The Draft Liverpool Local Plan Habitat Regulations Assessment September 2016
liverpool.gov.uk
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Liverpool Local Plan Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA)
5th July 2016
60470919
Prepared for:
Liverpool City Council Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
REVISION SCHEDULE
Rev Date Details Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by
1 8th July 2016 Draft for client comment Lisa Rigby Dr James Riley Dr James Riley Senior Ecologist Associate Associate Director Director MCIEEM CEnv MCIEEM CEnv MCIEEM
This report has been prepared and provided in accordance with the Code of Professional Conduct of the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management.
AECOM Exchange Court 1 Dale Street Liverpool L2 2ET United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)151 331 8900 www.AECOM.com
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
AECOM Infrastructure and Environment UK Ltd
AECOM Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited (“AECOM”) is a wholly owned subsidiary through which AECOM operates in the UK.
Limitations
AECOM has prepared this Report for the sole use of Liverpool City Council (“Client”) in accordance with the Agreement under which our services were performed. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this Report or any other services provided by AECOM. This Report is confidential and may not be disclosed by the Client nor relied upon by any other party without the prior and express written agreement of AECOM. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report are based upon information provided by others and upon the assumption that all relevant information has been provided by those parties from whom it has been requested and that such information is accurate. Information obtained by AECOM has not been independently verified by AECOM, unless otherwise stated in the Report. The methodology adopted and the sources of information used by AECOM in providing its services are outlined in this Report. The work described in this Report was undertaken in June and July 2016 and is based on the conditions encountered and the information available during the said period of time. The scope of this Report and the services are accordingly factually limited by these circumstances. Where assessments of works or costs identified in this Report are made, such assessments are based upon the information available at the time and where appropriate are subject to further investigations or information which may become available. AECOM disclaim any undertaking or obligation to advise any person of any change in any matter affecting the Report, which may come or be brought to AECOM’ attention after the date of the Report. Certain statements made in the Report that are not historical facts may constitute estimates, projections or other forward- looking statements and even though they are based on reasonable assumptions as of the date of the Report, such forward- looking statements by their nature involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from the results predicted. AECOM specifically does not guarantee or warrant any estimate or projections contained in this Report. Where field investigations are carried out, these have been restricted to a level of detail required to meet the stated objectives of the services. The results of any measurements taken may vary spatially or with time and further confirmatory measurements should be made after any significant delay in issuing this Report. Copyright © This Report is the copyright of AECOM Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited. Any unauthorised reproduction or usage by any person other than the addressee is strictly prohibited.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 4
1.1 Background to Habitats Regulations Assessment ...... 4 1.2 Liverpool Local Plan ...... 3 2 METHODOLOGY ...... 5 2.1 Introduction ...... 5 2.2 A Proportionate Assessment ...... 5
2.3 The Process of HRA ...... 6 2.4 Task 1: Test of Likely Significant Effect (Screening) ... 8 2.5 Physical Scope of the HRA ...... 8 2.6 The ‘In Combination’ Scope ...... 10
2.7 John Lennon Liverpool Airport Expansion ...... 13 2.8 Mersey Ports Masterplan and Port Expansion at Seaforth ...... 13
2.9 Consultation ...... 14 3 PATHWAYS OF IMPACT...... 15
3.1 Introduction ...... 15 3.2 Disturbance ...... 15
3.2.1 Breeding birds (March to August) ...... 15 3.2.2 Wintering and passage birds (August – May) ...... 15 3.2.3 Other activities causing disturbance ...... 16
3.3 Mechanical/abrasive damage and nutrient enrichment19 3.4 Atmospheric pollution ...... 20 3.4.1 Local air pollution ...... 22 3.4.2 Diffuse air pollution ...... 22 3.5 Water resources ...... 23 3.6 Water quality ...... 24 3.1 Port Development, Shipping and Dredging ...... 25 3.2 Coastal squeeze ...... 25 3.3 Loss of functionally-linked land outside of the European site boundary ...... 26 4 HRA – TEST OF LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS ...... 28 4.1 HRA of Liverpool Local Plan ...... 28 5 MERSEY ESTUARY SPA AND RAMSAR SITE ...... 32 5.1 Introduction ...... 32 5.2 Reasons for Designation ...... 32
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
The Mersey Estuary is designated an SPA under Article 4.1 ...... 32 5.3 Historic trends and existing pressures ...... 33 5.4 Key potential pressures from Liverpool ...... 35 5.5 Role of other projects and plans ...... 35 5.6 Likely Significant Effects ...... 37 Disturbance of Qualifying Bird Species ...... 37 5.7 Conclusion ...... 49 6 SEFTON COAST SAC ...... 50 6.1 Introduction ...... 50 6.2 Reasons for Designation ...... 50 6.3 Historic Trends and Current Pressures...... 50 6.4 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool ...... 51 6.5 Role of Other Projects and Plans ...... 51 6.6 Likely Significant Effects ...... 52 6.7 Conclusion ...... 55 7 RIBBLE AND ALT ESTUARIES SPA / RAMSAR ...... 56 7.1 Introduction ...... 56 7.2 Reasons for Designation ...... 56 7.3 Historic Trends and Current Pressures...... 57 7.4 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool ...... 59 7.5 Role of other Projects and Plans ...... 59 7.6 Likely Significant Effects ...... 60 7.7 Conclusion ...... 63 8 LIVERPOOL BAY SPA ...... 64 8.1 Introduction ...... 64 8.2 Reasons for Designation ...... 64 8.3 Historic Trends and Current Pressures...... 64 8.4 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool ...... 65 8.5 Role of other Projects and Plans ...... 66 8.6 Likely Significant Effects ...... 67 8.7 Conclusion ...... 70 9 MERSEY NARROWS AND NORTH WIRRAL FORESHORE SPA AND RAMSAR ...... 71 9.1 Introduction ...... 71
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
9.2 Reasons for Designation ...... 71 9.3 Historic Trends and Current Pressures...... 71 9.4 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool ...... 73 9.5 Role of other Projects and Plans ...... 73 9.6 Likely Significant Effects ...... 75 9.7 Conclusion ...... 79 10 MANCHESTER MOSSES SAC ...... 81 10.1 Introduction ...... 81 10.2 Reasons for Designation ...... 81 10.3 Historic Trends and Current Pressures...... 81 10.4 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool ...... 83 10.5 Likely Significant Effects ...... 83 10.6 Conclusion ...... 84 11 DEE ESTUARY SAC, SPA & RAMSAR ...... 85 11.1 Introduction ...... 85 11.2 Reasons for Designation ...... 85 11.3 Historic Trends and Current Pressures...... 87 11.4 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool ...... 88 11.5 Role of other Projects and Plans ...... 89 11.6 Likely Significant Effects ...... 90 11.7 Conclusion ...... 93 12 MARTIN MERE SPA AND RAMSAR ...... 94 12.1 Introduction ...... 94 12.2 Reasons for Designation ...... 94 12.3 Historic Trends and Existing Pressures...... 95 12.4 Key Pressures from Liverpool ...... 96 12.5 Role of other Projects and Plans ...... 96 12.6 Likely Significant Effects ...... 96 12.7 Conclusion ...... 97 13 RIVER DEE AND BALA LAKE SAC ...... 98 13.1 Reasons for Designation ...... 98 13.2 Historic Trends and Current Pressures...... 98 13.3 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool ...... 99 13.4 Role of other Projects and Plans ...... 99
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
13.5 Likely Significant Effects ...... 99 13.6 Conclusion ...... 100 14 RIVER EDEN SAC ...... 101 14.1 Reasons for Designation ...... 101 14.2 Historic Trends and Current Practices ...... 101 14.3 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool ...... 102 14.4 Role of other Projects and Plans ...... 102 14.5 Likely Significant Effects ...... 102 14.6 Conclusion ...... 103 15 SUMMARY OF SCREENING (LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS) ...... 104 REFERENCES ...... 106
List of Appendices
Appendix 1: Test of Likley Significant Effects Table for Local Plan Policies (Alone) Appendix 2: Test of Likely Significant Effects Table for Local Plan Policies (In-combination)
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY
The Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) requires local authorities to undertake assessment of the implications of their plans for internationally important wildlife sites. Internationally important wildlife sites are Special Areas of Conservation (sites designated for habitats and species other than birds), Special Protection Areas (sites designated for birds) and Ramsar sites (wetlands of international importance). There are a range of these sites within and around Liverpool City. This process is often called Habitats Regulations Assessment and consists of two key elements, an initial Test of Likely Significant Effects process to determine Likely Significant Effects (LSE) and an Appropriate Assessment, if there is a need to progress to investigating adverse effects on integrity.
A range of possible impact pathways (ways in which the development set out in the Local Plan can affect internationally important sites) have been scrutinized. Potential impact pathways examined include:
recreational pressure (both disturbance of wildlife and potential damage to habitats); loss of important associated habitat outside the designated sites themselves; water quality pathways (e.g. pollution); and, pollution through changes in air quality.
These relate to the following internationally important wildlife sites where potential impact pathways exist:
Mersey Estuary SPA and Mersey Estuary Ramsar site Sefton Coast SAC Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA and Ribble & Alt Estuaries Ramsar site Liverpool Bay SPA Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore Ramsar site Manchester Mosses SAC River Dee & Bala Lake SAC Dee Estuary SAC, Dee Estuary SPA & Dee Estuary Ramsar site River Eden SAC Morecambe Bay SAC, Morecambe Bay SPA & Morecambe Bay Ramsar site Berwyn & South Clwyd Mountains SAC
The purpose of the assessment was to identify possible impact pathways that result from the Local Plan policies that could lead to negative likely significant effects (LSEs) on the integrity of a European designated site. This assessment provides recommendations where required to ensure that the Local Plan contains policies to enable the delivery of any required measures that are necessary to address possible impacts,
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
particularly if they arise due to development throughout the City as a result of the Local Plan. This assessment does not currently include Strategic Allocations for employment use. However, it is understood that all employment sites will be in effect be re-affirming existing employment land designations, rather than allocating new areas for employment. Where possible site-specific effects were identified, for example site allocations for housing, recommendations were made for further studies that would need to be undertaken before the sites are given planning permission.
Of the 81 detailed policies put forward by the Local Plan, the following 24 were screened in (therefore requiring further consideration in the HRA) due to potential pathways being identified to European Sites. These are as follows:
Liverpool City Centre:
CC 4 The Waterfront CC 5 Recreational Use of Dock Water Spaces, Quaysides and the Waterfront CC 6 Liverpool Waters CC 13 Housing Provision in the City Centre
Employment Land and the Economy
EC1 Employment Land Supply EC2 Employment Areas EC3 Delivering Economic Growth EC4 Office Development EC6 Liverpool John Lennon Airport EC7 The Ports of Garston and Liverpool
Housing Provision
H1 Housing Requirements H2 Site Allocations H6 Older Persons Housing H8 Student Housing Provision H11 Permanent Gypsy and Traveller Sites H12 Primarily Residential Areas H14 Conversion of Dwellings and Buildings
Shopping Centres and Community Fcailities
SP1 The Hierarchy of Centres for Liverpool SP5 Community Facilities
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
SP6 Out-of Centre and Edge-of Centre Town Centre Uses
Green Infrastructure
GI4 Water Spaces
Environmental Resources
R6 Minerals Safeguarding and Extraction R7 Decentralised Energy Networks R8 Wind Turbines
Following the more detailed analysis, the following recommendations have been made, although only one of these requires a change to policy:
Policies resulting in an increase in residents or recreational activity could be screened out given the cross-authority working commitment given in Policy STP2, provided that the strategic study and resulting measures to manage recreational access within the coastal European sites around Merseyside is taken forward in a timely manner early in the plan period; The reference to Mersey Estuary SPA in Policy EC6 should either be made less specific (i.e. European sites) or expanded to include reference to Mersey Estuary SPA, Dee Estuary SAC, Dee Estuary SPA and Dee Estuary Ramsar site, Liverpool Bay SPA and Ramsar site and Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar site; and To protect Sefton Coast SAC it is recommended that when determining planning applications, consideration is given to whether they are likely to result in an increase of more than 1% of the critical load in nitrogen inputs into the Sefton Coast Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Such proposals are likely to include those in or within 200 metres (m) of the SAC, and those which could increase traffic flows on roads within 200m of the SAC by over 1,000 vehicle movements per day or 200 heavy duty vehicle movements per day (in terms of annual average daily traffic flows). If so then a project-level HRA should be undertaken. Once the change in bullet two is made it is considered that the Liverpool Local Plan will provide sufficient policy protection to ensure no adverse effect on the integrity of European sites either alone or in combination. HRA is an iterative process and further assessment will be required as Local Plan develops and employment allocations are confirmed.
1 introduction
1.1 Background to Habitats Regulations Assessment
AECOM has been appointed by Liverpool City Council (“the Council” or the “City Council”) to assist in undertaking a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) of the potential effects of the draft Local Plan, on the
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Natura 2000 network and Ramsar sites. AECOM (formerly URS) was previously appointed by Liverpool City Council to assist in undertaking a Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) of the potential effects of the Core Strategy, on the Natura 2000 network and Ramsar sites. That Core Strategy was ultimately not submitted. However, it has been carried forward as the basis of this Local Plan and as such a large amount of the HRA work undertaken for the Core Strategy is still valid for the Local Plan.
The Local Plan will supersede the current Unitary Development Plan. The current Unitary Development Plan was adopted in 2002 and is saved until the Local Plan Development Plan Documents (DPDs) come into effect. This HRA is required to evaluate the Likely Significant Effects (LSE) of the Local Plan on internationally important wildlife sites within the zone of influence, and determine if there is a relevant connecting pathway.
The objective of this assessment is to: Identify any aspects of the Local Plan that would cause an adverse effect on the integrity of Natura 2000 sites, otherwise known as European sites (Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and, as a matter of Government policy, Ramsar sites1), either in isolation or in-combination with other plans and projects; and To advise on appropriate policy mechanisms for delivering mitigation where such effects are identified.
If policies within the Local Plan cannot be screened out as being unlikely to lead to significant effects, then an Appropriate Assessment (AA) is required in order to devise measures that can be incorporated into the Local Plan which will enable the Council in their role as ‘competent authority’ to conclude that no adverse effect on the integrity of internationally important wildlife sites will result.
The Habitats Regulations applies the precautionary principle to Natura 2000 sites (Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), and Special Protection Areas (SPAs)). As a matter of UK Government policy, Ramsar sites are given equivalent status. In this report we use the term European sites to refer collectively to the sites listed in this paragraph.
Throughout this document the phrase Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) has been used to refer to the overall process required by The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (2010) (as amended), while Appropriate Assessment (AA) is used for the specific stage of the process in which it is necessary to determine adverse effects on the integrity of European sites. The need for Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) and Appropriate Assessment (AA) is set out within Article 6.3 of the EC Habitats Regulations 1992, and transposed into British law by the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (Box 1). The ultimate aim of the Regulations is to “maintain or restore, at favourable conservation status, natural habitats and species of wild fauna and flora of Community interest” (Habitats Regulations, Article 2(2)). This aim relates to habitats and species, not the European sites themselves, although the sites have a significant role in delivering favourable conservation status.
1 Wetlands of International Importance designated under the Ramsar Convention 1979
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 2
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Box 1. The legislative basis for Appropriate Assessment
Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended)
“A competent authority, before deciding to … give any consent for a plan or project which is likely to have a significant effect on a European site … must make an appropriate assessment of the implications for the site in view of that sites conservation objectives … The authority shall agree to the plan or project only after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the European Chapter 2 of this site”.report explains the HRA/AA process and methodology in more detail, identifying the scope of the assessment (i.e. which European Sites have been considered) including the rationale for scoping out some European Sites early in the process. The ‘in-combination’ scope is also explained,Regulation with a brief102 description of key plans and policies which have been considered. Chapter 3 explores the relevant pathways of impact resulting from the scale of development that will be delivered in Liverpool. Chapter 4 summarises the findings of the initial high-level HRA screening exercise (sift of policies) undertaken for this report, incorporating the Test of Likely Significant Effects of the 81 detailed policies carried out as part of this work.
Chapters 5 to 14 are divided up into one Chapter for each European site, except where multiple sites overlap in a particular geographic area (e.g. Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA and Ramsar sites). These chapters provide more detailed screening (Test of Likely Significant Effects). Each Chapter begins with a consideration of the interest features and ecological condition of the site and environmental process essential to maintain site integrity. Those policies which have been screened in and require further consideration within the Local Plan are discussed with respect to each European Site, and a more detailed Test of Likely Significant Effects is then carried out including any recommended changes to policy wording. The summary and conclusion of the HRA is presented in Chapter 15, including a summary of all recommended changes to the Liverpool Local Plan for compliance with the Habitats Regulations.
1.2 Liverpool Local Plan
Liverpool's current planning policy is set out in "A Plan for Liverpool", the City's Unitary Development Plan (UDP), adopted in November 2002. Once adopted, the Local Plan will replace the UDP. It will address all relevant issues to provide the up-to-date, strategic planning policy framework for Liverpool. Until then the UDP policies that have been saved or and not been superseded will remain in operation.
Once adopted, the Local Plan will provide a long-term spatial vision, strategic priorities and policies for future development in the City over the next 15-20 years. In accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) it will provide a long-term spatial vision, strategic priorities and policies for future development in the City specifically with regard to the quantity and location of new homes, employment provision, shops, facilities and other services, transport and other infrastructure provision, climate change
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 3
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
mitigation and adaption and the conservation and enhancement of the natural and historic environment. Additionally, it will set out:
Development management policies to guide the delivery of development in the City and will be used to determine planning applications. These policies will provide detailed advice to developers and others on the scale, design, accessibility, sustainability etc. of proposals;
Site allocations for residential, employment, retail and other land uses across the City, to be shown on a map; and
Designations where land is proposed to be safeguarded or where specific policies apply, such as for District and Local Centres.
The Local Plan will be supported by an Infrastructure Delivery Programme (IDP) which will identify future infrastructure requirements (including physical, social and green infrastructure), to support population change and housing and employment growth. The IDP will confirm, where possible, the type and location of new infrastructure provision required, the reason for its requirement, and the lead agency in its delivery, together with its cost, phasing and sources of funding.
The Local Plan should be consistent with national planning policy and take into account policies and strategies produced locally. It will:
Contain policies that will guide how the presumption in favour of sustainable development embodied in the NPPF should be applied locally Provide the strategic policy framework for Neighbourhood Plans in the City Be based on co-operation with neighbouring authorities, public, voluntary and private sector organisations
Compliance with European regulations on sustainability appraisal and habitat protection is also a requirement.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 4
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
2 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Introduction
This section sets out our approach and methodology for undertaking the Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA). HRA itself operates independently from the Planning Policy system, being a legal requirement of a discrete Statutory Instrument. Therefore there is no direct relationship to the National Planning Policy Framework and the ‘Tests of Soundness’.
2.2 A Proportionate Assessment
Project-related HRA often requires bespoke survey work and novel data generation in order to accurately determine the significance of effects. In other words, to look beyond the risk of an effect to a justified prediction of the actual likely effect and to the development of avoidance or mitigation measures.
However, the draft Communities and Local Government (CLG) guidance makes it clear that when implementing HRA of land-use plans, the Appropriate Assessment (AA) should be undertaken at a level of detail that is appropriate and proportional to the level of detail provided within the plan itself:
“The comprehensiveness of the [Appropriate] assessment work undertaken should be proportionate to the geographical scope of the option and the nature and extent of any effects identified. An AA need not be done in any more detail, or using more resources, than is useful for its purpose. It would be inappropriate and impracticable to assess the effects [of a strategic land use plan] in the degree of detail that would normally be required for the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of a project.”
More recently, the Court of Appeal2 ruled that providing the Council (competent authority) was duly satisfied that proposed mitigation could be ‘achieved in practice’ to satisfy that the proposed development would have no adverse effect, then this would suffice. This ruling has since been applied to a planning permission (rather than a Local Plan)3. In this case the High Court ruled that for ‘a multistage process, so long as there is sufficient information at any particular stage to enable the authority to be satisfied that the proposed mitigation can be achieved in practice it is not necessary for all matters concerning mitigation to be fully resolved before a decision maker is able to conclude that a development will satisfy the requirements of Regulation 102 of the Habitats Regulations’.
In other words, there is a tacit acceptance that AA can be tiered and that all impacts are not necessarily appropriate for consideration to the same degree of detail at all tiers (Figure 1).
For a Local Plan the level of detail concerning the developments that will be delivered is usually insufficient to make a highly detailed assessment of significance of effects. For example, precise and full determination of the impacts and significant effects of a new settlement will require extensive details concerning the design of the new housing sites, including layout of greenspace and type of development to be delivered in particular locations, yet these data will not be decided until subsequent stages.
The most robust and defensible approach to the absence of fine grain detail at this level is to make use of the precautionary principle. In other words, the plan is never given the benefit of the doubt (within the limits of reasonableness); it must be assumed that a policy/measure is likely to have an impact leading to a significant adverse effect upon a European site unless it can be clearly established otherwise.
2 No Adastral New Town Ltd (NANT) v Suffolk Coastal District Council Court of Appeal, 17th February 2015 3 High Court case of R (Devon Wildlife Trust) v Teignbridge District Council, 28 July 2015
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 5
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Figure 1: Tiering in HRA of Land Use Plans
2.3 The Process of HRA
The HRA is being carried out in the continuing absence of formal central Government guidance. CLG released a consultation paper on AA of Plans in 2006. As yet, no further formal guidance has emerged from CLG. However, Natural England (NE) has produced its own informal internal guidance and Natural Resources Wales (NRW) has produced guidance for Welsh authorities on ‘the appraisal of plans under the Habitats Regulations’ as a separate guidance document aimed at complementing and supplementing the guidance/advice provided within Technical Advice Note 5: Nature Conservation and Planning (2009). Although there is no requirement for an HRA to follow either guidance, both have been referred to in producing this HRA.
Figure 2 below outlines the stages of HRA according to current draft CLG guidance (which, since it is Central Government and Liverpool is an English authority has been considered to take precedence over other sources of guidance). The stages are essentially iterative, being revisited as necessary in response to more detailed information, recommendations and any relevant changes to the plan until no likely significant effects remain.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 6
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Evidence Gathering – collecting information on relevant European sites, their conservation objectives and characteristics and other plans or projects.
HRA Task 1: Likely significant effects (‘screening’) – identifying whether a plan is ‘likely to have a significant effect’ on a European site
HRA Task 2: Ascertaining the effect on site integrity – assessing the effects of the plan on the conservation objectives of any European sites ‘screened in’ during HRA Task 1
HRA Task 3: Mitigation measures and alternative solutions – where adverse effects are identified at HRA Task 2, the plan should be altered until adverse effects are cancelled out fully
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 7
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Figure 2: Four-Stage Approach to Habitat Regulations Assessment
The four staged approach shows for simplicity a basic progression from step to step, but it is quite usual for the process to be more iterative and cyclical, with each stage being fed back to the local authority to inform further amendments to the plan which are then re-assessed for implications on European sites. The following process has been adopted for carrying out the subsequent stages of the HRA.
2.4 Task 1: Test of Likely Significant Effect (Screening)
The first stage of any Habitats Regulations Assessment is a Likely Significant Effect LSE) test - essentially a high level risk assessment to decide whether the full subsequent stage known as Appropriate Assessment is required. The essential question is:
”Is the Plan, either alone or in combination with other relevant projects and plans, likely to result in a significant effect upon European sites?”
In evaluating significance, AECOM have relied on professional judgement as well as previous stakeholder consultation carried out as part of the HRA of the Core Strategy. Further consultation will occur on this Local Plan and its HRA. The level of detail concerning developments that will be permitted under land use plans is rarely sufficient to make a detailed quantification of effects. Therefore, we have again taken a precautionary approach (in the absence of more precise data) assuming as the default position that if an adverse effect cannot be confidently ruled out, avoidance or mitigation measures must be provided. This is in line with draft CLG guidance that the level of detail of the assessment, whilst meeting the relevant requirements of the Habitats Regulations, should be ‘appropriate’ to the level of plan or project that it addresses (see Figure 2 for a summary of this ‘tiering’ of assessment).
2.5 Physical Scope of the HRA
The physical scope of the HRA is as shown in Table 1. The location of these European Sites is illustrated in Figure 3.
Table 1: Physical scope of the HRA European site Reason for inclusion
Mersey Estuary SPA Located within Merseyside and is a direct link to development in Liverpool
Mersey Estuary Ramsar site
Located within Merseyside and linked to development in Sefton Coast SAC Liverpool through recreational pressure and air quality
Ribble & Alt Estuaries Located within Merseyside and is a direct link to development in SPA Liverpool through water quality (as sewage works serving Liverpool discharge to this site), air quality from transport plans, disturbance of birds and recreational pressure
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 8
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Ribble & Alt Estuaries Ramsar site
Located immediately adjacent to Merseyside and is therefore a potential water quality pathway through sewage effluent Liverpool Bay SPA discharges, air quality from transport plans, disturbance of birds and recreational pressure
Mersey Narrows & North Located within Merseyside. There is a direct link to development Wirral Foreshore SPA in Liverpool through both water quality (as sewage works serving Liverpool discharge to this site), air quality from transport plans,
disturbance of birds and recreational pressure Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore Ramsar site
Located adjacent to the M62 which is one of the principal routes Manchester Mosses SAC into and out of Merseyside
River Dee & Bala Lake Identified as a source of potable water for Merseyside SAC
Downstream of the River Dee which is identified as a source of Dee Estuary SAC potable water for Merseyside. Development in Liverpool also Dee Estuary SPA creates potential water quality pathways (with regard to the eastern fringes of the SAC), and air quality from air transport Dee Estuary Ramsar site expansion, along with disturbance of birds
Haweswater Lake (to which the River is hydrologically connected) River Eden SAC is likely to form part of the future water supply for Merseyside.
The designation for Liverpool Bay SPA features and extent have changed. The bay stretches from Anglesey in Wales to the Lancashire coast and was classified for its non-breeding aggregations of red-throated diver Gavia stellata and common scoter Melanitta nigra. For the most part the Proposed Extension to the SPA would extend the SPA further out to sea. However, the Proposed Extension to the SPA would also bring the physical area covered by the SPA up the River Mersey to the entrance to Birkenhead Docks. The Proposed Extension would afford protection to little gull Hydrocoloeus minutus, and cover important foraging areas for little tern Sterna albifrons (colony at Gronant) and common tern Sterna hirundo (colony at Seaforth). The Proposed Extension would also add red-breasted merganser Mergus serrator and cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo as named features of the assemblage for which the SPA is designated.
The scoping process also evaluated whether pathways existed to the following European sites but it was concluded that they could be scoped out of consideration: Morecambe Bay SAC SPA & Ramsar site - While this site was initially considered at the scoping stage for completeness it is considered unlikely that Liverpool will contribute significantly to visitor pressure since other estuaries which provide a similar experience are closer to, and much easier to get to, from Liverpool;
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 9
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Martin Mere SPA & Martin Mere Ramsar site - Martin Mere is approximately 10 km inland of Liverpool. It is specifically geared towards attracting visitors and during discussion the authors understanding is that recreation was sufficiently well managed on this site that recreational pressure was not an issue. Berwyn & South Clwyd Mountains SAC – It is considered that the impact pathways of water resources and air quality are sufficiently tenuous that impacts on the site can effectively be scoped out of consideration. The River Vyrnwy (the source of Lake Vyrnwy, which supplies Merseyside with water) does have its ultimate origin in the Welsh mountains; however, its sources are many and varied and there would seem to be no mechanism for abstraction from Lake Vyrnwy to have a drawdown or water quality effect on the mountain source of the river. Diffuse air quality is by its nature an impact that cannot be attributed to individual plans or schemes. Further details regarding the interest features and vulnerabilities of the European sites included within the scope of the HRA are given below. All baseline data relating to these European Sites presented in subsequent Chapters of this Report is taken from Joint Nature Conservancy Council websites (JNCC) unless otherwise stated. A full reference list of sites used is given in Chapter 16 (References).
2.6 The ‘In Combination’ Scope
It is a requirement of the Regulations that the impacts and effects of any land use plan being assessed are not considered in isolation but in combination with other plans and projects that may also be affecting the European site(s) in question. In practice, ‘in combination assessment’ is of greatest importance when the policy would otherwise be screened out because the individual contribution is inconsequential. It is neither practical nor necessary to assess the ‘in combination’ effects of the policy within the context of all other plans and projects within the region. The principal other plans and projects that are being considered are:
Projects Burbo Bank offshore windfarm comprises 25 turbines and is situated on the Burbo Flats in Liverpool Bay at the entrance to the River Mersey, approximately 6.4km (4.0 miles) from the Sefton coastline. The proposed Burbo Bank Extension offshore wind farm development consists of an area of 40 km² 8.5 km from Crosby beach. Following HRA and AA, the Secretary of State was satisfied of no likely significant effects in combination upon internationally designated sites and the application was granted planning permission in September 2014. At the time of writing (July 2016), a Marine Planning Licence Application is currently under consideration for additional dredging around the turbine bases. It is considered unlikely that this dredging will interact in combination with the Plan, resulting in likely significant effects; Mersey Ports Masterplan (Consultation draft; June 2011), including the Port expansion into Seaforth Nature Reserve and the Seaforth River Terminal (a deepwater container port expansion in Sefton is currently under construction and due for completion imminently), new opportunities for renewable energy, development of single and multi-user port centric warehousing and of new processing facilities for imported commodities. potentially leading to the Liverpool SuperPort – An integrated port, airport, intermodal terminal, freight and commercial network based upon the Port of Liverpool, the Manchester Ship Canal, Liverpool John Lennon Airport and the Mersey Multimodal Gateway (Liverpool City Region); Peel Waters: Wirral and Liverpool Waters - This project is the development of currently run down dockland areas both on the Wirral and Liverpool side of the River Mersey. This includes the construction of houses, retail and commercial developments. The construction of these two developments could have a direct impact on the Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 10
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
SPA due to loss of habitat, barrier impacts for birds in flight and significant disturbance issues during construction; Sandon Dock Waste Water Treatment Works outfall extension - to reduce adverse effects on estuary marshes the work to extend the outfall will take place on the opposite bank to the Egremont Shore section of the Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore Ramsar and SPA site (containing Mersey Narrows SSSI) but may still have an impact on the designated features of the SPA through the construction of the extended pipe. There may be issues relating to changes in sedimentation patterns altering the position of sand banks; Power from the Mersey – project to generate renewable power from the tidal processes in the River Mersey/Mersey Estuary. This project has been indefinitely postponed; Liverpool John Lennon Airport expansion; Energy from Waste Plants at Runcorn (Halton Borough Council) and Ince Marshes (Cheshire West & Chester); Frodsham Windfarm – 20 turbines to under construction on a stretch of land between the Manchester Ship Canal and the M56 (Cheshire West & Chester); Crosby Water Centre, Seaforth Terminal and possible visitor centres at Formby/Marshside (Sefton Borough Council); Hydrodec Oil Re-Refinery, Eastham - plans to build an oil re-refinery at a new port facility in Eastham as part of a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project; and Alexandra Dock Biomass Project.
Plans Horizon Nuclear Power (proposed nuclear power site at Wylfa Newydd Project on Anglesey); The Wales Spatial Plan (updated 2008); North West England & North Wales Shoreline Management Plan 2 (SMP 22 Great Ormes Head to Scotland) (2011), incorporating: Great Ormes Head to Formby Point Shoreline Management Plan, and Formby Point to River Wyre Shoreline Management Plan; Sefton Local Plan Knowsley Local Plan Core Strategy. Adopted January 2016; Halton Local Plan Core Strategy. Adopted April 2013; Wirral Local Plan Core Strategy – emerging. A revised proposed submission draft is expected to be published for public comment in 2016; St. Helens Local Plan Core Strategy Adopted 2012; Flintshire Unitary Development Plan (adopted 2011) and Flintshire Local Development Plan (emerging); Denbighshire Local Development Plan (adopted 2013); the Emerging Wrexham Local Plan; Conway Local Development Plan 2013;
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 11
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Joint Merseyside & Halton Waste Local Plan Adopted 2013; Greater Manchester Joint Waste Plan updated 2015; West Lancashire Local Plan Adopted 2013; Emerging Cheshire West and Chester Local Plan 2014; Warrington Local Plan Core Strategy (adopted 2014); Part 1 North West River Basin District River Basin Management Plan (updated 2015); Alt / Crossens Catchment Flood Management Plan (adopted 2009); and United Utilities Water Resources Management Plan 2015. For the purposes of this assessment, we have determined that, due to the nature of the identified impacts, the key plans and projects that are likely to result in ‘in-combination’ effects with the Liverpool Local Plan relate to the additional housing and commercial/industrial allocations proposed for other Merseyside and West Lancashire authorities over the lifetime of the Local Plan (see Table 2). In addition, due to the potential scale of impact, other plans/plans relating to Port Expansion at Seaforth Nature Reserve are also considered significant.
Table 2: Housing to be delivered within other Merseyside authorities under most recent published proposals (housing numbers are subject to change) Local Authority Total housing under most recent published proposals
Knowsley 8,100 new dwellings between 2010 and 20284
Halton 9,930 between 2010 and 20285
St Helens 13,680 between 2003 and 2027 6
Wirral 12,500 between 2003 and 20277
Sefton 11,520 homes during the period of 2012-20308
With regard to the specific issue of water resources, the long distance transfer pathways that exist for the supply of water to the Merseyside area and the fact that these same pathways or water sources also supply parts of North Wales, the West Midlands, Manchester, Cumbria and Cheshire, means that development across a much broader area is required for the consideration of water resource impacts ‘in combination’, as follows: North East Wales – specific housing levels to be delivered are not mentioned in the Wales Spatial Plan or its 2008 update but a significant increase is likely; Greater Manchester area – 185,800 homes to be delivered across Manchester, Salford, Oldham, Rochdale, Tameside, Stockport, Trafford, Congleton, Macclesfield (both now in Cheshire East), Bolton, Bury and Wigan between 2003 and 2021
4Knowsley Local Plan Core Strategy Adopted January 2016 5 Halton Core Strategy Local Plan Adopted April 2013 6St Helens Local Plan Core Strategy Adopted October 2012 7Proposed Submission Draft Core Strategy for Wirral (December 2012). A revised proposed submission draft is expected to be published for public comment in 2016 8Sefton Local Plan
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 12
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
West Midlands – potentially up to 445,600 additional homes across the region until 2026 West Cumbria – 11,640 homes to be delivered across Allderdale, Barrow-in-Furness and Copeland between 2003 and 2021; and Rest of Cheshire – approximately 12,000 homes to be delivered across Crewe & Nantwich (now in Cheshire East) and Vale Royal (now part of Cheshire West & Chester) between 2003 and 2021; a further 20,700 to be delivered elsewhere in Cheshire East.
It should be noted that, while the broad potential impacts of these other projects and plans will be considered, we do not propose carrying out full HRA on each of these plans – we will however draw upon existing HRA that have been carried out for surrounding regions and plans.
2.7 John Lennon Liverpool Airport Expansion
The expansion of the John Lennon Liverpool Airport is (currently) an explicit element of national government policy as set out in the White Paper 'The Future of Air Transport' (2003). However, Liverpool does have a Local Plan policy relating to the expansion of the Airport. Due to the location of the airport expansion immediately adjacent to the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site and the potential for effects on the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar Site, this project is described below. There is also potential for effects on other European sites such as Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar site, Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA and Ramsar site and Dee Estuary SAC, Dee Estuary SPA and Dee Estuary Ramsar site.
The ‘Draft Liverpool John Lennon Airport (JLA) Masterplan’ (November 2007) shows how the Airport intends to respond to the White Paper’s ‘The Future of Air Transport’ objectives.
The proposals involve the construction of new terminal facilities, with additional car-parking, as well as new cargo handling and aircraft maintenance facilities, a mixed-use development and hotel. There would also be an extension to the runway, extension of the northern parallel taxiway and additional apron areas and the European Air Transportation Command EATC. The proposals for 2030 incorporate cargo development and a new parallel taxiway, and further additional apron, terminal and car park areas. There would also be a requirement for an expanded fuel farm facility and a waste water treatment plant to serve the new cargo facilities. Not all the expansion proposals fall within the boundary of Liverpool.
LJLA lies immediately adjacent to the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site. The development of the Masterplan highlighted several potential likely significant effects on nature conservation and biodiversity which could directly or indirectly affect the favourable status of Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar. These potential effects would include: severance of habitats; bird and animal road deaths; pollution to adjacent habitats by road run-off; disturbance to feeding, roosting and breeding birds and bats due to increased lighting; and changes to the hydrology of the area. Potential indirect effects could include: sourcing and transport of construction materials and possibly disturbance to feeding waterfowl during construction, depending on its timing. The Masterplan also identifies that in the opinion of LJLA all issues should be resolvable such that no likely significant effects will result. However, since planning permissions have not yet been granted we have taken a precautionary view in this HRA.
Aircraft currently take off or land over the adjacent mudflats. Since these flats are used by a proportion of the passage and wintering waterfowl for which the Estuary is of international importance, there is a potential for an increase in such traffic to result in likely significant effects on the Mersey Estuary SPA and the Ramsar site in particular.
2.8 Mersey Ports Masterplan and Port Expansion at Seaforth The Port of Liverpool and The Manchester Ship Canal, known collectively as Mersey Ports, form an international gateway recognised by the Government as a key component of UK global trading links. This Mersey Ports Master Plan provides a framework for setting out the ports’ aspirations, including for the medium
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 13
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
and long term, assisting in the consideration of related projects and planning applications. The 44 miles of the combined Port of Liverpool and The Manchester Ship Canal will incorporate over 10 rail-linked terminals and with 10 motorways within 10 miles of operational port assets9. In addition developing greater warehousing, processing and operating facilities, there are a number of key strategic business drivers within the period of the Mersey Port Master Plan, including:
The planned Seaforth River Terminal (Liverpool2) a deep-water container port expansion, which is under construction; The development of a number of multi-modal inland ports upon The Manchester Ship Canal – Port Wirral, Port Bridgewater, Port Ince, Port Warrington and Port Salford; The wide diversity of Port operations both now and into the future; and Entry into new sectors – including biomass energy, offshore wind, waste to energy and recycling. The ‘Royal Seaforth’ area within the Master Plan comprises the deep water of active Royal Seaforth Dock. An adjoining site (now known as Liverpool2) comprises the only part of the Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar Site in Sefton. This area was originally reclaimed from the River Mersey for future port expansion as part of the construction of Royal Seaforth Dock in the late 1960s, but developed into the internationally designated site over the past 50 years or so.
There are two distinctive but closely related initiatives within Royal Seaforth: Firstly, the development of an in- river container terminal able to accommodate the increasing-sized container vessels; Secondly, the consideration as to the future use of the land forming Seaforth Nature Reserve for Port-related purposes.
The in-river terminal was consented under a Harbour Revision Order in May 2007, and is under construction. The approval was subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and HRA and there are a number of legal agreements in place relating to the mitigation of impacts arising from the development.
To allow for the Port of Liverpool’s future commercial growth, the whole of the Liverpool2 area is being promoted for development for port related use within the Mersey Ports Master Plan. The development to support the anticipated growth leads to the loss of habitats and features of interest to nature conservation and would result in an adverse effect on integrity of the Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore Ramsar site and adjacent sites. Consequently, in order to develop Liverpool2, the Port needed to satisfy a number of tests of the Habitats Regulations, namely that there are no alternative solutions, that the development is needed for imperative reasons of overriding public interest (IROPI) and that appropriate compensatory habitats could be provided.
2.9 Consultation
Natural England and Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) were both consulted on several iterations of the Liverpool Core Strategy HRA work. It is considered that their responses are also applicable to the Local Plan. Both Natural England and Natural Resources Wales (successor to CCW) will be consulted on this Local Plan and its HRA.
9 Peel Ports (2011) Mersey Ports Master plan Consultation Draft (July 2011) available from http://www.merseydocks.co.uk/masterplan/documents.htm [Accessed March 2016]. No updated document appears to be available.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 14
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
3 pathways of impact
3.1 Introduction
In carrying out an HRA it is important to avoid confining oneself to effectively arbitrary boundaries (such as Local Authority boundaries) but to use an understanding of the various ways in which land use plans can impact on European sites to follow the pathways along which development can be connected with European sites, in some cases many kilometres distant. Briefly defined, pathways are routes by which a change in activity associated with a development can lead to an effect upon a European site. It is also important to bear in mind CLG guidance which states that the AA should be ‘proportionate to the geographical scope of the [plan policy]’ and that ‘an AA need not be done in any more detail, or using more resources, than is useful for its purpose’ (CLG, 2006, p.6).
The following indirect pathways of impact were considered relevant to the Habitat Regulations Assessment of the Local Plan.
3.2 Disturbance
Habitat Regulation Assessments of Local Plans tend to focus on recreational sources of disturbance as a result of new residents or an increasingly aging population with more leisure time available. While this is a key factor, other sources of disturbance associated with an increase in commercial development, road transport adjacent to sensitive sites or increases in shipping and aircraft movement may also result.
3.2.1 Breeding birds (March to August)
Concern regarding the effects of disturbance on birds stems from the fact that they are expending energy unnecessarily and the time they spend responding to disturbance is time that is not spent feeding10. Disturbance therefore risks increasing energetic output while reducing energetic input, which can adversely affect the ‘condition’ and ultimately survival of the birds. In addition, displacement of birds from one feeding site to others can increase the pressure on the resources available within the remaining sites, as they have to sustain a greater number of birds11. Moreover, the more time a breeding bird spends disturbed from its nest, the more its eggs are likely to cool and the more vulnerable they, or any nestlings, are to predators.
3.2.2 Wintering and passage birds (August – May)
The potential for disturbance may be less in winter than in summer, in that there are often a smaller number of recreational users. In addition, the consequences of disturbance at a population level may be reduced because birds are not breeding. However, winter activity can still cause important disturbance, especially as birds are particularly vulnerable at this time of year due to food shortages, such that disturbance which results in abandonment of suitable feeding areas through disturbance can have severe consequences. Several empirical studies have, through correlative analysis, demonstrated that out-of-season (October-March) recreational activity can result in quantifiable disturbance: Tuite et al12 found that during periods of high recreational activity, bird numbers at Llangorse Lake decreased by 30% as the morning progressed, matching the increase in recreational activity towards midday. During periods of low recreational activity, however, no change in numbers was observed as the morning progressed. In addition, all species were found to spend less time in
10 Riddington, R. et al. 1996. The impact of disturbance on the behaviour and energy budgets of Brent geese. Bird Study 43:269-279 11 Gill, J.A., Sutherland, W.J. & Norris, K. 1998. The consequences of human disturbance for estuarine birds. RSPB Conservation Review 12: 67-72 12 Tuite, C. H., Owen, M. & Paynter, D. 1983. Interaction between wildfowl and recreation at Llangorse Lake and Talybont Reservoir, South Wales. Wildfowl 34: 48-63
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 15
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
their ‘preferred zones’ (the areas of the lake used most in the absence of recreational activity) as recreational intensity increased. Underhill et al13 counted waterfowl and all disturbance events on 54 water bodies within the South West London Water Bodies Special Protection Area and clearly correlated disturbance with a decrease in bird numbers at weekends in smaller sites and with the movement of birds within larger sites from disturbed to less disturbed areas. Evans & Warrington14 found that on Sundays total water bird numbers (including shoveler and gadwall) were 19% higher on Stocker’s Lake LNR in Hertfordshire, and attributed this to observed greater recreational activity on surrounding water bodies at weekends relative to week days. However, in this study, recreational activity was not quantified in detail, nor were individual recreational activities evaluated separately. Tuite et al15 used a large (379 site), long-term (10-year) dataset (September – March species counts) to correlate seasonal changes in wildfowl abundance with the presence of various recreational activities. They found that shoveler was one of the most sensitive species to disturbance. The greatest impact on winter wildfowl numbers was associated with sailing/windsurfing and rowing.
More recent research has established that human activity including recreational activity can be linked to disturbance of wintering waterfowl populations16 17.
3.2.3 Other activities causing disturbance
Human activity can affect birds either directly (e.g. through causing them to flee) or indirectly (e.g. through damaging their habitat). The most obvious direct effect is that of immediate mortality such as death by shooting, but human activity can also lead to behavioural changes (e.g. alterations in feeding behaviour, avoidance of certain areas etc.) and physiological changes (e.g. an increase in heart rate) that, although less noticeable, may ultimately result in major population-level effects by altering the balance between immigration/birth and emigration/death18.
The degree of impact that varying levels of noise will have on different species of bird is poorly understood except that a number of studies have found that an increase in traffic levels on roads does lead to a reduction in the bird abundance within adjacent hedgerows - Reijnen et al (1995) examined the distribution of 43 passerine species (i.e. ‘songbirds’), of which 60% had a lower density closer to the roadside than further away. By controlling vehicle usage they also found that the density generally was lower along busier roads than quieter roads19.
13 Underhill, M.C. et al. 1993. Use of Waterbodies in South West London by Waterfowl. An Investigation of the Factors Affecting Distribution, Abundance and Community Structure. Report to Thames Water Utilities Ltd. and English Nature. Wetlands Advisory Service, Slimbridge 14 Evans, D.M. & Warrington, S. 1997. The effects of recreational disturbance on wintering waterbirds on a mature gravel pitlake near London. International Journal of Environmental Studies 53: 167-182 15 Tuite, C.H., Hanson, P.R. & Owen, M. 1984. Some ecological factors affecting winter wildfowl distribution on inland waters in England and Wales and the influence of water-based recreation. Journal of Applied Ecology 21: 41-62 16 Footprint Ecology. 2010. Recreational Disturbance to Birds on the Humber Estuary 17 Footprint Ecology, Jonathan Cox Associates & Bournemouth University. 2010. Solent disturbance and mitigation project – various reports. 18 Riley, J. 2003. Review of Recreational Disturbance Research on Selected Wildlife in Scotland. Scottish Natural Heritage. 19 Reijnen, R. et al. 1995. The effects of car traffic on breeding bird populations in woodland. III. Reduction of density in relation to the proximity of main roads. Journal of Applied Ecology 32: 187-202
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 16
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Activities other than recreation may also lead to disturbance of wildlife. Of relevance to the Liverpool Local Plan for example would be noise, vibration and visual disturbance from ports and airports, and potentially disturbance from wind farms. Disturbance and displacement from feeding and areas has been demonstrated with regard to wintering geese20, curlew and hen harriers21. Light pollution can also be an issue.
The sensitivity of wildlife to the noise and vibration of roads and aircraft varies greatly from species to species. However road and airport/aircraft noise can cause some wildlife – notably a range of grassland and woodland birds - to avoid areas near them, reducing the density of those animal populations22. Elsewhere, reduced breeding success has been recorded.
Large structures (e.g. offshore and onshore wind turbines), have the potential to alter bird flight paths (e.g. hunting flight paths for raptors, bird migratory paths, regular flight paths between roosting and feeding sites, and foraging routes for bats etc. This may result in a collision risk barrier effect or displacement which could make birds either vulnerable to predation or loss of vital energy stores.
Animals can also be disturbed by the movement of ships. For instance, a DTI study of birds of the North West coast noted that: “Divers and scoters were absent from the mouths of some busier estuaries, notably the Mersey... Both species are known to be susceptible to disturbance from boats, and their relative scarcity in these areas... may in part reflect the volume of boat traffic in these areas”23.
Disturbing activities are on a continuum. The most disturbing activities are likely to be those that involve irregular, infrequent, unpredictable loud noise events, movement or vibration of long duration. Birds are least likely to be disturbed by activities that involve regular, frequent, predictable, quiet patterns of sound or movement or minimal vibration. The further any activity is from the birds, the less likely it is to result in disturbance.
The factors that influence a species response to a disturbance are numerous, but the three key factors are species sensitivity, proximity of disturbance sources and timing/duration of the potentially disturbing activity.
The distance at which a species takes flight when approached by a disturbing stimulus is known as the ‘tolerance distance’ (also called the ‘escape flight distance’) and differs between species to the same stimulus and within a species to different stimuli. These are given in Table 3, which compiles ‘tolerance distances’ from across the literature. It is reasonable to assume from this that disturbance is unlikely to be experienced more than a few hundred metres from the birds in question. Tolerance distances are unknown for many birds and simple extrapolation to other species is not advised.
Table 3 - Tolerance distances of 21 water bird species to various forms of recreational disturbance, as described in the literature. All distances are in metres. Single figures are mean distances; when means are not published, ranges are given. 1 Tydeman (1978), 2 Keller (1989), 3 Van der Meer (1985), 4 Wolff et al (1982), 5 Blankestijn et al (1986).24
20 Langston, R.H.W & Pullan, J.D. (2003). Effects of Wind Farms on Birds: Nature and Environment No. 139. Council of Europe. 21 Madders, M. & Whitfield, D.P. 2006. Upland raptors and the assessment of wind farm impacts. Ibis 148 (Suppl. 1), 43-56. 22 Kaseloo, P. A. and K. O. Tyson. 2004. Synthesis of Noise Effects on Wildlife Populations. FHWA Report. 23 DTI (2006). Aerial Surveys of Waterbirds in Strategic Wind Farm Areas: 2004/05 Final Report 24 Tydeman, C.F. 1978. Gravel Pits as conservation areas for breeding bird communities. PhD thesis. Bedford College Keller, V. 1989. Variations in the response of Great Crested Grebes Podiceps cristatus to human disturbance - a sign of adaptation? Biological Conservation 49:31-45
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 17
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Type of disturbance
Species Rowing boats/kayak Sailing boats Walking
Little grebe 60 – 100 1
Great crested 50 – 100 2 20 – 400 1 grebe
Mute swan 3 – 30 1
Teal 0 – 400 1
Mallard 10 – 100 1
Shoveler 200 – 400 1
Pochard 60 – 400 1
Tufted duck 60 – 400 1
Goldeneye 100 – 400 1
Smew 0 – 400 1
Moorhen 100 – 400 1
Coot 5 – 50 1
Curlew 211 3; 339 4; 213 5
Shelduck 148 3; 250 4
Grey plover 124 3
Ringed plover 121 3
Bar-tailed 107 3; 219 4 godwit
Van der Meer, J. 1985. De verstoring van vogels op de slikken van de Oosterschelde. Report 85.09 Deltadienst Milieu en Inrichting, Middelburg. 37 pp. Wolf, W.J., Reijenders, P.J.H. & Smit, C.J. 1982. The effects of recreation on the Wadden Sea ecosystem: many questions but few answers. In: G. Luck & H. Michaelis (Eds.), Schriftenreihe M.E.L.F., Reihe A: Agnew. Wissensch 275: 85-107 Blankestijn, S. et al. 1986. Seizoensverbreding in de recreatie en verstoring van Wulp en Scholkester op hoogwatervluchplaatsen op Terschelling. Report Projectgroep Wadden, L.H. Wageningen. 261pp.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 18
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Type of disturbance
Species Rowing boats/kayak Sailing boats Walking
Brent goose 105 3
Oystercatcher 85 3; 136 4; 82 5
Dunlin 71 3; 163 2
3.3 Mechanical/abrasive damage and nutrient enrichment
Most types of aquatic or terrestrial European site can be affected by trampling, which in turn causes soil compaction and erosion: Wilson & Seney (1994)25 examined the degree of track erosion caused by hikers, motorcycles, horses and cyclists from 108 plots along tracks in the Gallatin National Forest, Montana. Although the results proved difficult to interpret, it was concluded that horses and hikers disturbed more sediment on wet tracks, and therefore caused more erosion, than motorcycles and bicycles. Cole et al (1995a, b)26 conducted experimental off-track trampling in 18 closed forest, dwarf scrub and meadow & grassland communities (each tramped between 0 – 500 times) over five mountain regions in the US. Vegetation cover was assessed two weeks and one year after trampling, and an inverse relationship with trampling intensity was discovered, although this relationship was weaker after one year than two weeks indicating some recovery of the vegetation. Differences in plant morphological characteristics were found to explain more variation in response between different vegetation types than soil and topographic factors. Low-growing, mat-forming grasses regained their cover best after two weeks and were considered most resistant to trampling, while tall forbs (non-woody vascular plants other than grasses, sedges, rushes and ferns) were considered least resistant. Cover of hemicryptophytes and geophytes (plants with buds below the soil surface) was heavily reduced after two weeks, but had recovered well after one year and as such these were considered most resilient to trampling. Chamaephytes (plants with buds above the soil surface) were least resilient to trampling. It was concluded that these would be the least tolerant of a regular cycle of disturbance. Cole (1995c)27 conducted a follow-up study (in 4 vegetation types) in which shoe type (trainers or walking boots) and trampler weight were varied. Although immediate damage was greater with walking boots, there was no significant difference after one year. Heavier tramplers caused a
25 Wilson, J.P. & J.P. Seney. 1994. Erosional impact of hikers, horses, motorcycles and off road bicycles on mountain trails in Montana. Mountain Research and Development 14:77-88 26 Cole, D.N. 1995a. Experimental trampling of vegetation. I. Relationship between trampling intensity and vegetation response. Journal of Applied Ecology 32: 203-214 Cole, D.N. 1995b. Experimental trampling of vegetation. II. Predictors of resistance and resilience. Journal of Applied Ecology 32: 215- 224 27 Cole, D.N. 1995c. Recreational trampling experiments: effects of trampler weight and shoe type. Research Note INT-RN-425. U.S. Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Utah.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 19
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
greater reduction in vegetation height than lighter tramplers, but there was no difference in effect on cover. Cole & Spildie (1998)28 experimentally compared the effects of off-track trampling by hiker and horse (at two intensities – 25 and 150 passes) in two woodland vegetation types (one with an erect forb understorey and one with a low shrub understorey). Horse traffic was found to cause the largest reduction in vegetation cover. The forb-dominated vegetation suffered greatest disturbance, but recovered rapidly. Higher trampling intensities caused more disturbance. Walkers with dogs contribute to pressure on sites through nutrient enrichment via dog fouling and also have potential to cause greater disturbance to fauna as dogs are less likely to keep to marked footpaths and also tend to move in a more erratic manner. Motorcycle scrambling and off-road vehicle use can cause more serious erosion, as well as disturbance to sensitive species. Boats can also cause some mechanical damage to intertidal habitats through grounding.
3.4 Atmospheric pollution
The main pollutants of concern for European sites are oxides of nitrogen (NOx), ammonia (NH3) and sulphur dioxide (SO2). NOx can have a directly toxic effect upon vegetation. In addition, greater NOx or ammonia concentrations within the atmosphere will lead to greater rates of nitrogen deposition to soils. An increase in the deposition of nitrogen from the atmosphere to soils is generally regarded to lead to an increase in soil fertility, which can have a serious deleterious effect on the quality of semi-natural, nitrogen-limited terrestrial habitats.
Table 4. Main sources and effects of air pollutants on habitats and species Pollutant Source Effects on habitats and species
Acid deposition SO2, NOx and ammonia all contribute to acid Can affect habitats and species through both deposition. Although future trends in S wet (acid rain) and dry deposition. Some emissions and subsequent deposition to sites will be more at risk than others terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems will depending on soil type, bed rock geology, continue to decline, it is likely that increased weathering rate and buffering capacity. N emissions may cancel out any gains produced by reduced S levels.
Ammonia (NH3) Ammonia is released following Adverse effects are as a result of nitrogen decomposition and volatilisation of animal deposition leading to eutrophication. As wastes. It is a naturally occurring trace gas, emissions mostly occur at ground level in
but levels have increased considerably with the rural environment and NH3 is rapidly expansion in numbers of agricultural deposited, some of the most acute problems
livestock. Ammonia reacts with acid of NH3 deposition are for small relict nature pollutants such as the products of SO2 and reserves located in intensive agricultural NOX emissions to produce fine ammonium landscapes. (NH4+)- containing aerosol which may be transferred much longer distances (can therefore be a significant trans-boundary issue.)
28 Cole, D.N., Spildie, D.R. 1998. Hiker, horse and llama trampling effects on native vegetation in Montana, USA. Journal of Environmental Management 53: 61-71
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 20
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Pollutant Source Effects on habitats and species
Nitrogen oxides Nitrogen oxides are mostly produced in Deposition of nitrogen compounds (nitrates
combustion processes. About one quarter of (NO3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and nitric acid NOx the UK’s emissions are from power stations, (HNO3)) can lead to both soil and freshwater one-half from motor vehicles, and the rest acidification. In addition, NOx can cause from other industrial and domestic eutrophication of soils and water. This alters combustion processes. the species composition of plant communities and can eliminate sensitive species.
Nitrogen (N) The pollutants that contribute to nitrogen Species-rich plant communities with deposition deposition derive mainly from NOX and NH3 relatively high proportions of slow-growing emissions. These pollutants cause perennial species and bryophytes are most acidification (see also acid deposition) as at risk from N eutrophication, due to its well as eutrophication. promotion of competitive and invasive species which can respond readily to elevated levels of N. N deposition can also increase the risk of damage from abiotic factors, e.g. drought and frost.
Ozone (O3) A secondary pollutant generated by Concentrations of O3 above 40 ppb can be photochemical reactions from NOx and toxic to humans and wildlife, and can affect volatile organic compounds (VOCs). These buildings. Increased ozone concentrations are mainly released by the combustion of may lead to a reduction in growth of fossil fuels. The increase in combustion of agricultural crops, decreased forest fossil fuels in the UK has led to a large production and altered species composition increase in background ozone concentration, in semi-natural plant communities. leading to an increased number of days when levels across the region are above 40ppb. Reducing ozone pollution is believed to require action at international level to reduce levels of the precursors that form ozone.
Sulphur Dioxide Main sources of SO2 emissions are electricity Wet and dry deposition of SO2 acidifies soils generation, industry and domestic fuel and freshwater, and alters the species SO2 combustion. May also arise from shipping composition of plant and associated animal and increased atmospheric concentrations in communities. The significance of impacts
busy ports. Total SO2 emissions have depends on levels of deposition and the decreased substantially in the UK since the buffering capacity of soils. 1980s.
Sulphur dioxide emissions are overwhelmingly influenced by the output of power stations and industrial processes that require the combustion of coal and oil as well (particularly on a local scale) shipping.
Sulphur deposition is known to be a problem for the Sefton coast, originating from shipping exhaust emissions related to the Port of Liverpool. According to the UK Air Pollution Information System (www.apis.ac.uk) this is mainly with regard to the dune grassland interest feature. APIS (accessed 08/07/16) indicates that 53% of sulphur deposition within the SAC is due to shipping and ‘other transport’ (the latter category excludes road transport but does include air travel). The most recent National Vegetation Classification (NVC) assessment
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 21
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
of the Sefton coast (Sefton Coast Partnership, 2003-04) has also found that vegetation communities are becoming more eutrophic across the SAC as a result of nitrogen deposition, with shipping activities considered to be contributing to levels of deposition. The potential for effects from the port expansion project will therefore require consideration as it will bring shipping up to the boundary of the SAC as a result of the development of Seaforth Nature Reserve.
Ammonia emissions are dominated by agriculture, with some chemical processes also making notable contributions. As such, it is unlikely that material increases in SO2 or NH3 emissions will be associated with Local Plans. NOx emissions, however, are dominated by the output of vehicle exhausts (more than half of all emissions). Within a ‘typical’ housing development, by far the largest contribution to NOx (92%) will be made by the associated road traffic. Other sources, although relevant, are of minor importance (8%) in comparison29. Emissions of NOx could therefore be reasonably expected to increase as a result of greater vehicle use as an indirect effect of the Local Plan. According to the World Health Organisation, the critical NOx concentration (critical threshold) for the protection of vegetation is 30 µgm-3; the threshold for sulphur dioxide is 20 µgm-3. In addition, ecological studies have 30 determined ‘critical loads’ of atmospheric nitrogen deposition (that is, NOx combined with ammonia NH3).
3.4.1 Local air pollution According to the Department of Transport’s Transport Analysis Guidance, “Beyond 200m, the contribution of vehicle emissions from the roadside to local pollution levels is not significant”31. Figure 4. Traffic contribution to concentrations of pollutants at different distances from a road (Source: DfT)
This is therefore the distance that has been used throughout this HRA in order to determine whether European sites are likely to be significantly affected by traffic generated by development under the Local Plan. Such a distance threshold cannot be applied to shipping emissions and we must therefore restrict ourselves to assuming that the presence of a pathway indicates a possible issue.
3.4.2 Diffuse air pollution In addition to the contribution to local air quality issues, development can also contribute cumulatively to an overall change in background air quality across an entire region (although individual developments and plans
29 Proportions calculated based upon data presented in Dore CJ et al. 2005. UK Emissions of Air Pollutants 1970 – 2003. UK National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory. http://www.airquality.co.uk/archive/index.php 30 The critical load is the rate of deposition beyond which research indicates that adverse effects can reasonably be expected to occur 31 www.webtag.org.uk/archive/feb04/pdf/feb04-333.pdf
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 22
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
are – with the exception of large point sources such as power stations – likely to make very small individual contributions). During consultation on the HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects report produced to accompany the preferred options Core Strategy for Liverpool City in 2012 (URS, 2012), the Countryside Council for Wales (now Natural Resources Wales) queried whether diffuse air pollution impacts on the Dee Estuary and Berwyn & Clwyd Mountains should be included in the remit of HRA. In July 2006, when this issue was raised by Runnymede District Council in the South East, Natural England advised that their Local Plan ‘can only be concerned with locally emitted and short range locally acting pollutants’ 32 as this is the only scale which falls within a local authority remit. This guidance inevitably sets a precedent since (as far as we are aware) it is the only formal guidance that has been issued to a Local Authority from any Natural England office on this issue.
In the light of this and our own knowledge and experience, it is considered reasonable to conclude that it must be the responsibility of higher-tier plans to set a policy framework for addressing the cumulative diffuse pan- authority air quality impacts, partly because such impacts stem from the overall quantum of development within a region (over which individual districts have little control), and since this issue can only practically be addressed at the highest pan-authority level. Diffuse air quality issues will not therefore be considered further within this HRA except to identify where the Local Plan incorporates a suite of measures that will lead to an improvement in overall background air quality (or at least ensure that Liverpool’s contribution to future negative trends in diffuse air quality is minimal). In this case there are several measures listed in Improving Accessibility and Managing Demand for Travel (policy TP1) which would serve to protect European sites either directly or through promoting and delivering more sustainable travel: Improving access to Liverpool John Lennon Airport, including support for measures to maintain and increase the proportion of passengers arriving and departing the airport by public transport; Improving access to the Ports of Liverpool and Garston, including rail freight access and encouraging the retention and/or expansion of rail freight from the Port of Garston/Freightliner location Increasing the network of cycling and walking routes, based on programmes in the LTP's Active Travel Strategy and the longer term plan to complete the comprehensive Merseyside Cycle Network Improvements in the City Centre (e.g. rail capacity improvements) Strategic road schemes identified in statutory transport policy documents; and Facilities for park and ride. Policy TP9 (Public Transport) also seeks to promote the use of public transport which could subsequently result in a positive air quality impact.
3.5 Water resources
The North West is generally an area of low water stress, as is North Wales, which is a major source of potable water for north-west England.
Liverpool lies within United Utilities’ Integrated Resource Zone which serves 6.5 million people in south Cumbria, Lancashire, Greater Manchester, Merseyside and most of Cheshire. The Integrated Zone combines
32 English Nature (16 May 2006) letter to Runnymede Borough Council, ‘Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994, Runnymede Borough Council Local Plan’.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 23
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
sources in Wales, with sources in Cumbria, and other parts of North West England. It constitutes a large integrated supply network that enables substantial flexibility in distributing supplies within the zone. The construction of the ‘west to east link’ further aids this flexibility and thus breaks the traditional division in which Greater Manchester received water from Cumbria and Merseyside received water from the River Dee (which lies partly in England and partly in Wales) and from purely Welsh sources (e.g. Lake Vyrnwy).
The River Dee is a Special Area of Conservation and flows into the Dee Estuary which is also designated as an SAC as well as an SPA and Ramsar site. Four water companies abstract from sources that affect the River Dee including United Utilities (UU), Dee Valley Water, Welsh Water and Severn Trent Water. Excessive abstraction from the Dee could therefore result in sufficient drawdown of water to damage the interest features of the River Dee and Bala Lake SAC (through desiccation, fish entrainment or a deterioration in water quality due to the lower proportion of freshwater to sediment) and in turn reduce freshwater flows into the Dee Estuary to such a degree as to damage the interest features of that site through an increase in salinity. These risks are identified in the Environment Agency’s Review of Consents process for these sites.
As a result of the west-east link Merseyside (including Liverpool) now obtains a much greater proportion of its water supply from Lake District sources. This involves Haweswater as a principal reservoir. Haweswater is within the catchment of the River Eden SAC and thus we have included consideration of drawdown and reduced flow impacts on this designated site in this report.
3.6 Water quality
The Sewage Treatment Works (STWs) that serve Liverpool are principally Fazakerley and Sandon Dock/Wellington Dock. Fazakerley STW discharges treated effluent to the River Alt (or tributaries of that river), which drains to the Sefton Coast SAC, Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA and Ribble & Alt Estuaries Ramsar site. Sandon Dock STW discharges into the Mersey immediately upstream of Liverpool Bay SPA and within close proximity to the Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar site. As the boundary of Liverpool Bay SPA is being brought further up the River Mersey Sandon Dock STW will discharge directly into the SPA.
Increased amounts of housing or business development can lead to reduced water quality of rivers and estuarine environments. Sewage and industrial effluent discharges can contribute to increased nutrients on European sites leading to unfavourable conditions.
The quality of the water that feeds European sites is an important determinant of the nature of their habitats and the species they support. Poor water quality can have a range of environmental impacts: At high levels, toxic chemicals and metals can result in immediate death of aquatic life, and can have detrimental effects even at lower levels, including increased vulnerability to disease and changes in wildlife behaviour. Eutrophication, the enrichment of plant nutrients in water, increases plant growth and consequently results in oxygen depletion. Algal blooms, which commonly result from eutrophication, increase turbidity and decrease light penetration. The decomposition of organic wastes that often accompanies eutrophication deoxygenates water further, augmenting the oxygen depleting effects of eutrophication. In the marine environment, nitrogen is the limiting plant nutrient and so eutrophication is associated with discharges containing available nitrogen. Some pesticides, industrial chemicals, and components of sewage effluent are suspected to interfere with the functioning of the endocrine system, possibly having negative effects on the reproduction and development of aquatic life. Increased discharge of treated sewage effluent can result both in greater scour (as a result of greater flow volumes) and in high levels of macroalgal growth, which can smother the mudflats of value to SPA birds.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 24
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
For sewage treatment works close to capacity, further development may increase the risk of effluent escape into aquatic environments. In many urban areas, sewage treatment and surface water drainage systems are combined, and therefore a predicted increase in flood and storm events could increase pollution risk.
However, it is also important to note that the situation is not always simple – for sites designated for waterfowl a STW discharge can actually be a useful source of food and birds will often congregate around the outfall. In addition, while nutrient enrichment does cause considerable problems on the south coast (particularly in the Solent) due to the abundance of smothering macroalgae that is produced, it is not necessarily a problem in other areas where the macroalgae are broken up by tidal wave action and where colder and more turbid water limit the build-up in the first place. Nonetheless, at this screening stage water quality impacts are considered to be an issue that requires investigation.
3.1 Port Development, Shipping and Dredging
The construction and maintenance of ports and inland shipping channels poses a number of environmental risks33. Of particular importance is the dredging necessary to permit large vessels to enter ports, or to maintain inland channels. In natural estuaries and harbours, there is a balance between sediment transported out to sea and that which flows in with rivers and runoff, which tends to maintain an equilibrium depth. Often this is not deep enough to allow vessels safe passage, so navigational channels and harbours are dredged to deepen them. Because natural forces will tend to build up sediment until the channels and port return to their equilibrium, dredging to maintain safe depth is an ongoing maintenance activity. The need for such dredging is likely to increase in the future as ships become larger and require deeper ports or as inland water transport grows in importance.
Dredging poses direct threats to the areas in which it occurs. It introduces sediment into the adjacent water column, which is then redeposited on the bottom. This has a variety of usually short-term effects on pelagic fish and the benthic community. The suspended sediment increases turbidity, decreasing light penetration and photosynthetic activity. Dredging can also have longer term effects on water circulation patterns, particularly in estuarine areas where water circulation determines the distribution of fresh and salt water, patterns of dissolved oxygen, and other water quality parameters. Changes in salinity can affect the viability of freshwater wetlands and tidal marshes, with consequent impacts on the distribution of marine life. Changes in water circulation patterns can also alter sediment accumulation, thus affecting all ecosystems in the immediate area34
The development of the Ports of Liverpool and Garston (Policy EC7) has the potential to result in disturbance of sediment releasing legacy heavy metal pollution (mercury, lead, cadmium and other poisons) that is bound into the sediment, or other introduction of these metals. Policies that encourage more freight by shipping also have the potential to result in pollution through fuel emissions, and accidental spillages. As a precaution these pathways have been considered in this report.
3.2 Coastal squeeze Rising sea levels can be expected to cause intertidal habitats (principally saltmarsh, sand dunes and intertidal mudflats) to migrate landwards. However, in built-up areas such as Liverpool, such landward retreat is often rendered impossible due to the presence of the sea wall and other flood defences. In addition, development frequently takes place immediately behind the sea wall, so that the flood defences cannot be moved landwards to accommodate managed retreat of threatened habitats. The net result is that the quantity of saltmarsh, sand dunes and mudflat adjacent to built-up areas will progressively decrease as sea levels rise. This process is
33 OECD (ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT (1997) The Environmental Effects of Freight available from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/14/3/2386636.pdf (Accessed June 2010 )(p17)
34 Marine Board, Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems, National Research Council (1985), Dredging Coastal Ports: An Assessment of the Issues. (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press) (pp124-128)
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 25
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
known as ‘coastal squeeze’. In areas where sediment availability is reduced, the 'squeeze' also includes an increasingly steep beach profile and foreshortening of the seaward zones. Intertidal habitat loss is mainly occurring in the south and east of the country, particularly between the Humber and Severn. Northwest England, south Wales, the Solent in Hampshire, the southeast around the Thames estuary and large parts of East Anglia are also affected but to a lesser degree. The Shoreline Management Plan process for North West England will be the main process whereby the losses due to flood defences and coastal squeeze and the gains due to managed retreat along the frontage will be identified at a strategic level. However, local authorities can also contribute to minimising squeeze by appropriately situating new development in line with Shoreline Management Plan policy. Defra's current national assessment is that the creation of an annual average of at least 100 ha of intertidal habitat associated with European sites in England that are subject to coastal squeeze, together with any more specifically identified measures to replace losses of terrestrial and supra-tidal habitats, is likely to be required to protect the overall coherence of the Natura 2000 network. This assessment takes account of intertidal habitat loss from European sites in England that is caused by a combination of all flood risk management structures and sea level rise. The assessment will be kept under review taking account of the certainty of any adverse effects and monitoring of the actual impacts of plans and projects.16 Coastal squeeze cannot be assessed in detail until actual site allocations exist, but it can be at least broadly considered in the HRA of the Local Plan however given the built-up nature of Liverpool City, it is not considered to be a significant pathway.
3.3 Loss of functionally-linked land outside of the European site boundary While most European sites have been geographically defined in order to encompass the key features that are necessary for coherence of their structure and function, this is not the case for all such sites. Due to the highly mobile nature of waterfowl it is inevitable that areas of habitat of crucial importance to the maintenance of their populations are outside the physical limits of the European site for which they are an interest feature. However, this area will still be essential for maintenance of the structure and function of the interest feature for which the site was designated and land use plans that may affect this land should still therefore be subject to HRA.
This topic has been subject to ongoing work by Merseyside Environmental Advisory Service which is seeking to identify sensitive areas for Bewick’s swan, whooper swan and pink-footed goose in relation to agricultural land in Merseyside and West Lancashire (these being the main SPA species that are known to extensively utilize fields outside the SPA boundary). The State of Lancashire’s Birds (2013)35 identifies areas of sensitivity for both whooper swan and pink-footed goose. These bird species utilise arable and grassland fields to graze in during the winter months. As such, any loss of these habitats could have a likely significant effect upon the features of the designated sites within functionally-linked land; however such habitats are lacking within the City of Liverpool boundary, with the Docks and land fields south and east of Liverpool airport having the greatest importance in terms of functionally-linked land.
The following reports have also been referenced to inform this HRA :
16 Defra. 2005. Coastal Squeeze – Implications for Flood Management. http://www.defra.gov.uk/environ/fcd/policy/csqueeze.pdf 35 White, S.J. (Ed.), McCarthy, B., Dunstan, S., Martin, S.J., Harris, R.J., Hulme, G. and Marsh, P.J. (2013). The State of Lancashire’s Birds: An atlas survey of the breeding and wintering birds of Lancashire and North Merseyside, 2007-2011. Lancashire and Cheshire Fauna Society, Rishton. http://www.lacfs.org.uk/Lancs%20Birds.html
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 26
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Natural England Commissioned Report NECR172. 2015. Waterbird population trend analysis of the Mersey Estuary SPA, Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore pSPA and Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA; Natural England Commissioned Report NECR173. 2015. Review and Analysis of Changes in Waterbird Use of the Mersey Estuary SPA, Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore pSPA and Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA; Assessment of Supporting Habitat (Docks) for Use by Qualifying Features of Natura 2000 Sites in the Liverpool City Region, Ornithology Report, TEP Version 3.0, Ref 4157 005. August 2015; and Wintering Bird Survey, Wirral Waters, May 2008, TEP.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 27
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
4 hra – test of likely significant effects
The following Chapters set out the HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects carried out as part of this HRA/AA report. Whilst all results are presented in this report, this section serves to illustrate the iterative nature by which the HRA/AA has been carried out alongside the development of the Liverpool Local Plan.
4.1 HRA of Liverpool Local Plan The Liverpool Local Plan seeks to deliver the following key development:
29,600 dwellings (net) in the period up to 2032/33. This is actually substantially lower than the quantum planed for in the withdrawn Core Strategy; North Liverpool will be a particular focus for new residential development within the Urban Core. In the Suburban Areas, residential provision would be focused within the Regeneration Fringes, in locations such as Speke/ Garston, Netherley/Belle Vale, Dovecot and Stonebridge/Croxteth; Maximising economic growth, in particular in the City Centre and other key employment locations throughout the City, with further appropriate employment opportunities within residential areas; Mixed development, including leisure and tourism at waterfront locations; Expansion of capacity at the Airport (including Green Belt amendments, and upgraded access); and Continued development of the Ports of Liverpool and Garston.
These key aspects of the Local Plan are therefore subject to assessment.
4.2 Initial Test of Likely Significant Effects of the Liverpool Local Plan Policies The Liverpool Local Plan containing 81 policies was subject to an initial sift for the potential to cause likely significant effects on European sites namely Mersey Estuary SPA and the Ramsar site, Sefton Coast SAC, Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA and the Ramsar site, Liverpool Bay SPA, Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA and the Ramsar site, Manchester Mosses SAC, River Dee & Bala Lake SAC, Dee Estuary SAC, Dee Estuary SPA and the Ramsar site and River Eden SAC. The assessment was carried out alone and in combination with other plans and projects. Appendix 1 contains the policies and the detailed screening assessment including reasoning for Likely Significant Effects, and Appendix 2 contains the plans and policies used in the ‘in-combination’ assessment. Table 5 provides the results of the initial sift screening assessment. Table 5: Initial Screening Assessment
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 28
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Of the 81 detailed policies put forward by the Local Plan, the following 24 were screened in (therefore requiring
Policy Conclusion of No Likely Significant Conclusion of possible Likely Effects following initial sift Significant Effects following initial sift (therefore requiring further consideration) but can be mitigated though policy wording
Delivering the Vision STP1, STP2, STP3, STP4, STP5 and Strategic Priorities
Liverpool City Centre CC 1, CC 2, CC 3, CC 4, CC 7, CC 8, CC 4, CC 5, CC 6, CC 13 CC 9, CC 10, CC 11, CC 12, CC14
Employment Land and EC5, EC1, EC2, EC3, EC4, EC6, EC7 the Economy
Housing Provision H3, H4, H5, H7, H9, H10,H13,H15 H1, H2, H6, H8, H11, H12, H14
Shopping Centres and SP2, SP3, SP4 SP1, SP5, SP6 Community Facilities
Urban Design UD1, UD2, UD3, UD4, UD5, UD6, UD7, UD8, UD9, UD10
Heritage HD1, HD2
Green Infrastructure GI 1, GI 2, GI 3, GI 5, GI 6, GI 7, GI GI4 8, GI 9
Environmental R1, R2, R4, R5, R9, R10 R6, R7, R8 Resources
Sustainable Transport TP1, TP2, TP3, TP4, TP5, TP6, TP7, and Accessibility TP8, TP9 further consideration in the HRA) due to potential pathways being identified to European Sites. These are as follows:
Liverpool City Centre:
CC 4 The Waterfront CC 5 Recreational Use of Dock Water Spaces, Quaysides and the Waterfront
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 29
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
CC 6 Liverpool Waters CC 13 Housing Provision in the City Centre
Employment Land and the Economy
EC1 Employment Land Supply EC2 Employment Areas EC3 Delivering Economic Growth EC4 Office Development EC6 Liverpool John Lennon Airport EC7 The Ports of Garston and Liverpool
Housing Provision
H1 Housing Requirements H2 Site Allocations H6 Older Persons Housing H8 Student Housing Provision H11 Permanent Gypsy and Traveller Sites H12 Primarily Residential Areas H14 Conversion of Dwellings and Buildings
Shopping Centres and Community Fcailities
SP1 The Hierarchy of Centres for Liverpool SP5 Community Facilities SP6 Out-of Centre and Edge-of Centre Town Centre Uses
Green Infrastructure
GI4 Water Spaces
Environmental Resources
R6 Minerals Safeguarding and Extraction R7 Decentralised Energy Networks R8 Wind Turbines
The Local Plan as it stands already contains text which largely serves as a basis to protect the integrity of European Sites for example Policy R4, but particularly Policy STP2 and Policy GI5.
These policies are therefore discussed in more detailed screening in the following chapters.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 30
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 31
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
5 MERSEY ESTUARY SPA AND RAMSAR SITE
5.1 Introduction The Mersey Estuary is a large sheltered estuary that receives drainage from a catchment area of c.5,000 km2 encompassing the conurbations of Liverpool and Manchester, and including the River Mersey and the River Bollin and their tributaries in Cheshire and Merseyside. The Estuary covers 5023.35 ha of saltmarsh and inter- tidal sand and mudflats, with limited areas of brackish marsh, rocky shoreline and boulder clay cliffs, within a rural and industrial environment. The intertidal flats and saltmarshes provide feeding and roosting sites for large and internationally important populations of waterbirds, and during the winter, the site is of major importance for duck and waders. The site is also important during the spring and autumn migration periods, particularly for wader populations moving along the west coast of Britain.
5.2 Reasons for Designation
The Mersey Estuary is designated an SPA under Article 4.136 Golden plover (Pluvialis apricaria): 3,040 individuals (1.2% of GB population)
SPA Article 4.2 - winter: Redshank (Tringa totanus): 4,993 individuals (2.8% of Eastern Atlantic population) Dunlin (Calidris alpina): 48,789 individuals (3.6% of Northern Siberian / Europe / West African population Pintail (Anas acuta): 1,169 individuals (1.9% of NW European population) Shelduck (Tadorna tadorna): 6,746 individuals (2.2% of wintering NW European population) Eurasian teal (Anas crecca): 11,723 individuals (2.9% of NW European population) Wigeon (Anas penelope): 11,886 individuals (4.2% of the GB population) Black-tailed godwit (Limosa limosa): 976 individuals (1.6% of the Iceland population) Curlew (Numenius arquata): 1,300 individuals (1.1% of the GB population) Grey plover (Pluvialis squatarola): 1,010 individuals (2.3% of the GB population) Great crested grebe (Podiceps cristatus): 136 individuals (1.4% of the GB population) Lapwing (Vanellus vanellus): 10,544 individuals (0.7% of the GB population)
SPA Article 4.2 - on passage: Ringed plover (Charadrius hiaticula): 505 Ramsar Criterion 6, Internationally important populations of: Shelduck
36 All bird count data in this document is sourced from the SPA Review site accounts as available on the Joint Nature Conservation Committee website www.jncc.gov.uk/page-1412
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 32
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Black-tailed godwit (Limosa limosa) Redshank Eurasian teal Pintail Dunlin Ramsar Criterion 5: 89,576 waterfowl (5-year peak mean 1998/99-2002/03) Birdlife (2001) identify the Important Bird Area (IBA) to exceed the area currently designated as a Ramsar site, and recommend the designation expansion. This additional area is termed a ‘potential Ramsar’ (which is precedes the ‘proposed’ Ramsar (pRamsar) designation). This additional area is not considered in the assessment as objectives and site boundaries are unconfirmed, however its status highlights the nature conservation value of areas of the Mersey outside of the SPA and Ramsar designations.
5.3 Historic trends and existing pressures Water pollution has been an issue in the Mersey Estuary since at least the 18th century, when the Mersey catchment became a prime location for industrial expansion, especially the textile industry. With this there was an associated growth in bleaching, dying, and finishing trades, and paper, heavy chemical and glass industries, which are still in production to this day. All of these industries used the waterways as a means for the disposal of industrial waste, resulting in a legacy of pollutants within the River Mersey and including mercury, pesticides (e.g. DDT), and persistent organic contaminants (e.g. polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), pentachlorophenol (PCP)). In addition, there was surface runoff, and the discharge of domestic waste-water and sewage directly into the waterways from a large and growing human population, resulting in gross pollution37. The high levels of sewage discharged in to the waterways resulted in low oxygen levels and a major difficulty in improving water quality.
The problem of water pollution in the Mersey Estuary ‘was probably at its worst in the 1960’s and made it the most polluted Estuary in the UK (Mersey Basin Campaign 2004). Major improvements to water quality have been realised since the formation of the Mersey Basin Campaign in 1985, which aims to ‘revitalise the River Mersey and its waterfront’.
The major projects that brought about the improvements to water quality tackled the direct discharges of sewage into the region’s waterways. New projects included: primary sewage works at Sandon Dock which replaced 28 crude sewage discharges directly into the Mersey Estuary through the MEPAS scheme (Mersey Estuary Pollution Alleviation Scheme); fine sewage screening plants on the Wirral peninsula; secondary sewage treatment and petrochemical effluent treatment plants at Ellesmere Port; secondary sewage treatment plants at Widnes and Warrington; modification of the Davyhulme sewage treatment plan in Greater Manchester to treat ammonia (which may kill salmonid species); and later secondary sewage
37 Langston, W.J., Chesman, B.S. and Burt, G.R. (2006). Characterisation of European Marine Sites. Mersey Estuary SPA. [Online]. Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Occasional Publications 18, 185pp.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 33
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
treatment plants at Birkenhead/Bromborough. Other improvements have been made, including reducing inputs of mercury, lead, cadmium, PCP and chlorinated hydrocarbons into the Estuary.
However, certain inputs remain, including:
pesticides and herbicides from agriculture (largely dairy farming) into the upper river system; phthalate esters (used as plasticisers, increasing flexibility in plastics) thought to come from wastewater discharges in the upper Mersey; hydrocarbon contamination from oil spillage/spills from Tranmere Oil Dock/Terminal, Stanlow (Shell) Oil Refinery and oil tanks along the southern bank of the Estuary, from pipelines that run between these sites along the southern bank of the Estuary, and from oil shipping spills in the Irish Sea; PCB38s from the River Mersey (possibly also dredge spoils); and PCBs from contaminated land in the catchment area39 The General Quality Assessment (GQA) scheme, introduced by the National Rivers Authority (NRA), and replaced by the Environment Agency (EA) in 1996, monitors the water quality of rivers and canals throughout England and Wales. It assesses the chemical and biological status, nutrient levels, and aesthetic water quality from permanent sampling stations. The Mersey Basin Campaign (2005) reports on sites in the Mersey catchment that detail low (Grades D, E and F, or ‘fair’ to ‘bad’) biological and chemical river water quality; only those within the Mersey catchment are described here. Such sampling sites are particularly concentrated in the area between Knowsley and Manchester, including St. Helens and Wigan, although biological quality is generally poor from Liverpool to Manchester.
The main current environmental pressures upon the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site are considered to be:
disturbance of sediment releasing legacy heavy metal pollution (mercury, lead, cadmium and other poisons) that is bound into the sediment, or other introduction of these metals; pollution via rivers and drains by both treated sewerage and untreated runoff containing inorganic chemicals and organic compounds from everyday domestic products, which ‘may combine together in ways that make it difficult to predict their ultimate effect of the marine environment. Some may remain indefinitely in the seawater, the seabed, or the flesh, fat and oil of sea creatures’40; pollution via commercial shipping by chemical pollution and the dumping of litter at sea; ‘coastal squeeze’ and physical loss from land reclamation and coastal flood defences and drainage used in order to develop coastal land, and from sea level rise;
38 Polychlorinated biphenyl are toxic persistent organic pollutants used in industry as dielectric fluids for transformers, capacitors, coolants can bioaccumulate in the sublittoral prey species of the common scoter and bioaccumulate/ biomagnify in the fish species 39 Langston, W.J., Chesman, B.S. and Burt, G.R. (2006). Characterisation of European Marine Sites. Mersey Estuary SPA.. Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Occasional Publications 18, 185pp.
40 Langston, W.J., Chesman, B.S. and Burt, G.R. (2006). Characterisation of European Marine Sites. Mersey Estuary SPA.. Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Occasional Publications 18, 185pp.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 34
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
loss or physical damage of marine benthic habitat directly and indirectly (through changed sedimentation/deposition patterns) as a result of navigational or aggregate dredging; disturbance to birds from increased recreational pressure (e.g. boat or other recreational activity) and wildfowling; introduction of non-native species; and selective removal of species (e.g. bait digging, wildfowl, fishing)41 Although the Mersey Estuary does have a high load of nutrients mainly from diffuse sources, with levels for phosphate and nitrogen decreasing from point sources, recent modelling has shown that due to the natural turbidity of the water, there is only a low risk of excessive algal growth.
5.4 Key potential pressures from Liverpool
From the environmental requirements that have been identified above it can be determined that development in Liverpool could theoretically interfere with the environmental requirements and processes on the SPA and the Ramsar site in the following manner:
Increased recreational pressure; Disturbance to bird species from non-recreational sources, including airport expansion (light and noise) and tourism and leisure developments on the waterfront; Coastal squeeze; Habitat degradation of sediments through port-related activities, particularly dredging Reduced water quality from treated sewerage, untreated run-off and from potential pollution events associated with shipping Reduced air quality through nitrogen and sulphur deposition as a result of transport movements, in particular aircraft and shipping.
The remainder of this chapter will analyse whether any of these impacts will actually occur.
5.5 Role of other projects and plans
Projects Mersey Ports Masterplan (Consultation draft; June 2011), including the Port expansion into Seaforth Nature Reserve and the Seaforth River Terminal (a deepwater container port expansion in Sefton is currently under construction and due for completion imminently), new opportunities for renewable energy, development of single and multi-user port centric warehousing and of new processing facilities for imported commodities. potentially leading to the Liverpool SuperPort – An integrated port, airport, intermodal terminal, freight and commercial network based upon the Port of Liverpool, the Manchester Ship Canal, Liverpool John Lennon Airport and the Mersey Multimodal Gateway (Liverpool City Region);
41 Langston, W.J., Chesman, B.S. and Burt, G.R. (2006). Characterisation of European Marine Sites. Mersey Estuary SPA.. Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. Occasional Publications 18, 185pp.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 35
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Peel Waters: Wirral and Liverpool Waters - This project is the development of currently run down dockland areas both on the Wirral and Liverpool side of the River Mersey. This includes the construction of houses, retail and commercial developments. The construction of these two developments will have a direct impact on the Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA due to loss of habitat, barrier impacts for birds in flight and significant disturbance issues during construction; Sandon Dock Waste Water Treatment Works outfall extension - to reduce adverse effects on estuary marshes the work to extend the outfall will take place on the opposite bank to the Egremont Shore section of the Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore Ramsar and SPA site (containing Mersey Narrows SSSI) but may still have an impact on the designated features of the SPA through the construction of the extended pipe. There may be issues relating to changes in sedimentation patterns altering the position of sand banks; Power from the Mersey – project to generate renewable power from the tidal processes in the River Mersey/Mersey Estuary. This project has been indefinitely postponed; Liverpool John Lennon Airport expansion – potential impacts due to increased sulphur and nitrogen deposition from aircraft, loss of supporting foraging/high-tide roost habitat and possible disturbance of waterfowl from noise; Energy from Waste Plants at Runcorn and Ince Marshes – possible air quality impacts through nitrogen and sulphur deposition. However, both of these schemes are consented such that they will introduce mitigation for their own air quality impacts. In practice therefore, no in combination effect should result. Hydrodec Oil Re-Refinery, Eastham - plans to build an oil re-refinery at a new port facility in Eastham; and, Alexandra Dock Biomass Project.
Plans Liverpool City Region Renewable Energy Capacity Study – possible impacts on waterfowl flightpaths between the Mersey Estuary and other European sites depending upon the degree of wind power involved and the location of turbines; North West England & North Wales Shoreline Management Plan 2 (SMP 22 Great Ormes Head to Scotland) (2011), – possible impacts due to the maintenance or enhancement of flood defences could lead to coastal squeeze, changes in sediment release (if previously undefended areas become defended) and direct loss of habitat to flood defence footprint; Core Strategies or emerging Local Plans for Halton, Cheshire West and Chester, Cheshire East, Trafford, Knowsley, Sefton, Wirral and St Helens, the Mersey Heartlands Growth Point Programme of Delivery (Wirral and Liverpool) and Liverpool and Wirral Waters Development masterplans – possible water quality, air quality and wildfowl disturbance impacts as a result of delivery of 110,000 dwellings and associated commercial development over the next 20 years; and Merseyside and Halton Joint Waste Local Plan – possible impacts due to water quality, air quality and wildfowl disturbance or chick predation. However, since this DPD is itself subject to HRA it will address its own contribution to any ‘in combination’ effect that may otherwise arise.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 36
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
5.6 Likely Significant Effects Disturbance of Qualifying Bird Species
HRA screening identified potential pathways whereby policies within the Liverpool City Local Plan have the potential to result in direct disturbance to qualifying bird species of the Mersey Estuary SPA and the Ramsar site. These pathways are assessed in more detail below, including a discussion of any mitigation already built into the Local Plan.
The population of Liverpool is expected to increase over the lifetime of the Local Plan associated with the delivery of 29,600 net new dwellings across Liverpool from 2013-2033. Add to this the mixed-use development of Liverpool Waters (the latter of which will potentially involve 9,000 net new dwellings and associated jobs beyond 2040). This will mean greater demands for leisure and recreational activities and facilities, and potential for increased visitor numbers along the coast associated with policies CC4 – CC6, CC13, H1, H2, H6, H8, H11, H12, H14 and GI4. Given that exact locations are not currently known, Policies relating to employment land and the economy (EC1 – EC4) could result in possible manufacturing/engineering industry being located close to the shoreline which could create disturbance of feeding/roosting birds.
Moreover, this will occur in conjunction with the Mersey Waterfront Regional Park. The website for the park (www.merseywaterfront.com) states that ‘Leisure and recreation lie at the heart of the Regional Park concept. For the Mersey Waterfront, the creation, promotion and access to quality waterfront experiences for both residents and visitors is key. The natural environment, breathtaking views and fascinating heritage are already present; the visitor infrastructure needs to complement it. Pedestrian and cycle routes exist, but these are incomplete. Improvements such as more places to shop, eat and stay along the length of the stunning coastline will encourage more visitors to spend time exploring the area’.
Enhancing the visitor experience for the estuary is ultimately a positive action but it will need to be done sensitively since an inevitable potential corollary of attracting more visitors is a potentially greater challenge in directing and managing access such that excessive disturbance does not result.
To achieve this, Liverpool Council needs to work with the other Merseyside Authorities, MEAS, Natural England, Natural Resources Wales and other partners to devise a framework for the delivery of:
Suitably located Green Infrastructure where this will prove effective (the Mersey Waterfront Regional Park may well be a key element of this if it is accompanied by enhanced access management or wardening or provides additional greenspace landwards of the SPA). While this is unlikely to be effective (or viable) with regard to water-based recreation, it may be possible and effective with regard to dog walking and other non-vehicular activities. Some species for which European sites have been designated are particularly sensitive to dogs, and many dog walkers may be happy to be diverted to other, less sensitive, sites. However the location and type of alternative space must be sufficiently safe and appealing to be effective; and Enhanced access management to the European sites when it becomes necessary, to be informed by the collation of visitor survey data. Examples of measures that may be deployable include temporary footpath/access closures during sensitive periods (e.g. the winter, when wintering birds are a key feature), rerouting of footpaths away from key hotspots for waterfowl, introducing enhanced wardening, introducing improved signage to encourage dogs to be kept on a lead or walked in areas that are away from key waterfowl hotspots or screening of key locations for recreational activity. With regard to the use of watercraft, on some sites this can be achieved through zoning of activities by site managers or the introduction of permitting
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 37
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
systems limiting the amount of watercraft using the available space, although it is uncertain at this stage whether that would be feasible in the Mersey Estuary. In legal terms policy GI5 and STP2 both contain explicit protection of internationally important wildlife sites that would enable us to conclude that the plan will not result in an adverse effect in reality. Moreover, protection is also provided within policy CC5 through reference to policy GI4, which states that no negative consequences for nature conservation should occur, and through implementation of policy R4, which requires no adverse effects on international wildlife sites from development at the coast.
The intention of improving access to the Merseyside coast does require a cohesive multi-authority access management strategy to constitute a coordinated delivery mechanism for protecting the internationally important wildlife of the area. Whilst Policy GI5 (Protection of Biodiversity and Geodiversity) specifically focuses on the protection of designated sites the Council will need to, where appropriate, work in partnership with other districts and relevant bodies, to avoid and manage cumulative and in combination impacts of development on these sites. Policy SPT2 provides a policy hook for delivery of this multi-authority working (stating that ‘These sites will also be managed through the City Council working in partnership with neighbouring authorities on appropriate management plans but is not explicit as to the role of recreational management’).
Within the Liverpool Local Plan, the supporting text for STP2 at paragraph 5.25 does recognise the need for partnership working to deliver some strategic mitigation, stating that ‘The Habitat Regulations Assessment undertaken for the Core Strategy in 2010 concluded that the increase in population as a result of the level of development proposed in Liverpool could lead to recreational impacts on internationally-designated habitat sites within and beyond the City boundary. Policies within this Local Plan take account of these findings to avoid negative impacts on these sites, and the Council will, where appropriate, work in partnership with other districts and relevant bodies to avoid and manage cumulative and in-combination impacts of development on these sites. This policy identifies the sensitive areas where development may have an impact, and which would therefore require avoidance or careful assessment and mitigation measures. This includes Natura 2000 and Ramsar sites within and beyond Liverpool’.
Any strategy that follows on from the policy commitment to manage recreational pressure will need to be sufficiently developed at an early part of the plan period that there is at least a funded mechanism to monitor recreational activity and trigger the introduction of enhanced management, since the delivery of enhanced access management and Green Infrastructure will need to be phased alongside delivery of housing. The contribution of each authority should be based upon their contribution to recreational activity in each site or (where this information is not yet available) their relative populations and proximity to the site.
For the Mersey Estuary an appropriate detailed framework that encompasses the management of recreation may exist, or come to exist in the near future, through a European Marine Site Management Scheme, which, if it follows the pattern of other EMS Management Schemes would include recreation/access management within its remit. If this does prove to be the case then the commitment given in the Green Infrastructure policy cited above could be explicitly linked to a commitment to support and participate (financially as required) this Management Scheme, in conjunction with the other Merseyside authorities and stakeholders.
The original Core Strategy HRA identified potential pathways of effects between the expansion of Liverpool John Lennon Airport (JLA) (now Local Plan policy EC6) and disturbance/displacement/collision of bird species due to airplane movements closer to the SPA and Ramsar designations, which (if unmitigated) could result from airport and ancillary development to the west, south and east of the current runways and taxiways by
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 38
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
2030. The closest piece of new taxiway will be approximately 100m from the SPA boundary; approximately 50% closer than is currently the case. The owners, Peel Holdings, have a 25 year Masterplan for the Airport which could treble its size by 2030 to accommodate 12.3 million passengers. The plans include a runway extension for long-haul aircraft, a world cargo centre and a new link road respectively to the south and east of the Airport.
Initial drafts of the airport Masterplan refer to increased lighting as a result of the airport expansion, and note that birds and bats may be affected (Peel Airports, 2006), although subsequent drafts (i.e. the final 2007 Masterplan) indicate that these issues would in the opinion of LJLA be resolvable. However, it is not as yet clear as to whether Natural England and Countryside Council for Wales universally accept these conclusions. Any increase in illumination is unlikely to affect a site so far from the airport, particularly since use of the SPA by waterfowl remains high despite the north bank of the Mersey generally being a brightly lit environment.
A suite of ecological surveys has been undertaken in connection with this Master Plan on land within and adjacent to JLA and on areas required for expansion42. Aircraft currently take off or land over the mudflats adjacent to the Mersey Estuary SPA and the Ramsar site. The flats are used by a proportion of the passage and wintering waterfowl for which the Estuary is of international importance which probably constitutes more than 1% of the total population in the estuary and any impact on them would therefore be significant. The assessment of the potential disturbance effect on both feeding and roosting waterfowl under the flight path was carried out as part of the regular wintering bird study to inform the John Lennon Liverpool Airport Masterplan. The following was identified: the majority of waterfowl feeding on the shore at low water use the area between Garston and the western end of the runway. On most tides many of these birds remain to roost, moving up the shore in front of the tide. A relatively high level of disturbance to both feeding and roosting birds occurs here due to the use of the shore by walkers, dogs, quad bikes and four wheel drive vehicles, and at sometimes many of the birds are kept almost constantly on the move; no disturbance to the feeding birds due to aircraft was observed in any month except on abnormally high tides when roosting flocks are pushed right up to the toe of the cliff. At such times they are at their most susceptible to disturbance from all sources. During all other tide states, including more regular high tide heights, no disturbance effects from aircraft have been observed; most feeding birds move a relatively short distance along the shore before pitching again, but roosting birds may move directly to the cliff top and small flocks of waders have been observed feeding over the high tide period on remaining amenity grassland in the Liverpool International Business Park. Towards the end of winter 2005/06 small flocks of waders were observed on the new Coastal Reserve grassland areas. No birds moved (either off or along the shore by disturbance from any source) were observed passing through the flightpath of aircraft approaching or taking off from JLA; sporadic disturbance of roosting waterfowl by aircraft has been observed at the eastern (Hale) end of the survey area. Most waterfowl movements recorded are, again, of flocks travelling along the shoreline at all tide states, but occasional inshore movement has also been observed. This primarily consists of individuals and small flocks of curlews which feed on the farmland between Hale Heath and Rabbit Hey at all tide states, but more abundantly during the high tide periods;
42 John Lennon Liverpool Airport Masterplan November 2007 http://www.liverpoolairport.com/assets/_files/documents/oct_08/peel__1224146206_12_Master_Plan_Chapter_11.pdf
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 39
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
movements tend to be low and local, between the shore and adjacent land. No birds were seen to cross the airport flightpath during any survey visit, although single birds or small flocks of curlew have occasionally been recorded feeding on the fields north of Hale Heath. Curlew is not a qualifying species for the SPA and the Ramsar site, other than as part of the total assemblage, and at most, tens of birds have been recorded feeding in this area; and since the numbers involved were very small and birds disturbed at present appear to move the shortest possible distance, it was considered that there would be no significant impact to feeding or roosting birds using the shore adjacent to JLA, and thus no likely significant effect on the protected site. The proposed runway extension to 2,750 m would not encroach on the SSSI, SPA and the Ramsar site.
The findings of the wintering bird study carried out to inform the John Lennon Liverpool Airport Masterplan suggest that the Liverpool John Lennon Airport (JLA) expansion will not result in likely significant effects on the Mersey Estuary SPA and the Ramsar site through direct land take, or disturbance to feeding or roosting birds. However, it is not clear as to whether this conclusion has been accepted by Natural England and Natural Resources Wales and those studies were concluded several years ago; patterns of bird activity may have changed in the intervening decade. In any case Local Plan Policy EC6 contains a safeguard regarding this issue in stating that: ‘As a key sub-regional economic asset, the operation and expansion of Liverpool John Lennon Airport (LJLA), in line with its 2007 Masterplan, will be supported in principle, subject to satisfactory compliance with measures to address potential environmental impacts associated with this growth. These are: … impact on the adjacent natural and built environment, including sites and buildings of international, national or local conservation, ecological or landscape importance. With respect to internationally important sites (the Mersey Estuary Ramsar Site and Mersey Estuary Special Protection Area), development will be required to include appropriate mitigation measures agreed with the City Council and informed by an up-to-date environmental assessment.’ Given the age of the survey data, additional bird survey will be required to support planning applications, the scope and timing of which should be agreed with the local planning authority. However, this doesn’t actually require including explicitly in policy.
The Mersey Tidal Power Scheme has been indefinitely postponed but is also a project that could result in disturbance effects during construction and possibly maintenance on the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar sites depending upon the details of the scheme. Policy R4 (The Coast) of the Local Plan states ‘All development proposals must ensure that they do not:… Adversely affect the integrity of sites of international nature conservation importance, taking into account appropriate mitigation, or as a last resort, compensation in accordance with Policy GI 5 of the Local Plan’. Policy GI5 (Protection of Biodiversity and Geodiversity) specifically states ‘Development which may result in a likely significant effect on an internationally important site must be accompanied by sufficient evidence to enable the Council to make a Habitats Regulations Assessment’ and the requirements of Policy STP2 which states that ‘Development proposals which may have an adverse impact will be subject to a Habitat Regulations Assessment at the project level to ensure that any likely significant effects have been assessed, and measures to avoid or mitigate these effects have been identified and are deliverable’. As such, it is considered that the references in the Local Plan are sufficient to ensure that the SPA and the Ramsar site are protected.
Development of ports and docks has the potential to cause disturbance to waterfowl (however, this is not straightforward as, for example, boat wakes can bring fish to the surface and result in increased feeding opportunities for birds). However, Policy EC7 states that the sustainable development of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported but ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should:… comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 40
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
internationally important sites …’. As such, it is considered that the references in the Local Plan are sufficient to ensure that the SPA and Ramsar site are protected, when this text is considered alongside Policy GI5, Policy R4 and Policy STP2.
In meeting the needs of gypsies and travellers (Policy H11), HRA Screening identified a pathway for direct disturbance on the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site depending on the location of allocated sites in the south-east part of the City. Further investigation by Liverpool City Council found that although Liverpool has a relatively small supply of pitches, need is also relatively low and concluded that the existing provision was sufficient in the short/ medium-term. Liverpool does not intend to increase existing provision by identifying additional sites in the Local Plan but will consider application, should they come in, against set criteria. As such it should be relatively easy to locate sites in a manner that it will not lead to likely significant effects on European sites and can be addressed through a site-specific HRA rather than a change to policy. As such it is considered that likely significant effects will not occur. This would be more explicit if the wording ‘the site would not lead to adverse effects on the integrity of the Mersey Estuary SPA and/or Ramsar site’ was added at the end of the policy. However, it is recognised that this may not be strictly necessary since any gypsy and traveler development would need to comply with Policy GI5 and Policy STP2 even if that isn’t explicitly stated in Policy H11.
The Local Plan promotes renewable and low carbon energy within Liverpool (Policies R8, R9 and R10). As this includes wind turbine construction (Policy R8), a pathway exists for the construction of onshore/offshore turbines to disrupt flight paths and displace qualifying bird species. Disturbance issues associated with maintenance activities were also identified. The River Mersey frontage has been identified as an area that may have the potential for wind turbine development. Policy R8 states that with regard to wind turbines ‘Proposals for wind turbine(s) will need to demonstrate in a Design and Access Statement including an impact assessment that there will be no harm caused as a result of the size (height) and scale (number of turbines) on the character of the wider area and with specific reference to: …. the built or natural environment assets and the World Heritage Site in particular’. Given that any development under Policy R8, R9 and R10 would also have to comply with Policy GI5 and Policy STP2 this is considered to provide sufficient policy protection.
It is concluded that there will be no adverse effect on the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site through direct disturbance as a result of any of the policies proposed within the Local Plan, provided that the strategic study and resulting measures to manage recreational access within the coastal European sites around Merseyside is taken forward in a timely manner early in the plan period.
5.6.1 Coastal Squeeze and Loss of Functionally-Linked Land
The habitats within the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site (saltmarsh and intertidal mudflats) would be vulnerable to coastal squeeze due to either sea level rise or a shift in sediment processes from accretion to erosion if their landward retreat is prevented by flood defences. Mechanisms to ensure that suitable areas for Managed Retreat are provided will be identified through flood risk management planning and the Environment Agency’s Coastal Habitat Management Plans (CHaMP) and Regional Habitat Creation Programme. However, the placing of development in locations otherwise identified for Managed Retreat or which would require a strengthening of flood defence policy landward of the SPA (e.g. from No Active Intervention to Hold the Line) could either compromise managed retreat or exacerbate coastal squeeze.
It is also possible that development could occur on land outside of the SPA that is known to be important for birds that it is designated for. Studies to support the Airport Masterplan found that roosting birds may move directly to the cliff top and small flocks of waders have been observed feeding over the high tide period on
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 41
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
remaining amenity grassland in the Liverpool International Business Park. Towards the end of winter 2005/06 small flocks of waders were also observed on the new Coastal Reserve grassland areas.
There are significant pockets of undeveloped land alongside the boundary between Liverpool and the Mersey Estuary SPA & Ramsar site including land intended for the expansion of Liverpool John Lennon Airport.
There is therefore a risk that development proposals may come forward for sites in the south east of the City that could either lead to coastal squeeze, compromise managed retreat or lead to loss of supporting grassland habitat for SPA waterfowl. If such proposals are developed, the local planning authority should ensure that appropriate mechanisms are in place to ensure the loss of sites that serve as important functionally-linked land for SPA birds is adequately identified, assessed and mitigated as part of planning applications. If functionally- linked land were to be lost to any development, then the applicant would need to determine (a) how significant it was (i.e. whether it was used by more than 1% of the population of qualifying bird species and (b) to provide alternative habitat to replace it in an location that was reasonably close to the Estuary. These provisions will need to be taken into account as part of the development management process to deliver the requirements of Policy GI5 and Policy STP2.
The development site should be surveyed by an experienced ornithologist twice per month from September to March43. The two visits each month should be carried at different tidal states (as these are known to influence non-breeding bird movement) and/or at different times of day, if time of day is considered likely to be relevant. More than one survey season may be required if the data from any portion of the survey period is not considered representative (e.g. because the level of disturbance being experienced at time of survey is atypical), if bird numbers fluctuate greatly from visit to visit which would indicate that a larger dataset is required to determine typical levels of usage or if the species is known to vary considerably year-on-year in their level of use of high tide roost sites At each visit the date, time of day, species present and number of birds of each species should be recorded. Additional information which would be useful includes weather conditions, any records of disturbing activities and whether these are typical of the site, and details of feeding or roosting behaviour. Depending on the site, vantage point observations may also be of value to identify directions of flock flight to and from the parcel being surveyed.
Analysis of the data would need to determine the total number of non-breeding SPA bird features and the total number of each species of non-breeding bird in order to determine whether on any survey visit numbers exceeded 1% of the SPA population. Data analysis should also consider how often the 1% threshold is exceeded. If the threshold is only exceeded on a single occasion then it may not be appropriate to conclude that the site is important for the SPA. It is considered by the authors of this document that if however numbers exceeding 1% of the SPA population are recorded on multiple (for example, 3 or more) visits in a single season than regular use of that field by significant numbers of waterfowl can be reasonably assumed.
A key element of preventing loss of functionally-linked land would also be to prevent any development being delivered in areas that may exacerbate coastal squeeze, through either of the following routes:
Delivery of new development in locations which would require a change in coastal defence policy that might compromise natural coastal processes (e.g. from No Active Intervention to Hold the Line or Advance the Line); and
43 Natural England Technical Guidance Note TIN008: ‘Assessing ornithological impacts associated with wind farm developments: surveying recommendations’ provides further background on appropriate survey method requirements. While this guidance was specifically written for wind turbine projects and some aspects (e.g. vantage point surveys) are not necessarily relevant to other types of non-breeding bird survey, the guidance also provides advice on conventional non-breeding bird survey.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 42
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Delivery of new development in areas that may compromise locations identified for managed retreat as set out in the Environment Agency Coastal Habitats Management Plan (CHaMP) and Regional Habitat Creation Programme.
However, it is understood from the Council that no development would require the revision to current flood defence policy/standards and that no areas within Liverpool have currently been identified for Managed Realignment. These issues therefore do not require further consideration.
5.6.2 Deterioration in Water Quality
The HRA Screening identified policies within the Liverpool Local Plan that have potential pathways of impacts relating to the water quality of the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site. These relate to three areas which are discussed in turn below:
waste water discharge (domestic and industrial); shipping and dredging; and water abstraction (industrial).
The population of Liverpool is expected to increase over the lifetime of the Local Plan associated with the delivery of new dwellings across Liverpool and the mixed-use development of Liverpool Waters (the latter of which will potentially involve 9,000 net new dwellings and associated jobs beyond 2040). Since these will be associated with increased waste water discharge they have the potential to result in a deterioration of water quality in the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site. This increased pressure could result in deterioration in water quality simply through the increased volume of treated effluent (which will contain increased nutrient loading) or, if the Sewage Treatment Works in question is at or near capacity, in deterioration in the level of treatment that discharged effluent receives. Increased discharge of treated effluent to rivers that drain to the estuary could also affect water flows and sediment patterns within the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site.
The Environment Agency conducted its own review of water quality sources in relation to the requirements of HRA. According to Langston et al44 following a review of the Environment Agency Review of Consents for 3,886 permitted water discharges, all of these were ‘screened in’ as part of the Stage 1 HRA, and of these 919 were taken through from Stage 2 to Stage 3 Appropriate Assessment. This included:
those discharges responsible for discharging the top 90% of the nutrient/BOD/ammonia load entering the Mersey Estuary; those discharges discharging directly into the Mersey Estuary; those discharges authorised to discharge a List 1 and/or List 2 Dangerous substance that has been found to be either exceeding or at risk of exceeding the Environmental Quality Standard in the Mersey Estuary; all IPC/IPPPC water discharges not already considered under the Directive. Of the 919 discharges requiring an AA only around 380 were continuous discharges. The remainder largely represented intermittent discharges (storm sewage overflows / emergency discharges from pumping stations). Figure 6 indicates the Environment Agency priority outfalls of the Mersey. It is noted that three priority outfalls are located in Halton (Runcorn) with others located in Liverpool, Wirral and Warrington.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 43
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
It should be noted that the Mersey Basin clean-up campaign has produced substantial improvements over the last 25 years. The Mersey is now reported to support a wide range of fish species, including migratory fish, and there has been an increase in numbers of other animals returning to the estuary including reported sightings of porpoises, grey seals and octopus. Langston et al45 conclude that in the absence of specific information on individual discharges, there is insufficient evidence to justify further expensive remedial action on particular sources.
However, there is sufficient uncertainty to justify a more targeted and detailed programme of research and surveillance to measure actual biological impacts at a variety of levels (e.g. biochemistry, bioaccumulation, biomarkers and community structure) at sites within the European Marine Sites and near priority discharges. If results indicate deleterious effects, which can be attributed to known causes then the case for remedial action against key sources (which may include multiple inputs) would be placed on a stronger scientifically sound basis. At the very least such a program would provide a benchmark for assessing future changes in the condition of the site and likely contributions from water quality.
45 Langston, W.J., Chesman, B.S. and Burt, G.R. (2006).(The Marine Biological Association (2006)) Characterisation of European Marine Site: the Mersey Estuary Special Protection Area, Marine Biological Association Occasional Publication No18.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 44
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Figure 5. Environment Agency priority outfalls of the Mersey
These studies illustrate that combined pollution pressure from runoff and waste water discharges throughout the Mersey catchment (including the upper reaches outside of Merseyside) has been a significant historic pressure. Whilst this situation has improved significantly, the potential still exists for surface water runoff and waste discharges to adversely affect the qualifying features of the Mersey SPA and Ramsar site.
It would be disproportionate to suggest the development covered by Liverpool Local Plan policies, if considered in isolation, has the potential to deteriorate the water quality of the Mersey Estuary to an extent that would lead to likely significant effects on the SPA, particularly against a background trend of improving water quality in the Estuary. However it is reasonable to identify the potential for an in-combination effect of the Liverpool Local Plan (above the existing baseline) on the water quality pressures if care is not taken to ensure that development keeps pace with any necessary enhancements in water treatment infrastructure and surface water control/treatment. Other policies that are likely to contribute equally to this in-combination effect are those contained within the Halton, Wirral and Warrington Core Strategies or Local Plans as these are all adjacent to the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site.
It should be noted that the majority of the processes that could result in a deterioration of water quality (unregulated waste water discharges, surface water runoff and pollution from construction activities) are either regulated through statutory requirements or can be mitigated through standard construction techniques and environmental good practice. These impacts are therefore unlikely.
Avoiding an adverse effect is largely in the hands of the water companies (through their investment in future sewage treatment infrastructure) and the Environment Agency (through their role in consenting effluent discharges). However, local authorities can also contribute through ensuring that sufficient wastewater treatment infrastructure is in place prior to development being delivered through the Local Plan. In the case of Liverpool, this is alluded to in: Policy R5 (Rivers, Canals, Watercourses and Culverts) states that: ‘Planning permission will not be granted for any development which, in the opinion of the City Council following
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 45
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
consultation with the Environment Agency, would adversely affect the quality or supply of surface water or groundwater….’; and Policy R3 (Flood Risk and Water Management) states that: ‘Proposals within areas of infrastructure capacity and/or water supply constraint should demonstrate that there is adequate wastewater infrastructure and water supply capacity to serve the development or adequate provision can be made available’.
Given this and the requirements of Policy GI5 and STP2, it is considered that likely significant effects due to wastewater impacts will not occur as due account will be taken of the need to phase development in line with wastewater treatment infrastructure.
The Local Plan encourages dock and port development, and greater use of freight by shipping. These have the potential to result in a deterioration of water quality of the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site. Development of ports and docks has the potential to disturb substrates/ circulate synthetic chemical pollutants and heavy metals all of which could result in potential harm to benthic communities, aquatic invertebrates and habitats required by qualifying bird species. Furthermore greater shipping freight has the potential for pollution through fuel emissions/ accidental spillage (described above in relation to waste water discharge/run-off above).
These risks are highlighted by a study for Natural England46.. The level of Tributyltin (TBT) in tidal waters exceeds the Environmental Quality Standard (EQS) at most sites, sometimes by a considerable margin. Sources include the Manchester Ship Canal, docks and shipyards, and the river Mersey itself: highest levels were at Monks Hall at the head of the tidal waterway. Sediments in docks contain hotspots which are above action limits (for safe disposal). Additionally, heavy metal distribution, along with PAHs, PCBs and DDT residues from historical inputs, were identified as significant. Enhanced loadings sometimes appear in subsurface layers in sediment cores. Dredging has been identified as a key activity that could re-expose these layers making them and their associated contaminant burdens available to organisms. Redistribution of these sediments was identified as a significant threat to the condition of the site. Further investigation on sources, trends and impacts was recommended including further bio monitoring of sediments (bioaccumulation and effects) and the possibility of transfer of contaminants through dietary organisms to bird populations of the SPA.
With regards to greater shipping freight in the Mersey and the potential for pollutions through fuel emissions/accidental spillages, it should be noted that oil pollution is a continual threat to all inshore marine habitats, and is particularly pronounced in the Mersey Estuary due to its enclosed and sheltered nature. Risks include small leaks, spills and discharges, as well as the possibility of a major accident. There are a number of ways in which oil could potentially impact on the interest features of the SPA and Ramsar including intertidal habitats, shellfish beds, benthic communities, Zostera plants, eggs and planktonic larval stages of fish, molluscs and crustacean.
Studies have found total hydrocarbon concentrations (THC) in the Mersey to be amongst the most elevated in the UK47. In the mouths of the estuaries sampled (including Liverpool Bay for the Mersey), highest THC levels occurred at low tide, reflecting respective dominant flows of more highly contaminated water from upstream.
46 Langston, W.J., Chesman, B.S. and Burt, G.R. (2006).(The Marine Biological Association (2006)) Characterisation of European Marine Site: the Mersey Estuary Special Protection Area, Marine Biological Association Occasional Publication No18. 47 Kirby et al (1998) in English Nature, Plymouth Marine Partnership, The Marine Biological Association (2006) Characterisation of European Marine Site: the Mersey Estuary Special Protection Area, Marine Biological Association Occasional Publication No18.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 46
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
A variety of sources were suggested including industrial discharges and spillages from shipping and land- based sources (including river-borne discharges, road runoff) and atmospheric discharges.
Based on this evidence it is clear that policies contained within the Local Plan which encourage the development of docks and ports within the Mersey, and/or result in greater ship movements (either larger ships or new shipping routes which may require navigational dredging, or a greater number of ships creating more ship wash and erosion) have the potential to result in significant impacts on qualifying features of Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar.
However, Policy EC7 states that proposals for the expansion of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported provided ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should:… comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and internationally important sites …’. Moreover, any development under EC7 will need to comply with Policy GI5 and STP2. As such, it is considered that the references in the Local Plan are sufficient to ensure that the SPA and Ramsar site are protected.
The Mersey Tidal Power Scheme has been indefinitely postponed but is also a project that could result in adverse water quality impacts through dredging, contamination mobilisation, installation of cofferdams etc. during construction and possibly maintenance on the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar sites depending upon the details of the scheme. Policy R4 (The Coast) of the Local Plan states ‘All development proposals must ensure that they do not:… Adversely affect the integrity of sites of international nature conservation importance, taking into account appropriate mitigation, or as a last resort, compensation in accordance with Policy GI 5 of the Local Plan’. Moreover, any development will need to comply with Policy GI5 and Policy STP2. As such, it is considered that the references in the Local Plan are sufficient to ensure that the SPA and Ramsar site are protected.
It is concluded that there will be no likely significant effect on the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site through water quality issues as a result of any of the policies proposed within the Local Plan.
5.6.3 Deteriorating Air Quality
The Local Plan identifies policies that have the potential to contribute to a rise in atmospheric nitrogen deposition in the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site. This includes policies that:
may result in an increase car use notably as a consequence of housing and business development, particularly within 200m of the Mersey Estuary; policies which support airport expansion (Policy EC6); policies which support port expansion and thus greater shipping (Policy EC7), since these have the potential to result in a rise in atmospheric sulphur deposition.
With regards to air quality impacts relating to atmospheric sulphur deposition, these will relate largely to shipping and airport expansion. Reference to the Site Relevant Critical Loads for the SPA on APIS48 indicates that 11.5% of sulphur currently deposited in the SPA arises from 'other transport' (i.e. not road or shipping), which in this case is likely to be air traffic. This compares to only 7.5% derived from shipping. However, the Site Relevant Critical Load for each bird for which the SPA was designated also seems to indicate that they are not considered likely to be affected by high sulphur deposition. Moreover, while the proportional
48 Air Pollution Information System http://www.apis.ac.uk/, accessed 04/07/16.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 47
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
contribution of the airport to sulphur deposition is high the actual SO2 concentration in the SPA is well below the critical level (according to APIS the concentration49 is 3.89 µgm-3 compared to a critical level for damage of 20 µgm-3).
With regards to eutrophication as a result of atmospheric nitrogen deposition, one might expect similar pressures to arise described in the water quality section above. However, the Site Relevant Critical Load on APIS for nitrogen deposition as it relates to each bird for which the SPA was designated indicates that average nitrogen deposition within the SPA is 13.6 kgN/ha/yr compared to a critical load (for littoral sediment) of 20-30 kgN/ha/yr (last checked 04/07/16).
It should also be noted that APIS concludes the effects may be positive for most birds because nitrogen enrichment potentially means more prey species. The only SPA species for which nitrogen deposition is identified on APIS as being potentially negative are great crested grebe Podiceps cristatus (if algal blooms were to occur, which as we have seen is very unlikely due to inherent conditions in the Estuary) and wigeon Anas penelope, black-tailed godwit Limosa limosa and curlew Numenius arquata (if nitrogen deposition increases the sward height of their grassland foraging grounds; however, sward height is much more strongly influenced by other factors than atmospheric nitrogen deposition such as cut height & frequency and conventional fertilisation).
Moreover, there are several policies which would serve to protect the SPA either directly or through promoting and delivering sustainable transport:
Policy EC6 contains a safeguard regarding this issue in stating that: ‘As a key sub-regional economic asset, the operation and expansion of Liverpool John Lennon Airport (LJLA), in line with its 2007 Masterplan, will be supported in principle, subject to satisfactory compliance with measures to address potential environmental impacts associated with this growth.’ Policy EC7 states that the expansion of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported and that ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should: … comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and internationally important sites …’ Policy H11 states that gypsy and traveller sites must have access to public transport; Policy TP1 (Improving accessibility and managing demand for travel) states that ‘Development proposals should make the best use of existing transport infrastructure. Where this cannot be achieved, development should be phased to coincide with new transport infrastructure provision. Developments which singly or in combination have a significant impact on the movement of people or goods, should, through the provision of Travel Plans, positively manage travel demand and contribute to the improvement of accessibility in general, particularly by more sustainable modes of transport including walking, cycling and public transport. Development proposals should not compromise existing transport infrastructure or schemes programmed in the Local Transport Plan (LTP) and actions that are planned.’ These projects include more sustainable access to both Liverpool Airport and the Ports of Liverpool and Garston.
49 For grid reference SJ430812; last accessed 04/07/16
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 48
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Based on this information it is concluded that the Liverpool Local Plan will not result in likely significant effects on the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site due to deterioration in air quality. Therefore, no mitigation is recommended.
5.7 Conclusion
The HRA has concluded that the submission draft Liverpool Local Plan includes an adequate policy framework to enable the delivery of measures to avoid or adequately mitigate an adverse effect on the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site, and thus result in no likely significant effect, provided that:
a) the strategic study and resulting measures to manage recreational access within the coastal European sites around Merseyside is taken forward in a timely manner early in the plan period, utilizing the cross- authority working commitment given in Policy STP2 as its driver; and
b) If proposals come forward for developing significant pockets of undeveloped land alongside the boundary between Liverpool and the Mersey Estuary SPA & Ramsar site (including land intended for the expansion of Liverpool John Lennon Airport) it is ensured that appropriate mechanisms are in place to ensure the loss of functionally-linked land for SPA birds is adequately identified, assessed and mitigated as part of planning applications. If functionally-linked land were to be lost to any development, then the applicant would need to determine (a) how significant it was (i.e. whether it was used by more than 1% of the population of qualifying bird species and (b) to provide alternative habitat to replace it in an location that was reasonably close to the Estuary. These provisions will need to be taken into account as part of the development management process to deliver the requirements of policy GI5 and Policy STP2.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 49
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
6 Sefton Coast SAC
6.1 Introduction
Located to the north of Liverpool, the Sefton Coast SAC (approximately 4,560ha) consists of a mosaic of sand dune communities comprising a range of ages from embryonic (i.e. dune formation) to more established communities. A number of other habitats are also present, including lagoons, estuaries and riverine environments, but also scrub, heath and coniferous woodland.
6.2 Reasons for Designation
The Sefton Coast qualifies as an SAC for both habitats and species. Firstly, the site contains the Habitats Directive Annex I habitats of:
embryonic shifting sand dunes: considered rare, as its total extent in the United Kingdom is estimated to be less than 1,000 hectares – the Sefton Coast SAC is considered to be one of the best areas in the United Kingdom; shifting dunes along the shoreline with marram Ammophila arenaria (“white dunes”): the Sefton Coast SAC is considered to be one of the best areas in the United Kingdom; fixed dunes with herbaceous vegetation (“grey dunes”): the Sefton Coast SAC is considered to be one of the best areas in the United Kingdom; dunes with creeping willow Salix repens ssp. argentea (Salicion arenariae): considered rare, as its total extent in the United Kingdom is estimated to be less than 1,000 hectares – the Sefton Coast SAC is considered to support a significant presence of the species; humid dune slacks: the Sefton Coast SAC is considered to be one of the best areas in the United Kingdom; and Atlantic decalcified fixed dunes (Calluno-Ulicetea): considered rare, as its total extent in the United Kingdom is estimated to be less than 1,000 hectares – the Sefton Coast SAC is considered to support a significant presence.
Secondly, the site contains the Habitats Directive Annex II species petalwort Petalophyllum ralfsii, for which it is one of the best areas in the United Kingdom, and great-crested newt Triturus cristatus, for which the area is considered to support a significant presence.
6.3 Historic Trends and Current Pressures The dune habitats of the Sefton Coast SAC are dependent upon natural erosive processes. Various human activities that interrupt natural sedimentation and deposition patterns within the Liverpool Bay have had an effect on the wildlife value of these dunes and their existence. Since as early as the 18th century, ‘dredging, river training and coastline hardening have imposed a pattern of accretion and erosion on the shoreline where previous conditions were much more variable’ (Liverpool Hope University College, 2006). More recently, the dunes have been partially stabilised through maintaining their natural vegetation, the planting of pine trees, and artificial sea defences for protecting the developed shorelines. Another compounding influence is that the inland lakes and mosses behind the belt of coastal dunes have been drained and claimed for agricultural production (Liverpool Hope University College, 2006).
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 50
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
The environmental requirements of the Sefton Coast SAC are mainly:
the need to reduce the fragmentation of habitats, and the impact of fragmentation, to provide stepping stones for the movement of species; the need to counter negative changes to low-nutrient habitats resulting from atmospheric nutrient deposition; the need to manage the continuing coastal erosion at Formby Point which leads to a squeeze on habitats. This management would not constitute formal defences as these would in themselves harm the dune ecosystem, but the management of pine plantations preventing dune roll-back. The dunes require sufficient space that natural possesses can maintain the important habitats through roll-back; the need to consider the potential impact of climate change on shorelines, wetlands and dunes; the need to manage abstraction from the underlying aquifer for sources such as golf courses. The aquifer is critical to some features of the site, such as the humid dune slacks and the great crested newts; to manage recreational pressures and direct disturbance to qualifying habitats; the need to develop and maintain management practices which sustain the conservation value of the area; and the need to avoid loss of great-crested newt habitat, and habitats being further fragmented by distance or barriers.
6.4 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool
From the environmental requirements that have been identified above it can be determined that development in Liverpool could theoretically interfere with the environmental requirements and processes on the SAC in the following manner:
Excessive recreational pressure; and
Deteriorating air quality as a result of increased deposition of SO2/NOx through increased aircraft, shipping or car movements.
The remainder of this chapter will analyse whether any of these impacts will actually occur.
6.5 Role of Other Projects and Plans
6.5.1 Projects The Mersey Ports Masterplan (Consultation draft; July 2011) includes the potential development of the Seaforth Nature Reserve and construction of the Seaforth River Terminal (now known as Liverpool 2 and constituting a deep water container port expansion in Sefton now nearing completion), new opportunities for renewable energy, development of single and multi-user port centric warehousing and of new processing facilities for imported commodities, potentially leading to the Liverpool SuperPort - An integrated port, airport, intermodal terminal, freight and commercial network based
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 51
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
upon the Port of Liverpool, the Manchester Ship Canal, Liverpool John Lennon Airport and the Mersey Multimodal Gateway (Liverpool City Region).
6.5.2 Plans North West England & North Wales Shoreline Management Plan 2 – possible impacts due to the maintenance or enhancement of flood defences could lead to coastal squeeze, changes in sediment release (if previously undefended areas become defended) and direct loss of habitat to flood defence footprint;
Core Strategies or Local Plans for Sefton, West Lancashire, Knowsley, Sefton, Wirral and St Helens, the Mersey Heartlands Growth Point Programme of Delivery (Wirral and Liverpool) and Liverpool and Wirral Waters Development masterplans – possible water quality, air quality and wildfowl disturbance impacts as a result of delivery of 90,000 dwellings and associated commercial development over the next 20 years; and
Merseyside and Halton Joint Waste Local Plan – possible impacts due to water quality, air quality and wildfowl disturbance or chick predation. However, since this DPD is itself subject to HRA it will address its own contribution to any ‘in combination’ effect that may otherwise arise.
6.6 Likely Significant Effects
6.6.1 Recreational Trampling
Sand dunes are vulnerable to recreational trampling in that excessive physical disturbance can retard or set back the dune development process and lead to a reduction in habitat diversity. However, at the same time some recreational trampling is beneficial in that it ensures that the dune vegetation does not all succeed to the same late stage of development and thereby actually helps to preserve diversity.
A study on the recreational users of Sefton’s Natural Coast50 estimated that half of the recreational users to be ‘local residents’ (i.e. residents within the Borough of Sefton). With respect to reasons for visiting the coast the main reason cited by over half of the respondents was either dog walking/walking/fresh air or visiting the coast. Nature based attractions including visiting the squirrels, bird watching and fishing accounted for approximately 20% of the visitors. The majority of visitors were focused on Formby and Crosby.
The study did not explore where the remaining 50% of visitors (i.e. not local residents from Sefton) came from. However, respondents to the England Leisure Day Visits Survey indicated that they typically travelled 25.5km to visit the coast for the day. Based upon this and the fact that Liverpool is located just 4.5km from the Sefton Coast SAC at its closest point it is considered likely that Liverpool will be the primary source of visitors to the SAC from Merseyside (other than Sefton itself). A substantial proportion of visitors are also likely to derive from West Lancashire which lies even closer to the SAC than Liverpool.
50 England’s North West Research Service for Economic Development and Tourism (May 2009) Sefton’s Natural Coast Local Users of the Coast (Version 2)
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 52
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
The population of Liverpool is expected to increase over the lifetime of the Local Plan associated with the delivery of 29,600 net new dwellings across Liverpool from 2013-2033. Add to this the mixed-use development of Liverpool Waters (the latter of which will potentially involve 9,000 net new dwellings and associated jobs beyond 2040). This will mean greater demands for leisure and recreational activities and facilities, and potential for increased visitor numbers along the coast associated with policies CC4 – CC6, CC13, H1, H2, H6, H8, H11, H12, H14 and GI4. Given that exact locations are not currently known, Policies relating to employment land and the economy (EC1 – EC4) could result in possible manufacturing/engineering industry being located close to the shoreline which could create disturbance of feeding/roosting birds.
Moreover, this will occur in conjunction with the Mersey Waterfront Regional Park. The website for the park (www.merseywaterfront.com) states that ‘Leisure and recreation lie at the heart of the Regional Park concept. For the Mersey Waterfront, the creation, promotion and access to quality waterfront experiences for both residents and visitors is key. The natural environment, breathtaking views and fascinating heritage are already present; the visitor infrastructure needs to complement it. Pedestrian and cycle routes exist, but these are incomplete. Improvements such as more places to shop, eat and stay along the length of the stunning coastline will encourage more visitors to spend time exploring the area’.
Enhancing the visitor experience for the estuary is ultimately a positive action but it will need to be done sensitively since an inevitable potential corollary of attracting more visitors is a potentially greater challenge in directing and managing access such that excessive disturbance does not result.
The Sefton Coast, as a reflection of its existing high appeal for visitors, already has an access management strategy in place as set out in the Beach Management Plan and overseen by the Sefton Coast Management Scheme. Initially the scheme covered the dune coast and was concerned mainly with nature conservation and recreation. Now it covers the whole coast from the docks at Seaforth to Marshside at Southport. The scope of the scheme has also extended to embrace beach management, coastal engineering issues and environmental quality51.
Currently the scheme includes twelve partner organisations and is led and coordinated by Sefton Council. The cooperative approach to management has helped to give greater protection to rare wildlife and has also enabled new recreation facilities such as the coastal footpath to be established. Some achievements of the project, out of many, include;
The creation of a permanent Ranger Service for the coast by Sefton Council. the establishment of a coastal footpath running the length of the coast and the promotion of public transport. a review of beach management, and the implementation of a new zoning scheme. Sefton Council, with its partners in the Sefton Coast Landscape Partnership, is currently updating –the Coast Management Plan, incorporating Beach Management and a review of the Nature Conservation Strategy for the Sefton Coast, This will ensure increased recreational pressure resulting from any policies within the Local Plan do not have an adverse effect upon the internationally designated sites in-combination. At the time of writing (July 2016), work on the integrated Coastal Zone Management Plan is underway. It is expected that this will be adopted in approximately 12 months.
51 www.seftoncoast.org.uk
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 53
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
As such, a mechanism already exists to control the impacts of increased visitors to the SAC as a result of an increased pool of users based in Liverpool. However, it is reasonable to conclude that the management strategy may be placed under greater pressure as a result of the increased population of the City.
For the Sefton Coast the most logical response Liverpool could make would be a commitment to assist in the future delivery of the requirements of the Beach Management Plan (specifically as it relates to recreation management) commensurate with the contribution of visitors to the site that arise from Liverpool.
Within the Liverpool Local Plan, the supporting text for STP2 at paragraph 5.25 does recognise this, stating that ‘The Habitat Regulations Assessment undertaken for the Core Strategy in 2010 concluded that the increase in population as a result of the level of development proposed in Liverpool could lead to recreational impacts on internationally-designated habitat sites within and beyond the City boundary. Policies within this Local Plan take account of these findings to avoid negative impacts on these sites, and the Council will, where appropriate, work in partnership with other districts and relevant bodies to avoid and manage cumulative and in-combination impacts of development on these sites. This policy identifies the sensitive areas where development may have an impact, and which would therefore require avoidance or careful assessment and mitigation measures. This includes Natura 2000 and Ramsar sites within and beyond Liverpool. Policy SPT2 provides a policy hook for delivery of this multi-authority working but is not explicit as to the role of recreational management.
6.6.2 Air Quality
With regards to air quality impacts relating to atmospheric sulphur deposition, these will relate largely to shipping and airport expansion. The Site Relevant Critical Load on APIS currently indicates that 53% of sulphur deposition within the SAC is due to shipping and ‘other transport’ (the latter category excludes road transport but does include air travel). However, reference to APIS indicates that the actual SO2 concentration in the SAC is well below the critical level (according to APIS the average concentration is 1.9 µgm-3 compared to a critical level for damage of 20 µgm-3).
With regards to eutrophication as a result of atmospheric nitrogen deposition, sand dune succession and petalwort are both vulnerable to excessive nitrogen inputs in that this can increase the development of vegetation and both out-compete petalwort and more rapidly advance sand dune succession to a point of excessive scrub development. Moreover, the Site Relevant Critical Load on APIS for nitrogen deposition indicates that actual nitrogen deposition is 9.9 kgN/ha/yr compared to a critical load (for sand dunes) of 10-20 kgN/ha/yr. The site is therefore close to the minimum part of the critical load range. Road transport, air transport and shipping are currently responsible for 33% of nitrogen deposition in the SAC (note that this is not necessarily all locally emitted as pollutants can travel considerable distances). Since the site is already exceeding its critical load any source of NOx which will increase nitrogen inputs by more than 1%52 will at least require a project level Appropriate Assessment and could lead to an adverse impact ‘in combination’.
The Sefton Coast SAC does not lie within 200m of a major arterial route for traffic travelling from Liverpool to (or through) Sefton and therefore it is primarily airport expansion, sea port expansion recreational visitors to the SAC that will contribute to any increase in nitrogen deposition.
52 1% generally being the threshold used by the Environment Agency and Natural England to determine whether a point source can be scoped out as making a contribution that would be effectively inconsequential even when considered ‘in combination’. Exceedence of the 1% threshold does not mean that adverse effects will result but does mean that the project/plan cannot be simply dismissed and further detailed consideration is required.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 54
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
There are several policies which would serve to protect the SAC either directly or through promoting and delivering sustainable transport:
Policy EC6 contains a safeguard regarding this issue in stating that: ‘As a key sub-regional economic asset, the operation and expansion of Liverpool John Lennon Airport (LJLA), in line with its 2007 Masterplan, will be supported in principle, subject to satisfactory compliance with measures to address potential environmental impacts associated with this growth.’ Policy EC7 states that the expansion of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported and that ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should: … comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and internationally important sites …’; and Policy TP1 (Improving accessibility and managing demand for travel) states that ‘Development proposals should make the best use of existing transport infrastructure. Where this cannot be achieved, development should be phased to coincide with new transport infrastructure provision. Developments which singly or in combination have a significant impact on the movement of people or goods, should, through the provision of Travel Plans, positively manage travel demand and contribute to the improvement of accessibility in general, particularly by more sustainable modes of transport including walking, cycling and public transport. Development proposals should not compromise existing transport infrastructure or schemes programmed in the Local Transport Plan (LTP) and actions that are planned.’ These projects include more sustainable access to both Liverpool Airport and the Ports of Liverpool and Garston.
Based on this information it is concluded that the Liverpool Local Plan does provide a system of measures to minimise the contribution to any increase in nitrogen deposition within Sefton Coast SAC. As a safeguard it is recommended that when determining planning applications, consideration is given to whether they are likely to result in an increase of more than 1% of the critical load in nitrogen inputs into the Sefton Coast Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Such proposals are likely to include those in or within 200 metres (m) of the SAC, and those which could increase traffic flows on roads within 200m of the SAC by over 1,000 vehicle movements per day or 200 heavy duty vehicle movements per day (in terms of annual average daily traffic flows). If so then a project-level HRA should be undertaken. This requirement would be in line with the approach being taken in Sefton itself and provide suitable protection for Sefton Coast SAC.
6.7 Conclusion The HRA has concluded that the submission draft Liverpool Local Plan includes an adequate policy framework to enable the delivery of measures to adequately protect the Sefton Coast SAC and thus result in no likely significant effect, provided that the strategic study and resulting measures to manage recreational access within the coastal European sites around Merseyside is taken forward in a timely manner early in the plan period, utilizing the cross-authority working commitment given in Policy STP2 as its driver. It is also recommended that the standard thresholds for assessing traffic-related air quality impacts from development are applied to schemes that may result in a change in flows on roads within 200m of the SAC of 1,000 AADT or 200 HDV per day.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 55
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
7 Ribble and alt estuaries spa / ramsar
7.1 Introduction
The Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA and Ramsar site is approximately 12,360ha, and consists of extensive sand- and mud-flats and, particularly in the Ribble Estuary, large areas of saltmarsh. There are also areas of coastal grazing marsh located behind the sea embankments. The saltmarshes, coastal grazing marshes intertidal sand- and mud-flats all support high densities of grazing wildfowl and are used as high-tide roosts. Important populations of waterbirds occur in winter, including swans, geese, ducks and waders. The highest densities of feeding birds are on the muddier substrates of the Ribble.
The SPA is also of major importance during the spring and autumn migration periods, especially for wader populations moving along the west coast of Britain. The larger expanses of saltmarsh and areas of coastal grazing marsh support breeding birds during the summer, including large concentrations of gulls and terns. These seabirds feed both offshore and inland, outside of the SPA. Several species of waterbird (notably pink- footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus) utilise feeding areas on agricultural land outside of the SPA boundary. There is considerable interchange in the movements of wintering birds between this site and Morecambe Bay, the Mersey Estuary, the Dee Estuary and Martin Mere.
7.2 Reasons for Designation
The Ribble and Alt Estuaries site is designated as an SPA for its Birds Directive Annex I species, both breeding and over-wintering, and these are:
During the breeding season:
common tern Sterna hirundo: 182 pairs = 1.5% of the breeding population in Great Britain; ruff Philomachus pugnax: 1 pair = 9.1% of the breeding population in Great Britain;
Over winter:
bar-tailed godwit Limosa lapponica: 18,958 individuals = 35.8% of the population in Great Britain; Bewick’s swan Cygnus columbianus ssp. bewickii: 229 individuals = 3.3% of the population in Great Britain; golden plover Pluvialis apricaria: 4,277 individuals = 1.7% of the population in Great Britain whooper swan Cygnus cygnus: 159 individuals = 2.9% of the population in Great Britain.
It also meets the criteria for SPA designation under Article 2 of the Birds Directive, supporting internationally important populations of lesser black-backed gull Larus fuscus, ringed plover Charadrius hiaticula, sanderling Calidris alba, black-tailed godwit Limosa limosa ssp. limosa, dunlin Calidris alpina alpina, grey plover Pluvialis squatarola, knot Calidris canutus, oystercatcher Haematopus ostralegus, pink-footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus, pintail Anas acuta, redshank Tringa totanus, sanderling Calidris alba, shelduck Tadorna tadorna, teal Anas crecca and wigeon Anas penelope. It also qualifies by regularly supporting up to 29,236 individual seabirds, and, over winter, 301,449 individual waterfowl.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 56
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
It is additionally designated as a Ramsar site in accordance with Criterion 5 (UN, 2005) for supporting up 89,576 waterfowl (5-year peak mean 1998/99 – 2002/03), and in accordance with Criterion 6 for supporting internationally important populations of common shelduck Tadorna tadorna, black-tailed godwit Limosa limosa ssp. limosa, redshank Tringa totanus, Eurasian teal Anas crecca, northern pintail Anas acuta and dunlin Calidris alpina alpina.
The Ribble and Alt Estuaries also qualifies as Ramsar as it meets criterion 2 by supporting over 40% of the UK population of Natterjack toad. The Natterjack Toad occurs on the Sefton Coast in seaward dunes between Southport and Hightown. In 2000 it was present on 13 sites (three of which are reintroductions). The breeding population is estimated just over 1000 females. The largest populations are on Ainsdale Sand Dunes NNR and Ainsdale and Birkdale Sandhills LNR. Natterjacks are absent from much of the dune coast and some breeding sites are relatively isolated (North Merseyside Biodiversity Action Plan, undated).
7.3 Historic Trends and Current Pressures
As an estuarine site linked with the Liverpool Bay, this site has been subject to the same changes as described for the Liverpool Bay SPA but additionally its own unique pressures (some similar to those experienced in the Mersey Estuary). The estuaries were largely undisturbed until the 19th century, at which point there was extensive modification and dredging of the river channel for the Port of Preston, as well as landfill and drainage along the shoreline in order to increase agricultural usage of the land. The Ribble Estuary has over the past century experienced ‘a general pattern of sediment accretion in the inner Estuary and erosion in outer areas,’ but the estuary has begun ‘to revert to its natural state… since maintenance of the Ribble Channel for shipping ceased in 1980. There have been dramatic changes in the course of channels in the outer Estuary, and these are expected to continue. Anticipated climatic and sea level changes are likely to exaggerate existing patterns of erosion and accretion, although sea level rise is not expected to cause significant loss of intertidal land in the Ribble53.
The Ribble and Alt Estuaries are among ‘the most popular holiday destinations in Britain’, with Blackpool as the largest resort and Southport increasing in visitors. Leisure activities include ‘watersports such as sailing and windsurfing; fishing and shooting; bird watching; land yachting; and generally relaxing at the coast… enjoyed by both local people and visitors54’.
Some of the main environmental pressures relevant to the nature conservation objectives of the Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA / Ramsar site are:
loss or damage of habitat as a result of increasing off-shore exploration and production activity associated with oil and natural gas; over-grazing of the saltmarshes by cattle-farming; heavy metal pollution (lead, cadmium, arsenic and other poisons) from either industry or disturbance of sediment (legacy pollution bound into the sediment); pollution via rivers by agricultural effluent flowing off fields, ‘leading to increased fertility of inshore waters and associated algal blooms and de-oxygenation of seawater, particularly in enclosed bays and estuaries’;
53 (Ribble Estuary Strategy Steering Group, 1997, p.15). 54 (Ribble Estuary Strategy Steering Group, 1997, p.10).
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 57
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
pollution via rivers and drains by both treated sewerage and untreated runoff containing inorganic chemicals and organic compounds from everyday domestic products, which ‘may combine together in ways that make it difficult to predict their ultimate effect of the marine environment… Some may remain indefinitely in the seawater, the seabed, or the flesh, fat and oil of sea creatures’; damage of marine benthic habitat directly from fishing methods; damage of marine benthic habitat directly or indirectly from aggregate extraction; ‘coastal squeeze’ (a type of coastal habitat loss) from land reclamation and coastal flood defences and drainage used in order to farm or develop coastal land, and from sea level rise; harm to wildlife (especially birds) or habitat loss due to increasing proposals/demand for offshore wind turbines; pollution, direct kills, litter, disturbance or loss of habitat as a result of water-based recreation or other recreation activity and related development along the foreshore55 that there is disturbance to birds from aircraft, both from Blackpool Airport and from a private testing station introduction of non-native species and translocation; selective removal of species (e.g. bait digging, wildfowl, fishing) (Wildlife Trust, 2006 and Ribble Estuary Strategy Steering Group, 1997); interruption of dune accretion processes leading to over-stabilisation of dunes; the spread of rank grasses and scrub, partly caused by a decline in rabbit-grazing, further reducing suitable habitat; losses to development, forestry and recreational uses have reduced the area of available habitat; fragmentation of habitat has led to isolation of populations; creation of permanent water bodies in the dunes has encouraged populations of invertebrates which prey on Natterjack tadpoles and, most seriously, of Common Toads which both predate and suppress the development of Natterjack tadpoles; gassing of rabbits, especially on golf courses, can kill Natterjacks using burrows and removes a valuable grazing animal; collecting and disturbance of spawn and tadpoles can reduce metamorphic success; inappropriate management can cause the loss of low vegetation structure and open ground used by Natterjacks for foraging; water abstraction, conifers and scrub lower the water table locally and reduces the number of pools in which Natterjack tadpoles can develop to maturity.
55 Wildlife Trust (2006) – The Wildlife Trust for Lancashire, Manchester And North Merseyside (2006). Uses and abuses. .
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 58
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
There is both formal and informal recreation along the Sefton Coast and intensity varies with season, event and attraction. Recreation is much more informal within the Ribble Estuary itself.
7.4 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool
From the environmental requirements that have been identified above it can be determined development in Liverpool could theoretically interfere with the environmental requirements and processes on the SPA and Ramsar site in the following manner:
water quality from one or more of the following pathways to the River Mersey (with hydraulic connections to this SPA and Ramsar: discharge of treated sewage effluent into the Mersey; potential water pollution incidents arising from construction of Port developments, untreated runoff containing inorganic and organic compounds; water quality from increase in commercial shipping resulting from development of port activities; pollution, direct kills, litter, disturbance or loss of habitat as a result of water-based recreation or other recreation activity and related development along the foreshore (Wildlife Trust, 2006);
Deteriorating air quality as a result of increased deposition of SO2/NOx through increased aircraft, shipping or vehicle movements.
The remainder of this chapter will analyse whether any of these impacts will actually occur.
7.5 Role of other Projects and Plans
It was also considered that the following projects and plans could act ‘in combination’ with the Local Plan:
7.5.1 Projects Mersey Ports Masterplan (Consultation draft; June 2011), including the Seaforth River Terminal (a deepwater container port expansion in Sefton is currently under construction and due for completion imminently), new opportunities for renewable energy, development of single and multi-user port centric warehousing and of new processing facilities for imported commodities. potentially leading to the Liverpool SuperPort – An integrated port, airport, intermodal terminal, freight and commercial network based upon the Port of Liverpool, the Manchester Ship Canal, Liverpool John Lennon Airport and the Mersey Multimodal Gateway (Liverpool City Region).
7.5.2 Plans Liverpool City Region Renewable Energy Capacity Study – possible impacts on waterfowl flightpaths between the Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA and other European sites depending upon the degree of wind power involved and the location of turbines;
North West England & North Wales Shoreline Management Plan 2 – possible impacts due to the maintenance or enhancement of flood defences could lead to coastal squeeze, changes in sediment release (if previously undefended areas become defended) and direct loss of habitat to flood defence footprint;
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 59
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Core Strategies or Local Plans for West Lancashire, Knowsley, Sefton, Wirral and St Helens, the Mersey Heartlands Growth Point Programme of Delivery (Wirral and Liverpool) and Liverpool and Wirral Waters Development masterplans – possible water quality, air quality and wildfowl disturbance impacts as a result of delivery of 90,000 dwellings and associated commercial development over the next 20 years; and
Merseyside and Halton Joint Waste Local Plan – possible impacts due to water quality, air quality and wildfowl disturbance or chick predation. However, since this DPD is itself subject to a recent HRA it will address its own contribution to any ‘in combination’ effect that may otherwise arise.
7.6 Likely Significant Effects
7.6.1 Disturbance
Although the coast that lies adjacent to the Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA and the Ramsar site draws tourists from across the county due to the proximity of Blackpool in particular, these tourist activities are focussed upon the Ribble Estuary which is the furthest part of the SPA and Ramsar sites from Liverpool. With regard to visitors from Merseyside the southern part of the site (i.e. that largely contiguous with the Sefton Coast SAC) is of greater relevance.
As the southern part of the Ribble and Alt Estuary SPA and Ramsar sites both largely fall within the same geographical area as Sefton Coast SAC, the recreational pressures described for Sefton Coast SAC (above) are largely applicable to this site. One key difference is that recreational pressures in the Ribble and Alt Estuary SPA and Ramsar site related more to the bird interest and some species for which the site is designated (e.g. nesting terns) may be subject to different recreational disturbance in the fact that they use slightly different habitats than the SAC was designated for (i.e. sandflats and intertidal mudflats rather than coastal dunes). Furthermore since most of the interest of the SPA is in its wintering birds, the risk of recreational disturbance may be lower since there will be less recreational activity in winter. Natterjack toads however are qualifying Ramsar species, and would be more sensitive to disturbance during the spring/summer months when toadlets leave breeding ponds (the breeding ponds are generally fenced off/protected but toadlets leaving these ponds would be more subject to disturbance).
The population of Liverpool is expected to increase over the lifetime of the Local Plan associated with the delivery of 29,600 net new dwellings across Liverpool from 2013-2033. Add to this the mixed-use development of Liverpool Waters (the latter of which will potentially involve 9,000 net new dwellings and associated jobs beyond 2040). This will mean greater demands for leisure and recreational activities and facilities, and potential for increased visitor numbers along the coast associated with policies CC4 – CC6, CC13, H1, H2, H6, H8, H11, H12, H14 and GI4.
Moreover, this will occur in conjunction with the Mersey Waterfront Regional Park. The website for the park (www.merseywaterfront.com) states that ‘Leisure and recreation lie at the heart of the Regional Park concept. For the Mersey Waterfront, the creation, promotion and access to quality waterfront experiences for both residents and visitors is key. The natural environment, breathtaking views and fascinating heritage are already present; the visitor infrastructure needs to complement it. Pedestrian and cycle routes exist, but these are incomplete. Improvements such as more places to shop, eat and stay along the length of the stunning coastline will encourage more visitors to spend time exploring the area’.
The Sefton Coast, as a reflection of its existing high appeal for visitors, already has an access management strategy in place as set out in the Beach Management Plan and other initiatives overseen by the Sefton Coast Management Scheme. As such, a mechanism already exists to control the impacts of increased visitors as a
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 60
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
result of an increased pool of users based in Liverpool. However, it is reasonable to conclude that the management strategy may be placed under greater pressure as a result of the increased population of the City.
The most logical response Liverpool could make would be a Local Plan commitment to assist in the future delivery of the requirements of the Beach Management Plan (specifically as it relates to recreation management) commensurate with the contribution of visitors to the site that arise from Liverpool. This has already been discussed in the section on Sefton Coast SAC.
Development of ports and docks has the potential to cause disturbance to waterfowl. However, Policy EC7 states that the sustainable development of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported but ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should: … comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and internationally important sites …’. Moreover, development would need to comply with Policies STP2 and GI5. As such, it is considered that the references in the Local Plan are sufficient to ensure that the SPA and Ramsar site are protected.
7.6.2 Air Quality
The Site Relevant Critical Load for each bird for which the SPA was designated also seems to indicate that they are not considered likely to be affected by high sulphur deposition. It should also be noted that APIS concludes the effects may be positive for most birds because nitrogen enrichment potentially means more prey species. The only SPA species for which nitrogen deposition is identified on APIS as being potentially negative are black-tailed godwit Limosa limosa and curlew Numenius arquata (if nitrogen deposition increases the sward height of their grassland foraging grounds); however, sward height is much more strongly influenced by other factors than atmospheric nitrogen deposition such as cut height & frequency and conventional fertilisation.
Moreover, there are several policies which would serve to protect the SPA either directly or through promoting and delivering sustainable transport:
Policy EC6 contains a safeguard regarding this issue in stating that: ‘As a key sub-regional economic asset, the operation and expansion of Liverpool John Lennon Airport (LJLA), in line with its 2007 Masterplan, will be supported in principle, subject to satisfactory compliance with measures to address potential environmental impacts associated with this growth.’ Policy EC7 states that the expansion of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported and that ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should: … comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and internationally important sites …’; and Strategic Policy 34 (Improving accessibility and managing demand for travel) states that ‘Development proposals should make the best use of existing transport infrastructure. Where this cannot be achieved, development should be phased to coincide with new transport infrastructure provision. Developments which singly or in combination have a significant impact on the movement of people or goods, should, through the provision of Travel Plans, positively manage travel demand and contribute to the improvement of accessibility in general, particularly by more sustainable modes of transport including walking, cycling and public
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 61
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
transport. Development proposals should not compromise existing transport infrastructure or schemes programmed in the Local Transport Plan (LTP) and actions that are planned.’ These projects include more sustainable access to both Liverpool Airport and the Ports of Liverpool and Garston.
Based on this information it is concluded that the Liverpool Local Plan will not lead to likely significant effects on the Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA or Ramsar site due to deterioration in air quality. Therefore, no mitigation is recommended.
7.6.3 Water Quality Deterioration
Deterioration in water quality is a key environmental pressure being experienced by the Ribble and Alt Estuary SPA and Ramsar site, namely through heavy metal pollution from industry and sediment disturbance, pollution via rivers from agricultural effluent, and pollution via rivers and drains by both treated sewerage and untreated runoff containing inorganic chemicals and organic compounds from everyday domestic products.
A net increase in effluent being discharged into the European site will inevitably mean a higher nutrient loading. The implications of additional discharge which is within existing consented volumes will have already effectively been taken into account in the Environment Agency’s Review of Consents process, since the RoC is always based on consented volumes irrespective of whether the actual volume is lower. However, any increases beyond existing consented volumes (even if the works have sufficient capacity) may have implications for the European site.
Hydraulic connections were identified during the original Liverpool Core Strategy Appropriate Assessment between the Ribble and Alt Estuary SPA and Ramsar site and the Mersey Estuary. These potentially significant effects could be relevant to the Ribble and Alt Estuaries SP and /Ramsar sites due to the hydraulic connections. These changes could arise from: waste water discharge (domestic and industrial) and surface water runoff; shipping, port/dock expansion and associated navigational dredging/ship wash.
It is worth considering at this point that the majority of water quality pressures being experienced by the SPA and the Ramsar site are likely to arise from the River Ribble and the River Alt as well as the River Mersey. With this in mind policies contained within Liverpool Local Plan that may result in deterioration in water quality in the River Mersey will not lead to a likely significant effect on the Ribble and Alt Estuary SPA and Ramsar site when considered in isolation. Nevertheless, the in-combination contribution to the water quality of the Mersey should be considered and mitigated appropriately.
Avoiding an adverse effect from wastewater discharge is largely in the hands of the water companies (through their investment in future sewage treatment infrastructure) and the Environment Agency (through their role in consenting effluent discharges). However, local authorities can also contribute through ensuring that sufficient wastewater treatment infrastructure is in place prior to development being delivered through the Local Plan. In the case of Liverpool, this is alluded to in:
Policy R5 (Rivers, Canals, Watercourses and Culverts) states that: ‘Planning permission will not be granted for any development which, in the opinion of the City Council following consultation with the Environment Agency, would adversely affect the quality or supply of surface water or groundwater…’ Policy R3 (Flood Risk and Water Management) states that: ‘Proposals within areas of infrastructure capacity and/or water supply constraint should demonstrate that there is adequate
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 62
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
wastewater infrastructure and water supply capacity to serve the development or adequate provision can be made available’. Given this, and the requirement for development to comply with Policies STP2 and GI5, it is considered that likely significant effects due to wastewater impacts will not occur as due account will be taken of the need to phase development in line with wastewater treatment infrastructure.
Development of ports and docks has the potential to cause disturbance to sediment and mobilisation of contamination in addition to direct pollution. However, Policy EC7 states that proposals for the expansion of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported provided ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should: …comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and internationally important sites …’. Moreover, development would need to comply with Policies STP2 and GI5. As such, it is considered that the references in the Local Plan are sufficient to ensure that the SPA and Ramsar site are protected.
It is concluded that there will be no likely significant effect on the Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA and the Ramsar site through water quality issues as a result of any of the policies proposed within the Local Plan.
7.7 Conclusion
The HRA has concluded that the Liverpool Local Plan includes an adequate policy framework to enable the delivery of measures to adequately protect the Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA and the Ramsar site and thus result in no likely significant effect, provided that the strategic study and resulting measures to manage recreational access within the coastal European sites around Merseyside is taken forward in a timely manner early in the plan period, utilizing the cross-authority working commitment given in Policy STP2 as its driver..
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 63
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
8 Liverpool Bay SPA
8.1 Introduction The Liverpool Bay SPA is an approximately 198,000ha maritime site located in the Irish Sea, straddling the English and Welsh borders. The site has exposed mudflats and sandbanks in places, although the site extends up to approximately 20km from the shoreline and thus most of the area of the SPA is relatively shallow water up to 20m deep. It is contiguous with a number of other European sites, including the Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA and Ramsar site, Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar site, and Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site.
Consideration has also been given to the potential future extension of Liverpool Bay SPA. The proposed extension would bring the physical area covered by the SPA up to the entrance to Birkenhead Docks.
8.2 Reasons for Designation
Liverpool Bay SPA was designated from a pSPA to SPA in July 2010. Liverpool Bay has been identified by Natural England and Natural Resources Wales as qualifying for SPA status under the following Stage 1 guidelines:
Liverpool Bay regularly supports over 1% of the GB population of one species listed on Annex I of the EC Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds (79/409/EEC): red-throated diver (Gavia stellata). The mean peak count of overwintering red-throated divers within the SPA boundary over the period 2001/02 – 2005/06 was 922 individuals: or 5.4% of GB’s total estimated overwintering population. Liverpool Bay regularly supports more than 1% of the biogeographical population of one regularly occurring migratory species: common scoter (Melanitta nigra). The mean peak overwintering common scoter population of 54,675 individuals between 2001/02 – 2005/06 is an estimated 58% of the GB population. The site also supports more than 20,000 waterbirds in the non-breeding season with a mean peak average over 2001/02 – 2005/06 of at least 55,597, with at least 80,346 in winter 2001/02.
In 2004, a study team of the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) (referred to in citation as ‘Webb et al.’) produced two reports on a potential Liverpool Bay SPA, the first on the recommendation for designation, and the second on boundary options.
The proposed extension would also add red-breasted merganser and cormorant as named features of the assemblage for which the SPA is designated.
8.3 Historic Trends and Current Pressures With the proposed site encompassing approximately 198,000 hectares and a range of estuarine and maritime habitat, the Liverpool Bay SPA is subject to a wide range of pressures of varying spatial scope and human
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 64
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
activity. Perhaps the most direct way to establish the proposed site’s recent changes in health / ecological status is through the changing environmental pressures upon the Irish Sea.
The industrial revolution of the 19th century led to the Irish Sea being used to dispose liquid waste, including sewage and unwanted by-products of industrial processes (including mining, manufacturing, nuclear waste reprocessing and energy generation). This improved in the latter half of the 20th century, and sewage and other waste are no longer dumped offshore in an uncontrolled manner. While Liverpool Bay is hypernutrified, there is no evidence of harmful algal blooms or de-oxygenation of seawater (Environment Agency, pers. comm.).
Some of the main existing environmental pressures on the Irish Sea relevant to the nature conservation objectives of the Liverpool Bay SPA are:
disturbance of sediment releasing legacy heavy metal pollution (lead, cadmium, arsenic and other poisons) that is bound into the sediment; pollution via rivers and drains by both treated sewerage and untreated runoff containing inorganic chemicals and organic compounds from everyday domestic products, which ‘may combine together in ways that make it difficult to predict their ultimate effect of the marine environment… Some may remain indefinitely in the seawater, the seabed, or the flesh, fat and oil of sea creatures’; pollution via commercial shipping by chemical or noise pollution and the dumping of litter at sea; damage of marine benthic habitat directly from fishing methods; damage of marine benthic habitat directly or indirectly from aggregate extraction; ‘coastal squeeze’ (a type of coastal habitat loss) from land reclamation and coastal flood defences and drainage used in order to farm or develop coastal land, and from erosion and sea level rise; loss or damage of marine benthic habitat directly and indirectly (through changed sedimentation/deposition patterns) as a result of navigational dredging in order to accommodate large vessels – e.g. into the ports of Liverpool; harm to wildlife (especially birds) or habitat loss due to increasing proposals/demand for offshore wind turbines; and pollution, disturbance direct kills, litter or loss of habitat as a result of water-based recreation and related development along the foreshore or shipping activity.
8.4 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool
From the environmental requirements that have been identified above it can be determined that development in Liverpool could theoretically interfere with the environmental requirements and processes on the SPA in the following manner:
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 65
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Recreational disturbance with regard to the inshore parts of the site; Damage to sediments through port-related activities such as dredging; water quality from one or more of the following pathways to the River Mersey (with hydraulic connections to this SPA) discharge of treated sewage effluent into the Mersey; potential water pollution incidents arising from construction of Port developments, untreated runoff containing inorganic and organic compounds; water quality from increase in commercial shipping resulting from development of port activities; loss or damage of marine benthic habitat directly and indirectly (through changed sedimentation/deposition patterns) as a result of navigational dredging in order to accommodate large vessels; and pollution, direct kills, litter, disturbance or loss of habitat as a result of water-based recreation or other recreation activity and related development along the foreshore (Wildlife Trust, 2006).
The remainder of this chapter will analyse whether any of these impacts will actually occur.
8.5 Role of other Projects and Plans
It is considered that the following additional plans and projects could act ‘in combination’ on the SPA:
8.5.1 Projects Burbo Bank offshore windfarm comprises 25 turbines and is situated on the Burbo Flats in Liverpool Bay at the entrance to the River Mersey, approximately 6.4km (4.0 miles) from the Sefton coastline. The proposed Burbo Bank Extension offshore wind farm development consists of an area of 40 km² 8.5 km from Crosby beach. Following HRA and AA, the Secretary of State was satisfied of no likely significant effects in combination upon internationally designated sites and the application was granted planning permission in September 2014. At the time of writing (April 2016), a Marine Planning Licence Application is currently under consideration for additional dredging around the turbine bases. It is considered unlikely that this dredging will interact in combination with the Plan, resulting in likely significant effects;
Mersey Ports Masterplan (Consultation draft; June 2011), including the Seaforth River Terminal (a deepwater container port expansion in Sefton is currently under construction and due for completion imminently), new opportunities for renewable energy, development of single and multi-user port centric warehousing and of new processing facilities for imported commodities. potentially leading to the Liverpool SuperPort – An integrated port, airport, intermodal terminal, freight and commercial network based upon the Port of Liverpool, the Manchester Ship Canal, Liverpool John Lennon Airport and the Mersey Multimodal Gateway (Liverpool City Region);
Liverpool John Lennon Airport expansion – potential impacts due to increased sulphur and nitrogen deposition from aircraft, loss of supporting foraging/high-tide roost habitat and possible disturbance of waterfowl from noise;
Proposed incinerators at Runcorn and Ince Marshes – possible air quality impacts through nitrogen and sulphur deposition.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 66
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
8.5.2 Plans
Liverpool City Region Renewable Energy Capacity Study – possible impacts on waterfowl flightpaths between the Mersey Estuary and other European sites depending upon the degree of wind power involved and the location of turbines;
North West England & North Wales Shoreline Management Plan 2 – possible impacts due to the maintenance or enhancement of flood defences could lead to coastal squeeze, changes in sediment release (if previously undefended areas become defended) and direct loss of habitat to flood defence footprint;
Core Strategies or emerging Local Plans for Flintshire, Denbighshire, Halton, Conwy, Wrexham, Cheshire West and Chester, Knowsley, Sefton, Wirral and St Helens, the Mersey Heartlands Growth Point Programme of Delivery (Wirral and Liverpool) and Liverpool and Wirral Waters Development masterplans – possible water quality, air quality and wildfowl disturbance impacts as a result of delivery of over 110,000 dwellings and associated commercial development over the next 20 years; and
Merseyside and Halton Joint Waste Local Plan – possible impacts due to water quality, air quality and wildfowl disturbance or chick predation. However, since this DPD is itself subject to HRA it will address its own contribution to any ‘in combination’ effect that may otherwise arise.
Potential nuclear power development at Wyllfa in Anglesey as set out in National Policy Statement for Nuclear Power Generation EN6. The Appraisal of Sustainability site report has identified that significant strategic effects on Liverpool Bay SPA cannot be ruled out as a result of the high-level HRA undertaken for the NPS through some or all of through potential impacts on water resources and quality, habitat (and species) loss and fragmentation/ coastal squeeze, disturbance (noise, light and visual), and air quality.
8.6 Likely Significant Effects
8.6.1 Disturbance
Recreational disturbance arising from fishing, boating, visual impacts and noise are highlighted as pressures on the qualifying features of Liverpool Bay SPA56. Sefton Coast SAC and Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA and Ramsar sites are all subject to recreational pressure, and due to their close proximity to Liverpool Bay SPA, these same pressures are likely to be relevant. Red-throated diver winter inshore in water 0-20m deep and as such is likely to be particularly exposed to the impacts of water-borne recreation which largely takes place close to the shore.
Most of Liverpool Bay SPA is sufficiently far from the coast that coastal water-borne recreation (e.g. windsurfing, personal watercraft, water-skiing etc.) will constitute a small source of disturbance in comparison to conventional shipping. However, there is a margin of the site which abuts and is integrally linked with the Sefton Coast. As such, water-borne recreation around the coast will potentially affect not only the interest features of the Sefton Coast SAC/Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA and Ramsar site but also Liverpool Bay SPA.
The Sefton Coast, as a reflection of its existing high appeal for visitors, already has an access management strategy in place as set out in the Beach Management Plan and other initiatives overseen by the Sefton Coast
56 Natural England and Countryside Council for Wales (September 2009) Liverpool Bay / Bae Lerpwl pSPA Conservation Objectives from Natural England and CCW, September 2009 http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/LivBay-consobj_tcm6-15189.pdf
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 67
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Management Scheme. As such, a mechanism already exists to control the impacts of increased visitors as a result of an increased pool of users based in Liverpool. However, it is reasonable to conclude that the management strategy may be placed under greater pressure as a result of the increased population of the City.
The most logical response Liverpool could make would be a Local Plan commitment to assist in the future delivery of the requirements of the Beach Management Plan (specifically as it relates to recreation management) commensurate with the contribution of visitors to the site that arise from Liverpool, which would also cover the inshore areas of Liverpool Bay SPA.
Within the Liverpool Local Plan, the supporting text for STP2 at paragraph 5.25 does recognise this, stating that ‘The Habitat Regulations Assessment undertaken for the Core Strategy in 2010 concluded that the increase in population as a result of the level of development proposed in Liverpool could lead to recreational impacts on internationally-designated habitat sites within and beyond the City boundary. Policies within this Local Plan take account of these findings to avoid negative impacts on these sites, and the Council will, where appropriate, work in partnership with other districts and relevant bodies to avoid and manage cumulative and in-combination impacts of development on these sites. This policy identifies the sensitive areas where development may have an impact, and which would therefore require avoidance or careful assessment and mitigation measures. This includes Natura 2000 and Ramsar sites within and beyond Liverpool. Policy SPT2 provides a policy hook for delivery of this multi-authority working but is not explicit as to the role of recreational management.
The Local Plan promotes renewable and low carbon energy within Liverpool (Policies R8 and R10). HRA screening identified that this includes wind turbine construction (Policy R8), and therefore a pathway exists for the construction of onshore/offshore turbines to disrupt flight paths and displace qualifying bird species. Disturbance issues associated with maintenance activities were also identified. The River Mersey frontage has been identified as an area that may have the potential for wind turbine development. Policy R8 states that with regard to wind turbines ‘Proposals for wind turbine(s) will need to demonstrate in a Design and Access Statement including an impact assessment that there will be no harm caused as a result of the size (height) and scale (number of turbines) on the character of the wider area and with specific reference to: ….• the built or natural environment assets and the World Heritage Site in particular’. This is could be strengthened by cross-referencing to Policy GI5 in order to ensure that the Liverpool Bay SPA is protected.
Development of ports and docks has the potential to cause disturbance to waterfowl. However, Policy EC7 states that the sustainable development of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported but ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should: … comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and internationally important sites …As such, it is considered that the references in the Local Plan are sufficient to ensure that the SPA is protected.
8.6.2 Water Quality Deterioration
Liverpool Bay SPA extends over the Mouth of the Mersey Estuary. It is therefore susceptible to changes in water quality within Mersey Estuary arising from:
waste water discharge (domestic and industrial) and surface water runoff; and shipping, port/dock expansion and associated navigational dredging/ship wash.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 68
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
The Natural England Conservation Advice Package57 provides more detail on the risk that the pollutants pose to the qualifying features of interest at the Liverpool Bay SPA.
With respect to waste water discharge, non-toxic contamination through nutrient loading, organic loading and changes to the thermal regime could impact on prey species and distribution. The sensitivity of the prey species of both red-throated diver and common scoter to non-toxic contamination is considered moderate. As benthic feeders, common scoter are closely associated with the availability and condition of their shallow sandbank habitat. As such they are considered highly sensitive to its physical loss and smothering and any adverse impact on benthic communities.
Avoiding an adverse effect from wastewater discharge is largely in the hands of the water companies (through their investment in future sewage treatment infrastructure) and the Environment Agency (through their role in consenting effluent discharges). However, local authorities can also contribute through ensuring that sufficient wastewater treatment infrastructure is in place prior to development being delivered through the Local Plan. In the case of Liverpool, this is alluded to in:
Policy R5 (Rivers, Canals, Watercourses and Culverts) states that: ‘Planning permission will not be granted for any development which, in the opinion of the City Council following consultation with the Environment Agency, would adversely affect the quality or supply of surface water or groundwater….’; Policy R3 (Flood Risk and Water Management) states that: ‘Proposals within areas of infrastructure capacity and/or water supply constraint should demonstrate that there is adequate wastewater infrastructure and water supply capacity to serve the development or adequate provision can be made available’. Given this, and the need to comply with Policies STP2 and GI5, it is considered that likely significant effects due to wastewater impacts will not occur as due account will be taken of the need to phase development in line with wastewater treatment infrastructure.
PCBs are toxic persistent organic pollutants used in industry as dielectric fluids for transformers, capacitors, coolants can bioaccumulate in the sublittoral prey species of the common scoter and bioaccumulate/ biomagnify in the fish species of the red-throated diver. If marine pollution were to occur there is the potential for exposure to PCBs to change. Hotspots of PCBs include industrial estuaries and sandy environments offshore, but as PCB’s are currently banned, exposure can be considered low. However disturbance of sediments through shipping, dock/port expansion and navigational dredging may release such hotspots of PCBs.
Large oil and chemical spills affecting shallow sandbank habitats can have a detrimental effect on bird populations as it can affect their food sources and also the birds directly especially during their moulting times when they are far less mobile. Sensitivity to non-synthetic compounds is therefore considered to be high. Oil on the feathers of birds could lead to loss of insulation, reduced buoyancy and possible drowning. Consequently both qualifying bird species may suffer the inability to feed, resulting in starvation and death. The possibility of a pollution event, however, has been considered and the overall assessment of exposure is considered to be low. This is a combination of ‘normal’ toxic contamination in the SPA plus the low risk of a catastrophic event. Although exposure is low, the possibility of a catastrophic event due to vessel traffic (oil tankers, ships with toxic contaminants etc) exists.
57http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/3236717?category=3212324
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 69
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Development of ports and docks has the potential to disturb substrates/ circulate synthetic chemical pollutants and heavy metals all of which could result in potential harm to benthic communities, aquatic invertebrates and habitats required by qualifying bird species. Furthermore greater shipping freight has the potential for pollution through fuel emissions/ accidental spillage (described above in relation to waste water discharge/run-off above). However, Policy EC7 states that the sustainable development of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported but ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should:… comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and internationally important sites …’. As such, and given the need to comply with Policies STP2 and GI5, it is considered that the references in the Local Plan are sufficient to ensure that the SPA is protected.
It is concluded that there will be no likely significant effect on the Liverpool Bay SPA through water quality issues as a result of any of the policies proposed within the Local Plan.
8.7 Conclusion The HRA has concluded that the Liverpool Local Plan includes an adequate policy framework to enable the delivery of measures to adequately protect Liverpool Bay SPA and thus avoid a likely significant effect, provided that the strategic study and resulting measures to manage recreational access within the coastal European sites around Merseyside is taken forward in a timely manner early in the plan period, utilizing the cross-authority working commitment given in Policy STP2 as its driver..
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 70
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
9 Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar
9.1 Introduction The Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar site is approximately 2,078ha, located at the mouths of the Mersey and Dee estuaries. The site comprises intertidal habitats at Egremont foreshore (feeding habitat for waders at low tide), man-made lagoons at Seaforth Nature Reserve (high tide roost and nesting site for terns) and the extensive intertidal flats at North Wirral Foreshore (supports large numbers of feeding waders at low tide and also includes important high-tide roost sites). The most notable feature of the site is the exceptionally high density of wintering Turnstone. The Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore has clear links in terms of bird movements with the nearby Dee Estuary SPA and Ramsar site, Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA and Ramsar site, and (to a lesser extent) the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site (Wirral MBC, 2001).
9.2 Reasons for Designation The Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar site is proposed on the grounds of its feeding and roosting habitat for non-breeding wading birds, and as a breeding site for terns (Wirral MBC, 2001). The Birds Directive Annex I species (qualifying the site under Article 4.1), which can be found in any season, are:
The site regularly supports more than 1% of the GB populations of 3 species listed in Annex I of the EC Birds Directive (Bar-tailed Godwit Limosa lapponica, Little Gull Hydrocoloeus minutus and Common Tern Sterna hirundo). The site also qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Birds Directive, as it is used regularly by 1% or more of the biogeographical populations of the following migratory species:
Knot Calidris canutus: 2.4% of NW European, NE Canadian, Greenland & Icelandic populations; Additionally, in qualifying under Article 4.2 of the Birds Directive, the site regularly supports over 20,000 individuals of a wider range of species, including dunlin, knot Calidris canutus, grey plover Pluvialis squatarola, oystercatcher Haematopus ostralegus and cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo.
The site qualifies under the Ramsar Convention under Criterion 5, regularly supporting over 20,000 waterbirds (non-breeding season, 32,366 individual waterbirds), and Criterion 6, regularly supporting 1% of the species or subspecies of waterbird in any season listed above.
9.3 Historic Trends and Current Pressures Due to its location at the mouth of the Mersey Estuary and in the Liverpool Bay, this site has been subject to the same changes as described for the Liverpool Bay SPA and the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site, in particular water quality improvements since the 1960s (especially since 1985), and increases in agricultural effluent pollution during this same period.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 71
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Some of the main current (as opposed to future) environmental pressures relevant to the nature conservation objectives of the Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA / Ramsar site are:
disturbance of sediment releasing legacy heavy metal pollution (lead, cadmium, arsenic and other poisons) that is bound into the sediment; pollution via rivers and drains by both treated sewerage and untreated runoff containing inorganic chemicals and organic compounds from everyday domestic products, which ‘may combine together in ways that make it difficult to predict their ultimate effect of the marine environment… Some may remain indefinitely in the seawater, the seabed, or the flesh, fat and oil of sea creatures’; pollution via commercial shipping by chemical or noise pollution and the dumping of litter at sea; damage of marine benthic habitat directly from fishing methods; damage of marine benthic habitat along the North Wirral Foreshore directly or indirectly from aggregate extraction, particularly anywhere that dredging may be altering erosion/deposition patterns; ‘coastal squeeze’ (a type of coastal habitat loss) from land reclamation and coastal flood defences and drainage used in order to farm or develop coastal land, and from sea level rise; loss or damage of marine benthic habitat directly and indirectly (through changed sedimentation/deposition patterns) as a result of navigational dredging in order to accommodate large vessels – e.g. into the ports of Liverpool; harm to wildlife (especially birds) or habitat loss due to increasing proposals/demand for offshore wind turbines; and pollution, direct kills, litter, disturbance or loss of habitat as a result of water-based recreation or other recreation activity and related development along the foreshore (Wildlife Trust, 2006); introduction of non-native species and translocation; and selective removal of species (e.g. bait digging, wildfowl, fishing) (Wildlife Trust, 2006 and Marine Biological Association, 2006). Many of these are of course outside the remit of the local authority to affect (such as release of heavy metals from sediment disturbance, offshore wind turbines, commercial fishing and pollution from commercial shipping) but they all form the background picture for assessment. The Mersey estuary does have a high load of nutrients mainly from diffuse sources, with levels for phosphate and nitrogen decreasing from point sources. However, recent modelling has shown that due to the natural turbidity of the water, there is only a low risk of excessive algal growth.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 72
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
9.4 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool From the environmental requirements that have been identified above it can be determined that development in Liverpool could theoretically interfere with the environmental requirements and processes on the SPA and Ramsar site in the following manner:
Damage to sediments through some port-related activities (although most, such as dredging in addition to direct land-take of Seaforth Nature Reserve, will be in Sefton rather than Liverpool); water quality from one or more of the following pathways to the River Mersey (with hydraulic connections to this SPA and Ramsar: discharge of treated sewage effluent into the Mersey; potential water pollution incidents arising from construction of Port developments, untreated runoff containing inorganic and organic compounds; water quality from increase in commercial shipping resulting from development of port activities, although again most of the probable shipping increase would be in Sefton associated with the Seaforth River Terminal; loss or damage of marine benthic habitat directly and indirectly (through changed sedimentation/deposition patterns) as a result of navigational dredging in order to accommodate large vessels although again most of the probable shipping increase would be in Sefton associated with the Seaforth River Terminal; pollution, direct kills, litter, disturbance or loss of habitat as a result of water-based recreation or other recreation activity and related development along the foreshore (Wildlife Trust, 2006);
Deteriorating air quality as a result of increased deposition of SO2/NOx through increased aircraft or shipping movements Possible disturbance due to airport expansion particularly with regard to possible lighting impacts.
The remainder of this chapter will analyse whether any of these impacts will actually occur.
9.5 Role of other Projects and Plans The following plans and projects are considered to have the potential to act upon the SPA and Ramsar site ‘in combination’:
9.5.1 Projects Mersey Ports Masterplan (Consultation draft; June 2011), including the Seaforth River Terminal (a deepwater container port expansion in Sefton is currently under construction and due for completion imminently), new opportunities for renewable energy, development of single and multi-user port centric warehousing and of new processing facilities for imported commodities. potentially leading to the Liverpool SuperPort – An integrated port, airport, intermodal terminal, freight and commercial network based upon the Port of Liverpool, the Manchester Ship Canal, Liverpool John Lennon Airport and the Mersey Multimodal Gateway (Liverpool City Region);
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 73
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Peel Waters: Wirral and Liverpool Waters - This project is the development of currently run down dockland areas both on the Wirral and Liverpool side of the River Mersey. This includes the construction of houses, retail and commercial developments. The construction of these two developments will have a direct impact on the Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA due to loss of habitat, barrier impacts for birds in flight and significant disturbance issues during construction; Sandon Dock Waste Water Treatment Works outfall extension - to reduce adverse effects on estuary marshes the work to extend the outfall will take place on the opposite bank to the Egremont Shore section of the Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore Ramsar and SPA site (containing Mersey Narrows SSSI) but may still have an impact on the designated features of the SPA through the construction of the extended pipe. There may be issues relating to changes in sedimentation patterns altering the position of sand banks; Energy from Waste Plants at Runcorn and Ince Marshes – possible air quality impacts through nitrogen and sulphur deposition. However, both of these schemes are consented such that they will introduce mitigation for their own air quality impacts. In practice therefore, no in combination effect should result; and
Frodsham Windfarm - possible impacts on waterfowl flightpaths between the North Wirral Foreshore and other European sites. Although the assessments undertaken for the planning application indicate that these issues are resolvable, planning permission was granted subject to conditions so we have taken the precautionary view.
9.5.2 Plans Liverpool City Region Renewable Energy Capacity Study – possible impacts on waterfowl flightpaths between the Mersey Estuary and other European sites depending upon the degree of wind power involved and the location of turbines;
North West England & North Wales Shoreline Management Plan 2 – possible impacts due to the maintenance or enhancement of flood defences could lead to coastal squeeze, changes in sediment release (if previously undefended areas become defended) and direct loss of habitat to flood defence footprint;
Core Strategies for Flintshire, Wrexham, Conwy, Denbighshire, Halton, Cheshire West and Chester, and St Helens, the Mersey Heartlands Growth Point Programme of Delivery (Wirral and Liverpool) and Liverpool and Wirral Waters Development masterplans – possible water quality, air quality and wildfowl disturbance impacts as a result of delivery of over 110,000 dwellings and associated commercial development over the next 20 years; and
Merseyside and Halton Joint Waste Local Plan – possible impacts due to water quality, air quality and wildfowl disturbance or chick predation. However, since this DPD is itself
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 74
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
subject to HRA it will address its own contribution to any ‘in combination’ effect that may otherwise arise.
9.6 Likely Significant Effects
9.6.1 Direct Land-take In order to extend the Port of Liverpool (Policy EC7) part of the Mersey Narrows SSSI which would otherwise constitute part of the Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar sites (Management Unit 1, equivalent to Seaforth Nature Reserve) will be wholly or partially lost to direct landtake. However, Strategic Policy EC7 states that the sustainable development of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported but ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should: …comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and internationally important sites …’. Moreover, the additional land-take is located within Sefton rather than Liverpool. It is therefore considered that no further amendment is required to Local Plan policy in order to protect the SPA and Ramsar sites.
9.6.2 Disturbance Several online sources58 59 suggest that the North Wirral Foreshore is both easily accessible and well used by dog walkers. These sources also suggest water based recreation (e.g. jet ski’s) to be potentially damaging. Additionally, the North Wirral Foreshore is used for bait digging60. The population of Liverpool is expected to increase over the lifetime of the Local Plan associated with the delivery of 29,600 net new dwellings across Liverpool from 2013-2033. Add to this the mixed-use development of Liverpool Waters (the latter of which will potentially involve 9,000 net new dwellings and associated jobs beyond 2040). This will mean greater demands for leisure and recreational activities and facilities, and potential for increased visitor numbers along the coast. Under normal circumstances the Seaforth Nature Reserve component of the Mersey Narrows SSSI is sufficiently close to Liverpool that it would potentially be subject to increased visitor pressure. However, access to this reserve is controlled such that recreational pressure can in fact be managed. Although the remainder of the Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore is relatively close to Liverpool (approximately 2km in a direct line) and is accessible via either the ferry or the Kingsway/Queensway tunnels these are both payable, which is likely to considerably reduce the proportion of visitors from Liverpool compared to other sites both closer to home and for which access is free and a similar experience can be gained (i.e. Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site or Sefton Coast SAC or Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA or similarly named Ramsar site). On this basis it is considered that the Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA and the Ramsar site (other than the Seaforth Nature Reserve component) are unlikely to form a significant recreational resource for residents of Liverpool.
HRA screening identified potential pathways of effects between the expansion of Liverpool John Lennon Airport (JLA) (Policy EC6) and disturbance of qualifying bird species due to increase in airplanes taxiing which
58 http://friendsofnorthwirralcoastalpark.co.uk/
59 http://www.wirralglobe.co.uk/news/1732173.0/
60 Natural England, Countryside Council for Wales and Welsh Assembly Government (January 2010) ‘The Dee Estuary European Marine Site’
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 75
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
could create disturbance issues for birds using the SPA and the Ramsar site. Initial drafts of the Airport Masterplan refer to increased lighting as a result of the airport expansion, and note that birds and bats may be affected (Peel Airports, 2006), although subsequent drafts (i.e. the final 2007 Masterplan) indicate that these issues would in the opinion of LJLA be resolvable. However, it is not as yet clear as to whether Natural England and Countryside Council for Wales universally accept these conclusions. Any increase in illumination is unlikely to affect a site so far from the airport, particularly since use of the SPA and the Ramsar site by waterfowl remains high despite the north bank of the Mersey generally being a brightly lit environment.
Policy EC6 contains a safeguard regarding this issue in stating that: ‘As a key sub-regional economic asset, the operation and expansion of Liverpool John Lennon Airport (LJLA), in line with its 2007 Masterplan, will be supported in principle, subject to satisfactory compliance with measures to address potential environmental impacts associated with this growth. These are: … impact on the adjacent natural and built environment, including sites and buildings of international, national or local conservation, ecological or landscape importance. With respect to internationally important sites (the Mersey Estuary Ramsar Site and Mersey Estuary Special Protection Area), development will be required to include appropriate mitigation measures agreed with the City Council and informed by an up-to-date environmental assessment;’ This should either be made less site-specific or expanded to refer to Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar site. Any development will also need to comply with the requirements of Policy STP2 and Policy GI5.
It is concluded that there will be no likely significant effect on the Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar site through direct disturbance as a result of any of the policies proposed within the Local Plan, subject to the amendment of Policy EC6.
9.6.3 Water Quality Deterioration
The Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar sites include the mouth of the Mersey Estuary (principally Egremont Foreshore on the south bank, and Seaforth on the north bank) as well as the North Wirral Foreshore itself. Egremont Foreshore and Seaforth are separated by approximately 2km, but are considered to be an integral site on the basis of the constant interchange of bird populations. These areas of the Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar sites are susceptible to changes in water quality in the Mersey Estuary arising from:
waste water discharge (domestic and industrial) and surface water runoff; and shipping, port/dock expansion and associated navigational dredging/ship wash.
A recent study has been undertaken to establish the ecological value and functionality of key points along the Mersey Estuary, which included these two sites within the Mersey Narrows61 described below.
The area around Seaforth Nature Reserve was identified as particularly important as a high tide roost site, particularly during high spring tides when rocky shores and man-made structures closer to the feeding areas are submerged and not available as roosting sites. Important for wildfowl and some wading bird species. The Marine Lakes is a sheltered roosting location that regularly supported a diverse assemblage of mixed duck species; notably diving ducks. Numbers of dabbling ducks; Eurasian Teal and to a lesser extent Common Shelduck were high in comparison to other sites surveyed but again these records were mostly of birds on the Seaforth site. The site is adjacent to the Seaforth LNR and most of the wading species recorded at Crosby were of birds on this site. Black-tailed Godwits regularly used this site but were recorded almost exclusively
61 RSK (2010) Mersey Feasibility Study Winter Bird Report
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 76
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
on the Seaforth site. The foreshore areas were used by feeding shorebirds including locally significant numbers of Eurasian Oystercatcher, Sanderling and Ringed Plover. The foreshore areas at Crosby were subject to the greatest level of activity of Eurasian Oystercatcher of all sites surveyed. These birds transferred regularly with the site at New Brighton. The exposed sandy beaches were used regularly by this species as a feeding site with birds roosting near the Marine Lakes or on the Seaforth site. Bar-tailed Godwits were recorded sporadically at this site.
The North Wirral Foreshore and New Brighton area (around Egremont Foreshore) are widely recognised as being of conservation importance for many species of wading bird, particularly feeding at low tide on the barnacle beds and groynes. The foreshore area consists of large expanses of exposed sandy beach at low tide and it is in these areas that the highest activity of Eurasian Oystercatcher was recorded. This species occurred in locally significant numbers roosting on the breakwaters and surrounding structures at high tide. There is a high transference of birds between Egremont Foreshore and Crosby. This site is well known as a regular wintering site for Purple Sandpipers. These birds used the rocky areas, groynes and shore defences for both feeding and roosting and were closely associated with larger flocks (several thousands) of Ruddy Turnstone which also congregate on the Marine Lake area as a high tide roost; as well as feeding on the tide line. Eurasian Oystercatchers were also noted using the high tide roost on the Marine Lake as this area was relatively undisturbed.
It is therefore possible that any changes in water quality and resultant effects on crustaceans, worms or other food source, has the potential to affect these qualifying bird species within the Egremont Foreshore and Seaforth Nature Reserve areas. It should be noted, however that any deterioration in water quality arising from Liverpool Local Plan will be in combination with the Halton and Wirral Core Strategies (or Local Plans) within Merseyside, as well as the Warrington Core Strategy in Cheshire.
Avoiding an adverse effect from wastewater discharge is largely in the hands of the water companies (through their investment in future sewage treatment infrastructure) and the Environment Agency (through their role in consenting effluent discharges). However, local authorities can also contribute through ensuring that sufficient wastewater treatment infrastructure is in place prior to development being delivered through the Local Plan. In the case of Liverpool, this is alluded to in:
Policy R5 (Rivers, Canals, Watercourses and Culverts) states that: ‘Planning permission will not be granted for any development which, in the opinion of the City Council following consultation with the Environment Agency, would adversely affect the quality or supply of surface water or groundwater….’; Policy R3 (Flood Risk and Water Management) states that: ‘Proposals within areas of infrastructure capacity and/or water supply constraint should demonstrate that there is adequate wastewater infrastructure and water supply capacity to serve the development or adequate provision can be made available’.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 77
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Given this it is considered that likely significant effects due to wastewater impacts will not occur as due account will be taken of the need to phase development in line with wastewater treatment infrastructure.
Development of ports and docks has the potential to disturb substrates/ circulate synthetic chemical pollutants and heavy metals all of which could result in potential harm to benthic communities, aquatic invertebrates and habitats required by qualifying bird species. Furthermore greater shipping freight has the potential for pollution through fuel emissions/ accidental spillage (described above in relation to waste water discharge/run-off above). However, Policy EC7 states that proposals for the expansion of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported provided ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should:… comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and internationally important sites …’.
The Mersey Tidal Power Scheme has been indefinitely postponed but is also a project that could result in adverse water quality impacts through dredging, contamination mobilisation, installation of cofferdams etc. during construction and possibly maintenance on the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar sites depending upon the details of the scheme. Policy R4 (The Coast) of the Local Plan states ‘All development proposals must ensure that they do not:… Adversely affect the integrity of sites of international nature conservation importance, taking into account appropriate mitigation, or as a last resort, compensation in accordance with Policy GI 5 of the Local Plan’. As such, it is considered that the references in the Local Plan are sufficient to ensure that the SPA and the Ramsar site are protected.
It is concluded that there will be no likely significant effect on the Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA or Ramsar site through water quality issues as a result of any of the policies proposed within the Local Plan.
9.6.4 Air Quality The extension of Liverpool John Lennon Airport and (particularly) the expansion of the Ports of Liverpool and Garston are likely to increase sulphur dioxide emissions in the vicinity of the SPA and Ramsar site. However, reference to APIS indicates that the actual SO2 concentration in the SPA is well below the critical level (according to APIS the concentration is 2.3 µgm-3 compared to a critical level for damage of 20 µgm-3). Moreover, a review of the sensitivities (as described on APIS) of the species for which the SPA and Ramsar sites have been proposed seems to indicate that they are not considered likely to be affected by sulphur deposition.
Similarly, the current level of nitrogen deposition for the same point is 9.9 kgN/ha/yr compared to a minimum critical load (for sublittoral sediment) of 20 kgN/ha/yr. It should also be noted that APIS concludes the effects
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 78
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
may be positive for most birds because nitrogen enrichment potentially means more prey species. The only SPA and Ramsar species for which nitrogen deposition is identified on APIS as being potentially negative are black-tailed godwit Limosa limosa and curlew Numenius arquata (if nitrogen deposition increases the sward height of their grassland foraging grounds); however, sward height is much more strongly influenced by other factors than atmospheric nitrogen deposition such as cut height & frequency and conventional fertilisation.
Moreover, there are several policies which would serve to protect the SPA and Ramsar sites either directly or through promoting and delivering sustainable transport:
Policy EC6 contains a safeguard regarding this issue in stating that: ‘As a key sub-regional economic asset, the operation and expansion of Liverpool John Lennon Airport (LJLA), in line with its 2007 Masterplan, will be supported in principle, subject to satisfactory compliance with measures to address potential environmental impacts associated with this growth. These are: … impact on the adjacent natural and built environment, including sites and buildings of international, national or local conservation, ecological or landscape importance. With respect to internationally important sites (the Mersey Estuary Ramsar Site and Mersey Estuary Special Protection Area), development will be required to include appropriate mitigation measures agreed with the City Council and informed by an up-to-date environmental assessment;’ This should either be made less site-specific or expanded to refer to Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar site Policy EC7 states that the expansion of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported and that ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should: … comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and internationally important sites …’ Policy H11 states that gypsy and traveller sites must have access to public transport; Policy TP1 (Improving accessibility and managing demand for travel) states that ‘Development proposals should make the best use of existing transport infrastructure. Where this cannot be achieved, development should be phased to coincide with new transport infrastructure provision. Developments which singly or in combination have a significant impact on the movement of people or goods, should, through the provision of Travel Plans, positively manage travel demand and contribute to the improvement of accessibility in general, particularly by more sustainable modes of transport including walking, cycling and public transport. Development proposals should not compromise existing transport infrastructure or schemes programmed in the Local Transport Plan (LTP) and actions that are planned.’ These projects include more sustainable access to both Liverpool Airport and the Ports of Liverpool and Garston. Based on this information it is concluded that the Liverpool Local Plan will not lead to likely significant effects on the Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar site due to deterioration in air quality. Therefore, no mitigation is recommended.
9.7 Conclusion The HRA has concluded that the Liverpool Local Plan includes an adequate policy framework to enable the delivery of measures to ensure that the Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar site are protected and thus no likely significant effect results, provided that the reference to Mersey Estuary SPA in
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 79
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Policy EC6 is either made less specific (i.e. European sites) or expanded to include reference to Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA or Ramsar site.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 80
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
10 Manchester Mosses SAC
10.1 Introduction Manchester Mosses SAC comprises Astley and Bedford Mosses, Holcroft Moss and Risley Moss, totalling approximately 173ha. The site is significant for mossland that ‘formerly covered a very large part of low-lying Greater Manchester, Merseyside and southern Lancashire, and provided a severe obstacle to industrial and agricultural expansion’ (JNCC, 2006d). These sites are examples that have survived as degraded raised bog on the Mersey floodplain, with their surfaces elevated above surrounding land due to shrinkage of the surrounding tilled land, and ‘all except Holcroft Moss have been cut for peat at some time in the past’ (JNCC, 2006d).
10.2 Reasons for Designation Manchester Mosses SAC is designated for its Habitats Directive Annex I habitat of ‘degraded raised bogs still capable of natural regeneration’ (EC, 1992).
10.3 Historic Trends and Current Pressures As discussed above, the Manchester Mosses SAC is a direct result of historical loss of mossland (i.e. bog) habitat due to drainage for agriculture and built development. Mossland is reported to have been a significant obstacle to industrialisation of the area around Manchester, and its drainage and landfilling was intensified during the 19th and 20th centuries. However, recent rehabilitation management over the past 15-20 years has increased peat-producing Sphagnum species.
Guidance exists to address the potential effects of local pollution, for which the most significant contributors are power generators and other industrial processes, and traffic. Laxen and Wilson (2002) suggests that NO2 emissions from motorways essentially reach background levels within 200m of the roadside. Air pollution at many European sites is already believed to be having an adverse effect. Tables 6 and 7 show the degree to which Manchester Mosses SAC is affected by atmospheric nitrogen deposition (data downloaded from APIS on 04/07/16).
Table 6: Atmospheric nitrogen deposition compared with critical load at Holcroft Moss*
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 81
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Minimum Is atmospheric Nitrogen Grid critical Load nitrogen deposition Site Habitat Deposition/ Kg Exceedance / Kg currently a reference N/ha/ year N/ha/year problem?
Manchester SJ683928 Raised 5 20.16 Current deposition is Yes Mosses SAC and more than four times (Holcroft Moss) blanket the minimum critical bogs load.
Source: Based on information provided by the UK Air Pollution Information System (www.apis.ac.uk). Data downloaded from APIS on 04/07/16
* the closest part of Manchester Mosses SAC to the M62
Table 7: Atmospheric sulphur dioxide concentrations compared with critical load at Holcroft Moss
Is sulphur Critical SO2 Grid dioxide Site Habitat Level / Concentration / Exceedance reference currently a µg/m3 µg/m3 problem?
Manchester SJ683928 Raised and 20 4.9 Current No Mosses SAC blanket concentration is 25% (Holcroft Moss) bogs of the critical level.
Source: Based on information provided by the UK Air Pollution Information System (www.apis.ac.uk). Data downloaded from APIS on 04/07/16
Nevertheless, it is clear from Table 5 that nitrogen deposition is already a problem within Manchester Mosses SAC and it is not unreasonable to attribute this to the proximity of Holcroft Moss to the M62. Indeed, Environment Agency modelling data suggest that 40% of the nitrogen deposited on this site arises from road transport. In contrast, the site is not suffering from sulphur dioxide deposition, presumably because road traffic contributes very little to atmospheric concentrations of sulphur dioxide.
The environmental pressures upon the mossland habitat for which this site is designated are mainly:
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 82
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Atmospheric nitrogen deposition from road traffic; increased agricultural drainage in the surrounding land, which causes the habitat to dry out and begin succession towards scrubland and woodland (including drainage of peat that gradually increases a downward gradient away from the mosslands); changes to the maintenance regime of nearby agricultural drainage, which can cause either drying out through unsympathetic dredging, or waterlogging through complete lack of dredging; increased water abstraction for irrigation, which can contribute towards the drying out of mossland habitat through reduced flows and/or a lowered water table; afforestation as a result of natural succession; fly-tipping; loss of neighbouring mossland habitat as a result of agricultural drainage or drainage and landfill for development; loss of neighbouring peat and mossland habitat as a result of peat harvesting, both legally and illegally; damage to mossland habitat due to increased recreational pressure (e.g. paintball); and loss of Sphagnum species as a result of drying out and increased air pollution.
10.4 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool
From the environmental requirements that have been identified above it can be determined that development in Liverpool could theoretically interfere with the environmental requirements and processes on the SAC in the following manner:
Cumulative ‘in combination’ deterioration in local air quality (when considered alongside other authorities alongside the M62 that will be delivering new housing over the same period) and thus increased nitrogen deposition since the M62 is one of the major routes from eastern Merseyside (north of the river) and Greater Manchester.
The HRA will therefore concentrate on evaluating whether these impacts are likely to occur and what amendments to policy may be required to avoid or minimise them.
10.5 Likely Significant Effects
The population of Liverpool is expected to increase over the lifetime of the Local Plan associated with the delivery of 29,600 net new dwellings across Liverpool from 2013-2033. Add to this the mixed-use development of Liverpool Waters (the latter of which will potentially involve 9,000 net new dwellings and associated jobs beyond 2040). This has the potential to result in an increase in vehicle movements using the M62, and therefore contribute to an increase in atmospheric nitrogen deposition into the SAC.
Since Manchester Mosses SAC (Holcroft Moss SSSI) lies over 20 km from Liverpool, development within the city is very unlikely by itself to result in a significant increase in atmospheric nitrogen deposition into the SAC. However, under current plans, approximately 80,460 new dwellings and at least 1,440 ha of commercial development will be delivered across the Merseyside area over the next 20 years. Given the key role of the M62 as one of the major entry/exit routes to Merseyside from the Midlands and the North, it is reasonable to
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 83
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
assume that a significant cumulative ‘in combination’ air quality effect as a result of the cumulative increase in vehicle emissions is not unlikely.
There are several policies which would serve to protect the SAC either directly or through promoting and delivering sustainable transport:
Policy EC6 contains a safeguard regarding this issue in stating that: ‘As a key sub-regional economic asset, the operation and expansion of Liverpool John Lennon Airport (LJLA), in line with its 2007 Masterplan, will be supported in principle, subject to satisfactory compliance with measures to address potential environmental impacts associated with this growth.’ Policy EC7 states that the sustainable development of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported and that ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should: … comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and internationally important sites …’; and Policy TP1 (Improving accessibility and managing demand for travel) states that ‘Development proposals should make the best use of existing transport infrastructure. Where this cannot be achieved, development should be phased to coincide with new transport infrastructure provision. Developments which singly or in combination have a significant impact on the movement of people or goods, should, through the provision of Travel Plans, positively manage travel demand and contribute to the improvement of accessibility in general, particularly by more sustainable modes of transport including walking, cycling and public transport. Development proposals should not compromise existing transport infrastructure or schemes programmed in the Local Transport Plan (LTP) and actions that are planned.’ These projects include more sustainable access to both Liverpool Airport and the Ports of Liverpool and Garston. Based on this information it is concluded that the Liverpool Local Plan does provide a system of measures to minimise the contribution to any increase in nitrogen deposition within Manchester Mosses SAC.
10.6 Conclusion The provision of these policies demonstrates that the Local Plan does already include proportionate measures to minimise its contribution to vehicle movements on the M62 and therefore contains an adequate policy framework to enable Liverpool to reduce its atmospheric nitrogen deposition on Manchester Mosses SAC from Local Plan development to a level that is effectively inconsequential.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 84
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
11 DEE Estuary SAC, SPA & rAMSAR
11.1 Introduction The Dee Estuary SAC, SPA & Ramsar site is a large funnel-shaped sheltered estuary and is one of the top five estuaries in the UK for wintering and passage waterfowl populations. The Dee Estuary site covers over 13,000ha and is the largest macro-tidal coastal plain Estuary between the larger Severn Estuary and the Solway Firth. The Dee Estuary is hyper-tidal with a mean spring tidal range of 7.7m at the mouth. The site has extensive areas of intertidal sand-flats, mud-flats and saltmarsh. In areas where agricultural use has not occurred, the saltmarshes grade into transitional brackish and swamp vegetation on the upper shore. The site also supports three sandstone islands (the Hilbre islands) which have important cliff vegetation and maritime heathland and grassland. The two sides of the Estuary show a marked difference between the industrialised usage of the Welsh coastal belt and the residential and recreational English side.
The site also includes an assemblage of nationally scarce plants and the sandhill rustic moth Luperina nickerlii gueneei, a British Red Data Book species. The two shorelines of the estuary show a marked contrast between the industrialised usage of the coastal belt in Wales and residential and recreational usage in England.
11.2 Reasons for Designation
The Dee Estuary qualifies as an SAC for both habitats and species. Firstly, the site contains the following Habitats Directive Annex I habitats:
Water courses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho- Batrachion vegetation; Mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide; Salicornia and other annuals colonising mud and sand - The Dee Estuary is representative of pioneer glasswort Salicornia spp. saltmarsh in the north-west of the UK. Salicornia spp. saltmarsh forms extensive stands in the Dee, especially on the more sandy muds where there is reduced tidal scour. It mainly occurs on the seaward fringes as a pioneer community, and moving landwards usually forms a transition to common saltmarsh-grass Puccinellia maritima saltmarsh (SM10). There is also a low frequency of Salicornia spp. extending well inland. Associated species often include annual sea-blite Suaeda maritima and hybrid scurvy grass Cochlearia x hollandica. Atlantic salt meadows (Glauco-Puccinellietalia maritimae) - The Dee Estuary is representative of H1330 Atlantic salt meadows in the north-west of the UK. It forms the most extensive type of saltmarsh in the Dee, and since the 1980s it has probably displaced very large quantities of the non-native common cord-grass Spartina anglica. The high accretion rates found in the estuary are likely to favour further development of this type of vegetation. The saltmarsh is regularly inundated by the sea; characteristic salt-tolerant perennial flowering plant species include
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 85
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
common saltmarsh-grass Puccinellia maritima, sea aster Aster tripolium, and sea arrowgrass Triglochin maritima. In a few areas there are unusual transitions to wet woodland habitats. Secondly, the site contains the following Habitats Directive Annex II habitats and species:
Estuaries Annual vegetation of drift lines Vegetated sea cliffs of the Atlantic and Baltic coasts Embryonic shifting dunes Shifting dunes along the shoreline with Ammophila arenaria (`white dunes`) Fixed dunes with herbaceous vegetation (`grey dunes`) Humid dune slacks Sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus River lamprey Lampetra fluviatilis Petalwort Petalophyllum ralfsii The Dee Estuary also qualifies as a SPA supporting:
During the breeding season;
Common Tern Sterna hirundo, 392 pairs representing 3.2% of the breeding population in Great Britain (5 year mean 1995-99) Little Tern Sterna albifrons, 69 pairs representing at least 2.9% of the breeding population in Great Britain (RSPB, 5 year mean 1994-98)
On passage;
Sandwich Tern Sterna sandvicensis, 957 individuals representing at least 2.3% of the population in Great Britain (5 year mean 1995-99)
Over winter;
Bar-tailed Godwit Limosa lapponica, 1,150 individuals representing at least 2.2% of the wintering population in Great Britain (5 year peak mean 1995 - 99) This site also qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (79/409/EEC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following migratory species:
Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa islandica, 1,747 individuals representing at least 2.5% of the wintering Iceland - breeding population (5 year peak mean 1995 - 99) Curlew Numenius arquata, 3,899 individuals representing at least 1.1% of the wintering Europe - breeding population (5 year peak mean 1995 - 99) Dunlin Calidris alpina alpina, 27,769 individuals representing at least 2.0% of the wintering Northern Siberia/Europe/Western Africa population (5 year peak mean 1995 - 99)
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 86
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Grey Plover Pluvialis squatarola, 2,193 individuals representing at least 1.5% of the wintering Eastern Atlantic - wintering population (5 year peak mean 1995 - 99) Knot Calidris canutus, 12,394 individuals representing at least 3.5% of the wintering Northeastern Canada/Greenland/Iceland/Northwestern Europe population (5 year peak mean 1995 - 99) Oystercatcher Haematopus ostralegus, 22,677 individuals representing at least 2.5% of the wintering Europe & Northern/Western Africa population (5 year peak mean 1995 - 99) Pintail Anas acuta, 5,407 individuals representing at least 9.0% of the wintering Northwestern Europe population (5 year peak mean 1995 - 99) Redshank Tringa totanus, 5,293 wintering individuals representing at least 3.5% of the Eastern Atlantic - wintering population (5 year peak mean 1995 -99) Redshank Tringa totanus, 8,795 passage individuals representing at least 5.9% of the Eastern Atlantic population (5 year peak mean 1995 -99) Shelduck Tadorna tadorna, 7,725 individuals representing at least 2.6% of the wintering Northwestern Europe population (5 year peak mean 1995 - 99) Teal Anas crecca, 5,251 individuals representing at least 1.3% of the wintering Northwestern Europe population (5 year peak mean 1995 - 99)
The Dee Estuary is also designated as an SPA for regularly supporting 130,408 individual waterfowl (5 year peak mean 1995 - 99)62.
In addition to the SPA designation the Dee Estuary is also designated as a Ramsar site by meeting Ramsar criteria 1, 5 and 6 as follows:
Extensive intertidal mud and sand flats (20 km by 9 km) with large expanses of saltmarsh towards the head of the estuary. Supporting an overall bird assemblage of international importance; and Supporting the following species at levels of international importance: shelduck, oystercatcher, curlew, redshank, teal, pintail, grey plover, red knot, dunlin, bar-tailed godwit, black-tailed godwit and turnstone The historic trends and current pressures on the site are summarised below.
11.3 Historic Trends and Current Pressures The majority of the site is in the ownership and sympathetic management of public bodies and voluntary conservation organisations. Unlike most western estuaries, sizeable areas of saltmarsh in the Dee remain ungrazed and therefore plant species that are susceptible to grazing are widespread. This distinctive flora would therefore be sensitive to an increase in grazing pressure. The intertidal and subtidal habitats of the estuary are broadly subject to natural successional change, although shellfisheries and dredging are a current
62 The Ramsar citation sheet identifies the waterfowl population as 74,230 using slightly more recent data (5 year peak mean 1998/99- 2002/2003). However, this is still more than the 20,000 needed for consideration as being internationally important.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 87
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
concern. Threats to the estuary's conservation come from its industrialised shorelines on the Welsh side and the impact of adjacent historic industrial use. These include land contamination from chemical and steel manufacture and localised water quality problems. Remediation works are being undertaken. Contemporary issues relate to dock development and navigational dredging, coastal defence works and their impact on coastal process, regulation of shellfisheries, and the recreational use of sand dunes and saltmarshes.
The environmental pressures upon the Dee Estuary SAC, SPA & Ramsar site are mainly:
overgrazing of ungrazed/little grazed saltmarsh; certain recreational activities in sensitive areas at sensitive times such as shellfishing (in terms of loss of material from the food chain) and dog walking (in terms of disturbance of waterfowl) water quality threats from ex-industrial usage and agriculture; physical loss and alteration of coastal processes due to navigational dredging; ‘coastal squeeze’ from land reclamation and coastal flood defences and drainage used in order to develop coastal land, and from sea level rise; introduction of non-native species; and risk of excessive abstraction resulting in a decrease in freshwater flows into the estuary, reducing drinking and bathing habitat for birds and increasing the salinity in localised areas.
11.4 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool From the environmental requirements that have been identified above it can be determined that development in Liverpool could theoretically interfere with the environmental requirements and processes on the SAC, SPA & Ramsar site in the following manner:
Damaging levels of abstraction to supply housing in Liverpool when considered in combination with development elsewhere in United Utilities Integrated Resource Zone and development outside the zone that will receive water from the same sources (e.g. abstraction from the River Dee in relation to development in North Wales). water quality from one or more of the following pathways to the River Mersey (with hydraulic connections to this SAC, SPA & Ramsar site: discharge of treated sewage effluent into the Mersey; potential water pollution incidents arising from construction of Port developments, untreated runoff containing inorganic and organic compounds; water quality from increase in commercial shipping resulting from development of port activities; potential displacement of birds through Liverpool John Lennon Airport Expansion,
Deteriorating air quality as a result of increased deposition of SO2 /NOx through increased aircraft or shipping movements
The remainder of this chapter will analyse whether any of these impacts will actually occur.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 88
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
11.5 Role of other Projects and Plans It is considered that the following additional projects and plans could act ‘in combination’ on the SAC, SPA & Ramsar site:
11.5.1 Projects Mersey Ports Masterplan (Consultation draft; June 2011), including the Seaforth River Terminal (a deepwater container port expansion in Sefton is currently under construction and due for completion imminently), new opportunities for renewable energy, development of single and multi-user port centric warehousing and of new processing facilities for imported commodities. potentially leading to the Liverpool SuperPort – An integrated port, airport, intermodal terminal, freight and commercial network based upon the Port of Liverpool, the Manchester Ship Canal, Liverpool John Lennon Airport and the Mersey Multimodal Gateway (Liverpool City Region);
Liverpool John Lennon Airport expansion – potential impacts due to increased sulphur and nitrogen deposition from aircraft and possible disturbance of waterfowl from noise.
11.5.2 Plans Liverpool City Region Renewable Energy Capacity Study – possible impacts on waterfowl flightpaths between the Mersey Estuary and other European sites depending upon the degree of wind power involved and the location of turbines; North West England & North Wales Shoreline Management Plan 2 (SMP 22 Great Ormes Head to Scotland) (2011), – possible impacts due to the maintenance or enhancement of flood defences could lead to coastal squeeze, changes in sediment release (if previously undefended areas become defended) and direct loss of habitat to flood defence footprint; Horizon Nuclear Power (proposed nuclear power site at Wylfa Newydd Project on Anglesey); The Wales Spatial Plan (updated 2008); Core Strategies for Flintshire, Denbighshire, Halton, Cheshire West and Chester, Knowsley, Sefton, Wirral and St Helens, the Mersey Heartlands Growth Point Programme of Delivery (Wirral and Liverpool) and Liverpool and Wirral Waters Development masterplans – possible water quality, air quality and wildfowl disturbance impacts as a result of delivery of over 110,000 dwellings and associated commercial development over the next 20 years; and
Merseyside and Halton Joint Waste Local Plan – possible impacts due to water quality, air quality and wildfowl disturbance or chick predation. However, since this DPD is itself
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 89
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
subject to HRA it will address its own contribution to any ‘in combination’ effect that may otherwise arise.
11.6 Likely Significant Effects
11.6.1 Disturbance The population of Liverpool is expected to increase over the lifetime of the Local Plan associated with the delivery of new dwellings across Liverpool and the mixed-use development of Liverpool Waters (the latter of which will potentially involve 9,000 net new dwellings and associated jobs beyond 2040).
However, although the closest point of the Dee Estuary SAC is relatively close to Liverpool (approximately 2km in a direct line, constituting the North Wirral Foreshore) and is accessible via either the ferry or the Kingsway/Queensway tunnels these are both payable, which is likely to considerably reduce the proportion of visitors from Liverpool compared to other sites both closer to home and for which access is free and a similar experience can be gained (i.e. Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site or Sefton Coast SAC, or Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA or similarly named Ramsar site). The remainder of the Dee Estuary is even more distant (12km as the crow flies) and once again would require use of the ferry, toll tunnels or a considerable deviation through Halton and Wirral in order to reach it. On this basis it is considered that the Dee Estuary SAC, SPA & Ramsar site is unlikely to form a significant recreational resource for residents of Liverpool.
Development of ports and docks has the potential to cause disturbance to waterfowl. However, Policy EC7 states that the expansion of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported but that ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should:… comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and internationally important sites …’. As such, it is considered that the references in the Local Plan are sufficient to ensure that the SAC, SPA & Ramsar site is protected.
It is conceivable that an increase in flights from Liverpool John Lennon Airport may result in increased disturbance of SPA waterfowl (both from aircraft noise and lighting) given that aircraft taking off from the airport routinely cross the Dee Estuary as well as the Mersey. At this stage it is not possible to evaluate these impacts in detail although the risk is clearly considerably lower than that for the Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site and current noise contours as reported within the Masterplan indicate that noise levels will be similar to background levels at distances closer to the airport than the Dee Estuary SAC, SPA & Ramsar site. While there may be displacement of species from the Mersey Estuary which also use the Dee Estuary, this is included within the Chapter on the Mersey Estuary. Policy EC6 contains a safeguard regarding this issue in stating that: ‘As a key sub-regional economic asset, the operation and expansion of Liverpool John Lennon Airport (LJLA), in line with its 2007 Masterplan, will be supported in principle, subject to satisfactory compliance with measures to address potential environmental impacts associated with this growth. These are: … impact on the adjacent natural and built environment, including sites and buildings of international, national or local conservation, ecological or landscape importance. With respect to internationally important sites (the Mersey Estuary Ramsar Site and Mersey Estuary Special Protection Area), development will be required to include appropriate mitigation measures agreed with the City Council and informed by an up-to-date environmental assessment;’ This should either be made less site-specific or expanded to refer to the Dee Estuary SAC or similarly named SPA or Ramsar site.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 90
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Subject to this change, it is concluded that there will be no likely significant effect on the Dee Estuary SAC, SPA & Ramsar site through direct disturbance as a result of any of the policies proposed within the Local Plan.
11.6.2 Water Quality The Dee Estuary SAC designation covers not only the Dee Estuary proper but also the North Wirral Foreshore. There are therefore similar possible water quality impacts on the SAC as there are on the Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA or Ramsar sites (see Chapter 8). It should be noted, however that any deterioration in water quality arising from Liverpool Local Plan is most relevant when considered in combination with the Halton and Wirral Core Strategies or Local Plans within Merseyside, as well as the Warrington Core Strategy in Cheshire.
Avoiding an adverse effect from wastewater discharge is largely in the hands of the water companies (through their investment in future sewage treatment infrastructure) and the Environment Agency (through their role in consenting effluent discharges). However, local authorities can also contribute through ensuring that sufficient wastewater treatment infrastructure is in place prior to development being delivered through the Local Plan. In the case of Liverpool, this is alluded to in:
Policy R5 (Rivers, Canals, Watercourses and Culverts) states that: ‘Planning permission will not be granted for any development which, in the opinion of the City Council following consultation with the Environment Agency, would adversely affect the quality or supply of surface water or groundwater….’ Policy R3 (Flood Risk and Water Management) states that: ‘Proposals within areas of infrastructure capacity and/or water supply constraint should demonstrate that there is adequate wastewater infrastructure and water supply capacity to serve the development or adequate provision can be made available’. Given this it is considered that likely significant effects due to wastewater impacts will not occur as due account will be taken of the need to phase development in line with wastewater treatment infrastructure.
Development of ports and docks has the potential to disturb substrates/ circulate synthetic chemical pollutants and heavy metals all of which could result in potential harm to benthic communities, aquatic invertebrates and habitats required by qualifying bird species. Furthermore greater shipping freight has the potential for pollution through fuel emissions/ accidental spillage (described above in relation to waste water discharge/run-off above). However, Policy EC7 states that the expansion of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported but that ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should:… comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and internationally important sites …’.
The Mersey Tidal Power Scheme has been indefinitely postponed but is also a project that could result in adverse water quality impacts through dredging, contamination mobilisation, installation of cofferdams etc. during construction and possibly maintenance on the Mersey Estuary SPA or Ramsar sites depending upon the details of the scheme. Policy R4 (The Coast) of the Local Plan states ‘All development proposals must ensure that they do not:….Adversely affect the integrity of sites of international nature conservation importance, taking into account appropriate mitigation, or as a last resort, compensation in accordance with Policy GI 5 of the Local Plan’. As such, it is considered that the references in the Local Plan are sufficient to ensure that the SAC and SPA and Ramsar sites are protected.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 91
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
It is concluded that there will be no likely significant effect on the Dee Estuary SAC, Dee Estuary SPA or Dee Estuary Ramsar site through water quality issues as a result of any of the policies proposed within the Local Plan.
11.6.3 Air Quality Although the Liverpool John Lennon Airport Masterplan (2007) states that ‘Air quality assessments indicate that nitrogen dioxide concentrations close to LJLA will be similar to those currently experienced and well below the relevant UK and EU objectives. The increase in air and ground movements will be offset by improvements in vehicle and aircraft technology that reduce the emissions per movement’ it is not currently clear whether Natural England and Natural Resources Wales have accepted this conclusion and we have therefore taken a precautionary approach and concluded that the extension of Liverpool John Lennon Airport may increase sulphur dioxide emissions in the vicinity of the SAC, SPA & Ramsar site. However, reference to APIS63 indicates that the actual SO2 concentration in the SAC, SPA & Ramsar site is well below the critical level (according to APIS the concentration64 is 2.0 µgm-3 compared to a critical level for damage of 20 µgm-3). Similarly, the current level of nitrogen deposition for the same point is 10.1 kgN/ha/yr compared to a minimum critical load for sublittoral sediment of 20 kgN/ha/yr. It is highly unlikely that the expansion of Liverpool John Lennon Airport would increase nitrogen deposition or sulphur dioxide concentrations to such a degree that it would cause exceedence of the critical level/load, even when considered within the context of the expansions of the ports of Liverpool and Garston.
Moreover, there are several policies which would serve to protect the SAC, SPA & Ramsar site either directly or through promoting and delivering sustainable transport:
Policy EC6 contains a safeguard regarding this issue in stating that: ‘As a key sub-regional economic asset, the operation and expansion of Liverpool John Lennon Airport (LJLA), in line with its 2007 Masterplan, will be supported in principle, subject to satisfactory compliance with measures to address potential environmental impacts associated with this growth.’; and Policy EC7 states that the expansion of the Ports of Liverpool or Garston will be supported and that ‘Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should: … comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan; include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including impact on the adjacent natural … environment, and nationally and internationally important sites …’ Based on this information it is concluded that the Liverpool Local Plan will not result in likely significant effects on the Dee Estuary SAC, SPA & Ramsar site due to deterioration in air quality. Therefore, no mitigation is recommended.
11.6.4 Water Resources
AECOM determined from United Utilities that approximately 75% of potable water supply is historically abstracted from the River Dee, 20% is historically abstracted from Lake Vyrnwy and only 5% is historically abstracted from sites in Cumbria. The River Dee flows into the Dee Estuary which is also designated as an SAC as well as an SPA and Ramsar site. Four water companies abstract from sources that affect the River Dee including United Utilities (UU), Dee Valley Water, Welsh Water and Severn Trent Water. The potential
63 Air Pollution Information System http://www.apis.ac.uk/, accessed 04/07/16 64 For grid reference SJ236825
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 92
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
for excessive abstraction from the Dee to result in sufficient drawdown of water to damage the interest features of the River Dee and Bala Lake SAC has been considered in this HRA process. If this does occur, damage could occur through desiccation, fish entrainment or deterioration in water quality due to the lower proportion of freshwater to sediment. This, in turn, could reduce freshwater flows into the Dee Estuary to such a degree as to damage the interest features of that site through an increase in salinity. These risks are identified in the Environment Agency’s Review of Consents process for these sites.
In the future as a result of the west-east link Merseyside (including Sefton) will obtain a much greater proportion of its water supply from Lake District sources. This is likely to involve Haweswater as a principal reservoir. Haweswater is within the catchment of the River Eden SAC and thus the potential for extraction of Haweswater to result in drawdown and reduced flow impacts on the River Eden SAC was also considered.
The Draft United Utilities Water Resource Management Plan (2013) indicates that the water available for use in the Integrated Resource Zone is expected to reduce by 118.7 Ml/d between 2015/16 and 2039/40. Without water efficiency measures or new resources the initial supply demand balance for the Integrated Resource Zone is calculated to be in deficit.
However, from reading the Draft Water Resource Management Plan (WRMP) it does appear that abstraction from the Dee or any other European sites beyond the current licensed volumes is not part of United Utilities’ intended future supply strategy, which depends on a mixture of demand management and increased abstraction from groundwater. The United Utilities HRA of the WRMP: Assessment of Feasibility and Preferred Options (2013)65 identified that there would be no likely significant effect would result from the WRMP.
11.7 Conclusion It is concluded that since no increased abstraction from European sites will be required in order to service new development in Liverpool (or elsewhere within the Integrated Supply Zone) that likely significant effects on the Dee Estuary SAC, SPA & Ramsar site will not occur. Risk of abstraction at inappropriate times of the year (such as periods of low flow) will be prevented by the Environment Agency’s licensing regime and Review of Consents process. It is also concluded that since Liverpool is located sufficiently far from the Dee Estuary that it is unlikely to constitute a significant recreational resource for residents of the City. It is considered that the Local Plan will have incorporated an adequate policy framework to protect the Dee Estuary SAC, SPA & Ramsar site from development within the City, provided that the reference to Mersey Estuary SPA in Policy EC6 is either made less specific (i.e. European sites) or expanded to include reference to Dee Estuary SAC, Dee Estuary SPA or Dee Estuary Ramsar site.
65 AMEC (2013). United Utilities Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Water Resource Management Plan: Assessment of Feasibility and Preferred Options
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 93
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
12 Martin Mere SPA AND rAMSAR
12.1 Introduction Martin Mere SPA and Ramsar site (119.89 ha) is located north of Ormskirk in West Lancashire, north west England. However, the outstanding importance of Martin Mere is as a refuge for its large and diverse wintering, passage and breeding bird community.
It occupies part of a former lake and mire that extended over some 1,300 ha of the Lancashire Coastal Plain during the 17th century. In 1972 the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust purchased 147 hectares of the former Holcrofts Farm, consisting mainly of rough damp pasture, with the primary aim of providing grazing and roosting opportunities for wildfowl. Since acquisition the rough grazed pastures have been transformed by means of positive management into a wildfowl refuge of international importance. Areas of open water with associated muddy margins have been created, whilst maintaining seasonally flooded marsh and reed swamp habitats via water level control. In September 2002, an additional 63 hectares of land were purchased on the southern-most part of the refuge at Woodend Farm, with the aid of the Heritage Lottery Fund, to restore arable land to a variety of wetland habitats including seasonally flooded grassland, reedbed, wet woodland and open water habitats.
The complex now comprises open water, seasonally flooded marsh and damp, neutral hay meadows overlying deep peat. It includes a wildfowl refuge of international importance, with a large and diverse wintering, passage and breeding bird community. In particular, there are significant wintering populations of Bewick's swan (Cygnus columbianus bewickii) and whooper swan (Cygnus Cygnus), pink-footed goose (Anser brachyrhynchus) and pintail (Anas acuta). There is considerable movement of wintering birds between this site and the nearby Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA.
12.2 Reasons for Designation
This site qualifies for SPA under Article 4.1 of the Directive (79/409/EEC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following over wintering birds listed on Annex I of the Directive:
Bewick's swan, 449 individuals representing at least 6.4% of the wintering population in Great Britain (5 year peak mean 1991/2 - 1995/6); whooper swan 621 individuals representing at least 11.3% of the wintering population in Great Britain (5 year peak mean 1991/2 - 1995/6)
This site also qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (79/409/EEC) by supporting populations of European importance of the following over wintering migratory species:
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 94
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
pink-footed goose, 25,779 individuals representing at least 11.5% of the wintering Eastern Greenland/Iceland/UK population (5 year peak mean 1991/2 - 1995/6) pintail 978 individuals representing at least 1.6% of the wintering North western Europe population (5 year peak mean 1991/2 - 1995/6) The assemblage of birds present makes the site a wetland of international importance. The area qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Directive (79/409/EEC) by regularly supporting at least 20,000 waterfowl. Over winter, the area regularly supports 46,196 individual waterfowl (5 year peak mean 1991/2 - 1995/6) including: pochard (Aythya farina), mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), teal (Anas crecca), wigeon (Anas penelope), pintail pink-footed goose (Anser brachyrhynchus), whooper swan, and bewick's swan.
It is additionally designated as a Ramsar site in accordance with Criterion 5 (UN, 2005) for supporting up to 25,306 waterfowl (5-year peak mean 1998/99 – 2002/03) in winter, and in accordance with Criterion 6 for supporting internationally important populations of pink-footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus, Bewick’s swan Cygnus columbianus ssp. bewickii, whooper swan Cygnus cygnus, Eurasian wigeon Anas penelope and northern pintail Anas acuta.
12.3 Historic Trends and Existing Pressures
Since the site’s designation as a Wetland of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention and as a Special Protection Area in 1985 there has been a gradual increase in the usage of the mere by certain species of wildfowl and wading birds as a direct consequence of positive management. The site is geared towards attracting visitors, with a number of hides from which the Mere and its birds may be viewed. In addition to the wild species for which it is designated, the site holds a collection of about 1,500 captive birds of 125 species from around the world, as well as a number of other visitor attractions. This is because the site is a Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust reserve.
The environmental pressures experienced by Martin Mere in terms of its bird community are likely to be those common to all reedbed habitat. The refuge is vulnerable to the following:
direct loss of characteristic species as a result of nutrient enrichment from agricultural fertilisers and run-off; loss of reedbed due to weakening of stems through poor growth conditions; natural succession to woodland through lack of active management; changes in farming practice. grazing management is largely dependent upon cattle from surrounding farms; reduced water level by surface and ground water abstractions or agricultural drainage, which causes the habitat to dry out and begin succession towards ‘alder/willow carr woodland, hastening the overall process of succession towards broadleaved woodland’ (Lancashire BAP); removal of reeds and other vegetation from whole stretches of watercourses (e.g. neighbouring the site) through routine management of ditches and riverbanks (in some instances);
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 95
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
erosion of reedbeds due to increased recreational use of waterbodies and waterways (notably canals); habitat loss or degradation due to the isolation of reedbeds as a result of losses elsewhere, in turn due to the above or other factors (Lancashire BAP). In addition, the following pressures have been documented:
invasive plant species: Regular herbicide control of trifid burr marigold is necessary in order to prevent this plant from invading lake/scape margins to the detriment of bird populations; water borne disease that could affect wildfowl: water levels on the Mere are controlled to maintain optimum levels throughout the winter period, then lowered progressively in summer to expose marginal mud and the underlying damp pastures and maintain a mosaic of shallow pools. Ditches are regularly cut and dredged and all areas of pasture are positively managed under a Countryside Stewardship Scheme. Nutrients brought in with the water supply from the surrounding arable farmland and inadequate sewage treatment adds considerably to the large deposits of guano from wintering waterfowl. This results in the refuge being highly eutrophic with extremely poor water quality conditions and creates the possible risk of water borne diseases which could affect waterfowl, although no such outbreaks have been recorded. The Wildlife Trust have started to address this issue with the creation of reedbed water filtration systems and a series of settlement lagoons helps to reduce suspended solids of effluent water arising from waterfowl areas due to the eutrophication (described above) Martin Mere is also experiencing water quality issues.
12.4 Key Pressures from Liverpool
There is one potential pathway through which development in Liverpool could lead to likely significant effects on the SPA or Ramsar site:
Recreational disturbance
12.5 Role of other Projects and Plans The Liverpool City Region Renewable Energy Study (ongoing) is identifying the location for ‘Wind Priority Zones’. It is reasonable to assume that cumulative ‘in combination’ disturbance to qualifying bird species may arise, depending on the findings of this study, although no proposed sites lie within Liverpool City.
12.6 Likely Significant Effects Liverpool is located approximately 16km south of Martin Mere SPA and Ramsar site. During discussion with Natural England over the St Helens Core Strategy HRA there was a general view that recreation was sufficiently well managed on this site that recreational pressure wasn’t an issue. Moreover, the site lies on the fringes of the distances that respondents to the England Leisure Day Visits Surveys regularly travelled to visit a countryside site for the day (17.2km) and given that there are other sites much closer to and easily accessible from Liverpool it is considered unlikely that this SPA constitutes a significant recreational resource for the City.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 96
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
12.7 Conclusion It can be concluded that Liverpool Local Plan will not lead to likely significant effects on Martin Mere SPA or Ramsar site.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 97
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
13 River Dee and Bala Lake SAC
13.1 Reasons for Designation The River Dee and Bala Lake qualifies as an SAC for both habitats and species. Firstly, the site contains the following Habitats Directive Annex I habitats:
Watercourses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho- Batrachion vegetation
Secondly, the site contains the following Habitats Directive Annex II species:
Atlantic salmon Salmo salar Floating water-plantain Luronium natans Sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus Brook lamprey Lampetra planeri River lamprey Lampetra fluviatilis Bullhead Cottus gobio Otter Lutra lutra
The historic trends and current pressures on the site are summarised below.
13.2 Historic Trends and Current Pressures The habitats and species for which the site is designated are dependent on the maintenance of good water quality and suitable flow conditions. Fish species require suitable in-stream habitat and an unobstructed migration route. Otters also require suitable terrestrial habitat to provide cover and adequate populations of prey species. The site and its features have been historically threatened by practices which had an adverse effect on the quality, quantity and pattern of water flows, such as inappropriate flow regulation, excessive abstraction, deteriorating water quality from direct and diffuse pollution, eutrophication and siltation. Degradation of riparian habitats due to engineering works, agricultural practices and invasive plant species have also had localised adverse effects in the past. The Atlantic salmon population has been threatened by excessive exploitation by high sea, estuarine and recreational fisheries. Introduction of non-indigenous species has also been a risk to both fish and plant species.
The environmental pressures upon the River Dee & Bala Lake SAC are mainly:
Deterioration in water quality and changes in flow rates due to ex-industrial runoff, discharge of treated sewage effluent (which contains elevated nitrates) and agricultural runoff; Risk of excessive abstraction resulting in a decrease in freshwater flows and an increase in sediment loading of water such that dehydration of interest features may occur; Fish entrainment through abstraction intakes; Barriers to migration;
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 98
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Overfishing of Atlantic salmon; and Introduction of invasive species.
13.3 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool From the environmental requirements that have been identified above it can be determined that development in Liverpool could theoretically interfere with the environmental requirements and processes on the SAC in the following manner:
Damaging levels of abstraction to supply housing in Liverpool when considered in combination with development elsewhere in United Utilities Integrated Resource Zone and development outside the zone that will receive water from the same sources (e.g. abstraction from the River Dee in relation to development in North Wales).
The remainder of this chapter will analyse whether any of these impacts will actually occur.
13.4 Role of other Projects and Plans Due to the integrated nature of water supply across Greater Manchester and Merseyside it is not possible or necessary to consider the impacts of the Liverpool Local Plan in isolation since the situation does not arise; all impacts will be ‘in combination’.
13.5 Likely Significant Effects
The River Dee flows into the Dee Estuary which is also designated as an SAC as well as an SPA and Ramsar site. Four water companies abstract from sources that affect the River Dee including United Utilities (UU), Dee Valley Water, Welsh Water and Severn Trent Water. The potential for excessive abstraction from the Dee to result in sufficient drawdown of water to damage the interest features of the River Dee and Bala Lake SAC has been considered in this HRA process. If this does occur, damage could occur through desiccation, fish entrainment or deterioration in water quality due to the lower proportion of freshwater to sediment. This, in turn, could reduce freshwater flows into the Dee Estuary to such a degree as to damage the interest features of that site through an increase in salinity. These risks are identified in the Environment Agency’s Review of Consents process for these sites.
The Draft United Utilities Water Resource Management Plan (2013) indicates that the water available for use in the Integrated Resource Zone is expected to reduce by 118.7 Ml/d between 2015/16 and 2039/40. Without water efficiency measures or new resources the initial supply demand balance for the Integrated Resource Zone is calculated to be in deficit.
However, from reading the Draft Water Resource Management Plan (WRMP) it does appear that abstraction from the Dee or any other European sites beyond the current licensed volumes is not part of United Utilities’ intended future supply strategy, which depends on a mixture of demand management and increased abstraction from groundwater. The United Utilities HRA of the WRMP: Assessment of Feasibility and Preferred Options (2013)66 identified that there would be no likely significant effect would result from the WRMP.
66 AMEC (2013). United Utilities Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Water Resource Management Plan: Assessment of Feasibility and Preferred Options
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 99
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
13.6 Conclusion It is concluded that since no increased abstraction from European sites will be required in order to service new development in Liverpool (or elsewhere within the Integrated Supply Zone) that there will be no likely significant effects on the River Dee & Bala Lake SAC. Risk of abstraction at inappropriate times of the year (such as periods of low flow) will be prevented by the Environment Agency’s licencing regime and Review of Consents process.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 100
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
14 River Eden SAC
14.1 Reasons for Designation The River Eden in the Lake District qualifies as an SAC for both habitats and species. Firstly, the site contains the following Habitats Directive Annex I habitats:
Annex I habitats that are a primary reason for selection of this site
Oligotrophic to mesotrophic standing waters with vegetation of the Littorelletea uniflorae and/or of the Isoëto-Nanojuncetea Water courses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho- Batrachion vegetation Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior (Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae)
Secondly, the site contains the following Habitats Directive Annex II species:
White-clawed crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes Sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus Brook lamprey Lampetra planeri River lamprey Lampetra fluviatilis Atlantic salmon Salmo salar Bullhead Cottus gobio Otter Lutra lutra
The historic trends and current pressures on the site are summarised below.
14.2 Historic Trends and Current Practices The maintenance of breeding and nursery areas for the species on this site depends on the habitat quality of streams and their margins. Many of the streams within the site suffer from overgrazing of riverbanks and nutrient run-off. This is being addressed by a number of measures, including a conservation strategy with actions to address river quality issues, and a partnership approach to funding habitat improvements. The water-crowfoot communities as well as the species are sensitive to water quality, particularly eutrophication.
Practices associated with sheep-dipping pose a potential threat at this site, and are currently under investigation. Much of the alluvial forest cover is fragmented and/or in poor condition. It is hoped to address this through management agreements or Woodland Grant Schemes with individual owners.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 101
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
The habitats and species for which the site is designated are dependent on the maintenance of good water quality and suitable flow conditions. Fish species require suitable in-stream habitat and an unobstructed migration route. Otters also require suitable terrestrial habitat to provide cover and adequate populations of prey species. The site and its features have been historically threatened by practices which had an adverse effect on the quality, quantity and pattern of water flows, such as inappropriate flow regulation, excessive abstraction, deteriorating water quality from direct and diffuse pollution, eutrophication and siltation. Degradation of riparian habitats due to engineering works, agricultural practices and invasive plant species have also had localised adverse effects in the past. The Atlantic salmon population has been threatened by excessive exploitation by high sea, estuarine and recreational fisheries. Introduction of non-indigenous species has also been a risk to both fish and plant species.
The environmental pressures upon the River Eden SAC are mainly:
Deterioration in water quality and changes in flow rates due to agricultural runoff and discharge of treated sewage effluent (which contains elevated nitrates); Risk of excessive abstraction resulting in a decrease in freshwater flows and an increase in sediment loading of water such that dehydration of interest features may occur; Overfishing; and Introduction of invasive species.
14.3 Key Potential Pressures from Liverpool Traditionally, the water supply for Merseyside comes from the River Dee and Welsh sources, while that for Greater Manchester comes from the Lake District (particularly Haweswater which is within the catchment of the River Eden). The new west-east link main will enable greater flexibility of supply such that there will no longer be a strong split between water sources.
From the environmental requirements that have been identified above it can be determined that the following impacts of development could interfere with the above environmental requirements and processes on the SAC:
Damaging levels of abstraction to supply housing in Liverpool when considered in combination with development elsewhere in United Utilities Integrated Resource Zone and development outside the zone that will receive water from the same sources (e.g. abstraction from Haweswater in relation to development in Cumbria).
14.4 Role of other Projects and Plans Due to the integrated nature of water supply across Greater Manchester and Merseyside it is not possible or necessary to consider the impacts of the Liverpool Local Plan in isolation since the situation does not arise; all impacts will be ‘in combination’.
14.5 Likely Significant Effects
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 102
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
As a result of the west-east link Merseyside (including Liverpool) will obtain a much greater proportion of its water supply from Lake District sources. This is likely to involve Haweswater as a principal reservoir. Haweswater is within the catchment of the River Eden SAC and thus the potential for extraction of Haweswater to result in drawdown and reduced flow impacts on the River Eden SAC was also considered in this HRA.
The Draft United Utilities Water Resource Management Plan (2013) indicates that the water available for use in the Integrated Resource Zone is expected to reduce by 118.7 Ml/d between 2015/16 and 2039/40. Without water efficiency measures or new resources the initial supply demand balance for the Integrated Resource Zone is calculated to be in deficit.
However, from reading the Draft Water Resource Management Plan (WRMP) it does appear that abstraction from the Eden or any other European sites beyond the current licensed volumes is not part of United Utilities’ intended future supply strategy, which depends on a mixture of demand management and increased abstraction from groundwater. The United Utilities HRA of the WRMP: Assessment of Feasibility and Preferred Options (2013)67 identified that there would be no likely significant effect would result from the WRMP.
14.6 Conclusion It is concluded that since no increased abstraction from European sites will be required in order to service new development in Liverpool (or elsewhere within the Integrated Supply Zone) that there will be no likely significant effects on the River Eden SAC. Risk of abstraction at inappropriate times of the year (such as periods of low flow) will be prevented by the Environment Agency’s licencing regime and Review of Consents process.
67 AMEC (2013). United Utilities Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Water Resource Management Plan: Assessment of Feasibility and Preferred Options
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 103
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
15 Summary of Screening (Likely Significant Effects)
This HRA has identified a small number of aspects of the emerging Local Plan that have the potential to result in significant adverse effects on European Sites notwithstanding current protective mechanisms in draft policy. Recommendations have been made to change policy wording in order to mitigate these effects, in order for the Liverpool Local Plan to be compliant with the Habitats Regulations.
This HRA identified the following impact pathways from the Liverpool Local Plan to these European Sites, particularly when considered ‘in combination’ with other projects and plans:
Mersey Estuary SPA or Ramsar Site - Disturbance to qualifying bird species (from recreational pressure and other sources), deterioration in water quality, impacts due to possible changes in sediment associated with port expansion (although most ‘in river’ expansion and increase in shipping movements will be located in Sefton rather than Liverpool) and loss of functionally- linked land; Liverpool Bay SPA, Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA or Ramsar site, Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA or Ramsar site, Dee Estuary SAC, Dee Estuary SPA and Dee Estuary Ramsar site - Water quality effects ‘in combination’ Sefton Coast SAC and Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA and the Ramsar site - air quality impacts from Liverpool John Lennon Airport and recreational impacts. Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar sites, Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA and Ramsar sites and Dee Estuary SAC, Dee Estuary SPA and Dee Estuary Ramsar site – potential disturbance of waterfowl from LJLA expansion and increased flights, included on a precautionary basis.
Although the Local Plan was screened for likely significant effects upon the Dee Estuary SPA & Ramsar sites, River Dee & Bala Lake SAC, River Eden SAC, Berwyn & South Clwyd Mountains SAC and Martin Mere SPA it was ultimately concluded that the Local Plan would not lead to likely significant effects on these sites, even when considered in combination with other projects and plans.
Following the more detailed analysis, the following recommendations have been made, although only one of these requires a change to policy:
Policies resulting in an increase in residents or recreational activity could be screened out given the cross-authority working commitment given in Policy STP2, provided that the strategic study and resulting measures to manage recreational access within the coastal European sites around Merseyside is taken forward in a timely manner early in the plan period; The reference to Mersey Estuary SPA in Policy EC6 should either be made less specific (i.e. European sites) or expanded to include reference to Mersey Estuary SPA, Dee Estuary SAC, Dee Estuary SPA and Dee Estuary Ramsar site, Liverpool Bay SPA and Ramsar site and Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar site; and To protect Sefton Coast SAC it is recommended that when determining planning applications, consideration is given to whether they are likely to result in an increase of more than 1% of the critical load in nitrogen inputs into the Sefton Coast Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Such proposals are likely to include those in or within 200 metres (m) of the SAC, and those
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 104
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
which could increase traffic flows on roads within 200m of the SAC by over 1,000 vehicle movements per day or 200 heavy duty vehicle movements per day (in terms of annual average daily traffic flows). If so then a project-level HRA should be undertaken. Once the change in bullet two is made it is considered that the Liverpool Local Plan will provide sufficient policy protection to ensure no adverse effect on the integrity of European sites either alone or in combination. HRA is an iterative process and further assessment will be required as Local Plan develops and employment allocations are confirmed.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 105
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
References
Department of Transport (2004). Transport Analysis Guidance: Regional Air Pollution. http://www.webtag.org.uk/webdocuments/3_Expert/3_Environment_Objective/3.3.4. htm
EC, 1979 – European Council (1979). Council Directive of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (79/409/EEC). http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/consleg/pdf/1979/ en_1979L0409_do_001.pdf
EC, 1992 – European Council (1992). Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/nature_conservation/eu_nature_legislation/ habitats_directive/index_en.htm
European Commission (2001). Assessment of plans and projects significantly affecting Natura 2000 sites. http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature/nature_conservation/eu_ nature_legislation/specific_articles/art6/pdf/natura_2000_assess_en.pdf
JNCC, 2006d – Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2006d). Manchester Mosses. http://www.jncc.gov.uk/protectedsites/SACselection/SAC.asp?EUCode=UK0030200
Liverpool Hope University College (2006). The Sands of Time Website and A History of Coastal Change. http://www.sandsoftime.hope.ac.uk/index.htm and http://www.sandsoftime. hope.ac.uk/change/history.htm
The Marine Biological Association (2006). Site Characterisation of European Marine Sites: The Mersey Estuary SPA. www.mba.ac.uk/nmbl/publications/occpub/pdf/occ_pub_18.pdf
Natural England Conservation Advice Packages for Mersey Estuary SPA, Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA. Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/conservation-advice-packages-for- marine-protected-areas#conservation-advice-packages-north-west-england. Accessed 11/07/16
North Merseyside Biodiversity Action Plan (undated). http://www.merseysidebiodiversity.org.uk/
Ribble Estuary Strategy Steering Group (1997). Ribble Estuary Strategy. http://www.ribble- estuary.co.uk/pdf/Ribble%20Estuary%20Strategy.pdf
Sefton Coast Partnership (2004). Human impacts on coastal process. http://www.seftoncoast .org.uk/shore_human.html
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 106
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Webb et al., 2004a – Webb A., McSorley C..A., Dean B. J., Reid J. B., Cranswick P. A., Smith L. and Hall C. (2004a). An assessment of the numbers and distributions of inshore aggregations of waterbirds using Liverpool Bay during the non-breeding season in support of possible SPA identification: JNCC Report No. 373. http://www.jncc.gov.uk/ page-3810
Webb et al., 2004b – Webb A., McSorley C..A., Dean B. J. and Reid J. B. (2004b). Recommendations for the selection of, and boundary options for, an SPA in Liverpool Bay. http://www.jncc.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=3815
Wirral MBC, 2001 – Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council (2001). Consultations on proposed designation of North Wirral Foreshore SSSI and Mersey Narrows SSSI as a potential Special Protection Area and proposed Ramsar sire. http://www.wirral.gov.uk/minute/public/envped011029rep02_3275.pdf
Figure 3
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 107
THIS DRAWING IS TO BE USED ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ISSUE THAT IT WAS ISSUED FOR AND IS SUBJECT TO AMENDMENT LEGEND River Liverpool City Boundary Eden (SAC) Ramsar Special Protection Area (SPA) Special Area of Conservation (SAC)
Martin Mere (Ramsar) Martin Mere (SPA)
Sefton Coast (SAC)
Ribble & Alt Estuaries (SPA) Scale: 1:2,000,000 Ribble & Alt Estuaries (Ramsar)
Liverpool Manchester Bay (SPA) Mosses (SAC)
Copyright Mersey Narrows Contains Ordnance Survey Data Dee & North Wirral © Crown Copyright and database right 2016. Estuary Rixton Foreshore (SPA) (SAC) Clay Pits © Natural England material is reproduced with the Mersey Narrows (SAC) permission of Natural England 2016. & North Wirral Foreshore (Ramsar)
The Dee Rostherne Purpose of Issue Estuary Mere (SPA) (Ramsar) DRAFT The Dee Estuary Mersey Client (Ramsar) Estuary (Ramsar) LIVERPOOL CITY COUNCIL Mersey Midland Meres Estuary & Mosses - Phase Project Title (SPA) 1 (Ramsar)
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA
Drawing Title
Midland Meres & Mosses Phase 1 DESIGNATED SITES (Ramsar) West Midlands Mosses (SAC)
Drawn Checked Approved Date SJ JW LR 30/06/2016 Midland AECOM Internal Project No. Scale @ A3 Oak Mere Meres & Mosses 60470919 1:2,000,000 (SAC) Phase 2 (Ramsar) THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN PREPARED PURSUANT TO AND SUBJECT TO THE TERMS OF AECOM'S APPOINTMENT BY ITS CLIENT. AECOM ACCEPTS NO LIABILITY Midland Meres FOR ANY USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OTHER THAN BY ITS ORIGINAL CLIENT OR FOLLOWING AECOM'S EXPRESS AGREEMENT TO SUCH USE, AND ONLY FOR THE River Dee & Mosses - Phase PURPOSES FOR WHICH IT WAS PREPARED AND PROVIDED. 1 (Ramsar) and Bala AECOM Lake (SAC) Scott House Alençon Link, Basingstoke Hampshire, RG21 7PP Telephone (01256) 310200 Fax (01256) 310201 www.aecom.com
Drawing Number Rev
2 0 2 4 6 8 10 km FIGURE 3 File Name:K:\5004- Systems\60470919 InformationFile Knowsley HRA\project_files\MXDs\FigureDesignated with -Sites1 Inset.mxd Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Appendix 1
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 17
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Appendix 1: TEST OF LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS Table for Local Plan policies
The below table identifies the initial sift of the Local Plan policies to determine which require further consideration in the main body of the HRA report. At this point, policies were not cross-referenced to one another but considered entirely on their own merits. Green means unlikely to lead to a likely significant effect, while orange means that a likely significant effect cannot be dismissed following this initial sift and therefore the implications of the policy are considered further in the main body of the report.
Policy GI 5 (Protection of Biodiversity and Geodiversity) provides protection for European designated sites, including the provision of site specific HRA if required68.
Impact pathways considered for Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE) of Local Plan policies:
Disturbance and recreational pressure; o Breeding birds o Non-breeding birds o Other activities causing disturbance Mechanical/ abrasive damage and nutrient enrichment; Atmospheric pollution;
1. 68 Text for policy GI 5 includes ‘Development which may result in a likely significant effect on an internationally important site must be accompanied by sufficient evidence to enable the Council to make a Habitats Regulations Assessment. … Development which may adversely affect the integrity of internationally important sites will only be permitted where there are no alternative solutions and there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest, and suitable compensatory provision is secured.’
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 16
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Local air pollution; Diffuse air pollution; Water resources; Water quality; Port development, shipping and dredging; Coastal squeeze; and, Loss of supporting habitat.
Table: Liverpool Local Plan Policy Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE)
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications Delivering the Vision and Strategic Priorities STP1: To create a robust and regionally significant competitive economy and This is a control policy and sets out the principles for attractive residential neighbourhoods, development including the provision of development within Liverpool. Spatial Priorities for the new homes and land for employment uses will be located in sustainable Sustainable Growth of Liverpool locations. No LSE.
STP2. 1. New development should seek to avoid negative impacts on the This is a control policy and sets out the principles for environment through adoption of best practice. Where a negative effect is development within Liverpool. Sustainable Growth Principles and identified this should be mitigated by appropriate measures. Managing Environmental Impacts No LSE. 2. Sensitive areas where development may have an impact, and which would therefore require avoidance or careful assessment and mitigation measures, include: a) Areas at risk from coastal, river and surface water flooding… b) Areas at risk from ground water flooding c) Natura 2000 site and Ramsar sites…
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 17
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications d) Neighbouring authorities European sites… STP3. 1. The Local Plan as a whole has a presumption in favour of sustainable This is a control policy and sets out the principles for development. Planning applications that accord with this Local Plan (and development within Liverpool. Presumption in Favour of where relevant Neighbourhood Plans) will be approved unless material Sustainable Development considerations indicate otherwise. No LSE.
2. Where the Local Plan does not contain policies relevant to the proposed development or relevant policies are out of date at the time of making the decision, the City Council will grant planning permission unless: a. Material considerations indicate otherwise b. Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework taken as a whole, or c. Specific policies in the NPPF indicate development should be restricted. STP4. 1. New developments should primarily be located on previously developed This is a control policy and sets out the principles for land in accordance with Policy STP2 and then in areas with the best development within Liverpool. Infrastructure Provision infrastructure capacity, to maximise the use of existing facilities, minimise the need for new provision and reduce the need to travel. No LSE.
2. Where new development is likely to create a specific shortfall in infrastructure capacity or exacerbate existing deficiencies as identified by service providers or in the Council’s Infrastructure Delivery Programme (IDP), developers will be required to adequately mitigate or compensate for those deficiencies, in line with Policy STP5 – Developer Contributions, either through: a. Providing new on or off-site infrastructure provision; and/or
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 18
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications b. Making payments through a Community Infrastructure Levy or other developer contribution procedure.
3. Measures to address capacity issues will be required to be in place before development is begun or occupied; developments therefore should be phased accordingly. On developments that will be completed in phases or over a number of years, an agreed delivery schedule of infrastructure works and/or phased payment scheme may be required.
4. Applications for the provision of new infrastructure will be supported where they are required to help deliver national priorities and locally identified requirements and where their contribution to agreed objectives outweigh the potential for adverse impacts. STP5. 1. Developer contributions will be sought to ensure that new development This is a control policy and sets out the principles for meets the reasonable costs of providing the on and off-site infrastructure development within Liverpool Developer Contributions requirements, to meet the needs for additional or improvements to existing local and strategic infrastructure, services and No LSE. facilities that would mitigate and/or compensate for the impacts generated by the new development.
2. All developments will also be expected to provide for the future maintenance of facilities provided as a result of the development.
3. Developer contributions may be secured as a planning obligation through a Section 106 agreement, where development would otherwise be unacceptable and/or through the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) to enable the cumulative impacts of developments to be managed.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 19
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications
4. Where viability is identified as an issue, a site specific financial evaluation will be required to demonstrate to the Council that a development will be unviable as a consequence of the developer contributions. Liverpool City Centre CC 1. 1. The role and function of London Road District Centre will be protected There are no impact pathways. and enhanced. Proposals for Class A1 retail development and other town London Road District Centre centre uses within the centre will be permitted. Proposals should: This policy outlines development principles for the a. Comply with the criteria in Policy SP2 "Town Centre Uses" and Policy development of the London Road District Centre. SP3 "Design of new Development within the City Centre MRA, District, Local and Neighbourhood Centres"; and No LSE. b. Support the growth of the Knowledge Quarter. CC 2. 1. Liverpool City Centre’s Main Retail Area (MRA) will be protected There are no impact pathways. and enhanced by: Protecting and Enhancing the Main a. Granting planning permission for new class A1 non-food retail This policy outlines development principles for the Retail Area development; development of the MRA b. Granting planning permission for other town centre uses as defined by national planning policy subject to the criteria in Policy CC3; No LSE. c. Ensuring that it is the priority location for major non-food shopping facilities by requiring retail proposals within the rest of the City (including within the remainder of the City Centre) to demonstrate compliance with the sequential approach and no significant adverse impact on the vitality and viability of the MRA; and d. Ensuring that A1 non-food retailing is the primary use within the MRA, particularly within the Primary Frontages. CC 3. 1. Planning permission for non-A1 uses at ground floor level within the City There are no impact pathways. Centre MRA will be granted provided: Non-A1 Uses within the MRA
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 20
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications a. Within Primary Retail Frontages the proposal will not result in: This policy outlines development principles for The proportion of units for Class A1 retail falling below 70% development within the MRA of the total frontagelength; More than 30% of the total frontage length in non-Class A1 No LSE. retail use; and More than 2 non class A1 retail units adjacent to each other
Proposals will normally be refused where these thresholds have been/ would be exceeded unless the applicant clearly demonstrates that factors such as regeneration benefits, long term vacancies and contribution to vitality and viability outweigh the thresholds.
b. In the case of Hot Food Takeaway it is demonstrated it would not result in: More than 2 adjoining hot food take-aways in a frontage length; Less than 2 non-A5 units between individual or groups of hot food take-aways; and The total hot food takeaway frontage being more than 5 metres in length
Applications will normally be refused where these thresholds have been/would be exceeded unless the applicant can clearly demonstrate factors which outweigh the thresholds.
c. The proposal complies with the criteria in Policy CC11 in respect of food and drink uses and hot food takeaways d. The proportion of units within Class A1 retail use in Secondary Retail Frontages does notfall below 50% of the street frontage length;
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 21
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications e. The proposal would not result in the loss of a department store or its sub- division or result in the loss of a retail frontage of 10 metres or above; and f. The proposal maintains: A ground floor window display and/or shop frontage appropriate to the use of the premises at all times; Enhances the general appearance of the existing shopping frontages in the design and materials used in any external alterations to the building facade; and Establishes access to upper floors, where practicable
2. The City Council may consider the use of Article 4 Directions in the Primary Retail Frontages to ensure the predominately retail function is protected. CC 4. Development on the Waterfront should be of a high-quality design that HRA implications respects its sensitive historic surroundings, whilst making adequate The Waterfront provision for access, parking and servicing and not undermining local This policy outlines development principles for amenity and operations of businesses. Development proposals should: development on the Waterfront. Improvement of access for recreation to the dock water spaces could a. Protect the character, setting, distinctiveness and Outstanding Universal have an indirect effect on coastal sites since some of Value of the World Heritage Site by ensuring the siting, scale, form, the docks are known to provide functionally-linked architectural approach and materials are appropriate and respect the habitat to the SPAs and Ramsar sites. proposal's location; b. Respect the form and mass of the dock estate and its industrial heritage and make provision for the repair, conservation, integration and interpretation of heritage assets; c. Ensure high-quality, sustainable design; d. Reinforce the historic grain of buildings, water spaces and other spaces. e. Contribute towards enhanced pedestrian connectivity across ‘The Strand’, and making the riverfront more accessible to the public
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 22
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications f. Provide enhanced pedestrian / cycle movement routes including provision for secure, covered and well surveyed cycle storage g. Ensure inclusive and usable public realm; h. Incorporate appropriate landscaping and green infrastructure; i. Include appropriate street furniture, public art and feature lighting which enhances the waterfront; j. Ensure greater access to, interaction with and recreational use of dock water spaces and their quaysides; and k. Ensure a safe, vibrant, inclusive, accessible and welcoming environment. CC 5. The City Council will support proposals which facilitate greater access and HRA implications. recreational / leisure use of dock water spaces and their quaysides and which Recreational Use of Dock Water contribute towards the creation of an inclusive and usable movement route Given the potential for in combination recreational Spaces, Quaysides and the along Liverpool’s Waterfront, specifically: pressure with new housing, proposals within this Waterfront a. floating structures for canal boat mooring, boat hire, water taxis and water policy may result in: buses; Disturbance and recreational pressure b. installation of stepped dockside structures to gain access at water level; Mechanical/abrasive damage and c. feature lighting installations that assist in animating dock water spaces nutrient enrichment and adjacent quaysides; atmospheric pollution: local d. proposals which enhance the interpretation of the cultural heritage and water resources; archaeology of the historic dockland environment; water quality e. floating pontoons for dining, entertainment, performance and other leisure coastal squeeze; and, uses providing there is no adverse impact on residential amenity; loss of supporting habitat. f. water sports activities, including extreme water sports; g. expansion of Queens Dock water-sports centre; h. expansion/redevelopment of Brunswick Dock Marina with enhanced leisure and visitor facilities i. proposals which contribute towards the provision of a continuous and unimpeded pedestrian and cyclist route stretching from Princes Half Tide Dock in the North to Brunswick Dock in the south
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 23
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications
2. New development proposals should comply with the criteria in Policy GI 4. CC 6. 1. Liverpool City Council will support, subject to relevant policies in this HRA implications plan, planning applications to deliver the vision for Liverpool Waters. The Liverpool Waters Liverpool Waters Vision involves regenerating a 60 hectare historic This policy sets out proposals for a new mixed-use dockland site to create a world-class, high quality, mixed use waterfront development scheme. quarter in central Liverpool that will allow for substantial growth of the city's economy. Proposals within this policy may result in: Disturbance and recreational pressure 2. Proposals within the Liverpool Waters site should comply with all Mechanical/abrasive damage and relevant polices in this plan. nutrient enrichment atmospheric pollution: local water resources; water quality coastal squeeze; and, loss of supporting habitat.
CC 7. All development proposals within the Creative Quarter: This policy outlines development principles for i. Should demonstrate that it will protect and enhance the area's creative and development within the Creative Quarter. The Creative Quarter digital businesses and/or provide uses that complement those industries. ii. Demonstrate that there will be no adverse impact on residential amenity There are no impact pathways. No LSE. iii. Contribute to improving the public realm and environmental quality of the area iv. Include active ground floor uses and frontages v. Contribute to improving linkages to other parts of the City Centre
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 24
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications CC 7. 1. Within the primarily residential area of the Canning Georgian Quarter, This policy outlines development principles for the where permitted development rights do not apply, planning permission will conversion of dwelling houses within the Creative Protecting the Canning Georgian not normally be granted for the conversion of dwelling houses for use as Quarter. Residential Quarter Houses in Multiple Occupation. There are no impact pathways. No LSE. 2. Planning permission for the conversion of traditional residential dwellings within the primarily residential area of the Canning Georgian Quarter as shown on the proposals map will be granted provided: a. it is demonstrated that it contributes to the provision of suitable family accommodation; b. there would be no unacceptable effects on neighbours living conditions through increased activity, or noise and disturbance; c. bin storage is provided externally within the curtilage of the site, within a suitably designed structure located within the rear amenity space and not visible from the public realm; or in the case of landlocked constrained sites internal provision is required; d. there is sufficient availability for on-street parking in the surrounding road network for the likely increase in demand for car parking generated by the number of units proposed; and e. It complies with other relevant plan policies
3. Planning permission for the conversion of other properties within the wider Canning Georgian Quarter into HiMO's will be permitted provided it complies with the requirements of Policy H14. CC 8. Proposals for the temporary use/ more efficient use of vacant buildings or This policy outlines principles for the temporary / sites within the City Centre will be acceptable provided: efficient use of vacant City Centre buildings and Vacant Sites and Temporary Uses a. It does not prejudice any future development proposals sites.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 25
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications b. It does not cause undue detriment to the character and amenity of the There are no impact pathways. No LSE. surrounding area c. It does not give rise to unacceptable traffic conditions d. It complies with the car parking strategy for the City Centre e. There is no adverse impact on residential amenity f. There is no adverse impact on established uses within the City Centre or nearby areas CC 9. 1. Within the City Centre, planning permission will be granted for small- This policy outlines principles for the provision of scale convenience shops and services which meet the day-to-day needs of small-scale City Centre shops and community Convenience Retail Provision and city centre residents, workers and visitors facilities. Community Facilities where: a. It is clearly demonstrated that there are no sequentially preferable sites There are no impact pathways. No LSE. and where proposals are for A1 retail over 350sqm there will be no significant adverse impact on District and Local Centres b. They form part of mixed use schemes; c. There would be no significant impact on residential amenity; and d. There is no significant impact on the highway network.
2. Proposals for community facilities within the City Centre will be permitted in accordance with the criteria of Policy SP5 of the Shopping Centres and Community Facilities Chapter. CC 10. 1. Planning permission for night time economy uses within the City Centre This policy outlines principles for the provision of will be granted if it is clearly demonstrated that there would be no adverse City Centre night time economy uses. The Night Time Economy impact on: a. the residential amenity of nearby residents in terms of noise, customer There are no impact pathways. No LSE. activity, vibrations, odours, traffic disturbance and litter b. the operation of nearby businesses c. the overall character and function of the area;
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 26
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications 2.The hours of operation of late night uses will be managed through the use of planning conditions to ensure that residential amenity is appropriately protected. CC 11. 1. Outside the Main Retail Area (MRA) proposals for food and drink uses This policy outlines principles for the provision of and hot food takeaways should demonstrate that there will be no adverse food and drink outlets. Food and Drink Uses and Hot Food impact on residential amenity or character of the local area. Take-Aways 2. When determining the appropriate hours of opening for hot food take- There are no impact pathways. No LSE. aways within the City Centre, including the MRA, regard will be had to: a. The likely impacts on residential amenity b. The existence of an established late night economy in the area c. The character and function of the immediate area
3.. Proposals for food and drink uses and hot food take-aways within the City Centre should also comply with the criteria in Part 4 and Part 5 of Policy SP4. CC 12. The City Council will encourage and support proposals which enhance the This policy outlines principles for the retention and appearance of Markets and Street Trading in the City whilst achieving a enhancement of markets and support of street Markets and Street Traders fully accessible environment for everyone. Where planning permission is traders. required for a market/ street trader the applicant should demonstrate that: a. There would be no adverse impact on the vitality and viability of other There are no impact pathways. No LSE. licensed markets within the City Centre b. Stalls do not detract from the visual amenity of the area by reason of their size, design or position c. The stalls do not have an adverse impact on pedestrian circulation; d. Adequate arrangements for the storage and collection of refuse including the provision of litter bins where appropriate has been made; e. There is no severe loss of amenity or privacy to adjacent residents; and f. Adequate arrangements are made for pedestrian and vehicular access and for car parking.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 27
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications CC 13. 1. The City Council will support proposals which improve and diversify the HRA implications City Centre housing offer that comply with the criteria in part 2, through: Housing Provision in the City a. the full or part conversion of long-term vacant buildings, This policy sets out proposals for City Centre Centre b. the conversion of upper floors; housing provision, including within new mixed-use c. The provision of family accommodation; and development schemes. d. the inclusion of housing within mixed-use development schemes Proposals within this policy may result in: 2. Planning permission for residential development will be granted, provided Disturbance and recreational pressure it: Mechanical/abrasive damage and a. Does not compromise the City Centre's economic and commercial roles; nutrient enrichment b. Reflects the character and function of the surrounding area in terms of its atmospheric pollution: local scale, density and design; water resources; c. Forms an integral part of the City Centre, and is not planned and designed water quality as distinctly separate or self-contained zones; coastal squeeze; and, d. Provides adequate safeguards for the amenity and health of future loss of supporting habitat. residents, including light, views and sound insulation; e. Makes adequate provision for access, parking, servicing, refuse storage, external amenity space and in relation to multi-occupied developments management; and f. Can be demonstrated that facilities and services are readily available, particularly with respect to the provision of family housing CC 14. 1. Within the City Centre, purpose built student accommodation will be This policy outlines principles for the provision of supported within the Islington and Knowledge Quarter areas. Outside these City Centre student accommodation City Centre Student areas proposals should clearly demonstrate that the proposal: Accommodation a. Accords with the objectives of the City Centre Strategic Investment There are no impact pathways. No LSE. Framework; b. Is located in close proximity to the University Campus locations; c. Supports regeneration initiatives;
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 28
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications d. Does not have an adverse impact, including cumulative impact on long- established residential communities e. Does not conflict with neighbouring uses / activities and does not lead to the displacement of existing uses / activities to the detriment of the local area. f. Does not adversely impact on the commercial role of the City Centre
2. All proposals should also comply with the requirements in Part 2 of Policy H8. Employment Land and the Economy EC1. 1. The City Council has a requirement for x hectares of land for industrial HRA implications due to lack of information relating and business uses (Use Classes B1/2/8), over the period of the Local Plan, to to area requirements and locations. Employment Land Supply meet the needs of the City. Sites to meet this requirement are identified in Schedule XX and on the Policies Map. This policy sets out the requirement for employment land. Land allocation has not yet been identified 2. The take-up of existing employment land will be monitored, and its therefore assume that this policy may result in: ongoing supply managed, via regular review of site allocations, to meet Mechanical/abrasive damage and changing market conditions in land for employment and other uses. nutrient enrichment atmospheric pollution: local water resources; water quality coastal squeeze; and, loss of supporting habitat. EC2. 1. New employment development will be directed towards land designated HRA implications due to lack of information relating as Primarily Industrial Areas and allocated as Sites for Industrial/business to area requirements and locations. Employment Areas purposes, as identified on the Policies Map and in Schedule xx, which mainly fall within the City’s key employment areas. This policy sets out the principles for the development of employment areas. Land allocation
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 29
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications 2. Land in these areas will primarily be protected for industrial and business has not yet been identified therefore assume that this uses. Planning permission will be granted for industrial/business uses (Use policy may result in: Classes B1/2/8). Mechanical/abrasive damage and nutrient enrichment 3. Proposals for the use of Primarily Industrial/ Business Areas and Sites, for atmospheric pollution: local other purposes, should clearly demonstrate that: water resources; a. The proposed use is complementary to the primary employment use of the water quality area, providing a small scale-ancillary service to meet the day-to-day needs coastal squeeze; and, of local employees subject to compliance with other plan policies; or loss of supporting habitat. b. The proposal would not prejudice the long term development of the wider employment area primarily for industrial and business development. Use of the site for non-B purposes should not adversely affect the City’s overall capacity to meet future demand for employment land; and i. The proposal will not be incompatible with existing retained employment uses within their vicinity; ii. There is no likely future demand for employment use on the site. This would require evidence that it had been appropriately marketed for B1/2/8, across a range of media, for at least 18 months; iii. In the case of retail, leisure and town centre uses, the proposal complies with Policy SP6; and iv. Use of the site for other purposes would bring wider economic, social or environmental regeneration benefits which outweigh the economic impact of the loss of employment land. Evidence to demonstrate compliance with this requirement would include: net employment generation need/demand for proposed use lack of suitable alternative accommodation satisfactory relocation of displaced business
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 30
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications improvements to the physical/operational environment of the industrial area proposal forms part of comprehensive regeneration scheme EC3. 1. Development of business sectors with strong growth potential in HRA implications due to lack of information relating Liverpool and the City Region will be supported. These include: to area requirements and locations. Delivering Economic Growth Knowledge-based industries This policy sets out the principles for supporting the o Health and life sciences development of business sectors with strong growth o Advanced science, manufacturing and engineering potential. Land allocation has not yet been identified o Creative, cultural and media industries therefore assume that this policy may result in: o ICT and digital technology • Disturbance and recreational pressure • Mechanical/abrasive damage and nutrient Financial, professional and business services enrichment Port and maritime industry • atmospheric pollution: local Airport and aviation-related activity • water resources; Tourism/visitor economy, and • water quality Low carbon economy businesses • coastal squeeze; and, • loss of supporting habitat. 2. The football clubs of Everton and Liverpool contribute significantly to the City's economy, and proposals for the sustainable development or redevelopment of these clubs will be supported where they are of an appropriate scale, and subject to other relevant planning policies.
3. Sites for appropriate sectors within the main employment areas are shown on the Policies Map and within Schedule XX. EC4. 1. Within the Main Office Area in the City Centre, and on the sites identified HRA implications due to lack of information relating in Schedule XX and on the Policies Map, planning permission will be to area requirements and locations. Office Development granted for Use Classes A2, B1 and
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 31
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications complementary service uses such as Classes A1 and A3, providing proposals This policy sets out the principles for the provision comply with other plan policies, particularly those for retail development. of office space. Land allocation has not yet been identified therefore assume that this policy may 2. Outside the Main Office Area within the City Centre, and within district, result in: local and neighbourhood centres, planning permission will be granted for • Mechanical/abrasive damage and appropriate Use Classes A2 and B1. nutrient enrichment • atmospheric pollution: local 3. Proposals for office development outside the City Centre, district, local • water resources; and neighbourhood centres must comply with the sequential and impact • water quality; and, assessment requirements set out in Policy SP6. • loss of supporting habitat.
4. All proposals for office development will be subject to consideration of residential amenity, traffic generation and other Plan policies. EC5. 1. In Mixed Use Areas, as designated on the Policies Map, planning This policy only seeks to define how mixed used permission will be granted for those uses specified in the Mixed Use Area areas will be handled. T Mixed Use Areas and Sites for profiles subject to the provisions of other relevant Plan policies. Various Types of Development 2. On Sites for Various Types of Development as identified on the Policies Map, planning permission will be granted for the uses specified in Schedule XX, subject to the provision of other relevant Plan policies. EC6. 1. As a key sub-regional economic asset, the operation and expansion of HRA implications due to proximity of airport to Liverpool John Lennon Airport (LJLA), in line with its 2007 Masterplan, Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar site in particular. Liverpool John Lennon Airport will be supported in principle, subject to satisfactory Although some internationally important sites are compliance with measures to address potential environmental impacts mentioned, other sites that could be affected are not associated with this growth. These are : mentioned in policy. a. impact on the adjacent natural and built environment, including sites and buildings of international, national or local conservation, ecological or landscape importance. With respect to internationally important sites (the Mersey Estuary Ramsar Site and Mersey
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 32
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications Estuary Special Protection Area), development will be required to include appropriate mitigation measures agreed with the City Council and informed by an up-to-date environmental assessment; b. impact on adjacent residents and others (including those outside the City) in the vicinity of flightpaths, of any increases in traffic, noise and air pollution, including those generated by construction activity; and c. impact on the local and regional transport network, through the implementation of a sustainable surface access strategy
2. The Policies Map identifies the operational area of the Airport. The (hatched) area on the Map indicates the area currently designated as Green Belt which is identified in the Masterplan as likely to be required for future expansion of the Airport. The precise boundary of any extension of the Airport will be finalised as part of the determination of relevant planning applications. This review will be conducted in consultation with the operator/owner of the Airport, neighbouring local planning authorities and other appropriate parties.
3. Any land removed from the Green Belt as a result of this review will be reserved solely for appropriate airport-related development.
4. Sustainable access to the Airport, in accordance with the Airport Surface Access Strategy, will be supported. EC7. 1. Proposals to continue the sustainable development of the Ports of HRA implications due to proximity of Ports of Liverpool and Garston, as key catalysts of economic growth and job creation Liverpool and Garston to internationally important The Ports of Liverpool and Garston in the City and sub-Region, will be supported. In particular, improvements wildlife sites and functionally linked habitat. to the sustainability of freight and passenger access to the ports, including road, rail and water transport, will be sought.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 33
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications
2. Proposals for the sustainable development of the Ports should: a. Comply with other relevant policies in the Local Plan, b. Include measures to address the potential environmental issues raised by expansion of the Ports, including: c. impact on the adjacent natural and built environment, nationally and internationally important sites and buildings, and d. the amenity of neighbouring users. Housing Provision H1. 1. For the period 2013-2033, Liverpool's housing requirement is for 29,600 HRA implications. net additional dwellings. The average annualised level of housing growth Housing Requirement equates to 1480 dwellings. The City Council will meet this requirement This is a control policy and sets out the principles for through the following sources of supply: the provision of new housing within Liverpool.
a. Completed homes between April 2013 and the formal Adoption of the Pathways.include: Local Plan • Disturbance and recreational pressure b. The new homes which will be provided by unimplemented planning • Mechanical/abrasive damage and nutrient consents at the date enrichment the Local Plan is adopted, • atmospheric pollution: local c. The new allocations of sites for residential development made in this • water resources; Local Plan, and • water quality; and, d. 'Windfall' housing completions on sites not currently identified. • loss of supporting habitat.
H2. Housing Allocations HRA implications. 1. The following sites are allocated for housing development: Site Allocations Site Location Ward Indicative This policy identifies new sites for allocation for Ref. Capacity housing development. These sites are already within built-up areas however, it could result in an increase in disturbance and recreational pressure.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 34
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications 4284 Land bounded by East Lancs Croxteth 52 Rd/Stonebridge Ln/Stonedale Cres 3373A Buildings between Juvenal St & Everton 26 Rose Place/west of Grosvenor St 5582 Land at Aintree University Fazakerley 130 Hospital, Longmoor Lane, L10 1718 201-299 Prescot Rd and 16-24 Kensington 45 Prescot Dr and Fairfield 3360 Land between Great Mersey St & Kirkdale 30 Lancaster St 2103 Land at Kirkdale Rd/Whittle St Kirkdale 22 1472B Sterling Wy/Blackfield Kirkdale 16 St/Vesuvious Pl 4805 Smith Place (bounded by Latham Kirkdale 12 St/Vesuvius St/Sterling Way/Smith St) 4258 Site bounded by East Lancashire Norris 25 Rd/Lower House Ln/Stockmoor Green Rd 2109 Land at Moss Grove Picton 45 4249 Land at Davenport St/Upper Park Princes Park 50 St/Park Rd/Northumberland St 1553 Lodge Lane/Grierson St/Lodge Princes Park 40 Lane Baths 4201 Buildings & land at Stanhope Riverside 55 St/Mill St/Gore St/Upper Harrington St
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 35
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications 4263 Land adjacent to no. 142 Park Rd Riverside 48 L8 4649 Industrial units, Head St L8 Riverside 39 1895 Land bounded by Harlow Riverside 11 St/Haylock Close/Mill St 1897 Former 15-37 Bessemer St/102- Riverside 10 104 Beresford Rd/378-400 Mill St. 4349 Margaret Beavan School, West Derby 37 Hayman’s Green 3759B Land between Denfors Yew Tree 29 Rd/Ackers Hall Av/Dunchurch Rd 3759C Land between Ackers Hall Yew Tree 14 Av/Murcote Rd/Allesley Rd
2. Planning permission will be granted for the residential development of the sites set out in the table above, in accordance with other relevant policies in this plan. H3. 1. Planning applications for residential development should demonstrate This is a descriptive Policy outlining the dwelling their contribution towards broadening the City's housing offer. types and % proportions of each. Market and Affordable Housing Market No LSE. 2. Planning permission will be given to residential development that is primarily market-provided and predominantly for affordable owner- occupation subject to other Plan policies.
Affordable Housing
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 36
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications 3. Affordable housing which is to be delivered through non-planning mechanisms should seek to provide: 80% social / affordable rent, and 20% intermediate (shared equity housing) provision H4. 1. All proposals for residential development should: This is a descriptive Policy outlining the dwelling types and % proportions of each. Dwelling Type and Size Include an appropriate mix of dwelling types and sizes to address the long term needs of Liverpool No LSE. Provide justification for the proposed housing mix.
2. Proposals for 'Executive housing' development, comprising 4bed + detached and larger semi-detached dwellings, will be supported particularly where they make a contribution to the delivery of between 10 and 25% of the total number of new dwellings across the City.
3. For Market housing on sites of 10 plus dwellings, excluding the City Centre, developers should provide: 60% in the form of semi-detached and terraced dwellings 75% of dwellings with two and three bedrooms
4. In determining proposals the City Council will take into account the character of the location, and site viability. H5. 1. Planning Permission will be granted for new family housing development The majority of the Primarily Residential Area is in the Primarily Residential Area where it satisfies other plan policies. sufficient distance away from designated sites. Family Housing However, areas in close proximity will be subject to 2. For sites of more than ten dwellings, proposals should contain a range of Policy GI 5. family dwelling styles and bedroom sizes. No LSE.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 37
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications 3. For sites of more than ten dwellings, located within the higher value housing market areas of the City, the proposal should contain at least 15%, four bed plus executive style housing, unless the applicant can demonstrate otherwise on viability grounds H6. Independent Living HRA implications.
Older Persons Housing 1. Where planning permission is required for measures that will assist This policy identifies the requirement for the people to live independently in their own homes and to lead active lives provision of retirement housing. The sites have yet within the community, these will be supported subject to other Plan policies. to be allocated and it could result in an increase in disturbance and recreational pressure. 2. Adaptations and property annexes for relatives will be supported subject to other Plan policies, specifically Part 2 of Policy H13.
Retirement Housing (Use Class C3)
3. Planning permission will be granted for retirement housing that specifically accommodates older persons (55 years and older) provided it is demonstrated by the applicant that: a. The site is in a suitable location with particular importance given to being in close proximity to community facilities and public transport b. The site is located on level ground, avoiding back land and isolated sites and will be free from unwanted noise, fumes and traffic c. The form, scale and design of the development is appropriate to older residents d. Highway, parking and servicing arrangements are satisfactorily addressed e. Gardens and amenity space are appropriate in size and quality
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 38
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications f. A legal agreement is effected that restricts the occupation of units (excluding warden’s accommodation) to households containing at least one person aged 55 years or over.
4. Proposals for ‘Retirement Village’ type development will be supported provided the applicant demonstrates that the proposal: a. local healthcare or social service provision can meet the needs of the proposal without detriment to the local community; b. Will contribute positively to the creation and maintenance of balanced communities; and c. The proposal is of an appropriate scale for the neighbourhood within which it is located
Residential Care & Nursing Home Provision
5. Subject to other plan policies, the City Council will support development proposals which contribute to increasing the capacity of Residential Care Nursing Home provision by 1,000 places between 2013-2033. H7. The Local Plan will include a policy on Starter homes once the This is a control policy and sets out the commitment Government's requirements for Starter Homes have been finalised. to include a policy on starter homes in the future that Younger Persons Housing will comply with other plan policies. Provision (Starter Homes) Starter Homes should comply with all relevant Local plan policies. No LSE. H8. 1. Proposals for purpose built student accommodation outside the City HRA implications as locations not specified Centre will only be permitted where: Student Housing Provision a. The site is in close proximity to University campus areas This policy could have HRA implications depending b. The proposal will contribute to wider regeneration objectives upon the development locations.
Impact pathways include:
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 39
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications c. There would be no detrimental impact on residential amenity It would Disturbance and recreational pressure not result in an over concentration of student accommodation to the Mechanical/abrasive damage and detriment of the local community. nutrient enrichment atmospheric pollution: local 2. All proposals for purpose-built student accommodation should water resources; demonstrate that: water quality a. The design, security ,space, specification and facilities, and access loss of supporting habitat. arrangements provides high quality accommodation b. The accommodation layout is predominantly in a cluster configuration c. It does not displace existing uses and activities to the detriment of the local area d. The buildings can adapt to changing market conditions. Proposals should incorporate future-proofing arrangements to ensure the building is able to respond to changing market conditions, by embedding flexibility of use within the design to enable the building to readily accommodate a viable alternative use. e. A management strategy will be put in place which takes into account the use and operation for the occupation of the building, the behaviour of occupants, particularly regarding the amenity of adjacent residents. Measure should include: On-site supervision; Student welfare Procedures for addressing antisocial behaviour; Refuse collection; Access arrangements, particularly at key times (start / end of term) Travel plan Management Plan Coordinator
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 40
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications 3. Schemes within the City Centre should also comply with Policy CC14. H9. 1. The City Council will keep a register of people seeking to build or This Policy specifies the type of housing. The commission their own home and where this indicates a need for the actual number of dwellings is covered by policy H1 Self-build and Custom-build identification of specified plots for self-build and custom-build it will and development under H9 would need to comply Homes address this. No such need has yet been established. with that.
2. Proposals for self-build and custom-build homes within primarily No LSE. residential areas which demonstrate that they will extend the range of housing available in the City will be supported subject to other Plan policies. H10. 1. Planning permission will be granted, subject to other Local plan policies, This Policy describes a commitment to provide for proposals which deliver homes specifically for service personnel and housing for Service personnel and families. Service Housing Provision for Service their families. family accommodation would count towards their Personnel and Families overall housing target of policy H1. 2. Proposals for new build or conversion of existing dwellings in Primary Residential Areas, to provide permanent or temporary rehabilitation and No LSE. support accommodation, will be assessed against criteria for new residential development and should incorporate design solutions and adaptations which meet the needs of service personnel and their families. H11. Planning applications for Gypsy and Traveller sites will be permitted HRA implications. provided the site: Permanent Gypsy and Traveller a. Can be supplied with essential services (i.e. electricity, water, drainage) Although this Policy is against permitting Sites b. Is accessible by public transport; development in area of environmental sensitivity, c. Is well designed and landscaped to give privacy between pitches and there could be an impact if sites are permitted neighbouring uses, can be safely accessed from the public highway, and has adjacent to a European site, for example, disturbance adequate parking and turning space; and an increase in recreation pressure; habitat loss. d. Can accommodate work-related uses without undue detriment to the immediate locality due to noise or nuisance;
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 41
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications e. Is not located on land subject to protective natural environmental or historic environment policy designations or in the Green Belt. H12. Within the Primary Residential Areas designated on the Policies Map, HRA implications planning permission will be granted for: Primarily Residential Areas This policy could have HRA implications depending a. new housing development that satisfies other Plan policies; upon the development locations. b. new industrial and business development, subject to policies on economic development outside primarily industrial areas and where there will be no Impact pathways include: detrimental effect on the amenities and character of the residential area; Disturbance and recreational pressure c. new and improved community facilities, providing there is no adverse Mechanical/abrasive damage and impact on residential amenity, traffic generation and car parking and subject nutrient enrichment to compliance with Policy SP5 "Community Facilities"; and atmospheric pollution: local d. Other forms of development, redevelopment or changes of use, provided water resources; there is no adverse impact on residential amenity or the character of the area water quality and subject to other policies of the Plan. loss of supporting habitat.
H13. Vacant Housing The total amount of housing is already covered by policy H1. Vacant Housing, 1. Planning permission will be given for proposals which achieve a Refurbishment/Extensions, and reduction in the level of vacant housing through the refurbishment and No LSE. Housing Renewal alteration of the internal dwelling layout subject to other policies in this Local Plan.
House Extensions
2. Planning permission will be granted for house extensions providing: a. the scale, design, orientation and materials of the extension respects the character of the existing dwelling and adjacent properties, and preserves levels of privacy and amenity for
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 42
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications neighbours and other local residents; and b. the provision of off-street car parking is retained, to accommodate at least one car.
3. The Council's standards may be relaxed where the occupation of the extension is for a disabled or chronically ill person.
Housing Renewal
4. Planning Permission will be granted for large-scale refurbishment / redevelopment proposals which are set out in a masterplan. The masterplan will ensure the comprehensive regeneration of the area is achieved and are consistent with other Local Plan policies. Refurbishment / Redevelopment schemes which involve land assembly, and necessitate CPO action will be required to demonstrate deliverability. H14. Conversion - sub-division of dwellings HRA implications
Conversion of Dwellings and 1. Planning permission will be granted for the conversion of existing This policy could have HRA implications depending Buildings dwellings / buildings into self-contained flats, studio apartments/bedsits, and upon the development locations. houses-in-multiple occupation providing: Impact pathways include: a. The premises are suitable for a full or part conversion in terms of location, Disturbance and recreational pressure the provision of amenities, and size for the number of households to be Mechanical/abrasive damage and accommodated; nutrient enrichment b. There would be no adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring atmospheric pollution: local properties and the character of the surrounding area in particular through water resources; increased activity, noise or disturbance; water quality c. The configuration of internal space satisfactorily takes into account loss of supporting habitat. minimum room size, acoustic insulation, light and ventilation;
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 43
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications d. The design of external space is safe and secure, and includes provision for refuse storage and adequate off-street parking, and ensures access to yards and/or gardens; e. Bin storage is provided externally within the curtilage of the site, within a suitably designed structure located within the rear amenity space and not visible from the public realm; f. Landscaping reflects the character of the building and neighbourhood, allows for future maintenance, and avoids excessive use of hard materials; g. Where the property is within a row of existing commercial properties it is demonstrated that there is no longer demand for the commercial property; h. Living rooms, kitchens and bedrooms are not solely lit by rooflights; i. Where the proposal creates an HMO the proposal provides adequate safeguards for management j. With regard to the conversion of shops, the materials used for the front elevation, including windows and doors, reflect the design and character of upper elevations; and k. The proposal complies with Policy CC7 "Protecting the Canning Georgian Residential Quarter"
2. With regard to the necessary alterations and conversion works to effect a change of use to a house-in-multiple occupation or flat, including extensions and alterations, planning permission will be granted where: a. They are of a high quality of design that matches or complements the style of the dwelling and the surrounding area; b. The size, scale and materials of development are in keeping with the original dwelling and the surrounding area; and
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 44
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications c. The extensions and alterations are designed so that there shall be no significant reduction in the living conditions of the occupiers of neighbouring properties. In particular, extensions must not result in: Loss of outlook, from the main windows of neighbouring habitable rooms; A significant loss of light/overshadowing for neighbours; An overbearing or over-dominant effect on the habitable rooms of neighbouring properties; and A significant loss of privacy for neighbouring residents. Bed & Breakfast and Hostel Accommodation
3. In addition to the criteria set out above, proposals for Bed & Breakfast and Hostel establishments, should: a. Specify a maximum number of residents to be accommodated, taking into account the floor area of rooms b. Provide a communal lounge area of a minimum 12 square metres in area and 3 square metres per person if there are more than four residents c. Ensure the layout and vertical arrangement of the accommodation provides privacy and adequate acoustic insulation to minimise the transmission of noise through floors and walls. H15. 1. The City Council will identify areas where Article 4 Direction(s), to This is a control policy. remove permitted development rights to change the use of a dwelling (C3) Change of Use to Homes in to a small HMO (C4), will be brought forward on the basis of a 12 month No LSE. Multiple Occupation prior notice of implementation.
2. The proposed policy approach to manage further HMO development within the identified areas will include: identification of existing levels of concentration; imposition of a threshold
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 45
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications ceiling; the extent of the area affected by the threshold ceiling; identification of appropriate exceptional circumstance; and setting a maximum occupancy ceiling for individual HMO dwellings. Shopping Centres and Community Facilities SP 1. The vitality and viability of the centres within the City’s network and HRA implications hierarchy identified below will be protected and enhanced in order to The Hierarchy of Centres for provide a sustainable distribution of shops and services within Liverpool to This policy could have HRA implications depending Liverpool support local communities. These centres will be the preferred locations for upon the development locations. retail, office, leisure and cultural/ tourism developments. The City's centre hierarchy is as follows: Impact pathways include: Disturbance and recreational pressure a. Liverpool City Centre – As a Regional Centre it will be the focus for Mechanical/abrasive damage and investment in major comparison retailing, leisure, cultural and tourist and nutrient enrichment other main town centre uses including offices and complementary evening atmospheric pollution: local and night time uses. The Main Retail Area water resources; is the primary location for comparison retailing. water quality loss of supporting habitat. b. District Centres – Aigburth Road, Allerton Road, Belle Vale, Breck Road, Broadway, County Road, Edge Hill, Garston, Great Homer Street, London Road, Old Swan, Smithdown Road South, Speke,Walton Vale and Woolton
District Centres will be the primary focus for development and investment in shops, services, leisure and community uses outside the City Centre. A mix of uses will be supported to ensure vibrant and vital centres which meet the needs of the local communities that they serve. A key consideration when assessing proposals for town centre uses in other locations will be the impact on the vitality and viability of Liverpool's District Centres as well as centres in adjoining local
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 46
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications authority areas.
c. Local Centres – Aigburth Vale, Hunts Cross, Kensington, Knotty Ash, Lodge Lane, Muirhead Avenue, Park Road, Prescot Road, Rice Lane, Rose Lane, Tuebrook, Wavertree High Street, West Derby Village.
These centres will be the focus for small scale shops and services appropriate to their role and function which is to serve the everyday needs of local communities.
d. Neighbourhood Centres are the lowest tier in the hierarchy providing localised facilities. Their role in providing neighbourhood shops and services will be supported. SP2. 1. Proposals for town centre uses ( as defined by National Planning Policy) The policy focuses on maintaining the function of within District, Local and Neighbourhood Centres will be permitted Centres and use of vacant premises. Town Centre Uses provided: No LSE. a. The design complies with the requirements of Policy SP3 "Design of new Development within the City Centre MRA, District, Local and Neighbourhood Centres" b. The scale is appropriate to the role and function of the particular centre; c. It is demonstrated that there are no sequentially preferable sites within District and Local Centres in respect of proposals for new retail floorspace within Neighbourhood Centres; d. Highway, traffic and servicing issues are satisfactorily addressed; e. Residential amenity is not adversely affected; and f. It complies with the requirements of Policy SP4 " Food and Drink Uses and Hot Food Takeaways"
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 47
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications
2. Development which secures the use of upper floors within centres, including for residential development will be supported.
3. A number of development opportunities have been identified within a number of centres: Allerton Road - Land adjacent to Penny Lane Centre Garston - Former Garston Baths; Former Co-op Site; Woolton Carpets/ Alexandria Public House Site Hunts Cross - Hunts Cross Hotel, Hillfoot Avenue Kensington - Former Warehousing between Lister Road and Lockerbie Road Walton Vale - Land at Walton Vale/ Chapel Avenue Junction Wavertree - Former Gulf Petrol Filling Station, opposite Picton Road/ Wells junction Tuebrook - former cinema; vacant garage at Somerset Place/ Radnor Place SP3. Overall Design Requirements This is a control policy.
Design of new Development within 1. New development within the City Centre and District, Local and No LSE. the City Centre MRA, District, Neighbourhood Centres should contribute to enhancing the shopping Local and Neighbourhood Centres environment of the centre and its role and function. Development should:
a. Have a positive impact on the public realm; b. Be fully integrated within the centre and be designed to reflect the specific characteristics of the centre within which it is located; c. Front the street and respect the building lines of the existing environment and wherever appropriate new development should be built at the back edge of the pavement;
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 48
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications d. Contribute to enhancing the overall environmental quality of the centre including the pedestrian environment and connectivity; and e. Take opportunities to introduce appropriate greening measures such as landscaping and street trees in accordance with Policies GI 7 and GI 9.
2. Where a number of units are to be provided, the proposal should provide a mix of unit sizes, avoid an inward looking layout, maintain the street frontage and provide suitable and convenient linkages for shoppers to access other in centre uses.
Shop Front Design
3. The City Council will expect a high standard of design in new and altered shopfronts, canopies, blinds, security measures and other features Permission will be granted for new shopfronts and signs where:
a. The design is related to the scale, proportion and appearance of the building; b. The design respects the character and appearance of the location; c. The design retains, and where practicable provides, a separate entrance to upper floor accommodation where this is separate from the ground floor use d. It is designed to be fully accessible for all e. It does not have an adverse impact on pedestrian safety.
4. Principal entrances to upper floor accommodation should avoid the rear of buildings where practicable as this can give rise to personal safety and security issues.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 49
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications
5. Solid shutters which present blank frontages to shopping streets will not be permitted.
6. Where an original shopfront of architectural or historic value survives, in whole or in substantial part, there will be a presumption in favour of its retention. Where a new shopfront forms part of a group where original shop fronts survive, its design should complement their quality and character. SP4. 1. Planning permission for a Hot Food Take-away will be granted within an This is a control policy. identified district or local centre, provided it is demonstrated it would not Food and Drink Uses and Hot Food result in: No LSE. Take-aways a. More than 10% of units within the centre being hot food take-aways; b. More than 2 adjoining hot food take-aways in a frontage; and c. Less than 2 non-A5 units between individual or groups of hot food take- aways
2. Outside designated centres, planning permission for hot food take-aways within 400m of the boundary of a secondary school or sixth form college either within or outside Local Education Authority control will only be granted subject to a condition that the premises are not open to the public before 5pm (Monday to Friday, except bank holidays) and there are no over the counter sales before that time.
3. In assessing proposals for other food and drink uses within centres account will be taken of the number, distribution and proximity of other food and drink uses including those with unimplemented planning permission.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 50
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications 4. Proposals for all food and drink uses including hot food take-aways both within and outside designated centres should demonstrate that:
a. There would be no adverse impact on residential amenity in terms of noise, customer activity, vibrations, odours, traffic disturbance and litter; b. The hours of operation are appropriate for the location. Hot food take- aways will not normally be allowed to operate outside 11.30pm in District and Local Centres, and 11pm elsewhere in the City; c. Traffic and parking implications are satisfactorily addressed, the proposal is accessible by all forms of transport and that there would be no adverse implications for highway safety; d. Appropriate fume extraction systems and/ or noise insulation are provided; e. An appropriate location for commercial trade waste has been identified. Bins must be contained within the curtilage of the premises and should be stored so as to not cause odour nuisance, be convenient for refuse collection and be screened to protect visual amenity. Any bin provision should be retained in perpetuity. f. It would not increase the potential for crime and anti-social behaviour in the area. Applications for hot-food take-aways should be supported by a Crime Impact Statement or a Site Management Statement.
5. Liverpool City Council will assess the need for a bin for street litter. If a need is identified the operator will be required to provide a bin in a location determined by the City Council. SP5. 1. Planning permission will be granted for the provision of a new HRA implications community facility where the proposal is: Community Facilities a. Located within the City Centre, District, Local or Neighbourhood This policy could have HRA implications depending Centre; or upon the development locations.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 51
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications b. It is demonstrated that it is required to meet an identified local need. Impact pathways include: 2. All proposals for a new community facility should: Disturbance and recreational pressure a. Be close and accessible to the community it serves by a range of Mechanical/abrasive damage and sustainable transport modes including walking, cycling and public transport; nutrient enrichment b. Not have an adverse impact on residential amenity. Hours of opening atmospheric pollution: local should be appropriate to the specific location and appropriate car parking water resources; should be provided/ water quality be available; and loss of supporting habitat. c. Be within a building which is flexible, adaptable and capable of multi- use.
3. Development that would lead to the loss of an existing community facility will only be permitted where: a. there is no demonstrable current or future need or demand for the space, either in its current use or any alternative community use and it is therefore surplus to requirements; and b. the premises are no longer suitable to continue in community use; or c. if replacement provision, that meets current and future needs, is provided in an appropriate location. SP6. 1. The existing role and function of the following out of centre Shopping HRA implications Parks is recognised: Out-of-Centre and Edge-of-Centre New Mersey Shopping Park This policy could have HRA implications depending Town Centre Uses Hunts Cross Shopping Park upon the location of proposed Edge of Centre Stonedale Crescent Shopping Park developments. Edge Lane Shopping Park Impact pathways include: 2. Proposals for Main Town Centre uses, as defined by National Planning Mechanical/abrasive damage and Policy, including extensions and proposals to vary or remove conditions in nutrient enrichment
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 52
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications respect of the range of goods sold in retail units, outside the defined network atmospheric pollution: local of centres, including the above named water resources; Shopping Parks, must demonstrate: water quality a. Compliance with the sequential approach. All in centre sites should be loss of supporting habitat. thoroughly assessed for their suitability, availability and viability; b. That, in the case of retail, leisure and office uses there would be no significant adverse impact on any defined centre within the City or an adjacent authority. An impact assessment will be required for retail and leisure proposals outside centres which have a floorspace of 350 sqm gross or over. c. The proposal should be assessed against impact on: Existing, committed and planned public and private investment in a centre or centres within the catchment area Vitality and viability of centres, including local consumer choice, and the range and quality of the convenience and comparison retail offer In-centre trade/ turnover taking account of current and future consumer expenditure capacity
d. Benefits for the centre, in respect of edge-of-centre development, including how the proposal is/will be connected to the centre; and that the proposal is of an appropriate scale in relation to the size of the centre and its role in the hierarchy of centres. e. That the proposal is accessible by sustainable forms of transport
3. Where it is determined that a proposal meets the above criteria, in order to protect centres, planning conditions will be used to control the type and mix of the retail floorspace, range of goods sold, size of units, number of operators per unit and quantum of gross and net floorspace, to reflect the
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 53
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications planning permission and therefore the uses and floorspace that were tested as part of the planning application process. Urban Design UD1. In drawing up development proposals developers should demonstrate, This is a control policy. through the submission of a planning statement and / or a Design and Access Local Character and Statement, that the following aspects have been taken into account: No LSE. Distinctiveness a. Local grain and pattern of development, and where this has been fragmented, the opportunity to re-stitch damaged historic townscape. b. Means and pattern of enclosure, and any intrinsic rhythms and patterns established by streets, spaces and built form. c. The definition of private space. d. The hierarchy and height-width ratio of streets and spaces. e. The form, scale, proportion, building line, frontages, plot sizes, storey and absolute heights, rooflines and ratios of solid to void within buildings. f. Materials, colours, tones and textures. g. Relationship and response to topography, orientation and natural and built landscapes, including the underlying morphology of the area. h. Focal buildings, landmarks, compositions and building ensembles, nodes and gateways. i. Palette and detailing of the public realm. j. Existing uses and activity. k. Designated and undesignated historic assets. UD2. 1. The layout and form of development proposals should ensure that: This is a control policy.
Development Layout and Form a. The structure allows for ease of movement, transition and connection to No LSE. other areas and should be based on the established local grain, including hierarchy. Where this has been fractured, proposals should seek to repair the structure;
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 54
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications b. Enclosure, continuity and cohesion are key elements in street and space design, and allow for specific uses and functionality; c. New public spaces are fit for purpose and seek to supplement existing spaces; d. A variety of blocks and plots are provided; e. Safe, secure and usable private space is provided, where appropriate; f. Future expansions and adaptations or change of use have been considered; g. Form, height, scale and massing are appropriate to the function of the building; h. Car parking, cycle, waste and recycling storage are designed in a positive manner and are integrated into the development; i. The proposal reduces the opportunities for crime without compromising social cohesion; j. Landscaping is integral and is at the heart of the development
2. The developer should demonstrate that adequate building and street/space management has been considered as part of the design, and appropriate regimes put in place to demonstrate how these will be secured and delivered. UD3. When designing Public realm it should be demonstrated that it: This is a control policy.
Public Realm a. Takes account of the role of the particular location within the overall No LSE. movement hierarchy of the area; b. Reinforces and complements local distinctiveness. c. Is based on a clear rationale of function/s. Public realm should be designed for maximising opportunities for activity and enjoyment, and encourage interaction and community cohesion. d. Is based on the primacy of people over vehicles where appropriate. e. Allows for adequate car-parking, cycling provision and servicing.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 55
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications f. Incorporates existing and historically important features that contribute to sense of place. g. Has strong inclusive design principles and minimise physical barriers and visual clutter. h. Has considered landscaping holistically as part of the development within a submitted landscaping plan i. Will be of a scale, size and layout to achieve its primary function UD4. 1. All development proposals, by virtue of their location and physical This is a control policy. features, should meet the highest standards of accessibility and inclusion so Inclusive Design that all potential users, regardless of mental or physical ability, age or No LSE. gender can use the development safely and easily.
2. Development proposals (including extensions, alterations and changes of use) for any building that the public may use, will be required to provide safe, easy and inclusive access for all people. This should include access to, into and within the building and its facilities, as well as appropriate car parking and access to public transport provision. Planning applications will be expected to indicate space standards, (for example, door, corridor, wheelchair turning circles, ramp gradients, parking bay widths), together with any facilities such as lifts, ramps etc. required for compliance with good practice, Inclusive Design Guidance documents, Equality legislation and policies.
3. Development proposals to extend and/or enhance the public realm and the pedestrian environment should be designed to meet the highest standards of access and inclusion.
4. Alterations and extensions to historic buildings and their settings should take every possible opportunity to improve access for all into and around the
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 56
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications premises whilst having regard to what makes the building and surrounding area special. Where, in the view of the City Council such provision may reasonably be achieved, the Council will require its provision.
5. All external works should be designed to be accessible and safe for people with mobility, visual or hearing impairments. Layouts should be arranged to facilitate access to and within the buildings.
6. The highest standards of accessibility and inclusion should be met in all developments that would result in the provision of jobs.
7. All applications will need to be accompanied by an Inclusive Design Statement that could form part of Design and Access Statement. This should show that the principles of inclusive design, including the specific needs of disabled people, have been integrated into the proposed development and how inclusion will be maintained and managed.
8. Residential development proposals should meet the requirements set out in Policy UD8 Accessible Housing. UD5. All new buildings should be designed to the highest design standards, based This Policy specifies design standards for new on a clear rationale, and aesthetic based on the characteristics of the area. buildings. New Buildings Design proposals for new buildings should demonstrate that: No LSE.
a. The design has been considered from both a macro and a micro-scale, with adequate responses to issues of skyline impact, scale, relationship to
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 57
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications existing structures, function, amenity, and its relationship to the public realm. b. Active frontages relate well to the public realm c. Private amenity is provided where appropriate to the end-use. d. Orientation and micro-climate, overlooking and interface issues that may impact on existing structures or neighbouring plots have been considered. e. Buildings are robust and adaptable. f. Adequate sound attenuation and fume extraction is achieved, especially in mixed-use buildings. g. The building has a role in aiding legibility and ease of movement, and its function in the overall inter-connectivity of the City and its hierarchies. h. It has considered the impacts on views, vistas and setting of designated and non-designated heritage assets or other landmarks. i. The materiality, tone and texture of the area is reflected in the design. j. There is a clear rationale for continuity or contrast, and how the building ‘fits’ with the architectural grammar of the area, including the ratio of solid to void. k. The building is highly sustainable, including re-cycling and renewables. l. It provides for appropriate levels of car-parking, cycling provision and servicing. m. Fully meets the requirements of inclusive design principles. UD6. Alterations and extensions to existing buildings should ensure that: This is a control Policy.
Alterations and Extensions to a. The scale, proportion, form, materials and character of the existing No LSE. Existing Buildings building are considered in the proposals. b. The impact is minimised on neighbouring properties in terms of overshadowing, overlooking, noise and fumes. c. Adequate amenity space is retained for the occupiers of the building.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 58
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications d. The overall character of the area is retained. UD7. 1. Within all major developments or refurbishments and new development This is policy aims to incorporate art in to proposals for key public places, there will be a requirement for the development schemes. Public Art integration of public art within the development. No LSE. 2. Commissioned artwork, whether permanent or temporary, should contribute to the delivery of good design and sustainable place-making and demonstrate exemplary commissioning practice;
3. At Pre-Application stage the City Council will seek to negotiate a contribution for the provision of public art as a percentage of the construction cost. This should be appropriate to the scale and significance of the development and allow for a meaningful public art outcome. This may be provided directly by the developer as an integral part of the development, or by way of a commuted sum to be spent on providing public art in close proximity to the development. UD8. 1. To ensure that new homes provide quality living environments for This is a control policy. residents both now and in the future and to help deliver sustainable Accessible Housing communities, the following standards will apply, subject to site viability: No LSE.
a. Accessibility of homes Private Housing - for all new housing developments, all homes are to meet building regulation M4(2) – ‘accessible and adaptable dwellings’. Affordable Housing - for all new housing developments, 90% of homes should meet building regulation M4(2) – ‘accessible and adaptable dwellings’. For all new housing developments; 10% of all new homes should meet building regulation M4 (3) (2) (b).When
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 59
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications providing for wheelchair user housing, early discussion with the Council is required to obtain the most up-to-date information on specific need in the local area. Where there is no specific need identified, then M4 (3) (2) (a) will apply, to allow simple adaptation of the dwelling to meet the future needs of wheelchair users.
b. Internal Space in a Home All new homes should meet the Government’s Nationally Described Space Standard (NDSS). UD9. Planning permission will be granted for new residential development which: This Policy is about development design and in particular list the criteria with which development New Housing – Physical and Design a. Maintains or enhances the overall character and appearance of the local would need to comply. Requirements environment. The siting, design, density, massing, scale, layout, materials, building to plot ratio and integral landscaping should respect the character of No LSE. the surrounding area, and maintain levels of privacy and amenity for existing and future residents. b. Safeguard and enhance the built and historic environment; c. Provide landscaping as an integral part of the development, protecting existing landscape features, providing or if appropriate contributing to open space and enhancing the public realm; d. Ensures that highway and parking provision ensures a safe, attractive, convenient and nuisance-free highway environment for pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. e. Is sympathetic to surrounding land uses and occupiers and ensures that the amenities of occupiers of the new development will not be adversely affected by neighbouring uses and vice versa
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 60
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications f. Link in with surrounding movement patterns and not be prejudicial to the development of neighbouring land, including the creation of landlocked sites; g. Minimise opportunity for crime and maximise natural surveillance; h. Make provision for the needs of special groups in the community such as the elderly and those with disabilities; i. Demonstrate, through the Design and Access Statement, the appropriateness of the proposal;
2. The City Council will welcome residential schemes which include an element of local community facilities, particularly where existing facilities would be rendered inadequate as a result of an increase in population arising from the development, subject to the policies in the shopping centres and community facilities chapter. UD10. Proposals for advertisements will only be permitted where: This is a control policy.
Advertisements a. They are of the highest standard and contribute, rather than detract from No LSE. an area. b. They do not constitute a traffic hazard or detract from important landmark buildings. c. They do not become part of a critical mass of similar advertisements that lead to clutter. d. Hoardings and housings are well designed and are based on local considerations. e. They do not lead to loss of amenity to local residents or businesses due to light or noise pollution. f. The size and scale is appropriate to the size and scale of the building. Heritage
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 61
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications HD1. 1. Consent or permission will not be granted for: This policy focuses on the protection of Heritage Assets. Designated Heritage Assets a. applications which are not fully justified and accompanied by full information necessary to assess the impact of the proposals on the heritage No LSE. asset. Proposals that affect heritage assets should be accompanied by a Statement of Significance which may form part of Design and Statement, and/or a Heritage Impact Assessment to demonstrate that the architectural and historic interest of the structure has been understood and accounted for in any proposals. b. development or works which are unsympathetic to the heritage asset and/or its setting in terms of its architectural, historic, cultural or artistic significance. In considering any proposals, the quality of the design and layout and materials will be taken into account.
2. Where a proposal is likely to result in harm to, or loss of, a heritage asset or its setting, the granting of permission or consent will be exceptional other than where the public benefits considerably outweigh the harm to the asset or its setting. These benefits will be proportional to the significance of the asset and to the level of harm or loss proposed.
3. Granting of permissions or consents where a proposal is likely to result in substantial harm to the significance, or loss of, a designated heritage asset will be wholly exceptional. In such cases the applicant will be expected to demonstrate that all reasonable efforts have been made to sustain the existing use or to find viable alternative uses and should be the minimum necessary. Where substantial harm to a listed building is unavoidable for reasons of safety or other extenuating circumstances, the asset must be fully recorded and the
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 62
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications record and commentary deposited with the LPA and the Historic Environment Record.
4. Proposals for development in the World Heritage Site and its buffer zone will protect its Outstanding Universal Value as set out in the Liverpool Maritime Mercantile City World Heritage Site Supplementary Planning Document. HD2. 1. All planning applications likely to affect archaeological remains must be This policy focuses on the protection of Heritage accompanied by an appropriate archaeological assessment. Assets. Undesignated Heritage Assets of 2. There is a presumption in favour of physical preservation in situ of Archaeological Remains archaeological remains. Where this is not achievable, mitigation should be No LSE. undertaken through archaeological fieldwork to investigate and record remains in advance of works. Subsequent analysis, publication and dissemination of the findings should be submitted to the LPA and also deposited with the Historic Environment Record. Green Infrastructure GI 1. The recreational function, visual amenity, historic and structural quality and This policy focuses on the protection of the Natura value of the City’s green infrastructure resource will be protected and 2000 sites. Green Infrastructure enhanced. Specifically, protection will be afforded to: No LSE. a. The Green Belt, Green Wedges and the Mersey Estuary SSSI/SPA/Ramsar Site b. The network of City, District, Neighbourhood and Local Parks c. Biodiversity assets, including Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) and Local Nature Reserves (LNR) d. Regionally Important Geological/Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) e. Locally important open spaces and water courses, including amenity spaces and allotments f. Playing fields and pitches
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 63
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications g. Recreational routes and the Public Rights of Way network GI 2. 1. There is a strong presumption in favour of protecting land within the This policy focuses on the protection of potential Green Wedges from inappropriate development. The City Council will supporting habitat. Green Wedges protect and improve the open environment, recreational and ecological quality of the Green Wedges by not permitting development which would No LSE. affect the predominantly open character and compromise the functions of the Green Wedges.
2. Development will not be permitted unless it:
a. Can be shown that it will protect and enhance the functions of the Green Wedge; b. Uses materials and built form sympathetic to the character of the area; c. Provides and maintains a high level of landscaping; d. Retains existing vegetation and special site features; and e. Is, as a minimum, biodiversity neutral. GI 3 Planning permission will not be granted for development which will result in This policy focuses on the protection of potential the loss of open space or sports and recreation provision; unless it can be supporting habitat. Open Space, Sport and Recreation demonstrated in a statement submitted alongside the application, that the Provision proposed development can be accommodated without material harm to: No LSE.
a. The recreational function of the site:
The applicant should demonstrate how the proposal will meet local and national planning policy in relation to the provision of open spaces, sports and recreational buildings and land, as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (or any replacement).
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 64
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications Improvements to sports and recreational facilities which would lead to improved access to, or use of such facilities (such as floodlighting or ancillary development), or meet an identified need will be supported provided: Unacceptable impacts on open space, local amenity or biodiversity have been avoided; A need for the development at the scale proposed has been demonstrated; and It is demonstrated how the proposal will contribute to enhancing the role of the open space or facility. Applicants demonstrate compliance with relevant sport specific design guidance
Proposals for new open space, sports or recreation facilities which meet an identified need will be supported, subject to other policies in the Local Plan. In the case of open spaces used for educational purposes, the development will be supported where it is specifically required for educational uses, and suitable and convenient alternative recreation provision is available.
b. The visual amenity provided by the site:
The applicant should demonstrate how the proposal will maintain or wherever possible enhance the aesthetic function of an open space, including key vistas, frontages and/or important trees and landscaping features.
c. The structural role of the site:
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 65
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications The applicant should demonstrate that the development will not compromise the ability of the open space to enhance local identity, provide separation between different parts of the City, or provide recognisable features of local importance; or destroy a valuable link between areas of green spaces.
d. Food growing:
Development should not result in the loss of existing allotment sites unless it can be demonstrated the allotments no longer fulfil a local need and there is unlikely to be a future demand, or a suitable replacement can be provided of equal size and quality. If allotment sites are identified to be surplus to requirements and they are located within or adjacent to an area of identified open space need, then where appropriate these should be retained for an open space use.
e. The Recreational Routes Network:
Development proposals which would sever a public right of way or recreational route, which the Council considers should be retained, will only be permitted if the developer can demonstrate that an acceptable and equivalent alternative is provided. The Council will support and encourage the appropriate creation or improvement of links from new development to existing rights of way, to encourage active and sustainable travel and recreation. GI 4 1. The City Council will support proposals for increasing opportunities to HRA implications allow for greater access to, interaction with, and recreational use of water Water Spaces spaces in the City, whilst ensuring the spaces and their settings are protected This policy aims to protect the conservation value of and enhanced. the City’s water space. However, as with CC4, improvement of access for recreation to the dock
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 66
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications 2. Proposals for new development adjacent to a water space should water spaces could have an indirect effect on coastal demonstrate that account has been taken of its setting and should ensure sites since some of the docks are known to provide that: functionally-linked habitat to the SPAs and Ramsar a. The design, detailing, materials, scale and massing of the development sites. complements its location; b. the site layout takes account of the relationship between the siting of buildings, parking and landscaping areas and the water space, to maximise the benefits of a waterside setting; c. public access is maintained or enhanced where possible; d. opportunities are taken to create or enhance green infrastructure provision which contributes to enhancing visual amenity, biodiversity, and increased use of water spaces and their environs; e. any historical or industrial archaeological features relating to the water space are retained and restored; and f. there are no negative consequences for, and where possible the development should enhance, the nature conservation value and water quality of the water space and surrounding environment.
3. For proposals involving dock spaces, in addition to the criteria set out above, development: a. will not be permitted to infill dock water spaces or reduce the depth of dock water spaces to an extent that would limit the range of water vessels that could utilise these dock water spaces; b. should avoid dominating the water spaces and maintain their fundamental integrity as open water spaces that provide spacing between dockland buildings; c. Should demonstrate that there will be no adverse impact on residential amenity or existing businesses; and
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 67
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications d. should make appropriate provision for the future management and maintenance of public realm, movement routes, dock water spaces and adjacent quaysides.
4. Proposals in the City Centre should also refer to Policy CC 5. GI 5 1. Development which may result in a likely significant effect on an This is a control policy and focuses on the protection internationally important site must be accompanied by sufficient evidence to of designated sites, potential supporting habitat and Protection of Biodiversity and enable the Council to make a Habitats Regulations Assessment. Adverse protected/notable species. Geodiversity effects should be avoided and/or mitigated to ensure that the integrity of internationally important sites is protected. Development which may No LSE. adversely affect the integrity of internationally important sites will only be permitted where there are no alternative solutions and there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest and suitable compensatory provision is secured. This also applies to sites and habitats outside the designated boundaries that support species listed as being important in the designations of the internationally important sites.
2. Development which may affect other designated sites of nature or geological conservation importance, Priority Habitats, legally protected species and / or Priority Species will be assessed as follows:
Development which may cause significant harm will only be permitted for: National sites (Mersey Estuary Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)): where there are no alternatives and where the reasons for and the benefits of development clearly outweigh the impact on the nature conservation value of the site and its broader contribution to the national network;
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 68
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications Local Sites (Local Nature Reserves (LNRs), Local Wildlife Site (LWS) and Regionally Important Geological/Geomorphological Sites (RIGS)): where the reasons for and the benefits of development clearly outweigh the impact on the nature conservation value of the site and its broader contribution to the Liverpool City Region (LCR )Ecological Network; and Priority Habitats: where the reasons for and the benefits of development on balance clearly outweigh the impact on the nature conservation value of the habitat and its broader contribution to the LCR Ecological Network.
3. Where it has been demonstrated that significant harm cannot be avoided, appropriate mitigation, replacement or other compensatory provision may be required, to accord with the hierarchy of sites. The location of appropriate mitigation, replacement or other compensatory measures will be targeted, using a sequential approach as follows: : On site; Immediate locality and / or within the Core Biodiversity Area; LCR Nature Improvement Area within the City; and lastly LCR Nature Improvement Area outside the City.
4. Where significant harm resulting from development cannot be avoided, adequately mitigated or, as a last resort, compensated, then planning permission will be refused.
5. Development proposals which affect sites of nature conservation importance, priority habitats, legally protected species or priority species
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 69
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications must be supported by an Ecological Appraisal and include details of avoidance, mitigation and /or compensation where appropriate.
6. The policy applies where development proposals in Liverpool may directly or indirectly affect sites with known conservation value in a neighbouring authority area.
7. This policy will apply to other sites recognised during the Plan period as being of nature conservation importance, including land provided as compensation. GI 6 Development within the Nature Improvement Area will be permitted where Requires consistency with other policies. it: Liverpool City Region Nature a. Enables the functioning of the Nature Improvement Area; No LSE. Improvement Area b. Contributes to the opportunities for habitat creation/or habitat management as set out in the NIA Focus Profiles; and c. Is consistent with other policies in the Plan. GI 7 All new development should make an appropriate contribution to the enhancement of the City’s green infrastructure resource. As a minimum, No LSE. New Planting and Design proper provision should be made on site for the planting and successful growth of new trees and landscaping, including any replacement planting provided as compensation for loss due to development. In particular, it should be demonstrated that regard has been had to the following:
a. New planting must be sustainable for the long-term, fit for purpose, and species selection for planting schemes must have regard to international, national, sub-regional and local biodiversity initiatives. Plant selection must provide a high quality landscape and make a
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 70
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications positive contribution to the landscape character of the site and surrounding area. b. Proposals should demonstrate that consideration has been given to any locational challenges, such as those presented in the City Centre or more heavily urbanised parts of the City. It will be expected that on sites with limited space for planting, alternative planting surfaces and innovation green infrastructure solutions such as green roofs and walls will have been considered. Planting should where possible consist of more than just Sedum species. c. The use of larger size imported nursery stock in planting schemes should be avoided wherever possible to minimise the risk of importing plant pest and diseases into the country from the continent. Wherever possible stock should be supplied bare root and be sourced from within the UK. d. Selection of vigorous coniferous species are discouraged unless planted as a deliberate screen, for example to screen unsightly buildings; and planting schemes must not consist of entire blocks of shrub mass unless sufficient justification for this is provided. e. Plant selection and design of the planted area must wherever possible contribute to rainwater management of the site by minimising surface run off and maximising surface infiltration. GI 8 In order to protect and integrate existing trees and landscape features within Not supporting habitat for SPA/Ramsar species. new development, developers must demonstrate in documents submitted Management of Existing Site alongside the application, that the development proposal complies with the No pathway. Vegetation following criteria:
a. Where new development is proposed and there are trees present on site, or where the development is sited within 3m of the outer extent of the canopy spread of any tree, a tree survey, Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) and Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) must be submitted alongside
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 71
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications the planning application. The work must be carried out in line with the latest BS5837 Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - Recommendations. b. The tree constraints highlighted by the survey should inform the site layout design to ensure that development is suitably integrated with trees and that potential conflicts are avoided. c. Site layouts of the proposed development must show adequate spacing between existing retained trees, taking into account the current and future spatial requirement of the tree both above and under the ground. d. Any tree that is removed as part of an agreed development scheme must be replaced by at least two new trees. If replacement tree planting cannot be reasonably be located on site, then the Council will seek funding from the developer for off-site planting in the locality. e. The City Council will seek provision for the planting and successful growth of new trees, normally on the basis of at least two trees per dwelling in residential developments, and one tree per car space in other forms of development. f. For residential proposals, site layouts must also show the location of existing trees within the garden area, specifically indicating the proportion of the garden area under the canopy of an existing tree. It will not normally be acceptable for the canopy of an existing tree to cover more than 50% of the garden area. g. For residential proposals, trees identified as being veterans must not be situated within single garden areas but should be situated in communal areas. In the event where this is not possible, full justification must be provided as to why this cannot be achieved and mitigating measures to ensure the successful retention of the veteran must be proposed for consideration.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 72
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications h. Consideration must be given to protecting areas of post development planting on development sites from compaction or contamination which will inhibit the success and rapid establishment of future planting. Where space constraints do not allow this to occur then a restoration method must be proposed. GI 9 1. Development proposals should be designed to / will be expected to This Policy is aimed at enhancing biodiversity. incorporate new and/or enhanced green infrastructure or green spaces of an Green Infrastructure appropriate type, standard, size and which reflect the needs of the area. No LSE. Enhancement These may include:
Integrating or enhancing biodiversity features Improving the recreational function of open spaces, particularly where it would assist in minimising recreational pressures on internationally designated sites both within and beyond the City boundary. Providing or enhancing green infrastructure at key gateways to, and along, key corridors in the City Maintaining access to, and where required addressing deficiencies in, accessible open space Development of small scale green infrastructure projects which meet identified needs of the area. This could include food growing, small community gardens or public art projects. Contributing to effective water management through the use of permeable surfaces and/orSustainable Urban Drainage Systems, and where possible and appropriate to do, the opening of culverted watercourses. Improving or creating access to the Public Rights of Way network or other green routes, such as the Liverpool Loop
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 73
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications Line or the Leeds Liverpool Canal, to encourage active and sustainable travel and recreation
2. Where on-site provision has been demonstrated not to be possible, or the council is satisfied that on-site provision is not beneficial or appropriate, financial contributions through an appropriate legal agreement will be sought towards the creation of new provision, or to enhance and improve existing provision off-site, to meet the needs of the community, necessitated by the development. Environmental Resources R1 1. Planning Permission will not be granted for development which has the This policy is aimed at preventing pollution, which potential to create unacceptable air, water, noise or other pollution or applies as much to ecological receptors as human Air, Light and Noise Pollution nuisance. receptors.
2. Where existing uses adversely affect the environment through noise, No LSE. vibration, dust, smoke, fumes, smell, vehicle obstruction or other environmental problems the City Council will seek to remove the problem on site by: a. Refuse planning permission which would result in a consolidation or expansion of uses giving rise to environmental problems. b. Impose appropriate conditions on any permission which may be granted and/or obtain legal agreements in relation to such a permission in order to regulate uses.
3. In the case of new development close to existing uses which are authorised or licenced under pollution control legislation, and which are a potential nuisance to the proposed development, planning permission will not be granted unless the City Council is satisfied
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 74
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications that sufficient measures can be taken to protect amenity and environmental health. R2 1. Planning permission and Hazardous Substances Consent will not be This Policy is aimed at controlling/preventing the granted for either new developments involving hazardous substances or for release of hazardous substances, which applies as Hazardous Substances the use of hazardous substances much to ecological receptors as human receptors. in existing development, unless: i. The City Council is satisfied that there is no unacceptable risk to public No LSE. health and safety. ii. They are located where there is no unacceptable risk to residential and other sensitive areas. iii. The resulting consultation zone for the Health and Safety Executive would not fall across an existing or proposed residential area or place where a large number of people normally congregate, and iv. The proposal would not constrain an otherwise reasonable development.
2. Proposed development within the defined consultation zones surrounding existing locations or pipelines with Hazardous Substances Consent will not be permitted if it would result in a significant increase in the number of people living in, working in or visiting the area, or would otherwise cause unacceptable risk. R3 Flood risk will be reduced, water efficiency measures will be promoted, and This Policy aims to protect and enhance water water quality will be protected and enhanced through the following quality. Flood Risk and Water mechanisms: Management All proposals for development must follow the sequential No LSE. approach to determining the suitability of land for development, directing new development to areas at the lowest risk of flooding and where necessary apply the exception test, as outlined in national planning policy.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 75
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications Developers will be required to demonstrate, where necessary, through an appropriate Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) at the planning application stage, that development proposals will not increase flood risk on site or elsewhere, and should seek to reduce the risk of flooding. New development will be required to include or contribute to flood mitigation, compensation and/or protection measures, where necessary, to manage flood risk associated with or caused by the development. Unless appropriate alleviation or mitigation measures are carried out, planning permission will not be granted for development which would:
i. Be at direct unacceptable risk from flooding from all sources including flooding due to, or exacerbated by, rising groundwater ii. Be likely to increase the risk of flooding iii. Cause loss of access to watercourses for future maintenance iv. Result in an adverse impact on the water environment due to additional surface water run-off, or v. Have adverse effects upon the integrity of tidal and fluvial defences.
All works in, under, over or adjacent to water courses, waterbodies or the coast must be approved by the Environment Agency’s Environmental Appraisal Procedure. Culverting and diversion will not be permitted except to enable reasonable access over a watercourse. Development proposals should comply with the Water Framework Directive by contributing to the North West River Basin Management Plan and Mersey Estuary Management Plan objectives, by not adversely affecting water quality and
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 76
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications should where possible seek to improve water quality unless it can be demonstrated that this would not be technically feasible. The drainage of new development shall be designed to reduce surface water run-off rates to include the implementation of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS) which should be the preferred method, unless it can be demonstrated that it is not technically feasible or viable. Proposals for major developments should assess the incorporation of a sustainable drainage scheme into the development at the earliest site-planning stage. Proposals within areas of infrastructure capacity and/or water supply constraint should demonstrate that there is adequate wastewater infrastructure and water supply capacity to serve the development or adequate provision can be made available. R4 1. All development proposals must ensure that they do not: This Policy makes specific reference to GI 5. a. Increase the risk of tidal flooding or coastal erosion through their impact The Coast on coastal processes No LSE. b. Impair the capacity of the coast to form a natural sea defence or adjust to changes in conditions without risk to life or property c. Adversely affect the integrity of sites of international nature conservation importance, taking into account appropriate mitigation, or as a last resort, compensation in accordance with Policy GI 5 of the Local Plan.
2. Proposals which protect or enhance informal recreation, proposals for new coastal flood defences, flood risk management measures, and essential landfall facilities for offshore installations will be supported, subject to other Plan policies.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 77
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications R5 1. Planning permission will not be granted for any development which, in This Policy is aimed at protecting watercourses and the opinion of the City Council following consultation with the Environment could assist in delivering protection of European Rivers, Canals, Watercourses and Agency, would adversely affect the quality or supply of surface water or sites. Culverts groundwater as a result of: The nature of the surface or waste water discharge No LSE. Unsatisfactory arrangements for the disposal of foul sewage, trade effluent or surface water; The disturbance of contaminated land; or The spillage or leakage of stored oil or chemicals
2. Planning permission will not be granted for developments involving local abstraction of surface or ground water which, in the opinion of the City Council following consultation with the Environment Agency, would; i. increase requirements for water, unless an adequate water supply already exists or would be provided in time to serve the development, or ii. pose an unacceptable risk to the current supply of water users.
3. All works in, under, over or adjacent to water courses, waterbodies or the coast must be approved by the Environment Agency’s Environmental Appraisal Procedure.
4. Culverting and diversion will not be permitted except to enable reasonable access over a watercourse.
5. Development which would result in an unacceptable adverse impact on the water environment due to additional surface water run-off will not be permitted. R6 1. Planning permission will not be granted for proposals that adversely HRA implications affect mineral safeguarding areas.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 78
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications Minerals Safeguarding and This Policy makes aims to protect the nature Extraction 2. Any proposals for mineral extraction should ensure that there would be no conservation interest of sites, however there are unacceptable harm to residential amenity and to the environment. HRA implications as locations are not known.
3. Planning permission will only be granted for mineral extraction where; Impact pathways include: The environmental implications of the extraction and Disturbance restoration are acceptable Mechanical/abrasive damage and The extraction is necessary; and no other viable source is nutrient enrichment available atmospheric pollution: local The proposal will not be detrimental to local residents and water resources; businesses or to the enjoyment of the surrounding area as a water quality result of noise, smell, dust, vermin, vibration or other loss of supporting habitat. nuisance or loss of visual amenity. The proposal contains a satisfactory scheme of working which incorporates provision for site security and the containment and management of materials within the boundaries of the site. The access arrangements are satisfactory and traffic generated will not have an unacceptable effect on road safety, or on properties adjoining routes used by site traffic, anywhere between the site and the primary and strategic road network. There is a satisfactory scheme of restoration and after use, and The nature conservation interests of a site will not be harmed.
4. Where the proposed method of extraction involves a Hydraulic Fracturing (Fracking) process the additional requirements must be met:
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 79
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications The boreholes must be constructed so as to prevent uncontrolled discharge of artesian groundwater to surface, and to prevent uncontrolled discharge of water or contamination into or between individual aquifers or different geological formations. No development shall be commenced until a scheme providing full details of site landscaping works has been submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. Prior to the commencement of the drilling operations a detailed noise monitoring scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Mineral Planning Authority. The scheme shall include the locations and times for noise monitoring to be carried out commencing from the start of drilling operations. Prior to the commencement of the drilling operations a detailed dust management plan shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Minerals Planning Authority. R7 1. Proposals for renewable and low carbon energy generating and HRA implications as locations not known. distribution networks at all scales of development will be supported, Decentralised Energy Networks including community-led projects and district heat and power schemes. Impact pathways include: Disturbance 2. Specifically, the Knowledge Quarter area will be supported as the location Mechanical/abrasive damage and for a District Heat Network, including the provision of a appropriately sited nutrient enrichment Energy Centres. atmospheric pollution: local water resources; 3. All proposals should meet the requirements set out in other Local Plan water quality policies with respect, but not limited, to design, scale and location in loss of supporting habitat particular.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 80
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications
4. Where a decentralised network has been or is programmed to be constructed, future development within the network area will be required to connect as part of a planning obligation unless it can be demonstrated that this would not be viable. R8 Sites within the following types of location may have the potential for wind HRA implications particularly with respect to turbine(s) development: SPA/Ramsar species Wind Turbines River Mersey frontage; Impact pathways include: Open and exposed areas within and on the periphery of the Disturbance and possible city’s built-up area; and injury/mortality as a result of collisions; Within the curtilage of established development Mechanical/abrasive damage and nutrient enrichment Proposals for wind turbine(s) will need to demonstrate in a Design and atmospheric pollution: local Access Statement including an impact assessment that there will be no harm water resources; caused as a result of the size (height) and scale (number of turbines) on the water quality character of the wider area and with specific reference to: loss of supporting habitat the built or natural environment assets and the World Heritage Site in particular •Neighbouring land uses and development including adverse impacts on amenity by virtue of noise and visual intrusion, and
Applicants proposing a specific site must be able to demonstrate community engagement and support for the wind turbine development. R9 1. The deployment of solar panels for energy generation will be supported, The Policy includes a statement regarding protection in particular for building- mounted installation (either as a retrofit to an of biodiversity. Solar Panels existing development or integrated within the design of a new development) subject to other Local Plan policies. No LSE.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 81
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications
2. Proposals for solar panel development will need to be appropriately sited, regarding: a. The wider cultural and heritage landscape b. Minimising impact on visual amenity
3. For standalone ground - mounted installations, either on brownfield or greenfield sites applicants will need to demonstrate that the proposals; a. have been subject to and have community engagement and support b. will be no adverse impact on biodiversity c. Design incorporates the ability to remove the structure and restore the site R10 The adoption of non-fossil fuel technologies to generate locally sourced This Policy states the commitment of the Council to energy will be supported as part of the transition to a low carbon economy. move towards low carbon energy sources. Non-Fossil Fuel Energy Sources No LSE. Sustainable Transport and Accessibility TP1 1. Development proposals should make the best use of existing transport This Policy aims to control and manage adverse infrastructure. Where this cannot be achieved, development should be effects and is mainly aimed at encouraging and Improving Accessibility and phased to coincide with new transport infrastructure provision. maximizing the use of sustainable transport which Managing Demand for Travel should have a positive air quality effect. 2. Developments which singly or in combination have a significant impact on the movement of people or goods, should, through the provision of No LSE. Travel Plans, positively manage travel demand and contribute to the improvement of accessibility in general, particularly by more sustainable modes of transport including walking, cycling and public transport.
3. Development proposals should not compromise existing transport infrastructure or schemes programmed in the Local Transport Plan (LTP) and actions that are planned. These include:
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 82
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications
a. Improving access to Liverpool John Lennon Airport, including support for measures to maintain and increase the proportion of passengers arriving and departing the airport by public transport b. Improving access to the Ports of Liverpool and Garston, including through rail freight access and encouraging the retention and/or expansion of rail freight from the Port of Garston/Freightliner location c. Increasing the network of safe cycling and walking routes, based on programmes in the LTP's Active Travel Strategy and the longer term plan to complete the comprehensive Merseyside Cycle Network d. Improvements in the City Centre (e.g. rail capacity improvements) e. Strategic road schemes identified in statutory transport policy documents f. Facilities for park and ride.
4. All developments should address the accessibility of pedestrians and cyclists, as well as other users of the transport and movement networks within the City and make a positive contribution to the reduction and mitigation of climate change and road safety issues.
5. The City Council will support and facilitate proposals involving the construction or upgrading of passenger rail facilities and those which will improve the efficiency of the movement of freight transport to, through and across the City. TP2 1. Development proposals should be accompanied by a Transport Statement This policy sets out the requirements for transport or Transport Assessment in accordance with the Council’s Guidance Notes assessments so it wouldn’t result in LSE. However, Transport Assessments for the Submission of Transport Assessments. the need to consider air quality impacts of development where the change in flows on a road within 200m of a European site will exceed 1000
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 83
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications 2. In order to ensure that free and safe movement is not compromised AADT or 200 HDV as a result of the scheme needs consideration will be given to the effect on safety, congestion and the to be considered. environment when dealing with development proposals that involve: No LSE. a. new or altered access to the transport network; or b. improvement work to the transport network; or c. the creation of new transport infrastructure; or, d. the generation of additional trips on the transport network,
3. Development will only be permitted where: a. Accesses, junctions and new road layouts should be safe and operate efficiently. b. The development would not have a material detrimental impact on the functioning of the transport network; c. The proposal would not be detrimental to the safety of all users of the transport network, and in particular pedestrians and cyclists; d. The proposal makes provision for walking, cycling and the use of public transport. e. The proposal would not generate regular movement of heavy goods vehicles (HGVs) on unsuitable roads, or on roads without easy access to Merseyside’s Freight Route Network; and f. Vehicle and cycle parking, turning and servicing is appropriate to the scale and nature of the development is provided. TP3 1. Development of sites that would compromise land used or safeguarded This Policy aims to safeguard land. for transport functions, will only be permitted where: Safeguarding Land for Transport a. there is no current or future strategic or operational need, or No LSE. Functions b. alternative provision is made; and c. consultation has been undertaken with operators, owners and/or other interested parties
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 84
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications
2. In safeguarding land for transport functions the Council will: a. support proposals to improve access to Liverpool John Lennon Airport, including support for measures to maintain and increase the proportion of passengers travelling by public transport b. support the aim of Improving access to the Ports of Liverpool and Garston, including rail freight access and the retention and/or expansion of rail freight from the Port of Garston/Freightliner location. c. protect routes where necessary and support improvement of facilities that supports sustainable modes of transport that includes walking, cycling and the use of public transport d. support proposals which will maintain, improve or develop cross river services operating from Pier Head/Princes Landing Stage e. support initiatives designed to provide car and cycling facilities at rail stations by protecting land where necessary. TP4 The construction of new roads will be supported only where it can be clearly This Policy is setting out criteria that must be demonstrated that it will achieve the following aims: complied with should strategic road schemes come Strategic Road Schemes a. assist regeneration by attracting new investment through the opening up forward. of employment and development opportunities; and/or b. secure environmental improvements by removing extraneous traffic Although it is considered that Local Plan gives from congested areas, particularly residential areas and other sensitive sufficient policy protection to rule out LSE at plan locations level. HRA of individual schemes undertaken at the project level.
No LSE. TP5 Proposals for new development should: No LSE, as this policy is not specifically promoting a. Demonstrate that they will have a positive impact on the cycling cycling but setting out standards with which any new Cycling network and its users; developments will need to comply.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 85
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications b. Provide appropriate cycle access and sufficient, secure cycle parking facilities; and c. Provide evidence that it supports the vision and objectives of the City Council’s cycling strategy and the Liverpool City Region Transport Strategy for Growth TP6 All new development proposals should: No LSE, as this policy is not specifically promoting a. protect, maintain and where appropriate improve the existing pedestrian new walking routes. Walking infrastructure; b. not adversely impact on the pedestrian or the environment and provide Although it is considered that Local Plan gives appropriate pedestrian access; and sufficient policy protection to rule out LSE at plan c. improve the safety and security of pedestrians level. HRA of individual schemes undertaken at the project level.
TP7 Developments which are likely to be used by the public will be required to No LSE incorporate provision for taxi and Hackney Carriage facilities where there Taxis are no existing facilities in close proximity to the site, or where the scale and nature of development will generate a demand for taxi and Hackney Carriage facilities. TP8 1. All new developments including changes of use, which generate a No LSE, as this policy is not specifically promoting demand for car parking or servicing will be required to make provision on car parks but setting out standards with which any Car Parking and Servicing site appropriate to the scale and nature of the development in accordance new developments will need to comply. with the Council's standards. Parking standards may be set out in this Local Plan, in a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) Although it is considered that Local Plan gives or both. sufficient policy protection to rule out LSE at plan level. HRA of individual schemes undertaken at the 2. Proposals for residential and non-residential development will be required project level. to meet the Council's parking standards
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 86
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Heading Policies HRA Test of Likely Significant Effects (TOLSE), alone, implications 3. Car parking for the disabled including in the city centre should be provided in accordance with the Council's standards. TP9 1. Public transport should be considered in the design of all development No LSE, as this policy is not specifically promoting and it should be clear how the issue of ensuring public transport usage as a public transport schemes but setting out the need for Public Transport realistic alternative to private car trips has developers to consider them and providing some been addressed where it is material to do so. standards with which any new developments will need to comply. Also, the Policy is promoting the 2. Where a development is of sufficient size as to comprise an internal use public transport which should have a positive air highway circulation system for vehicles the design should ensure that it can quality impact. accommodate bus access. Although it is considered that Local Plan gives 3. Access to rail services should be facilitated for occupiers of all major sufficient policy protection to rule out LSE at plan development sites. Design and Access Statements should address how the level. HRA of individual schemes undertaken at the proposed development relates to and improves access to rail services and project level. networks in terms of: Walking distance and walking routes to stations Cycling distance and cycling routes to stations No LSE. Convenience of bus access to stations Principal destinations served from the rail stations (covering those destinations with frequent trains and then other appropriate destinations where a change of train may be required) Details of the service frequencies, hours of operation and principle destinations compared with the opening hours and demands of the development during the day, and Whether the station offers attractive waiting facilities, adequate shelter, perceived social safety and facilities for ease of access for all.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 87
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 88
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Appendix 2
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 89
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
The Table below considers those policies of the Liverpool Local Plan that could operation ‘in combination’ with other plans and projects. These pathways are discussed further in the main body of the report and a final conclusion reached in that document.
Option No Plans which could have an in- Likely Significant Effect-In Combination Effects LSE (in-combination) plus Measures to manage contribution to in combination effect combination effect reasoning
Liverpool City Centre CC 4, CC Renewable Energy Capacity Potential for in combination effects from the generation of pollutants and increased Assuming that the proposed developers implement best 5, CC 6 Study 2012 Policy - Low carbon disturbance during the construction of development schemes or increased practice measures, there is no potential for likely significant and CC 13 development and renewable recreational pressures during occupation upon Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar, effects in combination from pollutants and construction energy Sefton Coast SAC, Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA, Liverpool Bay SPA, Mersey disturbance. Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Sefton Local Plan Strategy 2015 Foreshore Ramsar site. For disturbance effects during occupation, protective policies (SD2, MN1, MN2, ED2, ED5, ED6, do exist in the Liverpool Local Plan, particularly STP2 and HC3, HC5, HC7, IN2, ;EQ3, EQ9, Potential for in combination traffic-related air quality impacts on Sefton Coast SAC GI5. Strategic measures to manage recreational access within and NH6) and Manchester Mosses SAC. the coastal European sites around Merseyside are also Wirral Core Strategy 2012 (CS2. required, in conjunction with other Merseyside Authorities. CS18, CS12, CS13, CS19, CS20, Potential for in combinations effects with an increase of water abstraction which may CS24, CS30, CS31, CS32. CS40 result in LSE upon River Eden SAC and River Dee and Bala Lake SAC. Appropriate phasing of development to ensure potable water and CS41 and wastewater treatment capacity keeps pace with delivery of development. Mersey Ports Masterplan
Liverpool John Lennon Airport Detailed air quality modelling of any development likely to Expansion result in a change in flows exceeding 1000 AADT or 200 Liverpool and Wirral Waters heavy duty vehicle movements per day on roads within 200m Development Masterplan of Sefton Coast SAC. Mersey Heartlands Growth Point Programme of Delivery Analysis of individual planning applications to ensure no adverse effect on integrity in line with policies GI5 and STP2. Employment Land and the Economy EC1 to Renewable Energy Capacity Potential for in combination effects from the generation of pollutants and increased Assuming that the proposed developers implement best EC4, EC6 Study 2012 Policy - Low carbon disturbance during the construction and operation of development schemes upon practice measures, there is no potential for likely significant and EC7 development and renewable Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar, Sefton Coast SAC, Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA, effects in combination from pollutants and construction energy disturbance.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 90
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Option No Plans which could have an in- Likely Significant Effect-In Combination Effects LSE (in-combination) plus Measures to manage contribution to in combination effect combination effect reasoning
Cheshire West and Chester (SO8, Liverpool Bay SPA, Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ramsar SO9, SO13, SO14, SO15, Strat 2, site. For disturbance effects during occupation, , protective policies Strat 3, Strat 4, Strat10, Strat 11, do exist in the Liverpool Local Plan, particularly STP2 and Econ 1, Econ 3, Soc 4, Soc 5, SOC 6, Potential for in combination traffic-related air quality impacts on Sefton Coast SAC GI5. Env 3, and Manchester Mosses SAC. Wirral Core Strategy 2012 (CS11, Appropriate phasing of development to ensure potable water CS12, CS13, CS18, CS19, CS20, Potential for in combinations effects with an increase of water abstraction which may and wastewater treatment capacity keeps pace with delivery of CS24, CS30, CS31, CS32, CS34, result in LSE upon River Eden SAC, River Dee and Bala Lake. development. CS40 and CS41) Sefton Core Strategy 2015 (MN1, Detailed air quality modelling of any development likely to MN2, ED1, ED2, ED5, ED6, HC3, result in a change in flows exceeding 1000 AADT or 200 HC5HC7, IN2, ECQ3, EQ7, EQ8, heavy duty vehicle movements per day on roads within 200m NH4 and NH6) of Sefton Coast SAC. Knowsley Core Strategy 2016 (CS1, CS2, CS3, CS4, CS5, CS7, Analysis of individual planning applications to ensure no CS8, CS18, CS19, CS21, CS22, adverse effect on integrity in line with policies GI5 and STP2. CS24 Mersey Ports Masterplan Liverpool John Lennon Airport Expansion Liverpool and Wirral Waters Development Masterplan Mersey Heartlands Growth Point Programme of Delivery Power from the Mersey Mersey Gateway Energy from Waste Plants Housing H1, H2, Renewable Energy Capacity Potential for in combination effects from the generation of pollutants and increased Assuming that the proposed developers implement best H6, H8, Study 2012 Policy - Low carbon disturbance during the construction of development schemes or increased practice measures, there is no potential for likely significant H11, H12, development and renewable recreational pressures during occupation upon Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar, effects in combination from pollutants and construction H14 energy Sefton Coast SAC, Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA, Liverpool Bay SPA, Mersey disturbance. Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Sefton Local Plan Strategy 2015 Foreshore Ramsar site. For disturbance effects during occupation, protective policies (SD2, MN1, MN2, ED2, ED5, ED6, do exist in the Liverpool Local Plan, particularly STP2 and HC3, HC5, HC7, IN2, ;EQ3, EQ9, Potential for in combination traffic-related air quality impacts on Sefton Coast SAC GI5. Strategic measures to manage recreational access within and NH6) and Manchester Mosses SAC.
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 91
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Option No Plans which could have an in- Likely Significant Effect-In Combination Effects LSE (in-combination) plus Measures to manage contribution to in combination effect combination effect reasoning
Wirral Core Strategy 2012 (CS2. the coastal European sites around Merseyside are also CS18, CS12, CS13, CS19, CS20, Potential for in combinations effects with an increase of water abstraction which may required, in conjunction with other Merseyside Authorities. CS24, CS30, CS31, CS32. CS40 result in LSE upon River Eden SAC and River Dee and Bala Lake SAC. and CS41 Appropriate phasing of development to ensure potable water and wastewater treatment capacity keeps pace with delivery of St Helens Core Strategy 2012 development. (CH1, CP2, CH3, CQL1, CQL5) Flintshire UDP (;HSG1, HSG3, Detailed air quality modelling of any development likely to HSG4, HSG5, HSG14) result in a change in flows exceeding 1000 AADT or 200 Wrexham LDP 2013-2028 (SP7) heavy duty vehicle movements per day on roads within 200m Mersey Ports Masterplan of Sefton Coast SAC. Liverpool John Lennon Airport Analysis of individual planning applications to ensure no Expansion adverse effect on integrity in line with policies GI5 and STP2. Liverpool and Wirral Waters Development Masterplan Mersey Heartlands Growth Point Programme of Delivery Shopping Centres and Community Facilities
SP 1, SP5, Renewable Energy Capacity Potential for in combination effects from the generation of pollutants and increased Analysis of individual planning applications to ensure no SP6 Study 2012 Policy - Low carbon disturbance during the construction of development schemes or increased adverse effect on integrity in line with policies GI5 and STP2. development and renewable recreational pressures during occupation upon Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar, energy Sefton Coast SAC, Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA, Liverpool Bay SPA, Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Sefton Local Plan Strategy 2015 Foreshore Ramsar site. (SD2, MN1, MN2, ED2, ED5, ED6, HC3, HC5, HC7, IN2, ;EQ3, EQ9, and NH6) Wirral Core Strategy 2012 (CS2. CS18, CS12, CS13, CS19, CS20, CS24, CS30, CS31, CS32. CS40 and CS41 St Helens Core Strategy 2012 (CP2) Flintshire UDP (;HSG8, S1, S4, S5 S6)
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 92
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Option No Plans which could have an in- Likely Significant Effect-In Combination Effects LSE (in-combination) plus Measures to manage contribution to in combination effect combination effect reasoning
Wrexham LDP 2013-2028 (SP1) Mersey Ports Masterplan Liverpool John Lennon Airport Expansion Liverpool and Wirral Waters Development Masterplan Mersey Heartlands Growth Point Programme of Delivery
Green Infrastructure
GI 4 Renewable Energy Capacity Potential for in combination effects from the generation of pollutants and increased For disturbance effects during occupation, protective policies Study 2012 Policy - Low carbon disturbance during the construction of development schemes or increased do exist in the Liverpool Local Plan, particularly STP2 and development and renewable recreational pressures during occupation upon Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar, GI5. Strategic measures to manage recreational access within energy Sefton Coast SAC, Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA, Liverpool Bay SPA, Mersey the coastal European sites around Merseyside are also Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Mersey Narrows & North Wirral required, in conjunction with other Merseyside Authorities. Sefton Local Plan Strategy 2015 Foreshore Ramsar site. (SD2, MN1, MN2, ED2, ED5, ED6, HC3, HC5, HC7, IN2, ;EQ3, EQ9, and NH6) Wirral Core Strategy 2012 (CS2. CS18, CS12, CS13, CS19, CS20, CS24, CS30, CS31, CS32. CS40 and CS41 Mersey Ports Masterplan Liverpool John Lennon Airport Expansion Liverpool and Wirral Waters Development Masterplan
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 93
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Option No Plans which could have an in- Likely Significant Effect-In Combination Effects LSE (in-combination) plus Measures to manage contribution to in combination effect combination effect reasoning
Mersey Heartlands Growth Point Programme of Delivery
Environmental Design R6, R7, R8 Renewable Energy Capacity Potential for in combination effects from the generation of pollutants and increased Assuming that the proposed developers implement best Study 2012 Policy - Low carbon disturbance during the construction or operation of development schemes upon practice measures, there is no potential for likely significant development and renewable Mersey Estuary SPA and Ramsar, Sefton Coast SAC, Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA, effects in combination from pollutants and construction energy Liverpool Bay SPA, Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Mersey disturbance. Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore Ramsar site. Sefton Local Plan Strategy 2015 Analysis of individual planning applications to ensure no (SD2, MN1, MN2, ED2, ED5, ED6, Potential for in combination traffic-related air quality impacts on Sefton Coast SAC adverse effect on integrity in line with policies GI5 and STP2. HC3, HC5, HC7, IN2, ;EQ3, EQ9, and Manchester Mosses SAC. and NH6) Wirral Core Strategy 2012 (CS2. Potential for in combinations effects with an increase of water abstraction which may CS18, CS12, CS13, CS19, CS20, result in LSE upon River Eden SAC and River Dee and Bala Lake SAC. CS24, CS30, CS31, CS32. CS40 and CS41 St Helens Core Strategy 2012 (CH1, CP2, CH3, CQL1, CQL5) Flintshire UDP (;HSG1, HSG3, HSG4, HSG5, HSG14) Wrexham LDP 2013-2028 (SP7) Mersey Ports Masterplan
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 94
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
Option No Plans which could have an in- Likely Significant Effect-In Combination Effects LSE (in-combination) plus Measures to manage contribution to in combination effect combination effect reasoning
Liverpool John Lennon Airport Expansion Liverpool and Wirral Waters Development Masterplan Mersey Heartlands Growth Point Programme of Delivery
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 95
Liverpool City Council — Liverpool Local Plan HRA
LIVERPOOL LOCAL PLAN HRA July 2016 96