Borth Coast Defence Scheme - IEMA - Home Statement Borth Coast Defence Scheme 5037097-830/70/DG/046 iii CMS Convention on Migratory Species Coastal Protection A scheme designed to

Borth Coast Defence

Scheme

Environmental Statement

Non-Technical Summary

Borth Coast Defence Scheme

5037097-830/70/DG/046



28 June 2010

Notice

This report was produced by Atkins for Ceredigion County Council for the specific purpose of the Borth Coast Defence Scheme.

This report may not be used by any person other than Ceredigion County Council without Ceredigion County Council’s express permission. In any event, Atkins accepts no liability for any costs, liabilities or losses arising as a result of the use of or reliance upon the contents of this report by any person other than Ceredigion County Council.

Atkins Limited

Document History

JOB NUMBER: 5037097-830 DOCUMENT REF: 5037097-830/62/DG/019

3 For Client CMcD KW NC DF 28 Jun 2010

2 External Review CMcD KW NC DF

1 Internal Review CMcD KW NC DF

Revision Purpose Description Originated Checked Reviewed Authorised Date


i

5037097-830/70/DG/046

Contents Section Page

Glossary of Terms ii

Non-Technical Summary 1



5037097-830/70/DG/046

ii

Glossary of Terms

Term Meaning / Definition

Accreting Occurrence of ‘accretion’ (see below)

Accretion The accumulation of sediments from any source, representing an excess of deposition over erosion

AD Anno Domini

AEWA African Eurasian Water bird Agreement (part of the CMS)

AOD Above Ordnance Datum - standard land height reference level used by Ordnance Survey based on mean sea level at Newlyn, Cornwall

Aeolian Processes

Processes pertaining to the activity of the winds and more specifically, to the winds' ability to shape the surface of the Earth

Appropriate Assessment The detailed consideration of the implications for a European Protected Site, with respect to the site’s Conservation Objectives. This is to determine whether there will be any adverse effects on the integrity of the site. Part of the Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA)

ATC Automatic Traffic Counter

BAP Biodiversity Action Plan – strategic framework for dealing with biodiversity conservation in the UK

Beach Nourishment The importation of material to add to existing natural sediment on a beach

BGS British Geological Society

Biotope An area of uniform environmental conditions providing a living place for a specific assemblage of plants and animals

Blue Flag Award A voluntary quality award for beaches and marinas adhering to criteria covering environmental education and information, water quality, environmental management and safety and services

BP Before present

Breakwater A marine structure, usually constructed of rock designed to dissipate wave energy and provide protection to the beach or harbour in its lee.

Bunded Area Area surrounded by a bund designed to retain fluids in the event of a spillage or leakage

Cadw The Welsh Assembly Government's historic environment division

CCC Ceredigion County Council

CCW Countryside Council for Wales – the statutory nature conservation body in Wales

CD Chart Datum - the theoretical level of water in any tidal area during the lowest astronomical tide (LAT)

CDM Construction Design Management

CEC Crown Estate Commission – organisation responsible for managing ‘Crown Land’ (see below)

CEMP Construction Environment Management Plan

CES Civil Engineering Solutions



5037097-830/70/DG/046

iii

CMS Convention on Migratory Species

Coastal Protection A scheme designed to protect the coastline from erosion or encroachment by the sea

Coastal Defence Protection of the coast against erosion and flooding

Coastal Processes The action of natural forces on the shoreline and nearshore area

Competent Authorities Person or organization that has the legally delegated or invested authority, capacity, or power to perform a designated function.

CPA Coast Protection Act 1949

CRoW Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000

Crown Land Land owned by the monarchy

DAT Dyfed Archaeological Trust

DCWW Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water

DEFRA Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

DHPW Department of Highways, Property and Works (within CCC)

DoE Department of Environment

Downdrift In the direction of the net longshore transport of beach material

d50 The median particle size of sediment (in a sample on in an area)

EAP Environmental Action Plan

EAW Environment Agency Wales

EHO Environmental Health Officer

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment - the process of considering the effect of a proposal on the environment

EMS European Marine Site - refers to those marine areas of both SACs and SPAs, which are protected under the EC Habitats and Birds Directives

Erosion The detachment of material from the earth’s surface by the agents of water, wind and ice

ES Environmental Statement - the report on the EIA process

EU European Union

EC Bathing Water Directive (76/160/EEC)

Sets limits for chemical, physical and microbial parameters to ensure good bathing water quality in coastal and inland waters

EU Birds Directive (79/409/EEC)

Aims to protect all European wild birds and the habitats of listed species, in particular through the designation of Special Protection Areas (SPAs)

EU Convergence Funding Grants available to aid the regeneration of an area and to help the region’s transformation into a sustainable and competitive economy by investing in the knowledge economy and helping new and existing businesses to grow

EU Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC)

Aims to protect species and habitats which are considered to be of European interest and are listed in the Directive’s Annexes

European designated sites Sites designated under the EU Habitats and Birds Directives

Faecal Coliforms Group of bacteria, including the genera that originate in faeces as well as those not of faecal origin. The presence of faecal coliforms in aquatic environments may indicate that the water has been contaminated with the



5037097-830/70/DG/046

iv

faecal material of man or other animals

Fauna Animals

FCA Flood Consequence Assessment

FCDPAG Flood and Coastal Defence Project Appraisal Guidance

FEE Foundation for Environmental Education

FEPA Food and Environment Protection Act 1985

Fines Particles of diameter less than 0.063mm (silt and clay)

Flora Plants

Foreshore The section of the coastline between the low and high water mark

FRA Flood Risk Assessment

Frontage The extent of land abutting the beach

FSC Forest Stewardship Council - independent, non-governmental, not-for-profit organisation established to promote the responsible management of the world’s forests

GCR Geological Conservation Review

Geotextile Layer Synthetic material commonly placed beneath rock structures prior to construction to reduce future subsidence through the movement of sediment up through the structure

Glacial Till A mixture of fine and coarse rock debris deposited by a glacier

Groyne A low barrier built out from the coast into the sea, to reduce longshore drift

Groyne Field Series of groynes acting together to protect a section of beach.

HAT Highest Astronomical Tide – the highest levels which can be predicted to occur under average meteorological conditions and under any combination of astronomical conditions

HEM Historic Environment Map

HGV Heavy Goods Vehicle – vehicles over 3,500kg in weight

Hinterland The land behind the coast

Hold the Line The process of retaining the existing line of the shore / river bank by carrying out maintenance, repairs and replacement of defences, as necessary

Holocene The geological epoch which began approximately 11,700 years ago and according to traditional geological thinking continues today

HRA Habitats Regulations Assessment – the process by which potential impacts and alternatives to a proposed plan or project are assessed to determine the possible effect on European Protected Sites.

Intertidal Zone or Foreshore The area between Lowest Astronomical Tide and Highest Astronomical Tide

JNCC Joint Nature Conservation Committee

KWT Keep Wales Tidy – Welsh environmental charity focussing on waste, cleanliness and tidiness. KWT administers and operates the Blue Flag Award in Wales

Longshore Transport Movement of beach sediment parallel to the shore, within the surf zone. Also called Longshore Drift



5037097-830/70/DG/046

v

LAT Lowest Astronomical Tide - the lowest levels which can be predicted to occur under average meteorological conditions and under any combination of astronomical conditions

LVIA Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment - the process of assessing the impact of a scheme on the existing visual landscape

Managed Realignment / Managed Retreat

The process of moving or enabling the line of the shore / river bank landward from its current position. The process can be used to create / re-create areas of habitat that help in flood and erosion management.

MCA Maritime Coastguard Agency

MCCIP Marine Climate Change Impacts Partnership

MCU Marine Consents Unit (part of the Welsh Assembly Government) – responsible for administering applications for FEPA and CPA licences in Wales from 1 April 2010

MFA Marine and Fisheries Agency – responsible for administering applications for FEPA and CPA licences in England and in Wales up until the MCU takes over responsibility (see MCU)

MHW Mean High Water - highest average level water reaches on an outgoing tide

MHWS Mean High Water Springs – the average level of high water during the spring tide cycle

MLW Mean Low Water – lowest average level water reaches on an outgoing tide

MLWS Mean Low Water Springs – the average level of low water during the spring tide cycle

MNCR Marine Nature Conservation Review

MPR Multi-Purpose Reef – a reef created / designed to achieve several aims – in the case of Borth, to improve coastal flood defence and improve surfing conditions

Natura 2000 The network of protected sites designated under the EU Birds and Habitats Directives

NERC Natural Environment Research Council

NNR National Nature Reserve

NWNWSFC North Western and North Wales Sea Fisheries Committee

NSO National Statistics Online

OCVs Operational Construction Vehicles

OPSI Office of Public Sector Information

OS Ordnance Survey

Overtopping Passing of water over the top of a structure as a result of wave action, seawater spray or the still water level exceeding the crest level

PAR Project Appraisal Report

Pers. Comm. Personal Communication

Piling A column of wood, steel or concrete that is driven into the ground to provide support for a structure

PPG Planning Policy Guidance



5037097-830/70/DG/046

vi

PPS Planning Policy Statement

PRoW Public Rights of Way

Ramsar Convention Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, is an intergovernmental treaty that provides the framework for national action and international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources

RCAHMW Royal Commission to the Ancient and Historic Monuments of Wales

Resilience Actions Actions taken to improve the ability of a community to cope with an event, risk or uncertainty. In this case, to better cope with the consequences of flooding, erosion and climate change.

Revetment Shore protection structure constructed of rock laid at a determined slope angle. Voids within the structure dissipate wave energy

RFC Ratio of Flow to Capacity – a measure of a road junction’s capacity. The theoretical capacity of a junction is taken at an RFC value of 1.0. The design capacity is taken at an RFC value of 0.85 (i.e. 85% of the theoretical capacity), with values in excess of these normally forecasting operational problems.

RIB Rigid Inflatable Boat – a lightweight, generally small, boat constructed of a solid, shaped hull and flexible, inflatable tubes forming a collar around the top (gunwales),which enable the vessel to maintain buoyancy even during bad weather. Often used by emergency rescue services. Also known as a rigid-hulled inflatable boat (RHIB).

RNLI Royal National Lifeboat Institute

Rock Armour Large rocks placed in order to provide a protective layer

Rock Berm A narrow ledge or mound of rock

RSPB Royal Society for the Protection of Birds

SAC Special Area of Conservation – area designated under the Habitats Directive and provide rare and vulnerable animals, plants and habitats with increased protection and management

SAM Scheduled Ancient Monument

Sand Particles/grains of diameter between 0.063mm and 2mm

Sea Level Rise The long term upward trend in mean sea level resulting from a combination of local or regional geological movements (rise or fall of land) and global climate change

Sediment Cell A length of coastline and its associated near shore area within which the movement of coarse sediment (sand and shingle) is largely self contained. Interruptions to the movement of sand and shingle within one cell should not affect beaches in an adjacent sediment cell

Sheet Piling A type of retaining wall achieved by driving interlocking sheets of steel into the ground

Shingle Stone diameter between 2mm and 75mm, also called gravel.

SI Statutory Instrument – a type of secondary legislation (law)

Slipway A sloping surface, leading down to the shore from which ships/boats are launched

SMP1 Shoreline Management Plan - sets the policy for coastal management (1st

Generation) – provides a large-scale assessment of the risks associated with coastal processes and presents a long term policy framework to reduce these risks to people and the developed, historic and natural



5037097-830/70/DG/046

vii

environment in a sustainable manner

SMP2 Shoreline Management Plan Review - sets the policy for coastal management (2

nd Generation) – see ‘SMP1’ above

SNP Snowdonia National Park

SNPA Snowdonia National Park Authority

SPA Special Protection Area – area designated under the Birds Directive to help protect and manage areas which are important for rare and vulnerable birds because they use them for breeding, feeding, wintering or migration

Specific Asset Assessment An evaluation of the sea defences in place in a particular area

SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest – an area that has been notified as being of biological or geological importance under the Wildlife and Countryside Act (WCA) 1981

Swash Aligned Land orientated parallel to prevailing waves

TA Traffic Assessment

Terminal Groyne The groyne at the end of a series of groynes. This will mark the end of groyne field in the downdrift direction

TIA Traffic Impact Assessment - a process of determining the effect of a proposal on the existing volume of traffic

Toe The relatively small mound usually constructed of rock armour to support an armour layer, buried under the existing ground level

UDP Unitary Development Plan – the Local Authority adopted plan that sets out priorities and proposals for development and any conditions that may be need to be met

UKBAP UK Biodiversity Action Plan

UKCIP United Kingdom Climate Impacts Programme

UKCP09 United Kingdom Climate Projections 2009

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

UKHO United Kingdom Hydrographic Office

WAG Welsh Assembly Government

WCA Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981

WEFO Welsh European Funding Office

ZVI Zone of Visual Influence - geographical extent to which the development proposals are visible from surrounding areas



5037097-830/70/DG/046

1

Non-Technical Summary

Introduction

Ceredigion County Council (CCC) intends to apply for planning permission and marine consents

to construct a coastal defence scheme at Borth, in Ceredigion, west Wales under the following

legislation:

• Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) (for work above mean low water)

• Food and Environmental Protection Act 1985 (FEPA) (for work below mean high water

springs)

• Coast Protection Act 1949 (CPA) (for work below mean high water springs)

The Scheme comprises the following structures along the coast from Lower Borth to Ynyslas:

• A new offshore Multi Purpose Reef (MPR) at Lower Borth

• 4 x 60m long rock groynes along the Lower Borth village frontage

• 6 x new rock breakwaters along the Lower Borth village frontage

• 25 x 40m long new rock groynes along the golf course and Ynyslas frontage

• Removal of existing timber groynes – to be removed as new rock groynes and

breakwaters are constructed

• Beach nourishment with shingle and sand along the whole Borth to Ynyslas frontage

Initially, CCC intends to apply for planning permission and marine consents for the sections of the

Scheme along the Lower Borth village frontage. Further applications will need to be made for the

remaining parts, as and when they are planned to be built. The whole Scheme will be constructed

in phases over a 15+ year period.

Assessment Requirements and Legal Considerations

The planning and marine consent applications above fall within the remit of legislation that

considers the need for any scheme to undergo an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) prior

to the applications being submitted, namely:

• Town & Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales)

Regulations 1999 (SI1999/293) as amended

• Marine Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2007 (SI2007/1518)

CCC appointed Atkins in 2009 to undertake the EIA. This document is the Environmental

Statement (ES), prepared as part of the EIA process, in accordance with the above Regulations,

to accompany both the planning application and FEPA/CPA application for the Scheme, both of

which will be prepared by Royal Haskoning, the appointed design consultant for the Scheme.

Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA)

There are a number of sites in or near the proposed Scheme that are protected under the

European Habitats (92/43/EEC) and Birds (79/409/EEC) Directives and the Ramsar Convention

on Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar sites).



5037097-830/70/DG/046

2

The Habitats and Birds Directives require ‘competent authorities’ to undertake an ‘appropriate

assessment’ of plans, projects and strategies that are not directly connected to the management

of the site itself and that may have a significant effect on the site. This ‘appropriate assessment’ is

part of a process known as a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA). It is the responsibility of

the competent authority / authorities to undertake the HRA. For this Scheme, the competent

authorities are CCC, in respect of the planning permission and Welsh Ministers (via the Welsh

Assembly Government) in respect of the marine consents. Information to inform a HRA has been

included within the ES. In particular, such information is included within Sections 6.3, 6.4, 7, 8

and Appendices C and D.

Other Consents

The Crown Estate Commission (CEC) manages much of the foreshore and seabed on behalf of

the Crown and issues leases, licences and consents for activities and developments on Crown

Land. CCC has a long-term lease from the CEC for the Borth frontage foreshore and has notified

CEC of the intention to carry out works within the area of their lease. CCC will write to the CEC to

apprise them of the proposed changes once the detailed design has been finalised.

The Environment Agency Wales (EAW) has confirmed that the Scheme itself does not require

their formal consent as Flood Defence Byelaw 25 specifically exempts Local Authorities from the

need to apply for consent for work on sea defence structures. A consent may be needed if works

are to take place to or within 7m of the Glan Wern outfall, however, it is not anticipated that works

will need to take place within 7m of this watercourse.

Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) consent for works within Sites of Special Scientific Interest

(SSSIs), which are not covered by planning permission, and assent to issue planning permission

or carry out other works that could affect SSSIs under the Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW)

Act are also required for the Scheme.

Background to the Scheme

Borth is a small seaside village on the west coast of Wales in the county of Ceredigion. It is

located within Cardigan Bay, approximately 4km south of the Dyfi Estuary. The beach at Borth

consists of a wide, gently sloping sandy beach backed by a steep shingle ridge. It extends

northwards from the cliffs of Craig y Delyn at the south end of Lower Borth to the sand dunes

north of Ynyslas, eventually terminating as a spit at the mouth of the Dyfi Estuary. The village is

characterised by residential properties, cafes, pubs and bed and breakfast tourist accommodation.

There are approximately 100 houses / small businesses built on the beach crest itself at the

southern end of the village.

There are a number of coast defence structures along the length of the beach. The defences

have been constructed, repaired and added to since the 1930s, when the first timber groynes

were put in place. The current defences are nearing the end of their useful life and put Borth at

risk from a breach of the shingle ridge and from the effects of overtopping flooding, particularly

during storm events. Flooding of the High Street in Lower Borth and the golf course from wave

overtopping is frequent during winter storms. The properties directly on the beach crest are

particularly vulnerable and all have developed ad-hoc private demountable defences. During

more severe storms, shingle can be washed into the village. The frequency and severity of storm

events are expected to increase over time as a result of climate change.

Without any improvements to the current defences, continued losses of beach material will

increase, lowering the beach levels and enabling larger waves to come closer inshore, resulting in

more frequent and widespread flooding of the village from both overtopping and potentially by

breaching through the progressively weakening shingle ridge.



5037097-830/70/DG/046

3

Scheme Aims and Objectives

The Borth Strategic Appraisal Report (Royal Haskoning, 2006) set a number of objectives for any

coastal defence scheme in Borth:

• To reduce the risk of over overtopping, breaching and associated damage to Lower

Borth by increasing the standard of defence to 1:100. This means that the Scheme will

afford protection to an event that has 1% chance of occurring at any time.

• To maintain and, if possible, improve the high amenity, social and recreational value of

the area, particularly the surfing amenity

• To minimise adverse potential impacts upon the natural environment of the area and

maximise opportunities for environmental enhancement

The Borth Outline Design Report (Royal Haskoning, 2008) considers that the primary means of

achieving the standard of defences is by maintaining a healthy shingle ridge in front of the hard

defences (breastwork). The crest level of the breastwork also controls the volume of water

overtopping the defences.

The Scheme is designed to help manage the risks along the length of the Borth-Ynyslas frontage

over the next 20-50 years. This is consistent with the existing Shoreline Management Plan

(SMP1) policies of ‘hold the line’ along these stretches of coast (see Section 5).

The Scheme alone will not eliminate the risks from flooding and erosion. Other community

resilience actions to help the community adapt to climate change and reduce the impacts of

flooding and erosion to the people and environment of Borth will also be needed. A long-term

strategy for the whole Borth to Ynyslas frontage will need to be considered. These other actions

are part of WAG’s New Approaches programme (WAG, 2007a & 2007b) to managing all sources

of flooding in Wales and the development of the Shoreline Management Plan Review (SMP2).

Consideration of Alternatives

Over the last ten years, CCC has commissioned a number of studies to develop a coastal defence

scheme for Borth. The Borth Strategic Appraisal Report (Royal Haskoning, 2006) considered a

range of alternative schemes on three strategic levels:

• Level 1 – Do nothing / do minimum (2 options)

• Level 2 – Continue with the current standard of defence (2 options)

• Level 3 – Improve defences (7 options)

All these options consider the whole frontage from Lower Borth to Ynyslas where defences

currently exist. Five of the options were initially rejected and the remaining six underwent Multi

Criteria Analysis (MCA), scoring each option against the following criteria:

• Technical

• Economics

• Amenity

• Environment

• Operation and maintenance

• Health and safety

• Constructability

• Planning acceptability



5037097-830/70/DG/046

4

The Borth Strategic Appraisal Report (Royal Haskoning, 2006) concluded that the preferred option

to take forward should be Option 9A, which incorporated the construction of rock control structures

and an offshore reef with beach nourishment along the Lower Borth frontage as well as the

replacement of the timber groynes along the golf course and Ynyslas frontages with rock groynes

supported by beach nourishment. See Sections 2.2 – 2.5 for more detail.

This option was preferred as it offers the potential to enhance the amenity value of the area, over

and above the other options by improving the surfing amenity of the Borth beach. Furthermore, it

requires fewer large rock structures on the beach in front of the village. The report did, however,

highlight the uncertainties concerning the costs of maintenance to the reef structure and the

greater overall cost of Option 9A, compared to other similar options (Options 9 and 10).

In 2008 the preferred scheme (Option 9A) was submitted to WAG and approval was gained to

develop the scheme to the outline design stage. In 2009, CCC was successful in their application

for EU Convergence Funding to help fund the development, delivery and construction of Phase 1

of the Scheme, beginning in 2010.

Atkins Ltd. have been appointed by CCC to undertake the environmental assessments needed to

support the planning and marine consent applications needed for the entire Scheme. Royal

Haskoning have been appointed by CCC to undertake the detailed design of Phase 1.

Later phases of the Scheme are anticipated to be constructed in three further phases in 5, 10, and

15 years.

Indicative Scheme Phasing

Phase Year Location Elements

Phase 1 0 +

(2010)

Lower Borth • New offshore Multi Purpose Artificial Reef (MPR)

• 2 x 60m long rock groynes

• 2 x rock breakwaters

• Removal of existing timber groynes

• Beach nourishment with shingle and sand

Phase 2 5 + Borth and Golf Club • 4 x rock breakwaters



• Removal of existing groynes


Phase 3 10 + Golf Course • Removal of existing timber groynes



Phase 4 15 + Golf Course and

Ynyslas

• Removal of existing timber groynes



The Scheme

The scheme will be constructed in a number of phases over the next 15+ years. The overall

layout of the Scheme is shown in the figure below (taken from Royal Haskoning, 2008). The EIA

has been undertaken based on the outline design. Should the Scheme be successful in gaining

the required planning application and marine consents, dimensions and quantities will be

determined in detail as part of the detailed design process. The detailed design will be informed

by physical modelling and value engineering undertaken by the designer and contractor appointed

to undertake construction. See Section 3.1 for more detail on the design.



5037097-830/70/DG/046

5

Scheme layout (Source: Borth Coast Protection Scheme Outline Design Report, Royal Haskoning, 2008)


Borth Coast Defence Scheme 6 5037097-830/70/DG/046

The construction methodology (and associated potential impacts) will be partly determined by the

preferred delivery option for materials. The ES considers the potential impacts associated with

the possibility of delivery either by sea or by road. Where there are differences in the approach or

impacts associated with the different delivery options, they are clearly identified based on the

following options:

• Delivery Option A – delivery of all construction materials by sea. Only plant, site

compound structures and labour would be delivered by road.

• Delivery Option B – delivery of all materials by road.

Methods, impacts or mitigation actions that are not assigned to either Delivery Option A or

Delivery Option B are common to both options. Under both options, suitable vehicle access

routes across the beach to/from the slipway will be agreed between the contractor and CCC /

CCW to reduce the impact of vehicles to the intertidal area to reduce impacts to the geological

features and the intertidal ecology on the beach (see Sections 6.3 and 6.4). In order to reduce

the noise to local residents in proximity of the works, working hours will be agreed with CCC

EHOs (see Sections 6.7). A Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) has been undertaken to assess the

potential impacts on the local road network of Delivery Option B (see Section 6.5).

The construction methodology will be agreed in consultation with CCC Planning, CCW and EAW

as part of the procurement process. CCC will need to be assured that every possible measure

(within the limits of what is economically and operationally viable) has been taken to minimise

disruption to locals and tourists.

Multi Purpose Reef (MPR)

The MPR would be constructed in Phase 1 and located around 300 - 400m offshore of Lower

Borth. It would comprise two arms – a northern and a southern arm – connected by a narrower

‘joiner’. The configuration of the MPR is designed to reduce wave action reaching the shore

behind the reef, maintaining the salient and shingle ridge, which act as the primary defence for the

village. Additionally, the shape should improve the consistency and quality of the surf around the

reef at certain states of the tide.

The MPR could be constructed in two ways:

1. Using large, sand-filled geotextile ‘bags’ placed on the seabed. It is estimated that

approximately 20,000 m3 sand would be needed to construct the MPR. The source of

material has not yet been determined, although it is likely that a licensed marine source

would be used.

2. Large rocks, similar to those used for the rock groynes and rock breakwaters (see below).

It is estimated that approximately 20,000 m3 of rocks (33,000 tonnes) ranging in size from

0.5 tonnes to 6 tonnes would be needed to construct the MPR.

If the MPR were to be constructed of sand filled geotextile bags, the number of bags required

would depend on the size of the bags used. Placing and filling the bags would require the use of

plant including a barge, dive vessel, digger, mooring blocks, pumps, pipelines and a team of

approximately 20 - 25 men (including a dive team, skipper, deck hand, pump team, and fabrication

crew).

Constructing the MPR from rock would require the rock to be placed on the seabed by excavators

to build up the required shape of the MPR. This could be achieved in a number of ways e.g. plant

could operate in the sea in shallow water, from a floating platform / barge, or from a temporary

causeway constructed of rock / shingle that will later be used for other elements of the Scheme.

The MPR will require additional monitoring above that which is currently undertaken to ensure that

it is functioning as it should and that no movement or damage to the reef has taken place.



There is currently no sub-tidal monitoring at Borth, although topographic surveys of the beach are

undertaken regularly throughout the year. Should the MPR be made of sand filled geotextile

bags, it is suggested that diver inspections are carried out annually for the first 10 years to assess

the overall structural integrity and the condition of the geotextile bags. See Section 3.1 for more

detail on the design and construction of the MPR.

Rock Groynes

29 new rock groynes are proposed along the Borth and Ynyslas frontage to control the longshore

movement of shingle and help control the shape of the beach by holding the shingle against the

timber breastwork. The rock groynes will replace the existing timber groynes, which currently

control the movement of shingle. Rock groynes would be constructed in a phased manner:

• Phase 1 – 2 x 60m long rock groynes at Lower Borth

• Future Phases – 2 x 60m long rock groynes along the remaining village frontage + 24 x

40m long rock groynes along the golf course and Ynyslas frontages

The rock groynes would be constructed from up to 6 tonne armour rocks, with the lowest layer of

rock below the level of the beach. Each 60m long rock groyne would have a footprint of around

500m2 and require approximately 1,200m

3 rock (2,000 tonnes). Each 40m long rock groyne would

have a footprint of around 325m2 and require approximately 800m

3 rock (1,400 tonnes). See

Section 3.1 for more detail on the design and construction of the rock groynes.

Rock Breakwaters

Six rock breakwaters would be constructed in a phased manner:

• Phase 1 - 2 rock breakwaters at Lower Borth

• Future Phases – 4 rock breakwaters along the remaining village frontage

The rock breakwaters would work with the rock groynes to control the longshore movement of

shingle and hold the shingle against the timber breastwork.

The rock breakwaters would be asymmetric open V-shaped structures located approximately 50m

from the top of the beach (upper timber breastwork). Spacing between the rock breakwaters and

adjacent rock groynes will be approximately 150m. The rock breakwaters would be constructed

from up to 6 tonne armour rocks. The volume of rock needed for each rock breakwater is

approximately 1,700m3 (2,800 tonnes). The footprint area of each rock breakwaters would be

approximately 570m2. See Section 3.1 for more detail on the design and construction of the rock

breakwaters.

Beach Nourishment

Beach nourishment would take place along most of the Borth to Ynyslas frontage. Shingle will be

placed on the beach to create a stable beach within the embayments formed by the rock

structures and/or the reef. Along the village frontage, the aim is to create and sustain a shingle

berm with a minimum crest width of 10m.

During Phase 1, approximately 5,000m3 sand (approximately 8,000 tonnes) and 5,000m

3 shingle

(approximately 9,000 tonnes) will be used to form the salient behind the MPR, while 70,000m3

shingle (approximately 126,000 tonnes) will be added to the shingle berm. Approximately

40,000m3 shingle (approximately 72,000 tonnes) will also be used to create a shingle berm to

control wave overtopping along the frontage in future phases.



The material imported for beach nourishment will be of a similar size grading and character

(mixture of sand/shingle/cobble) and colour to the existing sediment. No sources of sand or

shingle have yet been identified, although it is likely that the sand will come from a licensed

marine source. See Section 3.1 for more detail on the use of beach nourishment.

Removal of Existing Timber Groynes

The timber groynes would be removed and replaced by the 29 rock groynes and 6 rock

breakwaters. The existing timber groynes will be progressively removed as and when they are

replaced by new works. The phasing of the works will be determined by the deterioration of the

current sea defences (timber groynes and breastwork). This will ensure that structures to control

the movement of shingle will remain in place along the whole frontage as the Scheme progresses.

All waste materials will be removed and disposed of at a licensed waste site by a licensed waste

carrier. See Section 3.1 for more detail on the removal of the timber groynes.

Possible Managed Realignment at Ynyslas

There is potential to create an area of managed realignment at Ynyslas during later stages of the

Scheme (Phase 4). This could be achieved by allowing the most northerly groynes and

associated breastwork to fail over time (whilst measures to ensure that public Health and Safety is

protected) and the shoreline to retreat inland. Construction of a set back defence could be

required.

The decision on whether or not managed realignment will take place in this area will not be made

for several years and will depend on a number of factors, such as the Shoreline Management Plan

Review policy for the area (currently being developed), how the parts of the Scheme that will have

already been constructed are affecting the shoreline and climate change effects. Any future area

of managed realignment will need to be planned and designed in detail and will be subject to a

more detailed EIA. The ES only considers this option at a high level. See Section 3.1 for more

detail on the possibility of managed realignment at Ynyslas.

Decommissioning

This ES also considers the impacts of decommissioning the Scheme at a high level. For the

purposes of assessing the potential impacts, it is assumed that the full Scheme would be

removed. A detailed impact assessment (and potentially a HRA) may be required prior to any

decommissioning works taking place, based on the specific decommissioning actions planned.

Construction Schedule

Phase 1 will begin in late summer/ early autumn 2010 and for grant funding reasons must be

substantially complete by the end of March 2011. A 20 week construction period is anticipated.

The MPR could be constructed out of sand bags or rock. The construction of the sand bag MPR

will require the use of floating plant and divers. Late autumn and winter sea conditions in Wales

make it unsafe to undertake diving operations later than the end of September. Construction of a

sand bag MPR is not likely to start until spring 2011. The construction of the rock groynes,

detached rock breakwaters and rock MPR could commence in late summer / early autumn 2010

and continue over the winter. Beach nourishment would take place following construction of the

MPR, rock groynes and rock breakwaters.

Future phases will take place as and when the existing defence structures deteriorate and need

replacing. It has been necessary to make some assumptions regarding the future phasing of the

works for the purpose of the EIA.



Site Compounds

Site compounds for the construction works have not been finally agreed at this stage. It is likely

that the contractors will make use of some of the existing parking areas available in Borth as site

and / or storage compounds.

Consultation

The development of the proposed Scheme has taken place over several years, with the

involvement of various stakeholders. To take forward the preferred option, CCC formed a

Working Group, comprising the following representatives:

• County Councillor for Borth

• CCC Dept. of Highways, Property and Works (DHPW) – lead department with

responsibility for taking forward the preferred Scheme

• CCC Community Regeneration Officer

• CCC Procurement

• CCC Planning

• CCC Legal

• Environment Agency Wales (EAW)

• Countryside Council for Wales (CCW)

• Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) Flood and Coastal Defence

• Welsh European Funding Agency (WEFO)

The need to undertake an EIA and HRA was discussed and agreed by the Working Group. CCC

DPHW officers held a pre-scoping meeting with representatives from CCW and EAW on 27 May

2009 to discuss the content of the ES and produced a pre-scoping memorandum outlining issues

discussed at the meeting.

Consultation was undertaken to produce an Environmental Scoping Report, which was sent as

part of a formal request for a Scoping Opinion made to CCC Planning and the Marine and

Fisheries Agency (MFA) by Atkins on behalf of CCC on 22 December 2009. Responses were

received from CCC Planning on 23 February 2010 and from the MFA on 19 March 2010. Atkins

also sent a copy of the Scoping Report to over a dozen other consultees. A public meeting was

also held in the Borth Community Centre on 4 December 2009.

The responses, comments and information obtained through these consultations have been used

to inform the baseline understanding and assessment of impacts undertaken in this ES. See

Section 4 and Appendix B for more information on the consultation process and comments

raised.

The Planning Policy Context

A review of the national, regional and local planning policy documents and other strategies

determined that the Scheme is consistent with national policy by aiming to protect the local

communities of Lower Borth and Ynyslas from the unavoidable consequences of climate change.

The Scheme is also consistent with the current Shoreline Management Plan policy of Hold the

Line. See Section 5 for more information.



Impact Assessment

Scope of the ES

The scope of the EIA has been determined by seeking a formal Scoping Opinion from CCC

Planning and the MFA (which has liaised with the Welsh Assembly Government’s Marine

Consents Unit - WAG MCU). As a result of the scoping process, ‘Air Quality’ and ‘Vibration’ were

scoped out of the EIA. . The following receptors have been included within the scope of this ES.

• Geology, Geomorphology and Coastal Processes – including sediment transport,

shoreline evolution, impacts on adjacent stretches of coast and coastal defences

• Ecology – including impacts on European designated sites and species

• Traffic and Transport – including impacts of delivery of materials by sea (Delivery Option

A) and delivery of materials by road (Delivery Option B)

• Water and Sediment Quality

• Noise

• Landscape, Seascape and Visual Amenity

• Tourism and Recreation

• Fishing – including impacts on commercial and recreational fishing

• Historic Environment

• Inter-relationship between the above and in-combination with other projects

An assessment of the impacts of the proposed development on each of the receptors listed above

has been carried out, considering the impacts against the baseline conditions.

The potential impacts of future phases have also been considered at a high level to enable the

competent authorities to make an initial assessment of the potential impacts of the entire Scheme

early on in the Scheme’s development process. CCW have indicated that further EIAs are likely

to be needed as and when future phases are planned. The potential impacts of decommissioning

the whole Scheme have also been considered in general.

The assessment of the magnitude of effects has been carried out using published data,

professional judgement and numerical modelling, where appropriate. The assessment considers

both adverse and beneficial impacts. ‘Significant effects’ are considered to be those identified as

‘minor’, ‘moderate’ or ‘major’ and either ‘adverse’ or ‘beneficial’. Impacts that have been identified

as ‘negligible’ are not considered to be significant.

Where adverse impacts have been identified, mitigation measures are proposed to minimise or

compensate for these impacts. Mitigation seeks to eliminate or reduce the impact to an

acceptable level. Any remaining impacts following mitigation measures (residual impacts) are

identified and highlighted in bold in the text. Section 7 contains a summary of the residual

impacts and conclusions of the assessment. Section 8 set out an Environmental Action Plan

(EAP) summarising the mitigation measures, and any other actions which could be required to

ensure that all issues identified within this EIA are addressed.

Coastal Processes

Phase 1 construction impacts to Geology

The majority of the construction work in Phase 1 will take place on land outside of the protected

sites (SSSI’s and GCR sites). There are unlikely to be any impacts on these sites or their features

(negligible).



Excavation works needed to remove the timber groynes and to construct the new rock structures

may result in the damage and permanent loss of the submerged peat forest in these areas.

Movement of plant across the beach in areas where the submerged peat beds are exposed could

also result in damage to these areas. The amount of excavation that takes place and the tracking

of plant across the beach should be kept to a minimum to limit impacts to the peat beds. Vehicles

should avoid tracking across areas where peat beds are exposed. Where peat beds are exposed,

these should first be covered with protective matting or sand before vehicles are permitted to

cross them, to reduce any compression damage.

Should materials be delivered by sea (Delivery Option A) or construction works be undertaken by

sea, the anchoring of vessels and beaching of boats should be restricted to the areas outside the

area where forest beds have been observed.

Materials capable of damaging the submerged peat beds (such as rock) should not be unloaded /

stored on areas of the shore where peat beds are known to occur.

With the proposed mitigation measures in place the impacts of construction during Phase 1 are

considered to be minor adverse and irreversible in areas where excavation is required (in the

footprint of the rock breakwaters and, potentially, the rock groynes). In other areas, if peat beds

are covered by sand (either naturally or with imported material) or by protective matting, the

impacts are considered to be negligible.

Phase 1 construction impacts to Coastal Processes and Geomorphology

It is likely that the construction works will alter local patterns of sediment transport and therefore

the erosion and accretion patterns on the beach. This is most likely to occur if materials are

stored on the beach and during the short period between construction of the control elements

(MPR and rock structures) and the beach recharge. These are considered to be short term

minor adverse impacts which will be reversible once the dominant transport conditions return.

The implementation of measures to reduce the risk of sediment being released will reduce any

potential impacts to coastal processes. It is recommended that the works are arranged so that

complimentary structures and recharge take place so as to reduce the time period between the

construction of control elements (MPR and rock structures) and the beach recharge. This will limit

the potential for local patterns of sediment transport to be altered. If these mitigation measures

are put in place, residual impacts on coastal processes are considered to be minor adverse and

short term.

The geological and geomorphological SSSI’s and GCR to the north of Borth are considered to be

downdrift of the proposed works and impacts to these are considered to be negligible.

Post Phase 1 construction impacts to Geology

Following construction of Phase 1, erosion of the foreshore within the shadow zone of the new

structures will be reduced and it is considered that this is likely to have no adverse effect on

geological sites (negligible).

The rock breakwaters will have a fixed footprint on the beach and in the event one or both

structures are built on submerged peat forest beds, access to these beds for geological research

and educational purposes will be permanently lost, having a minor adverse and irreversible

impact.

The provision of an optimum amount of recharge material is an integral part of the design of the

overall Scheme and of Phase 1. This will be determined through the physical modelling and

detailed design process that is ongoing. The results of physical modelling will be used to

determine the optimum amount of recharge material and the precise location / orientation of the

MPR within the general location already determined. Given this, no additional long term erosion

of the beach levels is expected and the impact is considered to be negligible.



Post Phase 1 construction impacts to Coastal Processes and Geomorphology

In terms of the sand, any impact that the structures might have would be negligible compared to

the transport that occurs in and out of the Dyfi estuary mouth and the amount of sand in the active

system. The impact of the scheme on sand transport is likely to be confined to the local area

around the structures and is considered to be negligible.

There is a great deal of natural variability in the conditions along the frontage. The swash aligned

nature of the coast means that small changes in wave direction and storm action can lead to

significant alterations in the net drift directions – much greater than could be expected to occur as

a result of Phase 1 construction. Overall, the impact on geomorphology post construction of

Phase 1 is considered to be negligible, due to the localised nature of the impact on sand

transport and the relatively small volumes involved.

As part of the detailed design process, the placement and quantity of material used to create the

salient in the lee of the MPR should consider potential impacts to the Glan Wern outfall.

Provisions should be made by CCC in discussion with EAW to ensure that the outfall can be

cleared in a timely manner should it become blocked by beach material and additional mitigation

may be needed if blockages are frequent.

The existing system exhibits a “shuffling” of shingle northwards along the beach through the

groyne system, which acts to reduce the net rate of transport. This overall pattern of movement is

not expected to change and the overall impact post Phase 1 construction on the shingle fraction

are considered to be negligible.

Construction of future phases - impacts to Geology

The construction works for future phases, particularly Phases 3 and 4 will take place inside the

SSSI’s and GCR sites’ boundaries. Consequently, there is the potential for impacts to the

designated features. Mitigation measures similar to those proposed during the construction of

Phase 1 should be employed during the construction of future phases to minimise potential

impacts to geological features and sites. In addition, monitoring information from the beach

monitoring programme should be used to inform the detailed design process of future phases.

The impacts of construction during future phases are considered to be minor to moderate

adverse (depending on the extent of the features in the footprint of the structures) and

irreversible in areas where excavation is required (in the footprint of the rock breakwaters and,

potentially, the rock groynes). In other areas, if peat beds are covered by sand (either naturally or

with imported material) or by protective matting, the impacts are considered to be negligible.

Construction of future phases - impacts to Coastal Processes and Geomorphology

The impact on geomorphology during the construction stage of the future phases is likely to be

negligible, due to the relatively short time period of the works compared to the time period of the

processes involved in developing the morphological features of interest at Ynyslas. It should be

noted however that as the phases progress, they get nearer to the geomorphological features of

interest at Ynyslas.

Mitigation measures similar to those proposed during the construction of Phase 1 should be

employed and, as set out above monitoring information from the beach monitoring programme

should be used to inform the detailed design process. The impacts on coastal processes, with

these mitigation measures in place, are considered to be short term minor adverse impacts

which will be reversible once the dominant transport conditions return.



Post construction impacts to Geology

Post construction of the whole Scheme, the impacts on geology are likely to be a moderate

beneficial. This is because the scheme will promote the natural transport of sand material on the

lower foreshore, leading to ongoing exposure/recovering of the features of interest, which is

consistent with the current approach to the management of geological features of interest

(allowing them to be exposed to enable access and study).

Post construction impacts to Coastal Processes and Geomorphology

The impact on sand transport on the lower foreshore is likely to be negligible for Phase 2 of the

works (similar to Phase 1 impacts). Phases 3 and 4 may have minor adverse impacts. Reduction

of these impacts should be achieved through appropriate consideration of the design of the

structures. Any impacts should be considered in the light of the natural variability of the conditions

along the frontage - small changes in wave direction and storm sequencing can lead to significant

alterations in the net drift and the transport in and out of the Dyfi estuary is an order of magnitude

greater than the net alongshore sand transport. The behaviour of the estuary in the future will be

a more significant driver on coastal processes and geomorphology at Ynyslas than the Scheme as

a whole. Overall impacts to the sand sediment are considered to be negligible.

In relation to shingle, the new rock groynes built during future phases will behave in a similar

fashion to those built in Phase 1. With the entire scheme in place, there is a pattern of reducing

beach control as you progress northwards, with the rock breakwaters and groynes of Phases 1

and 2 enabling limited throughput of material and the more open groyne system to the north

allowing greater potential throughput of material. This arrangement should limit the overall

impacts on downdrift geomorphology, however further consideration of this ability to mitigate the

impact should be considered during the detailed design and optimisation of the Scheme as future

phases are planned. Overall impacts to shingle on the beach are considered to be negligible.

It should be noted that there is greater uncertainty with respect to the coastal processes following

the entire Scheme being implemented and that ongoing monitoring post Phase 1 construction is

strongly recommended to inform the detailed design of the arrangement of future phases.

Possible Managed Realignment at Ynyslas - impacts to Geology

Under the possible managed realignment option, as defences deteriorate / are removed and the

beach erodes landward naturally, it is likely that a breach in the shingle ridge will occur at the

northern end of the defences in front of Ynyslas. Overall, managed realignment at Ynyslas could

have impacts ranging from negligible to moderate adverse, depending on the location of the

breach in the shingle and of underlying geological features of interest. Adverse impacts would be

irreversible and could have knock-on impacts on coastal processes and geomorphology. There is

a great deal of uncertainty surrounding the potential impacts of managed realignment at Ynyslas

and any knock-on impacts that this could have on wider coastal processes and geomorphology. It

is important that a better understanding of the potential direct and indirect impacts of managed

realignment is reached before a decision on this aspect of the Scheme is taken forward.

Possible Managed Realignment at Ynyslas - impacts to Coastal Processes and Geomorphology

Managed realignment at Ynyslas will alter the coastal processes and hence the geomorphology of

the shoreline. Under a managed realignment scenario at Ynyslas, the impacts on coastal

processes and geomorphology could potentially be up to minor adverse, though the exact details

and extent are difficult to predict with certainty and would require additional investigation to

determine. At present, it is difficult to determine the scale and extent of such impacts and future

investigation and modelling, informed by the proposed and ongoing beach monitoring programme,

should be undertaken when the latter stages of the Scheme and the possibility of managed

realignment are considered in detail.



Decommissioning impacts to Geology

The decommissioning of the Scheme would require the movement of plant and machinery across

the beach. The specific impacts will depend on the material from which the reef is constructed

(rock or sand filled geotextile bags) and will be very similar to those resulting from the construction

of Phase 1 (see above). Overall, the impact on geology is considered negligible.

Decommissioning impacts to Coastal Processes and Geomorphology

The removal of the scheme will result in a rapid change in the dynamic equilibrium in coastal

processes that will have been achieved following the completion of the whole scheme, however,

there is limited information and thus considerable uncertainty in defining the impacts.

In principal, the removal of the scheme will allow the recharged material to enter the wider coastal

processes cell and likely be spread along the entire frontage and aid in the ongoing development

of the spit and dune system at Ynyslas. In the short term this would be viewed as a moderate

beneficial impact since the development of the spit and dune system is seen as positive.

However, eventually a similar situation to that at present would be observed with a breach risk

along much of the low-lying frontage. The shingle ridge will roll-back with consequent major

adverse impacts on the designated sites and their features (see ecology section below).

Ecology

Phase 1 construction impacts to Nature Conservation Sites

As the scheme is located partially within the Pen Llŷn a’r Sarnau SAC and adjacent to a number of

other European and national nature conservation sites, potential negative impacts to the

ecological interest features of these sites could arise during the construction work.

The majority of construction work will take place outside of the Pen Llŷn a’r Sarnau SAC boundary

and those works that do take place within the SAC are not near any of the features for which the

site has been designated. Direct impacts upon the Pen Llŷn a’r Sarnau SAC are therefore

considered negligible. Indirect impacts could arise as a result of changes to the coastal

processes and geomorphology. The changes however are likely to be minor and short term and

thus the impacts to the SAC are considered to be negligible.

The Borth Bog (Cors Fochno SAC) could be impacted by delivery traffic, however this is

discussed further in terrestrial ecology.

Phase 1 construction impacts to terrestrial ecology

The sand dunes at Ynyslas and the Borth and Ynyslas Golf Course are a considerable distance

from the site of construction or areas likely to be used as site compounds or storage areas during

the works and are thus unlikely to experience any impacts during the construction of Phase 1.

Impacts to the terrestrial ecology of the sand dunes and the golf course are considered to be

negligible.

The species of lichen associated with Borth cliffs will not be impacted during the construction of

Phase 1 (negligible).

Areas of Borth bog directly adjacent to the road could experience disturbance and damage as a

result of vehicle traffic during the construction period or due to lack of parking within Borth at times

of peak construction. The potential for impacts resulting from vehicle disturbance during

construction are likely to be greater with the delivery of all materials by road (Delivery Option B)

since there will be a greater number of vehicles passing the bog.



As with any construction occurring near watercourses, there is a risk of chemical, fuel or oil spills

occurring and contaminating watercourses. Overall, with appropriate mitigation measures in

place, the impacts to the terrestrial ecology are considered minor adverse, short term and

reversible.

Phase 1 construction impacts to intertidal ecology

The majority of work during construction will take place in the intertidal area and thus could result

in damage and disturbance to species and habitats immediately adjacent to the works. The main

cause of disturbance to habitats and species is likely to be from the movement of machinery,

vehicles and vessels on the beach and in the water as well as general construction activities such

as excavation. It is also possible that reduced water quality (caused by spills/leakages or

increased turbidity) may also disturb marine species.

The stockpiling of materials on the shingle ridge and beach may result in smothering of species.

However, intertidal surveys noted that the beach species observed were common and not

protected, although the presence of exposed peat deposits on the beach provides a habitat for

ephemeral piddock populations.

Removal of the colonised timber groynes will result in the loss of species such as barnacles and

limpets. These species are common throughout the UK.

There will be no direct impacts to the rock platform to the south of Borth. However the the release

of sediment in to the water column during construction could have a detrimental impact upon the

honeycomb worms (Sabellaria alveolata) reefs associated with the platform.

Overall, with the mitigation measures discussed in section 6.4.4 the impacts on intertidal ecology

are considered minor adverse, short term and reversible.

Phase 1 construction impacts to subtidal ecology

The construction of the MPR will result in the loss of some subtidal habitat within the footprint of

the reef (approximately 6,000m2) and in the area around the reef through damage/disturbance by

vessels and vehicles working on the reef. As predicted by HABMAP and confirmed by an

intertidal survey, the habitat loss will be confined to fine muddy sand colonised by molluscs,

polychaetes and amphipods which is a common habitat along the Borth frontage.

Construction of the reef may result in the loss of sediment or re-suspension of sediment into the

water column. There is a risk that this sediment could be transported offshore or along the coast

smothering any sensitive habitats. The nearest sediment sensitive habitats are the subtidal reefs

approximately 3.7km to the south or 12.5km to the north. These distant habitats are unlikely to be

impacted. Additional loss may be experienced if the reef is constructed from sand filled geotextile

bags.

Although the majority of work is taking place above MLW, there is potential for underwater noise

to be generated. Construction noise such as piling has been observed to result in behavioural

responses in cetaceans (whales and dolphins), however, no piling or works of this nature will be

undertaken during the construction of phase 1. It is possible that any underwater noise generated

may result in temporary displacement of marine mammals from the area but it would not be

injurious.

The potential release or re-suspension of sediment into the water column could directly impact fish

species as well as their feeding grounds and the plants upon which they feed. Further information

regarding impacts upon water quality is discussed in the water quality section.

Overall, the impacts upon subtidal ecology are considered to be minor adverse, short term and

reversible.



Phase 1 construction impacts to birds

There is potential for the work to cause disturbance to birds both within and around Borth through

physical disturbance to their habitats as well as through noise and general disturbance generated

by the presence and activity of vehicles, vessels and plant. However, only the section of frontage

in front of the area of works and immediately adjacent is likely to be effected and thus the frontage

to the north will still be available for wading birds to feed, as well as for over wintering birds (ringed

plover and Sanderling).

It is unlikely that the works will pose a disturbance to chough in the cliffs above Borth.

The impact on birds during the construction of Phase 1 is considered to be minor adverse, short

term and reversible.

Post Phase 1 construction impacts to Nature Conservation Sites

Following construction, the MPR will be located within the boundary of the SAC and will result in

the direct loss of approximately 0.0004% of the total area of the SAC. The subtidal survey

confirmed that the habitats likely to be lost in the footprint of the scheme are not those for which

the site was designated.

There is a risk that post construction impacts upon the coastal processes could result in the Glan

Wern outfall becoming blocked which would result in flooding behind the shingle ridge potentially

impacting the Cors Fochno site (Borth Bog).

Overall the impacts to nature conservation sites are considered to be negligible.

Post Phase 1 construction impacts to terrestrial ecology

Post construction of Phase 1, impacts to the terrestrial ecology could arise as a result of changes

in the coastal processes, however, post construction impacts on coastal processes are considered

to be negligible. Additional impacts could result from increased numbers of visitors to the area

generated by interest in the MPR and improved surfing conditions. However, as any additional

surfing activity would be mainly restricted to the area around the MPR in lower Borth, impacts to

the sand dunes, golf course, cliffs and bog are not anticipated.

As set out above, blockages to the Glan Wern outfall could affect the terrestrial ecology of the bog

behind the shingle ridge, however, mitigation measures proposed are considered to reduce this

risk.

Overall, impacts to the terrestrial ecology post Phase 1 construction are considered to be

negligible.

Post Phase 1 construction impacts to intertidal ecology

Some of the habitats and species will be impacted by the Scheme due to direct loss of existing

beach habitat from the presence of the new structures and smothering by beach nourishment.

Much of the foreshore habitat and species that will be lost is considered common, however, some

species are relatively rare and protected (e.g. sea kale, piddock). However, the areas smothered

by beach nourishment provide the same substrate as that lost and will most likely be re-colonised

from other similar areas along the remainder of the frontage.

The creation of new rocky shore type substrate in the shape of the rock groynes and breakwaters

will provide additional substrate that can be colonised by species such as limpets, barnacles and

algae, which colonised the timber rock groynes prior to their removal. These species are

commonly found on coastal defence structures in the UK and are already present on the rock

platform south of Borth.

Post construction impacts on the subtidal ecology are considered to be negligible.



Post Phase 1 construction impacts to subtidal ecology

Post construction, the location of the MPR in the subtidal area will result in the direct loss of an

area of benthic substrate in the footprint of the reef (approximately 6,000m2). However, the MPR

itself will also provide a substrate available for colonisation.

A rock reef potentially offers greater benefits to the subtidal ecology as it would provide a more

complex structure with more crevices, refuges and faces on the individual rocks to be colonised

and offer shelter to a wider range of species.

Should the MPR be built of sand filled geotextile bags, monitoring is advised to ensure that

damage does not result in loss of sediment. Such monitoring would not be necessary for a rock

MPR, but would be beneficial to the general understanding of the colonisation and potential

benefits of artificial reefs to subtidal ecology.

It is likely the new MPR structure may be of interest to marine mammals such as the bottlenose

dolphins, particularly since it could attract fish and provide a new feeding ground.

The MPR is likely to be better colonised, attract more fish and thus potentially more marine

mammals if constructed from rock due to the provision of a more stable substrate and more

crevices/refuge.

The rock breakwaters and rock groynes may create additional feeding areas, accessible to fish at

high states of the tide, if they are colonised by algae and marine invertebrates. The MPR could

also behave similarly. This would be accessible to fish at all states of the tide. Fish are also

attracted to structures that offer shelter and may be attracted to the new rock breakwaters, rock

groynes and MPR.

Overall, the impact is considered to be negligible to minor beneficial and medium term.

Post Phase 1 construction impacts to birds

Following construction, birds could be adversely impacted if the Scheme construction causes

permanent loss in feeding and/or roosting habitat. However, the existing beach does not provide

a significant habitat for birds. The loss of beach area caused by the footprint of the new structures

would be small compared to the remaining area of beach.

The Scheme could also have some beneficial impacts on birds, since the new rock structures

could provide bird roosting and feeding opportunities for some species. However, the significance

of any benefits depends on the numbers and types of birds present in the area, as well as the

colonisation of the new structures.

Overall, the potential impacts are considered to be negligible.

Construction of future phases - impacts to Nature Conservation Sites

The impacts generated during the construction of subsequent phases will be similar to those

generated during the construction of Phase 1 (see above).

The additional rock breakwaters will be built outside the area of the Pen Llŷn a’r Sarnau SAC, but

most of the remaining rock groynes will fall within the area of the SAC. Later phases fall within the

area around the Dyfi estuary, which contains the features “estuaries” and “mudflats and sandflats

not covered by water at low tide”. The SAC is considered one of the best in the UK for “estuaries”

and to support a significant presence of “mudflats and sandflats not covered by water at low tide”.

This area also overlaps with the Dyfi estuary SSSI.

The assessment of the impacts on the coastal processes and geomorphology of the area

considers the impacts of the construction of future phases to be negligible. Given that the

maintenance of dominant coastal processes is considered important to maintain the features of

the protected sites, knock on impacts to the protected sites are also considered to be negligible.

This conclusion is not, however, without uncertainty.



Construction of future phases - impacts to terrestrial ecology

There will be no direct impact to the sand dunes during construction of subsequent phases.

However, as the works move progressively north, it is likely that noise generated from the site and

by delivery vehicles, etc. will become more audible from the dunes. Terrestrial ecology may

experience disturbance from construction noise, with mobile species such as rabbits, lizards,

spiders etc. seeking refuge. Species within the dunes are likely to be accustomed to a degree of

disturbance from recreational use. Construction activities will generate different sources of

disturbance, but given the nature of the dune system and the availability of refuge, it is unlikely

that the noise disturbance generated will displace species from the sand dunes.

There will be no direct impacts to the golf course during construction of subsequent phases.

However, as the works move progressively it is likely that noise generated from the site of works

will become more audible from the golf course but this is not likely to result in any impacts to

terrestrial ecology.

No impacts to the cliffs are anticipated during the construction of subsequent phases.

The potential impacts upon Borth bog during the construction of subsequent phases are

considered to be similar to those during the construction of Phase 1 and could potentially be

significant if a serious pollution incident were to occur.

Overall impacts are considered to be minor adverse, short term and reversible.

Construction of future phases - impacts to intertidal ecology

The potential impacts to intertidal ecology resulting from the construction of subsequent phases

are likely to be similar to those during the construction of Phase 1. There will be no direct impacts

to the rock platform to the south of Borth and the potential for indirect impacts to the honeycomb

worm reefs is likely to reduce, as the phases move progressively northwards further from the rock

platform and the area where the reefs are found.


Construction of future phases - impacts to subtidal ecology

The impacts to the subtidal ecology during the construction of subsequent Phases are likely to be

similar to those arising during the construction of Phase 1 due to the creation of the rock groynes

and rock breakwaters.

The impacts are considered to be minor adverse, short term and reversible.

Construction of future phases - impacts to birds

The impacts to birds during the construction of subsequent Phases are likely to be similar to those

arising during the construction of Phase 1 due to the creation of the rock groynes and rock

breakwaters.

The dunes are not considered important for breeding birds, so works towards the northern end of

the frontage will not have a detrimental impact on breeding or nesting birds. The dunes and

shingle ridge may be important for overwintering sanderling and ringed plover, respectively.

These species could be disturbed if works at the northern end of the frontage take place during

winter months. The dunes are, however, quite extensive, providing natural screening by the

marram grass and other areas of refuge. As the construction of latter phases does not extend

significantly into the dune system, impacts to sanderling and other birds within the dunes are likely

to be relatively minor. Given that the works close to the cliff are considered unlikely to pose a

disturbance to chough in the cliffs above Borth, the potential for impacts to chough in the cliffs

above Borth will lessen even further as works progress north.




Post construction impacts to Nature Conservation Sites

Following construction of the whole Scheme, all of the 40m long rock groynes will be located

within the boundary of the Pen Llŷn a’r Sarnau SAC and will result in the direct loss of an area of

the SAC and Dyfi SSSI within the footprint of the structures. The new rock breakwaters will be

located in the same place as some of the existing timber groynes. The rock breakwaters will not

be located in the SAC. The total footprint of the structures within the SAC/SSSI would be

approximately 0.0005% of the designated area.

The features of the SAC that are in the area where the latter phases of the Scheme will be located

are “estuaries” and “mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide”. These features

are not likely to be directly impacted by the presence of the new rock groynes.

Overall, impacts to the protected features and sites are likely to be negligible. This conclusion is

not, however, without uncertainty.

Post construction impacts to terrestrial ecology

The impacts post construction of the whole Scheme are considered to be similar to those post

construction of Phase1 and arising mainly as a result of any changes to coastal processes. Post

construction impacts on coastal processes are considered to be negligible. Overall, impacts to the

terrestrial ecology post construction are considered to be negligible.

Post construction impacts to intertidal ecology

The impacts on the intertidal ecology post construction of the whole Scheme are considered to be

similar to those post construction of Phase 1 . These are considered to be minor beneficial and

medium term, due mainly to the creation of new habitat in the form of the rock groynes and rock

breakwaters.

Post construction impacts to subtidal ecology

Post construction, impacts on subtidal ecology and marine mammals are considered to be

negligible. The rock breakwaters and rock groynes may create additional feeding areas,

accessible to fish at high states of the tide, if they are colonised by algae and marine

invertebrates, but these impacts are considered to be very small (negligible).

Post construction impacts to birds

Impacts to birds are also considered to be negligible, as no loss of dunes are anticipated and any

breach in the shingle ridge will be small in comparison to the area remaining.

Possible Managed Realignment at Ynyslas - impacts to Ecology

The potential managed realignment at Ynyslas will lead to a direct loss of an area of the Dyfi SSSI

and the Pen Llŷn a’r Sarnau SAC. It could, however, have a potential beneficial impact on the

nature conservation sites by creating a new habitat that could be included within the designation

of the existing sites.

The method by which any managed realignment would be carried out is, as yet, unknown and it is

difficult to identify specific impacts. However, it is likely that during the construction of the earthen

embankment plant will be required to track across areas of the golf course resulting is disturbance

and potential damage. In addition, it is possible that some excavation will be required within the

footprint of the embankment, prior to construction starting.



The potential impacts arising from the creation of a managed realignment and set back defence at

Ynyslas are likely to be similar to those arising in the construction of other aspects of the Scheme.

The degree to which plant will need to track across the beach will depend on whether existing

defences are physically removed (as part of the construction process) or allowed to degrade

naturally (post construction) and whether the breach in the shingle ridge is created mechanically

(as part of the construction process) or allowed to occur naturally (post construction).

Managed realignment would result in a loss of terrestrial habitat to the golf course area of the

frontage. This habitat is mainly grassed fairway. Overall, the remainder of the golf course will

remain intact and will be protected from coastal erosion / overtopping by the new set back defence

line.

Managed realignment will alter the type of intertidal ecology present at the northern end of the

frontage, potentially creating a lagoon in front of the set back defence. The exact nature and

species composition of the altered intertidal habitat is unknown and will depend on physical

processes, coastal management and the design details at the time. Should managed realignment

be pursued, a monitoring programme to follow the successional colonisation of the area should be

considered as this could provide valuable information for the consideration of other managed

realignment schemes elsewhere.

Overall, the impact on the ecology is considered to be minor beneficial and long term.

Decommissioning impacts to Nature Conservation Sites

Decommissioning works will have to take place within the boundaries of the protected sites in

which the Scheme elements are located (MPR, rock groynes). Following decommissioning, rapid

changes to the coastal processes and coastline can be expected, leading to breach(es) in the

shingle ridge and a rolling backwards of the shore. These changes will have potentially major

adverse and irreversible impacts to the protected sites in the area, namely the Pen Llŷn a’r

Sarnau SAC, the Dyfi NNR and SSSI, the Cors Fochno SAC and the Cors Fochno and Dyfi

Estuary SPA.

Decommissioning impacts to terrestrial ecology

The rolling back of the shoreline will impact on all the sand dunes, golf course and bog, although

the cliffs are likely to be unaffected. These changes will have potentially major adverse and

irreversible impacts.

Decommissioning impacts to intertidal ecology

The removal of the structures in the intertidal area will result in the loss of habitat and species

associated with them e.g. algae, barnacles, limpets, etc.

As the shoreline moves landward, due to the altered coastal processes, the beach will also roll

backwards, creating new intertidal habitat as it does. Overall, the impact on intertidal ecology is

considered to be negligible.

Decommissioning impacts to subtidal ecology

The removal of the MPR will result in a loss of subtidal habitat that will have been colonised by

sessile species and the loss of a potential refuge for more mobile species, such as crustaceans

and fish. Other mobile species that may have been attracted by the presence of the MPR (fish

and cetaceans) will disperse. These impacts are not likely to have an impact on the populations

of these species and are considered to be minor adverse and short term.



Decommissioning impacts to Birds

The removal of the MPR and rock groynes will result in a loss of feeding areas and possible

roosting sites. The potential fish attracting properties of the MPR will be lost and thus there may

be a decline in prey availability for birds. There impacts are not likely to have an impact upon the

populations of bird species and are considered to be minor adverse and short term.

Traffic and Transport

Phase 1 construction impacts to Traffic and Transport

Under Delivery Option A, all materials will be delivered by sea. As such, the amount of traffic

generated by the Phase 1 construction will be much lower than that outlined below for Delivery

Option B. Nevertheless, some road traffic will be generated, in the main through movement of

employee vehicles.

Under Delivery Option B delivery lorries will join the B4353 from the A487, however, it is unknown

which direction on the A487 they will arrive and depart as the source of the material has not yet

been established. This will ensure that HGV’s associated with the scheme will not travel through

Borth town centre.

The B4353 is a single carriageway road, varying in width along the delivery route, there are

several bends, no weight or width restrictions and two rail underbridges along the route but they

are sufficiently high to allow most HGVs to pass underneath without problem.

HGVs delivering materials to and from the site should be able to travel along the route without

major difficultly and additional HGV traffic is unlikely to create any capacity issues given the

relatively low traffic flows along this route.

The delivery of the MPR rock will generate the highest number of HGV’s with 14 two-way

movements per hour throughout the day. This figure has been used in the operational analysis as

it represents the worst case scenario.

As all materials are assumed to be delivered to the proposed site / storage compound, delivery

vehicles will not impact on the operational performance of the B4353 / High Street / B4572 mini-

roundabout junction.

The proposed site compounds would utilise existing car parks in Lower Borth, resulting in a

reduction in available public parking space during the construction of Phase 1 and potentially

resulting in a higher demand for on-street parking.

Upon completion, the site and storage compounds will be removed and the car parks should be

reopened and reinstated to their original condition.

It is more likely that under Delivery Option A, more materials would be stored on the beach as this

is where rock and beach nourishment material would be unloaded. As such, it is anticipated that a

smaller area for site compound / storage for site offices, employee parking, storage of plant and

some materials (e.g. fuel) would be needed. Delivery Option B could potentially need to use a

larger proportion of the available parking space to enable delivery vehicles to enter, unload and

leave as well as for site offices, etc. as outlined for Delivery Option A above.

Post Phase 1 construction impacts to Traffic and Transport

Post Phase 1 construction, the MPR could lead to an increase in visitor traffic, particularly surfers

if the MPR improves the surfability of the waters off Borth. It is, however, very difficult to

determine the number of additional surfers.



Atkins’ research (using reports, websites or other sources) indicates mixed reviews regarding the

attractiveness of an artificial reef to surfers, but it is anticipated that a MPR is likely to attract some

additional surfers to Borth. Our only evidence of numbers on existing reefs is at Boscombe on the

opening day, when approximately 12 surfers used the new reef. This in itself is not a very high

number and we would anticipate that the number attracted to Borth would be lower as the reef in

Boscombe is part of a larger development and is a more popular surfing destination, closer to

population centres.

The peak tourist season in Borth is during the summer and this is when the demand for parking is

at its highest but this is the time of the year when experienced surfers may be dissuaded from

surfing due to the high volume of other beach users. The number and regularity of surfers to the

MPR at Borth will depend on how it changes the surfing conditions in the area and the skill level

needed to surf the MPR.

The forecast maximum anticipated number of additional surfers attracted to the MPR, during the

peak season is estimated to be five per day. As a worst case scenario, this would generate five

additional car trips and the demand for five additional parking spaces.

Construction of future phases - impacts to Traffic and Transport

Future Phases of work would not generate as much traffic as Phase 1 (Phases 2 – 4 combined

require 60% of the material needed for Phase 1). Given that the amount of traffic forecast to be

generated during Phase 1 has been assessed as having little or no impact on the key junctions

entering Borth, the traffic required for each of the future phases is not likely to impact on the

operation of these key points in the road transport system.

Future phases of work are located further along the frontage and the delivery of materials to / from

the works for future phases would either have to travel through the village, along High Street, or

track across the beach itself. The movements of large vehicles through the village has potential to

impact on local traffic as the road is relatively narrow with on street parking on both sides of the

road. This issue is likely to be greatest during Phase 2, which would require site traffic to pass

through the section of the village with houses on both sides of High Street.

Alternatively, delivery and construction traffic for future Phases could approach Borth from the

opposite direction, via Ynyslas. However, a section of the road between Llancynfelin and Ynyslas

is laid on former bogland and a survey of the road should be undertaken prior to its use.

Overall, the impacts of constructing future phases on traffic and transport are considered to be

minor to moderate adverse (depending on the route that site traffic takes) and short term.

Post construction impacts to Traffic and Transport

Post construction of the whole scheme, no impacts on traffic and transport additional to those set

out above are anticipated.

Possible Managed Realignment at Ynyslas - impacts to Traffic and Transport

Undertaking managed realignment along the northern part of the shore would result in the

inundation of an area of land, including part of the car park. As such, it is considered that in

addition to those impacts outline above as occurring during construction of future phases, this

option would have an additional long term, minor to moderate adverse impact on parking

(depending on the area of car park lost).

Decommissioning impacts to Traffic and Transport

Prior to decommissioning taking place, a detailed impact assessment should be submitted to, and

approved by, CCC Highways Authority. General mitigation measures used during the

construction of Phase 1 and the development of a traffic management plan should also be

considered prior to decommissioning.



Water and Sediment Quality

Phase 1 construction impacts to Water and Sediment quality

During construction, there is a risk of the release and re-suspension of sediment as a result of

construction works (including excavation, tracking across the beach, filling and/or placement of

geotextile bags, beach nourishment etc), which could increase levels of turbidity in the water

column. This could impact marine ecology and coastal processes (see sections above).

There is a risk that any sediment released could contain contaminants, which could reduce water

quality. There is no evidence that the existing beach sediment at Borth contains contaminants.

Historically, mining took place in the general area, however, it is unlikely that significant levels of

contaminants would be on the seabed. The car park adjacent to the slipway, which is proposed

as a site compound used to house a petrol filling station. Some residual contamination from petrol

storage tanks may remain.

There is a risk that contaminants could be brought to the site during beach nourishment and

construction of the MPR (if constructed from geotextile bags) as sediment will be imported from an

external source. Should the material be determined to contain harmful contaminants, an

alternative source would be found.

As with many construction Schemes near water, there is a risk of pollution from spills and leaks of

fuels and chemicals. To reduce the impacts on water quality from pollutants, the following best

practice measures will be implemented and included within the CEMP as well as the adoption of

appropriate working practices.

Consideration has been given to the impact of the Scheme on the Bathing Water Quality at the

beach and the ability of the beach to retain its Blue Flag status. During consultation, EAW stated

that the water quality component of the Blue Flag Award is based on achieving “Excellent” water

quality status under the Bathing Water Directive, which is based on the concentration of bacteria

in the water. Construction activities in Phase 1 do not take place near sewerage systems and are

not likely to lead to an increase in the concentration of faecal bacteria.

In addition to water quality, Blue Flag beach criteria include beach amenity and availability of

facilities. These may be affected by the presence of plant and material on the beach during

construction, resulting in access restrictions. Works are planned to start in late summer / early

autumn 2010 and continue for approximately 20 weeks. This could potentially impact of the

availability and use of the beach and facilities during both the 2010 and 2011 bathing seasons.

Overall, the impact on water quality is considered to be negligible.

Post Phase 1 construction impacts to Water and Sediment quality

Post construction, the material used to recharge the beach along the frontage will add to the

overall sediment budget of the system. Through natural washing and sorting of the recharge

material sediment will be released into the water column. The amount of sediment released is

likely to be too small to cause any significant impacts on water quality through turbidity.

A sand filled geotextile bag MPR could also be a potential source of sediment input post-

construction. Sediment could be released due to a number of reasons - damage from

boat/surfboard collisions, storm events, vandalism, failure of the geotextile material or natural

wear and tear over the lifetime of the Scheme. The potential impacts depend on the quantity and

particle size of the sediment released.

Should the MPR be made of sand filled geotextile bags, it is suggested that diver inspections are

carried out annually for the first 10 years to assess the overall structural integrity and the condition

of the geotextile bags. Assuming no significant damage occurs during this initial 10-year period,

the time between inspections could be extended to 3 years for the remainder of the 50 year

estimated life span the MPR.

The volume of sediment lost from a sand filled geotextile MPR is likely to be too small to cause

any significant impacts on water quality through turbidity.



Bathing Water Quality will continue to be monitored throughout the bathing season by the EAW.

If the MPR were constructed of rock, it would not be a potential source of sediment input to the

environment.

Overall, the post phase 1 construction impact upon water quality is considered negligible.

Construction of future phases - impacts to Water and Sediment quality

It is not possible to determine what the baseline water quality will be in the future. The

assessment of impacts for future phases of construction has been carried out using the baseline

water quality.

During construction of future phases, the potential impacts are similar to those for the construction

of Phase 1, however, risks associated with the construction of a MPR (either of sand filled

geotextile bags or rock) are not relevant to future phases. Mitigation measures to take during the

construction of future phases are, therefore, similar to those outlined for the construction of

Phase1.

Based on existing information, the impacts of constructing future phases on water and sediment

quality are considered to be the same as those for Phase 1 – negligible.

Post construction impacts to Water and Sediment quality

Post construction and during operation of the Scheme some of the sediment from the beach

nourishment will be released into the water column from the natural washing and sorting of the

beach recharge material. However, the amount released is likely to be too small to cause any

significant impacts on water quality through turbidity. The impact is therefore considered to be

negligible.

Sediment quality is not considered to be affected as a result of the Scheme (negligible).

Possible Managed Realignment at Ynyslas - impacts to Water and Sediment quality

Constructing a managed realignment option along the northern part of the shore would result in

similar impacts to those arising in the construction of future phases of the Scheme.

Post construction, managed realignment would result in the inundation of an area of land,

including a car park and part of the golf course. Erosion of the area will lead to an increase in

sediment in the water column, however, this is unlikely to impact on water quality unless there are

contaminants in the soil.

The land in the area could contain some contaminating e.g. from oils / fuel spills, insecticide /

pesticide use, etc. in the soil. Prior to implementing the retreat, testing of the soil should be

undertaken. Should any areas of contaminated soil exist, removal and disposal of contaminated

soil should take place before any managed realignment takes place.

Based on existing information and ensuring that suitable the recommended mitigation measures

outlined above are put in place, the impact on water quality is considered to be negligible.

Decommissioning impacts to Water and Sediment quality

It is assumed that decommissioning of a sand filled geotextile MPR would require the geotextile

bags to be deliberately split open. This would result in an increase in suspended sediment in the

water around the structure and an increase in the overall sediment budget. Sand contained in the

bags will have been tested prior to use and will contain no contaminants. Once released into the

sea, the sand should dissipate relatively quickly by natural water movement.



Impacts of sediment release on coastal processes and on marine ecology are considered in

above.

Sediment quality is unlikely to be affected during decommissioning of a sand filled geotextile MPR

(negligible).

Overall the impact of decommissioning a sand filled geotextile MPR is, therefore considered to be

minor adverse and short term.

Decommissioning a rock MPR would require removal of the rocks. Agreement of appropriate

working practices between CCC, CCW, EAW and the contractor will be required prior to

decommissioning e.g. following Environment Agency Pollution Prevention Guidance 21 and

Contractor Best Practice.

Sediment quality is unlikely to be affected during decommissioning of a sand filled geotextile MPR

(negligible).

The quantity of sediment released in to the water column is unlikely to be sufficient to have a

significant impact upon the water quality. The impact is therefore considered to be negligible.

Noise and Vibration

Phase 1 construction impacts to Noise and Vibration

Local residents and businesses in the properties located on and directly behind the shingle ridge

will be adversely impacted by construction and delivery noise, as they will be immediately

adjacent to the main working area. Pedestrians, beach users and surfers in the immediate vicinity

will also be adversely impacted by delivery and construction noise.

Noisy activities will include the general movement of plant and machinery (such as excavators,

bulldozers and dump trucks), delivery of rocks by road or marine vessels, filling of geotextile bags

(if MPR constructed from geotextile bags) the placement of rocks, beach nourishment and delivery

of other smaller materials by road.

During the spring/summer tourist season, the number of visitors to Borth increases and thus the

level of background noise is likely to increase.

Residents in properties along any road transport delivery route may also be impacted by the noise

generated by additional traffic movements.

Ynyslas, the golf course and caravan parks are a significant distance away from the Phase 1

works and thus area less likely to be impacted.

With appropriate mitigation measures in place, the residual impact is considered to be moderate

adverse and short term.

Post Phase 1 construction impacts to Noise and Vibration

Following construction there will be no impacts to noise levels. The impact is therefore considered

to be negligible.

Construction of future phases - impacts to Noise and Vibration

The assessment and mitigation of potential impacts during construction of future phases is likely

to be the same as that during construction of Phase 1. The amount of construction works and

associated deliveries required during future phases is much less than needed during Phase 1.

Future phases of construction will move progressively north, away from Borth and its associated

residents and businesses, and thus the number of people likely to be disturbed may decrease.

However, during these subsequent Phases, construction works will move closer to Ynyslas, the

golf course and caravan parks.



Based on current understanding and ensuring that recommended mitigation measures are

implemented, the impacts from any future during the construction of future phases are considered

to result in moderate adverse, short term impacts.

Post construction impacts to Noise and Vibration

Following construction of future phases, there will be no impacts to noise levels. No impacts to

noise levels would arise following a managed realignment option at Ynyslas. The impact is

therefore considered to be negligible.

Decommissioning impacts to Noise and Vibration

Any future decommissioning activities will require the use of plant, machinery and vehicles to

remove materials. This is assumed to entail similar noisy activities to those for the construction of

Phase 1. As such, mitigation measures similar to those indicated for Phase 1 shall also be

required. Post decommissioning, impacts to noise levels are considered to be negligible.

Landscape and Visual Amenity

Phase 1 construction impacts to Landscape and Visual Amenity

Potential impacts during construction of Phase 1 will arise from construction activities, the delivery

and storage of materials (by road and / or sea), the use of plant, and the establishment of site

compounds.

The works will also require the temporary restriction of access to areas of the public beach which

may negatively affect movement patterns. It is likely that the character of the site would be altered

during construction, due to the nature of a construction site, which is an incongruous feature in the

established local urban area affecting the coastal setting and existing site use.

Landscape impacts may arise during the construction and /or operational phases of the proposed

development and may impact on the following potential landscape resources: site vegetation, land

cover and land form; the landscape character of the area; and the existing site use.

The temporary use of site compounds, the storage and use of construction equipment and

vehicles and the importing of rock and other materials for construction of the proposed MPR, rock

groynes and breakwaters would result in a change in the landscape resources of the site during

construction. These impacts are anticipated as being moderate adverse and temporary.

The proposals would result in an adverse change in the landscape character of the local area due

to the introduction of construction activities into a reasonably peaceful landscape

These impacts would have a limited degree of exposure on the wider area due to the existing

urban nature of the local area and the site’s visual containment within it. Outside the immediate

construction site and site compounds, within the wider Borth-Ynyslas frontage, the works are

considered to be moderate adverse and temporary.

The proposals may result in noticeable detrimental change in the land use of the site during

construction due to restricted access and potential inconvenience to the beach and promenade

areas. Impacts on the landscape resources throughout construction phases are considered to be

moderate to substantial adverse on a local scale and temporary.

Post Phase 1 construction impacts to Landscape and Visual Amenity

Post-construction of Phase 1, it is anticipated that there will be a notable alteration in the physical

layout of the defences impacting on the land form of the beach however, the overall reduction in

number of groynes and removal of derelict structures is likely to improve the existing character.



The MPR and breakwaters are substantial new structures being introduced into the existing

seascape; however they will be contained largely below the water level and will be only partially

exposed during periods of low tide.

The removal and replacement of groynes, the proposed MPR and breakwaters will prevent

erosion and displacement of the beach itself, which in turn will help counteract the adverse

impacts of the presence of these new structures. The beach will also benefit from areas of beach

nourishment.

Due to the nature of the site there is limited existing vegetation that will be affected by the

proposals. The impacts on the landscape and landform are considered to be slight beneficial

and permanent.

The introduction of a MPR, breakwaters and rock groynes will have a moderate adverse impact on

the local landscape character due to the introduction of incongruous elements into the area.

However, sensitive scheme planning, the removal of dilapidated timber groynes and beach

nourishment, would also result in a positive change.

The proposals have the potential to have a favourable effect on the land use of the site due to the

improved amenity of the beach areas. The reduced number of groynes made possible by the

introduction of the breakwaters, rock groynes and MPR and any resulting improved surf may

result in increased footfall to the area, in addition to the improved functional ability of the coastal

defences themselves. As such, the impacts on the landscape resources throughout the

operational phase are expected to be slight beneficial.

Construction of future phases - impacts to Landscape and Visual Amenity

The construction of further rock breakwaters and rock groynes during future phases are likely to

have similar impact on landscape and visual amenity as those outlined above during construction

of Phase 1.

Post construction impacts to Landscape and Visual Amenity

The whole Scheme proposals would result in both adverse and beneficial changes to the

landcover and use of the site. There will be a notable alteration in the physical layout of the

defences. The breakwaters and rock groynes are substantial new structures being introduced into

the existing seascape; however they will be contained largely below the water level and will be

only partially exposed during periods of low tide.

The overall reduction in number of groynes and removal of derelict structures is likely to improve

the existing character. As such, the impacts on the landcover and landform resources post

construction of future phases are expected to be slight beneficial.

The introduction of new rock structures along the whole frontage or a combination of rock groynes

will have a moderate adverse impact on the local landscape character due to the introduction of

incongruous elements into the area and a physical change to the current situation.

The removal of dilapidated timber groynes and the addition beach nourishment would also result

in a positive change due to the remedying of the poor condition of the existing coastal defences,

improving their functionality and preventing further erosion and flooding which is detrimental to the

landscape character of the area.

Overall, the impacts on the landscape character of the area post construction of future phases are

expected to be slight beneficial and permanent.

The proposals have the potential to have a favourable effect on the land use of the site during

operations due to the improved amenity of the beach areas. The reduced number and length of

groynes made possible by the introduction of shorter rock groynes will also be beneficial. As

such, the impacts on the landscape post construction of the whole Scheme are expected to be

slight beneficial and permanent.



Possible Managed Realignment at Ynyslas - impacts to Landscape and Visual Amenity

Any future retreat at the northern end of this scheme will invite erosion of the existing timber

groynes and beach area up to the retreat itself. Initially this erosion will have an adverse impact

but the operation of the retreat preventing further erosion will in the long term counterbalance its

presence. As such, the impacts on the landscape resources in the operational phases are

expected to be slight beneficial.

Decommissioning impacts to Landscape and Visual Amenity

The decommissioning of the scheme would likely result in both adverse and beneficial changes to

the landscape character, landcover and use of the site. The removal of the substantial rock

structures will notably alter the physical layout of the beach. The decommissioning works

themselves with the presence of plant and construction traffic will have adverse impacts similar to

those set out for construction impacts. Due to their more prominent visibility compared to the

predominantly submerged MPR and breakwaters, the removal of the rock groynes will have the

greater visual and landscape impact; however the removal of each of the separate elements will

have their own impacts.

The removal of the anthropogenic features: the rock groynes, MPR and breakwaters are likely to

initially have positive impacts upon the landcover and landform. However, without any coastal

protection, the beach will be threatened by erosion and Lower Borth without any defence will be at

risk to flooding. As such, the impacts on the landscape resources from decommissioning the

coastal defences without replacement are expected to be moderate adverse and permanent.

The removal of the rock structures along the whole frontage of Borth-Ynyslas will have a moderate

beneficial impact on the local landscape character due to the removal of incongruous elements

from the area and a physical change to the current situation. However, their removal will also

mean loss of their functionality and ability to prevent further erosion and flooding which will be

detrimental to the landscape character of the area.

Overall, the impacts on the landscape character of the area during and post decommissioning are

expected to be moderate adverse and permanent.

The decommissioning of the proposals will have both negative and positive effects on the land use

of the site. The removal of the MPR and loss of subsequent surf will see a reduction in number of

surf and associated users of the beach; however this will be counterbalanced by the short term

benefits of removal of the groynes resulting in a more open and natural beach area for a wider

range of users. Over the long term any subsequent erosion of the beach will have detrimental

impacts on land use and potentially jeopardise certain interdependent important amenities and

attractions to the area, including the local public rights of way and Borth and Ynyslas Golf Club.

The impacts on the land use during and after decommissioning of the whole scheme are expected

to moderate adverse and permanent.

The potential impacts to visual amenity from decommissioning the Scheme are similar to those set

out during the construction of the Scheme (see above).

Tourism and Recreation

Phase 1 construction impacts to Tourism and Recreation

Tourists holidaying in and visiting Borth are likely to experience disturbance as a result of the

construction, from noise, visual impacts and the presence and movement of machinery and

vehicles to and from the beach.

The construction work on the beach and in the water will also impact recreational activities

enjoyed by tourists. Tourists and residents are also likely to be affected by the increased traffic

associated with the construction process and loss of parking areas, which will be used as site

compound and storage areas.



The disturbance experienced could cause people to cut short their holidays or even be

discouraged from visiting at all. Construction activities during late summer / early autumn 2010

will mean that the main tourism period will be affected, with the potential for financial

consequences to businesses, such as bed and breakfast accommodation, caravan parks, pubs,

cafes and shops.

Recreational beach activities are likely to be affected during the construction of Phase 1 due to the

presence of plant and machinery on the beach, restricting access to certain areas and causing

similar noise and nuisance impacts to those outlined above for tourism. Beach and access

restrictions will be confined to the immediate area around the works in Lower Borth, therefore

affecting all the activities that take place here. The remainder of the beach north of the works will

remain unrestricted, providing plenty of beach area for enjoyment. Activities such as kite

buggying at Ynyslas or the use of the golf course are unlikely to be affected.

Water-based activities will also be affected during the construction of Phase 1. It is likely that

water-based activities will be prohibited, or at least restricted, in the immediate area of the works

for safety reasons. The remainder of the sea along the frontage, north of the works will remain

unrestricted, providing plenty of space for water-based recreation, including surfing, kite surfing,

windsurfing, swimming, rowing, boating, diving and jet-skiing.

Although access to the area of beach and sea that the Borth Outdoor Education Centre normally

uses for its water sports will be prohibited during the construction of Phase 1, the area of beach to

the north, and access to the sea from there, will not be affected by construction activities.

Borth Rowing Club sometimes uses the Borth slipway. As such, the club / competitions could be

affected by restrictions to the slipway, beach and sea area around the construction area. It is

possible that competitions could still take place further north along the frontage, outside of the

restricted sea area, assuming the boats can be launched directly from the beach.

It is essential that the Borth slipway remains fully open for use by the RNLI to enable their training

and search and rescue operations to continue throughout the entire construction period. The

contractor will ensure that the slipway is not obstructed and that the path of the lifeboat to and

from the slipway (either on land or in the sea) remains clear at all times.

With the recommended mitigation measures in place, impacts are considered to be moderate

adverse and short term.

Post Phase 1 construction impacts to Tourism and Recreation

Following construction Lower Borth will be provided with improved protection from erosion and

flooding. The protection of the village will benefit its tourism industry through the protection of

holiday accommodation and services. The presence of the MPR may also attract more visitors,

potentially improving the tourism potential of Borth. The overall impact of the scheme on tourism

is considered to be moderate beneficial and medium term.

Maintenance of the scheme will be required and holidaymakers will experience some general

disturbance from these activities. However, maintenance of the MPR will only be undertaken

approximately every 5 years and maintenance recharge of the shingle berm is not anticipated until

after the construction of the whole Scheme.

The scheme will provide a number of recreational benefits to beach users such as a more

sheltered and stable beach for recreation, improved access along the beach, increased area for

beach activities and a wider shingle beach.

The MPR has been designed to improve the surfing amenity at Borth in the lee of the reef. In

addition to improving conditions for surfers, the MPR will also create conditions favourable to

windsurfers. The sheltered conditions in the lee of the reef will aid them in launching safely and

allow them to pick up speed before hitting the surf for wave jumping. User conflict between

surfers and windsurfers is likely to be minimal since conditions favourable to surfing are unsuitable

for windsurfing (ASR, 2003).



Other benefits to water recreation arising from the scheme are likely to include calmer waters in

the lee of the reef and breakwaters, which are more favourable to swimming, and the

enhancement of marine habitats by the presence of the new structures may encourage diving and

snorkelling. Should diving and snorkelling become popular, particularly around the MPR, CCC will

have to ensure appropriate signage and management is put in place to avoid user conflict

between divers/snorkelers and surfers/windsurfers.

It is likely that the calmer waters in the lee of the reef, the increased beach width and the waves

generated by the MPR will have a minor beneficial and medium term impact upon the Borth

Outdoor Education Centre and the activities it runs.

Borth Rowing Club indicated that it could practice along the frontage more frequently if the MPR

creates more sheltered conditions in the lee of the reef and reduced wave energy on the Borth

slipway.

Launching from the Borth slipway will resume following construction, and vessels will be able to

navigate around the MPR and breakwaters. The buoyed channel and speed restriction area

should be reviewed post construction of the MPR to determine if revisions to the current

arrangements are needed.

The scheme will not impact on existing RNLI navigation routes or the frequency of search and

rescue operations and thus the impact will be negligible.

Following construction, the maintenance works could cause some disruption to recreational

activities. However, as described earlier, the frequency of the works will be minimal. Signs and

fencing will be used where appropriate for any maintenance activities. The impacts are therefore

considered to be minor adverse and temporary (limited to period of works only).

Construction of future phases - impacts to Tourism and Recreation

The construction of future phases is likely to have similar impacts to those arising during the

construction of Phase 1, however each future phase requires less construction activity than Phase

1.

Phase 2 works are likely to disturb a greater number of people than the other future phases, as

they will be undertaken along a stretch of frontage with a greater number of residential properties,

tourist accommodation, pubs and shops.

Impacts to water-based recreation are likely to be similar to those during the construction of Phase

1, however, impacts associated with the construction of the MPR, which impact on water users,

are not relevant to future phases. Latter phases of work may also be able to access the beach by

an alternate route i.e. not via the slipway at lower Borth, thus reducing the degree of impacts on

recreational users and the RNLI.

Future phases of work will, however, have greater potential to disturb users of the golf course and

residents of the caravan parks further north along the frontage. Vehicular access through the golf

course, particularly for Phase 4, could also impact on users of the golf course.

The residual impacts during the construction of Phase 2 on tourism and recreation are considered

to be minor - moderate adverse, and short term. If construction materials for future phases are

delivered by road (Delivery Option B), there will be a negligible impact on water based-recreation.



Post construction impacts to Tourism and Recreation

Following construction of future phases, a greater area of Borth will be provided with greater flood

protection than at present. Access along the beach will also be improved by removing the

dilapidated timber groynes from that length of the frontage. This could improve the use for the

beach for activities such as kite buggying. Increased use of the beach by some or all activities

could, however, result in conflict between different groups of beach users. The impacts on

tourism and recreation are considered to be minor to moderate beneficial. No additional

impacts to water based recreation are anticipated (negligible).

Possible Managed Realignment at Ynyslas - impacts to Tourism and Recreation

At this stage in the outline design, the precise location and dimensions of any managed

realignment are not known. Construction activities would have similar impacts to those generated

during the construction of Phase 4 (see above). Impacts to water based recreation are likely to be

negligible, due to these construction works not taking place in the water or affecting access to the

water. Impacts to users of the golf course would be similar to those experienced during

construction of Phase 4 (see above), however, the construction of a setback defence would lead

to the loss of an area of the golf course, having a moderate adverse impact on users.

The construction of the set back defence is also likely to impact on users of the coastal path,

which crosses the golf course onto the beach near Renfrew Drive.

A managed realignment option at Ynyslas would impact on the coastal path and the golf course.

The area available for beach recreation and water based recreation will not change greatly and

the impact on beach and water users is likely to be negligible.

Decommissioning impacts to Tourism and Recreation

The decommissioning works would have similar impacts to those generated during the

construction processes.

The removal of the MPR, rock breakwaters and rock groynes will leave Borth exposed to greater

wave energy, which is likely to result in erosion of the beach in front of the village (further

decreasing the village’s coastal protection) and increased incidences of flooding, affecting roads,

houses, businesses and schools. Many of the properties currently providing accommodation to

visitors and tourists will need to be removed / relocated.

Any increased recreational amenity provided by the MPR will be removed, potentially returning

conditions to their current state. As such, the area may become less attractive to surfers and

windsurfers.

Overall impacts to tourism and recreation could potentially be major, adverse and long term.

Fishing

Phase 1 construction impacts to Fishing

There are unlikely to be any impacts on the commercial fisheries during construction of Phase 1

since both the fishing grounds and vessels are a considerable distance away from the site of

construction and none of the commercial fishing vessels launch from the slipway in Borth.

There are likely to be some impacts to recreational fishing/angling since the presence of plant and

construction activities on the beach will restrict access to areas of the beach in the immediate area

around the works in Lower Borth and will prohibit those wishing to fish within them. The

remainder of the beach north of the works will remain unrestricted and recreational angling

activities in these areas are unlikely to be affected.

Overall, the impact on commercial and recreational fisheries during construction of Phase 1 has

been determined to be minor adverse.



Post Phase 1 construction impacts to Fishing

Anglers will be able to continue to use the beach following construction, although the new rock

structures may restrict the area available to cast their lines and will result in a small reduction in

beach area. There will also be a small loss of subtidal area due to the footprint of the MPR. The

removal of the existing timber groynes will affect fixed netting from the beach, since the groynes

will no longer be available as the landward anchor along the frontage included within Phase 1,

however, it is possible to use a land anchor instead.

There is also the potential for the MPR to have beneficial impacts to recreational fishing and

angling through the creation of a new structure that can be colonised by algae and marine

benthos, providing a feeding ground and a refuge for fish and shellfish. This may increase the

number and type of fish available for recreational and commercial fishing.

The potential increase in beach and water users resulting from the MPR and improved beach

amenity could impact both people wishing to fish from the beach through conflict with other users

and/or disturb fish close to shore. Increased beach use is likely to be restricted to the area of the

MPR.

Overall, the impact to commercial and recreational fisheries post construction of Phase 1 is

considered to be negligible.

Construction of future phases - impacts to Fishing

The potential impacts to commercial and recreational fisheries during the construction of future

phases are likely to be similar to those during the construction of Phase 1.

However, Phase 2 includes the stretch of beach from which one of the commercial fishing boats is

launched. It is likely that construction activities will impact the launching of this vessel from its

existing location

With the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures in place the residual impacts

on commercial and recreational fisheries during construction of future phases of the scheme have

been determined to be minor adverse in the immediate area of works and short term.

Post construction impacts to Fishing

The identification and mitigation of impacts to commercial and recreational fisheries post

construction of the whole Scheme are considered to be similar to those post construction of Phase

1. Residual impacts are considered to be negligible.

Possible Managed Realignment at Ynyslas - impacts to Fishing

The creation and functioning of a managed realignment option at Ynyslas is not considered to

have any impacts on commercial or recreational fishing over and above those identified above in

the creation and operation of the Scheme as a whole.

Decommissioning impacts to Fishing

Decommissioning works are likely to have similar impacts to those identified during the

construction phases.

Following the removal of the Scheme, the coastal processes and shoreline of the Borth to Ynyslas

frontage will change dramatically. The rolling back of the shoreline and the erosion of the beach

will potentially make it impossible to launch commercial vessels from the beach. Eventually, the

slipway will degrade and launching of vessels will not be possible. The potential re-establishment

of the outflow from the Leri is also likely to impact on the boat yard at Ynyslas and the vessels that

launch from here.



It is difficult to determine with any certainty how future removal of the Scheme will impact on the

coastline and the Dyfi Estuary. any impacts could potentially be major, adverse and long term.

Historic Environment

Phase 1 construction impacts to Historic Environment

The construction of Phase 1 could potential affect two known features, notably a section of the

historic coastal defences and the buried peat deposits.

The exact location of the section of historic coastal defence adjacent to Borth village is unknown.

However based on descriptions of the sections of coastal defences to the north of the village, it is

likely to be heavily eroded and embedded within the front face of the shingle ridge at the top of the

beach. This section of historic coastal defence could be disturbed during any excavation activities

undertaken during Phase 1, including during the construction of the rock structures and the

removal of the existing timber groynes.

The proposed scheme has the potential to disturb yet unknown archaeological remains through

the removal of material during excavation or the possible destruction of sensitive deposits caused

by the presence of heavy plant.

Although the likelihood of finds being present is low, disturbance to the peat deposits during

excavation for the rock structures and the removal of the existing timber groynes is likely and thus

there is potential for disturbance / damage to any features present.

Overall, the impacts are considered minor adverse and long term, but limited to the immediate

areas of excavation.

Post Phase 1 construction impacts to Historic Environment

Post construction, Phase 1 has the potential to affect unknown archaeological remains on the

seabed through alterations to the coastal processes operating along the frontage. Impacts to

coastal processes are, however, considered to be negligible (see above). Knock on impacts to

historic environment features are, therefore, also considered to be negligible.

Construction of future phases - impacts to Historic Environment

The construction of future phases could directly affect several known features; two sections of

historic coastal defences/breakwater, the wrecks of several unknown vessels and a medieval fish

trap. The sections of coastal defence/breakwater are embedded within the front face of the

shingle ridge at the top of the beach. These sections of coastal defence could be disturbed during

excavation for the rock structures and the removal of the timber groynes.

The wrecks of the unknown vessels are likely to be buried beneath the sand on the lower shore

and could potentially be disturbed during excavation works to build the rock structures, removal of

the timber groynes or by plant tracking across the lower beach.

The medieval fish trap is located approximately 500m from the beach and is unlikely to be directly

impacted during construction works.

A number of archaeological finds have also been made along the beach. Although the artefacts

have been removed, there is the possibility of further artefacts being found.

The assessment of potential impacts upon unknown archaeological features during the

construction of future phases is considered to be similar to that relating to the construction of

Phase 1.

Overall, impacts on historic environment features are considered minor adverse.



Post construction impacts to Historic Environment

The proposed scheme has the potential to affect known and unknown archaeological remains on

the seabed through alterations to the coastal processes operating along the frontage. This could

result in an increase in scour or erosion affecting any remains on the seabed or within exposed

peat deposits. Impacts to coastal processes are, however, considered to be negligible (see

above). Knock on impacts to historic environment features are, therefore, also considered to be

negligible.

Possible Managed Realignment at Ynyslas - impacts to Historic Environment

There are no additional known historic environment features within the area proposed for possible

managed realignment. The creation and operation of a managed realignment option at Ynyslas is

not considered to have any impacts over and above those identified in the construction and

operation of future phases.

Decommissioning impacts to Historic Environment

The works required to decommission the Scheme are considered to have similar impacts to those

arising during the construction works (see above).

Following the decommissioning, the coastal processes will alter causing a breach(es) in the

shingle ridge, roll back of the shore and changes in sediment movement. These impacts could

have a knock on effect on the historic environment, causing buried features to be uncovered and,

potentially damaged. Should historic environment features be uncovered, this could provide an

opportunity for study and currently unknown features may be revealed.

The predicted changes to coastal processes are, however, uncertain making it difficult to predict

how known historic environment features could be impacted. Impacts could be major adverse

and long term.

Inter-relationship between the above and in-combination with other projects

CCC are undertaking a programme of refurbishment to the upper and lower timber-r breastwork

along the southern end of the Borth frontage, in the same area as the Phase 1 works for the

proposed Scheme. The refurbishment will comprise bolting new timbers to the front of the existing

breastwork upright timbers and replacing any rotten / work timber coping along the top of the

breastworks. CCC will be undertaking the design and construction of the refurbishment. The

refurbished timber breastworks will not be any higher than the existing breastwork.

The timber breastwork refurbishments are considered to be minor. The amount of material, plant

and staff required to undertake the works are relatively small. Once completed, the timber

breastworks will have a beneficial impact on the visual amenity of the immediate area, having

replaced the rotten timber coping currently visible along the southern end of the Borth frontage. In

addition, the refurbished breastworks will have improved the flood defence functionality and will

contribute to the functioning of the Scheme by holding the rear of the shingle ridge in place.

Other than the timber breastwork upgrading that is being undertaken by CCC, there are no other

coastal protection schemes known to be taking place along the frontage or to the north or south of

the proposed Scheme that could contribute to and increase the magnitude of the impacts from the

proposed Scheme. A coast protection and improvement scheme is currently underway on the

Gwynedd coast at Tywyn, to the north of the Dyfi estuary. The Dyfi estuary is a natural break /

headland preventing the transport of sediment from North of the Dyfi Southwards, or vice versa.

There are no other known developments or projects planned along the Borth frontage.

In-combination impacts are, therefore, considered to be of no greater significance than the

individual and cumulative impacts identified for the Scheme.



Conclusions and Recommendations

The Scheme is considered to provide benefits to the residents and visitors of Borth by reducing

the impacts of coastal flooding and erosion and maintaining or improving the amenity value and

use of the beach and water for recreation over the life of the Scheme.

‘Significant impacts’ identified throughout the EIA process are considered to be those identified as

‘minor’, ‘moderate’ or ‘major’ and either ‘adverse’ or ‘beneficial’ and have been highlighted in the

summary table below. Impacts that have been identified as ‘negligible’ are not considered to be

significant.

The adverse impacts of the Scheme are, in general, localised in the area(s) of construction /

decommissioning works and short term i.e. lasting only as long as the construction /

decommissioning activity. Long term adverse impacts to the geological peat forest deposits are

possible in the immediate area of construction of the rock structures, particularly the rock

breakwaters. These impacts are not avoidable, but can be limited by ensuring that excavation

works are kept to a minimum. Post construction impacts of Phase 1 and of the whole Scheme

are, in general, considered to be negligible or beneficial.

Recommendations for managing the environmental impacts identified have been made within this

ES. The implementation of these measures will minimise any adverse environmental impacts and

could increase beneficial impacts to some receptors. A draft Environmental Action Plan (EAP)

has been produced (see Section 8).

Given the uncertainty surrounding some of the post Phase 1 impacts and future impacts post

construction of the whole Scheme, increasing the level of knowledge associated with the

construction of a MPR coastal defence scheme would provide benefits to the design of future

phases and the construction of similar schemes elsewhere in Wales or the UK. Consideration

should be given to the collection of data relating to the following:

• Beach levels, sediment movement and functioning of the MPR

• Biological colonisation of the MPR (sub-tidal monitoring)

• Tourism / visitor numbers, particularly surfing and beach users

Monitoring of beach levels, sediment movement and of the biological colonisation of the MPR are

considered to be key recommendations post Phase 1 construction.



5037097-830/70/DG/046

36

Summary of impacts

Phase 1 construction Post Phase 1

construction

Construction of

future phases Post construction

Managed

realignment at

Ynyslas

Decommissioning

Geology, geomorphology

and coastal processes

Geology Negligible - minor adverse

Irreversible

Negligible - minor adverse

Irreversible

Negligible - moderate adverse

Irreversible

Negligible - moderate beneficial

Negligible - moderate adverse

Irreversible

Negligible - minor beneficial

Coastal processes Minor adverse Short term

Minor adverse Short term

Minor adverse Major adverse

Coastal processes –

sand Negligible Negligible Major adverse

Coastal processes –

shingle Negligible Negligible Major adverse

Geomorphology Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Major adverse

Ecology

Nature conservation

sites Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Adverse

Major adverse Irreversible

Terrestrial ecology Negligible - minor adverse

Reversible Negligible


Reversible Negligible

Minor adverse Long term

Major adverse Irreversible

Intertidal ecology Minor adverse Short term Reversible


Medium term

Minor adverse Short term Reversible


Medium term

Minor adverse, short term – Beneficial,

medium term Negligible

Subtidal ecology Negligible

Minor beneficial Medium term

Negligible Negligible Negligible Minor adverse

Short term

Marine mammals Minor adverse Short term

Negligible Minor adverse

Short term Negligible

Negligible - minor adverse, short term


Fish Minor adverse

Short term


Medium term


Negligible Negligible - minor

adverse Short term


Birds Minor adverse




adverse Short term


Traffic and transport

Traffic Minor adverse


Minor - moderate adverse

Short term Negligible Negligible Unclear



5037097-830/70/DG/046

37

Phase 1 construction Post Phase 1

construction

Construction of

future phases Post construction

Managed

realignment at

Ynyslas

Decommissioning

Parking Moderate – major

Short term Minor adverse -

moderate beneficial

Moderate – major adverse



Long term Unclear

Water and Sediment quality

Suspended sediment Minor adverse

Short term Negligible Negligible Negligible


Short term


Contaminants Negligible - minor adverse

Short term

Negligible Negligible minor

adverse Short term


adverse Short term


Short term

Bathing water Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible

Noise Moderate adverse Short term

Negligible Moderate adverse


Moderate adverse Short term

Moderate adverse Short term

Landscape, seascape and

visual amenity

Landcover and landform Moderate adverse Temporary

Slight beneficial Permanent

Moderate adverse Temporary



Moderate adverse Permanent

Landscape character Moderate - substantial adverse

Temporary


Moderate - substantial adverse

Temporary




Land use Moderate - substantial adverse

Temporary


Moderate - substantial adverse

Temporary




Visual amenity Up to substantial adverse

Slight adverse Up to substantial

adverse Slight adverse - slight beneficial

Slight adverse - slight beneficial

Slight - substantial adverse

Tourism and recreation

Beach recreation Moderate adverse

Short term

Moderate adverse - moderate beneficial

Medium term


Short term

Minor - moderate beneficial

Negligible Major adverse

Long term

Water based recreation Moderate adverse

Short term

Moderate adverse - moderate beneficial

Medium term


Short term Negligible Negligible

Major adverse Long term

Fishing Minor adverse




adverse Short term


Historic environment Minor adverse Long term

Negligible Minor adverse

Long term Negligible Negligible




Documents

Borth Coast Defence Scheme - IEMA - Home Statement Borth Coast Defence Scheme 5037097-830/70/DG/046 iii CMS Convention on Migratory Species Coastal Protection A scheme designed to