Ms Sue Peneluna Our Ref: D134633/TW Planning and … MVV and Sam Gilpin Demolition Ltd. Sam Gilpin...

Scott Wilson Ltd - Part of the worldwide Scott Wilson consultancy group Registered in England: No 880328 Registered Office: Scott House, Basing View, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 4JG

Scott Wilson Ltd Mayflower House, Armada Way, Plymouth, Devon, PL1 1LD United Kingdom T +44 (0)1752 676 700 F +44 (0)1752 676 701

www.scottwilson.com

Dear Ms Peneluna Whitecleaves Quarry Redevelopment: Request for Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping Opinion On behalf of our client, MVV Umwelt, we are writing in to request a formal Scoping Opinion for the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the proposed redevelopment of White Cleave Quarry, at Strode Road/Plymouth Road, Buckfastleigh, Devon. The request is made under the provisions of Regulation 10(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 (SI No. 203) (as amended). We note that a previous application for a Waste reception facility was submitted for this site in 2008 by Sam Gilpin Demolition Ltd, reference number 08/01622/DCC. At this time numerous environmental assessments were undertaken but additional studies were requested in order to assess the application. It should be noted that whilst this application is made on behalf of our clients MVV, this is a joint venture between MVV and Sam Gilpin Demolition Ltd. Sam Gilpin Demolition Ltd is the operators of the Whitecleaves Quarry site. We have based our scoping report on the previous studies undertaken in 2008 and the subsequent statutory consultations. However, we would be grateful if you could provide us with a formal Scoping Opinion to ensure that the scope of the EIA is agreed. We have enclosed a copy of our Scoping Report which identifies potential environmental issues associated with the development and defines what methods will be used to assess the environmental effects during the EIA. This has been informed by the previous surveys undertaken in 2008. Following agreement of the scope of the EIA, detailed environmental studies will be undertaken and an Environmental Statement compiled describing the likely significant effects of the proposed development on the environment and proposed measures to mitigate these effects. The Environmental Statement will be submitted with the planning application. We trust that you find this acceptable and that you will be in a position to issue your Scoping Opinion at the earliest opportunity. We look forward to hearing from you soon. Yours sincerely For and on behalf of URS/Scott Wilson Ltd Tamsin Wray Senior Environmental Consultant Direct Line: +44 (0)1752 676 772 email: [email protected] Encs. cc John Hadley

Bruce Braithwaite

Ms Sue Peneluna Planning and Building Control Devon County Council County Hall Topsham Road Exeter Devon EX2 4QD

Our Ref: D134633/TW Your Ref: Date: February 2011

Prepared for

Whitecleave Quarry Redevelopment

Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping

Report

Final Report

February 2011

MVV Environment Devonport Ltd

Whitecleave Quarry Redevelopment: Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping Report

URS/Scott Wilson 3

rd Floor Mayflower House

Armada Way Plymouth Devon PL1 1LD Tel 01752 676700 Fax 08702 386023 www.urs-scottwilson.com

This document has been prepared in accordance with the scope of Scott Wilson's appointment with its client and is subject to the terms of that appointment. It is addressed to and for the sole and confidential use and reliance of Scott Wilson's client. Scott Wilson accepts no liability for any use of this document other than by its client and only for the purposes for which it was prepared and provided. No person other than the client may copy (in whole or in part) use or rely on the contents of this document, without the prior written permission of the Company Secretary of Scott Wilson Ltd. Any advice, opinions, or recommendations within this document should be read and relied upon only in the context of the document as a whole. The contents of this document do not provide legal or tax advice or opinion. © Scott Wilson Ltd 2010

Revision Schedule


February 2011

Rev Date Details Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by

01 February 11 Final Tamsin Wray

Senior Environmental

Consultant

John Hadley

Senior Project Manager

Andrew Wooddisse

Head of Waste Planning



Table of Contents

1 Introduction ..................................................................................... 1

1.1 The proposed Whitecleave Quarry Redevelopment........................................................ 1

1.2 Purpose of this report: scoping of environmental impact assessment ............................. 2

2 The Site and Surrounding Area...................................................... 3

2.1 Introduction..................................................................................................................... 3

2.2 Location and setting........................................................................................................ 3

3 The Proposed Development ........................................................... 4

3.1 Introduction..................................................................................................................... 4

3.2 Phase 1 – Construction of the MRF Facility .................................................................... 4

3.3 Phase 2 – Development of the IBA Facility ..................................................................... 5

3.4 Phase 3 – Extending the Sustainability of Primary Aggregate & Backfilling of Whitecleave Quarry ........................................................................................................ 7

4 Environmental impact assessment................................................ 9

4.1 EIA Legislation................................................................................................................ 9

4.2 Determining the need (or otherwise) for EIA: ‘screening’ ................................................ 9

4.3 Scoping ........................................................................................................................ 10

4.4 General EIA methodology............................................................................................. 11

5 EIA topics....................................................................................... 12

5.1 Archaeology.................................................................................................................. 12

5.2 Air Quality..................................................................................................................... 12

5.3 Community issues & Socio-economic........................................................................... 12

5.4 Contaminated land........................................................................................................ 14

5.5 Demolition and construction.......................................................................................... 14

5.6 Ecology (terrestrial)....................................................................................................... 15

5.7 Flood risk assessment .................................................................................................. 15

5.8 Landscape and Visual .................................................................................................. 16

5.9 Tree Survey.................................................................................................................. 17

5.10 Noise and Vibration ...................................................................................................... 18

5.11 Transport Assessment / Travel Plan Statement ............................................................ 19

5.12 Waste audit statement .................................................................................................. 20

6 Content and indicative structure of the Environmental Statement....................................................................................... 21



6.1 Table Showing Requirements of the EIA Regulations 1999 as to the Content of an ES............................................................................................................................ 21

6.2 Table Showing Indicative structure of ES...................................................................... 22

6.3 Table Showing Other Documents that will be Submitted with the Planning Application and ES ....................................................................................................... 23

Appendix 1: Figures and Drawings

Figure 1 - Whitecleave Quarry Outline Plan

Figure 2 - Phase 1 Plan – New MRF Facility

Figure 3 - Phase 2 Plan - IBA Facility

Figure 4 - Phase 3 Plan – Backfilling of Quarry void to 60m AoD



Whitecleave Quarry Redevelopment: Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping Report February 2011 1

1 Introduction

1.1 The proposed Whitecleave Quarry Redevelopment

1.1.1 Whitecleave Quarry is located at Strode Road/Plymouth Road, Buckfastleigh, Devon, TQ11

0DW. The site is managed under leasehold by Sam Gilpin Demolition Ltd. The site is, in

totality, approximately 1.2 hectares (ha) and does not include the area to the east of the quarry

(adjacent to the A38) currently used as a coach park.

1.1.2 MVV Umwelt (MVV) have been announced as ‘preferred bidder’ for the South West Devon

Waste Partnership (SWDWP) Energy from Waste (EfW) PFI contract. This Scoping Report is

submitted as part of proposals to utilise the quarry to reuse and re-cycle the Incinerator Bottom

Ash (IBA ) which is a by-product of the EfW facility. This will also help to achieve high landfill

diversion rates (97%) for Municipal Solid Waste (MSW).

1.1.3 In addition this Scoping Report also covers other proposed changes within the quarry site as a

whole.

1.1.4 In 2008, SGDL undertook numerous environmental assessments in support of an application

to use the site for a Materials Recycling Facility (MRF) for Construction and Demolition (C&D)

waste (08/01622/DCC) which was eventually withdrawn. The detailed assessments

undertaken and the consultation for this application have been used to form the basis of this

scoping request. The context of the 2008 surveys are relevant to the application for the IBA

facility as much of the facilities function is comparable to that of the 2008 waste reception

facility application.

1.1.5 As part of the 2008 application, the following authorities were consulted:

• Teignbridge District Council (TDC)

• Dartmoor National Park (DNP)

• Buckfastleigh Town Council (BTC)

• Environment Agency (EA)

• Natural England (NE)

• Highways Agency (HA)

• Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB)

• and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE)

1.1.6 More detailed evaluations of each of the environmental assessments are provided in section 5

of this report.

1.1.7 Further details on the site location and the surrounding area can be found in chapter 2 of this

report. Further details on the proposed development itself can be found in chapter 3.




1.2 Purpose of this report: scoping of environmental impact

assessment

1.2.1 Prior to the planning application being made for the Whitecleave Quarry Redevelopment

project an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) will be undertaken. The screening opinion

issued by DCC on 19/06/2010 confirmed that this proposal requires an EIA as it falls within

description 11(b) of Schedule 2 of the 1999 Regulations (as amended).

1.2.2 The EIA procedure requires the developer to undertake certain studies and compile an

Environmental Statement (ES) describing the likely significant effects of the proposed

development on the environment and proposed measures to mitigate these effects.

1.2.3 The purposes of this Scoping Report are:

• to identify potential environmental issues and likely significant environmental effects

associated with the proposed development;

• to define what methods will be used to assess the environmental effects of the

proposed development during the EIA; and

• to obtain a ‘scoping opinion’ from the local planning authority, Devon County Council,

in order to formalise the above.

1.2.4 As part of the 2008 application the consultees listed in section 1.1.5 above provided comments

on the proposed redevelopment and its potential environmental effects. This Scoping Report

has been prepared considering the various comments, in order to present with clarity, the

topics that will be covered in the EIA and the level of detail to which they will be assessed.

1.2.5 This report has been produced on the basis that all materials will be imported or exported by

road.




2 The Site and Surrounding Area

2.1 Introduction

2.1.1 In order to identify the scope of issues that will need to be addressed by the EIA, it is

necessary to understand the characteristics of the Whitecleave Quarry site and the

surrounding area that may be affected by the proposed development. The following section

describes the location of the proposed development and the existing environmental features /

conditions of the site and the surrounding area.

2.2 Location and setting

2.2.1 The site is located on Strode Road/Plymouth Road, Buckfastleigh, Devon, TQ11 0DW. (Figure

1, Appendix 1). The site is currently occupied by the existing Whitecleave Quarry and

associated operations. Immediately adjacent, to the east of the quarry, is an area currently

used as a coach store. This area is not part of this proposal.

2.2.2 The site at Whitecleave is a quarry formerly operated by Hanson. The site is now leased by

Sam Gilpin Demolition Ltd (SGDL).

2.2.3 The site has planning permissions in place which permit the continued quarrying of the site until

2042. This proposal will mean that only minerals which need to be removed for the

construction of the IBA facility will be extracted, no other quarrying activities are proposed.

This work will be done within a 12-18 month time frame and would mean potentially less

material is removed than would be otherwise possible under the existing planning permissions.

2.2.4 The site is not located within the Dartmoor National Park or the South Devon Area of

Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). The site is not subject to any statutory or non-statutory

nature conservation designations although it adjoins Potters Wood to the south, which is a

designated Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). In addition Buckfastleigh Caves SSSI is

located 800m to the north of the Quarry. Buckfastleigh Caves forms part of the European

designated site of South Hams Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Within the site there are

no Listed Buildings.

2.2.5 Residential properties are located to the north of the A38, where the land slopes up away from

the road providing views of the road and some areas of the quarry, notably the back wall of the

Quarry which has now been partly overgrown with vegetation.

2.2.6 To the north of the site, 200m across the A38, is the town of Buckfastleigh, with a population of

approximately 4,000 residents. The A38 separates the Quarry from the village.

2.2.7 Agricultural pasture borders the site to the northeast and east. Dean Burn Stream runs

adjacent to the north-western boundary of the site. This is a tributary of the River Dart.




3 The Proposed Development

3.1 Introduction

3.1.1 Drawing; Figure 1 in Appendix 1 has been prepared to illustrate the proposed development as

currently envisaged. Figure 1 highlights the three areas of development within the site

boundary; area A, B and C. The development would comprise of a reception facility for the IBA

facility, the MRF and recycling operation all of which will be operated and managed by the

current site licensee Sam Gilpin Demolition Ltd (SGDL) under a new company known as

Whitecleave Quarry Ltd (WQL). As the new Company WQL is a legal entity, but is dormant, all

reference in this report is made to SGDL.

3.1.2 The work will be completed in three phases:

• Phase 1 – Construction of a MRF facility highlighted as Area A in Figure 1, due for

completion with 3 years of receiving planning permission.

• Phase 2 – Construction of the IBA facility highlighted as Area B in Figure 1, due to be

operational not before June 2014.

• Phase 3 – Utilisation of the quarry void to initially store the excavated Dolerite (from

Phase 2), to create a level area that can be used to store IBA product and inert

outputs from the MRF. Dependent on market forces the Dolerite will be removed and

possibly crushed and blended with processed IBA and/or inert outputs from the MRF

to produce a marketable construction aggregate. If there are long term periods of low

market demand the quarry void would be filled up, possibly quite quickly, thus

achieving the final reclamation of the void space. This approach potentially extends

the sustainable life of the primary aggregate (Dolerite) and reduces the risk of

sterilising the asset. The eventual target will be to create a level working site at 60m

above ordnance datum (AoD). This is highlighted as Area C in Figure 1. Blending

may also be undertaken at other sites in the region (subject to the necessary

consents).

3.1.3 Figures 2, 3 and 4 in Appendix 1 of this document illustrate the phasing of these works.

3.1.4 The proposal extends past the site boundary as defined in the current permission for quarrying

at the site. The existing ‘spur’ contains approximately 300,000 tonnes of material (Dolerite) is

required to be removed in order to create a level plateaux at approx 60m AoD that will facilitate

the development of an IBA facility in Area C. The re-profiling of the spur will include the

working of material that is outside of the current permitted boundary of mineral working.

3.1.5 The site was considered to be a high risk site under its previous operators Hansons due to the

steepness of the cliff edges and the depth of the ponded water in the quarry base. As a result

of these proposals, this risk will be reduced as the site is to be re-profiled to a level area, to a

height of approx 60m above ordnance datum (AoD).

3.2 Phase 1 – Construction of the MRF Facility

3.2.1 The MRF to be operated by SGDL will be sited in area A (Figure 1). This is adjacent to the

current location of the site offices.




3.2.2 In terms of construction chronology, the MRF area will be developed early in the construction

programme to enable SGDL to utilise the rubble from their C&D waste and blend with the

quarry extracted stone to be used as a recycled product enabling primary aggregate

extension.

3.2.3 The MRF will require the installation of six concrete bays covered by a sorting unit for

construction and C&D waste to be separated into its various waste streams. These bays will

be fed by a conveyor and the waste sorted by hand. The conveyor will be supplied by lorries

coming to site depositing C&D waste. In turn a 20 tonne excavator will feed the conveyor; a

wheeled loading shovel will be used for material management. The current quarry offices will

be the base for SGDL recycling/demolition operations.

3.2.4 C&D will comprise of material bought in from SGDL demolition sites. C&D waste is identified

and described as concrete, bricks, tiles, ceramics, wood, glass, plastic, bituminous mixtures,

metals, gypsum, soil and stones and or a mixture of the above; as described in the European

Waste Catalogue issued by the Environment Agency (EA).

3.2.5 Once the C&D waste has been sorted into its various waste streams the resulting rubble will

be crushed in the quarry base (which in due course may be elevated by filling with the

Dolerite) and stockpiled on site to use with stone quarried from the site. The resulting blended

aggregate will conform to Waste Resource Action Programme (WRAP) protocol for recycled

materials and supports The Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)

strategic priority on sustainable consumption and production. Currently SGDL sends approx

4,000 tonnes of waste per year to landfill and would look to reduce the quantity going to landfill

by 80%.

3.2.6 This processing facility will be managed to ensure dust suppression and noise reduction.

3.2.7 Figure 2 in Appendix 1 outlines how the site will look after phase 1 is complete. Subject to the

satisfactory completion of Phase 3 (see below) it is envisaged that the MRF would be

relocated to the Phase 3 area. This would be the subject of a separate planning application at

the time.

3.3 Phase 2 – Development of the IBA Facility

3.3.1 The development of the IBA facility will require changes to the existing site topography and

layout. Furthermore additional mineral extraction beyond that already permitted by the sites

permitted boundary of mineral working will be proposed in order to increase the level working

plateau. The land highlighted in Figure 1 as area C, will need to be levelled to accommodate

the new facility. The re-profiling of this area will be completed by drilling and blasting the

existing Dolerite (phase 2) in a sequenced extraction. It is estimated that in the region of

250,000-300,000t of material will need to be extracted. Once the top site of the Dolerite is

extracted, each subsequent blast would be in the region of 10,000 tonnes of blasted rock. It is

anticipated that this will be complete within 12-18 months from breaking ground and the start

of construction on-site. The quarry void will be utilised to store the excavated Dolerite (from

Phase 2), and, on the new raised floor, processed IBA and inert C&D waste, which dependent

on market forces will be crushed & blended appropriately to produce a viable construction

aggregate. This approach potentially extends the sustainable life of the primary aggregate

(Dolerite) and reduces the risk of sterilising the asset. The area may be filled partly to 60m and

partly (in the northern portion) to a lower level, which at this stage cannot be determined,

which would be accessed by the existing quarry floor ramp access. In this way the 60m area




can be used as an extension of the IBA processing area. The eventual target (Phase 3) will be

to create a level working site at 60m above ordnance datum (AoD) by backfilling the void with

crushed inert construction waste.

3.3.2 The IBA facility will consist of a concrete slab c 8000m2, a building, a settlement lagoon and

storage bays for the incoming and processed material.

3.3.3 Figure 3 in Appendix 1 outlines how the site will look after phase 2 is complete.

Access and car parking

3.3.4 All vehicular access to the Quarry and IBA facility would be via an existing site entrance on

Strode Road.

IBA Processing

3.3.5 The Incinerator Bottom Ash (IBA) would be brought to Whitecleave Quarry by lorries with 20-

25 ton net load, directly from the Devonport EfW site, using the A38 dual carriageway.

3.3.6 The mass flow diagram for the Incinerator at the proposed Devonport site shows IBA outputs

ranging from 57,000 tonnes per annum (tpa) to a maximum of 65,000tpa, depending on the

composition of the waste treated at the Devonport facility. This is based on the calculation that

IBA will form between 23.5% and 26% of the total inputs into the Devonport facility. The

variation of between 10-15% is dependent on the type of waste that is received and processed

at the Devonport Facility.

3.3.7 These volumes translate into 10.4 loads a day over an 8.5hour operating day giving

approximately two 20-25t (net load) vehicles per hour.

3.3.8 On site the IBA will be stored in the designated input storage area for 3 to 6 weeks – with up to

7,500 tons overall storage capacity. The storage area will have a concrete base to ensure the

area’s impermeability. Water that drains off is collected in the settlement lagoon and reused to

enhance the maturation process and to suppress dust. During this period soluble salts are

embedded in the crystalline structure and CO2 is absorbed by the maturation process. The

material forms a hard surface, which does not generate dust or odour.

3.3.9 A wheeled bucket loader loads the IBA material into the processing building.

3.3.10 The mechanical processing mainly consists of screening and sizing operations and removal of

ferrous and non-ferrous metals.

3.3.11 The coarse material (>150mm) is removed by a mechanical grill. Non-ferrous metals are

removed by an eddy current separator and ferrous metals are removed by a magnetic

separator situated above the head of conveyor. Subsequently, the mass flow is divided into a

fraction 0-40mm and a 40-150fraction by a Trommel screen. The oversized material greater

than 150mm is stored intermediately and will ultimately be crushed by a mobile crusher

brought on site as required. Coarse non-ferrous parts and unburned material can be removed

from the mass stream manually. The un-burned material would be returned to the Energy

from Waste (EfW) facility for further processing.

3.3.12 The fraction of aggregate between 0-40mm passes through a swinging sieve which produces

two fractions 0-10mm and 10-40mm. From both fractions, ferrous and non-ferrous metals are

removed by magnetic separator and an eddy-current separator respectively.




3.3.13 After being dropped in the receiving containers, both fractions are stored outside on separate

open piles. The wheel loaders are able to store the aggregate up to heights of up to 8 metres.

3.3.14 The IBA processing plant includes a building of approximately 750m², where the mechanical

processing is carried out, an input storage and traffic area of approximately 6,000m² as well as

a lagoon of approximately 1,500m², where surface water is collected and also a site

weighbridge. In Phase 3, when the quarry is levelled to 60m AoD a further product storage

area of approximately 6,000m² will also be available.

3.3.15 Equipment required for the daily operation of the site will include a wheel loader and container

lorry, both of which are mobile units. In addition a grizzly feeder, trommel, swinging sieve,

several magnetic separators and eddy current separators and numerous belt conveyors; all of

these items are fixed plant (stationary) within the building

3.3.16 The IBA will be stored for a period of 3 – 6 weeks for the maturation process.

3.3.17 The product would be defined as inert waste as cited in the Landfill (England and Wales)

Regulations 2002, Regulation 7(4). Under this legislation waste is inert waste if:

(a) it does not undergo any significant physical, chemical or biological transformations;

(b) it does not dissolve, burn or otherwise physically or chemically react, biodegrade or

adversely affect other matter with which it comes into contact in a way likely to give rise to

environmental pollution or harm to human health; and

(c) its total leachability and pollutant content and the ecotoxicity of its leachate are

insignificant and, in particular, do not endanger the quality of any surface water or

groundwater.

3.3.18 Incinerator Bottom Ash (IBA) is a heterogeneous substance, consisting of ash (approx. 45%),

melted and vitrified material (approx. 40%), inert materials such as stone and concrete

(approx. 10%) and metals (approx. 6%). Typically they have a specific surface area of 3 to 46

m²/g dry substance. Metals are partly melted during the incineration process, and also

form different metallic oxides. Ash consists of inorganic material, soot, dust particles, fine

glass and ceramic(s).

3.3.19 Regular chemical analysis is undertaken on the raw product in order to manage any organic

and inorganic toxic substances.

3.3.20 The IBA can be used for numerous applications including utility pipe bedding, a lightweight

aggregate for masonry, a component in bitumous mixes, but mainly as an aggregate for road

construction.

3.3.21 The final product will be transported off site to its end use site. The resulting movements of

HGVs will be comparable to the movements of vehicles entering the site with the un-refined

product from the EfW plant. However there will be a reduction in terms of IBA tonnage as a

result of the maturation process by between 10% & 15% due to moisture loss.

3.4 Phase 3 – Extending the Sustainability of Primary Aggregate &

Backfilling of Whitecleave Quarry

3.4.1 Phase 3 will utilise the quarry void to store the excavated Dolerite (from Phase 2), processed

IBA and inert C&D waste. The processed IBA product will continue to be managed within the

quarry and dependent on market forces will also be blended to produce a marketable




construction aggregate. This approach potentially extends the sustainable life of the primary

aggregate (Dolerite) and reduces the risk of sterilising the asset. The eventual target will be to

create a level working site at 60m above ordnance datum (AoD). The proposal for the finished

Whitecleave Quarry site is to have the entire quarry floor at one level. The site will finally

comprise a concreted surface with IBA treatment in one area (area C, Figure 1) with the rest of

the yard to be utilised by SGDL as a streamlined relocated MRF.

3.4.2 The quarry void (area B, Figure 1) will be filled with inert material brought in from SGDL

demolition works undertaken in the region. In addition other inert C&D materials will also be

brought in from other contractors.

3.4.3 Figure 4 in Appendix 1 outlines how the site will look after phase 3 is complete.

Combined Operation of MRF Facility and IBA Processing Facility

3.4.4 The site offers the possibility of a combined recycling facility to realise a high quality recycled

aggregate through the relocation of the MRF to the Phase 3 area.

3.4.5 This proposal also fulfils Sam Gilpin Demolition Ltd’s contribution to the commitment to the

National Federation of Demolition Contractor’s target of reducing waste to landfill by over 80%.

3.4.6 Once the site has been re-profiled and phase 3 is complete, the MRF will work alongside the

IBA Treatment facility to produce a recycled secondary aggregate. This can be blended with

primary aggregate from other sources or used as a discrete secondary aggregate.

3.4.7 The current quarry offices will be used as welfare and site offices for all operations.

Soft landscaping

3.4.8 Mature trees on the site would be retained where possible, with a tree survey being

undertaken to assess the importance of the trees on and adjacent to the site. A full description

of these services is contained within section 5.8 of this report.

Connections to infrastructure

3.4.9 There would be no requirement for any foul sewer connection or any gas or electricity

connections as part of this development. There will be a need to connect the IBA plant to the

incoming power supply already established by Western Power.

3.4.10 Foul drainage of the site is already in place.

3.4.11 Site drainage will be managed to ensure that there will be no impacts on the local surface

water. Full liaison with the Environment Agency (EA) will be undertaken throughout the design

of this contained system. All necessary discharge consents will be applied for and in place

prior to any discharge.




4 Environmental impact assessment

4.1 EIA Legislation

The EIA Directive

4.1.1 The legislative framework for EIA is set by European Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment

of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by

Directive 97/11/EC and Directive 2003/35/EC. Collectively, this is known as ‘the EIA Directive’.

The EIA Directive is concerned with ensuring that the likely environmental effects of proposed

major development projects are considered thoroughly in order to inform the decision makers in

the ‘development consent’ process.

The EIA Regulations

4.1.2 Since the UK has a number of different ‘development consent’ regimes for different types of

projects, the EIA Directive has been implemented into UK law through a number of Statutory

Instruments. In the case of the proposed Whitecleave Quarry Redevelopment, development

consent will be sought through a planning application to DCC. The Statutory Instrument

implementing the EIA Directive for the purposes of planning applications, and under which this

ES is submitted, is the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment)

(England and Wales) Regulations 1999 (SI No. 293) (as amended). For brevity these

Regulations are referred to in this report as the ‘EIA Regulations’.

4.2 Determining the need (or otherwise) for EIA: ‘screening’

4.2.1 The process of determining whether or not an EIA is required for a given development project

is known as ‘screening’. The EIA Regulations include two lists of different types of

development projects. The first list is Schedule 1, which identifies all types of projects for

which EIA is mandatory. The second list is Schedule 2, which identifies the types of projects

for which EIA may be required if the project in question is considered likely to give rise to

significant environmental effects. For the different types of development that may require EIA,

Schedule 2 includes ‘applicable’ thresholds and criteria. Further guidance, including

‘indicative’ thresholds and criteria, is also provided in Circular 2/99: Environmental Impact

Assessment (Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), 1999).

4.2.2 In order to determine whether or not an EIA is required it is necessary to consider the

proposed development against a set of sequential questions1:

1) Is the proposed development listed in Schedule 1 of the EIA Regulations?

The proposed development is not listed in Schedule 1.

2) Is the proposed development listed in Schedule 2 of the EIA Regulations?

The proposed Whitecleave Quarry Redevelopment does not meet exactly any of the

criteria within Schedule 2 of the EIA Regulations. The closest listing is:

• Schedule 2, Category 11(b): “Other Projects – Installations for the disposal of

waste”; and

1 As defined in DETR (1999) Circular 2/99: Environmental Impact Assessment. Figure 1.




• Schedule 2, Category 2(a): “Extractive Industry – Quarries and open cast

mining”

3) Is the proposed development in a ‘sensitive area’2?

The proposed development is not within a ‘sensitive area’ although the site adjoins Potters

Wood which is a designated Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). In addition

Buckfastleigh Caves SSSI is located 800m to the north of the Quarry.

4) Is the ‘Schedule 2 development’ likely to have significant effects on the

environment?

If the answer is yes, then EIA is required; if not, then EIA is not required. In order for this

question to be answered in a structured manner, Circular 2/993 indicates that, in general,

EIA will be required for Schedule 2 developments in three main types of case:

‘A) For major developments which are of more than local importance.

B) For developments which are proposed for particularly sensitive or vulnerable

locations.

C) For developments with unusually complex and potentially hazardous

environmental effects.’

Since the proposed Whitecleave Quarry Redevelopment is adjacent to a ‘sensitive area’

and that the previous application deemed that an EIA was required it is considered that an

EIA is required.

4.2.3 A formal judgement (a ‘screening opinion’) on the need (or otherwise) for EIA for a Schedule 2

was obtained from the local planning authority under Regulation 5 on 26th April 2010.

However, this was an cursory process as it was evident to Scott Wilson that conducting a

formal EIA is the appropriate course of action for this significant development in this sensitive

location.

4.3 Scoping

4.3.1 Scoping is the process of identifying the issues to be addressed in the EIA. It aims to focus the

EIA on the likely environmental impacts that require further attention, whilst determining the

impacts that are unlikely to require additional study. Circular 2/994 acknowledges that the role

of EIA is to examine “the main or significant effects to which a development is likely to give

rise”. The scoping of an EIA by which these main or significant effects are identified is,

therefore, an important preliminary procedure that sets the context for the study.

4.3.2 The proposed EIA scope set out in this report has been formulated by a team of environmental

consultants based on desk- and field-based knowledge of the site and prior experience of other

EIAs. The proposed EIA scope was also informed and agreed by the developer and its team of

advisers.

4.3.3 As noted in paragraph 0, the purposes of this Scoping Report are:

• to identify potential environmental issues associated with the proposed development;

2 As defined in Regulation 2 of the EIA Regulations.

3 Paragraph 33.

4 Paragraph 82.




• to define what methods will be used to assess the environmental effects of the proposed

development during the EIA; and

• to obtain a ‘scoping opinion’ from the local planning authority, Devon County Council

(DCC) and Teignbridge District Council, in order to formalise the above.

4.4 General EIA methodology

Government guidance documents

4.4.1 The Whitecleave Quarry Redevelopment EIA will be undertaken having regard to the following

Government guidance documents on EIA:

• DETR (1999) Circular 2/99: Environmental Impact Assessment.

• DETR and the National Assembly for Wales (2000) Environmental Impact Assessment: A

Guide to Procedures.

4.4.2 Between June and September 2006 the UK Government consulted on draft updated versions of

the above documents. These are now being updated to reflect, inter alia, the lessons derived

from the large amount of EIA case law that has arisen in the preceding eight years or so, an

amendment to the EIA Regulations in August 2008, and also the ongoing development of EIA as

a professional discipline. Although it is acknowledged that they are in draft form, the following

documents have nevertheless been reviewed and lessons drawn where appropriate:

• Department for Communities and Local Government (2006) Amended Circular on

Environmental Impact Assessment. A Consultation Paper.

• Department for Communities and Local Government (2006) Environmental Impact

Assessment: A guide to good practice and procedures. A Consultation Paper.

Other guidance documents and standards

4.4.3 Each ES chapter examining the key environmental issues will draw on a number of guidance

documents and / or standards, and references to these will be cited within the individual chapters.




5 EIA topics

5.1 Archaeology

5.1.1 As the site has been an operational Quarry since the mid 1950s it is not considered that any

archaeological finds would be contained within the site.

5.2 Air Quality

5.2.1 As part of the previous planning application air quality monitoring was undertaken. A draft Air

Quality Assessment was produced in April 2009 by Mouchel. It monitored PM10 and Dust An

ES was produced in 2009 relating to the re-instatement of operations at the site and the

construction and operation of the MRF. The ES also summarised the results of a project specific

baseline monitoring programme.

5.2.2 This application would involve extending the 2009 scope to include the backfilling of the quarry

void and the enabling and operational works relating the IBA process.

5.2.3 Teignbridge Council were consulted in 2008 on the need for a road traffic emissions

assessment to be undertaken. Their response was that this would not be necessary, provided

that the number of vehicle movements would not exceed that of the last year of quarry

operations (54). The basis of our methodology is that this is still the case and an assessment of

road traffic emissions would not be scoped into the ES.

5.2.4 Teignbridge Council were also consulted on the requirements for baseline monitoring. They

expressed a preference for six months data to be collected. The Mouchel ES details the results

of a three month monitoring exercise for PM2.5, PM10 and total suspended particulate at one

location during the winter months (i.e. not worst case), plus three months of Dustscan

monitoring at two locations during the spring of 2009.

5.2.5 It is not known if this monitoring was accepted by the Council, but no objections were made by

any of the consultees with regard to Air Quality following on from the 2008 application at

Whitecleave Quarry.

5.2.6 This proposal is submitted on the basis that no further baseline monitoring would be necessary.

It is understood that an entire years worth of background data is available and includes on-site

monitoring and locations off-site including Little Goose Nursery and Rangers Close.

5.2.7 Under the current proposals, the MRF facility, the IBA facility and the quarry site all operations

will incorporate dust controls. The effectiveness of on-site control measures to reduce dust

arisings would be evaluated with reference to best practice guidance for the construction and

minerals sectors.

5.2.8 The dust and particulate matter assessment would be based on a qualitative methodology, and

would incorporate standard Environment Agency risk assessment methodology. The

assessment would use information on the activities and working methods to be employed, local

meteorology, proposed control measures and distances to sensitive receptors to evaluate the

potential significance of effects.

5.3 Community issues & Socio-economic

5.3.1 Estimates of employment provision would be made for both the construction and operational

phases of the development.




5.3.2 Other potential impacts to the community would be considered within the individual assessment

chapters e.g. demolition and construction, noise and vibration, traffic and transport as they deal

(if not in name) with residential amenity and disruption issues.

Tourism

5.3.3 Although the Whitecleave Quarry resides just outside of Dartmoor National Park, it is important

to recognise that destinations, especially National Parks, have a ‘sphere of influence’ that

extends well beyond the administrative boundary. In this respect, Dartmoor National Park has

a significant recreation and tourism appeal with previous estimates by the Dartmoor National

Park Authority suggests that the area receives c. 10 million visits a year. Moreover, many of

these visitors originate from outside the Park boundary, with the cities of Exeter and Plymouth

providing a significant source of day visitors, whilst the coastal areas of South Devon are known

to support significant volumes of holiday-based visitors that will have a propensity to explore the

inland countryside areas.

5.3.4 Within this context, it is important that any development that could be viewed as having an

impact upon either the aesthetic quality of the environment; impinge upon the viability of

accommodation and attraction enterprises; or which may impact upon the enjoyment of leisure

and recreation pursuits by visitors to the Park; need to carefully considered from a strategic and

sustainability context.

5.3.5 In order to facilitate this process, any potential tourism implications will be identified and

assessed for their significance.

5.3.6 The investigation process would pursue the following format:

Strategic Context

5.3.7 A desk-based research exercise to present the strategic context of tourism within Devon and the

Dartmoor National Park will be undertaken. This will build a coherent picture of the scale of

tourism and the level to which the ‘sphere of influence’ extends by the National Park

administrative boundary.

Audit of Tourism Facilities and Services

5.3.8 Within a pre-determined zone with Whitecleave Quarry at its centre, the size, nature and quality

of the tourism enterprises that could be impacted by the proposed re-development of the site will

be identified and examined. This will help to determine the importance of the visitor amenities

from a local economic perspective as well within the wider context of Dartmoor National Park.

Consultation

5.3.9 Consultation with organisations such Visit South Devon and Dartmoor Partnership to understand

any broad concerns that they may have in terms of future development of the site from a tourism

perspective will be undertaken. We Additional consultation with Buckfastleigh & District Society

and Ashburton & Buckfastleigh Chamber of Trade could also be undertaken although this would

be subject of agreement with the Council given the sensitivity of the development.

Summary and Conclusions

5.3.10 The summary and conclusions will provide an overview of the potential impact on local tourism

businesses and the broader destination of Dartmoor National Park. This will include the

identification of potential mitigation measures.




5.4 Contaminated land

5.4.1 At this time only a geotechnical site visit has been undertaken. This did not include any

assessment of potential contamination.

5.4.2 However based on the authors experience it is considered that there is negligible risk for the site

to be designated as contaminated land with respect to Part IIA of the Environmental Protection

Act 1990.

5.4.3 In order to check for potentially contaminative sources on site, e.g. bulk fuel storage tanks, boiler

houses, and electrical sub-stations, a site visit would be undertaken.

5.4.4 Part of the desk study and site visit would also involve identifying water abstractions and

discharges, including searches of the Environment Agency and DCC databases.

5.4.5 We would compile the existing geo-environmental information and undertake an assessment

using the recognised source-pathway-receptor methodology. An ES Chapter would be prepared

in this respect, to meet the requirements of PPS 23.

5.5 Demolition and construction

5.5.1 Due to the constrained nature of the site, with the A38 on one side and the steep quarry walls the

other, the excavation and construction works themselves and their environmental effects will

require some consideration during design and planning. MVV, in conjunction with SGDL would

therefore prepare an ES chapter to document all phases of the excavation and construction

programme including:

5.5.2 Excavation phase:

• A walkover survey of the existing structure and preparation of an outline excavation

methodology would be undertaken. This would take into consideration the access points

to the Quarry and the proximity of local properties.

• Identification of good working practices to protect sensitive environmental ‘receptors’ such

as local residents in terms of dust, noise, traffic and water pollution impact.

• Consideration of on-site blasting / re-use of materials, transportation options, volume of

materials off-site and options for transport methods.

5.5.3 Construction phase:

• A review of architectural drawings and the consideration of construction types,

methodology for foundations, superstructures.

• Review of volumes / tonnages and vehicle movements / types / logistics most suited to the

excavation.

5.5.4 MVV would, in conjunction with SGDL produce an Indicative Construction Sequence and this

would be used to inform the ES chapter.

5.5.5 It is intended that the information in this chapter could be worked up into a Method Statement by

the excavation and construction Contractor, once appointed. Cross-references would also be

made to the Waste Audit Statement (see Section 5.12, below).




5.6 Ecology (terrestrial)

5.6.1 The assessment would consider the potential for the site to support protected or notable species

and habitats, or to affect those present in the locality.

5.6.2 In addition to the 2008 assessments and the ongoing surveys being undertaken, further desk

studies would be undertaken to identify all ecological features (terrestrial) within 2 km of the site;

extending to 4km for bat species. This would ensure that all previous data is brought up to date

with current ecological knowledge of the area. Data would be sought from the Devon Biodiversity

Records Centre in this regard. This would include records of protected or notable species and

habitats as well as statutory and non-statutory sites. It is not considered necessary to undertake

a standard (terrestrial) Phase I Habitat Survey for the site as the development footprint at present

consists of buildings and hard standing. In addition a Phase 1 Habitat Survey was undertaken as

part of the 2008 application.

5.6.3 A bat activity survey has been undertaken. This is ongoing. A review of the survey would be

included in this chapter of the EIA. In addition section 5.7.7 details groundwater assessments

which will be used to determine any potential risks to the SSSI. This is in direct response to

concerns raised by Natural England during the consultation of the 2008 application.

5.6.4 The results of the desk study and field surveys would feed into and form the basis for an ES

Chapter on ecological impacts, which would detail the baseline conditions, assess the potential

impacts and their significance, and propose mitigation where necessary.

5.6.5 Any sensitive species information would be contained and not released into the public domain.

5.7 Flood risk assessment

5.7.1 The Environment Agency’s flood map shows that the site is outside any Flood Zones. As such, it

is considered that a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) is not required for the planning application; as

specified by Planning Policy Statement 25 (PPS25): Development and Flood Risk.

5.7.2 As part of the 2008 application for the site, confirmation that no Flood Risk existed was received

from John Marks of the Environment Agency (EA). (Email dated 19/05/10)

5.7.3 Any flooding of the site by rainwater would be controlled by on site drainage systems. The

design for these will form part of the planning application.

5.7.4 Surface water will be discharged through an interceptor tank before release into the on-site

drainage system, on order to prevent any risk to adjacent surface waters.

5.7.5 Run-off from the IBA treatment area will be managed in a closed system.

5.7.6 A flood risk assessment is therefore not considered necessary as part of this EIA.

5.7.7 A need has been identified for a groundwater assessment. The scope of this element would include:

• Review available information (freely available information and EA / BGS data on groundwater levels, geology, hydrogeology, drainage, protected areas) - we acknowledge the confidentially issues i.e. the scheme will not be discussed with the EA / BGS;

• Describe the existing baseline groundwater conditions (which include existing dewatering activities);

• Outline potential impacts to sensitive water resource receptors during operation of the site using the source-pathway receptor model, where groundwater is the pathway. This will




concentrate on the potential impact on the bat caves, but will also cover other receptors including existing protected abstractions;

• Scope in those issues requiring further investigation;

• Identify any strategic mitigation required to reduce significant adverse impacts; and 5.7.8 This work will identify and assess any changes and associated risk to groundwater which could

result as a consequence of this proposal. The work will particularly reference the designated SSSI, Potters Wood Caves.

5.7.9 The groundwater work does not include dewatering assessment; numerical groundwater

modelling or the modelling of groundwater contamination using P20, ConSim, or similar software.

5.8 Landscape and Visual

5.8.1 The method of landscape and visual impact assessment adopted for the proposed development

will be devised to address the specific issues raised by a development of this scale and nature.

The methodology will draw upon established practice defined by the Guidelines for Landscape

and Visual Impact Assessment, produced by the Landscape Institute and Institute of

Environmental Management and Assessment (2002). The methodology makes a clear distinction

between the effects of a development or project upon landscape resources and visual receptors.

5.8.2 The landscape and visual assessment will be undertaken in the context of relevant planning

policy and landscape designations as summarised below.

5.8.3 A desk study will be undertaken to include relevant planning policy and published material, in

addition to information which can be obtained from the internet. This will include:

• Government guidance in the form of Planning Policy Statements;

• Development Plans;

• National Character Areas (Natural England);

• Relevant Landscape Character Assessments;

• Local Planning Authority and County publications relating to countryside management;

• Conservation Area plans;

• Aerial photographs; and

• Ordnance Survey maps.

5.8.4 The baseline landscape and visual conditions to be assessed will include:

• Topography and drainage;

• Vegetation;

• Settlement and land use;

• Roads, railways, footpaths and public open space;

• Landscape character; and




• Views and visual receptors.

5.8.5 Information gathered from the desk study will be used to define draft, development-specific

landscape character areas and a zone of visual influence (ZVI) in preparation for survey work in

the field. The focus will be on any major construction compounds that will in place during the

works. The draft ZVIs at these locations will determine the study area, which will be refined

during the field survey.

5.8.6 Landscape character areas, based upon the desk study, will be refined and described in terms of

quality and sensitivity to change to enable an assessment to be made of the likely levels of

significance of impacts of the development on the landscape.

5.8.7 Visual receptors will be identified and assessed in terms their sensitivity and the extent of likely

views of the development.

5.8.8 Character areas will be mapped and recorded with representative photographs. The ZVI and key

views will also be mapped, and a photographic record of views collected; a schedule of visual

receptors will be prepared.

5.8.9 The potential impacts of the proposed development upon the baseline landscape and receptor

groups’ views of that landscape will be assessed at three points in time:

• During construction;

• Year 1 – assumed to be the point at which the whole scheme is complete; and

• Year 15 after completion – when planting has matured.

5.8.10 Criteria specific to the project will be established to determine receptor sensitivity and impact

magnitude and to describe effect significance. Mitigation proposals will be designed in response

to the assessment of effects. In addition to the alignment refinement stage, these could include

measures during construction, such as colours for temporary site accommodation, hoardings,

locations of temporary soil storage bunds to provide screening, seeding of bunds etc. The

appearance and landscape treatment of permanent aboveground installations will be of particular

importance. The residual effects of the development will be based upon the situation at year 15.

5.9 Tree Survey

5.9.1 In support of the ES for the above site and in the absence of Planning conditions to specifically

define the scope and extent of works; the following services are proposed;

5.9.2 A Tree Survey would be undertaken broadly to BS5837 (2005) recording observational and

measured data from the existing tree stock on site to include homogenous woodland groups and

significant individual trees, (where accessible).

5.9.3 Compilation of the above data and a schedule of existing woodland group(s) and significant

individual trees (where present) would be incorporated into this chapter of the EIA.

5.9.4 In addition an Arboricultural Constraints Plan illustrating the potential limitation to any

development or quarrying of the site as imposed by the existing tree stock would also be

produced.




5.10 Noise and Vibration

5.10.1 The scope of work for this element of the EIA will consist of a Baseline Noise Survey, a

Construction Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, an Operational Noise and Vibration

Impact Assessment and an Operational road traffic noise impact assessment.

Baseline Noise Survey

5.10.2 The closest sensitive receptors will be determined through review of any previous work, available

mapping and aerial photography and confirmed during the site visit. Subject to approval form the

client, monitoring locations and survey protocol, the assessment methodology and noise criteria

will be discussed with the Local Authority. Any justified noise and vibration complaints received

by the Local Authority for the area will be noted.

5.10.3 Baseline noise monitoring will be carried out to establish the existing noise climate in the area.

The monitoring procedures will conform to BS 7445: 1991 ‘Description and Measurement of

Environmental Noise’. It is proposed to undertake medium-term baseline monitoring at positions

representative of closest sensitive receptors to include weekend and weekdays times. Ideally,

and subject to adequate security, a minimum five day unmanned monitoring period is preferred

(Thursday – Monday suggested) but if the locations are not secure this may not be possible and

a shortened, manned monitoring regime may be appropriate.

Construction noise and vibration impact assessment

5.10.4 Construction noise and vibration levels will be estimated at selected representative receptors

based on details of the likely required activities and plant as provided by the client. The

predictions will be carried out in accordance with the procedures and source data in BS 5228

2009 ‘Code of practice for noise and vibration control from construction and open sites’.

Additionally, any noise impacts due to construction traffic on public roads will be calculated

according to the methods given in Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN).

5.10.5 The assessment will include a preliminary assessment of noise and vibration impacts resulting

from blasting, which forms part of the construction works.

5.10.6 Discussions with the Local Authority will be carried out to determine any local requirements.

5.10.7 Operational noise and vibration impact assessment

5.10.8 A model of the proposed IBA facility, the other proposed site operations, and surrounding area

will be developed in a sophisticated noise modelling software package, which implements a

number of calculation methodologies, including that given in ISO 9613-2 for the calculation of

noise levels from industrial sources. The model will be based on the latest site design information

and noise source data as provided by the client.

5.10.9 The model will incorporate the detailed topography, ground types and surrounding buildings. The

model will include both external noise sources and the break out of noise from the process

buildings.

5.10.10 The significance of the noise impact of the plant will be assessed according to the criteria agreed

with the Local Authority.

5.10.11 Depending on the outcome of the initial assessment, mitigation options will be discussed with the

client and implemented in the noise model. The result will be a set of ranked mitigation options,

which can be employed to meet the agreed noise criteria at sensitive receptors.




5.10.12 It is unlikely that operation of the plant will result in significant vibration impacts to surrounding

sensitive receptors. However, a qualitative assessment of vibration impacts will be presented.

Operational road traffic noise impact assessment

5.10.13 The operation of the IBA facility and the other proposed site operations may have a potentially

significant impact on traffic flows on local roads around the site. The change in road traffic noise

levels, at a selection of relevant receptors, will be predicted using the standard methodology

outlined in the ‘Calculation of Road Traffic Noise’ (CRTN). The predictions will be based on

baseline and with development traffic data provided by the client.

5.10.14 All of these elements will be incorporated into the noise and vibration chapter of the EIA.

5.11 Transport Assessment / Travel Plan Statement

5.11.1 The transport work associated with this type of development will consist of a transport statement,

prepared in accordance with the following documents:

• Guidance on Transport Assessments (DfT, 2007).

• Circular 02/2007, Planning and the Strategic Road Network (2007).

• The Highways Agency and the Planning Application Process - A Protocol for Dealing with

Planning Applications.

5.11.2 The Transport Statement will largely relate to the traffic, transport and highways issues of the

redeveloped and re-opened Whitecleave Quarry and residential properties. However, there

would be crossovers with such issues covered in the Demolition and Construction Assessment,

discussed in Section 5.55 above. The Transport Statement would be agreed with the Highways

Agency prior to finalisation.

5.11.3 The document will be structured into 4 main sections detailing existing conditions at the site,

baseline transport data, details of the proposed development and details of residual vehicular trip

impact, as detailed below.

Existing conditions

5.11.4 This section will include a description of the current physical infrastructure and characteristics of

the site and its surroundings; background transport data and current transport infrastructure

details.

5.11.5 A site location plan will also be included which will show the proposed development site in

relation to the surrounding area and transport system. The permitted and existing use of the site

will be outlined along with the existing land uses in the vicinity of the site. The existing site

access arrangements including access constraints, where appropriate; any abnormal load uses

of the current site will also be described.

Baseline transport data

5.11.6 A qualitative description of the travel characteristics of the existing site will be provided, along

with a description and functional classification of the highway network in the vicinity of the site.

Accordingly details of the traffic flows at the B3380 site access junction will be collected.




5.11.7 An analysis of the injury accident records on the public highway between the site and the A38

(with the B3380) junctions from and to Plymouth for the most recent three-year period will also be

provided.

The proposed land use

5.11.8 The proposed land use will be described along with the scale of development. The main

features (design layout and access points) of the development will be outlined. The person-trip

generation of the proposed development and distribution of trips across mode will be described.

5.11.9 The proposed improvements to site accessibility via sustainable modes of travel will be outlined

along with the transport impacts of freight or service operations.

Residual vehicular trip impact

5.11.10 A qualitative and quantitative description of the travel characteristics of the proposed

development, based on observations undertaken on a site visit will be made including pedestrian

and cyclist facilities/movements. The transport impacts of site construction, including the

requirements of abnormal loads in the construction, use and decommissioning the present

development will also be described.

Travel Plan Statement

5.11.11 A travel plan statement will be produced which outlines the movement of staff and makes

recommendations regarding the sustainable transport opportunities at the site.

5.12 Waste audit statement

5.12.1 A Waste Audit Statement (WAS) is required for major new developments under Policy WM1 of

the Devon Structure Plan (Adopted October 2004). The WAS Chapter of the ES would cover

waste arisings and management both for the demolition / construction of the proposed

development and once it becomes operational.

5.12.2 In terms of identifying and calculating demolition and construction wastes, the WAS would draw

heavily on the Demolition and Construction Appraisal This would set the context for assessment

of on-site wastes, which would then be tested in the context of the waste hierarchy. The waste

hierarchy sets out the main options for management of wastes (reduction, re-use, recycling,

recovery and disposal etc.) with the most sustainable option first (reduction) and the least

sustainable option last (disposal). The objective would be to demonstrate that each waste

stream would be dealt with at the highest possible level of the hierarchy. The calculations and

discussion would be presented in the first part of the WAS.

5.12.3 The second part of the WAS would relate to waste arisings and management once the

development becomes operational. We would identify the different types of waste that would be

produced by the facility using published data, then calculate and document them. Storage

requirements for refuse, recycling and composting bins would be ascertained, in the first

instance by reference to the appropriate British Standard in order to facilitate recycling and

composting. Liaison with DCC would be undertaken to confirm the extent of servicing

requirements.




6 Content and indicative structure of the

Environmental Statement

The EIA Regulations define5 an ‘Environmental Statement’ as a statement:

(a) “That includes such of the information referred to in Part I of Schedule 4 as is reasonably

required to assess the environmental effects of the development and which the applicant can,

having regard in particular to current knowledge and methods of assessment, reasonably be

required to compile, but

(b) “That includes at least the information referred to in Part II of Schedule 4;”

Table 6.1 below identifies the requirements of Schedule 4, Parts I and II.

Table 6.2 identifies the indicative structure of the ES.

6.1 Table Showing Requirements of the EIA Regulations 1999 as to

the Content of an ES

EIA Regulations 1999: Schedule 4, Part I

1. Description of the development, including in particular -

(a) a description of the physical characteristics of the whole development and the land-use requirements during the construction and operational phases; (b) a description of the main characteristics of the production processes, for instance, nature and quality of the materials used; and (c) an estimate, by type and quantity, of expected residues and emissions (water, air and soil pollution, noise, vibration, light, heat, radiation, etc.) resulting from the operation of the proposed development.

2. An outline of the main alternatives studied by the applicant or appellant and an indication of the main reasons for his choice, taking into account the environmental effects.

3. A description of the aspects of the environment likely to be significantly affected by the development, including, in particular, population, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, including the architectural and archaeological heritage, landscape and the inter-relationship between the above factors.

4. A description of the likely significant effects of the development on the environment, which should cover the direct effects and any indirect, secondary, cumulative, short, medium and long-term, permanent and temporary, positive and negative effects of the development, resulting from –

(a) the existence of the development; (b) the use of natural resources; (c) the emission of pollutants, the creation of nuisances and the elimination of waste,

and the description by the applicant of the forecasting methods used to assess the effects on the environment.

5. A description of the measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and where possible offset any significant adverse effects on the environment.

6. A non-technical summary of the information provided under paragraphs 1 to 5 of this Part.

7. An indication of any difficulties (technical deficiencies or lack of know-how) encountered by the applicant in compiling the

5 Regulation 2(1).




required information. EIA Regulations 1999: Schedule 4, Part II

1. A description of the development comprising information on the site, design and size of the development.

2. A description of the measures envisaged in order to avoid, reduce and, if possible, remedy significant adverse effects.

3. The data required to identify and assess the main effects which the development is likely to have on the environment.

4. An outline of the main alternatives studied by the applicant and an indication of the main reasons for his choice, taking into account the environmental effects.

5. A non-technical summary of the information provided under paragraphs 1 to 4 of this Part.

6.2 Table Showing Indicative structure of ES

Non-technical summary

Non-technical summary Part A: context

1. Introduction 2. EIA legislation and general methodology

3. The need for the proposed development

4. Land use: the site and surrounding area 5. Description of the proposed development Part B: assessment

6. Alternatives to the proposed development

7. Air quality assessment

8. Archaeology and built heritage assessment

9. Community and social assessment

10. Construction waste management assessment

11. Ecology and nature conservation assessment

12. Hydrology and hydrogeology assessment

13. Land quality assessment

14. Landscape and visual assessment

15. Noise and vibration assessment 16. Traffic and transport assessment Part C: conclusions

17. Inter-relationships and cumulative effects

18. Summary of environmental effects, mitigation and monitoring




6.3 Table Showing Other Documents that will be Submitted with the

Planning Application and ES

Document

Planning supporting statement

Design and access statement

Sustainability statement

Transport assessment

Flood risk assessment

Secured by design statement

Figures and Drawings Figure 1 - Whitecleaves Quarry Outline Plan Figure 2 - Phase 1 Plan – New MRF Facility Figure 3 - Phase 2 Plan - IBA Facility Figure 4 - Phase 3 Plan – Backfilling of Quarry void to 60m AoD

Ms Sue Peneluna Our Ref: D134633/TW Planning and … MVV and Sam Gilpin Demolition Ltd. Sam Gilpin...

Documents

Transcript of Ms Sue Peneluna Our Ref: D134633/TW Planning and … MVV and Sam Gilpin Demolition Ltd. Sam Gilpin...