Environmental Impact Assessment
COBEX LTD
Howbrook Open Cast Coal Mine Proposal
LSC 301Environmental Impact Assessment
100231201
Environmental Impact Assessment Table of Contents
Table of Contents 1 2
1.1 1.2
2.1
Introduction
2
Project Summary
3-4
What is an Environmental Impact Assessment? Aim of Report
Background on Cobex 2.2 The Proposal 2.3 The Site 3 Planning Policies 3.1 EU 3.2 National 3.3 Local 4 Baseline Landscape Condition 4.1 What is Landscape Character? 4.2 National Landscape Character 4.3 Local Landscape Character 4.4 Site Condition 4.5 Site Landscpe Features 5 Visual Basline 5.1 Visual Envelope 5.2 Viewpoints 5.3 Viewpoint 1 - Bar House 5.4 Viewpoint 2 - High Green 5.5 Viewpoint 3 - Hollin Berry Farm 5.6 Viewpoint 4 - Carr House Farm 5.7 Viewpoint 5 - Westwood Country Park 5.8 Viewpoint 6 - Stoors Dike 5.9 ZVI - Zone of Visual Influence
6
6.1 6.2
7 7.1
Landscape Impact Assessment Potential Landscape Impacts Predicted Landscape Impacts
Visual Impacts
ZTV - Zone of Theoretical 7.2 Receptors 7.3 Viewpoint 1 - Bar House 7.4 Viewpoint 2 - High Green 7.5 Viewpoint 3 - Hollin Berry Farm 7.6 Viewpoint 4 - Carr House Farm 7.7 Viewpoint 5 - Westwood Country Park 7.8 Viewpoint 6 - Stoors Dike
8 8.1
Mitigation
Restoration Final Statment of Unavoidable Impacts References
Introduction 8.2 Visual Impacts 8.3 Landscape Impacts
9 10 11
1
5-6
7-9
10-17
18 19-23
24-25
26-27 28 29
Environmental Impact Assessment Introduction
1
Introduction 1.1 What is an Environmental Impact Assessment? An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) measures the environmental effects of a proposed development and will inform the planning process. Invariably the assessment is commissioned by the developer and undertaken by a range of professionals. An EIA encourages sustainable development through recognising, assessing and, if possible, addressing potential adverse environmental effects. This process protects and conserves the environment leading to better standards of development or, in some cases, ensuring the development does not proceed should appropriate mitigation measures not be feasible. The EIA should be objective, inclusive and evidence based, allowing the whole community, as well as the local authority, to understand the full implications of the proposed development.
1.2 Aim of Report This report assesses the potential landscape and visual impacts of a proposed opencast mine for a site in Howbrook, Sheffield. It will be part of a full EIA that will be submitted by Cobex Ltd, the developer and includes: - A description of the existing ‘baseline’ conditions including the policy context; - A description and measure of the landscape and visual impacts of the development; - Suggestions for mitigation including proposals for site restoration; - A summary and evaluation setting out the most significant landscape and visual impacts that will result from the proposals.
2
Environmental Impact Assessment Project Summary
2
Project Summary 2.1 Background on Codex The proposals for the development at Howbrook have been submitted by Cobex, a private opencast coal company who have been trading for many years. The company is based in Wakefield, West Yorkshire and have worked on several successful opencast sites in the area. They directly employ 30-40 people but also utilise the services of approximately 175 suppliers and are contracted to supply fuel to National Power with most deliveries going to Eggborough Power Station, which is a large coal fired plant located in North Yorkshire, East of Leeds. They also serve the industrial and domestic fuel markets.
2.2 The Site The site is located to the North of Sheffield and to the South of Barnsley, roughly 300 metres to the North-East of the small village of Howbrook. It covers around 47 hectares of agricultural land and is bordered by the West Wood to the north, Hollinberry Lane to the south, Bromley Carr Road and Storrs Lane to the east and also the A61 to the east which is a relatively busy road that leads into Sheffield city centre. Figure 1 (page 4) shows its exact location. It is a naturally undulating site and is divided by three streams; Storrs Dike, which forms the northern boundary, an unnamed tributary and the Howbrook itself. Currently the land is used for arable cropping or as permanent pasture. It also lies within a designated green belt, Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council’s area of Landscape Value, and in the South Yorkshire Community Forest.
2.3 The Proposal Cobex Ltd propose to extract around 160,000 tonnes of good quality coal for making products for the domestic and industrial fuel market. They also wish to extract up to 15,000 tonnes of clays. The work will be carried out in several phases with varying characters and levels of disturbance. It is estimated to take 20 months to complete once preparation of the site has finished. The updated proposal will be your revised after use proposal. Only 18 of the 47 hectares will be used for coal and clay extraction, the rest will remain untouched or used for things such as access, soil overburden, storage and overburden, and for coal pressing areas. There are three distinct areas of the site named A, B, and C. Work is to begin in Area C, following on with work in Area B and ending with Area A. The excavations will be a series of cuts roughly 40 metres wide, with the exception of Area C which will be block worked in two halves. The overburden from Area C will be used to create a screening mound around the coal processing area. This will provide better views for High Green and Howbrook so as to reduce visual impacts on residents and visitors to the area. Area C will take approximately 8 weeks to excavate. When work on Area C is coming to and end work will begin on Area B. Material that is excavated here will be used to backfill the void left in Area C and to extend the overburden mound. When the maximum void is approached, which is expected to be at cut 14, material will be placed both to backfill and to storage in mound number 2. Anything that is left over will be stored in overburden mound number 3. Area A will take approximately 40 weeks to complete with another 10 weeks to fill the void. Once this has been done there will be a 5 year period of aftercare to ensure the rehabilitation of the land. Due mainly to the concerns of the impact on residents sensitivities to opencast mining the new proposal looks at restoring the site to fit in with the objectives of the South Yorkshire Community Forest.
3
Environmental Impact Assessment Project Summary
Figure 1. (Above) sites exact location and boundaries (Google Maps, 2013)
4
Environmental Impact Assessment Planning Policies
3
Planning Policies The following policies relate to the proposed development:
3.1 EU Policy Box 1 Any projects that fall under Annex 1 of the DIRECTIVE 2011/92/EU must have an EIA. The Cobex proposal falls under article 4 (1) 19. ‘Quarries and open-cast mining where the surface of the site exceeds 25 hectares, or peat extraction, where the surface of the site exceeds 150 hectares.’
3.2 National National Planning Policy Framework:
Policy Box 2 NPPF - 9. Protecting Green Belt land...88 ‘When considering any planning application, local planning authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt. ‘Very special circumstances’ will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.’
Policy Box 3 NPPF - 9. Protecting Green Belt land...90 ‘Certain other forms of development are also not inappropriate in Green Belt provided they preserve the openness of the Green Belt and do not conflict with the purposes of including land in Green Belt. This includes mineral extraction.’
Policy Box 4 NPPF- 13. Facilitating the sustainable use of minerals....143 This ensures ‘that permitted operations do not have unacceptable adverse impacts on the natural and historic environment or human health, including from noise, dust, visual intrusion, traffic, tipand quarry-slope stability, differential settlement of quarry backfill, mining subsidence, increased flood risk, impacts on the flow and quantity of surface and groundwater and migration of contamination from the site; and take into account the cumulative effects of multiple impacts from individual sites and/or a number of sites in a locality;
5
Environmental Impact Assessment Planning Policies
3.3 Local UDP, Volume 1 - Part II, Mineral Extraction:
Policy Box 6 Opencast Coal- Policy M4 ‘APPLICATIONS TO MINE COAL BY OPENCAST METHODS WILL BE CONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF NATIONAL AND REGIONAL GUIDANCE, POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER BENEFITS AND POLICIES M9, M9A TO M9L, M10 AND M11 AS WELL AS OTHER RELEVANT POLICIES IN THE PLAN. PLANNING APPLICATIONS WILL ALSO BE CONSIDERED IN TERMS OF THEIR CUMULATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IN CONJUNCTION WITH OTHER SITES AND THE IMPACT UPON ECONOMIC REGENERATION PROPOSALS. PLANNING PERMISSION WILL BE REFUSED WHERE:
-THE PROPOSAL WOULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANTLY ADVERSE IMPACT ON PROPOSALS FOR ECONOMIC REGENERATION’.
Policy Box 7 Environment- Policy M9 Highlights how the mineral workings will be assessed with regard to; -’THE EFFECT ON LOCAL AMENITY (BASED ON ASSESSMENT OF VISUAL IMPACT, DUST, FUMES, NOISE AND OTHER POTENTIAL DISTURBANCE) TAKING INTO ACCOUNT SCREENING AND OTHER PROTECTIVE MEASURES WHICH ARE AVAILABLE’ - ‘THE PROPOSED RESTORATION OF THE SITE AND ITS FINAL USE, APPEARANCE AND LANDFORM’ - ‘THE EFFECTS ON THE NATURAL AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT’ - ‘THE EFFECT ON ANY AREA OF BOROUGH LANDSCAPE VALUE’
Policy Box 8 Woodland Hedgerows & Trees- Policy GS22 THE COUNCIL WILL SEEK THE RETENTION AND MANAGEMENT OF EXISTING HEDGEROWS, WOODLANDS AND TREES BOTH INDIVIDUALLY AND IN GROUPS.
Policy Box 9 Woodland Hedgerows & TreesPolicy GS23 THE COUNCIL WILL ACTIVELY SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF EXTENSIVE NEW WOODLAND AND HEDGEROW PLANTING AND ITS APPROPRIATE MANAGEMENT FOR LANDSCAPE, ECOLOGICAL, RECREATION AND ULTIMATELY ECONOMIC BENEFIT.
Policy Box 10 4.32 PPG2 (1995) acknowledges that mineral working need not be inappropriate in the Green Belt provided that high environmental standards are maintained and that the site is well restored.
6
Environmental Impact Assessment Baseline Landscape Condition
4
Baseline Landscape Condition 4.1 What is Landscape Character? Landscape character is defined by Natural England as ‘a distinct, recognisable and consistent pattern of elements, be it natural (soil, landform) and/or human (for example settlement and development) in the landscape that makes one landscape different from another, rather than better or worse’ (Natural England, 2009).
4.2 National Landscape Character Figure 2. shows the various different character areas in the Yorkshire and Humber region. The black square located in character area 38 and bordering 37, shows roughly where the current site is situated. Area 38’s key characteristics are; extensive evidence of industrial activity such as mine buildings and iron and steel plants, and a mixture of built up areas, industrial land, dereliction and farmed open country. As well as this there are Substantial areas of intact agricultural land in both arable and pastoral use.
Figure 2. (Left) National character areas map showing Yorkshire and Humber region (Natural England, 2009)
4.3 Local Landscape Character Figure 3. highlights the areas in the Barnsley Borough that are made up of settled wooded farmland. The blue square shows where Howbrook is located and lies within E1, which is known as ‘West Barnsley Settled Wooded Farmland’.
Figure 3. (Right) Barnsley Borough Landscape Character areas map (Barnsley Borough Landscape Character Assessment, 2002)
7
Environmental Impact Assessment Baseline Landscape Condition
4.4 Site Condition The site has an undulating landform, and due to it being farmland there has been a removal of many landscape features, such as trees and also the neglect of hedgerows. Due to farming the land has become bland. The site has little in the way of wildlife habitats. The hedgerows have little value due to them mainly being made up of Hawthorn. The streams provide the only semi natural vegetation on site and have excellent water quality, making it a vital landscape feature for the proposed development plans following the open cast mining. It also creates an active wildlife corridor. Farming has not affected the whole site as there are still small areas of grassland that thrive. Only field F5 can be considered as unimproved grassland, all other fields are made up of improved grassland, resulting in poor species richness. Due to the managed state of the land the area is species poor and lacks any real ecological value.
Arable Unimproved Grassland Improved Grassland Hedgerows Water Courses Trees/Woodland Pylon
Figure 4. (Left) Map showing site condition
8
Environmental Impact Assessment Baseline Landscape Condition
4.5 Site Landscape Features
Figure 6. (Above) Trees located on site
Figure 5. (Above) Stream located on site
Figure 7. (Above) An area of agricultural farmland at the north of the site
Figure 8. (Above) Hedgrow located on site
9
Figure 9. (Above) Pylon located on site
Environmental Impact Assessment Visual Baseline
5
Visual Baseline 5.1 Visual Envelope
Figure 10. (Above) Visual Envelope
A Visual Envelope highlights where in the surrounding area the site is visible. This is dictated by landform and does not include trees, buildings etc. Firgure 10 shows the openness of the site and the need for blocking views into the proposed site.
5.2 Viewpoints The viewpoints in figure 11 convey what can be seen by the viewer from certain areas surrounding the site. The following pages will show what can be seen from these locations.
Figure 11. (Left) Location of viewpoints
10
Environmental Impact Assessment Visual Baseline
5.3 Viewpoint 1- Bar House
Figure 12. (Above) Bar House viewpoint
Figure 13. (Above) Map showing viewshed taken from Bar House
From six viewpoints that have been taken this is the highest and furthest away and provides views across a lot of the area. This is clearly displayed in both figures 12 and 13. Although the development would be someway in the distance it would still be very clear to see and would be along a lot of this
11
Environmental Impact Assessment Visual Baseline
5.4 Viewpoint 2- High Green
Figure 14. (Above) High Green viewpoint
Figure 15. (Above) Map showing viewshed taken from High Green
This viewpoint is taken from the outskirts of the village and backs onto the proposed site. The trees that can be seen in Figure 14 provide a relatively good screening from the development, especially in the summer. Visually, this part of the village would be most affected; any houses located behind these would not be impacted.
12
Environmental Impact Assessment Visual Basline
5.5 Viewpoint 3- Hollin Berry Farm
Figure 16. (Above) Hollin Berry Farm viewpoint
Figure 17. (Above) Map showing viewshed taken from Hollin Berry Farm
The land in the foreground in Figure 16 shall remain agricultural; all the other land will be part of the development. This means the view from here, shown in both Figure 16 and 17, will be dominated by the development. This should be a priority when looking at reducing visual impacts.
13
Environmental Impact Assessment Visual Baseline
5.6 Viewpoint 4- Carr House Farm
Figure 18. (Above) Carr House Farm viewpoint
Figure 19. (Above) Map showing viewshed taken from Carr House Farm
This viewpoint looks down over the proposed site so would be greatly affected. Much like Hollin Berry Farm this should be seen as a priority when looking at reducing impacts due to the proportion of the site that can be seen.
14
Environmental Impact Assessment Visual Baseline
5.7 Viewpoint 5- Westwood Country Park
Figure 20. (Above) Westwood Country Park viewpoint
Figure 21. (Above) Map showing viewshed taken from Westwood Country Park
Although this is located close to the site and the landform slopes down towards it, the trees that can be seen in Figure 20 provide a fantastic screen due to their density and height. The impact here would be minimal.
15
Environmental Impact Assessment Visual Baseline
5.8 Viewpoint 6- Storrs Dike
Figure 22. (Above) Stoors Dike viewpoint
Figure 21. (Above) Map showing viewshed taken from Stoors Dike
This is located alongside the Storrs Dike River and looks into the site. Figure 22 clearly shows how the landform gradually rises and then drops off; meaning a large portion of the site is blocked from view. Figure 21 shows how little of the site can be seen. However, the part of the site that is visible is an area that will be totally excavated via a series of cuts.
16
Environmental Impact Assessment Visual Baseline
5.9 ZVI- Zone of Visual Influence
Figure 22. (Above) ZVI map
Buildings Trees Area Viewable From Site
17
A ZVI shows the degree to which a development may be seen taking into account objects and areas of visual interference. Figure 22 shows how various different visual influences would affect the areas viewable from the site. The woodland surrounding the area impedes views into the site. The settlements located south east of the site also block views for the residents. Only those that back onto the site will have views onto the area. Due to the zones of visual influence south east of the site, views onto the site from here are all but eradicated.
Environmental Impact Assessment Landscape Impact Assessment
6
Landscape Impact Assessment 6.1 Potential Landscape Impacts Although the coal mining process is a relatively short term development there are several landscape impacts that need to be addressed. These consist of both short term and long term issues that lie within and outside the site. The current agricultural character of the site, with its undulating landform, could be under threat even after the replacement of soils. One possible reason for this could be down to the soil that is refilled back into the pits. It may lose its quality during the long period of time the mounds are present. The water currently found in the streams on site is known to be of high quality. This could be compromised throughout the development and beyond due to the machinery used on site. This will also have a detrimental impact further downstream. Due to them being culverted during the development, they could also become forgotten about and fall into disregard. A build-up of sediment is also a possibility; this could also have impacts further downstream. Vegetation and habitats are at risk of being lost through the removal of hedgerows and trees; this will be a long term effect from the development. Although the hedgerows could still be replanted it would take time for them to become established within the site. Another habitat that could suffer from long term affects is the diverse, unimproved grassland found in field 5, which could be due to a knock on effect of the potential loss of soil quality.
6.2 Predicted Landscape Impacts The landform on site will suffer the greatest impact, going from rolling farmland to a series of pits and mounds in a short period of time. Visually it will lose its charm and become an eyesore for residents and anyone visiting the area. Visitors include walkers, who will also be impacted from the development due to the removal and modification of certain footpaths, such as the Barnsley Boundary Walk. Although the topography is to be changed back to its original form it will be almost impossible to have it exactly like it was before the development. Due to the removal of the hedgerows the field boundaries will also be removed. These hedges will not be instantly replaced meaning the site will take on a much different look after the development. There is no way of avoiding the removal of certain footpaths, but this will remain a short term impact as they can easily be reinstated. Traffic is a big impact of the development with a large quantity of articulated lorries and other vehicles regularly passing through the area. Current Condition Low - High
*
Fields Figure 23. (Right) Table showing landscape impacts
*
Streams Hedgerows/ Boundaries Footpath
18
*
Trees
* *
Duration Short - Long Term
Magnitude Low - High
Long
High
Long
Low
Short
Low
Medium
Medium
Short
Low
Environmental Impact Assessment Visual Impacts
7
Visual Impacts 7.1 ZTV - Zone of Theoretical Vision
Figure 24. (Above) Zone of Theoretical Vision (ZTV) @1:80,000
The ZTV shows the areas where the site can be seen from. This information can be used to dictate where visual restrictions, such as mounds, could be placed to block views of the development and create maximum satisfaction for residents and visitors. It does however only take landform into account. Figure 24 was created on GIS and shows the areas that will be able to see the site. The heights of the proposed mounds have been included and it shows clearly that it is not just the surrounding area that will be affected visually by the development.
19
Environmental Impact Assessment Visual Impacts
7.2 Receptors
High
Drivers
Residents
Walkers
Figure 25. (Above) Map showing volume of receptors
Low Figure 25 shows the three receptors that are most likely to be impacted by the site and by how much. This consists of residents, drivers, and pedestrians. Residents are the receptors that will be most affected by this development as they will be constantly affected, to varying degrees, throughout the duration of this project. Being that residents are to be the most affected, plans should be aimed at removing, as greatly as possible, the visual impacts on the large residential area south east of the site. Although as mentioned earlier, some residents would have little to no visual impact from the development due to the density of housing. Walkers will most likely be in the area to enjoy surrounding scenery. This will be massively impacted by the development. The Barnsley Boundary Walk that runs through the site will be removed for the entire duration of the site. Drivers are the least visually impacted as they will just be passing through the area. They should still be taken into account, especially in terms of views from the ‘A’ roads surrounding the site as they will have the highest amount of receptors. The distance from the development will also have an effect on the receptor so those closest should be of higher concern.
20
Environmental Impact Assessment Visual Impacts The following visualisations and sections have been taken using ‘phase 4’ (see 2.3 Proposal) of the extraction process, except ‘Viewpoint 5’. The sections have been exaggerated to show clearer the visual impacts of the development.
7.3 Viewpoint 1- Bar House Although there is quite a distance between this viewpoint and the site (Figure 27), the development would still be very clear. Figure 26 shows the degree of impact it would have visually on receptors.
Figure 26. (Above) Visualisation of site from Bar House viewpoint
Figure 27. (Above) Map showing Bar House location and viewshed
Due to the topography leading to the site it would be difficult to screen off the development from this viewpoint.
7.4 Viewpoint 2- High Green This viewpoint looks directly onto the site so any visual impacts would have a greater affect. However, the trees that boder the sight (see Figure 14) eliminate a large proportional of the potential impacts. Figure 29. shows the potentials risks if there trees were not there 165m
Figure 28. (Above) Map showing High Green location and viewshed
120m Figure 29. (Above) Section taken from High Green viewshed
21
Environmental Impact Assessment Visual Impacts
7.5 Viewpoint 3- Hollin Berry Farm
170m
Figure 32. shows the extense of the viusal impacts on Hollin Berry Farm. This is an area that is greater affected and an area that should be considered a priority when limiting visual impacts on surrounding areas.
Figure 30. (Above) Map showing Hollin Berry Farm location and viewshed
Figure 31. shows that the mounds do screen the extraction process in phase 4
145m
Figure 31. (Above) Section taken from Hollin Berry Farm viewshed
Figure 32. (Above) Visualisation of site from Hollin Berry Farm viewpoint
7.6 Viewpoint 4- Carr House Farm This area is greatly affected from the development. Both Figure 34 and Figure 35 show how the excavation at ‘phase 4’ will have large visual impacts on this viewpoint. This should be seen as a high priority area due to the quanitity of receptors (Figure 25). Residents, drivers, and walkers will be impacted from this area of the site. 130m
Figure 33. (Above) Map showing Carr House Farm location and viewshed
Figure 35. (Above) Visualisation of site from Hollin Berry Farm viewpoint
22
155m
Figure 34. (Above) Section taken from Hollin Berry Farm viewshed
Environmental Impact Assessment Visual Impacts 175m
7.7 Viewpoint 5- Westwood Country Park This viewpoint is taken using ‘phase 2’ and is one that will have an impact on walkers and visitors to the area but little affect on other receptors (Figure 25). 145m Figure 37. (Right) Section taken from Westwood Country Park viewshed
Figure 36. (Above) Map showing Westwood Country Park location and viewshed
Figure 38 shows that a large part of the viewpoint is concealed by the wooded area in the foreground. This has a significant affect on the visual impacts. Natural screens like this should be considered in the mitigation process to reduce visual impacts on other viewpoints as well as providing a start to the restoration process.
Figure 38. (Above) Visualisation of site from Westwood Country Park viewpoint
7.8 Viewpoint 6- Stoors Dike 160m
Although there is a small proportion of the site that can be seen its visual impacts are great. When Area A is cut in ‘phase 4’ the whole viewshed will be affected which can be seen in Figure 41. Prior to this phase the visual impacts are small.
140m
Figure 40. (Above) Section taken from Stoors Dike viewshed Figure 39. (Above) Map showing Stoors Dike location and viewshed
Figure 41. (Above) Visualisation of site from Stoors Dike viewpoint
23
Environmental Impact Assessment Mitigation
8
Mitigation 8.1 Introduction Opencast coal mining creates many inevitable visual and landscape impacts. These affects will be influential both on and off site. The mitigation process is vital to reduce these impacts as much as is possible. By preparing the site with the long term in mind, the affects can be greatly reduced. There are several levels of mitigation; Elimination, reduction and compensation.
8.2 Visual Impacts Eliminate - It is important to have plans for the future of the site in advance of the development so that the restoration of the area can be incorporated into the mitigation. This could be done through the planting of trees and hedgerows to create natural screens that will go on to be the basis for the restoration project. Reduce - The mounds are currently a big issue for the visual impacts. These could be regulated so they do not reach a certain height. This could be done by allocating greater surface areas. - Once the mounds have been created they should all be seeded rather than just a select of them. This provides a more attractive screen all around the site. - Another possible way of reducing the visual impacts of the mounds is to position them against tree strips and areas of high vegetation whilst restricting their height so they do not exceed that of the trees. This will at least partially block them from views when at ground level. - They could also be placed in areas with least receptor interaction, such as the lowest level on site. - The height of the proposed screening mounds could be increased to reduce visual impacts for areas that are above the level of the site and look down on it. Compensate - To compensate for the work that will be carried out Cobex have promised to regenerate the site over a 5 year period. This will be in keeping with the objectives of the Community Forest. This will provide an area that residents and many others can enjoy and interact with.
8.3 Landscape Impacts Eliminate - There are several trees that are to be felled in preparation for the development. These trees could be replanted when refilling of the pits is underway. This will aid the site in retaining some of its character. - The extraction of coal and clay from the site will make it impossible to reinstate the current topography as there will be a lack of material to do this. More material is needed to be brought back on site to eliminate this impact. Reduce - Streams could be covered and protection could be improved. This will help in sustaining the high quality water that currently runs through the site. - To reduce impacts it has already been proposed to preserve certain boundary hedgerows, which will help in retaining the sites character. - As well as this they have proposed plans to save the unimproved grassland by removing and storing it in small mounds which will then be integrated back into the site.
24
Environmental Impact Assessment Mitigation
Compensate - If trees are felled and removed from site Cobex could propose to replace but with a higher quantity. This will create more habitats for wildlife. - The potential disruption to soil could have a negative impact on the soil quality. To counteract this high nutrient soil could be brought onto site to replace it. - To compensate for the work that will be carried out Cobex have promised to regenerate the site over a 5 year period which is higher than the usual 2-3 years on most developments. This will be in keeping with the objectives of the Community Forest. This will provide an area that residents and many others can enjoy and interact with.
25
Environmental Impact Assessment Restoration
Restoration
9
The restoration will be based around the objectives of The South Yorkshire Forest. This organisation provides ‘New woodlands, accessible open spaces and outdoor recreation to improve quality of life’ (South Yorkshire Forest, 2007). They also have an emphasis on wildlife and education. This will involve bringing the West Woodland out into the site to create links to the surrounding areas. Doing this will provide wildlife corridors and attract numerous species to habitats where they can thrive. Another way to keep some of the sites character is to replace the eradicated hedgerows and introduce species rich hedgerows. These will be placed in the same positions as they once stood before to recreate the old site boundaries. The unimproved grassland that is currently found on site in field F5 will be re-established. This will then be used to influence large areas on site as a seed mix much like this will be used to replicate this area and keep some of the sites old character. Meadow will also be included. These habitats will be layered to create an eco-tone effect which develops from meadow, through to grassland and hedgerows, scrub and finally, woodland. Once all the pits have been filled the topography will be restored to how it was before development started. Although it will be impossible to replicate exactly, it will be done as accurate as is possible, with one alteration; a pond and wetland area will be created alongside the stream in area A. The excavation will not be totally filled allowing water to collect and create a diverse habitat. Keeping the topography similar to how it was will creates similarities to the old site and residents will generate an instant connection with the area. The streams provide fantastic wildlife corridors. These will be opened up and extra plant species introduced to create new habitats for potential wildlife. These habitats create new residential interactions which were not there before. Natural play will be incorporated into the restoration plan to create recreation for children. This will help develop an interest in the area and encourage them to want to learn about the sites ecological features. The Barnsley Boundary Walk footpath will be reinstated back onto the site. As well as this a wider network of footpaths will be created to allow and encourage the community to use the space and fit in with the wider network. Footpaths will also follow the course of the newly exposed streams onsite. By restoring it in this way it will not only remove almost all evidence of the open coal mine, but will create a space that is improved even from what is was before the development and enhance the ecological value of the site. This will also go a long way to counteracting the effects of the development. Figure 42 (page 27) shows the current proposals for the site following the open cast coal mine development.
Policy Box 11 NPPF - 9. Protecting Green Belt land...92 ‘Community Forests offer valuable opportunities for improving the environment around towns, by upgrading the landscape and providing for recreation and wildlife. An approved Community Forest plan may be a material consideration in preparing development plans and in deciding planning applications. Any development proposals within Community Forests in the Green Belt should be subject to the normal policies controlling development in Green Belts’.
26
Environmental Impact Assessment Restoration
Policy Box 12 NPPF- 13. Facilitating the sustainable use of minerals....143 ‘Local planning authorities should put in place policies to ensure worked land is reclaimed at the earliest opportunity, taking account of aviation safety, and that high quality restoration and aftercare of mineral sites takes place, including for agriculture (safeguarding the long term potential of best and most versatile agricultural land and conserving soil resources), geodiversity, biodiversity, native woodland, the historic environment and recreation’.
Figure 42. (Above) Restoration Plan
Retained Unimproved Grassland
27
Meadow
Extended Unimproved Grassland
Lake/Wetland/ Wet Woodland
Footpath
Environmental Impact Assessment Final Statement Of Unavoidable Impacts
10
Final Statement of Unavoidable Impacts The open cast coal mining proposal is a large scale development and many of its impacts are impossible to eliminate. The visual impacts during the development are unavoidable, but can be minimised if suggestions are taken into account and plans reconsidered. They can be improved significantly when the restoration begins. Effects on the landscape and its character are inevitable and it will be impossible to bring back the site to how it was. These effects can be counteracted if the restoration plan and mitigation plan is considered and taken into account before any work begins. Although the restoration project will take time to become established it will have a positive impact on the site and create a species rich, bio-diverse landscape that the community can enjoy.
28
Environmental Impact Assessment References
11
References Barnsley UDP (2002) Strategy, Policy & Justification. [e-book] Barnsley: Barnsley UDP. [Accessed: 21/01/2013]. Barnsley UDP (2002) Barnsley Urban Community Area. [e-book] Barnsley: [Accessed: 20/01/2013]. Department For Communities And Local Government (2012) National Planning Policy Framework. Department for Communities and Local Government, 1 Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/ uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.pdf [Accessed: 20/01/2013]. European Union (2011) DIRECTIVE 2011/92/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL. Official Journal of the European Union, [Accessed: 19/01/2013]. Land Use Consultants and University Of Sheffield (2002) Barnsley Borough Landscape Character Assessment. [e-book] Sheffield: ECUS. p.137. [Accessed: 21/01/2013]. Land Use Consultants and University Of Sheffield (2007) Barnsley Borough Landscape Character Assessment. [e-book] Sheffield: ECUS. [Accessed: 18/01/2013]. LVIA Guidelines (2013) GUIDELINES FOR LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT. [e-book] [Accessed: 20/01/2013]. Natural England (2007) NCA 37: Yorkshire & Southern Pennines Fringe Key Facts & Data. [e-book] Natural England. www.naturalengland.org.uk [Accessed: 22/01/2013]. South Yorkshire Forest (2002) South Yorkshire Forest Plan. South Yorkshire Forest, 1 Available at: www. syforest.co.uk [Accessed: 25/01/2013]. Syforest.co.uk (2013) South Yorkshire Forest. [online] Available at: http://www.syforest.co.uk/ [Accessed: 21/01/13].
Images Figure 1 Google (2013) Google Maps. [image online] Available at: http://maps.google.co.uk/ maps?hl=en&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.41524429,d.d2k&biw=1680&bih=930&wr apid=tlif135946850627310&q=howbrook&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=0x48797be7deb3b6e 9:0xa52e22e255ab7b10,Howbrook,+South+Yorkshire&gl=uk&sa=X&ei=3tcHUZemA5Kr0AW4_ YGIBw&ved=0CJMBELYD [Accessed: 20/01/2013]. Figure 2 National England (2007) Yorkshire and the Humber National Character Area map. [image online] Available at: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/nca/yorkshumber.aspx [Accessed: 21/01/2013]. Figure 3 Unknown. (2002) Barnsley Borough Landscape Character Assessment. [e-book] Sheffield: ECUS. p.137. [Accessed: 21/01/2013].
29