Spalding Energy Expansion Landscape and Visual Assessment · The are to accommodate the taller...

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data Crown Copyright 2004. All rights reserved License Number 0100031673

**Note : Limits of deviation parameters for the Spalding Energy Expansion power station have been modelled using several coloured ‘development envelopes’ related to the function and height of each part of the plant. The envelopes are modelled at the maximum height of structures or buildings within each area and therefore represent a worse case scenario. The are to accommodate the taller stacks have been modelled with cylinders rising out of the development blocks in order to illustrate the proposed position and maximum dimensions of the stacks. The dashed area surrounding these cylinders shows the limits of deviation for the location of the stacks.

These envelopes have been used as the basis for visual modelling in the photomontages and the assessment of impacts. Colours are used to illustrate the different development envelopes and are not indicative of the colour of the plant. The actual colours of the proposed structures and buildings will be agreed with the Local Planning Authority to help minimise the visual impact of the development. Photomontages do not illustrate the proposed landscape planting which may further reduce visibility of the development.

Spalding Expansion Project-P:\2008\8423795_00\PRODUCTION\GRAPHICS\090204_LVA-ParameterMontages-rev1and2\090226-LVA-ADDITIONAL VIEWS-rev2

Location: Viewpoint Grid Reference - 525954E, 324190NView Direction - NWViewpoint Elevation - c 7m AODHorizontal Field of View - 90 degrees

Note : Correct monocular perspective can be achieved by viewing this page at approximately 25cm

Existing view north west from River Welland Bridleway

Spalding Energy Expansion

Existing SECL Power Station

Photomontage showing Proposed Development Envelopes ** see note below

FIGURE 7.7 : Viewpoint 01

Client: SEELSpalding Energy ExpansionLandscape and Visual Assessment Date: March 2009

Version Control: 3

Drawn by: LCTProject No: 64C13376

Scale: NTS





Location: Viewpoint Grid Reference - 525924E, 325837NView Direction - SViewpoint Elevation - c 7m AODHorizontal Field of View - 90 degrees


Existing view south from A16






Version Control: 3


Scale: NTS





Location: Viewpoint Grid Reference - 526402E,325242NView Direction - SWViewpoint Elevation - c 9m AODHorizontal Field of View - 90 degrees



Existing view south west from A16 near bridge over River Welland





Version Control: 3


Scale: NTS





Location: Viewpoint Grid Reference - 5262889E, 323949NView Direction - NWViewpoint Elevation - c 6m AODHorizontal Field of View - 90 degrees



Existing view from Springfi elds at the Gardener’s Arms





Version Control: 3


Scale: NTS

FIGURE 7.11 : Viewpoint 05 & 6

Reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data Crown Copyright 2004. All rights reserved License Number 0100031673 Spalding Expansion Project-P:\2008\8423795_00\PRODUCTION\GRAPHICS\090204_LVA-ADDITIONALVIEWS-rev1and2\ 090226-LVA-ADDITIONAL VIEWS-rev2.ind




Viewpoint 5: From A16 & Bridleway at Herdgate Lane

Viewpoint 6: From A16, by the abattoir


Version Control: 3


Scale: NTS




Viewpoint 7: From A16 near layby



Version Control: 3


Scale: NTS





Location: Viewpoint Grid Reference - 524900E, 324167NView Direction - NEViewpoint Elevation - c 6m AODHorizontal Field of View - 90 degrees



Existing view from Vernatt’s Nature Reserve





Version Control: 3


Scale: NTS


Viewpoint 10: From Pinchbeck, Ingleside

Viewpoint 9: From Surfl eet Seas End County Primary School




FIGURE 7.14 : Viewpoints 09 & 10


Version Control: 3


Scale: NTS





Location: Viewpoint Grid Reference - 524801E, 325003NView Direction - SEViewpoint Elevation - c 5m AODHorizontal Field of View - 90 degrees



Existing view from Wardentree Lane





Version Control: 3


Scale: NTS





Location: Viewpoint Grid Reference - 323814 E, 323814 NView Direction - NWViewpoint Elevation - c 6m AODHorizontal Field of View - 90 degrees



Existing view from A151 bridge over Coronation Channel




Version Control: 3


Scale: NTS






Location: Viewpoint Grid Reference - 525904 E, 324322 NView Direction - NWViewpoint Elevation - c 7m AODHorizontal Field of View - 90 degrees


Existing view north west from River Welland Bridleway





Version Control: 3


Scale: NTS


Viewpoint 15: From Footbridge, Pinchbeck West

Viewpoint 14: From Baytree Garden Centre, Weston




FIGURE 7.18 : Viewpoints 14 & 15


Version Control: 3


Scale: NTS

Norloch House36 King's Stables RoadEdinburgh EH1 2EUTel. +44(0)131 222 3000Fax. +44(0)131 222 3030www.edaw.com

ENVIRON UK Limited

7 Walker StreetEdinburgh E 3 7JYHTel. +44(0)131 225 9899Fax.+44(0)131 220 3411

Client SEEL

Project No Scale 1:2500 @ A364C13376

Date Version Control 7March 2009

Figure 7.19Landscape Parameters

SEEL Environmental Statement


64-C13376 Issue: 6 8-1

8 Transport and Access Introduction

8.1 This Chapter of the ES describes the likely impact of the proposed SEE on the local and surrounding transport network. Where appropriate, mitigation measures have been identified to control adverse impacts.

8.2 Information is provided on the relevant transportation policies and the methodology used. The assessment has been undertaken within the context of prevailing transportation policies at national, regional and local levels.

8.3 In support of the application for Section 36 Consent, a Transport Statement has also been prepared by SBA. This provides the context for, and background against which, this chapter of the ES has been written. The Transport Statement is appended to the ES as Technical Appendix 8.1.

Legislation and Policy Context

8.4 The planning policy context relevant to the proposed SEE is set out in the Planning Statement. This section provides further information on specific policies relevant to transport and access.

National Legislation and Policy

PPG 13: TRANSPORT

8.5 PPG13 sets out the overall strategy for a sustainable transport system, with the objectives of integrating planning and transport at the national, regional, strategic and local level to:-

• promote more sustainable transport choices for people and for moving freight;

• promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services by public transport, walking and cycling; and

• reducing the need to travel, especially by car.

8.6 The Transport Statement (see Technical Appendix 8.1) demonstrates that there are opportunities to access the proposed SEE site by sustainable modes of transport such as walking, cycling and by bus. In addition, the internal layout of the proposed SEE site has been designed to provide pedestrians and cyclists with direct access to the public highway, thereby integrating the proposed SEE site with the wider highway network. Therefore, it is considered that the proposed SEE will promote sustainable transport choices and contribute to achieving the above objectives.

Regional Policy

EAST MIDLANDS REGIONAL PLAN 2009

8.7 The EMRP published by Government Office for the East Midlands in 2009 by sets out the spatial strategy for the region through to 2026 and identifies specific objectives for the Eastern Sub-area, which includes Spalding. Key priority objectives set out are as follows:

• developing the transport infrastructure, public transport and services needed to support Lincoln’s role as a Principal Urban Area in a sustainable manner;

• developing opportunities for modal switch away from road based transport in the food and drink sector;

• making better use of the opportunities offered by existing ports, in particular, Boston for all freight movements and improving linkages to major ports in adjacent regions such as Grimsby, Immingham and Felixstowe;

• improving access to the Lincolnshire Coast, particularly by public transport;

• reducing peripherality, particularly east of the A15, and overcoming rural isolation for those without access to a private car; and

• reducing the number of fatal and serious road traffic accidents.

Local Policy

LINCOLNSHIRE 2ND LOCAL TRANSPORT PLAN (2006)

8.8 The Lincolnshire 2nd Local Transport Plan1 covers the 5-year period from 2006/07 to 2010/11 and provides a framework of policies, objectives and proposals for developments in Lincolnshire.

8.9 The Local Transport Plan lists its long-term objectives of which the following relate to the proposed SEE:

• to assist the sustainable economic growth of Lincolnshire, and the East Midlands region, through improvements to the transport network;

• to increase public transport usage;

• to improve access to key services by widening travel choices, especially for those without access to a car;

• to make travel for all modes safer and, in particular, reduce the number and severity of road casualties;

• to remove unnecessary HGVs from affected communities;

• to maintain the transport system to standards which allow safe and efficient movement of people and goods;

1 Lincolnshire County Council (2006) Lincolnshire 2nd Local Transport Plan, accessed online (http://www.lincolnshire.gov.uk/upload/public/attachments/598/2ndLTPExecSum.pdf)

Environnmental Statement Spalding Energy Expansion SEEL

8-2 Issue: 6 64-C13376

• to protect and enhance the built and natural environment of the county by reducing the adverse impacts of traffic; and

• to enhance air quality, particularly within declared AQMAs.

SOUTH HOLLAND LOCAL PLAN (2006)

8.10 The SHLP is a comprehensive statement of SHDC planning policies enabling it to address those local issues which are a priority to the community of South Holland.

8.11 The Plan sets out two core policies relevant to transport – SG1 General Sustainable Development and SG2 Distribution of Development. The policies encourage new developments to enhance local sustainability by directing new development towards the towns and villages of the district, increasing accessibility to services and facilities, maximising the use of brownfield land and protecting the countryside from unnecessary development, only allowing development which is essential in that location.

8.12 It is considered that the proposed SEE supports and is consistent with local transport planning policy in encouraging the use of more sustainable modes of transport and reducing reliance on the private car.

Issues Identified During Consultation

8.13 Initial consultation with respect to the transport analysis, methodology and strategy to support the proposed SEE has been undertaken with SHDC and LCC.

8.14 The consultation process identified issues to be considered as part of this assessment, as outlined in Table 8.1. Issues identified have been evaluated, considered, assessed and where appropriate controlled or mitigated.

Table 8.1: Issues to be considered as part of this assessment

Consultee Issue Where in this chapter the issue is dealt with

Changes in road traffic flows in the area during construction: Local highway capacity Driver delay Likely traffic congestion

Possible queuing during construction

SHDC & LCC

Pedestrian and cyclist fear and intimidation during construction

Paragraphs 8.109 to 8.180

EMRA Policy 34 – Regional approach to traffic growth reduction Paragraphs 8.7

Lincolnshire Fire and Rescue (Spalding)

Access to the site for emergency vehicles during and upon completion of the construction works

Paragraphs 8.92

8.15 Discussions with SHDC and LCC identified no requirement to include traffic associated with other developments in the vicinity of the site during either the construction or operational period.

Assessment Methodology

8.16 The methodology utilised in this chapter reflects the guidance provided by the IEA (1993)2, and that produced by the DfT (2007)3.

Approach

8.17 In determining the study area it was anticipated that the majority of operational and construction traffic would approach the site via the A16(T), Wardentree Lane and West Marsh Road. A small proportion of local traffic may also approach the site from the B1356. Consequently, these sections of the road network, identified at Figure 8.1 comprise the study area for the purpose of the assessment.

8.18 In determining the scope of the Transport Statement in association with SHDC and LCC the following methodological approach was agreed in principle:

• evaluate the accessibility of the proposed SEE site for pedestrians, cyclists and by public transport;

• undertake a traffic survey of traffic associated with the existing SECL power station to identify existing base flows and movement patterns enabling comparative analysis;

• assess operational traffic generation of the proposed SEE site based on traffic flows associated with the existing SECL power station;

• identify future trips by people associated with the proposed SEE based on the number of expected employees;

• determine and assess the impact of construction traffic demand;

• assess the suitability of the existing junction at Gates A and C to accommodate the traffic associated with the proposed SEE;

• undertake junction modelling of junctions in the study area to identify whether they are sufficient to accommodate vehicles associated with the construction and operation of the proposed SEE;

• identify the impact of the proposed SEE site on pedestrian and cyclist movement; and

• develop a draft CTMP detailing how the impacts associated with construction vehicles could be controlled and/or mitigated.

DATA SOURCES AND TRAFFIC MODELLING

8.19 The principal sources of data used to assess the environmental impact of transport are MCC and ATC.

8.20 In addition to traffic data, 2001 Census data was also interrogated in order to identify the mode of travel used by employees travelling to the proposed SEE site during the day.

2 Institute of Environmental Assessment (1993) Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic

3 Department for Transport (2007) Guidance on Transport Assessment



64-C13376 Issue: 6 8-3

8.21 Following discussions with SEEL it was considered appropriate to use the year 2014 as horizon / opening year for assessment purposes, as this was confirmed as the targeted year of first operations of the proposed SEE.

ASSUMPTIONS

8.22 It is estimated that up to around 600 construction workers will be employed during construction. The average number of construction workers over a month is expected to range from between 18 and 455 per day, depending on the stage of construction. For a period of 16 months, an average of over 100 construction workers per day will be employed on the proposed SEE site. Personnel movements are expected to peak in month 18 during mechanical and electrical installation work, when the average number of workers per day will be 455.

8.23 It is estimated that approximately 15-20 direct FTE staff will be employed at the proposed SEE site once operational with the equivalent of a further 28 indirect FTE jobs for contracted engineering staff during regular maintenance shutdowns during the operational life of the proposed SEE.

8.24 It is, however, possible that the proposed SEE site will operate as a wholly stand alone power station, in which case approximately 40 direct FTE staff will be employed at the proposed SEE site with a further 28 indirect FTE jobs for contracted engineering staff during regular maintenance shutdowns. Under this scenario the maximum number of staff accessing the site will therefore be 68 (40 direct and 28 indirect) plus daily visitor, security staff movements and likely deliveries. Under this scenario access to the proposed SEE site will be via Gate C.

8.25 The calculation of peak hour operational traffic was therefore based on the level of traffic associated with both scenarios (either 48 members of staff via Gate A or 68 via Gate C, plus daily visitor and security staff movements and likely deliveries).

8.26 During certain maintenance periods there may be up to a total of 250 staff on-site including the permanent and contract maintenance personnel. These events are atypical and can last up to a period of four weeks. This scenario has additionally been considered in this assessment for both Gate A and Gate C and generates a maximum number of 250 (one-way) daily staff trips to the site. This translates to a maximum of 500 additional daily movements (Monday - Friday).

8.27 One vehicle per staff member has been assumed for both construction and operation. This approach is considered to be conservative.

8.28 Full details of the quantification of operational traffic (normal working conditions and during maintenance periods) for analytical purposes are provided in the Transport Statement contained in Technical Appendix 8.1.

IMPACT PREDICTION

8.29 The impact of traffic is dependent upon a wide range of factors including volume, speed and composition. The perception of changes in traffic by people and the impact of traffic changes on various ecological systems will also vary according to existing and future traffic levels, the location of traffic movements, the time of day, the design and layout of the road and land use activities adjacent to the route.

8.30 To identify the likely transport impacts of the proposed SEE during its construction and operational phases, the following sensitive receptors were identified:

• schools /colleges in the vicinity;

• hospital located in Spalding;

• pedestrian movement on West Marsh Road and Wardentree Lane;

• cyclist movement on West Marsh Road and Wardentree Lane; and

• Spalding Conservation Area.

8.31 The following factors were considered in predicting impacts associated with the proposed SEE site:

• vehicular site trip generation;

• changes in road traffic flows in the area;

• local highway capacity (driver delay, congestion and queuing);

• wide / hazardous loads;

• pedestrian and cyclist amenity and delay;

• pedestrian and cyclist fear and intimidation; and

• pedestrian and cyclist severance4.

METHOD OF IMPACT ASSESSMENT

8.32 The impacts of traffic during the construction and operational phases of the proposed SEE are assessed according to the likely magnitude of change over baseline traffic arising from operational and construction traffic generation.

8.33 In order to assess the aspects of the environment likely to be affected significantly by the proposed SEE, the impact of operational traffic was determined by comparing baseline traffic conditions to the opening year scenario (2014). For peak maintenance periods, 2015 baseline conditions were assessed against a 2015 design year. The impact of construction traffic was determined by comparing 2013 baseline traffic conditions to the 2013 scenario – the period associated with peak construction traffic levels.

8.34 Future year or forecast traffic flows were derived by applying the DfT high growth factors (NRTF) to the surveyed data to produce 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 forecast baseline traffic flows. By applying high growth factors to the surveyed flow data, a further element of robustness is built into the analysis as this approach ensures that base flow traffic in the study area is predicted to “increase” at an above average rate.

8.35 To consider the transport impacts of traffic associated with the proposed SEE site, the methodology and significance criteria utilised in this chapter reflect generally that contained within the guidance provided by the IEA (1993)5 and the DfT (2007)6.

4 Severance refers to the perceived division that can occur when pedestrians/cyclists are separated by a traffic artery. The more difficult it is for pedestrians/cyclists to cross a road, the higher level of perceived severance.


6 Department of Transport (2007) Guidance on Transport Assessment


8-4 Issue: 6 64-C13376

8.36 The assessment also recognised the relationship between the existing SECL power station and the proposed SEE.

Significance Criteria

8.37 The following significance criteria were used to identify the level or magnitude of impacts:

• link flow analysis;

• capacity assessment / junction operation;

• HGV nuisance and annoyance;

• pedestrian and cyclist delay, annoyance and risk;

• pedestrian and cyclist fear and intimidation; and

• pedestrian and cyclist severance.

8.38 These criteria are further explained below.

TRANSPORT ACCESSIBILITY

Link flow analysis

8.39 With regard to link flow analysis the assessment of changes in traffic conditions is based on guidance produced by the IHT (1997)7. The IHT states that there is a potential for significant traffic impacts where either:

• traffic to or from a development exceeds 10% of the two-way traffic on the adjoining highway;

• traffic to or from a development exceeds 10% of the two-way traffic on the adjoining highway, where traffic congestion exists or will exist; or

• 100 generated trips (in/out combined) are undertaken in a peak hour.

8.40 The significance of potential traffic and transport effects has been determined using a two-stage process, with criteria developed from best practice techniques. Effect significance is derived from measures of the magnitude (or scale) of the change and the sensitivity (or importance) of the resource affected. The first stage involves determination of the effect magnitude and sensitivity of the potentially affected receptors.

8.41 The magnitude of change on road links is defined as follows:

• Major - Change in total traffic, HGV or hazardous load flows of over 90%

• Moderate - Change in total traffic, HGV or hazardous load flows of 60% to 90%

• Minor - Change in total traffic, HGV or hazardous load flows of 30% to 60%

• Negligible - Change in total traffic, HGV or hazardous load flows of less than 30%

8.42 The following categories of receptor sensitivity have been used:

• High - Receptors of greatest sensitivity to traffic flows such as schools, colleges, playgrounds, accident blackspots, retirement homes, urban / residential / other roads used by pedestrians without pavements.

7 The Institution of Highways and Transportation (1997) Transport in the urban environment

• Medium - Traffic flow sensitive receptors such as congested junctions, surgeries / hospitals, shopping areas with roadside frontage, roads with narrow pavements used by pedestrians, unsegregated cycle ways, community centres, parks and recreation facilities, conservation areas.

• Low - Receptors with some sensitivity to traffic flows such as churches, public open space, nature conservation areas, listed buildings, tourist attractions, residential areas with adequate pavements.

• Low – negligible - Receptors with very low sensitivity to traffic flows.

• Negligible - Sensitive receptors sufficiently distant from affected roads and junctions.

8.43 The second stage involves comparing magnitude and sensitivity to determine the significance. There are no known published ‘standard’ criteria. As a result, reference has been made to a wide range of criteria relating to the nature of the receptors, expected duration of impact and the predicted change in relation to the baseline situation. The above criteria combine to produce the following definitions of potential effects, shown illustratively in Table 8.2.

• Very substantial - A change of total traffic, HGV or hazardous load flow to greater than 90% in areas where receptors are of greatest sensitivity such as schools, colleges.

• Substantial - A change of total traffic, HGV or hazardous load flow of 60% to 90% or greater than 90% in areas of medium sensitivity such as congested junctions, surgeries / hospitals, or a change of total traffic, HGV or hazardous load flow of 60% to 90% in areas of medium to high sensitivity such as schools, colleges, accident blackspots, congested junctions, surgeries and hospitals.

• Moderate - A change in total traffic HGV or hazardous load flows of 60% and above in areas where receptors have some sensitivity to traffic flows e.g. churches, nature conservation areas, or a change in total, HGV or hazardous load flow of 30% to 60% in areas where receptors are of high to medium sensitivity such as schools, colleges, accident blackspots and congested junctions, surgeries / hospitals.

• Slight - A change in total traffic, HGV or hazardous load flows of 10% to 30%, or 30% to 60% in areas where receptors have low sensitivity to traffic flows e.g. churches, nature conservation areas.

• Negligible - A change in total traffic, HGV or hazardous load flows of less than 10% or where receptors are very low sensitivity or sufficiently distant from affected roads and junctions.



64-C13376 Issue: 6 8-5

Table 8.2 Determination of Significance of Effects

Sensitivity of Receptor

High Medium Low Negligible

Large >90% Very substantial Substantial Moderate Negligible

Medium 60% - 90% Substantial Moderate Moderate Negligible

Small 30% - 60% Moderate Moderate Slight Negligible Magnitude of change

Negligible >30% Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible

Capacity assessment

8.44 With regard to assessing the impact of construction and operational traffic on the operation of Gates A and C, and other junctions in the assessment area, the TRL has developed a range of software programmes for assessing a variety of junction types. The programmes have been used to predict where queues are likely to form, how long they will be, for how long they will last, how many vehicles will be delayed and the level of junction saturation experienced. Where junction saturation levels reach 1.0 it means that a junction is operating at its maximum theoretical capacity which is not considered satisfactory and therefore a significant impact will be associated with such a level of saturation.

HGV nuisance and annoyance

8.45 Research undertaken on behalf of the DfT (formerly the DoT) has indicated a correlation between lorry nuisance and lorry flows. Provisional evidence by TRL8 (formerly the TRRL) suggests that a doubling of lorry flows is required to produce a 5% increase in the number of residents bothered "quite a lot" or "very much". Therefore, for the purposes of the assessment, a 50% to 100% increase in lorry flows is taken to be a substantial impact, while an increase of over 100% is considered to be very substantial.

8.46 Guidelines prepared by the IEA (1993) note that while quantitative thresholds, such as those above, are useful in assessing annoyance arising from HGV traffic, there will always be a need for an element of judgement to be exercised9.

8.47 In recognizing the potential for traffic impacts, it should be noted that the IHT guidance states that there are no hard and fast rules as to what constitutes a significant traffic impact. Consequently an element of qualitative judgment has been exercised in assessing the potential for traffic impact which takes into account the geometric design of a road and the nature of traffic using it.

PEDESTRIAN / CYCLIST ACCESSIBILITY

Pedestrian and cyclist fear and intimidation

8 TRRL Laboratory (1994) Vibration Nuisance from Road Traffic – Results of a 50 Site Survey, Report 1119

9 Institute of Environmental Assessment, (1993). Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic: Guidance Notes no 1

8.48 In the absence of commonly agreed thresholds, the suggestion in the IEA guidelines is that the thresholds for assessing Fear and Intimidation is based upon the conclusions of the study by Crompton and Gilbert (1981)10.

8.49 The criteria are summarised in Table 8.3. In the absence of further guidance, the degree of hazard lower than Moderate is referred to as Small:

Table 8.3 – Fear and Intimidation Thresholds

Degree of hazard Average traffic flows

over 18 hours day Vehicle/hr

Total 18 hr HGV flow Average Vehicle speed over 18 hr day - mph

Extreme >1800 >3000 >20

Great 1200 – 1800 2000 – 3000 15 – 20

Moderate 600 – 1200 100 – 2000 10 – 15

Pedestrian and cyclist delay, annoyance and risk

8.50 In terms of pedestrian and cyclist conflicts arising from changes in traffic, for the purposes of this assessment, it is assumed that changes in two-way traffic flow of less than 30% are unlikely to have significant impacts on pedestrian and cyclist movements. The adoption of this criterion is based on extensive studies examining the relationship between traffic flow and conflicts between motor vehicles and pedestrians and cyclists in a variety of road conditions.

Pedestrian and cyclist severance

8.51 The threshold for assessing pedestrian severance is based on the DoT (1983)11 range of indicators for assessing changes in traffic flows as shown by Table 8.4 below.

Table 8.4 Severance Indicators

Indicator Change in traffic flows

Slight 30% - 60%

Moderate 60% - 90%

Substantial >90%

8.52 For consistency, the presentation of the significance of impacts will, as far as possible, differentiate between:

• the type of effect, i.e. beneficial, adverse, negligible/neutral or unknown;

• the probability of the event occurring, i.e. certain, likely or unlikely; and

• the geographical context of the policy importance or significance of the effect, i.e. international, national, regional or local.

8.53 The base flow traffic for comparison is the forecast base flow at the year of opening (2014) and in 2013 (when construction traffic peaks).

10 Crompton and Gilbert (1981) Pedestrian Delay, Annoyance and Risk Imperial College, London

11 Department of Transport (1983) Manual of Environmental Appraisal


8-6 Issue: 6 64-C13376

Baseline Conditions

8.54 This section describes the baseline transport conditions of the study area.

Highway Network

8.55 The proposed SEE site is directly accessed via an existing site access (Gate C) off West Marsh Road, providing connections to the wider road network via Wardentree Lane (B1180), the A16(T) to the north and the A151 and B1773 to the south. The A16(T) is a strategic route that passes Spalding, linking with a number of B-roads within the surrounding area and thereby providing a good level of accessibility not only to Spalding but also to the proposed SEE site. The A16(T) interlinks with the A47 south of the proposed SEE site, providing connections to Leicester and the M1.

8.56 The junctions formed between West Marsh Road and Wardentree Lane and also Wardentree Lane and the A16(T) are roundabouts.

8.57 The southernmost point of West Marsh Road, where it joins the A151, has a width restriction of 2 m in both directions and is therefore a local constraint. HGVs are currently not able to access the existing SECL power station site from the south from West Marsh Road.

Existing and Forecast Baseline Traffic Flows

8.58 Peak hour turning movements classified by vehicle type were recorded on Tuesday 9th July 2008 by Signal Surveys at the following junctions (as shown in Appendix A of the Transport Statement, contained in Technical Appendix 8.1):

• at the existing SECL power station main site access (Gate A) on West Marsh Road;

• at the existing SECL power station site access (Gate B) on West Marsh Road;

• at the junction of Spalding Road (B1356) and Wardentree Lane;

• at the roundabout formed between West Marsh Road and Wardentree Lane; and

• at the roundabout formed between Wardentree Lane and the A16(T).

8.59 ATC data was collected by Signal Surveys from the 6th July 2008 to the 12th July 2008 at the following locations (as shown in Appendix A of the Transport Statement, contained in Technical Appendix 8.1):

• A16(T) north of the roundabout formed between Wardentree Lane and the A16(T);

• A16(T) south of the roundabout formed between Wardentree Lane and the A16(T); and

• West Marsh Road – north of existing SECL power station entrance – Gate A.

8.60 As data collection took place during a traffic neutral month it is considered reflective of typical traffic conditions and does not require additional adjustment or seasonality factors.

8.61 Table 8.5 summarises the 2008 baseline peak period traffic flows and forecast baseline data for the years 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015.

Table 8.5 ATC & MCC surveyed (base) and forecast base two-way flows (5-day average)

Road 2008 2001 2012 2013 2014 2015

A16 north of Wardentree Lane

08:00 – 09:00 1388 1456 1478 1500 1524 1573

17:00 – 18:00 1447 1518 1541 1564 1589 1639

A16 south of Wardentree Lane

08:00 – 09:00 1426 1496 1519 1542 1566 1616

17:00 – 18:00 1400 1469 1491 1513 1537 1586

West Marsh Road

08:00 – 09:00 736 772 784 796 808 834

17:00 – 18:00 781 819 832 844 858 885

Wardentree Lane (E)

08:00 – 09:00 1344 1410 1431 1453 1476 1523

17:00 – 18:00 1405 1474 1496 1519 1543 1592

Wardentree Lane (W)

08:00 – 09:00 1288 1351 1372 1392 1414 1459

17:00 – 18:00 1421 1491 1513 1536 1560 1610

Spalding Road B1356 (N of junction)

08:00 – 09:00 1329 1394 1415 1437 1459 1506

17:00 – 18:00 1443 1514 1537 1560 1584 1635

Spalding Road B1356 (S of junction)

08:00 – 09:00 825 865 879 892 906 935

17:00 – 18:00 861 903 917 931 945 976

Wardentree Lane (arm west of JW B1356)

08:00 – 09:00 634 665 675 685 696 718

17:00 – 18:00 748 785 797 809 821 847

Existing Local Highway Capacity

8.62 Using the PICADY and ARCADY programmes, junction analysis of the existing SECL power station site access points on West Marsh Road was undertaken, as well as at the roundabout formed between West Marsh Road and Wardentree Lane and Wardentree Lane and the A16(T), in order to understand their operation. The assessments indicated that the junctions operate well within capacity. Detailed results are contained within the Transport Statement included in Technical Appendix 8.1.

Existing Travel Characteristics

8.63 Having assessed the 2001 Census data, Table 8.6 below reflects the mode of travel used by the day-time population to travel to the Spalding Castle Ward in their journey to work.



64-C13376 Issue: 6 8-7

Table 8.6 Travel to Work – Spalding Castle Ward (2001 Census)

Mode Person Trips Modal Share %

Train 12 0

Bus, minibus or coach 192 3

Taxi or minicab 15 0

Driving a car or van 3860 67

Passenger in a car or van 525 9

Motorcycle, scooter or moped 57 1

Bicycle 488 8

On foot 609 11

Other 9 0

All People 5767 100

Traffic generation associated with the exiting SECL power station

8.64 Table 8.7 summarises the peak hour survey flows at Gates A and B associated with the existing SECL power station.

Table 8.7 Peak hour traffic generation associated with existing SECL power station

Gate A

In (Vehicles) Out (Vehicles)

Time Period Cars HGV Cars HGV

AM Peak: 0800-0900 15 0 2 0

PM Peak: 1700-1800 2 0 10 0

Gate B

Time Period In (Vehicles) Out (Vehicles)

AM Peak: 0800 - 0900 0 0 0 0

PM Peak: 1700-1800 0 0 0 0

8.65 The table indicates that no HGV movements are made to and from the existing SECL power station during the peak hours.

Pedestrian and cyclist accessibility

8.66 A footway exists on the west side of West Marsh Road allowing pedestrians to reach amenities to the south of the existing SECL power station site along Holbeach Road (A151) and West Elloe Avenue (A151).

8.67 Dropped kerbs with tactile paving are present at all junctions in the vicinity of the existing SECL power station site, especially at Gates A, B and C and the roundabout formed between West Marsh Road and Wardentree Lane.

8.68 A pedestrian island is present at the junction of West Marsh Road and Gate C.

8.69 Street lighting is also present along both sides of the road providing continued safe walking conditions during the hours of darkness.

8.70 On-road cycling allows access to Spalding Railway Station providing the opportunity to cycle to the station and continue an onward journey as part of a longer commute to work.

Existing Pedestrian Severance, and Delay

8.71 Relatively little pedestrian activity occurs within the proposed SEE site, but a small degree of pedestrian severance is caused by West Marsh Road and Wardentree Lane. In the surroundings of the proposed SEE site, the level of pedestrian severance is relatively minor, due to the existence of frequent formal and informal crossing facilities, and the footpath within the verge.

Existing Fear and Intimidation

8.72 By relating Table 8.3 to Table 8.5 it is inferred that a moderate level of pedestrian and cyclist fear and intimidation exists on West Marsh Road given existing vehicle flows of less than 1200.

Existing Bus Services

8.73 The nearest bus stops to the proposed SEE site are located on West Marsh Road, West Elloe Avenue and Holbeach Road on the A151 approximately 1 km to the south.

8.74 The bus stops are served by 5 bus services providing up to 3 buses (collectively) per hour during the AM and PM peak hours. Links are provides to Spalding Town centre, Kirton, Boston and Spilsby.

Existing Rail Services

8.75 Spalding Railway Station is located 3 km from the proposed SEE site. This station is served and operated by East Midlands Trains providing services to London via Peterborough to the south and Doncaster via Lincoln to the north at a frequency of 1 train per hour each way throughout the majority of the day.

Summary

8.76 The proposed SEE site benefits from a high level of transport accessibility being adjacent to West Marsh Road and close to Wardentree Lane. These roads in turn provide access to the A16(T), a strategic route located within a kilometre of the proposed SEE site. The proposed SEE site is also accessible by more sustainable modes of transport given its proximity to pedestrian and cyclist networks, and the availability of bus and rail services in Spalding.


8-8 Issue: 6 64-C13376

Potential Impacts

8.77 The potential traffic impacts that could arise as a consequence of the proposed SEE are divided into two categories, those arising during construction and those arising once the proposed SEE site is operational.

8.78 During construction, traffic impacts will occur mainly as a result of the following activities:

• removal of a Mound pre-construction by HGV;

• import and export of construction materials by HGV;

• import and export of soils for substation;

• the mobilisation of plant by HGV;

• the delivery of concrete; and

• construction workers / personnel accessing and egressing the worksite.

8.79 If left unmitigated these activities may give rise to the following potential impacts:

• an increase in vehicular movement on West Marsh Road, Wardentree Lane and the A16;

• an increase in driver delay, congestion and queuing in the study area;

• an increase in pedestrian and cyclist delay, severance, fear and intimidation;

• junctions in the study area may work close to their theoretical maximum capacity; and

• an increase in HGV nuisance and annoyance in the study area.

8.80 During the operational phase of the proposed SEE, traffic impacts will occur mainly as a result of two types of activities; normal working conditions and the peak maintenance.

Mitigation

8.81 This section will explain which mitigation measures will be introduced to reduce and/or control the significance and magnitude of potential impacts during construction and the operational phase. The section also explains how mitigation by design has informed the indicative layout of the proposed SEE.

Mitigation by design

8.82 As a starting point potential impacts have been reduced and / or controlled by design. The scheme was designed to interact effectively with surrounding transport infrastructure and to reduce likely transport impacts as far as possible, as described below.

8.83 The main and preferred point of access into the proposed SEE site will be via Gate A off West Marsh Road, to the north of the existing SECL power station. Gate C provides an alternative and direct access to the proposed SEE site. Gate A will provide access to visitors and staff only and will distribute traffic to the proposed SEE site via the internal road network. The internal road network will also introduce footways and hence continued walking infrastructure and provide a link between the existing SECL power station and the proposed SEE site.

8.84 The internal layout of the proposed SEE site has been designed in line with its needs, by providing pedestrian and cyclist access from the public highway by means of footways and

unmarked on-street cycle facilities. Adequate on-site parking is provided for staff and visitors, reducing the need for off-site parking.

8.85 Waste collection will take place from a conveniently located storage area. Sufficient space is provided for a large refuse vehicle to enter and leave the site in a forward gear thereby reducing potential vehicle conflicts associated with reversing onto the public highway.

8.86 Given the level of traffic that will be generated by the proposed SEE during its operational phase, the design of site access Gate A is considered acceptable to ensure that it operates within capacity and does not create general highway safety concerns.

8.87 The internal road network width within the proposed SEE site will be 6 m, with 1.8 m footways and minimum kerb radii of 10.5 m.

8.88 In reducing the anticipated construction traffic impact on the local highway network, personnel parking will be provided on site as well as off-site. 65% of personnel trips generated by the construction process, requiring parking, will be accommodated on site (300 informal on site parking spaces will be provided) whilst the remaining 35% (further 155 spaces) will accommodated off-site. On site parking facilities will be accessed via Gate C.

8.89 Currently, access Gate C takes the form of a priority junction, constructed to current design standards, with an 8.8 m carriageway width and 12 m kerb radii as required by the DMRB published by the Highways Agency12 and Development Guidance issued by LCC13 for developments of this nature. These dimensions are sufficient to support HGVs turning movements and site access.

8.90 At this stage SEEL is still in discussion with SHDC regarding the identification of a suitable off-site parking location(s), which is expected to be within a 5 – 8 km radius from the proposed SEE site. A shuttle bus will be used to transport personnel to and from the off-site car park and the proposed SEE site thereby reducing potential traffic impact at Gate C during construction.

8.91 Given the road alignment of West Marsh Road (long, straight), visibility from Gate A, B and C meets current DMRB (Volume 6)11 standards. This design feature allows for sufficient stopping sight distances and will reduce the likelihood of road traffic accidents and or vehicle conflict.

8.92 The site access points (Gates A - C) are of sufficient dimension to allow emergency vehicles safe and convenient access to the site. Operational procedures during and following construction will ensure that safe practices are adopted to allow emergency vehicles onto the site as well establishing safe emergency escape routes as part of CDM procedures and guidelines prescribed by the Health and Safety Executive.

8.93 In view of the above, it is considered that the design of the proposed SEE has, as far as possible, designed out the occurrence of some potential highway impacts that may have adverse effects on road users (drivers, cyclists and pedestrians).

Mitigation during construction phase

8.94 The traffic movements will be significant during the construction phase. It is, therefore, essential to put in place mitigation measures to reduce and or control such impacts.

12 Highways Agency (2008) Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB), accessed online (http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/dmrb/vol6/section3/ta9005.pdf)

13 Lincolnshire County Council (2005) Development Guide on Transport and New Development Issues in Lincolnshire



64-C13376 Issue: 6 8-9

8.95 A draft CTMP containing various measures has been developed as part of the Transport Statement (appended to the ES as Technical Appendix 8.1) as the primary tool to mitigate transport impacts arising from the proposed SEE.

8.96 The main purpose of the CTMP is to identify the way in which to manage construction traffic and explain the measures that will be implemented and the systems that will be operated on site in order to ensure that any nuisance to or impacts on other road users and local residents is kept to a minimum and that safe vehicle operation occurs.

8.97 The final CTMP would deal with the arrangements to be set in place to manage the movement of people, materials and plant on and off the development site during the construction phase. It is intended to form the basis of consultation on the management of construction traffic as it relates to the local community and will form the platform for discussions between interested parties prior to the commencement of construction. The implementation of a CTMP will form a condition of the Section 36 Consent. A final working document CTMP should be completed before spoil mound removal starts.

8.98 The objectives of the CTMP are to mitigate the potential impacts associated with an increased level of traffic flow in the study area, to ensure that operations within the site take place without adverse impact on the public highway and that the construction is run in an efficient and sympathetic manner at all times. This will be achieved through a combination of management practices and physical measures.

8.99 The construction manager will hold regular consultations with the local planning and highway authorities regarding the management of the construction phase. To strengthen the relationship with the public and business community the construction manager will act as the overall point of contact with local residents, local businesses, SHDC, LCC and other consultees.

8.100 Whilst full details of a draft CTMP are provided at Section 5 of the Transport Statement appended to the ES as Technical Appendix 8.1, the following typical measures will be included:

• construction access to the site will be provided with wide turning circles, good lines of sight and signing, in order to minimise conflicts at the site entrance Gate C;

• prescribed routes for construction traffic will be agreed with the DOT, LCC Highways Department and SHDC, particularly with respect to HGV traffic and abnormal loads;

• the scheduling and route of abnormal loads will be publicised in advance; and,

• HGV deliveries will be scheduled and/or use of in-cab communications to minimise the potential for platooning and, therefore, queues of HGVs waiting to access the site or at road junctions.

8.101 The significance of the impacts during the peak period of construction and during the AM and PM peak periods at junctions (particularly at Gate C) will be as follows:

• disruption in the form of queues and delays to journeys will occur mainly during the peak hours and will occur for a limited duration, i.e. during the peak construction period (month 18 and potentially 17 and 19); and

• other than during the peak period of construction during 2013 (month 18 and potentially 17 and 19) it is considered that the daily impact associated with construction traffic is acceptable.

8.102 The introduction of a CTMP will help reduce the traffic impact in terms of likely HGV annoyance, vehicle delay, queuing and congestion as it will have the ability to influence the vehicle arrival and departure profile.

8.103 The impact of construction traffic on pedestrian cyclist amenity and delay would be offset by mitigation at the proposed SEE site entrance Gate C by means of introducing a CTMP. One of the measures to be introduced is to employ a safety steward at Gate C during the peak hours to assist pedestrians and cyclists to cross the junction safely.

8.104 It is considered that the introduction of the package of measures contained by the CTMP is a principal element of mitigation that will help reduce the impact of construction traffic.

Mitigation during the operational phase

8.105 Whilst the number of additional vehicles generated during normal working conditions as part of the operational phase is limited and not considered to have a material highway impact, SEEL will offer a Travel Plan in their commitment to encourage staff to travel to the site by the most sustainable mode practical. The Plan will include measures to promote walking, cycling, the use of public transport and car sharing and endeavour to achieve mode shift targets. The Travel Plan will primarily be aimed at staff, although information will be made available to visitors of opportunities (and advantages) to travel to the site by modes other than the private car.

8.106 Typical measures that will be considered for implementation include:

• Travel Co-ordinator: SEEL will appoint a Travel Co-ordinator responsible for the development. That person will be responsible for all aspects of the Travel Plan including liaison with staff, discussions with SHDC, implementation of proposals and monitoring and reporting;

• provision for Cyclists: Parking facilities will be provided for those cycling to work;

• public transport information: The Travel Co-ordinator will be responsible for disseminating information regarding public transport routes and services in the vicinity of the site. General information will also be displayed within the site;

• website: The Travel Co-ordinator will establish and maintain a website dealing with travel options to and from the site;

• car sharing scheme: The Travel Co-ordinator will consider implementing a car sharing scheme; and

• monitoring and review: The Travel Co-ordinator will undertake regular monitoring of the performance of the Travel Plan e.g. by undertaking travel surveys and will report to the SHDC initially on an annual basis. The Co-ordinator will discuss with SHDC ways in which measures can be amended if the objectives of the Travel Plan are not being met.

8.107 The combination of measures contained in the Travel Plan will help reduce the impact of general operational traffic.

8.108 Traffic associated with peak maintenance periods is considered to be of insufficient magnitude to warrant direct mitigation by formal traffic management. On site operational practices and or the Travel Plan and management procedures will ensure that traffic generated during


8-10 Issue: 6 64-C13376

maintenance periods are controlled to reduce likely traffic impacts. It is considered that such procedures will ensure that highway impacts are local and limited.

Impact Assessment

8.109 This section explains the residual impacts, i.e. the remaining impacts of the proposed SEE, following the introduction of the mitigation measures described above assuming the implementation of the design as proposed is adopted.

8.110 To quantify the impacts two primary periods of assessment are considered, the construction phase and the operational phase. To quantify the impacts of construction traffic it is treated under two separate headings, HGV traffic and Personnel movements. Operational traffic is also treated under two separate headings, general working condition traffic and maintenance traffic.

HGV Traffic

8.111 Prior to construction a Mound of circa 140,000 tonnes will be removed by HGV from the proposed SEE site. The removal will take place from March 2011 over an estimated period of 6 months (Months -6–0) between the hours of 07:00 – 19:00 each weekday, and 07:00-17:00 on Saturdays. Circa 15 HGVs with a payload of 15 tonnes will be used for this purpose on a daily basis.

8.112 Given the amount of spoil to be removed, the number of HGV vehicles used and the time it takes to undertake a round trip, this activity will create 120 daily vehicle movements (two-way, i.e. 60 in and 60 out) and 10 movements (two-way, i.e. 5 in and 5 out) per hour.

8.113 Following the removal of the Mound, earthworks at the site will commence around September 2011. NGET will require that the area of the substation is excavated to a 3 m depth and replaced with clean fill material. Therefore, during months 1 - 6 of construction, it is expected that circa 85,500 tonnes of soil will be exported and a similar amount of replacement soil will be imported to the site. Up to 10 HGVs with a payload of 15 tonnes will be used for this purpose on a daily basis. Vehicle trips will be reduced during this activity as HGVs will be fully laden during outbound and inbound trips as imported soil is likely to be obtained from the same location as where excavated site soil will be taken. All HGV movements will arrive and depart the proposed SEE site via West Marsh Road and A16.

8.114 Given the amount of soil to be imported and exported during this task, the number of HGVs used and the time it takes to undertake a round trip, this activity will create circa 72 daily vehicle movements (two-way) and up to 6 movements (two-way) per hour.

8.115 Ground improvement is also required in the form of “vibro stone columns”. It is anticipated that circa 34,000 tonnes of stones/pebbles will be imported to the proposed SEE site during Months 1 - 6 and that up to 8 HGVs with a payload of 15 tonnes will be used for this purpose on a daily basis. Imported stone/pebbles will be sourced within 20 miles of the proposed SEE site and all HGV movements will arrive and depart via West Marsh Road and A16.

8.116 Given the amount of stone/pebbles to be imported to the site, the number of HGVs used and the time estimated to undertake a round trip, this activity will create approximately 46 daily vehicle movements (two-way) and up to 4 movements (two-way) per hour.

8.117 Pre-cast piles will be required for the ACC construction. It is expected that approximately 30 deliveries (60 trips two-way, i.e. 30 inbound and 30 outbound) will be made to assemble 10 piles during Months 1 - 6. This activity translates to approximately 10 two-way HGV trips per month or little over 1 delivery a week.

8.118 All the above activities will take place between 07:00 – 19:00 each weekday, and 07:00 -14:00 on Saturdays between Months 1 and 6. HGV traffic is expected to peak between Months 1 and 6 of construction.

8.119 From Month 7 onwards HGV traffic will continue to deliver construction materials and remove further top soil and waste between 07:00 – 19:00 each weekday, and 07:00 - 14:00 on Saturdays. Approximately 10 concrete deliveries will be made per day between Month 8 and 14. HGV traffic is, however, expected to reduce between Months 7 and 14 of construction (compared to Month 1 and 6), which coincides with the latter months of site preparation and the beginning of the heavy civil engineering phase. During these periods, approximately 50 HGVs are expected to access the proposed SEE site daily (i.e. equivalent to 100 two-way movements).

8.120 This peak HGV activity does not, however, correspond with the period of greatest total vehicle activity, which will occur in Month 18 of the construction programme, when the total number of construction workers on site is expected to be at a maximum during mechanical and electrical installation works. During this period, approximately 17 HGVs will access the proposed SEE site daily (i.e. 34 movements per day).

8.121 In addition to the above HGV movements, a number of abnormal load deliveries will be made. These will mainly occur in Months 11 and 12 (i.e. 2012) when approximately 22 abnormal loads per month will be made. Assuming an even distribution throughout the month, this would translate to one abnormal load delivery per day (i.e. 2 movements). In addition 3 abnormal loads (one per month) are also expected to be undertaken during Months 13, 14 and 16.

8.122 In terms of the scheduling of movements, a CTMP, as detailed earlier in this chapter, will ensure that HGV movements will be evenly distributed throughout the working day (i.e. spread equally from 07:00 to 19:00 hours). This aspect of the proposed SEE will be achieved by means of a condition attached to the Section 36 Consent.



64-C13376 Issue: 6 8-11

8.123 Chart 8.1 illustrates the profile of HGV movements during construction.

Daily 2-way HGV movements

120 123

100

34 34 34 34

020406080

100120140

Month -6- 0

Month 1- 6

Month 7- 14

Month15 - 16

Month17 - 19

Year2013

Year2014

Construction period

HGV

mov

emen

ts

Chart 8.1 Daily 2-way HGV movements

Personnel Movements

8.124 As set out in paragraph 8.22 an average of between 18 to 455 construction workers will access the site daily. Therefore, assuming one vehicle per construction worker, a maximum of approximately 455 cars/light goods vehicles (one-way) will be generated at the beginning and at the end of each working day during the peak month of construction. In terms of the profile of these movements, it is considered that for the purpose of analysis all arrivals will take place between 07:00 and 08:00 hours and all departures between 18:00 and 19:00 hours (as a worst case scenario). It should however be recognised that these arrival and departure times fall outside the AM and PM peak hour traffic flow as illustrated by the ATC data.

8.125 To identify the trip distribution patterns associated with the proposed SEE site it was assumed that operational traffic will disperse on the wider highway network in the same proportions as the traffic surveyed on the network at Gate A of the existing SECL power station.

8.126 Construction traffic was distributed onto the wider highway network following discussions with SEEL and on the basis of experience gained whilst constructing the existing SECL power station.

8.127 It is assumed that all personnel construction traffic will arrive during the morning peak and depart during the evening peak.

8.128 The distribution assumes that 40% of trips arrive from the north and 40% from the south along the A16 (T). It is further assumed that 10% of trips arriving at the site will do so via Wardentree Lane west of the site and that a further 10% of trips arrive at the site from the south of Spalding via West Marsh Road (non–HGV representing car, van and LGV trips from the area west of Spalding and in Spalding).

8.129 In terms of departures from the site during the PM peak, the same distribution assumption has been adopted for traffic arriving at the development (i.e. trips will depart from the site in the same direction as they arrived).

8.130 Because West Marsh Road has a width restriction to its south where it joins the A151, no HGV movements will arrive at the proposed SEE site from the south. All HGV movements are assumed to access the site via the A16(T) and Wardentree Lane.

Construction Phase

VEHICULAR TRIP GENERATION

8.131 In identifying the impact of construction traffic, only the period during which total construction traffic is predicted to peak was assessed. The assessment therefore focused on traffic movements during 2013 in reflecting a worst case scenario.

8.132 Construction traffic (personnel cars / LGVs) accessing the off-site car park(s) was not included in the analytical process as the car park is expected to be located well outside the study area. The shuttle bus movements associated with transferring personnel to the site is estimated to be low, i.e. 3 one-way bus trips during the peak hours, and have also been excluded from the analysis.

8.133 Notwithstanding this, Table 8.8 details the total estimated traffic movements during the construction phase and reflects a scenario for each year, representing the predicted month in which construction traffic is at its peak.

Table 8.8 Summary of two-way peak hour construction traffic generation for years 2011 - 2014

2011 2012 2013 2014

Traffic type Hourly Daily Hourly Daily Hourly Daily Hourly Daily

HGV 10 123 8 100 3 34 3 34

Car/LGV 3 40 200 400 455 910 200 400

Abnormal Loads 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0

Total 13 163 208 502 458 944 203 434

8.134 From Table 8.8 it was possible to estimate the construction traffic arrival and departure profile during the AM and PM peak hours, shown by Table 8.9.

Table 8.9 Construction traffic generation arrival and departure profile

AM Peak (07:00 – 08:00) PM Peak (18:00 – 19:00)

Year Arrivals Departures Arrivals Departures

2011 7(5)* 7(5)* 7(5)* 7(5)*

2012 208(8)* 8(8) * 8(8) * 208(8) *

2013 458(2) * 2(2) * 2(2) * 458(2) *

2014 203(2) * 2(2) * 2(2) * 203(2) *

* Note: Number between bracket denotes number of HGV movements of total


8-12 Issue: 6 64-C13376

8.135 By applying the construction traffic associated with 2013 to the 2013 forecast baseline flows, Table 8.10 illustrates the net increase in one-way traffic that will result.

Table 8.10 Net increase in one-way traffic flows associated with construction traffic 2013

Location 2013 Construction traffic

2013 + Construction

traffic

% Increase

A16(T) northbound, north of Wardentree Lane Rbt

07:00 – 08:00 533 119 652 22

17:00 – 18:00 889 119 1008 13

A16(T) southbound, south of Wardentree Lane Rbt

07:00 – 08:00 991 119 1110 12

17:00 – 18:00 817 119 936 15

West Marsh Road northbound

07:00 – 08:00 305 30 335 10

17:00 – 18:00 462 268 730 58

West Marsh Road southbound

07:00 – 08:00 488 268 756 55

17:00 – 18:00 382 30 412 8

Wardentree Lane eastbound, east of Rbt

07:00 – 08:00 562 238 800 42

17:00 – 18:00 985 238 1223 24

8.136 The table shows that construction traffic will give rise to an increase over baseline one-way flows in the order of 22% on the A16(T).

8.137 Peak hour one-way construction traffic on West Marsh Road will result in an increase of up to 58% over 2013 baseline flows at the beginning and end of the working day and, therefore, it is considered that there is potential for a moderate local traffic impact. Wardentree Lane will see an increase of up to 42% in one-way traffic flow.

8.138 A key area of local impact and disruption will be at Gate C where vehicles may queue to access the proposed SEE site during the peak hours. On the basis of the criteria set out in paragraphs 8.29-8.31, it is considered that these net increases may cause some disruption to other road users during the peak period of construction, particularly on West Marsh Road. Due to the magnitude of the change, the significance of impact will be moderate.

8.139 Whilst abnormal loads will also inevitably cause a degree of disruption to other road users, it should be noted that it will not be a daily feature of construction and will be undertaken only occasionally for a limited period of the construction programme. Therefore, abnormal loads are not predicted to significantly affect the traffic conditions on local roads.

CHANGES IN ROAD TRAFFIC FLOWS IN THE AREA

8.140 As shown by Table 8.10 above, construction traffic will give rise to an increase in baseline flows in the order of 55% to 58% on West Marsh Road. This increase presents a moderate impact on the sensitivity receptors, especially pedestrians and cyclists passing through the study area.

LOCAL HIGHWAY CAPACITY (DRIVER DELAY, CONGESTION AND QUEUING)

8.141 To determine the impact of construction traffic on key junctions in the study area an assessment has been undertaken of the weekday AM (07:00 – 08:00) and PM (18:00 – 19:00) peak hour two-way traffic flows at the following junctions for the 2013 assessment year, the year generating most construction traffic:

• at Gate C on West Marsh Road;

• at the roundabout formed between West Marsh Road and Wardentree Lane; and

• at the roundabout formed between Wardentree Lane and the A16(T).

8.142 Junction modelling results are shown in Tables 8.11 - 8.13.

Table 8.11 West Marsh Road / Gate C Junction Assessment Summary

AM Peak PM Peak

Arm Demand Flow RFC Queue Demand Flow RFC Queue

Gate C to West Marsh Road (North & South)

1.4 0.003 0.00 410 0.549 1.20

West Marsh Road (North) to West Marsh Road (South) & Gate C

368 0.503 0.99 1.4 0.004 0.00

Table 8.12 West Marsh Road / Wardentree Lane Junction Assessment Summary

AM Peak PM Peak


Wardentree Lane (East) 1442 0.359 0.6 647 0.176 0.2

West Marsh Road (South) 366 0.179 0.2 966 0.399 0.6

Wardentree Lane (East) 815 0.283 0.4 1155 0.437 0.8

West Marsh Road (North) 30 0.027 0.0 80 0.054 0.1



64-C13376 Issue: 6 8-13

Table 8.13 Wardentree Lane / A16(T) Junction Assessment Summary

AM Peak PM Peak


A16(T) (South) 1053 0.502 1.0 1025 0.422 0.7

Wardentree Lane 560 0.260 0.4 1309 0.575 1.3

A16(T) (South) 1347 0.511 1.0 741 0.307 0.4

8.143 Given the results it is considered that construction traffic will have a moderate traffic impact on other road users at junctions in the study network during the peak period of construction, with a particular area of impact being at the site entrance Gate C on West Marsh Road. Whilst Table 8.11 shows that the site access will operate within capacity during the AM and PM peak periods there is the potential for vehicles queuing when accessing or leaving the site to cause some disruption.

PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST AMENITY AND DELAY

8.144 The level of existing pedestrian amenity and delay off-site would be affected by the level of peak hour construction traffic increases associated with the proposed SEE. Given that the net increase in traffic flow is above 30% (as shown by Table 8.10) on West Marsh Road, it is considered that construction traffic may pose a moderate impact on pedestrian and cyclist amenity and delay during the peak hours although the number of pedestrians and cyclists are relatively low during these periods.

8.145 During the off-peak hours, the local highway impact upon pedestrians and cyclists is considered negligible to moderate.

PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST FEAR AND INTIMIDATION

8.146 The thresholds for assessing fear and intimidation have been detailed above at Table 8.3. The existing level of fear and intimidation in the study area is already great, particularly with respect to vehicle speeds and vehicle flow. The three elements of construction traffic that increase levels of fear and intimidation are the average hourly traffic flows, the total HGV flows, and average vehicle speeds on any highway link associated with the development.

8.147 Whilst Gate C will be an area of particular impact during the peak hours as pedestrians and cyclists have to cross it, a safety steward will help reduce the impact. With reference to the above criteria, and in the context of Table 8.3 and 8.10, mitigation will therefore result in a moderate residual impact on pedestrian and cyclist fear and intimidation.

8.148 During the off-peak hours, the highway impact upon pedestrians and cyclists is considered negligible to moderate.

PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST SEVERANCE

8.149 The threshold for assessing pedestrian severance is based on the DfT 1983 Manual of Environmental Appraisal range of indicators for assessing changes in traffic flows as shown at Table 8.4 above. Given the net increase in average traffic flow as shown by Table 8.10 it is

possible to determine the level of severance experienced on each link in the study area. To this end it is expected that a slight increase in severance will occur on the A16(T), a moderate increase in severance on Wardentree Lane and a moderate increase in severance on West Marsh Road.

8.150 Mitigation will, therefore, help reduce the impact of severance with the residual impact being moderate to slight.

POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANCE OF EFFECTS

8.151 Table 8.14 illustrates the significance of the residual impacts during construction post-mitigation.

Table 8.14 Significance of the residual impacts during construction post-mitigation

Significance during construction phase Residual impacts

AM & PM Peak Off-Peak

Increase in traffic in local area Moderate Moderate

Driver delay, congestion and queuing Moderate Moderate

Nuisance caused by increased HGV movements Moderate Moderate

Pedestrian and cyclist amenity and delay Moderate Negligible/ Moderate

Pedestrian and cyclist fear and intimidation Moderate Negligible/ Moderate

Pedestrian and cyclist severance Moderate Slight

8.152 The table shows that once the mitigation measures are introduced during the construction phase the residual impact during the AM and PM peak periods is considered moderate.

Operational Phase

8.153 In identifying the impact of operational traffic, the assessment differentiates between general operational traffic (i.e. 48 to 68 staff members plus visitors and security staff etc.) and maintenance traffic (peak of 250 staff in total) accessing the proposed SEE site either via Gate A or Gate C.

General operational traffic


8.154 As explained above two operational scenarios have been considered. The first scenario envisages a shared management between SECL and SEEL and is, therefore, based on 48 staff members (20 direct and 28 indirect) plus visitors and security staff etc. using Gate A as the main site access. Table 8.15 shows that 54 (48 direct and indirect staff, plus 6 visitors, security staff etc.) inbound and 54 outbound vehicles will be associated with the proposed SEE site during the peak hours.


8-14 Issue: 6 64-C13376

Table 8.15 Peak hour general operational traffic associated with proposed SEE – Gate A

In (vehicles) Out (Vehicles)

Time period Cars HGV Total Cars HGV Total

AM Peak: 0800-0900 54 0 54 3 0 3

PM Peak:1700-1800 3 0 3 54 0 54

8.155 An alternative scenario involves an assessment based on a wholly stand alone power station

with 68 staff members (40 direct and 28 indirect) plus visitors and security staff etc. using Gate C. Table 8.16 shows that 74 (68 direct and indirect staff, plus 6 visitors, security staff etc.) inbound and 74 outbound vehicles will be associated with the site during the peak hours in such an event.

Table 8.16 Peak hour general operational traffic associated with proposed SEE – Gate C


Time period Cars HGV Total Cars HGV Total

AM Peak: 0800-0900 74 0 74 3 0 3

PM Peak:1700-1800 3 0 3 74 0 74

8.156 The impact of the increase in general operational traffic associated with the proposed SEE under either scenario (i.e. both Gate A and Gate C) is considered negligible given the magnitude of increase in general operational traffic being well below 30% as demonstrated by Table 8.17 and 8.18. The implementation of a Travel Plan will further reduce or mitigate this impact by including measures to promote walking, cycling, the use of public transport and car sharing.

Table 8.17 Increase in traffic during general working conditions: two-way flows (Lights + Heavies) Gate A

Location 2014 Opening year traffic

Operational traffic

2014 + Operational

traffic

% Increase

A16 north of Wardentree Lane Rbt

08:00 – 09:00 1524 14 1538 1

17:00 – 18:00 1589 14 1603 1

A16 south of Wardentree Lane Rbt

08:00 – 09:00 1566 15 1581 1

17:00 – 18:00 1537 15 1552 1

West Marsh Road

08:00 – 09:00 808 57 865 7

17:00 – 18:00 858 57 915 7

Wardentree Lane (E)

08:00 – 09:00 1476 29 1505 2

Table 8.17 Increase in traffic during general working conditions: two-way flows (Lights + Heavies) Gate A


Operational traffic

2014 + Operational

traffic

% Increase

17:00 – 18:00 1543 29 1572 2

Wardentree Lane (W)

08:00 – 09:00 1414 28 1442 2

17:00 – 18:00 1560 28 1588 2

Spalding Road B1356 (N)

08:00 – 09:00 1459 28 1487 2

17:00 – 18:00 1584 28 1612 2

Spalding Road B1356 (S)

08:00 – 09:00 906 2 908 0

17:00 – 18:00 945 2 947 0


08:00 – 09:00 696 26 722 4

17:00 – 18:00 821 26 847 3

Table 8.18 Increase in traffic during general working conditions: two-way flows (Lights + Heavies) Gate C


Operational traffic

2014 + Operational

traffic

% Increase


08:00 – 09:00 1524 19 1543 1

17:00 – 18:00 1589 19 1608 1


08:00 – 09:00 1566 20 1586 1

17:00 – 18:00 1537 20 1557 1

West Marsh Road

08:00 – 09:00 808 74 882 9

17:00 – 18:00 858 74 932 9

Wardentree Lane (E)

08:00 – 09:00 1476 39 1515 3

17:00 – 18:00 1543 39 1582 3

Wardentree Lane (W)

08:00 – 09:00 1414 35 1449 2



64-C13376 Issue: 6 8-15

Table 8.18 Increase in traffic during general working conditions: two-way flows (Lights + Heavies) Gate C


Operational traffic

2014 + Operational

traffic

% Increase

17:00 – 18:00 1560 35 1595 2


08:00 – 09:00 1459 35 1494 2

17:00 – 18:00 1584 35 1619 2


08:00 – 09:00 906 4 910 0

17:00 – 18:00 945 4 949 0


08:00 – 09:00 696 31 727 4

17:00 – 18:00 821 31 852 4

8.157 Against this background it is considered that the proposed SEE will have a negligible impact on the sensitive receptors.


8.158 As shown by Table 8.17 and 8.18 above, operational traffic associated with the proposed SEE will be negligible given that the magnitude of operational traffic will be well below 30% of the predicted 2014 two-way flows.


8.159 Table 8.19 and 8.20 below show the results of assessing the operation of the main site access Gate A under the first scenario, and Gate C under the alternative scenario, in the opening year 2014.

Table 8.19 Junction operation Gate A – general operational traffic 2014

AM Peak Hour (08:00-09:00)

PM Peak Hour (17:00-18:00)

Traffic Stream Maximum

RFC Maximum

Queue Maximum

RFC Maximum

Queue

Site access Gate A – West Marsh Road N & S 0.013 0.01 0.139 0.16

West Marsh Road N - Site access Gate A 0.100 0.12 0.006 0.01

Table 8.20 Junction operation Gate C – general operational traffic 2014

AM Peak Hour (08:00-09:00)

PM Peak Hour (17:00-18:00)


RFC Maximum

Queue Maximum

RFC Maximum

Queue

Site access Gate C – West Marsh Road N & S 0.010 0.01 0.136 0.16

West Marsh Road N - Site access Gate C 0.110 0.12 0.002 0.00

8.160 The tables confirms that Gate A and C will have sufficient capacity to cater for the increase in general operational traffic at the proposed SEE site.

8.161 Against the background of the guidance provided by the TRL14 the assessment demonstrates that Gate A and C will operate well within capacity during the AM and PM peak hours and that no queuing will occur.

8.162 It is therefore considered that the traffic associated with the general operation of the proposed SEE site will have a negligible impact on local junctions and hence sensitive receptors from a capacity point of view.


8.163 As identified above, the proposed SEE will introduce on-site pedestrian routes which will connect to existing off-site pedestrian and cyclist infrastructure.

8.164 The level of existing pedestrian amenity and delay off-site would be affected to a negligible extent by traffic associated with the proposed SEE. Given that the net increase in traffic flow is well below 30% as shown by Table 8.17 and 8.18, it is considered that general operational traffic will have a negligible impact on pedestrian and cyclist amenity, delay and movements.


8.165 The existing level of fear and intimidation in the study area is already great given the assessment thresholds detailed at Table 8.3. The three elements of operational traffic that increase levels of fear and intimidation are the average hourly traffic flows, the total HGV flows and average vehicle speeds.

8.166 With reference to the above criteria and in the context of Table 8.17 and 8.18 it is considered that the impact of general operational traffic in terms of pedestrian and cyclist fear and intimidation will be negligible.


8.167 By relating the pedestrian and cycling severance thresholds shown at Table 8.4 above to the net increase in average traffic flow in the study area shown by Table 8.17 and 8.18, it is considered that the additional level of local pedestrian and cyclist severance associated with general operational traffic will be “slight”.

14 TRL Ltd (2006) PICADY 5.1 AD


8-16 Issue: 6 64-C13376

Maintenance traffic


8.168 Table 8.21 summarises the peak hour maintenance / outage traffic associated with the proposed SEE. It shows that 250 inbound and 250 outbound vehicles will be associated with the site during the peak hours.

Table 8.21 Peak hour maintenance traffic associated with proposed SEE


Time Period Cars HGV Total Cars HGV Total

AM Peak: 0800-0900 250 0 250 3 0 3

PM Peak:1700-1800 3 0 3 250 0 250

8.169 The impact of the increase in traffic associated with maintenance / outage traffic is considered negligible given the magnitude of traffic being no more than a 30% increase as demonstrated by Table 8.22.

Table 8.22 Increase in traffic during maintenance: two-way flows (Lights + Heavies) Gate A / C

Location 2015 Opening year

traffic

Operational traffic

2015 + Operational

traffic

% Increase


08:00 – 09:00 1573 53 1626 3

17:00 – 18:00 1639 50 1689 3


08:00 – 09:00 1616 78 1694 5

17:00 – 18:00 1586 62 1648 4

West Marsh Road

08:00 – 09:00 834 250 1084 30

17:00 – 18:00 885 250 1135 28

Wardentree Lane (E)

08:00 – 09:00 1523 131 1654 9

17:00 – 18:00 1592 112 1704 7

Wardentree Lane (W)

08:00 – 09:00 1459 69 1528 5

17:00 – 18:00 1610 82 1692 5


08:00 – 09:00 1506 58 1564 4

17:00 – 18:00 1635 73 1708 4

Table 8.22 Increase in traffic during maintenance: two-way flows (Lights + Heavies) Gate A / C

Location 2015 Opening year

traffic

Operational traffic

2015 + Operational

traffic

% Increase


08:00 – 09:00 935 11 946 1

17:00 – 18:00 976 9 985 1


08:00 – 09:00 718 58 776 8

17:00 – 18:00 847 73 920 9


8.170 As shown by Table 8.22 above, maintenance traffic associated with the proposed SEE will have a negligible impact given that the magnitude of this traffic is no more than 30% of the predicted 2015 two-way flows.


8.171 Table 8.23 and 8.24 below show the results of assessing the operation of both scenarios respectively (Gate A as primary site access and Gate C as primary site access) during a maintenance period in 2015.

Table 8.23 Junction operation Gate A – maintenance traffic 2015

AM Peak Hour (08:00-09:00)

PM Peak Hour (17:00-18:00)


RFC Maximum

Queue Maximum

RFC Maximum

Queue

Site access Gate A – West Marsh Road N & S 0.016 0.02 0.560 1.25

West Marsh Road N - Site access Gate A 0.391 0.83 0.004 0.00

Table 8.24 Junction operation Gate C – maintenance traffic 2015

AM Peak Hour (08:00-09:00)

PM Peak Hour (17:00-18:00)


RFC Maximum

Queue Maximum

RFC Maximum

Queue

Site access Gate C – West Marsh Road N & S 0.009 0.01 0.463 0.84

West Marsh Road N - Site access Gate C 0.377 0.60 0.002 0.00

8.172 The tables confirm that both Gate A and Gate C will have sufficient capacity to cater for the increase in maintenance traffic at the proposed SEE site.



64-C13376 Issue: 6 8-17

8.173 Against the background of the guidance provided by the TRL15 the assessment demonstrates that Gate A and C will operate well within capacity during the AM and PM peak hours and that very little queuing will occur.

8.174 It is therefore considered that the traffic associated with peak maintenance periods at the proposed SEE site will have a negligible impact on local junctions and hence sensitivity receptors from a capacity point of view.


8.175 The level of existing pedestrian amenity and delay off-site would be affected to a negligible extent by traffic associated with the maintenance process at the SEE site. Given that the net increase in traffic flow is no more than 30% as shown by Table 8.22, it is considered that maintenance traffic will have a negligible impact on pedestrian and cyclist amenity, delay and movements.


8.176 The existing level of fear and intimidation in the study area is already great given the assessment thresholds detailed at Table 8.3. The three elements of operational traffic that increase levels of fear and intimidation are the average hourly traffic flows, the total HGV flows and average vehicle speeds.

8.177 With reference to the above criteria and in the context of Table 8.22 it is considered that the impact of maintenance traffic in terms of pedestrian and cyclist fear and intimidation will be negligible.


8.178 By relating the pedestrian and cycling severance thresholds shown at Table 8.4 above to the net increase in average traffic flow in the study area shown by Table 8.22, it is considered that the additional level of local pedestrian and cyclist severance associated with maintenance traffic will be “slight”.

POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANCE OF EFFECTS

8.179 Table 8.25 illustrates the significance of the residual impacts once the proposed SEE is operational.

15 TRL Ltd (2006) PICADY 5.1 AD

Table 8.25 Significance of the residual impacts during the operational phase post-mitigation

Residual impacts Significance during general operation

Significance during maintenance

Increase in traffic in local area Insignificant Insignificant

Driver delay, congestion and queuing Insignificant Insignificant

Nuisance caused by increased HGV movements Insignificant Insignificant

Pedestrian and cyclist amenity and delay Insignificant Insignificant

Pedestrian and cyclist fear and intimidation Insignificant Insignificant

Pedestrian and cyclist severance Slight Slight

8.180 Once the proposed SEE is operational, its primary residual impact is a small net increase in traffic. The residual impact is considered to be negligible.

Committed development

8.181 The Transport Statement appended to the ES as Technical Appendix 8.1 highlighted the possibility that the recent outline planning permission received by RAND Developments Ltd. and Howtin Investments Ltd. (RAND) for a proposed petrol filling station development adjacent to the proposed SEE site may be implemented at some point in the future, assumed to be within 5 to 6 years. Assuming this development is built there will be a cumulative or combined traffic impact on the local highway network.

8.182 Given the uncertainty as to precisely when the petrol filling station development will be built it is appropriate to determine the likely cumulative impacts based on the increases in traffic generation that will result during the various stages of the construction and operation of the proposed SEE site.

8.183 Table 8.26 below highlights the percentage change over baseline traffic in year 2013, 2014 and 2015 assuming the cumulative traffic arising from both the SEE and the petrol filling station development. As an example, it shows that in 2013, 796 vehicles will use West Marsh Road during the AM peak, the cumulative traffic consisting of the petrol filling station committed traffic and the proposed SEE construction traffic is 450 trips. Therefore the percentage increase over baseline is (450/796)*100 = 57%.

8.184 Table 8.26 shows that in the context of Table 8.2, the significance of the cumulative impacts during 2013 (peak construction period), 2014 (opening year) and 2015 (first maintenance year) varies but are considered moderate overall. West Marsh Road especially sees the highest percentage increases. This is further discussed in Chapter 15 Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects.


8-18 Issue: 6 64-C13376

Table 8.26 Cumulative increase in traffic two-way flows (Lights + Heavies)

Location RAND Committed Development Traffic

2013 Base

2013 Cumulative Traffic

% Change

2014 Base

2014 Cumulative Traffic 2014

Access via Gate A % Change

2014 Cumulative Traffic 2014 Access

via Gate C %

Change 2015 Base

2015 Cumulative

Traffic %

Change

A16(T) north of Wardentree Lane Rbt

08:00 – 09:00 19 1500 1639 9 1524 1557 2 1562 2 1573 1645 5

17:00 – 18:00 25 1564 1709 9 1589 1628 2 1633 3 1639 1714 5

A16(T) south of Wardentree Lane Rbt

08:00 – 09:00 13 1542 1674 9 1566 1594 2 1599 2 1616 1707 6

17:00 – 18:00 25 1513 1658 10 1537 1577 3 1582 3 1586 1673 5

West Marsh Road

08:00 – 09:00 152 796 1246 57 808 1017 26 1034 28 834 1236 48

17:00 – 18:00 198 844 1340 59 858 1113 30 1130 32 885 1333 51

Wardentree Lane (E)

08:00 – 09:00 39 1453 1731 19 1476 1544 5 1554 5 1523 1693 11

17:00 – 18:00 50 1519 1808 19 1543 1622 5 1632 6 1592 1754 10

Wardentree Lane (W)

08:00 – 09:00 37 1392 1459 5 1414 1479 5 1486 5 1459 1565 7

17:00 – 18:00 50 1536 1616 5 1560 1638 5 1645 5 1610 1742 8


08:00 – 09:00 19 1437 1470 2 1459 1506 3 1513 4 1506 1583 5

17:00 – 18:00 26 1560 1602 3 1584 1638 3 1645 4 1635 1734 6


08:00 – 09:00 18 892 922 3 906 926 2 928 2 935 964 3

17:00 – 18:00 24 931 969 4 945 971 3 973 3 976 1009 3


08:00 – 09:00 37 685 752 10 696 759 9 764 10 718 813 13

17:00 – 18:00 50 809 889 10 821 897 9 902 10 847 970 15

*2013 Cumulative Traffic = 2013 Base + 2013 SEE Construction + RAND traffic *2014 Cumulative Traffic Access via Gate A = 2014 Base + 2014 SEE Operational via Gate A + RAND traffic *2014 Cumulative Traffic Access via Gate C = 2014 Base + 2014 SEE Operational via Gate C + RAND traffic *2015 Cumulative Traffic Access via Gate A or C = 2015 Base + 2015 SEE Maintenance traffic via either Gate A or C + RAND traffic



64-C13376 Issue: 6 8-19

Monitoring Measures

8.185 In order to manage the transport impacts associated with the construction phase it is necessary to ensure that construction schedules (phasing) are monitored and information is shared between contractors to identify impacts during particular activities or operations. To this end the following monitoring measures identified in the CTMP will be implemented:

• weekly spot checks to determine whether prescribed HGV and personnel routes are adhered to;

• maintain route signage;

• daily visual road inspection to determine if wheel-wash facilities are used;

• keeping a record of daily working hours;

• visually assess site worker arrival and departure times; and

• keep records of site worker arrival and departure times to ensure staggering takes place.

8.186 To monitor the transport impacts associated with the operational phase a Travel Plan will include a programme of monitoring and review, which will be implemented to generate information by which its success can be evaluated and subsequently amended accordingly after each review.

8.187 Monitoring and review of the Travel Plan will be the responsibility of the Travel Co-ordinator. The monitoring process will be ongoing for the entire life-cycle of the Travel Plan.

8.188 As the main aim of the Travel Plan is to effect a reduction in the use of Single Occupancy Vehicles a suitable indicator of the success of the Travel Plan will be the mode-shift of employee travel. The Travel Co-ordinator will monitor the travel habits of the employees and will undertake selected surveys to determine any change in modal split. These results will be incorporated into a Monitoring Report which will be submitted to SHDC after the initial report was submitted.

8.189 The Travel Co-ordinator will meet with SHDC to discuss the Monitoring Report. If the modal split targets have not been achieved then measures to improve the performance of the Travel Plan will be discussed and agreed. The Travel Co-ordinator will seek to implement these changes in conjunction with employees. Further monitoring reports will be produced cyclically.

Schedule of Mitigation and Monitoring Measures

8.190 Table 8.27 outlines a schedule of mitigation and monitoring measures.

Table 8.27 Schedule of Mitigation and Monitoring Measures

Issue Mitigation/Monitoring Measure Effect Timing

Changes in road traffic flows in the area during construction Local highway capacity Driver delay Likely traffic congestion

CTMP Weekly spot checks to determine whether prescribed HGV and personnel routes are adhered to Maintain route signage Visually assess site worker arrival and departure times Site management practices

Reduction in driver delay and congestion

During construction

Table 8.27 Schedule of Mitigation and Monitoring Measures

Issue Mitigation/Monitoring Measure Effect Timing HGV deliveries will be scheduled and/or use of in-cab communications to minimise the potential for platooning and, therefore, queues of HGVs waiting to access the site or at road junctions

Changes in road traffic flows in the area once operational Local highway capacity Driver delay Likely traffic congestion

Travel Plan Site Management Procedures

Reduction in the number of private car drivers accessing the site will contribute to a reduction in road traffic delay and congestion and enhance the sites sustainability credentials

Once operational

Possible queuing during construction

CTMP Visually assess site worker arrival and departure times

Reduction in queuing during construction

During construction

Pedestrian and cyclist amenity and delay during construction

CTMP Safety Steward

Reduction in pedestrian and cyclist delay during construction

During construction

Level of pedestrian and cyclist fear and intimidation during construction

CTMP Safety Steward

Reduction in pedestrian and cyclist fear and intimidation during construction

During construction

Policy 34 – Regional approach to traffic growth reduction

CTMP Transport Statement

Reduce the impact and occurrence of traffic congestion Less reliance on the private car

During construction During construction and once operational

Access to the site for emergency vehicles during and upon completion of the construction works

Access points (Gates A - C) are of sufficient dimension to accommodate emergency vehicles. CDM procedures. Adherence to Health and Safety Executive guidelines

Ensure that emergency vehicles have safe and convenient access to the site during construction and upon completion of the works

During construction and once operational.


8-20 Issue: 6 64-C13376

Summary

8.191 The traffic impact of the proposed SEE has been assessed in the context of current planning policy and guidance. It is considered that the proposed SEE supports and reflects national, regional and local policy with respect to land-use and transport planning. In particular, the proposed SEE site is in a suitable location for strategic-scale development within the Eastern Sub-area, consistent with national, regional and local transport policy objectives.

8.192 The assessment methodology reflects that contained within the guidance provided by the IEA (1993)16, and that produced by the DfT (2007)17. The approach taken was to review the existing situation as the baseline and then examine the impact and potential changes likely to arise as a result of the proposed SEE. Impacts were identified for two distinct phases of the proposed SEE – a construction phase and an operational phase.

8.193 With regard to baseline conditions, the proposed SEE site benefits from a high level of transport accessibility being close to the A16(T), a strategic route within a kilometre. Existing infrastructure provides a good level of connectivity to more sustainable modes of transport given the proposed SEE site’s proximity to pedestrian and cycle networks, and the availability of bus and rail services in Spalding. Site observations and traffic count data have also shown that the junctions in the study area do not suffer from unacceptable levels of queuing and delay.

8.194 Introducing mitigation measures during the construction phase will result in the increase of traffic flow on the local road network being moderate, as shown by Table 8.28, with vehicle queuing and delay being possible during the peak hours on West Marsh Road. Whilst construction traffic may disrupt local traffic, pedestrian and cyclist movements and patterns, its impacts are temporary and intermittent.

8.195 Operational traffic generated by the proposed SEE will be negligible given the number of additional trips generated during general working conditions and outage / maintenance periods, the implementation of a Travel Plan and the existing traffic flow profile in the study area. The residual impact of the proposed SEE once operational will be negligible as shown by Table 8.29.

8.196 The significance of the cumulative traffic impacts associated with both the SEE and committed developments are considered negligible (2014 and 2015) to moderate (2013), (see also Chapter 15 Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects).


17 Department for Transport (2007) Guidance on Transport Assessment

Table 8.28 Summary of the potential impacts of the proposed SEE during construction

Impact Mitigation Means of Implementation

Residual Effects

Increase in traffic in local area

Prescribed HGV and personnel routes Route signage Site worker arrival and departure times scheduling Use minibuses or car/van pooling Schedule HGV deliveries

CTMP Moderate*

Driver delay, congestion and queuing

Prescribed HGV and personnel routes Route signage Site worker arrival and departure times scheduling Use minibuses or car/van pooling

CTMP Moderate*

Nuisance caused by increased HGV movements

Prescribed HGV and personnel routes Route signage Staggering construction workers shifts Schedule HGV deliveries Wheel-wash facilities No parking of construction vehicle on West Marsh

Road

CTMP Moderate*

Pedestrian and cyclist amenity and delay

Site worker arrival and departure times scheduling Safety steward to attend the Gate C access during

the peak hours CTMP Moderate *


Site worker arrival and departure times scheduling Staggering construction workers shifts Safety steward to attend the Gate C access during

the peak hours

CTMP Moderate*

* Residual impact is dependent on the time of day, local factors and events and weather conditions



64-C13376 Issue: 6 8-21

Table 8.29 Summary of the potential impacts of the proposed SEE when operational

Impact Mitigation Means of Implementation Residual Effects

Increase in traffic in local area

Pre-determined hours of operation Car sharing Staff use Public Transport Staff walk or cycle to the site Visitors use alternatives modes of

transport to the private car to access the site

Operational feature of SEE power Station

Travel Plan Site Management

Procedures

Negligible

Driver delay, congestion and queuing

Pre-determined hours of operation Car sharing Staff use Public Transport Staff walk or cycle to the site Visitors use alternatives modes of

transport to the private car to access the site

Operational feature of SEE power Station

Travel Plan Site Management

Procedures

Negligible

Pedestrian and cyclist amenity and delay

Provision of pedestrian infrastructure and on-street cycle facilities

Existing pedestrian footways and those introduced internally on site

Negligible


Provision of pedestrian infrastructure and on-street cycle facilities

Existing pedestrian footways and those introduced internally on site

Negligible

Pedestrian and cyclist severance

Existing pedestrian island(s) at site access and roundabout junctions in the study area

Existing pedestrian and cyclist infrastructure Slight

* Residual impact is dependent on the time of day, local factors and events and weather conditions

References

Lincolnshire County Council (2006) Lincolnshire 2nd Local Transport Plan, accessed online (http://www.lincolnshire.gov.uk/upload/public/attachments/598/2ndLTPExecSum.pdf) Institute of Environmental Assessment (1993) Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic. Department for Transport (2007) Guidance on Transport Assessment. The Institution of Highways and Transportation (1997) Transport in the urban environment. TRRL Laboratory (1984) Vibration Nuisance from Road Traffic – Results of a 50 Site Survey, Report 1119. Crompton and Gilbert (1981) Pedestrian Delay, Annoyance and Risk Imperial College, London. Department of Transport (1983) Manual of Environmental Appraisal. Highways Agency (2008) Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB), accessed online (http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/dmrb/vol6/section3/ta9005.pdf) Lincolnshire County Council (2005) Development Guide on Transport and New Development Issues in Lincolnshire. TRL Ltd (2006) PICADY 5.1 AD.


8-22 Issue: 6 64-C13376

Client

Scale

Project No

Date

Drawn by

SEEL

NTS

64C13376 RC

March 2009

Figure 8.1Study Area

7 Walker StreetEdinburgh EH3 7JYTel. +44(0)131 225 9899Fax.+44(0)131 220 3411

ENVIRON UK Limited

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey with the permission of the controller HMSO Crown Copyright Reserved. Licence No. ES 100012174

Version Control 4

LEGEND

Study area

Proposed SEE Site

Wardentree Lane

West Marsh Road

A16

Holbeach Road (A151)

Spalding Road (B1356)

Client

Scale Version Control

Project No DateDrawn by

SEEL

NTS

64C13376 CC March 2009

Figure 8.2Access Point A, B and C

3ENVIRON UK Limited

7 Walker StreetEdinburgh E 3 7JYHTel. +44(0)131 225 9899Fax.+44(0)131 220 3411


Access Point (Gate A)

Access Point (Gate B)

Access Point (Gate C)



64-C13376 Issue: 5 9-1

9 Noise and VibrationIntroduction

9.1 This chapter of the ES sets out the assessment of the likely noise and vibration effects that the construction and operation of the proposed SEE are predicted to have on sensitive receptors surrounding the site and, where necessary, sets out mitigation measures to control potentially significant adverse effects.

9.2 Considerable development has occurred around the site in the years since the existing SECL power station was built and as a result, the proposed SEE has been assessed against existing environmental conditions (referred to as the baseline). Two operating scenarios have been considered in the assessment; start-up which is when the proposed SEE is preparing to deliver energy to the National Grid (which most commonly occurs between 0500 - 0800 and lasts for approximately 90 minutes from a 'hot' start) and base load which is the operational condition that occurs for the majority of the time (when the proposed SEE is delivering energy to the National Grid).

9.3 In the context of this assessment, noise is defined as unwanted or undesirable sound1 derived from sources such as operation of the proposed SEE, transport or construction works that interfere with normal activities, including conversation, sleep or recreation. Vibration can be defined as the transmission of energy through the ground or the air that can result in small movements of the transmitting medium, such as buildings, which can cause discomfort or even damage to structures if the movements are large enough.

9.4 The assessment is necessarily technical in nature and, to assist the reader, a glossary of acoustic terminology has been provided in Technical Appendix 9.1.1. This Chapter has been prepared by ENVIRON.

Legislation and Policy Context

National Legislation and Policy

9.5 DEFRA is responsible for all aspects of noise policy in the UK. Management and enforcement of noise policy is the joint responsibility of the EA and Local Planning Authorities.

9.6 The DCLG is responsible for local and regional planning, including planning policy guidance notes that set out the government’s policies on different aspects of planning.

9.7 Within England environmental noise assessment is covered by PPG 242: Planning and Noise. PPG 24 advises on the role of the planning system in preventing or limiting the adverse effects of noise without prejudicing the investment in enterprise, development and transport.

9.8 Part 1 of the Environment Act 1990 introduced a system of IPC and LAAPC to improve the regulation of pollution arising from various industrial processes and to control their environmental

1 World Health Organisation (1999) Guidelines for Community Noise 2 Department of the Environment (now Department of Communities and Local Government). 1994. Planning Policy Guidance Note: Planning and Noise. HMSO

impact. The IPC system was revised through The Pollution Prevention and Control Act 1999 which introduced the new IPPC system, which replaced IPC fully in 2007.

9.9 The IPPC Regime has itself been superseded recently by The Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2007. Under Section 4.1 Part A (1) (a) (ii) of the regulations, the plant will require an EP to operate from the EA. The EP represents a rigorous operating permit that ensures all emissions from the facility will meet the test of BAT. As part of the permit application process SEEL will be required to demonstrate how the process will be operated to ensure that the noise emission limits set in the permit are not exceeded and that the facility will not have a detrimental impact on noise sensitive receptors.

9.10 The EA Sector Guidance Note Combustion Activities provides guidance to industry operators on the BAT to control the environmental impact from large scale combustion (i.e. greater than 50 MW). The guidance refers to the control of noise through a systematic process of identifying the main noise sources, applying source reduction and best practice maintenance measures and carrying out noise surveys at the nearest noise-sensitive locations. The following assessment has been based on and complies with this guidance.

Regional Policy

EAST MIDLANDS REGIONAL PLAN 2009

9.11 The EMRP published in March 2009 sets out the spatial strategy for the region through to 2026 and identifies specific objectives for the Eastern Sub-area, which includes Spalding. There are a number of policies in relation to regional planning provision, renewable energy and transport, however, no specific policies which relate to noise from new industrial type developments such as power stations. Consequently, reference is made to PPG 24: Planning and Noise which is the overarching document for England3.

Local Policy

9.12 The SHDC July 2006 Local Plan contains the following noise related policies, which have been considered in this assessment;

• Policy SG13 - Pollution and Contamination: Planning permission will only be permitted for development proposals which: 1) do not cause unacceptable levels of pollution of the surrounding area by noise, light, toxic or offensive odour, airborne pollutants or by the release of waste products;

• Policy SG14 - Design and Layout of New Development: New development should be designed to ensure that it makes a positive contribution to the architectural and visual quality of its surroundings. It should normally respect the vernacular architecture of the area in which it is located although high quality contemporary design will be supported in appropriate contexts. In assessing the design and layout of new development the following matters will be taken into consideration … 7) the effect of the development on the amenity of

3 Department for Communities and Local Government (1994) Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) 24: Planning and Noise

Environmental Statement Spalding Energy Expansion SEEL

9-2 Issue: 5 64C13376

nearby residents in terms of noise, smell, general disturbance, overlooking and loss of light; and

• Policy SG17 - Protection of Residential Amenity; Planning permission will not be granted for development that would cause material harm to residential amenity. In considering proposals the following criteria will be taken into account … 3) potential noise nuisance including that associated with vehicular activity.

Issues Identified During Consultation

9.13 The assessment methodology to be employed for both the ES and EP application was initially outlined in the Scoping and Consultation Report4. This information has been set out subsequently in a letter to both the EA and SHDC and has been employed in this assessment5.

9.14 Although a number of responses have been received by the consultees which, are discussed in Chapter 2, no specific issues have been raised in respect of the assessment of noise and vibration other than from NHS Lincolnshire and EHD of SHDC. NHS Lincolnshire requested that the EIA should determine any potential public health impacts, and recommended that further comments should be sought from the EHD of SHDC. Comments made by the EHD of SHDC were in relation to the noise monitoring locations referenced in the Scoping and Consultation Report which relate to the compliance monitoring currently undertaken for the existing SECL power station. As proposed by SHDC, monitoring of baseline noise conditions has been undertaken where appropriate by using the previous noise measurement positions as set out in the Section 36 Consent for the existing SECL power station, and updated with alternative measurement positions where necessary, to reflect the proximity of the SEE to certain sensitive receptors. This is further explained in ‘Baseline Conditions’.

Assessment Methodology

9.15 The assessment of noise and vibration impacts in this chapter of the ES is based upon the methodology of a number of official guidance notes and BSs described in the following sections of this chapter. It takes into account any likely significant direct, short, medium and long term, permanent and temporary, positive and negative effects of the development. Indirect, secondary and cumulative impacts are assessed in Chapter 15, Indirect, Secondary and Cumulative Effects.

9.16 Given the nature of this application, with 'parameter blocks' rather than a 'specific' or 'fixed' design, the assessment has been undertaken based on recognised technical standards, BAT and reasonable assumptions relating to the likely built form within the parameters and noise emitting characteristics of the proposed SEE.

9.17 The proposed SEE is likely to be similar in scale and operational characteristics to the existing SECL power station, although the precise construction and configuration within the parameters will not be finalised until the detailed design stage. As such, in accordance with relevant best

4 ENVIRON Report 64C13376 Environmental Impact Assessment and Environmental Permit Scoping and Consultation Report Spalding Energy Expansion (dated 18 November 2008)

5 Letter 64C13376 dated 12th Jan 2009

practice guidance, the noise emitting characteristics measured at the existing SECL power station have been used as the basis for this assessment, supplemented by worst-case assumptions for any noise sources that could not be measured. This approach is considered to provide a robust assessment of the likely worst case noise effects.

Construction Noise

9.18 Noise levels generated by construction activities have the potential to impact upon nearby noise-sensitive receptors. However, the significance of the potential impact will depend upon a number of variables, such as the:

• noise generated by plant or equipment used on-site;

• period of time construction plant is operational;

• distance between the noise source and the receptor; and

• level of attenuation likely due to ground absorption and barrier effects.

9.19 Within Annex 3 PPG 24 refers to BS 52286 which provides a framework for good practice and presents a methodology to estimate noise emission levels from a construction site. These predictions are based on the type and number of plant being used, their location and the length of time they are in operation.

9.20 An estimate of the likely effects of noise from the construction phase has been made for key activities based on the recent experience with the construction of the existing SECL power station. The predictions are based on the construction plant and equipment as set out in Chapter 5, Table 5.3 of the ES, the methodology contained within BS 5228 and the DEFRA update of noise database for prediction of noise on open and construction sites (2005 & 2007).

Construction Vibration

9.21 The primary cause of community concern in relation to vibration generally relates to building damage from sources of construction vibration, such as vibro compaction or piling although the human body can perceive vibration at levels that are substantially lower than those required to cause building damage.

9.22 The nearest sensitive receptors to the proposed SEE development, which are residential dwellings, are located between 260 and 1100 m from the closest proposed construction activities. The construction activities that are most likely to give rise to perceptible vibration are vibro compaction, piling of foundations, both in terms of drop hammer impact piling and the installation of vibro-stone columns (a method of piling, see Chapter 5 Construction for more details)

9.23 BS 5228, Part 2 indicates that the threshold of human perception to vibration is around 0.15 mm/s. It is generally accepted that for the majority of people vibration levels in excess of between 0.15 and 0.3 mm/s ppv are just perceptible. It also provides information on measured vibration levels arising from various piling operations throughout the UK which can be used to indicate the magnitude and scatter likely from such operations.

9.24 The guidance presented in BS 5228 and the results of historical field measurements identify that vibration from rotary bored piling may just be perceptible at a distance of 30 m, and impact piling,

6 British Standard (BS) 5228: Part 1: 2009: Code of practise for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites. HMSO



64-C13376 Issue: 5 9-3

that might be required for the foundations of the ACC, may just be perceptible at a distance of 100 m. Historical field measurements also presented in BS 5228 Part 2 (Table 6) of vibration associated with penetration and compaction of the vibro-stone columns shows significant drop off with distance. At a distance of 3.5 m measured levels of vibration are 12.6 mm/s ppv, at 5 m measured levels of 10.7 mm/s and at 18 m the level drops significantly to 1.6 mm/s at 18 m. Assuming a similar drop off rate vibration levels at 100 m will be below the threshold of perceptibility. It is also noted in the results table that no reports of annoyance were reported during the measurement period.

9.25 As such, the likely effect is negligible and no further consideration is given to construction vibration in this ES. The same piling strategy was adopted during the construction of the existing SECL power station with no noise or vibration complaints received.

Construction Traffic Noise

9.26 As the construction vehicles on site will be working in a limited area, their impact has been considered within the context of BS 5228, which gives consideration to specific activities such as excavation, loading and concreting operations.

9.27 Construction traffic entering and exiting has been assessed in the context of public highway movements. A description of construction vehicle movements and the routes they will take has been provided in Chapter 5 Construction, with a description of the likely duration of the above activities provided in paragraph 9.77. When assessing construction traffic on the surrounding road network consideration has been given to the likely change in noise level that will result.

9.28 Reference has been made to the DMRB7 which provides guidance on the appropriate level of assessment from all new or improved road maintenance projects. Whilst the relevance of this document does not extend to the assessment of changes in noise level due to a temporary intensification of use, such as during the construction period, it does provide a methodology against which to consider any changes in noise level.

Operational Traffic Noise

9.29 The assessment of noise associated with additional traffic movements during the operational stage, over and above those associated with existing uses, has been scoped out, due to low predicted additional traffic flows. DMRB recognises that a change in noise level of less than 1 dB (A) is the minimum change that can be detected by the human ear in the short-term, this equates to an increase in traffic flow of 25% or a decrease of 20%. Tables 8.17 and 8.18 of Chapter 8 Transport and Access show that the increase in operational traffic in 2014 will be a maximum of 7% at Gate A and 9% at Gate C in comparison to 2014 base flows. Table 8.22 of Chapter 8 shows that the peak increase in maintenance traffic at both Gates A and C for a short-term outage will be 30% at most, in comparison to 2015 base flows. Whilst this slightly exceeds the minimum 25% increase required to bring about a readily perceptible change in noise level, the maintenance scenario is short-term and the increase in noise levels would be in the range 1-2 dB, resulting in a temporary negligible impact for West Marsh Road only. Therefore the potential for adverse impact has not been considered further.

7 Design Manual for Roads and Bridges:2008, Volume 11: Section 3: Part 7 Noise and Vibration

Operation of the proposed SEE

9.30 Where industrial sources of noise are the dominant influence, as in this instance, Annex 3 of PPG24 states that ‘the likelihood of complaints about noise from industrial development can be assessed, where the standard is appropriate, using BS 41428.

9.31 BS 4142 sets out a method to assess whether noise from industrial and commercial premises is likely to give rise to complaints from noise-sensitive receptors in the vicinity of a development site. The measured or predicted specific noise levels, LAeq,Tr from the source in question is compared to the existing background noise levels, LA90,T, at noise sensitive receptors’ façades.

9.32 Where the specific noise contains a distinguishable discrete continuous sound like a whine, hiss, screech, hum, etc, or if there are distinct impulses in the noise such as bangs, clicks, clatters, thumps, or if the noise is irregular enough to attract attention then a +5 dB correction is added to the specific noise level to obtain the ‘rating’ noise level, LAr,Tr.

9.33 The likelihood of the noise giving rise to complaints is assessed by subtracting the background noise levels from the rating noise level. BS 4142 states that a difference of around 10 dB or higher indicates that complaints are likely. A difference of around 5 dB is of marginal significance. A difference of minus 10 dB is a positive indication that complaints are unlikely.

9.34 The daytime assessment is carried out over a 1 hour period and the night-time assessment is carried out over a 5 minute period (as noise levels are more constant at night-time). The periods associated with day or night are not defined within BS 4142, but it states that night should cover the times when the general adult population are preparing for sleep or are actually sleeping. For the purpose of this assessment, the daily periods have been defined in line with PPG 24 were daytime is considered to be 07:00 - 23:00 and night-time 23:00 - 07:00 hours.

Approach

9.35 The approach taken to the assessment is detailed in the following sections of this chapter referencing published standards, guidelines and best practice where relevant. Any assumptions made in the assessment procedure are discussed and reasons given for their use.

9.36 The assessment is based largely on a comparison between measured existing background noise levels and predicted specific levels of noise from the proposed SEE, at noise-sensitive receptors in the vicinity.

9.37 Existing background noise levels in the vicinity of the proposed SEE were determined by direct measurement, during both daytime and night-time periods, at a representative number of receptor locations, which are identified in Figure 9.1. These measurements are described in more detail in the Baseline Conditions section and are considered to be representative of the locations most sensitive to noise associated with the proposed SEE, in accordance with best practice assessment guidance.

9.38 The noise modelling suite Cadna/A, has been utilised to predict the level of noise associated with the proposed SEE at receptor locations, based on directly measured source noise emission levels of the existing SECL power station, library data, the proposed parameter plans and a number of other assumptions. These predictions, the assumptions made and the results of the assessment are presented in more detail in the following sections.

8 BS 4142:1997 Method for Rating industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas, HMSO


9-4 Issue: 5 64C13376

Significance Criteria

9.39 The significance of a likely impact is determined by a number of factors, mainly its nature, existing conditions, duration and magnitude. The significance scale used in this instance is described below with moderate significance being considered as the trigger for the requirement of detailed mitigation measures. It should be noted that the significance scale has been based on the interpretation of relevant guidance documents clearly stated, site conditions and the sensitivity of nearby receptors.

• No significance – imperceptible effect on noise and vibration levels; • Minor significance – perceptible effect on noise levels; • Moderate significance – noticeable effect on noise and vibration levels; and • Substantial significance – very noticeable effect on noise levels.

9.40 The nature of a likely impact is defined as; adverse, detrimental or negative impacts to an environmental resource or receptor; neutral, no significant impacts to an environmental resource or receptor; or beneficial, advantageous or positive impact to an environmental resource or receptor.

9.41 The duration of an impact can be described as: short term (days / weeks), medium term (months), long term (years) or permanent for the duration of the construction/operational period.

9.42 The impact magnitude is normally determined by comparing the predicted deviation from the baseline conditions (i.e. the conditions to which receptors are accustomed) during normal operating conditions but not all instances, such as those arising during construction. In the latter situation the absolute noise level and the duration of the impact may also be a determining factor. Specific details relating to the assessment of noise and vibration impact magnitude during construction and operation of the proposed SEE are presented below. Information and data used to estimate the magnitude of the main impacts are set out and any missing information in the required data identified. Any uncertainties within the prediction or assessment of impact are highlighted appropriately.

Demolition and Construction Noise

9.43 BS 5228-1:2009 provides guidance for the assessment of the significance of noise associated with construction activities. The Standard notes that historically there have been two common approaches to assess whether construction9 noise levels are likely to be significant or not.

9.44 The older and more simplistic approach considers the likelihood of construction noise levels exceeding fixed absolute noise limits in the range 70 to 75 dB(A) at façade of sensitive, based on the guidance presented in Advisory Leaflet 72.

9.45 The newer alternative to determine the significance of construction noise levels is to consider the change in ambient noise level that is likely during the proposed works, which reflects a more conventional EIA methodology for noise and is generally considered to be a more robust assessment technique.

9.46 As such, in the context of this assessment and in accordance with the guidance presented in BS 5228, "Noise levels generated by construction activities are considered to significant if the

9 Where construction is referred to in this chapter, this term also encompasses demolition.

total noise (pre-construction ambient plus construction noise) exceeds the pre-construction ambient noise by 5 dB or more, subject to lower cut-off values of 65 dB, 55 dB and 45 dB LAeq,T, from construction noise alone, for the daytime, evening and night-time periods, respectively; and a duration of one month or more, unless works of a shorter duration are likely to result in significant impact".

9.47 Table 9.1 is based on the guidance contained within BS 5228 and shows the adopted overall significance criteria for daytime site enabling and construction noise impacts.

Table 9.1 : Site Enabling and Construction Noise Assessment Criteria

Predicted Facade Noise Level, dB(A) Impact Significance

<65 No significance

Predicted Increase in Façade Noise Level,dB(A) (where level is > 65 dB(A))

Impact Significance

0 - 5 Minor significance

5 - 10 Moderate significance

>10 Major significance

9.48 A typical working day during construction can vary anytime between 07:00 - 19:00 hours however, this is subject to local circumstances. The working week is generally regarded as Monday to Friday and Saturday 07:00 - 17:00, with no working on Sundays and Public/Bank Holidays unless by agreement with the Local Authority.

Construction Traffic

9.49 The impact of any change in noise level identified has been assessed by drawing upon the findings of the IOA/IEMA Draft Guidelines for Noise Impact Assessment10 that provide examples of categorising the significance of a basic noise change, such as that from road traffic.

9.50 The results of the research suggest that for very abrupt changes in noise level (such as the immediate increase upon the opening of a new road to traffic), a 1 dB rise can be adopted as indicating a potentially significant noise increase. However, for less abrupt changes in noise of a similar type, such as the gradual increase in noise on an existing road associated with a new residential development, 3 dB is generally considered to be the smallest change in noise that is readily perceptible. A 10 dB change in noise represents a perceived doubling or halving of the noise level.

9.51 The guidelines state that the assessor should set assessment criteria appropriate for the assessment being undertaken. To this end, the assessment criteria presented in Table 9.2 have been adopted to assess the impact of any changes in road traffic noise levels as a direct result of the proposed SEE

10 Institute of Acoustics/Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment Working Party, 2002, Draft Guidelines for Noise Impact Assessment.



64-C13376 Issue: 5 9-5

Table 9.2: Road Traffic Noise Assessment Criteria

Change in Noise Level, dB(A) Impact Significance

<1 None

1 – 3 Negligible

Not Significant

3 – 6 Minor

6 – 10 Moderate

>10 Major

Significant

Operational Noise from Proposed SEE

9.52 The assessment criteria contained within BS 4142 adopted for the assessment of likely operational plant noise impacts is summarised in Table 9.3 below.

Table 9.3: Industrial Noise Assessment Criteria

Excess of Rating Noise Level above Background Noise Level, dB

Impact Significance

-10 No significance

0 to +5 Minor significance

+5 to +10 Moderate significance

+10 Major significance

Baseline Conditions

9.53 The existing noise conditions, with the existing SECL power station in operation, have been determined at the closest noise sensitive receptors to the proposed SEE site by a series of environmental noise measurements recorded during the daytime and night-time periods. This approach reflects the methodology set out in the consultation letter issued to the EA and SHDC as per paragraph 9.13. The existing SECL power station is in compliance with both its Section 36 Consent conditions and EP conditions for noise, and has received one noise complaint during its operation, which was subsequently shown to be unjustified.

9.54 The noise measurement survey commenced on 16th December 2008, for a period of approximately 40 hours. Attended and unattended measurements were carried out on what was considered to be a typical weekday, during both the daytime (07:00 - 23:00 hours) and night-time (23:00 - 07:00 hours) periods.

9.55 The measurement positions were selected carefully to allow the existing noise climate at the closest receptors in all directions from the proposed SEE to be determined. Where appropriate the positions chosen were consistent with positions used in the assessment of noise for the existing SECL power station (i.e. where selected SECL receptor positions are also representative of receptors located closest to the proposed SEE). A number of receptor locations that were included in the assessment for the SECL power station have been demolished in

recent years and, as such, have not been used again in this assessment. These demolished receptors are shown in Figure 9.1.

9.56 The measurement positions are described in Table 9.4 below and presented in Figure 9.1.

Table 9.4: Noise Measurement Positions

Measurement Position

Full Grid Reference

Observations (existing influences on the noise environment including whether the existing SECL power station is audible)

A – Crown Cottage 526505, 325440 Noise climate dominated by traffic on the A16, with no noise from the existing SECL power station being discernible.

B – Ornam House 526236, 324709 Noise climate affected by a combination of noise from road traffic the A16, the existing SECL power station and to a lesser extent West Marsh Road.

C – Roman Bank 525874, 324111

Noise climate dominated by fixed plant, refrigerated HGVs and HGV movements associated with adjacent food processing factory, with further contributions from West Marsh Road and the A16 in the distance. No discernible noise from the existing SECL power station.

D – Chiltern Drive 525144, 323902

Noise climate dominated by fixed plant, refrigerated HGVs and HGV movements associated with adjacent food processing factory, with further contributions from other industrial premises in the area and A16 in the distance. No discernible noise from the existing SECL power station.

E – Sherwood Drive 524828, 324128

Noise climate dominated by road traffic on the B1356 Pinchbeck Road, with further contributions from fixed plant and vehicle movements associated with commercial/industrial operations located on Enterprise Way to the north. No discernible noise from the existing SECL power station.

F – Wardentree Lane 525163, 324978

Noise climate dominated by road traffic on Wardentree Lane, with further contributions from fixed plant and vehicle movements associated with Morrisons Superstore and commercial/industrial operations located on Enterprise Way to the south. No discernible noise from the existing SECL power station.

9.57 A summary of the recorded measurement results is presented in Table 9.5 below, more detailed results are provided in Technical Appendix 9.1.2.


9-6 Issue: 5 64C13376

Table 9.5: Baseline Noise Survey Results

Summary of measured Noise Level, dB(A) Measurement Position

Date and Start Time LAeq LA90,T LA10,T LAmax,T

16/12/2008 07:00 59.6 51.6 59.7 94.9 A

16/12/2008 01:45 53.5 44.1 56.9 78.3

16/12/2008 07:00 53.9 47.7 53.3 86.3 B

16/12/2008 01:14 48.7 42.7 51.4 73.4

16/12/2008 07:00 53.9 49.4 54.3 86.9 C

16/12/2008 00:44 50.2 46.5 52.6 77.8

16/12/2008 07:00 48.4 46.8 49.4 65.6 D

16/12/2008 02:25 47.6 44.9 47.5 91.2

16/12/2008 12:45 52.4 50.5 48.1 84.5 E

16/12/2008 23:00 47.3 47.7 45.2 62.2

16/12/2008 12:45 54.8 56.4 51.7 77.1 F

16/12/2008 00:15 49.7 50.4 47.5 74.8

9.58 In addition to the measurement of the baseline noise climate at noise sensitive receptors in the vicinity, a series of specific noise measurements were carried out at the existing SECL power station, to identify and quantify the noise emitting characteristics of the most significant sources of noise.

9.59 As appropriate, the measurements were either carried out under free-field conditions at a measured distance from 'point sources', as 'near field' swept surface measurements close to 'area/planer sources' or as reverberant internal levels in the case of internal noise sources.

9.60 The sources measured and raw results of these specific measurements, in 1/1 octave bands, are presented in Technical Appendix 9.1.2.

Potential Impacts

9.61 Potential noise and vibration impacts during the construction phase include:

• the operation of equipment associated with site clearance and construction has the potential to result in noise impacts at existing noise sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the proposed SEE site; and,

• the additional traffic movements associated with construction personnel and transportation of materials have the potential to increase noise levels on the road network around the proposed SEE site, potentially affecting noise sensitive receptors.

9.62 During the operational phase for the proposed SEE there is potential for noise associated with the noise emitting operational plant including gas turbines, steam turbines, ACC, transformers etc. to affect noise sensitive receptors.

Mitigation

Mitigation By Design

9.63 In order to determine the extent and nature of the mitigation that will be required to adequately control noise emissions from the proposed SEE and prevent any significant noise impacts at receptors in the vicinity, a series of noise predictions have been carried out in the noise modelling suite Cadna/A, in accordance with the ISO 9613 prediction methodology.

9.64 In addition to the input data described below, the model considers the effects of topography, ground and atmospheric absorption as well as applying a light downwind correction to consider a typical worst case downwind situation.

9.65 The noise model has been constructed on the basis of the maximum parameter plans for the proposed SEE and the results of the specific noise measurements taken at the existing SECL power station. The noise model takes into consideration all of the acoustic design measures currently incorporated at the SECL power station, such as the location and screening of significant items of noise emitting plant, the enclosure of gas and steam turbines within acoustically attenuated buildings and the more general screening effects of existing and proposed buildings/structures.

9.66 Where the height of proposed structures that may provide acoustic screening is uncertain, such as in the case of the inherently quiet water tanks, they have been excluded from the model to represent worst case in terms of potential acoustic screening. The model also considers all acoustic liabilities such as external plant, openings in buildings and line of sight propagation pathways.

9.67 The reduction in noise level of sources enclosed within buildings (such as the gas and steam turbines) has been included by considering the likely internal reverberant noise level (based on specific noise measurements presented above) and applying a 1/1 octave band frequency specific sound reduction performance for the cladding products that were used in the existing SECL power station construction.

9.68 Initial predictions identified that future operation of the proposed SEE under base-load operating conditions will not give rise to significant adverse impacts, although it is essential for the ACC duct to be acoustically attenuated in order to adequately control the level of noise during start-up operations.

9.69 Broadly speaking, the following noise mitigation measures have been assumed and would be incorporated, or their equivalent effect, in the design of the proposed SEE where appropriate:

• high performance splitter silencer to the gas turbine inlet providing maximum attenuation at high frequencies, and abatement of the compressor whine, in particular;

• high performance close fitting or spaced-off acoustic cladding on walls of the HRSG;

• high performance silencer to the outlet of the HRSG, tuned to attenuate low frequencies from the gas turbine exhaust. An additional primary silencer may be required in order to reduce noise radiated from the boiler walls;

• high performance acoustic insulation to the gas turbine inlet ductwork downstream of the inlet silencer, to reduce duct noise breakout in this area;



64-C13376 Issue: 5 9-7

• the turbine building walls and roof to incorporate acoustic panelling possibly comprising a double skin with plasterboard and an absorbent infill. The inner skin to be perforated to gain maximum absorption benefit within the turbine building;

• within the turbine building, the gas turbine to be housed inside its own acoustic enclosure. The acoustic enclosure will be of ‘heavy’ construction with acoustic doors;

• ‘low noise’ trims used on noise generating steam and gas valves and acoustic lagging on pipe work;

• ventilation systems serving the turbine building, admin/control building and equipment enclosures to be fitted with silencers to attenuate ventilation fan noise and internal machinery noise;

• ACC to have low noise, low speed fans; and

• intermittent sources such as start-up and emergency steam vents to be fitted with proprietary diffuser/absorptive silencers.

9.70 The sources and acoustic barriers included in the noise modelling exercise are summarised below and will be incorporated (or their equivalent effect) in the proposed SEE, where appropriate:

• Transformers – assumed to be acoustically screened on three sides, with barriers that extend 3 metres above the transformers;

• Inlet Air Filter – high performance acoustic insulation assumed downstream to reduce noise breakout;

• Gas Turbine Building - assumed to be fully enclosed within a high acoustic performance building;

• Steam Turbine Building – assumed to be fully enclosed within a high acoustic performance building;

• Fin Fan Cooler Pumps - assumed to have no acoustic screening, other than that provided by the installation buildings;

• Fin Fan Coolers - assumed to have no acoustic screening or mitigation;

• Gas Pressure Reduction Valves - assumed to be screened with high acoustic performance insulation;

• HRSG Feed Pumps - assumed to be fully screened acoustically, by a barrier extending to the eaves of the main installation buildings;

• HRSG Stacks - assumed to incorporate high performance acoustic silencer;

• ACC Duct - assumed to be fitted with high performance acoustic cladding;

• ACC - assumed to use low noise fans; and

• GRF - assumed to have no acoustic screening.

9.71 The final assumptions made in the modelling exercise, regarding the total sound emission assumed for each source, are presented in Technical Appendix 9.1.3. The contents of Technical Appendix 9.1.3 will be issued as design parameters for the construction of the proposed SEE at the detailed design stage.

Mitigation During Construction

9.72 The Principal contractor will be required contractually to carry out works on-site in accordance with BPM as specified in BS 5228 Parts 1 & 2 to proactively manage potentially adverse impacts. Measures to be implemented, where appropriate, include:

• using where possible, ‘silenced’ plant and equipment;

• locating noisy plant and ancillary plant such as generators and compressors as far from sensitive receptors as possible;

• switching engines off where vehicles are standing for a significant period of time;

• fitting acoustic enclosures where possible to suppress noisy equipment;

• operating plant at low speeds, where possible;

• selecting where possible, electrically driven equipment in preference to internal combustion powered, hydraulic power in preference to pneumatic and wheeled in lieu of tracked plant;

• properly maintaining all plant (greased, blown silencers replaced, saws kept sharpened, teeth set and blades flat, worn bearings replaced, etc);

• giving consideration to temporary screening or enclosures for static noisy plant to reduce noise emissions and certifying plant to meet relevant EC Directive standards11;

• all contractors will be made familiar with the guidance in BS 5228 (Parts 1 and 2) which will form a pre-requisite of their appointment;

• implementing management procedures and monitoring protocols to identify and address any adverse impacts that occur; and

• all deliveries to be managed; measures will include ‘just-in-time’ deliveries, parking off the public highway, controlled discharge of trucks from site to avoid congestion, implementing a CTMP at site entrances at all times to control the traffic into the site.

9.73 In addition, the implementation of good practice, management controls and procedures as outlined in Chapter 5 Construction and Chapter 6 Environmental Management, will be set out in a CEMP to ensure that noise levels can be further managed and reduced.

Mitigation During Operation

9.74 During the operation of the proposed SEE the control of noise will be managed in relation to the requirements of the EP. A HSE system will be implemented by a SEEL HSE professional and this will ensure that there is a regular programme of noise monitoring and reporting, at compliance locations agreed with the EA.

9.75 A planned and preventive maintenance programme will operate at the proposed SEE and this will help to ensure that noise mitigation measures described in the mitigation by design stage are operating effectively.

9.76 Any noise complaints received in relation to the operation of the proposed SEE will be recorded on a complaints register. Any such complaints will be investigated and if appropriate a Corrective Action Report will be raised in line with the HSE system requirements.

11 2005.The Noise Emission in the Environment by Equipment for Use Outdoors (Amendment) Regulations


9-8 Issue: 5 64C13376

Impact Assessment

Construction Works

9.77 From March 2011, a period of six months will be required for removal of the Mound (see Chapter 5 Construction and Chapter 11 Ground Conditions) from the proposed SEE site, for off-site re-use. Following the Mound removal it is anticipated that duration of the construction phase for the proposed SEE will be approximately 30 months.

9.78 The existing buildings occupying the north eastern portion of the proposed SEE site will be demolished and suitable demolition debris may be crushed to be used as piling mat or fill material where possible.

9.79 The key stages of works and activities associated with the construction phase are discussed in more detail in Chapter 5 Construction of the ES. The works have been divided into the following sub-sections and in summary would include:

• Mound Removal; to include earth moving and excavation activities using bulldozers, tracked excavators, dumper trucks and Mound removal vehicles. It is predicted that 120 daily two-way (i.e. 60 vehicles ‘in’ and 60 vehicles ‘out’ HGV movements will occur during this period (Monday to Saturday) for a period of 26 weeks (6 months);

• Earthworks associated with substation, requiring HGV movements for removal of soil and delivery of fill material;

• Site Preparation and Enabling Works; to include all site clearance, demolition, excavation, ground improvement and foundation works using bulldozers, tracked excavators, breakers, concrete crusher, rollers, dumper trucks, piling. Key sources of noise associated with these activities would be expected from the pumping and placement of concrete, concrete delivery trucks, poker vibrators and concrete batching plant and pre-mixed concrete delivery vehicles; and

• Erection of Steel Frame and Plant Installation utilising mobile cranes, hydraulic lifts, scissor lifts, fork lift trucks.

9.80 Noise predictions have been undertaken in order to determine whether the 'lower cut off' noise criterion of LAeq,T 65 dB is likely to be exceeded during key enabling and construction activities identified above at the nearest noise sensitive receptors (see Table 9.4).

9.81 Noise levels have been estimated, as described in paragraphs 9.18 to 9.20 and are based on increasing distance from the boundary of the site. The distance between the point boundary and sensitive receptors in the vicinity range from 260 m to over 1 km. Given these large distances and the presence of intervening structures and non-construction related noise sources make the actual level at individual receptors difficult to predict with any certainty.

9.82 The predicted noise levels consider the noisiest activities likely to occur during each phase throughout the demolition and construction works. However, in reality there may be some overlap across the site depending on the actual implementation and timing of the works. In addition, individual activities may occur for short durations only and be of a transient nature. All activities will be subject to localised conditions such as screening, both natural and man-made, ground conditions, distance from source and prevailing weather conditions.

9.83 For the most part, the shortest distances to the site boundary used in the noise level estimates represent worst case. However, where activities are not constrained by the location of the proposed buildings, greater distances have been used in the calculations as part of the mitigation strategy.

9.84 The results of the estimated noise levels are presented in Table 9.6, which assume that the prevailing pre-construction ambient noise level at the closest noise-sensitive receptors is approximately 55 dB as evidenced by the baseline measurement results presented in Table 9.5. The noise predictions are based on the sound power levels presented in BS 5228 and relevant Defra updates (2005 and 2007) operating simultaneously and corrected for % of time in use as appropriate. Technical data used in the calculations is provided in Technical Appendix 9.1.4. Although in reality significant screening will be present for the majority of sensitive receptors, attenuation due to screening has been excluded in the noise level estimates to represent worst case.

Table 9.6: Demolition and Construction Noise Predictions - façade level. LAeq,T, dB

Distance from Site Boundary

Mound Removal Site Preparation & Enabling Works

Steel Frame Erection

300m 62.5 63.0 58.9

400m 60.5 61.0 57.6

600m 58.3 58.7 56.4

9.85 Comparison of the estimated noise levels in Table 9.6 with the significance criteria presented in Table 9.1 identifies that noise levels at receptors during all phases of construction are likely to remain below the 'lower cut off' noise value and as such are considered to be of no adverse impact significance. As such, no further mitigation measures are considered necessary or recommended.

Construction Traffic

9.86 The construction traffic impact assessment is based on the data contained within Chapter 8 Transport and Access. Construction traffic has been compared with the construction flows for the AM and PM peak periods during the peak year (2013) for construction traffic.

9.87 Base and construction traffic flows as presented in Table 7.5 of the Transport Statement (Technical Appendix 8.1) have been used to predict the percentage increase in noise level due to construction traffic during this period. As described in paragraph 9.29, an increase of 25% in traffic flow is the minimum required to bring about a readily perceptible change in noise level below which no adverse impacts occur.

9.88 Although the percentage increase in traffic flows are higher when looking at the one-way flows individually, where they occur together as in this instance, distinctions in noise level associated with each directional flow would not be perceptible. For this reason the assessment has been based on two-way traffic flows. The information contained in Table 7.9 of the Transport Statement (Technical Appendix 8.1) has been reproduced in Table 9.7 below together with the corresponding increase in noise level.



64-C13376 Issue: 5 9-9

Table 9.7 Construction Traffic Impact Assessment (2-way Flows)

Location 2013 2013 + Construction

Traffic

% Increase dB Increase

Impact Significance

A16 North of Wardentree Lane

08:00 – 09:00 1500 1620 8 < 1 None

17:00 – 18:00 1564 1684 8 < 1 None

A16 South of Wardentree Lane

08:00 – 09:00 1542 1661 8 < 1 None

17:00 – 18:00 1513 1633 8 < 1 None

West Marsh Road

08:00 – 09:00 796 1094 37 1-2 Negligible

17:00 – 18:00 844 1142 35 1-2 Negligible

Wardentree Lane (E)

08:00 – 09:00 1453 1692 16 < 1 None

17:00 – 18:00 1519 1758 16 < 1 None

Wardentree Lane (W)

08:00 – 09:00 1392 1422 2 < 1 None

17:00 – 18:00 1536 1566 2 < 1 None


08:00 – 09:00 1437 1451 1 < 1 None

17:00 – 18:00 1560 1576 1 < 1 None


08:00 – 09:00 892 904 1 < 1 None

17:00 – 18:00 931 945 2 < 1 None

Wardentree Lane (W at B1356)

08:00 – 09:00 685 715 4 < 1 None

17:00 – 18:00 809 839 4 < 1 None

9.89 The results presented in Table 9.7 show that construction traffic flows when considered in the context of the local highway network would result in a maximum percentage increase of between 1 to 2 dB(A). Accordingly, the predicted flows would give rise to, at most, barely perceptible, temporary, medium term changes in noise levels, which will result in no significant adverse impacts.

Operational Phase

9.90 The potential impact from the operation of the proposed SEE has been assessed in accordance with BS 4142, based on a comparison between the predicted specific noise level (LAr,Tr) from the proposed SEE with recorded background (LA90,T) at noise-sensitive receptors in the vicinity.

9.91 The noise model described in paragraphs 9.38 and 9.63 above, has been used to predict the propagation of noise from the proposed SEE across the surrounding area and at a representative number of receptor locations.

9.92 The predictions consider the total noise emission level from all elements of the proposed SEE at a representative number of receptor positions, under base load and start-up conditions. Predictions have been undertaken for ground floor (1.5 m) and first floor (4.0 m) heights, as appropriate, for each receptor. The results of these predictions are presented in Table 9.9.

9.93 It should be noted that recorded baseline data was at a height of 1.5 m, in accordance with the measurement methodology in BS 4142. It is considered that in all likelihood, existing background noise levels will be slightly higher at first floor levels as the effect of any localised screening from road traffic noise provided by the River Welland flood defences will be reduced, particularly at Ornam House and Stumps Lane to the east of the site. As such, the assessment of noise impacts at first level presented below is considered to be slightly worse case than is likely in reality.

9.94 A total of eight assessment receptors have been selected as representative of the areas most likely to be affected by noise in the vicinity of the proposed SEE which are presented in Table 9.8 and shown in Figure 9.2. Six of the eight receptors used are the same as the noise measurement positions (A-F) as presented in Figure 9.1. An additional two receptors, on Stumps Lane and Marsh Road (G-H) have also been selected in order to provide a representative spread of the closest receptors.

9.95 It is worth noting that the measurements carried out at receptor B (Ornam House) were also considered to be representative of existing background noise levels at receptor F (Stumps Lane) and receptor G (Marsh Road). The measurement position at Ornam House was selected for reasons of practicality, as the property is owned by SECL and it was possible to leave the noise monitoring equipment unattended securely for extended periods. BS 4142 allows for background measurements to be undertaken at an alternative position if all other conditions remain constant. Subjective observations onsite identified that all three locations experienced similar noise climates, with any additional noise being experienced from operation of the existing SECL power station at Ornam House, being offset by higher road traffic noise from the A16 at Stumps Lane and additional contributions from industrial activities at Marsh Road.

9.96 Although Ornam House has been included in this assessment as a notionally sensitive receptor for completeness, the property is in actual fact no-longer used for residential purposes, having been purchased by SECL for noise mitigation purposes due to its proximity to the existing SECL power station.


9-10 Issue: 5 64C13376

Table 9.8: Noise Assessment Receptors

Assessment Receptor Full Grid Reference

A – Crown Cottage 526505, 325440

B – Ornam House 526236, 324709

C – Roman Bank 525874, 324111

D – Chiltern Drive 525144, 323902

E – Sherwood Drive 524828, 324128

F – Wardentree Lane 525163, 324978

G – Industrial / Residential Property off Marsh Road 526188, 324208

H – Stumps Lane 526373, 324672

OPERATION OF THE PROPOSED SEE PLANT (BASE LOAD)

9.97 The total predicted noise level from the base-load operation of the proposed SEE at ground and first floor heights are presented in Table 9.9 below and presented graphically in Figure 9.3.

Table 9.9: Predicted Operational SEE Noise Levels (Base Load) LAeq,16hr dB

Assessment Receptor Position Ground Floor First Floor

A 27.6 32.2

B 43.2 43.6

C 42.5 42.8

D 34.6 34.7

E 30.6 30.7

F 36.8 37.4

G -* 42.6

H 41.9 42.1

* First floor only considered sensitive noise as ground floor utilised for office/industrial purposes.

9.98 Given the nature of the current noise environment which is largely influenced by the operation of the existing industrial sites in the vicinity, in addition to the existing SECL power station, and the fact that noise emission from the proposed SEE will remain constant during base load operations, no correction for tonal character has been applied for the base load scenario to determine the LAr,Tr rating noise level. The results of the daytime and night-time BS 4142 assessments are presented in Table 9.10.

Table 9.10: Base Load BS 4142 Assessment - Excess of LAr,Tr ‘Rating Noise Level’ Above Existing LA90,T Background Noise Level, dB - free-field

Background Noise Level Ground Floor First Floor Assessment Receptor Position Daytime Night-time Daytime Night-time Daytime Night-time

A 51.6 44.1 -24.0 -16.5 -19.4 -11.9

B 47.7 42.7 -4.5 +0.5 -4.1 +0.9

C 49.4 46.5 -6.9 -4 -6.6 -3.7

D 46.8 44.9 -12.2 -10.3 -12.1 -10.2

E 50.5 47.7 -19.9 -17.1 -19.8 -17.0

F 56.4 50.4 -19.6 -13.6 -19.0 -13.0

G 47.7 42.7 n/a n/a -5.1 -0.1

H 47.7 42.7 -5.8 -0.8 -5.6 -0.6 + Indicates a predicted specific noise level above measured background (LA90,T) - Indicates a predicted specific noise level below measured background (LA90,T)

9.99 Comparison of the predicted LAr,Tr rating noise levels during base load operation, given in Table 9.9, with the average measured background daytime and night-time noise levels indicates that noise from the proposed SEE will be below the existing background noise level at all receptor locations, with the exception of Ornam House during the night-time. Noise levels at this location are predicted to be imperceptibly (0.5 - 0.9 dB) higher than the prevailing background levels and, therefore, could result in a minor adverse impact (if the location was utilised for residential purposes). However, SECL is in possession of this property, which is currently unoccupied. The next closest residential property, in private ownership, is on Stumps Lane, identified as receptor H above. It is predicted that noise from the proposed SEE will be below the existing background noise level at this location.

OPERATION OF THE PROPOSED SEE PLANT (START-UP)

9.100 The predicted noise levels from the operation of the proposed SEE at ground and first floor heights are presented in Table 9.11 below and presented graphically in Figure 9.4.



64-C13376 Issue: 5 9-11

Table 9.11: Predicted Operational SEE Noise Levels (Start-up) LAeq,16hr dB

Assessment Receptor Position Ground Floor First Floor

A 28.7 32.6

B 44.0 44.8

C 44.7 45.8

D 35.4 35.5

E 31.5 31.6

F 36.9 37.4

G -* 44.5

H 43.6 43.6

* First floor only considered sensitive noise as ground floor utilised for office/industrial purposes.

9.101 It is understood that the only fundamental difference in noise emissions during start-up are associated with the ACC Duct, which can at times emit significantly higher levels of noise as a result of bypass value operations. Given the potentially variable nature of this source, a correction for variable character of + 5 dB (A) has been applied in accordance with BS 4142 to noise emissions from the ACC Duct for the start-up scenario. The results of the daytime and night-time BS 4142 assessments are presented in Table 9.12.

Table 9.12: Start-up BS 4142 Assessment - Excess of LAr,Tr ‘Rating Noise Level’ Above Existing LA90,T Background Noise Level, dB - free-field

Background Noise Level Ground Floor First Floor Assessment Receptor Position Daytime Night-time Daytime Night-time Daytime Night-time

A 51.6 44.1 -22.9 -15.4 -19.0 -11.5

B 47.7 42.7 -3.7 +1.3 -2.9 +2.1

C 49.4 46.5 -4.7 -1.8 -3.6 -0.7

D 46.8 44.9 -11.4 -9.5 -11.3 -9.4

E 50.5 47.7 -19.0 -16.2 -18.9 -16.1

F 56.4 50.4 -19.5 -13.5 -19.0 -13.0

G 47.7 42.7 n/a n/a -3.2 +1.8

H 47.7 42.7 -4.1 +0.9 -4.1 +0.9 + Indicates a predicted specific noise level above measured background (LA90,T) - Indicates a predicted specific noise level below measured background (LA90,T)

9.102 Comparison of the predicted LAr,Tr rating noise levels during start up operations given in Table 9.11 with the average measured background daytime and night-time noise levels indicates that noise from the proposed SEE will be below the existing background noise level at the majority of

receptor locations, with the exception of Ornam House, Marsh Lane and Stumps Lane during the night-time.

9.103 Noise levels at Ornam House and Marsh Lane are predicted to be approximately 2 dB higher than the prevailing background levels and therefore could give result in a minor adverse impact. However, the fact that Ornam House is not actually used for residential purposes and the Marsh Lane residential receptor is located at and associated with an existing industrial operation, is considered to limit the significance of this minor impact.

9.104 Noise levels at Stumps Lane are predicted to be imperceptibly (0.9 dB) higher than the prevailing background levels at night and, therefore, could result in a minor adverse impact, although it is considered unlikely that an impact of this magnitude would be noticeable in reality or give rise to any complaints.

9.105 Notwithstanding the above, it has been determined that reducing total sound emission from the ACC and ACC Duct by a further 3 dB (when compared to the levels assumed in this assessment, and presented in Technical Appendix 9.1.3), will be sufficient to ensure that LAr,Tr

rating noise levels during start-up remain at or below existing background noise levels, during both daytime and night-time periods.

Schedule of Mitigation and Monitoring Measures

9.106 Table 9.13 below sets out the main noise mitigation measures, or there equivalents where appropriate, which will be used during the design, procurement, construction and operation phases for the proposed SEE.

Table 9.13: Mitigation Measures

Location Mitigation Measure Effect Timing Other Requirements

Transformers Specification of acoustic barriers

Source reduction of noise to avoid noise impacts.

Design & Procurement.

Demonstrate BAT for EP

Inlet air filter Specification of high performance acoustic insulation




Gas and Steam Turbine Hall

Specification of high acoustic performance building.




Gas Pressure Reduction Valves

Specification of high performance acoustic insulation




HRSG Feed Pumps

Specification of full acoustic barrier screen extending to the eaves of the main buildings





9-12 Issue: 5 64C13376

Table 9.13: Mitigation Measures

Location Mitigation Measure Effect Timing Other Requirements

HRSG Stacks Specification of high performance acoustic silencer




ACC Inlet Duct Specification of high performance acoustic cladding




ACC Specification of low noise, slow speed fans




Site Wide

Implementation of CEMP to control noise generation during the construction period associated with activities such as impact piling.

Reduction of adverse noise impact

Site clearance and construction

The CEMP requirement will be secured via a suitably worded condition.

Site Wide Carry out noise compliance monitoring

Measure and monitor noise generated during the operation of the SEE to demonstrate compliance with requirements of Environmental Permit.

Operation Compliance with EP

Summary

9.107 The assessment of likely noise and vibration impacts has been based on a series of environmental and source noise measurements undertaken at the proposed SEE site, reference to various British Standards and the results of the noise predictions generated by the noise model to identify any significant impacts that are likely as a result of the construction and operation of the proposed SEE.

9.108 The current noise environment at noise sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the site is influenced to varying degrees by road traffic noise and existing sources of industrial noise in addition to the existing SECL power station, this is particularly the case at Roman Bank. The principal source of road traffic noise in the area is from the A16 which passes to the east of the proposed SEE site.

9.109 The result of the noise assessment has been reported assuming that all recommended mitigation measures are implemented, a summary of the potential adverse impacts, recommended mitigation measures and means of implementation are given in Table 9.14 below.

Table 9.14: Summary of the potential impacts of the Proposed SEE, mitigation and outcome/residual effects in relation to Noise and Vibration

Potential Impact Mitigation Means of Implementation Outcome/Residual Effects

Construction Phase

Noise impact during construction works

Implementation of BPM and good practice to be set out in a CEMP to reduce and avoid potential impacts associated with timing, choice of plant and operating techniques

CEMP to be secured by means of an appropriately worded planning condition

No Adverse Impact

Operation of the Completed SEE

Noise impacts during routine operation of the SEE (baseload)

Various source noise mitigation measures, as detailed in Table 9.13, to be specified to avoid noise impacts at noise sensitive receptors

Design & Procurement specifications for major plant and equipment.

None

Noise impacts during operational start-up

Implementation of bespoke mitigation measures to further reduce the total sound emissions from the ACC and ACC Duct.

Design & Procurement specification.

None

References

Department of the Environment (now Department of Communities and Local Government). 1994. Planning Policy Guidance Note: Planning and Noise. HMSO

Department for Communities and Local Government (1994) Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) 24: Planning and Noise

British Standard (BS) 5228: Part 1: 2009: Code of practise for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites. HMSO

Design Manual for Roads and Bridges:2008, Volume 11: Section 3: Part 7 Noise and Vibration

BS 4142:1997 Method for Rating industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas, HMSO

Institute of Acoustics/Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment Working Party, 2002, Draft Guidelines for Noise Impact Assessment.

2005.The Noise Emission in the Environment by Equipment for Use Outdoors (Amendment) Regulations

World Health Organisation (1999) Guidelines for Community Noise

Client

Scale

Project No

Date

Drawn by

SEEL

NTS

64C13376 RC

March 2009

Figure 9.1Noise Measurement Locations

ENVIRON UK Limited


Version Control 4

8

9

9a

1

2

34

5

6

7

LEGEND

Noise monitoring locationsused for existing powerstation noise assessment(1996)

Noise monitoring locationswhich have been lost(s ince 1996) due todemolition or are nolonger in residential use

2008 noise monitoringlocations

Location of proposed

SEE site

A

B

C

D

E

F


N

Client

Scale

Project No

Date

Drawn by

SEEL

NTS

64C13376 RC

March 2009

Figure 9.2Noise Sensitive Receptor Locations

ENVIRON UK Limited


Version Control 4


LEGEND

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

2008 noise sensitivereceptors

N

Location of proposed

SEE site

Client

Scale Version Control

Project No DateDrawn by

SEEL

NTS

64C13376 RC March 2009

Figure 9.3Predicted Noise Levels - Baseload

3

7 Walker StreetEdinburgh E 3 7JYHTel. +44(0)131 225 9899Fax.+44(0)131 220 3411ENVIRON UK Limited


N

Spalding Energy Expansion Landscape and Visual Assessment · The are to accommodate the taller...

Documents

Transcript of Spalding Energy Expansion Landscape and Visual Assessment · The are to accommodate the taller...