north lincolnshire council - National Infrastructure Planning

Vision A4 postrair_Layout 1 13/06/2012 11:13 Page 1

NORTH LINCOLNSHIRE COUNCIL LOCAL IMPACT REPORT

NORTH KILLINGHOLME POWER PROJECT C GEN KILLINGHOLME LTD

Planning Inspectorate Reference:

O Putting our

I

1 T

customers

EN 010038

July 2013

LAND CONTAMINATION CONSTRAINTS PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT C.GEN Killingholme North Ltd 64032B FINAL

Land Contamination Constraints Preliminary Risk Assessment

Prepared for C.GEN Killingholme North Ltd Clough Lane North Killingholme DN40 3JP United Kingdom Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff Manchester Technology Centre Oxford Road Manchester M1 7ED United Kingdom www.pbworld.com

Report Title

:


Report Status

:

FINAL

Job No

:

64032B

Date

:

July 2013

DOCUMENT HISTORY AND STATUS Document control

Prepared by

M.Gardner

Checked by (technical)

S.Claxton

Approved by

S.McCudden

Checked by (quality assurance)

M.Gardner

Revision details

Version

Date

1.1

July 2013

Pages affected

Comments


CONTENTS Page 1 1.1 1.2 1.3

INTRODUCTION Appointment Proposed Development and Background Information Objective and Scope of Work

2 2.1 2.2 2.3

DATA REVIEW Information Sources Site Description & History Environment Setting

11 11 11 12

3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6

IDENTIFICATION OF IMPACTS Overview Clinker & Slag Hydrocarbon Impacts Asbestos Catalyst Waste Other Potential Sources

13 13 13 13 14 14 15

4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5

PRELIMINARY RISK ASSESSMENT Introduction Contamination Sources Pathways Receptors Conceptual Site Model Summary

16 16 16 16 18 19

5 5.1 5.2 5.3

PROPOSED MITIGATION Preamble Construction Phase Operational Phase

21 21 21 23

6 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4

OTHER DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATION Preliminary Geotechnical Appraisal Waste Soils Management Potable Water Supplies Preferential Pathways

24 24 24 25 25

7 7.1 7.2 7.3

CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS Overview Conclusions Recommendations

26 26 26 27

Appendices

Appendix A – Figures and Drawings Appendix B – Site Photographs Appendix C – Health and Safety Risk Assessment

64042B-Killingholme PRA v1-2a July 2013

-7-

9 9 9 9

Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff for C.GEN Killingholme North Ltd


1

INTRODUCTION

1.1

Appointment

1.1.1

Parsons Brinckerhoff Ltd was commissioned by C.GEN Killingholme North Ltd to provide an outline constraints appraisal with respect to land contamination at the Killingholme North site, North Lincolnshire.

1.1.2

A site location plan is presented on Figure 1 in Appendix A. The current site layout is shown on Figure 2 in Appendix A.

1.2

Proposed Development and Background Information

1.2.1

It is the client’s intention to develop the site into a modern 470 megawatt electrical (MWe) thermal generating station operating either as a Combined Cycle Gas Turbine (CCGT) plant or as an Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) plant with associated infrastructure. A proposed development plan is presented in Appendix A of this report.

1.2.2

In support of the development, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has been undertaken; referenced as follows: Environmental Statement (ES), North Killingholme Power Project. Parsons Brinckerhoff; dated 22 March 2013.

1.2.3

Chapter 14 of the ES comprised the impact assessment for Geology and Land Contamination which was largely based on the following reports included as appendices to the ES: Environmental Assessment Site Investigation Factual Report (Final), Clough Road, north Killingholme, North Lincolnshire. Parsons Brinckerhoff report for Secondsite Property; ref: BEN45505(V); dated June 2004. Geoenvironmental Appraisal of land at Clough Road, North Killingholme. Encia Consulting Ltd report for Humber Sea Terminal Ltd; ref 6238/1; dated January 2005. Site Specific Risk Assessment at Former Gas Reforming Plant, Clough Road, north Killingholme. Encia Consulting Ltd report for Humber Sea Terminal Ltd; ref 6238/2; dated April 2005.

1.2.4

The 2004 Parson Brinckerhoff report refers to a number of earlier reports which were not apparently transferred to the client upon acquisition and therefore not available for this appraisal. These included a Desk Study report carried out by White Young Green Environmental in 2000.

1.3

Objective and Scope of Work

1.3.1

The objective of this preliminary appraisal was to review the nature of the land contamination and relate these to the proposed development activities at the site; which comprise: Intrusive investigation and assessment of the site for archaeological, geotechnical and geoenvironmental aspects. Construction and operation of a power station

64042B-Killingholme PRA v1-2 July 2013

-9-



1.3.2

To achieve this objective, the following scope of work was undertaken: Data Review Site Walkover Develop Conceptual Site Model (CSM) Preliminary Risk Assessment Outline potential mitigation measures


- 10 -



2

DATA REVIEW

2.1

Information Sources

2.1.1

This review is based on the information contained in the reports included in the ES together with current online sources where required.

2.1.2

The 2004 Parsons Brinckerhoff investigation included the formation of 12no boreholes and over 100 trial pits. The following 2005 Encia investigation included the formation of 45no trial pits and a number plate bearing tests (for highways design). Unfortunately, the specific locations of the Encia trial pits remain unknown.

2.2

Site Description & History

2.2.1

The site is located approximately 800m south-west of the Humber and can be centred at National Grid Reference 515600, 419700; an indicative post code is DN40 3JP.

2.2.2

The site is an irregular polygonal shape in plan comprising approximately 27ha of currently vacant secure land segregated in a number of parcels by a network of roadways and several shallow retaining wall structures.

2.2.3

With reference to the site photographs in Appendix B, the site is generally covered in either hardstanding or hardcore cover which has become partially vegetated. In the south of the site there is a notable rise in ground levels (circa 2m) where soils appear to have been stockpiled historically; vegetation in this area is well established.

2.2.4

A number of buildings are present in the north-east of the site; a further building is located in the south-west of the site and a large walled off-compound occupies the central area of the northern half of the site. The walled compound has the remnants of four large circular storage tank bases evident.

2.2.5

Two water bodies exist within the site boundaries, located at the northernmost and southernmost extremities of the site; as shown on Figure 2.

2.2.6

The key aspects of the site’s history are summarised in Table 2.1 below: Table 2.3: Site History

Characteristic

Site Specific Summary

First Recorded Use(s)

Until the 1965 edition the site was shown as undeveloped land presumably in agricultural use.

First Recorded Development

The 1965 edition showed the site as partially developed with a number of structures. The site was shown as fully developed on the 1970 edition Few records exist as to the changes in procedures at the site. It is known that

Known changes of use

Potential off-site sources (250m radius of the site)

2.2.7

radioactive catalysts were used in the process for an unknown period of time. It is understood that by 1992, gas production had ceased at the site. 1932 to present: Railway line forms the north-east site boundary. 1965 to ~2003: Bulk storage of fuels on land to the east of the site. 1999 to present: Power station to the south-west of the site.

According to the Parsons Brinckerhoff report; unlike traditional coal gasification, the Killingholme Gas Production Plant produced “substitute coal gas" from Light Petroleum Distillate (LPD). Production peaked in mid to late 1960’s but with the


- 11 -



advent of natural gas production, the site was closed in 1974, with demolition taking place in the late 1980’s. 2.3

Environment Setting

2.3.1

The published geological information indicates the site is underlain by Glacial Till overlying Cretaceous Burnham Chalk.

2.3.2

The ground conditions encountered Made Ground between 0.13m and 3.4m thick overlying the Glacial Till (with a shallow veneer of Alluvium locally) to a maximum proven depth of 11m; though it is understood that archive records in the area suggest the Till extends to depths of circa 15 to 18mbgl.

2.3.3

The archive information suggests the chalk is structureless at shallow depth; being highly to completely weathered (“putty chalk”).

2.3.4

The Glacial Till is of limited permeability and constitutes Low Permeability Strata (Non-aquifer). In contrast, the underlying Chalk is a Principal Aquifer of regional importance. The site does not lie in a groundwater Source Protection Zone (SPZ).

2.3.5

The Humber Estuary is located ~800m to the north-east of the site and dominates the hydrology and hydrogeology of the area. Whilst the site is relatively flat and level, the regional topography generally slopes from south-west to north-east.

2.3.6

The eastern half of the site is shown to be in the Zone 3 Flood Risk area; i.e. the site is located within the estimated 1 in 100year flood event for the nearby Humber.

2.3.7

Shallow drainage is likely to be dominated by land drains and ditches which are present across the surrounding landscape; more likely to capture surface water run-off than groundwater.

2.3.8

Two ponds exist within the site boundary; one in the north and one in the south. Several other surface water bodies are present to the east of the site. It is understood that these ponds are relatively shallow; however this has not been verified.

2.3.9

Several trial pits formed during the site investigation became inundated with perched groundwater; conversely some were relatively dry throughout formation suggesting the presence of discontinuous perched water bearing strata.

2.3.10

Groundwater elevation data in the monitoring well installations is typically reflective of groundwater in the Glacial Till or a combination of Till, Alluvium and Made Ground. Due to the generally low permeability of the Till and the presence of locally permeable horizons, lateral groundwater flow is unlikely to be significant or reliable.

2.3.11

Groundwater flow in the Chalk is likely to be to the north-east; reflected in the shape of nearby SPZs. No monitoring wells were screened in the Chalk and therefore this has not been verified.


- 12 -



3

IDENTIFICATION OF IMPACTS

3.1

Overview

3.1.1

The ground investigation by Parsons Brinckerhoff identified a range of potentially significant areas of contamination. These can be grouped into four broad categories; namely Evidence of clinker and/or slag in Made Ground Hydrocarbons (fuels, tars and phenolic impacts) Asbestos Waste catalysts

3.1.2

Similar conditions and findings were described in the Encia report; however the specific locations cannot be related at this time.

3.2

Clinker & Slag

3.2.1

The report identified 50no incidences of clinker and/or slag in Made Ground. Such materials can often contain elevated heavy metals, high sulphates/sulphur and occasionally elevated poly aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) compounds. Notwithstanding, more often, they comprise inert components of Made Ground.

3.3

Hydrocarbon Impacts

3.3.1

Hydrocarbon impacts represent a potentially mobile impact either as a separate phase liquid (“Free Phase”) or as vapours where the hydrocarbon is volatile.

3.3.2

Specific observation of free phase in Made Ground was reported in nine trial pits (TP8, TP22, TP29, TP55, TP59, TP80, TP100, TP102 and TP104); two hand dug pits (HP4 and HP50) and one borehole (BH11). These observations can be grouped into three areas with TP80 appearing to be a relatively isolated incident: North-west Impact – located within a compound currently occupied by live gas infrastructure (see Plate 3). South-west Impact – located to the rear of a building which remains on site (see Plates 9 and 11). Eastern Impact – located to the east of the walled compound around BH11A.

3.3.3

Other observations in the form of odours were also reported around the site; broadly these correspond to those locations where evidence of free-phase was noted; however there are also a number of locations which are additional to those areas. Odours are a particularly subjective observation and such evidence should be used with caution in isolation.

3.3.4

Observation of hydrocarbon based impacts in Natural soils was limited to five trial pits: TP30, TP54, TP55, TP66 and TP77.

3.3.5

Contaminant concentrations ranged widely across the site. A complete detailed risk assessment will address all the determinands at the site however by way of summary the total petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations across the site ranged from 10m

Burnham Chalk (PRINCIPAL AQUIFER)

Figure 3 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL Schematic Cross Section Job No: 64042B Scale: NTS

Date: 09/07/2013

Key: Cretaceous Burnham Chalk Glacial Till Alluvium (local) Made Ground Identified hydrocarbon impact (local)

Manchester Technology Centre, Oxford Road Manchester M1 7ED, United Kingdom

APPENDIX B Site Photographs

24th June 2013

CLIENT:

C.GEN Killingholme North Ltd

DATE TAKEN:

REFERENCE:

64042B

Killingholme North

Plate 1 View south from the north-west corner along the western boundary. Note gas mains marker posts either side of the road.

Plate 2 View to the east from the western boundary with the walled storage tank compound visible in the background.

SITE NAME:


24th June 2013

CLIENT:


DATE TAKEN:

REFERENCE:

64042B

Killingholme North

Plate 3 View to the east from the north-western corner of the live gas infrastructure present in this part of the site.

Plate 4 View to the west from a mound of soil towards the west of the site. Note the live gas infrastructure present on the left hand side. Note existing power station in the background

SITE NAME:


24th June 2013

CLIENT:


DATE TAKEN:

REFERENCE:

64042B

Killingholme North

Plate 5 View to the south of the pipelines present along the south of the western site boundary.

Plate 6 View to the north from a mound of soil towards the west of the site.

SITE NAME:


24th June 2013

CLIENT:


DATE TAKEN:

REFERENCE:

64042B

Killingholme North

Plate 7 View to the north-east from a mound of soil towards the west of the site. Note walled compound on the left hand side and remaining structures in the background.

Plate 8 View to the east from a mound of soil towards the west of the site.

SITE NAME:


24th June 2013

CLIENT:


DATE TAKEN:

REFERENCE:

64042B

Killingholme North

Plate 9 View to the south from a mound of soil towards the west of the site.

Plate 10 View to the north from the southwest corner of the walled compound. Note the large circular tank base.

SITE NAME:


24th June 2013

CLIENT:


DATE TAKEN:

REFERENCE:

64042B

Killingholme North

Plate 11 Structure in the south of the site.

Plate 12 View to the south-east from the north-sout access road. The mound in the background is the raised land in the south of the site. Note further evidence of below ground infrastructure in the foreground.

SITE NAME:


24th June 2013

CLIENT:


DATE TAKEN:

REFERENCE:

64042B

Killingholme North

Plate 13 Reproduced from the 2004 Parsons Brinckerhoff Report. Examples of the four catalyst pots encountered and tested at the site. (Source – 2004 SI)

Plate 14 Reproduced from the 2004 Parsons Brinckerhoff Report. Area where catalyst pots were visible at the surface. (Source – 2004 SI)

SITE NAME:


APPENDIX C Health and Safety Risk Assessment

Section Status

Risk Assessment Form (Contaminated Land Aspects in relation to Archaeological Trenching)

1

1

5

Remote

2

Very Remote

3

Certain.

4

Minor Injury/Illness

5

Trivial Injury/Illness

Weighting Factor

Major Injury/Illness

No

Serious Injury/Illness

(Note: Any serious hazards or conditions of imminent danger must be supported with Safe Systems of Work, Health & Safety Plans, etc.)

Fatal Injury/Illness

[A]

Probable

Likelihood of Occurrence (L of Occ) [B1] Occasional

Worst Case Outcome

List Hazards Identified

4

3

2

1

Asbestos containing materials on site surface

HEALTH SAFETY ENVIRONMENT Pro forma

Reference

HSUKE SYSTEM NO: 3019/F1/RA/MHSW

Revision

1

Date

July 2013

Sheet No

1

Of

3

List Additional Control Measures Required to Reduce Risk to an Acceptable Level

List Current Control Measures Risk Rating [C1]

Include any specific training and/or competence requirements

-

15

Provide and review plan of identified locations.

New L of Occ [B2]

Risk Rating [C2]

-

3

Asbestos containing materials buried within Made Ground

Loose asbestos fibres entrained in Made Ground (unidentifiable)

No work to be carried out within 50m of TP2, TP10 and TP44.

If work is essential in the area, then a specialist asbestos consultant should be appointed to assess and if necessary dispose of the material, thereby removing the source.

5

1

5

Where visible ACMs or suspected ACMs are encountered, the trench should be either:

5

PPE to include boots, overalls and gloves.

10

PPE to include boots, overalls and gloves.

-

5

No work to be carried out in these areas.

15

-

1

No work to be carried out in areas with suspected asbestos containing materials (previously unidentified) on the surface.

2


Final Risk Rating [C3]

Backfilled and abandoned Covered over and a specialist asbestos consultant appointed.

1

5

N/A

2

6

N/A

All excavations to damped with water mist at the commencement of each shift and as required. Provision of decontamination unit.

4

Heavy metals, PAH compounds and inorganic cations

15

PPE to include boots, overalls and gloves. All excavations to damped with water mist at the commencement of each shift. And as required. Provision of decontamination unit

Document Reference 3019/F1/RA/MHSW – November2010 – Issue 6

Page 1 of 3

Risk Assessment Form

6

1

5

Remote

2

Very Remote

3

Certain.

4

Minor Injury/Illness

5

Trivial Injury/Illness

Weighting Factor

Major Injury/Illness

No

Serious Injury/Illness

(Note: Any serious hazards or conditions of imminent danger must be supported with Safe Systems of Work, Health & Safety Plans, etc.)

Fatal Injury/Illness

[A]

Probable

Likelihood of Occurrence (L of Occ) [B1] Occasional

Worst Case Outcome

4

3

2

1

Mobile hydrocarbon liquids

SAFETY, HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT

Status

Pro forma

Reference

(Contaminated Land Aspects in relation to Archaeological Trenching)

List Hazards Identified

Section


Revision

6

Date

Nov2010

Sheet No

2

Of

3

List Additional Control Measures Required to Reduce Risk to an Acceptable Level

List Current Control Measures Risk Rating [C1]


-

9

Access to these pits to be limited to occupational limits due to vapour exposure.

New L of Occ [B2]

Risk Rating [C2]


-

Final Risk Rating [C3]

-

-

1

3

N/A

1

5

If work is essential in the area, then a specialist Health Physics consultant should be appointed to assess and if necessary define a management procedure.

1

5

N/A

PPE to include boots, overalls and gloves. Goggles to be worn if splash hazard potential, Where pooling of liquids occurs, the trench should be terminated and covered over. Provision of decontamination unit

5

Radiological catalysts

10

Current assessment indicates no/limited radiation potential. If a large body of catalysts is uncovered/encountered, the trench should be abandoned and covered over.

6

Ground gas (Methane, Carbon Dioxide Carbon Monoxide)

Document Reference 3019/F1/RA/MHSW – September 2010 – Issue 6

10

Personal gas detection equipment to be employed. Any triggers will result in evacuation of the trench with subsequent covering over.

Page 2 of 3

‘0’

Risk Assessment Form

Section

SAFETY, HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT

Status

Pro forma

Reference

(Contaminated Land Aspects in relation to Archaeological Trenching)


Revision

6

Date

Nov2010

Sheet No

3

Of

3

Personal Protective Equipment: TO BE USED AT ALL TIMES

TO BE USED WHEN REQUIRED

TRAINING PROVIDED

DESCRIPTION OF PPE ISSUED

Safety Helmet

N/A

Staff Member’s Own

Safety Boots

N/A


High Visibility Clothing

N/A


Ear Defenders

N/A


Safety Glasses/Goggles

N/A


Safety Gloves (Cut Resistant)

N/A


Nitrile Gloves

N/A


Respiratory Protective Equipment

N/A

Water Proof Clothing

N/A


Other - Gas Detection Equipment

TBC

Sub-contracted Supplier

Check Calibration dates

Other – Water supply/Hose/Mister

TBC


Min Application at beginning of shifts

Other – Decontamination Unit

TBC


Min Application at end of shifts

PPE REQUIREMENTS IDENTIFIED FOR WORK

REQUIRED

COMMENTS

Site Equipment / Services:

Mobile phone/walkie talkie communication should be carried at all times by each member of the survey team.

Emergency Equipment:

A First Aider with appropriate kit (with eye bath facility) should also be present on site at all times.

Document Reference 3019/F1/RA/MHSW – September 2010 – Issue 6

Page 3 of 3

Interim Planning Guidance South Humber Gateway Transport Contributions April 2011

Submitted by Pell Frischmann

INTERIM PLANNING GUIDANCE SOUTH HUMBER GATEWAY TRANSPORT CONTRIBUTIONS W50358/T123

REVISION RECORD Rev

Description

Date

Originator

Checked

Approved

This report is to be regarded as confidential to our Client and it is intended for their use only and may not be assigned. Cons equently and in accordance with current practice, any liability to any third party in respect of the whole or any part of its contents is hereby expressly excluded. Before the report or any part of it is reproduced or referred to in any document, circular or statement and before its contents or the contents of any part of it are disclosed orally to any third party, our written approval as to the form and context of such a publication or disclosure must be obtained

Prepared for: North Lincolnshire Council

Pell Frischmann

Prepared by: Pell Frischmann George House George Street Wakefield WF1 1LY

INTERIM PLANNING GUIDANCE SOUTH HUMBER GATEWAY TRANSPORT CONTRIBUTIONS W50358/T123 CONTENTS

1

Introduction

2

South Humber Gateway

3

The Aims of the Document

4

Planning Context

5

An Overview of the Transport Strategy

6

Principals of Contributions

Pell Frischmann

INTERIM PLANNING GUIDANCE SOUTH HUMBER GATEWAY TRANSPORT CONTRIBUTIONS W50358/T123 1.0

INTRODUCTION

1.1

In 2008, Pell Frischmann (PF) were commissioned by Yorkshire Forward, North Lincolnshire Council (NLC) and North East Lincolnshire Council (NELC) to prepare a multi modal transport strategy for the South Humber Gateway.

1.2

The South Humber Gateway, which includes the largest port complex in the UK, has seen significant economic growth over recent years and with large areas of available development land surrounding the ports there is considerable potential for this growth to continue and the need to deliver new infrastructure and services to support it.

1.3

NLC are keen to support the continued development of the area and to ensure that the necessary transport infrastructure is planned, designed and delivered to facilitate this growth.

1.4

In order for NLC to achieve this and allow the Gateway’s full potential to be realised a Transport Strategy was developed in 2008 to look at upgrading the local infrastructure to meet the forecast levels of future demand over the next 15 to 20 years. The next stage in the process looks at defining and securing the necessary finances to deliver this transport infrastructure.

1.5

This document sets out a mechanism for securing financial contributions from new development to provide the necessary infrastructure and the development of an Area Wide Travel Plan (AWTP).

1.6

The council recognises that the area will be developed over a long period of time and that it is critical that the council provide the support and co-ordination of a strategy to deliver transport infrastructure and service that best serves the entire area and not just individual piecemeal development. This will also seek to deliver major pieces of infrastructure at the earliest possible opportunity.

1.7

The benefits of contributing to the Transport Strategy include:

Pell Frischmann

INTERIM PLANNING GUIDANCE SOUTH HUMBER GATEWAY TRANSPORT CONTRIBUTIONS W50358/T123 •

Improved environmental conditions

•

Reduced Congestion

•

Better Connectivity

•

Improved Access to employment

•

Improved Travel Choice

•

Improved health

Pell Frischmann


2.0

SOUTH HUMBER GATEWAY

2.1

Located next to the busiest ports complex in the UK, an international airport and excellent connections to the UK road and rail networks, the South Humber Gateway (SHG) is a major gateway to the rest of the UK and Europe.

2.2

With almost 1,000 hectares of development land spanning both North and North East Lincolnshire, the SHG is the last remaining strategic development site that fronts a deep-water estuary in the UK, and the largest employment land allocation in Yorkshire and Humber.

2.3

The SHG

is

attracting

significant

global

interest

and

is

experiencing

unprecedented levels of inward investment with an estimated £3 billion+ of investment over the next 10 years. 2.4

Besides its obvious size, what makes the SHG particularly attractive for investment is it’s home to the UK's busiest ports com plex, i.e. the ports of Immingham, Grimsby and Killingholme.

Pell Frischmann


These ports are already the busiest in the UK by tonnage of cargo handled, and with further port developments planned the capacity to handle an increase in cargo, will only grow.

2.6

Not only is it the UK's fastest growing ports complex, a top ten European Port and the East Coast's largest ro-ro port but also, together with the Humber Sea Terminal, the ports are key nodes on the North European Trade Axis.

2.7

The area’s road and freight-forwarding infrastructure provides a major competitive advantage for businesses and industry on the SHG . Approximately 40 million people can be accessed from any location on the SHG quickly and easily.

2.8

Further distribution channels include some of the UK's least congested motorways, an international airport on the doorstep at Humberside, the UK's second largest heliport, and an expanding rail network.

Pell Frischmann


THE AIMS OF THE DOCUMENT

3.1

The fundamental aim of this Interim Planning Guidance is to set out how financial contributions to the Transport Strategy will be calculated and secured against individual development that occurs within the study area.

3.2

The financial contributions will be negotiated at the time of submission of a planning application and secured through a legal agreement related to the planning permission under Section 106 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.

3.3

The document will also include an overview of the schemes and measures that are included in the Transport Strategy and thus the schemes that secured contributions will deliver and how these will then be prioritised by NLC.

3.4

This document provides the necessary context and background and explains how the guidance will be applied and which developments it will be applied to and gives examples of how contributions can be calculated.

3.5

Figure 3.1 shows the extent of the area to which this document will apply

Pell Frischmann


PLANNING CONTEXT

4.1

The Core Strategy of the Local Development Framework is required to set out a future vision for North Lincolnshire and the sort of place it should become over the next 15 years, up to 2026. In order to turn the vision for North Lincolnshire into reality, a number of preferred spatial objectives have been devised.

4.2

The objectives in relation to the SHG include: SO3 - To maximise North Lincolnshire’s major growth potential in the Yorkshire and the Humber region based on maximising the benefits of our major assets – the South Humber Bank ports, Humberside International Airport, Doncaster Robin Hood Airport, the Scunthorpe Urban Area and the world class environment – to become the north of England’s Global Gateway.

SO4 - To work with partners to deliver the appropriate road, rail and water infrastructure needed to maximise the opportunities provided by our unique assets such as delivering better quality access to the ports at the South Humber Bank .

4.3

In addition to the spatial objectives above the Core Strategy also refers to the Ports specifically as follows:

Pell Frischmann


“Further growth and expansion at the northern ports, in particular at the South Humber Bank ports can have two positive benefits. Firstly, it will help the area’s economy and assist in bridging the north-south output gap. Secondly, there are wider sustainability and environmental issues associated with port growth. Expansion and development of the northern ports and maximising the further port development in key strategic locations like the South Humber Bank employment site can have major positive impacts for road congestion and reducing CO2 emissions in the UK.

A number of businesses have

already relocated from the ports in the south and south east of England to the South Humber Bank ports in order to escape road congestion in the south. The Northern Way Strategy also recognises that the South Humber ports and the undeveloped South Humber Bank strategic employment site are served by motorways with surplus capacity.”

4.4

It is proposed that contributions to the transport infrastructure and services be secured via Section 106 Agreements. These are planning obligations under Section 106 of the 1990 Town and Country Planning Act, which provide a mechanism for establishing legal agreements between the council and a developer to secure infrastructure and services that NLC believe to be necessary to facilitate a proposed development.

4.5

Government Circular 5/2005 is the current key source of government guidance on the use of such planning obligations. Planning obligations may be negotiated to provide on and off-site physical and social infrastructure related to the development. Circular 5/2005 states that planning obligations should be sought only when they are: • relevant to planning; • necessary to make the proposed development acceptable; • directly related to the proposed development; • fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the proposed development; and • reasonable in all other aspects.

4.6.

Of particular relevance to this IPG is the Circular’s acceptance of ‘pooled Contributions’.

Pell Frischmann


Where the combined impact of a number of developments creates the need for infrastructure, it may be reasonable for the associated developers' contributions to be pooled, in order to allow the infrastructure to be secured in a fair and equitable way. Pooling can take place both between developments and between local authorities where there is a cross-authority impact. Local authorities should set out in advance the need for this joint supporting infrastructure and the likelihood of a contribution being required, demonstrating both the direct relationship between the development and the infrastructure and the fair and reasonable scale of the contribution being sought. There should be a clear audit trail between the contribution made and the infrastructure provided.

4.8

In some cases, individual developments will have some impact but not sufficient to justify the need for a discrete piece of infrastructure. In these instances, local planning authorities may wish to consider whether it is appropriate to seek contributions for specific future provision (in line with the requirements for demonstrating need as set out above). In these cases, spare capacity in existing infrastructure provision should not be credited to earlier developers

4.9

In cases where an item of infrastructure necessitated by the cumulative impact of a series of developments is provided by a local authority or other body before all the developments have come forward, the later developers may still be required to contribute towards the relevant proportion of the costs. This practice can still meet the requirements of the Secretary of State’s policy tests iif the need for the infrastructure and the proportionate contributions to be sought is set out in advance. In the event that contributions are made towards specific infrastructure provision but the infrastructure is not provided within an agreed timeframe, arrangements should be made for contributions to be returned to developers.

Pell Frischmann


AN OVERVIEW OF THE TRANSPORT STRATEGY

5.1

The Transport Strategy includes both policies in respect to transport and specific schemes to improve the transport network in the area. The strategy also includes a number of schemes outside of the council’s remit, but which will clearly be beneficial and critical to the area’s development.

5.2

The following policies have been developed in relation to transport in the study area. •

Lobby for reduced tolls on the Humber Bridge to open up the northern route to ports

•

Work closely with the Highways Agency to progress and bring forward the A160 scheme

•

Work with and lobby Lincolnshire County Council to progress improvements to the A15

•

Develop an Area Wide Travel Plan

•

Develop a Memorandum of Understanding between the LA’s and the Highways Agency

• 5.3

Protect the Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) in Immingham

There are a number of major transport improvements already in the pipeline which are being progressed by various other parties to meet the future needs of the area. These form the first tier of the strategy and in fact relate to approximately £137.5M of investment in new transport infrastructure including the following schemes:

5.4

•

A160 Improvements Scheme

•

A18 – A180 link road scheme

•

South Humber Bank Link Road

•

Great Coates Interchange Improvements

•

Network Rail – Gauge enhancements and Killingholme Loop

•

Eastgate Link

These planned improvements are illustrated in the figure below and as they are not to be delivered by NLC do not form part of the financial contribution proposal set out in

Pell Frischmann

INTERIM PLANNING GUIDANCE SOUTH HUMBER GATEWAY TRANSPORT CONTRIBUTIONS W50358/T123 this document and the contributions collect will thus not be used to contribute to these non NLC proposals.

Haven Road Scheme

Proposed Highway Schemes

A160 Improvements

Eastgate Link

A18 - A180 Link Road SHB Link Road Phase 2 Great Coates Interchange Improvements

5.5

In addition to the schemes, that are outside the remit of the council and this document,

the council have also identified a programme of local transport

improvements to address the infrastructure needs of the area. The other schemes identified as part of this Transport Strategy are listed below with a brief description: •

Complete works to Haven Road – whilst these works have now been partially completed, providing improved access to the Humber Sea Terminal, it is recommended that the remainder of the full scheme, which equates to a new roundabout on Rosper Road, be completed.

•

Dualling of Rosper Road – dualling of a key existing road to help develop a strong north-south corridor linking the A160 to the areas of development land to the north.

•

Improve Eastfield Road/A160 signals – minor widening to this A160 signalised junction

•

New roundabout at junction of Eastfield Road and Chase Hill Road

•

New roundabout at junction of Chase Hill Road and East Halton Road

Pell Frischmann


Transport Strategy Schemes Introduced Roundabout Junctions

Implement Roundabout Dual Rosper Road

Introduced dedicated left turn

Improve Signals

A180 Roundabout Improvements Improve Sliproads

Signalised Stallingborough Interchange

5.6

Preliminary designs of these improvements are included as Appendix A to this report.

5.7

Area Wide Travel Plan - In addition to the physical infrastructure, a major part of the Transport Strategy is the Area Wide Travel Plan (AW TP) project. This sets out a plan for encouraging the use of non car modes of transport, to encourage the many thousands of employees to utilise environmentally friendly modes of transport to travel to work.

5.8

The International Gateway AWTP project, is currently being set up by the council and involves the launch of an AWTP covering the area surrounding the South Humber Gateway as well as Humberside Airport, an international passenger and freight terminal.

5.9

The proposals will link the two key international gateways with the main population centres through the encouragement of sustainable travel. The project includes a range of tailored measures, infrastructure and resource to encourage sustainable access to the area, with the key aims of helping to reduce carbon emissions and thus

Pell Frischmann

INTERIM PLANNING GUIDANCE SOUTH HUMBER GATEWAY TRANSPORT CONTRIBUTIONS W50358/T123 reliving the environmental problems the area experiences and also increasing social mobility to the one of the country’s largest employment allocations. 5.10

5.11

The AWTP project will include the following measures: •

Direct bus service from Scunthorpe to the SHG

•

Wheels to work scheme

•

Improved pedestrian and cycle infrastructure

•

New bus stops

•

Area wide car sharing scheme

•

Travel planning website

•

An dedicated Travel Plan co-ordinator

•

Marketing and promoting the plan

•

Travel to work surveys

Whilst it is anticipated that funds will be sought from the public purse to launch the Travel Plan, contributions will be sought from development to ensure its longevity and provide further resource to promote further sustainable travel initiatives.

5.12

The Table below illustrates the anticipated costs of the overall Transport Strategy, for the areas which will be covered by this document. Scheme Dualling of Rosper Road

Cost £4,986,000

Completion of Haven Road works

£612,000

A160 Eastfield signal improvements

£231,000

Chase Hill Road/Eastfield Road

£696,000

Chase Hill/East Halton Roundabout

£710,000

Area Wide Travel Plan

£1,000,000 £8,235,000

5.13

The council will seek to accumulate funds to deliver these schemes and provide the necessary infrastructure to support travel movement in the area.

Pell Frischmann


PRINCIPALS OF CONTRIBUTIONS

6.1

Objectives

6.1.1

The objective of the contribution system will be to generate sufficient funds to deliver the elements of the overall Transport Strategy described in section 5 of this report. The collection of funds will be conducted in a manner that is fair and equitable to development and apportions contributions to reflect the respective impacts of individual development on the transport network.

6.1.2

This will be achieved by apportioning cost by relating it to the volume of traffic that each development generates on the local network during the network peak hours (i.e. the AM and PM peak periods).

6.1.3

New development will need to be designed with modal shift opportunities in mind to encourage greater use of public transport, cycling and access by foot to reduce the impacts on congestion and air quality.

6.2

What Development Proposals will this apply to?

6.2.1

All development proposals will be expected to contribute in addition to embracing the principals of sustainable development. Any development falling within the catchment shown in Figure 3.1 will be required to contribute to the process.

6.2.2

For the smallest developments however it is unlikely to be reasonable or cost effective to insist on it being applied to them. A threshold of 10 additional peak hour trips will be applied. Developments exceeding this threshold will be required to contribute.

6.2.3

The council is committed to early discussion in order to establish the parameters for negotiation and to set out the range of information needed to make progress on the submission of planning applications. At pre application discussions the council will provide information on the IPG and its application.

Pell Frischmann


Establishing Impact

6.3.1

The impact of individual development will be established through the Transport Assessment process, which will involve defining trip rates and trip generation values during the peak network hours. This information will be used to establish the financial contributions required from individual development.

6.3.2

Transport Assessments should generally be based on Guidance on Transport Assessment document published jointly by the Department for Transport and the Department for Communities and Local Government in March 2007.However developers should also refer to NLC guidance document.

6.3.3

The TA should demonstrate the volume of new vehicular traffic generated by a proposed development during the network peak hours and where appropriate and agreed by the council, consider reductions in gross trip generation to reflect passby trips, linked trips and reductions to reflect trips generated by existing land uses which are to be replaced.

6.3.4

Council policy is to encourage sustainable travel and developers will be expected to embrace and contribute fully to the Area Wide Travel Plan initivative. Where measures to encourage sustainable travel are proposed as part of the development this will be reflected in the assessment of new vehicular traffic generated by the development.

6.4

Level of contribution

6.4.1

The financial contribution from the Developer to the planned transport improvements will be calculated by taking the new peak hour vehicular trip movements, as agreed through the TA, times a cost multiplier.

6.4.2

The cost of the Transport Strategy is £8.235M, which is based on accommodating some 3680 new vehicular trips on NLC road network. This equates to some £2238 per trip, which will form the cost multiplier.

6.4.3.

An example calculation is included as Appendix B to this report.

Pell Frischmann


Securing Financial contributions

6.5.1

Securing a financial contribution is necessary for the proper planning of the area to provide the means by which the transport network can be developed and managed to accommodate new development and consequently to grant new planning permissions relatively unhindered. The alternative to this planned approach would be refusal of planning permissions on transport grounds or a single developer faced with the prospect of having to pay for major transport improvements.

6.5.2

The council will normally need a planning agreement to be entered into by developers under Section 106 of the Town & Country Planning Act. This will specify the amount of the contribution and the timing of the payment.

6.5.3

Payments should normally be made at the time of the commencement of the development. Proposals to defer payment of the contribution would not be acceptable unless this was agreeable to both parties. In such cases the council would require a bond guarantee to provide the necessary certainty that the payment would be accessible to them at a given date.

6.6

Monitoring and Review

6.6.1

The level of contributions secured and received will be continuously monitored and reported to assess progress against the most up to date programme for implementation of the transport improvements.

6.6.2

Whilst the process is not risk free, appropriate arrangements will be put in place to reduce risk and to give confidence that the proposed infrastructure improvements will be completed within a reasonable timescale. A systematic planning process will ensure that contributions are properly made and that a fair and equitable process applies to all relevant developments.

6.6.3

Regular monitoring will ensure that the level of contributions can be adjusted in line with changing development proposals and to take into account changes in funding methods, grant bids, and the receipt of developer contributions.

Pell Frischmann


6.6.4

The level of the tariff may need to be increased or decreased as circumstances change. This is in order to ensure that developers are not faced with undue uncertainty in the planning stages of new development proposals and as such the council propose to limit any increase to within the relevant cost index for road construction projects i.e. The Road Construction Price Index prepared by DfT.

Pell Frischmann


APPENDIX A – PRELIMINARY DESIGNS

Pell Frischmann

Scheme 1 - Complete works to Haven Road works A scheme to improve the alignment and standard of the current access road to the Humber Sea Terminal (HST) from Rosper Road has recently been completed by NLC. However the final scheme implemented was a reduced version of the original option which included a roundabout on Rosper Road replacing the existing priority junction. The reduction in the proposed works is believed to be on the basis of lack of funding. It is thus proposed that as part of the strategy this element of the design be completed and a new roundabout formed at this location to provide an appropriate level of access to the HST. Haven Road Improvements

Scheme 2 – Dualling of Rosper Road From the link assessments conducted it is evident that one of the three north-south corridors from the A160 needs to be improved to accommodate future traffic levels. Of the three, which are Eastfield Road, Rosper Road and East Halton Road, the latter is clearly the least appropriate to attract development traffic to as it runs through the village of North Killingholme. Of the other two options, each could provide a potential new spur to the north. Whilst the theoretical analysis conducted suggests Eastfield Road would be the first to reach capacity, the strategy’s preference is to upgrade Rosper Road to dual carriageway and tie this additional capacity into the nearby A160 scheme and the southern end of Rosper Road. Equally the scheme would tie into the completion of the Haven Road proposals at the northern end.

Pell Frischmann

Page 1 Form ref: CQF047/A

The motivation for selecting Rosper Road is firstly from a practical perspective, as there is more land available around Rosper Road to facilitate widening without the need for demolishing existing buildings and restricting existing accesses . In addition to this the scheme would open up a key area of vacant land alongside the estuary. It will also tie into improved infrastructure at the end of Rosper Road, created by the A160 scheme, as opposed to the signals at the end of Eastfield Road which are relatively constrained in terms of capacity. Scheme 3 – Improve Eastfield Road/A160 signals Although located on the A160, there are no plans in the current A160 options to improve this junction, due largely to the lack of available land surrounding the junction. The analysis conducted in this study has shown the need to improve this junction. This involves the provision of a new lane on the northern approach and minor widening to the right turn lane on the eastern arm. Improvements to Eastfield Road/A160 Signals

Pell Frischmann


Scheme 4 – New roundabout at junction of Eastfield Road and Chase Hill Road Part of the current Able development proposals include the provision of a new roundabout at the junction of Eastfield Road and Chase Hill Road including a new arm to the north to open the area of land to the north for development. Improvements to Eastfield Road and Chase Hill Road

Scheme 5 – New roundabout at junction of Chase Hill Road and East Halton Road This scheme will seek to improve capacity along Chase Hill Road and also open up land to the west for development such as North Killingholme Airfield.

Pell Frischmann


Improvements to Chase Hill Road and East Halton Road

Pell Frischmann



APPENDIX B – EXAMPLE CALCULATION

Pell Frischmann

An Example of the Financial Calculation Development Proposal:

An application is submitted to develop a site within the South Humber Gateway (SHG) for office (B1), general industry (B2) and warehousing and distribution (B8) land uses.

There total floor space of the proposed development is 50,310m2 GFA and will be split as follows; •

Office (B1) 5,310m2 GFA

•

General Industry (B2) 15,000m2 GFA

•

Warehousing (B8) 30,000m2 GFA

In order to establish the amount of traffic generated from the proposed development in the peak hours, a series of trip rates are derived using the TRICS database. As such, Table 1 below details the trip rates used in relation to the example development:

Table 1 – Proposed TRICS Trip Rates (per 100sqm) Land Use Office (B1) General Industry (B2) Warehousing (B8)

AM

PM

Arrivals

Departures

Total

Arrivals

Departures

Total

2.79

0.35

3.14

0.47

2.56

3.03

1.48

0.24

1.72

0.19

1.27

1.46

0.19

0.12

0.31

0.20

0.25

0.45

Multiplying the amount of land intended to be developed for each use by the corresponding trip rates gives a trip generation forecast presented in Table 2 below. However, it should be noted that no account has been taken in calculating these trip generations based on the impact of travel plans that are successfully implemented.

Table 2 – Proposed Trip Generation Land Use Office (B1) General Industry (B2) Warehousing (B8) TOTAL

AM

PM

Arrivals

Departures

Total

Arrivals

Departures

Total

148

19

334

24

136

160

222

36

258

29

191

220

57

37

94

62

77

139

427

92

519

115

404

519

Once a Transport Assessment (TA) for the development has been submitted, and the council is satisfied with the trip rates and generation levels presented, then these will be used to calculate the contribution from the developer towards the Transport Strategy for the South Humber Gateway (SHG).

In this example the morning peak hour flow of 519 will be used to calculate the contribution from the developer.

At the tariff agreed to be charged of £2,238 per trip, the contribution required from the developer to wards the South Humber Gateway (SHG) Transport Strategy is as follows: 519 trips @ £2,238 = £1,161,522