drilling and production phases of the development.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
The proposed CBM gas development is not expected to generate any significant levels of vehicle movements within either the drilling or production phases of the development. Therefore there has been no assessment of traffic noise.
9.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines
A review of the development plan documents and planning context in relation to the development proposals is provided in Chapter 3.
This section summarises those policies that are directly relevant to this assessment.
National Policy & Legislation
Scottish national planning advice concerning noise arising from development is presented in PAN56 Planning and Noise. PAN56 provides advice to local authorities in Scotland on the use of their planning powers to minimise the adverse impact of noise. It also advises that impact assessments should be conducted for noisy development (paragraph 14) and should:
Measure or predict and describe noise levels to be generated by the proposed development;
Establish criteria for assessing the impact of noise on its surroundings;
Outline measures available to reduce noise impact to acceptable levels.
Within PAN56, guidance on potentially noisy development is stated in paragraphs 17 to 44 and in paragraph 35 the following information is detailed in respect of “Noisy Industrial Development”, as detailed below:
Due to its variable character industrial noise is difficult to assess. However, BS4142 Method for rating industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas promotes a method for assessing whether industrial noise is likely to give rise to complaints from people living nearby. Whilst a useful guide, BS4142 should not be solely relied upon to accurately establish the impact of industrial development in terms of noise.
PAN56 refers to the assessment of construction noise in Paragraphs 40 to 41 and refers to the use of BS5228 as the appropriate assessment methodology.
Guidance on environmental impact assessment is found in PAN58. The document also provides general guidance on the assessment and prediction of environmental impacts and the determination of effects and paragraph 50 states:
Methods for predicting environmental effects and their magnitude are specific to the environmental topic and are a matter for expert consultants. For some topics there will be qualitative techniques (e.g. landscape assessment, photomontage) which rely on previous experience and knowledge about the consequences of a given action. For other topics there will be quantitative techniques which usually seek to model the natural environment and calculate the effects of the change due to the project (e.g. the dispersal patterns and dilution of emissions to air). Some topics may involve a mixture of qualitative and quantitative techniques. The predictions are very likely to be subject to a degree of uncertainty and this should be explained together with any assumptions on which they are based.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-2 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
With regard to further information which is reasonably required to assess the environmental effects of the development the fifth bullet point of paragraph 65 of PAN58 states that further information may include:
a description of the likely significant effects of the development, direct, indirect, and cumulative, on the environment.
An environmental assessment should therefore only identify those significant effects which are likely to occur.
Relevant Guidance Applicable to the Assessment
As a matter of best practice, this assessment has been undertaken based upon the relevant guidance on noise and vibration applicable to such developments. The guidance referenced includes these British Standards:
• BS4142 ‘Method for Rating Industrial Noise affecting Mixed Residential and Industrial Areas’, 1997; • BS5228: Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites – Part 1: Noise, 2009; • BS7445: Description and Measurement of Environmental Noise, 2003; and • BS8233: Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings – Code of Practice, 1999.
These guidance and methodology documents are discussed in the following sections.
Site Preparation and Restoration Phases
BS5228
In December 2008 the five parts of BS5228 (‘Construction Noise and Vibration’) were withdrawn and BS5228 parts 1 and 2: 2009 were published. The new BS5228 does not have any significant material changes when compared to the previous version, however, it does now include the updated construction plant source noise level data published by DEFRA and provides examples of construction noise limits in Annex E to Part 1 of the Standard. The Standard continues to provide best practice with regards to minimising the adverse effects of construction noise and vibration.
The statutory instrument which specifically relates to the control of noise and vibration from construction sites by means of imposition of conditions and by the development of agreed working procedures is the Control of Pollution Act 1974 (CoPA).
Sections 60 and 61 of the CoPA gives local authorities in Scotland, England and Wales special powers for controlling noise arising from construction and demolition works on any building or civil engineering sites. S60 refers to the control of noise on construction sites. It provides legislation by which local authorities can control noise from construction sites to prevent noise disturbance occurring. In addition, it recommends that guidance provided by BS5228 be implemented to ensure compliance with S60. S61 refers to prior consent for work on construction sites. It provides a method by which a contractor can apply for consent to undertake construction works in advance.
When determining a planning application, it is very rare for construction impacts to be a material consideration. It will be a combination of best practice (considerate working) by the prime construction contractor and adherence to working hours, etc
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-3 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
imposed by the local authority via appropriate planning conditions that will ensure that disruption due to construction works will be minimised.
Within the scope of this assessment noise generated during the preparation and restoration phases of the CBM gas development has been assumed to be akin to the noise generated during general construction operations.
The British Standard gives recommendations for basic methods of noise control relating to construction and open sites where work activities/operations generate significant noise. It includes sections on: legislative background; community relations; training; occupational noise effects; neighbourhood nuisance; project supervision; and control of noise. Annexes include: a list of EC and UK legislation; noise sources, remedies and their effectiveness (mitigation options); guide to sound level data on site equipment and site activities (source terms that are used for modelling); estimating noise from sites (calculation procedures which form the basis of the modelling packages); and noise monitoring.
It is noted, that the guidance of BS5228 Part 1 does not extend to providing an absolute noise criteria, although example significance criteria have been included in Annexe E of the Standard. The document also states the key factors that must be considered. These include:
a) site location; b) existing ambient noise levels; c) duration of site operations; d) hours of work; e) attitude of the site operator; and f) noise characteristics.
The assessment of whether changes in noise levels due to construction constitute significant effects, will be dependent on the absolute levels of ambient and construction noise, as well as the magnitude, duration, time of occurrence and frequency of the noise change.
BS5228 contains two example methods of determining the significance of construction noise. Method 1 ‘The ABC Method’ examines absolute levels based on various threshold categories and is detailed in Table 9.1 below.
TABLE 9.1 – EXAMPLE THRESHOLD OF SIGNIFICANT EFFECT AT DWELLINGS Assessment category and threshold value Threshold value, in decibels (dB) A) B) C) period (LAeq) Category A Category B Category C Night-time (23.00-07.00) 45 50 55 Evening and weekends D) 55 60 65 Daytime (07.00-19.00) and Saturdays (07.00- 65 70 75 13.00)
NOTE 1 A significant effect has been deemed to occur if the total LAeq noise level, including construction exceeds the threshold level for the Category appropriate to the ambient noise level. NOTE 2 If the ambient noise level exceeds the threshold values given in the table (i.e. the ambient noise level is higher than the above values), then a significant effect is deem to occur if the total LAeq noise level for the period increased by more than 3dB due to construction activity. NOTE 3 Applied to residential receptors only A) Category A: threshold values to use when ambient noise levels (when rounded to the nearest 5dB) are less than these values. B) Category B: threshold values to use when ambient noise levels (when rounded to the nearest 5dB) are the same as category A values. C) Category C: threshold values to use when ambient noise levels (when rounded to the nearest 5dB) are higher than category A values. D) 19.00-23.00 weekdays, 13.00-23.00 Saturdays and 07.00-23.00 Sundays
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-4 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Method 2 refers to a ‘5 dB(A) Change’ and states that construction noise is deemed to be significant if the total noise level exceeds the pre construction ambient noise level by 5 dB or more, subject to lower cut off values of 65 dB, 55 dB and 45 dB for daytime, evening and night-time respectively.
It is common practice to minimise construction noise effects through environmental controls defined in either an Environmental Management Plan or a Code of Construction Practice.
Drilling and Production Phases
BS4142
Within the scope of this assessment the drilling and production phases of the CBM gas development have been assumed to be the operational phases of the development. PAN56 cites the use of BS4142 to assess noise from operational industrial and commercial developments and to determine their effects on people residing nearby.
The method is based upon a comparison between the Rating Level of the noise from the specific source being considered and the background noise level (measured as an LA90), in the absence of the specific source. The noise level from the specific source is increased by 5 dB(A), if the source has any distinctive characteristics (tones or impulses such as whines, hums or bangs), or if it is irregular enough to attract attention and becomes known as the Rating Level.
Within the scope of the Standard if the Rating Level of the noise exceeds the background noise by 10 dB(A) or more, “complaints are likely". An increase of 5 dB(A) is deemed to be of "marginal significance", whilst a difference of minus 10dB(A) or more indicates that this is "a positive indication that complaints are unlikely".
These descriptions are summarised within Table 9.2 below:
TABLE 9.2 – BS4142 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA BS4142 Assessment Level, dB(A) (Rating Level relative BS4142 Semantic (as described in the Standard) to Background Level) “If the rating level is more than 10 dB below the measured < -10 background noise level then this is a positive indication that complaints are unlikely.” No description but the more negative the difference, the less the -10 to +5 likelihood of complaints +5 "A difference of around +5dB is of marginal significance" No description but the more positive the difference, the greater the +5 to +10 likelihood of complaints “A difference of around +10 dB or more indicates that > +10 complaints are likely.”
In situations where both the LA90 background noise level and the Rating Level of the facility under investigation are considered to be "low" (less than 30 dB(A) and less than 35 dB(A) respectively), the Standard states that the rating method of BS4142 is not suitable. In these circumstances, it is standard practice to assess the noise effect by considering sleep disturbance criteria and other aspects such as noise change.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-5 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
BS8233
BS8233 is the current guidance with regard to acceptable noise levels within buildings occupied by people. The Standard defines design criteria for “good” and “reasonable” conditions within certain habitable rooms for new or altered dwellings. The design criteria can be applied to existing dwellings.
Table 9.3 shows a summary of the levels recommended in BS8233 for rooms used for resting and sleeping within residential settings.
TABLE 9.3 – INDOOR AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS AS RECOMMENDED IN BS8233 Designed Range, L (dB) Criterion Typical Situation Aeq,T Good Reasonable Reasonable resting/ Living Rooms 30 40 sleeping conditions Bedrooms 30 35
World Health Organisation (WHO)
‘Guidelines for Community Noise’ was published on behalf of the WHO but the authors alone were responsible for the views expressed. In the 2000 guidelines, it is considered that the sleep disturbance criteria should be taken as internal noise levels of 30 dB LAeq and 45 dB LAmax or external levels of 45 dB LAeq and 60 dB LAmax (see Appendix 5 for definitions).
For daytime levels, the 2000 WHO document states that "To protect the majority of people from being seriously annoyed during the daytime, the outdoor sound level from steady, continuous noise should not exceed 55 dB LAeq on balconies, terraces, and outdoor living areas. To protect the majority of people from being moderately annoyed during the daytime, the outdoor sound level should not exceed 50 dB LAeq. Where it is practical and feasible, the lower outdoor sound level should be considered the maximum desirable sound level for new development."
Consultations
Discussions were held with Richard Proctor of the Environmental Protection Department at Dumfries and Galloway Council during February and July 2009. The main content of the discussions was to seek agreement in respect of suitable monitoring locations and durations, and the assessment approach to be used. Following consultation in February for the first tranche of proposed CBM gas development sites, Mr Proctor confirmed that the planned scope of the surveys and methodology was acceptable. At the time of writing there has been no formal feedback on the scope of the tranche 2 assessments. On the basis that the scope of the previous agreements was accepted, then it has been concluded that the same agreement applies to the tranche 2 sites.
Summary of Assessment Criteria
Site Preparation and Restoration Phases
Noise associated with the preparation and restoration phases of the development will be short lived comparative to the drilling phase and particularly the production phase. It is deemed more appropriate to deal with short duration construction noise by the use of control measures that can be put into place in order to adequately control noise in line with the requirements of BS5228. These measures can be implemented by means of a suitably worded planning condition to ensure that disruption due to these works is minimised.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-6 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
To ensure that construction noise does not have a significant effect on nearby receptors one of the two example methods described in BS5228 will be utilised (see section 9.3). There is relatively little difference between the two methodologies, however, method 2 is more straightforward and will allow a clear, simple assessment of the significance of construction noise to be completed.
Drilling and Production Phases
Using BS4142, a significant noise effect will be deemed to occur if:
• the Rating Level should exceed the Background Level (LA90) by greater than + 10 dB(A) during the daytime period; and
• noise Levels inside residential properties are more than 35 dB LAeq at night.
As the noisy phase of development (drilling) only lasts for 6 weeks, any identified significant effects may be described as being temporarily significant. Furthermore, using the BS4142 methodology alone for rating the impact may be overly stringent, especially as BS4142 is designed to assess noise from fixed sources such as permanent industrial sites. In situations where there are temporal impacts it is considered appropriate to determine impacts using additional assessments, such as internal noise guidance and noise change.
For a reasonable resting environment within residential properties, the internal noise levels should be no more than 35 dB LAeq at night. Noise levels of this magnitude would not give rise to appreciable sleep disturbance effects.
PAN56 notes that “For noise of a similar character, a change of 3dB(A) is the minimum perceptible under normal conditions, and a change of 10dB(A) corresponds roughly to halving or doubling the loudness of a sound.” Notwithstanding the character of the noise an increase in the LAeq noise metric of 3dB or more would be considered significant.
9.4 Methodology
Noise measurements were completed at the identified noise sensitive receptors. These receptors were deemed to represent areas that would be most affected by the CBM gas development in relation to noise. Details of these receptors are given in Section 9.5 of this chapter. During the daytime two 1-hour measurement periods were completed at each receptor and during the night six 5-minute measurements of the existing noise climate were completed. Measurements were made in terms of A- weighted LAeq and LA90. Full information regarding the survey methodology is detailed in Section 9.5.
The proposed CBM gas development was then modelled using SoundPLAN 6.5 software. The computer model was then used to predict noise levels incident on the identified receptors during the various phases of the development. The results of the prediction exercise were then assessed against the standards and legislative documents detailed in Section 9.3 so as to determine whether the development may cause a ‘significant’ effect.
9.5 Baseline Conditions
Introduction
Site visits were undertaken on the 12th and 13th February 2009 and 9th July 2009 in order to carry out a qualitative and quantitative assessment of the prevailing noise
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-7 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
conditions on and in the vicinity of the proposed site. It was considered that the key source of noise audible at the locations around the site was that of distant traffic on the A7 and occasionally from the surrounding local roads.
The following properties have been selected for assessment purposes and are superimposed on top of OS mapping information shown within Figure 9.1:
1) Residential Property at Newbie. NGR: 337490, 577100 2) Residential Property at Brockwoodlees. NGR: 338170, 578000 3) Residential Property at Esk Bank. NGR: 338930, 57700027
These receptors were confirmed as being potentially most affected following the site visit, inspection of site mapping and consultation with Dumfries and Galloway Council.
Daytime and night-time ambient noise monitoring surveys were undertaken between the 12th and 13th February 2009 and on the 9th July 2009. Table 9.4 provides details with regards to the monitoring locations.
TABLE 9.4- NOISE MONITORING LOCATIONS Measurement Location Loc. No. Existing Key Noise Sources Description Daytime – Dominant noise source was passing Sound Level Meter road traffic along the B720. Passing aircraft was (SLM) was located in the 1 also occasionally audible. driveway area to the Newbie Night-time – Noises of very occasional passing south side of the traffic were dominant. Local wildlife noises and property. farmyard animals were also audible. Daytime – Traffic noise from vehicles on the A7 SLM was located at the along with occasional vehicles on the A720 end of access lane were the main noise sources in this location. adjacent to the farm 2 Occasionally noise from farm animals was also yard. Brockwoodlees audible.
Night-time – Traffic on the A7 was the dominant Approx. Grid Ref of SLM noise source along with occasional noise from – 338169, 578026 farm animals. Sound Level Meter Daytime – Dominant noise source is road traffic (SLM) was located in the along the A7. Local passing traffic is also 3 front garden area of a audible along the adjacent minor road. Esk Bank property known as Esk Night-time – Distant traffic noise on the A7 was (Bogle Gill) Bank, to the east of the considered to be the dominant noise source. property. Dog barking was also audible.
Table 9.5 below provides details of the timings and durations of the noise surveys.
TABLE 9.5 – NOISE MONITORING TIMINGS AND LOCATIONS Monitoring Daytime and Night time Location Date Time 1 9th July 2009 12:01 – 14:01 Newbie 9th July 2009 02:23 – 02:53 2 12th February 2009 13:56 – 15:26 Brockwoodlees 13th February 2009 01:00 – 01:30 3 9th July 2009 14:20 – 16:20 Esk Bank (Bogle Gill) 9th July 2009 03:05 – 03:35
27 For the purposes of this assessment it is considered that noise levels monitored at Esk Bank are representative (if not quieter) of those experienced at Bogle Gill due to the distance away from the A7. The assessment has been carried out at Bogle Gill due to its slightly closer proximity to the proposed CBM gas development site.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-8 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Monitoring Protocol
In accordance with BS4142, 1-hour samples of data were recorded during the day and 5-minute samples at night. At each location, the daytime surveys comprised two sets of 1-hour measurements and during the night-time a minimum of 6 samples of 5- minute measurements.
The instrumentation used during the noise surveys was a Norsonic 118 Real Time Sound Analyser (Serial No. 31314). The instrumentation was calibrated before and after each survey and no significant deviations in calibration level were noted. The SLM was configured with a ‘fast’ time constant and a dynamic range of 20 - 120 dB. The microphone was mounted in a free field position on a tripod at a height of 1.5 m above ground level and a minimum of 3.5 m from any reflecting surface. The SLM was set to measure concurrent LAeq, LA90, LA10 and LAmax parameters.
Weather conditions were periodically noted by the field engineer during the survey periods as detailed below:
Daytime period - 12th February 2009: The weather during the daytime period was noted to be cloudy with occasional sleet falling. Temperatures were approximately 0ºC and wind speeds were well below 5 m/s throughout the survey period. The road surfaces were noted to be wet and partly covered with slush/sleet.
Night-time period - 13th February 2007: The weather during the night-time period was dry, overcast (100% cloud cover) with temperatures of approximately 4°C and negligible wind speeds. The road surfaces were noted to be wet for the duration of the night-time survey.
Daytime period – 9th July 2009: The weather during the daytime period was noted to be fine with sunny spells (70% cloud cover) and dry. Temperatures were approximately 13 °C and wind speeds were under 5m/s throughout the survey period. The road surfaces were dry.
Night-time period – 9th July 2009: The weather during the night-time period was dry, but fairly cloudy (70% cloud cover) with temperatures of approximately 7°C and wind speeds staying under 5m/s. The road surfaces were damp during the survey.
Measured Noise Level Data
A summary of the daytime and night-time survey results are presented within Table 9.6 and Table 9.7 below.
TABLE 9.6 – SUMMARY OF MEASURED DAYTIME NOISE LEVELS Measurement Measured Noise Level (dB) Location Start Time LAeq(1hour) LA90(1hour) 12:01 50.9 28.3 1 13:01 50.5 27.8 13:55 52.0 41.0 2 14:55 52.9 42.2 14:20 43.6 36.1 3 15:20 44.9 34.1
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-9 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 9.7 – SUMMARY OF MEASURED NIGHT TIME NOISE LEVELS Measurement Measured Noise Level (dB) Location Start Time LAeq(5min) LA90(5min) 1 02:23 24.6 17.5 1 02:28 19.9 18.3 1 02:33 25.2 19.1 1 02:38 25.4 20.2 1 02:42 20.7 18.8 1 02:48 32.4 18.8 2 01:00 39.3 34.5 2 01:05 36.0 34.0 2 01:10 39.2 34.1 2 01:15 43.8 34.7 2 01:20 39.4 37.0 2 01:25 40.0 36.8 3 03:05 61.2 23.3 3 03:10 60.8 23.5 3 03:15 59.4 23.5 3 03:20 59.1 24.1 3 03:25 55.7 25.4 3 03:30 55.6 25.1
9.6 Impact Assessment
Within the scope of the works proposed on site, there are considered to be four phases. These are defined below:
1. site preparation – approximately 6 weeks; 2. drilling – approximately 6 weeks; 3. production – including development and production up to 20 years; and 4. capping and restoration – approximately 6 weeks (season and weather dependent).
For the purposes of the assessment phases 1 and 4 above are considered to generate broadly similar noise levels and utilise similar plant.
Site Preparation and Restoration Phases
Plant that is expected to be used in these phases is shown in Table 9.8 below.
TABLE 9.8 – CONSTRUCTION PLANT SOURCE NOISE LEVELS SWL / dB(A) Description (Sound Power Level) Tracked Excavator 108 Dozer 109 Vibratory Roller (50 kW) 106 Diesel Generator 102 25tn Dump Truck 110 Delivery Lorries 105.5
Due to the transient nature of construction operations it is difficult to accurately predict potential noise impacts on adjacent sensitive receptors. Resulting noise levels at a receptor location will vary considerably dependent upon the activities that are being undertaken at the time and the associated plant utilised. However, indicative construction noise calculations have been undertaken based on noise levels detailed within Table 9.8 above and the following construction scenario as shown below:
• tracked excavator working in centre of site – 100% of time;
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-10 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• dozer working in centre of site - 100% of time; and • vibratory roller (50 kW) working in centre of site - 100% of time.
The results of the indicative calculations are presented within Table 9.9 below. In all modelling, soft ground conditions have been assumed. In addition noise levels have been calculated at ground and first floor level and the highest (worst case) noise level used in the assessment. It should be noted that with all equipment operating for 100% of the time, the following prediction can be viewed as a worst case scenario:
TABLE 9.9 – PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS DURING SITE PREPARATION AND RESTORATION Predicted noise Assessment Location (in dB LAeq, 1hr) 1 - Newbie 40.8 2 - Brockwoodlees 42.9 3 - Bogle Gill 43.3
When assessed using the example significance criteria (Method 2) detailed in Part 1 of BS5228, assuming construction operations are only likely to occur during the daytime period (0700 – 1900 Hrs weekdays and 0700-1300 Hrs Saturdays) it can be seen that the predicted construction noise level does not exceed the 65 dB LAeq cut- off value. As such when assessed using the example criteria detailed in BS5228 it has been found that construction noise is unlikely to have a significant effect on nearby receptors.
Drilling and Production Phases
During the drilling and production phases of the development it is considered that the main noise source on site will be the drilling rig. However it is noted that the drilling rig will only operate for approximately 6 weeks. Once the boreholes have been drilled the drilling rig will cease operation. During the production phase the site is not expected to generate significant noise as it will consist of buried wellheads, water handling equipment and gas handling equipment. It is therefore unlikely to have any impact on nearby receptors. The following section will therefore focus on noise generated by the site during the drilling phase of the proposed CBM gas development.
The drilling rig would operate at a relatively constant output during both the daytime and night-time periods. Therefore an assessment has been undertaken against both the measured daytime and night-time baseline noise levels.
Proposed Drilling Rig
Noise power levels for the proposed drilling rig are not available. For the purposes of this assessment it has been assumed that BDF Rig 28 (an older style rig) is to be used, providing a worst-case scenario. Measured noise data from the operational BDF Drilling Rig 28, as used on a previous site in Cumbria, has been used throughout this assessment.
A noise assessment was undertaken of Rig 28 on the 3rd December 2008. A number of measurements were made on site so as to enable the sound power level (SWL) of dominant noise sources to be quantified. Table 9.10 details the resultant SWL for the drilling rig and associated plant. The table also contains the assumed source heights (based on observations made on site) that have been used to create the acoustic model.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-11 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 9.10 – SUMMARY OF DRILLING RIG SOURCE SOUND POWER LEVELS Equipment Type Source Height (Metres) Source SWL in dB(A) Shale Shaker 1.5 99 Drilling Rig Deck 3.0 103 Generator 1.0 82 Pump Engine 1.5 94 Triplex Mud Pump 0.5 97 Centrifuge 3.0 101
External Noise Assessment
The prediction of noise associated with the drilling rig has been undertaken using SoundPLAN 6.5. The SoundPLAN software implements the calculation methodology of ISO9613 parts 1 and 2.
Table 9.11 below presents the predicted noise levels at each of the detailed locations based on plant SWLs, assumed source heights and the topography of the surrounding area. A 3m soil bund was modelled around the east, north and east boundary of the drilling site as detailed in Figure 9.1. As a result, some screening effects will have been taken into account. It has been assumed that all plant and equipment is continuously running. In all calculations soft ground conditions have been assumed.
TABLE 9.11 – PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS FROM DRILLING RIG Predicted noise level in dB L Location Aeq, 1hr Specific 1 - Newbie 29.9 2 - Brockwoodlees 35.7 3 - Bogle Gill 32.1
Table 9.12 below presents the results of a BS4142 assessment based upon the above predicted data and the background noise levels established within the scope of this chapter. The lowest measured hourly LA90 noise level during the day and five minute LA90 during the night have been used in the assessments, so as to represent a worst case scenario.
BS4142 states:
‘[BS4142 assessment methodology] is not suitable when the background and rating noise levels are both very low. For the purposes of this standard, background noise levels below about 30dB and rating levels below about 35dB are both very low.’
As there are background noise levels below 30dB in this assessment, they have been omitted from the BS4142 assessment in Table 9.12. As explained earlier, it is then considered more appropriate to assess the significance of the development noise based on external noise change for the daytime period and an internal noise assessment for the night-time period.
TABLE 9.12 – BS4142 ASSESSMENT OF DRILLING RIG 28 1 2 3 Newbie Brockwoodlees Bogle Gill Predicted Specific Noise Level in dB LAeq 30 36 32 Corrected Rating Level (Tonal penalty) 35 41 37 Assessment period Day Night Day Night Day NIght Measured Background Noise Level in dB N/A N/A 41 34 34 N/A LA90 of locality Rating Level - Background N/A N/A 0 +7 +3 N/A
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-12 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
The following table details the predicted noise change at the receptor locations based on the existing measured ambient noise level and the predicted specific noise level. Noise change has only been examined during the daytime for external areas.
TABLE 9.13 – PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS FROM DRILLING RIG 28 – NOISE CHANGE Existing Ambient Existing Ambient + Predicted Noise Location Noise Level in Predicted Specific Change in dB dBLAeq Noise Level in dB LAeq 1 - Newbie 51 51 0 2 - Brockwoodlees 52 52 0 3 - Bogle Gill 44 44 0
Daytime Period
External Noise
During the daytime period at Newbie, Bogle Gill and Brockwoodlees the BS4142 assessment has concluded that results are of less than marginal significance due to noise from the site.
It has been concluded that there would be no significant change in ambient noise levels as a result of the site’s operations.
Night Time Period
External Noise
During the period of night-time monitoring at Brockwoodlees the BS4142 assessment has concluded that results are of marginal significance due to noise from the site.
During the period of night-time noise monitoring at the receptors of Newbie and Bogle Gill, the highest background noise level recorded was 25.4dB LA90, 5min at Bogle Gill (during the quietest period of the night). Due to these low noise levels a night- time assessment in accordance with BS4142 guidelines could not be carried out. In these situations internal noise levels should be considered.
Internal Noise
Within any façade of a residential building typically the glazed portion would be the acoustically weak element of the construction. The sound insulation of typical window units is contained within BS8233 and summarised within Table 9.14 below.
TABLE 9.14 – BS8233 SOUND REDUCTION OF TYPICAL WINDOWS Weighted Sound Reduction Description Index RW (dB) Partially Open Window 10 – 15 (assumed as 13) Single Glazed Window (4 mm) 22 – 30 (assumed as 26) Thermal Insulating Unit (6 – 12 – 6 mm) 30 – 33 (assumed as 32)
Using the façade attenuation data and based upon the predicted external specific noise levels presented within Table 9.11, expected internal noise levels have been estimated for the drilling operations. This assessment method does not take into account the level of sound absorption and the geometry of the receiving room, however, in the absence of further data, the results provide indicative internal noise levels. The results of the assessment are detailed in Table 9.15.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-13 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 9.15 – BS8233 SOUND REDUCTION OF TYPICAL WINDOWS (AT RECEPTORS) Estimated internal noise levels in dB(A) Receptor Location Predicted L Double Aeq Open Window Single Glazed Glazed 1 - Newbie 30 17 4 0 2 - Brockwoodlees 36 23 10 4 3 - Bogle Gill 32 19 6 0
The results of the assessment indicate that during the night-time period the BS8233 “good” design conditions of 30dB LAeq,8hr is met in all scenarios.
Noise levels generated by plant associated with the CBM gas development are fairly constant with no sudden or impulsive elements expected. It is therefore believed that the internal 45dB LAmax target for ‘reasonable’ conditions at night in BS8233 would be complied with.
In summary, calculated worst case noise levels at Newbie, Brockwoodlees and Bogle Gill are considered to be acceptable with respect to noise change and internal noise guidance and hence a temporarily significant effect would not occur at this location.
Potential cumulative impacts
This site is one of eleven sites that Greenpark are including within this second phase of CBM development in this area. This follows a first phase of eight sites which have already been submitted to Dumfries & Galloway Council for determination. In total, there would be eighteen drill sites/Production Hubs and one Compressor Station in the area. Whilst the CBM gas developments would be developed sequentially, one site may be prepared over a period when drilling may be taking place at another site. Therefore, cumulative impacts on noise sensitive receptors could arise.
With the Production Hubs being mainly underground, visually non-intrusive and of small area, there would be no cumulative impact from the production phase overall.
Lastly, there are no other similar operations in the area. Therefore, no cumulative impacts on noise interests in this regard are predicted to occur.
9.7 Mitigation
Site Preparation and Restoration Phases
During the site preparation and restoration phases it has been predicted that noise generated by the CBM gas development is unlikely to have a significant impact. However, it is recommended that the following ‘Best Practicable Means’ be employed where possible to minimise construction impacts, including, for example:
Plant and Equipment
• modern, silenced and well-maintained plant should be used at all times, conforming to standards set out in EU Directives; • equipment including vehicles should be shut down when not in use; • engine compartments should be closed when equipment is in use and the resonance of body panels and cover plates should be reduced by the addition of suitable dampening materials. Any rattling noise should be addressed by the tightening of loose parts or the addition of resilient materials;
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-14 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• semi-static equipment is to be sited and orientated as far as is reasonably practicable away from noise-sensitive receptors and to have localised screening if deemed necessary; • generators and water pumps required for 24-hour operation should be super- silenced or screened as appropriate; • crane spindles, pulley wheels, telescopic sections and moving parts of working platforms should be adequately lubricated in order to prevent undue screeching and squealing.
Management of Works Programme
• wherever practicable, noisy works, which are audible at the site boundary, should be undertaken during normal daytime hours, e.g. between 09.00 and 17.00 Monday to Friday and between 09.00 and 13.00 on Saturdays; • routes and programming for the transportation of construction materials, fill, personnel etc. are to be carefully considered in order to minimise the overall noise impact generated by these movements; • personnel should be instructed on measures to reduce noise and vibration as part of their site induction training; and • use of radios should be prohibited except where two-way radios are required for reasons of safety.
Drilling and Production Phases
Drilling Phase
During the daytime it has been concluded that results are of marginal significance as a result of the proposed CBM gas development at the nearest identified sensitive receptors. When assessed in terms of noise change, there will be no increase due to the effects of the site.
It has been demonstrated that noise levels generated by the plant will meet BS8233 ‘good’ sleeping design guidance during the night inside the identified sensitive residential receptors.
Production Phase
During the production phase it is expected that the site will not generate significant noise and as such there would be no requirement for any mitigation measures.
Potential cumulative impacts
Efforts would be made to undertake site preparation and drilling phases outside the immediate area of the other. On this basis, a cumulative impact would be unlikely.
Verification of Noise Model
Noise levels predicted throughout this report are based on sound pressure levels measured at the previous drilling rig site in Cumbria referred to above. Due to noise from other nearby sources it is possible that a number of these measurements can be viewed as worst case. In order to verify the prediction methods, the reference site was modelled using the same methodology as described in this chapter. Predicted noise levels were then compared to actual noise measurements made on site. The following table details the predicted noise and measured noise levels at a location 120m from the reference CBM gas development with clear line of site to the noise generating plant and equipment.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-15 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 9.16 – MODEL VERIFICATION NOISE LEVELS EMPIRICAL DATA FROM A CUMBRIAN REFERENCE SITE Predicted Noise Level at 120m in Measured Noise Level Measured Noise Level dB LAeq dB LAeq dB LA90 51.0 48.8 45.7
The measured noise levels were also affected by noise from a nearby road. Noise from the drilling Rig and associated plant is virtually constant and therefore the LA90 is likely to be a better representation of noise from the rig at the measurement location. This would therefore indicate that the modelling procedure is over estimating noise by up to 5 dB at more distant receivers.
Based on the worst case noise model it has been shown in this assessment that drilling phase noise levels are unlikely to have a significant effect on nearby receptors. In addition, based on the findings of the model verification process, the noise levels are likely to be further reduced.
9.8 Statement of Significance
This assessment has considered the impact on nearby noise sensitive receptors of noise generated by the preparation, drilling, production and restoration phases of the CBM gas development at the Holehouse Plantation site.
Noise levels generated by the development have been predicted and compared to the guidance contained in PAN56, BS4142, BS5228 and BS8233.
It has been concluded that noise generated by the site preparation and restoration phases of the CBM gas development will not have a significant effect on nearby noise sensitive receptors at Newbie, Brockwoodlees and Bogle Gill.
It is not expected that significant noise will be produced during the production phase of the development and as such it is anticipated that there will be no impact on nearby sensitive receptors during this phase.
With regard to the drilling phase of the proposed development, it has been concluded that noise levels generated by the site during the night are unlikely to cause sleep disturbance and hence a significant effect on the nearby noise sensitive receptors. Noise levels generated by the proposed CBM gas development during the day have also been found to not have a significant effect on nearby receptors.
In addition, it should be noted that the assessment is based on the use of drilling rig 28. In reality, an alternative modern drilling rig will be used which will significantly reduce the noise levels.
It has therefore been concluded, taking into account the relatively short 6 week duration, that noise generated during the drilling phase of the development will not have a significant effect at Holehouse Plantation.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 9-16 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
10. Transport and Traffic
10.1 Summary
This chapter assessed the traffic impact effects of the CBM gas development on the local road network resulting from the proposed site at Holehouse Plantation. The access arrangements arising from the construction and operation of the CBM gas development have also been considered in full.
The key phases of the CBM gas development are: site preparation, drilling, production and restoration. These have each been considered in turn with regard to the impact on traffic, transport and highways.
The site is located within Holehouse Flow Plantation with the new access across two improved grassland fields and Cross Burn from the B720, approximately 750m south- west of the B720 / A7 junction.
Full depth carriageway construction is required at the site access junction with a 10m radii kerb on the western side and a nominal 3m radii to the eastern side.
Traffic activity will vary through the principal stages of the project, being at its greatest during the site preparation phase. However, even at this stage, the generated traffic will be modest and the impacts will not be significant.
The drilling phase will require the delivery and removal of the drilling rig, transported on a 24.75m total length abnormal load vehicle. The site access arrangements have been designed to accommodate this vehicle, and the police will be notified in advance to provide an escort on the public highway. With this mitigation in place, the impact of the abnormal load vehicle and all other site traffic will not be significant.
10.2 Introduction
With each new development there is a risk that the increase in traffic to the site may adversely affect the general traffic in the area. There is also the need to ensure that the proposal include, for examples, adequate accommodation for the increase in traffic to the site, junction capacity and parking for site staff. This chapter aims to describe the access arrangements, quantify and assess the level of traffic generated by the site and set out the materiality of impacts and any mitigation which may be required.
The key issues include ensuring that:
• There will be no adverse impact on traffic in the area; • There is suitable access to accommodate an increase in and change in the type of traffic as a result of this development; • There is adequate site access visibility; and • There is adequate car parking and turning facilities for site staff.
The local Roads Authority for the site is Dumfries and Galloway Council. The Highways Officer for the Authority who has been party to pre-application discussions and has helped inform the access arrangement design.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 10-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
10.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines
This chapter has been prepared with consideration of the following documentation:
• Transport Assessment and Implementation: A Guide” (Scottish Executive 2005) • NPPG 17 Transport and Planning (1999); • Planning Advice Note 57: Transport and Planning (1999); and • TD42/95 of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB).
10.4 Methodology
A site visit was undertaken to visually assess the suitability of the proposed access location and determine visibility requirements, junction geometry and construction standards.
A desktop study was performed to quantify the number of vehicle trips generated by each phase of operations and a design for the site access has been produced in accordance with discussions held on previous site visits with the Roads Authority.
The significance of any impact due to traffic generated by the site has been assessed by examining both magnitude and activity duration of vehicles generated by each phase of the CBM gas development.
10.5 Baseline Conditions
Accessibility
The road network in the vicinity of the site is generally of a rural nature. Access to the site will be taken from the B720, approximately 750m south-west of the B720 / A7 junction. The B720 has a derestricted speed limit with centre line markings and is generally in good condition. There are no footways or street lighting in the immediate area.
Access to the strategic road network is gained via the B720 onto the A7 to the north. Following discussions with Dumfries and Galloway Council, it has been established that there are no outstanding issues relating to transport regarding the proposed development.
Access to the site will be directly from the B720 via a new junction. The new access track will require being of 11m at the throat of the junction before narrowing down to 7.3m. The new access will have curbed radii of 10m on both west side of the junction and nominal 3m radii on the east which will allow vehicle access from the highway from both directions. The layout of the site access arrangement has been informed by the undertaking of swept path analysis for the drilling rig vehicle.
This arrangement (as shown in Detail 1, Figure 10.1) will remain until such time that all drilling operations have ceased at the site, or until a time otherwise agreed with the local highway. Following the completion of the drilling phase, in the interest of protecting the developments visual intrusion to its rural surroundings, the site access will be modified to provide 7.5m radii kerbs and a reduced 6m wide access track (as shown in Detail 3, Figure 10.1).
Visibility splays are in excess of 160m from a set-back distance of 2.4m and accord with the requirements of Dumfries and Galloway Council and DMRB. There is
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 10-2 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
adequate visibility in both directions to safely accommodate the movement of all vehicles.
Areas will be constructed near the main site area to allow adequate space for commercial vehicle parking and turning.
A drawing of the site access arrangements is shown in Figure 10.1.
The Operation
The development will be divided into four distinct phases, as set out below:
a. Site Preparation; b. Drilling; c. Production; and d. Capping and Site Restoration.
The traffic implications of each of the key stages are considered below.
Site Preparation Phase
The site will require a hardstanding area and access capable of withstanding the loads associated with the borehole drilling equipment.
Hard core and other equipment would be delivered on 20 tonne HGVs generating up to 40 trips per day for approximately 10 days. This 10 day period represents the most intensive usage of the site access.
Site preparation would involve the use of a dumper truck, tracked excavator and a vibrating roller. Between 4 and 8 members of staff will be required on site during this phase, which will last in the region of six weeks.
Drilling Phase
This phase will comprise the drilling of vertical and horizontal boreholes which would take approximately 6 weeks.
The vehicle used to move the drilling rig is an articulated vehicle with an extendible 5 axle, rear steering trailer. The width of the vehicle is 2.55 m and the total length is 24.75 m with the trailer extended by 9 m to accept the mast of the rig. This abnormal load vehicle will require advanced notification to the police and an escort to and from the site.
The site access has been designed to accommodate this vehicle with the trailer extended 9 m. The safe operation has been assessed by the use of swept path analysis, as shown in Figure 10.1.
There would be a limited number of visits by commercial vehicles and water tankers to remove excess water from the drilling process.
Between 16 and 20 people would be on site at any given time.
Once the boreholes have been drilled, the rig and other associated equipment will be removed from the site and the production equipment delivered to the site and installed. This may include water handling equipment. Construction of the production hub is expected to take around 12 weeks.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 10-3 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Production Phase
The production hub will generate minimal road traffic which would be associated with occasional maintenance inspections taking place and water tankers to remove excess water extracted with the gas.
The production phase is expected to last approximately 15-20 years.
Decommissioning and Site Restoration Phase
The site would be restored once all gas has been extracted. The aim is to ensure that the site is restored to the prior forestry use using the topsoil that had been retained on site. Whilst the actual period of activity may be as short as six weeks, because much of the work is seasonally dependent, the restoration phase may take up to 18 months.
The restoration process will commence by filling boreholes and 'cellars' with concrete. The hardcore will then be removed using 20 tonne HGVs before covering the site with the topsoil already at the site.
The access tracks leading to the site will remain.
10.6 Impact Assessment
Due to the abnormal length of the vehicle used for the transportation of the drilling rig, swept path analysis has been undertaken to ensure the site access provides a safe and operationally effective design.
Localised carriageway widening is not required to accommodate the drilling rig vehicle turning into or out of the site.
The most intensive use of the site access will occur during the site preparation phase resulting from the delivery of construction materials and site equipment. This would generate up to 40 HGV deliveries a day for a maximum of 10 days. For the remainder of the time, the site will generate a very low level of traffic for limited periods.
An Officer from Dumfries and Galloway Council Highways Department has confirmed that this level of traffic generation is not significant given the temporary nature. It is considered that the traffic increase associated with the delivery of construction materials at the site access is comparable to that experienced at an agricultural access during harvesting periods.
10.7 Mitigation
Given the limited impact of the number of trips generated by the proposed operation, it is considered that there is no material impact upon the road network other than that identified for the drilling rig vehicle.
In the interests of road safety, the drilling rig vehicle will require a police escort on the public highway during its delivery and removal to the site.
The only new road infrastructure will be that associated with the construction of the site access. During the site preparation phase, sweepers will be deployed to prevent mud from the site spreading onto the road.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 10-4 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
The visibility lines from the proposed junction are clear and therefore require no mitigation measures.
10.8 Statement of Significance
The potential traffic impacts of the proposed CBM gas development at Holehouse Plantation have been considered. The operation will encompass a number of distinct phases, each of which will generate varying levels of traffic and one of which will involve the single use of an abnormal load vehicle.
Traffic generated will be at its greatest during the site preparation phase. However, even at this stage the generated traffic will be modest and the impact on the road network will not be significant.
The drilling phase will require the delivery and removal of a mobile drilling rig, transported on an articulated, rear steer abnormal load vehicle of 24.75m total length. This will require mitigation in the form a prearranged police escort. With this mitigation in place, the impact of the abnormal load vehicle and all other site traffic will not be significant.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 10-5 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
11. Air Quality
11.1 Summary
This chapter assessed the effects of the CBM gas development on air quality during the phases of site preparation, drilling, production and restoration. The assessment of effects of nuisance dust has been undertaken using a qualitative risk-based approach, whereas the effects of suspended dust (particles with a mean aerodynamic diameter of less than 10 m, PM10) have been assessed semi- quantitatively.
Existing (baseline) levels of dust vary locally. Local monitoring within Dumfries and Galloway indicates that concentrations of PM10 at the site are currently below the Air Quality Strategy annual-mean objective of 18 g.m-3 (see section 11.3).
The impacts from nuisance dust are deemed to be negligible during all phases of the development. The concentrations of PM10 are predicted to remain below the Air Quality Strategy annual-mean objective during all phases development at all receptors. Mitigation measures have nevertheless been recommended that will further reduce impacts to a level where no significant effects would be expected.
Although small quantities of CBM gas could be released fugitively between the testing and production phases, the net overall effect on emissions of greenhouse gases is likely to be insignificant because Greenpark intends to move directly from testing into production.
11.2 Introduction
This Chapter assesses the potential effects on air quality of the proposed CBM gas development.
The releases with potential for effects are:
• dust, associated with the different phases (preparation, drilling, production, and restoration); and • traffic emissions from vehicle movements associated with the development.
Dust is a generic term used to describe particulate matter (PM) up to 75 m in diameter. It is classified further by size, into fine particles up to 2.5 m in diameter (PM2.5), a coarser fraction including particles up to 10 m in diameter (PM10) and particles greater than 10 m in diameter (termed nuisance dust). This chapter has assessed by a qualitative method the nuisance dust effects for separate phases of the development. The PM10 effects have been assessed semi-quantitatively for these separate development phases.
At all stages of the CBM gas development vehicles are used to transport equipment and materials. This air quality assessment focuses on the key traffic-related pollutant nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and a qualitative assessment has been made of the likely effects of this pollutant.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
11.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines
European Legislation
Current Directives
The European Union Framework Directive 1996/62/EC on ambient air quality assessment and management came into force in November 1996 and had to be implemented by Member States, including the UK, by May 1998. The Directive aims to protect human health and the environment by avoiding, reducing or preventing harmful concentrations of air pollutants. As a Framework Directive, it requires the European Commission (EC) to propose and set “Daughter” Directives prescribing air quality limit values and alert thresholds together with guidance on monitoring and measurement of individual pollutants.
New Directive
In the late 1990s, the Clean Air for Europe (CAFE) programme was established with a view to drawing together the air quality directives into a new single directive. On 21 September 2005, the EC adopted the Thematic Strategy on Air Quality proposed under the CAFE programme.
The main aims of the Strategy are to address the following:
• the need for an holistic approach to preventing air pollution; • the evidence that particles with a mean aerodynamic diameter of less than 2.5 m, PM2.5, are potentially more hazardous than larger particles. The current limit values are for particles with a mean aerodynamic diameter of less than 10 m, PM10; and • the current limit value based system requires Member States to reduce levels of pollutants in a relatively small number of highly localised ‘hot-spots’ rather than a general reduction in exposure. Effort and investment may be misplaced if pollutant levels are reduced in locations where the sources of pollution do not give rise to significant health or environmental concerns.
A new EU Directive 2008/50/EC, replacing all previous directives delivers the aims of the Strategy. The new Directive is to be implemented by Member States by June 2010. The new Directive makes provision for the:
• withdrawal of the Stage 2 2010 PM10 indicative limit values and the opportunity to apply for an extension to the existing target dates for achievement of the limit values; • introduction of a ‘national exposure reduction target’ to the average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations measured at urban background locations throughout the territory of a Member State by up to 20% between 2010 and 2020 with the actual reduction dependent on the initial concentration; • introduction of an ‘exposure concentration obligation’ based on the average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations measured at urban background locations throughout the territory of a Member State of 20 g.m-3 to be met by 2015; -3 • introduction of a target value for annual mean PM2.5 of 25 g.m to be met by 1 January 2010; and -3 • introduction of a Stage 1 limit value for annual mean PM2.5 of 25 g.m to be met by 1 January 2015 and an indicative Stage 2 limit value of 20 g.m-3 to be met by 1 January 2020.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-2 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
National Legislation
Air Quality Standards Regulations
The Air Quality Standards (Scotland) Regulations 2007 implement the limit values prescribed by current EU Directives, 1996/62/EC, as legal limits within Scotland. The limit values are legally binding and the Secretary of State, on behalf of the UK Government, is responsible for their implementation.
On 24 April 2009, the UK submitted an application for an exemption from the obligation to apply the limit values for PM10 until 2011. The exemption applies to eight areas in which the annual and/or daily limit values for PM10 have not been met at some point in time since 2005. The application follows the European Commission beginning legal proceedings against the ten Member States, including the UK, in January 2009 for failing to meet legally binding EU limits for PM10 by the deadline in October 2008. The site is not within any of the eight areas for which an exemption has been sought.
UK Air Quality Strategy
The UK Air Quality Strategy (AQS) was originally published in January 2000 and described the Government’s strategy for improving air quality in the UK. One of the key aspects of the strategy was the setting of air quality objectives for eight pollutants, namely benzene, 1,3-butadiene, ozone, carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, particulates and sulphur dioxide. The Government announced tighter objectives for particulates, benzene and carbon monoxide and a new objective for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in an Addendum to the AQS, published in February 2003. The Addendum included new provisional objectives for particulates in addition to existing objectives within the 2000 Strategy.
The current UK AQS was published in July 2007 and updates the original strategy to set out new objectives for local authorities in undertaking their local air quality management duties. The provisional objectives for PM10 are removed from the current AQS. Objectives in the current AQS are in some cases more onerous than the limit values set out within the relevant EU Directives, Daughter Directives and the Air Quality Standards (Scotland) Regulations 2007. In addition, objectives have been established for a wider range of pollutants.
It is expected that local air quality management in the UK will be assessed and controlled under the AQS for the foreseeable future. For the purposes of this assessment, the limit values set out in the Air Quality Standards (Scotland) Regulations 2007 and the objective levels specified under the current UK AQS have been used. The limit values and objectives relevant to this assessment are summarised in Table 11.1.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-3 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 11.1 – SUMMARY OF RELEVANT AIR QUALITY LIMIT VALUES AND OBJECTIVES (SCOTLAND) Pollutant Averaging Objectives / Limit Not to be Exceeded More Target Date Period Values Than Nitrogen 1 hour 200 g.m-3 18 times per calendar year 31.12.2005 (a) Dioxide 01.01.2010 (b) -3 (NO2 ) Annual 40 g.m 31.12.2005 (a) 01.01.2010 (b) Particulate 24 hour 50 g.m-3 7 times per calendar year 31.12.2010 (a) Matter 35 times per calendar year - (b) -3 (PM10) Annual 18 g.m 31.12.2010 (a) 40 g.m-3 - (b)
Particulate Annual Target of 15% Between 2010 Matter reduction in and 2020 (c) (PM2.5) concentrations at urban background locations Annual 12 g.m-3 2020 (c) (a) Target objective/date set in UK Air Quality Strategy 2007 (b) Target limit value/date set in Air Quality Standards (Scotland) Regulations 2007 (c) Objectives set in UK Air Quality Strategy 2007 only
National Policy Guidance – Planning
Policy Guidance Local Air Quality Management LAQM.PG(09), issued under Part IV of the Environmental Act 1995, is designed to help local authorities with their local air quality management duties. The guidance requires that local authorities integrate air quality considerations into the planning process at the earliest possible stage. As a result, the land use planning system is integral to improving air quality.
Scottish Planning Policies (SPPs) provide statements of Scottish Government Policy on land use and other planning matters. Planning Advice Note (PAN) 51 provides advice on best practice and offers guidance to local authorities on the relationship between controls over development under planning law, and under pollution control legislation.
PAN51 sets out those circumstances where air quality may be a material issue for planning applications and provides guidance to planning authorities on making these decisions. It states that air quality is likely to be particularly important where:
• the development is proposed inside, or adjacent to, an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) as designated under Part IV of the Environment Act 1995; • the development could in itself result in the designation of an AQMA; and/or • to grant planning permission would conflict with, or render unworkable, elements of a local authority’s air quality action plan.
PAN51 advises that not all planning applications for developments inside or adjacent to AQMAs should be refused if developments would result in a deterioration of local air quality. Local Planning Authorities (LPAs), transport authorities and pollution control authorities are encouraged to explore the possibility of securing mitigation measures that would allow the proposal to proceed. All applications should be supported by such information as is necessary to allow a full consideration of the impact of the proposal on the air quality of the area.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-4 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
11.4 Methodology
Dust Assessment Methodology
Behaviour of Dusts and their Effects
Dusts can contain a wide range of particles of different sizes. The size of a particle influences the aerodynamic and gravitational effects that determine the distance it travels and how long it stays suspended in the air before it settles out onto a surface. The impacts of dust decrease with distance from the source, due to dispersion and dilution. Information on the dispersion of dust provided in LAQM.TG(03)28, PAN 5029 and DOE guidance30 suggests that:
a) the downwind distance travelled by dust from the source, and within which deposition is most likely to occur, is generally less than 250 m.
• Large dust particles (>30 µm, which make up the greatest proportion of dust emitted from mineral workings) will largely deposit within 100 m of sources. Under average wind conditions (winds of mean speed between 2 and 6 m s-1) these particles, which comprise around 95% of total dust emissions, deposit within 60-90 m of the source.
• Intermediate-sized particles (10-30 µm) will generally travel up to 200- 500 m from the source. Under normal meteorological conditions, these medium-sized particles will generally travel up to 100-250 m from the source and only occasionally, when winds are stronger, will they travel beyond this.
b) dust particles travelling beyond 250 m are generally less than 10 µm diameter. These PM10 particles make up only a small proportion of the dust emitted from most mineral workings, and it is expected that this will also be the case for the proposed scheme. The PM10 fraction falls out of the atmosphere very slowly and may travel 1,000 m or more suspended in the air before being deposited. Over this distance, concentrations of the particles suspended in the air decrease rapidly with distance from the source due to dispersion and dilution.
This distinction between suspended dust and deposited dust is important, as it determines the adverse effects that can potentially occur:
• PM10 particles, whilst suspended in the atmosphere, are small enough to be inhaled and therefore potentially have health impacts. • Nuisance dust particles (larger than 10 µm diameter) can soil surfaces (e.g. a car, window sill, laundry) causing the perception of nuisance.
Nuisance Dust Deposition Assessment Methodology
Dust may be suspended in the atmosphere from:
• operations that actively generate airborne dust, such as site preparation, excavation, transportation and processing operations; and • wind blow, whereby dust is lifted from rest by the wind to become airborne.
28 Defra 2003, Local Air Quality Management – Technical Guidance TG(03) 29 The Scottish Office, Development Department 1996. Planning Advice Note PAN 50 : Controlling The Environmental Effects of Surface Mineral Workings 30 The Environmental Effects of Dust from Surface Mineral Workings, Department of the Environment, 1996.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-5 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
The suspended dust will eventually be deposited onto surfaces. The level and distribution of nuisance dust deposition will vary according to factors such as the type, duration and location of dust-generating activity, weather conditions, the effectiveness of dust suppression measures and sheltering features such as topography, purpose-made screening and bunds and tree cover. The risk of there being an adverse effect depends on whether the particular meteorological conditions that could transport dust to the receptors occur at the same time as the dust- generating activities.
Although dust can travel up to 500 m for sites with significant dust sources and with unfavourable meteorological conditions, concerns about dust are most likely to be experienced near to dust sources, generally within 100 m, depending on site characteristics and in the absence of appropriate mitigation.
Sensitive receptors around the application site are considered to be at higher risk from nuisance dust effects if:
• the sensitive receptors are located close to the emissions sources on site; and • the sensitive receptors are located downwind of the sources with regards to the prevailing wind direction for the area.
For nuisance dust, a qualitative risk-based approach has been used in this study to assess potential dust impact on local sensitive receptors, taking account of the prevailing wind direction in the area, operations (scale of working, duration, phasing and timing), and proximity of the CBM gas development. Where there are any other proposed CBM gas developments within 500 m of sensitive receptors, the cumulative nuisance effect has been assessed.
Sensitive Receptors for Nuisance Dust
The impact at a particular receptor will depend on how much dust there is (dust exposure) and the inherent sensitivity of the receptor. Receptors are the users of the adjacent land, and they may vary in their sensitivity to dust as shown in Table 11.2.
TABLE 11.2 - EXAMPLES OF DUST SENSITIVE FACILITIES (PAN 50, after Ireland M, 1992) High Sensitivity Medium Sensitivity Low Sensitivity Hospitals & clinics Residential areas Farms Retirement homes Schools Light & heavy industry Hi-tech industries Food retailers Outdoor storage Painting & furnishing Glasshouses & nurseries Food processing Horticultural land Offices
This dust assessment study identifies as sensitive receptors those High and Medium sensitivity examples shown above, that are located within the 500 m distance of the site within which the large (>30 µm) and intermediate-sized particles (10-30 µm) are likely to deposit.
Significance Criteria for Deposited Particulates (Nuisance Dust)
The potential effect of dust arising from the different development phases is principally one of the risk of causing nuisance to the local community. Dust nuisance is usually experienced as a result of dust deposition upon, and soiling of, clean surfaces such as window sills, cars or laundry.
Currently no UK statutory standards or limits exist which are appropriate for the assessment of deposited dust and its tendency for causing nuisance. Similarly, no
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-6 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
official air quality criterion has been set at a European or World Health Organisation (WHO) level although a range of yardstick criteria from 133 to 350 mg.m-2.day-1 are found in the literature31. PAN5029 comments that none of the various guidelines are sufficiently well established to be recommended for adoption for nuisance dust, therefore this study uses a risk-based qualitative assessment of the likely risk of impacts from nuisance dust.
Suspended Dust (PM10) Assessment Methodology
Semi-quantitative assessments have been carried out on the effects on of PM10 on local air quality during the different development phases. The assessments have been made by comparison with the annual-average PM10 Air Quality Strategy objective, because the published data on expected contributions from minerals sites are given in annual-average form. The assessments take into account the Government guidance provided in PAN5029 and give consideration to current Government guidance (LAQM.TG(09))32 on the assessment of local air quality. For the four phases, which includes site preparation, drilling, production and capping and restoration, the approach involves the following key elements:
• establishing the existing background PM10 concentration through a review of available air quality monitoring data for the area, National Air Quality Information Archive (NAQIA) estimates for the location and consideration of Dumfries and Galloway Council (DGC) Air Quality Review and Assessment (R&A) documents;
• estimating the annual process contribution (PC) of PM10 at the site, by combining the PCs from each of the four phases (site preparation, drilling, production and capping and restoration) weighted against the weekly duration of activities;
• estimating the total predicted environmental concentration (PEC) by summing the PC and the background PM10 concentration; and
• comparing the PEC with the annual mean Air Quality Strategy objective for PM10.
It should be stressed that CBM gas developments are much smaller in scale and involve much less dust-generating activity than the open cast coal sites on which the 29 PM10 guidance in PAN50 is based. The above potential contributions to annual- mean concentrations have been modified to take this into account.
Although the application site is located in the same general area as other proposed CBM gas development sites no cumulative effect will occur as the work at each site will be undertaken sequentially.
Sensitive Receptors for Suspended Particulates (PM10)
For assessment of PM10 the sensitive receptors to be considered are those where the public is regularly present and likely to be exposed over the averaging period of the objective. LAQM.TG(09) provides examples of where the air quality objectives should and should not apply. For the AQS annual-average PM10 objective, this includes residential properties, schools, hospitals and libraries.
31 Technical Guidance Document (Monitoring) M17. Monitoring of Particulate Matter in Ambient air around Waste Facilities version 3 : 2003 32 Defra 2009, Local Air Quality Management – Technical Guidance TG(09)
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-7 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Significance Criteria for Suspended Particulates (PM10)
A number of approaches can be used to determine whether the predicted air quality effects of a development are significant. However, there remains no universally recognised definition of what constitutes ‘significance’.
Guidance is available from a range of regulatory authorities and advisory bodies on how best to determine and present the significance of effects within an air quality assessment. It is generally considered good practice that, where possible, an assessment should communicate effects both numerically and descriptively.
As well as the semi-quantitative numerical comparison of predicted PM10 levels with the AQS annual-mean objective, this dust assessment study expresses descriptively the predicted PM10 effects. In order to ensure that the descriptions of effects used within this report are clear, consistent and in accordance with recent guidance, definitions have been adopted from the National Society for Clean Air (NSCA) document Development Control: Planning for Air Quality33. Table 11.3 provides magnitude descriptors used for predicted contributions from the development as a percentage of the AQS objective.
TABLE 11.3 – MAGNITUDE DESCRIPTORS Magnitude Descriptor Predicted Contribution as % of AQS
Very large Increase/decrease > 25% Large Increase/decrease 15 - 25% Medium Increase/decrease 10 - 15% Small Increase/decrease 5 - 10% Very Small Increase/decrease 1-5% Extremely Small Increase/decrease < 1% Standard = Air Quality Strategy Objective or Limit Value
The magnitude descriptor identified must then be considered in the context of existing air quality conditions within the study area in order for the significance of the impact to be determined. The most important aspects to consider are by how much existing concentrations are above or below the relevant AQS objective and whether existing receptors are within an Air Quality Management Area. Table 11.4 provides descriptors for the significance of air quality effects based on the magnitude descriptors described above. The NSCA recognises that professional judgement is required in the interpretation of air quality assessment significance.
33 Development Control: Planning for Air Quality, NSCA, 2006.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-8 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 11.4 – DESCRIPTORS FOR EFFECT SIGNIFICANCE WHEN THERE IS AN INCREASE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT Absolute Magnitude Descriptor Concentrations Extremely Very in Relation to Small Medium Large Very Large Small Small Standard Above Very Very standard Slight Slight Substantial Substantial substantial substantial without adverse adverse adverse adverse adverse adverse scheme Below standard Very Very Slight Moderate Substantial Substantial without substantial substantial adverse adverse adverse adverse scheme, above adverse adverse with scheme Below standard with Slight Slight Moderate Moderate Substantial Negligible scheme, but adverse adverse adverse adverse adverse not well below Well below Slight Slight Slight Moderate standard with Negligible Negligible adverse adverse adverse adverse scheme Notes: The NSCA descriptors have been used as a framework for this assessment; however, professional judgment is required to determine the significance of any change. ‘Standard’ = AQS objective or limit value ‘Well below standard’ = <75% of the standard level Adopted from NSCA guidance
Vehicle Emissions Assessment Methodology
At all stages of the CBM gas development vehicles are used to transport equipment and materials. The key pollutants from road traffic associated with local air quality and health impacts are NO2 and particulates. Nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions from motor vehicle exhausts comprise NO2 and nitric oxide (NO). The NO oxidises in the atmosphere to form NO2. NOx can affect sensitive vegetation directly and contribute to regional acid deposition. In addition to these pollutants, motor vehicles also emit small amounts of carbon monoxide (CO), benzene, 1,3-butadiene, un-burnt hydrocarbons and various greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide (CO2). This report has considered the likely significance of effects from vehicular emissions based on the expected scale, quantity and duration of vehicle movements as well as the proximity of receptors.
11.5 Baseline Conditions
Overview
Information on background air quality in the UK is usually available from two public sources:
• each local authority has published the results of its Review and Assessment (R&A) of air quality, with reference to local monitoring and modelling studies, providing a description of air quality at both kerbside and non-kerbside locations; and • the NAQIA includes projections of background (non-kerbside) concentrations for objective years up to 2020 for each 1 km grid square in the UK.
This information can be supplemented with reference to historical monitoring campaigns undertaken in the study area, by undertaking a site-specific monitoring campaign and by using typical background dust deposition rates from published sources.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-9 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Baseline Nuisance Dust Deposition Levels
UK Background Monitoring Data
The existing dust levels can be quantified from site-specific monitoring data or estimated baseline data. No site-specific baseline monitoring studies have been carried out for this site.
Although dust deposition rates – the main traditional means of assessing nuisance – are no longer routinely measured across the UK, monitoring was carried out nationally for a number of years. From these data, typical deposition rates for a variety of locations have been characterised and these are summarised below in Table 11.5.
TABLE 11.5 – TYPICAL DUST DEPOSITION RATES IN THE UK34 Measurement Location Mean Dust Deposition (mg.m-2.day-1) Open country 39 Outskirts of towns 59 Industrial areas 127
The study area fits into the “open country” category, and hence the background mean dust deposition rate can be expected to be in the region of 39 mg.m-2.day-1.
Baseline Air Quality (PM10 and NO2)
Local Authority Review and Assessment
The first round of R&A of air quality in DGC concluded that the AQS objectives were likely to be met. The updating and screening assessment, carried out as part of the second round of R&A, completed in 2006, concluded that a detailed assessment was required to determine the effect of the Stranraer and Cairnryan ferry terminals on sulphur dioxide (SO2) levels. The outcome of the detailed assessment was that an air quality management area (AQMA) was not required. Since 2006, the R&A documents have not identified any areas that require detailed assessments or AQMAs to be designated35.
Background Monitoring Data
DGC measures PM10 and NO2 at two continuous monitoring stations at Dumfries and Eskdalemuir, which are part of the Automatic Urban and Rural Network (AURN). However, it was considered that monitoring by Scottish Borders Council at Newcastleton, between June 2007 and June 2008, would be more conservative as this monitoring station is located in the back garden of a home in a small rural village. Although PM10 levels in this location may be influenced by the many houses in this area burning solid fuel36, this is not expected to be substantially different from dwellings near the proposed CBM gas development.
A summary of PM10 annual-mean concentrations in 2007 and 2008 obtained from Newcastleton is given in Table 11.6.
34 Building Research Establishment (BRE), Guidance on Controlling Dust from Demolition and Construction, 2003. 35 Dumfries and Galloway Local Air Quality Review and Assessment Documents. 36 Telecon Ken Jones – Scottish Borders Environmental Health Department
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-10 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
-3 TABLE 11.6 - MONITORED ANNUAL-MEAN PM10 and NO2 CONCENTRATIONS ( g.m ) Site Name Site Type Approx Pollutant 2007 2008 Distance (km) to Site
Newcastleton Background 15.3 PM10 16.7 14.9 Source: UK Air Quality Archive. Data for Newcastleton has been annualised according to the methodology in TG(09). This site has not been formally classified as background but it is located in the back garden of a home in a small village, hence it has been described here as a background monitor.
In addition to the automatic monitoring stations, DGC measures urban background concentrations of NO2 by passive diffusion tube at one location, Argyll Drive. The neighbouring district of Scottish Borders measures urban background concentrations of NO2 at five further sites using the same method. The concentrations measured at these locations between 2005 and 2007 are provided in Table 11.7.
-3 TABLE 11.7 – ANNUAL-MEAN NO2 CONCENTRATIONS ( g.m ) MEASURED BY DIFFUSION TUBES Site Name Approx Distance 2005 2006 2007 (km) to Site Argyll Drive 38.2 9.7 10.6 12.2 GALASHIELS 2N 61.0 5.4 ND 8.1 PEEBLES 6N 65.4 9.3 9.3 7.6 HAWICK 3N 39.4 8.9 7.1 6.2 MELROSE 1N 60.0 8.1 8.0 6.4 KELSO 2N 68.0 7.7 6.8 5.5 Source: Air Quality Archive Results have been bias adjusted using the UWE co-location data available at: http://www.uwe.ac.uk/aqm/review/diffusiontube230408.xls ND = No Data
NAQIA Estimated and Projected Data
The National Air Quality Information Archive (NAQIA) provides estimates of pollutant concentrations across the UK at a resolution of 1 km2 for each year up to 2020. The proposed development site is within grid square 337500, 576500. The NAQIA data for this grid square are presented in Table 11.8.
-3 TABLE 11.8 – NAQIA PM10 , NOx AND NO2 CONCENTRATION ( g.m ) ESTIMATES 2006 2007 2008
Annual mean NOx 7.2 7.0 6.7 Annual mean NO2 7.1 6.9 6.6 Annual mean PM10 9.3 9.2 9.1 Source: Air Quality Archive
Discussion of PM10 and NO2 Background Data
The requirement for this assessment is to set the background concentrations of PM10 and NO2 at conservative, but realistic levels.
The Newcastleton continuous monitoring site is considered representative of the application site area and annual-mean PM10 concentrations are likely to be higher than the NAQIA estimates. Therefore the Newcastleton 2008 annual-mean -3 concentration of 14.9 g.m has been used as a conservative, but realistic, PM10 baseline for the assessment.
Annual-mean NO2 concentrations monitored using diffusion tubes decreased each year at all background locations except Argyll Drive and Galashiels 2N. At the two closest urban background diffusion-tube sites (Argyll Drive and Hawick 3N) annual- mean concentrations ranged between 6.2 to 12.2 g.m-3.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-11 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
This range is higher than the NAQIA estimate for the site. The annual-mean concentration of 12.2 g.m-3 monitored at Argyll Drive in 2007 has therefore been set as a conservative, but realistic, NO2 baseline for the assessment.
The predicted opening year of the assessment is 2009, therefore the baseline data for 2007/2008 have been projected to 2009 in accordance with the method set out in LAQM.TG(09) and this has been used as an estimate of background concentrations for the assessment. The background concentrations used in the assessment are detailed below in Table 11.9.
-3 TABLE 11.9 – CONCENTRATIONS ( g.m ) OF PM10 AND NO2 USED IN THE ASSESSMENT ( g.m-3) Data Source Pollutant 2007 2008 2009 Argyll Drive – Diffusion Tube NO2 12.2 11.8 11.4 Newcastleton – Continuous monitoring station PM10 16.7 14.9 14.8
11.6 Impact Assessment
Overview
The assessments of effects of nuisance dust during the different phases of the development have been undertaken using a qualitative risk-based approach. The effects of PM10 have been assessed semi-quantitatively. The effects of traffic pollution have been assessed qualitatively.
Assessment of Nuisance Dust Effects
Site Preparation Phase Nuisance Dust Impacts
Preparation of the site will involve:
• removal of topsoil; • construction of a soil bund no greater than 3 m in height; • geo-textile and stone layer laid on the ground to protect subsoil; • provision of cabins for workers; • building of access roads; • provision of parking spaces; and • establishing a site to store fuel for the rig, in accordance with the Control of Pollution (Oil Storage) (England) Regulations 2001.
The activities that may cause fugitive dust emissions are as follows:
• removal of top soil and (if necessary) sub soil; • movement of vehicles, both on and off site; and • handling of loose construction materials.
The level and distribution of nuisance dust emissions will vary according to factors such as the type of dust, duration and location of dust-generating activity, weather conditions and the effectiveness of suppression measures.
The windrose in Figure 11.1 illustrates that the prevailing wind is from the southwest.
Figure 11.2 illustrates that there are no receptors within 500 m of the application site boundary. Nuisance dust effects are, therefore, not anticipated during the site preparation and construction phase.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-12 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Drilling Phase Nuisance Dust Impact
This phase will consist of drilling a number of boreholes over a six-week period. The activity may potentially lead to fugitive dust emissions.
Figure 11.2 illustrates that there are no receptors within 500 m of the application site boundary. Nuisance dust effects are, therefore, not anticipated during the drilling phase.
Production Phase Nuisance Dust Impacts
If it is viable to progress to the production stage, additional infrastructure will be required. Pipelines will be built to gather the gas from the wells and transport it to the Gas Compressor Station.
The activities that could cause fugitive dust emissions are as follows:
• removal of soils for pipe laying; • movement of vehicles, both on and off site; and • handling of loose construction materials.
Figure 11.2 illustrates that there are no receptors within 500 m of the application site boundary. Nuisance dust effects are, therefore, not anticipated during the production phase.
Nuisance Dust Impacts of Capping and Restoration Phase
Once production has finished, or if the gas yield is not viable the site will be decommissioned and restored. Restoration will involve, “plugging” the wellhead, replacing topsoil, and removal of the geo-textile and stone layer. The activities that may cause fugitive dust emissions are movement of vehicles, both on and off site, and handling of loose construction materials and topsoil.
Figure 11.2 illustrates that there are no receptors within 500 m of the application site boundary. Nuisance dust effects are, therefore, not anticipated during the restoration phase.
.Assessment of (PM10) Effects
The assessment has been made by comparison to the annual-average PM10 Air Quality Strategy objective of 18 g.m-3, because the published data on expected contributions from minerals sites are given in annual-average form.
The conservative but realistic estimate of the annual-mean background concentration -3 of PM10 is 14.8 g.m . Site preparation and restoration works could potentially contribute a worse case process contribution (PC) of up to 5 g.m-3 to background -3 PM10 at receptors within 200 m of the source, up to 2 g.m between 200 m and 400 m from the source, and up to 1 g.m-3 at receptors between 400 m and 1,000 m from the source. These distances are shown as concentric circles around the application site in Figure 11.3. It has been assumed that the drilling and production phases will contribute significantly less (< 10%) of the process contribution for stockpiling, as limited construction activity is associated with these phases.
For the purposes of the assessment, it has conservatively been assumed that all phases will be undertaken in the same year, with the construction of infrastructure in
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-13 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
the production phase expected to last for 12 weeks and the duration of all other phases being six weeks each.
The overall PM10 contribution from all the phases has been calculated by combining the duration- weighted PC from each phase as follows:
PC Total = (PC preparation x 6) + (PC drilling x 6) + (PC production x 12) + (PC restoration x 6) 52
The sensitive receptors falling into each distance category are shown in Table 11.11.
TABLE 11.10 – ASSESSMENT OF PM10 EFFECTS ASSUMING THE SITE TO BE AN OPENCAST COAL SITE Distance from Receptors PC PC + PC -3 Magnitude Significance Source (m) ( g.m ) Background (% AQS of Change PM10 objective) <200 m No sensitive 1.3 16.1 7.2 N/A N/A receptors 200 m to No sensitive 0.5 15.3 2.8 N/A N/A 400 m receptors 400 m to Byreburnfoot Very Slight 0.3 15.1 1.6 1000 m Small Adverse Brockwoodlees Very Slight 0.3 15.1 1.6 Small Adverse Hollows Mill Very Slight 0.3 15.1 1.6 Small Adverse Manse / Bogle Very Slight 0.3 15.1 1.6 Gill Small Adverse Canonbie A Very Slight 0.3 15.1 1.6 Small Adverse Drybow Very Slight 0.3 15.1 1.6 Small Adverse Broadmeadows Very Slight 0.3 15.1 1.6 Small Adverse Hawkshole Very Slight 0.3 15.1 1.6 Small Adverse Newbie Very Slight 0.3 15.1 1.6 Small Adverse
On this basis, site preparation, drilling, production and restoration activities at the application site could contribute a PC of up to 0.3 g.m-3 at the receptors. Using the NSCA criteria summarised in Tables 11.3 and 11.4, the magnitude of the change in PM10 concentration is defined as a “very small” increase and the significance of the effect on air quality is defined as “slight-adverse”.
Assessment of Traffic Pollution Effects
Movement of vehicles will result in emissions of combustion-related pollutants, including NO2. The operation of these vehicles will be on a relatively small scale and will be temporary (six weeks) and very localised (predominantly within the site area of approximately 0.8 ha). The results of the baseline assessment show that for NO2 the existing baseline annual-mean concentration of 11.4 g.m-3 within the District is well -3 below the relevant AQS objective of 40 g.m . The additional contributions of NO2 from construction-related vehicle movements are considered to be negligible and not likely to have any significant adverse effect on air quality as defined by NSCA guidance. As subsequent phases of the development involve similar or fewer vehicle movements, effects of NO2 resulting from traffic movements are not considered further in this assessment.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-14 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
CBM gas is a generic term for the naturally occurring gas found in coal seams, formed by geological or biological processes. CBM gas is likely to be composed primarily of methane, with the remainder comprising of small quantities of ethane, propane, carbon dioxide and nitrogen. Compared with the use of coal as a fuel, CBM gas is clean with low emissions of sulphur, particulates and nitrogen.
The amount of CBM gas that is likely to be released between the drilling and production phases is expected to be dependent upon how quickly Production Hubs are built. If there is a small transition time, then the volume of fugitive CBM gas released into the atmosphere will be minimal. Subject to the granting of planning permission, the scheme is able to move straight from testing to production if viability is demonstrated, thus further minimising releases of CBM gas.
11.7 Mitigation
The scheme will incorporate mitigation measures based on ‘good housekeeping’ site practices (such as water bowsers, upward pointing vehicle exhausts etc) and other measures to greatly reduce emissions of nuisance dusts: these are expected to be sufficient to control nuisance dust to a level where no nuisance effects would be expected and further mitigation is not, therefore, considered necessary.
For suspended dust (PM10), under pessimistic, worst-case assumptions, nearby receptors would experience very-small increases and slight adverse impacts. The PM10 concentrations at all receptors remain below the AQS objective value and, in practice, the impacts can be expected to be less than those predicted in this assessment. Notwithstanding this, the following measures would be implemented to mitigate the impacts to a level where the effects would not be considered significant.
Site Preparation and Construction Phase
• Hardcore surfacing of access roads, and regular inspection and cleaning if appropriate. • Use water as a dust suppressant in dry conditions where necessary. • Plan site layout – machinery and dust causing activities should be located away from sensitive receptors. • Topsoil and subsoil will be stored in bunds and seeded according to the site plan. • All vehicles should switch off engines – no idling vehicles. • No site runoff of water/mud.
Drilling Phase:
• Ability to monitor for and detect gases; gas monitoring while drilling may be required based upon risk assessment. • Minimise dust generating activities. • Use water as dust suppressant where applicable.
Production Phase:
• Cutting equipment to use water as suppressant or suitable local extract ventilation; • Use enclosed chutes and covered skips; • Minimise dust generating activities; and
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-15 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• Use water as dust suppressant where applicable.
Restoration Phase:
• Plan site layout – machinery and dust causing activities should be located away from sensitive receptors. • All vehicles should switch off engines – no idling vehicles. • No site runoff of water/mud.
11.8 Statement of Significance
For nuisance dust, the main potential effect could be the soiling of surfaces, particularly window sills, cars and laundry. Any such effects arising would be temporary and localised. However, this assessment has shown that no significant nuisance dust effects are expected for any phases of the development and further mitigation is not, therefore, considered necessary.
For suspended dust (PM10), under conservative assumptions, all receptors would experience very small increases and slight adverse impacts. The impacts could be greater if soil stripping is done during dry conditions. This activity can be completed in less than six weeks during which suppression techniques would be utilised to control effects, as necessary, together with advance site planning and good housekeeping. It should be stressed that this is a conservative assessment and CBM gas developments are much smaller in scale and involve much less dust-generating activity than the open cast coal sites on which the PM10 guidance in PAN50 is based. Even then, the PM10 concentrations at all receptors, remain below the AQS objective value and, in practice, the impacts can be expected to be considerably less.
Although small quantities of CBM gas could be released fugitively between the drilling and production phases, the net overall effect on emissions of greenhouse gases is likely to be insignificant because Greenpark intends to move directly from drilling into production.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 11-16 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
12. Archaeology/Cultural Heritage
12.1 Summary
This chapter assessed the effects of the CBM gas development upon statutorily protected and non-statutorily protected cultural heritage remains including Scheduled Ancient Monuments, listed buildings, conservation areas, designed landscapes and archaeological sites.
There is no evidence for below ground archaeology that would be affected by the CBM gas development and the impact is assessed as nil. There are no known or suspected cultural heritage features in the immediate vicinity of the CBM site.
The nearest Scheduled Ancient Monument is Gilnockie Castle, located approximately a kilometre northeast of the proposed development area. There would be no intervisibility between the SAM and the proposed development and no effect on the setting of the SAM.
The nearest listed building is the Grade B listed Canonbie Free Church Manse, located approximately 550 metres east of the proposed development area. There would be no intervisibility between the listed building and the proposed development and no impact upon the listed building from the proposed development.
The scheme has been designed so that the production site would not generate significant noise and would be visually discreet. All equipment would be appropriately sized and designed and the site would be screened either by bunding or appropriate tree/hedgerow planting. No other mitigation is necessary or proposed.
Following mitigation, no statutorily protected or registered cultural heritage feature would be affected, either physically or through an impact on setting, by the CBM gas development.
In conclusion, the CBM gas development would have no significant effect on the cultural heritage resource at the Holehouse Plantation site.
12.2 Introduction
An assessment of the likely significant effects of the proposed development on the cultural heritage resource has been undertaken. The key concern throughout the work is the potential for a feature of cultural heritage to be affected by the development.
The aim of this cultural heritage assessment is to consider the likelihood of the proposed development site containing archaeological remains and to provide an indication of what further work, if any, would be required with regard to archaeology at the site. This has been achieved through the following objectives:
• to identify statutorily protected cultural heritage remains including Scheduled Ancient Monuments, listed buildings, conservation areas and designed landscapes • to identify any non statutorily protected remains including archaeological sites. • to make an assessment of the relative importance of these remains and • to make an assessment of the likely impact of the proposed development on the identified remains
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 12-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
12.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines
The following have been referenced during the preparation of this chapter: Legislation
• Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act (1979) provides Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAMs) with protection. Scheduling is administered by Historic Scotland, who maintain a list of all SAMs and enforce the protection. Scheduled Monument Consent is required for works that affect or alter SAMs, with the exception of some agricultural activities. • Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Act 1997. A list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest is maintained by Historic Scotland. Development affecting the character of such designated features is subject to listed building consent via the Planning Authority under the Act. • A list (The Inventory of Gardens and Designed Landscapes in Scotland) of designated historic parks and gardens is maintained by Historic Scotland. Such designation is not the same as affording statutory protection.
Planning Guidance
• Scottish Planning Policy 23 Planning and the Historic Environment (October 2008). SPP 23 has superseded and consolidated NPPG18 Planning and Historic Environment and NPPG5 Archaeology and Planning. The policy sets out that planning authorities have to ensure that the special qualities of historic environments are safeguarded. Statutory and Non-Statutory designations are material considerations when determining planning applications: The policy recognises that the historic environment can be adapted to accommodate new uses, offering opportunities for new and creative design, whilst retaining its special character. Historic Scotland has to be consulted at the early stages of a proposal. Overall, SPP 23 aims to encourage a positive and proactive approach by Planning Authorities to managing change in the historic environment. • The Scottish Historic Environment Policy (SHEP) 2008 complements and has the same authority as the Scottish Planning Policy series and other Ministerial policy documents. The SHEP is a relevant document in the statutory planning, Environmental Impacts Assessments (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) processes. It has been prepared and is published in parallel with Scottish Planning Policy 23 on the Historic Environment. • Planning Advice Note (PAN) 42: Archaeology, The Planning Process and Scheduled Monument Procedures (1994) provides advice on the handling of archaeological matters within the planning process.
Professional Standards
• Institute of Field Archaeologists Code of Conduct 2002; and • Standards and Guidance for Archaeological Desk Based Assessments, Institute of Field Archaeologists (October 2008)
12.4 Methodology
The primary information resource was the Sites and Monuments Record, supplemented by relevant published documentary and cartographic material, as appropriate. Information on Scheduled Ancient Monuments, listed buildings and
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 12-2 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
inventoried Gardens and Designed Landscapes etc was obtained from Historic Scotland. The assessment has determined how likely it is that any archaeological/cultural heritage feature may occur at the site, what it is and its historical importance/relevance to the area.
Assessment of Resource Importance (Value) – Archaeological Remains
There are no national government guidelines for evaluating the importance or significance (and hence the 'value' of cultural heritage resources). For archaeological remains, English Heritage has proposed a series of recommended (i.e. non-statutory) criteria for use in the determination of national importance when scheduling ancient monuments and these are expressed in Annex 4 of Planning Policy Guidance 16: Archaeology and Planning (PPG 16). The criteria include period, rarity, documentation, group value, survival / condition, fragility / vulnerability, diversity and potential, and can be used as a basis for the assessment of the importance of historic remains and archaeological sites. However the annex also states that 'these criteria should not be regarded as definitive …… rather they are indicators which contribute to a wider judgement based on the individual circumstances of a case'.
The criteria described above could be used as a basis for the assessment of the importance of archaeological remains of less than national significance. However the categories of regional and district / local importance are less clearly established than that of national, and implicitly relate to local, district and regional priorities which themselves will be varied within and between regions. Local, district and regional research agenda may be available and local or structure plans may also help.
Clearly a high degree of professional judgement is necessary, guided by acknowledged standards, designations and priorities. It is also important to understand that buried archaeological remains may not be well-understood at the time of assessment, and can therefore be of uncertain value.
The most recent guidance from any national agency regarding cultural heritage and Environmental Impact Assessment is from the Highways Agency, and is expressed in Guidance Note 208/07 (August 2007) that now forms part of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB, Volume II, section 3, part 2). Guidance Note 208/07 provides the following table as a guide for assessing the value of archaeological resources.
TABLE 12.1 – FACTORS FOR ASSESSING THE VALUE OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSETS Very high • World Heritage Sites • Assets of acknowledged international importance • Assets that can contribute significantly to acknowledged international research objectives High • Scheduled Monuments • Undesignated assets of schedulable quality and importance • Assets that can contribute significantly to acknowledged national research objectives Medium • Designated or undesignated assets that contribute to regional research objectives Low • Undesignated assets of local importance • Assets compromised by poor preservation and/or poor survival of contextual associations • Assets of limited value, but with potential to contribute to local research objectives Negligible • Assets with very little or no surviving archaeological interest Unknown • The importance of the resource cannot be ascertained
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 12-3 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Assessment of Resource Importance (Value) – Historic Buildings
For historic buildings, assessment of importance is usually based on the designations used in the Listed Building process. However where historic buildings are not listed, or where the listing grade may be in need of updating, professional judgement will be required.
The criteria used in establishing the value of historic buildings within the listing procedure include architectural interest, historic interest, close historic association (with nationally important people or events), and group value. Age and rarity are also taken into account; in general (where surviving in original or near-original condition) all buildings of pre-1700 date are listed, most of 1700-1840 date are listed, those of 1840-1914 date are more selectively listed, and thereafter even more selectively. Specific criteria have been developed for buildings of 20th century date.
At a local level, buildings may be valued for their association with local events and people or for their role in the community.
Guidance Note 208/07 provides the following table as a guide for evaluating the value of historic buildings:
TABLE 12.2 – GUIDE FOR ESTABLISHING THE VALUE OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS Very high • Standing buildings inscribed as of universal importance as World Heritage Sites • Other buildings of recognised international importance High • Scheduled Monuments with standing remains • Grade A Listed buildings • Other listed buildings that can be shown to have exceptional qualities in their fabric or historical association not adequately reflected in the listing grade • Conservation Areas containing very important buildings • Undesignated structures of clear national importance Medium • Grade B Listed Buildings • Historic (unlisted) buildings that can be shown to have exceptional qualities in their fabric or historical association • Conservation Areas containing important buildings • Historic Townscape or built-up areas with historic integrity in their buildings, or built settings (e.g. including street furniture and other structures) Low • Grade C buildings • Historic (unlisted) buildings of modest quality in their fabric or historical association • Historic Townscape or built-up areas of limited historic integrity in their buildings, or built settings (e.g. including street furniture and other structures) Negligible • Buildings of no architectural or historic note; buildings of an intrusive character Unknown • Buildings with some hidden (i.e. inaccessible) potential for historic significance
Assessment of Resource Importance (Value) – Historic Landscape
The sub-topic of Historic Landscape is recognised as having significant overlaps with other topics such as Landscape and Townscape, and a multi-disciplinary approach to assessment is required. This is partially to avoid double counting, and also to avoid duplication of effort. There are also significant overlaps with the other Cultural Heritage sub-topics; Archaeological Remains and Historic Buildings. The elements that are considered within those two sub-topics can make significant contributions to the historic landscape, and this latter subtopic should concentrate on the overall historic landscape character and its value rather than the individual elements within it.
All landscapes have some level of historic significance, as all of the present appearance of the urban and rural parts of Scotland is the result of human or human-
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 12-4 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
influenced activities overlain on the physical parameters of climate, geography and geology.
There are number of designations that can apply to historic landscapes, including World Heritage Sites (inscribed for their historic landscape value), Registered Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest, Registered Historic Battlefields, and Conservation Areas. Some local plans include locally designated Historic Landscape Areas, and Historic Parks and Gardens (or similar).
A model has been produced by the Council for British Archaeology whereby the historic landscape can be divided up into units that are scaled, from smallest to largest, as follows:
• elements – individual features such as earthworks, structures, hedges, woods etc; • parcels – elements combined to produce, for example farmsteads or fields; • components – larger agglomerations of parcels, such as dispersed settlements or straight-sided field systems; • types – distinctive and repeated combinations of components defining generic historic landscapes such as ancient woodlands or parliamentary enclosure; • zones – characteristic combinations of types, such as Anciently Enclosed Land or Moorland and Rough Grazing; • sub-regions – distinguished on the basis of their unique combination of interrelated components, types and zones; and • regions – areas sharing an overall consistency over large geographical tracts.
The model described above can be used as the principal part of the overall assessment usually known as Historic Landscape Characterisation (HLC). However, although HLC has been undertaken for much of England, there is no significant guidance or advice regarding the attribution of significance or value to identified historic landscape units either in England or Scotland.
Guidance Note 208/07 provides the following table as a guide for evaluating the value of historic landscape units:
TABLE 12.3 – GUIDE FOR EVALUATING HISTORIC LANDSCAPE CHARACTER UNITS Very high • World Heritage Sites inscribed for their historic landscape qualities • Historic landscape of international sensitivity, whether designated or not • Extremely well-preserved historic landscapes with exceptional coherence, time-depth, or other critical factor(s) High • Designated historic landscapes of outstanding interest • Undesignated landscapes of outstanding interest • Undesignated landscapes of high quality and importance, and of demonstrable national sensitivity • Well-preserved historic landscapes exhibiting exceptional coherence, time- depth, or other critical factor(s) Medium • Designated special historic landscapes • Undesignated historic landscapes that would justify special historic landscape designation, landscapes of regional sensitivity • Averagely well-preserved historic landscapes with reasonable coherence, time-depth, or other critical factor(s) Low • Robust undesignated historic landscapes • Historic landscapes with specific and substantial importance to local interest groups, but with limited sensitivity • Historic landscapes whose sensitivity is limited by poor preservation and/or poor survival of contextual associations • Robust historic landscapes Negligible • Landscapes with little or no significant historical interest
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 12-5 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Assessment of Impact Magnitude – Archaeological Remains
The magnitude of impact is assessed without regard to the value of the resource. In terms of the judgement of the magnitude of impact, this is based on the principle that preservation of the resource is preferred, and that total physical loss of the resource is the least preferred.
It is not always possible to assess the physical impact in terms of percentage loss, and therefore it can be important in such cases to try to assess the capacity of the resource to retain its character following any impact. Similarly, impacts on the setting of archaeological remains may also be more difficult to assess as they do not involve physical loss of the resource and may actually be reversible.
Additional methodology regarding the assessment of effects on settings is provided below.
TABLE 12.4 – ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS ON SETTING – IMPACT SCALES (ARCHAEOLOGICAL REMAINS) Major 1.1 Change to most or all key archaeological elements, such that the resource is totally altered. Comprehensive changes to setting. Moderate 1.2 Changes to many key archaeological elements, such that the resource is clearly modified. Considerable changes to setting. Minor 1.3 Changes to key archaeological elements, such that the asset is slightly altered. Slight changes to setting. Negligible 1.4 Very minor changes to elements or setting. No change 1.5 No change.
Assessment of Impact Magnitude – Historic Buildings
The magnitude of impact is assessed without regard to the value of the resource, so the total destruction of an insignificant building has the same degree of impact as the total loss of a high value building. In terms of the judgement of the magnitude of impact, this is based on the principle that preservation of the resource and its setting is preferred, and that total physical loss of the resource is the least preferred.
Impacts on the setting of historic buildings may include vibration, noise and lighting issues as well as visual impacts, and may be reversible. Additional methodology regarding the assessment of effects on settings is provided below.
TABLE 12.5 – ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS ON SETTING – IMPACT SCALES (HISTORIC BUILDINGS) Major 1.6 Change to key historic building elements, such that the resource is totally altered. Total change to setting. Moderate 1.7 Change to many key historic building elements, such that the resource is significantly modified. Changes to the setting of an historic building, such that it is significantly modified. Minor 1.8 Changes to key historic building elements, such that the asset is slightly different. Change to setting of an historic building, such that it is noticeably changed. Negligible 1.9 Slight changes to historic buildings elements or setting that hardly affect it. No change 1.10 No change to fabric or setting.
Assessment of Impact Magnitude – Historic Landscape
Historic landscapes cannot be destroyed or damaged but impacts on them can change their character. Impacts should be assessed using evaluated historic landscape character units, not the elements/parcels/components that contribute towards the character (see above). There may be impacts on the setting of identified
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 12-6 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
units, especially with regard to designated historic landscapes. Additional methodology regarding the assessment of effects on settings is provided below.
TABLE 12.6 – ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS ON SETTING – IMPACT SCALES (HISTORIC LANDSCAPE) Major 1.11 Change to most or all key historic landscape elements, parcels or components; extreme visual effects; gross change of noise or change to sound quality; fundamental changes to use or access; resulting in total change to historic landscape character unit. Moderate 1.12 Changes to many key historic landscape elements, parcels or components; visual change to many key aspects of the historic landscape; noticeable differences in noise or sound quality; considerable changes to use or access; resulting in moderate changes to historic landscape character. Minor 1.13 Changes to few key historic landscape elements, parcels or components; slight visual changes to few key aspects of historic landscape; limited changes to noise levels or sound quality; slight changes to use or access; resulting in limited changes to historic landscape character. Negligible 1.14 Very minor changes to key historic landscape elements, parcels or components; virtually unchanged visual effects; very slight changes in noise levels or sound quality; very slight changes to use or access; resulting in a very small change to historic landscape character. No change 1.15 No change to elements, parcels or components; no visual or audible changes; no changes arising from amenity or community factors.
Significance of Effects
The significance of effects is a combination of the value of the resource or asset and the magnitude of impact on that resource or asset. Effects can be adverse or beneficial. Beneficial effects are those that mitigate existing impacts and help to restore or enhance heritage assets, therefore allowing for greater understanding and appreciation. In line with Guidance Note 208/07 the following matrix is used for all three sub-topics.
TABLE 12.7 – CULTURAL HERITAGE: SIGNIFICANCE OF EFFECTS MATRIX Value/Sensitivity Very High Neutral Slight Moderate/Large Large or Very Very Large Large High Neutral Slight Moderate/ Slight Moderate Large /Very Large Medium Neutral Neutral/Slight Slight Slight Moder ate/Lar ge Low Neutral Neutral/Slight Neutral/Slight Slight Slight/ Moder ate Negligible Neutral Neutral Neutral/Slight Neutral/Slight Slight No Negligible Minor Moderate Major Change MAGNITUDE OF IMPACT
Where the matrix provides a split in the significance of effects, e.g. Moderate/Slight, the assessor will exercise professional judgement in determining which of the levels of significance is more appropriate.
Moderate or greater effects are considered to be significant. Settings
The issues surrounding the identification of the 'setting' of cultural heritage features, and the nature and magnitude of impacts and consequently effects on such 'settings',
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 12-7 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
have been subject to much recent debate within the historic environment profession. Legislation and guidance makes reference to the desirability of preserving or not adversely affecting 'settings', but the term has never really been clearly defined.
The Institute for Archaeologists has recently established a working party to address this issue. In the meantime Colcutt’s (1999) definition of setting, as summarised in Lambrick (2008, below) is used as follows: • intrinsic visual interest and listing visual qualities;
• topographic setting, identifying visual relationships to topography and natural features that can be linked with the function of the site or the reason for placement of the site in the landscape;
• landuse setting, identifying whether the landuse is sympathetic to the site’s intellectual understanding; and,
• group setting including both contemporary and diachronic groupings or patterning, listing other sites, above or below ground that could assist with creating a network of relationships. This should acknowledge any spatial element.
12.5 Baseline Conditions
The proposed development area is located within the plantation at Holehouse Flow, on the northern perimeter, about 350 m to the east of the B720 at its closest point. The proposed development area is centred on NGR NY 3820 7730. The site is currently a commercial plantation of Sitka spruce which is now mature with a closed canopy.
There is no recorded pre-Roman and little Roman activity in the immediate vicinity, although a Roman fort at Broomholme Knowe, some 3 kilometres to the north, attests to occupation during that period. The route of the possible Roman road in the area (HER number 11253) is unknown.
The focus of recorded activity by the medieval period if not before was around the River Esk. In this area, medieval activity is represented by Gilnockie Castle, a small fort overlooking the River Esk and protecting the river crossing. The fort is a Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM number 11996 HER number 7830)
Rather later is Hollows Tower, also called Gilnockie Tower, a roofless but otherwise well preserved 16th century tower. The tower is listed at Grade A (HER number 7825 Listed Building reference number 3527). A further tower house is shown on map of 1590 but the site remains unlocated (HER number 9756)
Farming remained the main local activity. Brockwoodlees Farmhouse and steading dates from the late 18th to early 19th century but incorporates earlier fabric (HER numbers 10621 and 19642, Listed Building Grade ‘B’ ref 3537). Hollows Mill probably dates from the early 19th century (HER numbers 10622 and 19630, Listed Building Grade ‘B’ ref 3525), while the nearby farm steading probably dates from the late 18th or early 19th century and is listed at Grade B (HER number 19631, listed building ref 3526).
There is documentary evidence for 18th century coal mining in the wider area, although nothing apparently survives on the ground in the vicinity of the proposed development area (NMR number NY37NE 48).
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 12-8 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Gilnockie Bridge, crossing the River adjacent to the earlier fortified structures, is listed at Grade A (HER numbers 10624 and 19609, Listed Building Grade A ref 3504).
The remains of two clay-walled buildings representing the group of houses shown on the Ordnance Survey edition of 1857 are located just east of the A7 road and immediately west of the minor public road itself located west of Eskbank Wood, some 590 metres and 660 metres respectively from Brockwoodlees Steading (MDG 7829). Historic Ordnance Survey mapping of the area indicates that the disposition during the second half of the 19th century was otherwise largely similar to the present day.
Canonbie Free Church, located some 600 metres southeast of the proposed development area, was opened in January 1851. The building is a simple Gothic church, rectangular in plan, of 5 bays with buttresses, and of stugged grey ashlar with polished dressings. The building is listed at Grade B (HB number 3521). The adjacent Canonbie Free Church Manse was similarly constructed in c. 1851. The listed building comprises a 2-storey, 3-bay manse, with a long, near full-height rear wing. The building is of grey stugged ashlar coursers with polished dressings and is listed at Grade B (HB number 3538).
The HER data obtained in relation to the site is contained within Appendix 6.
12.6 Impact Assessment
There is no evidence for below ground archaeology that would be affected by the CBM gas development and the impact is assessed as nil.
The nearest Scheduled Ancient Monument is Gilnockie Castle, located approximately a kilometre northeast of the proposed development area. There would be no intervisibility between the SAM and the proposed development and no effect on the setting of the SAM.
The nearest listed building is the Grade B listed Canonbie Free Church Manse, located approximately 550 metres east of the proposed development area. There would be no intervisibility between the listed building and the proposed development and no impact upon the listed building from the proposed development.
No other statutorily protected or registered cultural heritage feature would be affected, either physically or through an impact on setting, by the CBM gas development.
The table below shows predicted impacts by CBM gas development phase.
TABLE 12.1 IMPACTS BY CBM GAS DEVELOPMENT PHASE Phase Impact
Phase 1: Site preparation Nil Phase 2: Drilling Nil Phase 3: Production (where CBM gas is extracted commercially) Nil Phase 4: Capping and restoration Nil
12.7 Mitigation
The scheme has been designed so that the production site would not generate significant noise and would be visually discreet. All equipment would be appropriately sized and designed and the site would be screened either by bunding
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 12-9 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
or appropriate tree/hedgerow planting. No further mitigation is necessary or proposed.
Following mitigation, no statutorily protected or registered cultural heritage feature would be affected, either physically or through an impact on setting, by the CBM gas development.
12.8 Statement of Significance
The cultural heritage assessment has considered the impact of the CBM gas development at Holehouse Plantation.
There is no evidence for below ground archaeology that would be affected by the CBM gas development and the impact is assessed as nil.
The nearest Scheduled Ancient Monument is Gilnockie Castle, located approximately a kilometre northeast of the proposed development area. There would be no intervisibility between the SAM and the proposed site and no effect on the setting of the SAM.
The nearest listed building is the Grade B listed Canonbie Free Church Manse, located approximately 550 m east of the proposed site. There would be no intervisibility between the listed building and the proposed development and no impact upon the listed building from the proposed development.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 12-10 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
13. Socio-Economic Impacts
13.1 Summary
This chapter assessed the various impacts of the proposed CBM gas development upon employment, financial investment and tourism at the Holehouse Plantation site and the wider area.
The proposed development should lead to additional spend of wages into the local economy and opportunities for local accommodation providers and other local services to construction workers who do not live locally. This is considered to be a significant positive effect. Furthermore, the proposed development offers potential opportunities for local people to be employed. This in turn may also generate additional expenditure in the local economy. This is considered to be a positive effect. Consequently, the overall socio-economic impact from the proposed development at the Holehouse Plantation site is assessed as positive and significant to the local area.
The minimal loss of earnings from Holehouse Plantation on the proposed site is outweighed by the income provided to the landowner. This is a positive effect associated with the development however it is not considered significant.
Due to the scale of the development and lack of tourist attractions in the immediate vicinity of the site, the effect on tourism is considered negligible.
13.2 Introduction
This chapter assesses the potential economic and social effects that may arise as a result of the site preparation, drilling, production, and restoration activities of the proposed CBM gas development at the Holehouse Plantation site.
13.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines
There is no specific legislation that relates to this chapter. However, the following guidelines have informed this assessment:
• Tyldesley, D. & Associates (2005). A Handbook on Environmental Impact Assessment. Guidance for Competent Authorities, Consultees and Others Involved in the EIA Process in Scotland. Scottish Natural Heritage, Perth.
13.4 Methodology
Data Gathering
Information was obtained from the following sources:
• Census 2001 - Scotland’s Census Results Online (SCROL) http://www.scrol.gov.uk/scrol/common/home.jsp
• Dumfries and Galloway Council http://www.dumgal.gov.uk/
• Dumfries and Galloway Community http://www.dgcommunity.net/
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 13-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• Dumfries and Galloway Tourist Board http://www.visitdumfriesandgalloway.co.uk/
• Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation 2006 – Scottish Government statistics http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/SIMD/
• Scottish Neighbourhood Statistics (SNS) http://www.sns.gov.uk/
• VisitScotland http://www.visitscotland.org/research_and_statistics
• Visit Southern Scotland http://www.visitsouthernscotland.co.uk/
Scope of Study
This chapter examined the effects of the development associated with the following issues:
• effects on employment and the economy; • effects on financial investment; and • effects on tourism.
Assessment Methodology
There is no prescribed methodology or standard guidance for this aspect of an EIA. The method adopted is therefore one of determining the existing circumstances (the baseline) through desk based analysis. The potential effects of the proposed CBM gas development on this baseline were then assessed using knowledge gained from professional experience to assess the significance of the potential effects.
Evaluation Criteria and Assessment of Significance
Two criteria were used in the evaluation of the significance of the predicted effects of the proposed CBM gas development:
• the type of effect (i.e. positive, negative, neutral or unknown); and • the magnitude of the effect - based upon the size of the proposed development and the number of people and/or businesses likely to be affected.
In terms of employment, predicted effects would be:
• “significantly beneficial” where a new business is created as a result of the proposed development; • “significant” where a new local employment opportunity is created, • “adverse” where there is a reduction in the local workforce; or • “neutral” where the overall number and quality of local beneficial and adverse impacts are the same.
In terms of financial investment, predicted effects would be:
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 13-2 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• “positive” where new income is received which will contribute to the raising and diversification of local farm income and/or where there is an increase in expenditure in businesses in the local area; • “negative” where there is a decrease in local farm income and/or local expenditure in businesses in the local area; or • “neutral” where there is no net increase in farm income and/or expenditure in local businesses.
In terms of tourism, predicted effects would be:
• “positive” where the proposed development attracts visitors to the local area; • “negative” where the proposed development deters visitors to the local area; or • “neutral” where there is no net change in visitors to the local area.
The impact on tourism may potentially have wider effects on the local economy and employment.
13.5 Baseline Conditions
Population
The proposed site falls within the ward of Canonbie and Kirtle, which lies within Dumfries and Galloway Local Authority. According to the 2001 Census, Canonbie and Kirtle has a total population of 3,182. This consisted of 1,573 males and 1,609 females.
Employment and Economic Activity
Table 13.1 highlights the age structure of Canonbie and Kirtle population and places this in the context of Dumfries and Galloway and Scotland as a whole. Canonbie and Kirtle’s population is broadly similar to Dumfries & Galloway as a whole.
Compared to the whole of Scotland there are fewer people aged 20-34 and more aged 50+ in Canonbie and Kirtle. 40% of Canonbie and Kirtle’s population is aged 50+ compared to 34% for Scotland as a whole. Similarly, 14% of Canonbie and Kirtle’s population is aged 20-34 compared to 20% for Scotland as a whole.
TABLE 13.1 – AGE STRUCTURE Age Group Canonbie & Kirtle Dumfries & Galloway Scotland 0-15 18% 19% 19% 16-19 5% 4% 5% 20-34 14% 16% 20% 35-49 23% 22% 22% 50-59 16% 14% 13% 60-64 6% 6% 5% 65-74 10% 11% 9% 75 and over 8% 8% 7% Total 3,182 147,765 5,062,011 Source: Census 2001, General Register Office http://www.sns.gov.uk/
The working age population is defined as males aged 16-64 years and females aged 16-59 years old. The working age population in Canonbie and Kirtle in 2001 was 1,938 comprising 1,028 males and 910 females. Expressing the working age as a percentage of the entire population produces figures of 61% for males and females; corresponding male and female percentages are 65% and 57% respectively. The
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 13-3 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
working age population in Dumfries and Galloway is 59% overall, with 63% for males and 55% for females. Likewise, figures for Scotland as a whole are 62% overall, with 66% for males and 59% for females.
Table 13.2 shows the economic activity of all persons aged 16-74 years in Canonbie and Kirtle, Dumfries and Galloway and Scotland in the 2001 Census.
TABLE 13.2 – ECONOMIC ACTIVITY OF PERSONS AGED 16-74 YEARS Canonbie & Kirtle Dumfries & Scotland Galloway Economically active 45% 48% 51% employee Self employed with 7% 5% 3% employees Self-employed without 12% 6% 4% employees) Unemployed 3% 4% 4% Full time students 2% 2% 3% Economically Active Economically Total economically active 69% 64% 65% Retired 14% 17% 14%
Student 3% 2% 4% Looking after home/family 6% 6% 6% Permanently sick/disabled 5% 7% 7%
Inactive Other 2% 4% 4%
Economically Economically Total economically 31% 36% 35% inactive All people aged 16-74 2,350 107,391 3,731,079 Source: Census 2001, General Register Office http://www.scrol.gov.uk/scrol/common/home.jsp
The economic activity of all persons aged 16-74 in Canonbie and Kirtle in the 2001 Census was 69%, above both the Dumfries and Galloway level of 64% and that of Scotland at 65%. The percentage of Canonbie & Kirtle’s persons aged 16-74 in employment (employee or self employed) was 65%, again this was above the Dumfries and Galloway rate of 59% and that of Scotland at 58%.
Table 13.3 shows the industries of employment of all persons aged 16-74 in employment (excluding full time students) in the 2001 Census.
TABLE 13.3 – INDUSTRY OF EMPLOYMENT OF ALL PERSONS AGED 16-74 IN EMPLOYMENT (EXCLUDING FULL TIME STUDENTS) Canonbie & Kirtle Dumfries & Galloway Scotland Agriculture, hunting 33% 9% 2% and forestry Fishing 0% 0% 0% Mining and quarrying 0% 0% 1% Manufacturing 6% 13% 14% Electricity, gas and 2% 1% 1% water supply Construction 12% 8% 8% Wholesale and retail 6% 15% 13% trade, repairs Hotels and restaurants 5% 6% 5% Transport, storage and 7% 7% 7% communications Financial 0% 2% 5% intermediaries Real estate, renting 6% 7% 11% and business activities Public administration and defence, social 1% 6% 7% security
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 13-4 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 13.3 – INDUSTRY OF EMPLOYMENT OF ALL PERSONS AGED 16-74 IN EMPLOYMENT (EXCLUDING FULL TIME STUDENTS) Canonbie & Kirtle Dumfries & Galloway Scotland Education 5% 6% 7% Health & social work 12% 14% 13% Other 3% 5% 5% Total 866 60,537 2,161,342 Source: Census 2001, General Register Office http://www.scrol.gov.uk/scrol/common/home.jsp
The above table demonstrates significant differences in the industries Canonbie and Kirtle residents work in. One third of all persons aged 16-74 in employment in Canonbie and Kirtle (excluding students) are employed in agriculture, hunting and forestry compared to 9% for Dumfries and Galloway and only 2% for Scotland as a whole. There is also an above average proportion of local people employed in the construction industry in Canonbie and Kirtle. Less than 5 people from Canonbie and Kirtle worked in the mining and quarrying sector in 2001.
Approximately 5% of Canonbie and Kirtle people aged 16-74 are employed in the hotel and restaurant sector.
Socio-Economic Indicators
The Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) is a composite measure of deprivation based on a range of indicators including employment, income, health and education. The local area geography adopted by the Scottish Government for this measure is data zones. These zones are based on groups of census output areas and have populations of between 500 and 1,000 household residents. There are 6,505 data zones in Scotland and 193 in Dumfries and Galloway.
The SIMD provides a relative ranking of 6,505 data zones across Scotland from the most deprived (ranked 1) to the least deprived (ranked 6,505). The proposed site falls within data zone S01001011 and in the 2006 SIMD had an overall rank of 3710 of 6,505. This rank places the data zone in the 57th percentile, well outwith the generally accepted range for “deprived” areas of the worst 20%. However, closer examination of the individual domain rankings shows that the area is disadvantaged in terms of geographic access to services for which it is ranked in the worst 5% of data zones in Scotland (see Table 13.4).
TABLE 13.4 – SCOTTISH INDEX OF MULTIPLE DEPRIVATION 2006 – DATA ZONE S01001011 Rank Percentile Overall SIMD 3710 57 Current income domain 3986 61 Employment domain 4698.5 72 Health domain 6401 98 Education, skills & training domain 3939 61 Housing domain 1991 31 Geographic access domain 132 2 Crime domain 6125 94
The area’s disadvantage in terms of geographic access to services was recognised by the Scottish Government, which identified Canonbie and Kirtle in 2005 as a Rural Services Priority Area (RSPA). The designation of RSPA status enabled government, local authorities and other partner agencies to focus improvements on services in disadvantaged rural communities. The initiative was initially funded until 2008.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 13-5 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Land Use
Just over 8% of Scotland’s farming land is in Dumfries and Galloway. The main farming activity is livestock farming, (dairying, beef and sheep) and to a lesser extent arable farming and grazing.37
The proposed site is currently used for forestry.
Tourism
The United Kingdom Tourism Survey (2005) provides detailed information on the impact of tourism in Dumfries and Galloway. Key findings were:
• over 1 million people visit Dumfries and Galloway each year; • the majority of visitors (970,000) come from the UK; • 60,000 visitors come from overseas; • the industry contributes around £226 million to the region’s economy (£200 million by UK visitors and £26 million by overseas visitors); • Day visitors contribute an additional £56 million; and • Tourism-related employment accounted for over 11% of the workforce in Dumfries and Galloway during 2001-2003.
The River Esk is internationally renowned amongst anglers for its salmon and sea trout. In 2004, the Scottish Executive (now Scottish Government) published a study on the ‘Economic impact of game and coarse angling in Scotland’38. This study found that anglers spend almost £7 million a year in Dumfries and Galloway. Of this, nearly £3 million is spent on angling for salmon and sea trout, whilst brown trout fishing attracts a revenue of £1.1 million. Rainbow trout fishing is also an important source of revenue to the region, with anglers spending £1.2 million every year. The survey concluded that 117,703 angler days a year were spent fishing in Dumfries and Galloway. It also indicated the impact that a loss of angling would have on regional employment. If salmon and sea trout angling stopped entirely in Dumfries and Galloway, employment equal to 88 full-time jobs would be lost. If either brown trout or coarse angling stopped, employment equal to 38 full-time jobs would be lost in each sector.
Tourist attractions in the vicinity of the site include:
• Gilnockie Tower – located 1.1km to the north of the site, the 16th century Gilnockie Tower (also known as Hollows Tower) was the home of Johnnie Armstrong, a celebrated Borders hero. The tower now houses a Clan Armstrong Centre and Museum and attracted 120 visitors in 2007 and 163 in 200639;
• Harelaw Limestone Quarry – located approximately 4.7km to the east of the site. The quarry remained in production from its inception in 1774 until its closure in 1996. The quarry is open to the public, with admission by guided tour only;
• The Debatable Lands – an extensive area of ground which extends across the border between England and Scotland, the Debatable Lands are centred around Canonbie but stretch for 21km from the Solway Firth in the southwest to Windy Standford, 8km east of Langholm; and,
37 Annandale and Eskdale Community Plan http://www.dgcommunity.net/DGCommunity/xdocuments/29581.pdf.ashx 38 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2004/03/19079/34383 39 VisitScotland http://www.visitscotland.org/dumfries___galloway-2.pdf
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 13-6 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• Scots Dike – a substantial linear earthwork built in 1552 to divide the Debatable Lands on the border between England and Scotland.
The main tourist attraction in Dumfries and Galloway is the Old Blacksmith’s Shop Visitor Centre in Gretna. The attraction contains a museum, visitor centre and marriage room, where more than 1000 couples still marry annually. Visitors to the Centre exceeded those to all other visitor attractions in Dumfries and Galloway in 2007, receiving 709,097 visitors40. The attraction is approximately 10 miles from Canonbie and will not be affected by the proposed development.
Information gaps
While there is a lack of specific data relating to finances in agriculture and other businesses in the local area, it is not considered to be sufficiently important in relation to this assessment. No other significant information gaps relating to socio-economic issues have been identified.
13.6 Impact Assessment
Employment and economy
The proposed CBM gas development would not result in any fundamental or long term changes in population, structure of the local community or local services, but could result in up to a dozen new highly skilled well paid jobs. In addition, it would involve investment in the local area and should therefore create direct and indirect economic benefits associated with the various phases. Table 13.5 summarises the potential impacts.
TABLE 13.5 – EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC IMPACT Full-time equivalent Tasks Opportunities Time (FTE) workers Civil constructions, fencing, drainage, • Local contractors Phase 1 – Site 6 weeks per 8-10 per site security, pipe laying, preparation site • Local accommodation welding and electrical suppliers works Drill rig operation, data logging and analysis, • Local contractors Phase 2 – 6 weeks per 16-20 per site communications, Drilling site • Local accommodation specialist equipment suppliers operations, security 12 (4 shifts of Production and Local residents/ contractors 3 personnel) maintenance crew Supervision/managemen Unknown Local residents/ contractors Phase 3 – Up to 20 t Production years Unknown Security Local residents/ contractors • Local contractors Unknown Annual overhaul • Local accommodation suppliers Phase 4 – Civil constructions, • Local contractors Capping & 6 weeks Unknown fencing, drainage, • Local accommodation restoration security suppliers
In terms of employment, the production phase of the proposed development will directly support twelve highly skilled engineering jobs for the duration of the production phase, which could be up to 20 years. This represents a significant direct employment and economic impact. Based on the median gross earnings in the UK
40 VisitScotland http://www.visitscotland.org/dumfries___galloway-2.pdf
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 13-7 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
of £24,900 per annum (Source: Annual Survey of Household Earnings, 2008) this would represent gross additional income of £298,800 per annum into the local economy. Furthermore, the direct impact will be enhanced by the induced effect of spending by these workers in the local economy.
The proposed drilling works will last up to 6 weeks. Due to the specialist technical nature of the drilling and maintenance work, there is likely to be a greater competitive advantage for experienced contractors. However, Greenpark will encourage the use of local contractors wherever possible to ensure maximum positive benefits to the local communities. Furthermore, it is anticipated that the site preparation and capping and restoration phases will support a number of jobs. However given the limited timescale of these activities, this effect is expected to be positive but negligible. It is estimated that the value of the construction contracts would be in the order of £250,000.
Indirectly the proposed development may also create further employment opportunities down the supply chain for those companies providing services to the contractors during the four phases of the proposed development. However, again given the scale of the development, this effect is expected to be positive but negligible.
One of the major potential economic impacts relates to local accommodation providers. It is estimated that the potential impact of the drilling phase alone, if undertaken by contractors outwith the area that require accommodation, is between £15,120 and £23,100 per site. These estimates are based on the following scenarios:
• 6 weeks with 16 workers staying 7 nights per week at £45 per night for a twin room = £15,120; and • 6 weeks with 20 workers staying 7 nights per week at £55 per night for a twin room = £23,100.
In addition, workers staying in local accommodation would also have a positive economic impact on other local services such as shops, cafes, takeaways etc.
Financial Investment
The proposed CBM gas development represents a loss of forestry land and associated income. However, the total area of land-take associated with the development is relatively small, covering a maximum area of 0.81ha. Consequently the loss of forestry land is assessed as insignificant in the context of the available forestry land both locally and in the wider area.
There will be an economic benefit to the local landowner through the income received from the leasing of the land. This is a positive effect associated with the development however given the number of beneficiaries (the landowner) it is not considered significant.
Tourism
Due to the scale of the development and the general low levels of tourist activity and attractions in the immediate area, it is not anticipated that there will be any significant effects on tourism as a result of the site preparation, production and restoration activities.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 13-8 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
However, there is potential for indirect effects on tourism during the drilling phase as a result of visual effects from the drilling equipment which may which may detract visitors who are attracted to the landscape. However, the drilling phase will only last approximately six weeks. Consequently, the effect on tourism in the local area is considered to be negligible and therefore negligible.
13.7 Mitigation
Socio-economic
Greenpark will seek to use local labour where possible to maximise the benefits to the local economy.
Financial Investment
The proposed development has been designed to minimise land take where possible, for example by ensuring that existing access tracks and roads are used where possible.
In order to avoid any potential damage and disturbance to neighbouring agricultural land, farming and forestry activities, all machinery used in the construction of the proposed CBM gas development would be restricted to the access track and site. All construction activities would also be contained within clearly demarcated areas, with fencing along the track to minimise disruption to agricultural activities.
Tourism and Recreation
Minimisation of visual impacts has taken place through the design and location process.
13.8 Statement of Significance
The Socio-Economic Impact Assessment has considered the impact of the proposed CBM gas development at the Holehouse Plantation site. The proposed development will generate opportunities for local accommodation providers and businesses through an increased demand, and this is a significant benefit to the local economy. In addition, the proposed development may provide potential opportunities for local people to be employed particularly during the production phase, which could provide 12 skilled engineering posts for up to 20 years. It will also provide a significant economic benefit to the local landowner.
Due to the scale of the development and lack of tourist attractions in the immediate vicinity of the site, the effect on tourism is considered negligible.
Overall, the socio-economic impact of the proposed development at the Holehouse Plantation site is therefore assessed as positive to the local economy.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 13-9 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
14. Amenity Issues
14.1 Summary
This chapter assessed the various impacts of the CBM gas development upon amenity, in terms of recreation and access, at the Holehouse Plantation site and the wider area.
A desktop assessment established that the site is not close to any recreational or access facilities, nor is it recognised as being locally significant for recreation or outdoor access.
Consequently there are no amenity impacts associated with the proposed development.
14.2 Introduction
This chapter assesses the potential amenity issues in terms of access and recreation that may arise as a result of the site preparation, operation and restoration activities of the proposed coal bed methane (CBM) development at the Holehouse Plantation site.
14.3 Relevant Legislation, Policy and Guidance
The Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 establishes statutory rights of access to land and inland water for outdoor recreation. The right may be exercised only:
• for recreational purposes; • for the purposes of carrying on a relevant educational activity; or • for the purposes of carrying on, commercially or for profit, an activity which the person exercising the right could carry on otherwise than commercially or for profit.
The following guidelines have been considered as part of this assessment:
• Tyldesley, D. & Associates (2005). A Handbook on Environmental Impact Assessment. Guidance for Competent Authorities, Consultees and Others Involved in the EIA Process in Scotland. Scottish Natural Heritage, Perth.
14.4 Methodology
Data gathering
Information was obtained from the following sources:
• Dumfries and Galloway Final Draft Core Path Plan http://www.dumgal.gov.uk/
• Ordnance Survey Explorer 1: 25000 Map 323 – Eskdale and Castle O’er Forest
• Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) www.snh.org.uk
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 14-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• SUSTRANS www.sustrans.org.uk
• VisitScotland http://www.visitscotland.org/research_and_statistics
Scope of Study
This chapter examined the effects of the development associated with the following issues:
• effects on recreation; and • effects on outdoor access.
Assessment methodology
There are no published Environmental Assessment techniques or good practice methods relating specifically to recreation and outdoor access impact assessment. The method adopted is therefore one of determining the existing circumstances (the baseline) through map based and desk based analysis.
Evaluation criteria and assessment of significance
Two criteria were used in the evaluation of the significance of the predicted effects of the proposed CBM gas development:
• the type of effect (i.e. positive, negative, neutral or unknown); and • the magnitude of the effect - based upon the size of the proposed development and the number of people likely to be affected.
In terms of recreation, predicted effects would be “negative” where the proposed development would impinge or result in the loss of a recreational resource. These are defined as “significant” where the proposed development would lead to permanent or long term effects on the recreational resource or where the impacts occur on recreational resources that have more than local use or importance.
In terms of access, predicted effects would be “negative” where the proposed development would impinge on a public right of way, Core Path and the wider path networks available through access rights. These are defined as “significant” where the proposed development would lead to permanent or long term effects on the access resource or where the impacts occur on access resources that have more than local use or importance.
14.5 Base Conditions
According to the United Kingdom Tourism Survey (2005), over 1 million people visit Dumfries and Galloway each year (970,000 from the UK and 60,000 from overseas). The kinds of activities that visitors participated in are set out in Table 14.1 below. The table shows that almost half of all visitors to Dumfries and Galloway visited castles, monuments, churches etc and almost as many went walking (for more than two miles). Both activities were more popular in Dumfries and Galloway than they were for visitors to Scotland as a whole.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 14-2 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
TABLE 14.1 – ACTIVITIES OF VISITORS IN DUMFRIES AND GALLOWAY AND SCOTLAND Dumfries and Galloway Scotland % % Visiting castles, monuments, churches etc. 48 39 Visiting museums, galleries etc. 33 29 Watching performing arts/cinema 7 16 Field/nature study 20 17 Sport: Walking (more than two miles) 44 33 Swimming 26 21 Golf 11 8 Watching and sport/sporting event 5 7 Fishing 8 6 Any activity undertaken 94 91 Source: Visit Scotland http://www.visitscotland.org/research_and_statistics
SNH’s ‘Natural Heritages Futures: Western Southern Upland and Inner Solway’ identifies that while walkers are the largest recreational group, cycling, horse riding, wildfowling, rough shooting, grouse shooting, freshwater and sea angling are all important recreational activities in Dumfries and Galloway. The report takes into account visitors and locals.
There are no National Parks, Regional Parks, Country Parks, National or Local Nature Reserves in the Canonbie – Evertown area.
Walking
Dumfries and Galloway has 641 rights of way covering a total distance of some 1,793km. A large majority of these are concentrated around the New Galloway area, the Dumfries area and along the coastline of the Solway Firth. There is a significant lack of rights of way in the Canonbie – Evertown area.
The Southern Uplands Way crosses the Southern Uplands in central Dumfries and Galloway and is Scotland’s longest walk. It was Britain's first coast to coast long distance footpath.
Several areas are managed for informal outdoor recreation in Dumfries and Galloway, for example at Threave Castle and Haddom Estates in Lower Annandale. Facilities for access exist in many of the lowland areas such as Dalbeattie. Local path networks have also been initiated at Dumfries, Annan, Moffat, Dalbeattie, Castle Douglas, Newton Stewart, Sanquhar and Kirkconnel. Outwith these areas formal access to the farmland is restricted.41
In the Canonbie – Evertown area, the majority of footpaths are concentrated to the north, south and east of Canonbie. This included the following routes which are identified within the Dumfries and Galloway Draft Core Paths Plan:
• Path Number 347 which runs southwards from Canonbie Bridge for approximately 1km along the eastern bank of the River Esk to Park House;
• Path Number 366 which provides a circular walk from Park House along the eastern bank of the River Esk toward the Liddell Water and back via Canonbie Holm;
• Path Number 350 which runs from Rowanburnfoot to Rowanburn via a dismantled railway line for approximately 1.4km;
41 SNH Natural Heritage Futures Western Southern Uplands and Inner Solway
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 14-3 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
• Path Number 346 which runs to the south of Brighton Plantation and connects Path Numbers 350 and 366;
• Path Number 374 which runs from Rowanburn to Rowanburnhead over a distance of approximately 1.1km;
• Path Number 379 which runs for approximately 1.5km from Archerbeck to the east of Rowanburn via Tail Wood to Burntcleuch Bridge;
• Path Numbers 348, 349, 362, 365 and 381 which combined form a circular walk through Byreburnfoot Forest around the Fairy Loup Waterfall. This route is also identified as part of a wider walk within the Langholm Walks booklet;
• Path Number 386 to the north of Byreburnfoot Forest through North Wood. The route follows a dismantled railway line and stretches for approximately 1km;
• Path Number 370 which runs eastwards from Path Number 386 along Little Thorniewhats Sike; and
• Path Number 373 which runs via Woodhouselees Plantation approximately 2km south west from Canonbie.
Cycling
There are two existing routes of National Cycle Network in Dumfries and Galloway. National Cycle Route 7 runs from Carlisle to Inverness. In Dumfries & Galloway it covers 114 miles, passing through the communities of Gretna Green, Annan, Dumfries, Castle Douglas, Kirkcudbright, Gatehouse of Fleet and Newton Stewart.
National Cycle Route 74 runs for 44 miles and connects Route 7 to South Lanarkshire along quiet roads adjacent to the A74(M) motorway.
A further National Cycle Route (Route 73) is proposed to link National Cycle Route 7 at Newton Stewart with the National Cycle Network in Northern Ireland via the ferry terminals at Stranraer / Cairnryan.
In relation to the Canonbie area, the nearest significant cycle route is the National Byway. The National Byway is a signed network of rural lanes and roads for cyclists and runs for 194 miles (312 km) in Dumfries & Galloway through Langholm, Lockerbie, Ecclefechan, Annan, Dumfries, Moniaive, St John's Town of Dalry, Clatteringshaws and Newton Stewart, before following National Cycle Route 7 to the border with South Ayrshire. In addition to the main route, there are also 50 circular loop rides. It is anticipated that a number of B, C and unclassified roads may also potentially be used for cycling.42
There are no Forest Enterprise cycle trails in the vicinity of the Holehouse Plantation site. However, a number of the draft Core Path Plan routes identified above may be suitable for cycling.
42 http://www.thenationalbyway.org/welcome.asp
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 14-4 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Horse Riding
A number of the draft Core Path Plan routes identified above may be suitable for horse-riding. There are no other bridleways identified in the Canonbie-Evertown area.
Angling
The River Esk is internationally renowned amongst anglers for its salmon and sea trout. In 2004, the Scottish Executive (now Scottish Government) published a study on the ‘Economic impact of game and coarse angling in Scotland’. This study identified that 117,703 angler days a year were spent fishing in Dumfries and Galloway. There are extensive opportunities for fishing along the River Esk in the Canonbie area.
Information Gaps
In Scotland there is no legally recognised record of rights of way. The best record at a national level is the National Catalogue of Rights of Way (CROW) which has been compiled by the Scottish Rights of Way and Access Society (Scotways). CROW is based largely on information gathered from local authorities. As local authorities have differing policies on rights of way, this means that the amount and quality of the information varies throughout Scotland.
14.6 Impact Assessment
On the basis of the available evidence, there are no formal recreational or access facilities on or in the vicinity of the proposed development at the Holehouse Plantation site.
Although the proposed CBM gas development will be located on woodland where the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill grants the right of responsible access, on the basis of the available evidence the site is not recognised as being locally significant for outdoor access.
Due to the scale of the proposed development, the lack of the formal recreational and access facilities on or in the vicinity of the area, and the lack of outdoor access activity in this area, the effect on recreation and access is therefore considered to be negligible.
14.7 Mitigation
Because there are no recreation or access facilities affected by the proposed CBM gas development, no mitigation is required.
14.8 Statement of Significance
The Amenity Impact Assessment has considered the impact of the proposed CBM gas development on the Holehouse Plantation site. On the basis of the available evidence there are no formal recreational or access facilities on or in the vicinity of the proposed development and there is also a lack of outdoor access activity. The effect on amenity is therefore considered to be negligible.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 14-5 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
15. Cumulative Impacts
15.1 Summary
The Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999 requires the consideration of cumulative impacts.
Cumulative impacts can arise as a result of a number of similar developments producing a combined adverse effect upon a particular receptor or receptors. It is also possible that the single development may have a number of different impacts on a given receptor.
Dumfries and Galloway Council (DGC) Planning Department was consulted and the various site specific mitigation measures suggested within individual topic areas, was examined. Both concluded that there will be no cumulative or secondary impacts from this development.
15.2 Introduction
The aim of this assessment was to identify other developments in the area that may in combination with this proposal become a significant adverse effect, or a cumulative impact. The assessment also identified direct and indirect adverse impacts (short, medium and long-term) for topic areas identified in the previous chapters for which mitigation measures have been proposed but which may cause a secondary impact e.g. a soil bund may have adverse an adverse landscape effect.
In summary, cumulative impacts may arise from:
• particular potential adverse impacts from this development adding to an adverse effect arising from other developments in the area (a cumulative impact); and • a particular receptor receiving a number of adverse impacts from this one development (a secondary impact).
15.3 Relevant Legislation, Policies and Guidelines
• The Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999.
15.4 Methodology
Cumulative Impacts
Discussions were held with DGC to ascertain whether other similar developments are proposed (either consented or in the planning process) within the area of the Holehouse Plantation site. Although the site itself is one of a number of sites that is being included within the CBM gas development programme in this area, should the planning application be successful, these sites will be developed sequentially thereby avoiding cumulative effects.
Secondary Impacts
Similarly, as to whether any receptor might have two or more adverse impacts was assessed by summarising the list of mitigation measures proposed in the various
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 15-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
chapter topic areas; any perceived as having two or more adverse impacts following mitigation measures resulted in discussion between topic specialists regarding the design of the site, including timing of an operation, as well as whether there might be more appropriate mitigation measures.
15.5 Baseline Conditions
DGC confirmed that no other similar developments were known to be planned within the vicinity of the proposed Holehouse Plantation site.
A summary of the mitigation measures recommended as a result of the EIA across the various topic areas is detailed in Table 15.1 below.
TABLE 15.1 – SUMMARY OF THE VARIOUS MITIGATION MEASURES RECOMMENDED AS A RESULT OF THE EIA Chapter Topic Mitigation Measures Landscape Soil Bunds to visually screen the site Aftercare Programme will be agreed with Local Planning Authority Ecology Root area to be established around mature oak tree Line of deciduous trees (including larch) would be retained along the northern boundary and a further five sessile oak trees would be planted Noise to be contained Lighting to be shielded and deflected downwards Tree felling would be undertaken out with the breeding bird season or inspection would be undertaken by an experienced ornithologist. Hydrology All site works to be undertaken in accordance with SEPA’s Pollution Prevention Guidelines Hydrogeology All site works to be undertaken in accordance with SEPA’s Pollution Prevention Guidelines Drilling mud would be kept on the site to seal off any loss zone, which is generally a fractured or high-permeability section Noise Adoption of best practice measures Efforts would be made to undertake site preparation and drilling phases outside the immediate area of the other Traffic Drilling rig vehicle will require police escort During site preparation, sweepers employed to prevent mud on road Air Quality Good housekeeping’ site practices (such as water bowsers, upward pointing vehicle exhausts etc) and other measures to greatly reduce emissions of nuisance dusts Archaeology/Cultural None recommended Heritage Socio- Economic None recommended Amenity None recommended
None of the mitigation measures work against one another.
15.6 Impact Assessment
There will be no cumulative or secondary impacts from this development.
15.7 Mitigation
No further mitigation is required beyond that proposed within the individual topic areas.
15.8 Statement of Significance
The EIA undertaken has carefully examined the potential for cumulative impacts associated with the CBM gas development at Holehouse Plantation. It is concluded that there will be no cumulative or secondary impacts from this development.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 15-2 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
16. Overall Conclusion
The potential environmental impacts of the proposed CBM gas development at Holehouse Plantation are minimised by the size of development and duration of the various phases, in addition to the chosen site location.
The phases within which the potential for environmental impact is at its highest (site preparation and drilling) are limited to a relatively short time frame of 12 weeks.
Should the site prove viable as a production site, even with the 20 year timescale proposed, the fact that the Production Hubs are not expected to emit significant amounts of noise, are visually discreet and limited in size (circa 0.5 ha) means the environmental impact is negligible.
The site proposed at Holehouse Plantation is 0.25 km west of the route of the A7 trunk road and 0.78km south west of the village of Hollows. The site is small (0.8 ha) and the location has been purposely chosen with limited receptors in the immediate locality.
The EIA included a number of topic areas which each assessed the potential impacts of the development for the site preparation, drilling, production and restoration phases. This is particularly relevant considering that the site lies within a landscape designation, an Area of Great Landscape Value, designated by Dumfries & Galloway Council.
The findings revealed that there are no designations regarding ecology or archaeological interests at or adjacent to the proposed site. No significant adverse impacts were identified in the studies relating to landscape, ecology, hydrology, traffic, noise, hydrogeology, air quality, archaeology, recreation or tourism.
The socio-economic assessment has identified that the loss of earnings resulting from the potential alternative use of the land on the proposed site is outweighed by the income provided to the owner of the land from this development, with further benefits to local construction contractors and suppliers. The socio-economic impact from this proposed development at Holehouse Plantation is therefore assessed as significantly beneficial to the local area.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-1 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Appendix 1 – List of Abbreviations
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-2 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
AQMA Air Quality Management Area AQS Air Quality Strategy bgl Below ground level BS British Standard BTO British Trust for Ornithology CBM gas Coal bed methane CIRIA Construction Industry Research and Information Association CMM Coal mine methane DECC Department of Energy and Climate Change DMRB Design Manual for Roads and Bridges EA Environment Agency EC European Commission EEC European Economic Community EIA Environmental Impact Assessment ES Environmental Statement EU European Union FRA Flood Risk Assessment Ha Hectare HER Historic Environmental Record IEEM Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management IHT Institution of Highways and Transportation JNCC Joint Nature Conservation Committee Km Kilometre LA90 Noise levels exceeded for 90% of each sample period Leq Equivalent continuous noise level averaged over the measurement period and often regarded as an average level m Metre MW Mega Watt NPPG National Planning Policy Guidance NSCA National Society for Clean Air LAQS Local Air Quality Strategy NTS Non Technical Summary NSR Noise Sensitive Receptor OS Ordnance Survey PAN Planning Advice Note PEDL Petroleum Exploration and Development Licence PM Particulate Matter PPG Pollution Prevention Guidelines Ramsar site Site protected under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (1971) RSPB Royal Society for the Protection of Birds SAC Special Area of Conservation SEPA Scottish Environment Protection Agency SNH Scottish Natural Heritage SPA Special Protection Area SPP Scottish Planning Policy SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest SUDS Sustainable Drainage Systems UK United Kingdom WHO World Health Organisation ZTV Zone of Theoretical Visibility
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-3 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Appendix 2 – Landscape Character Areas
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-4 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Landscape Character Areas identified within the study area:
1. Coastal Plateau 2. Flow Plateau 3. Foothills 4. Foothills With Forest 5. Inland Loch 6. Intimate Pastoral Valleys 7. Middle Dale (Valley) 8. Narrow Wooded River Valleys 9. Southern Uplands 10. Southern Uplands Forest Covered 11. Southern Uplands with Scattered Forest 12. Upland Fringe 13. Upland Glens 14. Upland Valley with Pastoral Floor 15. Border Moors and Forests 16. Solway Basin
Coastal Plateau – the Coastal Plateau landform is relatively flat, with local undulations, Valleys and hummocks that run down to the Solway Firth with a gentle incline. The landscape is primarily open, allowing long views over the estuary to the Cumbrian Mountains. The main visual horizons are formed by medium scale mixed farm and policy woodland and shelterbelts that form dark visual horizons within the landscape. Land cover is predominantly improved pasture, with some arable fields and rougher pastures in hummocky areas. Large, open fields face the coast with long views that accentuate the extensive horizontal scale of the character area. Wetlands are in evidence within this character area and related to the dense network of tributary burns, which flow into the Solway. The routes of the burns are often indicated by lines of trees and scrub. Human developments are evenly spread with isolated farmsteads situated at the end of straight lanes off the main roads. Due to the flat open nature of this landscape, they are often visually prominent and exposed to views from several sides. The character of this landscape is relatively weak, lacking strong features and visual Interest
Flow Plateau is comprised of extensive water logged marshy pastures, rough or improved pasture on higher ground with neglected hedgerows and tree lined enclosures or shelterbelts. The area is mostly flat and gently rolling with a south facing incline towards the Solway. On steep slopes the landscape merges with Upland fringe with frequent forestry plantations. Land use in the area is mostly cattle grazing. There are scattered farmsteads but the area is mostly uninhabited. The protection of this landscape character from inappropriate development is controlled through the classification of this landscape as an area of Great Landscape Value and Regional Scenic Area.
Foothills – this character is found within the eastern part of the region. Landform is gently undulating with rounded peaks between 170 and 250m A.O.D though craggy peaks up to 350m are evident. Frequent streams dissect this character area and incise the landscape. Land cover is semi-improved pasture with areas of rough pasture and heath. The foothill areas are primarily agricultural in character but they adjoin significant areas of afforested land. The scale of field boundaries is medium to large and these are enclosed by stone dyke walls and localised areas of hedgerow and hedgerow trees help to delineate minor roads. Pockets of mixed woodland are found within the lower lying sheltered areas most notably along river corridors. There are many scattered farmsteads and small settlements accessed via a network of minor roads, which give this character area a settled feel. Numerous archaeological sites are positioned to take advantage of the limited views that
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-5 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
exist and the character of this landscape has been recognised as an Area of Great Landscape Value.
Foothills with Forest – this landscape type is located throughout the central and eastern parts of the region. The landscape character is strongly influenced by swathes of forest, which straddle many of the rounded peaks and descend onto the lower slopes. The forest themselves display the characteristics of varying maturity and hill farming is in decline with forestry becoming the dominant land use. Few local topographical features exist within this character area. Where open ground is evident, it is mostly rough or semi improved pasture with patterns of dry stone walls delineating field boundaries. Road corridors are lined by tall mature conifers and views are restricted by plantation woodland. The character of this landscape has been recognised as worthy of enhancement, conservation or restoration through the designation of the character type as an Area of Great Landscape Value and Regional Scenic Area.
Inland Loch – inland lochs are not prevalent throughout Dumfries and Galloway but where present they are important wildlife features creating dynamic contrast with their landscape context. The scale of inland lochs where situated within the lowlands is small and intimate with wooded margins being a dominant feature. Within the uplands, they occupy basins and glacially carved hollows with the exception being Loch Ken, which is illustrative of a ribbon lake enlarged as part of a hydroelectric scheme. The largest inland lochs are associated with the provision for Hydro Electric Power being artificially created reservoirs constructed as part of the Galloway Hydro-Electric Scheme.
Intimate Pastoral Valleys (Eskdale) are typified by a flat bottomed open valley and steep pastoral valley sides, often featuring drystane dykes or hedgerows. The pastures are mostly small to medium scale that give way to rough pastures or moorland on the upper slopes, medium in scale, similar to small ‘dales’ although the valleys have a smaller proportion of woodland cover. Woodland cover extends at right angles to the valley floor and often joins river woodlands or woodlands of isolated houses. This forms an extensive pattern that breaks up the pastures and restricts views. Coniferous plantation is small to medium in scale and limited to upper slopes. The valleys are usually followed by a parallel road on one side. Small settlements, scattered farmhouses and isolated steadings contribute to the small scale settled and intimate character and this landscape is as a regional scenic area.
Middle Dale (valley) – the essential features of the Middle Dale landscape are natural hanging woodlands that cloth narrow valley slopes which range between 40 and 70 metres. The main watercourses meander within narrow floodplains, which are contained by steep slopes in many areas. Where Rivers converge, the landscape character is more open and allows for greater extensive views. Tributary valleys link with the Middle Dale landscape and middle valleys are predominantly covered by lush pastures grazed by sheep and cattle. Field boundaries are a mixture of hedgerows and dry stone dykes. Out with the floodplains, this landscape contains an extensive pattern of shelterbelts, policy woodlands and small coniferous plantations. These create medium scale enclosures, defining strong visual boundaries in many areas. The middle dales contain numerous settlements and isolated farmsteads. The pattern of roads is not extensive and tends to run in lines parallel with the main watercourses with regular cross connections. Middle dale landscapes have a settled, comfortable character generated by their lush pastures, diversity of textures and quality of buildings. The combination of these components creates a locally distinct landscape, which is classified as an area of Great Landscape Value.
Narrow Wooded River Valleys – topography ranges from 50m A.O.D upon the wide flat valley floor to above 100m A.O.D upon the steep sided v-shaped upper slopes. River meanders are a common feature upon the wide valley floors and a network of small scale pastoral or arable fields are defined by hedgerows within the lower reaches and walls, stone dykes and fences in the upper. Riparian woodland is a common feature upon the valley floor
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-6 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
whilst the upper slopes are characterised by a mixture of semi-natural woodlands, shelterbelts, farm and policy woodlands and small to medium scale coniferous plantations. Settlements are mainly found around the bridging points of rivers and isolated houses are more commonly found being situated within the flat valley floor accessible via minor roads. The small-scale pastoral/arable network of fields affords views between tracts of woodland creating an intimate landscape focusing on river views.
Southern Uplands – the scale of the landscape is large and is characterised by high, smooth, domed hills with steep, glacially eroded slopes with extensive foothills and plateaux, and deep, glacial valleys. The Southern Uplands generally lack walled enclosure and although there is some physical confinement between the peaks the prevailing character is open and exposed with dramatically sculpted landforms giving grandeur to the landscape. As such, the character of this area is protected by the classification of the landscape as an Area of Great Landscape Value and Regional Scenic Area. Commercial forestry and upland sheep farm are the principal land uses with heather moorlands upon the upper slopes that contrast with unimproved grassland pastures on the lower slopes creating strong vegetative relief between the upper and lower slopes. Woodland is largely confined to pockets located upon incised valley sides. There is evidence of industrial heritage within the landscape which takes the form of tunnels, chimneys, spoil heaps and small tracks.
Southern Uplands Forest Covered – this landscape type ranges between 200m and 500m. Land cover is dominated by Sitka spruce plantation, with occasional pine, larch and broadleaf species, confined mainly to the lower hill slopes and forest edges. Commercial forestry is the predominant land use within this character area. Landform is generally covered by forest and the uniformity of forest land cover creates a strong sense of place though large scale areas of unbroken uniformity create visual monotony and disorientation within the landscape. The unforested parts of this landscape type are typically covered by rough grazing pasture with rush pasture in areas of poor drainage. There are no significant towns or villages within this landscape and the road network is correspondingly sparse and this contributes to the low visual sensitivity of the area. Visual horizons in this landscape type are mainly confined by trees. Where longer views can be gained, visual orientation is often difficult due to the uniformity of much of the forest cover. The dark expanses of forestry covering this landscape are often visually prominent when viewed from adjacent landscape types and in many areas straight forestry edges contrast with the curves of the hill landform and the surrounding grassland and moorland. This creates stark boundaries between forest and adjoining low land cover types and there is strong visual influence of forest on adjoining landscape character areas.
Southern Uplands Scattered Forest – the topography of the southern uplands ranges from 200-500m A.O.D is characterised by large smooth domed or slightly conical shaped hills. The landscape scale is large with steeply sided clefts and glens located upon the hills with enclosure created where peaks are in close proximity to one another. The dominant land uses within this landscape are forestry and sheep grazing. Forest plantations are extensive comprising of stands of Sitka Spruce interspersed with Larch and extend over summits or are located upon side slopes leaving the smooth crests of hills exposed. Forest cover does visually obscure topographical landform of interest within this character type. The remnants of drystone dykes and upland farm ruins are in evidence in the landscape and further examples of human interventions are found through the legacy of mining operations that are now ruined.
Upland Fringe – the character of this landscape does bridge the transitional threshold between lowland pastures at 120m A.O.D and the upland at 170m A.O.D. This transitional feel to the landscape character is further demarcated by the division between agriculture and forestry with forestry becoming more prevalent upon the higher areas. This landscape is of high, gently rolling pastures with uneven topography and numerous minor valleys, ridges
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-7 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
and hollows. Panoramic vantage viewpoints are common over valley lowlands and there is a strong contrast between the wide-open areas and more intimate landform.
The land use within this character area is dominated by pasture with a mixture of both rough and improved grassland with Sheep and cattle grazing. The pattern of walls, hedgerows and tree lines are prominent features of the agricultural landscape, which is broken up by small- scale block pattern plantation woodland. Field shelterbelts and strip lines of trees are also evident. Fields are arranged into medium or large-scale plots often bounded by walls or hedge banks. Road infrastructure is extensive within this character area and human settlement has established primarily at the junctions of roads. The character of this landscape has been recognised as worthy of enhancement, conservation or restoration through the designation of the character type as an Area of Great Landscape Value and Regional Scenic Area.
Upland Glens – the shape of the upland glen valleys are generally u shaped with the lower glens sitting at 100m A.O.D reaching to over 300m A.O.D within the upper glens. This creates funnelled views along the glen. The valley floor, together with some of the shallower and lower valley slopes, comprise improved pastures, enclosed within drystone dykes constructed from distinctive shaley boulders. The pastures give way rapidly to rough grassland and in places heather moorland on slopes above the valley floor. Broadleaf woodland upon the valley floor is scarce, and forestry plantations have been introduced into parts of the upland glen landscape covering side slopes and leaving the valley floor clear. Human development is sparse consisting of isolated farmsteads and occasional houses and the area is classified as a Regional Scenic Area.
Upland Valley with Pastoral Floor – a landscape characterized by small to medium scale flat valley bottom sheep grazing pastures, strongly enclosed by steep valley sides merging with heather and forest covered uplands and river meanders. Land cover on the valley floor is predominantly improved permanent pasture divided into a regular pattern of small and medium sized fields enclosed by drystone dykes. The valley sides are typically covered by a rough mosaic of unimproved grassland and, in some areas, the valley sides are covered by large coniferous plantations, which often extend into the surrounding uplands. Elsewhere tree cover consists mainly of scattered small mixed and broadleaf woodland blocks shelterbelts and hedgerow lines. The river bluffs and tributary valleys commonly carry narrow strips of broadleaf woodland. The character of this landscape type is dominated by the surrounding uplands. The valley floor typically has an intimate enclosed quality with views confined to a narrow corridor, and occasional glimpses of tributary valleys. Long views may be gained along straighter, more open sections. Elsewhere visual horizons are formed by steep interlocking spurs, woodland blocks and tree lines. Buildings in this landscape generally fit well into the landform and settlement consists of numerous villages and farmsteads scattered along the valley typically sited on the terraces above the river floodplain and in the sheltered mouths of tributary valleys. Roads typically follow the river terraces along the lower valley sides. A simple, distinctive landscape strongly enclosed by uplands with intermittent long views along valley corridor.
Borders, Moors and Forests – the Borders landscape is a large-scale landscape of high, rolling or undulating plateau with expanses of sweeping moorland, extensive coniferous woodlands and large reservoirs, sparsely populated and with no major settlements. Exposed moorland areas heavily grazed by sheep and characterised by mixed heather and unimproved grassland, on broad hills, which offer extensive long distance views. There are extensive plantations mainly consisting of a patchwork of felled areas and different age classes of non-native conifers with few broadleaved trees, which are restricted to small woodland blocks in more sheltered valleys. A network of small rivers exists primarily in narrow gorges and there are archaeological remains and military training establishments within this landscape. The overall character area is protected as an Area of Great Landscape Value.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-8 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Solway Basin – the Solway Coast became an AONB in 1964 covering an area of approximately 59km of the Cumbrian coast. The designated area is split into two separate sectors. Both sectors are primarily agricultural in character and are remote from large towns and conurbations. Within the coastal environment, views are wide, open and exposed. The coastal fringe is composed of low cliffs, sand and pebble beaches, sand dunes and raised beaches formed by sea level changes, backed by dune headlands. Inland of the immediate coastal fringe, the low-lying plain is relatively flat, open and exposed to prevailing southwesterly winds. Cattle grazing is the dominant land use and fields are defined by drainage ditches, small streams, low wind-sheared hedgerows and stone-faced hedgebanks. Further inland the land is gently undulating and is intensively managed, predominantly as pasture. The field pattern is rectilinear and fields are fairly large in scale, bounded by hedges or fences with some hedgerow trees. Tree cover is generally limited being affected by the strength of the salt-laden winds. Broadleaved woodland is restricted to shallow valleys with some larger blocks of conifer and mixed woodland. Small villages and hamlets are well dispersed in the lowland agricultural areas and tend to be nucleated in form. They consist of collections of farm buildings ranging from substantial farmhouses, longhouses and square plan properties to small workers cottages. New road bypasses have altered the rural road system around the principal settlement of Carlisle and detracted from the remoteness of the Solway Basin, introducing a more urban element.
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-9 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Appendix 3 – Ecology
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-10 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
APPENDIX 3 – PHASE 1 HABITAT SURVEY TARGET NOTES Target Note Location Description Number 1 The two access track fields Improved grassland of perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) cut for silage. 2 East side of south-eastwards Non-stockproof hedgerow, mainly hawthorn proposed access track (Crataegus monogyna) with some beech (Fagus sylvatica) and crab apple (Malus sylvestris), about 1.5m high. Reinforced with a wire on posts fence. The groundflora is perennial ryegrass, creeping thistle (Cirsium arvense), broadleaved dock (Rumex obtusifolius), nettles (Urtica dioica) and chickweed (Stellaria media). 3 First corner of access track Existing metal gate. The hedgerow stops about 2.5m to the west, the field boundary being a wire on post fence. Closest hedgerow is very thin and unlikely to be used by breeding birds. 4 To the south of first corner of access Mature, closed canopy Sitka spruce (Picea track sitchensis), plantation at least 10m tall. 5 Woodland west of the site Mature Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) at least 10m tall and closed canopy. 6 Ditch/Cross Burn to west of the site A narrow (spade-dug?) 50cm deep ditch at the base of natural watercourse. The water is very low and not flowing. The banks are covered with soft rush (Juncus effusus) and Yorkshire fog (Holcus lanatus) with sorrel (Rumex acetosa), tufted hair grass (Deschampsia cespitosa) and the occasional self- seeded birch (Betula spp.) trees. 7 Second access field/route of access An area of raised land that is not obviously peaty. track There is a mix of soft rush (predominantly) and Yorkshire fog with acid grassland species in drier patches, such as red fescue (Festuca rubra), sweet vernal grass (Anthoxanthum odoratum) and tormentil (Potentilla erecta). 8 Second access field, north of the Cross Burn is a very shallow stream. On the day of access track the survey, the water depth was less that 5cm. The channel is about 1-2m wide and covered with floating sweetgrass (Glyceria fluitans). The low banks, with evidence of past poaching, are covered with soft rush and Yorkshire fog. 9 South of access track exiting second An area of planted trees: alder (Alnus glutinosa) and field ash (Fraxinus excelsior). 10 Exiting second access field Existing wooden gate. Adjacent hawthorn hedgerow is non-stockproof with fencing and no more than 1.5m high. 11 At entrance to the site. NY38197, An old sessile oak (Quercus petraea) with breast 77952 height diameter of about 1m. Old dead branches. High likelihood of roosting bats. 12 The site Mainly closed canopy Sitka spruce with little more than leaf litter below. Along a 5m margin of the field to the north is planted larch (Larix decidua) with a grassy carpet of smooth meadow grass (Poa pratensis) and Yorkshire fog with tall patched of nettles (Urtica dioica) 13 Entrance to the site Around the large oak, a number of young planted trees: (Quercus spp.) shill in tubes as well as ash (Fraxinus excelsior) and alder (Alnus glutinosa). 14 Forest break along the western edge Dominated by Yorkshire fog with patches of soft rush of the site and occasionally nettles. Frequent marsh thistle (Cirsium palustre). The ditch is dry and covered with grasses, mainly Yorkshire fog. 15 Forest break to the south of the site Dominated by Yorkshire fog with patches of bent grass (Agrostis sp.), red fescue (Festuca rubra) and mosses Polytrichum commune and Rhytidiadelphus squarrosus. 16 Fieldside of the Douglas Fir Self-seeded downy birch (Betula pubescens) and Plantation and at confluence of ditch Sitka spruce. The groundflora mainly tufted hair grass
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-11 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
and Cross Burn (Deschampsia cespitosa) with marsh thistle and marsh bedstraw (Galium palustre)
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-12 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Appendix 4 – Hydrology
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-13 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
SITE
GREENFIELD ESTIMATION OF PEAK FLOW RATE OF RUNOFF No. ASV1 Abbreviation Calculations Value Hydrological 1 Region R 2 2 (SOIL) type (1-5) S 4 3 Development Size A 0.56 Ha If development area is 200+ ha a full FEH analysis is recommended to Method of obtain a more accurate estimate of 4 Greenfield Analysis greenfield runoff characteristics No. ASV2 Abbreviation Calculations Value 5 Area A 0.56 Ha 6 Annual Rainfall SAAR 2000 mm Soil runoff 7 coefficient SPR 0.47 Development mean annual peak flow 8 rate QBAR 824.4503486 9.24 l/s Mean annual peak 9 flow per unit area QBAR/A 16.48900697 16.49 l/s/ha Minimum sizes of an orifice may limit the minimum hydraulic control flow Minimum limit of rate. This allows the derivation of an 10 discharge Qthrottle equivalent value of a QBAR/A l/s 100 year flow rate 10.1 per unit area Qthrottle/A l/s/ha Equivalent mean annual peak flow 10.2 per unit area Qthrottle/3.5A l/s/ha 1yr, 30 yr and 100yr peak discharge rate of Use the larger of the 2 values of item 11 runoff per unit area 9 and 10.2 for calculating 11.1 to 11.3 11.1 Q1yr 14.02 l/s/ha 11.2 Q30yr 20.94 l/s/ha 11.2 Q100yr 22.10 l/s/ha
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-14 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
SITE
ASSESSMENT OF ATTENUATION STORAGE VOLUMES No. ASV3 Abbreviation Calculations Value 1 Hydrological Region R 2 2 Hydrological rain fall region Z 20, 0.4 3 Development Area A 0.56 ha
Proportion of impervious area 4 requiring Attenuation Storage α 1 5 Greenfield flow Rate per unit area QBAR/A 16.49 l/s/ha
estimate of development (PIMP) 6 percentage impermeable area PIMP 100 % Attenuation storage volumes per unit 7 area Uvol1yr 170 m3/ha Uvol30yr 360 m3/ha Uvol100yr 450 m3/ha 8 Basic Storage Volumes BSV1yr U.Vol.α A 95.23 m3 BSV30yr U.Vol.α A 201.67 m3 BSV100yr U.Vol.α A 252.09 m3 No. ASV4 Abbreviation Calculations Value 9 Climate Change Factor CC 1.1 10 FEH Rainfall factor FF1yr 1.2 FF30yr 1.2 FF100yr 1.1 11 Storage Volume ratio SVR1yr 0.92 0.92 SVR30yr 0.92 0.92 SVR100yr 1.00 1.00 12 Adjustment Storage Volumes ASV1yr SVR x BSV 87.30 m3 ASV30yr SVR x BSV 184.87 m3 ASV100yr SVR x BSV 252.09 m3 Hydrological Region volume storage 13 ratio HR1yr 1 HR30yr 1.06 HR100yr 1.07 14 Final Estimated Attenuation Storage At.Vol1yr HR x ASV 87.30 m3 At.Vol30yr HR x ASV 195.03 m3 At.Vol100yr HR x ASV 269.74 m3
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-15 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
SITE
ASSESSMENT OF LONG TERM STORAGE VOLUME No. ASV3 Abbreviation Value 1 Development Area A 0.56 ha 2 Estimate of PIMP( percentage impermeable area) PIMP 100 % 3 Impermeable Area (A.PIMP/100) AP 0.56 ha 4 Long Term Storage Factor LFT 5.5 m3/ha.mm 5 Rainfall depth RD 70 mm
LTVol 100yr 6 Long Term storage volume 6hr 215.68 m3
SITE
ASSESSMENT OF TREATMENT STORAGE VOLUME No. ASV3 Abbreviation Value 1 Development Area A 0.56 ha 2 Estimate of PIMP (percentage impermeable area) PIMP 100 % 3 Proportion of impervious area requiring Treatment storage β 1 4 Soil runoff coefficient SPR 0.47 5 5 year/60 minute rainfall depth M560 20 mm 6 Treatment storage volume T Vol 100.84 m3
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-16 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
ACCESS
GREENFIELD ESTIMATION OF PEAK FLOW RATE OF RUNOFF No. ASV1 Abbreviation Calculations Value Hydrological 1 Region R 2 2 (SOIL) type (1-5) S 4 3 Development Size A 0.36 Ha If development area is 200+ ha a full FEH analysis is recommended to Method of obtain a more accurate estimate of 4 Greenfield Analysis greenfield runoff characteristics No. ASV2 Abbreviation Calculations Value 5 Area A 0.36 Ha 6 Annual Rainfall SAAR 2000 mm Soil runoff 7 coefficient SPR 0.47 Development mean annual peak flow 8 rate QBAR 824.4503486 6.00 l/s Mean annual peak 9 flow per unit area QBAR/A 16.48900697 16.49 l/s/ha Minimum sizes of an orifice may limit the minimum hydraulic control flow Minimum limit of rate. This allows the derivation of an 10 discharge Qthrottle equivalent value of a QBAR/A l/s 100 year flow rate 10.1 per unit area Qthrottle/A l/s/ha Equivalent mean annual peak flow 10.2 per unit area Qthrottle/3.5A l/s/ha 1yr, 30 yr and 100yr peak discharge rate of Use the larger of the 2 values of item 11 runoff per unit area 9 and 10.2 for calculating 11.1 to 11.3 11.1 Q1yr 14.02 l/s/ha 11.2 Q30yr 20.94 l/s/ha 11.2 Q100yr 22.10 l/s/ha
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-17 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
ACCESS
ASSESSMENT OF ATTENUATION STORAGE VOLUMES No. ASV3 Abbreviation Calculations Value 1 Hydrological Region R 2 2 Hydrological rain fall region Z 20, 0.4 3 Development Area A 0.36 ha
Proportion of impervious area 4 requiring Attenuation Storage α 1 5 Greenfield flow Rate per unit area QBAR/A 16.49 l/s/ha
estimate of development (PIMP) 6 percentage impermeable area PIMP 100 % Attenuation storage volumes per unit 7 area Uvol1yr 170 m3/ha Uvol30yr 360 m3/ha Uvol100yr 450 m3/ha 8 Basic Storage Volumes BSV1yr U.Vol.α A 61.83 m3 BSV30yr U.Vol.α A 130.93 m3 BSV100yr U.Vol.α A 163.67 m3 No. ASV4 Abbreviation Calculations Value 9 Climate Change Factor CC 1.1 10 FEH Rainfall factor FF1yr 1.2 FF30yr 1.2 FF100yr 1.1 11 Storage Volume ratio SVR1yr 0.92 0.92 SVR30yr 0.92 0.92 SVR100yr 1.00 1.00 12 Adjustment Storage Volumes ASV1yr SVR x BSV 56.68 m3 ASV30yr SVR x BSV 120.02 m3 ASV100yr SVR x BSV 163.67 m3 Hydrological Region volume storage 13 ratio HR1yr 1 HR30yr 1.06 HR100yr 1.07 14 Final Estimated Attenuation Storage At.Vol1yr HR x ASV 56.68 m3 At.Vol30yr HR x ASV 126.62 m3 At.Vol100yr HR x ASV 175.12 m3
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-18 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
ACCESS
ASSESSMENT OF LONG TERM STORAGE VOLUME No. ASV3 Abbreviation Value 1 Development Area A 0.36 ha 2 Estimate of PIMP( percentage impermeable area) PIMP 100 % 3 Impermeable Area (A.PIMP/100) AP 0.36 ha 4 Long Term Storage Factor LFT 5.5 m3/ha.mm 5 Rainfall depth RD 70 mm
LTVol 100yr 6 Long Term storage volume 6hr 140.02 m3
ACCESS
ASSESSMENT OF TREATMENT STORAGE VOLUME No. ASV3 Abbreviation Value 1 Development Area A 0.36 ha 2 Estimate of PIMP (percentage impermeable area) PIMP 100 % 3 Proportion of impervious area requiring Treatment storage β 1 4 Soil runoff coefficient SPR 0.47 5 5 year/60 minute rainfall depth M560 20 mm 6 Treatment storage volume T Vol 65.47 m3
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-19 Final Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Appendix 5 – Noise Definitions
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-20 Final Noise is defined as unwanted sound. The range of audible sound is from 0 dB to 140 dB. The frequency response of the ear is usually taken to be about 18 Hz (number of oscillations per second) to 18000 Hz. The ear does not respond equally to different frequencies at the same level. It is more sensitive in the mid- frequency range than the lower and higher frequencies and because of this, the low and high frequency components of a sound are reduced in importance by applying a weighting (filtering) circuit to the noise measuring instrument. The weighting which is most widely used and which correlates best with subjective response to noise is the dB(A) weighting. This is an internationally accepted standard for noise measurements.
For variable noise sources such as traffic, a difference of 3 dB(A) is just distinguishable. In addition, a doubling of a noise source would increase the overall noise by 3 dB(A). For example, if one item of machinery results in noise levels of 30 dB(A) at 10 m, then two identical items of machinery adjacent to one another would result in noise levels of 33 dB(A) at 10 m. The ‘loudness’ of a noise is a purely subjective parameter but it is generally accepted that an increase/decrease of 10 dB(A) corresponds to a doubling/halving in perceived loudness.
External noise levels are rarely steady but rise and fall according to activities within an area. In an attempt to produce a figure that relates this variable noise level to subjective response, a number of noise indices have been developed. These include:
• LAmax noise level: This is the maximum noise level recorded over the measurement period. • LAeq noise level: This is the ‘equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level, in decibels’ and is defined in British Standard 7445 (BS 7445) [1] as the ‘value of the A-weighted sound pressure level of a continuous, steady sound that, within a specified time interval, T, has the same mean square sound pressure as a sound under consideration whose level varies with time’.
It is a unit commonly used to describe community response plus, construction noise and noise from industrial premises and is the most suitable unit for the description of other forms of environmental noise. In more straightforward terms, it is a measure of energy within the varying noise.
• LA10 noise level: This is the noise level that is exceeded for 10% of the measurement period and gives an indication of the noisier levels. It is a unit that has been used over many years for the measurement and assessment of road traffic noise. • LA90 noise level: This is the noise level that is exceeded for 90% of the measurement period and gives an indication of the noise level during quieter periods. It is often referred to as the background noise level and is used in the assessment of disturbance from industrial noise. • Hz (Hertz): The tonal quality of a sound is described and measured in terms of the frequency content and is commonly expressed as octave or third octave bands, the latter being the division of the octave bands into three for finer analysis, across the frequency spectrum. The smaller the octave band or third octave band centre frequency number, defined in terms of Hz, the lower the sound. For example 63 Hz is lower than 500 Hz and is perceived as a deeper sound. The attenuation due to air absorption and natural barriers increases with frequency i.e. low frequencies are always the most difficult to control.
References
1 British Standards Institution. British Standard 7445: Description and measurement of environmental noise. Part 1: Guide to environmental quantities and procedures. 2003.
Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Appendix 6 – Archaeology HER Data
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-21 Final
.
.
. . . .. .
.
. .
. . . . . .. .
. .. . . . . . .
..
. ..
..
. . ... ..
. . .. . . ... . . .. . .
..
. . . . . . . . .. .
. . .. . . ... . . ..
..
. .
..
. . ... . . . ..
. . .. . . ... . . .. .
..
.
..
. . ... .. . . . . . . ..
.
. . .. . . ...
..
. . .. . .
..
. . .. . .
. . .. . . ... . . .. . .
THE ANCIENT MONUMENTS AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL AREAS ACT 1979 11996 ENTRY IN THE SCHEDULE OF MONUMENTS
The monument known as Gilnockie Castle, earthwork NE of Gilnockie Bridge comprises the remains of a ringwork, probably of later medieval date, surviving as a bank and ditch cutting off a promontory in a bend of the River Esk at 45m above sea level. It is located in mature deciduous woodland. The interior of the enclosure measures 60m by 35m. The promontory is cut off on its E side by a bank 7.5m wide and 1.8m high, an external ditch and a counterscarp. The modem road has cut through the S part of the site, and a small section of the earthwork survives to the south of this. The area to be scheduled comprises two discrete parts - an area to the north of the modem road that is irregular on plan, and an area to the south of the modem road that is sub-rectangular on plan, to include the remains described and an area around in which associated remains may survive. The scheduling specifically excludes all above-ground elements of modem fences and telegraph poles, to allow for their maintenance. The monument, which lies in the Parish of Canonbie and the County of Dumfries as shown outlined in red on the Plan annexed and executed as relative hereto and which forms part of the subjects described in the Disposition by John Charles, Duke of Buccleuch and Queensberry in favour of Buccleuch Estates Limited dated 4 April 1930 and recorded in the Division of the General Register of Sasines for the County of Dumfries on 6 May 1930 (the present owner whereof being Buccleuch Estates Ltd, Langholm Estate Office, Ewesbank, Langholm), is hereby included in the Schedule of Monuments appearing to the Scottish Ministers to be of national importance compiled and maintained by them under section 1(1) of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979.
Subscribed by Malcolm Cooper, Chief Inspector with Historic Scotland, being an officer of the Scottish Ministers at Edinburgh on the"Ll day of ~~ Two thousand and eight, before this witness Victoria Ball, of Longmore House, Salisbury Place, Edinburgh.
Chief Inspector
LD00307.Sch
THE ANCIENT MONUMENTS AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL AREAS ACT 1979
Entry in the Schedule of Monuments
2008
Re: The Monument known as Gilnockie Castle, earthwork NE of Gilnockie Bridge
in the Parish of Canonbie and County of Dumfries
Search Sheet No: 4345
Historic Scotland Longmore House Salisbury Place Edinburgh
LD00308.Sch Greenpark Energy Ltd October 2009
Appendix 7 – Figures
Holehouse Plantation Environmental Statement 16-22 Final