1. Appendix 1
Local Impact Report
Network Rail proposal for the construction of 3km chord
linking Askern and Skellow lines over the East Coast Main
Line and embankment works along boundaries. In addition,
modification to the existing rail infrastructure and closure of
the existing Joan Croft level crossing with a replacement
road bridge.
IPC Reference Number TR040001
2. Contents
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Site and Surroundings
3.0 Details of the Proposal
4.0 The Need for the Proposal
5.0 Relevant Planning History to the site and surrounding area
6.0 Site and area constraints
7.0 Relevant Development Plan Policies and their relevance and
relationship to the proposal
7.5 National
7.7 Regional
7.10 Local
8.0 Issues and Considerations
8.1 Setting of Listed Buildings and Archaeology
8.10 Visual Landscape
8.16 Trees and Landscaping
8.22 Ecology and Wildlife
8.29 Noise
8.39 Flooding
8.42 Air Quality
9.0 Local Transport and Highways issues and considerations
10.0 Economic Matters
11.0 Considerations on the impact of the proposed provisions and
requirements within the draft order
12.0 Conclusion
3. 1. Introduction
1.1 Network Rail (NR) have submitted an application for a new 3.2km twin track
railway line, constructed of two embankments and a 246m long viaduct across
the East Coast Main Line (ECML) connecting the Skellow and Askern lines and
also a new road bridge, following the closure of Joan Croft Level Crossing.
1.2 The application for the proposed development is to be determined by the
Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) which is responsible for consideration
of Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIP’s). The proposed
development is deemed to be a NSIP as it a construction / alteration of a railway
(section 14(1) (k) of the Planning Act 2008 (the act)).
1.3 Local Authorities in whose areas applications for NSIP’s are submitted, are
invited to produce a Local Impact Report (LIR). The Act requires that the IPC
must have regard to the LIR in deciding applications. The definition of an LIR in
the Planning Act 2008 is ‘a report in writing giving details of the likely impact of
the proposed development on the authority’s area (or any part of that area)’.
The content of the LIR is a matter for the local authority concerned but the IPC
has published guidance on its content. This report generally follows that
guidance.
2. Site and Surroundings
2.1 The site lies approximately five kilometres north of Doncaster Town centre in a
mainly rural area. The nearest settlement to the proposed development is
Thorpe-In-Balne which lies one kilometre to the east. The nearest town to the
site is Askern which is approximately four kilometres to the north. Surrounding
the immediate site is a gathering of dwellings and farmsteads. Former railway
cottages are situated at Joan Croft level crossing.
2.2 The main access into the area by road is either from the A19 approximately two
miles to the west of the site, (which also runs parallel to the ECML) or from
Barnby Dun/Thorpe-In-Balne. Barnby Dun is approximately three miles east of
the ECML. Between these two access points the roads are narrow rural country
roads.
2.3 The area is generally flat and low lying and is characteristic of the Humberhead
levels and within the River Don flood plain. The River Don runs to the east of
the ECML. Although the area is flat there are long distant views and the area is
broken up by hedgerows, trees and woodlands. The largest area of woodland is
Owston Woods which lies immediately to the west of the proposed development
on the edge of the A19. Generally the area is entirely agricultural in nature,
mainly pastoral.
2.4 The area is crossed by a number of railway lines. The ECML runs north to south
through the area. At Joan Croft junction the ECML is joined by the Skellow line
which runs east-west, also the Askern line branches off to the north west just
south of the junction.
4. 2.5 The most prominent physical features in the vicinity are the cooling towers of the
former Thorpe Marsh Power Station. This site lies to the east of the proposed
development and is a visible feature over significant distances.
3. Proposal
3.1 The proposal is for construction of a 3km chord linking Askern and Skellow lines
over the East Coast Main Line (ECML) including embankment works and
modification to existing rail infrastructure. The applicants, Network Rail (NR)
have also proposed to provide a road bridge over the ECML to the north of Joan
Croft level crossing.
3.2 The railway line is to be constructed on a grass sided embankment on each side
of the ECML. The track will be supported on 7.2m high embankments and a
new viaduct 9.5m to the top of the safety parapets. The embankment will
comprise of 500,000 tonnes of granular imported fill suitable for construction of
side slopes of 1 vertical to 2 horizontal.
3.3 The proposed road bridge which will replace Joan Croft level crossing will utilise
traditional reinforced concrete abutments and wing walls with an integral
concrete deck on pre-cast concrete beams to minimise maintenance
requirements.
3.4 Two access routes are proposed to serve the construction site.
3.5 East of the ECML – access is proposed via a combination of rail and road. The
bulk infill material is proposed to be delivered by rail into a siding located at
Thorpe Marsh power station. The fill material would be transported to the
working areas on wagons routed on Field Station Road and via Applehurst Lane
level crossing.
3.6 West of the ECML – Various option routes have been part of NR’s pre-
application consultation. The preferred option is for access via the A19 from the
M62 motorway then along Rockley Lane which would operate as a one-way
system for construction traffic and to provide passing places to allow normal
traffic to continue to use Rockley Lane safety. The one way system would
operate via Rockley Lane and out via Holme Lane which makes best use of
existing roads and is the easiest and safest way to manage traffic and minimise
impacts on hedgerows and biodiversity.
3.7 In order to construct the development the temporary haul roads, passing places
and junction enhancements are proposed to be built to connect parts of the work
site within the existing road network. The haul roads are to be connected to the
local public roads and it is agreed that the junction enhancements at Rockley
Lane and Holme Lane with the A19 will be retained on completion to enhance
the local road network. The temporary haul road and passing places will be
removed and land restored.
3.8 The proposed construction is expected to take 18 months. The proposed
commencement of the construction is unclear as is the start date of the
operation of services. No details have yet been given with regards the
5. construction methods, workforce number, quantity and source of materials,
frequency and number of deliveries or working hours.
3.9 Once the chord is operational, this will provide a direct rail link between the
Skellow and Askern lines, north of Doncaster station and will remove Humber
Ports Coal freight traffic to the West Yorkshire power stations from the ECML.
Once, the road bridge is operational this would enable the closure of the Joan
Croft level crossing.
4. The Need of the Proposal
4.1 Shaftholme Junction is a key junction on the increasingly popular ECML. The
line runs between London and Scotland and Shaftholme Junction is the point at
which freight trains join the busy passenger line.
4.2 Over the past decade there has been a 35% increase in passengers travelling
between Doncaster and York and a massive 60% increase in the amount of
freight carried by rail across the UK.
4.3 At present, slow moving coal traffic from Immingham interacts with the ECML at
Shaftholme and Joan Croft Junctions just to the north of Doncaster. These
existing junctions are not currently aligned and as a result the rail freight uses 15
miles of the ECML, a high speed passenger line, before reaching the Aire Valley
power stations. This causes a bottleneck at Shaftholme Junction and is a
restriction to the growth of the freight and passenger services on the ECML.
4.4 The new railway would join the Askern line, approximately 150m south of the
Haywood level crossing, and the Skellow line approximately 500m after the
Applehurst Chord, close to the Applehurst Lane level crossing. A multi-span
steel viaduct structure is proposed to be used for the twin track railway to cross
Joan Croft Lane and the ECML.
4.5 There is also an environmental case for getting more freight off roads onto rail
and thereby further increasing the demands made on the rail network which
cannot be catered for on this Doncaster – York section.
5. Relevant Planning History
5.1 In respect of the railway junctions at Shaftholme they were authorised under
various Acts of Parliament.
5.2 Other significant development within the locality is that of the redundant power
station known as Thorpe Marsh. The site closed in 1994. The power station
turbine hall and other ancillary buildings were demolished in the late 1990’s
however the cooling towers still exist on site.
5.3 In 1999, a planning application was submitted at the former power station
(reference 99/0345/P) for the change of use to a car storage and distribution
facility. This was refused on 20th May 1999 due to the fact that the highway
network is totally unsuitable for the size of vehicles to be used and the site is too
far away from trunk roads, `B' roads and the motorway for its intended use. The
6. decision was subsequently appealed and accordingly dismissed (PINS Ref
APP/F4410/A/99/1024257).
5.4 Also for the above site, in February 2010 an application was submitted under the
provisions of Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 and deemed planning
permission under Section 90 (2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for
the consent for a 1500 Mega Watt (MW) combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT)
electricity generating station on approximately 10 hectares of the former coal-
fired power station at Thorpe Marsh. The LPA was only a consultee on this
application and the decision fell to the Secretary of State for the Department
Energy and Climate Change (DECC) to determine this application.
5.5 On the 31st October the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change
issued a decision for the development and deemed the development granted.
5.6 At the time of preparing this report it is still unknown as to when the cooling
towers will be demolished.
6. Site and area constraints
6.1 The majority of the site area is located within Countryside Policy Area (Policy
ENV 4) with the remainder of the site being designated as Green Belt (Policy
ENV 3), this is according to the Doncaster Unitary Development Plan (UDP)
(Adopted July 1998, saved by the Secretary of State September 2007). The
general extent of the Green Belt is defined by a line approximating to that of the
East Coast Main Line.
Extent of Green Belt and Countryside Policy Area surrounding the site
7. 6.2 The land lies within Flood Zone 2 and 3a. The temporary works also propose
constructing haul routes and stockpiling construction material in Flood Zone 2
and locating a site compound in Flood Zone 3a.
6.3 The proposed development directly affects two public rights of way, namely
Public Footpath No. 11 and Public Bridleway No. 13 Owston. Also, affected is
the Trans Pennine Trail, a long distance multi user, recreation route.
6.4 The site lies close to a closed landfill site sited to the south east of the site
known as HJ Banks and Co.
6.5 The site area encompasses hedgerows considered as ‘important’ on historical
grounds under the Hedgerow Regulations 1997.
7. Relevant Development Plan Policies and their relevance and relationship to the
proposal
7.1 Doncaster Council is currently in the Publication Stages of its Core Strategy
2011-2026 (Doncaster Local Development Framework). Policy 3 (Countryside)
states that proposals in the Green Belt and Country Protection Policy Areas will
generally be acceptable including essential infrastructure. Also, proposals will
be supported where they would protect and enhance the countryside, not be
visually detrimental by reason of siting, materials or design; not create or
aggravate highway or amenity problems and preserve the openness of the
Green Belt and Countryside Protection Policy Area.
7.2 In the UDP Policy ENV 4 (a): Countryside states that development will not
normally be permitted for purposes other than agriculture, forestry, outdoor
recreation and leisure, cemeteries, essential service provision by statutory
undertakers or other uses appropriate to a rural area. Proposals will be
acceptable only where (i) it would not prejudice by reason of its nature, scale,
siting or design, the purposes of the countryside and in particular would not lead
towards the physical or visual coalescence of settlements, (ii) it would not create
to aggravate highway or amenity problems and (iii) it is sited, designed and
where necessary screened so as to minimise its impact on and wherever
possible enhance the character, landscape and nature conservation value of the
local environment.
7.3 The UDP Policy ENV 3 (c): Green Belt states that development will not be
permitted, except in very special circumstances for purposes other than uses of
land which include essential facilities which are genuinely required which
preserve the openness of the Green Belt and which do not conflict with the
purposes of including land in it. Proposals will be acceptable only where they
would not be visually detrimental by reason of their siting, materials or design
and would not give rise to unacceptable highway or amenity problems and would
not conflict with other policies.
7.4 Other planning policies to be considered include;
National Guidance
Planning Policy Statement 1 - Delivering Sustainable Development
Planning and Climate Change - Supplement to PPS1
8. Planning Policy Statement 4 - Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth
Planning Policy Statement 5 - Planning for the Historic Environment
Planning Policy Statement 9 - Biodiversity and Geological Conservation
Planning Policy Statement 13 – Transport
Planning Policy Guidance Note 14 - Development on Unstable Land
Planning Policy Statement 23 - Planning and Pollution Control
Planning Policy Statement 24 - Planning and Noise
Planning Policy Statement 25 - Development and Flood Risk
Regional Planning Policy - The Yorkshire and Humber Plan -Regional Spatial
Strategy to 2026
Section 13 – Regional Transport, Policy T4 – Freight
Local Planning Policy - Doncaster Unitary Development Plan Adopted July 1998,
saved by Secretary of State September 2007
ENV16 – Development Involving Agricultural Land
ENV17 – Areas of Special Landscape Value
ENV18 – Landscape Conservation
ENV34 - Setting of Listed Buildings
ENV53 - Design of New Buildings
ENV60 - Landscaping in New Developments
T5 - Highways Safety
T32 - Transport Facilities
T33 - Rail Network and Freight Movement
T38 - Public Rights of Way
T40 – Development of Public Rights of Way
T41 – Diversion of Public Rights of Way
T44 – Trans Pennine Trail
PU4 – Groundwater
PU5 - Land Drainage
PU6 – Watercourses
PU12 – New Public Utilities
PU13 – Design of Public Utilities
Local Planning Policy – Doncaster Council Core Strategy 2011-2026
Policy 1 – Quality of Life
Policy 3 – Countryside
Policy 4 – Flooding
Policy 9 – Providing Travel Choice
Policy 14 – Design and Sustainable Construction
Policy 15 – Valuing our Historic Environment
Policy 16 – Valuing our Natural Environment
Policy 18 – Air, Water and Agricultural Land
7.5 National
7.6 The main objectives of national policy for modes of transport are to integrate
planning and transport to promote a more sustainable transport choice both for
carrying people and freight.
9. 7.7 Regional
7.8 At the regional level the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) sets out policies
relating to transport uses, investment and management. In particular, Policy T4
(Freight) states that the Region will develop an integrated freight distribution
system that makes the most efficient and effective use of all modes of transport
subject to environmental considerations.
7.9 Plans, strategies, investment decisions and programmes should maximise the
use of rail or water for freight movements to and form new and existing
developments and significant change of use and recognise the contribution
these modes can make to the transportation of bulk materials including waste.
7.10 Local
7.11 At the local level the proposed site is located in the Green Belt (GB) to the west
of the ECML and Countryside Policy Area (CPA) to the east of the ECML as
designated in the Doncaster Unitary Development Plan (UDP). Policy ENV1
and ENV2 states the Council’s general commitment to protecting the GB and
CPA from inappropriate development and policies ENV3 and ENV4 sets out the
development management criteria applying to it.
7.12 Policies ENV3 and ENV4 sets down the Borough Council’s overall development
management policy within the GB and CPA which have equal force. However,
there is a general presumption against inappropriate development within GB and
as such developments will not be approved except in very special
circumstances. Developments in CPA are based on the guiding principle that
development in the countryside should both benefit economic activity and
maintain or enhance the environment. Although the proposed development
does not fall within the uses normally allowed in the GB and CPA, the main
thrust of ENV3 and ENV4 is to ensure that new development should not
prejudice by reason of its nature, scale, siting or design the purposes of the GB
and CPA. Consideration therefore needs to be given to whether there are
special circumstances to warrant approval contrary to policies ENV3 and ENV4.
7.13 Special circumstances in this instance include the fact that the development is
the only place to provide a direct link between Skellow and Askern lines to
reduce volumes of freight traffic on the ECML as well as other economic and
environmental considerations. One of the environmental considerations in this
instance is for getting more freight off roads onto rail and thereby further
increasing the demands made on the rail network which cannot be catered for
on this Doncaster – York section. Also, to improve the economy by increasing
the capacity on the ECML for passengers and freight.
8. Issues and Considerations
8.1 Setting of Listed Buildings and Archaeology
8.2 The setting of a listed building is often an essential feature of its character. The
visual merits afforded by listed buildings are often partly the result of the position
they occupy in the town, village or countryside. The juxtaposition of other
buildings, trees or other landscape features and views can all be extremely
10. important. Developments which close off important views of the buildings or
which detract from its immediate environment will be resisted.
8.3 Designated heritage assets are defined at Annexe 2 to Planning Policy
Statement (PPS) 5 as including: Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings,
Registered Parks and Gardens and Conservation Areas. (Designated assets
may also include World Heritage Sites and Registered Battlefields, which do not
occur in the Borough.) Designations are made in accordance with relevant
legislation. Not all heritage assets are nationally designated. A building,
monument, site, place or landscape may be identified by the LPA’s during the
process of decision-making or through the plan-making process as being a
valued component of the historic environment.
8.4 The submitted assessments take account of the views to and from the
surrounding Listed buildings. The designated asset nearest the proposed chord,
would be the Grade II Listed Poplar Farmhouse at Thorpe-in-Balne
(approximately 0.92km to the north). This property is within the village envelope
and which does not face directly towards the proposed chord, its setting was
considered not to be affected.
8.5 The site of Manor House Farm, Thorpe-in-Balne, incorporates both a Scheduled
Monument and a Grade II star Listed Building (approximately 1.14km to the
north). It was considered that the setting of neither would be significantly
affected. The former Chapel would not be visible in the same view as the
development, nor would it look towards it. The unbuilt area of the Scheduled
Monument is more exposed within the landscape, but lies on the north-east side
of the settlement, which interposes in most views.
8.6 There are a number of buildings and structures within 2km of the proposed
development which might be considered to be of local architectural or historic
interest, including Joan Croft Cottages, farmsteads and other buildings, and
elements of the historic rail network. Undesignated archaeological sites have
been considered by the SYAS. Some of the buildings of local interest in the
study area would be considerably closer to the proposed development than the
designated assets would be, and their settings would be more directly affected.
The effect has been assessed in the submitted report. Detrimental though this
might be in some cases, however, the heritage significance of the buildings is
considered to be insufficient to weigh significantly against the wider benefits
which would follow if the proposal is allowed.
8.7 Distant views of the proposed chord would be likely to be had from a number of
other designated assets, in particular from Listed Buildings. However, they are
even more distant than Thorpe-in-Balne and, given their scale and historic
purpose, it is considered that their settings, as defined in PPS5, would not be
affected.
8.8 The submitted assessment has demonstrated that the proposed development
would not have an adverse impact on Listed Buildings within a 2km radius.
However, it acknowledges there will be an effect on undesignated sites of
medium and low value. Mitigation measures such as a photographic survey has
been incorporated into the proposals where feasible and none of the resulting
effects are to be greater than slight adverse in terms of significance.
11. 8.9 The construction of the proposed development will also result in an impact on
any areas identified as an archaeological interest. These areas should be
mitigated through an appropriate scheme of further investigation and reporting
which should be agreed with the South Yorkshire Archaeology Service.
8.10 Visual Landscape
8.11 The UDP states that new developments involving significant construction work
will be required to provide a comprehensive scheme of hard and soft
landscaping in terms of the scope, design, quality, techniques and maintenance.
As part of the proposed development submission details the Landscape and
Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) are relevant. This assessment draws on
DMBC’s Landscape Character Assessment and Capacity Study of Doncaster.
Within the LVIA the process should be divided into four broad areas, a baseline
assessment, consideration of potential impacts, mitigation and an assessment of
residual effects. A landscape character and capacity assessment of Doncaster
MBC was carried out by ECUS in 2007 which the reviewed changes in the
landscape and updated character types into landscape character areas. The
study examines the capacity of the landscape to accommodate various types of
development including housing and strategic employment; however, it does
assess impacts on the landscape such as infrastructure works such as bridges
or proposed railways.
8.12 The proposed development lies predominantly in landscape character area F2
Owston to Sykehouse Settled Clay Farmlands but also affects Tollbar Settled
Clay Farmlands and E2 West Don and Dun River Carrlands. These landscape
character areas are predominantly flat and low lying and are characteristic of the
Humberhead levels. Thorpe Marsh Power Station and Power line currently
dominate the landscape of E2 West Don and Dun River Carrlands and other
landscape character areas within Doncaster. The area where the proposal is to
be located is predominantly rural, with surrounding land used mostly for
agricultural purposes.
8.13 Due to the nature of the scheme and relatively undeveloped nature of the area, it
is considered that the construction of the project will have an effect on the visual
appearance of the local landscape and needs to be carefully assessed.
Minimising the visual impact by reducing the height of the embankment and
bridge by closing Joan Croft level crossing and lowering the overhead lines
should be welcomed from the visual impact aspect and subject to proper
consideration of the highway effects of constructing the road bridge.
8.14 The ES contains a comprehensive assessment of landscape impacts of the
scheme and the proposed planting should address the visual impact of the
scheme on identified receptors once established. The mitigation measures are
required to soften the appearance of the North Doncaster Chord structure and
proposed road bridge.
8.15 Despite mitigation measures, it is considered by the Council that the
accumulative effect of both the Chord proposal and new road bridge proposal
within this area of Green Belt and Countryside Policy Area will have significant
impacts upon the visual amenity in and around the area.
12. 8.16 Trees and Landscaping
8.17 It is important to consider the protection of existing trees, hedgerows, wetland,
habitats and other natural landscape features. The proposal will be required to
ensure that there is no unnecessary loss of trees or hedgerows.
8.18 The submitted ES documents cover most of the issues that were raised in earlier
discussions with the applicants and its proposals will generally minimise and/or
mitigate the negative impacts of the proposal. However, the proposal will still
result in the almost entire loss of a solid hedgerow shown on the 1839 Dun
Drainage North River Don plan due to the oblique angle that the proposed
western haul road crosses it. This hedgerow is intact and is considered
‘important’ on historical grounds under the Hedgerow Regulations 1997 as an
integral part of a field system pre-dating the Inclosure Acts (this date taken to
mean before 1845). All efforts should therefore be made to retain this
hedgerow. Moving the haul road and compound to the south of the hedgerow
would minimise the impact of development and help preserve the historic
landscape.
8.19 Where it is not possible to avoid creating gaps in hedgerows it is important that
they are restored with a species mix according to the particular hedgerow on
completion of works.
8.20 Road alignment at the A19 junctions needs to be carefully planned and
implemented to avoid tree loss as far as possible – the tree survey suggests that
10 trees could have to be removed on the northern side of Rockley Lane near
the junction despite their distance from the existing carriageway (wide grass
verge, ditch and hedgerow). In addition to the arboriculture / silvicultural impact
of the loss of these trees several of them have wounds that would offer potential
roosting sites for bats.
8.21 Subject to amendment of the western haul road alignment to preserve the
section of ‘important’ hedgerow identified at 8.11 and restoration works identified
at 8.12, it is considered by the Council that the cumulative effect of the proposal
will not have significant impacts upon the on hedgerows or trees in and around
the area.
8.22 Ecology and Wildlife
8.23 Various policies within the UDP protect wildlife and species. Some animals such
as bats and badgers are also protected by their own legislation. The presence
of a protected species is a material consideration in considering development
proposals which are carried out which would be likely to result in harm to the
habitats.
8.24 Generally, the scope of the ecological survey work that has been provided in
relation to this development proposal is satisfactory.
8.25 The key feature of interest that has been identified is a nationally significant
population of great crested newts within 500m of the proposed development site.
The creation of a number of new ponds, would be highly beneficial to the great
crested newt population. At present the majority of this exceptional population is
predominantly using a single water body, making it potentially vulnerable to
13. outside influences, such as disturbance, water level fluctuations or pollution
events. Given the size of the proposed scheme and the guidance in national
planning policy, it is not considered unreasonable for ecological enhancements
to be included.
8.26 Other protected species such as bats, badgers and reptiles have been identified
through the surveys.
8.27 Within the submitted documents (Section 6.2.1) it states that there is no
requirement for supplementary mitigation, given that that incorporated mitigation
is sufficient to result in the avoidance of any significant residual effects. For a
scheme of this size, it would be expected to see a firmer commitment to
delivering supplementary mitigation. This view is supported by national planning
policy. One of the key objectives of PPS9 is that construction and development
should have minimal impacts on biodiversity and enhance it wherever possible.
The new National Draft Planning Policy also expresses a similar sentiment,
encouraging the incorporation of biodiversity in and around developments.
8.28 It is supported by the LA that all mitigation measures are encompassed into
sustainability deliverables for this development.
8.29 Noise
8.30 There is potential for noise to be generated both by the construction works and
its traffic and additional trains associated with the development.
8.31 The standard used by Network Rail to assess noise exposure is BS5228:1997
(Noise and vibration control on construction and open sites) is not considered to
be the most appropriate for such a large scale development. In this case, noise
levels are expressed as a 12 hour daytime average and give no indication of
peaks or short bursts of intrusive noise. Table 2.3 (in Volume 2 of the
Environmental Statement) indicates exposure at the BS5228 noise limits for
more than one month will give significant adverse effects.
8.32 As 500,000 Tonnes of infill material will be used as part of the land formation, a
more appropriate guidance would be Mineral Policy Statement 2 (MPS2) Annex
2 which provides guidance on controlling and mitigating the environmental
effects of noise from mineral workings and associated operations. This
statement was formulated in accordance with the World Health Organisation
(WHO) Guidelines for Community Noise that states, “to protect the majority of
people from being annoyed during the daytime, outdoor sound levels from
steady continuous noise should not exceed 55dBLAeq on balconies, terraces and
outdoor living areas”.
8.33 MPS2 sets noise controls that will protect residential amenity without imposing
unreasonable burdens on the applicant. BS5228 sets a 65dBLAeq over a 12 hour
period which is difficult to monitor, whereas MPS2 sets an absolute noise limit of
55dBLAeq over a 1 hour period. This is a more practical noise limit to monitor.
MPS2 also allows increased temporary daytime limits of up to 70dBLAeq,1hr for
periods of up to 8 weeks in a year, although the operator must aim to deliver
temporary works at a lower level of impact wherever possible.
14. 8.34 During construction it is anticipated that construction works will take place over a
17-20 month period between December 2012 and April-July 2014. With
construction working hours been between 0700 to 1900 Monday to Friday and
0800 to 1300 on Saturdays and some rail deliveries expected between 1900 and
0700. To add to this the rate of traffic is estimated at 6 vehicles per hour with a
peak of 10 vehicles per hour for bulk fill materials. The planned daytime hours
of construction are in accordance with those proposed within MPS2.
8.35 The Environmental Statement advises that night time work is expected for a
period of one month during the construction period. In accordance with MPS2, a
noise limit of 42dBLAeq at the nearest noise sensitive properties would be
required.
8.36 Post construction it is anticipated that there is an increase of freight traffic along
the Askern Line of one train, in each direction per hour. It is also anticipated that
the Chord will provide greater capacity and efficiency on the ECML for high
speed passenger trains and enable an additional passenger trains per hour.
The ES (Vol. 2) identifies that Crossing Gate Farm will be adversely affected by
the operation of the Chord. Network Rail has identified that this (and other noise
sensitive properties) will be assessed to identify whether they are eligible for
secondary glazing, in accordance with the Noise Insulation Regulations 1996.
8.37 The Council has received concerns with regards the additional noise from
construction traffic and both freight and passenger trains on both the Askern line
and ECML after construction. Network Rail has stated that best practice in
design and construction will be used to minimise the noise and vibration from the
track and rolling stock. The concerns raised by residents include the impact of
the noise which has not been assessed for the wider communities and its
surrounding areas such as Askern residents. The standard designed into the
scheme is to provide an estimate of the likelihood of the proposal leading to
complaints from the surrounding area rather than the actual impact of noise on
the resident’s daily lives, particularly on an evening and weekend.
8.38 Given that some elements of the construction traffic may have a 24 hour
operation and that the operational noise climate is proposed to have 12 hour
noise limits, it is considered that the impact on residential impact will be high
during the construction period. The noise climate that will be imposed on the
surrounding residential areas is likely to be higher than that suggested by the
Environmental Statement and will represent a change for the worse as far as the
public and residential amenity is concerned. Although, the Council welcomes
the proposal it is essential that the noise controls are in accordance with MPS2
rather than BS 5228.
8.39 Flooding
8.40 The site lies within Flood Zone 2 and 3a according to the Environment Agency
maps.
8.41 As the Council are a consultee on this proposal, it is considered appropriate that
the Environment Agency’s comments on flood risk made directly to the IPC are
taken account of.
15. 8.42 Air Quality
8.43 The Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) process is set out in Part IV of the
Environment Act 1995. It places an obligation on all LA’s to regularly review and
assess air quality in their areas, and to determine whether or not the air quality
objectives (laid down in The Air Quality Regulations 2000 as amended 2002) are
likely to be achieved.
8.44 Where exceedences are likely an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) must
be declared and an Action Plan produced outlining the measures it intends to
put in place to work towards achieving the objectives. In Doncaster, there are
currently 4 AQMAs with a 5th due to be declared by the end of 2011. These are
based around major roads in the area. Monitoring takes place across the
Borough mainly to measure the emissions from road transport. Development
proposals that have the potential to impact on air quality must be assessed to
ensure that they will not lead to deterioration in air quality.
8.45 The assessment provided for this proposal has not answered the questions put
to it through the previous consultation and so it is not possible to agree with the
validity of the report. The IPC have put forward comments which were similar to
those given by the Council. The changes in road vehicle numbers during the
operational phase are expected to be low. However, details of the number of
trains have not been discussed in the air quality chapter. It states they are
below the screening criteria however it is not clear exactly what the potential
worst case for the increase number of trains over the long term is and equally
the screening criteria does not negate the need for impacts of a new scheme to
be assessed. Equally there seems to be no cumulative impact for nearby
development, such as Thorpe Marsh, which may impact on the background
levels being considered in the assessment.
9. Local Transport and Highways issues and considerations
9.1 The use of the rail network for movement of freight, particularly where large
volumes are involved, can offer significant advantages in terms of speed and the
avoidance of road traffic congestion. There are also significant environmental
noise and pollution benefits possible by reducing the number of Heavy Goods
Vehicles (HGV) on roads, particularly where they would pass through sensitive
areas such as residential areas. The Council’s UDP policies take account for
this when proposals are being considered.
9.2 The A19 is a main arterial route connecting Doncaster Town centre to the North
of Doncaster through Bentley and Askern and then to Selby and York. The A19
lies to the west of the proposed site and is one of the main access routes for
vehicular construction traffic. The use of the A19 by construction traffic will have
some impacts upon Askern Town, which already suffers delays from the ‘down
time’ of the Station Road/Moss Road level crossing. However, no formal
assessment of the impact of the construction has been undertaken.
9.3 Whilst it is appreciated that the number of HGV’s serving the site is significant, it
is acknowledged that this is a short term issue during the construction period,
and the proposals include the use of rail to import fill to construct the Eastern
embankment in order to mitigate the level of construction traffic. Furthermore,
DMBC Highways Officers and Network Rail have agreed appropriate haul routes
16. to minimise the effects of construction traffic. The proposals include
improvements to be carried out at both the Rockley Lane and Holme Lane
junctions, together with localised passing bays along the haul route. The impact
will also be further mitigated by the creation of a one way system for
construction traffic and also the creation of a temporary haul route to by-pass
part of Holme Lane. The routes used for construction traffic will have a full
condition assessment carried out and any necessary strengthening works
undertaken prior to their use. These improvements are considered to be
appropriate mitigation in traffic and transportation terms.
9.4 The Joan Croft Level Crossing Study identified an indicative level of reassigned
trips from the Moss and Shaftholme route, given that the road bridge would
provide journey time benefits over these routes. Whilst this technical
assessment predicted an increase in use of the road across Joan Croft level
crossing to the A19, this increase is relatively modest in absolute terms. The
results estimate that 7 additional vehicles will use this route in the AM peak hour
(average hour between 0730-09.30); 5 in the inter peak hour (average hour
between 1300-1500) and 30 in the PM peak hour (average hour between 1600-
1800). Although, the documentation does not provide operational analysis of
junctions along the routes, DMBC Highways Officers advice is that the
modest increase in vehicle numbers does not compromise highway safety on
these roads or junctions. It must be noted that when comparing the impacts of
having the Joan Croft road bridge and not having it, Network Rail have a
programme of upgrading manned crossings with obstacle detection systems.
Network Rail has confirmed that Joan Croft would be part of the programme if
the bridge were not planned. The significance of this is that currently Joan Croft
level crossing is closed unless road vehicles want to cross. Under an obstacle
detection system the crossing would be open for road crossings until such times
as a train is approaching. The result would be that the crossing down time
would be more attractive to traffic in future even if the road bridge is not built.
The assessment carried out included this scenario and the results between the
over bridge and the upgraded crossing were very similar. Furthermore, the total
closure of Joan Croft level crossing without the over bridge is unacceptable in
transportation terms due to the severance this would introduce to the local
community and users of the Trans Pennine Trail here.
9.5 With regards the Joan Croft road bridge proposal, the Council can confirm that
no objections are raised to either the rationale or design parameters for the
bridge at this location. As well as retaining highway linkage, the proposed road
bridge provides added benefits by removing the potential road safety dangers
associated with at grade crossing of the East Coat Main Line. However, local
residents and communities have concerns with regards the increase of traffic
along this route.
9.6 The Council has assessed the road traffic collision data for C53 Station
Road/Moss Road, Askern to Junction with A19 High Street to Junction with C97
Trumfleet Lane and A19 Doncaster Road/High Street/Selby Road to Junction
with Tiltshills Lane to Borough Boundary (North Yorkshire) traffic accident data
has been analysed from (2007 to end September 2010), compared to the
previous four year period (2003 to 2006 inclusive) and it can be concluded that
there is no trend that needs to be addressed through road or junction
improvements. Whilst there is a perception of danger at junctions along these
17. routes the reports conclude that the number of collisions reported is typical in
relation to statistics for these road types.
9.7 From a Highways Authority perspective support cannot be given to the closure
of Joan Croft level crossing in the absence of any other proposed connectivity.
This route forms part of the Trans Pennine Trail (TPT) which is a national route
for pedestrians, equestrians and cyclists with no immediately suitable alternative
route. The road forms part of the network in a rural community and provides
resilience to the network during incidents or restrictions on other parts of the
network. Losing this link would lead to community severance. The duty of the
Highways Authority is to maintain the public enjoyment of highways within its
jurisdiction.
9.8 The TPT is a long distance multi user recreation route. The route of the TPT
runs along Middle Lane/Joan Croft Lane through to Thorpe-in-Balne. The road
is rural in nature with low amounts of traffic flow. This makes it more attractive
to non-motorised users. Any increase in traffic along the road will have an
impact on trail users and their enjoyment of the trail. Network Rail are
committed to carrying out staged safety audits and after studies to assess the
impact on Joan Croft Lane post construction of the bridge. If the results of these
studies show that the resultant increase in traffic flows have an adverse impact
on the safety of road users, in particular pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders,
then Network Rail will undertake any necessary improvements along this route
and also the diversion of the TPT, if required, at their expense.
9.9 Residents and the Council are concerned that the extra freight trains which the
Chord allows for will lead to greater disruption in Askern town centre from the
additional ‘down time’ at level crossings. The concerns raised include the
increased time of crossing closures at Station Road/Moss Road crossing and
A19 Selby Road, Askern and further on Norton Common Road/Station Road,
Norton and the highway issues which this will cause. It is thought by local
residents of Askern and Norton that the extra ‘down time’ at level crossings will
affect the traffic flow on the A19 and that the phasing of traffic light will not solve
the problem due to the increased volume of traffic and frequency of trains.
Specific information has not been provided on how many extra trains will use the
Askern line in the longer term. There is currently one train an hour in each
direction proposed to be transferred from the ECML to the Askern line. Each
downtime will result in the highway being closed for 3 minutes.
9.10 A concern also raised in respect of highway safety is that the proposals do not
show a turning head facility for vehicles accessing the railway cottages located
on the west side of the ECML Joan Croft level crossing. If a turning head is not
provided refuse vehicles and delivery vehicles may not be able to access and
exit these properties in a safe manner.
9.11 Having assessed all the highway and traffic information supplied and following
on from extensive meetings with the applicants it is considered that the
proposals during construction and afterwards can be agreed subject to strict
regulation of construction traffic, and the improvements that will be made to the
highway network. Network Rail will be required to implement the
recommendations of the relevant Safety Audits which will need to be
undertaken. The proposals will have a negative effect on the highway network
particularly the down time at level crossings and the Trans Pennine Trail.
18. However, it may be considered that the benefits of moving freight by rail and the
increase in the number of passenger trains using the east coast mainline out
weighs these negative effects of the scheme.
10. Economic Matters
10.1 The view of the Council and of the local residents is that this facility is required in
the geographical location proposed and due to the nature of the development
has a lack of long term economic benefits on the regeneration of the area.
10.2 It is acknowledged that there would be jobs created during construction.
Although, the applicants have stated that around 50 additional construction jobs
is expected and that this would have a potentially positive impact on
employment. However, due to the nature of the development there will be no
long term jobs created by this proposal. Due to the specialised nature of the
construction of the development many of the jobs at the construction stage may
go to a ‘temporary’ workforce from elsewhere rather than the local residents. It
is however acknowledged that there may be some apprenticeships created and
opportunities created for work experience.
11. Conclusion
11.1 The IPC guidance on the LIR recommends that a view is given by the authority
of the relative weighting between the social, economic and environmental issues
associated with the proposal and the impact of the scheme on them.
11.2 It is felt that there will be some positive impacts on the area in respect of the
possibility of the creation of temporary jobs during the period of construction.
However, due to the long term nature of the development, no jobs will be
created in the future therefore having a neutral impact within the area.
11.3 In terms of the environmental matters there would be some positive benefits in
respect of the upgrading of the junctions along the A19 at Rockley Lane and
Holme Lane, an extension to the ecological habitat management within the area
and additional tree planting and landscaping as part of the proposal. However,
this has to be set against the visual impact the two bridges will have on the
character of the existing rural area which will affect people’s experience of the
area and impact on its tranquillity.
11.4 In terms of highway connectivity, there are huge benefits including public safety
on the creation of the proposed road bridge and the closure of Joan Croft level
crossing. However, this does not off set the concerns raised that the proposed
road bridge would be likely to increase the risk of vehicles routing between
communities to the east and the west (A19) therefore causing potential
environmental, residential amenity and highway implications.