m1 j28 to 31 smart motorway scheme environmental...

M1 J28 to 31 Smart Motorway Scheme

Environmental Assessment Report

(SGAR5)

February 2014

1043319/ENV/PCF/001

An executive agency of

the Department for

Transport Working on behalf of the Highways Agency


Environmental Assessment Report (SGAR5)

Document Control

Document Title M1 J28 to 31 Smart Motorway Scheme – Environmental

Assessment Report (SGAR5)

Author Mouchel

Owner Andy Kirk (HA Senior Project Manager)

Distribution

Andy Kirk (HA Senior Project Manager)

Mark Belton (HA Assistant Project Manager)

Phil Barton (Mouchel Project Director)

Asrar Hussain (Mouchel Project Manager)

Peter Timson (Mouchel Integration Manager)

M1 J28 to 31 Smart Motorway Mailbox

All present on the Reviewer List

Document Status Final

Record of Issue

Version Status Author Date Checked Date Authorised Date

A Draft S Walton 13/03/13 K Stubbs 18/03/13 A Thornhill 19/03/13

B Draft S Walton 10/05/13 K Stubbs 10/05/13 K Stubbs 10/05/13

C Draft T. Taylor 08/11/13 R. Atuah 13/11/13 A. Thornhill 27/11/13

D Draft T. Taylor 09/12/13 R. Atuah 09/12/13 A. Thornhill 09/12/13

E Draft T. Taylor 22/01/14 R. Atuah 22/01/14 A. Thornhill 22/01/14

F Final T. Taylor 04/02/14 R. Atuah 04/02/14 A. Thornhill 04/02/14

Reviewer List

Name Role

Andy Kirk Highways Agency (Senior MP Project Manager)

Mark Belton Highways Agency (Assistant MP Project Manager)

David Griffiths Highways Agency (Regional Environmental Advisor)

Approvals

Name Signature Title Date of Issue Version

Sue Housley Project Senior Responsible Officer (SRO)

The original format of this document is copyright to the Highways Agency

M1 J28 to 31 SM Environmental Assessment Report of 211


This page is intentionally left blank.


Table of Contents 1 Introduction.............................................................................................................10

1.1 Project Overview ...................................................................................................10

1.2 Need for an Environmental Assessment ...............................................................11

1.3 Purpose of the Study .............................................................................................12

1.4 Structure of the Report ..........................................................................................12

2 Alternatives Considered .........................................................................................13

2.1 Project Background ...............................................................................................13

2.2 Scheme Development ...........................................................................................14

3 The Proposed Scheme ...........................................................................................18

3.1 Need for the Scheme.............................................................................................18

3.2 Proposed Operating Regime .................................................................................19

3.3 Proposed Scheme – Key Infrastructure.................................................................21

3.4 Scheme Delivery and Implementation ...................................................................29

3.5 Overview of the Existing Environment ...................................................................30

4 The Environmental Assessment Process ...............................................................35

4.1 Screening ..............................................................................................................35

4.2 Scoping Process....................................................................................................35

4.3 Environmental Consultation...................................................................................38

4.4 Delivery of the Environmental Assessment ...........................................................40

4.5 Reporting and Determination.................................................................................43

4.6 Public Consultation................................................................................................43

5 Air Quality ...............................................................................................................44

5.1 Focus of the Assessment ......................................................................................44

5.2 Regulatory / Policy Framework..............................................................................44

5.3 Methodology..........................................................................................................45

5.4 Study Area and Baseline Conditions .....................................................................52

5.5 Impact Assessment ...............................................................................................55

5.6 Mitigation Measures ..............................................................................................67

5.7 Summary ...............................................................................................................67

6 Cultural Heritage.....................................................................................................70




6.3 Methodology..........................................................................................................71


6.5 Impact Assessment ...............................................................................................79

6.6 Mitigation Measures ..............................................................................................87

6.7 Summary ...............................................................................................................88

7 Landscape Effects ..................................................................................................89



7.3 Methodology..........................................................................................................89


7.5 Impact Assessment .............................................................................................101

7.6 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................110

7.7 Summary .............................................................................................................112

8 Nature Conservation.............................................................................................113

8.1 Focus of the Assessment ....................................................................................113

8.2 Regulatory / Policy Framework............................................................................113

8.3 Methodology........................................................................................................115

8.4 Study Area and Baseline Conditions ...................................................................118



8.7 Summary .............................................................................................................137

9 Noise and Vibration ..............................................................................................138



9.3 Methodology........................................................................................................138




9.7 Summary .............................................................................................................157

10 Materials ...............................................................................................................159




10.3 Methodology........................................................................................................161




10.7 Summary .............................................................................................................173

11 Cumulative Effects................................................................................................174



11.3 Interactive Cumulative Effects .............................................................................174

11.4 In-combination Cumulative Effects ......................................................................179

11.5 Summary .............................................................................................................182

12 Outline Environmental Management Plan ............................................................183

13 Recommendation on Determination .....................................................................192

13.1 Introduction..........................................................................................................192

13.2 Summary of Potential Effects ..............................................................................192

13.3 Conclusion...........................................................................................................193

References ..................................................................................................................195

Glossary of Terms .......................................................................................................198

ABBREVIATIONS.......................................................................................................205

Appendix A1 – Figure 1043319/2600/001: General Arrangement ...............................211

Appendix A2 – Checklists ............................................................................................211

Appendix A3 – Environmental Mapping.......................................................................211

Appendix A4 – Scoping Information.............................................................................211

Appendix B1 – Air Quality Technical Report................................................................211

Appendix B2 – Phase 1 Habitat Survey Report ...........................................................211

Appendix B3 – Badger Field Report (CONFIDENTIAL)...............................................211

Appendix B4 – Great Crested Newt Survey Report .....................................................211

Appendix B5 – Bats Survey Report .............................................................................211

Appendix B6 – Noise Technical Report .......................................................................211


List of Tables Table 3.1: Proposed SM-ALR Infrastructure ..................................................................................... 24

Table 4.1: Summary of Scoping Exercise ......................................................................................... 36

Table 5.1: Air Quality Strategy Objectives......................................................................................... 45

Table 5.2: Air Quality Objectives and Limit Value for the Protection of Vegetation Set in Relation to NOx............................................................................................................................................ 45

Table 5.3: Summary of 2015 Annual Mean NO2 and PM10 Concentrations for the DN and DS across the Study Area........................................................................................................................... 57

Table 5.4: Summary of 2030 Annual Mean NO2 and PM10 Concentrations for the DN and DS across the Study Area........................................................................................................................... 58

Table 5.5: Annual Mean N-deposition Rate for Bogs Farm Quarry SSSI .......................................... 62

Table 5.6: Local Air Quality Receptors Informing Scheme Significance (2015) ................................. 62

Table 5.7: Local Air Quality Receptors Informing Scheme Significance (2030) ................................. 63

Table 5.8: Local Air Quality Results for PM10 .................................................................................... 65

Table 5.9: Local Air Quality Results for NO2 ..................................................................................... 66

Table 6.1: Significance of Effects Matrix for Cultural Heritage Assets ............................................... 72

Table 8.1: Ecological Data Sources Used to Inform the Assessment...............................................115

Table 8.2: Surveys Undertaken........................................................................................................116

Table 8.3: Nature Conservation Assessment Significance Matrix (IAN 130/10) ...............................118

Table 8.4: Summary of Nature Conservation and Biodiversity Features within the Study Area ........126

Table 8.5: General Potential Impacts of the Scheme Prior to Mitigation...........................................127

Table 8.6: Potential Impact Prior to Mitigation..................................................................................130

Table 8.7: Mitigation Measures.......................................................................................................133

Table 9.1: Classification of Magnitude of Noise Impacts in the Short Term......................................141

Table 9.2: Classification of Magnitude of Noise Impacts in the Long Term ......................................141

Table 9.3: Location of Thin Wearing Course along the Scheme.......................................................147

Table 9.4: Existing Barrier Locations................................................................................................147

Table 9.5: Construction Noise Level Thresholds at Monitoring Locations ........................................148

Table 9.6: Summary of Short Term Noise Impacts...........................................................................149

Table 9.7: Changes in Noise Levels without the Proposed Scheme ................................................150

Table 9.8: Summary of Long Term Noise Impacts ...........................................................................152

Table 9.10: Traffic Noise Nuisance Impacts.....................................................................................154

Table 9.11: Vibration Nuisance Assessment results ........................................................................155

Table 10.1: Waste Management Capacities.....................................................................................164

Table 10.2: Material Resources .......................................................................................................168

Table 10.3: Waste Arisings ..............................................................................................................170

Table 10.4: Highways Agency Waste Policy ....................................................................................171

Table 10.5: Anticipated Mitigation Measures....................................................................................172

Table 11.1: Potential for Interactive Cumulative Effects for the Proposed Scheme ..........................177

Table 11.2: Projects Considered in the Traffic Model.......................................................................180

Table 12.1: Schedule of Commitments ............................................................................................184


Table of Figures

Figure 1: Scheme Overview Map...................................................................................................... 10

Figure 2: Illustrative drawing of SM-ALR........................................................................................... 20

Figure 3: Proposed Scheme Operating Regime................................................................................ 21

Figure 4: Typical Signal Portal Gantry Configuration......................................................................... 22

Figure 5: Typical MS3 Cantilever ...................................................................................................... 23

Figure 6: Typical MS4 Cantilever ...................................................................................................... 23

Figure 7: Typical Average Speed Enforcement Camera ................................................................... 26

Figure 8: The Waste Management Hierarchy...................................................................................160




1 Introduction

1.1 Project Overview

Smart motorway (SM) is an operating regime that includes a series of physical interventions and operating procedures or ‘tools’ to facilitate the dynamic control of traffic for congestion and incident management. The tools allow the road space to be managed in different ways for varying conditions to maximise capacity whilst providing a safe and informed environment for the travelling public and on-road resources (including emergency services, maintenance operatives, recovery operators and Highways Agency Traffic Officers).

The Highways Agency has commissioned Mouchel to prepare an SM scheme to provide improvements to the M1 from Junction 28 to 31 (J28 to 31) (Marker Post (MP) 214/7+83 to 249/5+53) in the Mansfield through to Rotherham area. The commission includes the provision of engineering design and environmental assessment services on this 18 miles (30 kilometres (km)) stretch of motorway. The project is currently in the development phase with stage gate assessment review (SGAR5) programmed for January 2014. The Highways Agency is expected to commence construction of this scheme in March 2014 subject to the successful completion of statutory processes.

Figure 1: Scheme Overview Map




1.2 Need for an Environmental Assessment

The European Union (EU) Directive 2011/92/EU requires that an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) be undertaken by the promoters of certain types of development to identify and assess the environmental effects of certain public and private projects before development consent is given. Directive 2011/92/EU which consolidates the original Directive 85/337/EEC (now repealed) and its subsequent amendments specifies the qualification requirements and the process by which statutory EIA should be undertaken.

All developments listed under Annex I of the EIA Directive must be subject to EIA in every case. Developments listed under Annex II may need to be subject to statutory EIA depending on whether the proposal qualifies as a ‘relevant project’ (meet certain criteria and thresholds defined in Annex II) and gives rise to significant effects. The potential to generate significant environmental effects are described within Annex III of the EIA Directive.

In England and Wales, the requirements of the EIA Directive with regards to road projects has been transposed into United Kingdom (UK) statute by Section 105 of the Highways Act 1980, as amended by the Highways (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1988, the Highways (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1994, the Highways (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1999 and the Highways (EIA) Regulations 2007 (collectively termed the ‘EIA Regulations’). Screening procedures which accord with the requirements of the EIA Regulations exist within the Highways Agency to determine whether trunk road and motorway developments qualify for statutory EIA, leading to the preparation of an Environmental Statement (ES). This process is known as Determination and this Environmental Assessment Report (EAR) has been prepared to record this process.

The proposed scheme has been classified as a relevant Annex II Project i.e. statutory EIA is not mandatory. It is not of a type listed in Annex I but the anticipated area subject to construction / reconstruction is over the trigger threshold of 1 hectare (ha). Under the Agency’s procedures, Annex II relevant projects such as the application of SM All Lane Running (SM-ALR) on the M1 would require an appropriate level of environmental review in accordance with the regulations. The proposed scheme has therefore been subject to an environmental review and assessment in line with the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Volume 11 to establish whether significant environmental effects are likely to arise during its construction and operation phases. If significant environmental effects are predicted, a statutory EIA leading to the production of an ES will be required. In the event of this, the proposed scheme will be subject to the National Infrastructure Planning regime as it would meet the definition of a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project in Section 22 of the Planning Act 2008.

Where no significant effects are predicted, the conclusions of the detailed environmental assessment process, as recorded in a final EAR will be summarised in a Record of Determination (RoD).




1.3 Purpose of the Study

This EAR presents the findings of an environmental review and assessment of the potential environmental impacts and effects of the implementation of the proposed SM-ALR scheme on the M1 between J28 and 31. It has been produced as a deliverable in fulfilment of the SGAR5 product requirements of the Highways Agency’s Project Control Framework (PCF).

In addition, the report will be used to perform the following functions to assist in the iterative design process:

• To obtain and record baseline conditions;

• To identify key environmental constraints and ensure these are taken into account during the design phase;

• To outline opportunities to minimise and/or avoid any adverse effects or to realise any opportunities for mitigation to be considered during construction at the detailed design stage; and

• To identify any residual effects and mitigation measures to inform subsequent detailed scheme design.

Mitigation measures contained in this EAR are summarised in an outline Environmental Management Plan (EMP) to be used for the development of a comprehensive Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). The CEMP will then be utilised to prepare, manage and control construction activities to avoid and / or minimise environmental impacts during the construction phase whilst addressing and adhering to all statutory and legal processes. The requirements, approvals procedures for work, goods or materials needed to implement the mitigation measures will be detailed in Specification Appendices to the Contractor’s (hereafter referred to as Delivery Partner (DP)) contract.

1.4 Structure of the Report

This EAR has been prepared in line with the PCF product description and comprises:

• Chapters 1 – 4: provides a background to the proposed scheme, overview of the existing environment as an outline of the environmental assessment process and scope.

• Chapters 5 – 10: presents the findings of the environmental assessment with a focus on identifying significant residual effects, if any.

• Chapters 11 – 13: presents the findings of a cumulative effects assessment, summary of mitigation measures commitments and conclusions on the assessment topics.




2 Alternatives Considered

2.1 Project Background

In January 2009, the Government announced that Hard Shoulder Running (HSR) would be extended to some of the busiest parts of the Highways Agency’s major road network and this initiated the Managed Motorway (MM) programme (from hereon referred to as ‘Smart Motorways’). The SM concept builds upon the success of the M42 MM scheme which produced the following results after 12 months operation:

• The number of accidents has decreased from an average of 5.08 a month to 2.25 a month (based upon 36 months operation).

• Drivers’ ability to predict their weekday journey times has improved by 22%.

• There has been a reduction in fuel consumption by 4%.

• There has been a reduction in vehicle emissions by between 4 and 10%.

• The results of user consultation demonstrate that SM has proven to be a success for drivers.

The Comprehensive Spending Review announcement of Autumn 2010 prioritised the M1 J28 to 31 scheme as one of 14 schemes to proceed to construction before April 2015. This scheme continues the deployment of technology interventions onto the strategic road network to support an operational approach that maximises benefits and is part of an interconnecting network of capacity improvements to the M1 corridor. The adjacent schemes include:

• M1 J25 to 28: Widening (which includes controlled motorways) – completed.

• M1 J31 to 32: Variable Mandatory Speed Limit (VMSL) Pinch Point Scheme – Construction programmed to commence in February 2014.

• M1 J32 to 35a SM Scheme - Assessment ongoing

• M1 J39 to 42 SM Scheme – commenced construction in October 2013.

In the Autumn Statement 2011, the Government announced the investment of over £1bn (of which around £900m will be in the Spending Review 2010 period) to tackle areas of congestion and improve the national road network. To make the UK's infrastructure fit for the 21st century, the Government published its National Infrastructure Plan 2011 alongside the Autumn Statement. Within this document, it included the aim to implement a new specification for SM which will reduce the costs of implementation by up to a quarter. This specification will be applied to eight schemes in the Department for Transport (DfT) / Highways Agency investment programme which were due to start construction from October 2012 onwards. The M1 J28 to 31 SM scheme was listed as one of the eight schemes.

Key physical design aspects of the next generation of SM include the permanent conversion of the hard shoulder to a running lane along with the




ability to dynamically control mandatory speed limits and deployment of technology interventions including queue protection and CCTV systems. SM-ALR also has fewer requirement for emergency refuge areas (ERAs) than with HSR schemes alternatively often referred to as Dynamic HSR schemes which only make use of the hard shoulder during congestion periods. The SM-ALR concept has been developed and has just been released as Interim Advice Note (IAN) 161/13. This IAN provides comprehensive requirements for the revised SM-ALR concept to enable scheme designers to undertake scheme development.

2.2 Scheme Development

A South and West Yorkshire Multi-Modal Study (SWYMMS) was undertaken on behalf of the Government Office for Yorkshire and the Humber reported in 2002. One of its main objectives was to identify measures to reduce congestion on the region’s motorways and secondly to re-establish the primary role of the trunk road network for strategic traffic. One of the recommendations from the SWYMMS study was that sections of the M1 (J30 to 42) and M62 (J25 to 28) motorway network should be widened to four lanes and that this capacity improvement should be protected by use of ATM and physical demand management measures to control traffic flows on to the widened motorway sections.

The SWYMMS proposals were rejected on cost grounds and in July 2003 the Secretary of State tasked the Highways Agency to investigate means to increase motorway capacity through making the best use of existing infrastructure supported by appropriate Integrated Demand Management initiatives to ‘lock-in’ capacity and mitigate any risks that maybe realised through the committed and continuing development within the motorway hinterland. To this aim, a strategy South West Yorkshire Making Best Use Study (SWYMBUS) was initiated. The strategy was to provide improvements to capacity and operations comprising of a combination of full standard widening to dual four lane motorway (D4M) and permanent four lane running (P4L). This led to the construction of D4M on the M1 between J31 and 32 which was completed in January 2008.

However, in July 2007, the Highways Agency requested that all M1 and M62 improvement schemes in Yorkshire investigate the feasibility of ATM measures. In October 2007, following the success of an HSR trial on the M42 between J3A and J7, the transport secretary announced that a comprehensive review of the roads programme was to be undertaken. As part of this announcement the SM concept was born, recognising that an innovative mix of road widening, opening up the hard shoulder, and junction improvements was required to provide cost effective and sustainable solutions to highways congestion.

The DfT Command Paper, ‘Roads – Delivering Choice and Reliability’ considered the latest roads build programme, and initiated a nationwide study into whether alternatives to widening through the dynamic use of the hard shoulder and other innovative regimes could provide workable and cost effective solutions. SM encompasses the lessons learned from the existing SM




schemes and traditional widening schemes. Using SM dynamic hard shoulder (DHS) design guidance developed by the Highways Agency, 29 schemes were identified for review encompassing over 400km of motorway network.

2.2.1 Design Options at SGAR1 – Option Identification

As part of the feasibility study, a Stage 1 Environmental Assessment (Arup, December 2008) was prepared for various segments of the M1 between J21 to 31 considering up to four possible improvement solutions, including widening and HSR. The results of the feasibility study were used to inform the National Roads Programme. During January 2009 the National Roads Programme was announced in the DfT ‘Britain’s Transport Infrastructure – Motorways and Major Trunk Roads’. This included the projects which would be taken forward over the next five years; DHS on the M1 between J28 and 31 was one of these projects.

2.2.2 Design Options at SGAR2

In October 2009, Arup produced the SM Option Study: Stage 2 Environmental Assessment which formed the environmental assessment of DHS options being considered. Two variants of the original DHS scheme were identified and assessed.

On 15 January 2009, the Secretary of State announced up to £6 billion to improve the national road network; including the roll out of hard shoulder running across the core motorway network.

It should be noted however that the design concepts and underlying traffic model used at SGAR2 have now been superseded.

The M1 J28 to 31 SM scheme was initially developed by Arup through to a SGAR2 in 2009. At this point the design was for a fully compliant IAN 111 Smart Motorway. It was subsequently reviewed and redesigned by Atkins during a four month period (August 2011 to November 2011) taking into account the further developments of Smart Motorway and the guidance from IAN 149. An interim SGAR3 was held in November 2011. Following completion of the updated design by Atkins, the Highways Agency then awarded Mouchel the commission to develop the M1 J28-31 SM scheme from preliminary design through to the construction phase (SGAR5); it was announced that the scheme would be progressed as an SM-ALR in December 2011 (initially based on a CHE memo, and then in accordance with IAN 161 released in February 2012).

2.2.3 Design Option at SGAR3-SGAR5

By drawing on operational experience and value engineering expertise, the Highways Agency evolved the design for SM into the current design concept known as ‘SM-ALR’. This operating regime has been the focus for the M1 between J28 and 31 in the development phase; with the aim being to re-design the SGAR2 HSR option to align with requirements of IAN 161/13. The SM-ALR specification is expected to reduce scheme capital and whole life costs whilst delivering congestion alleviation benefits. As with HSR type SM schemes, SM-ALR is to be delivered within the existing motorway boundary but with increased spacing of information gantries and would use of smaller MS4 based verge mounted signing rather than portal gantries resulting in less potential for localised visual and ecology impacts. The propose scheme will be subject to a




review (SGAR5) to determine if the design delivers on the DfT’s scheme requirements. If given approval, it will proceed to the construction phase.

The consideration of more appropriate alternatives with regards to location and structure type has played a key role in reaching the final design. At design freeze points, various elements of the design have been subject to peer review and design team mitigation meetings were held to address potential adverse impacts on stakeholders. These reviews and mitigation meetings were conducted with a view to ensuring that the proposed scheme was incorporated into the environment as reasonably as possible and to ensure the design still provided value for money whilst meeting the scheme’s objectives. As a result, it is proposed to relocate a number of gantries to avoid significant adverse visual impacts and to utilise existing vegetation as screens. Changes to the design and reasons for these changes are documented in the M1 J28 to 31 SM Preliminary Design Report produced by Mouchel in 2013.

In spring of 2013 the scheme was subject to an environmental exercise and a draft EAR was prepared and issued to the Statutory Environmental Bodies and Local Planning Authorities along the scheme corridor. This EAR was however suspended due to the Highways Agency’s decision to reconsider the approach to traffic modelling and assessment, particular in relation to interactions with adjacent schemes.

The following summarises the timeline and rationale as to how the M1 J28 to 31 scheme has developed from a ‘standard’ SM - ALR project to a scheme with a reduced speed restriction, as did the adjacent M1 J32-35a scheme. It should be noted that due to the proximity of the two SM schemes on the same strategic motorway corridor, the identical opening year and significant overlaps in the schemes areas of influence a cumulative assessment is required for each scheme leading to the identification of a common mitigation requirements.

The following timeline summarises the key decision points and rationale:

• February to May 2013 – the M1 J28 to 31 air quality assessment suggested no significant adverse air quality effects. The draft EAR was completed and put out to SEB consultation. This was then subsequently suspended, pending review and update of traffic and environmental modelling requirements.

• July 2013 – An options investigation workshop was held between the Highways Agency and the designer team at Mouchel. This concluded that Controlled Motorways or 50/60mph speed control interventions should be investigated further with the latter two subsequently taken forward.

• August to September 2013 – scenario testing of traffic and air quality screening of options for 50mph / 60mph and outcomes agreed with Highways Agency NetServ and TAME.

o SM-ALR at 50mph indicated a predicted 6-15% reduction in

flows on the motorway but displaced traffic onto wider road

network, principally within Air Quality Management Areas

(AQMAs). Also significant concerns over viability of Business

Case. Option suspended.




o SM-ALR at 60mph indicated a general stabilisation of traffic

volumes, constraining flows to at, or in some cases below, the predicted Do Nothing (DN) scenario, hence suggesting no

additional adverse effects. Initial testing indicates Business

Case still protected. Option to move to Simple Assessment

• October 2013 – 60mph Opening Year (2015) and Design Year (2030) air quality Simple Assessments utilising 22 receptors in the Tinsley area as a ‘worst case’ proxy for the scheme was completed. The decision to proceed to Detailed Assessment was agreed with Highways Agency as the Simple Assessment indicated the proposed scheme would not result in significant impacts.

• November 2013 – utilising the latest draft Highways Agency Interim Advice on air quality long term trend and significance guidance findings for Opening and Design Years indicated no adverse air quality effects for the proposed scheme.

It is worth noting that the Highways Agency plans to investigate opportunities to remove the speed constraint in the future so as to allow the road to operate at 70mph. No changes will be made however until a further environmental assessment has been undertaken and the statutory consultation bodies have been consulted.




3 The Proposed Scheme

3.1 Need for the Scheme

This section discusses the traffic issues in this M1 scheme area which have led to the decision to progress with an SM-ALR solution and the regulatory policy / context which supports this decision.

3.1.1 Regulatory Framework / Policy Context

The following documents provide details of the overarching objectives that have guided and documented the need for SM type solution on the Highways Agency network and the need for the proposed scheme.

Client Scheme Requirements (M1 J28 to J31 Smart Motorway Scheme)

The Client Scheme Requirements document set out the DfT’s requirements for the project. This covers a high-level definition of the transport challenges and issues, objectives, project outputs and costs. The document also details how the scheme will contribute to the Regional Spatial Strategy and the DfT’s transport strategy objectives. The project requirements / objectives are set by the DfT Client at the beginning of the project life cycle (Stage 0) and have been reviewed at each Stage.

Highways Agency Environment Action Plan 2010–2011

Key priorities identified in the Agency’s Environment Strategy of specific relevance to the environmental assessment of the proposed scheme include:

• Air Quality – “delivering the most effective solutions to minimise the air quality impacts resulting from traffic using our network. We will operate and develop our network in a way that is compatible with working toward compliance with statutory air quality limits”.

• Noise and Vibration – “continue to work with other Government departments to deliver the requirements of the Environmental Noise Directive. Managing noise levels at priority locations and working towards meeting the requirements of the Government’s noise action plans will be given a high priority over the coming year”.

• Water Environment – “respond to the requirements of recent legislation and also the flooding events that have occurred over the last few years. Our priority here will be to continue to review and assess the network’s resilience to flooding and develop contingency plans accordingly”.

• Nature Conservation – “maximise opportunities for protecting and enhancing our diverse natural environment, and supporting its ability to adapt to the likely effects of climate change”.

• Material Resources and Waste – “committed to ensuring that a legal and responsible approach to materials and waste management is adopted in all our activities. We will work towards meeting the national waste strategy target of halving waste to landfill by 2012”.




3.2 Proposed Operating Regime

Key elements of the SM-ALR design concept for this scheme are as follows:

• The hard shoulder on the main line is permanently converted to a controlled running lane.

• Variable mandatory speed limits are utilised.

• Lane specific signalling is only provided at the ‘gateway signals and Variable Message Sign (VMS) locations and where necessary at intermediate locations.

• Driver information, including mandatory speed limits, is provided at intervals not less than 600m and not exceeding 1500m.

• Queue protection systems are implemented.

• Comprehensive low-light Pan-Tilt-Zoom (PTZ) CCTV coverage is used.

• Refuge areas are provided at a maximum of 2500m intervals. Refuge areas may either be bespoke facilities ERA or converted from an existing facility, for example a wide load bay, a motorway service area (MSA), the hard shoulder on an exit slip/link road or hard shoulder intra-junction.




Figure 2: Illustrative drawing of SM-ALR




Figure 3: Proposed Scheme Operating Regime

Within this document, the carriageways will be referenced and considered as running northbound (NB) – J28 to 31 and southbound (SB) – J31 to 28.

The changes to the scheme section as a result of the proposed SM-ALR operating regime are illustrated in Figure 3.

These include:

• J28: lane gain / drop at the north facing slip roads.

• J28 to 29 (approximately 11km): conversion of the hard shoulder to a running lane, with a lane gain/drop at J29.

• J29 to 29a (approximately 6km): lane gain / drop at J29a with conversion of the hard shoulder to a running lane.

• J29a to 30 (approximately 5km): lane gain / drop at J30 with conversion of the hard shoulder to a running lane.

• J30 to 31 (approximately 8km): lane gain / drop at the south facing slip roads.

The lane gain / drop regimes occur at junctions where traffic streams come together or are separated with an associated gain or loss of a traffic lane. Lane gains are included to ensure that joining traffic proceeds ahead in the additional lane without impeding the flow of traffic on the main carriageway and vice versa for leaving traffic with lane drops.

With implementation of the SM-ALR operating regime, the hard shoulder becomes Lane Below Sign 1 (LBS1). The road pavement on this lane will be strengthened to able trafficking.

The proposed would run at 60mph between the hours of 07:00 and 19:00 for 7 days a week.

3.3 Proposed Scheme – Key Infrastructure

This section briefly describes the key components of the proposed scheme. The locations of key infrastructure are shown on Figure 1043319/2600/001 Sheets 1 to 19: General Arrangement (Version 14) provided in Appendix A1 and on Figure 2.1: Environmental Constraints Plan in Appendix A3.

Gantries

Superspan Portal Gantries: These typically span both of the carriageways, including the hard shoulders (which will become LBS1) and will be designed




without access in accordance with current Highways Agency standards. These will be installed as both signal and sign gantries, with instances where signs and signals co-exist on the same gantry structures. Sign and signal gantries will have the same basic design structure, protection, service and mounting requirements as a signal. These will be constructed of steel utilising an open rectangular cross section beam upon which the signals and signs can be mounted on, following principles established during the M42 Active Traffic Management (ATM) Pilot and Birmingham Box Managed Motorway (BBMM) 1 and 2 schemes. The gantries require 5.7m minimum headroom, and will have a typical span range of 41-49m; however bespoke designs may be required at certain locations in accordance with current Highways Agency standards. Gantries will be mounted on mass concrete foundations or on screw pile foundations with a concrete capping beam depending on the underlying geology at proposed locations. Vehicle restraint systems (VRS) will be required in the verge to protect gantries from impact.

Signal Gantries: These will have Mark Signal 4 (MS4) sign located above the gantry boom, generally positioned over LBS1 (the dynamic ‘hard shoulder’ that is at time open to running traffic). The MS4 is a 4m wide X 3m high dual colour matrix, capable of displaying both text and pictograms. Each signal gantry will house Light Emitting Diode (LED) Advance Motorway Indicators (AMI) located above each running lane (including the hard shoulder). These, along with the MS4s are automatically set by detection loops located in the carriageways to provide ‘real time’ information to drivers and the Regional Control Centre operators.

Sign Gantries: These will have the same basic design structure, protection, service and mounting requirements as a signal gantry. However, directional sign plates will be fixed to the beam. The size and format of signs and nomenclature conditions will conform to current Highways Agency standards.

Sign and Signal Gantries: These will have the same basic design structure, protection, service and mounting requirements as a signal gantry. However, directional sign plates and MS4s will be fixed above the beam. The size and format of signs and nomenclature conditions will conform to current Highways Agency standards.

Figure 4: Typical Signal Portal Gantry Configuration




Advanced Directional Sign (ADS) Cantilever Gantries: At junction approaches, there will be a requirement to locate a number of ADS cantilever gantries. These will be designed and constructed in accordance with principles established within IAN 161/13.

Gantry Foundations: These will be constructed from either reinforced concrete piles or using helical steel piles with either a concrete or steel grillage pile cap.

Existing Gantries: Existing gantries with sufficient residual life and structural capacity to accommodate additional sign/signal requirements will be utilised wherever possible, suitably modified to mount the specific equipment required at that location. It is currently anticipated that one existing gantry will be re-used along with 24 cantilever gantries.

Mark Signals (MS): Along the scheme length, a number of verge mounted MS3 and MS4 signs on Cantilever Gantries will be required in addition to the portal gantry mounted MS4s. The MS4 is a dual colour matrix sign, capable of displaying both text and pictograms. See Figure 5 and 6 for illustrative examples of typical MS3 and MS4 cantilevers.

Figure 5: Typical MS3 Cantilever

Figure 6: Typical MS4 Cantilever




Table 3.1 below shows the total number of gantries required for the proposed SM scheme.

Table 3.1: Proposed SM-ALR Infrastructure

Equipment Total New Existing Retained

Foundation Reused

Sign Gantries 6 5 1 0

Signal Gantries 8 7 1 0

Sign Signal Gantries

15 5 10 0

ADS Cantilever Gantries

15 15 0 0

MS3 Cantilever Gantries

3 2 0 1

MS4 Cantilever Gantries

45 22 0 23

ADS 2 2 0 0

Eighteen gantries will be removed along the scheme length. Please see Appendix A1: Figure 1043319/2600/001 – General Arrangement for the scheme proposal.

Emergency Refuge Areas (ERAs)

ERAs (measuring 100m x 4.6m as indicated in IAN 161/13) are required to permit vehicles to stop in an emergency without interrupting the flow of traffic in LBS1. These are constructed within the existing highway verges and will include emergency roadside telephones. Additional road lighting will not be provided at ERA locations or anywhere else along the scheme length. A total of 20 ERAs are proposed as part of the scheme. Further details on the location of ERAs are provided in Appendix A2: Checklist 3 and shown on Appendix A1: Figure 1043319/2600/001.

Abnormal Loading Bay

Parking bays are proposed within the roundabout island at J28 of the M1. The bays are to replace the existing facilities on the NB and SB carriageways north of Tibshelf MSA. This area will be gated and the pavement construction will be concrete. The vertical alignment will be such that the bays drainage catchment is isolated and there will be an interceptor and pollution control device to close of the system. The outfall will be into the existing drainage network therefore additional run off will be attenuated. See Appendix A1: junction 28 Wide Load Bay Proposal Plan for further details.

Temporary Traffic Management Signs (TTMS)

As a result of permanently converting the existing hardshoulder to a live running lane, Light Emitting Diode (LED) secret signs have been identified to enable the safe maintenance of the SM-ALR environment. Permanently




located secret signs enable the remote deployment of the advanced signage associated with temporary traffic management. The signs to be provided include pairs of 1 mile “road worker” warning signs and pairs of 800 yards, 600 yards, 400 yards and 200 yards wicket signs. These signs enable the downstream temporary traffic management to be deployed and the lane(s) to be closed.

Each set of the five pairs of signs (1 mile, 800, 600, 400 and 200 yards) are linked with a location from which traffic management will be deployed (referred to as a fixed taper point) and so as a result the sign locations are determined by each fixed taper point location and the associated distance shown on the sign. A total of 110 pairs Temporary Traffic Management Signs (TTMS) will be installed at each pair location one TTMS will be in the concrete central reservations and the other in the highway verge.

The 1 mile road worker signs are approximately 1.7m wide x 2.3m high. The wicket signs vary in size depending on the number of lanes and whether they are in the central reserve or verge. However, the largest and most regularly used central reserve wicket sign is approximately 2.1m wide x 1.4m high and the largest and most regularly used verge wicket sign is approximately 2.5m wide x 1.6m high. These signs will be set back 1.4m from the carriageway and the sign faces will be 2415mm x 2170mm. Where these signs are installed vegetation will be cleared for sightlines for 180m on the run up to the sign. The secret signs would require local connection to power network along the motorway. Further details on the locations of TTMSs are provided in Appendix A2: Checklist 3 and shown on Appendix A3: Figure 2.1.

3.3.1 Supporting Infrastructure

Closed Circuit Television (CCTV)

PTZ CCTV will provide comprehensive, (100%) general surveillance coverage of the scheme. The associated masts will be located adjacent to gantry foundations wherever possible and will be positioned to complement the existing coverage of surveillance cameras in order to provide a view of conditions on the motorway and to help to detect and manage any incidents. The height of the CCTV masts will generally be 15m and would be mounted on separate masts located on foundations, typically in the order of 3m wide x 3m length.

A total of 78 new PTZ CCTV cameras will installed as part of the proposed scheme. Checklist 3 provided in Appendix A2 contains information on the locations of CCTV. Their location is shown on Figure 2.1 in Appendix A3.

Highways Agency Digital Enforcement Cameras (HADECS)

HADECS will be used to enforce variable speed limits under the SM-ALR system. These will be mounted on the top of gantries and will oversee the carriageway. They will be linked to the ATM system to enable real time adjustments to their thresholds when the speed limits change. A total of eight new HADECS cameras are proposed. See Appendix A3: Figure 2.1 and Checklist 3 Appendix A2 for the location of these cameras.




Enforcement Aspect Verification (EAVs)

Fixed cameras will be installed in the verge and generally mounted on 5m or 6m masts (depending on coverage requirements at locations) will be provided approximately 200m upstream of HADECS locations. The purpose of these cameras is to confirm the vehicle and signal at the time to support the enforcement of the variable speed limits. Thirteen new EAV cameras will be installed as part of the proposed scheme. Checklist 3 provided in Appendix A2 contains information on the locations of EAV cameras. Their location is shown on Figure 2.1 in Appendix A3.

Average Speed Enforcement (ASE) Cameras

ASE cameras operate as sets of two installed along a fixed route allowing the calculation of average speed between the two points. ASE masts are typically 8m in height and yellow in colour. . Thirty new ASE cameras will be installed as part of the proposed scheme. Checklist 3 provided in Appendix A2 contains information on the locations of ASE cameras. See Figure 7 for further information on this camera. Their locations are shown on Figure 2.1 in Appendix A3.

ASE cameras have yet to be confirmed in the scheme infrastructure and have been included in this environmental assessment as a worst case scenario.

Figure 7: Typical Average Speed Enforcement Camera

Motorway Incident Detection and Automatic Signaling (MIDAS) Loop System

Induction loops are installed in the carriageway typically 10m upstream each of portal and cantilever gantry. Between gantries, MIDAS loops are typically




spaced at regular intervals of 500m. These loops can be utilised for automatic signal setting, queue protection, congestion settings, incident detection, vehicle counting and ramp metering facilities. These facilities serve to ensure a better flow of traffic.

Electrical Interface Cabinets

Due to the increased quantity of technology provided and increased power requirements of the equipment, a number of new electricity supplies from the Distribution Network Operator (DNO) will be required. These electricity interfaces will be provisioned in type-609 Electrical Interface (EI) cabinets. The dimensions of EI 609 cabinets are 1261mm high x 330mm length x 370mm wide. Typically the total footprint of works area for installation of an EI cabinet site is 10m2 again including the temporary works area.

They will be located on the fence-line of the highway boundary. The DNO may need wayleaves to implement the interface. These cabinet sites will be accessed by steps, with landings and handrails if required. Existing footpaths will be retained as far as practical to sites retained by the scheme design. It must be noted that some existing access may not accord to current standards and where this is the case, they will be improved to address this issue. At the time of reporting, the locations where existing access required improvements had not been finalised.

A suite of equipment cabinets will be at all equipment locations and these will be utilised for equipment storage. These are typically located at gantry sites, standalone CCTV sites, and standalone MIDAS sites. Checklist 3 provided in Appendix A2 contains information on the proposed location of EI cabinets.

Cross Carriageway Ducts (CCDs)

At a number of locations, connections are required between the ducting in the A-carriageway and the ducting in the B-carriageway. This is achieved via Cross Carriageway Ducts (CCDs), constructed by drilling beneath the main carriageway and requiring pits in the motorway verge to thrust from and receive the plant. The thrust pit is normally approximately 5m x 4m whilst the receive pit is smaller being approximately 2m x 2m; the depth of the pits is dependent upon the profile of the motorway verge. Checklist 3 provided in Appendix A2 and Figure 2.1 in Appendix A3 contains information on the locations of CCDs along the scheme corridor.

Longitudinal Cables

Longitudinal telecommunications cables will be required to service the SM-ALR system. These are less visible items which will be located within the first 2m from the back of the carriageway kerb, in the soft estate and in ducts which are placed in narrow trenches. These trenches will be approximately 450mm wide and 500mm deep in the back of the carriageway. Checklist 2 provided in Appendix A2 contains further information on the locations of new cabling along scheme corridor.




Drainage

The majority of the carriageway is currently served by kerb and gully drainage which will be retained where possible, or replaced by asymmetrical surface water channel where there is a narrow hard strip. Where sufficient non-trafficked hard strip is to be retained, the existing kerb and gullies shall remain, with additional gullies where required to prevent flow encroaching into the live carriageway. The run-off will use the existing pipe networks as far as practical and will discharge to the existing outfalls at existing discharge rates, so as not to increase the flood risk to third party land; up to and including the 1 in 100 year return period rainfall event.

Each ERA will have an independent drainage system with combined kerb drainage units. These will discharge into in a storage tank underneath the ERA which will be able to retain a 1 in 5 year return period, critical duration storm, and specifically designed to contain the runoff should any accidental spillage occur locally within the ERA. A gate valve control will be provided downstream to retain the runoff within the independent system enabling it to be removed without entering the existing drainage system. The ERA drainage will be connected via a gate valve to the existing drainage system. The additional run-off generated by the ERA restricted to existing discharge rates using a flow control device.

Where the barriers have been installed and the central reserve has been paved, surface water channel will be installed to replace the gullies. Sub-surface attenuation will be provided in the verge, upstream of the outfalls, in addition to the existing drainage system capacity to accommodate the increased run-off generated from the paved central reserve. Flow controls and acute pollution shut off devices have also been included to maintain current discharge rates. Carriageway flooding at a 1:100 year return period rainfall event will be stored on the carriageway, retained by kerbs, kerb drainage units or asymmetrical surface water channels. No new outfalls will be constructed and no works are planned in the rivers and waterbodies in the vicinity of the proposed scheme.

Hard Shoulder Strengthening Works and Widening

As part of requirements to use the existing hard shoulder as a running lane for traffic, some strengthening works will be required to bring it up to specification. The extent of the hard shoulder strengthening will vary along the scheme length from full depth pavement reconstruction to 40mm inlay.

As part of the proposed scheme, the entire hard shoulder pavement along the proposed scheme length will be strengthened and will re-surfaced with low noise surfacing (also known as Thin Wearing Course (TWC). Currently only 40% of the hard shoulder length along the proposed scheme is subject to low noise surfacing.

Some minor widening of the carriageway hardstanding will be required on several slip roads. This is to accommodate the junction merge overruns, with a permanent loss of soft estate. There are four location where widening will be required. These are:




Northbound

• MP218/1+50 to 218/6+80A: widening to a maximum width of 3.5m.

• MP243/0+50 to 243/1+50A: widening to a maximum width of 2.5m.

Southbound

• MP218/5+60 to 218/3+50B: widening to a maximum width of 3m.

• MP221/7+00 to 221/5+20B: widening to a maximum width of 2.5m.

3.4 Scheme Delivery and Implementation

Subject to progression through statutory procedures, construction of the proposed scheme at the time of reporting was to commence in March 2014 and commissioned by 2015. Costain have been appointed as the Delivery Partner to construct this scheme.

For the purpose of construction, the scheme extent will be divided into phases. The main construction compound will be at Markham Vale which is accessible off the M1 at J29a. It is anticipated that on average approximately 400 vehicles will access the compound per day during peak construction periods. At the time of the assessment, the working hours had not been confirmed but this could be 24 hours a day (weekdays and weekends). The M1 will generally be open to traffic during the construction period but carriageway closures between junctions and rolling road blocks may be required during erection of portal gantry booms. Other traffic management measures to be adopted during construction include lane narrowing and speed restriction to 50mph.

Working space requirements from the edge of the carriageway at infrastructure locations would be as follows:

• Gantry and MS4 sites – this will be defined by the extent of the retaining solution which is yet to be confirmed. This will typically by 20m length x 6m width.

• ERA – 100m x 10m, however if on an embankment this could extend further.

• Camera sites – this also will be ultimately be defined by the retaining solution which is yet to be confirmed. The typical working area for these sites is expected to be about 7m x 5m.

• CCDs – 10m x 5m

• Longitudinal cables – typically 4m (from the edge of the white line marking).

During this period, construction materials will be required and waste generated on site. Information on the type of materials used, waste generated and disposal measures is provided in Chapter 10 of this report.

3.4.1 Grouting

Following a review of desk study information and subsequent ground investigation, locations have been identified where abandoned mine working may represent a hazard to the construction of the gantry foundations.




Collapse of such working within the zone of influence of the foundation could result in failure of the foundation and consequently grouting of these working will be required. The sites have been designated as different groups based on risk i.e. Red locations are those where grouting is definitely required on seams identified in the ground investigation. Orange locations are those where probing will be undertaken to a depth where the workings are considered possible. If this probing identifies workings they will be treated as Red, otherwise mining risk can be discounted. The sites have been designated as follows.

• Red Sites: Gantry (G1-15) to a depth of 9.0m below ground level (bgl). G1-16 to a depth of 19.2m bgl. Abnormal load bay at J28.

• Orange Site : G1-03; G1-05b; G1-06b; G1-06c; G1-09; G2-04 G2-08; G3-03; G3-06b; G3-07.

Where grouting is required, it will be undertaken over an area representing the zone of influence of the propose foundation. Grouting will be carried out by a specialist contractor to a method statement provided by them.

Boreholes will be drilled by rotary or rotary percussive techniques to intercept the mine workings and subsurface voids and penetrate into the rock 1.0 metre below seam level. The boreholes will be kept open over their full depth to enable them to be used for the injection of grout under pressure into the mine and also into all breaks and fissures in the overlying rock strata. Where soft, loose or broken strata encountered below rock head are associated with the mine workings or with related void migration or racking then these strata shall also be consolidated by injecting grout under pressure.

Initially holes will be drilled around the perimeter of the area of grouting at minimum of 3m centres, commencing at the point where the worked seam is deepest and progressing in both directions around the boundary of the grouting works. Grout introduced into the mine workings and sub-surface voids via perimeter boreholes will be capable of setting quickly without undue spread and in such a way that an efficient barrier is formed in the worked seam around the perimeter of the grouting works. Once the perimeter is formed, grouting will be undertaken on the interior of this area.

3.5 Overview of the Existing Environment

This section provides a high level description of the existing environment within which the scheme is situated. It covers the following:

• The location of the scheme

• Topography

• Land use and transportation pattern

• Hydrology

• Planning and environmental designations.

This section sets the context for the assessments presented in this EAR. The environmental assessment chapters (Chapters 5 to 10) contain detailed description of the environment for the topic being reported.




3.5.1 Location

The M1 between J28 and 31 forms part of a strategic transportation network linking London to Leeds. This section of the M1 provides a link between the Midlands and the North of England. From J28, the motorway passes through the following Local Planning Authority (LPA) areas all within the Derbyshire and South Yorkshire area:

• Ashfield District Council (ADC)

• Bolsover District Council (BDC)

• Chesterfield District Council (CDC)

• North East Derbyshire District Council (NEDDC)

• Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council (RMBC).

Appendix A3: Figure 2.1 – Environmental Constraints Plans shows the LPA boundaries.

3.5.2 Topography

The existing motorway corridor cuts through a largely rural landscape, comprising a mixture of pasture and arable farm methods, interspersed with former mine working operations.

Adjacent to the motorway at J28 is the settlement of South Normanton, much of it is elevated in relation to the M1.

Between Tibshelf Services Area and J29a, the landform becomes more enclosed and the River Doe Lea marks the bottom of a local valley. The eastern slopes are noticeably steeper and continue the elevated landform from the north, accommodating the settlements of Bolsover and Huthwaite, both of which have broad open views to the west. To the west of River Doe Lea, the landform gently rises to a series of local hills ranging between 190-170m AOD between Tibshelf and Heath, just to the south of J29a. Through this stretch, the motorway is typically contained within numerous shallow cuttings or at grade reflecting the local undulations in this more rolling landform.

From the north of J31 (Thurcroft) to Duckmanton (adjacent to J29a), the stretch of the M1 lies on the fringes of a ridgeline. This slope forms the eastern edge of the Rother Valley, a broad landform that incorporates the settlements of Killamarsh and Chesterfield. The landform descends from a series of local high points at approximately 155m AOD to the west, to approximately 50m AOD adjacent to the River Rother itself. The motorway corridor itself alternates between shallow cutting and broad embankments, particularly to the west, reflecting the local undulations of the valleys slopes.

3.5.3 Land Use and Transportation Pattern

The M1 motorway is a strategic route for local and regional traffic and plays a major role as a national artery providing a direct motorway route between the North and the South of England. As a major inter-urban regional route, it connects the Nottingham area in the south with the Sheffield/Rotherham conurbation to the north and Leeds beyond this. It also forms a strategic link with Hull via the M18 at J32 immediately to the north.




The existing motorway corridor cuts through a largely rural landscape, comprising a mixture of pasture and arable farm methods, interspersed with former mine working operations. This is particularly evident around J29a, where former mining operations are now giving way to large warehouses and distribution centres. North of J29a, land use is more frequently arable farming and this is particularly noticeable to the far north of the study area, around J31.

Elsewhere there are some particular features of note, namely the parkland associated with Hardwick Hall to the east and between J28 to 29, as well as the parkland surrounding Barlborough Hall, which now operates as a school, located to the northeast of J30.

Settlements occur throughout the corridor with smaller villages such as Tibshelf and Heath typically occurring to the south of the corridor giving way to larger more nucleated settlements to the north, which include Bolsover, Barlborough and Wales to the north.

The study section of the M1 caters for both strategic and local traffic with important links to nearby settlements, locally significant road links occur at the following locations:

• The A38 at J28

• The A617 and A6175 at J29

• The A6192 at J29a

• The A6135 and A616 at J30

• The A57 at J31.

Several local railway lines cross the M1 at Bolsover and Wales, although several of these served former mining operations and are now disused.

Footpaths occur throughout the study area and a number of these cross the M1 or run parallel with the corridor. Of particular note are some of the more recognised routes, including:

• Cuckoo Way which crosses the M1 to the south of Wales.

• Five Pits Trail to the west of the corridor and north of Tibshelf, which also includes a stretch of the Sustrans route 67.

3.5.4 Hydrology

The majority of the study area encompasses the elevated plateau that lies to the east of the Rother Valley that flows in a northerly direction through Chesterfield and northwards towards Sheffield and Rotherham. The elevated nature of the landscape and porous geology results in only a few surface water courses, limited to the River Doe Lea that rises to the north of Stainsby and flows north to join the Rother to the west of J30. To the north of J30, a number of local brooks typically flow west to drain into the River Rother complex.

To the south of the study area and flowing west is Normanton Brook (MP219/3); this crosses the M1 just west of Hilcote to link with the Alfreton Brook and River Amber.

Within the local valleys and folds in the landscape are a number of ponds and reservoirs. In the main these appear to have been man-made as a result of




former mine workings. Larger bodies of water occur to the east of the M1 corridor and are local reservoirs Hartshill and Pebley Reservoirs.

Please see Appendix A3: Figure 2.1- Environmental Constraints Plans for the location of the aforementioned features.

3.5.5 Planning and Environmental Designations

The extensive study area encompasses a number of local policy areas and environmental designations.

• Four AQMAs are declared where the EU limit and Government standards adopted for Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) and dust particles: particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10µm (PM10) are not being achieved or are in danger of being exceeded. Four AQMAs have been identified within 200m of the proposed scheme length for exceedence of the annual mean NO2 objective.

• Cultural heritage features along the route include Stainsby Defended Manorial Complex (Scheduled Monument), Sutton Scarsdale Country House (Scheduled Monument and Grade I Listed Building), Bolsover Castle (Scheduled Monument and Grade I Listed Buildings), Hardwick New and Old Hall (Scheduled Monument and Grade I Listed Buildings) , Balborough Hall (Grade I Listed Building), Barlborough Conservation Area, Wales Conservation Area and Aston Conservation Area.

• The Hardwick Estate, owned and managed by the National Trust, is adjacent to the highway boundary to both the east and west between J28 and 29. It was proposed as a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) in 2009 but not notified as such by Natural England. As such, Hardwick Estate has no protection as a SSSI as verified by Natural England 18/12/2012. There are also a number of Ancient Woodlands, Country Wildlife Sites and ponds around this section of the M1.

• Between MP225/3 and 225/9, landscapes at Hardwick Hall and Barlborough Hall are listed on the Register of Parks and Gardens. Between MP241/6 and 242/6 and north of MP248/2 the area is designated by RMBC as a Special Landscape Area.

• Dovedale Wood located 830m east of the M1 (MP224/7+50B) is a SSSI and is also a Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) habitat.

• Doe Lea located 523m east of the M1 (MP228/2B) is designated as a Local Nature Reserve (LNR).

• The two largest watercourses that are crossed by the scheme are Normanton Brook (MP219/3) and River Doe Lea (MP234/9+80).

• North of MP238/5, much of the landscape is designated as a Green Belt. Green Belts are land use designations used to retain areas of largely undeveloped or agricultural land surrounding or neighbouring urban areas.

• Seventeen Important Areas (IAs) have been identified within a 1m radius of the scheme, ten of which have designated First Priority Locations (FPLs).




See Appendix A2: Checklist 1, Appendix A3 for the location of these designations and Appendix B1: Figure 1 for the AQMAs. Further details on the planning and environmental designations are provided in the assessment chapters (Chapters 5 to 10).




4 The Environmental Assessment Process

4.1 Screening

As outlined earlier in this report in Section 1.2, the proposed scheme has been identified as a relevant project under Annex II of the EIA Directive due to the proposed works constituting an area of over 1ha in size. It has been subject to an environmental assessment to identify its likely environmental effects and their significance in line with guidance contained in DMRB Volume 11, Section 2, Part 3: HD47/08.

This chapter presents an overview of the environmental assessment process whilst the findings of the environmental assessment are recorded in Chapters 5 to 10.

4.2 Scoping Process

Scoping of potential environmental issues against the physical and operational aspects of the proposed scheme has been undertaken to provide a basis for ensuring that the environmental assessment is appropriately focused on issues of genuine potential significance. The scoping exercise and the environmental assessment have been undertaken principally in accordance with guidance contained within the following documents:

• DMRB, Volume 10: Environmental Design and Management and Volume 11: Environmental Assessment.

• IAN 161/13: Managed Motorways All Lane Running - This provides guidance on the environmental implications associated with implementation of Managed Motorways All Lane Running infrastructure on existing sections of the motorway network.

• IAN 125/09: Supplementary guidance for users of DMRB Volume 11 Environmental Assessment.

An initial review of the proposed scheme highlighted the following:

• It would be entirely confined within the existing operational highway boundary, and as such no additional land beyond the motorway corridor would be required to accommodate the proposals.

• The sensitivity of the receiving environment to the changes proposed is already reduced by the environmental impact of the existing motorway corridor.

• The modification of design options (e.g. alternative gantry positions) to address potential environmental issues are largely dictated by existing infrastructure, power supplies, visibility requirements, operational restrictions, and overarching design standards.

• Review of the proposed design with regards to potential environmental impacts would only be possible to the degree to which operational and safety requirements are not compromised.




In view of the above, scoping resulted in a number of environmental topic areas being identified for inclusion in (scoped-in) the environmental assessment. For these scoped-in topics, the scoping exercise served to establish the:

• the extent and availability of existing environmental information

• key sensitivities and interests within the receiving environment

• data collection and survey requirements

• the scope and level of detail to be progressed within individual assessments

• the methodologies, guidance and criteria to be adopted.

Scoping also resulted in some environmental topic areas being discounted (scoped-out) from the environmental assessment on the basis of there being limited potential for significant environmental effects to be generated through proposed scheme implementation.

4.2.1 Scoped in Environmental Topics

The following table presents a summary of the scoping exercise undertaken in April 2012 and reported in the M1 J28 to 31 SM Environmental Scoping Report (Ref. 1043249/ENV/DOC/001).

Table 4.1: Summary of Scoping Exercise

Sig

nif

ican

t Im

pacts

±

To

pic

s

Sim

ple

†

Deta

iled

†

Study Area Comment

D/ T /P

Air quality � 200m from centreline of proposed scheme and affected road network.

Study area to be determined after traffic data has been screened in accordance with the DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1.

D/ T /P

Cultural heritage

� To incorporate Zone of Visual Influence (ZVI) of the proposed scheme.

Archaeological remains and historic landscape elements scoped out. Focus to be on identified sensitive areas. A simple level assessment according to HA 208/07: Cultural Heritage will be undertaken for built heritage.

D/ T /P

Landscape effects

� Established ZVI. Further detailed assessment following iterative design process to establish locations of key SM infrastructure such as gantries and ERAs.

D/ T /P

Nature conservation

� Within 50m of Highways boundary

Data from previous EAR produced by Atkins used to




Sig

nif

ican

t Im

pacts

±

To

pic

s

Sim

ple

†

Deta

iled

†

Study Area Comment

Designated Sites within 1km.

Desk based Study within 500m buffer.

inform the scoping exercise. Update and verification ecology surveys to be undertaken to inform the design process and assessment.

The scoping exercise identified the requirement for great crested newt surveys, bat surveys on structures and a badger walkover.

D/T Materials � As defined by the location of receptors.

Undertaken to simple level assessment in line with IAN 153/11: Guidance on the Environmental Assessment of Material Resources.

D/ T /P

Noise and vibration

� The study area will be determined through the identification of ‘affected routes’. Affected routes are roads with a predicted change in noise level of at least 1db in the scheme opening year.

The study area will be set as;

600m either side of the centreline of the proposed scheme

600m buffer around affected routes within 1km of the proposed scheme; and

50m buffer around other affected routes that are over 1km from the proposed scheme.

Detailed assessment following provision of traffic data.

Including Assessment Summary Tables (AST) (A1.1, A1.2 and A1.3) required by DMRB, Volume 11, Section 3, Part 7: HD213/11.

± Potential for direct (D), temporary (T), permanent (P) impacts

† Simple or detailed level assessment as defined in DMRB Volume 11

All other DMRB environmental topic areas were scoped out of the assessment. Please see Appendix A4: Scoping Information for details on this.

4.2.2 Consideration of Cumulative Effects

The EIA Directive in Article 3 requires the consideration of the cumulative effects of a project and the interaction between the factors mentioned in the first indent in this section (human being, flora and fauna) and the second indent (soil, water, air, climate and the landscape). The need for this




assessment has been transposed to UK legislation and incorporated in the DMRB, Volume 11, Section 1 and 2.

Potential impacts on soil, water and climate have been scoped out during the scoping process outline in Section 4.2.1 and reported in the M1 J32 to 35a Scoping Report provided in Appendix 4. The assessment of cumulative effects in this report therefore focuses on human being, flora and flora and the landscape (interaction between scoped-in topics) and is provided in Chapter 11.

4.3 Environmental Consultation

4.3.1 Scoping Report Consultation

Consultation with Statutory Environmental Bodies (SEBs) and non-statutory environmental bodies has been an essential part of the environmental assessment process. In May 2012, selected organisations were invited to comment of the draft M1 J28 to 31 Scoping Report and to provide information held in relation to environmental interests and / or sensitivities within the study area. This was done by way of a standard scoping / consultation email to:

Statutory Environmental Bodies (SEBs)

• Natural England (NE)

• Environment Agency (EA)

• English Heritage (EH)

Local Planning Authorities (LPAs)

• Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council (RMBC)

• Derbyshire County Council

• Nottinghamshire County Council



• Chesterfield Borough Council (CDC)


• Broxtowe District Council

Wildlife Trusts

• Yorkshire Wildlife Trust

• Derbyshire Wildlife Trust

• Nottinghamshire Wildlife Trust

• Leicestershire and Rutland Wildlife Trust

Local Record Centres

• Rotherham Biological Records Centre




• Nottinghamshire Biological Records Centre

Local Interest Groups and other Relevant Organisations

• National Trust

• Forestry Commission

• Royal Society for the Protection of Birds

• Woodland Trust

• East Midlands Environment Link

• Green Space East Midlands

• Nottingham East Midlands Airport

• Sustrans East Midlands

• Greenwood Partnership

• South west Yorkshire Amphibian and Reptile Group

• Derbyshire Amphibian and Reptile Group

• Nottinghamshire Amphibian and Reptile Group

• South Yorkshire Badger Group

• Nottinghamshire Badger Group

• South Yorkshire Bat Group

• Derbyshire Bat Group

• Nottinghamshire Bat Group

• Rotherham and District Ornithological Trust

• Derbyshire Ornithological Society

• Chesterfield RSPB Local Group

• Yorkshire Naturalist Union

• Network Rail – Asset Protection Manager.

A copy of the standard Scoping / Consultation email is provided in Appendix A4 whilst a summary of the consultation responses is provided in Appendix A2: Checklist 1.

Important environmental data were provided and concerns and issues were identified during the consultation process. These informed the scoping exercise and allowed for the consolidation of mitigation strategies during the consideration of the design to address impacts during the construction and operational phases of the proposed scheme. Environmental consultation responses received included information on: baseline conditions with regards to archaeology, landscape character, land use, hydrology, ecological interests and pollution records.




Within some of the organisations consulted (for example SEBs and LPAs), responses from specific disciplines (for example, Ecology, Noise and Air Quality) were sought.

Targeted consultation was also undertaken with Environmental Health Officers (EHOs) of surrounding LPAs with respect to air quality impacts during operation. The following LPAs were contacted between January and June 2012 for baseline air quality data:

• Sheffield City Council (SCC)

• Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council (RMBC)

• Derbyshire County Council

• Nottinghamshire County Council



• Chesterfield Borough Council (CDC)


• Broxtowe District Council

• Nottingham City Council

4.3.2 Environmental Assessment Report Consultation

The SEBs and LPAs contacted on the scope of the environmental assessment (Section 4.3.1) were invited to comment on the draft EAR in April 2013 and following that an amended draft EAR in December 2013. A standard consultation email was sent to consultees including specific discipline representatives (for example: Ecology, Noise and Air Quality) inviting any comments on the EAR, including its conclusions and recommendations. A copy of the standard EAR Consultation email is provided in Appendix A4.

A summary of the consultation responses is provided in Appendix A2: Checklist 1.

4.4 Delivery of the Environmental Assessment

4.4.1 Establishment of the Baseline Environment

The environmental assessment commenced with the identification and review of information relating to known or likely presence of environmental receptors and resources within defined study areas. This was in order to determine their relative value / importance and / or sensitivity towards change.

Desk based data sources have comprised: consultation responses; literature relating to the study area; databases, records and schedules relating to environmental designations; national, regional and local policy documents; historic and current mapping; recent aerial photography; and data from previous environmental studies.

Site surveys have been undertaken to verify and consolidate information gathered during the desk based review, and to evaluate the relationships between specific environmental interests and their wider environmental value.




The assessment has consequently been based on the findings of the above tasks.

4.4.2 Levels of Assessment

Simple level assessments have been undertaken in environmental topic areas where scoping has concluded that the environmental effect is unlikely to be material to the decision-making process. Conversely, detailed level assessments have been progressed where the effect on the receiving environment has been concluded as being potentially significant. This is in line with DMRB Volume 11 Section 2, Part 1: HA 201/08 and topic specific scoping guidance contained in Volume 11, Section 3.

HA 200/08 (DMRB Volume 11, Section 1, Part 1) published in August 2008 provides supplementary guidance on the reporting of the environmental assessment of topic areas and guidance on cumulative impact assessment. It instructs that reporting of the environmental assessment should follow a 10 subject structure and defined levels of assessment, if applicable. However, DMRB Volume 11 Section 3 still provides specific guidance on environmental assessment techniques for 12 topics. This is yet to be fully updated in line with guidance contained in HA 200/08. This environmental assessment has been undertaken in line with guidance contained within HA 201/08 and IAN 161/13 which provides guidance on relevant environmental assessment topic areas for SM-ALR schemes. This guidance, published in 2013, gives an indication of the level of assessment to be adopted for scoped-in environmental topics based on experience on previous SM schemes.

4.4.3 Impact Identification and Assessment

Impact identification has involved comparison of the existing environmental conditions predicted to exist immediately prior to introduction of the proposed scheme against the conditions that would occur, or be likely to occur, as a consequence of its implementation. Impacts comprise identifiable changes to the environment which may be direct or indirect; short-term / temporary, medium-term, or long-term / permanent; secondary, cumulative and either beneficial or adverse. These are defined in accordance with accepted terminology and standardised methodologies contained in DMRB to predict the order of impact (change) resulting from implementation of the proposed scheme.

Some environmental topics such as landscape effects require further assessment beyond the operational year, up to 15 years hence (termed ‘the design year’ - 2030), to take account of factors such as traffic growth and establishment / maturity of mitigation.

4.4.4 Traffic Data Based Environmental Assessments

As noted in Section 2.1, there are a number of SM schemes on the M1 being designed and assessed alongside the M1 J28-31 SM-ALR scheme. The traffic data for the proposed scheme was derived from the East Midlands M1 Traffic Appraisal Model (EMM1TAM) prepared by Atkins and with inputs from the SWAMM model developed by AECOM and Jacobs. Differences in the traffic model outputs from both traffic models were however noted for the same roads in overlap areas. This had the potential to result in different air quality and




noise predictions for the same receptors within these areas. To address this issue, a mechanism was prepared by the Highways Agency which le to the production of a hybrid set of data. This was then undertaken by Mouchel in conjunction with the Traffic Modelling Consultants with the hybrid traffic data set reviewed and approved for use by all parties including Highways Agency NetServ Environment Group and TAME specialists and Project Managers. See Appendix B1: Air Quality Technical Report for a report on the rationale and methodology for the creation of the hybrid data traffic forecast for use in this environmental assessment process and to support environmental inputs into the WebTAG appraisal process.

Traffic data was provided for the base year (2010), the projected opening year (2015) and design year (2030). This has been used as the basis for modelling the proposed scheme’s environmental effects on air quality and noise. Traffic data used for the air quality and noise assessment is provided in Appendix B1.

4.4.5 Identification of Environmental Effects

Professional judgement, defined thresholds, and established criteria in DMRB Volumes 10 and 11 have been used to report the environmental effects of impacts. Environmental effects are formulated as a function of the receptor / resource value and sensitivity and the predicted magnitude of impact. Effects are reported as either prior to, or following establishment of environmental mitigation.

A series of checklists have been used to document the predicted effects of various aspects of the proposed scheme. These are contained within Appendix A2 and comprise:

• Checklist 1: existing data review along with a summary of relevant planning policies and consultation responses.

• Checklist 2: field appraisal of cable runs and infrastructure has been undertaken by assessing areas where vegetation in close proximity to the existing hard shoulder would be cleared as a result of longitudinal works.

• Checklist 3: each major equipment site has then been assessed in more detail, taking account of those locations where combined effects (effect on the same receptor from more than one piece of infrastructure) may occur and considering any support infrastructure e.g. cabinets.

References are made in the assessment chapters, where appropriate to figures provided in Appendix A3 which support the checklists.

4.4.6 Environmental Mitigation

Environmental mitigation measures have focused firstly on avoiding, then on reducing, or remedying potentially significant adverse environmental effects. In line with National Planning Policy Framework and Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2000 habitat restoration and enhancement measures have also been incorporated where possible. These have taken the form of:




• Agreed measures incorporated into the evolving design of the proposed scheme (e.g. relocation of gantries or ERAs where possible).

• Best practice measures (e.g. construction management to control dust emissions).

• Measures subject to future development dependent on design detail (e.g. planting to provide visual screening – dependent in part on the actual extent of vegetation clearance).

• Restoration / enhancement measure to be determined following vegetation clearance such as habitat connectivity.

4.5 Reporting and Determination

Guidance contained in DMRB Volume 11, Section 2, Part 6:HD48/08 have been considered in developing a report structure for the environmental assessment. Section 1.3 outlines the function of the EAR.

The content of the EAR will effectively be used to complete a Highways Agency standard summary document: a RoD. This will record the main environmental impacts arising from the proposed scheme and recommend whether the proposed scheme should or should not be subject to formal EIA i.e. on the basis of there being no predicted significant environmental effects.

The RoD will be subject to approval by Highways Agency NetServ specialists and the Project Manager under delegated responsibilities on behalf of the Secretary of State, and this decision recorded in a Notice of Determination (NoD). The NoD will be published by the Agency in the London Planning Gazette and a local newspaper and will be subject to a challenge window for a minimum period of six weeks, to allow objections to be made to the determination.

4.6 Public Consultation

A series of Public Information Exhibitions (PIEs) were held in February 2013 to engage with the public. The purpose of the PIE events was to focus on educating the public about the SM-ALR concept. . Another series of PIE to discuss issues associated with major equipment locations and other specific questions were held in March and April 2013.

A further series of PIEs are planned to provide the public with the results of the environmental assessment including the results of the traffic based assessments relating to the scheme. As with the first round of PIEs, newsletters will be published and further information made available on the Highways Agency’s website.




5 Air Quality

5.1 Focus of the Assessment

An assessment of the potential for changes in traffic characteristics as a result of the proposed introduction of SM-ALR operating regime on air quality has been undertaken. The assessment focused on changes to local and regional air quality resulting from both the generation of dust associated with the construction phases and traffic emissions on local and regional air quality once the scheme is operational. Given the nature of the proposal, which has the potential to result in a change in traffic speed, flow and capacity, the assessment focused on nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulate matter (PM10); key pollutants associated with road traffic; the magnitude of change and its potential impact on human health.

The assessment is based on the proposal to operate this scheme and the proposed adjacent scheme on the M1 between J32 and 35a with a mandatory speed limit of 60mph between 07.00 to 19.00; making this inherently a cumulative assessment. This was determined after preliminary assessments indicated that operation at SM-ALR at the National Speed Limit in the opening year would, in accordance with IAN 174/13, give rise to significant air quality effects. Further details of this are provided in Chapter 2 of this report and Appendix B1: Air Quality Assessment Technical Report.

5.2 Regulatory / Policy Framework

The following regulations and guidance documents have been considered key in support of this assessment. Further details are provided within Appendix B1.

5.2.1 European Directives and National Legislation

• European Clean Air for Europe Directive 2008/50/EC and UK 2010 Regulations contain air quality limit values established by the European Union for the protection of human health, vegetation and ecosystems.

• Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and Air Quality (England) Regulations 2000 and Air Quality (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2002: This defines both the standards and objectives for each of a range of air pollutants.

• The Environment Protection Act 1990 defines what constitutes a ‘statutory nuisance’, and places a duty on local authorities to take action if they believe a statutory nuisance is occurring within their area.

• The Environment Act 1995 places a duty on local authorities to review and assess air quality in their area, a cornerstone of the Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) system.

Air quality objectives included in the Regulations and current legislation which are relevant to the study area for NO2 and PM10 are outlined in Table 5.1.




Table 5.1: Air Quality Strategy Objectives

Date to be achieved by and maintained thereafter

Pollutant Objective/ Limit Value

Measured as Air Quality Strategy (AQS)

2008/50/EC

200µg/m3

Not to be exceeded more than 18 times per year

1 Hour Mean 31-Dec-05 1 January 2010 NO2

40µg/m3 Annual Mean 31-Dec-05 1 January 2010

50µg/m3

Not to be exceeded more than 35 times per year

24 Hour Mean

31-Dec-04 1 January 2005 PM10

40µg/m3 Annual Mean 31-Dec-04 1 January 2005

The UK air quality objectives for the protection of vegetation set in relation to oxides of nitrogen (NOx) are shown in Table 5.2.

Table 5.2: Air Quality Objectives and Limit Value for the Protection of Vegetation Set in Relation to NOx

Pollutant Measures as AQS / Limit value

NOx Annual Mean 30µg/m3

5.2.2 National Policy

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2012) and National Planning Policy Framework Technical Guidance (2012).

Paragraph 124 of the NPPF states that “Planning policies should sustain compliance with and contribute towards EU limit values or national objectives for pollutants, taking into account the presence of Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) and the cumulative impacts on air quality from individual sites in local areas. Planning decisions should ensure that any new development in AQMAs is consistent with the local air quality action plan.”

5.3 Methodology

Concentrations of pollutants and their associated health impacts are dependent on traffic composition and density, climatic conditions, vehicle travelling speeds, road layout and the proximity of the road to sensitive receptors.

This section outlines the method of assessment undertaken to determine the potential local and regional air quality impacts caused by the proposed scheme. The methods adopted for the assessment have principally been based on the guidance provided in HA207/07: DMRB Volume 11, Section 3,




Part 1(HA207/07), IAN 170/12, IAN 174/13, IAN 175/13, WebTAG1 and the Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance 2009 (LAQM.TG(09)). See Appendix B1 for further details.

A qualitative construction dust assessment has been undertaken alongside a detailed local air quality assessment in accordance with the principles of the DMRB air quality assessment methodology, together with an assessment of the significance of the predicted changes in pollutant concentrations in accordance with IAN 174/13. A regional emissions assessment was also undertaken.

The aforementioned assessments have involved consultation with a number of LPAs and the collection of the following data:

• Background NOx, NO2 and PM10 concentrations

• Local pollutant monitoring results

• Representative meteorological data

• Traffic data

• Relevant receptor locations (residential properties, hospitals, schools and care homes).

5.3.1 Construction Dust Assessment

The impact of construction activities was assessed based on the requirements of DMRB HA207/07, HA205/082, current best practice guidance3 and Annex 1 of the Minerals Policy Statement4.

Monitoring undertaken as part of research into PM10 emissions from construction sites indicated no discernible difference in levels of PM10 beyond 200m downwind of construction works5. The potential impacts of this phase of development also tend to be limited to the actual period of construction at any one location.

The assessment of construction-related dust has therefore focused on receptors located within 200m of the potential areas of works for the proposed scheme. As required by HA207/07, particular attention was given to sensitive receptors, such as residential properties, schools, care homes and hospitals. Ecologically sensitive receptors, including species or habitats found within a statutory designated site that could be subject to potential dust nuisance resulting from the construction of the proposed scheme, were also considered (Figure 2.1, Appendix A3).

1 http://www.dft.gov.uk/webtag/documents/expert/unit3.3.php

2 http://dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol11/section2/ha20508.pdf 3 London Councils, 2006. The Control of Dust and Emissions from Construction and Demolition: Best

Practice Guidance, London Councils, November 2006. 4 Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. Minerals Policy Statement 2: Controlling and mitigating the

environmental effects of mineral extraction in England. Annex 1: Dust. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London. 2005. 5 National Society for Clean Air, 2001, Clean Air and Environmental Protection; Measurements of PM10

Emissions from a Construction Site – A Case Study, Upton, S and Kikadia, V, Vol. 32, No.3, Autumn 2001




5.3.2 Local Air Quality Assessment

Changes in local traffic flow characteristics resulting from the operation of the proposed scheme may potentially impact on air quality. The quantity and composition of vehicle emissions is dependent on the type of fuel used, engine type, size and efficiency, vehicle speeds and the type of abatement equipment employed.

The main pollutants of health concern from road traffic exhaust releases are NO2 and fine particulates – normally assessed as the fraction of airborne particles of mean aerodynamic diameter less than ten micrometres (PM10), since these pollutants are most likely to approach their respective air quality objectives in proximity to major roads and in congested areas. These two pollutants were therefore considered within this assessment.

Local ambient concentrations of the remaining pollutants identified within the AQS, carbon monoxide (CO), benzene, 1,3-butadiene and sulphur dioxide (SO2) were well below air quality objectives and EU limit values within the LPAs areas. These were therefore deemed not significant to these LPAs and screened out of this assessment.

The Local Air Quality Assessment included:

• Detailed air quality dispersion modelling.

• Application of Long Term NO2 Trends Gap Analysis and determination of Significance and Compliance with a risk assessment.

• Ecological Assessment (Designated Sites).

The assessment has considered the following scenarios:

• Baseline Year / Model Verification – 2009: considers measured pollutant levels and traffic characteristics in the study area.

• Do Nothing (DN) Future Baseline – 2015: takes into account the predicted traffic flows in the Traffic Reliability Area (TRA) assuming that the proposed improvement does not take place.

• Do Something (DS) Opening Year with proposed scheme in 2015: takes into account the predicted traffic flow in the year of opening on the proposed options assuming that the proposed scheme is constructed.

• DN Future Baseline – 2030: takes into account the predicted traffic flows in the TRA assuming that the proposed improvement does not take place.

• DS Design Year with the proposed scheme – 2030: 15 years after opening for operation.

The Local Air Quality Assessment considers the number and location of receptors subjected to a potential change in air quality and compares it against UK air quality standards and objectives in the scenarios listed above. Changes in local traffic flow characteristics resulting from the operation of the proposed scheme has the potential to impact on air quality at properties near to roads affected by the proposed scheme. Particular attention is paid to the locations of the young, the elderly and other susceptible populations, such as schools, care homes and hospitals.




Local and Project Specific Monitoring Data

As outlined in Section 4.3, a number of LPAs were contacted specifically to outline scheme proposals and to obtain local air quality monitoring data (LPA diffusion tube and continuous monitor data).

Monitoring data over five years (2006 to 2010) was collected from these LPAs to establish the baseline concentration of NO2 and PM10. A six month NO2

monitoring survey was undertaken using diffusion tubes to support the air quality assessment.

Both continuous monitors and diffusion tube sites with suitable data capture representations of locations modelled within the study area. This data has used to inform the air quality assessment and to verify dispersion modelling results. Details of this monitoring programme and the locations of monitoring sites used in the assessment are presented in the Air Quality Technical Report provided in Appendix B1.

Background NOx, NO2 and PM10 Concentrations

Defra background maps have been produced for a base year of 2010, with the concentration calibrated against monitoring data collected in that year. Analysis across the Automatic Urban and Rural Network (AURN) air quality monitoring stations suggests that NOx concentrations were, on average, approximately 15% higher in 2010 than both preceding and following years. Following consultation with the Highways Agency and subsequent advice from Defra, it was decided that the use of 2010 monitoring data as the base year could skew the predictive modelling assessment. It was agreed that the use of 2009 monitoring data was more appropriate. Traffic consultants also confirmed that there would be little difference between 2009 and 2010 traffic data. Consequently, the base year was set as 2009, but using 2010 traffic data.

The NOx backgrounds were converted to NO2, using Defra’s NO2 Background Sector Tool (v3.2), following a Defra-issued protocol that removed the high influence of 2010 NO2 concentrations from the projected maps6. The 2010 maps were projected to provide 2009 backgrounds for the Base Year modelling, also based on advice from Defra.

Traffic Data

The air quality assessment was undertaken using traffic data for the Base Year (2010)7, Opening Year (2015) and Design Year (2030). The traffic data was provided within a Traffic Reliability Area (TRA), an area considered to have the potential to be significantly and reliably influenced by the proposed scheme. As outlined in Section 4.4.4, due to differences in traffic flow predictions in overlapping areas in the EMMITAM and SWAMM traffic models, a hybrid data set was generated for the environmental assessment. The methodology provided by the Highways Agency for the generation of the hybrid traffic data

6Defra (2012), How can I remove the influence of higher NO2 concentrations in 2010 from the

background maps? [online at: http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/laqm-faqs/faq136.html], accessed December 2012. 7 The modelled traffic data was modelled for 2010 but used as 2009 traffic data.




set is presented in Appendix 4 of the Air Quality Technical Report (Appendix B1).

Representative Meteorological Data

Meteorological data from Robin Hood Airport, the nearest suitable data source for 2009, has been used in the assessment. This year corresponds to the availability of monitoring data, and allows for verification of modelled outputs with the meteorological data for 2009. The predominant wind direction is from the south to westerly quadrant and is associated with the highest wind speeds. The 2009 wind rose from Watnall and Robin Hood Airport is shown in Appendix 5 of the Air Quality Technical Report (Appendix B1).

Relevant Sensitive Receptors of Public Exposure

Relevant receptors (residential, hospitals, schools and care homes) within 200m of the road network which meet the DMRB HA207(07) air quality scoping criteria were identified within the study area using the Ordnance Survey (OS) Address Layer 2 dataset. Detailed air quality dispersion modelling was undertaken to calculate pollutant concentrations at the façades of these receptor locations.

Long Term Nitrogen Dioxide Trends

Defra issues guidance on future NO2 emissions trends8. In April 2012, Defra published a report9 to address concerns that background concentrations and vehicle emissions were not reducing with time at the rate estimated in LAQM.TG(09). In line with this new report, a review of monitoring data provided by the LPAs was undertaken to identify recent trends in NO2 concentrations to determine if recent changes in background concentrations followed the annual trends identified in LAQM TG(09), or confirm the findings of the Defra report10.

Defra’s April 2012 report indicates that it may be appropriate to use a combination of assumptions about both background concentrations and emissions factors where, both background and roadside monitoring data do not appear to be declining. These can then be used to adjust future projected concentrations based on the methods contained in LAQM.TG(09), essentially forming a ‘gap analysis’ to assess future concentrations more conservatively and in-line with the average national trends in monitoring data that have been observed. The gap analysis factors may then be applied to the modelling results to assess the likely maximum predicted concentrations for future years for a more realistic view of prevailing conditions.

In response to this Defra report the Highways Agency issued an IAN 170/12 which provides supplementary advice to users of DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1 (HA207/07) on how to adjust verified modelled NO2 concentrations to account for the long term NO2 profiles. The methodology outlined in IAN170/12

8 LAQM Technical Guidance TG(09)

9 Defra (2012). Note on projecting NO2 Concentrations.

10 Defra (2011) Trends in NOx and NO2 Emissions and Ambient Measurements in the UK.




v3 together with supplementary information11 identified in Section 3 of that IAN and presented in Appendix 3 of the Air Quality Technical Report (Appendix B1) was used in this assessment. The Highways Agency requires that, “this guidance should be used forthwith on relevant projects in England, where air quality assessments are undertaken”.

Dispersion Model Verification (including Assumptions and Limitations)

Detailed modelling was undertaken with advanced air quality dispersion model; Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling System (ADMS)-Roads (Version 3.1) for the Base Year and DN and DS scenarios in the assessment years. The main input parameters required for the detailed modelling undertaken include:

• The Emissions Factors Toolkit (Version 5.1.3) – used to calculate vehicle emissions based on vehicle fleet composition, traffic speeds and road type for the different time profiles.

• Meteorological data from Robin Hood Airport (see Appendix 5 of the Air Quality Technical Report (Appendix B1)).

• All road links were set at ground level. Variations in predicted dispersion associated with geographical locations were considered in the verification exercise to improve the performance of the model under these circumstances.

There are numerous components that contribute to the uncertainty of air quality modelling predictions. Dispersion models rely on the output from traffic models, which themselves have an inherent uncertainty. There are additional uncertainties associated with vehicle fleets in the study area conforming to a national or regional composition; emissions per vehicle correspond to those factors published by Defra; meteorological conditions at the study area are the same as those at the location from which the data was derived; and that the dispersion of pollutants conforms to the algorithms utilised in the model. Road geometries and road widths were established in accordance with a model setup note12 provided by the Highways Agency. Consequently, an important stage in the process is the verification of model results against real-time measurements, as this can allow for the combined uncertainties found within the model to be evaluated.

Verification of the model was undertaken for a baseline year where predicted emissions concentrations can be compared against real monitoring data. Traffic data for 2010 (base year) were modelled using an appropriate meteorological data set. Monitoring data obtained from national and LPA monitoring programmes, together with additional targeted monitoring undertaken by the Highways Agency were used in the verification process.

Modelled NOx and NO2 concentrations for 2009 were compared with the available monitoring data, and model verification was undertaken following guidance detailed in LAQM. TG(09). The model verification factors calculated

11

Note on Highways Agency’s Interim Alternative Long Term Annual Projection Factors (LTTE6) for Annual Mean NO2 and NOx Concentrations Between 2008 and 2030. 12

HA PSF Technical note Ref SMDH-M1j39-42-030-TN002-V2




for the base year (2009) were applied to the projected base year and assessment years (2015 and 2030) results.

The model verification review, undertaken in conjunction with the Highways Agency suggested that adjustment factors, broadly based on geographical locations be applied to the modelled concentrations. The zones identified are summarised in Appendix B1.

In the absence of sufficient PM10 monitoring data for verification, the road NOx

adjustment factor was applied to the modelled road PM10 concentrations. Details of the model verification and adjustment procedures followed are provided in Appendix B1.

Presentation of Results and Evaluation of Significance

The Highways Agency has provided advice on the use of a test for evaluating the significant air quality effects to help inform the decision making process in IAN 174/13 (see Section 3.7 Appendix B1).

The Highways Agency’s approach requires the focus to be on any receptor already in, or with the potential to be in, exceedence of air quality objectives likely to be affected by the scheme. The methodology requires the assessor to determine whether the scheme results in improvements; no change; or worsening of any existing exceedences, how many receptors will be affected, the magnitude of change and the number of properties constituting a significant effect. The methodology then requires a professional judgement as to whether the impact of the proposed scheme is significant or not.

Risk Assessment of Compliance

The NPPF also gives consideration to local air quality and informs the competent authority that policies should sustain compliance with the EU Directive on ambient air quality and clean air for Europe (2008/50/EC), and national objectives for pollutants. The Highways Agency provided guidance for the assessment of compliance in IAN 175/13. This guidance is to be implemented in combination with Defra’s National Compliance reporting. The compliance risk assessment also informs judgement on significance of the scheme impacts.

Where the proposed scheme is provisionally judged to be at high risk of non-compliance with the EU Directive, guidance is provided on the production of a Scheme Air Quality Action Plan (SAQAP), which contains the relevant mitigation actions required in reducing the risk of non-compliance. The SAQAP may also be developed to support schemes identified as having a significant air quality effects as set out in IAN 174/13.

5.3.3 Ecologically Sensitive Receptors (Designated Sites)

HA207/07 requires an assessment of potential impact of the propose scheme on ecologically designated sites in the study area. There are sensitive ecologically sensitive receptors within the study area. This assessment has therefore been undertaken.




Adjusted modelled NOx at Designed site in the Base and Opening Year and Design Year scenarios (DN and DS) were compared to the limit value for vegetation of (30µg/m3).

N-deposition rates have been derived by calculating the road NO2 dry deposition rate using verified annual mean NO2 concentrations and adding this to 5km x 5km square average N-deposition rate from UK Air Pollution Information System (APIS)13.

5.3.4 Regional Emissions Assessment

The DMRB assessment of the contribution of the scheme to regional emissions is based on the total annual emissions of pollutants over the study area. The pollutants considered are total hydrocarbons (HCs), NOx, PM10 and carbon dioxide (CO2).

The DMRB regional assessment calculation uses the traffic characteristics and road length for each link in the traffic network area. Total annual emissions for the base year (2009), DN and DS scenarios for the opening year (2015) and design year (2030) are determined.

5.3.5 WebTAG Assessment

A WebTAG local assessment was undertaken in accordance with the Air Quality Sub Objective14 August 2012.

5.4 Study Area and Baseline Conditions

5.4.1 Study Area

HA 207/07 in paragraph 3.12 sets out qualifying criteria for defining `affected links’ to be included in the local air quality study area. This was applied to all hybrid traffic links within the scheme TRA to identify the affected links (in the opening and design year), and all links within 200m of those affected links.

A review of the screened traffic data (the affected road network) has identified changes in traffic which trigger the DMRB air quality criteria beyond the immediate vicinity of the scheme. The air quality assessment considered this wider geographical area. The extent of the study area shown on Figure 5 provided in Appendix 11 of the Air Quality Assessment Technical Report provided in Appendix B1.

The DMRB Regional Assessment was undertaken as described in HA 207/07 paragraph 3.20.

The study area for the construction effects is defined by HA 207/07 as within 200m of constructional activities.

13

UK Air Pollution Information System (APIS), www.apis.ac.uk 14

http://www.dft.gov.uk/webtag/index.php




5.4.2 Traffic Conditions

Road traffic can have a major impact on local air quality. Traffic volumes on the M1 between J28 and 31 are greatest between J28 and 29, with 61,461 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) on the NB carriageway and 59,167 AADT on the SB carriageway, with peak periods flows of about 4,921 and 4,506 vehicles per hour respectively. Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) average between 13% to 18% of the total traffic flow depending on the section of the motorway and the time of day.

5.4.3 Local Air Quality

ADC, BDC, CDC, EBC, NEDDC, RMBC and SCC all manage networks of roadside NO2 diffusion tube and continuous monitoring devices within their respective administrative areas. Where local authority data was lacking, monitoring data collected on behalf of the Highways Agency was also evaluated and used where appropriate. Monitored annual mean NO2 concentrations in 2009 ranged from 23 to 78µg/m3, at locations representative of public exposure (Section 4 of Appendix B1). Concentrations at these monitoring locations were dependent on their proximity to emission sources i.e. the volume of traffic on the surrounding road network.

The results for 2009 indicate that many of the monitoring locations exceed the annual mean NO2 objective.

5.4.4 Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs)

There are four existing AQMAs located adjacent to the highway boundary alignment of the M1 between J28 to 31. The AQMAs were declared as it was predicted that they would exceed the annual mean NO2 national air quality objective in 2010:

• South Normanton AQMA (1 to 23 Carter Lane East, South Normanton (J28), Bolsover District Council): The AQMA encompasses 12 properties and their gardens, 1 to 23 (odd) on the east side of the M1. The area extends 100m east of the main carriageway (not including the slip road).

• Barlborough AQMA No.1 (14 Chesterfield Road, Barlborough (J30), Bolsover District Council): The closest property to the A619/A616 roundabout.

• Barlborough AQMA No.2 (17-25 Orchard Close, Barlborough (J30), Bolsover District Council): Residential dwellings where the western property boundaries border the M1.

• Rotherham AQMA 1 – Part 3 (Wales, Rotherham (J30 to 31), Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council): An area of the settlement of Wales, Rotherham encompassing a small number of properties on either side of the M1 where the B6059, School Road, crosses the motorway.

In the wider study area, 11 other AQMAs have been declared for NO2 (see Figure 1 in Appendix B1).

• Barnsley AQMA No.1: An area along the M1 between J35a and J38, including Haigh, Darton, Cawthorne Dike, Higham, Dodworth, Gilroyd,




Rockley, Birdwell and Tankersley. The area extends 100m either side of the central reservation.

• Erewash Borough Council AQMA No.1: Five dwellings east of the M1 motorway, at Sandiacre, north of J25.

• Erewash Borough Council AQMA No.2: Dwellings situated to the south of J25 in Long Eaton.

• Broxtowe Borough Council AQMA No.1: AQMA No.2; AQMA No.3 and AQMA No.4: Properties next to the M1 motorway in Trowell, Nottingham.

• Sheffield City Council Citywide AQMA: An area covering entire eastern part of the City containing the major built up areas (now declared for annual and 1-hour nitrogen dioxide objectives, and the 24-hour PM10 objective).

• Rotherham AQMA 1 Part 1: An area along the M1 between Upper Whiston (in the east) and the boundary with Sheffield City Council to the west and extending on either side to encompass Brinsworth and Catcliffe.

• Rotherham AQMA 1 Part 2: An area to the west of the M1 motorway between Meadowbank Road to the south and New Droppingwell Road to the north and extending east to West Hill Kimberworth.

• Rotherham AQMA 1 Part 4: Encompassing the area next to the M1 around Barber Wood Road and New Droppingwell Road in Blackburn.

Figure 1 of the Air Quality Assessment Technical Report provided in Appendix B1 shows the locations of these AQMAs.

5.4.5 Public Exposure Receptors

Construction Phase

A total of 912 residential properties, one school and one care home are located within 200m of potential construction activities between M1 J28 and J31.

Operation Phase

There are 3750 (opening year) and 7938 (design year) potentially sensitive receptors within 200m of the air quality study area as defined by the affected links criteria in HA 207/07 paragraph 3.12.

5.4.6 Ecologically Sensitive Receptors (Designated Sites)

One Site of Special Scientific Interest, Bogs Farm Quarry, meets the DMRB qualifying criteria as it is situated within 200m of the proposed scheme. Unit 2 (Broadleaved, mixed and yew woodland – lowland) are nitrogen (N) sensitive and have been assigned a critical load for N-deposition. The site location is shown within Figure 1 of Appendix B1.




5.5 Impact Assessment

5.5.1 Construction Phase Impacts

At the time of this assessment, though the locations of major infrastructure had been identified, the exact duration of construction activities and information on construction traffic were not available. The greatest potential impact on air quality from traffic associated with the construction phase will be immediately adjacent to the site access and working areas. Approximately 400 construction vehicles are projected to arrive at the main construction compound (Markham Vale (M1 J29a)) each day. The NO2 contribution from the construction traffic compared to existing traffic flows are expected to be negligible due to the low traffic volume expected.

During the construction phase, there will be a number of activities undertaken that have the potential to generate and/or re-suspend dust and PM10. These will include excavation at proposed gantry and ERA locations. As outlined in the Section 5.3.1, properties within 200m of these locations are expected to experience deterioration in air quality for the duration of the work. This impact would be temporary in nature and short term. Excavations activities will also be required for drainage trenches, cable ducts, foundation at cabinet locations and access to cabinet sites. Sections of the existing hard shoulder will be strengthened with a 330 mm thick inlay and vehicle restraint systems will be replaced for the full length of the verges. Dust will also be generated during implementation of the landscaping programme.

In order to evaluate the magnitude and extent of potential adverse impacts likely to result from the proposed scheme the following construction activities have been assumed:

• Site clearance and preparation.

• Storage of materials.

• Erection of gantries; construction of ERAs and installation of associated infrastructure.

• Laying of hard surfaces.

• Landscaping.

Depending on wind direction, speed and turbulence, the greatest potential for nuisance problems associated with dust deposition/soiling is likely to be within 100m15 of the maximum extent of the site perimeter. There may be limited incidences of increased dust deposited on properties beyond this distance.

Local data from the Robin Hood Airport meteorological station indicates that the prevailing winds with the potential to generate windblown dust are from south-south-west. As a consequence, properties located to the north-north-east of any construction works are predicted to be those most affected by construction dust emissions.

A total of 914 sensitive receptors were identified within a distance of 200m of the proposed construction activities where the effects of construction activities

15

http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/mps2annex1




could lead to dust and PM10 impacts. However only those within 200m of the major equipment locations (gantries and ERA) are expected to be subject to a temporary deterioration in air quality during the construction period (see Appendix B1, Table 36). Dust generation associated with other construction activities such as cable installation are expected to generate less dust and therefore have less potential for impact. Depending on wind direction, speed and turbulence, the greatest potential for nuisance associated with dust deposition/soiling is likely to be within 100m16 of the maximum extent of the site perimeter. There may be limited incidences of increased dust deposited on properties beyond this distance.

Figure 2.1 (Appendix A3) shows the locations of sensitive receptors in the study area relative to proposed infrastructure locations. Depending on wind direction, speed and turbulence, the greatest potential for nuisance problems associated with dust deposition/soiling is likely to be within 100m16 of the maximum extent of the site perimeter. There may be limited incidences of increased dust deposited on properties beyond this distance (see Appendix B1, Table 37).

5.5.2 Operational Phase Impacts

A screening assessment carried out in accordance with the principles of the DMRB air quality assessment methodology identified areas having the potential to approach or exceed air quality objectives for NO2 with or without the proposed scheme. Detailed modelling for the base year, opening year (2015) and Design Year (2030) (with and without the scheme) was undertaken.

In agreement with the Highways Agency, it was considered that all areas where receptors had the potential to be exposed to annual average NO2 concentration greater than 36µg/m3 be assessed. Full results of the air quality assessment by addresses are provided in Appendix B1.

A Detailed Assessment was carried out in accordance with the DMRB air quality assessment methodology using traffic forecasts based on a maximum speed of 60mph operating between 07:00 and 19:00; seven days a week. The potential impact of the proposed scheme in both the opening year (2015) and the design year (2030) has been assessed.

Base Year (2009)

There were 488 modelled exceedences of the annual mean NO2 objective in 2009. These exceedences are predominantly found at relevant receptors in close proximity (typically within 50m) to the motorway across the motorway network.

A maximum concentration of 60.5µg/m3 was predicted at receptor TB0449 at M1 Tinsley junction. This figure is above the 60µg/m3 threshold for an annual mean (LAQM TG(09)), above which the 1 hour mean NO2 objective is expected to be exceeded. This is the only one relevant receptor that is predicted to exceed 60µg/m3 as an annual mean NO2 concentration.

16

http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/mps2annex1




There are no modelled exceedences of the annual mean PM10 objective in 2009, and no concentrations are greater than 32µg/m3. Therefore exceedence of the 24 hour mean PM10 objective is unlikely in 2009.

Opening Year (2015)

A summary of the detailed dispersion modelled annual mean NO2 and PM10 concentrations across the study area is presented in Table 5.3 below. Receptors which experience the highest or greatest change in concentrations, or new exceedences of the annual mean NO2 objective, as a result of the proposed scheme, or are no longer in exceedence as a result of the proposed scheme have been quantified.

Table 5.3: Summary of 2015 Annual Mean NO2 and PM10 Concentrations for the DN and DS across the Study Area

Pollutant

LAQM

TG (09)

NO2

Gap

Factored

NO2

PM10

Annual Mean Objective Limit (µg/m3) 40 40 40

DN Exceedences 17 461 0

DS Exceedences 15 459 0

New Exceedences 0 1 0

Number of

Properties

> 40µg/m3

Removal of Exceedences 2 3 0

Improvement in

Concentration 1820 1965 224

Deterioration in

Concentration 238 312 76

Total Number of

Properties

No Change in Concentration 1692 1473 3450

Maximum Worsening 0.7 0.9 0.1 DS-DM Annual

Mean Change

(µg/m3) Maximum Benefit -3.5 -4.8 -0.1

Exceedences of the annual mean NO2 objective in 2015 are predicted in both the DN scenario (461 exceedences) and DS scenario (459 exceedences).

When compared to the DN scenario, a total of 1965 properties in the study area received a decrease in NO2 concentration as a result of the proposed scheme with a maximum decrease of 4.8µg/m3. Of the properties subject to a decrease in NO2 concentrations, 305 properties are in exceedence of the annual mean objective limit of 40µg/m3 with three properties predicted to be taken out of exceedence.




A total of 312 properties are predicted to receive an increase in NO2 concentration as a result of the proposed scheme with a maximum increase of 0.9µg/m3. Of the properties predicted to experience an increase in NO2, 37 properties are in exceedence of the annual mean objective limit of 40µg/m3 with one property taken into exceedence.

Receptors that exceed the annual mean NO2 objective are within 50m of the motorways. These exceedences are primarily attributed to traffic emissions due to high volumes of AADT and HDV traffic flows on the motorway network. Further discussion of these results can be found later in this section.

There are no predicted exceedences of the annual mean or the 24 hour mean PM10 AQS objectives in the Opening Year in the DN or DS scenarios. Therefore, PM10 requires no further consideration.

Design Year (2030)

In the screening assessment undertaken for 2030, traffic flows were predicted to increase by more than 1000 AADT between J25 and J28, J29 to 41 on the M1 and on the A617 off J29. An increase in HGVs as a result of `switching’ from the M42 was predicted on the A38 north of Derby to J28 of the M1. Traffic flows were also predicted to fall along sections of the A61 between Clay Cross and Dronfield.

A summary of the modelled annual mean NO2 and PM10 concentrations across the study area for the Design Year are presented in Table 5.4.

Table 5.4: Summary of 2030 Annual Mean NO2 and PM10 Concentrations for the DN and DS across the Study Area

Pollutant TG(09) - NO2

Gap Factored - NO2

PM10

Annual Mean Objective Limit (µg/m3)

40 40 40

DN Exceedences 0 1 0

DS Exceedences 0 1 0

New Exceedences 0 0 0

Number of Properties

> 40µg/m3

Removal of Exceedences

0 0 0

Improvement in Concentration

381 445 62

Deterioration in Concentration

4274 4773 1834

Total Number of Properties

No Change in 3283 2720 6042




Pollutant TG(09) - NO2

Gap Factored - NO2

PM10

Annual Mean Objective Limit (µg/m3)

40 40 40

Concentration

Maximum Worsening 1.2 2.6 0.3 DS-DN Annual Mean Change (µg/m

3)

Maximum Benefit -1.8 -3.1 -0.1

The results of the 2030 Design Year assessment indicate that the number of receptors predicted to exceed NO2 annual mean objective limit in the DN scenario fell from 461 in the 2015 study area to one in the enlarged 2030 study area as background air pollutants fall and vehicle emissions control technologies are enforced.

In the DS scenario, one property is predicted to exceed the annual average objective limit of 40µg/m3. This property is also predicted to exceed the objective in the DN scenario (without the proposed scheme in 2030). The proposed therefore does not result in a new exceedence.

A total of 445 properties in the study area received a decrease in NO2 concentration (with a maximum of 0.1µg/m3) whilst 4773 properties received an increase in NO2 concentration of a maximum of 0.3µg/m3.

The modelling of PM10 has indicated that the maximum predicted concentration in the study area, in either the DN or DS scenario was 21.3µg/m3 as an annual mean. The maximum predicted change in annual mean PM10 was a worsening of 0.3µg/m3. Therefore, it is concluded that there is no risk of exceedence of the air quality objectives for PM10, as a result of the proposed scheme.

A summary of the results of detailed modelling for each geographical area is presented in Appendix B1, Section 5.8, Tables 18 to 28 and illustrated in Figures 35 to 58.

See Appendix B1: Figure 20 and 21 for the location of predicted NO2 and PM10 changes in the study area.

The DMRB local air quality assessment identified a number of geographical areas which exhibit the trends in traffic and air quality changes as a result of the proposed scheme. These geographic areas have been defined by the identified sensitive receptors within the air quality study area. The areas are:

• Erewash (J25)

• Broxtowe (J26)

• Bolsover (J28)

• Barlborough (J30)

• Wales (J30 to 31)




• Blackburn, Tinsley and Brinsworth (J33 to 35)

• Duckmanton (J29a) Design Year only

• Aston (J31) Design Year only

• A38 north of Derby to J28, Design Year only

• A61 (Clay Cross to Dronfield) Design Year only and

• A617 (at J29) Design Year only

Detailed summaries of the local air quality assessment for the opening and design years in these areas are presented in the Air Quality Assessment Technical Report provided in Appendix B1. Appendix 9 and 10 of the Air Quality Technical Report (Appendix B1) provides details of the change in concentration of NO2 at modelled sensitive receptors in the opening and design year respectively. A summary of geographical areas along the M1 J32 to 35a is provided below:

M1 J25 Erewash (J25)

In the opening year, there are 117 NO2 annual mean objective limit exceedences, with or without the proposed scheme. No exceedences were created or removed by the proposed scheme. No receptors were predicted to experience a deterioration in air quality and the maximum predicted decrease in NO2 concentration was 0.1µg/m3.

There were no NO2 annual mean objective limit exceedences with or without the proposed scheme in the design year. The maximum increase in NO2 concentration was 0.3µg/m3 at receptor E628 which is still below the annual mean objective limit of 40µg/m3 NO2. No properties received an improvement in air quality as a result of the proposed scheme in 2030.

Broxtowe (J26)

In the opening year, 5 properties are predicted to be in exceedence of the NO2 annual mean objective limit, with or without the proposed scheme. No exceedences were created or removed by the proposed scheme. No receptors were predicted to experience a deterioration in air quality and the maximum predicted decrease in NO2 concentration was 0.1µg/m3.

There were no NO2 annual mean objective limit exceedences with or without the proposed scheme in the design year. The maximum increase in NO2 concentration was 0.5µg/m3 at receptor ABX61 which remains below the 40µg/m3 annual mean objective limit of NO2. No properties received an improvement in air quality as a result of the proposed scheme in 2030.

Bolsover (J28)

In the opening year, 9 properties are predicted to be in exceedence of the NO2 annual mean objective limit, with or without the proposed scheme. One exceedence (B266) situated approximately 35m from the SB offslip carriageway at J28 is predicted to be removed by the proposed scheme. The maximum predicted increase in NO2 concentration is 0.7µg/m3 at a property




already in exceedence and the maximum predicted decrease in NO2 concentration is at B200 with a concentration of 4.8µg/m3.

There were no NO2 annual mean objective limit exceedences with or without the proposed scheme in the opening year. The maximum increase in NO2 concentration was 2.1µg/m3 at receptor B611, north of J28 which remains below the 40µg/m3 annual mean objective limit of NO2. The maximum predicted decrease in NO2 concentration is of 3.1µg/m3 at property B200.

Barlborough (J30)

In the opening year, 49 properties are predicted to be in exceedence of the NO2 annual mean objective limit, with or without the proposed scheme. One exceedence (BARL116) situated approximately 90m from the SB carriageway is predicted to be removed by the proposed scheme. The maximum predicted increase in NO2 concentration is 0.5µg/m3 at a property already in exceedence and the maximum predicted decrease in NO2 concentration is at another property already in exceedence with a concentration of 0.5µg/m3.

Five NO2 annual mean objective limit exceedences are predicted to be removed by the proposed scheme in the design year. No NO2 annual mean objective limit exceedences were generated by the proposed scheme. The maximum increase in NO2 concentration was 2.6µg/m3 at a property which remains below the 40µg/m3 annual mean objective limit of NO2. The maximum predicted decrease in NO2 concentration is of 0.7µg/m3.

Wales (J30-31)

In the opening year, 4 properties are predicted to be in exceedence of the NO2 annual mean objective limit, with or without the proposed scheme. No exceedence are created or removed by the proposed scheme. The maximum predicted increase in NO2 concentration is 0.2µg/m3 at a property already in exceedence and the maximum predicted decrease in NO2 concentration is at of concentration of 0.3µg/m3.

There were no NO2 annual mean objective limit exceedences with or without the proposed scheme in the design year. The maximum increase in NO2 concentration was 2.0µg/m3 at a property (W092) which remains below the 40µg/m3 annual mean objective limit of NO2. No properties received an improvement in air quality as a result of the proposed scheme.

Ecologically Sensitive Receptors (Designated Sites)

Bogs Farm Quarry SSSI lies within 92m of a section of the M1 which meets the DMRB qualifying criteria. A summary of the results of detailed dispersion modelling of NOx and N-deposition are presented in Appendix B1: Section 5.9, Tables 29 and 30 and the location of the modelled sites are shown on Figure 59 of the Air Quality Technical Report.

NOx Concentrations

The results indicated that the limit value of vegetation 30µg/m3 is exceeded at all modelled points within 130m of the motorway alignment for the DN and DS scenarios, in all assessment years. However, the implementation of the




proposed scheme is not predicted to increase annual NOx concentrations in either the opening or design years at Bogs Farm Quarry SSSI.

N-Deposition

Annual mean background 5km x 5km N-deposition rate estimates for this site are detailed in the table below.

Table 5.5: Annual Mean N-deposition Rate for Bogs Farm Quarry SSSI

Total Dry Deposition of N (kg N ha-1

yr-1

) Distance

from edge of SB M1

carriageway (m)

Base 2009

Base 2015

DN 2015

DS 2015

DS-DN

DN 2030

Base 2030

DS 2030

DS-DN

92 47.8 44.3 44.9 44.9 0.0 32.4 33.0 33.1 0.0

100 47.8 44.2 44.9 44.9 0.0 32.3 33.0 33.0 0.0

110 47.7 44.2 44.8 44.8 0.0 32.3 32.9 33.0 0.0

120 47.6 44.2 44.7 44.7 0.0 32.3 32.9 32.9 0.0

130 47.5 44.1 44.6 44.6 0.0 32.3 32.8 32.9 0.0

140 47.5 44.1 44.6 44.6 0.0 32.3 32.8 32.8 0.0

150 47.4 44.0 44.5 44.5 0.0 32.3 32.8 32.8 0.0

160 47.3 44.0 44.5 44.5 0.0 32.3 32.7 32.8 0.0

170 47.3 44.0 44.4 44.4 0.0 32.3 32.7 32.7 0.0

180 47.2 44.0 44.4 44.4 0.0 32.3 32.7 32.7 0.0

190 47.2 43.9 44.4 44.4 0.0 32.2 32.7 32.7 0.0

200 47.2 43.9 44.3 44.3 0.0 32.2 32.6 32.7 0.0

Predicted annual mean N-deposition rates at points aligned in a transect running perpendicular to the M1 southbound carriageway show that the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) critical load of 5-15kg N ha-1 yr-1 is exceeded at all modelled points within 200m of the motorway for each scenario, although it should be noted that background N-deposition rates are more than double the upper limit of the critical load classification. The implementation of the scheme is not predicted to increase or decrease N-deposition rates at Bogs Farm Quarry SSSI.

5.5.3 Significance Assessment

This assessment was undertaken in accordance with the IAN174/13. Evaluation of Significant Local Air Quality Effects; for users of DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1. A summary of the Significance Assessment for the opening year (2015) is provided in Table 5.6.

Table 5.6: Local Air Quality Receptors Informing Scheme Significance (2015)

Magnitude of Change in

Annual Average NO2 or PM10

(µg/m³)

Total Number of Receptors with:




Worsening of air quality

objective already above

objective or creation of a

new exceedence

Improvement of an air

quality objective already

above objective or the

removal of an existing

exceedence

Large (>4) 0 0

Medium (>2 to 4) 0 0

Small (>0.4 to 2) 8 10

As presented in Table 5.3, there were 461 sensitive receptors predicted to be in exceedence of annual mean NO2 concentrations within the study area in the Opening Year without the scheme. The proposed scheme introduces one additional exceedence and removed three others. Of the receptors in exceedence, 8 potential sensitive receptors in exceedence of annual mean NO2 concentrations within the study area received a small (>0.4 to 2µg/m3) worsening of air quality objective, with no receptors receiving either a medium of large worsening.

Ten potential sensitive receptors in exceedence of annual mean NO2 concentrations within the study area received a small (>0.4 to 2µg/m3) improvement of the air quality objective with no receptors receiving either a medium of large improvement.

A summary of the Significance Assessment for 2030 is provided in Table 5.7.

Table 5.7: Local Air Quality Receptors Informing Scheme Significance (2030)

Magnitude of Change in Annual Average NO2 or PM10

(µg/m³)

Total Number of Receptors with:

Worsening of air quality objective already above

objective or creation of a new exceedence

Improvement of an air quality objective

already above objective or the

removal of an existing exceedence

Large (>4) 0 0

Medium (>2 to 4) 0 0

Small (>0.4 to 2) 1 0

Only one sensitive receptor was predicted to be in exceedence of annual mean NO2 concentrations within the study area in the design year both with and without the scheme. The single sensitive receptors in exceedence of annual mean NO2 objective within the study area in the design year, received a small (>0.4 to 2µg/m3) worsening of air quality objective.




In the opening year the introduction of a maximum speed of 60mph between 07:00 and 19:00 constrained traffic growth such that only one annual average NO2 exceedence was created and three properties were removed, all on properties already at or close to exceedence. In the design year, with the introduction of enhanced engine technologies with reduced emissions and lower predicted background pollutant levels, only one property was predicted to be in exceedence of the annual average NO2 objective. Predicted increase in traffic levels associated with the scheme resulted in small increases in emissions and hence receptor pollutant concentrations. However, predicted pollutant levels remained well below EU limit values and UK objectives. Consequently the implementation of the proposed scheme with a maximum speed of 60mph between 07:00 and 19:00 on air quality was not significant using professional judgment and the terms of reference of the IAN 174/13.

5.5.4 Compliance

The compliance assessment was undertaken in accordance with guidance provided by the Highways Agency through the IAN 175/13 Risk Assessment of Compliance with EU Directive on Ambient Air Quality; for users of DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1 (see Appendix 8).

A summary of the Compliance Assessment for 2015 is provided in Appendix B1: Section 5.11, Table 33.

The PCM road links identified as part of the compliance assessment experience small increases in traffic flows and speeds. This, together with the widening of the moving carriageway, has the potential to increase predicted NO2 concentrations in DS-DN above 1% (0.4µg/m3 for annual mean NO2). However, the guidance suggests that this increase will not affect Defra compliance dates at the links identified and so risk may be described as Low.

5.5.5 WebTAG Appraisal

A WebTAG appraisal has been completed in respect of NO2 and PM10 exposure. This appraisal has been developed using the WebTAG methodology which considers individual links in isolation. The results of this appraisal are provided as required by DMRB guidance, in Table 5.8 and Table 5.9 below.

The proposed scheme is anticipated to lead to an improvement in air quality (exposure to PM10 concentrations) overall.

The results (Table 5.8) show that air quality would be improve (reduced pollution concentrations) at 279 properties, would deteriorate (increased pollution concentrations) at 146 properties, and remain the same (no change) at 4281 properties.

Overall 144 properties within the AQMA experience worsened air quality; 35 properties experience improved air quality and 1306 properties experience no changes.

No properties experience exceedence of the annual mean PM10 EU Limit Value. No properties are demolished or constructed as a result of the proposed scheme.




Table 5.8: Local Air Quality Results for PM10

PM10 Summary of

Routes: The

Aggregated Table

0-50m

(i)

50-100m

(ii)

100-150m

(iii)

150-200m

(iv)

0-200m

(v=i+ii+iii+iv)

Total properties

across all routes

(min)

101 972 1674 1959 4706

Total properties

across all routes

(some)

101 972 1674 1959 4706

DN PM10

assessment

Total assessment PM10 (I):

Across all routes

2548.70 19760.90 31278.10 35676.20

89263.90

DS PM10

assessment

Total assessment PM10 (II):

Across all routes

2551.90 19751.00 31266.10 35681.80

89250.80

Net total assessment for PM10, all routes (II-I) -13.10

Number of properties with an improvement 279

Number of properties with no change 4281

Number of properties with a deterioration 146

The proposed scheme is anticipated to lead to a deterioration in air quality (exposure to NO2 concentrations) overall.

The proposed scheme is anticipated to lead to improvement in air quality (reduced pollution concentrations) at 1549 properties, deteriorated (increased pollution concentrations) at 1006 properties, and stay the same (no change) at 2151 properties.

Overall 553 properties within the AQMA experience worsened air quality, 500 properties experience improved air quality and 432 properties experience no changes.

No properties are demolished or constructed as a result of the proposed scheme.




Table 5.9: Local Air Quality Results for NO2

NO2 Summary of

Routes: The

Aggregated Table

0-50m

(i)

50-100m

(ii)

100-150m

(iii)

150-200m

(iv)

0-200m

(v=i+ii+iii+iv)

Total properties

across all routes

(min)

101 972 1674 1959 4706

Total properties

across all routes

(some)

101 972 1674 1959 4706

DN NO2

assessment

Total assessment NO2 (I):

Across all routes

6651.10 35858.50 43435.30 43621.90

129566.80

DS NO2

assessment

Total assessment NO2 (II):

Across all routes

6700.40 35844.30 43410.20 43602.50

129557.40

Net total assessment for NO2, all routes (II-I) -9.40

Number of properties with an improvement 1549

Number of properties with no change 2151

Number of properties with a deterioration 1006

5.5.6 Regional Assessment

The DMRB Regional Assessment was undertaken as described in HA207/07 paragraph 3.20. A total of 61 links were affected by the proposed scheme in the opening year and 247 links in the design year.

A comparison of the DN and DS scenarios indicates that there would be a small decrease in all emissions, associated with the proposed scheme in the opening year (2015) as traffic growth is constrained. The decrease in NOx and CO2 emissions was predicted to be 4.4% and 0.5% respectively.

The results indicate that there is an overall increase in all emissions from the base year (2009) which is based on the 61 links of the opening year, compared with the design year (2030) with its 247 links.

A comparison of the DN and DS scenarios for the design year indicates that there would be an increase in all emissions, associated with the proposed scheme in the opening year (2015) as traffic growth is predicted. The increase in NOx and CO2 emissions was predicted to be 9.1% and 5.5% respectively.




5.6 Mitigation Measures

Construction operations within the existing highway boundary may experience some minor impacts on air quality during construction. These will be controlled by application of industry best practice embodied in a CEMP. The CEMP will also include measure for the mitigation of dust from construction activities. Further details relating to mitigation measures than can be adopted are provided within Appendix B1: Chapter 6.

5.7 Summary

5.7.1 Construction Phase Assessment

A total of 914 sensitive receptors were identified within a distance of 200m of the proposed construction activities for the proposed scheme where the effects of construction activities could lead to dust and PM10 impacts. Appropriate mitigation measures for the control of construction dust and PM10 will be implemented during construction. Implementation of these measures should ensure that the construction impacts of the scheme are insignificant.

5.7.2 Local Air Quality Assessment

Following implementation of the proposed scheme in the Opening Year (2015), with its constraints to traffic growth 459 properties will remain in exceedence of annual average NO2 concentrations.

When compared to the DN scenario, a total of 1965 properties in the study area received a decrease in NO2 concentration as a result of the proposed scheme with a maximum decrease of 4.8µg/m3. Of the properties subject to a decrease in NO2 concentrations, 305 properties are in exceedence of the annual mean objective limit of 40µg/m3 with three properties predicted to be taken out of exceedence.

A total of 312 properties are predicted to receive an increase in NO2 concentration as a result of the proposed scheme with a maximum increase of 0.9µg/m3. Of the properties predicted to experience an increase in NO2, 37 properties are in exceedence of the annual mean objective limit of 40µg/m3 with one property taken into exceedence.

There are no predicted exceedences of the annual mean or 24 hour mean PM10 AQS Objectives in the opening year with or without any of the scheme options in 2015.

Traffic growth was predicted between the opening year (2015) and design year (2030). However, in accordance with predicted reduction in vehicle emissions, only one property is predicted to exceed annual average NO2 concentrations with and without the scheme in 2030.

No exceedences were created or removed as a result of the proposed scheme in 2030. The maximum predicted increase in annual mean NO2 as a result of the scheme was 2.6µg/m3 but remained well below EU limit values and UK objectives. The maximum predicted decrease in annual mean NO2 was 3.1µg/m3.




There are no predicted exceedences of the annual mean or 24 hour mean PM10 AQS Objectives in the Opening Year with or without any of the scheme options in 2030.

5.7.3 Assessment of Designated Sites

The proposed scheme resulted in no change in NOx concentration or N-deposition at the Bogs Farm Quarry SSSI in either the opening year or design year.

5.7.4 Significance Assessment

Of the predicted sensitive receptors in exceedence of annual mean NO2 concentrations within the study area in the opening year, eight received a small (>0.4 to 2) worsening of annual mean concentrations. No receptors receiving either a medium or large worsening of annual mean NO2 concentrations with the proposed scheme.

Ten potential sensitive receptors in exceedence of annual mean NO2 concentrations within the study area in the opening year received a small (>0.4 to 2) improvement of annual mean NO2 concentrations with no receptors receiving either a medium of large improvement with the proposed scheme.

The single receptor in exceedence of annual mean NO2 concentrations within the study area in the design year received a small (>0.4 to 2) worsening of the air quality objective.

With only one exceedence created and three removed as a result of the proposed scheme in the opening year, and only one property within the study area with and without the scheme in the design year, the overall impact of the scheme on air quality may be deemed as not significant by the terms of reference of the IAN 174/13.

The Defra PCM road links identified within the scheme experienced a small increase in traffic flows and speeds with the proposed scheme. This, together with the widening of the moving carriageway has the potential to increase predicted NO2 concentrations in DS-DN above 1%. One PCM link is predicted to experience a change of 0.9µg/m3. However, the guidance suggests that this increase will not affect Defra compliance dates at the links identified.

Given the constrained traffic growth in the opening year such that only one annual average NO2 exceedence was created and three properties removed, and that in the design year, one property predicted to be in exceedence of the annual average NO2 objective with or without the scheme, the implementation of the proposed scheme with a maximum speed of 60mph between 07:00 and 19:00 on air quality was not deemed significant.

5.7.5 Compliance

The PCM road links identified as part of the compliance assessment experience small increases in traffic flows and speeds. The apparent change in traffic composition, together with the widening of the moving carriageway has the potential to increase predicted NO2 concentrations in DS-DN above 1%. One PCM link is predicted to experience a change of 0.9µg/m3. However, the guidance suggests that this increase will not affect Defra compliance dates at the links identified.




5.7.6 Regional Emissions Assessment

A comparison of the DN and DS scenarios indicates that there would be a small decrease in road traffic emissions with the scheme in the opening year (2015) in regional emissions, possible associated with traffic growth constraints.

In the design year (2030) there is a small predicted increase in road traffic emissions between the DN and DS scenarios as traffic flows increase as a result of traffic growth associated with the proposed scheme.




6 Cultural Heritage


This chapter details the potential effects of the installation of the SM-ALR physical infrastructure, in particular proposed gantry structures, CCTV cameras and masts, EAV and ASE cameras at specific locations and the physical presence of these structures, on cultural heritage resources. The implementation of SM-ALR will not have any direct impacts on cultural heritage resources as the proposed scheme and any physical interventions are restricted to the motorway corridor. As a result of this, it is also anticipated that there would be no significant impacts on buried archaeological remains. This assessment does not therefore consider below-ground issues. As the proposed scheme does not include re-development proposals outside the existing highway corridor, it will not alter the character of the wider historic landscape. This assessment therefore also does not consider historic landscape character, although potential effects on individual assets such as Registered Parks and Gardens have been assessed.

Given the potential for effects on the setting of Conservation Areas, Scheduled Monuments and Listed Buildings in the visual context of the proposed scheme corridor, the scoping exercise concluded that this environmental topic is relevant to the scope of this environmental assessment.

See Appendix A4 for further details on the Environmental Scoping Report.


The following statutes, policies and plans have been considered as part of the assessment:

6.2.1 National Legislation

Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act, 1979: This Act provides protection to archaeological areas, sites and monuments and their settings through scheduling meaning scheduled sites require consent prior to any works taking place within them, or that affect their setting.

The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990: This is the primary legislation for the identification and protection of historic buildings, Conservation Areas and other elements of the historic environment. In addition to normal development controls, the Act provides specific protection for buildings and areas of special architectural or historic interest and their settings.

6.2.2 Planning Policies

The NPPF sets out the Government’s policy on planning issues and provides guidance to LPAs and project proponents on the operation of the planning system. Chapter 12 of this policy document relates to conserving and enhancing the historic environment. It states that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource and they should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance. The significance of any heritage assets which may be




affected by a proposal (including by development affecting the setting of a heritage asset) should be identified and assessed taking account of the available evidence and any necessary expertise.

Relevant regional and local policies are identified within Appendix A2: Checklist 1.

6.3 Methodology

The assessment of potential impacts of the proposed scheme on the cultural heritage resource has been undertaken in line with guidance contained in the DMRB, Volume 11, Section 3, Part 2: Cultural Heritage HA208/07 and Volume 10, Section 6, Part 1: Trunk Roads and Archaeological Mitigation, HA75/01.

In light of the lack of direct impact on cultural heritage assets, a simple level assessment has been undertaken for this assessment. The methodology for this simple level assessment has comprised the following:

• Identification of all relevant designated assets and their settings that could potentially be affected within the study area.

• Reference has also been made to the baseline information contained within the Interim Environmental Assessment Report, July 2007, prepared by Atkins.

• Interrogation of the English Heritage (EH) National Heritage List (www.list.english-heritage.org.uk) to provide details of all known World Heritage Sites, Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings, Registered Parks and Gardens and Registered Battlefields in order to establish the existing baseline.

• Information on Conservation Areas has been obtained from the relevant LPAs (See Section 4.3).

• A review and assessment of visually prominent elements of the proposed scheme (gantries, signs, CCTV masts and ASE cameras), along with areas of highway verge requiring clearance that might expose new views of the existing corridor, to determine which if any, heritage assets or their settings might be affected.

• Development and incorporation of appropriate mitigation measures to address adverse effects, where deemed necessary.

Locally Listed Buildings have not been discussed as this simple level assessment is aimed at identifying constraints on statutorily protected built heritage assets; unless they are relevant to the understanding and significance of a statutory designated site, or are being impacted by the proposed scheme.

Consultation has been undertaken with EH and South Yorkshire Archaeology Service by means of an email sent on 31 May 2012. Consultation has also been undertaken with the National Trust via a series of meetings and a walkover survey to discuss concerns about specific views from within Hardwick Hall and parkland. Information on how comments or concerns raised by these organisations have been dealt with is provided in Appendix A2: Checklist 1.




In line with the scoping report and IAN 161/13, a simple level cultural heritage assessment was undertaken for the proposed scheme. This assessment has therefore focused on the identification of potential effects on the setting of built heritage assets (Listed Buildings, Registered Parks and Gardens and Conservation Areas) within the study area. The significance of effects matrix set out in the DMRB is provided in Table 6.1.

Table 6.1: Significance of Effects Matrix for Cultural Heritage Assets

A value for each of the heritage assets has also been assigned following guidance in DMRB, Volume 11, Section 3, Part 2: Cultural Heritage HA208/07 Annex 5, 6 and 7.

Details of the identified cultural heritage constraints are provided in Appendix A2: Checklist 1 (page 25 to 31) and shown on Appendix A3: Figure 2.1.

6.3.1 Assumptions and Limitations

Other than the assumption that the likelihood of encountering unknown buried archaeological remains is low, there are no other assumptions or limitations on the assessment of the proposed scheme on cultural heritage.


For the purpose of this simple level assessment, the study area has initially been defined as 1km either side of the motorway corridor. This has been defined as representing the visual limit at which proposed infrastructure, in particular gantries, would potentially give rise to significant effects on the setting of known heritage assets.

There are no World Heritage Sites or Registered Battlefields within 1km of the motorway.

A number of cultural heritage assets (Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas and Registered Parks and Gardens) were identified as being within the 1km visual context of proposed infrastructure and therefore potentially sensitive to the proposed scheme. Identified heritage assets have

Magnitude of Impact

No Change

Negligible Minor Moderate Major

Very High Neutral Slight Moderate or Large

Large or Very Large

Very Large

High Neutral Slight Moderate or Slight

Moderate or Large

Large or Very Large

Medium Neutral Neutral or Slight

Slight Moderate Moderate or Large

Low Neutral Neutral or Slight

Neutral or Slight

Slight Slight or Moderate

Valu

e

Negligible Neutral Neutral or Slight

Neutral or Slight

Neutral or Slight

Slight




been subject to an assessment of potential impacts on their setting by proposed infrastructure.

6.4.1 Archaeological Remains (Scheduled Monuments and Registered Parks and Gardens)

Stainsby Defended Manorial Complex (Scheduled Monument MP 227/1A – 227/4A; Conservation Area 226/7A-227/5A)

This comprises the below ground and earthwork remains of an 11th century medieval and manorial complex and is of high value. The site lies to the south of J29 and is situated approximately 170m to the west of the highway boundary. It is on the crest of a hill and consists of the below ground remains of a manor house, the surviving earthworks of the defensive ditch and rampart, the outer circuit bank and fishpond. The medieval manor house is thought to have stood on the brow of the hill and underlies the Victorian school building (now a scout centre) and adjacent School House. The present School House incorporates fabric of a much earlier building and provides evidence that this building was originally much larger. It is interpreted as a fragment of the earlier house. A cruck frame is incorporated towards the south end of the School House. The most visible features are the earthworks which enclose the northern end of the manorial complex. There are three circuits or part circuits of enclosing earthworks. The innermost surrounds an area approximately 130m x 120m on the summit of the hill and defines the northern side of the medieval manor itself. The largest earthworks are the defensive ditch, rampart and fishpond which form a segmented arc 150m long on the northern flank of the hill. The Scheduled Monument is within a Conservation Area and will be dealt with as an archaeological asset to avoid ‘double-counting’.

Sutton Scarsdale (Scheduled Monument MP 230/4A – 230/6A)

Sutton Scarsdale Country House is a Scheduled Monument, but also a Grade I Listed Building and is within a Conservation Area and will therefore be considered under the Built Heritage section (see Section 6.4.2 below), to avoid ‘double-counting’ of assets in the assessment.

Bolsover Castle

Bolsover Castle is a Scheduled Monument, Registered Park and Garden, Listed Building and is within a Conservation Area, so will be discussed under the Built Heritage section (see Section 6.4.2 below), to avoid ‘double counting’ of effects on assets.

6.4.2 Built Heritage (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas)

Old Blackwell Conservation Area (MP 220/0A-220/4A)

Old Blackwell is a small linear settlement which retains a strong rural character. The layout is a variation of a traditional nucleated village. The Conservation Area encompasses 17.06ha and includes a range of buildings of architectural or historic interest. The core of the village is determined by local topography to some extent being located on the plateau east of the church of St Werburgh. The Conservation Area lies immediately adjacent to the M1




corridor north of J28. Trees tend to screen views of the wider area. The M1 is a strong visual presence in views east along the main street and its noise influences the character and setting of the Conservation Area and listed buildings.

Hardstoft Conservation Area (MP 224/0A-225/5A)

The Hardstoft Conservation Area has a strong rural character which has been shaped by the local geology and topography, its agricultural origins dating back to the medieval period, and 400 years of management as part of the Hardwick Estate. Hardstoft sits on a sandstone ridge within a gently undulating landscape that is predominantly agricultural. The Conservation Area is encircled by open fields used for arable crops and grazing, and these are enclosed by hedgerows and trees. This landscape setting is an integral part of the rural character of Hardstoft.

Views of Hardstoft sitting within this landscape and views from the Conservation Area of the surrounding landscape reflect the agricultural origins of Hardstoft and make an important contribution to the character and appearance of the area. The dispersed settlement pattern of Hardstoft is a key characteristic. This is the result of the hap-hazard manner in which buildings were built on the edge of Hardstoft Common, the settlement of Hardstoft Common in the 19th century, and the survival of undeveloped open spaces interspersed amongst the clusters of buildings.

Hardstoft does not have a coherent centre due to this dispersed settlement pattern. The network of roads and lanes are of historical interest and contribute to the dispersed settlement pattern. In the 1820s, the construction of the turnpike road was an important development in the course of Hardstoft’s history. Since then several buildings of historic and architectural interest have been built along this road at Hardstoft Common. The network or lanes forming The Green is a historically important feature, and leading off from The Green and Deep Lane are several quiet, rural lanes. The roads and lanes are mainly enclosed by mature hedgerows, trees, and traditional stone and brick boundary treatment which are an integral part of the rural character of Hardstoft.

The Conservation Area covers an area of 23ha and extends beyond the confines of Hardstoft itself. The boundary encompasses the hamlet of Hardstoft, an area of built development to the northwest on Hardstoft Common, and The Fields, an isolated property on the southern boundary of the Conservation Area. The settlement lies on a sandstone ridge which is characteristic of the gently undulating Coal Measures landscape. The eastern slope of this ridge faces towards Hardwick, which is perched on the escarpment and dominates views to the east.

The Conservation Area lies between J28 and J29. The M1 corridor is some distance away from the Conservation Area (approximately 1 km at its closest point) and as such does not form part of its’ setting, although there are some channelled views from the Conservation Area towards the M1.




Hardwick New and Old Hall and Registered Park and Garden (MP226/6 – 228/0)

Hardwick New and Old Hall lie to the south-east of J29 and at their nearest point are approximately 850m from the motorway boundary. The Registered Park and Garden and Conservation Area associated with the site extend to border the motorway boundary.

These Grade I Listed Buildings, Scheduled Monument, Registered Park and Garden and Conservation Area are of very high value. Hardwick Old Hall, the re-modelled family home of Bess of Hardwick, one of the richest and most remarkable women of Elizabethan England stands beside Hardwick New Hall which she had built later in the 1590s. These assets were designed to dominate the landscape to the west and east. Its position on the crest of the slope ensures that it is highly visible from most directions.

Hardwick Old Hall is situated at the crest of the hill and has a commanding presence, particularly in views from the west. From ground level, trees to the south and west largely enclose the building and restrict distant views, particularly in summer. More open views can be had to the north, whilst the New Hall dominates to the east.

The New Hall was also designed to afford views across the landscape around it through its numerous windows and from its roof. Views west from the upper floors and roof of the Hall over the parkland include the M1 as a notable feature as the motorway bisects the historic estate associated with the Hall. The noise of the traffic on the M1 is a constant background presence in the environs around both the Old and New Hall.

Hardwick Hall has significant historical connections with Bolsover Castle, which stands on the edge of the same limestone scarp directly to the north and is just visible from Hardwick on a clear day.

Hardwick ancillary buildings comprise a number of Grade II listed buildings including the Joiners Shop, Engine House, Shed, Cottages and Conduit House. The Outbuildings and Stables are Grade II* listed. Whilst many are historic structures typical of those found at estates, their association with Hardwick merits their High value.

The Hardwick Estate is a Grade I Registered Park and Garden consisting of walled gardens with pavilions and a gatehouse probably designed by Robert Smythson during the 1590s and partly remodelled in the late C17. The parkland probably has medieval origins and was extended 1665-6. The 440ha Park is on land which falls to the south and east from a plateau. Apart from the M1 motorway, which forms the west boundary, the setting is rural and agricultural. The north and east boundary is formed by fencing dividing the park from agricultural land. The south boundary is formed by Newbound Lane, fencing, and the line of Deep Lane running north-west from the Hardwick Inn.

Hardwick New Hall is managed by the National Trust and open to the public. As well as the main hall buildings, there is an outdoor shop and Great Barn restaurant. Hardwick Old Hall is managed by EH and is also accessible to the public.




Stainsby Mill (MP 227/0B)

Stainsby Mill is a Grade II listed 18th century mill of medium value and was built to provide flour for the Hardwick Estate, within which it stands. It is situated to the south of J29 and is approximately 200m from the motorway boundary. The M1 is visible from the mill and its environs. It is managed by the National Trust and allows visitor access.

Heath Conservation Area (J29)

Heath Village lies approximately five miles to the southeast of Chesterfield and seven miles to the northwest of Mansfield. Today, it stands aside the A617 dual carriageway, formerly the trackway of the Great Central Railway, and is adjacent to J29 of the M1 motorway and the A6175 to Clay Cross.

Historically, the village is mentioned in the Domesday survey as being two settlements (Lunt, Lowne, Lund, Lune). The settlement in the valley bottom to the east went into decline in the 14th century but ruins remain of the 12th century church owned by the former Abbey of Croxton. The other settlement on the top heathland to the west prospered and from which the present village probably takes its name. Following the closure of the monastries, circa 1538, the Savages of nearby Stainsby became lords of the manor and in turn sold it to Bess of Hardwick thus beginning the Cavendish connection. Today the Chatsworth Estate is the major landowner in Heath Village.

The Conservation Area, including a number of listed buildings is a substantial rural Conservation Area defined by a high street and cross roads and situated within agricultural fields. Although immediately adjacent to J29 of the M1, local buildings, vegetation and topography mean that there are no significant views of the M1 from within the developed areas of the village, although they may be visible from the upper stories of private houses. The M1 and its screening are however visible from the fields in the Conservation Area.

Ruins of Heath Old Church (MP 228/7A)

Heath Old Church is a ruined church of medium value, probably dating to 12th century but with later 19th century alterations. The ruins are a listed building at Grade II. It is situated to the north of J29 approximately 50m from the motorway boundary. The ruins stand on a high position overlooking the motorway and are well concealed by vegetation although there are some views of the motorway through the vegetation.

Sutton Scarsdale Hall (Listed Buildings 230/4A to 230/6A; Conservation Area MP230/1A to 231/6A)

Sutton Scarsdale Hall is a Grade I listed Georgian ruin and a Scheduled Monument, with associated Listed Buildings and Conservation Area of high value. It lies to the north-west of J29, approximately 800m from the M1 highway boundary at its closest point. Situated on the eastern side of Sutton Scarsdale on the southern flank of a low ridge, the Hall occupies an imposing location overlooking the valley and was clearly designed to be seen.




All that remains of the Hall today is the imposing shell, built in 1724 to 1729, with an imposing columned exterior. The property has been roofless since 1919, when its interiors were dismantled and some exported to America.

There is a clear visual connection between the Hall and Bolsover Castle on the opposite side of the valley. The view across the valley is of great significance and provides one of the iconic views of the Castle dominating the valley, with the historic town of Bolsover stretching southwards along the top of the scarp. The M1 is a clear component of this view, a key aspect of the setting of the Hall and its environs along with existing MS3 and ADS signs. The associated buildings, St. Mary’s Church and the listed garden wall are more discreet and often separated from the surrounding landscape by vegetation and other structures.

Bolsover Castle (MP 229/0B-234/0B)

The site is situated approximately 2.2km to the east of the motorway boundary, south-east of J29. It is of very high value, with the majority of the site of Bolsover Castle a scheduled monument with the standing structures listed Grade I and the majority of the site is also a Grade I Registered Park and Garden. The site and much of the landscape beyond lie within the Bolsover Conservation Area. Fundamental to the concept, perception and significance of Bolsover Castle is its relationship to its physical setting and topographical context .The wealthy Sir Charles Cavendish bought the old fortress in 1612 and began work on his Little Castle project. His son William who was a Civil War Royalist general and the first Duke of Newcastle inherited the Little Castle in 1617 and set about its completion, assisted by the architect John Smythson.

Bolsover’s strong defensive situation, elevated above the wide Doe Lea valley, appealed to the builders of the early castle and its associated planned settlement. The position on a ridge of limestone overlooking over the valley towards Chesterfield is a natural strong point. It later offered the ideal location for a house to ‘see and be seen’. Hardwick Hall is built on the same limestone escarpment. Some key long distance views from and to the castle are significant because of its historic relationship with neighbouring properties. Building at Bolsover was inspired by a sense of competition with a number of other impressive Elizabethan houses, namely Hardwick Hall, which is just visible on the escarpment to the south, along with Sutton Scarsdale Hall. By its nature and location, Bolsover Castle is visible over a wide area and from a number of key view points. It looks out over a broad arc of open landscape, across and along the Doe Lea valley, from the south west round to the northwest. A further promontory to the north curtails views in that direction. To the immediate west of Bolsover, the River Doe Lea runs south-north along its valley, with the M1 motorway slightly further west and roughly parallel. The motorway structure is not particularly intrusive in the landscape, although the noise of motorway traffic is clearly audible from the Castle Terrace, and the moving traffic draws attention to it.

Manor Farmhouse and Barn at Manor Farm (MP 233/0A)

These buildings are two separate Grade II listed buildings of medium value. They are situated south of J29a with the Barn at Manor Farm situated closest to the motorway boundary (approximately 90m). The farmhouse was built in




the late 17th century and has later 18th century modifications. It is constructed of sandstone with a slate roof. The Barn at Manor Farm was built in the early 19th century and is also constructed of sandstone with brick dressings and a slate roof. The buildings are fairly well concealed from the motorway by vegetation but there are channelled views to the north-east.

Poplar Farmhouse (MP 233/7A)

Poplar Farmhouse is a Grade II listed building of medium value. It is constructed of coursed stone rubble with a slate roof. It dates to the 18th/ early 19th century. It is situated to the south-west of J29a, approximately 400m east from the highway boundary at it’s closest point. The farmhouse has long distance and clear views of the motorway to the east.

Barlborough Hall (MP239/5B to 242/0B)

Barlborough Hall is a Grade I listed 16th century country house, located in Barlborough, Chesterfield, Derbyshire. It is situated to the north of J30 approximately. It was originally built by Sir Francis Rodes, circa 1583-8 as the family seat, the hall’s Elizabethan design is attributed to Robert Smythson, one of a noted family of architects. Barlborough Hall became an independent Catholic day school, in the Jesuit tradition, around 1939. The school is now the Preparatory school for Mount St Mary's College at Spinkhill, 2.2 miles down the road.

The Hall is Grade I listed and there are other associated Grade II listed buildings. The Registered Park and Garden is Grade II listed. All assets are of high value.

Barlborough Hall lies immediately north of the village of Barlborough with the M1 motorway running along the west side of the park in an area which is otherwise rural and agricultural in nature. The 125ha site is on high land which rises gently to the south. The west side is bounded by Ward Lane and the M1 motorway, and the east by the road between Barlborough and Nitticarhill. Remaining boundaries are formed by fencing or stone walls separating the site from agricultural land.

The M1 is screened from the Hall and associated designed landscape by a screen of trees, now degraded, which forms the boundary with the M1.

Barlborough Conservation Area encompasses the core of Barlborough and the Hall and Gardens (see above).

4 Walseker Lane (MP243/2B)

This is a Grade II* listed farmhouse of high value, which has a medieval core encased within a 17th or 18th century shell. The building is constructed of sandstone with a pantile roof and internal timber framing. The farmhouse is situated between J30 and 31, at it’s closest point approximately 200m to the east of the motorway boundary. The building is well screened from the motorway by vegetation and other later buildings though there are some minor filtered views to the motorway.




Wales Conservation Area (MP 244/5A and MP244/5B)

The Conservation Area, including several listed buildings lies close to the M1 corridor (approximately 170m from the highway boundary at it’s closest point), south of J31. It is a dense urban / suburban Conservation Area largely surrounded by modern development. The historic core of the Conservation Area is screened from the surrounding area and the M1 is not visible. There are however views of the M1 from the far south of the Conservation Area, from the edge of the cemetery, although these views do not form a significant element of the Conservation Areas setting.

Dovecote 40m to south-west of Vessey Close Farmhouse (MP 249/1B)

Early to mid 18th century dovecote constructed of sandstone with stone slate roof. Dovecote is listed at Grade II and is of medium value. It lies to the north of J31, approximately 220m to the east of the motorway boundary at it’s closest point. The dovecote has minor channelled views of the motorway particularly to the south-west.

The locations of identified cultural heritage assets are shown Figure 2.1 provided in Appendix A3.


6.5.1 Archaeological Remains

Stainsby Defended Manorial Complex (Scheduled Monument MP 227/1A – 227/4A; Conservation Area 226/7A-227/5A)

No changes are expected to the character, significance and setting of Stainsby Manorial Complex Scheduled Monument and Conservation Area (MP 226/7A-227/1A). The M1, including two existing MS3 cantilever gantries already falls within the setting of the monument.

The M1 is visible in intermittent easterly views from the complex. Although these views are screened by intervening vegetation and topography, it is likely that G1-13 and G1-14 super span gantries with MS4s will appear as a minor component in easterly views from the defensive monument which forms a component of its setting.

For operational reasons the MS4s would be positioned on the top of the gantry, so would be slightly higher than the existing MS4. Similarly, the CCTV masts at 227/6+35A, 227/2+00B and 226/5+00B are largely screened by vegetation and topography but they will appear as a minor component in north-easterly and easterly views above the vegetation and/or filtered through the vegetation. The EAV camera proposed at 227/6+40B will be largely screened from the Scheduled Monument by existing vegetation and topography but may appear within filtered views. Whilst there will be increased visual intrusion from the gantry, CCTV masts, EAV and ASE cameras, it is not considered to significantly change the setting of the monument.

Furthermore, visual intrusion will be reduced through the application of an appropriate paint system colour, selected in consultation with EH and NT to merge the structure into the background as far as practical (see Section 7.6.4




for further information on the proposed modification of surface finishes and Appendix A3: Figure 7.3 for an example of a gantry with the paint system applied).

The proposed ERAs (MP 227/1B+25-227/0B+26 and MP 226/7A+03-226/8A+03) will not be visible from the complex. The removal of two existing MS3 cantilever gantries combined with new infrastructure will to some degree increase clutter within the corridor at this location however given the existing screening and limited opportunity for direct views to occur the impact is considered to be slight adverse.

The mitigation strategy through this stretch of the corridor comprises replacement and additional planting associated with infrastructure locations to replace screening or extend it locally. In addition gantries and elevated structures will be subject to a modification of the standard colour to a light brown. The effect of these modifications to the design is anticipated to result in no perceptible change and a predicted effect of Neutral.

6.5.2 Built heritage

Old Blackwell Conservation Area (MP 220/0A-220/4A)

No changes are expected to the character, significance or setting of Blackwell (MP 220/0A-220/4A) Conservation Area. A proposed CCTV mast at 219/8+21A will be well concealed by the embankment and vegetation but the top of the mast may be seen from Blackwell Conservation Area. Gantry G1-06a will be a replacement of an existing gantry structure. It will be seen in filtered views from the eastern side of the Conservation Area but this will not be a change from the existing setting. The proposed gantry G1-06b may be visible in filtered views from the Conservation Area. The proposed ERAs (MP 219/8A+57-219/9A+46 and MP 220/1B+51-220/43B+43) will be visible from the Conservation Area. There will be no effects on the significance or setting of the Conservation Area as a whole, or on the unlisted building which lies within the Conservation Area from the proposed structures.

Hardstoft Conservation Area (MP 224/0A-225/5A)

No changes are expected to the character, significance or setting of Hardstoft (MP 224/0A-225/5A) Conservation Area. Although the Conservation Area is some distance away (approximately 1.1 km), there are some channelled views towards the M1. There is an ERA and a reused gantry (G1-11) that might be visible from the edge of the Conservation Area although certainly not significant.

Hardwick New and Old Hall and Registered Park and Garden (MP226/6 – 228/0)

In advance of any mitigation measures moderate adverse effects are expected on the setting of Hardwick New and Old Hall. Within the setting of the assets, (between MP223/5 – 228/0), the following works are proposed which may have both beneficial and adverse effects on the assets:

• Two superspan gantries (G1-10, G1-13, G1-14, G1-15).




• Removal of three MS3 signs.

• Four new ERAs (MP224/2+91A-224/3+94A, MP224/7+25B-224/6+25B, 226/7+03A-226/8+03A, 227/1+25B-227/0+26B).

• Four MS4 signs on existing bases (G1-11, G1-11a, G1-12, G1-12a).

• 14 pairs of TTMS.

• CCTV masts (locations 224/0+18A, 224/6+00B, 224/9+35B, 225/3+80A, 225/7+90A, 226/5+00B, 226/8+62A, 227/2+00B and 227/6+35A).

• ASE cameras (locations 223/8+31A, 226/2+55B, 227/2+44 A and B).

• EAV cameras (locations 223/8+09B).

The four gantries may be visible in mid to long distance views from New Hall. There will be two MS4 signs at G1-12 and G1-12a. The MS4 on the northbound carriageway (G1-12) would likely be visible from Hardwick Hall, although it is not considered that this would have a significant effect on the setting of the building.

The super span gantry G1-13 and MS4 on top would be visible from the New Hall, although it would not significantly change the setting of the Hall. G1-14 and G1-15 super span gantries are on embankment and would be visible in distant oblique views from the New Hall and Estate and would not therefore result in substantial new infrastructure being present in the view and would not have a significant effect on the setting of the Hall. Superspan gantry G1-10 would be visible to the south-west in distant views, but would not have a significant effect on the setting of the Hall. Temporary traffic management signs will be perceptible within views of the motorway but would not represent a significant adverse impact. The view of the infrastructure would be against a backdrop of trees which would reduce visual intrusion. For the superspan gantries, potential impacts could be reduced by ensuring that no signage is placed atop the gantry.

The Hardwick ancillary buildings are approximately the same distance away from G1-12 7 G1-12a, G1-13, G1-14 and G1-15 as the Old Hall. The current visual impact of the M1 on these structures varies, but it is not a major element in their visual setting. The addition of these infrastructure locations in the M1 corridor will not significantly alter the visual setting of the structures which is largely characterised by their local relationship to other buildings and spaces.

CCTV masts at 224/6+00B, 224/9+35B, 225/3+80A, 225/7+90A, 227/2+00B 227/6+35A will be largely concealed from views from Hardwick Hall Conservation Area and parkland by vegetation and topography but the top of the pole may appear in long distance views and or filtered views over/ through the vegetation. These masts are not expected to effect the significance, character or setting of the asset.

CCTV masts at location 226/5+00B and 226/8+62A will have slight adverse effects on the Conservation Area since they appear within long distance views to and from the asset but also views between Hardwick Hall, Sutton Scarsdale and Stainsby. The masts are not considered, however, to change the character or significance of the asset.




The ASE cameras at locations 223/8+31A, 226/2+55B and 227/2+44 A and B will have an adverse impact on the Hardwick Hall Conservation Area, associated Listed Buildings and Registered Park and Garden; however since the structure is yellow and there are unrestricted views of the parkland from its chosen location to the parkland in the east, the structures are not expected, however, to affect the significance of the asset or its setting.

The combined effect of the various structures (gantries, CCTV masts, EAV cameras and ASE cameras) are expected to have a moderate adverse impact on the setting of Hardwick Hall. The structures will introduce new visual intrusions within the setting of the asset but this will not effect the significance of the asset or its setting.

The mitigation strategy through this stretch of the corridor comprises replacement and additional planting associated with infrastructure locations to replace screening or extend it locally. In addition gantries and elevated structures will be subject to a modification of the standard colour to a light brown; selected in consultation with EH and NT to merge the structure into the background as far as practical (see Section 7.6.4 for further information on the proposed modification of surface finishes and Appendix A3: Figure 7.3 for an example of a gantry with the paint system applied). The effect of these modifications to the design is anticipated to result in no perceptible change and a predicted effect of Slight and Adverse.

Stainsby Mill (MP 227/0B)

No changes are expected to the character, significance and setting of Stainsby Mill (MP 227/0B). G1-13 is likely to be visible from Stainsby Mill and will be higher than the current gantry nearby that is to be removed. As there is an existing gantry close to this location, replacement with a super span gantry will not significantly change the setting of the Mill and the character of its environs. The CCTV masts at 226/5+00B, 226/8+62A and 227/2+00B will appear within views from the asset but these will be largely filtered by existing vegetation but the masts will be visible above the vegetation. The ASE cameras at locations 226/2+55B, 227/2+44 A and B will have a slight adverse impact on Stainsby Mill Listed Building; particularly since the structures are yellow and there are views from the proposed camera locations to the asset. The structure is not expected, however, to affect the significance of the asset or its setting. Whilst the CCTV masts and ASE cameras will increase the visual intrusion upon the asset, it is considered that this will not significantly change the setting of the asset. Visual intrusion will be reduced through the application of an appropriate paint system colour.

Heath Conservation Area (J29)

No changes are expected to alter the character, significance or setting of Heath Conservation Area (MP228/1A to 228/8A). The CCTV mast at 228/3+03A may be seen over the existing vegetation from the western edge of the Conservation Area but the mast is heavily screened by existing vegetation.




Ruins of Heath Old Church (MP 228/7A)

No changes to the character, significance and setting of Ruins of Heath Old Church listed building are expected to take place but it is possible that CCTV mast at 228/8+35A will be seen from the asset though this will be heavily filtered by existing vegetation.

Sutton Scarsdale Hall (Listed Buildings 230/4A to 230/6A; Conservation Area MP230/1A to 231/6A)

Within the setting of the Hall (between MP229/0 to 233/0), the following works are proposed which may have both beneficial and adverse effects on the asset:

• Removal of one MS3 sign.

• Two super span gantries.

• Four new ERAs.

• Five MS4/ADS signs on existing bases.

• Four new MS4 signs.

• 10 pairs of TTMSs.

• CCTV cameras and masts (231/0+30B, 231/5+00A and 232/0+83A, 229/9+50B and 232/6+A).

• Average Restricted Speed Enforcement cameras (locations 229/9A, 229/8B and 231/9A).

The existing gantries G2-06, G2-06a and G2-07b which are currently visible from Sutton Scarsdale will be replaced by a cantilever and two MS4s, although there will not be significant additional impact on the setting of the Hall. The new gantries will not interrupt the views from Sutton Scarsdale to Bolsover. Temporary traffic management signs will be perceptible within views of the motorway but would not represent a significant impact. As for structures in the Hardwick Hall area, a colour scheme to reduce any visual impact has been discussed and agreed with EH.

G2-07 and G2-07a will be new gantries, but located in the vicinity of the existing ADS, so there will not be significant additional impact on the setting of the Hall, although the back of the MS4 will be visible from the Hall.

The proposed gantry G2-05, CCTV masts at 231/0+30B, 231/5+00A and 232/0+83A and Average Restricted Speed Enforcement cameras at 229/9A, 229/8B and 231/9A have clear views to and from Sutton Scarsdale Hall, associated listed buildings, Sutton Scarsdale Scheduled Monument and Sutton Scarsdale Conservation Area. The structures also appear within views between Sutton Scarsdale and Bolsover Castle which forms part of the setting of both assets. This is largely as a result of the Hall’s position upon a high promontory overlooking the motorway and the valley. Whilst the structures will pose a new visual intrusion on the setting of the asset, it will not alter the character and significance of the asset or its setting. This impact has been assessed as moderate adverse.




The new span gantry G2-03 and CCTV masts at 229/9+50B and 232/6+A will be seen in long distance views to and from the asset but these are not expected to alter the character, significance or setting of the asset either individually or as a combined group of structures. There will be no change to these assets.

The mitigation strategy through this stretch of the corridor comprises a limited approach to replacement and additional planting associated with infrastructure locations to reflect local landscape character. In addition gantries and elevated structures will be subject to a modification of the standard colour to a light brown; selected in consultation with EH and NT to merge the structure into the background as far as practical (see Section 7.6.4 for further information on the proposed modification of surface finishes and Appendix A3: Figure 7.3 for an example of a gantry with the paint system applied). The effect of these modifications to the design is anticipated to result in no perceptible change and a predicted effect of Slight and Adverse.

Bolsover Castle (MP 229/0B-234/0B)

At Bolsover Castle G2-04b MS4 sign would replace an existing MS3 sign on embankment whilst CCTV masts are proposed at 230/6+48B, 231/0+30B, 231/5+00A and 232/0+83A, which, although the gantry is currently perceptible in views across the motorway from Bolsover Castle terrace towards Sutton Scarsdale, is not a clearly visible element of the motorway corridor, which is some 2.5km away. The new gantry and masts will not therefore have a readily perceptible impact on the setting of Bolsover Castle and associated assets. G2-05 new cantilever ADS sign is likely to be visible in distant views from Bolsover Castle, although not a significant additional impact on the setting of Bolsover Castle and its associated assets.

The views from Bolsover Castle across to Sutton Scarsdale Hall (which form part of the Hall’s setting) includes the existing M1 motorway and associated gantries and ADS signs. However, due to the distance of the motorway from the Castle (approximately 2km), changes to the location of the gantries and signs will not be readily perceptible.

The mitigation strategy through this stretch of the corridor comprises a limited approach to replacement and additional planting associated with infrastructure locations to reflect local landscape character. In addition gantries and elevated structures will be subject to a modification of the standard colour to a light brown; selected in consultation with EH and NT to merge the structure into the background as far as practical (see Section 7.6.4 for further information on the proposed modification of surface finishes and Appendix A3: Figure 7.3 for an example of a gantry with the paint system applied). The effect of these modifications to the design is anticipated to result in a barely perceptible change to the setting, intrinsically linked with the setting of Sutton Scarsdale Hall, the resulting predicted effect is Slight and Adverse.

Manor Farmhouse and Barn at Manor Farm (MP 233/0A)

No changes are not expected to alter the character, significance or setting of Manor Farmhouse and Barn at Manor Framhouse listed buildings (MP233/0A).




Gantry G2-08, CCTV mast at 233/3+00B and EAV camera at 233/3B+42 appear within views to and from the buildings although these are over along distance, across the motorway carriageway and are filtered to a certain extent by intermittent vegetation.

Poplar Farmhouse (MP 233/7A)

No changes are expected to alter the character, significance and setting of Poplar Farm (MP233/7A) but gantry G2-09 and CCTV mast at 233/5+14A appear within views to the east of the listed building.

Barlborough Hall (MP239/5B to 242/0B)

The wide span gantry G4-03 and associated CCTV mast at 240/0+26A will be well screened from the Barlborough Hall Conservation Area and Registered Park and Garden by the existing topography and vegetation. It is possible, however, that given the height of the structures; they will be seen in long distance views from the western edge of the asset, although these will be heavily filtered by existing vegetation. The CCTV mast at 240/5+15A will be largely concealed by existing topography and vegetation but the top of the mast will be visible from the Barlborough Hall Conservation Area and Registered Park and Garden. Gantry G4-03a and Average Restricted Speed Enforcement camera at 240/2A and 240/4B will be well screened from the Barlborough Conservation Area by the existing embankment and vegetation although the top of the gantry and camera structure is likely to appear in long distance views from the western edge of the Conservation Area. Despite this visual intrusion, it is not expected that the significance of the asset will be changed. Gantry G4-04 would be situated adjacent to the complex on the edge of what was part of the Hall’s more immediate designed landscape. The area is now degraded. The gantry would be largely screened by trees but it is probable that it would be visible over the trees, especially if signage was mounted on its top. Gantry G4-04a will be a replacement and is largely concealed by the existing embankment and vegetation. However, the gantry will be visible above the embankment. Since the gantry will be a replacement, it is not expected to significantly change the setting of Barlborough Hall or its associated assets.

Gantry 04-04b, the associated CCTV mast at the same location 241/1+09A and the Average Restricted Speed Enforcement camera at 240/9A will be visible to and from the western edge of Barlborough Hall Conservation Area although existing vegetation will go some way to filtering these views and the gantry and mast will not significantly affect the asset or its setting. CCTV mast 241/3+79B will again be well concealed by vegetation but its proximity to the Conservation Area and parkland combined with the height of the mast means that it will be seen within views from the asset. Gantry G4-05 and Average Restricted Speed Enforcement camera at 241/7A are also situated adjacent to the complex, but lies further from the main hall and core of the site. They are, however, situated more directly in front of the hall and are likely to be more visible although existing tree planting may partially obscure it. Gantry G4-06 will be a replacement and is already well concealed by vegetation although given its height, the structure will be seen from the asset above the vegetation.




Average Restricted Speed Enforcement camera at 241/8B will also be well concealed by vegetation but its colour and height may mean it is visible within filtered views. Gantry G4-06a and associated CCTV mast at 241/9+80B are partially concealed by vegetation but the height of the structures will mean that they are seen within long distance views from the northern tip of the asset. CCTV mast 242/2+78B, given its height, will be seen in long distance views from the northern edge of the asset. This will be over a long distance and views will be filtered through existing vegetation.

The CCTV mast at 239/8+00B is to be removed and will have a beneficial impact on the setting of the Conservation Area though its removal will not change the significance or character of the asset or its setting.

It is therefore considered the proposed highway infrastructure described above will have a slight adverse impact on Barlborough Hall Conservation Area and Registered Park and Garden.

The mitigation strategy through this stretch of the corridor comprises replacement and additional planting associated with infrastructure locations to replace screening or extend it locally. In addition gantries and elevated structures will be subject to a modification of the standard colour to a light brown; selected in consultation with EH and NT to merge the structure into the background as far as practical (see Section 7.6.4 for further information on the proposed modification of surface finishes and Appendix A3: Figure 7.3 for an example of a gantry with the paint system applied). The effect of these modifications to the design is anticipated to result in no perceptible change and a predicted effect of Neutral.

4 Walseker Lane (MP243/2B)

No changes are expected to affect the character, significance and setting of 4 Walseker Lane (MP243/2A). The CCTV masts at 243/1+00B and 243/4+32B may appear above existing vegetation and may, therefore, appear in long distance views from the asset but the masts are largely screened by existing vegetation and buildings.

Wales Conservation Area (MP 244/5A and MP244/5B)

No changes are expected to the character, significance or setting of the Wales Conservation Area (MP244/5A and 244/5B). G4-09 and G4-09a proposed MS4 signs and the CCTV mast at 244/5+00B may be visible from the southern end of the Conservation Area. CCTV mast at 244/9_35B will also be seen from the east side of the Conservation Area given its location on a slope overlooking the motorway. However, these limited views do not form a significant element of the setting of the Conservation Area and will not change its setting. There will be no change to the setting of the Conservation Area from individual structures or a collection of the proposed new structures and therefore no mitigation is proposed.

Dovecote 40m to south-west of Vessey Close Farmhouse (MP 249/1B)

No changes to the character, significance and setting of the Dovecote at Vessey Farmhouse listed building are expected to take place but the new




gantry G8-03 will appear in views to the south-west. These will be heavily filtered by existing vegetation.


The proposed scheme has sought to minimise impacts on the setting of all assets identified as being sensitive (see above) through reduction in the number of gantries, the re-use of existing locations and alterations to the location and design of new gantries (see above for location details).

National Trust and EH were consulted with regard to Hardwick Hall, Sutton Scarsdale Hall. As a result, detailed design was reviewed at these locations and the following are design responses that were investigated:

• Relocation of ADS signs to the verge rather than on top of super span gantries (G1-13 at MP226/8+64) – this has been discounted for operational reasons.

• In visually sensitive locations and where feasible from an operational perspective, infrastructure is to be painted to blend in with surrounding landscape to minimise visual intrusion – this will be considered at the detailed design stage (for example of painted gantry see Appendix A3: Figure 7.3).

• Additional planting to screen infrastructure from long-distance views at Hardwick Hall, Sutton Scarsdale Hall, Barlborough, Bolsover and Stainsby as set out in Appendix 2, Checklist 3– actual requirements for this, if any, will be confirmed at the detailed design stage after vegetation clearance at this location.

• During the construction process, there is the remote possibility of localised damage to undiscovered sites of cultural heritage importance. In the unlikely event of the identification of archaeological features within the existing highway boundary during the construction process, works will be stopped to allow for recording or salvage excavation. The following procedures will then be instituted:

• Watching brief: A watching brief will be initiated requiring archaeological supervision of all ground disturbance works if and when archaeological remains are encountered. The objectives will be to confirm the presence or absence of archaeological deposits, to determine their character, extent, date and state of preservation, and to produce a report on the findings.

• Excavation: It may not be possible or desirable to avoid any significant archaeological sites identified by the archaeological watching brief. Excavation would involve mechanical stripping of topsoil in the areas of impact, followed by archaeological investigation. The objectives are to obtain a full record of the archaeological remains and to produce a report on the findings.

• Post Construction: A post-construction programme for dealing with finds (if any) and records of investigated archaeological remains will be




implemented, and where appropriate, the drafting of articles for publication.

• County Monitoring: The relevant county archaeologists will be consulted on the scope of works in the event of encountering archaeological remains.

6.7 Summary

This assessment has examined the environmental effect of the proposed scheme on the setting of a number of designated assets around the M1 between J28 to 31. A considered mitigation strategy includes replacement and/or additional screen planting and a modification of the standard colour applied to elevated infrastructure in the vicinity of the most sensitive heritage assets, The above assessment therefore concludes that due to the localised nature of the proposed scheme and restriction of the works to the highway boundary along with a robust mitigation strategy the scheme would have a neutral effect on Balborough Hall and Stainsby Defended Manorial Complex and slight and adverse effects on Hardwick Hall, Bolsover Castle and Sutton Scarsdale Hall.

It can be concluded that the scheme will not significantly alter the setting of designated heritage assets and would not result in significant adverse effects on the historic environment.

There is a very low potential for sub-surface archaeological remains of unknown value to exist within the study area and potential for impact on these features. With adoption of the above procedures, the significance of effects on any interest of this type encountered during construction remains unknown.




7 Landscape Effects


This section addresses the landscape and visual effects associated with the installation of the infrastructure, particularly ERAs, CCTVs, gantries, TTMSs, EAVs and ASE due to their scale and/or elevated nature within the corridor. Landscape and visual sensitivities along the corridor are identified in the relevant section of Appendix A2: Checklist 1 and discussed below, with detailed site-specific issues set out in the relevant section of Appendix A2: Checklists 2 and 3.


The following guidelines, legislation and planning policy documents provide the framework for the protection and conservation of landscape and townscape within the study area.


A number of statutes exist to ensure both direct and indirect protection of our most valued and important landscapes, their intrinsic visual qualities and the individual elements and components that constitute their appeal. Those with direct relevance to the assessment include the following:

• Countryside and Rights of Way Act, 2000

• Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981

Statutes and national planning policy make no direct provision for the protection or conservation of specific views. They are, however, an implicit part of the values and qualities recognised in broader landscape designations.

7.2.2 Planning Policies

The NPPF highlights the importance of designated landscapes and requires LPAs to give due consideration to the preservation of areas of open countryside, in particular those designated locally as areas of High Scenic Value along with the protection of Green Belt.

A schedule of regional and local policies relating specifically to the protection, conservation and enhancement of landscape is provided in Appendix A2: Checklist 1 along with a summary of how the proposed scheme performs against these policies.

7.3 Methodology

The effect of the scheme has been assessed in accordance with the M1 J28-31 Environmental Scoping Report May 2012, and the principles as described within IAN 135/10: Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment, November 2010. This document replaced the previous guidance provided within the DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 5: Landscape Effects. Specific guidance for infrastructure projects contained in IAN 161/13: Managed Motorway Requirements: All Lane Running Implementation Guidance – Hard Shoulder




Running has been referred to in order to assist in determining the level of assessment required for landscape character and visual effects.

In light of guidance and information contained in the aforementioned documents, the effect on Landscape Character has been assessed at a simple level. Visual impacts are likely to give rise to more significant effects on individual receptors therefore it has been assessed at a detailed level.

IAN 135/10 requires the preparation of a Visual Effects Drawing including the demarcation of a Zone of Visual Influence (ZVI). However due to the largely isolated and dispersed nature of the impacts arising from the introduction of infrastructure within the existing corridor it is not considered appropriate. It is considered more appropriate to provide an indication of the extent to which lengths of the existing motorway corridor that may be modified by the proposals is visible to the adjacent landscape or enclosed by landform and/or roadside vegetation. This is shown in Appendix A3: Figure 7.1.

Reference has also been made to the Interim Environmental Assessment Report, July 2007, prepared by Atkins. National, regional and local landscape character assessments were referenced in the development of Local Landscape Character Area (LLCA) definitions against which the potential effects on landscape character are assessed. This also involved a survey from the M1 SM-ALR scheme area of the surrounding area to inform the assessment and establishment of LLCAs and an investigation on a preferred option. The baseline studies were reviewed and updated in 2012 to inform the design process with regards to the sensitivity of potential locations for major infrastructure, with a view to avoiding significant adverse impacts.

The assessment addresses the effects during construction and at the year of opening (winter day) as a worst case scenario followed by the residual visual effects, taking into account establishment of post construction mitigation planting after 15 years (summer). These are presented as a Visual Effects Schedule (VES) in Appendix A2: Checklist 3.

Impacts are likely to arise as a result of the introduction of new or changes to existing infrastructure, in particular elevated elements such as gantries, MS4 / MS3, ADS and CCTV / EAV / ASE locations. In addition, the clearance of existing roadside vegetation to facilitate the construction of the infrastructure or CCDs may result in the exposure of new views of the road, traffic and / or infrastructure. Night time effects have been excluded from the assessment as no new lighting is proposed as part of the scheme, the only new light sources being directional LED signals associated with the AMIs; these are not anticipated to represent a new significant light source within the corridor, as a result no light is anticipated to be shed beyond the highway boundary.

The gantries, signals, ASE and CCTV masts, ERAs, environmental and safety barrier works in the verge are by their nature highly visible to road users, these can only rarely give rise to any beneficial landscape/townscape or visual effect.

The evaluation of the project on landscape character is derived by assessing the sensitivity of the landscape (IAN 135/10, Annex 1, Table 2) against the magnitude of impact resulting from the proposed scheme (IAN 135/10, Annex 1, Table 1). These aspects are combined to form a significance matrix (IAN




135/10, Annex 1, Table 3). The findings of the assessment record the baseline and identify the predicted residual effects (year 15) on the perception of the wider landscape character arising from individual infrastructure locations or longitudinal ducting along with appropriate mitigation measures, have been presented within the relevant checklists (See Appendix A2).

Construction effects have been scoped out of this assessment as works undertaken within the corridor would be short duration and are not considered likely to give rise to potentially significant effects on the perception of the wider landscape character.

The evaluation of the project on visual receptors is derived by assessing the sensitivity of the receptor (IAN 135/10, Annex 2, Table 1) against the magnitude of impact of the view resulting from the proposed scheme (IAN 135/10, Annex 2, Table 2). These aspects are combined to form a significance matrix (IAN 135/10, Annex 2, Table 3). The findings of the assessment recording the baseline and identifying the predicted effects on individual or groups of receptors arising from individual infrastructure locations or longitudinal ducting along with appropriate mitigation measures, have been presented within the relevant checklists (See Appendix A2). Where effects are moderate adverse or greater; these are summarised in Section 7.5 of this report.

The relative significance of effect on landscape adopted in this assessment (using guidance in IAN135/10) is outlined below:

• Slight adverse: where the introduction of a new unit or several units, or the loss of existing mitigation vegetation would cause a minor deterioration in the perception of the local landscape through an increased awareness of the existing motorway corridor and / or increased sense of urbanisation.

• Neutral: where the introduction of a new unit or several units, or the loss of existing mitigation vegetation would cause no discernable deterioration or improvement to the perception of the local landscape through an increased awareness of the existing motorway corridor and / or increased sense of urbanisation.

• Slight beneficial: where the removal of an existing unit, or the provision of new mitigation vegetation would cause a minor improvement in the perception of the local landscape/townscape through a decreased awareness of the existing motorway corridor and / or decreased sense of urbanisation.

The relative significance of effect on visual receptors adopted in this assessment (using guidance contained in IAN 135/10) is outlined below:

• Very large adverse visual effect: The project would cause the loss of views from a highly sensitive receptor, and would constitute a dominant discordant feature in the view.

• Large adverse visual effect: where the unit would be locally visually intrusive and or give rise to a major deterioration in the existing view from a highly sensitive receptor, and would constitute a major discordant element in the view. This is generally associated with sites on




embankment, close to residential properties or where overlooked from adjacent areas.

• Moderate adverse visual effect: where the unit would cause a noticeable deterioration in the existing view from a moderately sensitive receptor. Such as sites visible from middle distance locations, in open countryside or with limited intervening tree or shrub cover.

• Slight adverse visual effect: where the unit would cause a minor visual intrusion or deterioration of the existing view from a receptor of moderate sensitivity; or cause greater deterioration to a view from a receptor of low sensitivity. This includes sites partially located in cutting, where there is already a propensity of existing lighting, gantries, over bridges or other signs, with some screen planting or with views from middle to long distances.

• Neutral visual effect: no discernable deterioration or improvement to the existing view. This is generally associated for example with sites in deep cuttings, screened by dense mature planting, or where there are no properties or restricted visual and physical access, or where the units are attached to existing structures.

• Slight Beneficial visual effect: where the removal of a unit would cause a minor visual improvement in the existing view from a receptor of moderate sensitivity; or cause greater improvement to a view from a receptor of low sensitivity. This includes sites where existing MS3 signs are to be replaced with smaller MS4 units or where MS3s are to be removed altogether.


In undertaking the landscape and visual assessment the following assumptions and limitations have been made:

Working areas and therefore clearance areas for the proposed equipment as defined in Section 3.3 have been assumed however this might vary at ERA locations given the adjacent slope profiles and construction methods ultimately adopted.

Every effort has been made to establish views from receptors however given access from within these receptor sites was not possible, the aspect and degree to which proposed infrastructure might ultimately be visible i.e. upper floor, rear elevation, may differ slightly from those assessed.


As set out in the above methodology the study area has been broadly defined by the extent to which the existing motorway corridor influences the perception of the wider area. The study area has been defined as 1km either side of the corridor as the scale of the proposed infrastructure changes are such that any views beyond this distance are unlikely to give rise to a significant effect either on landscape character or visual receptors.

The assessment of effects on landscape character requires the establishment of LLCAs describing the form and features of the landscape that contribute to




its perceived qualities, relative value and sensitivity to change. National, regional and local landscape character assessments have been referenced and key features described below in order to establish the character areas.

7.4.1 Regional Character Areas

The study area falls within a single Natural England’s National Character Area – No. 38 Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and Yorkshire Coalfields. However, for much of its length it skirts long the eastern boundary with the adjoining character area, that of No. 30 South Magnesian Limestone. The key characteristics of both have been included within this report. Please see Appendix A3: Figure 7.1 for the location of the National Character Area.

Character Area No. 38 Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and Yorkshire Coalfields

The key characteristics and land cover elements of these character areas and of relevance to the study area are abstracted below:

• Widespread evidence of industrial activity including mine buildings, former spoil tips and iron and steel plants.

• Complex mix of built-up areas, industrial land, dereliction and farmed open country.

• Many areas affected by urban fringe pressures creating fragmented and downgraded landscapes.

• Substantial areas of intact agricultural land in both arable and pastoral use.

• Small, fragmented remnants of pre-industrial landscape and semi-natural vegetation, including many areas of woodland, river valley habitats, subsidence flashes and other relict habitats.

• Ever-present urban influences from major cities, smaller industrial towns and mining villages.

• Widespread influence of transport routes, including canal, road (M1, M62) and rail, with ribbon developments emphasising the urban influence in the landscape.

• Rolling landforms with hills, escarpments and broad valleys.

• Local variation in landscape character reflecting variations in underlying geology.

• Strong cultural identity arising from history of coal mining and other heavy industry.

Character Area No. 30 South Magnesian Limestone

• Elevated ridge with smoothly rolling landform dissected by dry valleys.

• Predominantly Magnesian Limestone geology which influences soils and ecological character.

• Long views over surrounding lowland.

• Fertile, intensively-farmed arable land.




• Large fields bounded by low-cut thorn hedges creating a generally large-scale, open landscape.

• Large number of country houses and estates with parkland, estate woodlands, plantations and game coverts.

• Woodlands combining with open arable land to create a wooded farmland landscape in some parts.

• Unifying influence of creamy white Magnesian Limestone as a building material often combined with red clay pantile roofing.

• River valleys and gorges cutting through the ridge exposing the underlying rock.

• Industrial influences, especially in the Aire and Don Valleys and other central valleys and along the Coal Measures fringe, with mines, shale tips, transport routes, power lines and industrial settlements.

• Main transport corridor of the A1 which is often apparent in areas of otherwise undisturbed rural landscape.

• Archaeological remains reflecting the long-standing importance of the area for settlement and transport.

7.4.2 Sub-regional Character Area

Rotherham MBC (Landscape Character Assessment and Landscape Capacity Study, 2010), Derbyshire County Council (The Landscape Character of Derbyshire, 2000) and Nottingham Shire County Council (Greater Nottingham Landscape Character Assessment) have undertaken landscape character assessments for their respective areas. The local character areas (LCA) relevant to the study are described below:

Rotherham MBC – Landscape Character Assessment and Landscape Capacity Study – 2010

LCA 5 Coalfield Tributary Valleys

Located centrally within the Borough the character areas form a central belt in a broadly north south direction, the main features of the landscapes are treed arable farmland with fragmented woodland blocks contained within an undulating landform with local valleys. Of relevance to this study area is the sub area 5b Treeton.

LCA 5b Treeton

A less intact landscape than 5a the valley form is wider and less pronounced but retains areas of mature tree cover and a coherent landscape pattern. The area is heavily influenced by its urban surroundings. Within Rotherham’s study this area has been identified as being of moderate sensitivity.

LCA 7 Rother Valley Reclaimed Farmland

Situated to the south of the Borough, this character area is centred on the reclaimed spoil areas associated with the former mining operations. The mounded landforms reflect the spoil heaps and these have been remodelled




and planted to create new country parks and extensive woodland. Much of the woodland is immature due to only recently having been planted. Within Rotherham’s study this area has been identified as being of moderate sensitivity.

LCA 8 Central Rotherham Coalfield Farmland

A large character area encompassing a tract of open farmland broadly running north south comprising a gently undulating landform, open arable fields with low woodland cover, small settlements some relatively recent and centred on several deep mining shafts. It is also noted that the M1 corridor is predominantly set within cutting and is not a dominant feature except in the far south of area which is not relevant to this assessment. Rotherham’s study considers the area to be of moderate to low sensitivity.

The Landscape Character of Derbyshire, 2000

Derbyshire County Council’s Landscape Character Assessment uses the National Character Areas as a basis for their assessment, as set out above. These areas have been expanded upon to provide greater detail and set out the subtle differences that occur through the areas.

Character Area No. 38 Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and Yorkshire Coalfields

The broadly north-south orientation of this character area has been subdivided into a number of sub areas or types, the key characteristics have been briefly summarised below.

Estate Farmlands

Generally occurring to the north of the area this is a landscape type that is typified by a gently rolling landform made up of predominantly arable agricultural land uses. Tree cover is limited which combined with the gentle landform leads to a distinctly open nature, interspersed with small settlements of former mining villages and transport corridors.

Wooded Farmlands

Occurring to the east of the area and marking an escarpment slope, this landscape type is typified by an undulating landform that is small scale, containing ancient field patterns, species rich hedgerows and frequent hedgerow trees. Some influences of mining activities such as spoil heaps and urban development is evident.

Coalfield Village Farmlands

Extending predominantly to the west of the broader area, this type also extends to the east to include an area of farmland around the Tibshelf area. The land use is predominantly dairy farming with some localised arable land uses. Small nucleated villages have expanded over the years as a result of mining activity and this is evident through ribbon development and red brick terraces. Tree cover is frequent but tends to be small scale and limited to copses and hedgerows.




Coalfield Estates

Occurring centrally within the area around the settlements of Alfreton and extending eastwards towards the boundary, this is a landscape typified by a gently undulating landform, frequent tree cover as woodlands, plantations and coverts. Urban development is frequent and extensive in places whilst the remaining agricultural practices are centred on dairy farming.

Riverside Meadows

Narrow linear character types that traverse the wider character area, these landscapes are centred on a number of local watercourses that meander through the coalfields. These are commonly bordered by wet meadows, generally too wet to cultivate resulting in pastoral land uses. As a result of the low lying and linear landforms these are historically given rise to the development of transport corridors including road and rail.

Character Area No. 30 South Magnesian Limestone

The South Magnesian Limestone character area has been sub-divided into only two sub areas, the largest one and which is of relevance to this assessment is the Limestone Farmlands.

Limestone Farmlands

This is an extensive landscape type extending across much of the area of Derbyshire. It comprises a simple rolling landform of large fields predominantly arable over a generally free draining soil. Woodland in the form of parkland copses and covets is frequent although due to the gentle landform broad views across the landscape are frequent. Previously mining activity has led to local urban development although the rural character is largely retained.

Greater Nottingham Landscape Character Assessment

This assessment encompasses all of the district councils within the Greater Nottingham area, of relevance to this study is Ashfield District Council, the M1 between J28 and 29 skirting along its western boundary. The following character areas, referred to Draft Policy Zones have been subdivided and outlined below:

NC05 – Kirkby Coalfield farmlands / Kirkby Vales

A semi rural landscape with strongly undulating landform, it is heavily influenced by surrounding urban development and comprises a mixed agricultural land use with medium to large fields bounded in the main by hedgerows. Infrequent farmsteads occupy higher ground with woodland typically following the base of slopes and watercourses and linear in nature. Overhead pylons and the existing road network including the M1 are strong visual detractors.

NC07 – Stanley and Silverhill

Locally prominent hills and ridgelines separated by steep narrow valleys, predominantly agricultural land use with scattered farms and small hamlets.




Woodland increases on steeper scarp slopes and links with woodland to the north that forms the Hardwick Estate woodland. Fields have a predominantly modern pattern and are bounded by hedgerows, these combine with local sunken lanes. Silverhill is a restored spoil heap and comprises open rough grassland and plantations and affords panoramic views including to the north towards Hardwick Hall.

7.4.3 Local Landscape Character Areas (LLCAs)

The landscape character has been analysed at a local level relevant to the scale and nature of the proposed changes within the existing motorway corridor. The magnitude of impact and sensitivity of these character areas have been assessed to give a significance of effect rating (as shown in IAN 135/10, Annex 1, Tables 1 to 3). These are outlined below according to the relevant sections of the study area and shown in Appendix A3: Figure 7.2. Impacts on the LLCAs have been outlined in section 7.5 and summarised in the relevant section of Appendix A2: Checklist 1.

LLCA 1: Mansfield Urban Fringe

The LLCA represents the southwest fringes of Mansfield and is formed by several small former mining villages, typically occupying elevated positions within the wider rolling landform and physically separated by farmland. Watercourses are generally sparse and discreet elements within the landform, commonly associated with the hedgerows that form a broad network across the areas of farmland. Woodland is rare although smaller copses and outgrown hedgerows form local visual constraints.

A network of local roads and lanes permeate the landscape and frequently feature ribbon development that erodes the boundaries of the adjacent land uses, commonly allowing views across the wider rolling landform.

Within the LLCA the motorway corridor is a locally significant visual element, traffic movements to the more elevated sections are visible at some distance and in combination with the surrounding built form creates the impression of a developed landscape (refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.2 Sheet 1 of 5: View Point (VP) 01). At several locations clusters of large warehouses dominate local views, their massing and scale results in locally intrusive elements.

The LLCA is typical of much of the wider area, as such the quality is considered to be ordinary. The area’s relationship with the local farmland and its proximity to more developed suburbs of Mansfield means that the landscape has some importance locally. As a result the landscape is considered to be of low sensitivity.

LLCA 2: Hardwick Estates Farmland

North of the settlements of Tibshelf and Huthwaite, the landscape character is subject to a noticeable change. The influence of the water courses to the south is lost and the landform is characterised by a series of low hills with a distinctly rural feel.

The vegetation pattern is more coherent through this area, woodland occurs throughout as a series of small woodlands, copses and plantations, linked by a




network of hedgerows which in places bound small fields representing an historic field pattern e.g. west of Huthwaite and north of Lane End.

Settlements within the area are relatively small in scale and with the exception of development in the south comprising Tibshelf, Huthwaite and Lane End the remaining built form is generally limited to small historic villages/hamlets and scattered farms, linked by a network of local roads and lanes. The combination of the landform, vegetation patterns and network of sunken lanes results in a landscape that is small scale and intimate.

In contrast to much of this landscape is the presence of the Hardwick Hall estate, largely under the control of the National Trust. It occupies an imposing position on the edge of a dip slope to a low ridgeline that extends to the east of the study area and runs in a north-south direction. The associated landscape is designated as a Registered Park and Garden and the complex of buildings includes the Old Hall which is managed by EH. The grounds themselves extend on all sides of the hall and up to and beyond the M1 corridor as it passes the estate to the west. The grounds themselves comprise typical estate planting with small woodlands/copses, mature estate trees and areas of open pastoral grass, gradually giving way to a series of small irregular fields bounded by mature hedgerows.

The M1 corridor descends from a high point to the south of the character area as it passes beneath Mansfield Road to occupy a relatively low position within the adjacent landform. Screened in part by roadside planting the motorway and associated traffic is a dominant element within the landscape in that it contrasts noticeably with the remaining landscape which is largely rural in nature (refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.2 Sheet 1 of 5: VP03).

The LLCA is represented by an important landscape at a national and international level identified in part by its inclusion on the Register of Parks and Gardens. The attractive and coherent landscape that forms the wider area is considered to be of good quality and as such the landscape sensitivity is considered to be high.

LCA 3: Duckmanton and Bolsover

To the north of J29 the landscape gradually changes indicated by a softening of the landform becoming increasingly undulating. This softer landform has lent itself to increasingly arable land uses resulting in larger field sizes and reduced woodland cover; hedgerows are frequently intermittent and in places are quite sparse.

This is a landscape that has been subject to historical mining activities, this is evident through scattered mining settlements to locally higher ground e.g. Duckmanton, Woodthorpe, the remains of mine workings as slag heaps form locally steep landform softened in part by recent planting to form pockets of immature woodland and numerous small ponds.

The M1 corridor passes through the area predominantly at grade; cuttings partially obscure some wider views in combination with roadside planting, although some significant lengths are exposed, set on embankment and visible at some distance (refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.2 Sheet 3 of 5: VP08). Immediately adjacent to the motorway corridor and J29a the recent




development of a distribution centre that includes several large warehouses and associated distributor roads represents a significant development within the area and a local visual detractor.

The south of the area retains visual and physical links with the Hardwick landscape to the south, the most significant of these is the marked ridgeline that extends to the north and on which the town of Bolsover represents the most significant settlement within the locality. Bolsover Castle sits to the very edge of the dip slope and is afforded long distance views, particularly to the west to include the motorway corridor and the rising landform beyond. This EH site represents an important local landmark although its influence on the wider landscape structure is much less evident when compared with Hardwick Hall.

To the northwest of J29 the ruins of Sutton Scarsdale Hall form a further important landmark within the wider landscape, its former designed landscape has been lost over the years and its position overlooking the M1 and Bolsover is uninterrupted.

The LLCA comprises a varied landscape featuring some important features the wider landscape lacks the cohesive nature of other parts of the study area and includes some local visual detractors. As such the landscape is considered to be of ordinary quality, its contribution to some important heritage assets would suggest that it is of regional importance. As such the landscape’s sensitivity is considered to be moderate but at the lower end of the scale.

LLCA 4: Barlborough Estate and Farmlands

To the south of J30 there is a subtle transition in the landscape from the gently undulating landscape to the south to the more markedly hilly landscape to the north comprising several low ridgelines and cloughs, these mark the edge of the limestone escarpment. Barlborough lies to the south of the LLCA with Wales marking the northern limit, the intervening landscape comprises a settled farmland with some extensive areas of mature woodland and estate plantations, these are most noticeable around Barlborough Hall and Norwood with smaller copses and some replanted woodland combining with the landform to create a contained landscape. Several of the shallow valleys have been used to form reservoirs, for example Harthill and Pebley Reservoirs.

The Registered Park and Garden at Barlborough Hall is contained within a boundary of mature vegetation and woodland, as such awareness of the landscape surrounding the hall itself is restricted (refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.2 Sheet 4 of 5: VP11).

The field pattern is less cohesive than adjoining areas to the south, the large fields and interrupted hedgerows associated with arable land uses dominates to the centre of the area in contrast with a smaller more intimate field pattern on the steeper slopes and to the edge of the villages and farmsteads which are used for grazing.

To the north and west the elevated nature of the wider landscape becomes apparent as interrupted views from the motorway corridor are afforded of the Rother valley that extends to the west.

The LLCA is formed around the undulating landform of the limestone escarpment, its low hills and valleys and predominantly arable landscape




results in a landscape that lacks cohesive elements. Settlements combine with ribbon development and are frequent visual detractors within the landscape along with the existing M1 corridor. As such the landscape is considered to be of ordinary quality, its relationship with existing development results in a landscape of local importance. As such the landscape’s sensitivity is considered to be moderate.

LLCA 5: Ulley Farmlands

North of Wales, the landform flattens and local undulations are less pronounced. This is a predominantly arable landscape with large fields, low levels of hedgerow boundaries and fewer mature trees within the landscape. There is a noticeable reduction in the scale and frequency of built form within the landscape as a whole, the settlements of Aughton to the west, Thurcroft to the north and Wales to the south have a relatively clear demarcation. The village of Ulley occupies a position on the edge of the dip slope to the escarpment to the west of the motorway corridor and is surrounded by open countryside.

The existing M1 corridor passes through the core of the character area and is largely contained by a combination of cuttings and/or roadside vegetation, occasionally a lack of this screening permits increased awareness of the corridor but this is typically short lived and the corridor exerts limited influence on the perception of the wider landscape (refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.2 Sheet 4 of 5: VP14).

The A57 and its intersection with the M1 at J31 results in some ribbon development however this and the junction itself is contained within a fold in the local landform and its influence on the core of the landscape character to the north is limited.

The open countryside associated with the character zone is considered to be of ordinary quality, there are few distinguishing features and vegetation cover is limited. The landscape has some relevance to the setting of the urban areas to the west and the fringes of the Sheffield conurbation however the network of local footpaths and links to neighbouring towns and villages suggests that there is more significant value at the local level. The resulting sensitivity of the landscape is moderate.

7.4.4 Summary of Local Landscape Character

The landscape character of the study area is, with the exception of the area around J28, largely rural, featuring extensive tracts of open countryside within which historic villages combine with former mining settlements to give the area a settled appearance. Woodland cover varies throughout with particularly extensive areas occurring to the south and central sections before becoming less frequent to the north of J30. The landscape becomes increasingly open from this point as the landform softens to a gently undulating one and settlements less frequent.

There are some nationally important landscapes within the study area, notably at Hardwick Hall, Bolsover Castle and Sutton Scarsdale Hall, all of which are visually linked and that have contributed much to the development of the




landscape over time. In addition several Conservation Areas cover some of the older villages set within the wider landscape.

The rolling landform most apparent in the south of the study before becoming less well defined in the north results in some extensive lengths of cuttings and embankments, extensive roadside planting provides effective screening for much of the route, the result is that the corridor and traffic movements within it are infrequently visible from the surrounding landscape but where they do occur e.g. around J29a the awareness can extend over a considerable distance.

Overall the combination and scale of landform, land cover and pattern results in a landscape that is typical of much of this part of South Yorkshire, Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire.

7.4.5 Visual Context

The study corridor is set within a largely rural and sparsely settled landscape, the exception being to the south where the urban fringes of Mansfield and surrounding settlements results in development occurring over a greater area resulting in increased visual awareness of the existing corridor.

Through much of its length views typically occur from individual dwellings, small hamlets and villages, longer distance views from larger settlements such as Bolsover do occur but these tend to be in the context of broad expansive views within which the motorway corridor represents a noticeable feature primarily due to the movement of vehicles through the landscape (refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.2 Sheet 3 of 5: VP08).

There are some views however that have been identified during consultation with the Statutory Environmental Bodies, these are primarily concerned with the Hardwick Hall Estate (The National Trust and EH), Sutton Scarsdale Hall and Bolsover Castle (both EH properties), their visual links also being closely linked to their historical connections (refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.2 Sheet 2 of 5: VP07).

During earlier consultation between Atkins and The National Trust a number of key views were identified, these have been subsequently reviewed and confirmed as being potentially sensitive to the implementation of SM (Refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.1). As a result, specific work to identify where and to what degree existing views from and to the hall and its grounds might be affected has been undertaken. .Specific impacts on the heritage resources have been identified and discussed within Chapter 6, whilst the degree to which these sensitive views are likely to be impacted upon and the effect of these modifications have been identified within this chapter.


The landscape and visual effects of the scheme and specifically major equipment sites have been assessed and described below. Visual effects have been summarised below with specific details of the individual sites’ characteristics, opportunities for mitigation and recommendations on any other mitigation requirements are set out in the relevant section of Appendix A2: Checklists 1, 2 and 3.




7.5.1 Local Landscape Character

In accordance with the methodology in Section 7.3, a simple level assessment of potential effects on landscape character has been undertaken. This has comprised identifying via Appendix A2: Checklist 3 where individual pieces or combinations of infrastructure or the loss of vegetation for local connections (Appendix A2: Checklist 2) are likely to modify how the landscape character is perceived. In so doing the overall effects of the infrastructure and outline mitigation philosophy for each of the landscape / townscape character areas through the study area are outlined below. Reference should be made to Appendix A3: Figure 7.1 for the location of infrastructure within the relevant LLCA and Chapter 3 of this report for information on the proposed infrastructure. Also see Figures 4, 5, 6 and 7 in Chapter 3 for illustrations of the proposed gantries.

LLCA 1: Mansfield Urban Fringe

Proposals within approximately 7.6km length comprise (refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.1 Sheets 1 and 2 of 10):

• 3 super span gantries G0-03, G1-04, G1-03

• 4 gantries with proposed modifications, G0-01a, G0-02, G0-04, G0-05

• 2 ERAs (MP219/8+50A to 219/9+50A, MP220/0+50B to 220/1+50B

• 8 new MS4 (G0-06, G0-01, G1-04a, G1-05a, G1-06, G1-06b, G1-08, G1-09

• 4 MS4 / ADS on existing bases (G1-01, G1-07A, G1-07, G1-09A

• 6 MS3 removed (218/8+90A)

• 2 MS3 (G1-05b, G1-06c)

• 2 ADS (cantilever type) (G1-05, G1-06a)

• 1 EAV camera

• 14 CCTVs (PTZ) cameras

• 6 ASE cameras (AS1-01, AS1-02, AS1-03, AS1-04, AS1-05, AS1-06)

• 8 CCDs


New infrastructure, in particular the super span gantries, MS4s and ASEs would be visible over a broader area than is currently experienced, the structures would be visible above existing roadside planting and would where planting is absent be a noticeable new element.

The combination of modifications to existing infrastructure and the introduction of intermittent new elevated structures would lead to the potential for greater awareness of the corridor, particularly where clusters of infrastructure occur however this increased visibility is in the context of some extensive warehouse buildings (High View Road) and road network (Ball Hill and Sporton Lane). The impacts arising from these are not considered to represent a significant




change to the fabric of the landscape that contributes to its defining features. The modifications to the existing motorway corridor would be confined to a defined area/feature within the landscape and as such the perception of the wider character area would be unchanged.

The resulting magnitude of impact is considered to be no greater than minor and adverse, in the context of a landscape that is of low sensitivity, the resulting significance of effect in the year of opening is therefore in the order of slight adverse and is predicted to remain so into the design year.

LLCA 2: Hardwick Estates Farmland

Proposals within approximately 5.6km length comprise (refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.1: Sheets 3 and 4 of 10):

• 4 super span gantries (G1-10, G1-13, G1-14, G1-15)

• 4 ERAs (MP224/2+90A to 224/3+90A, MP224/6+20B to 224/7+20B, MP226/7A to 226/8A, MP227/0+25B to 227/1+25B)

• 1 new MS4 (G1-16)

• 4 MS4 / ADS on existing bases (G1-11, G1-11a, G1-12, G1-12a)

• 5 MS3 removed (MP223/3+5B, MP223/6+15A, MP226/8+70A, MP227/6+30B, MP228/90A)

• 3 EAV cameras

• 11 CCTV (PTZ) cameras

• 4 ASE cameras (AS1-07, AS1-08, AS1-9, AS1-10)

• 6 CCDs


The existing M1 corridor represents one of the few detracting elements within what is a predominantly rural character area. Roadside planting effectively screens extensive lengths of the corridor especially during summer months although awareness remains from the local ridgelines and highpoints to the east and west (Deep Lane and Astwith Lane). The introduction of new infrastructure, particularly superspan gantries, ASEs and CCTV locations or modification to the existing infrastructure along with clusters of TTMS on relatively sparsely vegetated sections of verge is anticipated to result in a minor change to the way in which the wider character area is perceived. Existing locations have been re-used wherever possible with slightly smaller MS4 units and positioned so as to be visually associated with existing locations that are to be removed or with structures such as road bridges.

The resulting magnitude of impact is considered to be no greater than minor and adverse, in the context of a landscape that is of high sensitivity, the resulting significance of effect in the year of opening is therefore in the order of slight adverse and is predicted to remain so into the design year.

The proposed modification of the surface finish (refer to Section 7.6.4) would result in the majority of equipment giving rise to an individual effect of neutral.




Despite this the occurrence of the equipment within the corridor and the remaining awareness of the ASE and TTMS locations are likely to maintain the overall significance of effect as slight adverse.

LLCA 3: Duckmanton and Bolsover

Proposals within approximately 9.7km length comprise (refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.1: Sheets 4, 5, 6 and 7 of 10):

• 6 super span gantries (G2-02, G2-03, G2-08, G3-02, G3-03, G3-09)

• 8 ERAs (MP230/0+50A to 230/1+50A, MP230/2+25B to 230/3+25B, MP232/2+30A to 232/3+30A, MP232/2+40B to 232/3+40B, MP235/2+40A to 235/3+40A, MP235/5+60B to 235/6+60B, MP237/3+85A to 237/4+85A, MP237/3+95B to 237/4+95B)

• 7 new MS4 (G2-01, G2-04a, G2-07a, G3-00, G3-05a, G3-06a, G3-06b)

• 9 MS4 / ADS on existing bases (G2-04b, G2-06, G2-06a, G2-07b, G2-09, G3-01, G3-05, G3-06, G3-07a)

• 6 MS3 removed (MP228/8+45B, MP229/7+30A, MP233/0+50B, MP235/0+50A, MP236/6+30A, MP238/1+80B)

• 6 ADS (cantilever type) (G2-04, G2-05, G2-07, G3-04, G3-07, G3-08)

• 3 EAV cameras


• 10 ASE cameras (AS2-01, AS2-02, AS2-03, AS2-04, AS2-05, AS3-01, AS3-02, AS3-03, AS3-04, AS3-05)

• 13 CCDs


The introduction of SM infrastructure in the form of additional elevated structures and signs would result in some increased awareness of the motorway corridor within the landscape. In general these structures and proposed signs would be visible within the context of the existing corridor but in places may be visible above adjoining landform and/or vegetation resulting in the orientation or location of the motorway being readily perceptible.

The proposed TTMS, gantries, CCTV locations and ASE cameras on the approach and through J29a are set within the context of the ongoing development of the distribution/retail areas immediately adjacent to the motorway corridor, off Markham Lane and as a result are not anticipated to give rise to significant changes. Views from the ridgeline to the east, including Bolsover are open and in places dramatic, however changes of the type being proposed within the existing corridor combined with distance are not considered significant and the existing traffic movements are the most readily perceptible visual detractor.

The resulting magnitude of impact is considered to be no greater than minor and adverse, in the context of a landscape that is of moderate sensitivity, the




resulting significance of effect in the year of opening is therefore in the order of slight adverse and is predicted to remain so into the design year.

The proposed modification of the surface finish (refer to Section 7.6.4) would result in the majority of equipment giving rise to an individual effect of neutral. Despite this the occurrence of the equipment within the corridor and the remaining awareness of the ASE and TTMS locations are likely to maintain the overall significance of effect as slight adverse.

LLCA 4: Barlborough Estate and Farmlands

Proposals within approximately 4.4km length comprise (refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.1: Sheets 7 and 8 of 10):

• 1 super span gantry (G4-03);

• 2 ERAs (MP240/9+60 to 241/0+90A, MP240/9+70 to 241/0+70B);

• 2 new MS4 (G3-10, G4-03a);

• 3 MS4 / ADS on existing bases (G4-01, G4-04a, G4-06);

• 2 MS3 removed (MP239/1A, MP240/2+60A);

• 1 ADS (cantilever type) (G4-04); and

• 2 EAV cameras;

• 9 CCTV (PTZ) cameras;

• 5 ASE cameras (AS4-01, AS4-02, AS4-03, AS4-04, AS4-05)

• 3 CCDs


The larger structures including the super span gantries would result in an increased awareness of the motorway corridor from local highpoints. A number of existing locations would be re-used to accommodate new infrastructure and would not give rise to a significant change in awareness or perception of the corridor as a result (refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.2 Sheet 4 of 5: VP11).

The character area is relatively large and encompasses numerous small hills and settlements that punctuate the local skyline including Killamarsh and Upperthorpe, the hilly nature of the landform would result in any perception being rapidly screened from view and the potential wider effects on landscape character reduced. The proposals require the removal of a number of existing MS3s despite this there would be a net increase in the number of structures and signs and as a result there is anticipated to be a slightly greater overall awareness of the location of the motorway corridor within the landscape character.

The resulting magnitude of impact is considered to be no greater than minor and adverse, in the context of a landscape that is of moderate sensitivity, the resulting significance of effect in the year of opening is therefore in the order of slight adverse and is predicted to remain so into the design year.




The proposed modification of the surface finish (refer to Section 7.6.4) would result in the majority of equipment giving rise to an individual effect of neutral as the well wooded context would enable the proposed colour to blend effectively within views of the corridor. Despite this the occurrence of the equipment within the corridor and the remaining awareness of the ASE and TTMS locations are likely to maintain the overall significance of effect as slight adverse.

LLCA 5: Ulley Farmlands

Proposals within approximately 5.1km length comprise (refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.1: Sheets 8, 9 and 10 of 10):

• 3 super span gantries (G4-08, G4-13a, G4-13)

• 4 ERAs (MP244/0+25 to 244/1+25B, MP244/1+5 to 244/1+5A, MP245/8+5 to 245/9+5A, MP245/8+80 – 245/9+80B)

• 4 new MS4 (G4-09, G4-09a, G4-12b, G4-15)

• 3 MS4 / ADS on existing bases (G4-10, G4-11, G4-12a)

• 4 MS3 removed (MP243/4+75B, MP243/6+15A, MP246/7+90B, MP247/9+95B)

• 2 ADS (cantilever type) (G4-10a, G4-12)

• 1 MS3 on existing base (G4-14)

• 4 EAV cameras


• 5 ASE cameras (AS4-06, AS4-07, AS4-08, AS4-09, AS4-10)

• 7 CCDs


Modifications to the existing infrastructure, additional high level structures and proposed clusters of TTMS are not anticipated to significantly alter the perception of the motorway corridor over much of this broad character area. The motorway itself, in combination with moving traffic and existing infrastructure locations forms a relatively discreet element over much of the area. Only in the vicinity of the motorway itself is there a marked increase in the influence of the corridor arising from the movement of traffic combined with an increased frequency of roadside signs on the perception of the landscape, this rapidly diminishes as the undulating landform lifts and views are screened.

The resulting magnitude of impact is considered to be negligible, in the context of a landscape that is of moderate sensitivity, the resulting significance of effect in the year of opening is therefore in the order of neutral and is predicted to remain so into the design year.




7.5.2 Visual Effects

By the very nature of the infrastructure and their dispersed location within the existing corridor the effects on groups of receptors have been identified against the relevant piece of infrastructure/cable run and discussed in the appropriate checklist. A summary of the significant effects has been included below however for a detailed assessment of an individual location please refer to Appendix A2: Checklist 2 and 3.

The key visual receptor groupings (Visual Receptors – VR) with views of the existing motorway and predicted to be aware of modifications within the corridor are shown on Appendix A3: Figure 7.1. Detailed information of the effects are described against the visual receptor groups and the specific infrastructure location in Appendix A2: Checklist 3.

Majority of the visual impacts would result from where proposed individual infrastructure or clusters would locally modify views of the existing corridor by introducing new conspicuous elements that frequently highlight the location of the M1 corridor within the wider view. Elsewhere the removal of vegetation is anticipated in order to facilitate the construction of new infrastructure (the footings to infrastructure or CCDs) to sections of the motorway contained within narrow wooded belts and/or environmental barriers where residential property frequently lies immediately adjacent to the existing motorway corridor.

7.5.3 Longitudinal Cable Runs

Detailed assessment of potential effects associated with the installation of cabling in ducts, along with outline mitigation strategies and recommendations which are outlined in the relevant section of Appendix A2: Checklist 2.

The proposed scheme has been designed to utilise the existing infrastructure and sections of the ducted network as far as practical, the majority of cabling being confined to the SB carriageway verge. The requirement for working space along the verge is limited (assumption of 4m width and 4m height). As the existing verge to the edge of LBS1 is predominantly grass, with only small pockets of shrub and scrub the verge has been assessed as being able to effectively accommodate local connections with minimal vegetation clearance, the resulting effect being considered neutral. Where minor clearance is required the effects are temporary, being associated with the construction/installation phases and involving minor vegetation thinning and/or clearance with recommendations to minimise the works footprint where possible.

7.5.4 Gantries and Major Equipment

Detailed assessments of the potential visual effects of the installation of each proposed gantry location and major equipment site along with outline mitigation strategies are set out in the relevant section of Appendix A2: Checklist 3, including an assessment during construction, post construction (winter - year of opening) and residual effect (summer – year 15).

Majority of residual effects (summer in year 15) related to the scheme are considered to be no more than neutral to slight adverse. The majority of effects related to the scheme are considered to be no more than neutral (286 sites) and the remaining key identified residual effects are no more than slight




adverse (85 sites). A single receptor (VR-01a Kirby Park’s Farm) is anticipated to be subject to a slight beneficial effect – arising from changes to signs at an existing portal gantry. No locations have been identified as resulting in long term effects greater than slight adverse.

As has been previously outlined, the National Trust had expressed some concerns about the potential effect of the implementation of SM on Hardwick Hall and its surrounding estate parkland. A number of agreed viewpoints have been discussed and agreed with the National Trust. Panoramic photographs have been annotated to describe the location and the extent to which views of the proposed infrastructure locations are anticipated (refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.3 for proposed gantry treatment submitted to National Trust). Furthermore, visual intrusion will be reduced through the application of an appropriate paint system colour, selected in consultation with EH and NT to merge the structure into the background as far as practical (see Appendix A3: Figure 7.3 for comparison of gantry with/ without applied paint system). Within the vicinity of the estate, proposed replacement MS4s at MP224/7+97A (G1-11), MP226/0+55A (G1-12), MP226/0+55B (G1-12a) and MP224/9+35B (G1-11a) along with six CCTV locations and two ASE cameras may be perceptible from elevated locations within Hardwick Estate; views are typically limited by existing roadside and parkland vegetation. To the north of these locations awareness from Stainsby Road of the top of a proposed super span gantry at MP226/8+64 that replaces an existing MS3 and associated CCTV site, are anticipated. No locations are anticipated to give rise to an effect greater than slight and adverse in the design year.

7.5.5 Through Junction Running (TJR) Implementation

In addition to the major infrastructure sites, the inclusion of TJR within the scheme requires a number of localised areas of widening and/or hardening of the existing verge, requiring the removal of short lengths of existing planting. Although the elements of widening and/or hardening of the verge are not visually significant they may require the removal of existing planting. This has the potential to expose or increase the extent of views of the corridor and elements within it, such as traffic movements, barriers, and signage. Locations where widening of the existing carriageway is proposed are set out below along with an outline of the predicted effects:

• MP218+50A to 218/6+80A, NB, Maximum width: 3.5m; Set in cutting the widening is likely to require the front face of mature trees to be trimmed back and at its widest point some removal of the first row of trees, set within cutting the removal of trees and widening of the carriageway is not anticipated to give rise to a significance of effect greater than neutral.

• MP243/0+50A to 243/1+50A, NB, Maximum width: 2.5m; Existing broad grass verge with isolated shrubs – widening of the carriageway would require some localised vegetation removal but would not give rise to significant impacts – the resulting significance of effect would be neutral.

• MP218/5+60B to 218/3+50B, SB, Maximum width: 3m; Set in cutting the widening is likely to require the front face of mature trees to be trimmed back and at its widest point some removal of the first row of trees, set




within cutting the removal of trees and widening of the carriageway is not anticipated to give rise to a significance of effect greater than neutral.

• MP221/7+00B to 221/5+20B, SB, Maximum width: 2.5m; Slight embankment with existing grass verge – some pruning of adjacent vegetation is required but this is not anticipated to give rise to impacts on adjacent receptors, the resulting significance of effect would be neutral.

7.5.6 Abnormal Load Bay

At J28 abnormal load bays are proposed to be located within the roundabout to provide parking areas to NB and SB traffic. These bays would require an area of hardstanding to be constructed and would require the removal of some areas of scrubby vegetation and open grassland. The effects would generally be contained within the busy junction environment and would not adversely impact upon local character. Visual receptors to the west of the junction would, during the winter, have the potential to be aware of the changes however these are not anticipated to be significant, the effects being outlined in Appendix A2: Checklist 3. Post construction consideration will be given to the planting of appropriate tree species to replace that removed for working space.

7.5.7 Combined Effects

In a limited number of places, several items of proposed infrastructure combine to be visible over a considerable distance. This has the potential to give rise to a combined effect on landscape character and/or visual receptors; this is likely to be limited to a slightly increased awareness of the presence of the existing M1 corridor which is an established feature within the landscape. Where infrastructure lies in close proximity a reference has been made to nearby locations within the checklist to highlight the potential for combined effects. Following the assessment combined effects of the proposed changes are anticipated to be most evident at the following locations:

• MP218/7 to 220/3 – Proposed cluster of TTMS, ASE and CCTV cameras on a slightly elevated section of the M1 corridor in combination with several proposed MS4s (G1-05, G1-05b, G1-05a, G1-06, G1-06a) would increase awareness locally of the motorway corridor (South Normanton incorporating Sough Road and Carr Lane (VR12) and the fringes of Hilcote (VR13, VR15)).

• MP223/6 to 224/4 – A slightly exposed section of the corridor would be made more perceptible by the introduction of TTMS and individual EAV, ASE and CCTV locations, awareness would increase from the Hardwick Estate and open farmland to the west (refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.2 Sheet 1 of 5: VP02).

• MP225/9 to 227/2 – Sensitive views from the Hardwick Estate and access road would be affected by the introduction of TTMS, CCTV locations and a single ASE, in combination with proposed gantry (G1-13) and ERA at MP227/0+30 to 227/1+30B.

• MP243/9 to 245/5 – A relatively long stretch of the corridor with some exposed distant views to the wider landscape – proposed cluster of TTMS, EAVs and CCTV locations in combination with ERAs (MP244/0+30 to




244/1+30B and MP244/2+10 to 244/3+10A) and new cantilever gantries (G4-09, G4-09a) would increase local awareness from Woodhall in the south and Wales and Wales Bar in the north.

The combined effect of the proposed infrastructure on landscape character is therefore anticipated to slightly increase the magnitude of impacts arising from the progression of the scheme, this should however be considered in the context of these being local to the scheme corridor.


7.6.1 General Principals

In 2012, the environment team undertook baseline studies to inform the design process and comment on the sensitivity of potential locations of major infrastructure emerging through the design process, with a view to avoiding where possible without compromising the operational regime. Subsequently specific mitigation measures have been identified to address remaining impacts and these have been described for each location within Appendix A2: Checklist 3.

The following general design principles have been applied and reviewed on site to minimise and mitigate the adverse impacts of the physical components of the construction phase, whilst integrating the scheme into the landscape pattern of the area. These include:

• Consideration of the location of the proposed equipment to avoid or reduce the need for the removal of existing vegetation.

• Careful attention to minimise earthworks and avoid existing young trees and retain as much existing vegetation as possible.

• Selection of coordinated surface finishes with a view to reducing visual awareness (for example see Appendix A3: Figure 7.3).

• The detailed design of the individual sites to avoid the need for temporary removal of the existing environmental barrier.

• Where appropriate the replacement of vegetation to reduce visual awareness of the proposed equipment in accordance with the Highways Agency’s policy on mitigation planting.

7.6.2 Retention of Existing Vegetation

The importance of working with existing mitigation measures, and particularly the retention of existing tree and shrub cover cannot be overstated as the maturity of many sections of the Highways Agency’s soft estate cannot be rapidly recreated by new planting, particularly if mature planting is acting as a screen for nearby receptors. The protection and retention of established tree cover is particularly important for the following reasons:

• It maintains the existing landscape framework and screening;

• It provides a backdrop to soften the visual impact of the new equipment; and

• It maintains the local habitat diversity of the verge.




Advanced site clearance works will be undertaken to establish the footprint at each of the cabinet locations and required working space for both the cable runs and cabinet sites, linked to the definition of ‘no go areas’ for the DP during construction.

7.6.3 New Vegetation

Where existing vegetation is removed to facilitate construction of new infrastructure, consideration will be given to the replacement with native species appropriate to the location (refer to Derbyshire County Council’s Landscape Character Assessment for species appropriate to the wider landscape character and the Phase 1 Habitat Survey) but likely to include species such as hawthorn, hazel, blackthorn, field maple, geulder rose, cherry, birch, spindle and oak. At specific locations where significant impacts have been identified the use of evergreen species such as Scots pine and holly may be used in a targeted manner to screen specific views.

New planting would primarily comprise small nursery stock i.e. transplants these are anticipated to establish more effectively in the short term and reinstate existing planting objectives in the medium to long term. At specific locations where direct views are anticipated to be significantly affected, the use of larger nursery stock, such as feathereds may be deemed appropriate. A planting schedule for identified locations will be prepared following site clearance and implementation of the proposed scheme and the HA are committed to the establishment of the planting.

Draft planting plans have been drafted for three specific stretches of the corridor considered to be highly sensitive to potential visual impacts on heritage resources. These are provided in Appendix A3: Figure 7.4: Proposed Visual Effects Mitigation Strategy (Sheets 1-3).

7.6.4 Surface Finishes

Along three sections of the corridor the proposed surface finish of the main elevated infrastructure locations (gantries, ADS, MS4s) has been discussed with the National Trust and English Heritage and subsequently modified from the regular grey colour to a light brown (BS 4008 colour ref 08 C 39, refer to Appendix A3: Figure 7.3). The exceptions to this will be the ASE cameras and the TTMS as they are required to be highly visible to road users.

The three sections have been identified as they coincide with landscapes of higher sensitivity, namely:

• MP223/5 – 228/4 – Encompasses the Hardwick Hall and Estate, that includes a Registered Park and Garden and several Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas

• MP230/8 – 233/0 – Extending along a relatively open stretch of the M1 corridor with an awareness from Bolsover Castle and Sutton Scarsdale Hall.

• MP239/6 – 241/9 – Where the M1 marks the western boundary of the Barlborough Hall Estate that is a Registered Park and Garden.




7.7 Summary

The use of existing gantry bases and in a small number of locations the signs themselves minimises the amount of vegetation clearance required and thus reduces the potential for ‘new’ views being opened up through gaps in planting. The magnitude of impact in visual outlook is also kept to a minimum as the only change, in the long term, will be as a result of the installation of new signs or signals.

In general it can be concluded that the majority of structures can be incorporated into the surrounding landscape pattern with no significant residual effects. A slight adverse significance of residual effect rating has been given to all the LLCAs with the exception of LLCA 5: Ulley Farmlands which was considered neutral. The retention of as much of the soft estate as possible enables the accommodation of the scheme within the existing landscape framework as far possible. It also provides an effective framework to allow for the development of a comprehensive set of additional complementary planting proposals to contribute to the scheme’s integration into the local landscape.

With regards to visual effects, the assessment identified that the majority of equipment would result in effects during construction and immediately post construction no greater than slight adverse (refer to Appendix A2: Checklist 3). This is reflected in the 70 sites anticipated to result in residual effects in the order of slight adverse. No sites resulted in a moderate and adverse effect or greater. A higher degree of impact would generally occur during construction at sensitive locations, primarily due to requirements for temporary removal of environmental barriers where they exist and some significant vegetation clearance, hence opening views towards the works and the existing carriageway and traffic movements. These are however only temporary impacts, reducing once environmental barriers are replaced and mitigation planting has taken place and started to mature.

The majority of localised visual impacts result from the introduction of new infrastructure to sections of the motorway where the removal of vegetation to accommodate new elements within the corridor would result in noticeable changes. Localised adverse visual effects are also anticipated to occur as a result of changes on sections of open carriageway with minimal existing highway planting and on embankments where proposed gantries and associated signs would be visible with limited opportunities to mitigate the affected view. However the majority of views to the scheme are mid to long distance and constitute a minor change in visual outlook.




8 Nature Conservation


This section summarises the findings of the ecological assessment undertaken for the proposed scheme. It describes recommended mitigation measures and the potential for residual effects to occur upon biodiversity resources. The ecological assessment has been informed by desk studies and field surveys which identified designated wildlife sites and other habitats, and species that are protected by law or otherwise of particular nature conservation importance.

Field surveys focussed on the soft estate and other semi-natural habitats within the Highways Agency boundary, but also considered adjacent habitats where appropriate (e.g. ponds and water courses located off-site but within the zone of influence of the scheme).


Ecological resources receive protection through legislation and planning policy. Legislation and planning policy relevant to the scheme has been identified following determination of ecological receptors by means of a desk study (see Appendix A2: Checklist 1).

8.2.1 European Directives

The following European legislation is likely to be relevant to the scheme:

• Water Framework Directive 2000

• EC Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora).


The following UK legislation is likely to be relevant to the proposed scheme:

• National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 (as amended);

• Weeds Act 1959;

• Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended);

• Environmental Protection Act 1990;

• Water Resources Act 1991;

• Protection of Badgers Act 1992;

• Environment Act 1995;

• Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996;

• Hedgerow Regulations 1997;

• Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act 2000;

• Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006; and

• Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010.




Please see Appendix 1 of the Phase 1 Habitat Survey Report (provided in Appendix B2 of this report) for details of the afore-listed Directives and legislation.

8.2.3 National Policy

National Planning Policy on the protection of biodiversity is set out in the NPPF. It identifies three dimensions to sustainable development one of which is an environmental role – contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; and, as part of this, helping to improve biodiversity, use natural resources prudently and minimise waste and pollution.

The NPPF requires that:

• Distinctions should be made between the hierarchy of international, national and locally designated sites, so that protection is commensurate with their status and gives appropriate weight to their importance and the contribution that they make to wider ecological networks.

• Impacts on biodiversity are minimised and projects provide net gains in biodiversity where possible.

• Opportunities to incorporate biodiversity in and around developments should be encouraged.

8.2.4 Local Policies

Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) / Local Wildlife Sites (LWSs) are identified by LPAs because of their value for wildlife. These receive a measure of protection through local planning policies. For further details on relevant LPA nature conservation policies please refer to Appendix A2: Checklist 1 and for the location of these SINCs and LWSs please see Appendix A3: Figure 2.1 - Environmental Constraints Plan).

8.2.5 Highways Agency Biodiversity Action Plan (HABAP)

As part of the objectives of the ‘Environment Strategic Plan’ the Highways Agency developed its own BAP. This lists objectives that seek to effectively manage the Agency’s soft estate, prevent significant adverse impacts upon HABAP species/habitats and, where possible, enhance the biodiversity value of the Agency’s land.

The HABAP lists twenty species of importance, each of which is associated with the broad habitat type with which they are most commonly, but not exclusively, associated. Full details of the HABAP can be found on the Highways Agency website.

8.2.6 National and Local Biodiversity Action Plans (UK/LBAP)

Many species are included on lists of UK BAP priority species and habitats. Government agencies and LPAs are obliged to have regard to these as features of principal conservation importance in exercising their functions (Section 74 CRoW Act, 2000, Section 40 NERC Act, 2006).

They are also obliged to implement measures to further the conservation interest of such species and to restore or enhance their populations or habitats. LBAPs covering the area of the scheme comprise: Rotherham LBAP; Chesterfield LBAP; Lowland Derbyshire LBAP and Nottinghamshire LBAP.




8.3 Methodology

The ecological assessment follows the methodology outlined in the DMRB Volume 10 and Volume 11, Section 2, Part 2 Ecology and Nature Conservation and incorporates guidance contained in IAN 130/10: Ecology and Nature Conservation: Criteria for Impact Assessment. In line with IAN 161/13, a simple level assessment based on data obtained from a desk study and field surveys has been undertaken.

Consultation on the scope of the ecological assessment was undertaken with Natural England, the Environment Agency, LPAs and other local interest groups. To establish the baseline environment the consultation also included a request for ecological Information. Appendix A2: Checklist 1 contains a summary of the consultation responses.

The ecological assessment has followed the following principal steps:

• Ecological data collection to establish the baseline environment in the form of desk studies followed by field surveys to confirm the presence / likely absence of habitats and species within the study area.

• Assessment of potential impact of the proposed scheme.

• Development and incorporation of appropriate mitigation measures to address adverse effects where required.

• Conclusion on the significance of residual effects.

8.3.1 Collection of Baseline Ecological Data (Desk Based Study)

Ecological data for the study area was collected from a variety of sources listed in Table 8.1.

Table 8.1: Ecological Data Sources Used to Inform the Assessment

Data Source Description Limitations

Multi-agency geographic information centre (MAGIC) - magic.defra.gov.uk

Online data source providing the locations and extents of statutory designated sites and habitats listed on national inventories (e.g. ancient woodlands) within the UK.

Provides data on statutory sites only, does not cover non-statutory sites.

National Biodiversity Network (NBN) Gateway

Provides ecological records relating to the UK’s flora and fauna, including location and dates of sightings.

Data is often patchy with some areas not covered, and often resolution is low with most records relating to 10km grid squares.

Ordnance Survey (OS) 1:25,000 scale maps

Provide locations of ponds and other distinctive habitat features (e.g. woodlands).

Provides no details about the potential ecological value of specific features

Area 12 Managing Agent Contractor (MAC), Aone+

Ecological information from environmental studies or reports undertaken for the area.

-

Local ornithological groups, local amphibian and reptile groups, local bat groups, local badger groups, local Wildlife Trusts, Network Rail, Local Biological

Historical data from ecological surveys of the local area.

Data can be patchy with some areas not covered and/or out of date




Data Source Description Limitations

Records Centres, Yorkshire Naturalist Union.

The findings of the desk study are presented in Phase 1 Habitat Survey Report in Appendix B2 and summarised in Section 8.4 of this report.

8.3.2 Collection of Baseline Ecological Data (Field Surveys)

As outlined above, a number of field surveys were conducted to verify and confirm the presence / likely absence of species in the study area. Roadside habitats (within the Highways Agency soft estate) were identified during a field survey carried out in April 2012 and updated as required throughout the survey season. Ecologists studied the motorway soft estate and identified habitats according to the standard Phase 1 habitat survey methodology17

. The findings of the Phase 1 habitat survey are reported in Phase 1 Habitat Survey Report in Appendix B2.

Desk studies and habitat surveys informed the scope of field surveys for protected species which may be present within the scheme area. Surveys undertaken and methods used are outlined in Table 8.2 below.

Table 8.2: Surveys Undertaken

Species Date Undertaken

Survey Methods

Phase 1 Habitat Survey

March 2012

18

A desk study and Phase 1 habitat survey were undertaken in order to assess the value of habitats present within the survey area and the likelihood of the area to support protected species.

Great Crested Newt Triturus cristatus

March-June 2012

19

Habitat suitability assessment (HSI) of all ponds within 250m and other potentially suitable water bodies within 500m of the scheme corridor. Survey of all potentially suitable water bodies to identify those which currently support newts. Night-time torching, bottle trapping and egg searching were employed over four visits, extended to six visits if great crested newts were found. Where access was not allowed terrestrial surveys were undertaken on the Highways Agency corridor within 500m of those ponds, as agreed with the Highways Agency and NE.

Badger Meles meles

February 2012

20

Survey of suitable habitat within and a visual inspection of a further 20m outside the Highway Agency’s soft estate for field signs of badger use/activity.

Bats (various species)

Bat activity surveys June-August 2012

21

Surveys of underpasses, bridges and trees were assessed to establish their bat potential and subsequently surveyed. More detailed surveys including emergence, re-entry, automated and transect surveys using bat detectors to determine the usage of these structures and trees as

17

Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC), 2007 Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey. 18

M1 MM J28 to J31 Phase 1 Habitat Survey Report. 2012. Appendix B2. 19

M1 MM J28 to J31 – Great Crested Newts Survey Report, 2012, Appendix B4. 20

M1 MM J28 to J31 - Badger Field Survey Report 2012. Appendix B3 21

M1 MM J28 to J31 Bat Survey Report 2012. Appendix B5.

22 M1 MM J28 to J31 Winter Bat Survey Report 2013. Appendix B5.




Species Date Undertaken

Survey Methods

Winter surveys January and February 2013

22

roosts, crossing points or key foraging sites for bats. Ten structures were surveyed in winter 2013 to determine whether bats were roosting in the structures. This was to support a European Protected Species License Application with NE.

The findings of the above surveys are reported in Phase 1 Habitat Report in Appendix B2; Badger Report in Appendix B3; Great Crested Newt Survey Report in Appendix B4; and Bat Survey Report in Appendix B5.

Targeted surveys were not undertaken for otters Lutra lutra or water voles Arvicola amphibius due to the absence of suitable habitat within or immediately adjacent to the Highways Agency soft estate.

Several areas within the soft estate contain habitat which is suitable for reptiles. Reptile surveys were not undertaken as, although reptiles are likely to be present within the study area, it was considered that the data provided from the desk study indicate that they are unlikely to be present in large numbers. Baseline habitats recorded during the Phase 1 habitat survey enabled an assessment of their nature conservation value and the scheme’s likely impact on these species.

Suitable habitat for birds is present throughout the study area. Given the scale of the proposed works and potential impact upon this habitat and the availability of suitable habitat adjacent to the Highways Agency soft estate it was concluded that the Phase 1 habitat survey and desk study provides sufficient data to assess the nature conservation value and the proposed scheme’s likely impact on birds within the study area. Evidence suggests that the species present will be relatively common and mobile, therefore mitigation will be more successful when targeted directly before construction begins. For both these species groups, appropriate mitigation measures have been recommended to minimise any potential impacts.

8.3.3 Evaluation of Value and Assessment Methodology

DMRB Volume 11, Section 2, Part 5, HA205/08 states that “the significance of the effect is formulated as a function of the receptor or resource environmental values (or sensitivity) and the magnitude of project impact (change)”. This process includes the following stages:

• Assigning a nature conservation and biodiversity value.

• Assigning a magnitude of impact.

• Assigning a significance level.




The likely importance of the habitats and species on-site have been attributed a value according to a geographical scale. This work was undertaken during the Phase 1 habitat assessment and specialist species surveys, and the evaluations are presented within the accompanying ecological reports held within Appendix B2 to B5 and in Section 8.4 of this report.

A comprehensive list and descriptions of potentially valuable ecological features identified through desk study and field surveys are presented in Appendix A2: Checklist 1, along with nature conservation evaluation scores. Appendix A3: Figure 2.1 shows the locations of these features.

The overall significance of effect categories detailed within the DMRB combines the appraisal of the Nature Conservation Value (IAN 130/10) with the appraisal of the impact magnitude (HA 205/08) and is presented in Table 8.3. Changes and effects can be either beneficial or adverse.

Table 8.3: Nature Conservation Assessment Significance Matrix (IAN 130/10)

Nature Conservation Value of Sites Magnitude of potential impact

International/National

Regional County Local Within the immediate survey area only/ Negligible

Major Very Large Very Large Large or Moderate

Moderate or Slight

Slight

Moderate Very Large or Large

Large or Moderate

Moderate Slight Neutral or Slight

Minor Moderate or Large

Slight or Moderate

Slight Neutral or Slight

Neutral or Slight

Negligible Slight Slight Neutral or Slight Neutral or Slight

Neutral

No change Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral Neutral


The Phase 1 survey was undertaken in March. This is a sub-optimal time to carry out flora surveys as many species have a seasonal expression in spring and summer only. However, Phase 1 surveys can be undertaken at any time of year because habitat types are readily identifiable even if the visible flora may lack evidence of some species present. The findings of the surveys enabled identification of the character of the habitats that are present and determination of their biodiversity value. Any areas that were assessed as requiring re-visiting during the summer were noted and re-assessed during other surveys that were undertaken throughout the summer months.


This section summarises the ecological resources within the proposed scheme study area and provides an evaluation of biodiversity receptors.

The study area for the purposes of the desk study has included a review of statutory sites within a distance of:




• Internationally designated sites – 2km corridor, 30km for existing, candidate or proposed Special Area of Conservation sites with bats as a qualifying feature (as required in DRMB Volume 11, Section 4, Part 1, HD 44/09).

• Nationally designated sites – 500m.

• Locally designated sites – 250m.

• Watercourses – 50m.

The adopted study areas are based on the nature of the proposed works (being restricted to the motorway boundary) and the hierarchical nature conservation importance of designated sites. Greater distances from the motorway have been adopted for internationally important designated sites which are deemed of greater value than local sites.

8.4.1 Internationally Designated Nature Conservation Sites

There are no internationally designated nature conservation sites within the study area or within 2km. There are also no designated Special Areas of Conservation with bats as a qualifying feature within 30km of the proposed scheme area.

8.4.2 Nationally Designated Nature Conservation Sites

There are no statutory nationally designated sites within 500m of the Highways Agency boundary:

• Dovedale Wood comprises ancient ash-wych elm woodland and is designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) 830m to east of the M1 J28-29 MP224/7+50B. This is also a BAP habitat, defined as ancient and semi-natural woodland.

• Hardwick Estate is adjacent to the southbound carriageway of the motorway. It was proposed as a SSSI in 2009 but not notified as such by NE. There are no current applications to propose SSSI status for Hardwick Estate (checked with NE 18/12/2012). As such, Hardwick Estate has no protection as a pSSSI.

8.4.3 Locally Designated Nature Conservation Sites

There are no locally designated sites within 250m of the scheme. Doe Lea designated as a Local Nature Reserve (LNR) is situated 523m to east of the M1 J28 to 29 MP228/2B. It comprises woodland, scrub and reedbed and supports breeding bird populations.

There are a total of 26 non-statutory LWSs/ SINCs within 250m, listed below:

• Nickerwoods and Ponds (MP247/6+50A adjacent to west of scheme).

• Nor Wood and Locks (MP243/2+50A, MP243/7A and MP244/4A adjacent to west of scheme).

• Maghole Brook and Ashfield Dumble LWS (MP216/3B to 216/6B east of the scheme).

• Todwick Common (MP246/5B to 247/9B adjacent to scheme).

• Sporton Lane Field (MP218/1A adjacent to the west of the scheme).




• Fordbridge Lane and Grassland (MP219/2+50 crosses under scheme).

• Hilcote Water Gardens, Grassland and Swamp (MP219/3A to 219/5+50A, MP219/2+50B to 219/3B adjacent to scheme).

• Red Barn Meadows (MP221/0B 80m to the east of the scheme).

• Littlemoor Disused Railway connecting to Newton Green Meadow and Ponds, Tibshelf Ponds and Sunny Bank Fields (MP221/4+20A adjacent to the west of the scheme).

• Saw Pit Lane Grassland (MP222/2+50B to 222/6+60B adjacent to the east of the scheme).

• Stanley Grange Grasslands (MP223/6+70B to 224/6B 60 m to the east of the scheme).

• County Dumble (MP224/1+90B to 224/6B adjacent to the east of the scheme).

• Hardwick Estate (MP225/4B to 226/0B adjacent to the east of the scheme).

• Heath Hedges (MP228/4A and 228/6+80A 200m to the west of the scheme).

• J29 Meadow [MP228/5B to 228/6+60B within scheme boundary (See Figure Phase 1 Habitat Survey Technical Report – Target Note 1)].

• Owlcotes Wood (MP229/6A 50m to the west of the scheme).

• Wrang Plantation (MP229/9+50A 150m to the west of the scheme).

• Poolsbrook Marsh (MP234/8A to 234/9+95A 50m to the west of the scheme).

• Markham Tip (MP234/9+80B to 234/0+75B 50m to the east of the scheme).

• Romeley Wood (MP237/3B to 238/2B 30m to the east of the scheme).

• Robinson’s Lumb (MP238/7+70A adjacent to the west of the scheme).

• Sheffield Road Field (MP239/4A 200m to the west of the scheme).

• High Wood and Thompson’s Holt (MP240/5+50A adjacent to the west of the scheme).

• Barlborough Hall Wood (MP240/6+50B 200m to the east of the scheme).

• Hawke Wood (MP241/1B adjacent to the east of the scheme).

• Brampton Common (MP249/1B+20 to 249/9B+60).

These LWSs / SINCs are of county conservation value.




8.4.4 UKBAP Habitats

There are 8 areas of UK BAP Priority habitat that lie immediately adjacent to the scheme. All are considered to be of national conservation value.

Five areas of ancient semi-natural woodland are located within 250m of the scheme with one of these areas immediately adjacent. All are considered to be of national conservation value. Please refer to Appendix A2, and the Phase 1 Habitat Report (Mouchel 2012) - Appendix B2 for further detail.

8.4.5 Habitats

Mixed Plantation Woodland

This habitat comprises a sparse understorey below an enclosed canopy of mature broadleaved and coniferous trees. Whilst not a UK BAP priority habitat, it is a habitat identified in the Lowland Derbyshire BAP.

There are two areas of this habitat within the scheme study area, both of which are located in the area between J28 and J29, one on the NB carriageway between MP225/5A and 225/9A and the other on the SB carriageway between MP224/2B and MP224/7B. The dominant trees were silver birch, ash, sycamore and Scots pine Pinus sylvestris above a sparse understorey.

Mixed plantation woodland is a common habitat across the UK. As such, the areas of this habitat within the survey area are assessed as being of conservation value within the survey area only. The habitat has potential supporting value for protected species including common nesting birds.

Species Poor Hedgerow

Within the Highways Agency boundaries there are three hedgerows, two of which are intact and one that is defunct (hedgerows which are not stock-proof and in which there are gaps). The intact hedgerows occur between MP220/7A and 221/0A; and between MP221/0+50B and 2221/4B. The defunct hedgerow lies between MP219/9+50B and 220/2B. All three hedgerows consisted of hawthorn Crataegus monogyna only and are therefore considered to be species poor.

All hedgerows are a UK BAP priority habitat. They are included as a priority habitat in Chesterfield, Lowland Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Rotherham LBAPs. However, as the hedgerows are species poor, this habitat has been assessed as being of conservation value at the local level.

Running Water

River habitats may be of high ecological value, as they can support a large number of species and provide a corridor for movement of others. Rivers are a UK BAP priority habitat type as of December 2011. They are included under the Highways Agency Habitat Action Plans and as the habitat type ‘Rivers and Streams’ in Chesterfield, Lowland Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire LBAPs.

The two largest watercourses that are crossed by the scheme are Normanton Brook MP219/3 and the River Doe Lea MP234/9+80. In addition, the scheme crosses many smaller watercourses including tributaries of the River Doe Lea and drainage ditches.




Watercourses within the survey area have the potential to be of supporting value for otters, water voles, birds such as the Kingfisher Alcedo atthis and freshwater fish. If these species are present it may be necessary to address legal and policy implications. The River Doe Lea and Normanton Brook provide habitats that have been designated as non-statutory wildlife sites and the River Doe Lea also supports Doe Lea LNR. As such they have been assessed as being of conservation value at the local level.

Standing Water

Wet ditches do not constitute a UK BAP priority habitat type, but are included within the Highways Agency Habitat Action Plans. Ponds are a UK BAP priority habitat and are included in Chesterfield, Lowland Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and Rotherham LBAPs.

There are two wet ditches within the survey area at MP231/5+50B to 232/0B and MP240/4+50B to 240/5+60B. There is one pond within the survey area in the land between the motorway and the northbound off-slip road at MP234/0A. Some of these habitats have potential supporting value for foraging and breeding amphibians such as Great Crested Newts (GCNs) and foraging reptiles such as grass snake Natrix natrix. If these species are present it may be necessary to address legal and policy implications. Standing water has been assessed as being of conservation value at the local level.

8.4.6 Species

Great Crested Newts (GCNs)

Ninety-four (94) water bodies were identified within 500m of the scheme. Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) surveys were undertaken on 46 of these water bodies to assess their potential to support breeding GCNs. The remaining 48 water bodies either had no access granted to them (nine) and surveys could not be undertaken; no longer existed or had dried up (12) or were being surveyed by URS Infrastructure and Environment UK (27) who supplied their data for this assessment.

Water bodies assessed as having a HSI score of greater than 0.45 were identified as having the potential to support a breeding population of GCNs. The conservative HSI threshold of 0.45 was adopted. Waterbodies with a score greater than 0.45 were subject to presence/likely absence surveys for GCN.

A total of 22 water bodies were subsequently surveyed for the presence/likely absence of GCN. Three water bodies were found to have GCN present. Their locations were north of J30 at:

• MP241/1B approximately 82m from the Highways Agency boundary (medium sized population of GCN)

• MP241/0B approximately 450m from the Highways Agency boundary (small population)

• MP241/1+50A approximately 200m from the Highways Agency boundary (medium population)




For further details of the HSI and GCN surveys please refer to Great Crested Newt Survey Report (Mouchel 2012), found within Appendix B4. Based upon the GCN survey results, the presence of GCN within the study area has been assessed as of county conservation value. During the GCN surveys, populations of the UK BAP species common toad Bufo bufo were also recorded; these have been assessed as of local conservation value.

Common Reptiles

The desk study found that all common reptile species have been recorded in low numbers within the study area. Common reptiles, which include common lizard, slow worm, and grass snake, may possibly be found within the extents of the field survey area where species-poor semi-improved grassland, woodland edges and bracken scrub has been recorded (See Phase 1 Habitat Report Mouchel 2012, Appendix B2). These habitats, which are present along the majority of the soft estate, are likely to be valuable to these species, providing continuity between larger areas of habitat. The wet ditches offer foraging habitat for reptiles, in particular grass snake. These species are widespread and relatively common in England. However, they have all been included on the UK BAP and the LBAPs. Although records show that each species is relatively widespread, they are vulnerable to population declines as a result of habitat loss due to development.

The potential presence of common lizard, slow worm and/or grass snake within the survey area has the potential to be of county biodiversity value. However, any populations are likely to be of no more than county biodiversity value.

Breeding Birds

Bird nests were observed within woodland vegetation. Birds observed within the survey area during the Phase 1 Habitat survey included tawny owl Strix aluco (dead), wood pigeon Columba palambus, kestrel Falco tinnunculus, buzzard Buteo buteo and magpie Pica pica.

All areas of woodland, scrub, scattered trees, heathland and rough grassland within the Agency verge and immediately adjacent offer suitable breeding sites for common breeding bird species. The motorway verge is assessed as of conservation value within the survey area only.

Badgers

The findings of the badger surveys can be found in Confidential Badger Survey Report in Appendix B3. Surveys have identified that there is badger presence within the survey area.

Badgers are relatively abundant locally and nationally and have been assessed as having conservation value in the survey area only.

At the time of the surveys, there were one main badger sett and one outlier sett, a live badger, badger digging, footprints and badger paths observed within the scheme boundary.

An additional two badger holes were found at the main sett in February 2012, one of which was within the Highways Agency soft estate. As a result,




appropriate licensing and mitigation is recommended prior to the commencement of the construction works.

Bats

Assessment of 34 structures (bridges, underpasses and culvert) for bat roost potential was undertaken during the Phase 1 Habitat survey in accordance with the standard criteria in Mitchell-Jones (2004)23. In addition, the woodland at Hardwick Estate adjacent to the scheme boundary was assessed (MP225/4 to 225/9 A and B) for potentially important bat foraging and commuting areas that may be affected by the proposed scheme. At the time of these surveys, the proposed scheme did not include any works on overbridges; therefore these were scoped out of the bat surveys. Please refer to Appendix B5 for the Bat Survey Report (Mouchel, 2012) for locations of the sites.

From this initial assessment, 26 sites were identified as requiring bat surveys for bat roost presence. The bat surveys were undertaken between June and August 2012. One structure (Waleswood Railway Underbridge MP246/5) is a live rail line and was not surveyed because of access restrictions.

Five bat roosts and one bat perch were found at the following sites:

• Huthwaite Road MP220/3

• Stainsby-Rowthorne Road Underbridge MP226/9+30

• Footpath No. 18 Underpass MP232/0+30

• Footpath No. 33 Staveley Underpass MP223/6+80

• Oxcroft Colliery Branch Railway Underbridge (Perch) MP236/6+70

• Clowne Branch Railway Underpass MP237/2+50.

Bats roosting or perching were observed during one out of the three surveys of each site. The observed roosts were recorded between 27 June and 11 July 2012. Between one and four bats were observed at each of the above sites, indicating that the structures are used as occasional roosts by bats. The species observed roosting or perching were common pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus in all cases except Stainsby-Rowthorne Road Underbridge which contained a soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus bat.

Blackwell Railway Underbridge (MP219/2+50) and Oxcroft Colliery Branch Railway Underbridge (MP236/6+70) had six species of bats present, including two Myotis species and the less common Leisler’s bat Nyctalus leisleri. These sites also had high levels (>60%) of the recorded survey time registering commuting and foraging activity by bats.

The eight sites above have been assessed as being of county level conservation status.

All but four structures were used by bats for foraging or commuting. Of these, six sites supported bats which were recorded spending high proportions (approximately 41-60%) of the survey time in commuting and foraging activity. At least four species of bat were present. Although bat numbers and activity

23

Mitchell-Jones, (2004) Bat Mitigation Guidelines. English Nature. Peterborough




were lower at J29 Subway South than at the other sites, a total of five bat species were present including two Myotis sp(p) and Leisler’s bat.

The following sites are of local importance for bats:

• Tibshelf and Teversal Railway Underbridge MP221/4+30

• J29 Subway South MP228/5M

• Renishaw-Bolsover Road Underbridge MP236/5+60

• Killamarsh Lane Underbridge MP243/1+50

• Baugy Hill Underbridge MP243/6+75

• Poplar Farm Underpass MP244/4+20

• High House Farm Underpass MP244/9+90.

In addition to the bat surveys that were undertaken between June and August 2012, a total of ten underbridges where work is proposed on the underside of the structure / containing roosts were subject to winter surveys by Mouchel between January and February 2013. The ten underbridges include:

• Huthwaite Road (MP220/2+90A to 220/3+20B)

• Stainsby-Rowthorne Road Underbridge (MP226/9+30A to 226/9+35B)

• Footpath No.18 Underpass (MP232/0+25A to 232/0+20B)

• Footpath No.33 Staveley Underpass (MP233/6+80A to 233/6+75B)

• Doe Lea Railway and Access Road Underbridge (MP234/7+50A to 234/75B)

• Renishaw-Bolsover Road Underbridge (MP236/5+70A to 236/5+50B)

• Oxcroft Colliery Branch Railway Underbridge (MP236/6+65A to 236/6+70B)

• Clowne Branch Railway Underpass (MP237/2+25A to 237/2+60B)

• Poplar Farm Underpass (MP244/4+25A to 244/4+10B)

• High House Farm Underpass (MP244/9+95A to 244/9+80B)

No bats were seen or recorded during the winter survey.

Other Notable Species

During the Phase 1 Habitat and badger surveys several brown hare Lepus europaeus were recorded when flushed from areas of grassland into adjacent agricultural fields. This species is widespread throughout the area and is assessed as of conservation value within the local area only. The European hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus is common and widespread and likely to be found in hedgerows and grassland throughout the survey area, although surveys to determine locations and numbers were not undertaken as they were thought to be unfeasible. Hedgehogs have been assessed as of value at the local level. Recent records of harvest mouse Micromys minutus were received from Rotherham BRC and NBN Gateway Long grassland within the scheme is a suitable habitat for this species, although surveys to determine




locations and numbers were not undertaken as they were thought to be unfeasible. This species has been assessed as of biodiversity value at the local level.

Invasive Species

No invasive species (those listed on Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act) were recorded within the desk study data and none have been recorded during surveys undertaken on site.

Summary

Table 8.4 presents an overview of the ecological resources present within the area of influence of the scheme and relevant legislation and policy considerations.

Table 8.4: Summary of Nature Conservation and Biodiversity Features within the Study Area

Biodiversity Resource

Biodiversity Value

Legal Status and Relevant Policies/Guidance

Ancient semi-natural and replanted woodland

National NPPF, Local Planning Policy, UK BAP, HA BAP and LBAP Priority Habitat

LWS or SINC sites County NPPF, Local Planning Policy, UK BAP, HA BAP and LBAP Priority Habitat

UK BAP priority habitats (outside designated sites)

National NPPF, Local Planning Policy, UK BAP, HA BAP and LBAP Priority Habitat

Hedgerows Local CRoW Act 2000 and NERC Act 2006, Local Planning policy, LBAP

Running water Local WRA1991, WER 2003, CRoW 2000, Local Planning Policy UK BAP, HA BAP and LBAP Priority Habitat

Standing water Local Local Planning policy, LBAP

GCNs Local

Fully protected under the conservation of habitats and species regulations 2010. Partially protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). CRoW Act 2000, NERC Act 2006, Priority HA and UKBAP species, NPPF, some local planning policies.

Reptiles County

Partially protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). CRoW Act 2000 and NERC Act 2006. Priority UK and HABAP species, NPPF

Breeding Birds Survey area only

Partially protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). CRoW Act 2000 and NERC Act 2006. Priority UK and HABAP species, NPPF

Badgers Survey area only

Protected under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992. NPPF, HABAP,

Bats County

Fully protected under the conservation of habitats and species regulations 2010. Partially protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). HABAP and some species are UK BAP priority




Biodiversity Resource

Biodiversity Value

Legal Status and Relevant Policies/Guidance

species (CRoW Act 2000 and NERC Act 2006), NPPF, LBAP.

Brown hare, hedgehog, common toad, harvest mouse

Local UKBAP priority species (CRoW Act 2000 and NERC ACT 2006), NPPF.


Using the assessment method outline in Section 8.3, the residual effect of the proposed scheme on identified habitats and species in the study area was determined. To minimise repetition, generic impacts that are likely to occur as a result of the proposed scheme are discussed in Table 8.5. These could arise during the construction and operation stages. Details of possible effects on ecological receptors are also discussed in Table 8.5.

Table 8.5: General Potential Impacts of the Scheme Prior to Mitigation

Impact Description and Potential Effects Ecological Receptors

Direct loss and fragmentation of significant ecological receptors

Within the soft estate, such as grassland, woodland and scrub and offsite (except where statutory protected sites) for electricity board interface cabinets which are partially offsite.

- UKBAP habitats - On-site habitats - Protected species - UKBAP species

This could affect ecological receptors through: 1) Habitat degradation may, unintentionally, result from the construction activities including: Compaction and disturbance through movement of vehicles; Storage of materials; and Spillage of contaminants (including structure installation, fuels, oils and lubricants).

- UKBAP habitats - On-site habitats

Degradation of significant ecological receptors including those effects related to the following potential impacts

2) Exposure of the topsoil and subsoil during the construction activities may increase the amount of sediment run-off into watercourses. There may also be a higher risk of contaminant release into watercourses due to the presence of heavy vehicles and machinery. Particularly sensitive areas include those in the vicinity of rivers and other water courses. All of the areas of interest bisected or immediately adjacent to the works could be vulnerable.

- Watercourses

This could affect ecological receptors through: 1) Direct disturbance during construction could be caused through visual intrusion, noise and light pollution.

- Protected species - UKBAP Species

Disturbance to significant ecological receptors e.g. protected species

2) Increased disturbance during operation from increased traffic volumes.

- Protected species - UKBAP Species

In accordance with IEEM (2006) and IAN130/10 impacts are only discussed in detail for nature conservation features assessed as being of sufficient ecological value to represent a potentially significant ecological impact in




relation to the proposed works. This is taken as being any ecological feature valued as being of local nature conservation value and above only. In addition, if a potential receptor has been assessed as being of likely negligible ecological value within the survey area but its’ potential presence on site may still lead to the breach of a parliamentary Act or Regulation e.g. in this instance badger, common reptiles and nesting birds then potential effects on these receptors have also been assessed below.

8.5.1 Assessment of Impacts Prior to Mitigation

This section describes the likely impacts of the proposed scheme on ecological resources in the absence of specific mitigation during construction and operation. The assessment assumes that standard good practice working methods as outlined in Section 8.6.1 will be adopted during construction. To aid reporting, these are documented in the Mitigation section (Section 8.6).

There are no internationally or nationally designated nature conservation sites within the proposed scheme’s impact area so no impacts expected to any of these features.

8.5.2 Locally Designated Nature Conservation Sites

Statutory Designated Nature Conservation Sites

Doe Lea LNR is located approximately 523m from the scheme. No direct land take will take place at either site. Degradation or disturbance of the ecological resources of these sites is unlikely because of their distance from the scheme.

Given that works are of temporary duration and there is a large distance between these sites and the proposed works, significance of effects are assessed as likely to be neutral.

Non-statutory Designated Nature Conservation Sites

There are 26 non-statutory designated sites identified within 250m of the proposed scheme (see Section 8.4.3). No land take is anticipated at any of these sites. However, works in proximity to these sites may degrade adjacent habitat and disturb wildlife. Given that works are restricted to the Highways Agency soft estate, are of a limited scale and extent, and are temporary, impacts to designated sites are unlikely. Any effects are therefore assessed as of neutral significance.

J29 Meadow

One of these sites, J29 meadow (MP228/5B to 228/6+60B) is located within the scheme boundary; however the design indicates that no land take from this site will occur.

Although land take would not occur, works in adjacent land has the potential to cause degradation of disturbance. Such effects are likely to be minor negative and the significance of effects is therefore assessed as likely to be slight adverse.




8.5.3 UK BAP Habitats

No UK BAP Priority habitat occurs within the Highways Agency boundary. There are five sites of the UK BAP Priority habitat (Habitat Action Plan Woodland) immediately adjacent to the highways boundary. No land take is anticipated at any of these sites. However, works in proximity have the potential to degrade adjacent habitat and disturb wildlife. Given that works are restricted to the Highways Agency soft estate, are of a limited scale and extent, and are temporary, impacts are unlikely. Significance of effects would therefore be of neutral.

8.5.4 Ancient Semi-Natural or Replanted Ancient Woodland

No ancient semi-natural or replanted ancient woodland occurs within the Highways Agency boundary. At one location (High Wood MP241/0) ancient woodland is adjacent to the Highways Agency verge. All other areas of ancient woodland are at least 50m from the Highways Agency boundary and would not be affected. Effects on ancient woodland have been assessed as neutral.

8.5.5 Other Ecologically Sensitive Sites

An assessment of impacts of Air Quality on ecologically sensitive sites has been undertaken and is reported in Section 5.3.3.

8.5.6 On-Site Habitats

Running Water

None of the rivers and streams located within 50m of the proposed development site will be directly affected by the proposed works. Waterways that pass directly beneath the carriageways may be subject to indirect effects during construction from dust deposition and surface run off. Species that use these watercourses may be subject to temporary disturbance. In the absence of mitigation, adverse impacts are likely to be of no more than minor negative magnitude and consequently effects are assessed as being slight adverse.

Standing Water

Two wet ditches and one water body are present within the scheme boundary. The ditches are located at the outer boundaries of the Highways Agency land and are unlikely to be subject to direct land take, but may be affected indirectly during construction by dust deposition and site surface run off. In the absence of mitigation, adverse effects are likely to be of no more than minor negative magnitude and are consequently assessed as slight adverse.

Hedgerows

Three hedgerows are located at the outer edges of the Highways Agency boundaries. It is unlikely that the works will impact directly on these hedgerows. Effects on these hedgerows have been assessed as of neutral significance.




Other Habitats

Other habitats present on the Highways Agency verge are not of significant nature conservation value despite representing a significant proportion of the Highways Agency verge. Nevertheless the proposed scheme will involve the permanent loss and temporary degradation of species-poor semi-improved grassland, immature scattered trees, scrub, ephemeral / short perennial and tall ruderal vegetation. Effects on these habitats have been assessed as of neutral significance.

8.5.7 Protected Species

Table 8.6 below lists potential impacts on protected species and their significance in the absence of mitigation. The significance of mitigated impacts is considered within Section 8.6.

All the effects listed in the table below have legal and policy implications requiring mitigation and/or compensation measures that aim to reduce effects to neutral.

Table 8.6: Potential Impact Prior to Mitigation

Species Impact Characterisation Impact Magnitude/

Significance (Prior to Mitigation)

GCNs A 1km stretch of Highways Agency verge is within 500m of three known GCN ponds. There is suitable foraging and sheltering terrestrial habitat adjacent to the verges. Therefore, although there will be no loss off suitable terrestrial newt habitat, there is potential that individual newts may enter the Highways Agency verge and be killed or injured during construction once the soil has been disturbed or if materials are stored on the verge that may provide shelter.

Moderate Negative / Moderate adverse

During construction there is potential for individual animals to be killed or injured on roadside verges.

Moderate Negative / Moderate adverse

Reptiles

There is also potential for permanent and temporary loss of reptile habitat. These are likely to represent relatively minor effects as extensive suitable habitat is available on adjacent land, and the majority of works will be close to the hard shoulder which is generally low quality and degraded and therefore has poor suitability for reptiles. Refer to Checklists 2 and 3 within Appendix A2 for works specific locations.

Minor Negative / Slight Adverse

Breeding Birds

Loss of nesting habitat due to construction of the scheme. This is likely to represent a relatively minor effect as extensive and less disturbed nesting habitat is available on adjacent land.


Badgers During construction there is potential for damage or destruction of badger setts and for animals to be killed or injured, whilst in setts and away from their setts at night.

Moderate Negative / Neutral




Species Impact Characterisation Impact Magnitude/

Significance (Prior to Mitigation)

There is also potential for permanent and temporary loss of suitable foraging habitat. This is likely to represent a relatively minor effect as extensive suitable habitat is available on adjacent land, and the majority of works will be close to the hard shoulder which is generally low quality and degraded and therefore has poor suitability for foraging badgers.

Minor Negative/ Neutral

Bridges/underpasses with bat roosts present. During construction, noise and vibration from drilling and digging into the structures may cause bats to abandon roosts. Roosting bats may potentially be present within Waleswood Railway Underbridge which was not surveyed.

Moderate Negative/ Moderate Adverse

Potential for disturbance of areas used by foraging and commuting bats. This is likely to have a minor effect on bats as foraging habitats generally extend onto the Highways Agency verge from offsite. Works are of a temporary nature and commuting routes are unlikely to be severed permanently.


Bats

There is potential that flood lighting during nights works (if required) could disturb or prevent bats using regular commuting routes or foraging areas. This potentially could sever temporarily habitats for bats.


During construction there is potential for individual animals to be killed or injured on roadside verges.

Moderate Negative / Slight adverse

Other species: Hedgehogs / Brown hare / common toad, harvest mouse

There is also potential for permanent and temporary loss of hedgehog / brown hare and common toad habitat. These are likely to represent relatively minor effects as extensive suitable habitat is available on adjacent land, and the majority of works will be close to the hard shoulder which is generally low quality and degraded and therefore has poor suitability for these species.



This section outlines the proposed mitigation measures to avoid or reduce impacts on features of local and above nature conservation value and/or legal significance, including measures that would be implemented during the construction and operation phase.

Adverse impacts, where possible, have been avoided or minimised in the proposed design by adjustments to infrastructure locations. Where unavoidable, the magnitude of these impacts during construction and operation should be minimised by generic good practice guidelines, as detailed in a CEMP, and execution of detailed receptor specific mitigation.

Specific details of the required mitigation have been translated into the Construction Contract as specification and an outline CEMP is provided in




Chapter 12 to ensure that the mitigation proposed is effectively and efficiently implemented on site.

8.6.1 General Mitigation Measures

Generic measures that will be adopted as best practice to avoid predicted impacts of degradation of terrestrial habitats, watercourses and species adjacent to work sites would include the following:

• All site works will be carried out in accordance with best environmental working practices e.g. CIRIA publications.

• Polluting materials will not be stored in works areas located within areas of significant biodiversity value, particularly within 50m of watercourses.

• Methods to minimise/prevent contamination of the watercourses during the construction works will be implemented. The EA’s Pollution Prevention Guidance (PPG) 5 should be adhered to in order to prevent damage and/or pollution to aquatic habitats.

• Retention of as many trees as possible with reference to the undertaking of any essential tree surgery to the crown or roots in accordance with British Standard (BS) 3998:2010 Tree Work Recommendations and appropriate Arboricultural Association advice notes, along with the protection of trees. Particular attention when adjacent to ancient woodland, in accordance with:

o BS 5837:2005 Trees in Relation to Construction

Recommendations.

o Arboricultural Association and Forestry Authority Advice Notes. o The National Joint Utilities Group Guidelines for the Planning,

Installation and Maintenance of Utility Services in Proximity to

Trees.

• Any works that disturb drainage features will include for any necessary mitigation or reinstatement to ensure the features retain their correct working function.

• The presence of significant ecological receptors would also have implications for the timing of the development work. The avoidance of periods of particular sensitivity is considered best practice for protected species such as nesting birds, reptiles and amphibians.

• All trenches and work excavations will be covered overnight or fenced off to prevent animals falling in, or trenches should include an earth ramp to allow animals to climb out.

• A watching brief will be maintained throughout the works. If any protected species are found, then works close by will cease until the clerk of works or ecologist has been contacted to advice on how to proceed.

• Areas of verge temporarily disturbed will be re-instated once works are completed, to enable habitats to regenerate naturally.

• In view of the current national issue with fungal infection (Chalara fraxinea) on ash trees, a walkover survey for signs of ash dieback will be




undertaken prior to any works within areas containing ash or felling of ash trees. If any infected ash trees are identified during the pre-construction surveys bio-security advice issued by the Highways Agency and the Forestry Commission would be followed.

8.6.2 Designated Sites / Habitat Specific Mitigation Measures

The measures listed in Section 8.6.1 above will be strictly adhered to during works within or immediately adjacent to any designated sites or water courses to ensure that the integrity of these sites is maintained during and after works. Works at such locations will be monitored by an ecological clerk of works to ensure that best practice guidelines are being followed and adverse effects are minimised as far as possible.

Post vegetation clearance / construction planting would aim to restore the ecological value of the Highways Agency soft estate where affected and would aim to enhance and reflect the local biodiversity where possible. This could include re-instating and re-linking severed linear wildlife corridors with new planting. Consideration will be given to the inclusion of locally sourced native plant species within planting proposals and the application of sensitive management and monitoring regimes. The findings of the Phase 1 Habitat Survey will inform the selection of species for post construction replanting.

A general landscape and ecological mitigation proposal will be implemented to re-instate onsite designated sites and ensure that the sites overall integrity and conservation objectives are maintained.

8.6.3 Species Specific Mitigation Measures

Table 8.7: Mitigation Measures

Species Potential Mitigation Measures Residual Impact Magnitude/ Significance

GCNs Pre-Construction Mitigation for GCNs will depend on the anticipated works for a particular location. As the presence of GCNs has been confirmed in the area north of J30, a European Protected Species (EPS) licence for the development is required for the proposed works in this area in respect of both the A and B-carriageways prior to construction. The EPS licence is likely to involve a fingertip search of the area prior to the erection of newt-proof fencing along an area of 250m to either side of MP241/1B (protected by chestnut paling fencing) and MP241/1+50A supervised by a licensed ecologist. Inside the fencing, pitfall traps and refugia are placed at 10m intervals along the fence. The traps and refugia are checked by ecologists daily for a minimum of 60 days based on the population size of each pond. The trapping will be undertaken between March-October and is weather dependant (temperatures must be above 5°C when newts are active and there should have been recent rain). Once the trapping is complete, a fingertip search of the working area will take place immediately prior to construction works by an

Negligible / Neutral





ecologist. During Construction Toolbox talks will be given to contractors to make them aware of the presence of GCNs nearby, and the legal implications of their presence. Site workers will be instructed to stop works and consult a suitably qualified ecologist if they see or disturb any notable species while working on site. The newt-proof fencing will stay intact during the works. Post Construction The newt-proof fencing will be taken down under ecological supervision. Monitoring the population of GCNs in the three ponds where they have been identified will be necessary to fulfil the licence conditions. This will involve four presence/absence surveys as described previously, carried out two years after construction has ended. Monitoring surveys are usually required for two years.

Reptiles A precautionary method statement to prevent and reduce adverse effects on reptiles will be produced for the entire scheme prior to works. Areas of works will be assessed in advance to enable mitigation to be focused effectively. This would identify areas of no reptile potential, reptile potential only in the active season and reptile potential in active and hibernation season. Areas of no potential – works can proceed at any time of year. Areas with reptile potential only in the active season - works can proceed only in the winter without mitigation; mitigation required in the active season. Areas with reptile potential in active and hibernation season – works will only be undertaken in the active season unless the habitat has been made unsuitable prior to the hibernation season. Mitigation required in the active season. Mitigation would likely include a programme of habitat manipulation (strimming of vegetation to 10-15cm), hand searches of refugia and potential shelters e.g. holes and supervision of topsoil excavation to check for any reptiles. If any reptiles are found, they would be moved into adjacent suitable habitat outside the works area. Mitigation will be undertaken under the supervision of a suitably qualified ecologist. Habitats on-site could be enhanced for reptiles by creating hibernacula.


Breeding birds Any necessary vegetation clearance works will be undertaken outside the main bird breeding season (March to July) if at all possible. Should works be required to take place during these dates, an ecologist or watching brief will attend the site to check for the presence of species within patches of vegetation prior to the commencement of works.

Negligible / neutral

Badgers Pre-Construction As badgers are highly mobile and can quickly move into an area that was previously unoccupied an updated badger survey at least three months prior to





the commencement of works of the entire survey area will be undertaken. Once the locations of badger setts are known and it is found that proposed works could interfere or disturb a sett, a licence from NE may be required. All works close to badger setts (within approximately 30m) during the period 1st Nov – 30th June are likely to require a licence. Works outside this period may also require a licence. Based on the findings of the two badger setts during the surveys, and the additional two badger holes located at the main sett in February 2012 (one of which was within the Highways Agency soft estate), appropriate licensing and mitigation will be required. All site workers will be informed of the legal implications and offences regarding badgers and working in close proximity to their setts. Should any vegetation clearance be required close to setts, checks will be carried out by an ecologist and the clearance will be undertaken with hand tools such as petrol strimmers and chainsaws. Trees will be felled in such a way that they fall away from setts. Badger/mammal paths will be cleared of any felled trees or scrub. During Construction Contractors will be vigilant for badgers which may enter the works area. If badgers or setts are found, an ecologist will be notified for advice to offset potential impacts. All works will be kept within the clearly demarcated works area for the duration of construction. Materials will not be stored or works compounds sited within the corridor crossing the area of interest, thus reducing the spatial footprint of the impact on the important feature. As best practice, in areas known to support badgers, trenches will be covered overnight to prevent badgers from falling in or trenches will include an earth ramp to allow badgers to climb out. Vehicles parked on-site and materials stored on-site will be kept within the site construction area to minimise disturbance to the surrounding area. Works close to setts will be restricted at night to reduce disturbance to any badgers which may be leaving or returning. If night works are essential then they will be completed under ecological supervision. Consideration will be given to excessive light and noise pollution and mitigation to these, including screens, directional lighting and mufflers, particularly if night works are proposed. Ecological monitoring of the setts will be undertaken periodically to check the setts’ integrity is maintained. Post Construction A final walkover will be undertaken to ensure that no damage or harm has occurred to any setts or badger and provide updated information on the status of the setts post works completion.

Minor adverse / neutral Negligible / Neutral





Bats Bat surveys in the summer of 2012 identified five roosts and one perch. The structures supporting the five roosts and one perch and an additional four structures were subject to additional winter surveys in January and February 2013. There were no bats seen or recorded during the winter surveys although not all crevices in the bridges could be assessed safely Works are to be undertaken from the top of the motorway deck. There should be no direct damage or exclusion to the roosts or killing or injury to any bats present. However, there will still be a high level of disturbance to any bats present due to drilling and other works. Works at the known roosts and perch will be undertaken at night, commencing an hour after dusk, to enable all bats to leave the roost. The structures will not be subject to direct lighting. An ecological toolbox talk will be given to all site contractors by Mouchel’s ecologist. Waleswood Railway Underbridge was not surveyed because of access restrictions, so in order to avoid disturbance to any unknown roosts at this site. Any proposed cabling or other works will be undertaken without drilling into the structure. This could involve cabling being boxed in and laid across the structure. Should any drilling need to be undertaken, this will be carried out during the night while bats are away from potential roosts. Any works to the underside of these structures may require mitigation in the form of appropriate replacement roosts, sensitive timing of works or require a licence from NE prior to the commencement of works. In addition, there are nine sites with high levels of bat activity but no roosts recorded during the summer period (June, July and August). Blackwell Railway Underbridge (219/2+60), Tibshelf & Teversal Railway Underbridge (221/4+30), Stainsby-Teversal Road Underbridge (225/4+35), J29 Subway South (228/5M), Renishaw – Bolsover Road Underbridge 236/5+60), Killamarsh Lane Underbridge (243/1+50), Baugy Hill Underbridge (243/6+75), Poplar Farm Underpass (244/4+20) and High House Farm Underpass (244/9+95). At these sites, works will be undertaken during the day within the summer period, to avoid potential winter roosts or hibernacula and to prevent disturbance of the bats’ activity at night. Should works need to be undertaken at night, the sites will not be lit directly and lighting will be directed away from the underbridges. At all other structures surveyed, general measures will include works being undertaken during the daytime. If not possible, the structures will not be lit directly at night and any lighting used during construction will be directed away from the underpasses.

Negligible / Slight Adverse Negligible / Neutral

Other species: Otter, water

The mitigation for these species is covered under general mitigation and the mitigation for reptiles above.






vole, Brown hare, hedgehogs, common toad, harvest mouse

In addition, should any brash piles need clearing they will first be carefully checked by hand for hedgehogs. If a hedgehog is found it will be relocated (using gloves) with the brash to a safe location.

8.7 Summary

The assessment of nature conservation has established that overall the corridor is of very limited biodiversity value with discrete areas or features having value at the local level, this primarily as a result of their use by protected species.

There would be the loss of a small amount of Highways Agency soft estate due to the construction of gantries, ERAs, CCTV, EAV and ASE cameras, TTMS, CCDs, abnormal load bay, minor widening and the installation of cabinets. The proposed scheme would also result in the temporary loss of small amounts of the soft estate for cabling and adjacent foundation works for infrastructure. Between J28 and J31, this would result in the temporary or permanent loss of scrub, species poor grassland, semi-natural broad-leaved woodland and plantation woodland. The scheme would result in no loss of riparian or ancient woodland habitats.

There would be no physical changes to any of the watercourses.

The scheme has the potential to cause degradation to a non-statutory site (J29 Meadow LWS), although the impacts on this area are not expected to compromise the sites integrity or reduce the ability of the site to fulfil its designation objectives.

With the implementation of suitable mitigation measures and appropriate licensing of works relating to GCNs and badgers, the significance of residual effects are expected to be no greater than slight adverse.

Mitigation will be required during the construction period to address potential direct or indirect effects on protected species. Mitigation is likely to require measures to exclude animals from works areas and prevent their return for the duration of construction.

After construction, habitats will be re-instated and where necessary planted to allow species to re-establish where possible.




9 Noise and Vibration


The proposed scheme seeks to alleviate congestions along the M1 between J28 to 31 by converting the hard shoulder to a permanent running lane. This is expected to make this section of the M1 more attractive to users of the motorway thereby altering the current traffic volume, composition and speed. The permanent use of the hard shoulder as a running lane will also move the source of road traffic noise in closer proximity to receptors adjacent to the motorway carriageways. This chapter presents the findings of the noise and vibration assessment of the proposed scheme during both the construction and operational phases.

The assessment is based on the proposal to operate this scheme with a mandatory speed limit of 60mph between 07:00 to 19:00. Further details are provided in Chapter 2 of this report and details of the noise assessment in Appendix B6: Noise Technical Report.


The following legislation and guidance has been considered in the production of this assessment. The documents are described in more detail in Appendix B6: Noise Technical Report.

• The Noise Insulation Regulations 1975 as Amended 1988

• Control of Pollution Act (CoPA) 1974

• Environmental Protection Act 1990

• The Environmental Noise (England) Regulations 2006

• National Planning Policy Framework 2012

• World Health Organisation, Guidelines for Community Noise, 1999

Local policies relevant to noise are identified within Checklist 1 (Appendix A2).

9.3 Methodology

9.3.1 General

The assessment of noise and vibration has been undertaken in accordance with guidance contained in the DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 4, HD 213/11. In addition to HD 213/11, the prediction of noise generated during the operational phase of the proposed scheme has been undertaken in accordance with guidance contained in the DfT’s Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (CRTN).

An assessment of noise impact of the proposed scheme’s construction has been undertaken.

For the operation phase, the scoping assessment (see Appendix A4) identified that exceedences of the threshold values (1dB(A) in the short term or 3dB(A) in the long term) were possible and therefore a detailed assessment of




the noise and vibration impacts during the operation phase has been undertaken as recommended within HD 213/11.

The noise assessment involved noise modelling following which an assessment of the

significance of the changes in noise level was undertaken. This assessment has

involved consultation with a number of LPAs and the use of the following data:

• Baseline noise levels following baseline noise surveys

• Traffic data

• Sample receptor locations defined in DMRB as sensitive receptors including dwellings (residential), hospitals, schools, community facilities, designated landscape and nature Conservation Areas such as National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, Special Areas of Conservation, Special Protection Areas, Sites of Special Scientific Interests and Scheduled Monuments and Public Rights of Way.

9.3.2 Baseline Noise Survey

A baseline noise survey has been undertaken in order to quantify the noise climate in the vicinity of the scheme. Attended noise measurements were undertaken at a total of 20 locations, 15 being within 600m of the proposed scheme and five farther away 5 away from the M1. The measurements were undertaken between 25 May and 11 October 2012.

Measurements of three hours in duration, between the hours of 10:00 and 17:00 were made in accordance with the DfT’s CRTN shortened measurement procedure.

Furthermore, peak-time monitoring, defined as being within the periods 07:00-09:00 and 16:00-18:00 was carried out at the initial eleven locations for a period of up to an hour.

Night time monitoring was also undertaken during weekday nights within the period 00:00 and 06:00 at the same selected monitoring locations.

Appendix A3: Figure 2.1 shows the locations of the measurement positions.

The baseline survey was undertaken in accordance with the principles of British Standard (BS) 7445 and following the guidance given in CRTN. Appendix B6 contains further information on the baseline noise monitoring programme.

Traffic Data

As with the air quality assessment, the hybrid data set was used for the noise assessment, Please see Appendix B1 for information on how this data was derived.

Data provided for the noise model includes 18hr Annual Average Weekday Traffic (AAWT) flows (06:00 to 00:00 hours), traffic composition expressed as the percentage of HGVs greater than 3,500kg (unladen weight) and the average speed of traffic in kilometres per hour (km/h).

Receptor Locations

Property counting to ascertain the number of potentially affected dwellings and other sensitive receptors within the noise study area using Address Layer 2 (AL2) data using GIS software. Sensitive noise receptors are defined as




locations particularly sensitive to changes in the local noise environment. Within the scope of this assessment this category includes: residential properties (dwellings), schools, churches, hospitals and care homes.


At the time of the assessment information on the types of plant and equipment, phasing, working times, traffic management measures, method of piling and plant set up / combination had not been finalised. Consequently calculation of potential noise levels during construction could not be undertaken. The construction noise assessment is therefore based on estimations of noise limits during construction from the monitored ambient noise levels at receptors within 300m of the M1 carriageways.

The estimate of construction noise limits has involved application of the ‘ABC’ method in BS5228. Detailed explanation of the methods and its application is provided in Appendix B6. Calculated noise level limits derived from this calculation methods have been set to afford the greatest protection at each location under consideration. Therefore the assessment focuses on the estimation of construction noise limits derived from the monitored ambient noise levels within the area.

Construction noise limits have been determined at the 11 monitoring locations. These 11 locations are within 600m of the existing carriageway and the noise levels monitored at these locations are considered to be typical of other properties positioned at similar distances from the scheme, and therefore the same construction noise limits can be applied at other properties alongside the scheme. Where construction noise levels are deemed to have a significant effect as outlined in BS 5228 - ‘A significant effect has been deemed to occur if the total LAeq noise level, including construction, exceeds the threshold level for the category appropriate to the ambient noise level’, then, where possible measures will be adopted to reduce noise levels at source or by using other appropriate mitigation.

9.3.4 Operation Phase Assessment

A detailed level of assessment was undertaken for the proposed scheme as screening of traffic data has shown that there are potential flow changes of a magnitude likely to cause significant impacts. See Appendix A4 for more details on the scoping exercise.

The objective of a detailed assessment is to understand the impact on the noise and vibration climate both with and without the proposed scheme, referred to as the Do-Something (DS) and Do-Nothing (DN) scenarios respectively. These scenarios are required to be assessed for the baseline year (opening year) and a future year (design year). NoiseMap Server Edition noise mapping software, in accordance with CRTN and DMRB,was used to predict noise levels at residential properties and other potentially sensitive receptor locations within the study area. The following scenarios were modelled:

• Opening year (2015), DN scenario (without scheme).

• Opening year (2015), DS scenario (with scheme).

• Design year (2030), DN scenario.




• Design year (2030), DS scenario.

The DMRB detailed level of assessment of noise impacts involved a comparison of the predicted noise levels resulting from the proposed scheme for the following scenarios:

• Short term impacts (difference in noise levels between 2015 DS and 2015 DN).

• Long term noise climate without the proposed scheme (difference in noise levels between 2030 DN and 2015 DN).

• Long term impacts (difference in noise levels between 2030 DS and 2015 DN).

Calculation points for all sensitive receptors have been defined on all the external facades of dwelling and other non-dwelling sensitive receptors within a calculation study area of 600m each side of the M1, in accordance with the DMRB. Non-dwelling receptors in the study area include schools, health facilities and rest homes.

For a more detailed explanation of the DMRB threshold criteria used for the traffic noise assessment, the DN / DS assessment scenarios and CRTN please refer to Appendix B6.

9.3.5 Impact Evaluation

The magnitude of impact has been assessed by comparing the increase or decrease in noise levels between compared scenarios. The magnitude of noise impacts associated with road traffic noise is defined in DMRB HD 213/11 (Table 3.1 and 3.2); and reproduced in Table 9.1 (short term) and Table 9.2 (long term). Changes in noise level can either be increases or decreases.

Table 9.1: Classification of Magnitude of Noise Impacts in the Short Term

Noise Change LA10,18h Magnitude of Impact

0 No Change

0.1 – 0.9 Negligible

1 – 2.9 Minor

3 – 4.9 Moderate

5 + Major

Table 9.2: Classification of Magnitude of Noise Impacts in the Long Term

Noise Change LA10,18h Magnitude of Impact

0 No Change

0.1 – 2.9 Negligible

3 – 4.9 Minor

5 – 9.9 Moderate

10 + Major




DMRB HD 213/11 requires mitigation to be considered where there is an increase of greater than 1dB in the short term (in recognition of the sudden change effects as reported within DMRB), or 3dB in the long term, irrespective of the absolute noise level.

9.3.6 Night Time Assessment

In accordance with the DMRB detailed assessment, a night time noise assessment has also been undertaken. The assessment of noise associated with road schemes within the UK is based upon the LA10, 18hr daytime levels between 06:00 and 00:00. This is as stated within the UK accepted prediction methodology of CRTN. However, the road network is increasingly used at night, with potential of an increase in road traffic noise levels at receptors, and the perception of nuisance. Therefore an assessment of night time road traffic noise is now a requirement when undertaking a DMRB detailed assessment. The assessment was undertaken for receptors where traffic noise levels are predicted to exceed 55dB (Lnight outside) and an increase of 3dB (Lnight outside) is predicted in the long term.

The Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) report “Converting the UK traffic noise index LA10, 18h to EU noise indices for noise mapping” as recommended in the HD213/11 guidance, has been followed to calculate the night time noise levels for each scenario.

9.3.7 Nuisance Assessment

The DMRB notes that the nuisance caused by noise mainly affects people in their homes. Nuisance is measured in terms of the percentage of the population as a whole that is bothered “very much” or "quite a lot" by virtue of a specific traffic related noise level. The correlation between specific levels and the percentage population bothered for the purposes of the assessment has been developed from studies which have been focused on reported nuisance where traffic-related noise has changed over a relatively long period of time. The change in nuisance ratings as a result of the proposed scheme is presented in this chapter.

Noise nuisance takes into account both the long term and short term impacts. The methodology requires the reporting of the worst case noise changes as a result of the comparisons undertaken within the first 15 years following opening of the scheme.

9.3.8 Vibration Assessment

The DMRB outlines a method for the assessment of traffic induced vibration and this includes the assessment of the numbers of people bothered by airborne vibration. It states that that vibration associated with road traffic sources would not normally have any influence at distances outside of 40m from an affected road. As such the assessment of vibration has been limited to buildings within 40m of the centre line of the scheme length. Additionally, as recommended by DMRB, only properties which have predicted traffic noise levels greater than 58dB L18hour have been assessed.




Ground borne vibration is not anticipated to be a major issue for the proposed scheme as ground borne vibrations are only generally perceptible where the road surface is uneven24 (Watts, 1992) which is not the case with the scheme section. If there are irregularities in the hard shoulder it is anticipated that these will be addressed as part of the assessment of the hard shoulder as a potential running lane.

9.3.9 Defra Priority Areas

The Environmental Noise (England) Regulations of 2006 required strategic noise maps and action plans to be prepared for urban areas agglomerations), major roads, major railways and major airports. In response to this, Defra published the noise maps for England’s roads in 2008, with the noise action plans following in 2010. The purpose of the Noise Action Plans is to assist in the management of environmental noise and its effects, including noise reduction if necessary, in the context of government policy on sustainable development.

Noise Action Plans are intended to apply in particular to the most ‘important areas (IAs)’ identified by the results of strategic noise mapping published in 2008. Noise Action Plans have been developed for each of the IAs and FPLs identified.

The definitions of ‘Important Areas’ and ‘Important Areas with First Priority Locations’ which apply to major roads are set out below:

• Important Areas (IAs): These are where the 1% of the population that are affected by the highest noise levels from major roads are located according to the results of Defra's strategic noise maps;

• First Priority Locations (IAs with FPLs): These are those Important Areas which have locations with road traffic noise levels in excess of 76dB LA10,

18hr according to the results of Defra's strategic noise maps.

As part of implementing the Action Plans, the relevant noise making authorities have been asked to prioritise investigating IAs that contain FPLs in the first instance. However, once that work has been completed the relevant authorities should investigate the remaining IAs to determine what further measures, if any, might be implemented to improve the management of noise. According to Defra, IAs and FPLs give a very good indication of the places exposed to the highest levels of noise. LPAs in conjunction with the Highways Agency are required to investigate identified FPLs and IAs and develop noise action plans.

The Highways Agency have issued an instruction that for Important Areas; ‘consideration should be given to improving the noise environment in these locations where possible, even if the scheme itself does not cause a worsening of the impact in these, as per the Government’s legal responsibility to consider such opportunities under the NERC Act 2006.’

Taking into consideration the above Highways Instruction alongside the scheme proposals, the application of Thin Wearing Course (TWC - a low noise

24

Watts G R (1992). The generation and propagation of vibration in various soils produced by the dynamic loading of road pavements. Journal of Sound and Vibration 156(2), pp191 - 206




surfacing) is proposed for all carriageway lanes along the scheme length in the opening year (2015); prior to the operation of the scheme in 2015. This assessment considers the impact of the proposed scheme on Defra Noise Priority Area with the scheme study area.

Numbers of dwellings within each IA/FPL experiencing an increase or decrease of 1dB(A) or more have been identified. Thresholds of 1dB and 3dB have been selected for Short Term and Long Term respectively, as these represent the least perceptible change in noise level in each scenario25.


In order to construct the noise model a number assumptions were made. The key made assumptions are listed below:

• All buildings are a height of 6m.

• Receivers at dwellings are positioned 4m above ground level, 1m from the façade whilst receivers at other sensitive receptors are positioned 1.5m above ground level, 1m from the façade.

• Intervening ground between any road and a receiver is acoustically ‘soft’.

• For the DN scenario in 2015, road surfaces were modelled as hot rolled asphalt (HRA) except for areas of TWC identified by data obtained from the Highways Agency Pavement Management System (HAPMS) database.

• For existing areas of TWC a surface correction of -2.5dB has been applied for the DN scenario in the in the Opening Year. Where a single surface type has not covered the entire width of the carriageway, the predominant surface type covering the carriageway was assumed. Where equal amounts of different surfaces were identified to be present, the worst case has been assumed, i.e. HRA.

• -3.5dB for the surface correction has been applied for all carriageways, i.e. all road surfaces in the DS opening year and future design year of 2030 are assumed to have TWC for both the DN and DS scenario.

• In accordance with DMRB, a -3.5dB road surface correction is only applicable for roads where traffic speeds are predicted to be above 75km/hr. A -1dB correction is applied for roads where future traffic speeds are anticipated to be below 75km/hr.

• A visual survey was undertaken to determine the heights and function of the barriers along the proposed scheme length. This should be treated as a rough guide and not as a detailed and accurate specification of barrier location / construction.

Please see Appendix B6 for further details on assumptions made during the noise assessment.

25

http://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol11/section3/hd21311.pdf - HD213/11: DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 7 (Revision 1)





9.4.1 Study Area

As outlined in Section 9.3.3, the noise study area for the assessment of impact during operations has been defined in accordance to guidance contained in HD213/11. This informed the detailed assessment of noise during operation.

In accordance with DMRB the noise model has included an area of 1km from the edge of the existing carriageway (M1 J28 to 31) and 600m from any other affected routes within this 1km study area. The calculation area has been taken as 600m from the carriageway edge of both the main route (M1 J28 to 31) and affected routes under consideration. There was no affected road links outside the 1km boundary of the scheme as per HD213/11. A calculation of basic noise levels was therefore not required.

Construction noise limits have been derived using the BS5228 methodology for selected receptors within 300m of the M1 carriageways.

Receiver calculation points have been defined on all the external facades of all relevant receptor locations, within a calculation study area of 600m each side of the M1, in accordance with DMRB.

9.4.2 Relevant Noise Receptors

There are 6209 residential properties within the detailed assessment study area of the proposed scheme. There are 34 other sensitive receptors in this study area. Of these non-dwelling sensitive noise receptors, there are 12 schools, three health facilities and one nursing home. These are listed in Appendix B6: Table 1.13.

9.4.3 Baseline Noise Levels

As outlined in Section 9.3, baseline noise monitoring was undertaken during weekday peak and daytime off-peak periods in order to establish background levels around the existing motorway corridor and identify the principal sources of noise within the study area. Ambient noise measurements (LAeq) recorded at these locations indicate levels ranging from: 54-75dB(A) during peak periods, 51-75dB(A) during the daytime periods and 47-64dB(A) during the night time.

During the peak period, ambient noise measurement was over 60dB(A) at nine locations whilst three locations recorded measurements under 60dB(A). Of the 20 locations, day time weekday measurements were over 60dB(A) at ten locations and between 51 and 58.7dB(A) at ten locations. As expected at night time, noise measurements were generally lower than day time measurement with only two of the 10 locations registering over 60dB(A).

There were no significant industrial noise sources within the vicinity of the proposed scheme. The noise surveys showed that the average difference between day and night time LAeq levels is less than 10dB(A) at seven of the 11 selected receptors, in close proximity to the carriageway.

At all monitoring locations, traffic noise from the M1 was dominant and clearly a constant steady-state noise source. Within the study area, ambient noise levels are dominated by background traffic noise on the M1. However, there were other minor sources that contribute to the background noise levels. These include:




• Traffic on minor roads close to the measurement position.

• High jet aircraft flyover on the approach path to East Midlands airport.

• Light aircraft flyover.

The noise level at a specific monitoring location varies with time. This can be attributed to the following:

• Changes in the traffic volume, HGV percentage, distribution or speed of traffic on the road network.

• Periods of congestion.

• Changes in wind direction and speed, causing noise to ‘come and go’;

• Sources of distant non-road traffic noise, such as aircraft.

• Sources of noise local to the monitoring point, for example car door slamming, car horns, emergency sirens, pedestrians and barking dogs.

Please see Appendix B6: Annexe A for further details on the background noise monitoring survey.

The measured noise levels indicate a number of localities along the proposed scheme where dwellings currently experience noise levels in excess of the World Health Organisation (WHO) guideline values to prevent serious annoyance in external living spaces (55dB LAeq (16hour)). The 3hr measured LAeq levels at 17 of the 20 measured locations exceed this value. The measured noise levels also demonstrate current exceedences of the WHO night time noise guideline values at all the monitoring locations.

9.4.4 Baseline Vibration Levels

Subjective observations were undertaken during the noise monitoring survey which indicated that there were no major sources of vibration in the vicinity of the proposed scheme. Therefore, baseline vibration monitoring was not considered to be required in the context of this assessment.

As outlined in Section 9.3, the study area for potential vibration impact is within 40m of the scheme. A count revealed that there are 10 dwellings within 40m of affected roads in the study area.

9.4.5 Defra Important Areas (IAs) and First Priority Locations (FPLs)

Seventeen IAs have been identified alongside the proposed scheme, nine of these IAs have designated FPLs Appendix A3: Figure 2.1 and Appendix B6: Table 1-5 indicates the location of the relevant IAs and FPLs.

9.4.6 Existing Noise Reduction Measures

Noise mitigation is defined as measures taken in order to control the level of noise perceived at a receiver point. These measures can include changing the characteristics of the noise source or obstructing the propagation of the noise through the receiving environment. To achieve this along a motorway, TWC or acoustic barriers may be used respectively.

Information on existing locations of TWC on the scheme length was provided by the MAC and from HAPMS. Table 9.3 provides a summary of locations currently benefiting from TWC.




Table 9.3: Location of Thin Wearing Course along the Scheme

Approximate Maker Post Extents Carriageway

Start End

Surface Correction dB

NB 216/8A 217/3A -2.5

SB 216/7B 217/4B -2.5

SB 218/4B 221/4B -2.5

NB 218/5A 221/5A -2.5

SB 227/8A 239/6B -2.5

NB 228/4A 238/6A -2.5

A review of the existing motorway corridor highlighted that several residential areas are currently afforded noise protection from highway related noise through provision of intervening environmental barriers. Information on the location of acoustic barriers was provided by the MAC. A basic visual survey was also completed to identify the approximate location, length and type of the existing noise barriers along the length of the proposed scheme.

Table 9.4 below provides details of the existing noise barriers and fences.

Table 9.4: Existing Barrier Locations

Marker Post Direction Length OS Grid Ref Height

217/4J NB 153 SK4556 2.4m

218/1L SB 149 SK4556 2.4m

217/9L SB 71 SK4556 2.4m

218/2L SB 233 SK4556 2.4m

217/8K NB 307 SK4556 2.4m

218/3A NB 117 SK4556 2.4m

218/7A NB 284 SK4457 2.4m

217/5J NB 26 SK4556 2.4m

216/1A NB 1000 SK4655 2.4m

As outlined in Section 9.3.10, only a visual survey was completed in order to determine the heights and function of the barriers detailed in Table 9.4. This should be treated as an approximate guide and not as a detailed and accurate specification of barrier location / construction.



Following the criteria methodology contained within BS 5228, thresholds of significant noise impacts have been derived from the established baseline noise survey results. These are detailed in Table 9.5.




Table 9.5: Construction Noise Level Thresholds at Monitoring Locations

LAeq, dB calculated using the BS 5228 ABC Methodology

Weekday Daytime Weekday Night Location

Ambient Threshold Ambient Threshold

M01 65 70 56 55

M02 59 65 53 55

M03 67 70 57 55

M04 70 75 61 55

M05 51 65 53 55

M06 69 75 58 55

M07 75 75 64 55

M08 64 70 59 55

M09 53 65 47 50

M10 62 65 55 55

M11 58 65 48 55

Please see Appendix B6 for a detailed description of the BS 5228 construction noise assessment methods used.

At two locations, the existing acoustic barriers will be taken down to enable construction of the proposed scheme. This will result in temporary increases in noise levels due to the absence of the environmental barriers enabling free propagation of traffic noise. However this temporary increase in noise levels will be considerably reduced and more in line with existing background noise levels once the acoustic barriers are reinstated. The existing noise barriers sited at these locations (G0-03 and TTMS on the NB carriageway approximately 50m from G0-03) will be subject to temporary removal and reinstatement with adjustments to accommodate erection the new infrastructure. See Appendix A3: Figure 2.1: Environmental Constraints Plan (Sheet 1) for the location of the afore-mentioned structures.

Piling

It is expected that construction at major infrastructure locations such as gantries and ERAs will result in more noise locations during the construction period than at supporting infrastructure locations. This will however be short term and temporary, lasting only for the duration of the works at these locations.

All the ERAs are sited to be roughly opposite each other on both northbound and southbound and have been positioned such that sensitive receptors are avoided. A total of 20 ERAs are proposed as part of the proposed scheme.

It is expected that construction at major infrastructure locations such as gantries and ERAs will result in more noise locations during the construction period than at supporting infrastructure locations. This will however be short




term and temporary, lasting only for the duration of the works at these locations.

Construction of the foundation of some portal and cantilever gantries will require some

piling operations. Gantry piling activities are bored in-situ concrete piles; however there may be an opportunity to use steel helical piles or steel micro bored piles. Piling activities are also required for steel sheet pile and plastic pile retaining walls.

A total of 6209 receptors fall within 300m of gantry and ERA locations. Construction noise impacts decrease with increased distance from the motorway. As a result receptors closer to the motorway are expected to be subject to less noise impact than those closer to the gantry and ERA locations. Standard best practice noise abatement measures outlined in Section 9.6 would serve to reduce noise during construction.

9.5.2 Vibration

Without information relating to the specifics of the piling operations (including piling rig size, pile diameters, depth energy per blow etc), an assessment of vibration during construction at this location has not been possible. Vibration from plant, and control measures to mitigate the effects of such, will be considered by the construction DP within the scope of the CEMP before any works with potential to generate vibration impacts are undertaken.

9.5.3 Operation Phase

The results of the noise modelling exercise are given in Tables 9.6 to 9.10. These tables provide details on the number of dwelling and non-dwelling receptors subject to increases, decreases or no change in noise levels in the short and long term as outlined in Section 9.3.4. The results are also ascribed magnitudes of impact for predicted noise level increase and decrease.

Short Term Impacts (DS 2015, DN 2015)

Table 9.6: Summary of Short Term Noise Impacts

Scenario: Short term Traffic Noise Impacts

Comparison: DS scenario in 2015 relative to the DN scenario in 2015

Daytime

Change in noise level Number of Dwellings

Number of other sensitive receptors

0.1- 0.9 (Negligible) 339 2

1 - 2.9 (Minor) 0 0

3 - 4.9 (Moderate) 0 0

Increase in noise level LA10, 18h

5+ (Major) 0 0

No Change 0 276 1

Decrease in noise 0.1 - 0.9 (Negligible) 2959 24




Scenario: Short term Traffic Noise Impacts


Daytime

Change in noise level Number of Dwellings

Number of other sensitive receptors

1 - 2.9 (Minor) 2393 7

3 - 4.9 (Moderate) 242 0

level, LA10, 18h

5+ (Major) 0 0

In the short term, the DS 2015 scenario compared to the DN in 2015, the opening of the proposed scheme is predicted to have a negligible or minor decrease in impact at the majority (86.9%) of the dwellings, with no dwellings anticipated to experience minor, moderate or major increases as a result of traffic on the motorway making use of its greater capacity. In total, 5594 (90.1%) of dwellings / receptors will experience a benefit from the opening of the proposed scheme. These beneficial decreases in traffic noise levels are attributable to the application of TWC in the opening year of the scheme and the proposed reduction in traffic speeds from 70mph to 60mph between 0700 and 1900, 7 days a weeks. The receptors are presented in Appendix 6: Annexe C, Figures and Annexe D, Receptor Data Table.

Long Term Impacts, Do Nothing Change (DN2015, DN2030)

Table 9.7 summarises the predicted changes in noise levels without the proposed scheme in the long term by comparing the two DN scenarios in 2015 and 2030. This comparison is undertaken as a requirement of the DMRB in order to quantify the effect of inherent traffic growth between the proposed year of opening and the scheme design year if the proposed scheme were not constructed. It is worth noting that the magnitude of impact bandings in the long term tables differ from those in the short term table as greater magnitudes of change in noise level are required for them to be perceptible over the long term (DN2015 against DN2030).

Table 9.7: Changes in Noise Levels without the Proposed Scheme

Scenario: Long Term Traffic Noise Impacts

Comparison: DN Scenario in 2015 relative to the DN scenario in 2030

Daytime

Change in noise level Number of Dwellings Number of other sensitive receptors

0.1- 2.9 (Negligible) 1394 13

3- 4.9 (Minor) 20 0

5- 9.9 (Moderate) 3 0


10+ (Major) 0 0





Comparison: DN Scenario in 2015 relative to the DN scenario in 2030

Daytime


No Change 0 131 1

0.1- 2.9 (Negligible) 4415 20

3- 4.9 (Minor) 246 0

5- 9.9 (Moderate) 0 0

Decrease in noise level LA10, 18h

10+ (Major) 0 0

Without the proposed scheme the majority of the receptors studied are predicted to experience a negligible decrease in noise level due to traffic growth over the 15 year period. The minor and moderate increases in noise level predicted at the 20 and 3 dwellings respectively are predominantly due to the cumulative impact on traffic flows of the numerous proposed developments around Junction 29a of the M1 and the Duckmanton area. The proposals in this area include the following:

• 18 hectares of B1, B2 and B8 Employment use for the land at Seymour (Part of Markham Vale). This development is anticipated to generate additional traffic flows on the A6192 Erin Road;

• 65 hectares of B1, B2 and B8 Employment use, resulting in traffic loading onto Markham Vale;

• 400 residential dwellings proposed at Duckmanton, resulting in additional traffic on Markham Road and

• 900 residential dwellings on land between Marlpit Lane and Oxcroft, resulting in additional traffic on the B6419 Shuttleworth Road.

All other predicted increases in traffic noise when comparing the Do-Nothing scenario in 2015 and 2030 are predicted to be negligible.

Long Term Impacts, Do Something Change (DS 2030, DN 2015)

Table 9.8 presents the result of permanent long term noise impacts due to the introduction of the scheme. In the long term, comparing the DS in the design year of 2030 relative to the DN situation in 2015, the majority of receptors (93.7%) are expected to experience negligible changes (increases and decreases) with the implementation of the proposed scheme and resulting traffic growth over a 15 year period, however 237 fewer properties (when compared with DN2030) experience no change in noise levels. The dwellings at which changes of 3dB(A) or more in traffic noise levels are predicted are represented visually on the figures included within Appendix B6.




Table 9.8: Summary of Long Term Noise Impacts



Daytime


0.1- 2.9 (Negligible) 2645 21

3- 4.9 (Minor) 28 0

5- 9.9 (Moderate) 6 0


10+ (Major) 0 0

No Change 0 378 2

0.1- 2.9 (Negligible) 3152 11

3- 4.9 (Minor) 0 0

5- 9.9 (Moderate) 0 0

Decrease in noise level LA10, 18h

10+ (Major) 0 0

Thirty-four (34) properties are predicted to experience minor and moderate increases in noise level, compared to the 23 properties when undertaking a comparison of the traffic noise levels in the DN design year and the DN opening year. These properties are not adjacent to the M1 carriageways. The minor to moderate increases in traffic noise are a cumulative effect of the proposed committed developments at J29a and Duckmanton and the negligible increases in traffic noises at these receptors due to the SM ALR scheme.

Further evaluation of the noise modelling results at these 34 properties has shown that the overall contribution to the traffic noise levels at these receptors due to the proposed scheme is less than 1dB(A) (between 0.4 and 0.8dB(A)) and therefore makes a negligible contribution to noise levels.

Night Time Noise Impacts

The DMRB requires a night time noise impact assessment to be undertaken where an Lnight, outside noise level is greater than 55dB and there is a noise level increase of 3dB Lnight, outside in the long term26. All properties are predicted to experience an Lnight, outside noise level greater than 55dB, however there are no increases of 3dB(A) Lnight, outside or more in the long term as a result of the proposed scheme. No further assessment of night time noise impacts hastherefore been undertaken.

26

Lnight, outside is defined as the equivalent continuous sound level LAeq, 8hr for the period 2300 to 0700 hours assessed outside a dwelling and is free-field.




Non-Dwelling Sensitive Receptors

With the proposed scheme in place, in the short term (DN2015 versus DS2015), majority of schools and health facilities in the study area will experience a negligible decrease in noise levels. Seven non-dwelling sensitive receptors are predicted to experience a minor decrease in noise level in the short term, as defined in DMRB HD 213/11. In the long term, with or without the scheme in place, noise levels are negligible at schools or health facilities. In the long term with the proposed scheme (DN2015 versus DS 2030), non- dwelling receptors are predicted to experience only negligible changes or no change in noise levels.

Sample Receptor Locations

To obtain an overview of the predicted noise levels for each scenario, 18 locations have been selected as being typically representative of the Calculation Area. These locations are provided in Appendix B6, Figure 1.46. The results for the sample receptors deemed to be representative of their locality, at first floor, for both the Baseline Year and the Design Year, with and without the proposed scheme are presented in Appendix B6; Tables 1-15 to 1-19, together with their associated magnitude of impact.

In addition the traffic noise level results for the Hardwick Hall Lower Visitor Centre are provided within Table 1.15 Sample Receptor Locations in Appendix B6. This does not strictly fall into the “Other Sensitive Receptors” category as defined by HD 213/11, however the centre is regularly used for public events and has therefore been considered to be a community facility.

Appendix B6, Annex D contains predicted noise levels for all dwellings and other sensitive receptors within the study area.

Daytime Scenarios

With the proposed scheme in place, in the short term; the majority of sample receptors in the study area will experience a negligible decrease in noise levels. One sample receptor are predicted to experience a moderate decrease, six sample receptors are predicted to experience a minor decrease in noise level in the short term during the day.

In the long term, without the scheme in place, predicted changes in noise levels comprises the following; negligible changes in noise level predicted at 13 locations and minor decreases at four locations.

In the long term, with the scheme in place, negligible and non significant noise level changes are predicted for all the sample receptors.

Noise Nuisance Impact

Noise nuisance impact is calculated in both the opening (2015) and future assessment year (2030) with the worst case within the first 15 years following opening of the scheme being reported. The DN nuisance impacts are based solely on the future assessment year, as continual traffic growth implies that this will be the year with the highest percentage of annoyed residents.

Table 9.10 below gives the predicted noise nuisance impacts for the day time period and shows that without the scheme, the DN nuisance impacts are predicted to be less than 10% (6209 dwellings) for all of the residential




receptors across the study area. With the scheme, the distribution of changes in nuisance is wider. There are more increases in annoyance as a result of the proposed scheme at 149 dwellings and these are predominantly in the opening year. This is as expected, as the DMRB states that people are more sensitive to abrupt changes in traffic noise immediately following a scheme opening. This is likely to be due to the use of the hard shoulder as a running lane and thereby moving traffic closer to dwellings. There are also more properties subject to a negligible increase in traffic noise levels as a result of the scheme, which may result in a slight increase in nuisance at a small number of receptors.

Table 9.10: Traffic Noise Nuisance Impacts

Comparison: Traffic Noise Nuisance Impacts

Do Nothing Do Something

Change in nuisance level Number of Dwellings Number of Dwellings

< 10% 1380 2505

10 < 20% 0 149

20 < 30% 0 0

30 < 40% 0 0

Increase in nuisance level

> 40% 0 0

No Change 0 % 136 386

< 10% 4693 3169

10 < 20% 0 0

20 < 30% 0 0

30 < 40% 0 0

Decrease in nuisance level

> 40% 0 0

Vibration Impacts

A vibration nuisance assessment has been undertaken for all buildings within 40m of the centre line of the scheme, the results are presented in Table 9.11 below. As recommended by DMRB, only properties which have predicted traffic noise levels greater than 58dB LA1018hour have been included within the assessment.




Table 9.11: Vibration Nuisance Assessment results

Comparison: Vibration Nuisance Impacts

Do Nothing Do Something

Change in vibration level Number of Dwellings Number of Dwellings

< 10% 0 2

10 < 20% 0 0

20 < 30% 0 0

30 < 40% 0 0

Increase in nuisance level

> 40% 0 0

No Change 0 % 0 8

< 10% 10 0

10 < 20% 0 0

20 < 30% 0 0

30 < 40% 0 0

Decrease in nuisance level

> 40% 0 0

Ten dwellings are predicted to experience a decrease in vibration nuisance of less than 10% and two dwellings an increase of less than 10%. These increases are likely to be due to the increased width of the carriageway, as both properties are located in close proximity to the carriageway.

Defra Important Areas and First Priority Locations

As a result of the Defra noise mapping exercise, 17 IAs have been identified alongside this scheme including nine designated FPLs within these IAs. According to Defra, IAs and FPLs give a very good indication of the places exposed to the highest levels of noise.

For this scheme, FPL’s are identified in the areas of Pinxton, South Normanton, Blackwell, Lane End, Long Duckmanton, Barlborough and Wales. IAs are located at Hilcote, Heath (J29), Woodthorpe, Barlborough, Woodall and Aston (J31).

No long term increases in calculated road traffic noise levels as a direct impact of the SM-ALR scheme are identified at these locations. The results are as summarised in Table 1-23 in Appendix B6: Noise Technical Report.


9.6.1 Construction Phase

Specific noise abatement measures will be incorporated as part of a CEMP which will be implemented during the construction phase. Some of the measures likely to be implemented comprise:




• Undertaking a letter drop of local residents detailing the duration and type of works to be undertaken. A contact telephone number should also be provided in the event of complaints;

• Best Practice measures to be adopted on site with regards to noise abatement. Best practicable means including maintenance of plant to minimise the noise produced by operations on site, acoustic enclosure of static plant and portable screen where appropriate;

• All vehicles and mechanical plant to be fitted with effective exhaust silencers and maintained in good working order;

• Machinery that is used intermittently would be shut down or throttled back to a minimum during periods when not in use; and

• Static plant known to generate significant vibration levels to be fitted with acoustic dampening.

Using the measured baseline noise levels (Section 9.3.2), construction noise level thresholds have been set using BS5228 for the monitoring locations (Section 9.5.1). In the absence of detailed information on the timing of construction works and plant combination, it is not known if any construction works would result in exceedence of these thresholds. When this information becomes available, the DP will undertake noise calculations which will inform measures required to achieve the set construction noise thresholds. The DP will also undertake monitoring of noise and vibration levels during the construction phase to enable the set noise thresholds are not exceeded. Ambient noise measurements will be undertaken in accordance with the principles of BS7445 and following the guidance given in BS4142 by individuals certified as competent in environmental noise monitoring.

Removal of acoustic fencing to facilitate construction of proposed motorway infrastructure shall be done on a rolling programme and reinstated as soon as practicable upon completion of works at each individual site. This will be reinstalled following a like for like replacement approach to achieve the same attenuation as before the fence was taken down.

9.6.2 Operation Phase

The DMRB outlines that mitigation is to be considered where there is an increase of greater than 1dB in the short term, or 3dB in the long term, irrespective of the absolute noise level.

Analysis of this scheme has identified that in accordance with DMRB there are no requirements for noise mitigation along the scheme. This is primarily due to the application of TWC in the opening year of the scheme, resulting in an immediate improvement in road traffic noise levels.

Table 9.6 details 339 dwellings are subject to a negligible increase in traffic noise levels in the opening year, this can be attributed to the use of the hard shoulder as a running lane thereby moving traffic closer to dwellings. Both the application of TWC in the Opening year of the scheme and the proposed reduction in traffic speeds between 0700 and 1900, mitigate further increases in road traffic noise levels.




In the long term (DS 2030 – DN 2015), 34 dwellings are predicted to be subject to an increase of over 3 dB(A). All 34 dwellings are located along Markham Road, Duckmanton the minor to moderate predicted increases in traffic noise are attributable to the considerable development proposed in the surrounding area, as outlined above. The increases in traffic noise along Markham Road in Duckmanton are not directly attributable to the proposed scheme.

9.7 Summary

A review of the existing motorway corridor highlighted that several residential areas are currently afforded noise protection from highway related noise through provision of intervening environmental barriers, which indicates an existing noise problem along the proposed scheme corridor.

Monitoring has been undertaken during weekday peak and daytime off-peak periods, at 19 key locations, in order to establish background levels around the existing motorway corridor, and to enable correlation between measurements and observed congestion. Ambient noise measurements (LAeq) recorded at these locations indicate levels ranging from: 54 - 75dB(A) during peak periods, 51 - 75dB(A) during off-peak periods and 47 - 64dB(A) during the night time.

A DMRB detailed level of assessment of noise impacts at 6209 residential dwellings and 34 other sensitive receptors has been carried out for a comparison of the predicted noise levels resulting from the proposed scheme.

The following assessment scenarios were considered for this assessment:

• Short term impacts (difference in noise levels between 2015 DS and 2015 DN).

• Long term noise climate without the proposed scheme (difference in noise levels between 2030 DN and 2015 DN).

• Long term impacts (difference in noise levels between 2030 DS and 2015 DN).

The short term comparison for the opening year indicates that there is a negligible or minor decrease in traffic noise impact at the majority (86.9%) of the dwellings, with no dwellings anticipated to experience minor, moderate or major increases as a result of traffic on the motorway making use of its greater capacity. In total, 5594 of dwellings / receptors will experience a benefit from the opening of the proposed scheme.

For the long term comparison (future baseline DN 2030– DN 2015) without the proposed scheme the majority of the receptors studied are predicted to experience a negligible decrease in noise level due to traffic growth over the 15 year period. Minor and moderate increases in noise level are predicted at twenty three dwellings due to the cumulative impact on traffic flows of the numerous proposed developments around Junction 29a of the M1 and the Markham Road, Duckmanton area.

These minor to moderate increases are attributable to the proposed developments in proximity to Junction 29A of the M1. The proposals include;18 hectares of B1, B2 and B8 Employment use for the land at Seymour (Part of Markham Vale); 65 hectares of B1, B2 and B8 Employment use; 400




residential dwellings proposed at Duckmanton; and 900 residential dwellings on land between Marlpit Lane and Oxcroft.

Results of the assessment of the permanent long term noise impacts due to the introduction of the proposed scheme, show that the majority of receptors (93.7%) are to experience negligible changes (increases and decreases) with the implementation of the scheme and resulting traffic growth over a 15 year period. Thirty-four (34) properties are predicted to experience minor and moderate increases in noise level, compared to the 23 properties when undertaking a comparison of the traffic noise levels in the DN design year and the DN opening year. The minor to moderate increases in traffic noise are a cumulative effect of the proposed committed developments at J29a and Duckmanton and the negligible increases in traffic noises at these receptors due to the proposed scheme.

All night time noise impacts are predicted to be negligible. No long term increases in calculated road traffic noise levels as a direct impact of the proposed scheme are identified at the IAs identified by Defra along the scheme.

The negligible increases in traffic noise levels can be attributed to the use of the hard shoulder as a running lane thereby moving traffic closer to dwellings, however both the application of TWC in the opening year of the scheme and the proposed reduction in traffic speeds between 0700 and 1900; 7 days a week, mitigate further increases in road traffic noise levels and subsequently reduce the impact magnitude.




10 Materials


The new construction, improvement and/or maintenance of a SM scheme is associated with increases in consumption of material resources and increases in the generation of waste. These activities create environmental impacts which need to be effectively managed or mitigated. This chapter defines and focuses on the following two key areas of materials:

• Use of Material Resources

• Waste Generation.

The construction cost of the proposed scheme is expected to be over £300,000 (including labour, plant and materials). IAN 153/11 in line with the Site Waste Management Plan Regulations (SWMP, 2008) states that projects with an estimated cost greater than £300,000 have the potential to generate environmental impacts. In view of this, the IAN requires an assessment of materials be undertaken to at least the simple level.

This assessment has focused on the material resource required during the construction phase of the proposed works; following construction minimal material resources are expected to be required to operate/ maintain the proposed scheme. It has also focused on the generation, management and disposal of waste from the site and potential impact on waste policies and available waste management facilities. The use of material resources and the management and transportation of waste during construction could also give rise to other adverse environmental effects such as air quality and noise impacts however this chapter does not consider these impacts. The respective specialist topic areas include an assessment of impacts during construction and are not repeated in this section.


Council Directive 2008/98/EC (the Waste Framework Directive) provides a general framework of waste management requirements and sets the basic waste management definitions for the EU. The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 transposes the requirement of the Waste Directive into UK law. It also requires the application of the waste management hierarchy (Figure 8) in preventing or reducing the adverse impacts of the waste generation.




Figure 8: The Waste Management Hierarchy27

The following UK legislation / policy documents have been considered within this assessment:

10.2.1 The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011

These regulations require SWMPs to be prepared for all projects with a construction value of greater than £300,000. It also required businesses to adopt the waste hierarchy for the disposal of waste.

10.2.2 The Landfill (England and Wales) Regulations 2002

The overall objective of these regulations is to supplement the requirements of the Waste Framework Directive and prevent or reduce as far as possible the negative effects of landfilling on the environment as well as any resultant risk to human health.

10.2.3 The Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005

The key implications of the regulations are that the list of Hazardous Wastes will be defined by the European Waste Catalogue under the List of Wastes Regulations 2005 and that each hazardous waste producing site – unless exempt – must be required to be pre-registered with the Environment Agency before waste can be collected.

10.2.4 The Environmental Protection Act 1990

This requires all producers of controlled waste to ensure that they only transfer wastes that they produce to authorised carriers or to operators with suitable permits for the management of these wastes.

10.2.5 Environmental Permitting Regulations (England and Wales), 2011 (As amended)

The legislation produces a single regulatory framework by streamlining and integrating a number of regimes including waste management licensing, pollution prevention and control, water discharge consenting and groundwater authorisations.

27

European Union (2008). Directive 2008/98/EC: The Waste Framework Directive




10.2.6 Highways Agency ‘Managing Our Approach to Environmental Performance: Supporting our Environmental Strategy’

The Highways Agency in the construction, maintenance and operation of the strategic road network plays a key role in the management of construction waste by its supply. Since 2007, the Agency has targeted driving down their contribution to the national total of waste materials to landfill. It aspires to working towards shifting the focus from waste management to the more efficient management of material resources throughout their lifecycle28. The Agency has developed “Actions” which promote increased material efficiency and better waste management.

10.3 Methodology

The assessment of impact of the proposed scheme on material resources and waste has been undertaken in line with the Highways Agency Interim Advice Note 153/11: Guidance on the Environmental Assessment of Material Resources.

Based on the project cost exceeding the £300,000 threshold and based on limited detailed information on construction materials quantities or waste management facility capacities, a simple level assessment has been undertaken and has included identification and assessment of the following:

• The materials required for the scheme together with the quantities (where known).

• The anticipated waste arisings from the project, along with the quantities and type e.g. hazardous (where known).

• The impacts that may arise in relation to the materials and waste generation.

As the SM-ALR operating regime seeks to reduce the motorway infrastructure and reuse site won materials, progression to a detailed assessment is not considered necessary.

The assessment focuses on the effects arising from the use of materials in the development of the scheme, with materials defined as comprising:

• Material Resources – the use of primary/ secondary/ recycled materials and manufactured products during the construction of the proposed scheme.

• Waste – is likely to arise from two sources: removal of existing site materials (such as redundant motorway infrastructure, excavation of material from earthworks), or surplus materials (such as damages or off cuts).

10.3.1 Materials Resource

Resource efficiency requires an assessment of both material selection and waste management e.g. effective ordering of materials to meet exact need,

28

The Highways Agency. Materials Resource and Waste: http://www.highways.gov.uk/knowledge/18540.aspx




reusing existing materials generated on-site and surplus materials generated (on or off-site).

The key materials considered for this scheme are grouped under two main areas:

• Material Resources – this includes materials required to construct the scheme. Materials that are expected to be required during construction include grout for groundwork, asphalt, concrete, steel reinforcements, sheet piles, prefabricated gantries CCTV cameras and road restraint systems, copper cabling, Type 1 sub-base, pipe-bedding, Class 1 granular fill, Class 5 topsoil and Class 6 capping.

• Waste – excavated materials from key infrastructure locations, excess materials, redundant furniture, road planings, and contaminated materials to be disposed off.

It must be noted that some of the “waste” materials can be reused on-site and may therefore be considered as material resources.

10.3.2 Waste Facilities

The study area for the assessment was defined as the boundaries of the proposed scheme for potential immediate impacts. The LPA boundaries form the wider study area in relation to potential impacts on waste policies and targets.

Local Authority waste policies were identified for the area within which the proposed scheme falls. These policies were considered only to the extent to which the proposed scheme’s material resources and waste management impact upon the relevant local waste policy requirements and the local waste capacity.

The types of waste management facilities within South Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire were identified from the ‘Environmental Agency Waste Data Tables (2011)’29.

The potential landfill capacity (m3) was derived from the tables indicated above17. To identify potential capacity for all other waste treatments, the Waste plans for Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, Sheffield City Council (SCC) and RMBC have been reviewed in conjunction with the ‘Environment Agency Waste Trends Data Tables (2000 to 2011)’30.

Although the capacities of individual sites for the rest of the counties were not available, the conjunction of the above information sources provided an overview of potential capacity within Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and South Yorkshire to treat waste streams other than that which was bound for landfill.

In addition to the above, consultation was also held with the DP to identify potential material sources and waste management facility locations.


Approximate quantities of net import / export for cut / fill material and the numbers of infrastructure required to facilitate the proposed scheme have

29

Environment Agency (2012).Waste Data Tables 2011. 30

Environment Agency (2012).Waste Data Trends Tables 2011.




been used for the assessment as exact quantities of materials required were unknown at the time of writing.

IAN 153/11 does not define an assessment process to determine significance of environmental effects resulting from the use of materials or generation / disposal of waste from highway construction sites. It acknowledges that this is a developing assessment area and further research is required. Therefore in line with Article 3 of the codified EIA Directive, the direct and indirect impacts, secondary, short, medium and long-term, permanent and temporary, positive and negative effects of the project have been identified and reported, where relevant. Indications of the geographic extent, duration and frequency of potential impacts have also been given.

Waste management facilities identified in the immediate vicinity of the proposed scheme have been highlighted on Appendix A3: Figure 10.1. It must be noted that this information has only been provided to show the availability of waste management facilities in the study area. It therefore does not represent a comprehensive list of waste management facilities in the South Yorkshire region that could be utilised by the proposed scheme DP.


The study area for this assessment has been defined principally as the motorway corridor with regards to immediate scheme impacts on materials use and waste generation. The LPA boundaries form the wider study area in relation to potential impacts on waste policies and targets.

10.4.1 Relevant Waste Policies

As mentioned previously, to identify potential capacity for all other waste treatments, the Waste plans for Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, Sheffield City Council (SCC) and RMBC have been reviewed in conjunction with the ‘Environment Agency Waste Trends Data Tables (2000 to 2011).

The Highways Agency document ‘Managing Our Approach to Environmental Performance: Supporting our Environmental Strategy’ includes four ‘actions’ which are relevant to the use of materials and the treatment of waste on Highways Agency projects.

10.4.2 Motorway Infrastructure

Materials resource considered as part of the baseline is the existing motorway equipment. These are elements of the existing motorway infrastructure that will potentially be reused, recycled or disposed of during the implementation of the SM-ALR operating regime throughout the M28-31 motorway corridor. These elements mostly comprise:

• Existing Gantries

• Existing Signage

• Existing Electrical Interface Cabinets

• Construction materials such as hardcore, concrete and planings.

• Soils and excavated materials.




10.4.3 Waste Management Facilities and Capacities

Within the Local Authority areas of SCC, RMBC, Derbyshire County Council (DCC) and Nottinghamshire County Council (NCC), there is capacity for disposal of construction waste. This is indicated in the Core Strategy and Waste Plan and Joint Waste Plan documents for these counties.

The Environment Agency’s Waste Data Tables provide an indication of the capacities of Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and South Yorkshire landfills in 2011. These capacities are outlined in Table 10.1.

Table 10.1: Waste Management Capacities

Type Derbyshire Nottinghamshire South Yorkshire

Inert 2,841,,000 m³ 1,951,000 m³ 7,374,000m³

Non-hazardous 3,252,000 m³ 4,582,000 m³ 15,757,000m³

Non-hazardous Restricted

24,000 m³ 4,709,000 m³ -

Non-hazardous site accepting Stable Non Reactive Hazardous Wastes

7,296,000m³ - -

The waste tables do not identify any landfill capacity in South Yorkshire, Derbyshire or Nottinghamshire to manage hazardous waste.

Historically, LPAs have not been obliged to monitor the capacity of other types of waste treatment facilities and the Environment Agency Waste Data Tables do not indicate this. However, the tables do demonstrate that in 2011 the following materials treatments were undertaken in Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and South Yorkshire:

• Transfer

• Material recovery

• Physical

• Physico-chemical

• Chemical

• Composting

• Biological

• Metal Recycling.

The above list indicates that there are numerous options within the M1 J28 to 31 host counties for material treatment other than landfill.


The proposed scheme will make use of the existing hard shoulder and will be delivered within the existing highway boundary. The proposed scheme design has sought to reduce the number of and frequency of gantries and ERAs that




have been proposed through previous layouts. As outlined in Chapter 3, where possible, the SM infrastructure will use existing bases and other materials which will minimise material use and waste.

The key potential impacts associated with materials are expected to arise from the following:

• Transportation of Materials

• Storage of Imported Materials

• Excavation

• Removal of Existing Infrastructure

• Treatment of Materials.

The effects associated with the above could potentially have a negative impact on the Highways Agency’s waste management policies and waste management facilities in the three affected counties.

10.5.1 Proposed Infrastructure

Measures for reuse of materials (either on-site or off-site) have been considered during the design phase. Particular attention has been paid to the generation and reuse of excess materials within the motorway corridor as this offers the largest opportunity to ensure waste prevention and disposal.

For the purpose of the materials assessment there has been no differentiation in the type of gantries required to facilitate SM-ALR along the scheme length (for a detailed description of potential scheme infrastructure please see Section 3.3). Of the 92 gantries required for the proposed scheme, 24 would make use of existing foundations and 12 existing gantries will be retained and reused. Please see Table 3.1 for a breakdown of infrastructure required for the proposed scheme. Re-using existing infrastructure will minimise the amount of material resource that will be imported by the proposed scheme, and therefore to a degree avoid some impacts associated with material use.

Eighteen gantries will become redundant and removed from the scheme length. These and all other surplus existing infrastructure will be treated in adherence to the waste hierarchy.

Twenty ERAs will be needed to facilitate the proposed scheme requiring additional materials with the potential to generate waste. However, it is anticipated that material will be won within the construction site and used to construct these, again reducing the need to import materials. Materials will still be required to construct the proposed scheme and the DP has identified the following potential material sources locations (see Appendix A3: Figure 10.1):

• Lafarge, Canklow Bridge, Rotherham – Ready Mixed Concrete.

• Lafarge Aggregates, Lindrick Dale, Worksop – Aggregates.

• Former Wellbeck Colliery, Meden Vale – Recycled Aggregates.

10.5.2 Storage of Imported Materials

Inadequate storage of materials can result in negative impacts on nearby water systems or surrounding habitats e.g. through damage / contamination.




There will be a storage period between materials delivery to site and use in the construction process. In line with best practice working practices all imported materials to site will be stored safely and appropriately for that type of material; thus avoiding any degradation or loss of that resource.

Best practice measures will be utilised in all material storage locations, including the site compound and on site locations, as outlined in the DP’s CEMP.

10.5.3 Treatment of Surplus or Waste Materials

Table 10-2 indicates the type and where known, the approximate quantities of materials that will be considered appropriate for treatment off-site. The waste hierarchy will be adhered to thus minimising the amount of material sent to landfill. Where material resource cannot be reduced or reused on-site, it will be considered for recycling. If this form of treatment is not appropriate, some form of energy recovery will be considered.

In the event that the material is considered waste that can only be disposed off as in the case of the majority of hazardous material, then disposal will be considered by using the appropriate method and adhering to the relevant regulation (see Section 10.1).

It is anticipated that where required, the capacity of waste treatments other than landfill is anticipated to be sufficient to receive surplus or waste materials from the proposed scheme.

10.5.4 Waste Management Facilities

It is clear from baseline information (see Section 10.4) that there are appropriate waste management facilities and sufficient capacity within the LPA areas to deal with construction waste from the proposed scheme. The DP has identified the former Wellbeck Colliery, Meden Vale as a potential location for non-hazardous and inert waste, with the possibility of recycling at the site. Other potential waste management facilities in the immediate vicinity of the scheme are shown in Appendix A3: Figure 10.1.

At this stage it has not been possible to determine exact quantities of materials that would be recycled, recovered or disposed of to landfill. However, a summary of the expected materials and waste streams associated with the construction of the proposed scheme, and existing motorway infrastructure to be removed are provided in Tables 10.2 and 10.3.

10.5.5 Excavation

Re-use of inert material (such as soil processing of excavated material for re-use on site) will reduce the need for surplus material resource to be disposed off. It is anticipated that all site won inert material will be used wherever possible during construction of the proposed scheme. As yet the exact quantities of site won materials that will be produced are unknown but there is extensive scope to reuse these materials in the scheme e.g. for new ERA foundations and general landscape works. Overall, the DP anticipates that there will be a need for a 68,000m3 net import of materials and 153,000m3

excavated material thereby requiring disposal.




10.5.6 Construction Process

The construction of the proposed scheme would include the following activities:

• Site set up and traffic management deployment.

• Vegetation and site clearance.

• Excavation of the soil at infrastructure locations and disposal off-site.

• Erection of gantries and associated grouting (if required) and construction of ERAs.

• Installation of longitudinal cabling, cameras, CCDs, cabinets and associated steps.

• Erection of discreet lengths of steel barrier.

• Paving and replacement of removed road markings back on to existing alignment.

• Removal of traffic management.

• Removal of redundant infrastructure.

Materials will be required and waste generated whilst undertaking the afore-listed activities. Tables 10.2 and 10.3 provide information on the proposed scheme’s material resource requirements and potential waste arisings, where possible these have been linked to the afore-listed construction activities.

During Step 4 above, it is anticipated that a number of foundation locations will have to be grouted. Grout materials will be prepared on-site as and when required. Excess grout will be disposed off on a daily basis as they contain cement and bentonite which solidify when left standing.

Appendix A3: Figure 2.1 shows the locations of the gantries relative to the flood zones.




Table 10.2: Material Resources

Project Activity Purpose of Material Resources Required Material Resources Required (Quantities Provided Where Known)

Additional Information

Site remediation / preparation / earthworks

- Primary aggregate for ground stabilisation during ERA construction (Step 4 above)

- Granular fill for ground stabilisation during ERA, sign / gantry foundations and other infrastructure.

- Brick and aggregate for steps and other access points

Primary aggregate

Granular fill

Bricks and general aggregate

Primary materials will be sourced locally where possible. Materials will be transported by road, using the existing highway network.

Excavated material will be reused wherever possible.

Demolition and site construction

Material use is not expected to be significant during the anticipated minor demolition works.

The installation of new technology and infrastructure would require material use including:

- Infrastructure: Steel, plastic

- Piling: Steel reinforcement and concrete;

- Narrowing central reserve at underbridges and central pier protection at overbridges:

- Concrete for signs and gantries foundations and capping beams (Step 4); and

- Bituminous strip widening of carriageway, converting central reserve and ERAs (Step 7);

A number of the existing infrastructure (gantries) will be reused as part of the proposed scheme.

5 New Sign Gantries

7 New Signal Gantries

5 New Sign Signal Gantries

15 New ADS Cantilever Gantries

2 New MS3 Cantilever Gantries

22 New MS4 Cantilever Gantries

110 TTMS Signs

41 CCDs

78 PTZ Cameras

13 EAV Cameras

Electrical Interface and Equipment Cabinets

Cable Ducts

Bitumen for 20 ERAs

The design approach has been to, where possible and within the operating regime guidelines, minimise the number of new infrastructure installed. Therefore, the potential material resources used in the construction of the new infrastructure has as a result been minimised.

Primary materials will be sourced locally where possible. Materials will be transported by road, using the existing highway network. Potential materials source locations are shown on Figure 10.1 (Appendix A3)

Excavated material will be reused wherever possible.

Operation and maintenance Routine maintenance of infrastructure and technology including surfacing asphalt and

Material resources yet to be determined but expected to be

Primary materials will be sourced locally where possible. Materials will be transported




Project Activity Purpose of Material Resources Required Material Resources Required (Quantities Provided Where Known)


servicing of electronic equipment. insignificant. by road, using the existing highway network. Potential materials source locations are shown on Figure 10.1 (Appendix A3)

Maintenance activities will be addressed in a Environmental Management Plan (EMP) or Environmental Management System (EMS).




Table 10.3: Waste Arisings

Project Activity Anticipated Waste Arisings Waste Arisings (Quantities Provided Where Known)


Site remediation / preparation / earthworks

Minimal waste arisings are anticipated which would be disposed of in accordance with legislation and as specified in the SWMP.

Waste quantities not known at this stage

Waste will be minimised as far as possible through reuse on site.


(Step 9) Gantries will be removed:

- Primarily concrete and steel;

Some infrastructure (e.g. gantries, drainage) may be re-aligned, including:

- New construction: Small quantities of spoil from piling, timber shuttering.

- Some existing asphalt and central reserve fill material.

Some may contain asbestos.

The installation of new technology and infrastructure will result in waste arisings including the following:

- Spoil from piling, timber shuttering.

- Packaging material related to new infrastructure.

- Material excavated for gantry foundations.

18 existing gantries to be removed

Material excavated from gantry foundations

Spoil generated from piling, timber shuttering and packaging material related to new infrastructure.

The removal and disposal of any small quantities of asbestos would be managed through the SWMP and in line with legislation. Due to the relatively small amounts of asbestos expected to be present and the implementation of the SWMP in accordance with legislation, significant impacts or effects are unlikely.

The proposed scheme will require the removal and disposal of some materials (such as that excavated for foundations) that are considered to be Construction and Demolition (C and D) waste, and therefore require disposal to inert landfill. Materials will be transported by road, using the existing highway network.

Operation and maintenance Waste arisings during operation and maintenance are expected to be minimal.

Waste quantities not known at this stage, but expected to be insignificant.

Any waste arisings will be during periodic maintenance and are not expected to be significant.




10.5.7 Highways Agency Waste Policy

In the construction, maintenance and operation of the Strategic Road Network, the Highways Agency plays a key role in the management of construction waste by its supply.

Since 2007, the Highways Agency has targeted driving down their contribution to the national total of waste materials to landfill. The Highways Agency has also indicated that it aspires to continue working towards shifting the focus from waste management to the more efficient management of material resources throughout their Projects’ lifecycle.

Quoting from the document ‘Managing our approach to environmental performance: Supporting our Environmental Strategy’, the Highways Agency has developed actions which will promote increased material efficiency and better waste management. The actions relevant to the proposed scheme are as follows:

Table 10.4: Highways Agency Waste Policy

Policy / Action Effect Explanation

Action 1: Identify where waste is being generated; to establish benchmarks for the quantity of waste produced in trunk road management.

Positive In response to Action 1 the management of the proposed scheme would identify where waste is being generated with the production of an SWMP.

Action 2: Conserve existing resources and reduce quantities of waste.

Positive The aims of Action 2 and 4 have been attained through the reduction of motorway infrastructure in comparison to other operating regimes and the re-use of existing infrastructure and foundations. It is also expected that surplus materials would be managed using the waste management hierarchy (refer to Figure 8).

Action 4: Cooperate more closely with industry to identify barriers to the reuse or recycling of highway materials and to encourage the use of secondary and waste materials where practical.

Positive Action 4 indicates that cooperating more closely with industry to identify barriers to using the waste management hierarchy. It is expected that this would be addressed within the DP’s SWMP and CEMP, method statements and good working practices.

Action 5: Amend technical specifications to encourage use of local and lower grade materials in highway construction as a means of reducing demand for new materials

No effect

There is currently no requirement for this in the technical specifications. This should be addressed within the DP’s method statements and working practices.


Implementing material resource efficiency at the design stage is commonly referred to as ‘Designing out Waste’31. Due to the value of the project, a

31

WRAP (2012). Designing out Waste Process; Implementing Designing out Waste in Construction Projects




SWMP will be required and delivered by the DP; in this case Costain. This is required in addition to a CEMP. These documents will be live documents which will track materials and waste (with the aim of reducing to a minimum any potential environmental impacts) and ensure compliance with legislation. The DP will populate these documents with detailed information once the scheme has progressed to the detailed design stage.

A summary of anticipated mitigation measures is presented in the Table 10.5.

Table 10.5: Anticipated Mitigation Measures

Project Activity Potential Impacts Associated with Material Resource Use / Waste Management

Mitigation Measures

Implementation, Measuring and Monitoring of the Mitigation Measures

Site remediation / preparation

Impacts associated with the transportation of materials and unnecessary imports of primary aggregates and/or fill material.

Primary materials will be sourced locally wherever practicable (see Appendix A3: Figure 10.1 for potential locations). Excavated material will be reused on site where possible. Materials and waste will be transported by road, using the existing highway network.

Mitigation measures will be implemented by a site specific CEMP and SWMP. Opportunities for reduction, reuse and recycling will be identified.


Impacts associated with the transportation of construction material and the disposal of waste associated with the removal of existing material.

Primary materials will be sourced locally where practicable. Excavated material will be reused on site where possible. Materials and waste will be transported by road, using the existing highway network.

Mitigation measures will be implemented by a site specific CEMP and SWMP. Opportunities for reduction, reuse and recycling will be identified.

Operation and maintenance

Impacts associated with the annual maintenance regime in respect of cleaning and replacement / maintenance of electrical equipment.

Maintenance will be carried out in accordance with a planned annual schedule (likely to involve overnight closure of the motorway). This will reduce the impact by limiting ad-hoc visits by maintenance contractors.

Scheduled maintenance regimes will form part of the contract for on-going maintenance and will ensure efficient use of resources.




10.7 Summary

It is expected that the application of the waste hierarchy, SWMP and CEMP during the proposed works will have a positive effect on the requirements / targets outlined in local waste policies and the Highways Agency’s Strategy.

Mitigation measures have been identified and will be developed and finalised at the detailed design stage when further information is available on the quantities of material resources required.




11 Cumulative Effects


The individual subject assessments have addressed issues of combined effects on receptors where multiple equipments are proposed.

The assessment reported in this chapter focuses on the likely main significant cumulative effects of the proposed scheme rather than reporting every interaction. Where possible impact interactions between environmental subject areas exist and no project specific environmental effects are predicted for one interacting subject area, potential for cumulative effects have been scoped out as the probability of cumulative effects occurring is low.

Based on the scoping exercise, the key potential impacts of the proposed scheme would be on noise, air quality, landscape / visual, cultural heritage and nature conservation. Therefore potential cumulative effects which can arise in two forms: interactive (interaction between environmental topic areas) or in-combination cumulative effects (combined effects with other proposed projects) would be in relation to these environmental aspects.

No assessment of cumulative effects has been undertaken for materials use and waste generation as waste generation will be restricted to development boundaries and any requirements for materials and waste disposal will be dealt with on a development by development basis.


The EIA Directive in Article 3 requires the consideration of the cumulative effects of a project and the inter-action between the human being, flora and fauna with soil, water, air, climate and the landscape. It also requires a consideration of the in-combination environmental effects of a project with other projects on the aforementioned receptors and resource. As outlined in Section 4.2.2, the need for this assessment has been transposed to UK legislation and incorporated in the DMRB, Volume 11, Section 1 and 2 and the Highways Agency’s Determination Process.

11.3 Interactive Cumulative Effects

11.3.1 Introduction

Interactive cumulative effects could result from the additive effect of the proposed scheme: e.g. deterioration in air quality through increased vehicle emissions; increases in traffic-sourced noise levels; and heightened visual intrusion through increased visual exposure to new highway infrastructure (e.g. vegetation clearance or the introduction of a gantry; new visual element) on the same receptors / resources. Potential for cumulative effects will primarily be dictated by the location of these receptors with greater potential for cumulative effects on receptors closer to the motorway.




11.3.2 Study Area and Assessment Methodology

The interactive cumulative study area has been dictated by the study areas adopted for the interacting environmental aspect being considered. These are as detailed in the respective assessment chapters.

For all potential interactions, the smaller study area has been adopted as possible interactions will not exist outside the scope of one interacting aspect. For instance, for possible interaction between nature conservation and air quality with regards to habitat loss and dust generation during construction, where habitat loss is restricted to the “immediate zone of influence of the proposed scheme”, interactive cumulative effects outside the proposed scheme’s immediate zone of influence is not considered as the potential for interaction is removed outside this area. The study area in this instance will be the proposed scheme’s immediate zone of influence as defined in Chapter 8: Nature Conservation.

In light of the above, further explanation on the study area adopted for potential interactive cumulative effects will be given in the respective impact assessment sections.

The following steps have been undertaken in the assessment of interactive cumulative effects:

• Identification of the potential for interaction between potential / predicted impacts (before mitigation) as reported in the assessment chapters (Chapters 5 to 9) to result in significant cumulative effects. Where neutral or slight (adverse / beneficial) effects are concluded in both subject area assessments, the potential for these to result in significant interactive cumulative effects were ruled out.

• GIS spatial analysis in the form of overlay mapping making use of mapping layers prepared as part of the subject assessment to identify the spatial distribution of impacts and identify where impact interaction may occur as a result of the proposed project.

• Confirmation of the study area, extent of receptors / resources and baseline conditions with potential to result in significant interactive cumulative effects.

The assessment also considers potential cumulative environmental effects arising from past actions in considering the baseline environment; present and future actions in considering the proposed scheme during the construction and operational phases as well as other planned schemes in the vicinity of the proposed scheme. It also considers effects during the construction (temporary / short term effects) and operation phase (permanent / long term effects). In doing this, highly mobile receptors have not been considered as a level of immobility is required be subject to significant interactive cumulative effects. Users of footpaths, roads and railway lines have therefore not been considered.

Table 2.4 of DMRB Volume 11, Section 2, Part 5: H205/08 has been used to ascertain the significance of the cumulative effects.




11.3.3 Impact Assessment

The scoping exercise concluded that there is potential for interactive cumulative effects on receptors and resources. Table 11.1 provides details on the potential key interactions identified and reported in Chapters 5-9.




Table 11.1: Potential for Interactive Cumulative Effects for the Proposed Scheme

Subject Areas Air Quality Cultural Heritage Landscape Nature Conservation Noise and Vibration

Air Quality Chapter 5 – Air Quality

No - No potential for cumulative effects expected. Lived in cultural heritage assets have been assessed as residential dwellings.

No – Slight adverse visual effects identified and potential increase in dust deposition during construction not considered significant.

No - No more than slight adverse impact expected from loss of habitat and increased dust deposition on habitats. Therefore no potential for significant adverse cumulative effects.

Yes - Increase in noise levels and dust deposition during construction.

Increase in traffic noise levels (short and long term) and NO2 during operation.

Cultural Heritage None– see cross link above

Chapter 6 – Cultural Heritage

Yes – Adverse impacts on settings and visual impacts

No - only neutral or slight adverse effects are predicted in subject assessments therefore no potential for significant cumulative effects.

No - No potential for cumulative effects.

Landscape Effects Yes– see cross link above

Yes– see cross link above Chapter 7 – Landscape Effects

Yes - Loss of habitat and visual screening vegetation

Yes - Increase in noise during construction and adverse visual impacts on same receptors.

Nature Conservation

Yes– see cross link above

None– see cross link above

Yes– see cross link above Chapter 8 – Nature Conservation

No - No potential for impact on same receptors or resources.

Noise and Vibration

Yes– see cross link above

None– see cross link above

Yes– see cross link above None– see cross link above Chapter 9 – Noise and Vibration




Air Quality and Noise

A review of areas predicted to experience air quality and noise impacts was undertaken. During construction, potential exists for interactive cumulative effects resulting from deterioration in air quality (increase in PM10 and dust deposition) and increases in traffic noise levels. Following the methodology outlined in Section 11.2.3, the study adopted for this assessment has been 200m from the proposed scheme – the HD207/07 defined area for the air quality construction assessment as beyond this area, the potential for interaction with construction noise impacts in the additional 100m considered as part of the construction noise assessment is removed.

Construction of the proposed scheme is not predicted to result in unmanageable levels of dust and noise. Impacts relating to these are also expected to be short term and temporary, lasting only for the duration of works at proposed infrastructure locations. The adoption of best practice construction working mitigation measures as outlined in Chapter 5: Air Quality and Chapter 9: Noise and Vibration will serve to ensure there are no significant adverse interactive cumulative effects on receptors.

The cumulative effects assessment has focused on air quality and noise changes in the opening year. This is considered to be the worst year in the first 15 years following operation of the proposed scheme32. It has also been undertaken for the design year. The local air quality and noise assessments have demonstrated that some receptors would be subject to adverse impacts as a result of localised deterioration in air quality (increases in NO2 concentration) and negligible increases in traffic-related noise in the short term of less than 1dB(A) during the operation phase of the proposed scheme. In line with the methodology outlined in Section 11.3.2, an assessment of cumulative effects has been ruled out as the potential of predicted negligible increases in noise levels in the short and long term (Table 9.6 and 9.8) and small worsening in air quality (increase in NO2 concentrations) in the opening and design year (Table 5.5 and 5.6) has little potential of resulting in significant cumulative effects. This is the case for beneficial impacts.

Cultural Heritage and Landscape Effects

Interactions would potentially occur in relation to the landscape character and the setting of cultural heritage assets. A number of Scheduled Monument, Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas have been identified within the visual context of the motorway and proposed scheme infrastructure locations. These have been assessed as visual receptors where appropriate i.e. residential property that is also a listed building or a representative view as a visitor to a location. Impacts on the setting of a Conversation Area have been addressed in isolation within the cultural heritage assessment.

32

http://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol11/section3/ha20707.pdf - HA207/07: DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1




Nature Conservation and Landscape Effects

Interactions would potentially occur during the construction phase of the proposed scheme.

During construction, cumulative effects could arise from the effects of the loss of habitat in addition to the potential effects on landscape character from the removal of roadside vegetation and its contribution to local character. Mitigation proposals would seek to replace vegetation removed with native planting which in the medium to long term would restore both habitat and capacity to integrate the corridor within the wider landscape framework.

Landscape Effects and Noise and Vibration

No receptor has been predicted to be subject to residual effects greater than slight adverse (See Appendix A2: Checklist 2 and 3 and Section 7.7). In line with the methodology outlined in Section 11.3.2, an assessment of cumulative effects has been ruled out as the potential of predicted slight adverse residual effects in visual effects and small worsening in air quality (increase in NO2 concentrations) in the opening and design year (Table 5.5 and 5.6) has little potential of resulting in significant cumulative effects.

11.4 In-combination Cumulative Effects

11.4.1 Introduction

In-combination cumulative effects could be as a result of the effects of the proposed scheme in combination with effects of other highway schemes and local developments on either: the same receptors / resources or resources in general. Current DMRB guidance (Volume 11, Section 2, Part 5) requires the cumulative effects assessment of trunk roads that have been confirmed (i.e. gone through the statutory processes) and development projects with valid planning permissions as granted by LPAs, and for which statutory EIA is a requirement or for which non-statutory EIA has been undertaken.

11.4.2 Study Area and Methodology

The following steps have been undertaken in the assessment of in-combination cumulative effects:

• Information gathering on road schemes and developments in the planning system in the vicinity of the proposed scheme.

• Establishment of potential interaction between the proposed scheme and other projects;

• Confirmation of the study area and baseline conditions for the elements with potential to result in in-combination cumulative effects;

• Review of the impact assessment and conclusion regarding these elements. Where a scheme is not expected to result in a topic related effects, in-combination cumulative effects are ruled out. Where topic related effects are expected for both projects being considered, an assessment of overlaps between areas of predicted effects has been undertaken as the potential for cumulative effects exists within these




overlap areas. Potential for in-combination effects in a much wider study area was also considered with regards to synergistic effects.

The five LPAs within which the proposed scheme lies were approached for information on committed developments within 500m of the proposed scheme between August 2012 and March 2013. The information provided has informed the assessment of in-combination cumulative effects. Responses received were as follows:

• RMBC provided a spreadsheet and MapInfo Layer for live application sites within the M1 (and M18) 500m buffer zone.

• BDC provided a list of committed developments within 500m of the proposed scheme.

• Response from ADC and NEDDC was not received at the time of writing.

• The CDC request was directed to NEDDC owing to re-alignment of the boundary between the two LPAs.

Based on current information and guidance, projects scoped in to the in-combination cumulative assessment include:

• Confirmed trunk roads schemes within or connecting to the proposed scheme which have gone through the statutory process and are likely to commence construction or operation within three years of the proposed scheme. This allows for any potential temporal and spatial interaction to be assessed.

• Committed local development projects within 500m of the proposed scheme.

To arrive at a significance of effects, Table 2.6 of DMRB Volume 11, Section 2, Part 5: HA 205/08 has been used.

11.4.3 Impact Assessment

Traffic Related Environmental Assessments (Road Schemes)

There are a number of additional proposed schemes in the vicinity of the proposed scheme. These and some other road schemes have been taken account of in the traffic model which also includes growth factors to account for the future presence and operation of a number of committed developments within the study area. As a result of this, the air quality and noise assessments are inherently cumulative assessments. All traffic data for 2010 (Base Year), 2015 (Opening Year) and 2030 (Design Year) was provided by Atkins Group Ltd using the East Midlands Traffic M1 Traffic Appraisal Model (EMMITAM).

Table 11.2: Projects Considered in the Traffic Model

Reference Location Status / Description Scope

M1 J32-35a MM Scheme

To the north of the proposed scheme

M1 J39-42 To the north of

NC – 20-15: MM-ALR scheme with TJR; includes the installation of gantries, ERAs, cables and supporting

Potential for cumulative landscape / visual effects.

No spatial overlap – no




Reference Location Status / Description Scope

MM Scheme the proposed scheme

infrastructure.

M1 J31-32 Variable Mandatory Speed Limit Scheme

At the northern end of the proposed scheme

NC – 2015: Sign swap out from existing gantries, installation of two new MS4s at J32.

M18 J2-3 Pinchpoint Scheme

To the south of the proposed scheme

NC- 2015: Installation of MIDAS

potential for physical impacts with associated with ecology impacts, visual effects and impact on setting of cultural heritage assets.

M1 J33 Pinchpoint Scheme

To the north of the proposed scheme

NC- 2015: Conversion of two lanes to three at the northbound off-slip with localised widening.

The proposed scheme includes works at an existing gantry (G8-01). No new infrastructure proposed at this location, therefore no scope for in-combination cumulative effects.

Non Traffic Related Environmental Assessments

Some schemes included in the traffic model have also been considered in the non-traffic related cumulative effects assessment due to their proximity. It is worth noting that for this assessment only schemes classed as “Near Certain” (NC), “More than Likely” (MTL) and “Reasonably Foreseeable” (RF) (accordingly to TAG Unit 3.15.5: The Treatment of Uncertainty in Model Forecasting) in the traffic model that meet the spatial and temporal scope of this assessment.

Details of a project identified by BDC for consideration in the cumulative effects assessment which are within the temporal scope of this assessment (see Section 11.3.2 for definition of temporal scope) are provided below. This excludes the road schemes listed above in Table 11.2.

12/00477/FULMAJ: (RF – application received: 5 October 2012) Land west of Cragg Lane, rear of 1A to 19 Alfreton Road and east of Thurgaton Way, Newton – residential development of 49 dwellings including associated garages and infrastructure.

No scope for in-combination cumulative effects has been identified with the above-listed project based on the absence of a spatial overlap.

In addition to the above, based on information obtained from BDC, it is understood that there is a proposed development around J29a of the M1 (Markham Vale) for which NEDDC is the lead authority. Based on the location of this proposed development, there is potential for cumulative landscape / visual and noise effects.

RMBC responded with a total of 21 schemes within the M1 and M18 for consideration in the cumulative effects assessment. Of these, only five were within 500m of the proposed scheme, none of which were within the temporal scope of this assessment (See Section 11.4.2). As a result of this, no in-




combination cumulative effects with developments in the planning system are expected in this area.

11.5 Summary

In light of the above, no significant cumulative effects are expected during the construction (temporary effects) and operation (permanent effects) phase of the proposed scheme. This is mainly due to distance of receptors and nature of proposed works which has limited the potential for interaction between the proposed scheme impacts and other identified proposed schemes. The significance of cumulative environmental effects is therefore adjudged to be neutral.




12 Outline Environmental Management Plan

This assessment of the proposed scheme has identified a number of impacts that would arise during the construction and operation phase of the proposed improvement. To address these, a number of mitigation measures have been identified.

The key mitigation measures identified as part of the environmental assessment and reported in this EAR are scheduled below in Table 12.1. These measures have been translated into specific actions in appropriate Specification Appendices document. Where appropriate, the relevant works specification appendix is referenced to in Table 12.1.

The measures listed in Table 12.1 will also be used for the development of a comprehensive CEMP which will then be utilised to prepare, manage and control construction activities to avoid and or minimise environmental impacts during the construction phase whilst addressing and adhering to all statutory and legal processes. The requirements, approvals procedures for work, goods or materials needed to implement the mitigation measures will be detailed in Specification Appendices to the DP’s contract. The CEMP will address the impacts identified within this EAR as well as those arising from the construction related activities at the site office (J29A – Markham Vale) and other satellite locations.




Table 12.1: Schedule of Commitments

Stage Ref No

Impact Mitigation Measure Monitoring Requirements

Air Quality

Pre Construction AQ1 Site Management - Where appropriate, reasonable, and practicable, it is recommended that the DP would plan the site layout to locate machinery and dust-causing activities away from sensitive receptors.

Pre and During Construction

AQ2 Liaison with the local authority will be maintained throughout the construction process. If complaints are received from local residents, these are to be documented in a diary or log held on-site by the Site Manager and the information used in establishing improved construction nuisance management protocols where required.

During Construction AQ3 Site Management - Where appropriate, reasonable, and practicable, it is recommended that the Contractor would use appropriate methods, such as the erection of hoardings or other barriers along the site boundary, to mitigate the spread of dust to any sensitive buildings or other environmental receptors.

During Construction AQ4

Dust / PM10

Increases

Construction Plant and Vehicles - Where practical vehicles and plant will be switched off when not in use; and enclose, shield or provide filters for plant likely to generate excessive quantities of dust beyond the site boundaries. It is recommended the use of items such as dust extractors, filters and collectors will be used on rigs and silos.

Transportation, Storage and Handling of Materials - Where appropriate, reasonable, and practicable, it is recommended that the Contractor would employ appropriate measures, such as covering materials deliveries or loads entering and leaving the construction site by a fixed cover or sheeting appropriately fixed and suitable for the purposes of preventing materials and dust spillage; and use appropriate measures such as watering facilities to reduce or prevent escape of dust from the site boundaries.

Excavation and Earthworks Activities - Where appropriate, reasonable, and practicable, it is recommended that the Contractor would strip topsoil as close as reasonably practicable to the period of excavation or other earthworks activities to avoid risks associated with run-off or dust generation; and keep drop heights from excavators to vehicles involved in the transport of excavated material to the minimum practicable to control dust generation associated with the

If complaints are received from local residents, these are to be documented in a diary or log held on-site by the Site Manager and the information used in establishing improved construction nuisance management protocols where required including contacting the Environmental Health Officer.




Stage Ref No


fall of materials.

Nature Conservation (See the Contractors Specifications Document: 3000 Series: Clause 3012: Special Ecological Measures also referred to as Appendix 30/12)


NC1 Temporary disturbance degradation of terrestrial habitat, watercourses and controlled waters

All site works will be carried out in accordance with best environmental working practices e.g. CIRIA publications;

The working areas will be minimised and demarcated by the erection of fencing to prevent encroachment into those areas identified as sensitive receptors. Polluting materials will not be stored in works areas located within areas of significant biodiversity value, particularly within 50m of watercourses.

A methodology to prevent the spread of injurious and invasive weeds will be implemented and long-term monitoring and treatment undertaken where required for the duration of the contract. This programme should follow the NetRegs guidance (www.netregs.gov.uk) issued by the Environment Agency and other Statutory bodies across the UK.

Methods to minimise/prevent contamination of the watercourses during the construction works will be implemented. This could involve sediment traps in temporary surface water drainage systems. The EA produces guidelines for works in/near watercourses that would be followed.

Short term aerial pollution resulting from site vehicle emissions and dust will be controlled through best practice measures such as wetting, if dictated by very dry weather condition.

Retention of as many trees as possible with reference to the undertaking of any essential tree surgery to the crown or roots in accordance with British Standard (BS) 3998:2010 Tree Work Recommendations and appropriate Arboricultural Association advice notes, along with the protection of trees, with particular attention when adjacent to ancient woodland, in accordance with BS 5837:2005 Trees in Relation to Construction - Recommendations, Arboricultural Association and Forestry Authority Advice Notes, and the National Joint Utilities Group Guidelines for the Planning, Installation and Maintenance of Utility Services in Proximity to Trees.

Spill kits to be available on site and all staff are trained in how to use emergency response equipment.

Any works that disturb drainage features must include for any necessary mitigation or reinstatement to ensure the features retain their correct working function.

Monitor measures during construction to ensure these are still effective




Stage Ref No



NC2 Direct impact of land take and habitat loss / degradation of (SLINCS detailed in Section 7.4.2)

In addition to measures outlined in NC1 above, a general landscape and ecological mitigation proposal will be implemented to re-instate onsite habitats and ensure that the sites overall integrity and conservation objectives are maintained. This includes planting with appropriate species compositions within the extents of the SLINC and corridor.

Monitor establishment of re-instated vegetation.

Pre-Construction NC3 Update / Pre-Construction Surveys

GCN – EPS licence will be applied for from Natural England to undertake the works. See Appendix B4 for details. Common Reptiles – Targeted presence / absence surveys for reptiles at identified reptile suitable habitat. See Table 8.2 Badger – Badger surveys to be undertaken 6 weeks prior to work commencing at location of known badger setts. See Appendix B3 for this location.

If additional mitigation is required, monitor these throughout the implementation period to ensure effectiveness.


NC4 Disturbance / death / Injury to common reptiles

Habitat manipulation - buffer zones of 10m (where possible) around the proposed development site. If a reptile is noted all works must cease and ecological advice sought. Strimming the vegetation within the works area prior to any commencement of works to reduce the vegetation to a sward height that encourages reptiles to move offsite and into adjacent areas. The strimming will cut vegetation to a height of approximately 150mm to avoid impacts to any reptiles present, and completed in phases. An ecological toolbox talk will be given to contractors and site staff prior to construction commencing to highlight any potential ecological issues on site. Where possible, all reptile mitigation works should be carried out and completed during the active reptile season mid March to end October (weather dependent). If any reptiles are found during the works, then work should cease immediately, and advice sought from a suitably qualified ecologist. The mitigation strategy for each specific works location is summarised within Appendix A2: Checklists 2 and 3 and the locations highlighted on Appendix A3: Figure 8.1.

Maintain vegetation at stipulated height until construction is completed at works locations,

Pre-Construction:

NC5 Disturbance / death / Injury to badgers

All site workers will be informed of the known badger setts through toolbox talks, which will also cover the legal implications and offences regarding badgers and working in close proximity to their setts; All procedures will be carried out in accordance with best practice site working guidelines and a nearby vet that can accommodate injured badgers will be sourced and contact details provided prior to the commencement of works; The area to be cleared will be checked by a suitably trained ecologist prior to clearance. Vegetation clearance will be undertaken using hand tools, such as petrol strimmers and

As in NC12 below




Stage Ref No


chainsaws, and light machinery where necessary for chipping any branches that are trimmed; Any vegetation clearance close to badger setts should be done in a sensitive manner. This includes felling trees away from setts. Badger/mammal paths should be cleared of any felled trees or scrub; The working area will be minimised as far as practical and once the site is cleared it will be demarcated by the erection of fencing of a suitable durability to prevent badgers from entering the works area or works encroaching onto sensitive badger habitat; and, All pre-construction works must be supervised by a suitably trained ecologist and, where possible, should be sensitive to the diurnal activity patterns. Night works should therefore be avoided as far as practical.


NC6 Disturbance / death / Injury to bats

Sensitive timing of works to reduce the likelihood of construction related impacts to bats. Works within the immediate vicinity of the underpass will be carried out during the daylight hours when bats are inactive, where practicable; Works carried out outside of the bat activity season (active season: late March to late September); Carrying out works during pre-breeding (March-April) and pre-hibernation (September-October); In accordance with BCT guidance, lighting levels during construction in close proximity to the underpass should be kept as low as legally possible, ideally below 3 lux at ground level; Retain existing tall vegetation and screen planting where possible along the entire scheme extent and particularly in the vicinity of underpasses and riparian corridors potentially used by bats; A watching brief should be kept for all works in close proximity to the underpass throughout construction to ensure that no impacts on commuting bats arise; and, The implementation of a code of construction practice including measures to prevent adverse effects on bats. The mitigation strategy for each specific works location is summarised within Appendix A2: Checklists 2 and 3 and the locations highlighted on Appendix A3: Figure 8.1.

N/A


NC7 Disturbance / death / Injury to nesting birds

Clearance of vegetation suitable for nesting birds (woodland, grassland and scrub) to be scheduled for outside the optimal months for nesting birds (March to August inclusive). If it is not possible to clear suitable vegetation outside of nesting season, all clearance must take place under ecologist supervision. If an active nest is found works in its vicinity of works during construction works must cease until the nest is no longer active.

Ecological Supervision required if works are undertaken during the active bird nesting season.

During Construction NC8 Disturbance / death / Injury to

All works should be kept within the clearly demarcated works area for the duration of construction;

N/A




Stage Ref No


badgers If vehicles have to be temporarily parked onsite, they must be kept within the site construction area to minimise disturbance to the surrounding area; Materials shall not be stored or works compounds sited within the corridor crossing the area of interest, thus reducing the spatial footprint of the impact on the important feature; Consideration shall be given to excessive light and noise pollution and mitigation to minimise light and noise pollution, including screens, directional lighting and mufflers may be required; In all areas where badgers have been accessing the location of the works areas, trenches, ditches and works excavations should be covered overnight to prevent badgers from falling into them or trenches should include an earth ramp to allow badgers to climb out of; Ecological monitoring of the setts will be undertaken periodically to check the setts’ integrity is maintained; and, Works close to badger setts should be restricted at night to reduce disturbance to any badgers which may be leaving or returning to setts. If night works are essential then they should be completed under ecological supervision.

During Construction NC9 Disturbance / death / Injury to nesting birds

A watching brief and nest searches in habitats where nesting birds may be present will be undertaken. If active nests are encountered then works within that area should be delayed until after the birds have fledged. The mitigation strategy for each specific works location is summarised within Appendix A2: Checklists 2 and 3 and the locations highlighted on Appendix A3: Figure 8.1.

During Construction NC10 Permanent loss of common reptile habitat

Minimisation and demarcation of working area / polluting materials will not be stored in work areas of significant biodiversity value.

During Construction NC11 Permanent loss of nesting bird habitat

Retention and protection of as many trees as possible with reference to BS3998:2010 and BS5837:2005.

Post Construction NC12 Disturbance / death / Injury to badgers

A final walkover of the setts will be undertaken to ensure that no damage or harm has occurred to any setts or badger and provide updated information on the status of the setts post works completion.

Targeted pre-construction badger surveys will be carried 6 weeks prior to works commencing at specific works locations as the interval between the most recent badger survey and works




Stage Ref No


commencing will be greater than 6 months.


NC13 Direct impact of land take and habitat loss

The landscape mitigation planting strategy of onsite habitats will serve to ensure that the overall biodiversity value of affected habitats is regained.

Post vegetation clearance / construction planting would aim to restore the ecological value of the Highways Agency soft estate where affected and would aim to enhance and reflect the local biodiversity where possible. This could include re-instating and re-linking severed linear wildlife corridors with new planting. Consideration will be given to the inclusion of locally sourced native plant species within planting proposals and the application of sensitive management and monitoring regimes. The findings of the Phase 1 Habitat Survey will inform the selection of species for post construction replanting.

Proposed planting will reinstate and where possible enhance bird nesting foraging habitat.

Monitor establishment of re-instated vegetation.

Cultural Heritage

Pre Construction CH1 Watching Brief A watching brief put in place that would require archaeological supervision. The objectives would be to confirm the presence or absence of archaeological deposits, to determine their character, extent, date and state of preservation, and to produce a report on the findings.

During Construction CH2 Discovery of Archaeological remains with soft estate

If any archaeological features are uncovered works should stop for recording or salvage excavation. The following procedures should then be followed: Excavation would involve mechanical stripping of topsoil in open areas within the working width, followed by archaeological investigation. The objectives are to obtain a full record of the archaeological remains and to produce a report on the findings.

The relevant County Archaeologists should be invited to monitor implementation of the archaeological project design, and should be informed of any significant archaeological sites found at each stage. Provision should be made for the County Archaeologist to monitor




Stage Ref No


fieldwork in progress, and also to visit the construction site.

Post Construction CH3 Archaeological Finds, if any

A post-construction programme for dealing with finds (if any) and records of investigated archaeological remains should be implemented, and where appropriate, the drafting of articles for publication.

Landscape Effects (See the Contractors Specifications Document: 3000 Series: Landscape and Ecology Clause 3006 and 3009 also referred to as Appendix 30/6 and 30/9)

L1 Visual Impact A planting schedule will be implemented to mitigated visual impacts. Please refer to Appendix A2: Checklist 2 and 3 for locations where planting will be required.

Reinstatement and planting to be monitored. Maintenance and monitoring periods will be specified by the Highways Agency.

Materials

During Construction M1 Mitigation measures will be implemented by a site specific CEMP and SWMP through which opportunities for reduction, reuse and recycling will be identified.

Noise and Vibration (See the Contractors Specifications Document: 100 Series: Appendix 1/9)

Pre-Construction NV1 Noise and vibration Levels

In the absence of detailed information on the construction phasing and plants to be used, it is not known if any construction works would result in exceedance of these criteria at any sensitive receptors. An assessment of noise and vibration levels during the construction phase will be undertaken by the DP in due course when the detailed information becomes available.

Construction NV2 Potential exceedences of noise thresholds (dB) due to construction activities / plant operation

The measures presented are by no means exhaustive of the options available to the DP but give an indication of the types of measures that could be implemented: Undertaking a letter drop of local residents detailing the duration and type of works to be undertaken. A contact telephone number should also be provided in the event of complaints; Best practice measures to be adopted on site with regards to noise abatement, Best practicable means including maintenance of plant to minimise the noise produced by operations on site, acoustic enclosure of static plant and portable screen where appropriate; All vehicles and mechanical plant to be fitted with effective exhaust silencers and maintained in good working order;

Monitoring of noise and vibration levels during the construction phase will be undertaken by the DP in due course when the detailed information on plants to be used becomes available.




Stage Ref No


Machinery that is used intermittently would be shut down or throttled back to a minimum during periods when not in use; and, Static plant known to generate significant vibration levels to be fitted with acoustic dampening. In addition to the above measures, BS 5228 Section E.4 notes a number of measures that should be put in place where noise levels are expected to exceed trigger levels as set out in Table E.2 of BS 5228.




13 Recommendation on Determination

13.1 Introduction

Chapters 5 to 10 set out a consideration of the potential environmental implications and impacts of implementing the proposed scheme. This has been assessed under the following headings, derived after undertaking a scoping exercise of DMRB Volume 11 environmental assessment topic areas and IAN 161/13 as being the most relevant to the implementation of a SM-ALR scheme entirely within the existing highway boundary. The following briefly sets out the conclusions of the environmental assessment.

13.2 Summary of Potential Effects

13.2.1 Air Quality

No significant adverse impacts on air quality during construction are expected. Adherence to appropriate best practice mitigation measures will serve to prevent or minimise any temporary impacts on protected species during construction.

In the Opening Year (2015), 461 sensitive receptors in the study area are predicted to be in exceedence of the Air Quality Standard annual mean NO2 objective without the scheme being implemented. With the proposed 60mph scheme operational, it is predicted that one additional exceedence would be generated and three existing exceedences removed. Eight sensitive receptors already above the annual mean NO2 objective are predicted to receive a small (>0.4 to 2µg/m3) worsening of annual mean NO2 concentrations, with no receptors receiving either a medium or large worsening. Ten sensitive receptors in exceedence of the annual mean NO2 objective are predicted to receive a small (>0.4 to 2µg/m3) improvement in annual mean NO2 concentrations, with no receptors receiving either a medium or large improvement.

In the Design Year (2030), it is predicted that only one receptor in the study area will be in exceedence of the annual mean NO2 objective, with or without the proposed 60mph scheme. This receptor receives a small (>0.4 to 2 µg/m3) worsening in annual mean NO2 concentrations with the proposed scheme.

The implementation of the proposed scheme, with a maximum speed of 60mph between 07:00 and 19:00, on air quality is considered not significant, based on professional judgement and the terms of reference of the IAN 170/12v3 and IAN 174/13.

13.2.2 Cultural Heritage

The assessment has concluded that due to the localised nature of the proposed scheme and restriction of the works to the highway boundary, the proposed scheme would have a neutral effect on all cultural heritage assets identified within the study area except Hardwick Hall and Sutton Scarsdale Hall where slight adverse effects are expected.

The scheme is consider to have no impact on archaeological remains, being constructed within the existing disturbed highway boundary and to have no long term significant or residual impacts or alterations on the setting of




designated heritage assets and would not result in significant adverse effects on the historic environment.

13.2.3 Landscape and Visual Effects

Majority of localised visual impacts result from the introduction of new infrastructure to sections of the motorway where the removal of vegetation to accommodate new elements within the corridor would result in noticeable changes. Localised adverse visual effects are also anticipated to occur as a result of changes on sections of open carriageway with minimal existing highway planting and on embankments where proposed gantries and associated signs would be visible with limited opportunities to mitigate the affected view. However the majority of views to the scheme are mid to long distance and constitute a minor change in visual outlook. Any adverse impacts will reduce over time as mitigation planting matures.

13.2.4 Nature Conservation

No significant adverse impacts on designated sites of nature conservation importance or on protected species are expected. Adherence to best practice appropriate will serve to prevent or minimise any temporary impacts on protected species during construction. Local adverse impacts on the existing soft estate can be successfully mitigated by the application of the measures set out in the report.

13.2.5 Noise and Vibration

No significant changes to the existing noise levels on local residents or other sensitive receptors are predicted during operation of the proposed scheme in the short and long term. During construction, exceedences of set thresholds are predicted especially if works take place at night. These will however be localised, temporary and would only last for the duration of works in equipment locations.

13.2.6 Materials

Measures for reuse of materials (on and offsite) have been considered during the scheme’s design process. This has resulted in a number of gantry foundations being reused and a number of gantries being retained. As with all construction processes, materials will be required and waste will be generated. Application of the waste hierarchy, development of a CEMP and production of a SWMP for the proposed works will serve to ensure efficiency in the use of materials and minimal waste generations during the construction process.

13.3 Conclusion

In conclusion, many of the potential impacts identified and assessed during this environmental assessment exercise are temporary, relatively short term in duration and associated with the construction process. Best practice working methods, accommodated within a CEMP and the contract specification documentation and implemented by the DP are expected to avoid or minimise potential ecological, noise, dust and disruption to road users and the local communities.




The overall impact of the scheme on air quality is judged to be not significant; and there are no long term increases in predicted traffic noise levels which are directly attributable to the proposed scheme. In addition, the scheme is not expected to result in significant adverse effects on the historic environment or on ecological receptors. In general it can also be concluded that the majority of structures (including proposed gantries and associated signs) can be incorporated into the surrounding landscape pattern with no significant residual visual effects.

The outcome of this environmental assessment exercise and the scale significance, and restricted nature of any residual effects suggest that a formal Environmental Impact Assessment process leading to the production of an Environmental Statement is not required for the proposed scheme. The information from this environmental assessment will form the basis of a Record of Determination.




References

• Bolsover District Council, Bolsover’s District Local Plan (adopted February 2000), http://www.bolsover.gov.uk/LocalPlan/statement.htm, Reviewed date: 06.02.2013.

• British Standard 3998, (2010). Tree Work Recommendations.

• British Standard 4142 (1997), Rating Industrial Noise affecting mixed Residential and Industrial areas.

• British Standard 5837, (2005). Trees in Relation to Construction – Recommendations

• British Standard 7445, (2003). Description and measurement of environmental noise. Guide to quantities and procedures.

• British Standard 5228, (2009). Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction and open sites.

• Chesterfield District Council, Chesterfield’s Local Plan (June 2006), http://www.cartoplus.co.uk/chesterfield/text/00_cont.htm, Reviewed date: 06.02.2013.

• Department for Communities and Local Government (2012), National Planning Policy Framework.

• Department for Communities and Local Government (2012), National Planning Policy Framework: technical guidance.

• Defra. LAQM Support, Tools, Background Maps. Available at http://laqm.defra.gov.uk/review-and-assessment/tools/background-maps.html. Accessed on 18.02.2013.

• Defra, (2009). Part IV of the Environmental Act 1995. Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance Note 09.

• Defra, (2011).Trends in NOx and NO2 Emissions and Ambient Measurements in the UK.

• Defra, (2007). The Air Quality Strategy of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, HMSO, London.

• Department for Transport and Welsh Office, (1998). Calculation of Road Traffic Noise.

• Department for Transport, (2007). Towards a Sustainable Transport System, Supporting Economic Growth in a Low Carbon World.

• Department for Transport, Transport Analysis Guidance, Unit 3.3.

• Environment Agency, (2006). The Knotweed Code of Practice.

• English Heritage. The National Heritage List for England. Available at http://list.english-heritage.org.uk/. Accessed on 20.02.2013.

• Highways Agency, Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 10.




• Highways Agency, Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11.

• Highways Agency (2012). Environmental Database (EnvIS). Available at http://www.highways.gov.uk/about-us/sustainability/envis/. Accessed on 01.03.2013.

• Highways Agency (2011). Environment Strategy.

• Highways Agency Interim Advice Note (IAN) 125/09, (October 2009). Supplementary Guidance for Users of DMRB Volume 11 Environmental Assessment.

• Highways Agency, Interim Advice Note 130/10 (September 2010), Ecology and Nature Conservation Criteria for Impact Assessment.

• Highways Agency, Interim Advice Note 135/10 (November 2010). Landscape and Visual Effects Assessment.

• Highways Agency, Interim Advice Note 153/11 (October 2011) Guidance on the Environmental Assessment of Material Resources.

• Highways Agency Interim Advice Note (IAN) 161/13, (August 2013). Managed Motorways All lanes running.

• Highways Agency Interim Advice Note (IAN) 170/12, (November 2012), Updated air quality advice on the assessment of future NOx and NO2 projections for users of DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1 ‘Air Quality’.

• Highways Agency (2011). Managing our approach to environmental performance: Supporting our Environment Strategy. Highways Agency.

• Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM), (2006). Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment.

• Joint Nature Conservation Council (JNCC), (2007). Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey – a technique for environmental audit.

• London Councils, (2006). The Control of Dust and Emissions from Construction and Demolition: Best Practice Guidance, London Councils.

• Martin D.J. (1980). Ground vibrations from Impact Pile Driving Road Construction. Transport Research Laboratory Report SR544, Crowthorne.

• Mouchel Ltd, (2013). M1 J28 to 31 Smart Motorway: Preliminary Design Report.

• Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC). UK Government Map Generator. MAGIC, (2012), www.magic.gov.uk, Reviewed date: 08.01.2013.

• National Biodiversity Network (2012). National Biodiversity Network's Gateway, http://data.nbn.org.uk/, Reviewed date: 04.12.2013.

• National Society for Clean Air, (2001). Clean Air and Environmental Protection; Measurements of PM10 Emissions from a Construction Site – A Case Study, Upton, S and Kikadia, V, Vol. 32, No.3.




• National Joint Utilities Group, (2007). Volume 4, NJUG Guidelines for the Planning, Installation and Maintenance of Utility Apparatus in Proximity to Trees.

• North East Derbyshire District Council, North East Derbyshire’s Local Plan (adopted 2005), http://www.ne-derbyshire.gov.uk/environment-planning/planning/planning-policy/local-plan-2001-2011/, Reviewed date: 06.02.2013.

• Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, (2005). Minerals Policy Statement 2: Controlling and mitigating the environmental effects of mineral extraction in England. Annex 1: Dust. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London.

• Ordnance Survey, OS MasterMap Address Layer 2, http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/os-mastermap/address-layer-2/index.html, Reviewed date: 06.02.2013.

• Rotherham Biodiversity Forum (2012), Rotherham Wetland Action Plan – Consultation Draft (July 2012).

• Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council, (2004). Rotherham's Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), http://www.rotherham.gov.uk/info/1009/wildlife/946/biodiversity_action_plan/1, Reviewed date: 04.12.2012.

• Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council, Rotherham’s Unitary Development Plan (adopted June 1993), http://www.rotherham.gov.uk/info/1004/planning_policy/627/unitary_development_plan/1, Reviewed date: 06.02.2013.

• UK Biodiversity Partnership. (2007). Conserving Biodiversity – The UK Approach. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra).

• Watts G R, (1992). The generation and propagation of vibration in various soils produced by the dynamic loading of road pavements. Journal of Sound and Vibration 156(2), pp191 - 206.

• World Health Organisation, Guidelines for Community Noise. WHO: (1999), http://www.who.int/docstore/peh/noise/guidelines2.html, Reviewed date: 04.12.2012.

• WRAP (2012). Designing out Waste Process; Implementing Designing out Waste in Construction Projects.




Glossary of Terms

Term Meaning

Annual Average Weekly Traffic (AAWT)

It is the total volume of vehicle traffic of a motorway or road for a year divided by365 days.

Active Traffic Management (ATM)

The ATM scheme was piloted on the M42 and was designed to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion. The technology and lesson learned from the ATM Pilot now form the basis for the implementation of Managed Motorways.

Advanced Motorway Indicator

A LED lane based variable message sign allowing the display of both variable mandatory speed limits and lane status

Advanced Works The construction activities that are required in preparation for the construction phase of a project. Advanced works may include, for example, the clearance of vegetation or the relocation of utilities.

Air Quality Standard

The concentration of a pollutant, over a specified period, above which adverse effects on health (or the environment) may occur and which should not be exceeded.

Air Quality Management Area (AQMA)

An Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) is an area of land where air quality levels are breeching the national limits and require action to deal with or ‘manage’ this. Thus in places where National Air Quality Objectives are not likely to be achieved, the LPAs must declare an Air Quality Management Area.

Amenity A feature that increases attractiveness or value, especially of a piece of real estate or a geographic location.

Analysis The process of breaking something down into its component parts to understand how it is made up.

Appraisal A process (with methodologies that differ to those of environmental assessment) that looks at the worth of a course of action.

Assessment A process by which information about effects of a proposed plan, project or intervention is collected, assessed and used to inform decision-making.

Baseline Environment

The environment as it appears (or would appear) immediately prior to the implementation of the project together with any known or foreseeable future changes that will take place before completion of the project.

Best Practice The undertaking of assessments in line with nationally and internationally recognised assessment guidelines.

Biodiversity The variety of life forms, the different plants animals and micro-organisms, the genes they contain and the eco-systems they form. Considered at three levels: genetic, species and ecosystem diversity.

Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP)

Plans that provide actions for targets for the conservation and enhancement of endangered and/or declining species and habitats. Can cover UK, regional or local areas: or the interests of the overseeing organisation.

Catchment A drainage/basin area within which precipitation drains into a river system and eventually into the sea; or the population region which is served by a city, town, or village.




Term Meaning

Classification A process of sorting attributes into different types using selected criteria.

Compensation Measures taken to offset or compensate for residual adverse effects that cannot be mitigated, or for which mitigation cannot entirely eliminate.

Connectivity The degree to which habitat patches in an urban or agricultural matrix are interconnected by linear habitats; or the degree to which rights of way and local roads interact with each other.

Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP)

Developed prior to any works commencing on site, the primary purpose which is to guide environmental management of implementation of the project, as required by the Overseeing Organisation.

Consultation A process by which regulatory authorities, statutory and non-statutory bodies are approached for information and opinions regarding a development proposal.

Controlled Motorways

The dynamic management of traffic in the designated running lanes (either in 3 or 4 lane operation using variable mandatory speed limits).

Countryside The rural environment and its associated communities.

Cultural Heritage Encompasses the qualities and attributes of places that have aesthetic, historic, scientific or social value for past, present or future generations.

Cumulative Effects

Effects that result from incremental changes caused by other past, present or reasonably foreseeable actions together with the project

Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)

UK Government department with responsibilities for uncultivated land and semi-natural areas in England and Wales.

Desk Study A review of secondary information/resources i.e. studies of historical maps and written text.

Designations Notable sites, areas, buildings or structures protected by planning or other laws. Can be applied at Local, Regional and National and International level.

Delivery Partner (DP)

A Delivery Partner will be appointed by the Highways Agency to take the scheme forward through the construction phase.

Design Year Defined as 15 years after scheme opening.

Diversity Where a variety of qualities or characteristics occurs.

Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB)

A set of documents that provide a comprehensive manual system which accommodates all current standards, advice notes and other published documents relating to the design, assessment and operation of trunk roads (including motorways).

Detailed Assessment

Method applied to gain an in-depth appreciation of the beneficial and adverse consequences of the project and to inform project decisions.

Detailed Assessments are likely to require detailed field surveys and/or quantified modelling techniques.

Diffusion Tubes

Passive gas collection (e.g. NO2) devices consisting of a small tube containing a chemical absorbent. Diffusion tubes are used to determine relatively long period average concentrations, typically weekly, fortnightly or monthly.

Do-Nothing (DN) Scenario

The conditions that would persist in the absence of the implementation of a construction or improvement project, but given that maintenance is




Term Meaning

ongoing.

Dynamic Hard Shoulder Running (HSR)

The controlled use of the hard shoulder during times of heavy congestion or during incident management

Effect

Term used to express the consequence of an impact (expressed as the ‘significance of effect’), which is determined by correlating the magnitude of the impact to the importance, or sensitivity, of the receptor or resource in accordance with defined significance criteria. For example, land clearing during construction results in habitat loss (impact), the effect of which is the significance of the habitat loss on the ecological resource.

Emissions Standard

The maximum amount or pollution concentration allowed to be released from a specific source.

Enhancement A measure that is over and above what is required to mitigate the adverse effects of a project.

Environment Our physical surroundings, including land, air and water.

Environmental Assessment

A method and a process by which information about environmental effects is collected, assessed and used to inform decision-making. Assessment

processes include Strategic Environmental Assessment, Assessment of

Implications on European Sites and environmental impact assessment.

Environmental Designation

A defined area which is protected by legislation that is threatened by change from manmade and natural influences e.g. Ramsar sites, Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and Special Area of Conservation (SAC).

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

A statutory process by which certain planned projects must be assessed Assessment (EIA) before a formal decision to proceed can be made. Involves the collection and consideration of environmental information, which fulfils the assessment requirements of Directive 85/337/EEC (as amended), including the publication of an Environmental Statement.

Environmental Management Plan (EMP)

Developed prior to any works commencing on site, the primary purpose of

Plan the Environmental Management Plan is to guide environmental management of implementation of the project.

Environmental Screening

The formal process undertaken to determine whether it is necessary to carry out a statutory Environmental Impact Assessment and publish an Environmental Statement in accordance with the EIA Regulations.

Environmental Statement (ES)

A document produced in accordance with the EIA Directive as transposed

into UK law by the EIA Regulations.

Evaluation

The determination of the significance of effects. Evaluation involves making judgements as to the value of the receptor/resource that is being affected and the consequences of the effect on the receptor/resource based on the magnitude of the impact.

Feature A prominent, eye-catching element.

Gantry

Commonly constructed above high traffic roads, a gantry is a traffic sign and/or signal assembly on which signs/signals are mounted on an overhead support. Gantries in the United Kingdom display exit (junction) numbers, distances to junctions / exits (1 mile, 1/2 mile, 1/4 mile, 1/3




Term Meaning

mile, 3/4 mile, 2/3 mile) and destinations reached, and if necessary what lane to use for them.

Geology The scientific study of the origin, history, and structure of the earth.

Habitats Regulations

EC Council Directive 92/43/EEC, known as the Habitats Directive, was transposed in the UK by the Habitats Regulations 1994 (as amended).

Habitat Suitability Index (HSI)

A relative weighting (usually between 0 and 1) of the suitability of a particular environmental characteristic or combination of characteristics based on a particular biota's requirements.

Hard Shoulder A paved strip beside a motorway, usually only used for stopping in emergencies, however it is often used as a running lane in Managed Motorways schemes.

Heritage Historic or Cultural Associations.

Hydrogeology The branch of geology that deals with the occurrence, distribution, and effect of ground water.

Impact Change that is caused by an action; for example, land clearing (action) during construction which results in habitat loss (impact).

Improvement The doing of any act under powers conferred by Part V of the Highways Act 1980 (as amended).

Indirect Impact

Indirect or induced changes in the environment, population, economic growth and land use and other environmental effects resulting from these changes in land use, population and economic growth. The potential effects of additional changes that are likely to occur later in time or at a different place as a result of the implementation of a particular action.

Interface A point at which independent systems or diverse groups interact, i.e. the meeting of two roads at a junction/roundabout.

LA10 hourly dB(A) Noise level exceeded for just 10% of the time over a period of one hour.

LA90 Sound level that is exceeded for 90% of the sample period; generally used to quantify background noise.

LAeq T A weighted equivalent continuous sound level during the sample period (T) and effectively represents an average value.

LA10,18h The arithmetic average of the values of L10 hourly dB(A) for each of the eighteen one-hour periods between 0600 to 2400 hours.

LAmax Maximum A-weighted sound level during the sample period; the highest level of environmental noise during the measurement.

Land cover Combinations of land use and vegetation that cover the land surface.

Landform Combinations of slope and elevation that produce the shape and form of the land.

Landscape Human perception of the land contained by knowledge, cultural associations and identity with a place.

Landscape Character

The distinct and recognisable pattern of elements that occur consistently in a particular type of landscape, and how this is perceived by people. Character reflects combinations of geology, landform, soils, vegetation, land use and settlement pattern, inferring a sense of place.

Landscape Character Zone

A landscape type expressing broadly similar physical characteristics, discernible from maps and field surveys.




Term Meaning

Landscape Effects

Change in the elements, characteristics and overall character and qualities that make up the landscape as a result of development, both positive and negative.

Land take Extent of land required for a proposed development.

Land Use The primary use of land, encompassing both rural and urban activities.

Legislation A law or set of laws suggested by a government and made official by a parliament.

Link A stretch of road or route identified as lying between two defined points.

Listed Building A structure which is protected by English Law to protect its architectural and historic interest.

Magnitude A combination of the scale, extent and duration of a given effect.

Smart Motorways (SM)

Smart Motorways is a ‘tool-box’ of systems and technologies which facilitates the dynamic control of traffic for congestion and incident management, allowing road space to be managed in different ways for varying conditions to maximise capacity.

Methodology The specific approach and techniques used for a given study.

Mitigation Measures intended to avoid, reduce and, where possible, remedy significant adverse environmental effects.

Mitigation Measures

Methods employed to avoid, reduce, remedy or compensate for significant adverse impacts of development proposals.

Monitoring

A continuing assessment of the performance of the project, including mitigation measures. This determines if effects occur as predicted or if operations remain within acceptable limits, and if mitigation measures are as effective as predicted.

Operational The functioning of a project on completion of construction.

Operational Regime

The process by which a Managed Motorways Scheme is operated. Different operational regimes may be deployed according to traffic conditions in order to appropriately manage changing traffic flows safely and efficiently.

Ordnance Survey (OS)

Digital mapping agency of the British Isles.

Overseeing Organisation

The organisation responsible for the project, i.e. the Highways Agency (an agency of the Department for Transport); Transport Wales (part of the Welsh Assembly Government); Transport Scotland (an agency of the Scottish Government); or in Northern Ireland, the Roads Agency of the Department for Regional Development.

Perception The psychology of seeing and attaching value and/or meaning to something.

Phase 1 Habitat Survey

Recognised standard methodology for collating information on the habitat structure of a particular site.

Plan A document setting out the intention or intentions of the Overseeing Organisation.

Pollution An increase of matter or energy to a level considered harmful to living organisms or their environment.

Preferred Option The chosen design option that most successfully achieves the project objectives and becomes subject to further design and assessment.




Term Meaning

Programme A series of steps that have been identified or series of projects that are linked by dependency.

Project One, or more, aspect of a programme or plan that has been identified by the Overseeing Organisation and which usually involves a direct physical intervention.

Receptor A defined individual environmental feature usually associated with population, fauna and flora that has potential to be affected by a project.

Regulations Official rules or acts to control something.

Relevant Project A project that falls under Annex II of the Council Directive 85/37/EEC (as amended) and for which Determination is required.

Resource

A defined but generally collective environmental feature usually associated with soil, water, air, climatic factors, landscape, material assets, including the architectural and archaeological heritage that has potential to be affected by a project.

Scenario A picture of a possible future.

Scoping

The process of identifying the issues to be addressed by the environmental impact assessment process. It is a method of ensuring that an assessment focuses on the important issues and avoids those that are considered to be not significant.

Sediment Organic or inorganic material, precipitated from water to accumulate on the floor of a water body, watercourse or trap. Commonly consists of silt, but can include coarser material and particles.

Sensitivity The extent to which the receiving environment can accept and accommodate change without experiencing adverse effects.

Significance of effect

A measure of the importance or gravity of the environmental effect, defined by significance criteria specific to the environmental topic.

Stakeholder An organisation or individual with a particular interest in the project.

Statutory Related to legislation or prescribed in law or regulation.

Statutory Organisations

Any principal council for the area where the land is situated, Natural England, English Heritage, the Environment Agency; and any other public authority which has environmental responsibilities and which the Secretary of State considers likely to have an interest in the project.

Study Area

The spatial area within which environmental effects are assessed (i.e. extending a distance from the project footprint in which significant environmental effects are anticipated to occur). This may vary between the topic areas.

Technique A specified working practice.

Threshold A specified level in grading effects, for example, of magnitude, sensitivity or significance.

Through Junction Running (TJR)

Managed motorways operational regime which allow drivers using the hard shoulder approaching a junction, to remain on the hard shoulder through the junction.

Traffic Modelling / Forecasting

The process used to estimate the number of vehicles using a specific section of road or defined network of roads.

Visual Amenity The value of a particular area or view in terms of what is seen.

Visual Envelope Extent of potential visibility to or from a specified location, area or




Term Meaning

feature.

Wildlife Corridors Linear habitats and landscape features which can increase connectivity between habitats for species, e.g. roadside verges.




ABBREVIATIONS

Abbreviation Meaning

AADT Average Annual Daily Traffic

AAWT Average Annual Weekly Traffic

AB Acoustic Barrier

ADC Ashfield District Council

ADMS Air Dispersion Modelling System

ADS Advanced Directional Signs

AHLV Area of High Landscape Value

AIES Assessment of Implications on European Sites

AL2 Address Layer 2

AM Ante Meridiem

AMI Advanced Motorway Indicator

AOD Above Ordnance Datum

AQMA Air Quality Management Area

AQS Air Quality Strategy

AQSR Air Quality Standard Regulations

ATM Active Traffic Management

ASE Average Speed Enforcement Camera

BAP Biodiversity Action Plan

BC Borough Council

BDC Bolsover District Council

BS British Standard

CAFE Cleaner Air for Europe

CALR Controlled All Lane Running

CCD Cross Carriageway Duct

CCTV Closed Circuit Television

CDC Chesterfield District Council

CECs Combined Equipment Cabinets

CEMP Construction Environmental Management Plan

CM Continuous Monitor

CoPA Control of Pollution Act

CRoW Countryside and Rights of Way

CRTN Calculation of Road Traffic Noise

CSR Comprehensive Spending Review

D4M Dual Four Lane MotorwAY





dB Decibel

DCC Derbyshire County Council

DfT Department for Transport

DHS Dynamic Hard Shoulder

DN Do Nothing

DMRB Design Manual for Roads and Bridges

DNO Distribution Network Operator

DP Delivery Partner

DS Do Something

DTM Digital Terrain Model

EA Environment Agency

EAR Environmental Assessment Report

EAV Enforcement Aspect Verification Camera

EB Eastbound

EC European Community

EEC European Economic Community

EFT Emissions Factor Toolkit

EH English Heritage

EHO Environmental Health Officer

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EI Electricity Interface

EMM1TAM East Midlands M1 Traffic Appraisal Model

EMP Environmental Management Plan

EPA Environmental Protection Act

ERA Emergency Refuge Area

ES Environmental Statement

EU European Union

FPL First Priority Location

GCN Great Crested Newts

GIS Geographical Information System

GLA Greater London Authority

ha Hectare

HA Highways Agency

HABAP Highways Agency Biodiversity Action Plan

HADEC Highways Agency Digital Enforcement Camera

HAPMS Highways Agency Pavement Management System





HC Hydrocarbon

HDC Hart District Council

HER Historic Environment Record

HGV Heavy Goods Vehicles

HRA

HSI Habitat Suitability Index

HSR Hard Shoulder Running

IA Important Area

IAN Interim Advice Note

IEEM Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management

J Junction

JNCC Joint Nature Conservation Committee

kg Kilogram

km Kilometre

km/h Kilometres per hour

LAQM TG Local Air Quality Management Technical Guidance

LBAP Local Biodiversity Action Plan

LBS Lane Below Signal

LCA Landscape Character Area

LED Light Emitting Diode

LLCA Local Landscape Character Area

LNR Local Nature Reserve

LPA Local Planning Authority

LWS Local Wildlife Site

m Metres

m2 Metre squared

m3 Metre cubed

MAC Managing Agent Contractor

MAGIC Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside

MHS Maintenance Hard Standing

MIDAS Motorway Incident Detection and Automatic Signalling

MM Managed Motorways

MM-ALR Managed Motorways All Lane Running

MP Marker Post





MPS Minerals Policy Statement

MS3 Motorway Signal Mark 3

MS4 Motorway Signal Mark 4

MSA Motorway Service Area

N Nitrogen

NB Northbound

NBN National Biodiversity Network

N-deposition Nitrogen Deposition

NAP Noise Action Plan

Natural Environment and Rural Communities NERC

NCA National Character Area

NCC Nottinghamshire County Council

NE Natural England

NEDDC North East Derbyshire District Council

NERC Natural Environment and Rural Communities

NetServ Highways Agency Network Services

NIR Noise Insulation Regulations

NNR National Nature Reserve

NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide

NOx Nitrogen Oxides

NoD Notice of Determination

NPPF National Planning Policy Framework

NRTS National Roads Telecommunication Services

O2 Oxygen

OIR Options Identification Report

OPDM Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

OS Ordnance Survey

P4L Permanent Four Lane Running

PCF Project Control Framework

PIE Public Information Exhibition

PPG Planning Policy Guidance

PM Post Meridiem

PM10 Particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 10 micrometres

PRoW Public Right of Way

PTZ Pan, Tilt and Zoom

RCB Rigid Concrete Barrier





RoD Record of Determination

RMBC Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council

RPG Registered Park and Garden

SAC Special Area of Conservation

SAM Scheduled Ancient Monument

SAQAP Scheme Air Quality Action Plan

SB Southbound

SEBs Statutory Environmental Bodies

SINC Site of Importance for Nature Conservation

SHBC Surrey Heath Borough Council

SGAR Stage Gate Assessment Review

SoS Secretary of State

SPA Special Protection Area

SSSIs Site of Special Scientific Interest

SWMP Site Waste Management Plan

SWT Surrey Wildlife Trust

SWYMMS South and West Yorkshire Multi-Modal Study

SM Smart Motorway

TAME Traffic Appraisal Modelling and Economics

TAG Transport Appraisal Guidance

TRA Traffic Reliability Area

TRL Transport Research Laboratory

TTMS Temporary Traffic Management Area

TWC Thin Wearing Course

UK United Kingdom

UKAQA United Kingdom Air Quality Archive

UKBAP United Kingdom Biodiversity Action Plan

UNECE United Nations Economic Commission for Europe

µg/m3 Microgram per metre cubed

VMSL Variable Mandatory Speed limits

VMS Variable Message Sign

VP View Point

VR Visual Receptor

VES Visual Effects Schedule

WB Westbound

WFD Water Framework Directive





ZVI Zone of Visual Influence




Appendices Appendix A1 – Figure 1043319/2600/001: General Arrangement

Appendix A2 – Checklists

• Checklist 1 – Existing Data Review

• Checklist 2 – Cable Runs and Support Infrastructure Field Appraisal

• Checklist 3 – Major Infrastructure Field Appraisal

Appendix A3 – Environmental Mapping

All drawings are numbered in accordance with the chapter of this EAR in which they are relate e.g. Figure 2.1 is the first figure referred to in the EAR Chapter 2 (The Proposed Scheme); and Figure 7.1 is the second set of figures referred to in the EAR in Chapter 7 (Air Quality)).

• Figure 2.1 - Environmental Constraints Plans

• Figure 7.1 - Landscape and Visual Context Map

• Figure 7.2 - Photo Locations

• Figure 7.3 – Proposed Gantry Treatment

• Figure 7.4 – Proposed Visual Effects Mitigation Strategy

• Figure 10.1 - Material and Waste Management Facility Locations

Appendix A4 – Scoping Information

• Sample of Scoping / Consultation Letter

• M1 J28 to 31 Managed Motorway Environmental Scoping Report, Mouchel, April 2012.

Appendix B1 – Air Quality Technical Report

Appendix B2 – Phase 1 Habitat Survey Report

Appendix B3 – Badger Field Report (CONFIDENTIAL)

Appendix B4 – Great Crested Newt Survey Report

Appendix B5 – Bats Survey Report

Appendix B6 – Noise Technical Report

m1 j28 to 31 smart motorway scheme environmental...

Documents