CITY AND COUNTY OF SWANSEA
NOTICE OF MEETING
You are invited to attend a Special Meeting of the DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL COMMITTEE
At: Council Chamber, Civic Centre, Swansea.
On: Thursday, 29 August, 2013
Time: 5.00 pm
AGENDA
Page No.
1. To receive Apologies for Absence.
2. To receive Disclosures of Personal & Prejudicial Interests. 1 - 2
3. Planning Application 2012/0931 - Atlantic Array Wind Farm - 3 - 8 Registration and Relevant Representation.
4. Planning Application No. 2013/1012 - Land off Ffordd Amazon, 9 - 26 Jersey Marine, Neath Port Talbot, SA1 8QL (Referral from Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council).
5. Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon Formal Pre-Application Consultation 27 - 141 Report.
Patrick Arran Head of Legal, Democratic Services & Procurement Thursday, 22 August 2013 Contact: Democratic Services - 636820
ACCESS TO INFORMATION LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 (SECTION 100) (AS AMENDED) (NOTE: The documents and files used in the preparation of this Schedule of Planning Applications are identified in the ‘Background Information’ Section of each report. The Application files will be available in the committee room for half an hour before the start of the meeting, to enable Members to inspect the contents).
Agenda Item 2 Disclosures of Interest
To receive Disclosures of Interest from Councillors and Officers
Councillors
Councillors Interests are made in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Conduct adopted by the City and County of Swansea. You must disclose orally to the meeting the existence and nature of that interest.
NOTE: You are requested to identify the Agenda Item / Minute No. / Planning Application No. and Subject Matter to which that interest relates and to enter all declared interests on the sheet provided for that purpose at the meeting.
1. If you have a Personal Interest as set out in Paragraph 10 of the Code, you MAY STAY, SPEAK AND VOTE unless it is also a Prejudicial Interest.
2. If you have a Personal Interest which is also a Prejudicial Interest as set out in Paragraph 12 of the Code, then subject to point 3 below, you MUST WITHDRAW from the meeting (unless you have obtained a dispensation from the Authority’s Standards Committee)
3. Where you have a Prejudicial Interest you may attend the meeting but only for the purpose of making representations, answering questions or giving evidence relating to the business, provided that the public are also allowed to attend the meeting for the same purpose, whether under a statutory right or otherwise. In such a case, you must withdraw from the meeting immediately after the period for making representations, answering questions, or giving evidence relating to the business has ended, and in any event before further consideration of the business begins, whether or not the public are allowed to remain in attendance for such consideration (Paragraph 14 of the Code).
4. Where you have agreement from the Monitoring Officer that the information relating to your Personal Interest is sensitive information, as set out in Paragraph 16 of the Code of Conduct, your obligation to disclose such information is replaced with an obligation to disclose the existence of a personal interest and to confirm that the Monitoring Officer has agreed that the nature of such personal interest is sensitive information.
5. If you are relying on a grant of a dispensation by the Standards Committee, you must, before the matter is under consideration:
i) Disclose orally both the interest concerned and the existence of the dispensation; and ii) Before or immediately after the close of the meeting give written notification to the Authority containing:
D:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\6\6\0\AI00005066\$m55yfqky.docPage 1 a) Details of the prejudicial interest; b) Details of the business to which the prejudicial interest relates; c) Details of, and the date on which, the dispensation was granted; and d) Your signature
Officers
Financial Interests
1. If an Officer has a financial interest in any matter which arises for decision at any meeting to which the Officer is reporting or at which the Officer is in attendance involving any member of the Council and /or any third party the Officer shall declare an interest in that matter and take no part in the consideration or determination of the matter and shall withdraw from the meeting while that matter is considered. Any such declaration made in a meeting of a constitutional body shall be recorded in the minutes of that meeting. No Officer shall make a report to a meeting for a decision to be made on any matter in which s/he has a financial interest.
2. A “financial interest” is defined as any interest affecting the financial position of the Officer, either to his/her benefit or to his/her detriment. It also includes an interest on the same basis for any member of the Officers family or a close friend and any company firm or business from which an Officer or a member of his/her family receives any remuneration. There is no financial interest for an Officer where a decision on a report affects all of the Officers of the Council or all of the officers in a Department or Service.
D:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\6\6\0\AI00005066\$m55yfqky.docPage 2 Agenda Item 3
Report of the Head of Economic Regeneration & Planning
Development Management & Control Committee - 29 August 2013
PLANNING APPLICATION REFERENCE 2012/0931 – ATLANTIC ARRAY WIND FARM – REGISTRATION AND RELEVANT REPRESENTATION
Purpose: To seek Committee approval to register the City & County of Swansea as in an interested party with the Planning Inspectorate and to highlight relevant representation issues.
Policy Framework: National Policy Statements, Planning Policy Wales and the adopted City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.
Reason for Decision: To allow Officers to register the City & County of Swansea with the Planning Inspectorate and to highlight relevant representation issues.
Consultation: Legal Services, Finance, Technical Services, Pollution Control, Sustainable Development, Culture, Tourism, Sport and Leisure, Economic Development, Nature and Conservation.
Recommendation(s): It is recommended that:
1) the City & County of Swansea registers with the Planning Inspectorate to become an interested party for the purpose of the examination of the Atlantic Array off-shore wind farm proposals and to highlight initial relevant representation issues as per the following areas of concern:
• The landscape, seascape and visual impacts; • The Socio Economic impacts; • The Tourism and Recreation impacts.
Report Author: Richard Jones
Finance Officer: Kim Lawrence
Legal Officer: Nigel Havard / Sandie Richards
1.0 Background
1.1 Members will recall that a report was presented to this Committee on the 30th August 2012 to inform Members of RWE npower renewables’ (RWE) formal pre-application consultation in respect of their proposals to develop the Atlantic Array Off Shore Wind Farm in the Bristol Channel and to determine the response of the City & County of Swansea to the consultation. Page 3
1.2 It was resolved that the City & County of Swansea formally responds to the pre-application consultation received from RWE, in accordance with Section 42 of the Planning Act 2008, as follows:
1.3 “That RWE be provided with a copy of this report and note this Council’s significant concerns and objections in respect of:
1.4 The significant adverse seascape, landscape and visual effects on the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the Gower AONB which would be contrary to the primary purpose of the designation and the national duty to conserve and enhance the area’s natural beauty, contrary to Planning Policy Wales and to Policies EV22, EV26 and EV31 of the adopted UDP.
• The areas most affected by the proposals cover the majority of the coast of the south western end of the Gower peninsula which include many of the most scenic, attractive and well known parts of the AONB. The undeveloped coastline in this area is recognised as a valuable but fragile asset and is identified in the UDP as a key element in the image, identity and quality of life of the area. • The acknowledged significant adverse impacts will therefore in turn result in significant adverse impacts on the AONB and its key, iconic assets. • The scale, form, design, appearance and cumulative impacts of the proposals would significantly adversely affect visual amenity, local environment and the recreational/tourist use of the Gower AONB. • The social, economic and environmental benefits of the scheme in meeting local, and national energy targets do not outweigh the acknowledged significant adverse impacts, contrary to UDP Policy R11.
That RWE be provided with a copy of the “Evaluation of Proposals and Seascape and Visual Impact Assessment Report” prepared by White Consultants on behalf of the City & County of Swansea and that RWE be requested to:
• Provide the additional information and clarification as set out in the report; • Note and address the suggested ways to minimise effects; • Note and address the conclusions where effects are considered to be understated.
That RWE be provided with the consultation responses received from the Council’s Ecologist and the Gower AONB Partnership as well as the letter of objection received from a member of the public.”
1.5 Notification has now subsequently been received from RWE, on the 25th July 2013, that the Planning Inspectorate (on behalf of the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change) has accepted their application for a development consent order (DCO) to construct and operate the proposed Atlantic Array Wind Farm.
1.6 For the avoidance of doubt, this does not mean that the proposals are approved. It confirms only that the application for a DCO meets with the statutory requirements for examination.Page 4 2.0 The site and proposal
2.1 The Atlantic Array would be located in the outer Bristol Channel, approximately 22 km from the south Wales coast, 15.5 km from the north Devon coast and 13.5 km from Lundy Island, at its closest points. The site occupies an area of approximately 200 km2 and is approximately 25 km east-west, and 12.25 km north-south.
2.2 A site location plan is provided as Appendix A.
2.3 The developer wishes to retain flexibility as to the final layout and size of the turbines in order to respond to technological and commercial factors as well as prevailing market conditions at the time of construction. Consequently, at this stage in the development process, the electrical capacity of the turbines to be used, and consequently the actual number of turbines and overall generating capacity of the Atlantic Array, is not fully determined.
2.4 A range of turbines with a generating capacity of between 8 MW and 5 MW is currently being considered within a project design envelope ranging from 150 to 240 turbines respectively, with a resulting installed capacity of up to 1,200 MW. (This is equivalent to the approximate domestic needs of around 900,000 average UK households.) The maximum height of the turbines would range between 180m for the 240 turbine scheme and 220m for the 150 turbine scheme.
2.5 If the application for development consent is successful, construction of the onshore infrastructure is anticipated to commence in 2016, and construction of the offshore infrastructure approximately 1 to 2 years later. It is advised that works may be undertaken in up to three phases. In a three phased approach each phase of the wind farm is anticipated to take up to 24 months to build. Construction phases may not be continuous.
2.6 All onshore elements of the proposal, including grid connection works, would take place in North Devon.
3.0 The process and current position
3.1 Following acceptance for examination by the Planning Inspectorate, the application now moves into the pre-examination stage. This normally takes approximately 3 months and everyone who has registered to put their case in respect of the proposal will be invited to attend a Preliminary Meeting chaired by the Inspector appointed to examine the application. The purpose of the Preliminary Meeting is to give interested parties the opportunity to make representations to the Planning Inspectorate about how the application should be examined. The Preliminary Meeting will concern itself only with the procedure for examining the application, including, setting the timetable for making more detailed written representations.
Page 5 3.2 The Planning Inspectorate has six months to carry out the examination and must prepare a report on the application to the Secretary of State, including a recommendation, within 3 months of the six month examination period. The Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to make the decision on whether to grant or refuse development consent. Once a decision has been issued by the Secretary of State, there is a six week period in which the decision may be challenged in the High Court. This process of legal challenge is known as Judicial Review.
3.3 In terms of this Council’s involvement in this process, local authorities are identified under Section 43 of the Planning Act 2008 as either ‘A’ or ‘B’ local authorities. A ‘B’ authority is the authority(s) in which the proposed application is located, which includes the development integral to the nationally significant infrastructure project and any associated development. An ‘A’ authority is an authority that shares a boundary with the ‘B’ authority.
3.4 At the examination stage of the process, relevant local authorities are formally invited by the Planning Inspectorate to submit a Local Impact Report (LIR). Relevant local authorities are those where the site of a proposed nationally significant infrastructure project, or any part of it, lies in their area, or if their area adjoins those authorities, i.e. ‘A’ or ‘B’ Authorities.
3.5 In this particular case the associated onshore development would take place in North Devon. No onshore development would take place within the City & County of Swansea or any other South Wales local authority. Accordingly the City & County of Swansea is neither an ‘A’ or a ‘B’ authority.
3.6 It is recognised however that proposed nationally significant infrastructure project schemes located in offshore locations have a potential visual impact on local authorities which are not identified as ‘A’ or ‘B’ authorities. In these circumstances, the Planning Inspectorate will consult the local authority(s) within a 35km zone of visual influence identified from the nearest element of the proposed development to the shoreline. The City & County of Swansea falls within this zone and is identified as a non-prescribed consultation body.
3.7 Non-prescribed consultation bodies notified and/or consulted by the Planning Inspectorate are not automatically registered as an interested party as part of the examination process. To continue its involvement in the process it will be necessary therefore for the City & County of Swansea to register its interest in the proposals by making relevant representation to the Planning Inspectorate by the 16th September 2013. Relevant representations are used by the Planning Inspectorate to help identify the initial principal issues for examination. In order therefore to make valid relevant representation, it will be necessary to set out the Council’s main areas of interest or concern as part of the registration process.
Page 6 3.8 Registering will enable this Authority to:
• Put a summary of the Councils case to the Planning Inspectorate in writing; • Request to speak at the Preliminary Meeting about how the application should be examined; • Provide detailed written representation to the Planning Inspectorate; • Request that a hearing be held; • Request to speak at a hearing.
3.9 Having regard to the foregoing, it is recommended that the City & County of Swansea registers with the Planning Inspectorate to become an interested party for the purpose of the examination of the Atlantic Array off-shore wind farm proposals and that the initial relevant representation reflects that of the main issues of concern as set out in the aforementioned report to this Committee, namely:
• The landscape, seascape and visual impacts; • The socio economic impacts; • The tourism and recreation impacts.
3.10 The relevant representation at this stage does not require any further information beyond setting out the above topic headings.
3.11 In due course it is recommended that this Authority makes detailed representation to the Planning Inspectorate based on the final Environmental Statement provided as part of the application. Accordingly a further report will be presented to Members which appraises the impact of the proposal on the City and County of Swansea and recommends what will essentially be a LIR for submission to the Planning Inspectorate.
4.0 Financial Implications
4.1 The City & County of Swansea does not receive a fee and is not eligible for external funding towards the cost of considering this nationally significant infrastructure proposal. The cost of Officer time and relevant expert advice therefore falls to the Council.
5.0 Legal Implications
5.1 The submission is subject to a detailed legal regime under the Planning Act 2008 and the associated Regulations. Some of the details are set out in the Report. The Developers will have to satisfy the requirements if their submission is to be successful.
Background Papers: National Policy Statements, Planning Policy Wales, adopted City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan and the Atlantic Array Offshore Wind Farm Draft Environmental Statement.
Appendices: Appendix A – Location Plan.
Page 7 APPENDIX A Page 8 Agenda Item 4
Report of the Head of Economic Regeneration and Planning
Development Management and Control Committee - 29 August 2013
LAND OFF FFORDD AMAZON JERSEY MARINE NEATH PORT TALBOT SA1 8QL (2013/1012)
3 OFFICE BUILDINGS (B1) TO CREATE UP TO 20,160SQ.M OF FLOORSPACE WITH ANCILLARY CAR PARKING AND LANDSCAPING (OUTLINE) (REFERRAL FROM NEATH PORT TALBOT COUNTY BOROUGH COUNCIL)
Purpose: To determine the response from the City & County of Swansea to the consultation from Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council relating to the application for 3 office buildings (b1) to create up to 20,160sq.m of floorspace with ancillary car parking and landscaping (outline) (referral from Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council)
Policy Framework: Welsh Government and Local Planning Policies
Reason for Decision: Statutory responsibility of the Local Planning Authority.
Consultation: Consultations carried out by Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council
Recommendation: It is recommended that: -
1) Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council be informed that this authority raises Objections to the proposal for the reasons set out in the report.
Report Author: David Owen
Finance Officer: Not applicable
Legal Officer: No applicable
1.0 Introduction
1.1 This application is being reported directly to this Development Management and Control Committee because of its strategic significance in accordance with the Council Constitution.
Page 9
1.2 The report sets out an analysis of the merits of the scheme in the context of the relevant policy framework, and a recommended response to Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council.
1.3 It is recommended that the Council offers an objection to the application.
1.4 A site location plan is provided as Appendix A.
Background Papers: Planning Policy Wales, Wales Spatial Plan, City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan, Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council Unitary Development Plan, Swansea Economic Regeneration Strategy, Swansea City Centre Strategic Framework, Economic Assessment and Employment, Land Provision for Swansea and Neath Port Talbot
Appendices Appendix A – Site Plan Appendix B - Report
Page 10 APPENDIX A Page 11 APPENDIX B
ITEM APPLICATION NO. 2013/1012 WARD:
Location: Land off Ffordd Amazon Jersey Marine Neath Port Talbot SA1 8QL Proposal: 3 Office Buildings (B1) to create up to 20,160sq.m of floorspace with ancillary car parking and landscaping (outline) (Referral from Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council) Applicant: Welsh Government
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: a. Relevant Planning Policies and Supporting Strategies
Wales Spatial Plan - People, Places, Futures – updated and adopted by Welsh Government, July 2008
Planning Policy Wales – Edition 5 - Nov. 2012
Swansea Unitary Development Plan Strategic Policy SP6 The primary focus for new retail, cultural and business development will be the City Centre.
Policy AS1 New development associated with housing, employment, shopping, leisure and service provision should be located in areas that are currently highly accessible by a range of transport modes, in particular public transport, walking and cycling, or in areas where a good level of such provision can realistically be achieved.
Policy CC1 Within the City Centre, development of the following uses will be supported: Retailing and associated uses; Offices; Hotels, Residential… [and other uses]
Policy CC3 The St David’s / Quadrant area is defined as the area of highest priority for redevelopment in the City Centre. Development proposals that would put at risk the comprehensive retail led regeneration scheme will not be supported.
Swansea City Centre Strategic Framework Adopted as SPG in 2009, the document provides a city wide framework to guide development and investment in a coordinated fashion.
Swansea Economic Regeneration Strategy 2020 Sets out the vision and strategy for Swansea 2020 to be an internationally competitive economy, Wales leading centre for the knowledge economy, high employment with a skilled workforce and a proud, vibrant and ambitious City where people want to live and work
Page 12 The Fabian Way Corridor Transport Assessment - Jan. 2010 Approved by Cabinet 21 Oct. 2010 as the Preferred Transport Strategy.
Economic Assessment & Employment Land Provision for Swansea and Neath Port Talbot, Peter Brett Associates, 2012
Neath Port Talbot Unitary Development Plan – March 2008 Policy EC1/3 The land at Jersey Marine is allocated for employment development under business (B1), industry (B2), storage and distribution (B8), and offices (financial and professional services – A2). b. Relevant Planning History
None c. Response to Consultations The statutory consultation and publicity procedures have been carried out by Neath and Port Talbot County Borough Council.
Highway Observations –
1. Introduction
The site lies approximately 5km to the east of Swansea city centre and comprises two plots of land to the east of the Amazon distribution centre off the A483 Fabian Way near Jersey Marine.
The site is allocated for employment use in the Neath Port Talbot Unitary Development Plan for A2 (financial and professional services), B1 (business), B2 (general industry) and B8 (storage and distribution). Following discussions with the Welsh Government, it has been determined that the proposed development will be B1 led comprising high specification offices. The site is split into two plots by Ffordd Amazon and for reference these will be named Plot A and Plot B. The proposed scheme comprises 217,000 sq.ft. (20,160m2) of B1 office space in three units of identical size with two units proposed on Plot A and a single unit on Plot B. Access will be taken from two existing access roads from the Ffordd Amazon roundabout. Both plots will be accessed from the existing access roads at the Ffordd Amazon roundabout. The access roads will be improved and constructed to adoptable standards with 6.0m carriageways, an appropriate level of lighting and footways/ cycleways that connect directly to the existing facilities on Ffordd Amazon.
In 2009 / 2010 Arup undertook a more wide ranging assessment of the entire Fabian Way corridor. The report (Fabian Way Corridor Transport Assessment, Rev. A, dated January 2010) sets out the transport strategy for the corridor and provides a framework within which transport can support the wider regeneration aims of the corridor. The strategy involves major highway improvements but also includes a range of public transport, cycle and pedestrian improvements. The focus on sustainable means of transport is in recognition of the fact that if the corridor is to continue to operate efficiently, it is essential that transport links are strengthened and those travelling into Swansea and on the Fabian Way Corridor are provided with realistic choices. By utilising the existing infrastructure provided by the completion of Phase 2 of Ffordd Amazon and the improved Jersey Marine junction, the proposed development complements the strategy by avoiding the introduction
Page 13 of new junctions onto Fabian Way whilst also defining a clear gateway into Swansea from the east for transport users along the Fabian Way Corridor.
The scope of the TA was discussed at a meeting with the Highway and Planning authorities at NPTCBC on 21 March 2013. In terms of the highway impact it was agreed that capacity assessments should be undertaken at the following junctions:
* Ffordd Amazon Roundabout * Jersey Marine Signalised Roundabout (Fabian Way/ Ffordd Amazon) * Earlswood Interchange Traffic Signals(A48/ Fabian Way)
It was agreed that assessments would be undertaken in the opening year plus 15 years with background traffic factored to the appropriate year using TEMPRO growth rates for the Neath Port Talbot authority area. It was also agreed that the traffic flow forecasts would include the impact from four key committed development sites including, Coed Darcy Urban Village and the Swansea University Science and Innovation Campus.
As well as presenting the highway impact it was agreed that the TA should review the accessibility of the site for public transport, cyclists and pedestrians including where appropriate an indication of how these could be enhanced to offset the traffic impact of the development. It was agreed that a Framework Travel Plan would be prepared alongside the TA. The Travel Plan, which will also be a supporting document for the planning application, will set out the overall delivery of alternative transport arrangements and establish the overall management framework for how these will be implemented and monitored.
2. Parking Parking in accordance with the adopted parking standards for both vehicles and cycles is included within the indicative layout (the application is for outline with all matters reserved).
3. Public transport There are currently six separate bus services which run hourly along Fabian Way. There are bus stops on Ffordd Amazon but currently these are not served by any services. The nearest railway stations are at Briton Ferry, 4.5km to the north east and Baglan, 5.5km to the south east. Both are minor stations on the South Wales Main Line served by Arriva Trains Wales Swanline providing regional trains between Swansea and Cardiff. Monday to Saturday the typical service pattern is one service per hour in each direction. Some westbound trains continue on to Carmarthen and Milford Haven. The current Sunday service is very limited with only two trains in each direction. Both stations are unmanned.
4. Pedestrian and Cycle Facilities National Cycle Network route 4 passes adjacent to the site with a temporary cycle route along the western boundary of Plot A. Route 4 is a long distance cycle route between London and Fishguard via Reading, Bath , Bristol, Newport and Swansea. In Wales National Route 4 forms the main option of the Celtic Trail East cycle route passing through Newport, Caerphilly, Pontypridd and Port Talbot en route to Swansea. Large parts of the Celtic Trail are traffic free. Locally Route 4 follows Fabian Way between Junction 42 of the M4 and Swansea city centre where it is mostly traffic free. At the Jersey Marine roundabout it crosses the B4290 at a signalised crossing then continues on the north side of Ffordd Amazon before
Page 14 crossing to the south side at a partially controlled crossing just to the south east of the Ffordd Amazon roundabout. It then passes on a temporary cycle route between the western boundary of Plot A and the Amazon distribution centre before re-joining Fabian Way en route to Swansea.
A short distance to the west there is a Toucan crossing on Fabian Way. The crossing is next to the bus stops and provides a safe crossing point for pedestrians accessing westbound bus services. Cyclists are also permitted to use the crossing and it is also used by pedestrians using the footway on the south side of Fabian Way. There is a combined 3.0m footway/ cycleway on the north side of Ffordd Amazon between the Jersey Marine roundabout and the 'bus blocker' at the western end. There is also a 2.0m footway on the southern side. These form part of a traffic free and direct route for pedestrians and cyclists between Coed Darcy and Swansea city centre. As Coed Darcy develops the expectation is that the presence of walking and cycling in the area will increase significantly. This should help to foster a culture of sustainable transportation along the Ffordd Amazon corridor with the anticipation that other users of the corridor are encouraged to walk and cycle for the journey to and from work.
5. Transport Assessment A TA has been provided to support the proposed development submitted by URS on behalf of the Welsh Government. This analysed, in detail, the junctions as referred to in the introduction above.
The baseline data (traffic flows) showed that all junction and roundabouts were operating within their capacity.
Regarding trip generation the generation of person movements at the proposed development is based on a combination of the TRICS database and the 2001 Census Journey to Work Data for the daytime population in the Coedffranc West ward. Coedffranc West contains the proposed development site and in 2001 would have included many of the traditional industrial premises on the north side of Fabian Way that are now either unoccupied or have been redeveloped as part of the on-going regeneration in the area.
The trips amounted to a combined total of 468 arrivals and 33 departures in the morning peak and 36 arrivals and 378 departures in the afternoon peak.
Based on the Coedffranc ward the Mode of Travel Percentage Split was as follows:
• Train 0.00% • Bus, minibus or coach 2.19% • Taxi or minicab 0.17% • Driving a car or van 84.53% • Passenger in a car or van 7.72% • Motorcycle, scooter or moped 1.41% • Bicycle 0.94% • On Foot 2.66% • Other 0.39%
Applying these splits to the total trips shows that 395 cars will be arriving in the morning peak and 320 leaving in the afternoon peak.
Page 15 In 2031 it has been estimated that Coed Darcy will be 70% complete and to reflect the improvements to sustainable transport modes that a new sustainable urban village to the north will bring, a manual adjustment has been made to the modal split information. The improvements as a result of Coed Darcy will include:
• An increase in the number of bus services operating at higher frequencies many of which will pass close to the site on Ffordd Amazon en route to/ from Coed Darcy. • Enhancements to the pedestrian and cycle networks to provide direct and segregated links between Cored Darcy and Ffordd Amazon.
In total a 20% shift from car driver to sustainable modes has been assumed in the following proportions - 10% bus, 6% cycle, 4% walk - and the revised predicted number of journeys for each mode detailed. However I do not consider that there is an appropriate level of bus provision currently to support the proposed 10% employees using the bus.
The committed development has also been taken into consideration.
Taking the traffic growth factors into account for the year of opening 2016 and 15 years later in 2031 the affected junctions and roundabouts have been tested:
• Amazon roundabout has a negligible increase with no queues, and a maximum RFC of 0.355 so working well within capacity (an RFC level of 1 would indicate that the roundabout was saturated). • Queues would be expected at the Jersey Marine roundabout but still the RFC value is less the 0.85 in the main with one arm showing a saturation of 94% resulting in queue of 17 vehicles.
In 2031 the jersey marine junction achieves a RFC of 1.16 and hence saturation has been exceeded. Highway improvement works will be required as well as continuing to encourage non car modes of transport.
At the Fabian Way /A48 interchange the junction operates within capacity in 2016 but not in 2031.
Non car transport modes. There will be small number of patrons arriving on foot, by bus and by bike. As Coed Darcy develops there will be enhancements to the pedestrian and cycle networks to provide direct and segregated links between the new settlement and Ffordd Amazon. The expectation is that the presence of walking and cycling in the area will increase significantly. This should help to foster a culture of sustainable transportation along the Ffordd Amazon corridor with the anticipation that other users of the corridor are encouraged to walk and cycle for the journey to and from work. To encourage people to cycle to work, seven short stay and 34 long stay cycle stands will be provided at each unit. This accords with the relevant parking standards and there will be scope for the number of parking spaces to increase should the number of cyclists exceed the number of spaces. However it is not clear from the aims and aspirations to encourage cycling that this level of provision would be sufficient. A cycle shelter will be provided at each unit and these will be conveniently located close to the main entrance where they will benefit from natural surveillance. The shelter will be covered, well-lit and secure. Showers and lockers will be provided within each unit.
Page 16 Within each development plot footways/ cycleways that connect directly to the existing facilities on Ffordd Amazon will be provided. Direct links will also be provided to Fabian Way where there is a combined footway/ cycleway on the north side and a footway on the south side. The cycleway forms part of NCN 4 that locally connects Junction 42 of the M4 with Swansea city centre and is mostly traffic free. There is a TOUCAN crossing on Fabian Way. The crossing in next to the bus stops that are closest to the site and provides a safe crossing point for pedestrians accessing westbound bus services. Cyclists are permitted to use the crossing and it is also used by pedestrians using the footway on the south side of Fabian Way.
6. Conclusions The TA report has considered the transportation impacts of proposed employment development at a site situated to the north west of the Jersey Marine roundabout referred to as the Ffordd Amazon Gateway site. The proposed scheme comprises 217,000 sq.ft. (20,160m2) of B1 office space in three units of identical size. Access will be taken from two existing access roads from the Ffordd Amazon roundabout.
To establish the baseline conditions, traffic surveys were undertaken at each junction in March 2013. Detailed junction capacity assessments indicate that all three junctions are currently operating within capacity. The impact of the proposed development on the local highway network has been assessed in an assumed opening year of 2016 and a design year of 2031. In both the opening and design years, the Ffordd Amazon roundabout, which forms the primary point of access to the development, is predicted to be operating well within capacity. In the opening year the Jersey Marine roundabout and the Fabian Way/ A48 junction are predicted to be operating within capacity both with and without development.
In the design year 2031 the network is beginning to show signs of stress with the Fabian Way/ A48 junction predicted to be operating above capacity both with and without development. The impact of the development at this junction is not considered to be significant with only small reductions in capacity with the addition of the development related traffic. The Jersey Marine roundabout is expected to be operating above capacity in 2031 with the addition of the development traffic. The critical period is the evening peak and the arm under the most pressure is Ffordd Amazon. A potential highway solution to alleviate the problem has been identified and a preliminary assessment indicates that the implementation of a third lane on the approach would restore capacity of the Ffordd Amazon entry during the evening peak. In addition the improvement could be provided within land that is either under the control of the Highway Authority or the Welsh Government. An alternative solution would be to reallocate any funds set aside for highway improvements into the provision of sustainable transport initiatives such as measures to encourage employees to use public transport, walk or cycle for the journey to and from work.
The importance of the role of car sharing, flexible working arrangements and teleworking should also be emphasised as they provide employees with the scope to avoid travelling during the peaks when travel is least efficient. Flexible working practices also provide the opportunity for those travelling by public transport to tailor their working hours to match public transport services. The delivery of sustainable transport measures and the setting of stringent targets to help achieve the desired modal shift will be delivered through the Travel Plan process. A Travel Plan will be submitted as a supporting document to the planning application. It is not clear who will monitor this and where there will be any implications for failing to
Page 17 meet targets. Enforcement could be an issue. The Travel Plan will be monitored at regular intervals to ensure that the key objectives are being met and so that the success of the actions contained within can be reviewed and modified as required. The aim of the Travel Plan is to encourage employees to be responsible in their travel habits and to promote more environmentally sustainable and less polluting methods of transport. The objective is to foster a culture of sustainable travel by formally encouraging a reduction in single occupant car journeys in line with the Welsh Government's sustainable transport agenda.
It is considered by the developer that the development site is well located to encourage trips by public transport with six bus services operating in close proximity to the site. However the six buses per hour is not ideal to support the numbers of employees that the intended to use public transport. As the development at Coed Darcy continues to progress, the expectation is that bus services will improve with additional routes and higher frequencies operating close to the site on Ffordd Amazon providing employees with a realistic opportunity to use public transport for the journey to and from work. Shared use paths will be provided within the development to link with the provision on Ffordd Amazon. Direct links will also be provided to Fabian Way where there is a combined footway/ cycleway on the north side and a footway on the south side. The cycleway forms part of NCN 4 that locally connects A48 with Swansea city centre and is mostly traffic free. Cycle parking in accordance with local standards will be provided at the development. A cycle shelter will be provided at each unit and these will be conveniently located close to the main entrance where they will benefit from natural surveillance. One unit may not be enough if the aim to encourage cycling to work is successful, some provision should be made for additional provision if future demand requires it. The shelter will be covered, well-lit and secure. Showers and lockers will be provided within each unit. As Coed Darcy develops there will be enhancements to the pedestrian and cycle networks to provide direct and segregated links between the new settlement and Ffordd Amazon. The expectation is that the presence of walking and cycling in the area will increase significantly. This should help to foster a culture of sustainable transportation along the Ffordd Amazon corridor with the anticipation that other users of the corridor are encouraged to walk and cycle for the journey to and from work.
In summary it is considered that the proposed development will provide a catalyst to encourage and maintain modal shift with less environmental impact in accordance with the Welsh Government's key aims and objectives.
7. Recommendations As the neighbouring Highways Authority we would wish to summarize our comments as follows:
The proposal has the potential to have quite an impact on the local highway network particularly the Jersey Marine Roundabout and the Fabian Way/A48 which show overcapacity in future years. We would be interested to see what improvement works are proposed for both the junctions in order to be sure that the traffic generated will not have a negative impact on traffic flows, particularly travelling to Swansea as Fabian Way in one of the main arterial routes into the city centre.
As the main thrust of the transport will be utilizing Fabian Way there will be a requirement for a financial contribution towards the Fabian Way Corridor study
Page 18 proposed works. The level of this contribution will be dependent on the car trips on Fabian Way so the modal split of cars/cycles/pedestrian/public transport will be critical to this calculation. I suggest holding back some monies to improve the cycle parking facilities should future demand require them.
The site cannot be readily accessed by sustainable transport so a review of the origin of the visitor numbers is likely to be required in order to determine their likely transport mode and hence provide suitable facilities, particularly for public transport users.
The package of measures identified as being the 'minimum' requirements from the Fabian way corridor study may help with some areas of concern however these are dependent on suitable developments coming online and appropriate financial contributions being sought. Therefore there is no guarantee as to when the full funding may be in place nor when the improvements may be carried out.
APPRAISAL
The application is, in the opinion of the Head of Economic Regeneration and Planning of strategic importance and is reported directly to the Development Management and Control Committee for decision.
This is a consultation from Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council (NPTBC) and relates to an outline application for the construction of 3 Office Buildings (B1) to create up to 20,160sq.m (217,000 sq.ft.) of floorspace with ancillary car parking and landscaping on land off land off Ffordd Amazon, Jersey Marine, Neath Port Talbot. The determining authority for the application is therefore NPTCBC, however, in coming to a decision the determining Authority is obliged to consider the response from this Authority as a material planning consideration.
The proposal is to develop three office buildings (B1) set within two plots, (2.8ha and 1.7ha in size respectively), on either side of Ffordd Amazon situated directly to the east of the Amazon Distribution Centre. Whilst all matters are reserved, the indicative layout envisages three buildings of 6,720sq.m typically 3 stories up to a maximum 4 stories with up a total of 504 car parking spaces. It is envisaged that the development could employ up 1680 people and it is proposed to create a gateway development at the Jersey Marine roundabout along the Fabian Way corridor. The application is submitted by the Welsh Government but no end users are currently indicated.
Main Issues The two main issues to be considered in relation to this consultation are firstly the proposed economic impact of developing the proposed quantum of office floorspace (217,000sq.ft) at this out of centre location on the attractiveness, vitality and ability of the City Centre having regard to the National and Development Plan Policies, and the Council’s adopted economic regeneration strategies. Secondly, the proposed transportation impact on the capacity of Fabian Way which is a key highway approach into the City Centre.
Strategic Economic Impact Planning Policy Wales – Edition 5 Nov. 2012 PPW in respect of Development Plans and the economy, states that development plans should concentrate development that attracts large numbers of people, including retail and offices, in city, town and village centres (7.5.1). Whilst in reference to planning policy for
Page 19 Retailing and Town Centres states that Local Planning Authorities should consider through their development plans whether new sites should be identified in town, district, local or village centres for retail development, leisure development or other uses best located in centres. Uses which need to be accessible to a large number of people, including retailing, major leisure uses (such as theatres, multi-screen cinemas, bingo halls and bowling alleys), offices of central and local government, commercial offices, hospitals and tertiary education facilities are preferably to be located in town centres (10.2.9).
Wales Spatial Plan The Wales Spatial Plan - People, Places, Futures - was originally adopted by the National Assembly for Wales in November 2004 (reviewed 2008), and its broad principles seek to:
• Making sure that decisions are taken with regard to their impact beyond the immediate sectoral or administrative boundaries and that the core values of sustainable development govern everything we do • Setting the context for local and community planning • Influencing where money is spent by the Welsh Assembly Government through an understanding of the roles of and interactions between places • Providing a clear evidence base for the public, private and third sectors to develop policy and action.
It is a principle of the Wales Spatial Plan that development should be sustainable. Sustainable development is about improving wellbeing and quality of life by integrating social, economic and environmental objectives in the context of more efficient use of natural resources. The Wales Spatial Plan aims to deliver sustainable development through its Area Strategies in the context of the Welsh Assembly Government’s statutory Sustainable Development Scheme. The purpose of the Wales Spatial Plan is to ensure that what is done in the public, private and third sectors in Wales is integrated and sustainable, and that actions within an area support each other and jointly move towards a shared vision for Wales and for the different parts of Wales. It achieves this through collaborative working and the vertical and horizontal integration of policies nationally and regionally.
It sets out cross-cutting national spatial priorities. These provide the context for the application of national and regional policies for specific sectors, such as health, education, housing and the economy, reflecting the distinctive characteristics of different sub-regions of Wales and their cross-border relationships. It identifies six sub-regions in Wales without defining hard boundaries. The vision for the Swansea Bay Waterfront and Western Valleys is to create ‘A network of interdependent settlements with Swansea at its heart which pull together effectively as a city region with a modern, competitive, knowledge-based economy designed to deliver a high quality of life, a sustainable environment, a vibrant waterfront and excellent national and international connections’. The Spatial Plan seeks to develop a strong network of urban centres across the region with Swansea as the flourishing heart of the City Region and identifies Swansea as the regional capital and main driver for economic growth in the region.
Swansea Economic Regeneration Strategy The Strategy recognises the position of Swansea City Centre as the economic driver within the Swansea Bay City Region and the importance of Swansea having a vibrant and successful city centre.
Swansea City Centre Strategic Framework (SCCSF)
Page 20 The vision within the SCCSF “...is to make Swansea a vibrant, exciting, attractive, sustainable, cultured European Waterfront City Centre, attracting businesses and visitors, driving the economy and enhancing the quality of life of residents of Swansea and South West Wales”.
The Strategic Framework recommends a retail led regeneration as part of a mixed use approach to development in Swansea City Centre. This involves active inclusion of offices, residential, leisure and other uses in support of retailing if the City Centre is to be truly vibrant and sustainable in the future. A key priority for the Strategic Framework is to increase the quality and provide appropriate size of commercial space within the City Centre to stimulate investment and different activities in the core area. This is central to evolving the urban structure of the city but the issue of timing, phasing and deliverability are critical given initiatives elsewhere. The City Centre must seek to deliver offices which are targeted at a market that is not accommodated at other locations, adopting a flexible approach to cater for all types of end users and providing a suitable mix and size of accommodation, differing tenures and service provision. It should also be noted that the City Centre Strategic Framework is currently in the process of being reviewed and one of the recommendations is likely to be the creation of more office space in the city centre.
The SCCSF recognises that the delivery of its aspirations will require successful partnerships and in this respect recognises the need for the City Council and Welsh Government to work jointly in delivery, co-ordination and facilitation, especially through funding, land assembly and policy decisions. Welsh Government in particular should provide clears guidance on the wider regional and sub-regional policy context, particularly through the Wales Spatial Plan and lead on economic development and inward investment. Within this context it is especially disappointing that Welsh Government are submitting this proposal on this site, particularly in the light of the City Region and city / town centre first regeneration agendas which are promoted through the Wales Spatial Plan and Planning Policy Wales.
Economic Assessment & Employment Land Provision for Swansea and Neath Port Talbot, Peter Brett Associates, 2012 The City & County of Swansea Council, in partnership with Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, commissioned consultants Peter Brett Associates in 2012 to provide an up to date independent review of economic growth and employment land requirements for the Swansea Bay area over the LDP period to 2025. The report identifies the application site as being part of the Fabian Way corridor area suitable for employment uses in its broadest sense. However the report is clear that the regional economy has a certain level of realistic growth potential and that there is a maximum level of floorspace for office development that is required in order to deliver the required growth targets. It identifies that a key element of the spatial strategy in this context is to direct such development towards Swansea city centre to support regeneration initiatives.
Swansea’s Vibrant & Viable Places Submission Swansea’s Vibrant & Viable Places Submission to the Welsh Government is a transformational regeneration programme focussed on Swansea City Centre, to reinvigorate the City Centre as a driver of the City-Region economy. The City Centre suffers from a lack of grade A office space, therefore creation of new high quality office floorspace is an integral part of the Vibrant & Viable Places Submission, to create jobs and growth for the city-region that supports the retail regeneration of Swansea and creating a vibrant mixed use destination for Swansea City Centre.
Unitary Development Plans
Page 21 The NPTCBC Unitary Development Plan allocates the site at Jersey Marine for employment development under Class (B1) business, (B2) industry, (B8) storage and distribution, and A2 offices (financial and professional services) – Policy EC1/3. Whilst the application will be determined by NPTCBC with reference to its own UDP, the potential impacts of the proposal on the administrative area of the City and County of Swansea are potentially highly significant and therefore it is appropriate that due regard also be given to policies set out in the relevant development plan for Swansea as set out below:
Swansea UDP Part 1 - Strategic Objectives and Policies: The UDP Spatial Strategy is set out in Part 1 of the Development Plan and is based on sustainable planning principles. Its primary focus is the reinvigoration of the City Centre and Swansea Waterfront, with most other development within the wider urban area of Swansea making the best use of available brownfield land complemented by policies to improve transport and accessibility, especially by means other than the car.
Part 1 of the Plan also sets out the vision, goals and objectives of the UDP, which seek to identify the enabling infrastructure, developments and safeguards needed to implement national planning policy guidance, contained in Planning Policy Wales and the Wales Spatial Plan. The UDP also seeks to deliver the land use objectives of adopted Council strategies such as the Economic Regeneration Strategy and the City Centre Strategic Framework. Goal 2 seeks to promote the sustainable growth of the local and regional economy. This is underpinned by a number of objectives, including:
- To ensure the availability of high quality and diverse portfolio of sites and premises to meet the needs of economic growth sectors (2.a) - To develop Swansea as a major Waterfront City capitalising on the opportunities provided by SA1 (2.b) - To reinforce and improve the City Centre as a vibrant regional focus for business and administration, shopping culture and leisure bring forward proposals for the remediation of dereliction and pollution (2.d)
Strategic Policy SP6 states that the primary focus for new retail, cultural and business development will be the City Centre.
Swansea UDP Part 2 - Detailed Policies: Within the Chapter 2 Policies for developing the economy, the strengthening of the role of the City Centre is seen as the key driver and economic hub of the regional economy in delivering the overall proposals. Strategic employment sites in the Swansea Bay area are recognised as potentially important contributors to the County’s economy for appropriate development.
The UDP emphasises that proposals will not be supported where they would undermine the attractiveness, vitality or viability of the City Centre. The City Centre policies within the UDP are consistent with the Council adopted Swansea City Centre Strategic Framework, the delivery of which is crucial for Swansea’s future as a truly distinctive, attractive and successful Waterfront City. In particular, UDP Policy CC3 focuses on proposals for the St Davids/Quadrant Area and emphasises that it is vital such proposals are not compromised by other development schemes elsewhere within the County. The policy specifically resists development proposals at other locations that are likely to threaten the emerging scheme for the St Davids/Quadrant Area and, thereby, the necessary revitalisation of the City Centre. Office development is considered a strong financial and regeneration driver in this respect, for both St Davids/Quadrant and the City Centre as a whole.
Page 22 Local Development Plan The City & County of Swansea Local Development Plan will replace the UDP once adopted. The draft LDP Preferred Strategy was published in July 2013 and sets out the strategic policies that will underpin the new Plan. Whilst the LDP cannot be used in planning decision making until formally adopted it is noteworthy that the emerging LDP reflects Council priorities with regard to regeneration and city centre investment. Strategic Policy 11 makes clear that the City Centre will be the preferred location for all new office development, in order to enhance the overall vibrancy and attractiveness of the City Centre and to create a thriving daytime and evening economy.
Planning Policy Conclusions It is acknowledged that the site at Jersey Marine is allocated for employment development (including Class B1 -Business) under the Neath Port Talbot Unitary Development Plan – Policy EC1/3. The range of uses and developments that such an allocation permits in principle is potentially wide ranging. Whilst many employment uses could be considered appropriate for the site, the proposed high quality office development is a very specific form of development that could have profound implications for the region and Swansea in particular. There is clearly a potentially positive economic benefit to enhancing the Fabian Way corridor at one of the main gateway approaches into Swansea, which is consistent with policy aims and would be welcomed. Notwithstanding this element, the proposals are at variance with the Council’s regeneration strategy and key objectives and detailed policies set out in the UDP and supporting planning guidance. One of the key objectives of the Swansea UDP is to reinforce and improve the City Centre as a vibrant regional focus for business, shopping and leisure (Strategic Policy SP6 relates). This is consistent with the aspirations of the Wales Spatial Plan and emerging Swansea Bay City Region initiative, which identifies Swansea as the key driver in the economy of South West Wales, and acknowledges the important role of the City Centre, which is repeated in the economic strategies of the Swansea Economic Regeneration Strategy. The Swansea City Centre Strategic Framework also makes clear that offices need to be directed to appropriate city centre locations to complement regeneration proposals. As well as being at variance with the local policy framework the proposed development is also contrary to Welsh Government policy set out in PPW that states office uses are more appropriate for town centre locations. Therefore whilst not objecting to the principle of employment uses at the application site the proposed quantum of office floorspace is considered to be contrary to the national and local planning policy and regeneration frameworks and could significantly prejudice an important part of Swansea City Centre’s regeneration strategy.
Transportation The Fabian Way Corridor Transport Assessment has been completed (Jan. 2010) and was approved by Cabinet 21 Oct. 2010 as the Preferred Transport Strategy. The City and County of Swansea UDP (adopted Nov. 2008) pre-dates the Fabian Way Corridor Transport Assessment and therefore there are no specific policies relating to it although the visions, goals and objectives of the UDP as reflected in Strategic Policy SP13 seek to deliver improved accessibility through a sustainable transport system. The overall aim of the study was to develop a transport strategy to support the regeneration development along the corridor, in particular the key regeneration schemes of the SA1 Swansea Waterfront, Coed Darcy Urban Village and the proposed Swansea University second campus.
The Fabian Way Corridor Study looked at the future of Fabian Way and what measures/improvements would need to be undertaken in order to ensure that Fabian Way continues to operate and support the future levels of traffic that are expected. A package of measures was tabled and costed by an independent consultant and it was agreed that
Page 23 the costs of the necessary works would be apportioned to any development that would be increasing traffic along Fabian Way. To date the main contribution is from the Bay Campus Swansea University scheme who were increasing traffic by 8% and who therefore are contributing 8% of the costs of three stages of development. As Fabian Way links the City and County of Swansea with NPTBC then both parties are seeking contributions to fund the proposed package of works from Planning applications which are deemed to have an impact on Fabian Way.
The submitted Transport Assessment (TA) has concluded that the detailed junction assessments of the Ffordd Amazon roundabout, the Jersey Marine roundabout and the Fabian Way/ A48 traffic signals at Junction 42 of the M4 indicate that all three junctions are currently operating within capacity. The impact of the proposed development on the local highway network has been assessed in an assumed opening year of 2016 and a design year of 2031. In the design year the local network is beginning to show signs of stress with the Fabian Way/ A48 junction predicted to be operating above capacity both with and without development.
A potential highway solution to alleviate the problem has been identified and a preliminary assessment indicates that the implementation of a third lane on the approach would restore capacity of the Ffordd Amazon entry during the evening peak. An alternative solution would be to reallocate any funds set aside for highway improvements into the provision of sustainable transport initiatives such as measures to encourage employees to use public transport, walk or cycle for the journey to and from work.
Whilst improvement works are proposed in order to be sure that the traffic generated will not have a negative impact on traffic flows, particularly travelling to Swansea as Fabian Way is one of the main arterial routes into the city centre, unless a financial contribution is sought in accordance with the recommendations of the Fabian Way Corridor Study, the proposed additional traffic generation from the development is likely to have a detrimental impact on the Fabian Way arterial route into the city centre.
A Travel Plan has been submitted as a supporting document to the planning application and highlight the importance of the role of car sharing, flexible working arrangements and teleworking in order to allow employees the opportunity to travel outside peak hours. The aim of the Travel Plan will be to promote more environmentally sustainable and less polluting methods of transport encouraging a reduction in single occupant car journeys in line with the Welsh Government’s sustainable transport agenda.
It is indicated that the development site is well located to encourage trips by public transport with six bus services operating in close proximity to the site. However, the Head of Transportation considers that six buses per hour is not ideal having regard to the potential number of employees at the site. The opportunities for cycling and walking are also highlighted.
UDP Policy AS1 states that new development associated with housing, employment, shopping, leisure and service provision should be located in areas that are currently highly accessible by a range of transport modes, in particular public transport, walking and cycling, or in areas where a good level of such provision can realistically be achieved. The Head of Transportation highlights that the site cannot be readily accessed by sustainable transport so a review of the origin of the visitor numbers is likely to be required in order to determine their likely transport mode and hence provide suitable facilities, particularly for public transport users.
Page 24 As indicated above, a financial contribution is sought in accordance with the Fabian Way Corridor Study towards a package of measures to address areas of concern. However unless adequate financial contributions are sought and the improvements being implemented there is concern that the proposed development has potential to having a detrimental impact on the Fabian Way arterial route into the city centre.
It is therefore proposed that NPTBC be informed that unless financial contributions are sought towards a package of measures outlined in the Fabian Way Corridor study, this Authority is minded to raise an objection to the proposed development.
Conclusions This is a consultation from NPTCBC on an outline planning application for which they are the determining authority for the development however the application is of a scale and nature considered to be of strategic significance to Swansea City Centre and the City Region. It is for a major development to create a total of 20,160sq.m of office floorspace along a gateway site along the Fabian Way corridor, located approximately 5km from Swansea city centre. The application indicates potential to employ 1680 employees.
The application raises concerns at a strategic level in respect of the proposed quantum of office accommodation which will potentially undermine the redevelopment opportunities for Swansea City centre. The provision of office accommodation is acknowledged as a significant economic driver for the regeneration of the City Centre and there are concerns that the proposed quantum of development will displace potential new investment in office accommodation away from the City Centre and undermine the viability of the mix of uses necessary to redevelop and regenerate the area. In this respect the proposal is contrary to the City Centre Strategic Framework and the strategic objectives of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan, and could undermine one of the Council’s key regeneration strategies.
Fundamentally however the overall economic and social impact of the proposals for the City & County of Swansea are not clear. The application therefore presents a dichotomy to the Council. The application provides the opportunity for a large strategic regeneration initiative at this gateway location, and will create significant new employment opportunities and transform a brownfield site at the entrance to the City. In that respect it fully accords with Swansea’s Economic Regeneration Strategy.
The application does not provide any economic assessment of the proposed development, and does not consider the potential adverse effect of diverting investment away from Swansea City Centre and undermining the viability of the necessary mix of land uses which will drive future redevelopment proposals. In that respect it must be of concern to the Council.
However, one of the key objectives of the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) for Swansea is to reinforce and improve the City Centre as a vibrant regional focus for business, shopping and leisure (Strategic Policy SP6 relates). This is consistent with the aspirations of the Wales Spatial Plan, which identifies Swansea as the key driver in the economy of South West Wales, and acknowledges the important role of the City Centre, which is repeated in the economic strategies of the Swansea Economic Regeneration Strategy and Swansea City Centre Strategic Framework. Therefore whilst not objecting to the principle of the development, there is concern that the proposed quantum of proposed office floorspace could significantly prejudice an important part of Swansea City Centre’s regeneration strategy.
Page 25 The submitted Transport Assessment (TA) highlights that the local highway network particularly the Jersey Marine Roundabout and the Fabian Way / A48 would be overcapacity in future years. Potential highway improvement works are identified as are the potential to allocate funds for the provision of sustainable transport initiatives such as measures to encourage employees to use public transport, walk or cycle for the journey to and from work. These improvement works are considered necessary to avoid the additional traffic generation having a negative impact on traffic flows along Fabian Way and are sought in accordance with the recommendations of the Fabian Way Corridor Study. A Travel Plan has been submitted as a supporting document to the planning application with the aim of promoting more environmentally sustainable and less polluting methods of transport encouraging a reduction in single occupant car journeys. However, unless adequate financial contributions are sought in accordance with the Fabian Way Corridor Study towards a package of measures to address areas of concern and the improvements being implemented there is concern that the proposed development has potential to having a detrimental impact on the Fabian Way arterial route into the city centre.
It is recommended that the Council offers an objection to the application.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council be informed that this authority raises Objections to the proposal for the following reasons:
1 The application fails to consider the full socio-economic impact of the proposal on Swansea City Centre as a result the potential diversion of investment, development and socio-economic activity away from the City Centre and its environs. As such the application fails to adequately consider the strategic vision, goals and objectives and strategic policy SP6 contained within part 1 of the Swansea Unitary Development Plan, the UDP Strategic Objectives for the City Centre and Policy CC3 insofar as it has not been demonstrated that the development would not put at risk the comprehensive retail led mixed use regeneration of the St. David's/Quadrant area in accordance with the adopted Swansea City Centre Strategic Framework.
2 Contrary to Unitary Development Plan Policy AS1, the site is not currently highly accessible by a range of sustainable transport modes. Moreover, unless adequate financial contributions are sought in accordance with the Fabian Way Corridor Study towards a package of measures and those proposed improvements being implemented, this Authority is minded to raise an objection to the proposed development as there is concern that the proposed additional traffic generation has potential to have a detrimental impact on the Fabian Way arterial route into the city centre.
INFORMATIVES
PLANS
Site location plan, design and access statement received 28th June 2013
Page 26 Agenda Item 5
Report of the Head of Economic Regeneration & Planning
Development Management and Control Committee – 29 August 2013
SWANSEA BAY TIDAL LAGOON FORMAL PRE-APPLICATION CONSULTATION REPORT
Purpose: To inform Committee of the formal pre-application consultation by Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd in respect of their proposals to design, construct and operate a tidal lagoon for the purpose of generating renewable energy in Swansea Bay, and to determine the response of the City & County of Swansea to the consultation.
Policy Framework: National Policy Statements, Planning Policy Wales and the adopted City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan.
Reason for Decision: To provide a response to Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd to their formal pre-application consultation with the City & County of Swansea.
Consultation: Legal Services, Finance, Technical Services, Pollution Control, Sustainable Development, Culture, Tourism, Sport and Leisure, Economic Regeneration, Economic Development, Nature and Conservation, Marina Manager and Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust.
Recommendation(s): It is recommended that:
1) the City & County of Swansea formally responds to the pre-application consultation received from Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd, in accordance with Section 42 of the Planning Act 2008, as follows:
1. That a copy of this report, including the responses received from the internal consultation, be forwarded in full for the information and attention of Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd.
2. That Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd take note of the concerns set out in this report and be requested to continue to liaise with the City & County of Swansea on the design evolution of the scheme and associated Environmental Impact Assessment.
3. That Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd be provided with a copy of the “Review of Preliminary Environmental Report: Seascape, Landscape and Visual” prepared by White Consultants on behalf of the City & County of Swansea and that Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd be requested to note and address the findings of the report.
Page 27 4. That Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd be provided with copies of the unsolicited representation received.
5. That Members delegate the response on technical matters relating to the forthcoming informal consultation on the draft Environmental Statement to Officers.
6. That the Planning Inspectorate be advised in due course that the City and County of Swansea considers that Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd has adequately consulted with the Local Planning Authority and provided adequate supporting information to comply with its duties to consult under Section 42 of the Planning Act 2008.
Report Author: Richard Jones
Finance Officer: Kim Lawrence
Legal Officer: Janine Townsley
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Members will recall that a report was presented to this Committee on the 7th March 2013 to formally introduce the proposed tidal lagoon scheme and also to advise Members of the determination process for such an application and the role of the City & County of Swansea in that process.
1.2 As explained in the aforementioned report, the Planning Act 2008 (as amended by the Localism Act 2011) made significant changes to the planning system for major infrastructure projects such as this. The proposed Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon is an offshore generating station of more than 100MW and as such it is classified under the 2008 Act as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP). An application must therefore be made to the Planning Inspectorate for permission under a development consent order (DCO) from the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change.
1.3 The DCO will authorise construction and operation of the generating station itself, and its component parts. These include the offshore and most onshore aspects of the project, including the integral electrical grid connection works. Onshore elements of the project which are not categorised as ‘associated development’ will be applied for under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to the relevant local authority, in this case most likely the City and County of Swansea. (A small eastern part of the site also falls within Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council.)
1.4 The Project is located in Welsh coastal waters and therefore also requires a marine license to be granted via an application to the Marine Licensing Team of Natural Resources Wales on behalf of the Welsh Government.
1.5 Before submitting the application to the Planning Inspectorate, Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd has a statutory obligation under Section 42 of the 2008 Act to carry out pre-application consultation on their proposals. Groups that must be consulted include local authorities, a set list of public and regulatory bodies and those with an interest in Page the land28 affected by the project. In addition, Section 47 (duty to consult the local community) requires the applicant to prepare a statement (with input from the local authorities) setting out how it proposes to consult with people living in the vicinity of the development, and then to conduct the consultation in accordance with that statement. The statement is known as a Statement of Community Consultation (SoCC).
1.6 As a prescribed statutory consultee, the City and County of Swansea is now in receipt of the formal Section 42 pre-application consultation received from Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd in respect of its proposals for a tidal powered generating station in Swansea Bay. The Section 47 consultation with the local community is running concurrently with this consultation and responses are to be sent back to Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd, who in turn must demonstrate to the Planning Inspectorate how they have taken account of any feedback that has been provided by the local community, the local authority and statutory consultees.
1.7 The formal pre-application consultation is supported by a Preliminary Environmental Information Report (PEIR), which reports on the project’s Environmental Impact Assessment for the purposes of consultation prior to an application for a DCO. It provides environmental information assembled to date, and describes further investigations to be conducted during the Environmental Impact Assessment process. The full results of the Environmental Impact Assessment will be presented in an Environmental Statement submitted with the application for a DCO. The PEIR forms part of the Project’s formal consultation process under the Planning Act 2008. Comments on the environmental information and assessments in the PEIR are sought and will influence the final form of the project. Before submitting the application for a DCO, Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd will consider and take account of all comments and representations received in relation to the Project.
1.8 Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd intends to submit its application for a DCO to the Planning Inspectorate in December 2013. Upon submission the Planning Inspectorate has 28 days to decide whether or not to accept the application for examination. The decision to accept the application is made by considering a number of factors, including whether the right environmental issues have been identified and the adequacy of the developer’s public consultation.
1.9 If the application is accepted for examination, the process moves onto the pre-examination stage. This stage of the process has no fixed timetable but normally takes approximately 3 months. At pre-examination stage, everyone who has registered to put their case in respect of the proposal will be invited to attend a Preliminary Meeting chaired by the Inspector appointed to examine the application.
1.10 The purpose of the Preliminary Meeting is to give interested parties the opportunity to make representations to the Planning Inspectorate about how the application should be examined. The Preliminary Meeting will concern itself only with the procedure for examining the application, including, setting the timetable for making more detailed written representations.
1.11 The Planning Inspectorate has six months to carry out the examination. During this stage the City & County of Swansea will be invited to submit a Local Impact Report (LIR). The Inspector must have regard to the LIR in Page 29 determining the application. Accordingly a further report will be presented to Members which appraises the impact of the proposal on the City and County of Swansea, based upon the Environmental Statement. The report will also recommend a LIR for submission to the Planning Inspectorate.
1.12 The Planning Inspectorate must prepare a report on the application to the Secretary of State, including a recommendation, within 3 months of the six month examination period. The Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to make the decision on whether to grant or refuse development consent. Once a decision has been issued by the Secretary of State, there is a six week period in which the decision may be challenged in the High Court. This process of legal challenge is known as Judicial Review.
1.13 The streamlined process for examining applications within a timetable strictly defined in law means that it is not normally possible for significant changes to be made to a proposal after it has been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate. Therefore, the best time to influence a proposal is before it is finalised, at this pre-application stage by taking part in the developer’s consultation.
1.14 The purpose of this report in the first instance is therefore to inform Committee of the formal pre-application consultation by Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd in respect of their proposals to design, construct and operate a tidal lagoon for the purpose of generating renewable energy in Swansea Bay. Secondly, its purpose is to appraise the supporting PEIR, highlight any deficiencies, areas of concern, points of clarification and suggestions for improvements to the proposed scheme in order to inform a recommendation to members for a response to Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd to their formal pre-application consultation.
1.15 Each section of the report provides a response without prejudice to any other section. They are independently appraised and support for one element does not necessarily endorse the whole or any other individual part or material planning issue.
1.16 To prepare this report, internal consultation has taken place with relevant Council Service Areas in relation to the applicable topic areas of the PEIR. Copies of the responses received are reproduced in full as Appendix A.
1.17 No external consultation has taken place with statutory consultees such as Natural Resources Wales as the onus to do so lies with Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd.
Page 30 1.18 One individual letter of objection and one letter of comment from the Gower Society have however been received and it is recommended that these be forwarded for the information and attention of Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd. A copy of the joint letter of concern sent to Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd from the Angling Trust and Fish Legal has also been received. Copies of these letters are provided as Appendix B.
2.0 The Proposed Scheme
2.1 Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd proposes to design, construct and operate a tidal lagoon for the purpose of generating renewable energy. This will be achieved by harnessing the power of the high tidal range in Swansea Bay (where the maximum Spring tidal range reaches over 10m).
The scheme would comprise:
• The permanent breakwater bund seawalls; • The turbine and sluice gate housing structure; • The turbines and sluice gates; • Electricity connection to the National Electricity Transmission System; • The Lagoon and offshore public realm; • Operational and maintenance (O&M) facilities; • Emergency facilities and slipways; • Visitor(s) facilities including access and parking; • Queen’s Dock and wider area seafront public realm; • Highway Infrastructure; • Sporting public realm; • Mariculture facilities and wider public leisure opportunities; • Pedestrian and cycle route links.
2.2 The final design of a number of aspects of the scheme is yet to be finalised pending further refinement to ensure the most appropriate solution is achieved.
A location/layout plan for the project is provided as Appendix C.
2.3 The main element of the project would comprise a seawall constructed using a standard sand core with rock armour bund. This will form a 9.5km-long, U- shaped, seawall running from the entrance to the River Tawe adjacent to Swansea Dock (Swansea Port) out to sea before curving back to re-join land adjacent to Swansea University’s new Science and Innovation Campus (SAIC).
2.4 The seawall would incorporate a turbine and sluice gate structure located at the deepest, south western point of the wall, approximately 2.5km from the western end of the Queens Dock. This would be a large reinforced concrete structure made up of individual turbine and sluice gate housings set in a row. The sluices gate housings sit in the middle of the structure with the turbine housings located either side.
Page 31
2.5 The current design includes 16 turbines, 7m in diameter and 10 sluice gates, giving an overall structure approximately 400m in length. As the design is developed, it is envisaged that there could be up to 22 turbines, 7m in diameter and 10 sluice gates, which would have an overall length of approximately 490m. The number and size of turbines will be finalised following optimisation, and may be lower than figures stated.
2.6 Each individual turbine housing unit would be approximately 15m wide, 67.5m long and a total of 28m from seabed to the top of the wave wall. Each individual sluice gate housing would be approximately 16m wide, 45.5m long and a total of 28m from seabed to the top of the wave wall. Both the turbine housing and sluice gate housing would be constructed from reinforced concrete.
2.7 It is proposed to use either 7m or 8m bi-directional turbines in the project to enable power generation with water flow in either direction. The sluice gates would be vertical lift metal gates that control the water entering and leaving the lagoon in addition to water flowing through the turbines. The sluice gates will be opened and lowered by mechanical means and controlled remotely from the control centre.
2.8 In order to function, the turbine and sluice gate structure has to be at a level to ensure that the turbines and sluice gates are submerged at all states of the tide. To achieve this, the seabed will be gradually deepened, at a 1 in 10 slope towards the turbines and sluice gate structure.
2.9 Around the base of the perimeter of the turbine and sluice gate structure there would be a sheet pile wall approximately 10mm thick and extending into the seabed up to 10m below the turbine and sluice structure. This sheet pile wall would be linked together to create an impenetrable barrier. The sheet pile wall would not act in a load bearing capacity, but would be designed simply to prevent water flow underneath the structure.
2.10 For maintenance purposes there would be a requirement for 2 gantry cranes located on top of the turbine and sluice gate structure measuring between 12 and 18.65m in height. These would be permanent features which would traverse the top of the turbine and sluice gate structure as required but would have a default ‘home’ position where they will be placed when not in use. At these locations the cranes can be secured to the structure to protect them against the effects of high winds during storm events. The standard colour of the cranes is yellow, however it stated that there is scope to use a more harmonising colour.
2.11 The seawall, comprising a permanent breakwater bund, would enclose an area of 11.5km2 of seabed and foreshore to create the lagoon. The power would be generated by using the sluice gates in the turbine housing to impound a “head” of water – a difference in water level between the inside and outside of the lagoon. When released, the resulting flow would be channelled through the turbines thereby generating electricity. The hydro turbines would be able to operate with flows of water in both directions. Therefore, it is stated that the lagoon will generate electricity four times per day (on each of two ebb and flood tides) totalling, on average, 14 hours of generation every day. Page 32
2.12 The electricity will be exported from the lagoon via underground cable into the National Electricity Transmission System via National Grid's substation in Baglan.
2.13 It is anticipated that the project, which would have a nominal installed power of 240MW at a normal operating head, would produce 400 GWh net of electricity on an annual basis, which is enough to power around 121,000 homes.
2.14 The submission states that alongside the generation of electricity, the tidal lagoon will offer additional benefits to the Swansea Bay area and the wider population, in terms of promoting educational, sport, recreational art and cultural activities for public use.
2.15 The type of construction for the permanent breakwater bund seawall would vary depending on its location. At the most exposed locations, typically furthest offshore adjacent to the turbine and sluice gate structure where greatest structural stability is needed, it will be as shown below.
2.16 The structure would have a sediment core contained by layers of sediment filled geotextile tubes. The outside of the structure would be covered in rock armour of various sizes, depending on its exposure. The rock armour would have a slope of between 1 in 1.5 and 1 in 2.5 from the top of the bund to the seabed. This angle is intended to give stability to the bund and also reduces refraction of waves.
2.17 In less exposed locations nearer to the existing shore on the eastern arm of the breakwater bund, it would be as shown below.
Page 33 2.18 In such locations it is stated that stability can be achieved in a more straightforward manner with a simpler construction of fill material, with outer rock armour protection.
2.19 It is intended that the sediment used within the core of the breakwater bunds and the geotextile tubes will be taken from the seabed within the footprint of the lagoon. It has been calculated that 5 million cubic meters of sediment will be required for the development and that this can be obtained from an area within the lagoon of 2.5km², requiring dredging at an average depth of 2m. At the turbine and sluice gate structure location it is stated that the seabed would be taken down 9 to 10m below bed level, to provide the required depth for the operation of the turbines.
2.20 The permanent breakwater bund seawall would be between 40 and 75 metres wide at the base, dependant on the seabed depth, and 8m across at the top. The visible height of the permanent breakwater above the water level measured at the deepest point would be approximately 3.5m at high tide and 12m at low tide.
2.21 In order to allow access around the lagoon a reinforced concrete crest would be constructed along the breakwater seawall. The crest would be set 1 to 2.5m below the top of the outer rock armour to provide protection for the crest and those using it for access purposes. It would generally be 5m wide and would form the access route onto and off the permanent breakwater bund seawall for operational staff, emergency access and the public.
2.22 It is also stated that the water within the lagoon will also create an area of water that can be used for recreation and sporting purposes. Slipway access(s) is proposed to the water for O&M, safety and leisure use.
2.23 The provision of an enclosed water sports venue capable of providing a body of water for local, regional and national events is stated as being intrinsic to the project. The key sports which have been identified at this stage are sailing, extreme sailing, triathlon, rowing and fishing. In addition it is envisaged that the new rocky seawall would provide good opportunities for recreational fishermen, walkers, runners and cyclists.
2.24 As part of the project it is also proposed to provide mariculture opportunities (the cultivation of marine organisms) and various options are currently being investigated. It is stated that these opportunities could include facilities to help regenerate the native oyster within Swansea Bay, a potential lobster hatchery which could be used to increase biodiversity of the new seawall/reef habitat, mariculture “plots” and opportunities linked to research at the SAIC, for instance into bio-fuel. The locations of the facilities to support these options have not currently been identified however each will have their own tidal location requirements.
2.25 O&M facilities will be required to operate and maintain the Tidal Lagoon. It is proposed that the operation facilities be located within and adjoining the main turbine housing structure forming part of the offshore buildings(s) with the remainder of the facilities being located in the building(s) at the western lagoon landfall. The main O&M facilities will be continuously manned and include parking, spares store, welfare facilities, office accommodation, control room, garage space, an area for boat storage and slipway access to the Lagoon. Page 34 2.26 The PEIR states that the lagoon is intended both to be functional and to offer recreational benefit to the local and wider community and therefore public use of the Lagoon will be encouraged. It is anticipated that the lagoon development will attract some 70,000-100,000 visitors a year, with potentially up to 3,000-5,000 visitors attending individual events.
2.27 A range of locations for visitor facilities are being considered at this stage. With reference to the plan below, the main visitor centre is anticipated to be located as part of the offshore building(s) (Location A) on the main turbine housing with a smaller visitor facility as part of the western landfall building(s) (Location B).
2.28 The main visitor centre would be integral to the O&M facilities at the turbine housing forming part of the offshore building(s). This visitor centre would offer information and facilities to the visiting public and would be a maximum of three storeys high above the turbine housing apron to permit elevated views across the lagoon. For health and safety reasons it is anticipated that access would be limited, possibly seasonally, or to daylight hours and to appropriate weather/ sea conditions.
2.29 It is anticipated that the O&M building at the western landfall (Location B) will also provide a smaller visitor exhibition and public information space on the lagoon to help orientate visitors, boating centre facilities as well as facilities for controlling access to the Lagoon seawall.
2.30 An information and orientation facility, the eastern landfall building, is also being considered at location C on a proposed enhanced water front south of the University SAIC. This building would also provide access controls to the eastern arm of the Lagoon seawall.
2.31 Emergency facilities are proposed at Location D,
Page 35 2.32 To facilitate access to the lagoon from Swansea city centre and Fabian Way, and for the Port to operate in the absence of the existing dock road south of Queens Dock, it is stated that two crossings are potentially required across the entrance to King’s Dock. One would be to permit port related traffic to access the eastern side of the Queen’s and King’s Dock avoiding the use of the Queen’s Dock access road, and a second one would provide access for the western landfall building(s) and offshore building(s) to the western side of the Lagoon.
2.33 Both bridge crossings would require a swing or opening bridge such that current Port access to the King’s Dock would be maintained. At this stage both bridges would allow for vehicle use and the bridge access to the lagoon to include for pedestrians and cyclists.
2.34 A range of options are being considered for appropriate access to the lagoon at the eastern and western landfalls including access routes for O&M vehicles, visitor vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians. In addition, parking options are being explored for the western landfall building(s).
2.35 In order to provide enhanced connectivity for the visitors to the lagoon with Swansea city centre and to permit a circular route around the lagoon for O&M and recreational purposes, it is proposed to provide enhancements along the existing Queen’s Dock road and seafront. Currently this area comprises a port road with wide grass and stoned verges, and rock armour seawall protection topped by 2m concrete wall with limited sea access through gaps in the wall. The area is privately controlled with access for Port operations only.
2.36 Proposals currently being considered for this area include the re-profiling of the existing rock armour to allow for the establishment of a waterfront path/road and attractive recreation areas at a level above the high tides and the formation of attractive links to low tide areas. Public realm at either end of this route is also being considered and is stated as including an extended public concourse, new beach and proposed saltmarsh and grassland area.
2.37 It is stated that sustainable transport links will also be integrated into the lagoon concept, specifically pedestrian and bicycle access routes. It is intended that these will be designed to result in minimal interaction with existing Swansea Port activities while providing connectivity between Swansea city centre and the Lagoon, as well as from the SAIC in the east to the Lagoon and through onto Swansea city in the west. In addition to cycle access routes, the potential to create a recreational cycle route around the lagoon along the seawall crest is identified.
2.38 The main vehicular access route is anticipated to be off Fabian Way and 6 potential accesses points have been identified.
2.39 Access points 1 and 2 are located at the Kings Road and Gateway Junction to SA1 and are intended to be used for those accessing the Project from Swansea and the local area and would principally comprise pedestrian and cycle links.
2.40 Access point 3 is the recently closed port access and was the route formerly used by the Swansea-Cork Ro-Ro ferry traffic.
Page 36
2.41 Access point 4 is the eastern Port access, which is the new main port access point.
2.42 Access routes 5 and 6 are focussed on access to the eastern lagoon seawall through the new SAIC. All access routes are currently being considered and points 1 to 4 would require interfaces to be addressed with Swansea Port (Associated British Ports), Welsh Government and the local highway authority (City & County of Swansea). Access points 5 and 6 would be likely to require agreement with SAIC and Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council.
2.43 It is stated that construction will start on gaining the DCO and other relevant approvals for the project, and it is anticipated that this will be the end of 2014 to early 2015. In general the “dredging season” is usually April to October, such that there is less potential chance of delay due to bad weather. As such the permanent breakwater bund seawalls are programmed for construction during the summers of 2015 and 2016, and the closure of the eastern arm of the breakwater bund seawall during the summer of 2017. The construction of the turbine and sluice gate structure is programmed from Autumn 2015 to Autumn 2017. Following commencement of generation at the end of the 2017, the supporting infrastructure elements of the project are programmed for completion during 2018.
2.44 The overall life expectancy of the Project is 120 years although it has a design life of 50 years, therefore ongoing maintenance and repair work will be required to extend the facility beyond this.
2.45 The permanent breakwater bund seawalls would be designed for 1 in 100 year return wave conditions. The expected sea level rise for a period of 50 years will be used in the design of the seawall, and it is expected that maintenance work and/or raising of the crest level could be required after this period. For mechanical and electrical equipment, it is expected that this may need replacing and/or upgrading after 25 years. The turbine runners are expected to need major refurbishment or replacement after 50 years.
2.46 At this stage it is explained that there are a number of potential decommissioning options. Firstly, at the end of the working life of the facility, the turbines and sluice gates could be removed, and the tide allowed to flow through the resultant gaps in the structure. An alternative to this approach would be to remove a section of the breakwater bund seawall from landfall of the eastern arm to where it meets the River Neath Cannel. The breakwater bunds would remain and the Lagoon would continue to be used for Leisure. Sections of the breakwater bund could also be removed as required by the Local Planning Authority.
2.47 It is stated as equally likely that at the nominal end of the working life of this facility, power generation by tidal Lagoons will have further developed, and the Swansea Tidal Lagoon will be progressively updated so that the facility can be kept in use as an energy source as well as its ongoing leisure use.
2.48 Total removal of the lagoon is not proposed on the basis that by end of the operational life the seawall would have an established ecology and recreational environment and as such would be detrimental to remove.
Page 37
2.49 Clarification has been sought on funding arrangements for any decommissioning requirements.
3.0 Planning Policy
3.1 National Policy Statements
3.1.1 On 18th July 2011 the House of Commons debated and approved the six National Policy Statements for Energy (NPS). On 19th July 2011, the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change designated the NPSs under the Planning Act 2008.
3.1.2 The energy NPSs set out national policy against which proposals for major energy projects will be assessed and decided on by the Planning Inspectorate. The Planning Inspectorate will use NPSs in its examination of applications for development consent, and Ministers will use them when making decisions. (Under the Planning Act 2008 the Secretary of State must also have regard to any local impact report submitted by a relevant local authority.)
3.1.3 The NPSs of relevance to this application are:
• Overarching Energy National Policy Statement (EN-1); • Renewable Energy Infrastructure National Policy Statement (EN-3); and • Electricity Networks Infrastructure National Policy Statement (EN-5).
3.1.4 NPS EN-1 sets out:
• The high level objectives, policy and regulatory framework for new nationally significant infrastructure projects; • The need and urgency for new energy infrastructure to be consented and built with the objective of contributing to a secure, diverse and affordable energy supply and supporting Government’s policies on sustainable development, in particular by mitigating and adapting to climate change; • Key principles to be followed in the examination and determination of applications; • Policy on the assessment of impacts which are common across a range of the technologies (generic impacts)
3.1.5 Given the urgency of need for renewable energy infrastructure, it is stated that the Secretary of State should start with a presumption in favour of granting consent to applications for energy NSIPs.
3.1.6 It is stated that this presumption applies unless any more specific and relevant policies set out in the relevant NPSs clearly indicate that consent should be refused or if the proposal will result in adverse impacts from the development outweighing the benefits. In considering any proposed development, and in particular when weighing its adverse impacts against its benefits, the Secretary of State should take into account:
• Its potential benefits including its contribution to meeting the need for energy infrastructure, job creation and any long-term or wider benefits; and
Page 38 • Its potential adverse impacts, including any long-term and cumulative adverse impacts, as well as any measures to avoid, reduce or compensate for any adverse impacts.
3.1.7 In this context, NPS EN-1 states that the Secretary of State should take into account environmental, social and economic benefits and adverse impacts, at national, regional and local levels. These may be identified in this NPS, the relevant technology-specific NPS, in the application or elsewhere (including in local impact reports).
3.1.8 NPS EN-3 contains policy specifically relating to renewable energy infrastructure and is designed to be read in conjunction with EN-1. The infrastructure covered by this NPS comprises energy from biomass and/or waste, offshore wind and onshore wind. The NPS does not cover other types of renewable energy generation that at the time of publication were not technically viable, such as schemes that generate electricity from tidal stream or wave power. It was expected that tidal range schemes may be the subject of applications within the near future and government is, therefore considering the need for either a revision to this NPS or a separate NPS to provide the primary basis for decision-making under the Planning Act on such schemes.
3.1.9 Although Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd now submit that tidal power is now economically and technically viable, Government has not yet indicated when it intends to address the situation on directly applicable NPSs.
3.1.10 NPS EN-3 clarifies that the Secretary of State should have regard to Planning Policy Wales and advice issued by Welsh Government relevant to renewables and expect applicants to have taken them into account when working up their proposals.
3.1.11 NPS EN-5 is concerned with impacts and other matters which are specific to electricity networks infrastructure or where, although the impact or issue is generic and covered in EN-1, there are further specific considerations arising from this technology. The policies set out in this NPS are additional to those on generic impacts set out in EN-1.
3.2 Planning Policy Wales
3.2.1 Planning Policy Wales (Edition 5, November 2012) (PPW) states that in determining applications for renewable and low carbon energy development and associated infrastructure local planning authorities should take into account:
• The contribution a proposal will play in meeting identified national, UK and European targets and potential for renewable energy, including the contribution to cutting greenhouse gas emissions; • The wider environmental, social and economic benefits and opportunities from renewable and low carbon energy development; • The impact on the natural heritage, the Coast and the Historic Environment; • The need to minimise impacts on local communities to safeguard quality of life for existing and future generations; • Ways to avoid, mitigate or compensate identified adverse impacts;
Page 39 • The impacts of climate change on the location, design, build and operation of renewable and low carbon energy development. In doing so consider whether measures to adapt to climate change impacts give rise to additional impacts; • Grid connection issues where renewable (electricity) energy developments are proposed; and • The capacity of and effects on the transportation network relating to the construction and operation of the proposal.
3.2.2 Planning Policy Wales Technical Advice Note 8: Planning for Renewable Energy sets out the land use planning considerations of renewable energy and advises that in order to meet WG renewable energy targets that 800MW of additional installed capacity is required from onshore wind sources and a further 200MW of installed capacity is required from offshore wind and other renewable technologies.
3.2.3 It is advised that although generally supported, there could be occasions where some hydro schemes are unacceptable because of potential ecological damage. It states that all of the parties involved should work constructively to find acceptable solutions.
3.3 City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan
3.3.1 The preamble to City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan (UDP), Policy R11 sets out the Council’s support for Welsh Government’s policy for strengthening renewable energy production, and recognises the long-term benefits to be derived from the development of renewable energy sources. It is recognised that renewable energy technologies can have a positive impact on local communities and the local economy in terms of monetary savings and in generating and underpinning economic development within the County. There are however concerns about the impacts that some renewable energy technologies can have on the landscape, local communities, natural heritage and historic environment, nearby land uses and activities. The Council therefore seeks to achieve a balance between supporting renewable energy proposals whilst avoiding significant damage to the environment and its key assets. It is explained that favourable consideration will be given to developments that produce or use renewable energy where such proposals conform with UDP policies and are in scale and character with their surroundings.
3.3.2 To this end Policy R11 states that proposals for the provision of renewable energy resources, including ancillary infrastructure and buildings, will be permitted provided:
i. The social, economic or environmental benefits of the scheme in meeting local, and national energy targets outweigh any adverse impacts, ii. The scale, form, design, appearance and cumulative impacts of proposals can be satisfactorily incorporated into the landscape, seascape or built environment and would not significantly adversely affect the visual amenity, local environment or recreational/tourist use of these areas, iii. There would be no significant adverse effect on local amenity, highways, aircraft operations or telecommunications, iv. There would be no significant adverse effect on natural heritage and the historic environment, Page 40
v. The development would preserve or enhance any conservation areas and not adversely affect listed buildings or their settings, vi. The development is accompanied by adequate information to indicate the extent of possible environmental effects and how they can be satisfactorily contained and/or mitigated, vii. The development includes measures to secure the satisfactory removal of structures/related infrastructure and an acceptable after use which brings about a net gain where practically feasible for biodiversity following cessation of operation of the installation.
3.3.3 The above sets out the main national and local planning policy principles that apply to this proposal. There is significant other relevant planning policy that will be considered in due course as part of this Authority’s LIR.
4.0 Relevant Planning Issues
4.1 The main material considerations with regard to the proposal are set out below. These correspond largely to the topic areas contained within the PEIR.
• Compliance with national and development plan policy • Seascape & Landscape Visual Impact • Design and Public Realm • Marine Water Quality Assessment • Navigation and Marine Transport Assessment • Coastal Processes, Sediment Transport and Contamination • Intertidal and Subtidal Benthic Ecology • Fish, Including Recreational and Commercial Fisheries • Marine Mammals and Turtles • Coastal Birds • Terrestrial Ecology • Air Quality • Hydrology and Flood Risk • Land Quality and Hydrogeology • Noise and Vibration • Onshore Transport Assessment • Cultural heritage: terrestrial and marine archaeology and historic landscape • Economy, Tourism and Recreation • Sustainability
4.2 There are considered to be no additional issues arising from the provisions of the Human Rights Act.
Compliance with national and development plan policy
4.3 Essentially UDP Policy R11 replicates the national policy position for renewable projects in that the starting point is a presumption in favour of such development, provided that certain criteria is met. As will be evident from the discussion below on individual topic areas and, as inferred by the title of the supporting consultation document (Preliminary Environmental Information Report), much of the assessment material provided at this stage is either incomplete and ongoing. Page 41 This stage of the process therefore affords this Authority the opportunity to highlight issues that should be addressed as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment and areas of concern.
4.4 Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd will be required to consider the issues raised by this Authority in the final preparation of the Environmental Impact Assessment. This in turn will allow the Authority to come to an informed position when invited by the Planning Inspectorate to submit a LIR, if and when an application is accepted for examination.
4.5 Accordingly, at present the City & County of Swansea is not in a position to come to a view as to whether the benefits of the scheme outweigh any adverse impacts and therefore whether the proposal accords with UDP Policy R11.
4.6 The position is therefore effectively one of in principle support, subject to the criteria of Policy R11 and other relevant planning policy being met.
Seascape & Landscape Visual Impact Assessment
4.7 The PEIR contains a chapter relating to a seascape and landscape visual impact assessment of the proposal. This chapter is intended to assess the likely impacts of the project on both the seascape and landscape, in terms of its impact on character and visual amenity within a defined study area.
4.8 The chapter at present sets out the approach and methodology, the baseline conditions, including that of the assessed seascape units, landscape character areas and identification of the viewpoints selected. At present the chapter stops short of providing an impact assessment with accompanying visualisations. This work is currently ongoing.
4.9 Given the nature of the proposed development and that the specialism is not available within the Council, White Consultants were commissioned by the City and County of Swansea prior to receiving the PEIR in June 2013 to review the seascape and landscape visual impact assessment (SLVIA). The purpose of the brief to White Consultants is to:
• Assess whether the SLVIA is comprehensive, clear and follows best practice guidance; • Assess whether visualisations are reasonable/accurate; • Assess whether conclusions on effects are reasonable and valid; • Give advice on how the scheme may be improved or effects may be mitigated.
4.10 In terms of the methodology and scope of the report, White Consultant’s conclude that:
• The SLVIA covers a large amount of ground but does not focus sufficiently on what is important in Swansea Bay. There is undue emphasis on land-based rather than seascape issues/receptors. • Up to date guidance and emerging seascape assessment techniques need to be taken on board. The assessment needs to consider the use of smaller seascape character areas to complement its existing assessment. Page 42
• There are a few methodological issues which hopefully can be resolved. • The sensitivity for each seascape unit and landscape character area in or adjacent to Swansea County Council’s area in the majority of cases appears reasonable, however there are concerns in 4 instances of the conclusions reached. • Cumulative assessment should cover combined as well additional effects. • Viewpoints should be amended to ensure the worst case situations are addressed. • Full size visualisations and figures are needed as soon as possible so comments can be made in good time before the final SLVIA.
4.11 In terms of the review of the design and mitigation, White Consultants highlight the following key issues:
• The effect the development will have on the character of the bay, especially west of the Tawe, on which Swansea relies as a major asset essential to its positive image and quality of life. • The development is very large scale protruding 3.5km into Swansea Bay and effectively dividing it into two. • The height of the proposed seawall is higher than the promenade (13m AOD compared to 7-8m AOD). It is not clear how much of an effect this will have visually. • The design evolution of the development is explained with smaller, less potentially obtrusive and more elegant shaped options appearing to not be commercially viable. As the development would be such a major component of the Bay’s seascape it is questioned whether there is any potential for improving the lagoon design to become a more pleasing and compact shape? • The overall sweep of the Bay will be disrupted with views of the almost continuous strong sandy strip around the bay being hidden by the rock faced seawall which is likely to become a dark grey/black over time. This will reduce the feeling of continuity of the sandy strand and will remove views of this positive element. Views from the Swansea and Mumbles promenade may therefore focus more on the detractive industrial and built development elements in Port Talbot. • Sedimentation patterns may be changed. It would be of concern if mud deposited by the River Tawe or Neath increases in proportion to sand on beaches, especially the beach along the promenade at Swansea/Mumbles. The modelling contained in the PEIR appears to be based on a smaller proposal so this issue needs to be carefully considered. • Night time effects need to be considered adequately. • A Ro Ro terminal on the western wall would be a potentially major detractor.
4.12 Based on the preliminary information, suggested mitigation measures might include:
• Reducing the extent that the development protrudes into Swansea Bay. • Making a more elegant shape of the lagoon • Careful design of lighting and structures.
Page 43 4.13 The final preliminary conclusion from White Consultant’s is that:
• “There is concern that the development may have significant adverse effects on the essential qualities of Swansea Bay, adversely affecting one of the city’s best assets. More information is needed to assess if this is the case.”
4.14 A copy of the report from White Consultant’s is provided as Appendix C.
4.15 Members will note that the recommendation above is that the advice received from White Consultants be forwarded for the information and attention of Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd.
4.16 It can reasonably be assumed that the issues raised in terms of the methodology and scope of the report can be accommodated in the final assessment forming part of the Environmental Statement. The other issues that clearly come out of the report by White Consultant’s is that the development is very large scale, protruding 3.5km into Swansea Bay and effectively dividing it in two thereby disrupting the sweep of the bay, which is one of the City’s major assets.
4.17 It is also questioned that as the development would be such a major component of the Bay’s seascape whether there is any potential for improving the lagoon design to become a more pleasing and compact shape. Indeed in this respect the size and shape of the lagoon has significantly increased and changed since the scheme was introduced to Members in March 2013. The differences are illustrated below.
4.18 The area of the lagoon has increased from 9.4km² to 11.7km² whilst the height of the wall has changed from 11-19m to 5-20m. The height of the wall above low water mark has increased from 11.3 to 12m and the wall above the high water mark has increased from 2.8m to 3.5m.
Page 44 4.19 In at least visual terms this is considered to be a retrograde step and it is recommended therefore, as per the conclusions of the White Report, that Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd be requested to reduce the extent that the development protrudes into the Bay and to make the lagoon a more elegant shape as per previous more rounded iterations.
4.20 The report from White Consultant’s importantly recognises that sedimentation patterns may be changed by the proposal and that it would be of concern if mud deposited by the River Tawe or Neath increases in proportion to sand on beaches, especially the beach along the promenade at Swansea/Mumbles. It is considered that the loss of sand to this stretch of the beach would have significant adverse impacts on its present character and appearance of the Bay and the waterfront aspirations of the Council.
4.21 Again as noted above, the final preliminary conclusion from White Consultant’s is that there is “concern that the development may have significant adverse effects on the essential qualities of Swansea Bay, adversely affecting one of the city’s best assets. More information is needed to assess if this is the case.”
4.22 Should this prove to the conclusion of the final SLVIA, the proposal would conflict with criteria (ii) of above referenced UDP Policy R11 which supports renewable energy developments provided that the scale, form, design, appearance and cumulative impacts of proposals can be satisfactorily incorporated into the landscape, seascape or built environment and would not significantly adversely affect the visual amenity, local environment or recreational/tourist use of these areas.
4.23 At this stage however, it is considered premature to come to any firm conclusion in the absence of a completed SLVIA and a review of the same by White Consultants on behalf of this Authority. It is recommended however that Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd be advised that the City & County of Swansea is rightly concerned about the potential seascape, landscape and visual impact of the proposal and that appropriate consideration should be given to findings and recommendations of the report from White Consultants as part of the evolving Environmental Statement.
4.24 A copy of the White Consultant’s report is provided as Appendix D.
Design and Public Realm
4.25 At this stage there is no significant detail from a design and public realm perspective but rather strategic options within the overall general layout.
4.26 Notwithstanding the potential seascape, landscape and visual impacts of the proposal, in strategic terms the tidal lagoon has potential to create a significant visitor attraction as well as an important local public realm resource. It has potential to create many kilometres of public realm with a wide variety of features and provision.
4.27 The public realm treatment around the lagoon, which is described as ‘world class’ in the PEIR, aims to create different character areas responding to the sense of place and levels of potential use. The general approach is to use curves and features to break up what would otherwise be a harsh and functional linear structure. Page 45 4.28 It is considered that this should include a public art strategy which is integral to the public realm rather then define a series of ‘plinths’.
4.29 It is considered that key to the public realm potential will be the establishment of a legible and welcoming walking/cycling route between Swansea City Centre and the western landfall of the tidal lagoon. This would provide a direct and car free link along the dock edge to the emerging Swansea University Bay Campus and should also include onward links to the Wales Coastal Path and Sustrans cycle routes. It will also be important to ensure that this dock edge route is free, truly public and open all day, every day.
4.30 It is acknowledged that Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd recognise the strategic importance of this linkage, however there is no detail at this stage and the support of ABP, who control this land, is not known.
4.31 The main public realm issue will be the delivery of a legible and welcoming walking and cycling route between the southern part of the SA1 regeneration area, through the operating docks (ABP land) past the mothballed ferry terminal and over the Kings Lock. There are various challenges to be resolved with this route such as the relationship to the ferry terminal, the security/safety passing through the operating docks (including ship recycling operation) and general issues of legibility. These issues will need to be resolved in the next stages of the project in discussion with ABP, but it must be noted that this link is considered to be an essential component of the ‘world class’ public realm that is proposed. If the western link is not delivered and the only access to the lagoon is from the east, then this will have severe implications for connectivity, public realm and would be a significant missed opportunity to connect the City with the Bay Campus and the wider ongoing waterfront regeneration objectives.
4.32 It is considered that the Sailbridge over the River Tawe sets a quality precedent of an iconic new bridges and it considered therefore that a new bridge over Kings Lock should aspire to deliver an appropriate visual quality.
4.33 At present there is no detail of the various buildings associated with the scheme or the various shelters and features to break up the significant distances involved and to create focal points.
4.34 It is recommended therefore that Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd take note of the concerns set out above and be requested to continue to liaise with the City & County of Swansea on the public realm and design evolution of the scheme.
Marine Water Quality Assessment
4.35 Swansea Bay offers many recreational activities including two designated ‘bathing waters’ and many more along the adjacent Gower coastline. The area is also designated as ‘shellfish waters’. As such, the PEIR recognises the importance of water quality issues.
4.36 It is stated that the lagoon itself should not contribute any pollutant load to the marine waters, but its impact on water circulation within the Bay could affect water quality and the outfall from Swansea Bay Waste Water Treatment Works (WWTW), owned by DCWW, would terminate within the proposed Lagoon area. Page 46 (The outfall discharges a tertiary treated UV disinfected final effluent.) In addition, water quality from the Tawe and Neath estuaries must be considered.
4.37 It is submitted that the effects of these issues can all be minimised by careful design of the lagoon shape and turbine/sluice location. An existing computer model of water quality in the Bay has been used to test these issues for a range of lagoon designs. It is advised that the results showed that the lagoon would not have as large an effect on water circulation as might be expected, since the area proposed for the lagoon lies in a part of the Bay that is shallow and relatively isolated from the main areas of circulation and mixing. The modelling showed that during wet weather the plume of the River Tawe will follow the lagoon wall, with an overall positive benefit in taking the plume away from Swansea Bay bathing waters. Although it is acknowledged that the plume could be drawn into the lagoon (through the turbines) on the flood tide and re-released to the Bay, affecting local bathing waters during ebb discharge from the lagoon, it is submitted that careful location of the turbine housing will largely mitigate this effect on beach water quality.
4.38 The PEIR states that in dry weather the flows from the WWTW outfall are ultra-violet (UV) disinfected and have very low levels of bacteria, and the tidal movements through the turbines ensure water is never impounded in the lagoon for long. However, in very wet weather, it is acknowledged that screened storm water can be released through the outfall, affecting water quality in the lagoon and the wider Bay.
4.39 At these times, without mitigation (additional measures), the reduction in lagoon water quality may be enough to preclude its use for contact water sports for periods after heavy rainfall. To mitigate this, it is advised that three options are currently being considered in conjunction with Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water (DCWW). These are discussed below:
4.40 Option 1 – would be the provision of additional storm water storage to reduce the storm spills from the main long sea outfall. The proposal would be to build storm water storage into the western landfall of the seawall Lagoon. It would be proposed to design the storage to reduce storm spills down the outfall to, in the order of, one spill per year. To achieve this, a storm water tank would be built into the concrete caisson which would form the Lagoon wall. The storm tank would need to be connected from the existing Langdon Road infrastructure (a storm tunnel some 3.84m diameter). There would be a pumped feed to the new storm tank and then once the storm subsides storm water would gravity feed back to the tunnel and on to the WWTW for full treatment. Although it is stated that a small potential for an untreated storm water discharge within the Lagoon still exists, this would be on the most significant storms only, or after significant consecutive storms. The provision of storage and transferring all flows back to the works for full treatment would also reduce the nutrient load to the Bay which would be of benefit to the Water Framework Directive objectives.
4.41 Option 2 - is the provision of UV treatment of the storm water as has been constructed at some other WWTWs in South Wales. The UV disinfection would be used to treat all storm water flows which currently pass down the outfall, thereby reducing bacterial content to achieve the required water quality standard.
Page 47 4.42 Option 3 is the extension of the existing long sea outfall to a position outside the Lagoon. Although this is physically possible the PEIR states that a number of issues arise, primarily maintaining access to the outfall as it passes under the seawall, for DCWW to undertake maintenance if required. In addition to this, although the outfall could be positioned outside of the lagoon, initial modelling indicated that hydrodynamics in the area would draw the storm water back into the lagoon on certain tidal states. As such the outfall may have to be considerably extended (in excess of 2km beyond the lagoon seawall) to prevent recirculation of storm water.
4.43 It is explained that further assessment will be undertaken of these options in conjunction with DCWW to achieve the objectives of the lagoon, whilst integrating into DCWW current operations. It is also explained that detailed water quality modelling is on-going, with the existing computer model being updated with recent site specific survey data as well as data collected by City and County of Swansea and Aberystwyth University under the SMART Coast Project. It is advised that the modelling will continue to be used during design development to ensure that the optimum lagoon design is achieved and that the results of the modelling and the findings of the assessment against all relevant water quality standards will be provided in the Environmental Statement.
4.44 In consideration of the information submitted, the impact on bathing water quality has been highlighted as the main area of concern for the Head of Environment, Management and Protection.
4.45 As Members may be aware, the Council’s Pollution Control Team has recently undertaken some major surveys at considerable expense to generate a reliable and robust prediction method for water quality in Swansea Bay. It is advised that this is the only way forward to comply with the revised Bathing Water Directive and is essential to avoid infraction proceedings sometime after 2016.
4.46 There is agreement between Welsh water, Natural Resources Wales, Public Health Wales and the City & County of Swansea that even if significant further engineering improvements are made to the sewerage infrastructure, daily prediction systems will still be required to operate to protect public health and to comply with the Bathing Water Directive.
4.47 The Head of Environment, Management and Protection has advised that the tidal lagoon proposal will have a major impact on bacterial water quality in the Bay for a number of reasons:
• The Swansea sewage treatment works outfall is currently in the impounded area. • Tidal flows around the lagoon will change from the current arrangement. • River flows from the Tawe and Neath will significantly change in terms of their impact in the embayment. • Even after full treatment and UV disinfection the outfall will still release significant numbers of indicator organisms. • Any slight change in the deposition of sand in the intertidal area could result in the surf zone and swimming areas being more turbid; this allows bacteria and viruses to live longer and results in poorer water quality.
Page 48
4.48 The Head of Environment, Management and Protection has advised that the physical changes to the Bay will be significant enough to require a repeat of much of the survey work carried out in 2011, which has enabled the City & County of Swansea to construct the prediction model. It will be essential for this work to be repeated if the lagoon is constructed. Whilst this will enable the Authority to continue with daily predictions, there will inevitably be a period through construction and for some time afterwards when the prediction method will not be as reliable. It is advised that there is no easy way around this issue and it would probably take at least one full year from the month of May following the completion of an operational lagoon, for the survey to be repeated and a new prediction model calculated based upon the new data.
4.49 This matter has been considered by Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd and at present there is a commitment to repeat the survey work post completion. However the estimated cost of this is an additional £400,000, which would have to be found by Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd, not this Authority. This estimate also assumes sufficient staff within the Pollution Control Team to undertake the work in 2018 and the academic expertise provided through the recent INTERREG project still being available.
4.50 It is the view of the Head of Environment, Management and Protection that it is imperative that the Planning Inspectorate/Secretary of State make this an enforceable condition of any approval potentially given in the future.
4.51 It is considered by the Head of Environment, Management and Protection that the options in the PEIR for treating sewage discharges and storm discharges are reasonable at this early stage but are mainly a concern in terms of the after-use of the lagoon itself. Clearly any shell fishery or recreational use would require good water quality (compliant with the relevant Directives) and in this respect it is considered that the option of extra storage is probably not wise in the longer term. In the experience of the Head of Environment, Management and Protection, extra sewage storage does not usually resolve a problem for more than a few years and also, the current storm discharge into the lagoon would have to be treated.
4.52 It is considered too early to say whether UV disinfection of all discharges into the lagoon would be safe for lagoon swimmers. It is advised that this can be quite a complicated risk assessment as UV disinfection can disable pathogens, but the indicator organisms are still countable. Advising organisers of triathlons etc could be quite difficult in those circumstances. From a public relations viewpoint it would be much easier to promote the use of the lagoon if the outfall was extended further into the Bay, sufficiently far enough away from the turbines.
4.53 Another related issue identified by the Head of Environment, Management and Protection is the fact that the long sea outfall from the Afan sewage works has no UV disinfection and that this may be an issue for future compliance at Aberavon Beach. It is advised that both these issues should be fully assessed as part of this decision process.
Page 49
4.54 The Head of Environment, Management and Protection has advised that the aforementioned issues hinge upon very accurate and reliable modelling to be able to assess the potential negative impacts of the proposal. It is also explained that this will be difficult as fairly small changes will be irreversible whilst the impacts could become quite obvious. In this respect the Head of Environment, Management and Protection has highlighted concern that the current model quality is not good enough to reach a confident decision. It is advised that there are better models in development and it is hoped that Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd is willing to continue to find the best resolution throughout this application process.
Navigation and Marine Transport Assessment
4.55 As explained above, the proposed lagoon is situated between the approach channels of the River Neath and the River Tawe. As Members will be aware, the approach channel to the River Tawe leads to the Port of Swansea and Swansea Marina. Should the planning permission for the change of use of the Prince of Wales Dock to commercial marina be implemented the channel would lead to this provision also.
4.56 The PEIR therefore recognises that shipping and navigation are of key importance in the area and are accordingly being considered fully in the project.
4.57 It is advised that during the initial design stage, discussions were held with Neath and Swansea Port Authorities and as a result, the lagoon seawalls have been positioned along each respective approach channel based on their input. For the Tawe channel, the lagoon seawall would tie into the existing Swansea Port seawall, and then continue running parallel to the dredged channel but positioned 100m away (to the east).
4.58 In addition to this, a Hazard Workshop was held in April 2013 with around 30 key maritime stakeholders to identify potential shipping and navigation impacts through the construction, operation and decommissioning phases of the project. Ideas for potential measures to reduce the risk level were also discussed. It is advised that input from the coastal process modelling, and feedback received from on-going consultation and the hazard workshop, will be used as inputs to inform the design of the project and reduce potential impacts. Further mitigation measures will be developed based on the findings of the assessment.
4.59 Swansea’s Marina Manager has been consulted on this issue and has raised the following concerns:
• There seems to be a good chance of large waves / surf developing along the western lagoon wall during certain tide / wind conditions. This wall is immediately adjacent to the dredged entrance channel and could possibly cause difficulties for craft trying to navigate into Swansea.
Page 50 • If a vessel was to lose power on the way in or out of Swansea, the prevailing wind would tend to push them into the western lagoon wall. With the bay in its current configuration, a boat owner would have sufficient time to take action to prevent grounding or avoid a collision. The western lagoon wall is immediately adjacent to the dredged approach channel, leaving little time for a boat owner to react in the event of a failure.
• Would the suction / discharge effect of the turbines be sufficient to cause difficulties for small craft?
• There will be a reduction in useable space on eastern side of the dredged channel. All craft approaching Swansea from the east will be forced into using the dredged approach channel. The entrance to Swansea is shared between large commercial and pleasure craft. Whilst the rules of the sea should prevent issues, the number of near misses in terms of interaction between pleasure craft and large commercial vessels may increase.
• A structure of this nature will undoubtedly alter the regime of the River Tawe Estuary Channel estuary and may lead to increased siltation. It is questioned whether this has been fully considered and who will bear costs if regular dredging becomes necessary?
• A structure of this nature will undoubtedly alter the regime of Swansea Bay approach channel and may lead to increased siltation. Again, it is questioned whether this has been fully considered and who will bear costs if regular dredging becomes necessary?
4.60 In addition, the Head of Environment, Management and Protection has advised that whilst it is agreed that the lagoon has the potential to benefit water sports in the area if the water quality issues can be resolved, however there is a possible negative impact to existing water users in that the wave climate for the approach to the three marinas on the Tawe and the marina on the River Neath could become far more complex and uncomfortable for small craft particularly in adverse weather conditions. Reflected waves from the lagoon walls could be a problem and spoil what is currently a very safe and easy approach even during storm conditions. This will be a real concern to marina operators in terms of their future success.
4.61 It is recommended that Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd be made aware of these concerns.
Ecological issues
General comments
4.62 The following advice has been provided by the Council’s Ecologist.
4.63 Natural Resources Wales are consulted by Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd directly.
Page 51 4.64 In the first instance it is advised that the PEIR contains the relevant areas of study for ecological matters, however many of the areas lack a full data set and therefore full consideration and an accurate assessment of the short, medium and long term consequences of the lagoon, particularly in relation to ecology and geomorphology, cannot be provided until these elements are completed.
4.65 It is however reasonable to state from the outset that, if built, the lagoon will alter the dynamics and ecology of the Bay. It is important therefore that these processes and impacts are fully understood for both the construction and operational phases and that predicted changes are accurately quantified with confidence limits allowing a robust assessment. Mitigation and compensation proposed must at the very least ensure no overall ecological loss.
4.66 It is advised that all studies must cover the whole area that might be affected by the project including areas affected by changes in sediment deposition and areas affected by sediment disturbed during construction.
4.67 There is a need to include mitigation / compensation plans where losses are considered to be significant and mechanisms/resources for the ongoing monitoring of ecological impacts and dealing with possible negative long term consequences.
4.68 The Council’s Ecologist has highlighted that there may be longer term and unpredicted negative affects and the potential for such impacts therefore needs to be acknowledged and an assumption made that these will be dealt with appropriately. Mitigation / compensation plans must provide for an equivalent compensation i.e. no overall loss and some habitats, for example, intertidal mud flats, will need to be compensated for on a like for like basis. Intertidal habitats have already been lost in Cardiff and Swansea Bay and the area has also suffered a significant loss of sand dunes.
4.69 Sufficient evidence is needed to ensure that base line data is sufficient to measure any future changes.
4.70 The Council’s Ecologist has highlighted that there are possible significant effects on Natura 2000 site features e.g. possible bird exchange between Black Pill SSSI and the Burry Inlet and drainage affecting Crymlyn Bog. Data gathered must therefore be sufficient to carry out a full Habitats Regulations Assessment.
4.71 In some sections of the PEIR heavy reliance is replaced on old data. These need proofing and ensuring that where appropriate they cover the potential area of influence. All available relevant data needs to be gathered to ensure accurate conclusions are reached.
4.72 The Environmental Statement should also clarify any knock-on effects due to construction.
Page 52 Coastal Processes Sedimentation and Contamination
4.73 The PEIR recognises that the lagoon location and Swansea Bay experiences a very large tidal range (termed hyper-tidal) and that the project would be exposed to relatively large waves originating from the North Atlantic and propagating along the Bristol Channel.
4.74 Across much of the outer regions of the Bay, it is stated that seabed sediment is mainly made up of coarser-grained material (coarse sand and gravel), whilst closer to the shore (and particularly over the shallow intertidal area) the bed is mainly comprised of finer-grained sediment.
4.75 The PEIR states that the results of the initial assessment based on emerging designs for the lagoon suggest that potential effects on tidal characteristics (water levels and currents) are limited in magnitude and predominantly contained in extent to Swansea Bay itself.
4.76 Similarly, it is stated that effects on local wave behaviour are also limited in both magnitude and extent with the lagoon structure providing shelter to sections of the shoreline behind it, depending on the prevailing wave direction.
4.77 It is explained that a detailed modelling study is currently being carried out to develop a more finely grained understanding of potential changes to the marine physical environment as a result of the final design of the project.
4.78 In addition to coastal processes, the localised effect of the lagoon wall on wind-blown sand to the adjacent sand dune system is also being considered within the Environmental Impact Assessment.
4.79 On this issue the Council’s Ecologist has highlighted that changes in sediment movement caused by the lagoon will have the largest ecological impact. It is imperative therefore that those possible changes are fully quantified and that impacts on geomorphological processes, coastal subtidal and intertidal habitats are fully explored. To this end, more complex modelling is required to predict possible long term effects and changes. It is emphasised as particularly important to avoid further habitat losses that have occurred as a result of Cardiff and Swansea barrages.
4.80 To this end it is advised that the tidal model must have a resolution small enough to predict local effects on sediment movement. The discussion of the data needs specifically to be aimed at sand dune and marine sediments and to assess effects of any increased exposure of soft coastal deposits e.g. peat and clay.
4.81 As detailed above, it is of significant concern in respect of seascape, landscape and visual amenity that the remaining sand on Swansea Bay is replaced with exposed clay and/or peat.
4.82 The Council’s Ecologist has expressed concern that what happens if the modelling of the impacts on sediment movement proves to be incorrect, resulting in loss of sand on Swansea Beach, or an increase in sediment leading to greater problems of wind blown sand onto Oystermouth Road?
Page 53 4.83 It is also questioned:
• Whether there could be short term changes to the quality of sand on Swansea Beach during the construction phase? • Whether deterioration of Crymlyn Burrows SAC and Blackpill SSSI is possible? • Whether such changes could be rectified and who will be responsible? • Who will be responsible for monitoring changes over time and who will pay for this work?
4.84 The Head of Environment, Management and Protection has raised concern that sediment deposition can be difficult to predict accurately, as found with the Tawe barrage.
4.85 It is advised that further data is also being collected on sediment quality (contamination) across the study area, including areas from which sediment is to be extracted to form the lagoon seawalls. The data is being collected from the surface and at depth and will be used in both the sediment transport modelling and the contamination assessment. The computer models are being used to assess the potential effects of the Project during its construction, operation and decommissioning, and on both Swansea Bay and across the wider study area. The range of issues to be considered include potential effects on the existing Ports in the Bay as well as designated such as Blackpill SSSI.
4.86 On the issue of sediment quality, the Head of Environment, Management and Protection does not see the historic contamination of sediments being a problem or becoming significantly more available. It is acknowledged that more data will be presented from the survey being undertaken and this will be reviewed in due course.
4.87 Concern has however been expressed by the Council’s Ecologist regarding the possible mobilisation of heavy metals through disturbance to sediments for use in filling geotextile tubes and the significant effects this could have on fish and fishing within the Bay.
Intertidal and Subtidal Benthic Ecology
4.88 The PEIR explains that a detailed assessment of the marine plants and animals (ecology) on the beach and on the seabed within the Bay is currently being undertaken. Although the project site does not overlap any ecologically protected sites, it is acknowledged that there are two sites within the Bay that have been protected for marine features namely: Blackpill SSSI and Crymlyn Burrows SSSI. In addition to this, there are a number of important ecological features within Swansea Bay as a whole, including the reefforming species, the honeycomb worm and the native oyster.
4.89 The PEIR states that the lagoon will have a direct impact on the plants and animals on the beach and underwater from the construction of the seawalls. The potential effects that have been identified at this stage primarily relate to a loss and change in available habitat extent and a change in both the physical processes and water quality through the implementation of the project. Page 54 These may occur through changes in availability or quality of habitat; release of existing or new contaminants; localised smothering of habitats or species; changes in suspended sediment concentrations; changes in biological communities and the introduction of non-native species. Measures are to be identified where possible to minimise any potential impacts along with investigating enhancement measures such as the reintroduction of native oysters to Swansea Bay and the feasibility of transplanting the honeycomb worm. It is stated that the introduction of new intertidal and subtidal rocky habitat should also be of benefit to the area.
4.90 In response, the Council’s Ecologist has advised that there must be sufficient data available to fully assess impacts on geomorphological processes, coastal subtidal and intertidal habitats including the Blackpill SSSI. The data in the former Countryside Council for Wales intertidal survey is now at least 10 years old and this needs to be proofed for the whole area that might be affected, as displaced sediment will affect marine habitats out side the lagoon boundary. It should be acknowledged that it may be necessary to carry out further plankton study work once the desk study is done.
Fish, Including Recreational and Commercial Fisheries
4.91 The PEIR recognises that recreational, commercial and migratory fisheries are an important consideration within Swansea Bay and the wider area. To understand the environment without the project, a review of existing fisheries information and a number of field surveys are being conducted. The first field surveys (February 2013), indicated that species caught were consistent with the results gathered through the desktop study. A total of 31 species were caught and the fish population was dominated by gobies, juvenile and adult flatfish (dab and plaice), as well as rays.
4.92 The area surrounding the Bay is rich in fish and shellfish, including species of commercial and/or conservation value. Migratory fish (fish which travel back and forth between water bodies during their lifetime) such as Atlantic salmon, allis shad, European eel, twaite shad, river lamprey and sea lamprey, are of high conservation value and move past the Swansea Bay area and into the Bristol Channel to a number of internationally designated sites upstream. Rivers flowing into Swansea Bay also host good numbers of migratory brown trout stocks, which have been identified as being of national importance.
4.93 There are also a number of regionally important fish and shellfish stocks, including bass, dab, herring, plaice, sole, rays and other elasmobranchs. A number of species are commercially valuable in the area, these include: bass, mullet, rays, sole, plaice, edible crab, spider crab, whelk and lobster. Other shellfish, such as mussel, are also harvested within the Bay.
4.94 The PEIR states that during construction there would be potential to affect fish and shellfish populations temporarily through effects such as increases in noise and sediment, although measures will be implemented to reduce these where possible. The lagoon will not physically block access to the mouths of any rivers, however its effects on migratory fish are being investigated.
Page 55
4.95 Detailed fish computer modelling is being undertaken for some key species, including behaviour modelling (the likelihood of the various fish species coming into the lagoon area) and entrainment modelling (the effect on any fish that pass through the turbines). It is stated that the size of the turbines (7-8m in diameter) and low rotation speeds (approx. 60rpm) mean that there will be large gaps through which fish can pass but the modelling will give a better understanding of this. Furthermore, the use of sluice gates will allow free passage of fish in and out of the lagoon in the latter part of the tidal cycle.
4.96 It is acknowledged that there will be some disruption to local fishermen, especially to any who pot within the project area. During operation, the lagoon would not be accessible to any fishing vessels which currently use this area of the Bay and therefore this would result in a loss of some fishing grounds within the lagoon footprint.
4.97 In response, the Council’s Ecologist has advised that the lagoon, will cover an area equivalent to approximately 3 times the size of Mumbles Headland, and will effectively turn part of the Bay into a large harbour . In doing so, this could create a significant barrier to species movement across the wider Bay area as well as reducing area of foraging ground. Data must therefore be presented to be able to fully assess potential impacts on fish and on organisms that feed on fish across the area that may be affected by the proposal. It is essential that the effect on fish mortality during the operation of the lagoon is quantified. It is not possible to comment fully on this issue until the full data set is available.
Marine Mammals and Turtles
4.98 The PEIR advises that a detailed assessment of the potential impacts of the project on marine mammals and turtles is being undertaken and to gain an understanding of the occurrence and distribution of these species throughout the study area, a number of data sources have been reviewed including data from the most up-to-date study undertaken by Swansea Metropolitan University on behalf of the Low Carbon Research Institute.
4.99 The marine mammal which occurs most frequently and in the highest numbers within Swansea Bay is the harbour porpoise. Grey seal are also recorded relatively frequently. Although a number of other species such as common dolphin are recorded in the Bristol Channel, these are rarely sighted inshore around Swansea Bay.
4.100 An initial assessment of the potential effects that could arise as a result of the construction, operation and decommissioning phases of the project has been undertaken for the PEIR. During the construction phase, potential impacts are stated to include collision risk, visual disturbance and noise/vibration disturbance, and the implications of changes in water quality as compared to baseline conditions.
4.101 The processes involved in operating and maintaining the project over its lifetime will lead to potential impacts including changes to feeding habitat, collision risk, barrier effects upon movement, noise/vibration disturbance, electromagnetic fields and toxic contamination. Page 56
4.102 It is advised that the significance of these potential impact pathways will be determined in full following completion of the consultation exercise of which this PEIR forms part and once the design and construction methodology for the project have been finalised. The assessments will also take account of underwater noise data that is being collected within Swansea Bay. Mitigation measures will be identified where possible to minimise any potential impacts that are identified.
4.103 The Council’s Ecologist has advised that marine mammal data must be robust and use all relevant sources. It is identified that some of the studies used in the desk based study cover a limited time period, are old or the scope falls on the edge of the lagoon affected area. This should be addressed as part of the evolving Environmental Statement. It is advised that the effects of the proposal on marine mammals’ foraging also needs quantifying.
Coastal Birds
4.104 The PEIR recognises that coastal birds, in particular over-wintering birds, are an important feature of the Bay with Blackpill SSSI located in the west. Over-wintering bird surveys covering the Bay as a whole have been undertaken in the last two consecutive winters to inform the Environmental Impact Assessment, and these surveys have been extended into the summer for the project area. Surveys have recorded a total of 31 species of birds using areas of the Bay for foraging and roosting. Three main high tide roosts have been identified in the Bay with the largest being in Blackpill SSSI (utilised by 19 species of birds) with two smaller roosts recorded in Crymlyn Burrows SSSI, including one adjacent to the eastern end of the project (five species of birds).
4.105 It is stated that as the Blackpill SSSI is a few kilometres away from the project, direct impact from the development will not occur, although the potential for indirect impacts (e.g. noise disturbance or changes in coastal processes affecting intertidal habitats) remain and these will be further investigated during the Environmental Impact Assessment. In terms of the project area, it is stated that there will be localised disturbance during construction which may put-off birds from foraging and roosting in the local area. With respect to the nearby roost, as the construction of the lagoon walls is anticipated to be during April to October, impacts on over-wintering birds will be minimised.
4.106 Overall it is stated that the sheer scale of the lagoon should also help reduce potential disturbance effects to birds, as construction activities will not be taking place everywhere at the same time. Notwithstanding this, the full potential effects during construction will be investigated during the Environmental Impact Assessment.
4.107 During operation, the slight change in tides within the lagoon is anticipated to have both positive and negative effects. It will extend the low water feeding times in the local area as the tide will be “out” within the lagoon for longer (approx. two hours). However, a reduction in tidal range and therefore intertidal feeding area would have a negative effect.
Page 57
4.108 The use of the lagoon for recreational activities would also increase the level of disturbance in the area compared to that experienced now. Again, it is anticipated that the scale of the development and the fact that recreational activities are more likely to be focused on weekends, should help reduce this effect. It is advised that the full extent of these and other potential effects of the lagoon will be determined during the Environmental Impact Assessment and mitigation measures are being investigated to incorporate into the design of the lagoon. Concepts currently being considered include provision of more secluded roost areas and rafts.
4.109 On this issue, the Council’s Ecologist has advised that the impacts on birds must be fully assessed. There are Special Protection Areas within the Swansea area and there may be an exchange of birds between the Black Pill SSSI and the Bury Inlet. This should be addressed. It is noted that sanderling, one of the Black Pill SSSI features, use the whole beach and impacts on the beach sediments may adversely affect them. As noted above, there has been a loss of intertidal habitats along the south coast of Wales including at Cardiff Bay and Swansea Bay. If these habitats are reduced in area or quality, compensation may be required.
Terrestrial Ecology
4.110 The land-based construction and operational area of the project is largely centred on Swansea Docks and the foreshore beside the SAIC. Statutorily protected sites close to the project include the sand dune habitat of Crymlyn Burrows SSSI (which falls within the administrative boundaries of NPT) and, as such, the PEIR recognises that it is important to assess potential impacts on this site and to develop ways to reduce them.
4.111 Although the potential impact to Crymlyn Burrows SSSI is an obvious focus of attention, the PEIR explains that the port also has animals and plants of ecological interest due to its restricted public access and quiet setting. It is stated that to fully understand the baseline so as to ensure that the project has minimal effect, a range of ecological surveys (including Phase 1 habitat, protected species and breeding birds surveys) have been undertaken. The results confirm that otter and reptiles are present within Swansea Port and bats were recorded alongside exposed rock armouring on the coastal side of the Port seawall.
4.112 It is submitted that during construction, no structures suitable for supporting roosting/hibernating bats will be affected and mitigation measures will be implemented so that potential impacts on other species are minimised. These would include for instance, seasonal timing of clearance works.
4.113 It is advised that for the operation phase of the Project, the potential effects of changes to coastal processes and sand feed will be investigated for both Crymlyn Burrows SSSI and sand dune systems further away. The findings of the ecological surveys, as well as the results of coastal process and wind transport modelling, will be used to predict direct and indirect impacts of the project and develop appropriate mitigation measures for the construction and operational phases, such that potential impacts are minimised.
Page 58 4.114 It is the view of the Council’s Ecologist that the development will impact on terrestrial ecology particularly due to changes in coastal sediment movement and deposition. It is important therefore that these are fully quantified. Possible mitigation /compensation will need to be indentified.
Air Quality
4.115 The air quality assessment contained within the PEIR looks at the potential impacts linked to emissions (exhaust fumes) generated by increased road traffic during the construction of the project. The Environmental Statement will also look at exhaust emissions from site preparation/construction plant, and the potential for dust generation during works.
4.116 During operation Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd does not anticipate that the project itself would release any atmospheric emissions, but traffic associated with major sporting events that might be hosted at the project has been considered.
4.117 The effect of the lagoon wall on wind-blown sand processes and the neighbouring Crymlyn SSSI are to be considered within the terrestrial ecology chapter.
4.118 A review of baseline data has identified that the project itself does not lie within an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA), however, the Hafod AQMA lies within approximately 3.3km of the lagoon.
4.119 The PEIR states that the main traffic generated as a result of the project is not anticipated to travel through the Hafod AQMA and therefore will not affect this area.
4.120 It is advised as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment, further assessments will be undertaken using an advanced dispersion model to assess the impact of additional vehicles during the construction phase and, if required, the effects from routine operation/maintenance and average visitor usage of the site and also from the site hosting significant sporting events during the operational phase. In addition, an assessment will be undertaken to determine the potential impacts arising from near-shore plant such as a jack-up barge, crawler crane, crane vessel and dredger, plus any concrete batching plant that will be required during the construction phase.
4.121 The Head of Environment, Management and Protection is satisfied with the approach being taken thus far on air quality.
Land Quality and Hydrogeology
4.122 The PEIR states that a robust desk study of land quality has taken place to identify key land contamination receptors and their sensitivity. The potential impacts of site preparation, construction and then operation of the project have been assessed against the importance or sensitivity of the receptors.
Page 59 4.123 It is stated that most of the land along the foreshore was reclaimed, many years ago, from the intertidal area to form the dock enclosure and is therefore comprised of ‘made ground’. Queen’s Dock was formerly an oil terminal with pipelines that ran to the Llandarcy Refinery. These are understood to have been removed within the dock but remain in the ground from the Port boundary to the River Neath / Baglan Bay on approximately the same route to that proposed for the lagoon’s grid connection.
4.124 Parts of the onshore area have been subject to industrial use, in conjunction with the Port operations and associated industrial activities, for many years. Some areas with previously identified land contamination have already been remediated by the landowners. Remediation works to the ground and groundwater are currently ongoing in other parts of the onshore area. The proposed onshore development areas of the project avoid areas of known contamination, particularly those associated with former oil industry infrastructure. It is stated that this will be monitored during construction to confirm that the impacts are minor.
4.125 It is stated that during the construction phase, potential impacts will be temporary in nature and controlled by standard operating procedures to ensure they are minimised whilst during the operational phase land quality impacts will be negligible and limited to the storage and use of potential contaminants.
4.126 Again the Head of Environment, Management and Protection is satisfied with the approach taken thus far on contaminated land issues although an assumption is made that the current decontamination works in the Queens Dock area will be satisfactorily completed by the other parties involved. It is advised that this should be completed prior to completion of the lagoon as there is currently some loss of oil contamination through the sea wall into the area that will become impounded by this proposal.
Hydrology and Flood Risk
4.127 A preliminary hydrology (movement of surface water) and flood risk assessment has been undertaken as part of the initial stages of the project. The potential effects on surface water and flood risk have been assessed for the site preparation, construction and operational phases of the project.
4.128 It is stated that during the construction phase, standard good construction practices will be used to control and minimise the effect on surface waters. This would include reducing potential contamination caused by the construction process, such as release of sediments into the sewers, spillage and leakage of oils and fuels, leakage of wet cement and concrete, and the disturbance of existing contamination and drainage. The overall likely impact of the project during construction is predicted to be minor and temporary in nature provided that the procedures are followed.
4.129 It is stated that during the operational phase, possible surface water impacts are considerably less than during construction. Possible impacts have been identified as increased surface water runoff, increased foul water volume, and increased drinking water supply demands. All of these have been assessed as being insignificant, even with the cumulative effect of current and proposed developments. Page 60
4.130 The Head of Drainage and Coastal Management has highlighted the possibility that surface water arising from the onshore development may be directed towards the DCWW network and that it is highly unlikely that the water company will permit this without very stringent requirements for flow control and attenuation. Surface water being directed to towards the DCWW should be considered as an absolute last resort and agreement in principle will need to be sought from DCWW as soon as possible if there are no other options.
4.131 In terms of potential flooding impact, the PEIR results indicate that the Port area remains at low risk of flooding from tidal sources, mainly due to the rock armour and seawall (which has a number of gaps in it) that currently exist on site. An option to lower the height of the existing seawall is proposed to open up views and access to the lagoon area. Although it is submitted that the new lagoon seawall will provide coastal protection, additional studies will be undertaken to assess the potential effect of removing this existing, inner seawall. The assessment would look at overtopping of the lowered defence wall from wind generated waves within the lagoon, and an assessment of wave transfer across the offshore works during extreme events.
4.132 On this issue the Council’s Head of Drainage and Coastal Management Engineer has highlighted that an assessment of the proposals flood risk management function and flood risk impact to third parties will be required along with information regarding the standard of defence provided by the sea wall and whether or not it is a viable proposition.
4.133 The Head of Drainage and Coastal Management has also highlighted that the PEIR indicates that there may be effects on groundwater flooding because of the tide and that any Flood Consequence Assessment will need to consider the effects of delaying the tidal cycle on groundwater movements and whether any increase in risk may occur and what mitigation measures may be necessary.
4.134 As correctly identified the development will need to carefully consider the management of surface water during and after construction to avoid creating a surface water flood risk to the project or surrounding third parties.
4.135 The Head of Drainage and Coastal Management also makes reference to the aforementioned sediment regime explained within the PEIR, which states that the marine physical environment incorporates the hydrodynamic processes (water levels, currents and waves) and the effects of these processes on the sediment regime. It is advised that the Environmental Statement will also need to consider whether the presence of the lagoon changes the behaviour in both sediment movement and flood risk terms i.e. water levels, wave height, deposition, erosion etc to ascertain whether incoming watercourses could be adversely affected.
4.136 In short, the Head of Drainage and Coastal Management has advised that a Flood Consequence Assessment, considering flood risk from all sources i.e. surface, ground, tidal, fluvial etc, will be necessary and mitigation measures proposed accordingly.
Page 61 Noise and Vibration
4.137 The PEIR explains that background terrestrial (land) and marine (underwater) noise surveys have been undertaken to inform the Environmental Impact Assessment. The baseline land noise surveys have been undertaken at seven sites along Swansea seafront. Data from previous noise surveys undertaken in the area as well as the Wales Noise Map, have also been reviewed. Underwater marine noise measurements have been collected from five offshore points around the project site.
4.138 It is stated that on land, the main noise sources appear to be associated with vehicle movement namely, traffic on Fabian Way and around industrial sites. Offshore, the highest noise levels are associated with shipping accessing one of the three ports in the area (Swansea, Neath or Port Talbot).
4.139 It is assessed that the temporary construction phase is likely to generate the most noise and therefore could affect human and ecological receptors (including fish, birds and marine mammals). As such, a preliminary assessment of this has been undertaken. The results indicate that, generally, on land noise impact from construction plant should not be an issue, mainly due to the distance to receptors. It is anticipated that noise associated with increased traffic during the construction should also not result in adverse effects over the baseline traffic noise, in part because some materials will be brought into site by sea.
4.140 In terms of the marine environment, a comparison of noise levels from marine plant (suction dredgers) and construction activities (piling) indicate that these can be similar to the background noise generated by shipping in the area. Notwithstanding this, it is advised that during the Environmental Impact Assessment the findings of the preliminary assessment will be reviewed for the temporary construction phase and, where appropriate, measures to reduce noise will be identified
4.141 During operation, it is identified that the recreational use of the lagoon could generate noise, especially during major events. The initial assessment indicates that significant noise impact on human and ecological receptors is not anticipated, however, these findings will be reviewed during the Environmental Impact Assessment.
4.142 The Head of Environment, Management and Protection is again satisfied with the approach taken thus far on noise control.
Onshore Transport Assessment
4.143 A brief onshore Transport Assessment has been provided to support the proposed Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon PEIR. The document assesses the impact to onshore traffic and transport resulting from the project.
4.144 The proposed use is intended to be of both functional and recreational benefit to the local and wider community. The PEIR estimates that 70,000- 100,000 people will visit the lagoon per annum with potentially 3,000 to 5,000 visitors attending individual events.
Page 62 (This is not broken down into travel modes and it would be helpful that the final Environmental Statement estimates those who would walk/cycle (obviously this is predicated on the delivery of the western link) and those that would arrive by vehicle. It would also be helpful to indicate the level of incidental use of the public realm such as students moving between the Bay Campus and the city centre, or users of the new beach/ park areas.)
4.145 Access to the site is along Fabian Way which is an arterial road which forms part of the A483 connecting Swansea City centre to junction 42 of the M4 motorway. A section of carriageway 7.6km long has been considered as part of this application. As part of the Fabian Way corridor study (for which financial contributions will be sought from the developer) there is a £25 million scheme proposed to ensure that Fabian Way remains fit for purpose for future traffic levels growth. This includes upgraded facilities for all users: car, public transport, cycle and pedestrians.
4.146 A detailed impact of the potential effects of traffic associated with the construction phase is being undertaken. The assessment will include:
a. Identification of appropriate access routes for construction staff and deliveries. b. Determining the potential impact of the additional traffic on the local highway network and proposed mitigation measures where appropriate. c. Determining the potential impact on public transport, pedestrian and cyclist amenity. d. Appropriate mitigation, such as the preparation of a construction transport management plan.
4.147 It is expected that the main bulk material for the construction of the lagoon seawall will be imported by sea as far as possible. Some deliveries by road however are inevitable and early indications are for a total 300 lorries a week over the construction period. It is stated that where possible deliveries will be timed to avoid the peak commuter periods and a construction phase travel plan will be prepared to minimize the impact of employee traffic.
4.148 A detailed impact of the potential effects of traffic associated with the operational phase is also being undertaken. Traffic associated with the operation and maintenance of the Lagoon is anticipated to be low, however with the intention that the lagoon will form a new focal point as a tourist attraction within the bay. The review will include:
a. Identification of appropriate access routes and parking to the western and eastern landfalls for the development of the various levels of visitor numbers, including daily visitors/recreational users and moderate/major sporting events. b. Determine the potential impact of traffic associated with the leisure use of the lagoon and other facilities on the local highway network. c. An assessment of the potential impact on public transport, pedestrian and cyclist amenity including integration with existing pedestrian and cycle routes.
4.149 A travel plan will be submitted and the objectives as set out in the Fabian Way corridor study (to improve access for pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users) will be taken into consideration. Page 63 4.150 The majority of the leisure use of the Lagoon will be concentrated during weekends and holidays and as such is not expected to coincide with the existing peak flows as experienced on the local highway network.
4.151 The impact of a major sporting event and mitigation works will be considered as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment.
4.152 It is the view of the Head of Transportation and Engineering Services that the proposal has the potential to have a moderate impact on the local highway network despite the fact that from an operational viewpoint the main impact will be outside of the traditional peak hours.
4.153 As the main thrust of the transport will be utilizing Fabian Way there will be a requirement for a financial contribution towards the Fabian Way Corridor study proposed works. The level of this contribution will be dependent on the car trips on Fabian Way so the modal split of cars/cycles/pedestrian/public transport will be critical to this calculation.
4.154 It is the view of the Head of Transportation and Engineering Services that currently the site is not particularly sustainable so a review of the origin of the visitor numbers is likely to be required in order to determine their likely transport mode and hence provide suitable facilities, particularly in view of the fact that a major sporting event may attract visitor numbers of between 3,000 and 5,000.
4.155 As the access/egress to the site is still undecided at this point then detailed comments cannot be made, suffice to say that a full transport assessment will be required to accompany the application complete with full testing at a number of key junctions.
4.156 It is highlighted that third party land is critical to all of the six various access options and that one access option indicates the access road for visitors running through the SA1 area along the south side of the Prince of Wales Dock. This road forms part of the SA1 masterplan but was never envisaged to carry the potential levels of traffic to the tidal lagoon and in land use terms is largely residential. As well as potential amenity issues it is a concern that such traffic could diminish the quality of public realm on the waterside.
4.157 Moreover, if the route as described above is used for vehicle access then it is considered that an opening bridge should be provided over the lock between the Kings Dock and Prince of Wales Dock. This is needed to ensure that Swansea’s heritage as a maritime city can continue to be celebrated with large visiting ships such as HMS Scott and tall ships such as Stavros S Niarchos moored in the Prince of Wales dock to allow public access.
4.158 For access point 4 at Fabian Way/Baldwin’s Crescent, there is a concern that the short length of slip road onto Fabian Way could result in construction vehicles having insufficient time to accelerate to join the moving traffic.
Page 64 4.159 The position of the Head of Transportation and Engineering Services is that the site will need to ensure adequate access for all users during the construction and operational phases and also for major sporting events. The infrastructure requirements should be focussed on pedestrians, cyclists, public transport users, coaches (for school trips/major events etc.) but will also have to provide parking for motor vehicles and delivery vehicles during the construction phase.
4.160 The Head of Transportation and Engineering Services has confirmed that the following measures should form part of the DCO application:
1. A construction travel plan and methodology of how the site will operate in terms of access, compound, parking provision (staff), parking (construction vehicles/deliveries) and public transport access.
2. An operational travel plan and methodology of how the site will operate in terms of access for all, parking provision (cycle and car), coach provision (including turning facility), deliveries and possible bus stop lay-by,
3. An operational travel plan and methodology of how the site will operate for major sporting events in terms of access for all, parking provision (cycle and car), coach provision (including turning facility), deliveries, possible bus stop lay-by and diverting of public transport routes to increase frequency to the site.
4. Modal split of methods of transport to the site to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.
5. A review of the public transport provision in accordance with details to be submitted for approval, including upgrades (at the developers expense) if the services are found lacking for the anticipated visitor numbers which are expected to arrive by public transport (refer back to the modal split of methods of transport).
6. Junction testing of the major junctions along the Fabian Way Corridor in accordance with details to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.
7. Roundabout testing of any roundabouts affected by the project, at any phase of the project.
8. Details of the financial contribution required towards the Fabian Way Corridor study to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.
9. Cycle parking provision.
10. Car parking.
11. Coach parking/turning.
12. Bus lay-by for services diverted through the site.
13. Pedestrian access routes including enhancement (resurfacing/lighting etc) where necessary. Page 65
Cultural heritage: terrestrial and marine archaeology and historic landscape
4.161 Chapters 20 and 21 of the PEIR provide information on the marine and terrestrial historic and archaeological resource in the development area. Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust, as archaeological advisor to this Authority, confirm that they have been prepared to the appropriate standards. The work has looked at all of the relevant existing information on the historic and archaeological resource in the development area and included analysis of information provided by marine geophysical data and walkover surveys. The results of this work have shown that Swansea Bay (including the proposed development area) was subject to periodic marine inundations during the prehistoric period, but there is a possibility that occupation and activity sites of most prehistoric periods could be located in the area although Late Upper Palaeolithic, Mesolithic, Neolithic, Late Bronze Age and Iron Age are the most likely. The current maritime location makes it likely that if such sites are found they will be well preserved and be associated with important palaeo-environmental information. Unfortunately the nature of the marine deposits in Swansea Bay mean that archaeological sites are normally covered by sediment and may only be exposed, if at all, in rare short periods. Consequently the short period of investigation allowed for the preparation of the environmental statement, especially for walk over surveys, means that the presence of potentially very important prehistoric archaeological sites in the development area cannot be discounted and the construction of the proposed lagoon could reveal and destroy these sites.
4.162 The model set out for sea-level change in Swansea Bay confirms with current predictions. It appears that by the Roman period the Bay had been flooded to it current shore and it is therefore unlikely that any Roman and later settlement sites will be found in the area. However, the Bay was heavily used for fishing, not only by boat but particularly using traps and nets with associated features. The walkover survey did find evidence for fish traps in the intertidal part of the development area, but given the variable nature of the sediment cover, the presence of further sites inside the development area cannot be discounted. The discovery of fishing sites could provide considerable information on the development of this important aspect of the historic economy of the Bay.
4.163 The maritime nature of the Bay in historic periods removes the possibility of settlement sites being found but makes it likely that evidence of shipping could be located in the development area. The historic record identify a number of vessels that are known to have been wrecked in, or close to the development area; however, it is often difficult to precisely identify the location of even well documented wrecks, and in many cases there are no documentary references to wrecks. The use of geophysics has been able of identify a number of potential sites inside the development area but analysis of the data suggest that they are unlikely to be wrecks and therefore have been discounted. However, given that the majority of historic boats and ships were constructed in wood with, in some case, no metalwork it is unlikely that geophysical survey at the resolution used for most of the existing surveys would have located them. As such there must remain a possibility that the wrecks of historic vessels could be located in the development area and be revealed by the proposed development.
Page 66
4.164 As noted above, the marine sediments of Swansea Bay and the nature of the site, part intertidal and partly sea, restricts archaeological investigation of the development area prior to construction commencing. The assessments so far have been carried out to the appropriate levels but cannot discount that important archaeological sites, both terrestrial and marine, may be located in the development area. However, so far, apart from the presence of some features associated with fishing no archaeological sites have been located in the development area. The PEIR provides suggested mitigation of the marine sites, including the continuing analysis by archaeologists of new information produced to assist in the construction process and the need for a watching brief to be maintained during the dredging operations. The Trust suggest that there is also a need for the identified fish traps to be fully investigated and recorded and that contingency arrangements are in place, including the provision of appropriate time and finance, to ensure that that any archaeological features that are revealed during the construction programme are fully investigated and recorded. The developer will also need to ensure that any significant archaeological artefacts that are recovered are appropriately recorded and conserved.
4.165 Chapter 21 of the PEIR provides little information on appropriate mitigation measures to protect the terrestrial archaeological resource. It is noted that it is proposed to ensure the preservation of at least one of the pillboxes that constitute part of the WWII defences of Swansea and to ensure that any other associated features are fully recorded. Whilst the authors of the assessment suggest that there are only a few possible areas where archaeological sites may be encountered during the construction of the connection to the National Grid there remains a possibility that evidence for human activity could be found. Therefore the Trust expect an appropriate watching brief to be maintained during these construction works and that contingency arrangements are in place, including the provision of appropriate time and finance, to ensure that that any archaeological features that are revealed during the construction programme are fully investigated and recorded.
4.166 In order to ensure that the measures outlined above are implemented the Trust suggest that the City and County of Swansea request the Planning Inspectorate to attach the following condition to any consent for this development that is granted:
A) No development shall take place/commence until a programme of archaeological work including a Written Scheme of Investigation has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The scheme shall include an assessment of significance and research questions; and:
1. The programme and methodology of site investigation and recording. 2. The programme for post investigation assessment. 3. Provision to be made for analysis of the site investigation and recording. 4. Provision to be made for publication and dissemination of the analysis and records of the site investigation. Page 67 5. Provision to be made for archive deposition of the analysis and records of the site investigation. 6. Nomination of a competent person or persons/organisation to undertake the works set out within the Written Scheme of Investigation. B) No development shall take place other than in accordance with the Written Scheme of Investigation approved under condition (A).
C) The development shall not be operational until the site investigation and post investigation assessment has been completed in accordance with the programme set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation approved under condition (A) and the provision made for analysis, publication and dissemination of results and archive deposition has been secured . 4.167 In conclusion, an assessment of the impacts of the development on the archaeological and historical resource, both marine and terrestrial, have been carried out in accordance with the agreed standards. The work as identified few sites that will be directly affected by the development but has emphasised that due to the location of the main part of the development in Swansea Bay that there is a possibility that archaeological sites, currently covered by sediment, may be located during the construction programme. Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust do not therefore request that the City & County of Swansea object to the granting of planning consent for this development in relation to its impact on the archaeological resource, but strongly recommend the aforementioned condition be proposed requiring the developer to submit and implement a written scheme of archaeological investigation for the development prior to construction work commencing.
4.168 It is recommended therefore that the full response from Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust be forwarded to Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd to inform the requirements of any DCO going forward.
4.169 The PEIR states that the proposal will have no direct impact upon any listed buildings or scheduled ancient monuments within the site or within a 1km study area. It is noted however that the sea wall at Queens Dock retains three pill boxes of from World War II which, although not statutorily protected, are of historic value. These will be affected by the proposed development and some of these may be destroyed. Currently the significance of WWII defences is being considered by Cadw and before any of these features are damaged an opportunity for an Inspector from Cadw to inspect them ascertain their importance should be allowed.
4.170 The potential impact upon the setting of historic environment assets in two wider study areas of 5km and 10km has also been assessed with no significant impacts identified. It is noted that the significance of the historic setting of Oystermouth Castle may be affected to some degree but no other designated assets are likely to be significantly affected.
Socio-Economic impacts, tourism and recreation
4.171 The PEIR recognises that the City and County of Swansea is a dynamic area, with numerous attractions and much recreational activity centred around the Bay and adjacent coastal area.
Page 68 Although there may be temporary disruption during construction, it is the submission of Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd that the location of the project within Swansea Port should minimise this.
4.172 In addition, the project looks to provide a number of direct and indirect jobs to the area during the construction and operation of the lagoon, with initial conservative figures of 2,880 jobs in construction (based on 12 jobs per MW), and around 44 permanent jobs in operation. The project also aims to contribute to the local and wider Swansea Bay area, with the aforementioned onshore and offshore facilities and use of the lagoon for a range of water contact and other sporting activities included rowing, sailing, open water swimming and triathlon.
4.173 It is highlighted that the new seawall itself will provide additional rocky habitat, which should attract a range of marine species including fish, which would be of benefit to recreational fisherman. Different mariculture opportunities are also being investigated to enhance the wider ecological environment, which could also benefit the local economy. Some initial concepts include the encouragement of the re-introduction of the native oyster to Swansea Bay and a lobster hatchery with introduction of lobster onto the lagoon wall.
4.174 It is proposed that the project should also provide a setting for art and educational programmes at all levels for Swansea Bay and beyond and the project is expected to be a significant tourist attraction in its own right.
4.175 In response, the Council’s Head of Culture, Tourism, Sport & Leisure has identified the Council’s current vision that by 2020 Swansea will aim to be a distinctive European City and is of the view that the project, as presented would appear to support this vision and fit with the new Council ‘Destination Management Plan’ that is currently being developed. From the information provided, the Head of Culture, Tourism, Sport & Leisure has stated that it would appear that the project has the potential to:
• Provide Swansea Bay and Wales with a unique ‘maritime-themed’ visitor attraction – this might help provide Swansea with a real sense of distinctiveness over other coastal locations. In effect, the attraction could attract a new category of visitor in its own right. • Contribute towards a more visually appealing gateway to the city from the sea and also from the road. • Provide a visitor centre in a seascape setting which can be enjoyed in all weather conditions. • Create a new unique selling point to include in destination marketing activity for the area. • Meet the needs of Swansea Bay’s current visitor demographic – mainly interested in scenery/landscape, walking and watersports. • Complement the ‘Watersports Centre of Excellence’ and build on this further with more actual reasons to visit. • Provide the infrastructure to stage major events in the area at international and national levels regardless of any tidal restrictions that currently exist due to the very high levels of high and low water. • Act as a catalyst to encourage further tourism investment, for example accommodation, additional attractions, etc.
Page 69 • Generate employment opportunities both at construction stage and post completion. • Combat seasonality challenges by relieving pressure from Gower in busy summer period for water based recreational activities. • Improve the offer within the destination for watersports related training and recreational activities (sailing, rowing etc.). • Provide better links from the City Centre to the sea – inline with European Boulevard project and Waterfront Connections. • Encourage sustainability by rejuvenating bio-diversity/marine eco- systems, therefore promoting local produce (oysters, lobsters, samphire) and Welsh heritage. This in turn could help support the increased demand for and expectation of locally sourced seafood products as part of the important food product for visitors.
4.176 It is highlighted however that some aspects require further information / clarification in respect of:
• The role and management of the visitor centre. • Parking provision. • Accessibility and security issues. • Pricing structure and policy. • Business plan measures of success – clearly payback into the local grid system is one, but the Head of Culture, Tourism, Sport & Leisure is keen to receive more information about the marketing strategy and targets for visitor numbers and expenditure. • The potential for displacement of business from other Watersports facilities recently in receipt of public funding • The ‘Coastal Recreational Facilities’ map is out-of-date and needs to be replaced with latest version. • The level of noise affecting existing leisure and recreational businesses on SA1. • Impact of sand levels at other Swansea Bay beaches as a result of the development. • Impact on any other tourism sectors e.g. cruise market and port access.
4.177 In summary, it is the view of the Head of Culture, Tourism, Sport & Leisure that in principle the project affords the opportunity to strengthen the tourism product and offer within the destination. It would also appear to be able to meet a number of tourism objectives including creating and maintaining a sustainable tourism destination; further developing activity tourism; the development of ‘must see’ attractions; uniqueness and distinctiveness.
4.178 The Council’s Sustainability Team has highlighted that the PEIR identifies 5 socio-economic impacts as being significant, namely:
• Employment generation during the construction phase • Employment generation during the operational phase • Additional local spending • Impact on open space • Impact on recreational infrastructure
Page 70 4.179 On this issues, the Sustainability Team has advised that it would be helpful to understand how and what methodology was used in coming to decision about these impacts, how they were scoped for inclusion and what socio- economic impacts were scoped out for assessment. For example, possible health benefits from the increased recreational opportunities and the potential for the proposal to help address the significant inequalities in the region are not being considered or assessed.
4.180 On economic issues, the Council’s Economic Development Team has confirmed that the PEIR sets out the salient economic regeneration strategies “Swansea 2020” and Swansea’s Beyond Bricks and Mortar initiative to secure social benefit clauses such as targeted recruitment and training from development and construction contracts.
4.181 It is advised that the significance criteria for measuring the magnitude of impact is clearly stated however, from an economic perspective, the inclusion of estimates of economic value in relation to the project outputs would be beneficial e.g. in assessing the value of jobs created and the occupational/ professional profile.
4.182 The difficulty of estimating potential employment during the construction stage is acknowledged, and the review of previous case studies in arriving at a conservative estimate on potential job creation is deemed to be reasonable.
4.183 In terms of the impacts from construction jobs, the Economic Regeneration Team has advised that:
• 2,880 (960 direct, 1920 indirect) are estimated to be created from construction and through the supply chain over the three year construction phase, based on a conservative estimate of 12 jobs per MW and the potential for listed activities, facilities and materials to be provided locally. Whilst there is “potential” to provide the listed services locally, there is no guarantee that contracts will actually be secured locally as a result of competitive tendering processes. The figure of 2,880 must be considered an upper limit of the potential for local employment. The strong commitment by Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd to maximising opportunities for local procurement is very positive and more detail of its procurement strategy may help further assessment of how achievable the estimate might be.
• 80 jobs (excluding indirect/induced jobs) are estimated from the potential to source stone from the UK. It is not likely that these jobs would be sourced locally but a preferred sourcing option would benefit North Wales;
• No occupational/ professional profile of the construction phase is provided identifying the numbers of managers, professionals, technical roles and other groups. It is recommended therefore that this is included in the Environmental Impact Assessment when design and construction methods are agreed;
• The Economic Development Team would welcome the opportunity to work with Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd to develop its procurement strategy and maximise local Pageopportunities; 71
• Despite the three-year construction phase of the project being assessed as likely to have a moderate beneficial short-term impact on the Swansea economy, its short-term economic value may still be significant given the current economic climate.
4.184 For operational jobs the Economic Regeneration Team has advised that:
• 50 jobs (33 net direct, 17 net indirect) are estimated, generated from the lagoon operation, management and maintenance and from the visitor centre. This is not considered to likely materially contribute to local economic value. Again, it is advised as difficult to assess the economic value of the local jobs, but it is agreed that operational jobs are likely to have only a minor beneficial long term impact on Swansea’s economy.
4.185 No measures of impact or economic value are provided at this stage with regards to additional onshore and offshore facilities in the form of water/other sports, recreational access and art/education programmes but the employment potential of some of these initiatives will be determined during Environmental Impact Assessment stage. The Economic Regeneration Team would also welcome details of the impacts and economic value of the community benefits being identified at the Environmental Impact Assessment also.
4.186 The potential for the lagoon to impact on tourism is also noted by the Economic Development Team although more details on visitor numbers at a later stage would be welcomed.
4.187 It is also highlighted that the potential disruption during the construction phase on recreational users, the Marinas and surfers as well as the effect on water quality should be assessed at the Environmental Impact Assessment stage. Accordingly, the Economic Development Team has stated it to be surprising that there no adverse impacts are currently anticipated requiring mitigation.
4.188 In conclusion the Council’s Economic Development Team has advised that, on the basis of the initial assessment, it is agreed that the project is likely to have an overall positive impact on the study area economy, albeit a minor impact over the long term. Further assessment at the Environmental Impact Assessment stage would be welcomed, particularly if it reveals that:
• The estimated economic impact/value of the onshore and offshore project outputs; • Details of the occupational/ professional employment profile at the construction phase; • The procurement strategy and how opportunities for local procurement will be maximised; • How community benefits will be delivered (e.g. Community Fund, Share Offer, Cheaper Electricity and any other benefits); • The impact on tourism, recreational users, the Marinas, surfers and water quality, and details of any mitigation measures to minimise potential negative impacts.
Page 72 Sustainability issues
4.189 The City and County of Swansea adopted Sustainable Development Policy in January 2012 and defines sustainable development as "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
4.190 The PEIR advises that energy optimisation work for the project is on-going and is being designed to secure the optimum energy yield from the project in operation.
4.191 It is stated that tidal data for Swansea Bay has been used in energy output studies to assess the potential for energy extraction through the tidal lagoon and that results show that predictable power output can be used directly by the National Grid as a baseload source of electricity capacity (meaning that the tidal power station does not require back-up, fossil-fuel driven load balancing elsewhere).
4.192 At present, the lagoon’s energy generation is estimated at approximately 400,000MWh per year. As the average household use is 3300kWh per year (Ofgem typical domestic energy consumption figures) the PEIR concludes that the lagoon should supply the equivalent of 121,000 homes, saving approximately 216,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide each year when compared to UK grid average emissions, thereby making an important contribution towards national carbon emission reduction targets. The construction of the Project is estimated to produce approximately 500,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide, meaning it will be carbon neutral within three years.
4.193 It is submitted that the power generated will be carbon-free, reliable, predictable and enough for approximately 121,000 homes – equivalent to 9% of Wales’s domestic electricity consumption.
4.194 The project is expected, with appropriate maintenance, to be operational for 120 years, which Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd submit to be far longer than most generating technologies.
4.195 The Council’s Sustainable Development Team has advised that if built as per the project description:
• The Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd proposal will make a significant contribution to renewable electricity generation, using a natural resource in a sustainable way. • The electricity will be exported to the National Grid for distribution so whilst there will be no direct local benefit, there will be indirect benefit by contributing to de-carbonising the supply of electricity. • The development of power generation infrastructure locally that has the potential for intergenerational production of electricity provides potential long term resilience into the region. It is considered that the proposal will make a significant positive impact in terms of climate change mitigation i.e. reducing carbon emissions, but it is highlighted as unclear as to how the proposal can support Swansea Bay in building resilience to climate change in the future.
Page 73 • The timescales for assessing the impacts of the proposal vary throughout the PEIR from 50 years to 125 years. The Environmental Impact Assessment should therefore take a consistent approach and the longer period of 125 years should be considered, especially with regard to climate change impacts. • The proposal is considering supporting local resilience through the offer of a community fund, share offer and cheaper electricity tariff. It is not clear from the PEIR if the cheaper tariffs are only for domestic consumers or if it will be also open to commercial customers. Whilst needing to be benchmarked against other mainstream tariffs to fully understand its impact, it is considered that the proposal could build greater resilience into the local economy. • The Community Fund has the potential to support social inclusion initiatives however details are unavailable at this stage. • The community benefit proposals are only under consideration and their impact has not been assessed by the PEIR. More information regarding the detail of these wider community benefits and how they will be governed would help in assessing the significance of these benefits. Proper consideration of these potential benefits can only be completed when this information is available. This assessment is important as the direct local economic impact in the long term is likely to be limited. • The proposal’s support of the City and County of Swansea’s Beyond Bricks and Mortar will help build some short term resilience into the local economy during the construction phase. • The potential for the creation of a limited number of long term jobs during the operation phase is a small positive. However of these 44 jobs, only a small proportion are high value, with the majority being of low value. It is also unclear at this stage how many of these jobs will be full-time or part- time. It would be helpful to understand what skills will be required for the higher value jobs and whether these skills are currently available locally, so that local people will have the opportunity to apply for the jobs. If the skills are not available locally then the long term benefit is significantly limited. • The PEIR identifies potential for ancillary uses of the lagoon structure to support both recreational and economic activity. However this potential will be dependent on the types of mitigation measures used. As such the cost of satisfactory mitigation to address this risk is also unknown and will impact on the potential of the business model to support the community benefit schemes as well as ancillary uses. • The PEIR considers a wide ranging number of issues and topics, however at this stage it does not look at the interrelationship between the different issues and how the impacts in different chapters impact upon each other. Neither does the PEIR consider the cumulative nature of the impacts on each other. For example the impacts on the wider economics of Swansea should the beach change from one that is primarily sand to one of mud is not considered. A more complete, integrated assessment once the final modelling is completed will be welcome in the final Environmental Statement.
4.196 To conclude it is clear that the scheme will provide a significant contribution to the production of carbon free energy. However at this stage of the assessment it is too early to come to any conclusions about how the proposal will contribute to the sustainability of Swansea in the long term.
Page 74
5.0 Financial Implications
5.1 As a prescribed consultee, the City & County of Swansea does not receive a fee for this formal pre-application process or for the application for a DCO. The cost of Officer time and relevant expert advice therefore falls to the Council.
6.0 Legal Implications
6.1 The submission is subject to a detailed legal regime under the Planning Act 2008 and the associated Regulations. Some of the details are set out in the Report. The Developers will have to satisfy the requirements if their submission is to be successful.
6.2 The Authority is also in receipt of a DCO and related explanatory memorandum in respect of the proposed development. This is currently being discussed with the Council’s Legal Services Team on a ‘without prejudice’ basis.
7.0 Conclusions
7.1 The proposed Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon is an offshore generating station of more than 100MW and as such it is classified under the Planning Act 2008 as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP). An application must therefore be made to the Planning Inspectorate for permission under a development consent order (DCO) from the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change to authorise construction and operation of the generating station itself, and its component parts.
7.2 Before submitting the application to the Planning Inspectorate, Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd has a statutory obligation under Sections 42 and 47 of the Planning Act 2008 to carry out pre-application consultation on their proposals.
7.3 The purpose of this report in the first instance it is therefore to inform Committee of the formal Section 42 pre-application consultation by Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd in respect of their proposals to design, construct and operate a tidal lagoon for the purpose of generating renewable energy in Swansea Bay.
7.4 This formal pre-application consultation is supported by a Preliminary Environmental Information Report (PEIR), which reports on the project’s Environmental Impact Assessment for the purposes of consultation prior to making an application for a DCO from the Secretary of State. It provides environmental information assembled to date, and describes further investigations to be conducted during the Environmental Impact Assessment process. Comments on the environmental information and assessments in the PEIR are sought and will influence the final form of the project. (Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd will need to demonstrate to the Planning Inspectorate how they have taken account of any feedback that has been provided by the local community, the local authority and statutory consultees.)
Page 75
7.5 The streamlined process for examining applications within a timetable strictly defined in law by the 2008 Act means that it is not normally possible for significant changes to be made to a proposal after it has been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate. Therefore, the best time to influence a proposal is before it is finalised, at the current pre-application stage by taking part in the developer’s consultation.
7.6 Accordingly, the second main purpose of this report is therefore to appraise the supporting PEIR, highlight any deficiencies, areas of concern, points of clarification and suggestions for improvements to the proposed scheme in order to inform a recommendation to members for a response to Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd to their formal pre-application consultation.
7.7 To prepare this report, internal consultation has taken place with relevant Council Service Areas in relation to the applicable topic areas of the PEIR. No external consultation has taken place with statutory consultees as the requirement to do so lies with Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd.
7.8 In principle, as set out in the City and County of Swansea’ adopted UDP, the Council supports Welsh Government’s policy for strengthening renewable energy production, and recognises the long-term benefits to be derived from the development of renewable energy sources. It is recognised that renewable energy technologies can have a positive impact on local communities and the local economy in terms of monetary savings and in generating and underpinning economic development within the County. There are however concerns about the impacts that some renewable energy technologies can have on the landscape, local communities, natural heritage and historic environment, nearby land uses and activities. The Council therefore seeks to achieve a balance between supporting renewable energy proposals whilst avoiding significant damage to the environment and its key assets. Favourable consideration will therefore be given to developments that produce or use renewable energy where such proposals conform with UDP policies and are in scale and character with their surroundings.
7.9 The main element of the project would comprise a seawall constructed using a standard sand core with rock armour bund. This will form a 9.5km-long, U- shaped, seawall running from the entrance to the River Tawe adjacent to Swansea Dock out to sea before curving back to re-join land adjacent to Swansea University’s new Science and Innovation Campus (SAIC). The area of the lagoon would be 11.7km² whilst the height of the seawalls would be between 5-20m. The seawall would incorporate a turbine and sluice gate structure located at the deepest, south western point of the wall, approximately 2.5km from the western end of Queens Dock.
7.10 The proposal at present would have a rated capacity of 240 Megawatts (MW), generating 400GWh net annual output. This is enough electricity for approximately 121,000 homes, which is more than Swansea’s annual domestic electricity use (109,000 households) or approximately 9% of Wales’ annual domestic electricity use (based on 1,369k households). In turn, it is calculated that a saving of approximately 216,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide would be made each year.
Page 76
7.11 In principle therefore it is considered that the tidal lagoon proposal would make a significant contribution to renewable electricity generation, using a natural resource in a sustainable way.
7.12 In addition to generating electricity, the project also aims to provide visitor facilities and other amenities including art, education, mariculture and sporting/recreational facilities. The seawall is expected to be open to the public during daylight hours for walking, running, cycling etc, though access will be controlled in extreme weather.
7.13 In strategic terms therefore the tidal lagoon has potential to create a significant visitor attraction as well as an important local public realm resource. It has potential to create many kilometres of public realm with a wide variety of features and to improve connectivity between the City Centre, the eastern waterfront and the SAIC.
7.14 However, as will be evident from the discussion above on individual topic areas and, as inferred by the title of the supporting consultation document (Preliminary Environmental Information Report), much of the assessment material provided at this stage is incomplete and currently ongoing. This stage of the process therefore affords this Authority the opportunity to highlight issues that it considers should be addressed as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment along with any areas of concern. What it doesn’t allow is the opportunity at this stage to arrive at an informed position on whether the benefits of the scheme outweigh the negative impacts to the environment and the key assets of the City & County of Swansea, and therefore whether the proposal accords with UDP Policy R11.
7.15 Given the nature of the proposed development, White Consultants have been commissioned to review the seascape and landscape visual impact assessment (SLVIA) on behalf of the City & County of Swansea. The following key issues have been highlighted:
• The effect the development will have on the character of the bay, especially west of the Tawe, on which Swansea relies as a major asset essential to its positive image and quality of life. • The development is very large scale protruding 3.5km into Swansea Bay and effectively dividing it into two. • The overall sweep of the Bay will be disrupted with views of the almost continuous strong sandy strip around the bay being hidden by the rock faced seawall which is likely to become a dark grey/black over time. • Sedimentation patterns may be changed and it would be of concern if mud deposited by the River Tawe or Neath increases in proportion to sand on beaches, especially the beach along the promenade at Swansea/Mumbles.
7.16 The final preliminary conclusion from White Consultant’s is that there is concern that the development may have significant adverse effects on the essential qualities of Swansea Bay, adversely affecting one of the city’s best assets. It is acknowledged however that more information is needed to assess if this is the case.
Page 77 7.17 It is recommended therefore that Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd be provided with a copy of the “Review of Preliminary Environmental Report: Seascape, Landscape and Visual” prepared by White Consultants on behalf of the City & County of Swansea and be requested to note and address where possible the findings of the report.
7.18 It is considered that key to the public realm potential of the proposal will be the establishment of a legible and welcoming walking/cycling route between Swansea City Centre and the western landfall of the tidal lagoon. This in turn would not only provide a direct link to the circular route of the lagoon seawalls but also a car free link along the dock edge to the emerging SAIC and onward links to the Wales Coastal Path and Sustrans cycle routes.
7.19 In consideration of the information submitted, the impact on bathing water quality has been highlighted as the main area of concern for the Pollution Control Division. Indeed it is the view of the same that the tidal lagoon proposal will potentially have a major impact on bacterial water quality in the Bay. It has been advised that the consideration of the issue of water quality will hinge upon very accurate and reliable modelling to be able to assess the potential negative impacts of the proposal. It is also explained that this will be difficult as fairly small changes will be irreversible whilst the impacts could become quite obvious. In this respect the Council’s Pollution Control Team has raised concerns that the current model quality is not good enough to reach a confident decision.
7.20 In addition, as Members may be aware, the Council’s Pollution Control Team has recently undertaken some major surveys at considerable expense to generate a reliable and robust prediction method for water quality in Swansea Bay. It is advised that this is the only way forward to comply with the revised Bathing Water Directive and is essential to avoid infraction proceedings sometime after 2016.
7.21 On this issue the Council’s Pollution Control Team has advised that the physical changes to the Bay will be significant enough to require a repeat of much of this survey work and the onus to do so should fall to Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd.
7.22 In terms of ecological issues, the PEIR contains the relevant areas of study, however many of the areas lack a full data set and therefore full consideration and an accurate assessment of the short, medium and long term consequences of the lagoon, particularly in relation to ecology and geomorphology, cannot be provided until these elements are completed.
7.23 It is however considered reasonable to conclude from the outset that, if built, the lagoon will alter the dynamics and ecology of the Bay. It is important therefore that these processes and impacts are fully understood for both the construction and operational phases of the development and that predicted changes are accurately quantified. There is a need to include mitigation / compensation plans where losses are considered to be significant and mechanisms/resources for the ongoing monitoring of ecological impacts and addressing possible negative long term consequences. The mitigation and compensation proposed must at the very least ensure no overall ecological loss.
Page 78
7.24 The Council’s Ecologist has highlighted that changes in sediment movement caused by the lagoon will have the largest ecological impact and it is imperative therefore that those possible changes are fully quantified and that impacts are fully explored.
7.25 On this issue, the prospect that that the remaining sand on Swansea Bay is replaced with exposed clay and/or peat is of significant concern not only in ecological terms but also to seascape and visual amenity, waterfront regeneration aspirations, tourism and economic development.
7.26 It is advised that the Head of Environment, Management and Protection is satisfied with the approach being taken thus far on matters relating to air quality, noise control and contaminated land issues.
7.27 The Head of Drainage and Coastal Management has advised that a Flood Consequence Assessment, considering flood risk from all sources i.e. surface, ground, tidal, fluvial etc, will be necessary and mitigation measures proposed accordingly.
7.28 The Head of Transportation and Engineering Services has advised that the proposal has the potential to have a moderate impact on the local highway, however, as the access/egress to the site is still unresolved at this point then detailed comments cannot be made. Advice has however been provided on the information and measures that should form part of the DCO application.
7.29 Swansea’s Marina Manager has been consulted on the proposal and has raised a number of concerns including that the western lagoon wall adjacent to the dredged entrance channel to the Marina could possibly cause difficulties for craft trying to navigate into Swansea during certain tide / wind conditions. This concern is also shared by the Head of Environment, Management and Protection who has advised that whilst the lagoon has the potential to benefit water sports in the area, if the water quality issues can be resolved, there is a possible negative impact to existing water users in that the wave climate for the approach to the three marinas on the Tawe and the marina on the River Neath could become far more complex and uncomfortable for small craft particularly in adverse weather conditions.
7.30 The impact on the operational port and Swansea Marina is considered to be a material planning consideration in this instance.
7.31 Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust, as archaeological advisors to this Authority, has concluded that there is a possibility that archaeological sites, currently covered by sediment, may be located during the construction programme. A condition is therefore recommended requiring the developer to submit and implement a written scheme of archaeological investigation for the development prior to construction work commencing.
7.32 The PEIR suggests that the tidal lagoon could attract as many as 70,000 to 100,000 visitors per year and it is the view of the Head of Culture, Tourism, Sport & Leisure that in principle the project affords the opportunity to strengthen the tourism product and offer within the County. It is highlighted however that some consequential aspects that may have adverse tourism impacts, such as sand levels at other Swansea Bay beaches, require further information / clarification. Page 79 7.33 The Council’s Economic Development Team has advised that, on the basis of the initial assessment, it is agreed that the project is likely to have an overall positive impact on the study area economy, albeit a minor impact over the long term. Further assessments are however requested.
7.34 The Council’s Sustainable Development Team has advised that the scheme will provide a significant contribution to the production of carbon free energy. However at this stage of the assessment it is too early to come to any conclusions about how the proposal will contribute to the sustainability of Swansea in the long term.
7.35 It is acknowledged, having regard to the above, that much of the main body of this report concentrates on the potential negative aspects of the proposal. This is unavoidable having regard to the nature of the consultation and the interim stage of the evolving Environmental Impact Assessment. Indeed it is considered vital that the report highlights any deficiencies, areas of concern, points of clarification and suggestions for improvements to the proposed scheme in order to facilitate preparation of an Environmental Statement that contains all the assessments and information required to allow the City & County of Swansea to arrive at an informed position later in the process when the Council is invited to submit a LIR at the examination stage of proceedings.
7.36 As highlighted in the responses received from the relevant Council Service Areas, there is insufficient information currently available to clearly assess possible impacts of the proposal and whether the benefits gained from the lagoon will outweigh the long term negative impacts to our outstanding natural environment.
7.37 In the absence of the completed Environmental Statement, it is also not possible at this stage to properly appraise the potential impacts on residential amenity (both positive and negative) arising from this proposal.
7.38 It is recommended therefore that a copy of this report, including the responses received from the internal consultation, be forwarded in full for the information and attention of Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd.
7.39 The next stage for Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd will be to consider the responses received and to complete the draft Environmental Statement. The Council will be offered further opportunity to comment on this draft. This will have the status of informal consultation and will be the final opportunity to comment on the supporting assessments prior to the application being submitted to the Planning Inspectorate. It is likely however that the timescales for response will be restricted to approximately two weeks.
7.40 Within such a limited timescale, it will not be possible for the findings of the draft Environmental Statement to be reported to this Committee. It is recommended therefore that Members delegate matters relating to technical issues to officers to allow a response within the required timescale and to ensure that the information required by this Authority is presented within the Environmental Impact Assessment. For the avoidance of doubt, this response will deal only with technical aspects of the Environmental Statement and will not consider the merits of the scheme.
Page 80
7.41 Following completion of the Environmental Statement, Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd intends to submit its application for a DCO to the Planning Inspectorate in December 2013. Upon submission the Planning Inspectorate has 28 days to decide whether or not to accept the application for examination. The decision to accept the application is made by considering a number of factors, including whether the right environmental issues have been identified and the adequacy of the developer’s public consultation.
7.42 On the latter issue, the Planning Inspectorate will during the 28 day period formally consult the City & County of Swansea on its view of the adequacy of the developer’s consultation. On the basis of the consultation carried out thus far and the ongoing intentions, it is recommended that Officers advise the Planning Inspectorate that the City and County of Swansea considers that Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd has adequately consulted with the Local Planning Authority and provided adequate supporting information and accordingly has complied with its duties to consult under Section 42 of the Planning Act 2008.
Background Papers: The Planning Act 2008 (as amended), National Policy Statements, Planning Policy Wales, adopted City & County of Swansea Unitary Development Plan and the Tidal Lagoon Swansea Bay Ltd Preliminary Environmental Report.
Appendices: Appendix A – Internal responses Appendix B – Unsolicited letters Appendix C – Location plan Appendix D – White Consultant’s Report.
Contact Officer: Richard Jones 01792 635735
Page 81 Page 82 Page 83 Page 84 Page 85 Page 86 Page 87 Page 88 Page 89 Page 90 Page 91 Page 92 Page 93 Page 94 Page 95 Page 96 Page 97 Page 98 Page 99 Page 100 Page 101 Page 102 Page 103 Page 104 Page 105 Page 106 Page 107 Page 108 Page 109 Page 110 Page 111 Page 112 Page 113 Page 114 Page 115 Page 116 Page 117 Page 118 Page 119 Page 120 Page 121 Page 122 Page 123 Page 124 Page 125 Page 126 Page 127 Page 128 Page 129 Page 130 SWANSEA BAY TIDAL LAGOON
REVIEW OF PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT: SEASCAPE, LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL
Final Report
for
City and County of Swansea
August 2013
18-19, Park Place Cardiff CF10 3DQ Tel: 029 2064 0971 Fax: 029 2064 0973 Email: [email protected] Web: www.whiteconsultants.co.uk
Page 131 Review of Preliminary Environmental Information Report Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon
CONTENTS
1. Introduction ...... 2 2. The site, current proposals and site selection process ...... 3 3. Review of Preliminary Environmental Information ...... 4 4. Review of design and mitigation ...... 8 5. Preliminary conclusions ...... 8
White Consultants 1 final/August 2013 Page 132 Review of Preliminary Environmental Information Report Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon
1. Introduction
1.1. White Consultants were commissioned by the City and County of Swansea (CCS) on 4 July 2013 to review a scheme for tidal lagoon in Swansea Bay. 1.2. The project is an offshore electricity generating station of more than 100 megawatts, and so is considered to be a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) under the Planning Act 2008. It requires a DCO via an application to the Planning Inspectorate (PINS). As it is located in Welsh coastal waters it also requires a marine licence to be granted by an application to Natural Resources Wales (NRW) and possibly additional consents for areas outside the NSIP and DCO. 1.3. A Preliminary Environmental Information Report [PEIR] and related Non Technical Summary [NTS] have been prepared by the developer. This report reviews the scheme design and the seascape, landscape and visual effects element of the PEIR. An application with a full Environmental Statement [ES] is expected subsequently. 1.4. A chartered landscape architect with 29 years experience has carried out this review. The PEIR was studied with accompanying drawings and information. The site and its environs were visited on 9 July 2013 including key viewpoints of relevance to CCS’s consideration of the scheme. The submitted documents considered include: Preliminary Environmental Statement [PEIR] July 2013: Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 2: Project context and consenting process Chapter 3: Site selection and option appraisal Chapter 4: Project description Chapter 4: The Preliminary Scheme Chapter 6: Coastal Processes Chapter 13: Seascape, Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment PEIR Non- Technical Summary July 2013 1.5. The site lies predominantly in the CCS but also partly to the east in Neath Port Talbot. However, the analysis of the potential effects are confined to those on CCS. 1.6. The structure of the report includes the following: Review of Non Technical Summary Review of overall structure, clarity and comprehensiveness of the landscape and visual resources section of the PEIR. Review of proposed method and references in relation to best practice guidance- eg Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment [GLVIA] 2013, LANDMAP guidelines and seascape guidance. Review of: baseline data viewpoints proposed design and proposed mitigation
White Consultants 2 final/August 2013 Page 133 Review of Preliminary Environmental Information Report Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon
1.7. The views in this report represent those of the assessor, not CCS. 2. The site, current proposals and site selection process
Site selection and alternatives 2.1. The process followed in identifying a suitable site and layout is explained in Chapter 3 of the PEIR. The key factors for location in Swansea Bay were appropriate beach profile and depth of water, avoidance of beaches of recreational quality, suitable landfall, avoidance of navigation channels and sufficient turbine depth. 2.2. Fourteen lagoon shape options and multiple turbine configurations have been explored to balance commercially viable options with navigation, water quality, coastal processes, nature conservation and visual considerations. Site and the development 2.3. The site lies in Swansea Bay between the mouths of the Tawe and Neath rivers. The landfall of the lagoon seawall is at Swansea Docks to the east and the Swansea science and innovation campus under construction to the west. 2.4. The proposal is for a tidal lagoon generating 400GWh of electricity, enough to power 121,000 homes. The development comprises: Lagoon enclosing 11.5km2 of seabed and foreshore extending around 3.25km offshore from Swansea Docks. Breakwater bund 40-75m wide at the base and 8m wide at the top with a top level of 13mAOD allowing pedestrian and other access around the lagoon. 16-22 hydro turbines 7-8m in diameter and sluice gate within a housing structure Electricity connection to the grid via an underground conduit beneath the River Neath to Baglan Bay substation. Operational and management facilities including slipways Visitor facilities including two main visitor centres onshore and by the sluices upto 3 storeys high, and two further buildings for operational and visitor facilities upto two storeys high to the east. Access and parking Seafront public realm including pedestrian and cycle links and possible beaches Sporting public realm Mariculture facilities Lighting 2.5. There is also potential for the ‘passive provision’ of Ro-Ro ferry terminal on the western seawall. 2.6. The bund uses 5 million cu.m of sediment abstracted from the lagoon seabed as a core with natural stone facing. The stone will be sourced preferable by barge from the UK, Norway or France. Concrete will be sourced from Aberthaw. for the sewall 2.7. Construction support sites would be located in and around Swansea docks. The construction period is intended to start from the beginning of 2015 and be completed in 2018. The lagoon operation would be expected to last at least 100
White Consultants 3 final/August 2013 Page 134 Review of Preliminary Environmental Information Report Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon
years. It is assumed that it would remain in perpetuity from this time, whether operational or not. 3. Review of Preliminary Environmental Information
REVIEW OF NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY 3.1. The non-technical summary dated July 2013 summarises the PEIR and sets out the relevant project details. The document introduces the project, the consenting process, how it would be run and briefly summarises the main components of the environmental assessment being undertaken. Methods for making comments are explained and the location of exhibition venues is set out at the end of the document. Overall, the NTS summarises the PEIR adequately. REVIEW OF SEASCAPE, LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL ASSESSMENT Review of overall structure, clarity and comprehensiveness of the assessment and adequacy of information provided. 3.2. The structure of the section covers policy context, assessment method, baseline conditions including the assessment of the sensitivity of seascape and landscape character areas, a high-level review of likely visibility of the proposals, chosen viewpoints and the range of assessments/next steps to be carried out which include cumulative effects. 3.3. The study area of 15km radius seems reasonable although a focus on closer seascape related receptors is considered important as the main effects are within the marine environment of the bay and its related coastal strip, rather than onshore. A number of issues arise which are discussed in the following paragraphs. Method- guidance used 3.4. An assessment method is set out for the project which is generally understandable. Guidance references are noted and are generally helpful. However, the following comments apply: The Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment [GLVIA] 2002 have now been superseded by GLVIA3 2013 so the method needs to comply with this. LANDMAP Guidance Note 3 2010 has now been superseded by 2013 guidance so the method needs to comply with this. NECR105- Approach to seascape character assessment is complemented by Seascape Characterisation around the English Coast (Marine Plan Areas 3 and 4 and Part of Area 6 Pilot Study) (NECR106), Natural England, 2012. Seascape assessment at a district scale has been piloted in Pembrokeshire by White Consultants for the National Park and NRW. This will be published shortly and includes a method for taking on board NECR105 as well as CCW guidance. Method- LANDMAP 3.5. In terms of the use of LANDMAP, the assessment takes the approach of using the five LANDMAP aspects to inform the derivation of landscape character areas. This is permitted as an option in Guidance Note 3 and appears to be a sensible approach in this case. The main problem is that the urban area of Swansea was excluded from some aspects of the original LANDMAP assessment, including the visual and sensory, and so there is no data relating to it and it is not divided into different aspect areas. The landscape character assessment treats Swansea as
White Consultants 4 final/August 2013 Page 135 Review of Preliminary Environmental Information Report Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon
one area (including the coastal strip and Kilvey Hill) which is not satisfactory. An alternative approach may be needed but taking account of comments on the level of seascape assessment below. Method-Seascape 3.6. The main effect of this proposal is on the seascape rather than landscape but the assessment does not reflect this emphasis. It is useful to have the two regional seascape units as a context. This addresses the effect of the proposal on Swansea Bay as a unit with the open sweep of the bay and the continuous line of sand from Mumbles to Aberavon with the minor breaks of the docks. However, the scale of assessment is the equivalent of using national landscape character areas. GLVIA3 advises against the use of this scale of unit for LVIAs. 3.7. My view is that, in addition to the effect on the bay as a whole, which is essential, the effect on district scale seascape character areas should be carried out. This means these would have to be derived by the assessor, possibly using the emerging NRW method developed in Pembrokeshire. These should/could include the three components of marine, intertidal and coast and engage fully with the nature of the sea including water depth, the nature of the seabed and wave climate which would define the marine boundaries of each area. The coastal location may include the directly adjacent intervisible areas such as the Swansea Bay promenade, Oystermouth castle or a slightly wider area, provided there is a strong connection to the sea. The former approach may have less overlap with the assessment of effects on the LCAs. The grain of seascape character area may include, for example, the coast from Mumbles Head to the mouth of the Tawe, with similar divisions around the coast with marine boundaries reflecting the depth/characteristics of the sea, with some offshore areas/area possibly. Descriptions of each area’s physical nature, cultural heritage and use and aesthetic and perceptual factors as well as a judgement on sensitivity would be helpful. 3.8. Some information such as the Admiralty charts which would help in describing each area has been already been set out in the assessment, related to Swansea Bay as a whole. Additional datasets would be needed which currently are only used in the coastal processes and ecological sections. 3.9. The effects of the development itself and related coastal processes should be considered and addressed including the effect of the potentially changed balance and proportions of sand, mud and gravel on Swansea Bay. 3.10. The SLVIA does not express an opinion on whether effects are adverse, neutral or beneficial [13.3.03]. GLVIA 3 now states that the landscape assessor should make this judgement. Method- Individual development effects 3.11. The level of significance in terms of EIA regulations for landscape and seascape, and visual effects are not defined whereas they are for cumulative effects ie major and some moderate. This needs to be rectified. 3.12. The sensitivity of receptor is taken as the sensitivity to offshore development generically [13.3.4.11]. It may be a more appropriate and in line with GLVIA3 if the sensitivity was defined as sensitivity to the type and scale of development proposed. This may change some of the judgements already in the assessment. 3.13. Table 13.5 defines seascape and landscape effects significance. If the same principles apply as for cumulative this is acceptable. If only major effects are ‘significant’ the thresholds of significance are calibrated too high. 3.14. Table 13.7 (should be titled Magnitude of visual impacts)indicates that medium
White Consultants 5 final/August 2013 Page 136 Review of Preliminary Environmental Information Report Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon
impact is defined as the development being visually prominent. This seems to be a high calibration and consideration should be given to a five/six point scale. 3.15. Table 13.8 significance of visual impacts appears to concentrate on landscape elements in the view rather than seascape elements, especially in the definition of major effects. Method- Cumulative effects 3.16. A number of other recent and proposed developments are included for consideration in conjunction with the proposal [Table 13.9]. The concern of various consultees appears to be the potential combined cumulative effect of the proposal with these other developments- possibly resulting in an over intensification of use of the area. However, the method only considers the additional changes caused by the proposed development [13.3.8.1]. The greater the number of developments, the less the additional effect of the proposal proportionately. Whereas the additional effect is a valid consideration, the combined effect should also be considered. However, as all the other developments are land based, the assessment should be proportionate. 3.17. Tables 13.11 and 13.13 set out the significance of cumulative impacts. The level of ‘not significant’ appears to relate to where an area/receptor is not ‘highly sensitive’ which appears to be a very high threshold. It should be reconsidered/reworded. 13.3.8.13 should define the two types of static cumulative effects- in combination and successive. The latter is important for receptors who would experience development on two sides. These definitions derive from SNH 2012 cumulative assessment guidance for windfarms (which possibly also should be referenced) and also referred to in GLVIA3. Sensitivity of seascape units and landscape character areas 3.18. The sensitivity for each seascape unit and landscape character area set out in Table 13.16 of the PEIR, in or adjacent to Swansea County Council’s area. The majority of the assessed sensitivities appear reasonable. Those where there are concerns are as follows: SU2- the seascape sensitivity would be expected to be high as it is a highly indented rocky coast with small sandy bays. D1- whilst the sensitivity might be justified as high/moderate due to tree cover there are views out from the area and it includes Clyne Gardens. G1- Swansea is a large area with a variation in sensitivity. For instance, the promenade area will have a higher sensitivity than moderate/other parts of the city. This variation can either be reflected in a subdivision of the LCA or the definition and use of local seascape character areas which is highly desirable, or both. This is explained further in the main part of the review report July 2013. H2- whilst outside Swansea it is of concern that Crymlyn Burrows appear to be subsumed into a business park. The Neath estuary area flanked by sand dunes needs to be reconsidered in this respect and would be expected to have a higher sensitivity. Viewpoints 3.19. The viewpoints chosen have been subject to discussion with the developer directly following the site visit. Though nominally 'agreed' with the authorities there is some reliance by the authorities on the developer team picking locations which can see the fullest representative extent of the development for a given location. This was not the case with Viewpoints 5 and 6.
White Consultants 6 final/August 2013 Page 137 Review of Preliminary Environmental Information Report Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon
3.20. The suggested alternative locations are: Vpt 5- move viewpoint to allow full extent of proposed development to be seen without screening by the lifeboat station and to see the relationship with the coast to the east and preferably also the Mumbles pier. Location- The Knab waterfront: E262460 N187760 Vpt 6- move viewpoint to avoid screening of full extent of the proposal in its context by scrub to a more open location which also takes in the Mumbles lighthouse and piers as well as the sweep of the bay- Location to the west on Mumbles Hill E162787 N287439. 3.21. The Grade 1 Clyne Gardens in the AONB have views. The land rises up with trees channelling views down its main grass space directly towards the bay and the proposal. The gardens are otherwise enclosed. The viewpoint coordinates are E 261246 N 190515. This is certainly an elevated sensitive receptor along with Oystermouth Castle, both of which would need consideration in the assessment. Visualisations and figures 3.22. There are no visualisations attached to the PER. It is understood that these will be produced in due course. It would be very helpful to have sight of these before submission of the draft SLVIA so comment can be made. The viewing distance of the photomontages or wirelines would be desirable at 400mm-500mm viewing distance as recommended by SNH best practice guidance as well as panoramas where useful. 3.23. Without specific night time views, it is not clear how the assessor will formally assess the night-time effects and in relation to what images and from where. The 3D model is said to provide this information but it is not clear if images will be available in the final assessment to demonstrate effects. 3.24. The figures/drawings submitted are A4 and sub-standard. It will be helpful to receive a full size hard copy of the draft SLVIA with all figures and visualisations at a size and print quality that can assist verification. A ZTV over the district level seascape areas and LCAs would also be helpful. Review of baseline data including planning policy context 3.25. The section on relevant legislation and policy [13.2] only includes guidance/reports. It is not clear if policy is going to be discussed in the draft, although various policies are mentioned later on in the report eg 13.4.3. The effects on the Gower AONB purposes and special qualities will need to be addressed. 3.26. As noted above, the baseline should include district level seascape character areas with associated value and sensitivity. In relation to SU2, a seascape sensitivity assessment of moderate appears to be a mistake, or unjustifiable [13.5.1.10]. 3.27. As mentioned above, LCA G1 Swansea, including the promenade, Kilvey Hill , Townhill etc is all treated as one area which tends to generalise descriptions and sensitivity judgements. =In my view, the promenade/coastal strip is more sensitive than other parts of the city. 3.28. The Crymlyn and Baglan Burrows, either side of the mouth of the Neath appear to be subsumed by adjacent industrial developments, which does not reflect their importance in terms of landscape/seascape character. Though in NPT, and strictly outside the terms of reference of this report, this may need further review.
White Consultants 7 final/August 2013 Page 138 Review of Preliminary Environmental Information Report Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon
4. Review of design and mitigation
Key Issues 4.1. The key issues are: The effect the development will have on the character of the bay, especially west of the Tawe, on which Swansea relies as a major asset essential to its positive image and quality of life. The development is very large scale protruding 3.5km into Swansea Bay and effectively dividing it into two. The height of the proposed seawall is much higher than the promenade- ie13mAOD rather than 7-8mAOD. It is not clear how much of an effect this will have visually. The overall sweep of the Bay will be disrupted with views of the almost continuous strong sandy strip around the bay being hidden by the rock faced seawall which is likely to become a dark grey/black over time. This will reduce the feeling of continuity of the sandy strand and will remove views of this positive element, rather focusing on the the detractive industrial and built development elements in Port Talbot when viewed from the Swansea promenade/coastal strip. Sedimentation patterns may be changed meaning that mud deposited by the River Tawe or Neath increases in proportion to sand on beaches, especially the beach along the promenade at Swansea/Mumbles. ABPmer’s modelling of currents in chapter 6.0 appear to be based on a smaller proposal so this needs to be carefully considered. The design evolution of the development is explained with smaller, less potentially obtrusive and more elegant shaped options appearing to be not commercially viable. Night time effects need to be considered. A Ro Ro terminal on the western wall would be a potentially major detractor. 4.2. Based on the preliminary information, suggested mitigation measures might include: Reducing the extent that the development protrudes into Swansea Bay. Making a more elegant rounded shape of the lagoon Careful design of lighting and structures.
5. Preliminary conclusions
5.1. The SLVIA covers a large amount of ground but does not focus sufficiently on what is important in Swansea Bay. There is undue emphasis on land-based rather than seascape issues/receptors and this needs to change. 5.2. Up to date guidance including GLVIA3 and emerging seascape techniques need to be taken on board. The assessment needs to consider the use of smaller seascape character areas to complement its existing assessment. 5.3. There are a few methodological issues which hopefully can be resolved. Cumulative assessment should cover combined as well additional effects.
White Consultants 8 final/August 2013 Page 139 Review of Preliminary Environmental Information Report Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon
5.4. Viewpoints should be amended to ensure the worst case situations are addressed. 5.5. Full size visualisations and figures are needed as soon as possible so comments can be made in good time before the final LVIA. 5.6. There is concern that the development may have significant adverse effects on the essential qualities of Swansea Bay, adversely affecting one of the city’s best assets.
White Consultants 9 final/August 2013 Page 140 Review of Preliminary Environmental Information Report Swansea Bay Tidal Lagoon
Glossary
ES- Environmental Statement LCA- Landscape character assessment/area GLVIA3- Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, LI IEMA 2013. SLVIA- Seascape, Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment in Environmental Statement NTS- Non Technical Summary PEIR- Preliminary Environmental Information Report ZTV- Zone of Theoretical Visibility
White Consultants 10 final/August 2013 Page 141 DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT & CONTROL COMMITTEE (72)
Councillors: John C Bayliss Andrea S Lewis Peter M Black David J Lewis Nicholas S Bradley Richard D Lewis June E Burtonshaw Clive E Lloyd Mark C Child Paul Lloyd (Vice Chair) Bob A Clay Keith E Marsh Uta C Clay Penny M Matthews Anthony C S Colburn Paul M Meara David W Cole Hazel M Morris Ann M Cook John Newbury Sybil E Crouch Byron G Owen Jan P Curtice Geraint Owens Nick J Davies David Phillips W John F Davies Cheryl L Philpott A Mike Day Jennifer A Raynor Phil Downing T Huw Rees C Ryland Doyle Ioan M Richard V Mandy Evans J Christine Richards William Evans Neil M Ronconi-Woollard E Wendy Fitzgerald Pearleen Sangha Robert Francis-Davies (Chair) Paulette B Smith Fiona M Gordon Robert V Smith Joe A Hale R June Stanton Jane E C Harris Rob C Stewart Terry J Hennegan D Gareth Sullivan Chris A Holley Gloria J Tanner Paxton R Hood-Williams Mitchell Theaker Beverly Hopkins Ceinwen Thomas David H Hopkins C Miles R W D Thomas Lynda James Des W W Thomas Yvonne V Jardine Mark Thomas Andrew J Jones L Graham Thomas Jeff W Jones Linda J Tyler-Lloyd Mary H Jones Gordon D Walker Susan M Jones Lesley V Walton Erika T Kirchner T Mike White
Page 142