1

REPORT TO: Development Control Committee DATE: 28 July 2008 REPORTING OFFICER: Operational Director–Environmental and Regulatory Services. SUBJECT: The Mersey Gateway Plan No: 08/00325/TWA Application Numbers: 08/00325/TWA: South of Ditton Junction, Ditton Road, land north of Hutchinson Street, Victoria Road, Catalyst Trade Park, Ashley Way, St. Helens Canal, Widnes Warth, Runcorn Sands/River Mersey, Wigg Island, Astmoor Industrial Estate, the A533 Central Expressway with its junction with the A533 Bridgwater Expressway and the A558 Daresbury Expressway, and part of the A533 Central Expressway to Halton Brow Wards: Of Borough wide interest.

2

Introduction The context of this application, a description of the proposed works, along with the consultation exercise undertaken and relevant national, regional and local policies are contained within the background report provided within this agenda. The Transport & Works Act (TWA) application has been submitted to the Secretary of State for determination. The application includes a request that the Secretary of State determines the associated planning application within the TWA submission, the associated CPO’s, Side Roads and Footpath Orders and the proposed tolling regime. Halton Borough Council is a consultee in respect of this submission and is only expressing its view on the TWA submission to the Secretary of State. It is not able to determine any aspect of this submission. Other bodies such as the Environment Agency will also be consulted and will make their views known independently to the Secretary of State. Whilst the Council should have regard to the views of outside bodies it should bear in mind that it does not have the power or ability to resolve any issue they may raise. The Council should give weight to their views but also have regard to all the material considerations relating to the scheme as a whole. In assessing the impact of the development the following issues are considered to be relevant:

• Transport (chapter 16 of the ES)

• Environmental Health o Noise (chapter 17 of the ES) o Air Quality (chapter 19 of the ES) o Contamination (chapter 14 of the ES)

• Ecology o Terrestrial and Avian (chapter 10 of the ES) o Aquatic (chapter 11 of the ES)

• Landscape and Visual Amenity (chapter 12 of the ES)

• Cultural Heritage (chapter 13 of the ES)

• Navigation (chapter 18 of the ES)

• Hydrodynamics/Estuarine Process (chapter 7 of the ES)

• Waste (chapter 15 of the ES)

• Surface water quality (chapter 8 of the ES)

• Regeneration (chapter 20 of the ES)

• Other matters (Greenbelt and Greenspace) Navigation, Aquatic Ecology and Hydrodynamics & Estuarine Process are issues unique to the TWA application. All of these issues will have to be assessed against the policies in the Development Plan in line with Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 in order to identify the extent to which the project complies or conflict with planning policy or offers material benefits which may outweigh any harm to policy.

3

Transport & Works Act Order: South of Ditton Junction, Ditton Road, land north of Hutchinson Street, Victoria Road, Catalyst Trade Park, Ashley Way, St. Helens Canal, Widnes Warth, Runcorn Sands/River Mersey, Wigg Island, Astmoor Industrial Estate, and the A533 Central Expressway with its junction with the A533 Bridgwater Expressway and the A558 Daresbury Expressway Transport Surpassed only by the M6 Thelwall Viaduct, the SJB is the second busiest crossing of the Mersey, carrying significantly more traffic than the Mersey Tunnels and the Warrington crossings at peak times. The SJB was widened to accommodate a four-lane carriageway in 1977. At the time of the widening the bridge had a daily vehicle carrying capacity of 58,000 vehicles per day. Typically the SJB now carries 83,000 vehicles per weekday. It is also important to note that between the morning and evening peak periods, the traffic flow is typically in excess of 5000 vehicles per hour (two way) and is therefore operating in excess of 70% of its capacity. Incidents on the bridge or its approaches can result in extensive queues and delays that can impact on the road networks of Halton and surrounding Authorities. Such incidents affect businesses; residents and visitors across the sub-region, and can extend for long periods. Whilst other crossings over the Mersey will continue to attract more traffic over the coming period up to 2015 (known as the project opening year), the SJB already operates at full capacity during peak periods and therefore the additional pressures on the crossing will result in longer peak periods, resulting in worsening environmental quality and journey-time reliability. The approach roads to the SJB also suffer problems with congestion. In addition the dependency of bus services on the SJB is also resulting in issues with local public transport reliability with a moderate to high negative significance. Also of high negative significance is the lack of a cycleway across the river and lack of an acceptable pedestrian route. Instead pedestrians have a discrete canterlivered walkway. The SJB currently has 4 sub standard width lanes, which cyclists must share with cars, buses and heavy goods vehicles. Alternatively they are required to dismount and share the walkway with pedestrians. A detailed traffic model known as the “Mersey Gateway Model” MGM has been created to assess the traffic that would result, in various scenarios. Traffic flows are predicted for 2 future scenarios in both the 2015 opening year and 2030 future year, as follows: “do minimum” which includes the most likely development/ infrastructure scenarios & traffic growth etc, but no

4

Mersey Gateway; and “do something”, which includes the most likely development/ infrastructure scenarios, traffic growth and Mersey Gateway. The do something scenarios include the addition of charging a toll on both the existing SJB and the new crossing. Construction phase Whilst the development is under construction there will be temporary disruption to traffic in various locations in Runcorn and Widnes. This matter will be addressed through a Traffic Management Plan (within the EMP). Construction vehicles will access the full length of the project corridor, but will not contribute significantly to the overall traffic volume. Holistically construction work will have a low to high negative impact depending on the specific location. It is proposed that a Code of Construction Practice be adopted by the successful contractor that will seek to control construction related matters including time of operations, dust, noise, vehicle movements etc. A construction management plan will also be required. Operational phase The MGM predicts that in the opening year (2015) the traffic on the SJB will drop from its current maximum recorded daily flow of 93,000 vehicles to 13,000 vehicles per day and that by the “design year” (15 years after opening – 2030) the numbers of daily crossings will only have increased to 16,000, freeing the bridge up for its intended role as a sustainable transport route. The MGM demonstrates that although the new crossing provides three lanes in both directions, the effect of tolling on both the new crossing and the SJB will result in a small reduction in total peak hour traffic, crossing the river in Halton, rather than the attraction of new additional traffic, in the opening year. The model also indicates that in both 2015 and 2030 journey times across the borough (across the river and non-river crossing journeys) would be cut for cars, heavy goods vehicles and buses. As such the impact of the project on journey times will be of high positive significance as will it be for trips generated through walking and cycling which will increase across the river via the SJB. In terms of public rights of way these will be retained, albeit in a modified location in some cases. A draft Mersey Gateway Sustainable Transport Strategy has been prepared for public consultation. This sets out proposals and an Action Plan for a phased approach to the implementation of sustainable transport measures. Phase 1 will initially focus on Runcorn Busway improvements, service enhancements, cycling and walking improvements (including linking SJB,

5

Runcorn Station and Old Town), and interchange at stations, whilst Phase 2 will focus on SMART card payment, strategic Park&Ride, canals, mobility management and reopening of the Halton Curve. This draft strategy is to be considered by the Executive Board on 25 July 2008. If approved it will go out to public consultation over the summer. The measures proposed by the strategy will benefit many of the deprived communities across the borough of which 30% do not have access to a car or van since they will be able to benefit from a sustainable transport corridor. The draft strategy will continue to evolve and be evaluated as the project is further developed and brought into use. Cumulative effect During construction the project in conjunction with other major developments in the borough would result in negative cumulative impact. However, once in operation, the project will have a positive cumulative impact, providing improved access to areas of regeneration and development, as well as to leisure, education, retail, health and employment opportunities. Conclusion In addition to the submitted documents further traffic flow information and local highway capacity assessments were requested, for all junctions and links along the reference design i.e. from Ditton junction through to J12 M56. Data was provided so that a comparison could be made between the modelled base year (2006) flows and the observed (from count information) base year flows, to ensure that the flows generated by the model were realistic for application on a local level. This now provides officers with the confidence to proceed to the more detailed design stages of the project. Regular meetings have been held with the design team to discuss the design proposals, and the refinement of the design is an ongoing process to be taken forward to the technical approval procedure post planning. It should be noted that the Highway Authority will be the technical approval Authority for the project and the detailed design will adhere as appropriate to the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges or other design standards existent at the time of technical approval. With this in mind, the Highway Authority as regulator therefore does not wish to object to the scheme and a number of conditions have been recommended. The Highways Agency has been in discussions with the applicant and is anticipating the submission of further information relating to the traffic modelling. There have been objections received from the Transport Activists’ Roundtable North West, Halton Friends of the Earth and The Campaign to Protect Rural England concerning the need to reduce CO2 emissions, the need to inter-connect land-use and transport policies and reducing the need to travel.

6

Concerns have also been voiced by many of the local residents who live along the project corridor. The owners of Halton Lea Shopping Centre have recognised that the project will assist in enhancing the centre’s prospects through the redirection of traffic closer to the centre. However, they have objected to the disconnecting of the Halton Lea Junction from the main carriageway that will connect to the Gateway. Instead, to access Halton Lea, traffic will need to leave the Central Expressway at Halton Brow or the Lodge Lane Junction in order to join distributor roads that link to the Halton Lea Junction. This, the Shopping Centre owners consider, will affect the ease of access to the centre. The shopping centre owners have identified five principle routes to the centre. They have suggested that their objection can be overcome should a thorough and comprehensive ‘Signage Strategy’, including Halton Lea, be prepared. It is recognised that the SJB is the only crossing of the Mersey between Liverpool and Warrington and the only strategic crossing between Liverpool and the Thelwall Viaduct on the M6. As such congestion on the SJB is very high, resulting in slow journey times and it is a weak point in the highway network during poor weather conditions or when accidents occur, undermining its resilience and therefore fails to meet transportational requirements. Planning Policy Considerations The application satisfies the requirements of Planning Policy Guidance 13 (PPG13): Transport (2001) as it promotes sustainable transport choices and facilitates improved cross-river walking and cycling. In terms of current RSS policies, the project aims to improve the economic competitiveness of the North-west, improve a regionally significant route, and expresses the need to increase use of public transport, walking and cycling and reduce or reverse the growth of road traffic and therefore Policies T1, T3, T4 & EQ2 are satisfied. Emerging RSS Draft Policies RT2, RT4, RT9, DP5 are concerned with ensuring reduced dependency on the car through the securing of improvements to other modes of transport and as such are complied with. Draft policy RT10 and DP4 of the emerging RSS is concerned with transport management and investment, including the need to improve existing infrastructure and changes to public transport services, which the Mersey Gateway satisfies. In terms of the UDP, the project satisfies Policy S13 through its promotion of an integrated transport system. The project will deliver on Policies TP2, TP3, TP4, TP6 and TP7, which seek to protect existing and proposed new transport infrastructure and modes of sustainable transport.

7

There is no detriment in relation to Policy TP9: The Greenway Network or Policy TP10: The Trans-Pennine Trail and Mersey Way, which both cross the project corridor. The project provides, through the Mersey Gateway, a more efficient transport route with greater capacity for the private car, which initially appears contrary to national, regional and local planning and transport policy, which aims to reduce dependency on private car use. However, the Transport Assessment and associated transport modelling undertaken in the ES finds that the effect will be largely felt at the local level and the Gateway will not attract traffic from other crossing points over the Mersey. Tolling will ensure that the scheme does not attract new traffic but will result in a reassigning of the existing traffic from the SJB to the new crossing. The primary benefits of the scheme are reduced journey times and congestion. The scheme will result in an 80% shift in traffic between the bridges so as to enable a sustainable local traffic and public transport route to be provided across the SJB. As such Policy S14 of the UDP is satisfied and Policy T3 of the RSS is complied with. The predicted benefits of the scheme will considerably outweigh any disbenefits. Noise The ES considers the impact of noise and vibration on residential neighbourhoods as a result of both construction and operational traffic movements and various periods in the future. Moderate to high noise levels are currently experienced along the Weston Point Expressway and across the SJB under the ES Noise Assessment. The traffic on the expressway corridors were considered to be the primary noise source although within the project corridor the area across the Estuary including the saltmarshes from St Helens Canal through to the Manchester Ship Canal were found to be relatively quiet due to their currently remote location from the highway network. Construction phase Noise disruption and vibration will occur during construction to the Wigg Island Community Park and the residential areas along the Central Expressway round the Bridgewater Junction. Even with the application of mitigation measures the Wigg Island Community Park will continue to suffer from a high negative impacts in terms of construction noise and vibration. Operational phase In terms of vibration the project has no real impact on numbers of people affected, however in terms of noise there is a reduction in the number of

8

people affected. This moderate to high positive effect will be felt by those communities living in close proximity to the SJB and the Western Point Expressway. Two schools will also benefit from a high positive effect. A moderate negative effect will be felt by residents living in close proximity to the Central Expressway and a high negative impact will be had on the Wigg Island Community Park. Mitigation measures will include the featuring of acoustic road barriers and fencing to the Central Expressway resulting in the noise impact going from a moderate negative effect to a low negative impact. Overall it is considered that the project will have a moderate positive effect in terms of the numbers of individuals it will impact on compared to the numbers of individuals the existing crossing impacts on. Cumulative effect Both during construction and operation the cumulative impact would range from positive to negative depending on the specific location, however overall it would result in a positive environmental impact. Results of Consultations and Issues Arising Halton Friends of the Earth and The Campaign to Protect Rural England have both objected to the impact of the development on noise levels. URS has independently assessed the ES and is advising the Environmental Health officer on the impact of noise. The Environmental Health officer has been in discussions with the applicant and is anticipating the submission of further information relating to noise. Members will be updated orally on this matter. Policy Response Whilst further information is required it is recognised there is a likely conflict with Planning Policy Guidance 24 (PPG24): Planning and Noise Policy PR2 of the UDP, which aims to protect residents, and other noise sensitive uses from an increase to ambient noise levels. The noise assessment illustrates that overall noise will be reduced by the project, however while a positive effect will be had around the SJB and Weston Point Expressway, it will generate some harm along the Central Expressway. In the ‘Do Minimum’ Scenario the number of people bothered by noise generated by the scheme will increase by 8% in 2015 and by 13% by 2030, whilst the ‘Do Something’ Scenario would see an initial reduction in 2015 and a 4.5% increase by 2030. The harm that will be generated during the construction phase along the Central Expressway from the Bridgewater Junction to Halton Brow and on

9

Wigg Island will be temporary and of low to moderate negative significance, with limited impact on policy PR2. It is anticipated that, following further assessment, that operational noise will be had on the residents near to the Bridgewater Expressway and Central Expressway resulting in a low level of harm and high-level harm to Wigg Island. Conclusion With the exception of Wigg Island the policy test, which aims to resist ‘significant increases in ambient noise’ is therefore satisfied, leaving Wigg Island as the only area where harm is located, however, when viewed holistically against the benefits achieved elsewhere the harm is considered to be limited. Air Quality and Climate The Air Quality Assessment addressed all roads across Runcorn and Widnes with an anticipated increase in traffic flow of 10%. 568 receptors were assessed during 2006 as the baseline conditions, which indicated that two pollutants across the study were exceeded. Construction phase During 2011 construction activities would reduce air quality mainly through the generation of dust and construction vehicles. Dust is a temporary air pollutant and will have the greatest impact within 200m of its source. The greatest harm from dust will be during construction periods where dust-generating activities will coincide with dry and windy weather conditions. The EMP will address mitigating measures so as to reduce the impact of dust creation to a minimum on human health and vegetation etc and will therefore be of low negative significance. A Project Construction Area Plan has been prepared and submitted by the applicant illustrating the subdivision of the project into nine construction areas. The Construction Method Report (CMR) notes that a maximum of 250 construction vehicles a day will service each construction area. Following mitigation though the EMP the impact of construction vehicles will have a low negative effect on air quality, which will not exceed any of the relevant government objectives for air quality. Operational phase The Air Quality Assessment notes that the change in air quality across the project area is not significant, however generally speaking there is a positive effect across the SJB (particularly to West Bank and Runcorn Old Town) and along the Weston Point Expressway, while there is a negative effect on the

10

Central Expressway. With the project in place regional air quality would benefit from a reduction in vehicle emissions. The assessment notes that during the opening year 2015 the air quality would fall within existing government objectives and that with tighter emission standards no mitigating measures would be required to address air pollution from traffic. In terms of long-term travel patterns, it is anticipated that there will be a decrease in traffic flow across the new crossing and as such the impact on climate change in the long term will be of loss positive significance. Cumulative effect There will be negative cumulative effects during construction, but this could be controlled through mitigation, however during the operational phase the modelling has included other developments and the significance remains unchanged. Results of Consultations and Issues Arising Transport Activists’ Roundtable North West, Halton Friends of the Earth and The Campaign to Protect Rural England are concerned with the adverse effect on air quality. Consultants working for the Council are independently assessing the ES and helping to advise the Environmental Health Officer on the impact of noise. The EHO has been in discussions with the applicant and is anticipating the submission of further information relating to the air quality. Policy Response Whilst further information is required it is recognised that a likely conflict will arise between the project and Planning Policy Statement 23 (PPS23): Pollution, Policy EQ2 of RSS, emerging RSS Draft Policy DP9 and Policy PR1 of the UDP with regards to air quality. These policies aim to ensure that development do not generate air quality that effects the amenity of the local environment, human health or investment into the borough. The Air Quality Assessment undertaken as part of the ES highlights where positive and negative effects arise. Conclusion It is anticipated that following the submission and assessment of further information in the ‘Do Minimum’ Scenario – with the project in place, air quality would be improved in terms of carbon and carbon dioxide emissions. In the ‘Do Something’ – 2015 Scenario NOx, PM10 and CO2 emissions fall due to new traffic patterns away from the SJB and the Weston Point Expressway. Following mitigation any negative impact identified in the ES,

11

mainly along the Central Expressway will be of extremely low magnitude and the harm would not represent an unacceptable effect. Contamination of Soil, Sediments and Groundwater The borough has an industrial legacy of existing and former land uses that has left both the soil and groundwater contaminated throughout the project corridor. Site investigations have been undertaken to identify the presence of contaminants in soil, groundwater and surface water. The ground conditions identified include:

• Made ground – material deposited or re-worked by man (natural soil and industrial waste);

• Alluvial deposits – soil deposits by river of brooks comprising clay, silts, sand and peat;

• Glacial deposits – clay with interbedded layers of sand and gravel; and

• Sandstone and mudstone bedrock. The bedrock increases in depth (up to 40m deep) northwards across the project area with glacial deposit and made ground over it throughout the project area, besides the estuary where alluvium was identified. Alluvium is also present in the saltmarshes and between St Michaels Golf Course and the Thermphos Site in Widnes. It should be noted that both alluvium and sandstone are both aquifers. A risk assessment was undertaken to assess the baseline contamination at sensitive receptors and the risk of releasing contamination or adding to it during construction or operational phases. Human health, groundwater, surface water, landscaping, buildings and services were assessed and mitigation offered. The northern part of the application site extends over a groundwater source protection zone where water is abstracted from the major aquifer at a depth of 40m. Soil contamination however across Widnes and Wigg Island in made ground and alluvium is present at a shallow depth and associated areas of groundwater contamination were also identified. In addition separate, both within and outside of the project area liquid phases or ‘free phase’ Non Aqueous Phase Liquids were identified, which hold contaminants sometimes denser than water, which had migrated into the soil itself. Glacial deposits are however preventing the contamination from reaching the major aquifer in Widnes. Saline intrusion is present in groundwater on land either side of the Estuary. In addition high levels of contaminants are held within the shallow sediments of Widnes Warth and Astmoor Saltmarsh and less so within the sediment of the Estuary itself. Soil contamination on Wigg Island in made ground and

12

alluvium is present at a shallow depth and associated areas of groundwater contamination were also identified. Only localised areas of low level contamination were found south of the Manchester Ship Canal (in the Astmoor Area). Construction phase The construction of the towers in the Estuary will not greatly impact on the release of the low levels of contaminates held within the sediment. The piling of piers across the saltmarshes north and south of the Estuary will require mitigation to avoid run-off of pollutants into the river. Mitigation will need to be established for receptors such as landscaping and water supply pipes and buried concrete outside of the site. In addition remediation will need to be in place to mitigate against ‘free phase’ contamination of groundwater. Operational phase The constructed project would effectively cover existing areas of contamination across Widnes reducing the risk of it spreading or surfacing, although mitigation measures will need to be put in place that protect the health and safety of maintenance workers across the site. There is no risk of contamination extending beyond the site or moving off site. Results of Consultation and Issues Arising Halton Friends of the Earth and The Campaign to Protect Rural England are concerned with the adverse effect on the Contamination of Soil, Sediments and Groundwater. The Environment Agency have noted that contaminants have been encountered in some of the areas at concentrations that exceed generic assessment criteria, as such further information is required and conditions are recommended. The Health and Safety Executive has confirmed their opinion that there are sufficient reasons, on health and safety grounds to advise against the granting of planning permission in this case. It is not, however, considered that the proposal conflicts with the aspirations of UDP policy and that refusal could be justified on these grounds. As such, the Health and Safety Executive has been formally notified with regards to their intentions to have the application called in and Members will be updated as required. Policy Response

13

A temporary high risk was identified in the ES to groundwater, particularly during construction, but also during operation. Whilst further information is to be submitted, it is anticipated that mitigation measures will be endorsed within the EMP and as such Policy PR15 of the UDP and overarching policies within RSS are satisfied. The project has the risk of releasing pollutants held within land and water to the detriment of the health of individuals living and working in the area both during construction and the operational phases. Following the submission of further information and undertaking further investigations, UDP Policy S4, PR6, PR14 and PR15 which seek to resist development that has an unacceptable effect on levels of ground water pollution, or ground contamination are likely to be satisfied. Planning Policy Statement 23 (PPS23): Pollution, has been fully considered and the application is in accordance with the general thrust of this document. Terrestrial and Avian Ecology Due to the sensitive location of the project and the important ecological features in the wider area a detailed assessment of effect on ecology has been undertaken based on a terrestrial ecology study area encompassing the designated sites in and around the estuary. Within the project corridor of the TWA application are a number of Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) and Local Nature Reserves (LNR). In addition, due to the scale of the crossing and its potential strategic impact on both the middle as well as the upper estuary, other designations including European (international) sites are assessed including Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), Special Protection Areas (SPA), European Marine Site and a RAMSAR. These include:

• Widnes Warth Saltmarsh (LWS);

• Upper Mersey Estuary Intertidal Areas (LWS);

• Astmoor Saltmarsh and Swamps (LWS);

• Wigg Island (LWS);

• Manchester Ship Canal Bank, Astmoor (LWS);

• The Mersey Estuary (SSSI);

• The Mersey Estuary (Ramsar);

• The Mersey Estuary (SPA); and

• The Mersey Estuary (European Marine Site. Construction phase The saltmarshes of the Upper Estuary provide limited (compared to the Middle Estuary) breading grounds for both saltmarsh birds and rare visiting birds, this is due to the poorer bed sediment that sustains less food. In terms of the connectivity of these two areas in the estuary, the breading, feeding and roosting patterns of bird populations in the Middle and Upper Estuary are

14

largely independent. As such construction work in the Upper Estuary will not directly impact on an interconnected ecological environment of the wider river environment. The salt marshes will be impacted on during construction in terms of both the direct construction of piers into the sediment and the access required to undertake these operations. Mitigation measures proposed include the laying of temporary tracks and the removal of vegetation at completion to allow for the stimulation of fresh growth. Construction lighting shall be kept to a minimum with no construction being undertaken during the bird breading season. Where this is not possible, restricted assess shall be secured along with ecological monitoring. In addition, to mitigate against any risk of releasing contaminants on the saltmarshes from the construction of the piers, specialised risk management plans will be formulated within the EMP and will contain a series of best practice measures and management techniques to be adopted. As such it is considered there will be low significant effects on terrestrial and avian ecology. In terms of the Middle Estuary (the European site) this is far more vibrant in terms of ecology based on its greater food supply. The construction phase has the risk of releasing some pollutants held within the sediments. The level however is low to negligible. The specialist risk management plans within the EMP, noted above would address this matter. There is not considered to be any great risk to birds although there may be some risk of collision with structures, this will however only be temporary. In terms of MSC Bank, Astmoor, it is suggested that mitigation measures should be put in place to ensure that the management of this areas is handled properly, such as the removal of sensitive plants. New landscaping is proposed throughout the project and this will be managed in such a way as to strengthen the planting between these areas and the adapted highway. It is not anticipated that the construction period will affect the natural habitat of any protected species, should such a situation arise then the requisite licences will be obtained in conjunction with the necessary mitigation measures. Protected species are addressed through condition. Operational phase The towers, piers, cables and decking of the new crossing will have a negative impact on terrestrial and avian ecology in terms of shading and birds colliding with the structure. The impact of shading has a low negative impact, however due to the height of the deck, shadowing will shift enough for vegetation to be sustained as at present. In terms of the conflict between the towers and birds, bats and their environment, extensive mitigation in terms of enhancements to both Widnes Warth and Astmoor Saltmarshes is proposed.

15

The nature conservation benefits to Wigg Island Community Park LNR will stimulate greater biodiversity in accordance with Government objectives on nature conservation and will offset the negative impact of the towers and as such the project can be considered to have no effects on habitats or birds in the Upper Estuary. In terms of the European Site of the Middle Estuary, other than the continued movement of sediments and sand that will be slightly altered by the footings of the towers the crossing will have no operational effect on the SSSI, Ramsar, SPA or European Marine Site. Cumulative effect In conjunction with other developments the proposal would not have any significant effects on terrestrial and avian ecology. Results of Consultation and Issues Arising The Transport Activists’ Roundtable North West considers the project to be at odds with the protection of the wider environment and biodiversity and Halton Friends of the Earth are mindful that it will release contaminants into the immediate ecology or the food chain. The Campaign to Protect Rural England has objected to the adverse effect on biodiversity and the natural environment. Cheshire County Council note that the environmental sensitivity of the area and the submitted detailed Environmental Assessment, setting out the estimated impacts of the proposal, and the mitigation measures to be implemented. The County’s Ecological Officer has raised no objection to the proposals. Policy Response The European Habitats Regulations Directive 92/43/EEC has been acknowledged during the assessment of the scheme as it is directly concerned with the management of the Middle Estuary European Site for nature conservation. Consideration has been given to RSS Policy ER5, which is concerned with the protection of international, and national significant sites, while UDP Policy GE17, GE18 GE20, and GE21 provide a further local level of protection for various habitat designations and protected species native to the estuary. Whilst the development does not fully accord with the protection that these policies afford to the Ramsar site, Special Protection Areas and Special Areas of Conservation, National Nature Reserves and SSSI’s, the project has been assessment in line with Planning Policy Statement 9 (PPS9): Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, to consider what level of mitigation might be appropriate to overcome the harm caused.

16

The mitigation offered is broadly in line with Action No. 33 of the Council’s Natural Assets Strategy 2007 – 2012 that aims to “create a significant new nature reserve which supports the council’s efforts to deliver urban renewal through the Mersey Gateway”. This matter can however be addressed fully in the EMP and as such will be addressed through condition. In terms of terrestrial and avian ecology, protected species will be largely unaffected. The habitats of wild birds and animals will not be so affected as to disrupt the normal feeding patterns, roosting and migration throughout the area. As such Policy GE17 through GE21 are satisfied in terms of there being no harm inflicted on this aspect of the natural environment, subject to mitigation measures. Conclusion Following the mitigation measures included within Chapter 10 of the ES, the Councils Nature Conservation Section, along with Natural England and the Environment Agency will be satisfied with the proposed development. While this mitigation is not clearly stated nor is it clear how it would be put in place, discussions are ongoing between these relevant bodies as how to deliver the nature reserve and manage the salt marshes. The precise detail of the Environmental Management Plan and the required enhancement detail for Wigg Island Community Park and Local Nature Reserve will be addressed through condition. These have to be agreed and in place before all biodiversity concerns are satisfied. Aquatic Ecology The locally and internationally important avian ecology in the Middle and Upper Estuary are dependent on the aquatic ecology of the estuary and some of the surrounding fresh water brooks and canals which host several protected fish species. Surveys were undertaken between 2002 and 2007 over an area covering the estuary from Hale Head to Fiddlers Ferry, along with the St Helens Canal, Bridgewater Canal, Latchford Canal, Stewards Brook and Bowers Brook. Species identified were of national and international importance and included fish, invertebrates (0.125mm long backboneless animals), algae and macrophtes (both water based plants). It was found that invertebrates were limited throughout the area, but were most populated in the Middle estuary. Construction phase Construction would affect these aquatic species through underwater noise, pollutants and disturbance of sediment and loss of habitat in terms of construction routes, equipment and structures. Noise is considered to have the greatest impact and will affect fish and mammals such as salmon, lamprey and eel which migrate up and down the

17

river, along with bottlenose dolphin, harbour porpoise and grey seals that are now being spotted in these waters. As such a piling method statement is proposed to ensure sensitive aquatic species are not unreasonably affected and therefore would have low negative significance. Piling will also increase the risk of disturbing sediment and pollutants held within the sediment. A piling method statement would also address the risk to fish and mammals and therefore are not deemed to be significant. Mitigation cannot be provided for the loss of habitat where construction equipment and access is required or indeed on the location of the towers. These losses are however of low negative significance. Operational phase During the operation of the crossing the risks presented to avian ecology are from the accidental spillages of pollutants and run off from road surfaces. This can be addressed through drain filters and inceptors. ‘Guano’, which is the bird droppings will be generated from birds that will roost under the crossings new structure and will accelerate nutrient levels in the water, this will be of low negative significance and can not be prevented. Long term monitoring will be undertaken before, during and after construction to assess the impact of pollutants, noise and habitat disturbance/loss on avian ecology. Cumulative effect A temporary cumulative effect could occur during the construction phase involving a potential decrease in water quality damaging to aquatic organisms. Result of Consultation and Issues Arising Cheshire County Council notes that the environmental sensitivity of the area and the protected birds and aquatic species are present in numerous international environmental designations (e.g. Ramsar sites) to the west and number of local protective designations to the east. The detailed Environmental Assessment setting out the estimated impacts of the proposal, along with mitigation measures satisfy the County’s Ecological Officer. Policy Response There will be no adverse on the SSSI, Ramsar and SPA designations and therefore no harm in terms of Policy GE17 through GE21. Conclusion Subject to sensitive construction methods being employed and secured through the CEMP to reduce noise shockwaves through the water, the aquatic

18

ecology (of which some constitutes protected species) will not be harmed. As such no impact will be passed onto the avian population (particularly in the international designated area) of the Middle and Upper Estuary. Monitoring will be ongoing throughout the 20-month construction period, which may result in further mitigation measures needing to be employed. Landscape and Visual Amenity (Design) The project corridor is situated in the most distinctive part of the Mersey Valley where the river naturally narrows to form an historic crossing point at the Runcorn Gap. While this area is not afforded any regional or national significance, it is of importance to local and sub-regions character. The grouping of structures around the Runcorn Gap including the Grade II* Aethelfreda Railway Bridge and Viaducts, Grade II SJB, Runcorn Old Town and the settlement of West Bank (including its conservation area) are particularly important in forming the area’s character. The open plains of Lancashire characterise the north side of the estuary and the sandstone escarpment featuring Halton Castle dominates the south side. The whole of the middle and upper estuary is designated as an Area of Special Landscape Value (SLV) in the UDP and Spike and Wigg Islands are classified as Important Landscape Features (ILF). Both Islands are publicly accessible and the Transpennine Trail runs along the towpath of the St. Helens Canal. The ES subdivides the project corridor into three areas; South Widnes, The Crossing and Bridgewater Expressway through to Junction 12 of the M56. This application relates to the first two of these areas and in part to the third. Construction phase The large majority of the project corridor through South Widnes is located through and on former (and in part existing) industrial land. Tree cover is scant and will be particularly affected through St. Michaels Golf Course. The estuary itself is considered to be highly visually appealing, with its escarpment to the south and open aspect to the north, this is however disrupted at various points where construction equipment and access will span the estuary. Operational phase The key operational effects are:

• Integrating the scale and geometry of the route with the surrounding urban environment;

• Maintaining and if possible improving acceptable visual and physical links between Widnes Town Centre and West Bank;

19

• Absorbing the scale of the junctions into the surrounding landscape;

• Screening views of traffic from the surrounding neighbourhood and screening views of the more degraded elements of the urban environment from the road;

• To mitigate the visual effect with screen planting whilst permitting selected views from the highway into the surroundings;

• Maintaining an open aspect from the St Helens Canal and the adjacent Trans-Pennine Trail;

• The effect on the Spike Island leisure activities and environmental qualities;

• The effect on West Bank;

• The effects on Wigg Island Community Park;

• The effects of proposed alignments improvements within the existing highway corridor;

• Changes to the environmental quality of the highway corridor;

• The scale and geometry of the new junctions with the surrounding landscape and urban / light industrial development;

• The effect on residents in properties which overlook the junctions;

• The effect on existing visual and physical respects of the Manchester Ship Canal and the Bridgewater Canal corridors;

• The effects of lighting; The proposed highway layout will result in the loss of vegetation which would be replaced and would (together with that retained) mitigate against the impact of lighting and the visual impact of the roads, bridges and junctions and therefore have only a low negative significance. Not all vegetation will be able to be replaced in the area around the Bridgewater Junction at the northern end of the Central Expressway. Planting will enhance Ditton Junction and the new toll plazas and the Widnes Loops will be absorbed into new landscaping along with improved access routes. The new viaduct crossing over Victoria road provided the opportunity for improved public realm at the gateway into West Bank. A detrimental effect on the landscape and visual amenity of the St. Helens Canal is evident and it would intrude on Spike Island in terms of lighting and physical form. Whilst the bridge, approach viaducts and abutments are large in scale and height, the estuary is vast and can absorb such scale similar to the SJB, As such it is likely to become iconic and will have a high positive significance. However, the structure will allow for open aspects along and across the estuary. In local terms the structure of the bridge will be more intrusive and may be of moderate negative significance, this also includes the effect of lighting. The viaduct over Wigg Island will be of high negative significance on the Community Park and Green Belt and the Manchester Ship Canal, however,

20

the loss of industrial units on the Astmoor Industrial Estate will result in new development plots under the viaduct and as such the impact is minimum due to its relationship with the estate and the landscaped escarpment. The impact on the Bridgewater Canal and new highway structures will only have a significant impact when viewed at close quarters. Of particular impact will be lighting, which will only be mitigated in part by existing and new planting, otherwise the works will have little impact on strategic views across the area. Overall the impact is considered to be of moderate negative significance with the impact on Wigg Island and the associated Green Belt being of high negative significance. Cumulative effect There is a potential negative cumulative impact of the project with other new developments in the project corridor, however adjacent schemes that offer landscaping and will introduce lighting will have a positive cumulative effect. Results of Consultation and Issues Arising Halton Friends of the Earth are concerned about the elevated nature of the approach roads will be particularly harmful in certain areas such as Castlefields. They go on to note that planting and screening will take a long time to offer effecting mitigation and therefore noise and light pollution will have a negative impact during the construction and operational phases. CABE, support the bridges design noting it’s slender cross section, the dynamic cable-stayed construction and the fine design of the decks. Natural England is concerned with the wider strategic effects of the development on existing and future green infrastructure networks, on recreation and amenity. Natural England also note that the landscape areas around the Bridgewater Junction of the Central Expressway Corridor is very important, as they will provide a buffer to the widened area. Landscape treatment is not substantial enough in some areas and off-site landscape treatment could be considered if there is insufficient space within the landscape corridor itself. Many of the wooded areas on the expressway embankments are in need of management and the opportunity should be taken to carry that out in accordance with good silvicultural practice, delivering a landscape that can be sustained for the benefit of both present and future generations. In terms of the main toll plaza along Speke Rd, the importance of the existing planting to the north of Speke Rd in providing a visual screen is noted. However, this planting is in quite poor condition, and many of the trees (particularly willow and poplar) will have to be removed in the near future.

21

Therefore, in order to function efficiently as a screen, a programme of management / selective thinning / additional planting will be required. The proposed planting to the south of the toll plaza appears to be very thin, and will need to form part of a substantial landscaping scheme in order to mitigate the impact on the Greenspace to the south (St. Michaels Golf Course). Cheshire County Council’s landscape officer has raised no objection to the proposals. It is considered that there will not be a detrimental impact from any of the key viewpoints or sensitive receptors within Cheshire and that the bridge presents the opportunity to provide an iconic addition to a highly industrial and urbanised landscape. It is recognised that incorporating a lighting scheme will emphasise the iconic nature of the structure. Policy Response The application accords with the general principals of RSS Policy SD2 in terms of providing improved townscape and landscaping in both Runcorn and Widnes and promotes environmental quality through Draft Policy DP7. The project delivers a high standard of design and landscape in accordance with UDP Policies S2 and BE2. The project falls within the Environmental Priority Area (Policy BE£ of the UDP) of Wigg Island and areas of Southern Widnes and Widnes Waterfront and impacts on the environmental quality of these areas. The landscape and planting proposed however ensure that the scheme complies with Policy BE3. Conclusion The overall impact of the scheme is greater at the local level than the strategic level where it is felt that the project will establish into the wider landscape, similar to the existing bridges at the Runcorn Gap and as such will form part of a group of structures spanning the estuary. While it will most significant impact on the areas surrounding the new Speke Road toll plazas, the Widnes ‘Loops’, Widnes Warth Salt marshes, the estuary, Wigg Island and Astmoor, much of this will be mitigated through the new landscaping that will be agreed through condition. Cultural Heritage Cultural heritage addresses both historic buildings along with archaeological sites. Within the project corridor and adjacent land there are 47 Listed Buildings, 4 Conservation Areas, 1 Scheduled Ancient Monument (Halton Castle) and 125 sites and buildings of heritage interest. There is also the possibility that within the Cultural Heritage Study Area, within the project corridor, there maybe unknown archaeological remains. Construction phase

22

To avoid any damage to unknown cultural heritage during construction mitigation measures are proposed. This effectively will form a programme of archaeological fieldwork, recording and reporting. This will ensure that any heritage receptors, as yet unknown, are identified and fully recorded in such a way as to be of both use for academic purposes as well as public interest. In terms of known receptors, the construction phase will be undertaken within a clearly identified construction area that will directly impact on Halton Castle, the SJB, the West Bank Conservation Area and the church of St Mary, West Bank, the Aethelfreda Railway Bridge, All Saints Church, Runcorn Old Town and other less strategically important heritage assets. The temporary impact of construction on the strategic context and setting of these affected sites and buildings is short term with low negative significance. Operational phase The reduction of vehicular traffic on the SJB, the promotion of the structure within the local transport network and the creation of a sustainable travel route along the A533 will ensure the SJB is less congested and can function as originally designed. As such the Cultural Heritage Assessment in the ES shows that the development will be of no significance. The open aspect of the Upper Estuary along with the elevated position of Halton Castle, the Aethefreda Railway Bridge and the SJB, in conjunction with the exposed location of the two listed churches either side of the river and the West Bank Conservation Area, make it impossible to mitigate against the impact of the new crossing itself and the viaduct through Southern Widnes. As such it is acknowledged that the project would have a negative impact on the setting of this Scheduled Ancient Monument, Listed Buildings and Conservation Area. Cumulative effects Construction work could affect the quality of the setting of certain Listed Buildings in both the construction and operational phases and the operation of the new crossing in conjunction with other projects could affect the setting of the West Bank Conservation Area. Results of Consultations and Issues Arising English Heritage and Cheshire County Council Conservation and Archaeology Section raise no objections to the impact on the surrounding historic buildings and areas and note that it is not expected that any important remains will be uncovered by the development. However, the potential for unexpected archaeological discoveries is possible and close liaison with Cheshire and Merseyside Archaeologists should continue in conjunction with a Watching Brief during groundworks. This will focus on Halton Industrial Heritage as identified by the Cheshire Historic Towns Survey. The only mitigation

23

proposed is a Building Recording Survey of the former Steel Alloy Works, the unlisted industrial building to be demolished. In addition to the main heritage receptors noted by the applicant (above under the operational phase), English Heritage have noted that there is limited effect on the church of St. Michael (grade II* listed), however the detailed design of the toll booths, lighting gantries and associated infrastructure and associated landscaping screens to the northern side of Speke Road will have an impact on surrounding heritage. This however will be mitigated by landscaping along both sides of the toll plazas. The effect of the bridge is described in all cases as being negative. It is considered, however, that new bridges can become,”iconic” and attractive structures, as is the case with the SJB. Policy Response The provisions of Planning Policy Guidance 15 (PPG15): Heritage and Planning and Planning Policy Guidance 16 (PPG16): Archaeology have been followed and as such the development satisfies Section 72 of the Town and Country Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. The works accord with emerging RSS Draft Policy EM1 as the project has ensured it is not harmful to the wider strategic conservation and heritage of the collective landscape. The development has ensured it does not affect the setting of Scheduled Ancient Monuments, including Halton Castle and the Augustinian Abbey of Norton Priory or other Sites of Archaeological Importance, so as to accord with UDP Policy BE4, BE5 and BE6. Policy BE10 – Protecting the Setting of Listed Buildings – sates that “development which would affect the setting of a listed building should aim to preserve both the character of that setting and its historic relationship to the listed building”. Policy BE12 aims to ensure that the development impact on Conservation Areas protects the special character of these areas in line with PPG15. The proposed route and structures are sensitively located do as to afford some distance from the West Bank Conservation Area, harm is still considered to take place. However, due to the substantial distance and the fact that the new crossing is likely to quickly gain iconic regional status then the evolving landscape around the Conservation Area will soon be absorbed into the wider setting and has less of a harmful impact over time. Conclusion The application will have a strategic impact on the setting of historic structures and areas across the length of the project corridor; however, the development is set at a substantial distance from the most sensitive receptors and as such

24

will become an established element within the wider historic setting of the area. Navigation The ES has assessed the impact of the impact of the project on all private and commercial navigable water and airspace. A consultation exercise was undertaken by the applicant with all navigation and aviation stakeholders to understand their requirements along a series navigable waterways and controlled airspace. Construction phase The St Helens Canal is not currently navigable due to siltration, plant growth and a series of fixed low bridges linking the Trans Pennine Way to Spike Island and Widnes Warth. The River Mersey is subject to constant shifting sands and silts (see ‘Hydrodynamics and Estuarine Process’ above), which results in the navigable channels of the river constantly shifting. The Mersey is primarily used for pleasure craft (dinghies and yachts) of which the majority using the Upper Estuary are registered to the Fiddlers Ferry Sailing Club and the West Bank Boat Club. Access to the Upper Estuary from the Middle Estuary, Liverpool and the Irish Sea beyond is limited by the Aethlfreda Railway Bridge, which during an earlier consultation exercise, the Fiddlers Ferry Sailing Club noted to be the minimum clearance dimensions for the new crossing. As such for an average vessel specification of 12m keel to top of mast and 1.9m draft, a vertical clearance of 10.1m above the Mean High Water Springs (MHWS) should apply. The Mersey Docks and Harbour Company (as the Local Lighthouse Authority) have stated that for compliance with International Association of Lighthouse Authorities (IALA) requirements the towers of the bridge should be floodlit. During the construction of the new crossing it will be necessary to position jetties and air cushioned plant (a type of hovering platform) along with construction equipment and stansions along with cofferdams around the position of the new towers in the river and surrounding saltmarshes of the estuary. A low negative effect will therefore result from these additional bodies in the river, although navigable routs will be maintained throughout the duration of construction and water users will be given notification of the position, arrangement and specifications of all construction equipment and infrastructure so as to maintain safety. The Manchester Ship Canal provides a navigable waterway that linking the Irish Sea with the Salford Docks in Manchester. Like the river itself, the sea-going vessels it caters for are limited by the height of the Athelfreda Railway Bridge at the Runcorn Gap and as such its operator, The Manchester Ship Canal Company (MSCC), require the same navigable clearance under the

25

new crossing. As such the MSCC have confirmed that it will be possible for gantries and other construction equipment to be sited within the canal between 1 November and 28 February and for no more than 2 hours at any other time. Any construction work that requires structures lower than the clearance of the railway bridge or the soffit levels of the new crossings deck will be require the consent of the Deputy Harbourmaster, must be movable within 30 minutes and offer a specified navigation clearance. The Latchford Canal is a 400m long section of unnavigable waterspace, which the new crossing would therefore have no impact on in terms of navigation. The Bridgewater Canal is principally a recreational waterway, however the largest vessel to use it is the MSCC maintenance craft and subject to prior notification closure of the canal will be possible between 1 November and 28 February and for no more than 2 hours at any other time. The project is within the controlled airspace (all airspace from ground level to 2500feet / 762m) of John Lennon Airport. A maximum height of 150 Above Ordinance Datum) must be maintained in order for there not to be a risk of physical clearance or interference with radar. During construction equipment will not exceed 150m and will include aircraft warning lights on the top. The airport has confirmed that this will not impact on aviation or the safety of navigation. Operational phase While the St Helens Canal is not navigable the Sankey Canal Restoration Society along with British Waterways have requested that a 5m clearance is maintained so that should the canal become navigable in the future, then the new crossing will not impact on navigation of vessels. The bridge will provide this requisite clearance. The 10.1m clearance of the new crossing in the River Mersey will be maintained in line with the requirements of the Fiddlers Ferry Sailing Club. In terms of maintenance, the crossing will require access to the underside of the deck, which will reduce clearance. This, however, will follow notification to the MDHC and other users of the river and will normally only are for short periods of time. The towers will be a permanent obstacle in the river, but will be floodlit in accordance with the IALA regulations and signage will be provided to make river users aware of the hazard they present, not only in terms of their location, but also the accelerated wind speeds and water currents in their vicinity and therefore is of low negative significance. Following the erection of lighting and signage, there will be no permanent navigational effects on the Manchester Ship Canal from the new crossing. The MSCC have recognised the need for short periods of maintenance that will be required, however this can easily be accommodated within the annual

26

winter maintenance of the canal and therefore there will be no significant effect. The MSCC have noted the need for short periods of maintenance along the Bridgewater Canal, which can be programmed, with the annual winter maintenance operations of the maintenance boat, therefore causing no disruptions. The towers of the new crossing are 150m high and therefore (once aircraft navigation lights have been installed on top) will cause no radar navigational or physical obstacle to aircraft into and out of Liverpool’s John Lennon Airport. Cumulative effect There may be a temporary negative cumulative impact on the navigation of the estuary during construction due to other proposed developments in and around the estuary. Results of Consultation and Issues Arising Subject to continues consultation and liaison with regular users and owners of the navigable waterways along with the MDHC, there is no objections to the application on grounds of river navigation. In terms of aviation navigation, Liverpool John Lennon Airport has confirmed that the development will have no effect upon operations due to the limited height of the towers (not exceeding 150m). The Civil Aviation Authority has previously advised that it did not believe that the new bridge would constitute an aviation en-route obstacle. It further notes that providing that the new bridge towers are restricted to a height of 150m AOD and aircraft warning lighting is incorporated (NTS 4.3.79) the Airport licensee would appear to be content with the proposal. The CAA supports the proposal for the towers to be equip with aviation warning lighting, the standard for which should, in the first instance at least, be agreed with the Airport. There is a requirement in the UK for all structures over 300feet to be charted on civil aviation maps. As such the details of the development, including the position and height of the three towers of the crossing shall be supplied to the Defence Geographic Centre so that it may be included on civil aviation maps. The Mersey Conservator has not responded to the application. Conclusion The project due to the position of the bridge towers, the height of the bridge deck above the River Mersey and the Manchester Ship Canal and the limited height of the towers, will not adversely affect the operation of river craft and aircraft.

27

Hydrodynamics and Estuarine Process Hydrodynamics and the Estuarine Process is the study of the movement of sands, silts, sediment and water within the estuary. In the upper estuary the tidal movements are chaotic causing the silts and sands to shift in a constant and relatively unpredictable fashion, forming moving channels and mudflats. The bed material can be fixed for long periods of time and then change in a single tide as can the edges of the salt marshes that bound the estuary. Should the construction of the bridge result in three towers being positioned directly into the estuary and could have an effect on these processes. This is important as such movement could result in an adverse impact on aquatic ecology, which would impact on terrestrian, and avian ecology. Construction phase During construction the bridge would require a construction area and temporary jetty access. This will result in limited alterations to the movement patters of water sand and sediment and will be rectified quickly once removed. As such no mitigation is required. Operational phase The construction of three new towers in the estuary to support the new crossing will have an impact on the water levels in adjacent areas. This impact however is limited and will not significantly disrupt the hydrodynamics and the estuarine process of the upper estuary as a whole, causing little to change from the natural sporadic changes that take place. As little impact is anticipated no mitigation measures are required, however, the applicant does propose that a period of monitoring of the hydrodynamics and the estuarine process in the upper estuary take place to assess any long-term changes to the movement of the bed material and the edges of the salt marshes. Results of Consultation and Issues Arising Environment Agency has noted that a 5-year monitoring programme is required in order to understand the long-term impact of the structure on hydrodynamics. Natural England has raised concerns over the impact that hydrodynamics might have on the Mersey Estuary SSSI/SPA/Ramsar site and any changes to the SSSI/SPA. Under the Aquatic Ecology Chapter of the ES long term monitoring is proposed before, during and after construction to assess the impact of structures disturbance on avian ecology. Conclusion

28

The impact of the new crossings piers on the already ad hoc pattern of movement of the shifting sands and sediments in the River Mersey will change as a result of this development. These changes will not affect navigation or harm ecology and subject to conditions monitoring these patters over the 5 years following completion of the project, will be acceptable. Waste The project will generate a large amount of waste material and due to the levels of contamination will require the special handling, treatment, storage, transportation and disposal of material that in part will be hazardous. Consideration must be made for the construction workers, local residents and businesses as well as the waste management industry. The EIA Waste Assessment identifies a total amount of waste, which has been limited to approximately 153,620m3 by ensuring that excavation and demolition is kept to a minimum and where possible the reuse of soil in the new embankments to be formed round the various new structures is identified. Since the publication of the ES, it has been confirmed that the regional waste capacity has been revised by the Environment Agency. The regional capacity has been significantly increased, while the annual waste generated has fallen. None hazardous capacity has risen to 91.7 million cubic metres from 87.5 million cubic metres, although hazardous waste capacity has slightly decreased. Construction phase During construction the application will generate waste material from the excavation of existing embankments around Speke Road and the northern end of the Central Expressway and through the demolition of Ashley Way, Ditton Junction and the Bridgewater through Daresbury Expressway Junction. 104,120m3 will be un-contaminated (non-hazardous waste) that would be deposited in landfill sites across the North West Region, which the Waste Assessment identifies a capacity for. Waste will need to be transported to the site construction area (the compound), separated, stored, sampled to identify its contamination and the transferred to the relevant landfill or back on site for re-use. These activities will affect noise levels, dust emission, water quality, regional landfill capacity and highway congestion on local businesses and residents. Government policy on waste emphasises the recycling of material. It is however the concessionaire who will ultimately implement a Construction Management Plan that will aim to minimise waste and maximise recycling, The Waste Assessment notes that the concessionaire will work closely with

29

local recycling companies who (depending on demand) may take a percentage of the non-hazardous waste for reuse in the construction industry. The Waste Assessment notes that there is also capacity for the remaining 49,500m3 of contaminated (hazardous waste) to be treated and transferred to a suitably licensed landfill site in the region. The concessionaire will produce a range of management plans including emergency procedures to reduce the effects of the waste transfer process as follows. The transfer of material to specially constructed dust and water controlled compounds with wheel washing facilities and covered wagons. In addition special compounds will have trained staff, routinely monitored with full reports prepared on waste management targets with open inspections by the Council and the Environment Agency. With there being a regional increase in capacity and a fall in annual waste generated, there with there being a greater regional landfill void and lower levels of waste being generated, the impact on total landfill capacity will be lower than originally anticipated in the ES. Operational phase Waste will be generated by the toll booths and welfare facilities and will total one vehicle collection a week whilst maintenance of the crossing and associated infrastructure will generate no more than four vehicle collections a year and as such this will not be noticeable over the existing vehicular movement in the area or waste management in the vicinity. Cumulative effect A negative cumulative effect may be generated should other major construction projects be implemented in conjunction with the Mersey Gateway in terms of waste. The regional capacity would be put under cumulative pressure and noise and dust would be greatly increased, this however would be unavoidable. Results of Consultation and Issues Arising

The chapter on waste is generally thorough and well thought through, and links have been made with other relevant sections in particular on contaminated land issues. This project involves demolition and construction on a considerable scale. These activities are a key source of potentially significant environmental impacts and must be systematically controlled to ensure that the potential for issues to arise is kept to a minimum. Assessment of construction impacts is spread throughout the themed chapters of the ES, as such the intention to create a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) within the overall EMP and which is formally linked to the SWMP is welcomed.

30

The proposed scope of the CEMP is generally appropriate, although it is advise that it should also include coverage of demolition activities. Some thought has been given to the contents of the Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP), although some of what would be expected to be included in the SWMP is referred to under the section on the CEMP (15.8.6) and the Waste and Resource Management Plan (15.8.8), these will all need to be integrated under the banner of SWMP, which is now a statutory requirement. The main area of concern with waste relates to odours (hydrogen sulphide), and this is primarily related to the alkali waste. This may also be an issue if this difficult waste is stored in quarantine, which may be a possibility. Whilst the volumes of waste being generated are fairly low for a project of this size, there will still be a significant amount of waste traffic generated. The EIA indicates that this is of low magnitude, and therefore not significant, however, the number of vehicle movements is still quite high and will need to be regulated through the Construction Transport Management Plan. It is acknowledged that the transport impacts for taking non-hazardous waste to landfill is pushing this waste stream further up the waste hierarchy, and this is assessed for other impacts. This is advocated and would further minimise the landfill requirement for this project. Consideration could be given to unifying each stage of the project in terms of providing a storage area for non-hazardous waste, which can usefully be re-used on another stage of the project. This may require an environmental permit from the Environment Agency. Alternatively, use could be made of the existing network of waste transfer stations etc. Cheshire County Council notes that Environmental Statement comprehensively covers estimates of waste raisings by type, and provides information on the management and movement of waste, including measures for incorporating as much waste material as possible into the bridge works. As such the County Council raise no objection to the handling of this matter. Policy Response The Environment Agency advise that any hazardous waste which is removed from the site will need to be moved in accordance with the Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005. The project has satisfactorily addressed waste and its role in the construction and operational phases and as such the waste management strategy to be implemented through the EMP will accord with Planning Policy Statement 10 (PPS10): Waste. Conclusion The amount of waste, both hazardous and non-hazardous can be catered for within the regions landfill capacity. In addition some of the non-hazardous

31

waste can be recycled within the project corridor and will be conditioned as such within the Construction Environment Management Plan.

Surface Water Quality Over the past century, due to the industrial heritage of the borough, all watercourses have been polluted, however since the 1980’s and in particular the launch of the 1985 Mersey Basin Campaign, pollution levels have been improving. A surface water quality study was produced to assess both direct and indirect contamination that may take place both during construction (spillage) and operation (run off of oil from road surfaces). This involved the testing of samples taken from all watercourses within the project corridor against test criteria and being given a score from ‘bad’ to ‘very good’. The area covered by the order crosses 8 separate waterways, which are summarised below, including their test result rating: Stewards Brook is situated across the Speke Road (orientated north-south) (Area 1). At present Stewards Brook qualifies as ‘fairly good’. Bowers Brook is located in Widnes, south of the Ditton Junction (Area 2). At present Bowers Brook qualifies as ‘bad’ to ‘fairly good’. St Helens Canal runs east-west to the north of the River Mersey, which it is separated from by Spike Island and Widnes Wharf (Area 4). At present St Helens Canal qualifies as ‘fair’. The estuary (Area 5). At present the estuary qualifies as ‘fair’ to ‘fairly good’. Latchford Canal is situated on Wigg Island and consists of only a short redundant stretch of watercourse that is unconnected to the wider waterways in the area (Areas 5). At present the Latchford Canal qualifies as ‘poor’. Manchester Ship Canal runs east-west to the south of the River Mersey, which it is separated from by Wigg Island through the project corridor, although it runs directs adjacent to the estuary further west as it passes Runcorn Old Town (Area 5). At present the Manchester Ship Canal qualifies as ‘poor’. Halton Brook is located in Astmoor Industrial Estate and consists of only a short stretch of watercourse running north-south (Areas 5). At present Halton Brook is dry and is not considered further. Bridgewater Canal runs east-west, roughly parallel to the south of the Manchester Ship Canal, at the top of escarpment that encases the Astmoor Industrial Estate. The canal roughly follows the line of the Bridgewater and Daresbury Expressways and passes Runcorn Old Town before terminating

32

where the existing links onto the SJB are located. At present the Bridgewater Canal qualifies as ‘fair’. Construction phase The construction of the three towers may cause the release of pollutants trapped in the sediment in the bed of the river, this however would be of limited significance compared to the substantial shifting of sediment as part of the natural hydrodynamics and the estuarine process noted above. The St Helens Canal will also need to be in filled in part under the section of the new crossing where the viaduct leading up to the north abutment crosses its path. The stones used should have properties to prevent the release of fine pieces of material into the water column. Operational phase Stewards Brook and the St Helens Canal will form a receiving watercourse for road runoff. A drainage strategy and Flood Risk Assessment have been prepared to improve highway drainage and to minimise pollution and flooding of the watercourse. The use of interceptors and filters on drains are proposed, however it is noted that the application does not increase the risk of flooding. Cumulative effect No cumulative effects were identified as a result of other developments. Results of Consultation and issues Arising While the Transport Activists’ Roundtable North West and The Campaign to Protect Rural England raise some concerns over the impact on surface water quality, the Environment Agency have undertaken a full assessment of the flood risks. This addresses the maximum allowed discharge of surface water between St Michaels Road and Ditton Road, Ditton Road to St Helens Canal and between the Manchester Ship Canal and the Bridgewater Junction: and an assessment of the use oversized pipes and balancing ponds in accordance with PPS25. The Environment Agency does not advocate the culverting of watercourses, due to adverse ecological harm, however the culverting of Steward’s Brook can be mitigated against. Water voles are evident in Steward’s Brook and may be present in the section to be culverted and therefore they will need to be trapped and relocated. This can be addressed through condition. The Environment Agency has suggested the use of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) wherever possible. Policy Response

33

As such the drainage system has been assessed against Planning Policy Statement 25 (PPS25): Development and Flood Risk as well as Planning Policy Statement 23 (PPS23): Pollution, to ensure that any flooding and discharge would not likely harm animals, plants and the environment. The effect upon surface water quality, following mitigation measures will result in no significant impacts and therefore both the impact on water courses (canals and rivers) and the quality of surface, ground and coastal waters and the management of flood risk has been appraised and satisfied through compliance with RSS Policy EQ3 and Draft RSS Policy EM5. Similarly UDP Policies S4, PR5 and PR16 are accorded with. Conclusion The Environment Agency have confirmed that the surface water that will drain from the project corridor will in no way damage the ecological resources within and adjacent to the application site. Conditions concerning culverting and drainage capacity (including SuDS) will be attached. Regeneration The EIA has assessed the effect of the project on the socio-economics of the borough, in particular the wards adjacent or playing host to the project. Deprivation is measured on health, employment, income, education, housing and services. Most wards are rankled above average regionally and nationally for health, income and employment deprivation, with the borough as a whole within the worst 12% for deprivation as a whole, with only just a recent halt to its population decline. There is limited further education opportunities in the borough, which is reflected by the low levels of further education gained by residents mirrored by the high level of unemployment of those under the age of 25. While there is provision for cycling and walking across the borough, this is poor across the river. The addendum to the ES notes the changes to the European Structural Funding International Policy and how the Liverpool City Region is no longer listed as an Objective 1 Funding area and that instead the North West European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) provides targets which include the creation of 26,700 additional jobs in the area, improve the annual gross value adds (GVA) by £1.17 billion and make a 25% reduction in CO2 emissions between 2007 and 2013. Construction phase

34

Employment will be generated during the construction phase and as this will inevitably require specialist training initiatives to be provided for residents to improve their skills. There will be a low negative impact from the construction process itself, along with the movement of construction vehicles across the borough, over employment, services and facilities. In addition the general impact of a large number of workers in the area will not only place pressure on local services but will increase anxiety over residents and businesses in close proximity to the project. As such a Community Liaison Officer would be appointed to manage the relationship between the local community and the new construction community living and working in the area. The addendum to the ES notes that the North West European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) aims to create 26,700 additional jobs in the area between 2007 and 2013 and that during the construction phase a third of the jobs created will be opportunities for local people. While no Compulsory Purchase Orders are required in connection with any residential premises, Orders will need to be made on certain commercial businesses, which occupy land that the new project will require. As such the Council is providing a relocation strategy for those businesses so as to limit this impact to low negative significance. In terms of health, while there will be some impact on air and surface water quality, following mitigation there will be no significant impact. Operational phase The project will direct create 98 jobs, largely available to local residents, however, it is calculated that the improved transportational links across the borough and the wider region will result in the creation of approximately 3,600 jobs. There will be more opportunity for residents of the borough and people beyond the borough will be attracted to the employment opportunities to be had. More people will be able to cross the river using the new sustainable travel route of the SJB, providing them with not only a healthy alternative travel route, but also for those without private transport, greater assess to opportunities and the wider society of the borough, although financially it is acknowledged that tolling will limit some peoples opportunities. While those living in close proximity to the SJB will benefit from improved air quality Transportation times will improve, particularly for those dependent on public transport, which will benefit from the Sustainable Transport Study (STS), which seeks to deliver improvement particularly to bus routes. Cumulative effect

35

During construction there is a negative cumulative impact on facilities and social networks, however job and training opportunities are generated. During the operational phase pressure will be placed on facilities due to an increase in population. In terms of economic regeneration, besides the employment opportunities that will arise out of the construction and operational phases, the removal of a key regional infrastructure constraint will benefit businesses locally and regionally, which will be able to grow subject to no longer being restricted by the unreliability of the existing SJB in isolation of a second crossing. The Mersey Gateway Regeneration Strategy was adopted on 19 June 2008 by Executive Board for Development Control purposes. This document considers the opportunities arising from the improved connectivity of areas such as West Bank and the benefits that can be delivered through claiming land back through the demolition of redundant road structures and the subsequent consolidation of land for business development, the remediation of contaminated land and the general profile of the area. In terms of economic performance benefits, there will be savings to business costs resulting from the more efficient transport links generated from a more reliable river crossing. The area will be able to support higher rates of investment and business uses that depend on good access links and reliable transport corridors such as the 3MG – Mersey Multimodal Gateway. Through the potential cluster of businesses, agglomeration benefits would be felt and the local and regional labour markets would be drawn on, inflating prosperity across the Liverpool city-region as a whole. The area would become more competitive as the crossing would facilitate access to customers and suppliers and the resource of the labour market would be realised both in real terms but also through perception. Results of Consultation and Issues Arising Northwest Regional Development Agency has invested £4m into helping develop the project and put a business case to Government and therefore fully supports the application. Moreover it was integral to the development of the proposed new Mersey Crossing, which is identified as one of the transformational actions within the Regional Economic Strategy (Action 66). The NWDA considers the Mersey Gateway to significantly relieve congestion, improve reliability of access the Liverpool City Region. It notes that it could act as a catalyst for regeneration in Widnes and Runcorn. Global mobile investment will find the location of South Liverpool more attractive, particularly when considered in conjunction with the improvements the crossing will make to Liverpool John Lennon Airport, the Port of Liverpool and the Port of Garston.

36

The project will deliver physical regeneration benefits in terms of improved landscaping and in particular it will enable the public realm improvements and enhancements of the environment identified as an objective under UDP Policy RG1 – Action Area 1 Southern Widnes, where new public realm works are identified in areas where old infrastructure is going and around new infrastructure created. In terms of social benefits, while the Transport Activists’ Roundtable North West and Halton Friends of the Earth consider the project to be at odds with a number of national and regional government agendas, namely reducing social exclusion and health inequalities, the borough will experience a wealth of investment during the construction period in terms of job creation through the construction industry, but also in terms of workers requirements for accommodation, transport, food, drink and entertainment. These demands will benefit local business and the wider economy. Following construction, the better linking of the two towns of Runcorn and Widnes through the decongested SJB will allow for improved sustainable transport links for local residents in deprived areas to access, jobs, education, health, leisure and social facilities located either side of the river and will therefore reduce social exclusion. The knock-on effect of improved transport reliability and reduced journey times will result in business growth and prosperity for local employers, which is currently limited, in part, by the confidence in the highway network. Greater business prosperity will result in higher employment and greater social inclusion. The improved pedestrian and cycleway across the SJB will generate more interest and confidence in these modes of transport from the local communities. By encouraging more people to walk and cycle will have a direct impact on the health of individuals. The use of toll charging on both the SJB and the new crossing will ensure that limited private car journeys will use the SJB and therefore CO2 emissions and noise levels will fall in the surrounding areas of West Bank, Runcorn Old Town and the Weston point Expressway, leading to a better quality of life for people living and working in these areas. As such the proposal accords fully with the provisions of RSS Policy DP1 which seeks to deliver economic prosperity through development that meets local needs and Policy DP4: which aims to deliver development that will decrease social inclusion through good facilities and linkages. A host of Draft RSS policies concerning the closing of the economic prosperity gap between the north west and the rest of the country including DP3, RDF3, W1 and LCR3 are satisfied through the Mersey Gateway Project. The UDP tackles regeneration on a local area basis and refers to Action Areas within the borough. The Mersey Gateway passes either through or

37

adjacent to four of these areas (South Widnes, Central Widnes, Widnes Waterfront and Castlefields & Norton Priory). While Policy S1 – Regeneration – offers a broad strategy to address Action Area Plans, these areas are considered in greater detail under the area policies of RG1, RG2, RG3 and RG6. The project in its entirety satisfies the criteria of Policy S1, which includes:

• Stimulate economic development and create jobs for local people;

• Provide housing to meet local needs;

• Provide local facilities for the community; and Reclaim derelict and contaminated land and bring such land back into beneficial use; and protect and enhance the local environment. Policy RG1 – Action Area 1 Southern Widnes, will surrender 31.5ha of land towards its northern fringe for the new road alignment, including the loss of employment land, landscaping, infrastructure and an unsightly scrap metal yard. A major transport infrastructure project is not identified as an acceptable use although the list is not exhaustive. It should however be noted that whilst land is to be lost, 9.6ha of new land will be released for redevelopment following the demolition of the A557 elevated highway and the part demolition of the Queensway viaduct, south of the Ditton Junction. This will not only free up land for development, but it will consolidate existing land and improve access. In addition inappropriate uses (bad neighbours) such as the scrap metal yard will be removed, new public realm and environmental improvements will be delivered and the transport infrastructure and corridors will be rationalised to the north of the area. Policy RG2 – Action Area 2 Central Widnes, aims to deliver new housing and environmental improvements that will support the regeneration of Widnes Town Centre. The uses that are considered appropriate do not include major transport infrastructure, however the list is not exhaustive. The land take constitutes just 0.55ha for on/off-links for the new Widnes Loops and would only omit the southern corner of the Action Area, therefore not harming the potential for the Action Area to deliver its regeneration objectives. Policy RG3 – Action Area 3 Widnes Waterfront, aims to attract investment into the public realm, generate physical improvements to the built environment and create opportunities along the waterfront in order to deliver regeneration. In line with Policy S14 it acknowledges the Mersey crossing as being an entity that will likely affect this area and therefore factors it into its development principles. The land take would be 1ha and would be consolidated into the western corner of the Action Area, where it would have a limited impact on the effective delivery of regeneration initiatives. Therefore, although major transport infrastructure is not listed as appropriate development, the development is considered to be of insignificant harm on the delivery of the Action Areas aims and will in part deliver environmental remediation and benefits to the area. Policy RG6 – Action Area 6 Castlefield and Northern Priory, aims to deliver a range of uses, which do not include major transport infrastructure. The loss of

38

just 0.7ha of land from the western corner of the areas boundary adjacent to the Central Expressway does not compromise the Action Area significantly and therefore the harm caused is considered insignificant. The Project Corridor runs to the western side of this allocation and slightly infringes it. It is mainly concerned with housing and neighbourhood regeneration. However, as the project only impacts on areas of landscaping that it will mitigate with new planting, then while it does not strictly speaking accord with the policy, it is not harmful to its aspirations. The Mersey Gateway Regeneration Strategy (adopted on 19 June 2008) It seeks to capture the economic, social, physical and environmental regeneration opportunities that the Mersey Gateway Project offers. The strategy assesses the improved connectivity, role of varying highways and release of land that will result from the project. It addresses an area of 20sq.km, within Widnes, which comprises the area south of the town centre, east of the Mersey Multimodal Gateway and west of the Widnes Waterfront Economic Development Zone, as well as parts of Runcorn including the Old Town, Halton Lea, Rock Savage and Astmoor Industrial Estate and both the SJB and the proposed route of the new crossing. The key socio-economic and environmental regeneration objectives are: (1) Priority Regeneration Objective 1 – Image and Place Making To build on the strong local sense of community and raise the profile of both towns through the Mersey Gateway Project. (2) Priority Regeneration Objective 2 – Accessibility and Movement Using the Mersey Gateway Project to promote ease of movement on foot, cycle or public transport to increase connectivity throughout the area and thereby increase the catchment for labour, goods and market. (3) Priority Regeneration Objective 3 – Development and Economic Prosperity Improvements to residential and commercial accommodation within the local area to meet requirements and aspirations. The release of land brought back into use that currently forms part of the highway network, including land that is contaminated within the West Bank area of Southern Widnes. Options on the potential physical regeneration have been prepared and have been subject to a detailed Sustainability Appraisal. These options are recognised in the project, which aims to deliver the opportunity for regeneration through the delivery of improved access, connectivity, land consolidation in terms of ownership and configuration and the remediation of large areas of contamination.

39

The regeneration strategy has been prepared with the final preferred crossing option in place and therefore is able to clearly identify the regeneration opportunities it generates. The submission of the project to the Council and the DfT complies fully with the aims and objectives of the Regeneration Strategy. CABE support the project and is mindful that it should be linked to the regeneration of Runcorn and Widnes. It notes the needs to be linked to a masterplan that defines principles for addressing the zones surrounding the project and ensure they are accessible meaningful parts of the urban area. The Strategy lends itself to addressing the following opportunities:

o Creating a ‘sense of place’; o Encouraging local accessibility; and o Embracing sustainability.

The objectives include the rebranding of West Bank as a high-quality gateway location, facilitating development that attracts high quality business, improve access routes to serve local transport and create a new retail and serve centre. In order to achieve this the Strategy criteria of land uses and physical development parameters for the various sub-areas along with a phasing plan. The Mersey Gateway Project fully accords with the Strategy, as its implementation is crucial to the delivery of Phase 1, which is the demolition of the A568 and elevated southern link to the Ditton Junction and formation of indicative development parcels in Phase 2. In terms of the Widnes Waterfront SPD (adopted in July 2005) it consists of one of the six Action Areas in Halton that require comprehensive action or redevelopment to deliver regeneration and is therefore consistent with policy RG3 (Action Area 3 – Widnes Waterfront) in the UDP. Only the western end of the area the SPD covers falls within the West Bank, South Widnes ‘impact area’ identified in the Regeneration Strategy. The SPD’s masterplan focuses on social, economic and physical regeneration objectives. It recognises the level of contamination in the area, which the Mersey Gateway will, in part, remediate. It recognises under Para. 5.2 that “The whole area will be more accessible when the new Mersey Gateway Crossing is constructed” and therefore the profile of the area will be raised and the opportunity for economic and social regeneration will be provided. Map 4 within the SPD illustrates the relationship of the Mersey Gateway Crossing with the Widnes Waterfront and as a result this has been considered in the creation of development parcels, public realm and new connections through the area. Runcorn Old Town

40

In terms of Runcorn Old Town, the Runcorn Old Town Centre Strategy (Draft SPD Public Consultation - Feb 2007) has been published. The Mersey Gateway is considering as having an impact on accessibility to the Old Town in terms of the options it presents in de-linking. The Regeneration Strategy refers to the removal of the ‘loops’ allowing for a new gateway into the town centre and opening up the Bridgewater Canal link through to Runcorn Docks. The Mersey Gateway Project therefore accords with the Strategy and the SPD as it allows for the regeneration opportunities of delivering the sustainable transport corridor and the creation of indicative development parcels in connection with the de-linking so as to strengthen the town role, which is currently the weakest of the three in the borough. Moreover, similar to West Bank, Southern Widnes, the application allows for Phase 1 of the Regeneration Strategy for the Old Town to be realised and extensive areas of elevated carriageway to be removed and new development plots to be generated in Phase 2. Astmoor and Wigg Island The Regeneration Strategy notes that the delivery of the Mersey Gateway Project will raise the profile of the Astmoor Industrial Estate through improved landscaping, the removal of vacant plots and the creating of new consolidated development plots. In addition displaced businesses will be relocated in new high quality accommodation to the east of the site. Future opportunities that will arise for the creation of improved links through to the town centre, the access onto Wigg Island and the possibility of creating a business park, targeting higher profile occupiers. Halton Lea In terms of Halton Lea, the Halton Lea Town Centre Strategy (Draft SPD Public Consultation - Feb 2007) has been published Whilst the centre has a large catchment area it suffers from complex segregated pedestrian and road traffic links and consists of a poorly accessed and inward looking structure with high vacancies. As such both the Regeneration Strategy and the SPD aims to improve the shopping centre’s health and prosperity, strengthen its role, create employment opportunities and architectural standards. Strategic Policy 4 of the SPD seeks to “Improve linkages to the shopping centre from surrounding areas by:

• The enhancement of existing footbridges; and

• Continue active management and enhancement of footways around the shopping centre including from surrounding residential areas”.

41

The Mersey Gateway project is altering some of the bridges and the busway into Halton Lea and seeks to address Strategic Policy 12, which aims to “Improve directional signage to and within the town centre”. This is a matter of particular concern for the Shopping Centre, which has specifically requested that during both the construction and operational phases a ‘signage strategy’ be applied to each of the 5 principal access routes to the shopping centre. Rocksavage & Clifton The Strategy notes that the Project will provide the opportunities to deliver improved access to the Weaver Navigation and a potential expansion to the Sutton Employment Park to the south of Junction 12 f the M56. Other matters (Greenbelt, Greenspace and Primary Employment Areas) A land use assessment has been undertaken to establish the impact of the application on the land uses along the 500m width of the project corridor. The assessment identifies existing uses to include:

• Residential Areas;

• Community Resources / Open Space / Greenspace;

• Commercial / Industrial / Employment Land

• Agricultural Land; and

• Roads and footpaths The application uses an extensive amount of existing highway that it will be upgraded and redesigned and as such no residential land is lost. The Campaign to Protect Rural England has raised an objection to the loss of Greenbelt and open space. There will be the temporary and permanent loss of proposed and existing greenspace along either side of the project corridor. Greenspace A conflict arises between the project corridor at several points and UDP Policy GE6, through the loss of designated greenspace as the development is not proposed for the ancillary enjoyment of that space nor does it provide compensation. There are extensive areas of greenspace along the length of the project corridor that forms the area of the application, in particular St Michaels Golf Course (Area 1), Land to the south of the Garston to Timperley Railway Line, Widnes Warth, Wigg Island (greenbelt), an area to the south of the Manchester Ship Canal and land surrounding the junction of the Bridgewater, Daresbury and Central Expressways. The majority of the lost openspace across the project will be under the application and is 29.6 hectares. The temporary loss of land will take place on Wigg Island and Widnes Warth, but will be permanent on St. Michaels Golf Course (11.63 ha). The large areas of

42

land at St Michaels Golf Course will have a high negative negative effect, while the smaller areas (the Central Expressway junction and area north of the St Helens Canal) are currently only embankments, incidental parcels of land or highway landscaping. St Michaels Golf Course has been closed since 2004 due to the identification of serious contamination of the land. No further funding has been identified for its remediation and therefore any prospects of its reuse as a recreational facility are not anticipated in the near future. 7.72ha of the golf course would be utilised temporarily for the 40-month construction period causing limited harm and 2.4ha would be permanently redeveloped to form the new toll plazas along the widened Speke Road. This permanent loss is small compared to the entire greenspace and would not compromise its future use as a reconfigured 18-hole course and therefore harm is considered to be limited. Widnes Warth Salt Marsh will lose some 6.23ha of land temporarily during the 20-month construction period with limited harm, however, 0.14ha of land will be lost permanently under the supporting piers of the approach viaduct to the crossing. The harm that risen from this is limited by virtue that the 0.14ha of land lost is small compared to the scale of the overall greenspace, it does not prejudice its recreational value, will not generate additional development on the greenspace and will only be limited in its visual harm, which planting of woodland scale trees will in part mitigate. The large majority of open space used during the construction phase across Widnes Warth, Wigg Island and the salt marshes will be returned to open space again, with only the permanent loss of 0.26 hectares where the piers and abutments will be sited. A permanent effect however will be had on these areas. There are various segments and pieces of greenspace either side of the Bridgewater Junction at the northern end of the Central Expressway. These pieces of land are lost, in part, in order to facilitate the widening of the existing carriageway and in the reconfiguration of the various junctions. The ES appraisal concludes that the harm through the loss of these parcels of land is low and it should be noted that these pieces of land act only as incidental landscaping around existing junctions and highways that will be landscaped. Proposed Greenspace An area of proposed greenspace is situated on Wigg Island and would be lost contrary to Policy GE7. This policy offers no criteria to determine appropriate development and therefore the applicant has referred back to Policy GE6 which addresses land currently designated as greenspace. Whilst the development is not ancillary to the enjoyment of the greenspace or provides compensation, it will utilise a vary small area of land (that taken up by the footprint of the piers), will not harm the overall enjoyment of the proposed greenspace and will be screened by new woodland scale planting. As such the extent of this harm is minimal.

43

Green Belt There is conflict with Green Belt policy in relation to the designation at Wigg Island. The designation is bounded by the river to the north and the Ship Canal to the south and the new crossing would pass over it at a height of 24m on piers. The harm would be generated on two levels, that of effect on the purpose of the Green Belt and secondly that on the visual impact of the structure. The purpose of the Green Belt is set out in para 1.5 of PPG2. In this respect the development constitutes a direct encroachment through the positioning of the piers. These however, would only develop 0.12ha of Green Belt in a segment of Green Belt that is 161ha in size. As such this encroachment is not only limited it would not undermine the function of the Green Belt in terms of the level of development. The nature of the urban sprawl would be limited to the linear design of the bridge and the catalytic effect it would generate would be entirely within the boundaries of the existing urban areas not within the Green Belt. In terms of merging, again this is limited to the linear structure of the bridge and while it does physically link the two towns together, this is no greater than that presented by the Aethelfreda Railway Bridge and the SJB. Indirectly the development generates urban sprawl through linking Runcorn and Widnes across the Estuary, which currently acts as a buffer separating the two urban areas. The bridge would have a major effect on this portion of Green Belt on Wigg Island. The visual assessment undertaken in the ES notes that the appearance of Wigg Island would be significantly altered and the aspect of the wider environment from Wigg Island would be significantly harmed. Substantial planting of trees on a woodland scale would provide some mitigation, however the harm would only be reduced rather than entirely overcome. Para 3.15 of PPG2 addressed scale of harm through an assessment of visual detriment. As such it is noted that the passage of the deck over the island at 24m in height would preserve an open aspect at ground level through and around the structures. The design of the structure is considered in the Design and Access Statement and reflects the wide-open setting of the island and the estuary through its sleek linear proportions and vertical piers, which will blend with the mitigation measures delivered through planting. As such following consideration of the structure’s design merits and the planting offered it is argued by the applicant that the harm generated on the Green Belt is mitigated against. Policy GE1 states that “Planning permission will not be given for inappropriate development within the Green Belt, as defined on the proposals map, except in very special circumstances” and PPG2 further supports this stance. Considering the regional significance and support for the crossing through the existing and emerging RSS, and the detailed selection process of electing

44

Route 3A as the preferred crossing option, there is no alternative other than this scheme, which impact on the Green Belt, which is feasible to deliver the new crossing. Primary Employment Areas Astmoor Industrial Estate and the Catalyst Trade Park will collectively see the loss of 21.02 hectares of industrial land and will have a high negative impact in conflict with Policy E3 of the UDP, which seeks to retain land in these areas for business uses (B1, B2, B8 and Sui Generis Industrial Uses). Following construction much of the land surrounding the new highway infrastructure at Astmoor Industrial Estate and the Catalyst Trade Park can be returned to industrial use, with new parcels being formed adjacent to the highway or beneath the viaducts. Land to be made available for redevelopment would be 7.12ha. This is addressed further in the Regeneration Strategy of this report. Financing and Compulsory Purchase Order Issues of financing (in terms of tolling) and the compulsory purchase of land in order to construct and operate this new highway network by the local authority and the concessionaire are matter addressed by the TWA, but are not the concern of this report, which is only concerned with assessing material planning issues. It must be recognised, however, that these matters are unavoidable in order to bring about the scheme.

45

CONCLUSION This TWA application alone does not deliver the new Mersey Crossing, however, it does include the principal element of the new bridge and new road and tolling infrastructure of the Mersey Gateway Project. As such the application has support both locally and regionally through the development plan in Policy T10 of RSS and Policy S14 of the UDP. Policy T10 in RSS identifies the second crossing of the River Mersey in Halton as a “Transport Study of Regional Significance” and that it should be delivered by 2007. Whilst clearly this timetable has slipped, the principle of the project is recognised in regional policy and therefore supported strategically. Halton UDP Policy S14 provides local policy support for the scheme, giving a more specific location, identifying the area to the east of the existing SJB as being the promoted location for the crossing and therefore enshrining the need for this regionally significant crossing at local level. The Regional Economic Strategy (RES) 2006 notes the second Mersey Crossing as being a major regional transport infrastructure project for the northwest, through the delivery of improved access to Liverpool and reducing congestion across the region as a whole. Halton’s Local Transport Plan addresses the Second Crossing as a Priority 1 scheme that is locally important in improving cross-river connectivity and reducing journey time. It also promotes the SJB as a sustainable transport corridor as part of the rationalised and reordered highway network within the borough. Other policies throughout the development plan further support the creation of a sustainable transport corridor and better walking, cycling and public transport facilities, which are being provided over the existing SJB. Also policies within the development plan that address strategic planning matters such as regeneration, the economy, the environment and amenity of residents and businesses are adhered to. The effect upon surface water quality, following mitigation measures will result in no significant impacts and therefore the proposal accords with policies in the RSS and Policy PR5 of the UDP In terms of contamination, the project has the risk of releasing pollutants held within land and water to the detriment of the health of individuals living and working in the area both during construction and the operational phases. Following the application of mitigation measures Policies in the RSS and Policy PR4 of the UDP will be complied with and no harm will result. A temporary high risk was identified in the ES to groundwater, particularly during construction, but also during operation. Mitigation measures will be endorsed within the EMP and as such Policy PR15 of the UDP and overarching policies within RSS are satisfied.

46

In terms of terrestrial and avian ecology, protected species will be largely unaffected. The habitats of wild birds and animals will not be so affected as to disrupt the normal feeding patterns, roosting and migration throughout the area. As such Policy GE17 through GE21 are satisfied in terms of there being no harm inflicted on this aspect of the natural environment, subject to mitigation measures. Subject to sensitive construction methods being employed to reduce noise shockwaves through the water the aquatic ecology (of which some constitutes protected species) will not be harmed and therefore no impact will be passed onto the avian population (particularly in the international designated area) of the Middle and Upper Estuary. Monitoring will be ongoing throughout the 20-month construction period, which may result in further mitigation measures needing to be employed. As such there will be no adverse on the SSSI, Ramsar and SPA designations and therefore no harm in terms of Policy GE17 through GE21. Whilst strategic policies within the development plan clearly support the principle of a second crossing over the River Mersey east of the SJB, there are inevitably policies within the RSS and the UDP that will not squarely support all material planning issues concerning the scheme. As such it is necessary to assess policies that will not offer full support and consider the degree of harm that will result. A conflict arises between the project corridor at several points and UDP Policy GE6, through the loss of designated greenspace as the development is not proposed for the ancillary enjoyment of that space nor des it provide compensation. The harm to policy aspirations on the greenspace on Wigg Island is minimal and therefore considered appropriate. There are various segments and pieces of greenspace either side of the Central Expressway and Weston point Expressway along their length from Junction 12 of the M56 through to the Bridgewater Junction. These various pieces of land are lost in order to facilitate the widening of the existing carriageway and in the reconfiguration of the various junctions. The ES appraisal concludes that the harm through the loss of these parcels of land is low and it should be noted that these pieces of land act only as incidental landscaping around existing junctions and highways that will be landscaped. In terms of the Green Belt the development is considered to be harmful by reason of inappropriateness, with there being harm to visual amenity, but only limited harm in terms of the objectives of Green Belt. A conflict arises in terms of the use of land in Southern Widnes (Policy RG1) as the use of land for major transport infrastructure is not specifically listed. The limited harm however is outweighed when considered against the regeneration strategy and the public realm opportunities generated. The change of use and loss of land in the other Action Areas (RG2, RG3 and

47

RG6) are not considered to be significant enough to warrant a degree of harm that requires compensation. Harm is identified over several heritage receptors, however these structures and area designations are at some distance from the new crossing and therefore the harm is limited. Moreover it is accepted that the character of the Upper Estuary has evolved over a long period of time and the heritage present represents many different periods of heritage and the new crossing is anticipated to become part of that wealth of local landmarks that collectively define Halton. There is a conflict between the project and Policy EQ2 of RSS and Policy PR1 of the UDP with regards to air quality. These policies aim to ensure that development do not generate air quality that effects the amenity of the local environment, human health or investment into the borough. The Air Quality Assessment undertaken as part of the ES highlights where positive and negative effects arise. In the ‘Do Minimum’ Scenario – with the project in place, air quality would be improved in terms of carbon and carbon dioxide emissions. In the ‘Do Something’ – 2015 Scenario NOx, PM10 and CO2 emissions fall due to new traffic patterns away from the SJB and the Weston Point Expressway. Following mitigation any negative impact identified in the ES, mainly along the Central Expressway will be of extremely low magnitude and the harm would not represent an unacceptable effect. There is a conflict with Policy PR2 of the UDP, which aims to protect residents, and other noise sensitive uses from an increase to ambient noise levels. The noise assessment illustrates that overall noise will be reduced by the project, however while a positive effect will be had around the SJB and Weston Point Expressway, it will generate some harm along the Central Expressway. In the ‘Do Minimum’ Scenario the number of people bothered by noise generated by the scheme will increase by 8% in 2015 and by 13% by 2030, whilst the ‘Do Something’ Scenario would see an initial reduction in 2015 and a 4.5% increase by 2030. The harm that will be generated during the construction phase along the Central Expressway, Halton Brow, Western Link and Wigg Island will be temporary and of low to moderate negative significance, with limited impact on Policy PR2. Operational noise will be had on the residents near to the Bridgewater Expressway and Central Expressway, Lodge Lea, Halton Brow and Western Link Junctions resulting in a low level of harm and high-level harm to Wigg Island. With the exception of Wigg Island the policy test, which aims to resist ‘significant increases in ambient noise’ is therefore satisfied, leaving Wigg

48

Island as the only area where harm is located, however when viewed holistically against the benefits achieved elsewhere the harm is considered to be limited. The project in its entirety delivers significant transport, economic and social benefits and generally accords with national guidance and the development plan. Whilst it does cause harm with regards to some policies, the special circumstances of the project and its benefits outweigh this harm, which to the larger extent is low or limited, this is particularly the case with regards the harm to Green Belt. As such the primary policies of the development plan are satisfied and no other material considerations that have been assessed have offered significant negative harm so as to constitute a refusal of the scheme.

49

Recommendations: Halton Borough Council having regard to all the observations made and all the issues raised has no objection to the application, subject to the conditions accompanying the submission and the suggested changes or additions detailed below. Conditions:

1. Time Limits 10 years

2. Notification of Commencement

3. Development to be carried out in accordance with approved details

4. Phasing Programme

5. Design, External Appearance and Materials

6. Construction Environmental Management Plan

7. Construction Transportation Management Plan

8. Code of construction practice

9. Travel Plan (including personnel travel and parking)

10. Landscaping – submission of scheme

11. Landscaping - Maintenance of landscaping

12. Street furniture street furniture

13. Lighting details (Including toll booth lighting and design)

14. Permanent and temporary highway and footpath access, phasing and

specification (including bridleways)

• Highway access and junction improvements to serve construction works

• Alternative access routes and diversions during construction works

15. Contaminated Land

16. Hydrodynamics

• Removal of all temporary construction works

• Morphological monitoring of the upper Mersey Estuary

50

17. Surface Water Quality

18. Drainage / Flood Risk (from the Environment Agency)

19. Terrestrial and Avian Ecology

20. Aquatic Ecology

21. Noise Monitoring

22. Archaeology

23. Navigation

24. Construction Compound

25. Wheel Cleaning Facilities

26. Implementation

27. Conditions at end of the Environment Agency comments under

contamination,

28. Signage Strategy (including speed limits)

29. Gantry Signing

30. Mitigation for the culverting of Stewards Brook

31. Stones used to temporarily fill the St Helens Canal shall contain properties to prevent the release of fine pieces of material into the water course

32. Abnormal load routing

33. Requisite approvals, including Highway Authority as Technical

Approval Authority

34. Extent and reinstatement of demolition/relocation works

Informatives

1. Approval must be obtained from Network Rails Territory Outside Party Engineers from any works that may impact on, or be near close proximity to the operational railway.

51

2. The details of the development, including the position and height of the three towers of the crossing shall be supplied to the Defence Geographic Centre so that it may be included on civil aviation maps.

3. United Utilities Wastewater Adoption Engineer, Graham Perry should

be contacted (01925 428 267) to arrange a sewer diversions.

4. Deep rooted shrubs and trees should not be planted in the vicinity of the public sewer and overflow systems.

• United Utilities will only consider the adoption of surface water sewer draining to balancing ponds, providing the following criteria are met

• The Local Authority take responsibility for the maintenance of the ponds;

• The freehold of the land on which the pond lies is transferred to the Local Authority;

• United Utilities is provided with a deed of “Grant of Rights” to discharge into the pond in perpetuity. Such a deed would necessarily contain provision against development within the balancing pond, and against altering its topography, or making connections to it;

• That measures have been taken to prevent flooding of properties; and

• That a legal agreement is in place between all parties. 5. A section 104 (Water Industry Act 1991) agreement for the surface

water sewers draining to the balancing pond, will not be entered into until every condition described above has been met.

6. The applicant should check the location and conditions of any

easement with United Utilities Facilities and Property Management Ltd, Coniston Buildings, Lingley Mere, Lingley Green Avenue, Great Sankey, Warrington. WA5 3UU. The route of the work covers a large area and will affect a number of our mains.

7. Written consent will need to be sought from the Environment Agency to

culvert of Stewards Brook to the South Side of Speke Road, in accordance with the Water Resources Act 1991. The balancing pond outfalls are to be into Steward's Brook and prior written consent under the above Act will also be required for the headwall structures.

8. The Project will cross both legs of Bowers Brook and our prior written

consent will be required for the proposals in accordance with the Water Resources Act 1991 and the Land Drainage Byelaws.

9. The proposals at the existing roundabout to the north of the M56

Junction 12 may affect Flood Brook. The details of these should be

52

submitted for comment and to determine whether our prior written consent is required in accordance with the Land Drainage Act 1991.

10. The Environment Agency advise that should the development involve

the import or deposit of waste materials for the purpose of construction or landscaping, or if contaminated soils are treated on site the activity may require an Environmental Permit, or may require an exemption.

11. The Environment Agency advise that any hazardous waste which is

removed from the site will need to be moved in accordance with the Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005.

12. The applicant must submit details to, and seek approval from the

Environment Agency for any intended abstraction of raw water, or impoundment of any watercourses.

13. The Environment Agency advise that it is the responsibility of the

applicant to ensure that the development will not affect any water features (i.e. wells, boreholes, springs, streams or ponds) in the area, including licensed and unlicensed abstractions.

14. The Environment Agency advises that all breeding birds in the wild are

protected under the Wildlife & Countryside Act (1981). It is therefore an offence to disturb or kill any wild bird while it is nest building, or at a nest containing eggs or young, or to disturb the dependent young of such a bird.

15. Should protected species be identified in Local Wildlife Sites and SSSI

(Flood Brook) a Licence should be obtained to carry out the works in accordance with the Wildlife & Countryside Act (1981).