MERSEY GATEWAY PROJECT - Halton Borough …...Mersey Gateway Project Gifford COPE Page 4 Report No. B4027D/COPE/R01˜ 1.2.4 Therefore, a series of planning applications (known as the

Report No. B4027D/COPE/R01 April 2009 November 2011

Halton Borough Council Rutland House Halton Lea Runcorn Cheshire WA7 2GW

CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION CODE OF PRACTICE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

MERSEY GATEWAY PROJECT

Mersey Gateway Project Gifford COPE Page i Report No. B4027D/COPE/R01�


CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION CODE OF PRACTICE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

C O N T E N T S Page 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 3

1.1 The Mersey Gateway Project ................................................................................... 3

1.2 Further Applications .................................................................................................. 3

1.3 The Purpose and Aims of the Code of Practice ....................................................... 5

1.4 Plans ......................................................................................................................... 5

1.5 Structure of this Document ....................................................................................... 6

2. REGULATORY ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS .................................................... 6

2.1 Register of Environmental Legislation ...................................................................... 6

3. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE ....................................................................................... 7

3.1 Roles and Responsibilities ........................................................................................ 7

3.2 Communication ......................................................................................................... 7

4. CONSTRUCTION ARRANGEMENTS ............................................................................... 8

4.1 Construction Environmental Management Plan ....................................................... 8

4.2 Construction Site Housekeeping .............................................................................. 9

Monitoring and Measurement ............................................................................................. 9

Fencing and Hoarding ......................................................................................................... 9

Lighting and Visual Intrusion ............................................................................................. 10

Access and Loading .......................................................................................................... 10

Site Security ...................................................................................................................... 11

Clearance of Site on Completion ...................................................................................... 11

Pest Control ...................................................................................................................... 11

Safety ................................................................................................................................ 11

Material and Waste Storage ............................................................................................. 12

5. HYDRODYNAMICS ......................................................................................................... 13

5.1 Management and Mitigation ................................................................................... 13

5.2 Monitoring ............................................................................................................... 13

6. SURFACE WATER QUALITY .......................................................................................... 14


Mersey Gateway Project Gifford COPE Page ii Report No. B4027D/COPE/R01�

6.2 Monitoring ............................................................................................................... 17

7. AVIAN ECOLOGY ........................................................................................................... 18


7.2 Monitoring ............................................................................................................... 20

8. TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY ............................................................................................. 21


8.2 Monitoring ............................................................................................................... 23

9. AQUATIC ECOLOGY ....................................................................................................... 24


9.2 Monitoring ............................................................................................................... 25

10. CONTAMINATION ............................................................................................................ 26

10.1 Management and Monitoring .................................................................................. 26

10.2 Monitoring and Response ....................................................................................... 27

11. WASTE AND MATERIALS .............................................................................................. 28


11.2 Monitoring ............................................................................................................... 30

12. AIR QUALITY ................................................................................................................... 31


12.2 Monitoring ............................................................................................................... 32

13. NOISE ............................................................................................................................... 35


13.2 Monitoring ............................................................................................................... 36

14. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................ 37


APPENDIX

DESCRIPTION

APPENDIX A Monitoring Frameworks APPENDIX A1 Hydrodynamic Monitoring Plan APPENDIX A2 Surface Water Quality Monitoring Plan (updated) APPENDIX A3 Upper Mersey Estuary Ecological Monitoring Plan (updated) APPENDIX A4 Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Plan (updated) APPENDIX A5 Sediment Monitoring Plan APPENDIX B Biodiversity Management Plan (BDMP) (updated)

Mersey Gateway Project Gifford COPE Page 3 Report No. B4027D/COPE/R01�

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 The Mersey Gateway Project

1.1.1 Halton Borough Council (the “Council”) is promoting a new road crossing of the Mersey Estuary (the “Estuary”) in the Borough of Halton (the “Borough”) and associated works to incorporate the new road crossing into the existing road network and to make changes to that network. Collectively the works required are known as the Mersey Gateway Project (the “Project”).

1.1.2 The Project will provide effective road connections to the Liverpool City area from north Cheshire in the south, thereby providing effective connectivity for the sub-region and addressing existing congestion in the Borough. The new road capacity provides an opportunity to will re-balance the transportation infrastructure within Halton towards delivering local sustainable transport and economic goals.

1.1.3 The Project’s scope includes the following:

a. The delivery of a new road crossing of the River in Halton, known as the Mersey Gateway Bridge (referred to as the “New Bridge” throughout this report);

b. Incorporation of the New Bridge in the existing highway network. These works are referred to as the Remote Highway Works;

c. Modification and de-linking of the Silver Jubilee Bridge (SJB) (excluding the asset management of the SJB works);

d. Integration of the revised networks with public transport, cycle and pedestrian links across Halton;

e. Integration with the surrounding environment through landscaping and on the New Bridge and SJB; and

f. Implementation of tolling and development of associated infrastructures; and g. Letting a Concession Contract for the construction, operation and maintenance of the

Project.

1.2 Further Applications

1.2.1 The principle of the Project was established, and certain details approved, by a number of permissions, deemed permissions, consents and Orders granted in late 2010/ early 2011 (the Permissions and Orders) following the submission of the Orders and Applications in 2008 and a Public Inquiry in 2009. The applications that led to the Permissions and Orders were accompanied by an Environmental Statement (the Orders ES).

1.2.2 The Permissions and Orders together granted planning permission, powers to acquire land, powers to charge tolls, powers to alter the highway, powers to interfere with navigation and other powers. However, they relate to relatively specific forms of development. As the Project moves into its delivery phase, the Council must have regard to a number of considerations necessary and relevant to secure the implementation of the Project and address any changes in circumstances since the date of the Permissions and Orders.

1.2.3 As explained in Chapter 1 of the Further Application Environmental Statement the Council is now advancing the Project including the Proposals to its delivery phase and in order to prepare the Project for procurement of the Project Company and in response to consultation with the Department for Transport, some modifications to the Reference Design proposals have been made which are the subject of the Further Application. This Construction and Operation Code of Practice for Environmental Management has been updated to reflect these modifications.


1.2.4 Therefore, a series of planning applications (known as the Further Applications) are being submitted with the objectives of: a. Allowing design changes to accommodate newly available technology such as open road

tolling (ORT) (i.e. toll collection without barriers and/or toll booths); b. Permitting the Project Company flexibility to construct the Project in a manner that is as

economically advantageous to the Council as possible; and c. Securing the quality of the design of the Project that is actually delivered.

1.2.5 The Proposals contained in the Further Applications (the Proposals) can be summarised as follows: a. Adoption of Open Road Tolling Technology from opening, as opposed to the barrier

tolling authorised by the Permissions and Orders; b. Redesign of the on- and off-slips at the formerly proposed Widnes Loops Junction to

remove the loops configuration from the proposals and provide a grade separated roundabout junction;

c. Changes to the vertical alignment of the mainline of the Project as a result of other design changes;

d. Adjustments to the alignment at Lodge Lane Junction to remove the need to replace the existing busway bridge; and

e. Adoption of urban highway standards in some locations where rural standards had been used.

1.2.6 Because the Further Applications would allow the Project to be delivered in a different form to

that provided in some of the Permission and Orders, it was necessary for an Environmental Statement (Further Applications ES) to be carried out to assess the environmental effects of the Project including the Proposals that are covered by the Further Applications.

1.2.7 As a result, it is relevant to consider how the measures outlined in this Construction and Operation code of Practice for Environmental management (COPE), which accompanies the Further Applications ES, differ from those contained in the COPE document that accompanied the Orders ES and the application that led to the Permissions and Orders. To assist in this, amended text is indicated by strikethrough (thus strikethrough) and new text by a change to blue font colour. Where more extensive changes have been made, this is noted accordingly.


1.3 The Purpose and Aims of the Code of Practice

1.3.1 The purpose of this COPE Construction and Operation code of Practice for Environmental management (COPE) is to define the measures required to mitigate and monitor the construction and operation of the Project set out a code of practice for the construction and operation of the Project including the Proposals contained in the Further Applications (hereafter referred to as the “Project including the Proposals”) so as to protect the environment.

1.3.2 It elaborates upon the mitigation proposals set out in the Further Applications ES Environmental Statement (ES) and also those that the Council, as the promoters of the Project, proposes following discussions with the Local Planning Authority (LPA) and stakeholders. It covers specific regulatory and best practice requirements.

1.3.3 This COPE sets out provisions for the management, mitigation and monitoring of environmental effects during the construction and operational phases of the Project’s implementation. It also outlines provisions for auditing, reporting and action to be taken to rectify any breaches to the COPE during construction and operation.

1.3.4 The COPE sits within the framework of the Project Environmental Management Plan (EMP). The provisions of the COPE will be secured through the imposition and implementation of planning conditions and incorporated into the contract(s) for the construction and operation of the Project. Because the Council will not build and operate the Project, any Concessionaire Project Company that it appoints to design build and operate the Project, is likely to be responsible for discharge of these responsibilities.

1.3.5 Some of the environmental topics addressed within this COPE are developed to a greater level of detail than others. This is because the mitigation in some areas will require final, detailed approval once the construction methodologies to be adopted by the Concessionaire Project Company are known. However, in all cases the mitigation is specified at a sufficient level of detail to give confidence that the environmental effects of the Project including the Proposals properly to have been addressed. Plans

1.3.6 This COPE sets out a code of practice for the construction and operation of the Project to ensure protection of the environment. As part of the Project’s construction and operation a number of specific operational techniques and activities are required to take place. This COPE sets out the requirements for a series of more detailed environmental management and monitoring plans that will need to be prepared so that the objectives of this COPE are satisfied, environmental requirements are met and the environment is protected.

1.3.7 These more detailed environmental management plans will include those set out below at Table 1. This COPE makes reference to these specific plans where necessary in Sections 4 to 14. These plans may also be used in the discharge of the planning conditions and, in some cases, more than one condition.

Table 1: Environmental Management Plans

Environmental Management Plan Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) Pollution Control and Contingency Plan (including cofferdam dewatering) Water Management Plan (Surface and Groundwater) Biodiversity Management Plan (BDMP) Remediation Strategy


Environmental Management Plan Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) Noise and Vibration Management Plan Construction Transport Management Plan Green Travel Plan

1.4 Structure of this Document

1.4.1 This document is set out in sections relating to the environmental topics addressed by the Environmental Impact Assessment for the Project including the Proposals and documented in the Further Applications ES which accompanied the orders and applications for the Project submitted in 2008 which accompanies the Further Applications for the Project submitted in 2011.

1.4.2 The remainder of the COPE is structured as follows:

1.4.3 Section 2: describes the regulatory framework that has informed the production of this COPE.

1.4.4 Section 3: outlines the implementation schedule for the COPE including roles and responsibilities, communication and reporting pathways, environmental training and awareness and monitoring mechanisms.

1.4.5 Sections 4 to 14: set out the standards of construction and operational practice for the individual topics addressed in the ES as shown below. Chapter 4 Construction Arrangements Chapter 5 Hydrodynamics Chapter 6 Surface Water Quality Chapter 7 Avian Ecology Chapter 8 Terrestrial Ecology Chapter 9 Aquatic Ecology Chapter 10 Contamination Chapter 11 Waste and Materials Chapter 12 Air Quality Chapter 13 Noise Chapter 14 Traffic Management

2. REGULATORY ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Register of Environmental Legislation

2.1.1 All works will be undertaken in accordance with relevant Codes, Standards, Regulations and Acts of Parliament that cover environmental and related matters. These are summarised in the relevant chapters of this COPE (albeit that this summary is not exhaustive).

2.1.2 Notwithstanding these references, compliance with this COPE will not absolve any person from

compliance with all legislative requirements applicable at the time of Project construction and operation. Wherever this COPE makes reference to Legislation, Standards or Codes it will be the necessary to ensure that the current versions are used at all times.


3. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

3.1 Roles and Responsibilities

3.1.1 The need for accountability and responsibility for environmental issues should be recognised by everyone involved in the construction and operation of the Project including the Proposals. This will include site staff and operatives, who are a key determinant of environmental performance, and senior management staff who will ensure that the works are undertaken in accordance with this COPE.

3.1.2 It will be necessary to establish and maintain contact with the LPA and local residents and keep them informed of construction matters likely to affect them. It will be necessary to demonstrate compliance with this COPE through the management, monitoring, auditing and training procedures in place under the EMP.

3.1.3 The Council expects that the roles below will be performed by its Concessionaire Project Company. 3.2 Communication

Stakeholder Communication

3.2.1 A Project Liaison Officer will be provided under the EMP to manage public relations, information and press related matters, who will liaise with the LPA, other statutory bodies, members of the public, press and the media on matters relating to the construction and operation of the Project including the Proposals.

Internal Communication

3.2.2 An Environmental Co-ordinator must be provided by the Concessionaire Project Company under the EMP to liaise with all statutory environmental organisations during the construction and operation of the Project including the Proposals as per the requirements set out in this COPE. The Environmental Co-ordinator will manage the implementation of environmental procedures as set out in this COPE to all staff and site personnel to ensure compliance with the COPE. The Environmental Co-ordinator will be responsible for ensuring that all staff are adequately briefed of their environmental duties under this COPE and organising environmental training.

External Communication Website

3.2.3 A website will be provided and maintained for the duration of the Project’s construction and for 5 years following the year of its opening, which will provide up-to-date information on such issues as the progress of the works, current areas affected by construction, temporary road closures and scheduled maintenance works. The website will also provide details of the results of monitoring carried out as part of the management plans set out in this COPE (see Table 1).


Complaints Procedure and Protocol

3.2.4 A ‘Complaints Hotline’ will be provided and maintained to deal with any complaints received in connection with the construction of the Project including the Proposals. The hotline should be answered by designated competent operator between the hours of 0700 and one hour after construction is terminated for the day. Outside these hours an automated call recording service will be provided. The telephone and fax numbers and the website address of the hotline will be provided through the press and be clearly displayed on hoarding or notices around and in the vicinity of every work site.

3.2.5 The Environmental Co-ordinator under the EMP will be responsible for the management of any

environmental related complaints through received through this mechanism. Such complaints will be recorded and all action taken logged through the use of a ‘Contacts Log’.

4. CONSTRUCTION ARRANGEMENTS 4.1 Construction Environmental Management Plan

4.1.1 A Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) CEMP will be produced prior to construction works commencing. The CEMP will be focused upon the measures set out below but also set out specific control measures necessary to deliver the construction related requirements of this COPE.

4.1.2 The CEMP will comprise a number of management and monitoring plans designed to reflect the requirements specified within the mitigation and enhancement sections of the Further Applications ES and elaborated within this COPE, commitments made during the planning and Public Inquiry phases, and requirements imposed by any other means. The management and monitoring plans will set out specific environmental requirements and will include the following: a. Pollution Control and Contingency Plan – emergency procedures; b. Site Waste and Resource Management Plan, including a Site Waste Management Plan

(SWMP); c. Contamination and Remediation Management Plan; d. Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Management Plan; e. Noise and Vibration Management Plan; f. Air Quality Plan; g. Water Quality Management Plan (Surface and Groundwater); h. Hydrodynamics Management Plan; i. Biodiversity Management Plan (BDMP); j. Socio-Economic Development Plan; k. Topsoil Management Plan; l. River Vessel Management Plan; m. Energy Management Plan; n. Landscape and Visual Management Plan; o. Construction Traffic Management Plan; and p. Green Travel Plan.

4.1.3 Each plan will be implemented at an appropriate stage of the Project’s development. A framework will therefore be drawn up to outline timeframes for implementation of each plan under the umbrella of the EMP.


4.1.4 This COPE makes reference to the CEMP management plans where necessary in Sections 4 to 14. These plans may also be used in the discharge of the planning conditions and, in some cases, more than one condition.

4.1.5 The CEMP will set out the specific roles and responsibilities of the various personnel in managing, monitoring and controlling all sub-contractor(s). 4.2 Construction Site Housekeeping

4.2.1 The Further Applications do not give rise to any amendments to the Construction Site Housekeeping requirements as reported in the Orders ES and supporting COPE document. There are therefore no changes to this section of the COPE.

4.2.2 Best practice construction site housekeeping should be applied at all times. This should include the following requirements:

a. Staff will be made aware of energy efficiency issues and measures to be implemented to

reduce energy consumption; b. Use of paper will be certified to the Forestry Stewardship Council (FSC) or equivalent

standards; c. Use of paper will be minimised and reused where possible and recycled paper purchased

as a preference; d. All working areas will be kept in a clean and tidy condition; e. All site waste and litter will be collected at regular intervals, adequately contained and

sorted for recycling where possible; f. Measures to promote efficient use of water on the construction site will be adopted where

possible; g. Checks will be made to ensure that on-site toilets (if applicable) are connected to the foul

sewer or that chemical toilets are disposed of appropriately; h. Spill kits will be retained on site and maintained; and i. Wheel washing facility areas will be provided for all vehicles and cleaned regularly. Monitoring and Measurement

4.2.3 Details of the monitoring will be set out in the CEMP. Certain management plans in Appendix A

to this document also outline the requirements for monitoring during the construction phase. Following these inspections a regular environmental performance report will be prepared by the Environmental Co-ordinator. The report will record data on compliance with the COPE and more detailed environmental management plans.

4.2.4 Any non-compliance identified through the monitoring will be documented by the Environmental Co-ordinator. Fencing and Hoarding

4.2.5 So far as appropriate, all working areas will be sufficiently fenced off from members of the public and to prevent animals from straying on to a working area. Hoardings will be selected to suit the location but may include the following: a. A wire mesh fence, where appropriate for minimum security needs; or b. A 2.4 m minimum height, plywood faced, timber framed boundary hoarding, of a surface

density of not less than 7 kg/m² or other hoarding providing equivalent security and noise attenuation, in the vicinity of noise sensitive neighbours; or


c. Other designs where a particular appearance or acoustic rating is considered to be required and as agreed with the LPA.

4.2.6 More details of noise mitigation are provided at Section 13. The location and design of site

boundaries, hoarding and temporary structures on the public highway should permit adequate visibility at junctions and appropriate forward visibility along highways in accordance with Department for Transport advice and the requirements of the LPA.

4.2.7 Where hoardings are provided, they will be painted on the side facing away from the construction site in a colour and style to be approved by the LPA, include identification of the Project and contact information. All hoardings and boundary fences should be maintained in a neat and tidy condition. No advertisement, notice, etc. including illicit bill or fly posting will be permitted on any fence or hoarding. All graffiti, flyposting or defacement to the hoardings will be removed and made good or obscured within 48 hours of discovery.

4.2.8 An information board will be provided at each worksite detailing information on the site

programme and estimated duration of the works, together with the web address and a 24 hour telephone number for use by members of the public who wish to lodge complaints or comments (see Section 4.2).

4.2.9 All temporary fencing and hoarding should be removed as soon as reasonably practicable after

completion of construction works. Lighting and Visual Intrusion

4.2.10 Construction buildings, equipment and lighting should be sited so as to minimise visual intrusion and light spillage at nearby residential properties, in so far as is consistent with the safe and efficient operation of each construction work site.

4.2.11 Site lighting should be positioned to minimise distractions or confusion to passing drivers on adjoining public highways. This provision should apply particularly to sites where work will be carried out after dark. .

4.2.12 So far as is practicable, all power to temporary traffic signals, lighting etc should be taken from mains supplies rather than from portable generators. Where portable generators are used, best industry practice should be followed to minimise noise and pollution from such generators. Access and Loading

4.2.13 Lorries should enter and exit any construction work site in a forward direction, except where space restrictions do not permit this. If the reversing of vehicles into public spaces is required, then the movement should be properly controlled by a responsible person observing the rear of the vehicle. The sounding of audible reversing alarms will not be permitted outside normal working hours, except where this has been approved by the LPA in connection with works permitted under Paragraph 4.2.28.

4.2.14 All loading and unloading of vehicles should take place off the public highway so far as is

reasonably practicable.


Site Security

4.2.15 Adequate security will be imposed by the Concessionaire Project Company to protect the public and prevent unauthorised entry to or exit from construction work sites. Site gates will be closed and locked when there is no site activity and proper security measures will be implemented.

4.2.16 Where site security cameras are used they should be placed in locations which will not impinge

upon the privacy of local residents. Clearance of Site on Completion

4.2.17 All working areas and accesses will be cleared and cleaned.

4.2.18 All surplus soil and materials, temporary roads and hardstandings, plant, sheds, offices and temporary fencing will be removed, post holes filled and the surface of the ground restored to as near as practicable to its original condition, to such condition as has previously been agreed with the land owner and/or the LPA or as required by the works comprised in the Project. Pest Control

4.2.19 The risk of infestation by pests or vermin will be minimised by adequate arrangements for the disposal of food waste or other material attractive to pests. If infestation occurs such action will be taken to deal with it as required by the LPA as the Council’s Environmental Health Officer. Safety

Emergency Contacts and Procedures 4.2.20 Emergency Contact Procedures will be maintained for each construction work site and will be

displayed prominently at each site. These procedures will be followed in any site emergency. 4.2.21 They will contain emergency phone numbers and the method of notifying the emergency

services and the Council in case of emergency. Copies of the procedure will be issued to the Council, the Fire Brigade, the Police, the Ambulance Service and other relevant statutory authorities.

4.2.22 Emergency telephone numbers for key personnel will also be included. Contaminated Materials (Special Precautions) 4.2.23 At those sites where contaminated material is encountered, the Safety Officer will ensure that a

Workers’ Safety Information Sheet is prominently displayed in rest/mess rooms and wash rooms covering hygiene, work practices, clothing requirements etc.

4.2.24 General provisions concerning remediation and disposal of contaminated materials are

described in Section 10 and 11 of this document. Crane Arcs 4.2.25 Crane arcs will be confined within the construction work site boundaries.


Material and Waste Storage

4.2.26 The following measures will be adopted, unless agreed otherwise with the LPA, when managing material and waste stockpiles at construction work sites: a. Storage areas will be clearly marked; b. Materials will be stored in suitable containers that are appropriately labelled with fitted

lids, taps and tops in good condition; c. Control measures will be put in place and/or spill response kits/materials will be located

near to bulk stores; d. Materials will be stored and protected against breakage, vandalism, theft or

inundation/flood damage; e. Topsoil will be stored in piles of less than 2m high to prevent damage to soil structure; f. Different grades of soil and waste types will be separated; g. So far as possible having regard to the nature of the works materials will be stored away

from sensitive environmental receptors such as watercourses; and h. Materials will be stored away from main site access roads. Working Hours

4.2.27 Normal hours of work for construction of the Project will be Monday to Friday 0700 to 1900 hours and Saturday 0700 to 1300 hours. These hours of work will not apply to equipment which is required to operate continuously.

4.2.28 In certain circumstances different working hours will apply. These will be agreed between the Concessionaire Project Company and the LPA. Application for approval of any working arrangements for works outside normal hours should be made at least two weeks in advance except in an emergency.

4.2.29 Where Sunday or evening/night working has the potential to disturb people living and working nearby occupiers will be notified seven days in advance, providing a description of the work to be carried out, measures that will be taken to control noise or other disturbance and the proposed hours of working.

4.2.30 The LPA will be informed of any emergency works outside normal or agreed working hours.


5. HYDRODYNAMICS 5.1 Management and Mitigation

5.1.1 There are no specific changes arising from the Further Applications of relevance to hydrodynamics as the Project including the Proposals does not involve any modifications to the Reference Design in the Estuary.

5.1.2 The Further Applications ES concludes that the baseline remains within the same bounds at the time of the modelling for the Orders ES. On this basis it is considered that the management and monitoring requirements put forward for the Orders ES and supporting COPE document also remain valid. There are therefore no resultant changes to this section of the COPE.

5.1.3 All temporary construction works undertaken as part of the Project including the Proposals and sited within the Upper Mersey Estuary will be removed within three months of the end of the construction of any relevant phase.

5.1.4 Measures required to mitigate construction and operational ecological effects on habitats within the Upper Mersey Estuary are discussed at Sections 7 and 8 (Avian and Terrestrial Ecology) in detail. 5.2 Monitoring

5.2.1 Appendix A1 sets out a plan for hydrodynamic monitoring that will be implemented before, during and after completion of construction of the Project including the Proposals. This plan has been developed in consultation and agreement with the Acting Conservator of the River Mersey (ACRM), the Environment Agency (EA) and Natural England (NE).


6. SURFACE WATER QUALITY 6.1 Management and Mitigation

6.1.1 Changes arising from the Further Applications of relevance to surface water quality are the removal of toll plazas and the reduction in the western extent of works on Speke Road. In terms of potential impacts of the Further Applications on surface water quality, the main change is that Stewards Brook would no longer be impacted by the Project during the operational phase as it is located outside the development area and no drainage will be directed to it; the removal of toll plazas will also reduce the amount of run-off discharged to other watercourses. As the Planning Application Boundary for the Project including Proposals is in the vicinity of Stewards Brook, however, there is potential for a construction compound or other structures to be located within this area during the construction phase and there may be surface run-off or spillages associated with these structures which could have a potential impact on Stewards Brook. This section of the COPE has been updated accordingly.

6.1.2 Additional 2008 to 2011 studies to gather recent baseline data relating to water quality of the watercourses potentially influenced by the Project have been considered in the Further Applications ES surface water quality assessment. There are no resultant changes to this section of the COPE in this regard.

6.1.3 The following plans will be prepared to ensure that the effects of the Project including the Proposals on surface water quality receptors are managed and mitigated throughout the Project’s construction and operation:

a. Pollution Control and Contingency Plan (including cofferdam dewatering) and b. Surface Water Quality Management Plan.

Physical Management Techniques

6.1.4 Physical techniques will be employed during construction of the Project including the Proposals to protect surface water quality which will include, but not be restricted to, the following techniques: a. All fuel storage will occur within bunded fuel tanks with a bund capacity of over 110% of

the tank volume. These tanks will be properly maintained and have fuel filler facilities within the tank. A minimum volume of fuel will be stored on site. The location of all fuel storage will be such that it minimises the risks to surface and groundwater;

a. Construction compounds will be hard surfaced where possible with self contained surface water collection and management systems;

b. Oil/water separators will be used on the construction compounds surface water management systems to remove oils and fuels accidentally spilled/accumulated during operation of the Project including the Proposals. These are to be maintained in accordance with the manufactures instructions to ensure they remain efficient;

c. Bunded areas for the waste quarantine and pre-segregation areas. Stockpiles of contaminated or suspect material will be sheeted to minimise runoff;

d. All chemical and other stores will use appropriate containers. Spill mats and drip trays will be used wherever necessary;

e. Spill Control kits will be available and maintained at all compounds and works where these are adjacent to watercourses;

f. Measures to prevent the reintroduction of suspended solids into watercourses will be incorporated into temporary works such as earthwork areas, haul routes and compounds.


No exposed stockpiles will be located within an agreed distance of principal water courses;

g. Appropriate measures will be taken where contaminated soils and groundwater are to be excavated/removed. All contaminated groundwaters will be collected and stored prior to monitoring and disposal. Appropriate disposal techniques will be used in accordance with the Environmental Protection (Duty of Care) Regulations 1991; Appropriate disposal techniques will be used in accordance with The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 which replace the Environmental Protection (Duty of Care) Regulations 1991 (and amendments) in England and Wales and amend the Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations.

h. No storage of contaminated soils will occur within 20m of principal water courses unless this is on dedicated engineered and bunded areas. Contaminated waste will be stored for a minimum of time prior to removal for management and disposal;

i. Surface runoff will be stored and monitored in accordance with the requirements of discharge consents negotiated with the EA; and

j. Any wheel washes used in site compounds will have self contained water collection systems and these waters will be monitored prior to discharge.

6.1.5 Best practice construction site housekeeping should be applied at all times. Of relevance to water quality this should include: a. Checks will be made to ensure that on-site toilets (if applicable) are connected to the foul

sewer or that chemical toilets are disposed of appropriately; b. Spill kits will be retained on site and maintained; and c. Wheel washing facility areas will be provided for all vehicles and cleaned regularly.

6.1.6 For works within the River or Estuary physical measures will be used to minimise the release of sediments. These will include the use of silt nets during piling activities.

6.1.7 For the infilling of the St Helens Canal for use by construction plant to access the saltmarsh a chemically inert stone will be used such as granite or shale to minimise the release of fines into the water column. In addition to this the stone will be pre-washed in a controlled area (i.e. away from sensitive areas such as watercourses) to remove any fines prior to infilling the canal.

6.1.8 During construction work on culverts in Bowers Brook and Stewards Brook, the brooks will be overpumped to ensure the working area is dry, which will minimise the risk of contamination. Under the Further Applications proposals, the western extent of the Project no longer extends as far as Stewards Brook. With the revised drainage design, water from the Project will no longer drain into Stewards Brook. Therefore there will be no work on culverts in Stewards Brook for the Project including the Proposals.

Control and Management of Surface Water Runoff and Drainage

6.1.9 Prior to commencement of each phase of the development details of the drainage works to be carried out in accordance with an approved drainage strategy will be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA.


6.1.10 Appropriate design standards will be used, such as the EA Pollution Prevention Guidelines1 and DMRB2, for all temporary and permanent works.

6.1.11 Balancing The use of balancing ponds, and swales or underground storage structures such as oversized pipes will control the flow of runoff into the designated watercourses and minimise the potential for scour of sediments and input of suspended sediments from routine road runoff. The exact location of these facilities is to be confirmed by the Concessionaire Project Company in the detailed design. However, at present it is proposed to provide two balancing ponds at the Main Toll Plaza’s on the former St. Michaels Golf Course, a swale south of the Widnes Loops and a balancing pond at the Lodge Lane Junction, which will discharge into Flood Brook that the surface water can be attenuated, for example via the potential provision of balancing ponds at the Ditton Junction, at Widnes Loops, and the Bridgewater Junction and at the Lodge Lane junction. These features will be fitted with spill and pollution control equipment to deal with possible accidents in these locations. the details of which will require the prior approval of the LPA. These requirements should be secured by condition. The existing sewer system (storm or foul) will be used to outfall where appropriate and agreed by the operating authority.

6.1.12 Interceptors and filter drains will be used to minimise any pollutant input from routine runoff and

spillage of chemicals from roads into surface water courses. The locations of these features have not been designed at this stage. However, they will be located at key locations of the Project such as the main toll plaza. Under the Updated Reference Design the toll plazas have been removed.

6.1.13 Routine highway runoff will be discharged into Stewards Brook, St Helens Canal and Flood Brook. All runoff entering the watercourses should pass through a series of control measures in order to remove pollutants and to attenuate flows. These should include: k. Oil traps; l. Interceptors; m. Baffle boards; n. Check dams; o. Scum boards; p. Vegetated swales; q. Balancing Ponds; and r. Penstocks.

6.1.14 The existing sewer system (storm or foul) should not be used for surface water drainage from the Project.

6.1.15 Mitigation should be in place to control the migration through groundwater of existing chlorinated solvent contamination reaching Bowers Brook, to minimise impact to the Estuary. This comprises source reduction techniques (in line with recommendations for mitigation set out for contamination in Section 10): the existing drainage beneath Catalyst Trade Park area is to be stopped up prior to the construction of the Widnes Loops Junction. It is envisaged that the construction of the Widnes Loops Junction will use a grid of vibro-concrete columns to improve the ground.

1 The EA have produced a series of Pollution Prevention Guidance notes (known as PPGs), which provides practical advice to help avoid causing pollution, minimise waste and comply with the requirements of the law. 2 Design Manual for Roads & Bridges (DMRB) - This standardised method provides an indication of the risk of an accidental spillage causing a pollution impact on a receiving watercourse.


6.1.16 Other techniques to minimise the migration through groundwater of chlorinated solvents entering Bowers Brook may include measures such as a physical barrier constructed in the ground between Catalyst Trade Park and Bowers Brook extending 4-5m below ground level. The details of measures actually deployed will require the prior approval of the LPA and will be developed in line with principles set out in Section 10 of this COPE.

6.1.17 The removal of an access track built along the saltmarsh will be avoided during the highest annual spring tides that inundate the saltmarsh. This will minimise the risk of loose material being washed into the Estuary. 6.2 Monitoring

6.2.1 Appendix A2 sets out a plan for surface water quality monitoring that is to be implemented before, during and after construction of the Project. This plan has been prepared in consultation and agreement with the ACRM, EA and NE.


7. AVIAN ECOLOGY 7.1 Management and Mitigation

7.1.1 Change arising from the Further Applications of relevance to avian ecology is the increased flexibility to the design of the New Bridge over the Estuary. The flexibility in design could affect the final amount of shading, depending on the final choice of design and the amount of light falling between the centres of the two lanes. The flexibility in design could also affect the number of piers (up to a maximum of 35) that are needed to be built in the saltmarsh, affecting the physical loss of habitat under concrete.

7.1.2 The mitigation as reported in the Orders ES and supporting COPE document remains sufficient to allow for this increase in flexibility. This is because the areas of saltmarsh required for management on either side of the New Bridge remains the same. There are therefore no changes to this section of the COPE in this regard.

7.1.3 All avian ecology mitigation measures have been updated to take into account the additional 2009 to 2011 survey work considered in the Further Applications ES ecology assessment.

7.1.4 Avian, terrestrial and aquatic ecology mitigation will be delivered through the implementation of the Biodiversity Management Plan (BDMP, B4027/BDMP/R01, Appendix B). In addition to the details set out below, which will be developed in any event as part of the Project, the BDMP will set out all mitigation that is required to meet the codes of best practise set out this document, protect ecological features likely to be affected by the construction and operation of the Project, ensure compliance with wildlife legislation and satisfy requirements of statutory bodies.

Upper Mersey Estuary LWS

7.1.5 To ensure the protection of habitats and birds within the Upper Mersey Estuary Local Wildlife Site (LWS) a package of essential mitigation has been developed in consultation with NE and the EA.

7.1.6 This essential mitigation requires the management and restoration of saltmarsh habitats within

the Upper Mersey Estuary LWS and their conversion to more favourable feeding and roosting habitat for wildfowl and wading birds. This mitigation will be achieved through a combination of habitat creation and habitat modifications. This essential mitigation will be implemented through the adoption of detailed measures which will require the prior approval of the LPA.

7.1.7 The key principles of the essential mitigation to be implemented in the LWS during the

construction of the Project will include the following: a. Saltmarsh access by machinery will be restricted to access tracks and (subject to

paragraph (b) below) there is to be no access by personnel to bird-breeding habitats in the bird-breeding season of March to August inclusive. Fencing and/or other appropriate measures will be used to prevent deliberate or accidental access;


b. If the construction and/or use of access tracks across the saltmarsh is required to commence within the bird-breeding season, vegetation will be cut short and maintained in that condition within the construction traffic routes and directly underneath the New Bridge construction area to create a sterile environment for ground nesting birds. Marker posts at 15 metre interval intervals will also deter ground nesting birds from moving into this area;

c. Temporary fences will be erected to demarcate and prevent machinery and personnel access to areas of saltmarsh bird-breeding habitat;

d. Lighting required during construction will incorporate the use of directional and screened lighting to avoid glare so far as it is safe and practicable to do so;

e. There will be ecological monitoring and surveillance of the saltmarsh habitats and breeding birds throughout the construction of the Project. If temporary access for site investigations or other construction-related activities is necessary, ecological advice and survey information on breeding bird locations should be obtained beforehand. The method of obtaining such access will have regard to such advice;

f. Shooting rights on the Estuary edge to the saltmarsh mitigation areas will be suspended within the 300 metre construction corridor measured from the proposed centre line of the New Bridge; and

g. Protected areas are to include saltmarsh on both sides of the Upper Mersey Estuary so that if birds are disturbed on one side of the Estuary, they will have alternative and similar feeding and roosting habitats nearby, well within a short flying distance.

7.1.8 The essential mitigation to be implemented in the Upper Mersey Estuary LWS during the

operation of the Project should include the following:

a. Cut saltmarsh vegetation should be managed by conservation cattle grazing to convert the vegetation to a range of saltmarsh plant communities known to be favoured by feeding and roosting wildfowl and wading birds, specifically those species whose populations in the European Site are of international importance. Grazing densities should be controlled so that saltmarsh vegetation is reduced to an appropriate height to avoid over-grazing that could result in localised losses of saltmarsh vegetation and increased risk of sediment erosion;

b. Saltmarsh scrapes and pools will be created in close proximity to the bridge alignment by excavation in conjunction with an artificial liner or other methods of water retention. The pools and scrapes will be of different sizes and shapes but all will be shallow and no more than 1.5 metres deep. They will have shallow margins and, in some cases, deeper central water areas. The pools will be separated by wide gaps. to avoid pools merging. They will be created well away from the eroding channel margins of the saltmarshes and well separated from major creeks. The scrapes are intended to provide a wide range of habitats for marine and brackish water invertebrates that are the invertebrate prey of the bird species of the internationally important wildfowl and wader populations of the SPA;

c. Conservation and vegetation management of the natural system of saltmarsh creeks will be undertaken, including reed colonisation and reedbed management, as part of an integrated scheme intended to create favourable saltmarsh habitat for wintering and migratory wildfowl and wading birds;

d. The construction period fenceline will be upgraded to protect saltmarshes from disturbance by people and dogs. This will help to protect ground nesting birds during the breeding season, as well as providing sanctuary in winter for wildfowl and wading birds;

e. Shooting rights on the saltmarsh mitigation areas that were suspended within the 300 metre construction corridor, will be allowed back to within 200 metres of the centre line of the New Bridge during the operation period;

f. Access to higher ground will be provided for grazing livestock to obtain safe refuges during high tides and stormy weather. There will be facilities to allow livestock to be


removed from the saltmarshes at times when tidal flooding of the saltmarshes is expected;

g. Improved areas will include saltmarsh on both sides of the Upper Mersey Estuary so that if birds are disturbed on one of the areas, they will have alternative and similar feeding and roosting habitats nearby, well within a short flying distance;

h. The saltmarsh mitigation areas will encompass habitat on both sides of the New Bridge at both Astmoor and Widnes Warth saltmarshes which will be continuous beneath the bridge and connected by creeks, saltmarsh vegetation, pools and intertidal sand and mudflats;

i. Both mitigation areas will be close to Runcorn Sands which has supported saltmarsh vegetation in the past, and is likely to be colonised by similar saltmarsh vegetation in the future, albeit temporarily. The presence of Runcorn Sands, particularly if saltmarsh recolonisation occurs, will increase the ornithological value of the mitigation areas by providing additional bird-feeding habitat and potential roosting habitat;

j. The Astmoor mitigation area will be adjacent to Wigg Island Community Park and very close to the visitor centre. This location will promote the value of Wigg Island Local Nature Reserve; and

k. The Widnes Warth mitigation area will be easily accessible from Spike Island and at a location where hides can be provided to allow local people and visitors to study and enjoy new landscape provided by the mitigation and the birdlife that it will attract;.

Avoidance of Bird Breeding Season

7.1.9 Vegetation clearance required as part of the construction of the Project will be carried out outside the breeding season (March to August inclusive) where possible. Where this is not possible all clearance will be preceded by an inspection by a competent ornithologist. Where nesting birds are identified they will be protected from damage until the young have fledged. 7.2 Monitoring

7.2.1 Appendix A3 sets out a plan for ecology monitoring that will be implemented within the LWS before, during and after construction of the Project. This plan has been prepared in consultation and agreement with NE and the EA.


8. TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY 8.1 Management and Mitigation

8.1.1 Change arising from the Further Applications of relevance to terrestrial ecology is the increased flexibility to the design of the New Bridge over the Estuary. The flexibility in design could affect the final amount of shading, depending on the final choice of design and the amount of light falling between the centres of the two lanes. The flexibility in design could also affect the number of piers that are needed to be built in the saltmarsh, affecting the physical loss of habitat under concrete.

8.1.2 The mitigation as reported in the Orders ES and supporting COPE document remains sufficient to allow for this increase in flexibility. This is because the areas of saltmarsh required for management on either side of the New Bridge remains the same. Also, any change to shading can become an opportunity to create pools underneath the bridge to provide shelter for invertebrates. There are therefore no changes to this section of the COPE in this regard.

8.1.3 All terrestrial ecology mitigation measures have been updated to take into account the additional 2009 to 2011 survey work considered in the Further Applications ES ecology assessment.

8.1.4 As set out above at Paragraph 7.1.1 7.1.4 all terrestrial ecology mitigation will be delivered through the implementation of the BDMP.

Upper Mersey Estuary LWS 8.1.5 The package of essential mitigation that will be implemented to protect the Upper Mersey

Estuary LWS habitats is set out above at Paragraphs 7.1.2 to 7.1.6 7.1.5 to 7.1.9. This package will mitigate both construction and operational effects on the estuarine habitats.

8.1.6 Following removal of construction access roads and cofferdam working areas there are several potential methods for saltmarsh vegetation restoration. The chosen methodology, which will be subject to the prior approval of the LPA, will be set out in the BDMP. Options include the following: a. Loosening of compacted soil, cultivation and planting with an appropriate seed mix; b. Encouraging natural recolonisation by seed released from adjacent saltmarsh vegetation

through tilth, seedbank germination and possible fertiliser application; c. Translocation of affected saltmarsh vegetation to a holding area; d. Restoration of work areas to saltmarsh vegetation; and e. Possible translocation of stripped turf from other areas of restoration area to access track

routes and / or cofferdam areas following infilling.


Wigg Island LWS 8.1.7 During operation of the Project tree and shrub planting will be implemented along both sides of

the New Bridge crossing of Wigg Island to minimise the reduction in aesthetic and intrinsic appeal of the Community Park. This planting will use tall and fast-growing tree species. To encourage fast growth the soil conditions are to be improved through physical and organic means. This habitat will be managed during operation to maximise its screening effect and suitability as bird-breeding habitat.

St Helens Canal LWS

8.1.8 A water vole survey will be undertaken within the proposed works area along the banks of St

Helens Canal to ensure water vole absence prior to commencement of the works likely to affect the St Helens Canal.

8.1.9 To compensate for operational effects of vegetation shading by the New Bridge suitable ponds and linear aquatic habitats will be provided on Wigg Island. These aquatic habitats will be designed to support types of flora and fauna found in the canal. The details of this mitigation will be outlined in a BDMP as described at Paragraph 7.1.1 7.1.4.

Manchester Ship Canal LWS

8.1.10 Orchid colonies and Grass Vetchling within the Manchester Ship Canal LWS will be identified prior to commencement of construction through a vegetation survey which will be carried out during May to July inclusive. Where orchids, Grass Vetchling and other important plant species (such as those supporting breeding butterflies) are found they will be protected using protective fencing. Where protection is not practicable, such plant species will be translocated to a suitable receptor site elsewhere along the canal bank or in Wigg Island LWS following preparation of the relevant translocation sites. More details regarding such mitigation will be set out in a BDMP as described at Paragraph 7.1.1 7.1.4.

8.1.11 Soil located beneath the New Bridge will be treated following construction to allow natural plant recolonisation in line with methods which are to be set out in a BDMP as described at Paragraph 7.1.1 7.1.4.

8.1.12 As described at Paragraph 8.1.7 8.1.10 vegetation, containing larval food plants for butterflies and invertebrates and which is likely to be affected by construction of the Project will be translocated to a suitable receptor site. Following construction, soil will be treated by methods to be set out in a BDMP to encourage natural recolonisation.

Great Crested Newts at Rocksavage

8.1.13 Great Crested Newts and their habitat are protected under European and National legislation. A detailed Great Crested Newt Method Statement will be prepared as part of the BDMP to mitigate any impact on Great Crested Newts or their habitat at Rocksavage. This mitigation will include the erection of newt fencing along the boundary of the land adjacent to the works. A European Protected Species mitigation licence must be sought from NE to permit the works at this location.


Bat Populations

8.1.14 Bats and their habitat are protected under European and National legislation. Prior to construction, and during the appropriate survey season, a survey of all potential bat roosts in buildings for demolition will be undertaken. Depending on the results of this survey and where necessary, appropriate mitigation measures will be set out in the BDMP and a European Protected Species mitigation licence must be sought from NE to permit the works at this location. Such mitigation measures may include demolition during appropriate seasons and provision of alternative suitable bat roosting habitat.

8.1.15 Areas of suitable bat foraging and commuting habitat will be retained across the Project area where practicable during construction. The location and extent of bat habitat to be safeguarded will be set out in detail in the BDMP.

8.1.16 Sensitive lighting techniques will be used during construction and operation to ensure minimal

effects on bat movements in the study area. Such mitigation should include the use of directional lighting design and low light emitting specifications. Water Voles

8.1.17 Water voles and their habitat are protected under European and National legislation. A water

vole survey will be undertaken prior to construction to identify potential water vole recolonisation. Based on the findings of the water vole surveys, water vole Method Statement will be prepared as part of the BDMP to mitigate any impact on water voles or their habitat. Based on the survey results, and where necessary, a European Protected Species mitigation licence will be sought from NE to permit the works at this location.

8.2 Monitoring

8.2.1 As stated at Paragraph 7.2.1 7.2.4, Appendix A3 sets out a framework for ecology monitoring that will be implemented within the Upper Mersey Estuary LWS pre, during and post construction of the Project.

8.2.2 Ecological surveillance will be undertaken during the construction of the Project. The details of

this surveillance will be set out in detail in the BDMP.

8.2.3 A detailed programme of terrestrial ecology monitoring will be set out within the BDMP to determine the success of mitigation outlined at Section 8.1 above. This will comprise vegetation, habitat and protected species surveys to monitor the success of mitigation and species activity following Project construction.


9. AQUATIC ECOLOGY 9.1 Management and Mitigation

9.1.1 Changes arising from the Further Applications of relevance to aquatic ecology (due to effects on water quality in freshwater watercourses) are the removal of toll plazas and the reduction in the western extent of works on Speke Road. In terms of potential impacts of the Further Applications on aquatic ecology the main change is that the water quality, and hence aquatic communities, in Stewards Brook will no longer be potentially impacted by the development during the operational phase as it is located outside the development area and no drainage will be directed to it. As the red line boundary for the Project including Proposals is in the vicinity of Stewards Brook, however, there is potential for a construction compound or other structures to be located within this area during the construction phase and there may be surface run-off or spillages associated with these structures which could have a potential impact on water quality, and consequently aquatic ecology, in Stewards Brook. There are no resultant changes to this section of the COPE.

9.1.2 A number of measures will be adopted during the construction of the Project including the Proposals to ensure protection of aquatic ecology receptors. These measures will be detailed in the CEMP and the BDMP and will include, but not be limited to, the following: a. Use of low-noise emitting methods and equipment (such as vibro-piling) for in water

pilling activities where possible; b. Monitoring of in-water noise levels (see Appendix A4) during construction with the aid of

hydrophones; c. Cessation of in-water piling works at appropriate times and where practicable, having

regard to the nature of the works and the programme for their implementation, during peak periods of salmon migration (May for downstream salmon smolt migration, and August to October for adult migration upstream);

d. Sensitive timing of construction activities to take into consideration fish migration periods; e. Establishment of a marine mammal safety zone3 during pile driving activities; f. Management of sediment releases into the Estuary and watercourse in line with surface

water quality mitigation measures (see Paragraph 6.1.3); g. Implementation of construction phase monitoring in line with methods set out in

Appendix A4; h. Control of contaminant releases in line with measures set out in the Remediation Strategy

(Section 10); i. Disposal of waste in line with the Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) as set out in

Section 11; and j. Sensitive design of temporary access routes to ensure maintenance of adequate fish

passage routes.

9.1.3 As detailed in Section 6 appropriate design standards will be maintained during the operation of the Project in compliance with EA standards and waste legislation (Duty of Care Regulations) for surface water runoff and drainage to surface water features.

3 A Marine Mammal Safety Zone is a successful strategy operated by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in the United States (US). It involves a patrol around an area where pile driving is being undertaken. Should a marine mammal be spotted the ground crews are alerted and works suspended until the mammal moves out of the area.


9.2 Monitoring

9.2.1 Appendix A4 sets out a framework for aquatic ecology monitoring that will be implemented pre, during and post construction of the Project including Proposals.


10. CONTAMINATION 10.1 Management and Monitoring

10.1.1 There are no specific changes arising from the Further Applications of relevance to contamination, however the Further Applications ES is informed by additional information arising from research, monitoring, site investigation and assessment undertaken since the Orders ES in 2008; this includes data obtained for the Public Inquiry in 2009. There are no resultant changes to this section of the COPE in this regard.

10.1.2 Additional consultation was also undertaken in 2009 intended to build upon the findings of the first consultation in 2007 and to refine the estimated costs and programme for remediation. The information received from consultees indicates there is a wide range of techniques available for the remediation of contaminated soil and groundwater within the Project site area. The consultation exercise did not identify any remediation techniques that had not previously been considered in the Orders ES. There are no resultant changes to this section of the COPE in this regard.

10.1.3 Prior to construction of the Project including the Proposals a Remediation Strategy will be prepared in respect of contaminated land, soils and groundwater within the development site. The Project Remediation Strategy will address all matters for mitigation and remediation of significant effects associated with contaminants and as identified in the Further Applications ES (Chapter 14).

10.1.4 Options for remediation will be designed in accordance with applicable Department for Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), Environment Agency (EA) guidance and all other relevant guidance and legislation for contamination and will be compliant with the Environmental Protection Act 1990. The Remediation Strategy will be subject to approval by the LPA in consultation with the EA.

10.1.5 The Remediation Strategy will include the following elements:

a. Detail regarding implementation of remediation and mitigation measures on site will include details of the methods to be adopted and implemented in parallel with the remedial works to ensure that possible impacts are managed adequately;

b. Information on how the effectiveness of the mitigation measures will be verified on site during the construction and operation of the Project and any longer term verification measures that may be necessary;

c. Details of monitoring during the implementation of the mitigation measures to confirm that there are no adverse impacts from the remedial works themselves. In addition there will be a need for longer term monitoring to measure the efficacy of the remedial works;

d. Detail regarding actions to be taken should monitoring indicate that any parameters are diverging from those anticipated in the Remediation Strategy; and

e. Where appropriate having regard to pathways identified and measures proposed in the Remediation Strategy, a risk assessment in respect of the potential effects of contamination through these pathways and an explanation in each case where such an assessment is not performed as to why that assessment is not required.

10.1.6 The measures that may be included in the Remediation Strategy will include the following during

construction and operation (including maintenance) of the Project including the Proposals. Exact requirements will be determined on a location-by-location basis and addressed in detail in the Remediation Strategy:


a. Use of good site management (including site security and measures to protect local residents and workers) and adoption of appropriate personal protective equipment by construction workers through implementation of a CEMP (refer to Section 4);

b. Adoption of watching briefs in sensitive works areas including identifying circumstances (if any) where construction workers may need to be subject to medical checks;

c. Minimisation of intrusive works where practicable; d. Control of dust emissions in line with measures set out at Section 12; e. Soil and groundwater remediation where appropriate; f. Adoption of measures (including appropriate construction methodologies) to prevent

vertical migration and horizontal (or lateral) migration of contaminants where considered necessary;

g. Light and dense non aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) remediation where appropriate; h. Minimisation of exposure to contaminated soils; i. Use of suitable fill in excavations and use of pipe materials not affected by contaminants

in the Study Area; j. Control and monitoring of odours and vapours; k. Adoption of measures to manage accidental spillages and releases through the

implementation of a CEMP (see Section 4); l. Use of suitable soil thickness and type in areas of landscaping; m. Use of the appropriate concrete class in contaminated areas; n. Retention of existing foundations where practicable; o. Back-filling of voids with low permeability materials; p. Protection of surface water quality through measures outlined in Section 4 and 6; q. Design of surface water drainage systems as set out in Section 6; r. Disposal of wastes to a suitably licensed waste disposal facility as set out in Section 11; s. A protocol will be produced to deal with unexploded ordnance. Monitoring will be

required during excavations for the Bridge piers and towers for unexploded ordnance. If unexploded ordnance is encountered then work will need to be stopped until the object has been removed and made safe by suitably qualified specialist personnel;

t. Protocol to deal with unexpected contamination; u. Removal or protection of existing drains where they form a pathway for contamination

migration; and v. Management of soils contaminated by radioactivity 10.2 Monitoring and Response

10.2.1 As detailed at Paragraph 10.1.3 (c) and (d) monitoring measures will be required during the construction of the Project including the Proposals and, if necessary, following completion of construction activities, to ensure that there are no adverse impacts from the remedial works themselves and to measure their efficiency. These monitoring measures will be set out in detail in the Remediation Strategy. The contamination monitoring strategy will also provide actions to be taken should monitoring indicate that any parameters are diverging from those anticipated in the Remediation Strategy.

10.2.2 On completion of remedial works in accordance with the Remediation Strategy a Verification Report will be prepared to demonstrate that the mitigation measures have been implemented. Should long term monitoring be required as part of the process, for example, associated with monitoring natural attenuation, then a series of Verification Reports will be required at regular intervals throughout this process.


11. WASTE AND MATERIALS 11.1 Management and Mitigation

11.1.1 There are no specific changes arising from the Further Applications of relevance to waste and materials. The only changes to the waste assessment reported in the Further Applications ES relate to the Claire: Protocol, published as “The definition of Waste: Development Industry Code of Practice” in March 2011. This section of the COPE has been updated accordingly.

11.1.2 Prior to construction commencing, a Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) will be produced in accordance with the Site Waste Management Plans Regulations 2008 (Statutory Instrument No. 314) for approval by the LPA. The approved SWMP will be implemented during construction.

Implementation of Waste Management Hierarchy

11.1.3 The Claire: Protocol provides a code of practice to developers in the assessment and reuse of materials, particularly where these materials are contaminated. The protocol provides that any materials generated during site works can be re-used, with or without pre-treatment, where they can be shown to meet four criteria. These comprise the following: 1. Where they do not compromise human health or the environment; 2. Where they suitable for use with or without pre-treatment; 3. Where there is a certainty of use; and 4. Where the quantity of material does not exceed that required for the project.

11.1.4 Clearly this protocol allows the re-use of materials where they can meet the four criteria with or without pre-treatment. This would allow the Project Company to re-use material which has been classified as hazardous waste where pre-treatment would enable them to meet the four criteria above. The SWMP will incorporate the Project Company’s approach to the Claire: Protocol.

11.1.5 All Project waste management activities will be undertaken in line with the Government’s Waste Hierarchy and Proximity Principles. This will encourage the reduction of waste volumes sent to landfill through adoption of alternative waste management methods under the hierarchical scheme; minimise, reduce, reuse and recycle through the use of the Claire: Protocol. Furthermore, management and disposal of waste arisings will be undertaken as close as possible to the origin of waste sources.

11.1.6 In order to mitigate the effects of waste management, waste resources will form part of the SWMP. This element of the SWMP will contain details which may include the following: a. Ticketing of all loads of material generated on site. This will include a description of the

location of arising and details of the nature of the material; b. Storage requirements for wastes in the quarantine, pre-treatment and general storage

areas on the site; c. Transport arrangements for all materials exported from site, including sheeting

requirements, routes to be used, waste transfer notes, Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) test results and destination;

d. Pre-treatment of hazardous waste materials to extract non-hazardous waste material for re-use on site or export to off site recycling facilities;

e. Engagement with the local waste management industry to divert Project non-hazardous waste from landfill to local recycling facilities wherever possible;

f. Any special requirements or difficult wastes; and


g. Details of waste management roles and responsibilities.

11.1.7 Due to the interaction between waste management and other disciplines, effects resulting from Project waste activities will also be managed through measures proposed within other discipline management plans. Measures to manage and minimise the effects of waste generation from the Project are also contained within the following plans:

a. Water Management Plan (Surface and Groundwater); b. Air Quality Management within the CEMP c. Remediation Strategy; and d. Pollution Control and Contingency Management Plan.

11.1.8 Physical measures to minimise effects of waste management may include: a. Use of bunded hard surfaces on the waste quarantine and waste pre-treatment areas; b. Use of bunding around waste storage areas; c. Storage of wastes in locations on the compounds taking into account the location of

nearby sensitive receptors; d. Sheeting of waste stockpiles in the quarantine and pre-treatment areas; e. WAC testing of waste materials to understand the nature of the material and handling

requirements; and f. Appropriate signage and access control to waste storage areas.

11.1.9 An environmental induction and tool box talks will be provided to all Project staff including training and awareness on waste management issues.

11.1.10 Excavated galligu will be treated by blending with cement based additives to form structurally stable non leachable material for reuse on site.

11.1.11 Separate receptacles will be provided for different waste streams in order to allow wastes to be pre-treated prior to disposal. Waste segregation should take place at source, where practicable and appropriate with immediate removal from site in order to minimise double handling of waste, reduce the potential for emissions and minimise land take used for waste activities. Pre-treatment requirements for wastes, under The Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005 (Statutory Instrument No. 894) and EA guidance4 will apply.

11.1.12 Where materials are recyclable, materials should be taken to a dedicated waste management centre or via a contract with third party recycler(s).

11.1.13 Waste management activities should be undertaken in line with good practice guidance. Guidance documents are available for the management, monitoring and reporting of construction waste in order to improve resource efficiency and implement mitigation measures. Current sources of information for good practice guidance include: a. The Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) Construction Sector resources

(www.wrap.org.uk/construction/); b. The Building Research Establishment (BRE) SMARTWaste Benchmarking initiative and

DEFRA funded project (www.smartwaste.co.uk/benchmarking.jsp); and c. Envirowise Construction Sector advice (www.envirowise.gov.uk/skip).

4 EA Guidance for waste destined for disposal in landfills. Interpretation of the Waste Acceptance Requirements of the Landfill (England and Wales) Regulations 2002 (as amended). Version 2. June 2006.


11.2 Monitoring

11.2.1 Information regarding the total volume and classification of waste streams resulting from Project activities will be collated throughout the construction of the Project. Any changes to design of construction methods will then be incorporated into a revised SWMP.

11.2.2 In line with the Environmental Protection (Duty of Care) 1991 Regulations (Statutory Instrument No. 2839) all wastes will be monitored using specified procedures for waste description, transfer, treatment and disposal. Appropriate disposal techniques will be used in accordance with The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 which replace the Environmental Protection (Duty of Care) Regulations 1991 (and amendments) in England and Wales, and amend the Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations.

11.2.3 A Waste Management Licence will be needed for pre-treatment activities. Should existing

merchant facilities not be used so that materials are treated on-site, an Integrated Pollution Control (IPC), permitting procedures licence will be required.

11.2.4 Monitoring and reporting requirements will be detailed within the SWMP, and may include the requirement for specialist monitoring of specific activities, such as piling operations.

11.2.5 Project waste arisings will be monitored against waste management objectives approved by the LPA in advance.


12. AIR QUALITY 12.1 Management and Mitigation

12.1.1 Changes arising from the Further Applications of relevance to the air quality assessment relate to the changes in the predicted traffic flows and opening year and changes in the proposed construction footprints and phasing. The air quality mitigation as reported in the Orders ES and supporting COPE document remains sufficient for the revised construction air quality effects. There are therefore no resultant changes to this section of the COPE in this regard.

12.1.2 Directive 2008/50/EC, (the “CAFE” Directive) on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe draws together previous directives (with exception of the Fourth Daughter Directive) into a single EU Directive on air quality. The Air Quality Standards (England) Regulations 2010 also came into force on the 11th June 2010. There are no resultant changes to this section of the COPE. Construction

12.1.3 Detailed management and mitigation to be implemented throughout construction of the Project will be contained within the CEMP.

12.1.4 A Project dust risk register will be developed and maintained throughout the construction of the

Project. Those activities with the potential to emit dust and PM10 using the BRE risk assessment publication ‘control of dust from construction and demolition activities’ will be identified. In order to minimise the effect of dust nuisance throughout the construction of the Project the following dust suppression measures will be implemented where required: a. Damping down of exposed soils, loose materials or unmade surfaces close to sensitive

locations during dry weather; b. Sheeting of vehicles transporting earthworks material to or from site; c. Limiting vehicle speeds over unmade surfaces; d. Controls will be applied to the cutting and grinding of materials; e. Burning of materials will be prohibited; f. Cleanable hard standing will be provided; g. Wheel washing facilities will be provided where appropriate; h. Sweepers will be used regularly on local roads if visible amounts of soil material from the

works are carried into the public highway; i. Haul roads should be located away from off-site sensitive properties as far as practicable

and to be watered regularly (wet suppression of dust); j. Where possible, all site vehicles and plant should have upward facing exhaust to

minimise surface dust re-suspension; k. Bunds or screens may be constructed as wind breaks, to reduce wind speeds. Earth

bunds would be seeded as soon as possible, prior to which they should be maintained damp;

l. Any aggregate stocking areas should be located away from sensitive areas and residential properties as far as practicable;

m. Stockpiles should also be watered and where necessary they should be covered; n. Off-site vehicles should have their wheels and bodies cleaned on a regular basis and the

access roads should be hard-surfaced and maintained damp; o. Permanent roads should be paved as early as practicable; p. Drop heights should be minimised and chutes used to discharge material close to where

it is required;


q. Consolidation and bulking of wastes so as to minimise transportation and handling requirements;

r. No vehicle or item of equipment emitting visible black smoke (other than during ignition) should be used on any construction site or public highway;

s. Combustion engines on all plant and equipment should not be left running unnecessarily; t. Vehicle exhausts should be placed as far from sensitive properties as practicable; u. Clear signing of construction vehicle access routes will be provided; v. Screening and/or wrapping of buildings which are to be demolished to reduce dust

emissions where necessary; w. Demolition activities will use methods to minimise emissions of dust including the use of

water sprays to suppress dust; and x. Fitting dust control devices to equipment which may include wet suppression methods

and local exhaust ventilation.

12.1.5 Targeted planning and identification of dust sources should be undertaken through the use of checklists provided in the Building Research Establishment’s ‘Control of Dust from construction and demolition activities’.

Sensitive Construction Traffic Management

12.1.6 The following construction traffic management measures should be implemented to minimise adverse effects to local air quality resulting from construction traffic exhaust emissions. a. Where possible, all non-road mobile machinery (NRMM) should use fuel equivalent to

ultra low sulphur diesel (ULSD); b. All NRMM should comply with either the current EU Directive Staged Emission Standards

(97/98/EC, 2002/88/EC, 2004/26/EC) now transposed into UK regulations; c. NRMM with power outputs greater than 37kW should be fitted with suitable after-

treatment devices stated on the approved list managed by the Energy Saving Trust; d. No vehicles or plant should be left idling unnecessarily e. All vehicles and plants should be well maintained and regularly serviced according to the

manufacturers recommendations; f. Vehicle exhausts should be placed as far from sensitive properties as practicable; g. Existing power sources should be used rather than temporary power generators; h. Haul routes should be located away from off-site sensitive properties with appropriate

speed limits enforced; i. The use of consolidation centres to manage site deliveries and handling requirements

should be considered; and j. Where construction works are located near to waterways and/or railways, delivering and

removing materials from the site using these means, rather than by road should be considered;

k. Clear signage of construction vehicle routes and access/egress points; l. Construction affecting traffic flows should be scheduled for off-peak hours when possible;

and m. Wheel wash facilities should be provided, along with regular cleaning and sweeping of

haul roads. 12.2 Monitoring


12.2.1 In order to define baseline pollutant concentrations prior to and during construction both continuous and non-continuous monitoring stations will be employed. Baseline monitoring sites would be established 3 months prior to construction works commencing (or at a time agreed by the LPA) in order to provide information on the local baseline near to sensitive receptors. The baseline construction monitoring would be used establish “action levels” for each pollutant. These action levels are usually set at a precautionary level below the relevant air quality standard or objective, or at a level that is agreed to be an acceptable increase above the construction baseline.

12.2.2 Monitoring during construction will be assessed against these action levels and the CEMP will require that procedures are reviewed and action is taken to reduce levels to below the action levels. The procedures would be agreed within the CEMP and ensure that monitored pollutant concentrations reduce below the action levels.

12.2.3 Monitoring of the effects of operation of the Project on NO2 and PM10 concentrations will be undertaken at locations to be agreed with the LPA. Suitable monitoring sites previously established throughout the construction phase of the Project would provide ideal locations at which to continue monitoring the long term effects. Deposited Dust Monitoring

12.2.4 Existing levels of dust will be monitored within 200m of construction areas. Monitoring locations during construction would be agreed in writing with the LPA and would include locations within 50m of the construction areas F (Bridgewater Junction), Area G (Central Expressway, Lodge Lane and Weston Link junctions), and Area I (SJB and Widnes De-Linking). Deposited dust levels will be monitored using one or more of the following options or an alternative approved by the local planning authority in advance; a. Depositional Dust Gauges b. Adhesive Strips c. Glass Slides NOx and PM10 Monitoring

12.2.5 Concentrations of NOx and PM10 will be monitored through the use of continuous analysers at a minimum of three locations. These locations will be agreed with the LPA and would include:

a. On the Central Expressway, Runcorn; b. North of the River, adjacent to those properties most affected by the SJB; and c. South of the SJB

12.2.6 Typical continuous PM10 monitoring will employ one or more of the following options or an alternative approved by the LPA in advance of construction works commencing; a. Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance (TEOM) b. Tapered Element Oscillating Microbalance Filter Dynamic Measurement System TEOM-

FDMS c. Met-one Beta Attenuation Monitor (BAM) d. Opsis SM200


12.2.7 Monitoring of NO2 will also be undertaken using NO2 diffusion tubes with a triplicate co-location positioned at the LPA’s continuous analyser. Details of the monitoring regime will be approved by the LPA in advance of construction works commencing Other Pollutants

12.2.8 Monitoring of metals (e.g. arsenic, cadmium, nickel and lead) will be undertaken using appropriate techniques and analytical methods, under timescales to be agreed with the LPA, based on sampling of PM10.

12.2.9 Monitoring of other pollutants as required will be identified for Health and Safety and under the contaminated land Remediation Strategy.

Meteorological Data

12.2.10 Local meteorological data will be recorded at strategic locations to the north and south of the Mersey Gateway and relative to those construction areas with the longest construction phases e.g. construction of the New Bridge in the inter-tidal zone. Meteorological data should specifically measure wind speed, wind direction and rainfall.

Odours

12.2.11 Measures for odour control will be incorporated within the CEMP and approved by the local planning authority in advance. The CEMP will contain details such as odour testing locations within the vicinity of construction works.


13. NOISE 13.1 Management and Mitigation

13.1.1 Changes arising from the Further Applications of relevance to the noise and vibration assessment relate to the changes in the predicted traffic flows and opening year and changes in the proposed construction locations and phasing. Both the construction noise assessment and the 3D noise modelling of the area have been updated and re-run as part of the Further Applications ES. The noise and vibration mitigation as reported in the Orders ES and supporting COPE document remains sufficient for the revised construction noise effects. There are therefore no resultant changes to this section of the COPE in this regard.

13.1.2 Some changes to the DMRB assessment methodology were being implemented at the time of the Orders ES. These changes were anticipated and incorporated into the noise and vibration assessment reported in the Orders ES, so the DMRB methodology followed in the Further Applications ES remains the same as that used previously. There are therefore no resultant changes to this section of the COPE.

13.1.3 The British Standard BS 5228 was updated in 2009. The primary change has been to incorporate a more up to date database of source noise levels derived from a research project carried out by Defra. The revised BS 5228 now also provides different noise level targets (for day, evening and night-time work) in three bands, where the band to be used is selected depending on the existing ambient noise levels. By reference to the baseline noise model it can be seen that the existing ambient noise levels in the main construction areas are generally below 65 dB LAeq during the daytime. Therefore the lower Category A threshold are used. This gives a 65 dB LAeq daytime noise level target rather than a 70 dB LAeq target as used previously. There are no other resultant changes to this section in the COPE.

Noise and Vibration Management Plan

13.1.4 A Noise and Vibration Management Plan (NVMP) will be prepared for incorporation into the CEMP. This plan will include best practice on the control and management of noise and vibration including specification of noise and vibration targets and trigger levels and limits on hours of working for certain activities in certain areas to manage and mitigate adverse effects of the Project including Proposals on sensitive receptors. Measures which will be included within the plan should include the following:

a. Where noisy tasks have to be undertaken close to occupied buildings, the occupiers

would be given advance notice, in writing, explaining the reason for the works, the expected time and duration of the works, and the procedures to be adopted for minimising the noise or vibration;

b. All plant and equipment associated with the construction works should be properly maintained, provided with effective silencers and operated in such a manner as to avoid causing excessive noise emission. Where plant has been designed to operate with engine covers to reduce noise, these should be used and remain closed while the plant is in operation. Unless otherwise directed by senior construction management, items of plant in intermittent use should be shut down during idle periods;

c. Static plant should be located in areas as far from inhabited buildings as possible and should be screened where practicable. Plant known to emit noise predominantly in one direction should, when possible, be screened or orientated so that the noise is directed away from noise sensitive areas;

d. No music or radios should be played on site;


e. Audible warning systems, such as vehicle reversing sirens, would normally be set to as low a setting as is compatible with safety requirements. Where appropriate, broadband warning systems would be used;

f. Site compounds should be located as far as possible from local occupied premises and, where possible, site buildings should be situated to provide additional screening between the works and other occupied premises. Where appropriate, the stockpiling of site materials, soil or spoil should be located where it can provide some additional screening provided that any plant associated with this would in itself not generate nuisance and provided that prevailing wind conditions would not increase the potential for nuisance due to dust. The transport of materials on or off site by road should generally take place during the normal daytime working period and where possible should also be routed away from particularly sensitive receivers; and

g. Site personnel should be informed about the need to minimise noise to the neighbouring community as well as about the health hazards of exposure to excessive noise or vibration. Their training should include advice relating to the proper use and maintenance of tools and equipment, the positioning of machinery on site to reduce noise emissions to neighbouring communities, and the avoidance of unnecessary noise when carrying out manual operations and when operating plant and equipment.

13.1.5 An application will be made to the LPA for a Section 61 agreement. This agreement will detail a noise control regime for construction works prior to construction commencing. Working Hour Restrictions

13.1.6 Noise will be controlled through restriction on working hours and/ or restriction on processes allowed in certain areas during construction. Night time working will be kept to a minimum.

13.1.7 Programming of noisy works near to schools will be undertaken where possible within the school holiday period. Use of Noise Barriers and Prevention Measures

13.1.8 Noise barriers shall be erected in areas detailed within the ES and NVMP. Barriers will mitigate the effects of road traffic noise to sensitive receptors.

13.1.9 Under the Noise Insulation (Amendment) Regulations 1988 (Statutory Instrument No. 2000) noise insulation shall be provided to those properties which are defined under the regulations as being ‘seriously affected for a substantial period of time’. 13.2 Monitoring Noise monitoring will be undertaken during construction in order to check noise and vibration level targets agreed within the Section 61 agreement, in line with British Standard 5228. Specific details regarding the frequency and locations of monitoring will be detailed within the NVMP.

13.2.1 Vibration monitoring of specific activities, such as piling, may be required.


14. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT 14.1 Management and Mitigation

14.1.1 Changes arising from the Further Applications of relevance to the transportation assessment relate to the changes in traffic forecasts as a result of the April 2011 WebTAG guidance. The Project including the Proposals various options at Victoria Road and St Helens canal, these have been considered in the transport assessment reported in the Further Applications ES.

14.1.2 The resulting forecasts are significantly lower than those presented in the Orders ES. Consequently, the operational assessments remain appropriate because the traffic flows used in the Orders ES are a worst case when compared to the current revised, reduced forecasts. The other revised assessments (physical fitness, journey ambiance, security, accessibility and transport interchange) have been re-assessed because of the changes in relevant guidance. None of these is significantly affected by changes in traffic forecasts. There are no resultant changes to this section of the COPE in this regard.

14.1.3 A Construction Transport Management Plan will be prepared and approved by the LPA prior to construction commencing. This requirement will be secured through Planning Condition 8 in relation to the Central Expressway Planning Conditions (ref 08/00200/FULEIA) and the SJB Planning Conditions (ref 08/00201/FULEIA) and a similar condition would be used in any planning permission granted as a result of the Further Applications.

Construction Traffic Routes

14.1.4 Construction traffic will be restricted to identified routes, which will be agreed with the police and highway authority prior to the commencement of the works. Particular conditions may apply in respect of hours of use, type of use, maintenance of routes (road sweeping etc).

Construction Traffic Parking

14.1.5 All construction vehicles not in use will be held at compounds within the works or at offsite locations provided by the Concessionaire Project Company.

Temporary and Permanent Closures and Diversions

14.1.6 Construction of the works will require temporary and permanent closures and diversions for road traffic.

14.1.7 The timing of all closures and diversions will be subject to approval by the police and highway authority. The Concessionaire Project Company will also be required to demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed measures to accommodate the diverted traffic, with respect to both capacity safety and design standards, including situations where elements of the permanent works may be brought into use before completion of the full scheme.

14.1.8 Indicative traffic management schemes for key areas of the works have been developed, and used to produce the indicative construction programme. These will be developed or replaced by the Concessionaire Project Company to reflect his anticipated sequence and timing of different parts of the works.


14.1.9 Before the development of each phase commences, details of the siting, design and layout of any new or altered vehicular access to the highway network (which will serve the works within that phase) and any highway junction improvements other than those shown on the Planning Direction Drawings, will be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA (Planning Condition 14, ref 08/00200/FULEIA and 08/00201/FULEIA) and a similar condition would be used in any planning permission granted as a result of the Further Applications. . Any works necessary to ensure highway safety will be completed before substantive construction activity served by such works or accesses is commenced during that phase.

Public Rights of Ways and Footways

14.1.10 Construction of the works will require temporary and permanent closures and diversions for pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians.

14.1.11 The timing of all closures and diversions will be subject to approval by the police and highway authority. It will also be necessary to demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed measures to accommodate the diverted trips, with respect to both capacity and design standards, including situations where elements of the permanent works may be used.

14.1.12 Prior to the commencement of each phase of the development, details of alternative access routes and/or diversions along the existing greenway, footway and cycle networks within that phase will be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA (Planning Condition 15, ref 08/00200/FULEIA and 08/00201/FULEIA) and a similar condition would be used in any planning permission granted as a result of the Further Applications. . The temporary and permanent closures of any street permitted by the Order will not be implemented until the designated alternative or diversion routes are available. Temporary closures will be for no longer than is necessary to enable the works to be undertaken, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the LPA.

Public Transport

14.1.13 Construction of the works will potentially require temporary and permanent closures and

diversions of some public transport routes and relocations of stops.

14.1.14 The timing of all closures and diversions will be subject to approval by the police, highway authority and public transport operators. It will also be necessary to demonstrate the adequacy of the proposed measures to accommodate the diverted trips, with respect to both capacity and design standards, including situations where elements of the permanent works may be used.

Maintenance and Repair

14.1.15 All diversionary routes which are part of the Project will be maintained to the appropriate standards during construction or maintenance.

14.1.16 The Concessionaire Project Company will liaise with the highway maintenance authority to ensure works are coordinated.

Sustainable Transport Strategy

14.1.17 The Concessionaire Project Company will: a. Implement a Travel Plan for staff employed on the project (Planning Condition 9, ref

08/00200/FULEIA and 08/00201/FULEIA) and a similar condition would be used in any planning permission granted as a result of the Further Applications. . Prior to the


development being opened to traffic a Workplace Travel Plan will be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The development will be operated in accordance with the Plan unless otherwise agreed in writing by the LPA;

b. Consider the sustainable transport implications in selecting materials and suppliers for use on the project; and

c. Be aware of the Council’s sustainable transport objectives and documents, and consider these in the design and operation of temporary diversions.


APPENDIX A – MONITORING FRAMEWORKS


APPENDIX A1 - HYDRODYNAMIC MONITORING PLAN

Report No.B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXA1 May 2009 November 2011

HYDRODYNAMIC MONITORING PLAN


Mersey Gateway Project Gifford Hydrodynamic Monitoring Plan Page 2 Report No.B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXA1


HYDRODYNAMIC MONITORING PLAN

C O N T E N T S Page 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 3

1.1 General ..................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Proposed Approach .................................................................................................. 4

2. PROPOSED HYDRODYNAMIC MONITORING ................................................................ 6 2.1 Framework and Stakeholder Involvement ................................................................ 6 2.2 Monitoring Plan ......................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Exceptions Plan ...................................................................................................... 11 2.4 Reporting ................................................................................................................. 11 2.5 Exceptions reporting ............................................................................................... 11

Appendix 1: Monitoring Plan

Appendix 2: Monitoring Programme

Appendix 3: Plan (B4027/4/SK447)


1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

1.1.1 As part of the proposals to construct a second road crossing of the River Mersey between Widnes and Runcorn (“the Project”), a series of applications have been made for Orders authorising works within the River Mersey and upon land adjacent to the River. These applications have been accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES).

1.1.2 A Construction and Operation code of Practice for Environmental management (COPE) has been developed for the Project to define the measures required to mitigate and monitor the construction and operation of the Project including the proposals contained in the Further Applications (hereafter referred to as the “Project including the Proposals”). The COPE covers specific regulatory, legislative and best practice requirements. It also provides for measures set out in the Project’s Further Applications ES.

1.1.3 In considering the applications and the Further Applications ES, the Acting Conservator of the River Mersey (ACRM), Environment Agency (EA) and Natural England (NE) and Peel have commented on the proposals. In the context of this document Peel includes the Manchester Ship Canal Company (MSCC) and the Mersey Docks and Harbour Company (MDHC). This has resulted in the agreement to secure the monitoring of the characteristics of the Study Area in relation to hydrodynamic processes.

1.1.4 With regard to the role of the ACRM, the statutory permissions which enable the Secretary of State for Transport to appoint an Acting Conservator remain in force. The appointment occurs annually and at the time that the Further Applications ES was prepared the previous appointment had not been renewed. As such there is not (at the time of preparing the Further Applications ES) an ACRM appointed to office. It is understood that Mersey Docks and Harbour Company (MDHC) are maintaining a ‘watching brief’. The responsibility to preserve the Navigation of the River Mersey is therefore vested in the Secretary of State for Transport. This plan has been prepared on the basis that the post of ACRM is filled and the requirements of the ACRM require to be complied with.

1.1.5 Appendix A of the COPE comprises a series of monitoring plans for the Project including the

Proposals, of which this document is one, which have been developed as a result of consultation on the applications and ES as described above.

1.1.6 The Hydrodynamic Monitoring Plan is expected to be delivered by the Concessionaire Project

Company, who will construct the Project on behalf of Halton Borough Council (HBC “the Council”). This document comprises a draft proposal for the monitoring of the hydrodynamics of the Estuary prior to construction, during construction and for an appropriate period following completion of the construction. Its content will be the subject of agreements between HBC the Council, the ACRM, EA, NE and Peel.

1.1.7 The details set out within these monitoring plans will be secured through relevant planning

conditions and/or the implementation of the COPE and Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) for the Project including the Proposals.


1.2 Proposed Approach

1.2.1 Hydrodynamic monitoring will form a component of the Monitoring Plan for the Project including the Proposals, and will be integrated into monitoring proposed for other issues/disciplines, and which we expect will be delivered by the Concessionaire Project Company on behalf of HBC the Council. Hydrodynamic monitoring will be undertaken only in the area shown in Figure 1 (“the Study Area”). Scour monitoring will also be undertaken in area S4 of the Study Area (paragraph 2.2.13).

1.2.2 Seven measures will be used to identify potential change to the stability within geomorphic/hydrodynamic systems of the Study Area (Figure 1). These proxy data (i.e. data which provide information on a range of hydrodynamic processes and change) consist of the following measures:

a. Aerial photographs: the aerial photograph survey has already been used to record

channel change and the mobility of channels which is a characteristic of this area within the Mersey Estuary. These data provide a database of over 5 years information which will be used to benchmark results of future proposed flights. This work included assessments of saltmarsh boundary change. Flights were undertaken at low tide (low water) to illustrate the spatial extent of the low flow channels. Images were also obtained at high water to illustrate the extent of inundation of saltmarshes at high tide. The flight paths are replicated as far as weather conditions allowed, taking photographs from similar positions, angles and altitudes. Furthermore, flights were only undertaken during good weather conditions with high cloud cover (i.e. not lower than 600 feet). It is proposed to continue these flights for the monitoring programme, using the same flight conditions and flight-paths for the low tide flights. The locations to be included in the aerial photography and frequency of flights are discussed later in this report.

b. Tide gauge data: These data has been collected using monitoring equipment supplied and installed by OTT Hydrometry for the purposes of the ES, and has been continued since the publication of the ES. This equipment was used to measure tidal elevation, temperature, conductivity and turbidity within the estuary. It is proposed to continue this monitoring throughout the monitoring programme. In addition to the tide gauges installed for the ES, it is proposed that data will be collected from the Tide Gauge at Fiddlers Ferry (owned by the Environment Agency) and also from the Liverpool tide gauge (under the control of Peel), the latter of which can be freely downloaded via the British Oceanographic Data Centre (BODC) web site.

c. Saltmarsh edge monitoring: This was undertaken in the ES using both the aerial photographs and topographic survey data to record change from a fixed position. It is proposed to continue this monitoring throughout the Project’s monitoring programme.

d. Estuary bathymetry: A topographic survey has been undertaken in order to provide a quantitative survey of the study area and provide an indication of the vertical extent of channel change for the ES. The methodology used for the topographic surveys is outlined in the ES Chapter 7. It is proposed to repeat this survey for one year before, three years during and for a further five years post construction.

e. Scour: This will be monitored through each relevant phase for the duration of this plan. The frequency and location of scour monitoring is addressed later in this report.

f. Estuary Volume: Topographic/bathymetric and aerial photography data will be used to calculate a total volume of the upper estuary between the Silver Jubilee Bridge, and Fiddlers Ferry lagoons. This exercise was undertaken previously and reported upon in the ES (Chapter 7). The methodology for undertaking this calculation will be the same as reported in the ES to ensure comparability of results.


1.2.3 Each of the measures identified above is commonly used to monitor coastal and estuarine change over a long time series or across large spatial areas. They are particularly useful in providing indicators of change within estuarine systems. All of these data will be stored within a geographical information system (GIS) and will complement the catalogue of existing data.

1.2.4 For each monitoring type, the subsequent interpretation of data will require expertise in marine

and/or estuarial environments. Interpretation will be undertaken by a suitably qualified geomorphologist. In particular, interpretation of the aerial photographs requires a geomorphologist with experience in geomorphic system behaviour, estuarine/coastal bar movements and estuarine processes. Knowledge of saltmarsh behaviour may also be required to facilitate interpretation of the behaviour of the estuarine boundaries. So far as reasonably possible technical specialists should be familiar with, or have working knowledge of, the Mersey Estuary.

1.2.5 Tide gauge data will be processed and/or interpreted by a suitably qualified scientist or engineer

who is familiar with, or has working knowledge of the Mersey Estuary tidal regime. Saltmarsh edge changes will be interpreted by a geomorphologist or a scientist (ecologist). Lastly, bathymetric data will be analysed by a surveyor with a geomorphologist providing a significant input to the interpretation of hydrodynamic/estuarine change.


2. PROPOSED HYDRODYNAMIC MONITORING 2.1 Framework and Stakeholder Involvement

2.1.1 It is proposed that current pre-construction hydrodynamic and sedimentary monitoring be continued for one year prior to in-river construction commencing and supplemented by the relevant measures identified in this plan until construction of the in-river works commences. Monitoring will continue during the construction phase of the Project including the Proposals (this is estimated as 3 years for works in the river) and for up to five years following the year in which construction is completed; however long the works last in practice. Following completion of the monitoring period, a detailed review is recommended to determine whether further monitoring is required. Further monitoring will be required only if significant morphological change attributable to the presence of the new bridge is experienced and that change is more than 25 metres from the foot of the main towers of the new bridge, i.e. change associated with predicted scour adjacent to the towers should not trigger further monitoring.

2.1.2 This document is part of the requirements to which HBC, NE, EA, the ACRM and Peel are party. Information produced as part of the requirements will be supplied to all parties listed in this paragraph. The information may be supplied on behalf of HBC by the Concessionaire appointed to build and operate the new bridge.

2.2 Monitoring Plan

2.2.1 This Hydrodynamic Monitoring Plan drawn up by Gifford comprises a Monitoring Plan (Appendix

1) and the Monitoring Programme (Appendix 2). The Monitoring Plan covers a series of estuarine components, monitoring requirements; timescales and frequencies. It comprises a framework of monitoring techniques to be undertaken over the specified monitoring periods. Where trigger levels are exceeded, specific steps to mitigate effects would be agreed with relevant parties listed at paragraph 1.1.3 and implemented. The Monitoring Plan covers a period of nine years, including pre-commencement surveys, the in-river construction period (estimated at 3 years) and post-construction phases (up to 5 years).

2.2.2 This Monitoring Plan also includes details of the type and frequency of monitoring to be undertaken and the trigger levels that will be used to initiate mitigation. If trigger levels are exceeded, the Exceptions Plan will be initiated. The trigger levels proposed are given in Appendix 1.

Components of the Monitoring Plan

2.2.3 Six components will be monitored namely:

• Movement and attachment of channels close to the new bridge; • Movement and change in size of sand bars within the study area; • Erosion of the boundary of the salt marshes at Astmoor and Widnes Warth; • Scour at the new bridge piers and Manchester Ship Canal Training Wall; • Tidal cycle; and • Change in upper estuary volume.


Location

2.2.4 To provide data for the six components to be assessed, a series of monitoring techniques will

be used at specific locations. The exact monitoring locations will be agreed with the bodies listed in paragraph 1.1.3 following appointment of the Project Company Concessionaire and completion of this plan.

2.2.5 The current proposed extent of monitoring will be:

• Aerial photography – between the Silver Jubilee Bridge and Fiddlers Ferry Power Station Lagoons, including saltmarsh boundaries (Figure 1). In addition aerial photography of the Manchester Ship Canal Training Wall will be taken as shown in Figure B4027/4/SK447 (Appendix 3). The area covered by this aerial photography will be not less than the area covered by the scour monitoring described in paragraph 2.2.13 below and shown in Appendix 3;

• Tidal Data. It is proposed to use the existing locations at Old Lock Quay and Wigg Island for comparability with historic data in ES. In addition, data will be collected from the Environment Agency’s tide Gauge at Fiddlers Ferry and at Liverpool tide gauge. The location of these three tide gauges are shown on Figures 2 and 3);

• Topographic surveys. These will be undertaken between the Silver Jubilee Bridge and Fiddlers Ferry Power Station Lagoons; and

• Scour. Scour monitoring will be undertaken adjacent to the bridge piers/coffer dams and in relation to the Manchester Ship Canal Training Wall, as explained below.

Frequency

2.2.6 Currently, it is estimated that the in-river works will take three years to complete, and the

monitoring period will continue for a further five years. Should the construction programme change, then the monitoring period would be modified to ensure that at least five full year’s monitoring is completed.

2.2.7 Aerial photographs will be used to assess the movement of channels and sand bars, monitor for

channel attachment, erosion of the saltmarsh boundaries, change in size of sand bars and scour at the bridge piers and Manchester Ship Canal Training Wall. It will also be used with topographic data to estimate the size of the upper estuary on an annual basis. Aerial photography will be undertaken on a monthly basis, prior to construction, during the construction phase (estimated to be three years in river); every three months for two years following completion of the works and every six months for three years subsequent to this. Analysis of the data will be undertaken after each monitoring episode to assess if the trigger levels are exceeded. Reporting frequency is discussed in section 2.4.

2.2.8 Topographic surveys will be used in conjunction with aerial photographs to monitor the potential for erosion of the saltmarsh edge (Astmoor and Widnes Warth). This will be undertaken annually over the monitoring period.

2.2.9 Tide gauge data will be collected from the four proposed locations (three locations shown on Figure 2 and also at the Liverpool Tide Gauge) and used in conjunction with the aerial photographs and topographic surveys in order to monitor the effect of equinoxial tides and/or storm surges on saltmarshes and also bar movements. The tide data will be used to assess any changes caused to the tidal phasing/amplitude as a result of the construction. Tide gauge data exist as a time series but will be downloaded on a quarterly basis, prior to construction, during construction and for two years subsequently (a total of five years) and annually for a further three years.


2.2.10 Scour monitoring will take place in two locations: around the new main towers/coffer dams and along the base of the Manchester Ship Canal Training Wall (from wall to 20 m from the wall face). Collection of scour measurements will be undertaken:

• Monthly for one year prior to commencement of in-river construction works adjacent to the Manchester Ship Canal Training Wall.

• At both locations monthly during the in-river construction period (estimated to be three years).

• Subject to review between relevant parties at completion of the in-river construction period, thereafter at such intervals as may be agreed for a further period of five years. However, currently it is thought likely that scour monitoring will continue on a monthly basis for a further five years.

2.2.11 In addition to the above, HBC will work with the EA to facilitate its ongoing quinquennial LiDAR

surveys of the Mersey Estuary. Should the EA undertake such surveys during the 9 year life span of this Monitoring Plan, HBC will negotiate the purchase of relevant data from this survey pertaining to the Upper Estuary study area (areas S1, S2 and S3). If purchased, this data will be used to reinforce the topographic / bathymetric data collected by the Project Company Concessionaire (see 2.4.4.c).

2.2.12 Any changes to monitoring will be agreed with the relevant parties listed at paragraph 1.1.3

above. Any modifications in monitoring should be agreed with Halton Borough Council and MSCC.

2.2.13 Monitoring of scour at the Manchester Ship Canal Training Wall will be by way of parallel hydrography lines. Within Areas S3 and S4 this will be at 1, 2, 5, 10 and 20 metres from the wall face along the length of the training wall, as shown on drawing B4027/4/SK447 (Appendix 3). A further five equally spaced perpendicular lines will also be surveyed, giving a total of 25 quality controlled monitoring points. In addition to these 25 monitoring points, the echo sounder lines will be observed such that there is a maximum interval between the soundings of 10m along the survey lines.


Figure 1: Areas within the Upper Mersey Estuary. Hydrodynamic Study Area comprises

S1,2 and 3

Figure 2: Tide Gauge Locations: Upper Mersey Estuary


Figure 3: Tide Gauge and Meteorological Recording Station Locations: The Narrows and Outer Mersey Estuary


2.3 Exceptions Plan 2.3.1 In the event of trigger levels being exceeded, steps to secure mitigation during either the

construction or post-construction phase will be agreed with the relevant parties listed in paragraph 1.1.3.

2.3.2 The mitigation consists of three potential actions:

Level Action Type1 Continuous review and monitoring of change 2 Change and/or increase to the frequency of monitoring 3 Physical intervention

2.3.3 The last category, physical intervention, could comprise a number of actions. The exact nature

of the intervention will depend on the exact nature of the effect monitored.

2.3.4 In the event of an exception being triggered, third party data will be collected as far (as it is available) to assist in the assessment of the causes of the trigger being exceeded. At present, this is predicted to be Environment Agency Data from tide gauges in the outer estuary and meteorological data from (inter alia) the meteorological recording station at Hilbre Island1. This should enable the identification of storm surges occurring in the period of the trigger occurring. The tide gauge in the outer estuary is located at Liverpool Docks, and the meteorological recording station is located at Hilbre Island. The tide gauge and met. recording station locations are shown in Figure 3.

2.4 Reporting

2.4.1 Routinely, the monitoring will be reported to the parties listed in paragraph 1.1.3 when each

report has been completed such reports to be completed as soon as reasonably practicable following the relevant survey or monitoring exercise as detailed in paragraph 2.2 Factual reports will be prepared on a quarterly basis during construction and for two subsequent years, and six monthly for a further three years. An interpretative report will be prepared annually throughout the monitoring period. It is proposed that a stakeholder meeting to receive the interpretative report and discuss the monitoring results is held annually. 2.5 Exceptions reporting

2.5.1 Where any exception occurs, this will be reported as soon as reasonably practicable and in

accordance with Appendix 1. At this point, the actions proposed will also be notified to parties affected, for the purpose of agreeing steps to secure mitigation referred to in paragraph 2.3.

1 http://cobs.pol.ac.uk/cobs/met/


APPENDIX 1 –MONITORING PLAN

Appendix 1 - Monitoring Plan

Discipline What? Component How?Where?

LocationWhen? Frequency Why? Type

Intervention

level/trigger and

linkages

Action

(Processes) Reporting

1. Movement of channels

and sand bars

Aerial photography and

topographic surveys

Between upper

SPA boundary

and Fiddler's

Ferry lagoons

To confirm

continuation of

channel movement

Exceptional change.

Change of more than

10m beyond normal GIS

envelope -using data

from the GIS database

catalogue

2. Attachment of channels Aerial photography

Between upper

SPA boundary

and Fiddler's

Ferry lagoons

To confirm channels

not attaching to piers

If channel attaches for

more than 3 months

3. Erosion of boundary of

saltmarshes

Aerial photography,

topographic survey, tide

gauge data

Between upper

SPA boundary

and Fiddler's

Ferry lagoons

Provide information on

erosion of saltmarshes

Physical

measurement of

effect via

topographic

survey.

Comparison with

aerial

photography for

spatial extent

Movement of boundaries

by greater than 10% of

saltmarsh where this is

not associated with storm

events

4. Scour at the bridge

towers and MSC Training

Wall

Lead-line monitoring at the

cofferdams and echo-

monitoring at the

Manchester Ship Canal

training wall by contractor

and aerial photography of

both areas

Between upper

SPA boundary

and Fiddler's

Ferry lagoons

and Manchester

Ship Canal

To identify significant

persistent area of

scour and related

damages to

morphology of Study

Area

Spatial analysis,

and observation

and comparison

using GIS

database

Significant area of scour,

persistent for more than

one month (i.e. reaching

1m above datum (Chart

or Ordnance))

5. Change in the volume of

the Upper Estuary.

Aerial photography and

topographic / bathymetric

surveys

Between upper

SPA boundary

and Fiddler's

Ferry lagoons

To determine any

significant change or

trend in Upper Estuary

volume

Spatial-temporal

analysis,

observation and

comparison using

GIS database

See 1 & 3 above

6. Change in the tidal

amplitude and tidal cycle of

the Mersey Estuary

Tidal gauge data

four tide gauges

defined in

monitoring plan

Daily tidal data

every 6 months for

pre-construction and

construction period.

Continue every 6

months for 2 years

post construction

and reduce to

annually for years 3,

4 and 5 post

construction. At the

end of post

construction period,

major review to

determine whether

to continue.

To determine any

significant change or

trend in the tidal

movement of water

Spatial-temporal

analysis to notify

significant

change.

Observation and

comparison using

GIS database

See 1 & 3 above

Reporting should be

undertaken every 3

months. This should

be a report of fact

issued to the

stakeholder group.

An interpretative

report should be

undertaken on all

monitoring data on an

annual basis. Where

intervention level

triggered, report to

stakeholder group

within 48 hours

Spatial analysis,

and observation

and comparison

using GIS

database

Hyd

rod

yn

am

ics

Aerial photographs

should be

undertaken monthly

during construction

phase; post

construction every 3

months for 2 years.

Reduce to 6 months

for 2 years. At the

end of 4 years,

major review to

determine whether

to continueInteraction to be

agreed with the

relevant parties

(see paragraph

1.1.5)


APPENDIX 2 – MONITORING PROGRAMME

Appendix 2. Mersey Gateway Hydrodynamic Monitoring Programme

1 year pre-const. monitoring 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

Aerial Photography * * * * * * * * * * * *

Tide Gauge Data * *

Topography/Bathymetry *

Scour Survey ( MSC only) * * * * * * * * * * * *

Report (Factual) * * * *

Report (Interperative) *

+ continue until end of in-river works

Construction Years (x3) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

Aerial Photography * * * * * * * * * * * *

Tide Gauge Data * *

Topography/Bathymetry *

Scour Survey (Bridge + MSC) * * * * * * * * * * * *



+ continue until end of in-river works

Post Construction Years 1, 2 & 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

Aerial Photography * * * *

Tide Gauge Data * *

Topography/Bathymetry *Scour Survey (Bridge + MSC) ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?



Post Construction Years 4 & 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

12

Aerial Photography * *

Tide Gauge Data *

Topography/Bathymetry *Scour Survey (Bridge + MSC) ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

Report (Factual) * *

Report (Interperative) *Legend * Defined monitoring periods

? Monitoring periods dependant upon outcomes of previous annual meeting with stakeholders (see

monitoring plan).


APPENDIX 3 - PLAN (B4027/4/SK447)


APPENDIX A2 - SURFACE WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN

Report No.B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXA2

May 2009 November 2011

SURFACE WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN


Mersey Gateway Project APEM

Surface Water Quality Monitoring Plan Page i Report No.B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXA2


SURFACE WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN

C O N T E N T S

Page

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 2

1.1 General ..................................................................................................................... 2

1.2 Proposed Approach .................................................................................................. 2

2. WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN ........................................................................... 3

2.1 Framework and Stakeholder Involvement ................................................................ 3

2.2 Water Quality Monitoring Plan .................................................................................. 3

2.3 Components of the Monitoring .................................................................................. 3

2.4 Reporting .................................................................................................................. 8

APPENDIX A: EXCEPTIONS PLAN ............................................................................................ 9

APPENDIX B: MONITORING PROGRAMME ........................................................................... 12

APPENDIX C: MITIGATION MEASURES RELATED TO SURFACE WATER QUALITY........................................................................................................................... 14


Surface Water Quality Monitoring Plan Page 2 Report No.B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXA2

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

1.1.1 As part of the proposals to construct a second road crossing of the River Mersey between

Widnes and Runcorn – the Mersey Gateway Project (“the Project”), a series of applications

have been made for orders authorising works within the River Mersey and upon land adjacent

to the River. These applications have been accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES).

1.1.2 A Construction and Operation code of Practice for Environmental management (COPE) has

been developed for the Project to define the measures required to mitigate and monitor the

construction and operation of the Project including the proposals contained in the Further

Applications in relation to an updated reference design (hereafter referred to as the “Project

including the Proposals”) to protect the environment. The COPE covers specific regulatory,

legislative and best practice requirements. It also provides for measures set out in the Project

Further Applications ES. The COPE sits within the framework of the Project Environmental

Management Plan (EMP).

1.1.3 The Project including the Proposals and their potential impacts on Surface Water Quality have

been considered in the Surface Water Quality Chapter of the Further Applications ES.

1.1.4 In considering the applications and Further Applications ES, the Environment Agency (EA) and

Natural England (NE) have commented on the Project including the proposals. This has

resulted in the agreement to secure the monitoring of the characteristics of the Study Area in

relation to surface water quality ecology monitoring.


Proposals, of which this document is one, which have been developed as a result of

consultation on application and consideration of the Further Applications ES as described

above.

1.1.6 This document comprises the proposals for the monitoring of surface water quality during both

construction and for an appropriate period following completion of the construction of the Project

including Proposals. Its contents will be subject to consultation between Halton Borough Council

(HBC “the Council”), the EA and NE prior to any approval of its terms.


conditions and/or the implementation of the Construction Environment Management Plan

(CEMP) for the Project including the Proposals.


1.2.1 The surface water quality monitoring plan for the Project including the Proposals incorporates

the Monitoring Framework an Exceptions Plan (Appendix A) and Monitoring Programme

(Appendix B). The Monitoring Framework sets out the monitoring required in order to assess

the water quality within the Estuary and specified freshwater watercourses likely to be affected

by the Project including the Proposals before, during and, for a limited period, after

construction.

1.2.2 The aim of the Monitoring Framework is to:

a. Establish a baseline for current water quality in specified freshwater watercourses prior to

commencement of the Project including the Proposals.



b. Ensure that the construction of the Project including the Proposals will not have a material

detriment upon the surface water quality of these identified water bodies.

c. Confirm that mitigation measures put in place during construction are sufficient in

preventing any material detriment to surface water quality in the specified watercourse.

d. Continue to monitor water quality of the Estuary and the specific watercourses for a

specified period once the Project including the Proposals is in operation to ensure that

attenuation methods are successful.

2. WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN

2.1 Framework and Stakeholder Involvement

2.1.1 Baseline pre-construction monitoring is expected to start during 2009 and will continue until

construction commences. It is considered that monitoring should be conducted for 2 years prior

to construction. The construction phase is expected to last for 3 years and during this time there

will be a period of intensive monitoring to ensure that the works do not have a materially

detrimental impact on surface water quality. Once operation commences, there will be a period

of post-construction monitoring which is expected to last for a further 5 years. Therefore, in total

there will be at least 10 years of consecutive monitoring from 2009 onwards the

commencement of the pre-construction monitoring.

2.1.2 This document will form part of the mitigation and monitoring requirements for the Project

including Proposals. Information produced as part of the monitoring agreement will be supplied

to Halton Borough Council (HBC) the Council, Natural England (NE) and the Environment

Agency (EA). The information may be supplied on behalf of HBC by the Concessionaire

appointed to build and operate the new bridge.

2.2 Water Quality Monitoring Plan

2.2.1 The water quality monitoring plan covers a period of 10 years, including both the pre

construction surveys (estimated at 2 years), in-river construction works (estimated at 3 years)

and post-construction phases (up to 5 years).

2.2.2 The Monitoring Framework (i.e. this document) outlines water quality monitoring requirements,

methods, timescales and frequencies.

2.2.3 The Exceptions Plan consists of procedures, trigger levels and measures that would need to be

implemented in order to mitigate effects. Exceedence of the trigger levels identified would

result in the initiation of the Exceptions Plan. The exceedance of these triggers would be

identified using the results of the surveys undertaken pre, during and after construction.

2.2.4 A summary of the monitoring programme has been provided in Appendix B to illustrate the

timings and frequencies of the sampling periods required by the proposed water quality

monitoring plan.

2.3 Components of the Monitoring

2.3.1 Water quality of all potentially affected watercourses will be assessed in terms of:

a. Physico-chemical determinands (dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, salinity, turbidity, ammonia,

suspended solids (SS), BOD, total oxidised nitrogen (TON), soluble reactive phosphorus

(SRP) and dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN);

b. Pollutant/contaminant determinands (e.g. arsenic, mercury, PAHs) as listed in the EA

EQS standards and the draft WFD standards (The River Basin Districts Surface Water



Typology and Environmental Standards Direction 2008). the River Basin Districts

Typology, Standards and Groundwater threshold values (Water Framework Directive)

(England and Wales) Direction 2010.

Location

2.3.2 Water quality monitoring will take place in all watercourses that could potentially be affected by

the Project including the Proposals (Stewards Brook, Bowers Brook, St Helens Canal,

Latchford Canal, Bridgewater Canal, Manchester Ship Canal, Halton Brook, Flood Brook and

the Mersey Estuary). Watercourses will not be sampled during periods of no flow. Sites will be

selected from both upstream and downstream of the works. The exact locations of the sites will

be subject to approval by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the EA.

Purpose of Monitoring

2.3.3 Monitoring will be required in the specified watercourses as they could potentially be at risk

from accidental spillages during construction. The purpose of monitoring is set out below.

2.3.4 The water quality of Stewards Brook and Bowers Brook will be monitored for pollution from

contaminated sediments entering the watercourses due to the construction of culverts.

Stewards Brook will be monitored in case of surface water run off or spillages at construction

compound areas which could be located just inside the Red Line Boundary in the vicinity of the

Brook. Monitoring will be directed at chlorinated solvents entering freshwater inflows of Bowers

Brook from the Catalyst Trade Park as drainage pipes will be closed off before construction of

the Widnes Loops Junction commences.

2.3.5 St Helens Canal will be monitored owing to potentially being temporarily infilled to enable the

construction of the Project including the Proposals. Inert material will be used in order to reduce

the mobilisation of fine sediments (planning condition 18).

2.3.6 Monitoring will be undertaken within the Mersey Estuary to identify any effects due to scouring

action from the construction of cofferdams, towers and the piled jetty and sediments mobilised

resulting in contaminant release and increased oxygen demand.

2.3.7 Once operation has commenced, Stewards Brook, St Helens Canal and Flood Brook and the

Mersey Estuary are to receive road run off via attenuation systems such as balancing ponds.

There will be a requirement to monitor discharge to these watercourses during the first [5] years

of the operational phase to ensure mitigation is effective. It may also be necessary to monitor

Bowers Brook to ensure that solvent migration has ceased.



Survey Information

2.3.8 Surface water quality will be assessed in terms of a number of physico-chemical determinands

to establish a baseline against which to compare construction and operational phase effects.

Monitoring data will be compared with the relevant Water Framework Directive Environmental

Standards (The River Basin Districts Typology, Standards and Groundwater threshold values

(Water Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Direction 2010) and the freshwater

watercourses will also be compared with the mandatory or guideline values in the EC

Freshwater Fish Directive (2006\44\EC), as all freshwater watercourses have the potential to

support populations of cyprinid (coarse) fish; It should be noted that in 2013 the FFD will be

repealed and replaced by the WFD. The relevant standards for both the freshwater

watercourses and the Estuary are outlined in Tables A1 and A2 (Appendix A). Contaminant

levels will be assessed using the WFD guidelines for contaminants including Specific Pollutants

and Priority Substances (The River Basin Districts Typology, Standards and Groundwater

threshold values (Water Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Direction 2010). If

baseline water quality exceeds these guideline values, trigger levels will be based on an

exceedance of the baseline range.

Pre Construction Monitoring

2.3.9 Baseline data will be required for the Estuary and all the freshwater watercourses that may be

affected by the Project including the Proposals. Monitoring is proposed to take place for a

period of two years before construction commences, and will need to be co-ordinated to take

place at the same time as the aquatic ecology monitoring program. This will provide a link

between the monitoring data for water quality and aquatic ecology of potentially affected

watercourses. Hence, once the construction phase has commenced, any subsequent changes

to the water quality, or indeed aquatic ecology, can be determined and appropriate mitigation

imposed.

2.3.10 It is proposed to monitor baseline levels of both the estuarine and freshwater watercourses

between 2009 and 2011 2011 and 2013.

Freshwater Watercourses

2.3.11 Pre construction baseline monitoring will be required for all watercourses and will comprise the

following surveys:

a. Physico-chemical parameters will be monitored monthly. Water samples will be collected

from two sites within each watercourse. They will be analysed for DO, pH, salinity,

turbidity, ammonia, suspended solids (SS), BOD, total oxidised nitrogen (TON), soluble

reactive phosphorus (SRP) and dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN).

b. Water samples will be analysed for a suite of contaminants that could potentially be

released from the sediments such as copper, zinc, arsenic, mercury and PAHs. The exact

details of the sampling strategy will be approved by the local planning authority in

consultation with the EA.

Mersey Estuary

2.3.12 It is considered necessary to monitor the potential impacts of scour on suspended sediment

and oxygen demand, and thus on water quality. Surveys within the Mersey Estuary will

comprise the following:

a. Physico-chemical parameters will be monitored monthly. Water samples will be collected

from six sites within the Mersey Estuary. Six sampling periods will be scheduled during



high tide and six sampling periods will be scheduled during low tide annually. They will be

analysed for DO, pH, salinity, turbidity, ammonia, suspended solids (SS), BOD and

dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN).

b. Turbidity will be continually logged via three submerged mobile data sondes for two week

periods covering the tidal cycle from spring to neap. The sondes1 would be deployed and

recovered by Hovercraft, being attached to small moorings for the two weeks. Data

download would be manual. The continuous data recorded (15 min intervals) can then be

compared against the spot sampling monthly data referred to above. This will be

undertaken four times a year (i.e. a two week deployment once per season) for one year

prior to when ‘in river’ construction begins. Three locations are suggested to be used, one

downstream of the bridge location, one upstream and one at Fiddler's Ferry. It may be

possible to integrate the latter location with that used by the Agency Tide monitor.

c. Sediment oxygen demand (SOD) is a measurement of the rate at which dissolved oxygen

in the overlying water is depleted by the bottom sediment. Sediment oxygen demand

(SOD) measurements will be taken at each tower site in situ once every month during

peak spring tides using a SOD chamber developed by APEM. This baseline data will help

determine the degree of any impacts upon SOD levels observed during and post

construction.

d. In conjunction with SOD, further SS and DO measurements will be taken at each tower

site monthly. Water samples will be collected three times at each site over a 1.5 hour

period during peak spring tides. These data will provide a baseline against which

construction monitoring at the same sites can be compared. This comparison will show

any increase in SS and associated decrease in DO that may occur as a result of scour

around the tower sites/cofferdams.

Monitoring During Construction

2.3.13 It is estimated that in-river works will take 3 years to complete. During this period, monitoring of

water quality will take place alongside the aquatic ecology monitoring programme and will

follow a similar methodology to that described in paragraphs 2.3.12-13 2.3.9 – 2.3.12.

Freshwater watercourses

a. Water samples will be collected from the same sites as the baseline survey i.e. two sites

from Stewards Brook, Bowers Brook, St Helens Canal, Latchford Canal, Bridgewater

Canal, Manchester Ship Canal, Halton Brook and Flood Brook. Physico-chemical

parameters will be analysed on a monthly basis throughout the construction phase.

b. Water samples will be collected and analysed monthly for a suite of contaminants that

could potentially be released from the sediments. The exact details of the sampling

strategy will be approved by the local planning authority in consultation with the EA.

Mersey Estuary

a. Physico-chemical parameters will be monitored monthly from six sites in the Mersey

Estuary.

b. Sediment oxygen demand (SOD) will be monitored in situ on a monthly basis during

spring tides at each tower site.

1 The equipment proposed is the RS Hydro - Troll 9500 Professional XP with a factory fitted turbidity sensor. The sonde also measures level, pressure and salinity - hence turbidity can be related to real-time tidal influence. Data logging is internal (either FTU or NTU) and will be set at 15 minute intervals, although higher levels of resolution can be applied (down to 5 seconds if necessary).



c. Further SS and DO measurements will be taken monthly at each tower site from surface

and bottom waters using the same methodology set out in paragraph 2.3.12.

d. During the construction period, there will be additional data loggers situated within the

Estuary. Any relationship between turbidity and suspended solids will be established.

Turbidity will be continually logged via three submerged mobile data sondes for two week

periods covering the tidal cycle from spring to neap. The sondes would be deployed and

recovered by Hovercraft, being attached to small moorings for the two weeks. Data

download would be manual. The continuous data recorded (15 min intervals) can then be

compared against the spot sampling monthly data referred to above. This will be

undertaken four times a year (i.e. a two week deployment once per season) for the period

where in-river construction activities occur (currently estimated as 3 years). Three

locations are suggested to be used, one downstream of the bridge location, one upstream

and one at Fiddler's Ferry. It may be possible to integrate the latter location with that used

by the Agency Tide monitor.

e. It also is recommended to analyse water samples for a suite of contaminants that are

likely to be contained within the sediments on a monthly basis. Exact details will be

approved by the local planning authority in consultation with the EA.

2.3.14 Frequent monitoring is necessary to ensure that the construction works are undertaken in an

environmental sensitive manner and that the mitigation methods employed are sufficient in

preventing any detrimental impacts on surface water quality.

2.3.15 In the event of an accidental spillage or exceedance of the specified trigger levels (Appendix A)

extra monitoring will be required whereby the standard suite of physico-chemical and

contamination parameters listed above will need to be measured. Extra monitoring should take

place within one week of an accidental spillage or exceedance of trigger levels and appropriate

mitigation will be imposed.

Post Construction Monitoring

2.3.16 There will be a 5 year period of post construction monitoring. Monitoring is to take place

monthly for the first 2 years and following review, with the potential to reduce monitoring to

quarterly for the remaining 3 years.

2.3.17 Stewards Brook, St Helens Canal and Flood Brook and the Mersey Estuary will be monitored

once the new bridge is in operation for a period of five years as they are to receive road runoff

via a sustainable drainage system (SuDS). Monitoring will be required to ensure that the

mitigation measures (Appendix C) are functional, maintained and fit for purpose.

2.3.18 As it has been proposed to close off the drainage pipes leading from the Catalyst Trading Park

to Bowers Brook to prevent solvent migration, monitoring will also continue in Bowers Brook for

a period of 5 years after operation commences in case of migration of contaminants into the

Brook.

2.3.19 Sampling will occur on a monthly basis for five years. Monitoring should follow the same

methodology outlined in the baseline monitoring programme.



2.3.20 For the turbidity loggers, one year post construction monitoring would be undertaken (following

the same method described for construction monitoring), with subsequent years subject to

review. The data collected from this exercise would be reported and discussed on an annual

basis with the Acting Conservator for the River Mersey. At the annual discussion, all parties to

this element of the monitoring plan will have due regard to the results of the monitoring

reported, in deciding the need for monitoring to continue as proposed.

2.4 Reporting

Pre-Construction Reporting

2.4.1 Baseline water quality data collated in the period leading up to the construction of the Project

including the Proposals will be collated with existing baseline information in a pre-construction

surface water quality survey report. This information will then inform the mitigation (Appendix

C) and provide a baseline against which the effects of construction and success of the

mitigation implemented can be measured.

Construction Period Reporting

2.4.2 The results of the water quality survey will be routinely reported to the parties in the Monitoring

Plan. Factual reports will be prepared on a quarterly basis, unless the exception plan needed

to be implemented, during construction in line with the CEMP requirements. If the exception

plan was implemented, immediate contact and/or meetings with the statutory bodies would be

required.

Post Construction Reporting

2.4.3 For five years following construction, an annual water quality monitoring report will be prepared.

It is proposed that a stakeholder meeting will be held annually to consider the monitoring report

and discuss the results.

Exceptions Reporting

2.4.4 Where any exception occurs, this will be reported as soon as reasonably practicable. At this

point, the actions proposed will also be notified to parties affected.



APPENDIX A: EXCEPTIONS PLAN

TRIGGER LEVELS

A1. Mitigation specified in Appendix C should minimise any impacts that the construction or

operational phases of the Project including the Proposals may have on water quality. Water

quality will be monitored to ensure that the mitigation techniques employed are sufficient.

Trigger levels have been identified, and once exceeded, an Exceptions Plan will be

implemented so as to bring specific mitigation measures into effect.

A2. The trigger levels will be confirmed once pre-construction monitoring has identified the natural

baseline levels of the water quality parameters described in the paragraphs 2.3.12-13 and those

previously collected, and relevant environmental standards listed in Tables A1 and A2 plus the

EQS or draft WFD standards. The baseline for each determinand is defined as being between

the upper and lower 95th percentile confidence limit from the data collection during the pre-

construction period.

A3. Environmental standards are based on the relevant Water Framework Directive Standards (The

River Basin Districts Typology, Standards and Groundwater threshold values (Water

Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Direction 2010) and as all the watercourses have

the potential to support populations of cyprinid fish, mandatory or guideline values from the EC

Freshwater Fish Directive (2006\44\EC) will also be used. The relevant standards for both the

freshwater watercourses and the Estuary are outlined in Tables A1 and A2 (Appendix A).

Contaminant levels including Specific Pollutants and Priority Substances will be assessed using

the WFD standards (The River Basin Districts Typology, Standards and Groundwater threshold

values (Water Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Direction 2010).

A4. The Exceptions Plan will be implemented when:

a. Levels of various physicochemical parameters determinands (e.g. DO, pH, BOD,

ammonia, salinity, TON, SRP, DIN, turbidity) and/or a suite of contaminants are found

to be outside the range of values observed within the baseline dataset; AND

b. Failure of relevant standards (Table A1 & A2) only when baseline levels are consistently

found to comply with these standards i.e. evidence of severe water quality deterioration.

A5. In some cases, it is expected that baseline levels will exceed these triggers as a number of

watercourses have been identified as having poor existing water quality (Stewards Brook,

Bowers Brook, Latchford Canal and the Manchester Ship Canal (Chapter 8 of the ES, section

8.5). For those watercourses where existing baseline water quality does not meet these

standards, it will not be necessary to implement the Exceptions Plan if environmental standards

continue to be exceeded during the construction or operational phases. Instead the relevant

trigger levels will be based on an exceedance of baseline levels only.



Table A1. Environmental trigger levels for physicochemical parameters in the freshwater

watercourses

Parameter Environmental Standards/Targets

Source of Standard

DO (mg/l) 50% ≥ 7 mg/l Minimum DO concentration: 4 mg/l

Mandatory level for cyprinid fish (EC Freshwater Fish Directive, (2006\44\EC)

DO (% saturation) 90% ≥ 60% saturation WFD ‘Good’ status standard for lowland high alkalinity rivers (UKTAG phase 1, 2008) ‘Good status’ WFD Standards

(The River Basin Districts Typology, Standards and Groundwater threshold values (Water Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Direction 2010)

BOD (mg/l) 90% ≤ 5 mg/l ‘Good status’ WFD Standards 2010

Total Ammonia (mg/l) 90% ≤ 0.6 mg/l ‘Good status’ WFD Standards 2010 pH 90% 6 to 9 ‘Good status’ WFD Standards 2010

SRP (µg/l) Annual mean should not exceed 120 µg/l

‘Good status’ WFD Standards 2010

Suspended Solids (mg/l) ≤ 25 mg/l Guideline level for cyprinid fish (EC Freshwater Fish Directive, (2006\44\EC)

Total Zinc (mg/l) ≤ 1.0 mg/l Mandatory level for cyprinid fish (EC Freshwater Fish Directive, (2006\44\EC)

Dissolved Copper (mg/l) ≤ 0.04 mg/l Guideline level for cyprinid fish (EC Freshwater Fish Directive, (2006\44\EC)

Table A2. Environmental trigger levels for the Mersey Estuary

Parameter Environmental Standards/Targets

Source of Standard

DO (mg/l) 95% ≥ 4 – 5.7 5.0 mg/l (depending on salinity)


DIN (µg/l) Winter mean should not exceed 30 µg/l

99% ≤ 270 µmol/l (for

very turbid waters)




EXCEPTIONS PLAN

A6. If the exceptions plan is triggered using the above criteria, emergency procedures will follow

and activities will be reviewed to order to identify the source of the contamination and implement

appropriate mitigation (Appendix C). This procedure should take approximately 10 days.

A7. If trigger levels are exceeded, the following exceptions plan should be implemented:

Implement emergency procedure

Review activities and identify source

of contamination

Trigger levels exceeded

Implement appropriate mitigation

Mers

ey G

ate

way P

roje

ct

A

PE

M

Surf

ace W

ate

r Q

ualit

y M

onito

ring P

lan

Page 12

Report

No.B

4027D

/CO

PE

/AP

PE

ND

IXA

2

AP

PE

ND

IX B

: M

ON

ITO

RIN

G P

RO

GR

AM

ME

Table

C1: T

he info

rmation

belo

w p

rovid

es a

n o

utlin

e o

f th

e s

am

plin

g f

reque

ncy r

equire

d b

y th

e p

ropose

d w

ate

r qua

lity m

on

itori

ng

pla

n.

Mo

nit

ori

ng

Pe

rio

d

Re

ce

pto

r P

ara

me

ters

me

as

ure

d

Fre

qu

en

cy

Pre

con

str

uctio

n

mo

nito

rin

g

Fre

sh

wate

r w

ate

rcou

rses

Ph

ysic

o-c

hem

ica

l p

ara

me

ters

: D

O,

SS

, am

mo

nia

, p

H,

turb

idity,

BO

D,

TO

N,

SR

P,

DIN

Mo

nth

ly

Co

nta

min

an

ts l

iste

d i

n W

FD

sta

nd

ard

s 2

01

0 e

.g.

cop

pe

r, l

ea

d,

zin

c

Mo

nth

ly

Me

rse

y E

stu

ary

Ph

ysic

o-c

hem

ica

l p

ara

me

ters

: D

O,

SS

, am

mo

nia

, p

H,

turb

idity,

BO

D,

DIN

Mo

nth

ly (

6 t

imes d

urin

g h

igh

tid

e,

6 t

ime

s d

urin

g lo

w t

ide

ann

ua

lly)

Tu

rbid

ity

so

nd

e m

on

ito

rin

g

4 t

wo

we

ek p

erio

ds fo

r o

ne

ye

ar

Se

dim

en

t o

xyg

en

dem

and

Mo

nth

ly d

uri

ng

pe

ak s

prin

g t

ide

SS

an

d D

O a

t to

we

r site

s

Mo

nth

ly d

uri

ng

pe

ak s

prin

g t

ide

Co

nstr

uctio

n

mo

nito

rin

g

Fre

sh

wate

r w

ate

rcou

rses

Ph

ysic

o-c

hem

ica

l p

ara

me

ters

: D

O,

SS

, am

mo

nia

, p

H,

turb

idity,

BO

D,

TO

N,

SR

P,

DIN

Mo

nth

ly

Co

nta

min

an

ts l

iste

d i

n W

FD

sta

nd

ard

s 2

01

0 e

.g.

cop

pe

r, l

ea

d,

zin

c

Mo

nth

ly

Me

rse

y E

stu

ary

Ph

ysic

o-c

hem

ica

l p

ara

me

ters

: D

O,

SS

, am

mo

nia

, p

H,

turb

idity,

BO

D,

DIN

Mo

nth

ly (

6 t

imes d

urin

g h

igh

tid

e,

6 t

ime

s d

urin

g lo

w t

ide

ann

ua

lly)

Tu

rbid

ity

so

nd

e m

on

ito

rin

g

4 t

wo

we

ek p

erio

ds p

er

yea

r

Co

nta

min

an

ts l

iste

d i

n W

FD

sta

nd

ard

s 2

01

0 e

.g.

cop

pe

r, l

ea

d,

zin

c

Mo

nth

ly (

6 t

imes d

urin

g h

igh

tid

e,

6 t

ime

s d

urin

g lo

w t

ide

ann

ua

lly)

Se

dim

en

t o

xyg

en

dem

and

Mo

nth

ly d

uri

ng

pe

ak s

prin

g t

ide

SS

an

d D

O a

t to

we

r site

s

Mo

nth

ly d

uri

ng

pe

ak s

prin

g t

ide

Po

st

con

str

uctio

n

mo

nito

rin

g

Fre

sh

wate

r w

ate

rcou

rses

Ph

ysic

o-c

hem

ica

l p

ara

me

ters

e

.g.

DO

, S

S,

am

mon

ia,

pH

,

turb

idity,

BO

D,

TO

N,

SR

P, D

IN

Initia

lly m

on

thly

fo

r 2

ye

ars

, th

en

po

ten

tia

lly

qu

art

erl

y fo

r th

ree

yea

rs

Co

nta

min

an

ts l

iste

d i

n W

FD

sta

nd

ard

s 2

01

0 e

.g.

cop

pe

r, l

ea

d,

zin

c

Initia

lly m

on

thly

fo

r 2

ye

ars

, th

en

po

ten

tia

lly

qu

art

erl

y fo

r th

ree

yea

rs

Me

rse

y E

stu

ary

Ph

ysic

o-c

hem

ica

l p

ara

me

ters

e

.g.

DO

, S

S,

am

mon

ia,

pH

,

turb

idity,

BO

D,

DIN

Initia

lly m

on

thly

fo

r 2

ye

ars

, th

en

po

ten

tia

lly

qu

art

erl

y fo

r th

ree

yea

rs

Tu

rbid

ity

so

nd

e m

on

ito

rin

g

4

two

w

ee

k

pe

rio

ds

pe

r ye

ar,

initia

lly f

or

on

e y

ea

r, t

he

re

vie

we

d

Mers

ey G

ate

way P

roje

ct

A

PE

M

Surf

ace W

ate

r Q

ualit

y M

onito

ring P

lan

Page 13

Report

No.B

4027D

/CO

PE

/AP

PE

ND

IXA

2

Mo

nit

ori

ng

Pe

rio

d

Re

ce

pto

r P

ara

me

ters

me

as

ure

d

Fre

qu

en

cy

an

nu

ally

Co

nta

min

an

ts l

iste

d i

n W

FD

sta

nd

ard

s 2

01

0 e

.g.

cop

pe

r, l

ea

d,

zin

c

Initia

lly m

on

thly

fo

r 2

ye

ars

, th

en

po

ten

tia

lly

qu

art

erl

y fo

r th

ree

yea

rs



APPENDIX C: MITIGATION MEASURES RELATED TO SURFACE WATER QUALITY

Construction Impacts Impact

ID Effect Mitigation & Enhancement Measure

Extension of culverts

SWQ1 Water quality in

Stewards Brook Management techniques should be used to

mitigate effect on water quality within the

brook. A water management plan and

pollution control contingency plan should be

prepared, particularly for works within

watercourses. It will be necessary to ensure

that materials within or adjacent to the brook

do not enter the brook during construction

so as to minimise any pollution incidents

from sediments or contaminated materials. It

will be necessary to over pump the brook to

ensure that the working area is dry which

will minimise pollution incidents.


Bowers Brook

Accidental spillage of

pollutants such as fuels,

oils, concrete/cement,

suspended solids from

runoff, etc.


Stewards Brook

Physical techniques will be employed to

minimise the risk of accidental spillages

during the construction phase.

Environmental best practice should be used

including the use of bunded fuel tanks,

keeping stockpiles of contaminated

materials and fuel tanks away from

watercourses, use of spill mats and drip

trays and other methods as suggested in the

ES Chapter.


Bowers Brook

SWQ5 Water quality in St

Helens Canal

SWQ6 Water quality in the

Estuary


Latchford Canal

SWQ8

Water quality in the

Manchester Ship

Canal


Bridgewater Canal

SWQ10 Water quality in Flood

Brook

Mobilisation of

chlorinated solvents into

Bowers Brook as a result

of the development on

the Catalyst Trade Park

site.


Bowers Brook

Source reduction techniques should be

employed to minimise the migration of

chlorinated solvents toward Bowers Brook.

Other techniques could be used such as the

construction of a cut off wall to act as a

physical barrier.

Mobilisation of Fines from

Stone used to temporarily

infill the St Helens Canal

to allow construction

plant to access the

saltmarsh.

SWQ12 Water quality in St

Helens Canal

Stone should be chemically inert (such as

granite or shale) and pre-washed in a

controlled location to minimise the release of

fines into the St Helens Canal.

Increased sediment load

in the water column from

construction of a piled

jetty and cofferdams in

the Estuary potentially

causing mobilisation of

sediments and elevating

sediment oxygen demand


river.

Management techniques should be used to

mitigate effect on water quality within the

brook. A water management plan and

pollution control contingency plan should be

prepared, particularly for works within the

river. Physical techniques could include the

use of silt nets to be used for piling

operations.



Construction Impacts Impact


(SOD)

Following removal of the

access track along the

salt marsh by the action

of ripping, loose material

may be brought to the

surface. Increased

sediment load in the

Estuary may result from

tidal inundation of the

area, washing loose

material into the Estuary.

SWQ 16 Water Quality in the

Estuary.

Ripping action should be avoided during the

highest annual spring tides that inundate the

salt marsh. Sufficient time should be allowed

for re-establishment of vegetation before the

area is tidally inundated.

Operational Impacts Impact


Routine runoff and

spillage of chemicals

from roads into surface

water courses

SWQ14

Water quality in St

Helens Canal and

Flood brook

Physical measures will be incorporated

through control measures will be

incorporated into the drainage design such

as interceptors, oil traps, gulley pots and

scum boards to remove contaminants from

runoff. These will then pass into a balancing

pond or a swale which will remove

sediments before discharging into the

receiving watercourse.


APPENDIX A3 - UPPER MERSEY ESTUARY ECOLOGICAL MONITORING PLAN

Report No. B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXA3

April 2009 November 2011

UPPER MERSEY ESTUARINE ECOLOGY MONITORING PLAN


Mersey Gateway Project Gifford

Upper Mersey Estuary Ecology Monitoring Plan Page i Report No. B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXA3


UPPER MERSEY ESTUARINE ECOLOGY MONITORING PLAN

C O N T E N T S

Page

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 2

1.1 General ..................................................................................................................... 2

1.2 Proposed Approach .................................................................................................. 3

2. PROPOSED UPPER MERSEY ESTUARINE ECOLOGY MONITORING ........................ 3

2.1 Framework and Stakeholder Involvement ................................................................ 3

2.2 Draft Upper Mersey Estuarine Ecology Monitoring Plan .......................................... 3

2.3 Components of the Monitoring Plan ......................................................................... 5

2.4 Exceptions Plan ........................................................................................................ 6

2.5 Reporting .................................................................................................................. 7

APPENDIX A: MONITORING FRAMEWORK ............................................................................. 8

APPENDIX B: EXCEPTIONS PLAN .......................................................................................... 12


Upper Mersey Estuary Ecology Monitoring Plan Page 2 Report No. B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXA3

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 General

1.1.1 As part of the proposals to construct a second road crossing of the River Mersey between

Widnes and Runcorn – the Mersey Gateway Project (the “Project”), a series of applications

have been made for orders authorising works within the River Mersey and upon land adjacent

to the River. These applications have been accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES).

1.1.2 A Construction and Operation code of Practice for Environmental management (COPE) has

been developed for the Project to define the measures required to mitigate and monitor the

construction and operation of the Project including the proposals contained in the Further

Applications (hereafter referred to as the “Project including the Proposals”) to protect the

environment. The COPE covers specific regulatory, legislative and best practice requirements.

It also provides for measures set out in the Project’s Further Applications ES. The COPE sits

within the framework of the Project Environmental Management Plan (EMP).

1.1.3 The Project including the Proposals and their potential impacts on ecology have been

considered in the Terrestrial and Avian, and Aquatic Ecology chapters of the Further

Applications ES.

1.1.4 In considering the applications and the Further Applications ES, Natural England (NE) and the

Environment Agency (EA) have commented on the proposals for ecological monitoring in the

Upper Mersey Estuary Local Wildlife Site (LWS). This has resulted in the agreement to secure

the ecological monitoring of this environment.


Proposals, of which this document is one, which have been developed as a result of

consultation on application and consideration of the Further Applications ES as described

above.

1.1.6 The Upper Mersey Estuarine Ecology Monitoring Plan is expected to be delivered by the

Concessionaire Project Company, who will construct the Project including the Proposals, on

behalf of Halton Borough Council (HBC “the Council”). This document comprises a draft

proposal for the monitoring of the ecology of the Upper Mersey Estuary both during construction

and for an appropriate period following completion of the construction. Its content will be the

subject of agreements between HBC the Council, NE and the EA.


conditions and/or the implementation of the Construction Environment Management Plan

(CEMP) and the Biodiversity Management Plan (BDMP) for the Project including the

Proposals.




1.2.1 This estuarine ecology monitoring plan, drawn up by Gifford, ERAP and HBC the Council,

comprises a Monitoring Report (this document), a Monitoring Framework (Appendix A) and an

Exceptions Plan (Appendix B).

1.2.2 The Monitoring Framework (Appendix A) has been sub-divided into monitoring required before,

during and after construction. Ecological monitoring within the estuary focuses on two key

ecological features including; birds and saltmarsh habitats.

1.2.3 The aim of the framework is as follows:

a. Establish current ecological baseline building upon the results of the Further Applications

ES;

b. Ensure birds and saltmarsh habitats within the Upper Mersey Estuary are protected as far

as possible during construction and that all works are undertaken in a sensitive manner;

c. Prevent knock-on effects to downstream designated sites and species which depend on

these habitats;

d. Monitor the success of the mitigation measures adopted; and

e. Inform long term management plans to conserve the estuarine habitats.

2. PROPOSED UPPER MERSEY ESTUARINE ECOLOGY MONITORING

2.1 Framework and Stakeholder Involvement

2.1.1 It is proposed that ecological monitoring be undertaken prior to, during and after construction of

the Project. It is estimated that construction works within the River Mersey itself will commence

in 2012 2013 (construction start date) and be ongoing for 3 years. It is estimated that the

ecological mitigation package to be provided within the Upper Mersey Estuary (as set out in the

COPE and BDMP) will take up to 6 years to develop and establish and to begin to deliver the

forecast ecological benefits following completion of construction. The total timeframe of the

estuarine ecology monitoring plan will therefore be 6 years following completion of construction,

giving a total survey period of 13 years (i.e. from 2009 onwards). Upper Mersey Estuarine

surveys have begun in 2009 and are listed in Table 1.

Table 1 – Upper Mersey Estuarine surveys carried out between 2009 and 2011

Date Title

2009 -2011 Breeding Bird Surveys

2009 - 2011 Low Water Counts

2010 Invertebrate saltmarsh survey on Widnes Warth

2011 NVC Survey

2.1.2 This document is part of the monitoring plan requirements to which HBC the Council, NE and

the EA are party. Information produced as part of the monitoring agreement will be supplied to

all parties to the Agreement. The information may be supplied on behalf of HBC the Council by

the Concessionaire appointed to build and operate the Project.

2.2 Draft Upper Mersey Estuarine Ecology Monitoring Plan



2.2.1 This monitoring plan covers a period of 13 years, including both the pre construction surveys

(estimated at 4 at 5 years), in-river construction works (estimated at 3 year) and post-

construction phases (up to 6 years).

2.2.2 The Monitoring Framework (Appendix A) covers a series of ecological features, monitoring

requirements, timescales and frequencies. It comprises a framework of monitoring techniques

to be undertaken over the specified monitoring periods. The Monitoring Framework also

includes details of the trigger levels that shall be used to initiate the Exceptions Plan (Appendix

B).

2.2.3 The Exceptions Plan shall consist of a procedure, trigger levels and mitigation measures to

mitigate effects and to reflect the requirements of the Monitoring Framework. Exceedence of

the triggers identified would result in the initiation of an Exceptions Plan. An outline Exceptions

Plan is included at Appendix B of this document, the details of this plan shall be informed by the

Monitoring Framework and worked up by the Concessionaire. The exceedance of these

triggers would be identified using the results of survey undertaken pre, during and after

construction.



2.3 Components of the Monitoring Plan

2.3.1 The two key ecological receptors (or components) within the Upper Mersey estuarine

environment that will be monitored are:

a. Birds; and

b. Saltmarsh Habitat (including intertidal zones).

Location

2.3.2 To provide data for the two components to be assessed, a series of monitoring techniques will

be used at locations within the mitigation boundary (i.e. 200 metres from the line of the new

bridge forming part of the Project). The exact monitoring locations will be proposed in

consultation with NE and the HBC Council Conservation Office following appointment of the

Concessionaire Project Company and prior to submission of this plan for approval by HBC

Council.

Survey Information

Pre Construction Monitoring

2.3.3 Prior to construction bird and habitat surveys shall be undertaken within the Upper Mersey

Estuary to ensure a current baseline is established against which the effects of the Project

including the Proposals and the success of the estuarine mitigation package can be measured.

Monitoring of the The baseline ecological features of the estuarine environment began in 2009

and will continue until the start of the construction period are proposed to be monitored between

2009 and 2012.

2.3.4 Pre construction baseline monitoring surveys shall comprise the following surveys:

a. Bird Surveys: Monthly bird breeding, wintering and resident bird surveys undertaken in line

with the Common Bird Census (CBC) methodologies. This shall involve monthly walked

transects including along the line of the new bridge corridor recording bird presence and

bird activity on the saltmarshes and within the intertidal zones;

b. Saltmarsh Habitat: One pre-construction National Vegetation Classification (NVC) survey

shall be undertaken within the limits of land to be acquired or used during flowering season

(mid to late summer). This will enable all NVC communities to be identified both in the field

and by analysis of the recorded DAFOR1 and percentage cover observations for each

species. Other important NVC community identification factors, in addition to species

composition, shall also be monitored. These include factors such as drainage, habitat

conditions, soil type, management techniques and geographical information. An NVC

survey was carried out in July 2011.

2.3.5 In addition, should vegetation in the construction corridor need to be removed within the bird

breeding season2 it shall be checked for evidence of breeding birds. This shall ensure

compliance with Part 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) which makes it an offence to

intentionally kill, injure or take any species of wild bird, and to take, damage or destroy their

nests or eggs. Should breeding birds be identified vegetation clearance will need to be stopped

until any nestlings have left the nest. This survey shall be undertaken in advance of clearance

on a “site by site” basis by a suitably qualified ornithologist.

1 Dominant, Abundant, Frequent, Occasional or Rare

2 The bird breeding season runs from March to September inclusive.


Upper Mersey Estuary Ecology Monitoring Plan Page 6 B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXB4

2.3.6 Prior to adoption of the estuarine ecological mitigation package and implementation of any

grazing regime the suitability of saltmarsh habitat for use for grazing stock shall be verified.

This shall be undertaken through a grass and forage survey which shall be designed to ensure

that the habitat is suitable for the proposed grazing stock. The output of this survey shall inform

the grazing specification implemented as part of the Upper Mersey Estuary mitigation package.


2.3.7 Currently, it is estimated that the in-river works shall take 3 years to complete. During this

period, ecological surveillance (completed by an ecological walkover) shall be undertaken on a

weekly basis as part of the CEMP review procedure. This shall involve a visual inspection of all

habitats within the construction corridor to ensure that the works are being undertaken in a

sensitive manner and that the saltmarsh habitat is not adversely affected. Visual inspections

shall identify evidence of physical changes such as compaction, rutting and depressions. A

method statement will be agreed with the HBC Council Conservation Office prior to construction

detailing sensitive methods of working and implemented through the CEMP.

Post Construction Monitoring

2.3.8 To monitor the success of ecological mitigation and to inform the long term management of the

Upper Mersey Estuary environment a 6 year post construction monitoring regime shall be

adopted focusing on the two key estuarine ecological receptors; birds and saltmarsh habitat.

2.3.9 Monthly bird surveys shall be undertaken in line with the CBC methods (described at Section

2.3.4 (a)) for three years following completion of construction within the Estuary. These surveys

will shall be undertaken in tandem with annual Wetland Bird Surveys (WeBS) and high tides to

ensure accurate and comparable survey results. This survey data shall be collected within the

limits of land to be acquired of used. from Widnes Warth and Astmoor saltmarshes, Astmoor

lagoon, Wigg Island and the Intertidal areas.

2.3.10 To monitor the success of ecological mitigation implemented in the Upper Mersey Estuary that

annual NVC surveys shall be undertaken over a 6 year period following construction of the new

bridge. These shall be undertaken in line with the methods described at Section 2.3.4 (b) and

within the limits of land to be acquired or used. To compliment the results of the annual NVC

surveys pool, creek and scrape systems shall be identified within this study area and cross

sections produced to demonstrate the continued development of scrapes in line with

specifications set out in the BDMP.

2.3.11 In line with the Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Plan (B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXB4) annual

invertebrate sampling shall be undertaken in the water features within the limits of land to be

acquired or used. As part of the Hydrodynamic Monitoring Plan (B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXB1)

geomorphological processes within the estuary shall also be monitored. Monitoring information

obtained on aquatic and morphology changes within the estuary shall be considered upon

review of the ecological monitoring results.

2.4 Exceptions Plan 2.4.1 At this stage, the Exceptions Plan comprises a flow chart showing the procedures to be

implemented should the trigger levels listed in this report are exceeded. This is shown in

Appendix B. The details of this plan are to be developed by the Concessionaire in line with the

requirements of the Monitoring Framework.


Upper Mersey Estuary Ecology Monitoring Plan Page 7 B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXB1

2.4.2 The Exceptions Plan shall consist of a series of steps to facilitate remediation should any

triggers discussed in the Monitoring Framework be exceeded within the Upper Mersey Estuary

during either the construction or post-construction phase.

2.4.3 The Exceptions Plan shall consist of three potential actions:

Level Action Type

1 Continuous review and monitoring of change

2 Change and/or increase to the frequency of monitoring

3 Intervention

2.4.4 The last category, intervention, could comprise a number of actions as set out in the Monitoring

Framework (contained at Appendix A). The exact nature of the intervention (s) shall depend on

the exact nature of the effect monitored, but shall aim to minimise adverse effects on ecological

components and promote the success of mitigation implemented.

2.4.5 The proposal for a charitable trust to deliver the wider ecological strategy for the Upper Mersey

Estuary now has the approval of the Mersey Gateway Executive Board. The Trust was

incorporated in September 2010, and is registered with Companies House and the Charity

Commission. It has been specifically created by Halton Borough Council to assist the Project

Company to manage its long term environmental planning commitments and its ecological

assets, including all the hectares of saltmarsh to be managed for nature conservation purposes

on both sides of the estuary. The detailed working of the Trust shall then be set up, and it is

envisaged that the monitoring plan for the Project shall be part of this wider delivery

mechanism.

2.5 Reporting


2.5.1 Baseline ecological data collated in the period leading up to the construction of the Project shall

be collated with existing baseline information in a pre-construction ecology survey report. This

information shall then inform the proposed mitigation and provide a baseline against which the

effects of construction and success of the mitigation implemented can be measured.

Construction Period Reporting

2.5.2 Routinely, the results of the ecological surveillance shall be reported to the parties to the

monitoring agreement. Factual reports shall be prepared on a weekly basis during construction

in line with the CEMP requirements.

Post Construction Reporting

2.5.3 For six years following construction an annual estuarine ecology monitoring report shall be

prepared throughout the monitoring period. It is proposed that a stakeholder meeting to receive

the monitoring report and discuss the results shall be held annually, and to be organised by the

Mersey Gateway Environmental Trust,

Exceptions Reporting

2.5.4 Where any exception occurs, this shall be reported as soon as reasonably practicable. At this

point, the actions proposed shall also be notified to parties affected.

Mers

ey G

ate

way P

roje

ct

G

ifford

Upper

Mers

ey E

stu

ary

Ecolo

gy M

onito

ring P

lan

Page 8

B4027D

/CO

PE

/AP

PE

ND

IXB

1

AP

PE

ND

IX A

: M

ON

ITO

RIN

G F

RA

ME

WO

RK

Dis

cip

lin

e / P

has

e

Eco

lgo

cia

l R

ecep

tor

Ho

w?

W

here

?

Lo

cati

on

W

hen

? F

req

uen

cy

Wh

y?

T

yp

e

Inte

rven

tio

n

level/

trig

ger

an

d

lin

kag

es

Acti

on

(P

roce

sse

s)

R

ep

ort

ing

Pre

Co

nstr

ucti

on

Ecology: Upper Mersey Estuarine Environment

1. B

ird

s:

Bre

ed

ing B

ird

Bre

ed

ing,

win

teri

ng

and r

esid

ent b

ird

surv

eys.

In lin

e w

ith

CB

C m

eth

ods.

Specific

birds to b

e

surv

eyed inclu

de

: sheld

uck, te

al,

gold

en p

lover,

la

pw

ing, curl

ew

, dun

lin, re

dsh

ank,

skyla

rk a

nd m

eado

w

pip

it.

Wid

nes

Wart

h a

nd

Astm

oor

saltm

ars

hes,

Astm

oor

lag

oon, W

igg

Isla

nd

. A

ll are

as

with

in t

he

limits o

f la

nd

to b

e

acquire

d o

r used

Month

ly b

etw

een M

arc

h 2

009

and s

tart

of

constr

uction

(2

008

to 2

012)

Update

exis

ting

baselin

e

info

rmation t

o

info

rm m

itig

ation

desig

n a

nd

pro

vid

e

mon

itori

ng

baselin

e.

Orn

itho

logic

al

Surv

eys

n/a

n/a

Pre

-constr

uctio

n

ecolo

gy s

urv

ey

report

in lin

e w

ith

CE

MP

re

quire

me

nts

.

2. S

alt

mars

h H

ab

itat

& In

tert

idal Z

on

es:

Veg

eta

tio

n

NV

C s

urv

eys to b

e

undert

aken d

urin

g

appro

priate

seaso

n

(mid

to late

su

mm

er)

.

All

are

as

sub

ject to

gra

zin

g /

m

ana

ge

ment

as p

art

of

the

m

itig

atio

n

str

ate

gy a

nd

with

in t

he

limits o

f la

nd

to b

e

acquire

d o

r used

One s

urv

ey p

rior

to s

tart

of

constr

uction

Ensure

bota

nic

al

data

base is u

p t

o

date

and

to info

rm

ecolo

gic

al

mana

ge

ment

com

pon

ents

of

Upper

Mers

ey

Estu

ary

mitig

ation

str

ate

gy a

nd

pro

vid

e

mon

itori

ng

baselin

e

NV

C S

urv

ey

n/a

n/a

Pre

-constr

uctio

n

ecolo

gy s

urv

ey

report

and t

o

info

rm th

e

mitig

atio

n

ele

ments

of

the

BD

MP

.

2. S

alt

mars

h H

ab

itat

& In

tert

idal Z

on

es:

Gra

zin

g S

uitab

ility

Gra

ss a

nd f

ora

ge

surv

ey

Upper

Mers

ey

Estu

ary

m

itig

atio

n

are

a

pro

pose

d f

or

gra

zin

g

Sin

gle

surv

ey p

rior

to

imp

lem

enta

tion o

f gra

zin

g

regim

e

Prior

to th

e

intr

od

uction o

f th

e

cattle

gra

zin

g

pro

ject to

ensure

th

e h

ab

itat

is

suitab

le f

or

specifie

d s

tock.

Gra

ss a

nd

fora

ge s

urv

ey

n/a

n/a

Info

rm t

he

mitig

atio

n

ele

ments

of

the

BD

MP

.

2. S

alt

mars

h H

ab

itat

& In

tert

idal Z

on

es:

Gra

zin

g S

uitab

ility

Sa

mplin

g o

f vegeta

tio

n a

nd

subseque

nt a

na

lysis

b

y a

ppro

priate

UC

AS

la

b.

Upper

Mers

ey

Estu

ary

m

itig

atio

n

are

a

pro

pose

d f

or

gra

zin

g

Sin

gle

surv

ey p

rior

to

imp

lem

enta

tion o

f gra

zin

g

regim

e

To e

sta

blis

h

wheth

er

pla

nt

upta

ke o

f pote

ntially

hazard

ous

mate

rials

ma

y

have a

n e

ffect on

gra

zin

g s

tock a

nd

its e

nd u

se

Che

mic

al

ana

lysis

n/a

Regim

e a

nd

cattle

type w

ill

be m

odifie

d

depe

nd

ing o

n

outc

om

e o

f ana

lysis

Info

rm g

razie

rs

and info

rm th

e

mitig

atio

n

ele

ments

of

the

BD

MP

.

Mers

ey G

ate

way P

roje

ct

G

ifford

Upper

Mers

ey E

stu

ary

Ecolo

gy M

onito

ring P

lan

Page 9

B4027D

/CO

PE

/AP

PE

ND

IXB

1

Dis

cip

lin

e / P

has

e

Eco

lgo

cia

l R

ecep

tor

Ho

w?

W

here

?

Lo

cati

on

W

hen

? F

req

uen

cy

Wh

y?

T

yp

e

Inte

rven

tio

n

level/

trig

ger

an

d

lin

kag

es

Acti

on

(P

roce

sse

s)

R

ep

ort

ing

1. B

ird

s:

Bre

ed

ing / N

estin

g

Birds (

on

ly w

here

vegeta

tio

n is t

o b

e

rem

oved insid

e t

he

bird b

reed

ing

season

i.e.

Marc

h t

o

Septe

mber

inclu

siv

e)

Vis

ua

l in

spections b

y

com

pete

nt

orn

ith

olo

gis

t of

all

suitab

le b

ird

bre

edin

g

hab

itat

to b

e

rem

oved

All

are

as

with

in t

he

limits o

f la

nd

to b

e

acquire

d o

r used

1 w

eek p

rior

to r

em

oval of

vegeta

tio

n. T

o b

e u

nd

ert

aken

in s

tages in lin

e w

ith

constr

uction p

rogra

mm

e

Ensure

com

plia

nce w

ith

Wild

life a

nd

Countr

ysid

e A

ct

(1981)

Orn

itho

logic

al

Surv

ey

Pre

sence o

f nestin

g

birds w

ith

in

vegeta

tio

n f

or

rem

oval

Work

s n

ot

perm

itte

d in

are

as w

here

nestin

g b

irds

are

id

entified a

s

bein

g p

resent.

Work

s d

ela

yed

until b

irds h

ave

fledged

the

ir

nest.

Bre

ed

ing b

ird

surv

ey r

eport

to

be c

om

ple

ted

as

part

of

the p

re-

constr

uction

enab

ling w

ork

s

pro

cess

imp

lem

ente

d

under

CE

MP

re

quire

me

nts

Du

rin

g C

on

str

ucti

on


1. B

ird

s:

B

reed

ing B

ird

Bre

ed

ing,

win

teri

ng

and r

esid

ent b

ird

surv

eys.

In lin

e w

ith

CB

C m

eth

ods.

Specific

birds to b

e

surv

eyed inclu

de

: sheld

uck, te

al,

gold

en p

lover,

la

pw

ing, curl

ew

, dun

lin, re

dsh

ank,

skyla

rk a

nd m

eado

w

pip

it.

Wid

nes

Wart

h a

nd

Astm

oor

saltm

ars

hes,

Astm

oor

lag

oon,

an

d

Wig

g Isla

nd.

All

are

as

with

in t

he

limits o

f la

nd

to b

e

acquire

d o

r used

Month

ly d

urin

g c

onstr

uction

perio

d

Main

tain

baselin

e

info

rmation t

o

info

rm m

itig

ation

desig

n a

nd

pro

vid

e

mon

itori

ng

baselin

e.

Orn

itho

logic

al

Surv

eys

n/a

n/a

Report

ing

on a

w

eekly

basis

in

lin

e w

ith C

EM

P

inspection

require

me

nts

2. S

alt

mars

h H

ab

itat

Ecolo

gic

al

Surv

eill

ance. W

eekly

vis

ual in

spections

require

d w

ith

in w

ork

s

are

as in

lin

e w

ith

CE

MP

req

uire

men

ts

All

are

as

with

in t

he

limits o

f la

nd

to b

e

acquire

d o

r used

Weekly

in lin

e w

ith

CE

MP

re

port

ing r

equire

me

nts

To e

nsure

saltm

ars

h h

ab

ita

t is

not

advers

ely

eff

ecte

d b

y w

ork

s.

Identify

advers

e

eff

ects

e.g

. evid

ence o

f ph

ysic

al ch

ang

es

Ecolo

gic

al

Surv

eill

ance

Evid

ence o

f ph

ysic

al ch

ang

es to

saltm

ars

h h

ab

ita

t e.g

. ru

ttin

g,

depre

ssio

ns,

com

paction

In lin

e w

ith

meth

ods s

et o

ut

with

in t

he

meth

od

sta

tem

ent to

be

agre

ed w

ith

HB

C C

ouncil

Conserv

ation

Off

icer

and

imp

lem

ente

d

under

the

CE

MP

.

Sensitiv

e tim

ing

of

the w

ork

s,

avoid

ance o

f sensitiv

e a

reas

(thro

ugh

the

use o

f fe

ncin

g),

im

ple

menta

tion

of

mach

inery

/

pers

onn

el

restr

ictions.

Report

ing

on a

w

eekly

basis

in

lin

e w

ith C

EM

P

inspection

require

me

nts

Mers

ey G

ate

way P

roje

ct

G

ifford

Upper

Mers

ey E

stu

ary

Ecolo

gy M

onito

ring P

lan

Page 10

B4027D

/CO

PE

/AP

PE

ND

IXB

1

Dis

cip

lin

e / P

has

e

Eco

lgo

cia

l R

ecep

tor

Ho

w?

W

here

?

Lo

cati

on

W

hen

? F

req

uen

cy

Wh

y?

T

yp

e

Inte

rven

tio

n

level/

trig

ger

an

d

lin

kag

es

Acti

on

(P

roce

sse

s)

R

ep

ort

ing

Po

st

Co

nstr

ucti

on


1. B

ird

s:

W

adin

g a

nd W

ildfo

wl

Birds

Bird s

urv

eys in lin

e

with W

eB

S a

nd C

BC

surv

ey techn

iques.

Specific

birds to b

e

surv

eyed inclu

de

: sheld

uck, te

al,

gold

en p

lover,

la

pw

ing, curl

ew

, dun

lin, re

dsh

ank,

skyla

rk a

nd m

eado

w

pip

it.

Wid

nes

Wart

h a

nd

Astm

oor

saltm

ars

hes,

Astm

oor

lag

oon, W

igg

Isla

nd

an

d

the I

nte

rtid

al

are

as.

All

are

as

with

in t

he

limits o

f la

nd

to b

e

acquire

d o

r used

Month

ly (

tim

ings to

coin

cid

e

with h

igh t

ides a

nd n

atio

nal

WeB

S s

urv

ey d

ate

s).

M

onth

ly

surv

eys o

ng

oin

g f

or

3 y

ear

aft

er

bridg

e c

om

ple

tio

n.

To m

onitor

the

eff

icacy o

f th

e

BD

MP

and U

pper

Mers

ey E

stu

ary

essentia

l m

itig

atio

n

package.

To

info

rm th

e 2

0 y

ear

mana

ge

ment

pla

n

pro

cess.

Bird s

urv

eys

Bird n

um

bers

usin

g

the a

rea o

f saltm

ars

h w

ithin

the

m

ana

ge

ment

are

a

are

at sim

ilar

levels

to

th

ose u

sin

g t

he

saltm

ars

h a

reas a

s

esta

blis

he

d d

uri

ng

th

e p

repara

tio

n o

f th

e E

S a

nd

the

baselin

e s

urv

eys

Use o

f art

ific

ial

measure

s t

o

enha

nce

saltm

ars

h

hab

itats

(w

ate

r fe

atu

res a

nd

vegeta

tio

n

com

mu

nitie

s).

S

uch m

easure

s

ma

y inclu

de

alteri

ng c

attle

gra

zin

g r

egim

es

and r

evie

win

g

poo

l, c

reek a

nd

scra

pe locatio

ns

/ cro

ss s

ections.

Post constr

uction

mon

itori

ng

report

ing a

s p

art

of

the o

ngo

ing

BD

MP

re

quire

me

nts

.

2. S

alt

mars

h H

ab

itat

& In

tert

idal Z

on

es:

Veg

eta

tio

n

NV

C s

urv

eys to b

e

undert

aken d

urin

g

flow

erin

g s

eason

(m

id t

o late

su

mm

er)

.

Surv

ey to inclu

de

cro

ss s

ections o

f poo

l, c

reek a

nd

scra

pe s

yste

ms

All

are

as

with

in t

he

limits o

f la

nd

to b

e

acquire

d o

r used

One s

urv

ey t

o b

e c

om

ple

ted

with

in 1

2 m

onth

s o

f brid

ge

com

ple

tion. O

ngo

ing s

urv

eys

1 s

urv

ey e

very

2 y

ears

for

[6]

years

. R

evie

w o

f surv

ey

require

me

nts

at th

e 6

year

mark

.

To m

onitor

the

eff

icacy o

f th

e

BD

MP

and U

pper

Mers

ey E

stu

ary

essentia

l m

itig

atio

n

package.

To

info

rm th

e 2

0 y

ear

mana

ge

ment

pla

n

pro

cess. T

he

report

ing

mechan

ism

sh

all

be p

rovid

ed b

y

the C

harita

ble

T

rust during th

is

perio

d.

NV

C S

urv

ey

NV

C t

arg

et

saltm

ars

h

com

mu

nitie

s n

ot

achie

ved

Chan

ge in

gra

zin

g

regim

es,

org

an

ic

enrich

ment

and

use o

f fe

ncin

g

and

cuttin

g/m

ow

ing.

Post constr

uction

mon

itori

ng

report

ing a

s p

art

of

the o

ngo

ing

BD

MP

re

quire

me

nts

.

Mers

ey G

ate

way P

roje

ct

G

ifford

Upper

Mers

ey E

stu

ary

Ecolo

gy M

onito

ring P

lan

Page 11

B4027D

/CO

PE

/AP

PE

ND

IXB

4)

Dis

cip

lin

e / P

has

e

Eco

lgo

cia

l R

ecep

tor

Ho

w?

W

here

?

Lo

cati

on

W

hen

? F

req

uen

cy

Wh

y?

T

yp

e

Inte

rven

tio

n

level/

trig

ger

an

d

lin

kag

es

Acti

on

(P

roce

sse

s)

R

ep

ort

ing

2. S

alt

mars

h H

ab

itat

& In

tert

idal Z

on

es:

Wate

r F

eatu

res

Poo

l, c

reek a

nd

scra

pe s

yste

m c

ross

sections to

be

pre

pare

d a

s p

art

of

NV

C s

urv

eys

All

are

as

with

in t

he

limits o

f la

nd

to b

e

acquire

d o

r used

One w

ithin

12 m

onth

s o

f bridge

com

ple

tion. O

ngo

ing s

urv

eys

at 1 s

urv

ey e

very

2 y

ears

for

6

years

. R

evie

w o

f surv

ey

require

me

nts

at th

e 6

year

mark

.

To m

onitor

the

eff

icacy o

f th

e

BD

MP

and U

pper

Mers

ey E

stu

ary

essentia

l m

itig

atio

n

package.

To

info

rm th

e 2

0 y

ear

mana

ge

ment

pla

n

pro

cess.

Wate

r fe

atu

re

surv

ey

Poo

ls/s

cra

pes a

nd

cre

eks s

pecifie

d a

s

part

of

the U

pp

er

Mers

ey E

stu

ary

m

itig

atio

n p

ackage

not fo

rmed

. O

r in

fille

d a

s a

resu

lt o

f tida

l pro

cesses.

Min

or

mechan

ica

l opera

tio

ns

Post constr

uction

mon

itori

ng

report

ing a

s p

art

of

the o

ngo

ing

BD

MP

re

quire

me

nts

.

2. S

alt

mars

h H

ab

itat

& In

tert

idal Z

on

es:

Aqu

atic I

nvert

ebra

tes

Poo

l, c

reek a

nd

scra

pe s

yste

ms t

o b

e

surv

eyed f

or

aq

uatic

invert

ebra

te d

ivers

ity

and a

bu

nda

nce. U

se

of

nettin

g a

nd s

cra

pe

te

chniq

ues.

Refe

r to

A

qu

atic E

colo

gy

Mon

itori

ng P

lan.

All

are

as

with

in t

he

limits o

f la

nd

to b

e

acquire

d o

r used

In lin

e w

ith A

qu

atic E

colo

gy

Mon

itori

ng P

lan

(B402

7D

/CO

PE

/AP

PE

ND

IXB

4)

To m

onitor

the

eff

icacy o

f th

e

BD

MP

and U

pper

Mers

ey E

stu

ary

essentia

l m

itig

atio

n

package.

To

info

rm th

e 2

0 y

ear

mana

ge

ment

pla

n

pro

cess.

Aqu

atic

invert

ebra

te

surv

eys

Aqu

atic invert

ebra

te

div

ers

ity a

nd

abun

dance

be

low

le

vels

ide

ntifie

d p

re

constr

uction

(baselin

e s

urv

eys).

Min

or

mechan

ica

l opera

tio

ns to

impro

ve w

ate

r fe

atu

re h

abitats

.

Post constr

uction

mon

itori

ng

report

ing a

s p

art

of

the o

ngo

ing

BD

MP

re

quire

me

nts

.


Upper Mersey Estuary Ecology Monitoring Plan Page 12 B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXB4)

APPENDIX B: EXCEPTIONS PLAN

Determine action required based on

Monitoring Framework action

protocols

Undertake consultation with Statutory

Authorities

Exceedence of Intervention / Trigger

Levels as set out in Monitoring

Framework (Appendix A)

Review and adapt mitigation

techniques to ensure trigger levels are

not exceeded in the future


APPENDIX A4 - AQUATIC ECOLOGY MONITORING PLAN

Report No.B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXA4 April 2009 November 2011

AQUATIC ECOLOGY MONITORING PLAN


Mersey Gateway Project Gifford Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Plan Page i Report No.B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXA4


AQUATIC ECOLOGY MONITORING PLAN

C O N T E N T S Page

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 2 1.1 General ..................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Proposed approach ................................................................................................... 2

2. AQUATIC ECOLOGY MONITORING FRAMEWORK ....................................................... 4 2.1 Framework ................................................................................................................ 4 2.2 Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Framework ................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 2.3 Components of the Monitoring Framework ............................................................... 5 2.4 Exceptions Plan ........................................................................................................ 8 2.5 Reporting ................................................................................................................... 8 Exceptions Reporting .......................................................................................................... 8

Appendix A: Aquatic Ecology Exceptions Plan

Appendix B: Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Programme

Appendix C: Aquatic Ecology Exceptions Plan

Appendix D: Map of Study Area

Mersey Gateway Project Gifford Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Plan Page 2 Report No.B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXA4

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 General

1.1.1 As part of the proposals to construct a second road crossing of the River Mersey between Widnes and Runcorn (“the Project”), a series of applications have been made for orders authorising works within the River Mersey and upon land adjacent to the River. These applications have been accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES).

1.1.2 A Construction and Operation code of Practice for Environmental management (COPE) has been developed for the Project to define the measures required to mitigate and monitor the construction and operation of the Project including the proposals contained in the Further Applications (hereafter referred to as the “Project including the Proposals”) to protect the environment. The COPE covers specific regulatory, legislative and best practice requirements. It also provides for measures set out in the Project’s Further Applications ES.

1.1.3 The Project including the Proposals and their potential impacts on Aquatic Ecology have been considered in the Aquatic Ecology Chapter of the Further Applications ES.

1.1.4 In considering the applications and the Further Applications ES, the Environment Agency (EA) and Natural England (NE) have commented on the proposals. This has resulted in the agreement to secure the monitoring of the characteristics of the Study Area in relation to aquatic ecology monitoring.


Proposals, of which this document is one, which have been developed as a result of consultation on application and consideration of the Further Applications ES as described above.

1.1.6 This document comprises a draft proposal for the monitoring of aquatic ecology during both

construction and for an appropriate period following completion of the construction of the Project including Proposals. Its contents will be subject to agreements between Halton Borough Council (HBC “the Council”), the EA and NE.


conditions and/or the implementation of the Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) for the Project including the Proposals.


1.2.1 This Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Framework comprises a Monitoring Framework, an Exceptions Plan (Appendix A) and a Monitoring Programme (Appendix B). The Monitoring Framework sets out the aquatic ecology monitoring required before, during and after construction within areas of the Mersey Estuary and certain freshwater watercourses potentially affected by the Project including the Proposals, and also where required within the River Mersey upstream of the Project including the Proposals.

1.2.2 The aim of the Framework is to:

a. Establish a robust aquatic ecology baseline data set building upon the results of the Further

Applications ES; b. Ensure key components of aquatic ecology are protected as far as possible during

construction and operation (with emphasis on species of conservation interest);


c. Prevent knock-on effects to downstream designated sites and species which depend on these habitats;

d. Monitor the success of the mitigation measures adopted and set out in Appendix C; and e. Inform long term management plans to conserve the aquatic ecology of the main Estuary

and freshwater watercourses potentially impacted by the Project including the Proposals.


2. PROPOSED AQUATIC ECOLOGY MONITORING 2.1 Framework and Stakeholder Involvement

2.1.1 Ecological monitoring will be undertaken prior to, during and after construction of the Project including the Proposals. It is considered that monitoring should be conducted for 2 years prior to construction and it is estimated that construction works within the River Mersey itself will commence in 2011 2013 (construction start date) and be ongoing for 3 years. Once in operation, there will be a period of post-construction monitoring which is expected to last a further 5 years. The total timeframe of the aquatic ecology monitoring framework will therefore be 10 years from 2009 onwards the commencement of the pre-construction monitoring.

2.1.2 This document will form part of the mitigation and monitoring requirements for the Project

including the Proposals. Documents produced as part of the monitoring requirement will be supplied to the EA an NE [To be listed]. The information may be supplied on behalf of HBC the Council by the Concessionaire Project Company appointed to build and operate the new bridge.

2.2 Draft Monitoring Plan

2.2.1 The Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Framework covers a period of 10 years, including both the pre

construction surveys (estimated at 2 years), in-river construction works (estimated at 3 years) and post-construction phases (up to 5 years).

2.2.2 The Monitoring Framework covers a series of aquatic ecology features, monitoring

requirements, timescales and frequencies. It comprises a framework of monitoring techniques to be undertaken over the specified monitoring periods. The Monitoring Framework also includes details of the trigger levels that will be used to initiate the Exceptions Plan (Appendix A).

2.2.3 The Exceptions Plan consists of a procedure, trigger levels and mitigation measures to mitigate effects. Exceedance of the triggers identified would result in the initiation of the Exceptions Plan. The exceedance of these triggers would be identified using the results of survey undertaken pre, during and after construction.

2.2.4 A summary of the Monitoring Programme has been provided at Appendix B, this illustrates the timings and frequencies of the ecological monitoring that is proposed as part of the Monitoring Framework for incorporation into the overall construction programme.


2.3 Components of the Monitoring Plan 2.3.1 Ecological receptors (or components) within the main Estuary that will be monitored are:

a. Benthic algae; b. Phytoplankton; c. Benthic Invertebrates; d. Epifauna; e. Fish; and f. Marine mammals.

2.3.2 Ecological receptors (or components) within the freshwater watercourse that will be monitored

are:

a. Macrophytes; and b. Invertebrates.

Location

A series of monitoring techniques will be used at locations within the Study Area (see Appendix D). The proposed monitoring locations are a selection of sites which have been previously monitored during the Aquatic Ecology baseline survey for the Environmental Impact Assessment relating to the Project and subsequently the Project including the Proposals. Locations will be subject to approval by the local planning authority in consultation with the Environment Agency and Natural England. Survey Information Pre Construction Monitoring

2.3.3 Sampling of estuarine benthic algae, invertebrates and fish, and freshwater macrophytes and invertebrates would be carried out utilising the same sampling methods described within the Aquatic Ecology Chapter of the Mersey Gateway Environmental Statement (Section 11.5: Assessment Methodology) and summarised in Paragraph 2.3.8 below.

2.3.4 Phytoplankton monitoring would also be conducted during the pre-construction phase. This is

because this group of organisms is used to assess the ecological quality of estuaries under the Water Framework Directive. Sample sites will be subject to approval by the local planning authority in consultation with the Environment Agency and Natural England.

2.3.5 Monitoring would continue during pre-construction within the main Estuary and the freshwater watercourses of Stewards and Bowers Brook, Bowers Brook spur and the St. Helen’s and Bridgewater Canals.

2.3.6 Pre construction baseline monitoring within the main Estuary will comprise the following surveys: a. Benthic algae: Sampled via intertidal cores. Five sites will be sampled in both Zones 1

and 2 during spring and summer. b. Phytoplankton: Sampled by collecting water samples within the Estuary. Five sites will be

sampled in both Zones 1 and 2 during spring and summer. c. Benthic Invertebrates: Subtidal invertebrates will be sampled via an Eckman grab, while

intertidal invertebrates will be sampled using intertidal cores. Five subtidal and five intertidal sites will be sampled in both Zones 1 and 2 during spring and summer


d. Epifauna: Sampled within the main Estuary and saltmarsh scrapes via epifaunal trawls using a dredge. Five sites will be sampled in both Zones 1 and 2, and two scrapes in Zone 2 will be monitored during spring and summer.

e. Fish: Sampled within the main Estuary via beam trawling, some fish will also be caught as by-catch by the epifaunal dredge. These sampling methods will be deployed at five sites in both Zones 1 and 2. Fish within saltmarsh scrapes will be sampled via seine netting at 2 sites. All sampling will be undertaken in spring and summer.

f. Marine mammals: During the pre-construction phase any marine mammal survey sightings, by the public and the Mersey Estuary Conservation Group would be collated where possible.

2.3.7 Pre construction baseline monitoring within the freshwater watercourses will comprise the

following surveys:

a. Macrophytes: Sampled via grapnel and visual survey. Three sites will be sampled in each of Stewards Brook, Bowers Brook, Bowers Brook spur, the St. Helens Canal and the Bridgewater Canal. Sampling will be conducted during spring and summer.

b. Invertebrates: Sampled via kick sample/dredge. Three sites will be sampled in each of

Stewards Brook, Bowers Brook, Bowers Brook spur, the St. Helens Canal and the Bridgewater Canal. Sampling will be conducted during spring and summer.

2.3.8 Pre construction baseline monitoring upstream of the main Estuary will comprise the following

surveys:

a. Fish: Salmon, lamprey and eel will be monitored by counting numbers of these species caught at the fish trap on Woolston Weir upstream of the Survey Area. The trap will be monitored over at least one day a week throughout the year, but with a three month intensive sampling period (involving monitoring 5 days each week) being conducted during the peak migration in later summer/autumn. The intensive sampling data would be used to predict weekly catches for the remainder of the year (i.e. when sampling was conducted one day a week) using a linear interpolation approach.


2.3.9 The routine monitoring detailed in 2.3.3 - 2.3.8 above will also be conducted during the construction phase.

2.3.10 In addition, due to the potential impacts of elevated underwater noise levels on fish and marine

mammals noise would be measured during pile driving using hydrophones. A zone of radius 200 m would be monitored by 'spotters' looking for marine mammals during construction, mammal spotters would be monitoring the safety zone every day during pile driving activity. Following commencement of piling and accompanying noise measurement, the safe zone for fish would be defined by a circle with a radius within which underwater noise does not exceed 180 dB re: 1 µPa. Values above these levels are considered to be harmful by the United States National Marine Fisheries Service.

2.3.11 In terms of marine mammals, the underwater noise limit above which noise levels are considered potentially harmful is 190 dB re: 1 µPa for pinnipeds (e.g. seals) and 180 dB re:1 µPa for odontocetes (e.g. toothed whales, dolphins and porpoises). Therefore, the precautionary principle will be applied and the safe zone for all marine mammals will be defined by a circle with a radius within which underwater noise does not exceed 180 dB re: 1 µPa (this is the same underwater noise limit as for fish).


2.3.12 Elevated noise levels above this value would result in the actions detailed in Appendix A. 2.3.13 Similarly, suspended sediment levels would be monitored during construction. Monitoring of

suspended solids is outlined in the Surface Water Quality Monitoring Plan.

2.3.14 Water column contaminant levels would also be monitored as outlined in the Surface Water Quality Monitoring Plan. Post Construction Monitoring

2.3.15 The routine monitoring detailed in 2.3.3 - 2.3.8 above will also be conducted for 5 years post construction to provide further data to assess if the presence of the bridge is having an effect on aquatic ecology. Due to the reduction in the western extent of the works under the Updated Reference Design for the Project including the Proposals the main change is that Stewards Brook will no longer be impacted by the Project including the Proposals during the operational phase as it is located outside the development area and no drainage will be directed to it. For this reason it is considered that there is no longer a requirement to monitor Stewards Brook post construction (as the Red Line boundary for the Project including the Proposals is in the vicinity of Stewards Brook there is the potential for surface run-off or spillages from any construction compounds built in the area which is why monitoring during the construction phase is still required).

2.3.16 Levels of suspended solids within the Study Areas will also be monitored for 5 years post construction as outlined in the Surface Water Quality Monitoring Plan.

2.3.17 Monitoring data regarding changes in water quality within the Estuary will be considered when assessing the aquatic ecology monitoring results. Trigger Levels

2.3.18 Trigger levels for key components of aquatic ecology within the main Estuary and/or freshwater watercourses (i.e. benthic algae, macrophytes, phytoplankton, invertebrates and fish) would be a change in abundance and/or community composition above and beyond the baseline ranges identified during the 7 year pre-construction monitoring period (inclusive of the baseline ES surveys 2002/04 (depending on receptor) to 2011 period considered for the Further Applications ES Aquatic Ecology chapter which encompasses the 2008 data collected to inform the Public Inquiry and the 2011 data collected to inform the Further Applications ES and the further 2 years before commencement of construction), or the 2 survey years pre-construction period in the case of phytoplankton. Any anomalous environmental conditions (e.g. storm events), however, would also be considered when assessing these data.

2.3.19 Trigger levels for salmon specifically, would be a decrease in numbers caught in the trap at Woolston Weir during and post construction to levels below the numbers recorded during the 2 year pre-construction monitoring period.

2.3.20 If noise levels are elevated above the limits detailed in 2.3.10 and 2.3.11 then pile driving would

cease for a short period to allow any migratory fish to pass the area, or until any marine mammals present were observed to have left the area. In addition, the method of piling could be modified, where possible.

2.3.21 A second trigger level for marine mammals would be the spotting of a marine mammal within the safety zone during pile driving.


2.3.22 Trigger levels for suspended sediments and concentrations of contaminants are detailed in the Surface Water Quality Monitoring Plan. 2.4 Exceptions Plan

2.4.1 At this stage, the Aquatic Ecology Exceptions Plan comprises a flow chart showing the

procedures to be implemented should the trigger levels listed in this report be exceeded. This is shown in Appendix A.

2.4.2 The Aquatic Ecology Exceptions Plan consists of steps to facilitate remediation if any triggers

discussed in the Monitoring Framework are exceeded within the Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Framework during either the construction or post-construction phase.

2.4.3 The Aquatic Ecology Exceptions Plan consists of three potential actions:

Level Action Type1 Continuous review and monitoring of change 2 Change and/or increase to the frequency of monitoring 3 Intervention

2.4.4 The last category, intervention, could comprise a number of actions as set out in the Monitoring

Framework. The exact nature of the intervention (s) will depend on the exact nature of the effect monitored, but will aim to minimise adverse effects on ecological components and promote the success of the mitigation implemented. 2.5 Reporting


2.5.1 Baseline ecological data collated in the period leading up to the construction of the Project including the Proposals will be collated with existing baseline information in a pre-construction ecology survey report. This information will then help inform the proposed mitigation and provide a baseline against which the effects of construction and success of the mitigation implemented can be measured. Construction Period Reporting

2.5.2 Routinely, the results of the ecological surveillance will be reported to the parties to the monitoring agreement. Factual reports will be prepared on a quarterly basis during construction in line with the CEMP requirements. Post Construction Reporting

2.5.3 For 5 years following construction an annual estuarine ecology monitoring report will be

prepared throughout the monitoring period. It is proposed that a stakeholder meeting will be held annually to consider the monitoring report and discuss the results. Exceptions Reporting

2.5.4 Where any exception occurs, this will be reported as soon as reasonably practicable. At this

point, the actions proposed will also be notified to parties affected.


APPENDIX A: EXCEPTIONS PLAN

Trigger Levels

A1. The trigger levels will be based on the baseline levels of the determinands measured during pre-construction monitoring. Once baseline monitoring has been completed, exact values for the trigger levels will be determined.

Watercourse Determinand Trigger level

1. Mersey Estuary Benthic algae, phytoplankton, benthic invertebrates, fish.

A change in abundance or community composition (above and beyond that observed for the pre-construction baseline data). Environmental conditions unrelated to the Project including the Proposals would be considerd when assessing the trigger level following establishment of the baseline.

2. River Mersey Salmon. A decline in numbers caught in the fish trap at Woolston Weir following establishment of the baseline during construction of the Project including the Proposals.

3. Freshwater watercourses Macrophytes, invertebrates. A change in abundance or community composition (above and beyond that observed for the pre-construction baseline data). Environmental conditions unrelated to the Project including the Proposals would be considerd when assessing the trigger level following establishment of the baseline.

4. Mersey Estuary Safety zone for marine mammals Observation of a marine mammal within the safety zone during construction.

5. Mersey Estuary Underwater Noise 180 dB re: 1 µPa for fish.

180 dB re: 1 µPa for marine mammals.


Exceptions Plan

A2. If trigger levels are exceeded, the following exceptions plan should be implemented.

Cease construction until levels reduce naturally

Review and adapt mitigation techniques to ensure trigger levels are not exceeded in the future

Trigger levels exceeded e.g. outside of baseline range

If trigger level is exceedence of a value If trigger level is a change in abundance or community structure

Conduct targeted monitoring on aquatic component for which change is observed.

Assess change, recommend appropriate mitigation/compensation as required


APPENDIX B: MONITORING PROGRAMME The information below provides an outline of the sampling frequency required by the proposed Aquatic Ecology Monitoring Framework. Monitoring Period Receptor Parameters measured Frequency

Pre construction monitoring

Infauna and benthic algae Abundance and community composition Spring and summer each year

Phytoplankton Abundance and community composition Spring and summer each year

Epifauna and fish Abundance and community composition Spring and summer each year

Marine mammals Abundance and community composition (assessment of available information and consultation with appropriate organisations)

Ongoing

Canal and brook flora and fauna Abundance and community composition (macrophytes and invertebrates)

Spring and summer each year

Migratory fish Abundance One day a week throughout the year, with three months monitoring for 5 days each week during the peak migration period (late summer and autumn)

Construction monitoring

Infauna and benthic algae Abundance and community composition Spring and summer each year Phytoplankton Abundance and community composition Spring and summer each year Epifauna and fish Abundance and community composition.

Measurement of underwater noise using hydrophones. Spring and summer each year Noise measurement during pile driving activity

Marine mammals Spotters to observe mammals within safety zone during construction. Measurement of underwater noise using hydrophones.

During pile driving activity

Canal and brook flora and fauna Abundance and community composition (macrophytes and invertebrates)

Spring and summer each year

Migratory fish Abundance One day a week throughout the year, with three months monitoring for 5 days each week during the peak


Monitoring Period Receptor Parameters measured Frequencymigration period (late summer and autumn).

Post construction monitoring

Infauna and benthic algae Abundance and community composition Spring and summer each year

Phytoplankton Abundance and community composition Spring and summer each year Epifauna and fish Abundance and community composition. Spring and summer each year Canal and brook flora and fauna(not including Stewards Brook)

Abundance and community composition. Spring and summer each year

Migratory fish Abundance One day a week throughout the year, with three months monitoring for 5 days each week during the peak migration period (late summer and autumn).


APPENDIX C: MITIGATION MEASURES

Effect Mitigation & Enhancement Measure Source

Construction Phase

Potential disturbance, auditory problems, loss of balance and coordination, from pile driving noise. In extreme cases possible mortality near pile driving source. Noise from hover barges to epifauna and fish.

Use of suitable pile driving method e.g. vibro piling where possible. Maintenance of 'noise free' window (at least during hours of darkness) for times of peak migration. Noise to be monitored during construction via hydrophones with reaction to elevated noise levels.

Chapter 11, ES

Potential disturbance, auditory problems, loss of balance and coordination, from pile driving noise. In extreme cases possible mortality near pile driving source. Noise from hover barges to marine mammals.

Establishment of a safety zone to protect marine mammals. Chapter 11, ES

Removal and redispersal of sediments which are usually static. Increased density of sediment particles in water column to intertidal and subtidal habitat

Removal of sediment to a suitable disposal site. Work conducted during low tide where possible. Monitoring of turbidity in the vicinity of the New Bridge with reaction to elevated levels (see Surface Water Quality Monitoring Framework).

Chapter 11, ES Removal and redispersal of sediments which are usually static. Increased density of sediment particles in water column to infauna and benthic algae.

Removal and redispersal of sediments which are usually static. Increased density of sediment particles in water column to epifauna and fish.



Erosion of sediments/spillages and leakages of material. Potential release of contaminants within intertidal zone, .e.g. planings containing tar to intertidal and subtidal habitat.

Removal of excavated material and dewater to appropriate disposal sites. Adhere to relevant waste legislation (e.g. Duty of Care Guidance). Store hazardous material in secure containers to avoid spillage and leakage.

Chapter 11, ES

Potentially direct damage to organisms if above Predicted No Effect Concentrations (PNECs) for specific taxa. Bioaccumulation of contaminants along food chain to infauna and benthic algae. Potentially direct adverse effect on epifauna and fish species (depending on type of pollutant and its concentration in sediments/water column). Damage due to consumption of contaminated prey items and bioaccumulation of contaminants to epifauna and fish. Pollutant release, mainly due to spills and leakages of materials. Potentially adverse effect on aquatic fauna and flora depending upon type of pollutant and its concentration. Bioaccumulation of contaminants.

Construction of tower, piers, cofferdams and stone haul road. Direct loss of sediment habitat, tower surfaces would create a small area of new habitat to intertidal and subtidal habitat.

No mitigation possible. Chapter 11, ES

Construction of tower, piers cofferdams and stone haul road. Direct loss of sediment habitat, tower surfaces would create a small area of new habitat to infauna and benthic algae.


Fish can move away from impacted areas and relocate to areas away from the site of construction. If stone haul road construction removes saltmarsh scrapes (potentially important habitat) this would decrease availability of potentially important intertidal refuge areas for fish. Cofferdam and pier structures may disorientate and impede salmon migration.

Ensure adequate space between pilings for fish to pass through. Chapter 11, ES

Infilling of section of the St Helens Canal and potential reduction in canal width under construction Option 1. Fish likely to be impacted. Displacement of organisms and reduction of available habitats for aquatic flora and fauna.


Operational Phase



Dispersal of contaminants due to resuspension of deeper sediments. Pollution of intertidal sediments due to road runoff/spillages to intertidal and subtidal habitat.

Adhere to relevant waste legislation (e.g. Duty of Care Guidance). Interceptors on bridge and to prevent road spillages/runoff.

Chapter 11, ES Potential for more contaminants to be released into water column. Concentrations not expected to exceed levels to which organisms in near-surface sediments are currently exposed. Spillages/runoff could lea to local increase in contaminants. Bioaccumulation of contaminants along food chain to infauna and benthic algae. Contaminant levels released due to erosion are not predicted to exceed current elevated levels. Spillages/runoff could lead to local increase in contaminants. Fish and epifauna can move away from areas of disturbance. Bioaccumulation of contaminants along food chain.

Primarily due to road runoff and spillage. Low rate of dispersal due to slow flow in canals. Contaminants could have adverse impact on infauna. Fish would be expected to move away from impacted area. Bioaccumulation of contaminants along food chain.

Adhere to relevant waste legislation (e.g. Duty of Care Guidance). Interceptors on bridge and to prevent road spillages/runoff. Treatment of runoff before entering St Helens Canal and Stewards Brook.

Chapter 11, ES

Potential adverse impact due to increase organic input from roosting birds. Depletion of dissolved oxygen levels in water column due to increase bacterial activity. Potential local reduction in macroinvertebrate diversity.



APPENDIX D: MAP OF STUDY AREA


APPENDIX A5 - SEDIMENT MONITORING PLAN

Report No.B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXA5 May 2009 November 2011

SEDIMENT MONITORING PLAN


DELIVERY PHASE

Mersey Gateway Project Gifford Draft Sediment Monitoring Plan Page i Report No.B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXA5


DELIVERY PHASE

SEDIMENT MONITORING PLAN

C O N T E N T S Page

1. OUTLINE SURVEILLANCE MONITORING PLAN FOR CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS ....................................................................................................................... 2

2. ESTABLISHING THE BASELINE ...................................................................................... 2 2.2 Location .................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Sampling ................................................................................................................... 2 2.4 Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 3

3. MONITORING PROGRAMME FOR SCOUR AND EROSION .......................................... 3 3.1 Visual Inspection of Stone Haul Road Construction and Operation ......................... 3 3.2 Survey and Recording Programme Following Removal of Stone haul

roads ......................................................................................................................... 3 4. ACTION PLAN .................................................................................................................... 4

Mersey Gateway Project Gifford Draft Sediment Monitoring Plan Page 2 Report No.B4027D/COPE/APPENDIXA5

1. OUTLINE SURVEILLANCE MONITORING PLAN FOR CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS 1.1.1 This Outline Surveillance Monitoring Plan provides the framework for monitoring of potentially

contaminated sediments and their potential impacts on areas of estuary flats and salt marsh surrounding the Mersey Gateway Project area area of the Project including the Proposals and extending into the Mersey Estuary Special Protection Area (the 'Special Protection Area').

1.1.2 Where any approval or agreement is required of the Environment Agency under this plan the

protective provisions contained in the River Mersey (Mersey Gateway Bridge) Order for the benefit of the Agency in respect of the Mersey Gateway Project shall apply to that approval.

2. ESTABLISHING THE BASELINE 2.1.1 The following section describes the steps to be undertaken to establish a baseline of the

sediment contamination levels in the Special Protection Area and refine knowledge in and around the Mersey Gateway Project area of the Project including the Proposals.

2.2 Location

2.2.1 It is proposed that a total of eight sample points are to be used for the purpose of sediment

monitoring, which will be distributed as follows:

a) Four sample points between Hempstones Point and The Runcorn Gap, arranged so that there are two sampling points on each side of the river. On each side of the river one sampling point shall be upstream of the Project area and the other shall be downstream; and

b) Four sample points in the Special Protection Area to comprise two sample points on each of the salt marshes either side of the river within 1 km downstream of the Runcorn Gap.

2.2.2 The sampling points shall be located such that they will not be disturbed by the Works. If

necessary, they shall be protected with fencing to ensure that they are not damaged or altered. Where practicable, the sampling points should be aligned with the water quality monitoring sites to allow for the possibility of comparisons between the two monitoring schemes. Final locations shall be agreed with the Environment Agency prior to commencement of sampling.

2.2.3 No sampling points are required in the channels or areas of regular, active erosion and

deposition (i.e. the “sand banks”).

2.3 Sampling 2.3.1 A 300mm long core of sufficient diameter to provide sufficient sample for analysis shall be

taken. The core shall be extruded and sub sampled for the depth range 0mm to 150mm below ground level.

2.3.2 If several cores are required to achieve sufficient volume, then subsequent cores shall be taken

within 1m of the original position from ground not disturbed by sampling activities. 2.3.3 A methodology shall be prepared to describe how the samples will be taken, stored and

transported to the laboratory. This shall be agreed with the Environment Agency prior to commencement of sampling. Sampling will be undertaken in accordance with the agreed sampling methodology.


2.3.4 At each sample location the following shall be recorded:

a) Location to an accuracy of +/- 5cm laterally; and b) Ground level to an accuracy of +/- 1mm.

2.3.5 Baseline sampling shall occur on a single occasion and the data will be used to establish a

baseline dataset.

2.4 Analysis 2.4.1 Samples shall be analysed for the suite of determinants given in the Interim Marine Sediment

Quality Guidelines given in the Guidelines for managing water quality impacts within UK European Marine Sites October 1999 or any succeeding document.

2.4.2 Levels of detection shall be capable of comparison with the guideline values. Analysis shall be

undertaken by a laboratory accredited under the MCERTS scheme. 3. MONITORING PROGRAMME FOR SCOUR AND EROSION

3.1 Visual Inspection of Stone Haul Road Construction and Operation 3.1.1 A visual record of the salt marshes at Astmoor and Wigg Island shall be made immediately prior

to building of the construction causeway. This will be a photographic record taken from points to be agreed with the Environment Agency prior to commencing any construction work for the construction for the Mersey Gateway Project including the Proposals on the salt marshes.

3.1.2 A programme of regular visual inspections shall be implemented to monitor the stone haul road

for evidence of erosion or damage. Particular care shall be taken to ensure that monitoring takes place immediately following any tide or “set” of tides that inundate the salt marsh.

3.1.3 In addition, the stone haul road will be inspected on a weekly basis and a photographic record

of the inspection shall be made. A record of the surveys shall be maintained on site and copies of the inspection results shall be forwarded to the Environment Agency.

3.2 Survey and Recording Programme Following Removal of Stone haul roads

3.2.1 On removal of the stone haul road or a section of stone haul road a topographic survey of the

land that is exposed shall be undertaken. The survey shall provide vertical accuracy of +/- 1mm. The survey shall extend a minimum of 5m beyond the edge of any land affected by the stone haul road.

3.2.2 Further topographic surveys shall be undertaken to monitor the area of soil exposed. The

monitoring frequency will be dictated by the frequency with which the salt marshes are inundated, as influenced by the relevant high spring tides.

3.2.3 Following each period of inundation, topographic surveys shall be undertaken at the intervals

proposed below. It will not be necessary to undertake the topographic survey after each tide only after each group or “set” of tides that inundate the salt marsh in any one period.


3.2.4 Two control locations shall be established adjacent to the area of exposed salt marsh on either side of the river. These shall be an equivalent size and shall be situated sufficiently far from the line of the stone haul road to be unlikely to be affected by the Works. The control areas shall be monitored on the same basis as the areas of exposed soils. The location of the control areas shall be agreed with the Environment Agency.

3.2.5 The frequency of monitoring shall be:

a) Immediately following the first three “sets” of high tides to inundate the salt marshes following the removal of the stone haul road or any section of stone haul road;

b) At monthly intervals for one year; and c) At quarterly intervals for two further years.

3.2.6 A “set” of high tides shall be defined as a group of adjacent spring tides that inundate the salt

marsh. 4. ACTION PLAN 4.1.1 An Action Plan shall be prepared to define the following:

a) The level of erosion or scour that will trigger the plan; b) Levels of significance to be adopted should additional sediment surveys of the SPA

occur; and c) Actions to be taken to prevent erosion or scour should monitoring show this is occurring.

4.1.2 The Action Plan shall be agreed with the Environment Agency prior to commencing any work on

the salt marshes. The Action Plan shall only be required to be implemented when erosion or scour is attributable to the Mersey Gateway Project including the Proposals.

4.1.3 Should there be erosion or scour then it may be necessary to take additional sediment samples

at the locations previously established during the baseline monitoring. The requirement to do this would be agreed with the EA if scour is detected and shall be detailed in the Action Plan.


APPENDIX B - BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (BDMP)

Report No. B4027D/BDMP/R01

April 2009 November 2011

Halton Borough Council Rutland House Halton Lea Runcorn Cheshire WA7 2GW

BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT PLAN


Mersey Gateway ProjectMersey Gateway Project Gifford

Biodiversity Management Plan Page i Report No. Report No. B4027D/BDMP/R01


BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT PLAN

C O N T E N T S

Page

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 The Mersey Gateway Project ................................................................................... 1

1.2 Construction and Operation Code of Practice .......................................................... 1

1.3 Purpose of this Document ........................................................................................ 2

1.4 Structure of this BDMP ............................................................................................. 2

2. BIODIVERSITY VALUE OF THE STUDY AREA ............................................................... 3

3. AVIAN ECOLOGY .............................................................................................................. 6

3.1 Summary of Construction and Operational Effects .................................................. 6

3.2 Mitigation of Avian Effects ........................................................................................ 7

3.3 Monitoring ................................................................................................................. 7

4. TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY ................................................................................................ 8

4.1 Terrestrial Ecology Summary of Effects ................................................................... 8

4.2 Terrestrial Ecology Mitigation ................................................................................. 11

4.3 Monitoring ............................................................................................................... 11

5. AQUATIC ECOLOGY ....................................................................................................... 12

5.1 Summary of Aquatic Ecological Effects .................................................................. 12

5.2 Aquatic Ecology Mitigation and Monitoring ............................................................. 14

APPENDIX

DESCRIPTION

APPENDIX 1 Mitigation Scheme for the Ecological Effects of the Project in

the UME LWS

APPENDIX 2 Specification of the desired saltmarsh plant communities.

APPENDIX 3 Mitigation Scheme for the Ecological Effects of the Project on

Terrestrial Ecology Receptors


Biodiversity Management Plan Page 1 Report No. B4027D/COPE/R01

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Mersey Gateway Project

1.1.1 Halton Borough Council (the “Council”) is promoting a new road crossing of the Mersey Estuary

(the “Estuary”) in the Borough of Halton (the “Borough”) and associated works to incorporate the

new road crossing into the existing road network and to make changes to that network.

Collectively the works required are known as the Mersey Gateway Project (hereafter referred to

as the “Project”).

1.1.2 The Project will provide effective road connections to the Liverpool City area from north

Cheshire in the south, thereby providing effective connectivity for the sub-region and addressing

existing congestion in the Borough. The new road capacity provides an opportunity to will re-

balance the transportation infrastructure within Halton towards delivering local sustainable

transport and economic goals.

1.1.3 The Project’s scope includes the following:

a. The delivery of a new road crossing of the River in Halton, known as the Mersey Gateway Bridge (referred to as the “New Bridge” throughout this plan);

b. Incorporation of the New Bridge in the existing highway network. These works are referred to as the Remote Highway Works;

c. Modification and de-linking of the Silver Jubilee Bridge (SJB) (excluding the asset management of the SJB works);

d. Integration of the revised networks with public transport, cycle and pedestrian links across Halton;

e. Integration with the surrounding environment through landscaping adjacent to the New Bridge and SJB; and

f. Implementation of tolling and development of associated infrastructure; and g. Letting a Concession Contract for the construction, operation and maintenance of the

Project.

1.2 Construction and Operation Code of Practice

1.2.1 A Construction and Operation code of Practice for Environmental management (COPE,

B4027D/COPE/R01) has been prepared for the Project including the Proposals contained in the

Further Applications (hereafter referred to as the “Project including the Proposals”). It defines

the measures required to mitigate and monitor the construction and operation of the Project

including the Proposals so as to protect the environment. It elaborates upon the mitigation

proposals set out in the Further Applications Environmental Statement (ES) and also those that

the Council proposes following discussions with stakeholders. It covers specific regulatory and

best practice requirements. The COPE sits within the framework of the Project Environmental

Management Plan (EMP).

1.2.2 The COPE sets out the requirements for a series of more detailed environmental management

plans to ensure that the objectives of the COPE are satisfied, environmental legislative

requirements are met and the environment is protected.



1.3 Purpose of this Document

1.3.1 This document is the Biodiversity Management Plan (BDMP) and forms one of the more

detailed environmental management plans required by the COPE. It sets out ecological

mitigation and monitoring measures required to mitigate the effects of the Project as drawn from

the Further Applications ES (Chapters 10 (Terrestrial & Avian Ecology) and 11 (Aquatic

Ecology)). It has been further developed during consultation with Natural England (NE), the

Environment Agency (EA) and the Council’s Nature Conservation Officer.

1.3.2 This BDMP outlines measures for mitigation and management which have been developed to

address the ecological effects identified through the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

and presented in the Further Applications ES. The measures contained within this BDMP focus

on the following receptors:

a. The Upper Mersey Estuary (UME) Local Wildlife Site (LWS); b. Wigg Island LWS and Local Nature Reserve (LNR); c. St Helens Canal LWS; d. Manchester Ship Canal LWS; e. Watercourses within the Study Area: Stewards Brook, Bowers Brook Spur, Bowers

Brook, Latchford Canal, Halton Brook, and Bridgewater Canal; f. Birds; g. Great Crested Newts; h. Bats; and i. Water Voles.

1.4 Structure of this BDMP

1.4.1 Avian, terrestrial and aquatic ecological effects identified through the EIA process are

interlinked. This is particularly relevant in the estuarine environment. The estuarine habitats,

which make up the UME LWS are comprised of saltmarshes, mudflats and intertidal habitats

and support aquatic organisms and estuarine flora. These organisms and flora in turn provide

the food source which supports the birdlife of the Estuary. These factors are highly dependent

on one another and changes to variables within the Estuary can have a knock on effect on this

sensitive estuarine environment and subsequently the flora and fauna that it supports.

1.4.2 As a result this BDMP takes into consideration the interactive nature of this environment. All

ecological mitigation that has been developed for the UME LWS is set out in Section 3.2 and

4.2 of this BDMP.

1.4.3 The BDMP is structured as follows:

1.4.4 Section 2: provides an outline of features having biodiversity value in the Project study area.

1.4.5 Sections 3 to 5: comprise the three main components of the BDMP; avian (Section 3),

terrestrial (Section 4) and aquatic ecology (Section 5). Each of these components of the

BDMP is supported by a series of appendices.



2. BIODIVERSITY VALUE OF THE STUDY AREA

Upper Mersey Estuary

2.1.1 There are a number of LWS1 and LNR located in the UME and Halton. These are designated

primarily for wildfowl and waders but also because of the saltmarsh and associated intertidal

habitats that are located upstream of the Silver Jubilee Bridge (SJB).

2.1.2 On the north bank of the Estuary is an area of saltmarsh known as Widnes Warth and on the

south bank, is an area of saltmarsh known as Astmoor Saltmarsh. The Astmoor Saltmarsh is

bordered by the Estuary and the Manchester Ship Canal. Wigg Island is also located on the

edge of the Estuary abutting the Astmoor Saltmarsh. These areas, along with the Estuarine

habitats between them, are designated as a LWS.

2.1.3 Wigg Island is also designated as a LNR and contains Wigg Island Community Park and

comprises 8.7 hectares of woodland and 9.1 hectares of grassland. These habitats support a

wide range of flora and fauna including breeding and visiting birds, butterflies and moths,

dragonflies and damselflies and a large number of terrestrial invertebrates. An award winning

visitor centre was opened on the site in November 2007.

2.1.4 The UME LWS supports a small but significant assemblage of wintering and migratory wildfowl

and wading birds. This environment also supports an assemblage, albeit of limited species

content and density, of marine invertebrates which, together with marine plant species, provide

a food resource for the wildfowl and wading birds.

2.1.5 There are significant populations of breeding bird species including Priority Species, notably

Skylark and Reed Bunting, which use the saltmarsh habitats. The ecological surveys for the

period 2009 to 2011 confirm this view and have refreshed the baseline data.

Middle Mersey Estuary

2.1.6 Although the Further Applications ES concludes that neither habitat nor biodiversity within the

Middle Mersey Estuary will not be affected by the construction and operation of the Project

including the Proposals it is important to set out information in relation to its European

designation.

2.1.7 Immediately downstream of the SJB there are a number of sites having national and

international designations for nature conservation purposes including:

a. The Mersey Estuary Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) as designated under the

Wildlife & Countryside Act (1981) (amended by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act

2000);

b. The Mersey Estuary Ramsar Site (as designated under the Ramsar Convention on

wetlands of international importance);

c. The Mersey Estuary Special Protection Area (SPA) for Birds (as designated under the

European Commission Council on the Conservation of Wild Birds (79/409/EEC) on April

1979); and

d. The Mersey Estuary European Marine Site.

2.1.8 The Ramsar Site, SPA and European Marine Site form part of a network of sites that are

collectively known as Natura 2000.

1 Formerly known as Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs)



2.1.9 The principal reason for the SPA designation is the occurrence of very large and internationally

important populations of migratory wildfowl and wading birds. These birds are attracted to this

area by its large and sheltered nature, grazed diverse flora and rich invertebrate fauna that live

in the extensive areas of intertidal sand bank and mud-flats and creek and pool systems.

2.1.10 The conservation objective for the internationally important populations of regularly occurring

migratory bird species states: ‘Subject to natural change, maintain in favourable condition the

habitats for the internationally important populations of regularly occurring migratory bird

species, under the Birds Directive; in particular:

• Intertidal sediments

• Rocky shores

• Saltmarsh’

2.1.11 The conservation objective for the internationally important assemblage of waterfowl states:

‘Subject to natural change, maintain in favourable condition the habitats for the internationally

important assemblage of waterfowl, under the Birds Directive, in particular:

• Intertidal sediments

• Rocky shores

• Saltmarsh’

Watercourses

2.1.12 A number of watercourses located within the area surrounding the proposed alignment of the

Project are considered to offer biodiversity value. These are:

a. The St Helens Canal LWS. Its biodiversity and nature conservation importance is

associated with its eutrophic standing water habitats, reedbed margins and a small

amount of developing wet woodland. It also supports good assemblages of fish species

and breeding dragonflies.

b. The Manchester Ship Canal LWS. This canal is of significant botanical importance for

the colonies of wild orchid and species–rich plant communities it supports. It also offers

habitat for a range of butterflies species.

c. The Steward’s Brook. Water voles have been recorded in this canal as noted at Water

voles have not been recorded on the Stewards Brook since 2006, but as a precaution it

is assumed they could still be present, as noted in Paragraph 2.1.15.

d. Other watercourses in the study area include; the Bowers Brook spur, the Bowers

Brook, The Latchford Canal, Halton Brook and the Bridgewater Canal.

Protected Species

2.1.13 A meta-population of Great Crested Newts (GCN) on the south side of the A557 Weston Point

Expressway between the expressway and the nearby chemical works and in the vicinity of the

Weston Link junction are likely to be affected by the construction and operation of the Project.

GCN’s and their habitats are protected by European and National legislation.

2.1.14 Bats, which are also protected by European and National legislation, have been recorded along

the Project corridor. Bat foraging and commuting was associated with the Manchester Ship

Canal, the disused St. Helen’s Canal, the Bridgewater Canal, the disused Runcorn to Latchford

Canal and Wigg Island. It is also likely that bats are using surrounding residential properties for

roosting.



2.1.15 Although not identified during the Further Applications ES surveys, including surveys carried out

in 2011, water voles are likely to could still be present along the Steward’s Brook. Similarly to

bats, water voles are protected by European and National legislation.



3. AVIAN ECOLOGY

3.1 Summary of Construction and Operational Effects

3.1.1 Table 1 below provides a schedule of predicted significant effects of the Project including the

Proposals on avian receptors. These effects have been extracted from Chapter 10 of the

Further Applications ES where a detailed effect assessment can be found.

Table 1: Summary of Significant Effects of the Project on Avian Receptors

Project

Phase Effect and ES Reference Description of Effect

Mitigation / Management

Option in BDMP


Construction

Effects

Loss of saltmarsh and intertidal

habitats

ES: Paragraphs 10.17.64 to

10.17.99

Construction of structures and

working areas Management of Astmoor

and Widnes Warth

Saltmarshes

(Appendix 1)

Disturbance to breeding,

roosting, feeding and loafing

and migratory birds


10.17.121

Presence and movements of

structures, machinery and

personnel


roosting, feeding and loafing

and migratory birds and oiling

of birds

ES: Paragraph 10.17.114

Noise and pollution produced

by machinery

Implementation of best

practice pollution prevention

techniques as outlined in

the COPE (Section 6.1)

Operational

Effects


feeding, roosting and flying

birds


10.17.167

Presence of bridge structure

Management of Astmoor

and Widnes Warth

Saltmarshes

(Appendix 1)


feeding, roosting birds and

disorientation of birds


10.17.180

Movements of traffic, noise and

artificial light

Oiling of birds


10.17.182

Pollution from oils and road

run-off

Adoption of appropriate

design standards as

outlined in the COPE

(Section 6.1)

Mersey Estuary European Site

Construction

Effects

Oiling of birds and ingestion of

chemicals


10.17.135

Pollution from oil and chemical

spillages in the UME

Implementation of best

practice pollution prevention

techniques as outlined in

the COPE (Section 6.1)

Operational

Effects

Pollution of birds using the

intertidal habitats and river

channels


10.17.204

Pollution due to release of oils

and other contaminants from

traffic

Adoption of appropriate

design standards as


(Section 6.1)


Construction

Effects

Disturbance to breeding birds

ES: Table 10.58

Construction activities and

presence of the New Bridge

Avoidance of bird breeding

season or adoption of

appropriate precautions

(Paragraph 3.2.3)

Wigg Island LWS and LNR

Construction Disturbance to breeding birds Construction activities and Avoidance of bird breeding



Project

Phase Effect and ES Reference Description of Effect

Mitigation / Management

Option in BDMP

Effects ES: Paragraph 10.17.233 presence of the bridge

structure



(Paragraph 3.2.3)

Operational

Effects

Disturbance to resident,

breeding, visiting and roosting

birds.


10.17.244

Presence of moving traffic,

noise and artificial lighting

Management of Astmoor

and Widnes Warth

Saltmarshes

(Section 3.2)

St Helens Canal LWS

Operational

Effects

Disturbance to birds

ES: Paragraph 10.17.215

Presence of the bridge and

traffic use

Avoidance of bird breeding



(Appendix 1)

3.2 Mitigation of Avian Effects

3.2.1 This section of the BDMP sets out the essential mitigation and management that is required to

mitigate the direct and indirect construction and operational effects of the Project including the

Proposals (as listed in Table 1 above) on birdlife that utilises the UME and surrounding

terrestrial habitats.


3.2.2 Details relating to the proposed mitigation scheme for the ecological effects of the Project

including the Proposals on habitats and birds within the UME LWS are provided at Appendix 1

of this BDMP.

Disturbance to Breeding Birds

3.2.3 Vegetation clearance required as part of the construction of the Project including the Proposals

will be carried out outside the breeding season (March to August inclusive) where possible.

Where this is not possible all clearance will be preceded by an inspection by a competent

ornithologist. Where nesting birds are identified they will be protected from damage until the

young have fledged.

3.3 Monitoring

3.3.1 Appendix A3 of the COPE sets out a framework for avian ecological monitoring that will be

implemented within the UME before, during and after construction of the Project including the

Proposals.



4. TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY

4.1 Terrestrial Ecology Summary of Effects


Proposals on terrestrial ecology receptors. These effects have been extracted from Chapter 10

of the Further Applications ES where a detailed effect assessment can be found. Relevant

mitigation and management options in respect to the UME mitigation package are discussed

above at Section 3.2, and information in relation to the protection of surface water quality

features are detailed in the COPE.

Table 2: Schedule of Significant Effects of the Project on Terrestrial Ecology Receptors

Location

Terrestrial

Ecology

Receptor

Effect and ES

Reference

Effect Description of Effect

Mitigation /

Management

Option in BDMP


Construction

Effects

Widnes Warth

Saltmarsh and

Astmoor

Saltmarsh

ES:

Paragraphs

10.17.53 to

10.17.81

Loss of vegetation Construction and use

of stone haul road

Management of

Astmoor and Widnes

Warth Saltmarshes

(Appendix 1) and

implementation of

measures to for

saltmarsh restoration

(Appendix 1)

Loss of seedbank

Damage to soil structure

Loss of vegetation Construction of

cofferdams and

working areas for

construction of piers

Loss of seedbank

Damage to soil structure

Intertidal sand,

silt or mudflats

including

sandbanks

ES:

Paragraphs

10.17.82 to

10.17.99

Release of sediments

Use of hovercrafts

Use of low ground

pressure tractors

Operational

Effects

All habitats

ES:

Paragraphs

10.17.144 to

10.17.158 and

10.17.178 to

10.17.196

Pollution of satlmarsh and

other intertidal habitats and

river channels

Release of oils and

other pollutants from

traffic

Implementation of

best practice

pollution prevention

techniques as


(Section 6.1)

Inhibition of growth or

dieback of vegetation

Shading of saltmarsh

vegetation

Management of

Astmoor and Widnes

Warth Saltmarshes

(Appendix 1)

Mersey Estuary European Marine Site

Construction

Effects

Habitats in the

European Site

ES:

Paragraphs

10.17.126 to

10.17.131

Oiling and chemical

contamination of waters

and intertidal habitats in the

European Site

Pollution from oil and

chemical spillages in

the UME

Implementation of

best practice

pollution prevention

techniques as


(Section 6.1)

Operational

Effects

All habitats

ES:

Paragraphs

10.17.192 to

10.17.196

Pollution of saltmarsh and

other intertidal habitats and

river channels

Pollution caused by

the release of oils,

petrol and other

contaminants from

traffic

Adoption of

appropriate design

standards as outlined

in the COPE (Section

6.1)

St Helens Canal LWS

Construction Vegetation Loss of aquatic and water Infilling a section of Provision of



Location

Terrestrial

Ecology

Receptor

Effect and ES

Reference


Mitigation /

Management

Option in BDMP

Effects ES: Paragraph

10.17.210

margin habitats and

vegetation

the Canal compensatory habitat

(Appendix 3)

Fauna

ES: Paragraph

10.17.212

Disturbance to water vole Construction activities

involving movements

of machinery and

noise

Provision of

compensatory habitat

(Appendix 3) Vegetation

ES: Paragraph

10.17.210

Fragmentation of the canal

habitat

Operational

Effects

Vegetation

ES: Paragraph

10.17.215

Shading of canal

vegetation and change to

the local environment

Presence of the New

Bridge structure

Provision of

compensatory habitat

(Appendix 3)


Construction

Effects

Vegetation

ES: Paragraph

10.17.220

Mechanical and trampling

damage to soils, vegetation

and storage of materials

Construction activities

involving access,

movements of

machinery and

personnel and storage

of materials

Translocation of flora

(Appendix 3)

Butterflies

ES: Paragraph

10.17.222

Damage to butterflies Construction activities

Translocation of

butterfly flora

(Appendix 3)

Operational

Effects

Vegetation

ES:

Paragraphs

10.17.224 to

10.17.229

Inhibition of plant growth of

orchids and other plant

species requiring sunny

habitats and moist soils

Presence of the New

Bridge including

shading and

interception of rainfall

Soil Treatment

(Appendix 3)

Inhibition of plant growth Compacted and poorly

drained soils

Soil Treatment

(Appendix 3)

Sparse vegetation and poor

habitat for invertebrates

and other fauna

Shading, dry and

compacted soils

Soil Treatment

(Appendix 3)

Wigg Island LWS and LNR

Construction

Effects

Vegetation

ES:

Paragraphs

10.17.232 to

10.17.234

Loss of habitat and

vegetation. Mechanical

and trampling damage to

soils, vegetation and plant

species

Construction activities,

involving access,

movements of

machinery and

personnel and storage

of materials

Management of

Astmoor and Widnes

Warth Saltmarshes

(Appendix 1)

Butterflies

ES: Table

10.60

Damage and losses of

butterfly and other

invertebrate habitats

Construction activities Landscaping

(Appendix 3)

Aesthetic

appeal

ES:

Paragraphs

10.17.236 to

10.17.238

Reduction in aesthetic

appeal and tranquillity of

the LNR

Construction activities

and presence of the

New Bridge structure

Landscaping

(Appendix 3)

Operational

Effects

Vegetation

ES:

Paragraphs

10.17.239 to

10.17.240

Inhibition of plant growth of

herbaceous and woody

species

Presence of the New

Bridge structure

including shading Management of

Astmoor and Widnes

Warth Saltmarshes

(Appendix 1)

Inhibition of plant growth.

Poor habitat for

invertebrates and other

fauna

Interception of rainfall

by the New Bridge

structure

Aesthetic

appeal

Reduction in aesthetic

appeal and tranquillity of

Presence of moving

traffic, noise and

Landscaping

(Appendix 3)



Location

Terrestrial

Ecology

Receptor

Effect and ES

Reference


Mitigation /

Management

Option in BDMP

ES: Paragraph

10.17.244

the LNR artificial lighting

Bats

ES: Table

10.61

Disturbance to bats

Presence of moving

traffic, noise and

artificial lighting

Landscaping

(Appendix 3)

Bats

Construction

Effects

Bats

ES:

Paragraphs

10.17.252 to

10.17.260

Loss of roosts Construction of the

Project including

demolition of

buildings, felling of

trees, crossing of

canals and de-linking Implementation of

bat mitigation

(Appendix 3)

Fragmentation of foraging

habitat

Loss, reduction or

deterioration of foraging

habitat

Operational

Effects

Bats

ES:

Paragraphs

10.17.262 to

10.17.265

Loss of roosts Construction of the

Project including

demolition of

buildings, felling of

trees, crossing of

canals and de-linking

Loss, reduction or

deterioration of foraging

habitat

Disorientation due to

lighting and collisions with

traffic

Weston Link Junction

Construction

Effects

Great Crested

Newts

ES:

Paragraphs

10.17.266 to

10.17.271

Loss of GCN foraging

habitat Improvement of the

Weston Link Junction

on the A557 Weston

Point Expressway Implementation of

great crested newt

mitigation (Appendix

3)

Loss of GCN habitat used

for shelter and protection

Loss of GCN hibernation

habitat

Injury or killing GCNs

Operational

Effects

Great Crested

Newts

ES: Paragraph

10.17.272 to

273

Loss of GCN foraging

habitat Traffic use of the

Weston Point

Expressway bringing

traffic closer to the

GCN ponds along part

of the Expressway.

Loss of GCN habitat used

for shelter and protection

Loss of GCN hibernation

habitat

Injury or killing GCNs

St Michael’s Golf Course

Construction

Effects

Water Voles

ES:

Paragraphs

10.17.275 to

10.17.281

Disturbance to water voles Construction of Toll

Plazas and associated

highway works in the

former St Michael’s

Golf Course and the

culverting of a section

of ditch Implementation of

water vole mitigation

(Appendix 3)

Potential losses of water

vole burrows

Losses of aquatic and

water-margin vegetation

(foraging habitat)

Loss of water-margin and

bankside vegetation cover

Operational

Effects

Water Voles

ES:

Paragraphs

10.17.282 to

10.17.284

Disturbance to water voles

Presence of culvert,

traffic movements

including noise and

light and the use of toll

booths in the former St

Michael’s Golf Course

Potential losses of water

vole burrows

Losses of aquatic and

water-margin vegetation

(foraging habitat)

Loss of water-margin and

bankside vegetation cover



4.2 Terrestrial Ecology Mitigation


4.2.1 Section 3.2 and Appendix 1 provides details on the mitigation package that is to be adopted as

part of the Project including the Proposals at the Astmoor and Widnes Warth Saltmarshes. This

package will mitigate the effects of the Project including the Proposals, during both construction

and operation, on avian and habitat receptors.

4.2.2 Appendix 2 provides further details the desired saltmarsh plant communities and their

management requirements.

Terrestrial Ecology Habitats

4.2.3 Appendix 3 provides details on the mitigation package that is to be adopted as part of the

Project including the Proposals for habitats and protected species outside the UME LWS which

are likely to be affected by the Project (as detailed in Table 2). This package will mitigate the

effects of the Project including the Proposals, during both construction and operation on

terrestrial ecology receptors.

4.3 Monitoring

4.3.1 As stated at Section 3.3 Appendix B3 sets out a framework for ecology monitoring that will be

implemented within the UME LWS before, during and after construction of the Project including

the Proposals.



5. AQUATIC ECOLOGY

5.1 Summary of Aquatic Ecological Effects


Proposals on aquatic ecology receptors. These effects have been extracted from Chapter 11 of

the ES where a detailed effect assessment can be found.

Table 3: Schedule Significant Effects of the Project on Aquatic Ecology Receptors

Location

Aquatic

Ecology

Receptor


Mitigation /

Management

Option in BDMP

Construction Effects

Mersey

Estuary

Epifauna and

fish

Underwater noise

Potential disturbance,

auditory problems,

loss of balance and

coordination, from pile

driving noise. In

extreme cases

possible mortality near

pile driving source.

Noise from hover

barges.

Use of vibro instead

of percussive piling.

Maintenance of

'noise free' window

during times of peak

migration.

Appendix A4 of

COPE

Marine

mammals

Potential disturbance,

auditory problems,

loss of balance and

coordination, from pile

driving noise. In

extreme cases

possible mortality near

pile driving source.

Noise from hover

barges.

Establishment of a

safety zone to protect

marine mammals.

Appendix A4 of

COPE

Intertidal and

subtidal habitat

Release of pollutants Erosion of sediments/

spillages and leakages

of material. Potential

release of

contaminants within

intertidal zone e.g.

planings containing

tar.

Removal of

excavated material

and dewater to

appropriate disposal

sites. Adhere to

relevant waste

legislation (e.g. Duty

of Care Guidance).

Store hazardous

materials in secure

containers to avoid

spillage and leakage.

COPE (Section 6.1)

Infauna and

benthic algae

Potentially direct

damage to organisms

if above Predicted No

Effect Concentrations

(PNECs) for specific

taxa. Bioaccumulation

of contaminants along

food chain.

Removal of

excavated material

and dewater to


sites. Adhere to

relevant waste


of Care Guidance).

Store hazardous

materials in secure

containers to avoid




COPE (Section 6.1)

Epifauna and

fish

Potentially direct

adverse effect on

epifauna and fish

species (depending on

type of pollutant and

its concentration in

sediments/water

column). Damage due

to consumption of

contaminated prey

items and

bioaccumulation of

contaminants.

Removal of

excavated material

and dewater to


sites. Adhere to

relevant waste


of Care Guidance).

Store hazardous

materials in secure

containers to avoid


COPE (Section 6.1)

Intertidal and

subtidal habitat

Habitat loss/disruption Construction of tower,

piers cofferdams and

stone haul road. Direct

loss of sediment

habitat, tower surfaces

would create a small

area of new habitat.

None

Infauna and

benthic algae

Construction of tower,

piers cofferdams and

stone haul road. Direct

loss of sediment

habitat, tower surfaces

would create a small

area of new habitat.

None

Epifauna and

fish

Fish can move away

from impacted areas

and relocate to areas

away from the site of

construction. If stone

haul road construction

removes saltmarsh

scrapes (potentially

important habitat) this

would decrease

availability of

potentially important

intertidal refuge areas

for fish. Cofferdam

and pier structures

may disorientate and

impede salmon

migration.

Ensure adequate

space between

pilings for fish to

pass through.

Appendix A4 of

COPE

Canal fauna

and flora

Infilling of section of

the St. Helens Canal.

Displacement of

organisms and

reduction of available

habitat for aquatic

flora and fauna.

None

Operation

Canal fauna

and flora

Guanotrophy: Potential adverse

impact due to

increased organic

input from roosting

birds. Depletion of

None



dissolved oxygen

levels in water column

due to increased

bacterial activity.

Potential local

reduction in

macroinvertebrate

diversity.

5.2 Aquatic Ecology Mitigation and Monitoring

5.2.1 Appendix A4 of the COPE sets out a framework for aquatic ecology mitigation and monitoring

that will be implemented before, during and after construction of the Project including the

Proposals.

APPENDIX 1

1. MITIGATION SCHEME FOR THE ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF THE MERSEY GATEWAY

PROJECT ON THE UPPER ESTUARY

Objectives for the Mitigation Scheme for the Ecological Effects on the UME LWS

1.1.1 This appendix sets out a package of essential mitigation that is required to mitigate those

effects listed in Table 1 of the BDMP on the habitats and bird life of the UME LWS.

1.1.2 Mitigation focuses on two themes. The first is to mitigate direct impacts to UME habitats caused

by the construction phase. The second theme focuses on mitigating effects associated with the

construction and operation of the New Bridge on birds within the UME.

1.1.3 The objectives of this package of mitigation for the Upper Estuary are to improve the values of

the Widnes Warth and Astmoor saltmarshes in close proximity to the New Bridge so that

wildfowl and wading birds are encouraged to use those areas for feeding and roosting, despite

the presence and use of the New Bridge and despite the permanent losses of saltmarsh and

other intertidal habitat following pier and tower construction.

1.1.4 The principal objective is to increase bird habituation to the presence and use of the New Bridge

by the conversion of sub-optimal saltmarsh habitat to more favourable saltmarsh habitat.

1.1.5 The proposed mitigation involves the conversion of ungrazed saltmarsh to grazed saltmarsh,

and the creation of scrapes and pools to provide the birds with an increased density of marine

invertebrate prey.

1.1.6 Mitigation will also involve replacing the coarse saltmarsh grasses with soft-leaved and

palatable grasses, and other saltmarsh plants to attract herbivorous waterbirds and to enable

the saltmarsh vegetation to be grazed by livestock in a conventional manner.

1.1.7 The sections below set out in detail the proposed mitigation strategy.

1.2 Mitigation of the Construction Effects of the New Bridge on Habitat and Birds

Mitigation along Access Tracks and Cofferdams

1.2.1 The stone haul roads and cofferdams are proposed to be retained for up to three years. This will

cause the vegetation and soils to be completely covered, smothered and/or compacted. Under

these circumstances appropriate measures will be taken to conserve the viability of the

saltmarsh vegetation and soil seedbank, and to restore favourable soil conditions for saltmarsh

regeneration.

1.2.2 The preferred method of saltmarsh reinstatement is traditional recultivation and reseeding

techniques using salt-tolerant grasses or relying on encouraging natural colonisation. It is a

reliable and rapid method in a situation where slow restoration may expose the partially restored

areas to erosion.

1.2.3 This method will involve the restoration of saltmarsh habitat on removal of the access roads by

seeding with a grass mixture of suitable species, particularly Red Fescue, Creeping Bent-grass,

Common Couch-grass. The seeds mixture will preferably consist of salt-tolerant ecotypes

(varieties). Although the developing saltmarsh vegetation would probably not consist of the

same native species and ecotypes as the existing saltmarsh (such as Sea Couch), early

development of the grass cover would stabilise the saltmarsh and natural changes would result

in the native saltmarsh species gradually replacing the sown vegetation.

1.2.4 Following restoration by seeding, it may necessary to improve soil and subsoil conditions by

ripping and/or other cultivation means, depending on the extent of damage to the soil and

subsoil structure. The aim will be to restore the original porosity, drainage and density

characteristics of the saltmarsh soil and subsoil.

Mitigation of Construction Impacts on Birds

Location and Extent of Mitigation

1.2.5 During construction of the Project mitigation will extend to 300 metres on each side of the New

Bridge at Astmoor and Widnes Warth Saltmarshes as shown in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1 (Revised Red Line Boundary): Map of the Extent of Saltmarsh Mitigation Areas

for the

Construction Period

Conversion of Saltmarsh Habitat

1.2.6 Vegetation within this 300 metre area will be cut short and maintained in that condition within

the construction traffic routes and directly underneath the New Bridge construction area to

create a sterile environment for ground nesting birds. Marker posts at 15 metre interval

intervals will also deter ground nesting birds from moving into this area.

Installation of Fencing

1.2.7 During construction fences will be installed as shown on Figures 2 and 3. These will protect

the mitigation area from damage and disturbance by construction personal and machinery, dogs

and people.

Shooting Rights

1.2.8 During the construction of the Project shooting rights on the UME within 300 metres of the

construction corridor for the New Bridge will be extinguished.

Wigg Island

1.2.9 At Wigg Island, to avoid or minimise disturbance to breeding birds, there will be pre-contract

clearance of woody vegetation and other bird-breeding habitat outside the bird-breeding

season. It is proposed that construction will start in the winter so that birds in adjacent

woodland can habituate to construction work or avoid nesting in the construction corridor.

Nesting baskets for Long-eared owls are already in place at locations unaffected by the

construction activity.

1.3 Mitigation of the Operational Effects of the New Bridge on Birds and Habitats

1.3.1 The only satisfactory and feasible method of mitigating the effects of construction and operation

of the New Bridge on the bird interests of the UME LWS is to carry out habitat restoration and

enhancement works in the estuarine ecosystem itself, because the specialised habitats that the

birds use depend on the estuarine habitats.

1.3.2 Because all the proposed construction works and the New Bridge structure itself will be entirely

in the UME, it is necessary that the mitigation is conducted at the source of the impacts and as

close as possible to the construction corridor and alignment of the New Bridge desk across the

UME. For example restoration of the access road across the saltmarshes will, of necessity, be

along its alignment.

1.3.3 Further, because bird disturbance effects including degradation of their estuarine habitats will

be associated with the New Bridge corridor, it is preferable that mitigation is concentrated along

that corridor, especially where mitigation is directed to measures that will encourage bird

habituation to the New Bridge structure and subsequent traffic use.

1.3.4 Therefore mitigation will be directed towards those areas of saltmarsh in the UME that are

proposed to be crossed by the New Bridge and adjacent to it. The saltmarshes have potential

for enhancement to more favourable feeding and roosting habitat for wildfowl and wading birds

by a combination of habitat creation and habitat modifications.

1.3.5 The selected saltmarsh mitigation areas will be on both sides of the UME and on both sides of

the proposed New Bridge at Astmoor and Widnes Warth saltmarshes. Details of their locations

and extent, including their physical and vegetation features after construction and modification,

are shown in Figures 2 and 3.

Figure 2 (Revised Route Line): Map of the Extent of Widnes Warth Saltmarsh Mitigation

Areas

for the Operational Period

Figure 3 (Revised Route Line): Map of the Extent of Astmoor Saltmarsh Mitigation Areas

for the Operational Period

1.3.6 The areas of saltmarsh proposed for mitigation have been selected for ecological reasons and a

number of other reasons as summarised below:

a. They are within the Transport and Works Act Order Application boundary which includes areas on both sides of the New Bridge route across Widnes Warth and Astmoor saltmarshes.

b. The areas include saltmarsh on both sides of the UME so that if for any reason birds are disturbed on one of the areas, they will have an alternative and similar feeding and roosting habitat nearby and well within a short flight range.

c. The saltmarsh mitigation areas encompass habitat on both sides of the New Bridge at Astmoor Saltmarsh which will be continuous beneath the bridge and connected by creeks, saltmarsh vegetation, pools and intertidal sand and mudflats where saltmarsh vegetation is inhibited or reduced by bridge shading. Although there will be no mitigation on the downstream side of the New Bridge at Widnes Warth Saltmarsh, there will be connectivity beneath the bridge with the existing saltmarsh habitat.

d. The Astmoor mitigation area will be adjacent to Wigg Island Community Park and in very close proximity to the visitor centre, in a position that will increase the value of the Wigg Island Local Nature Reserve.

e. The Widnes Warth mitigation area will be easily viewed from Spike Island and at a location where hides can be provided to allow local people and visitors to study and enjoy the new landscape provided by the mitigation and the birdlife that it will attract.

f. The locations of the mitigation areas are in the least important part of the Mersey Estuary but where there is high potential for habitat creation and management in the area directly affected by the New Bridge, rather than in the European Site in the Middle Estuary where effects of the New Bridge will be minimal and avoiding the north-eastern parts of the UME which will not be affected by the New Bridge.

1.3.7 This Appendix focuses on the details regarding mitigation required within the UME LWS to

mitigate the effects of the New Bridge on bird populations.

Mitigation at Widnes Warth Saltmarsh

Creation of Grazed Saltmarsh Habitat

1.3.8 At Widnes Warth Saltmarsh it is proposed to convert a minimum of 23.5 [20.5] hectares of

ungrazed saltmarsh to grazed saltmarsh, based on a 200m zone either side of the bridge and

the natural boundary of the saltmarsh where it abuts Spike Island. This includes an area of

conversion of [2.5] hectares of saltmarsh which will be located beneath the New Bridge and will

be subject to a degree of shading during the operational period. After the construction period,

this shaded area of saltmarsh will be re-assessed as to its long term management and required

stocking levels, and to be based on the monitoring of the effects of the construction period and

from the grazing results of the trial grazing project on adjacent saltmarsh which commenced in

April 2011.

Cutting and grazing of saltmarsh vegetation

1.3.9 Conversion of the saltmarsh to pasture will involve the following throughout the area indicated in

Figure 2:

a. There will be cutting and clearing of the tall and dense vegetation using appropriate machinery depending on soil moisture conditions at the time. If the saltmarsh is dry the use of a tractor-drawn machine should be feasible but other equipment will be necessary for difficult and localised areas such as wet and soft ground, and the margins of pools and creeks.

b. A fence system along with a series of bunds in selected places will be erected to contain grazing livestock and to prevent trespass and consequent bird disturbance.

c. The introduction of grazing livestock using cattle, sheep, horses, ponies or mixtures of livestock will be used to manage the saltmarsh vegetation.

d. Grazing densities will be carefully controlled to ensure that the saltmarsh vegetation is reduced to the correct height and to avoid the problems of over-grazing that could result in the localised losses of saltmarsh vegetation and increased risk of sediment erosion.

e. It may be necessary to use vegetation cutting and clearance in combination with grazing to avoid the regeneration of coarse saltmarsh grasses and other undesirable plant species.

Creation of Saltmarsh Scrapes and Pools

1.3.10 Saltmarsh scrapes and pools will be created in close proximity to the bridge alignment by

excavation in conjunction with an artificial liner or other methods of water retention at the

locations indicated in Figure 2. The exact locations will be informed by the monitoring and

evaluation reports contained within the COPE and by the trial saltmarsh grazing project that

commenced in April 2011 in conjunction with a PhD research project with the University of

Salford.

1.3.11 The pools and scrapes will be of different sizes and shapes but all will be shallow and no more

than 1.5 metres deep. They will have shallow margins and, in some cases, deeper central

water areas.

1.3.12 The pools will be separated by wide gaps because narrow gaps could result in some pools

merging. They will be created well away from the eroding channel margins of the saltmarshes

and well separated from major creeks.

1.3.13 The pools will be lined with an impermeable synthetic liner or with bentonite or with natural

material such as clay of high impermeability.

1.3.14 Enhancement of the Creek System and Encouragement of the Natural Formation of Creeks and

Pools

1.3.15 Creeks will be managed by strimming to supplement grazing as a means of removing all tall and

coarse vegetation such as Sea Couch and encouraging colonisation by a diverse assemblage

of saltmarsh plants of value to grazing wildfowl.

1.3.16 There are five main purposes of grazing management of the saltmarshes as explained below:

a. To maintain a short sward which is required by wildfowl and waders for feeding and roosting. A short sward will provide a good all-round field of view for the birds so that they can see and react to approaching predators in good time.

b. To change the species composition of the saltmarsh vegetation from tall and coarse grasses such as Sea Couch to short and soft grasses such as Sea Meadow-grass that are palatable to herbivorous wildfowl such as Wigeon as well as being attractive to grazing livestock.

c. To allow more light penetration to the saltmarsh surface and to the creek sides so that a species-rich assemblage of short-growing saltmarsh plants can establish and thrive, including species such as Thrift, Sea Milkwort and Sea Spurrey, thereby creating conditions for the regeneration of typical saltmarsh plant communities of traditionally grazed saltmarshes.

d. To reduce drying-out of the saltmarsh soils in the late spring, summer and autumn months. The existing dense and tall coarse grasses remove large amounts of soil moisture in the summer, causing drying-out of the underlying saltmarsh soils which leads to sub-optimal and often unfavourable conditions for characteristic saltmarsh plants.

e. The intention of cutting followed by grazing is to encourage natural creek and pool formation throughout the mitigation area, instead of artificial pool excavation and creek modifications. In the long-term this will create a much more sustainable system of saltmarsh habitats and their associated plant communities, and consequently more favourable conditions for marine invertebrates and associated birdlife.

Construction of Screenbanks

1.3.17 Low screenbanks, constructed to a height of 2.0 metres, will be necessary to protect the

mitigation areas from disturbance and trespass, during and after New Bridge construction.

1.3.18 Screenbanks will be constructed from native saltmarsh sediments and surface soils and will be

grassed over.

Saltmarsh Management to Create a Range of Saltmarsh Plant Communities

1.3.19 It is proposed, by management, to encourage the natural development of appropriate NVC

(National Vegetation Classification) plant communities to encourage the spread of those plant

species of importance to grazing herbivorous wildfowl.

1.3.20 The preferred species include Common Saltmarsh Grass (Puccinellia maritima), Sea Aster

(Aster tripolium), Sea Purslane (Atriplex portulacoides), Herbaceous Seablite (Suaeda maritima)

and Glasswort (Salicornia europaea).

1.3.21 Natural development of the following NVC communities will be encouraged by management and

in line with the method statements provided at Appendix 2 of the BDMP:

Saltmarsh plant communities

SM8 Annual Salicornia saltmarsh community

SM9 Suaeda maritima saltmarsh community

SM11 Aster tripolium saltmarsh community on creek sides, and pool and scrape margins

SM13 Puccinellia maritima saltmarsh community

SM14 Atriplex portulacoides (Sea Purslane) saltmarsh community SM16 Festuca rubra saltmarsh community (SM16a Puccinellia maritima sub-community)

SM16 Festuca rubra saltmarsh community (SM16c Glaux maritima sub-community)

Aquatic plant communities

A21 Ranunculus baudotii (Brackish Water-crowfoot) aquatic community

1.3.22 The management regimes that will be adopted to create and maintain the saltmarsh and

brackish water plant communities are summarised below:

a. Intensity and duration of grazing and/or cutting management, including types of grazing livestock and height of cutting and/or strimming.

b. Control of water regimes and drainage by means of creek blocking, shallow scrape excavation and localised soil consolidation or compaction.

c. Improvement of soil drainage by agricultural techniques such as tining or by shallow creek/ditch excavation and integration with the natural creek system.

d. Introduction of selected native saltmarsh plants.

Mitigation at Astmoor Saltmarsh

Creation of Grazed Saltmarsh Habitat

1.3.23 A similar approach to that described earlier for Widnes Warth Saltmarsh will be followed at

Astmoor Saltmarsh. The extent of the grazed area is indicated in Figure 3. In this case, there

will be areas of grazed saltmarsh along both sides of the New Bridge.

1.3.24 At Astmoor it is proposed to convert a minimum of 10.5 Saltmarsh it is proposed to convert [8.5]

hectares of ungrazed saltmarsh to grazed saltmarsh, based on a 200m zone either side of the

bridge and an area of saltmarsh to allow cattle access from an entrance point off Wigg Island.

This includes conversion of [0.8] hectare of saltmarsh beneath the New Bridge (Figure 2). which

will be located beneath the New Bridge and will be subject to a degree of shading during the

operational period. After the construction period, this shaded area of saltmarsh will be re-

assessed as to its long term management and required stocking levels, and to be based on the

monitoring of the effects of the construction period and from the grazing results of the trial

grazing project on adjacent saltmarsh which commenced in April 2011.

Cutting and Grazing

1.3.25 Conversion of the saltmarsh to pasture will involve the following throughout the area indicated in

Figure 3:

a. There will be cutting and clearing of the tall and dense vegetation using appropriate machinery depending on soil moisture conditions at the time. If the saltmarsh is dry the use of a tractor-drawn machine should be feasible but other equipment will be necessary for difficult and localised areas such as wet and soft ground, and the margins of pools and creeks.

b. A fence system along with a series of bunds in selected places will be erected to contain grazing livestock and to prevent trespass and consequent bird disturbance.

c. The introduction of grazing livestock using cattle, sheep, horses, ponies or mixtures of livestock will be used to manage the saltmarsh vegetation.

d. Grazing densities will be carefully controlled to ensure that the saltmarsh vegetation is reduced to the correct height and to avoid the problems of over-grazing that could result in the localised losses of saltmarsh vegetation and increased risk of sediment erosion.

e. It may be necessary to use vegetation cutting and clearance in combination with grazing to avoid the regeneration of coarse saltmarsh grasses and other undesirable plant species.

Creation of Saltmarsh Scrapes and Pools

1.3.26 As at Widnes Warth Saltmarsh, scrapes and pools will be created in close proximity to the

bridge alignment by excavation in conjunction with an artificial liner or other methods of water

retention at the locations indicated in Figure 3.

1.3.27 The pools and scrapes will be of different sizes and shapes but all will be shallow and no more

than 1.5 metres deep. They will have shallow margins and, in some cases, deeper central

water areas.

1.3.28 The pools will be separated by wide gaps because narrow gaps could result in some pools

merging. They will be created well away from the eroding channel margins of the saltmarshes

and well separated from major creeks.

1.3.29 The pools will be lined with an impermeable synthetic liner or with bentonite or with natural

material such as clay of high impermeability.

1.3.30 Enhancement of the Creek System and Encouragement of the Natural Formation of Creeks and

Pools

1.3.31 There will be minor modifications to the existing creeks by blocking four of the creeks (Figure 3)

to raise ground water levels in the associated areas of saltmarsh.

1.3.32 Creeks will be managed by strimming to supplement grazing as a means of removing all tall and

coarse vegetation such as Sea Couch and encouraging colonisation by a diverse assemblage

of saltmarsh plants of value to grazing wildfowl.

Construction of Screenbanks

1.3.33 Low screenbanks, constructed to a height of 2.0 metres, will be necessary at Astmoor

Saltmarsh to protect the mitigation areas from disturbance and trespass, during and after New

Bridge construction.

1.3.34 Screenbanks will be constructed from native saltmarsh sediments and surface soils and will be

grassed over.

Saltmarsh Management to Create a Range of Saltmarsh Plant Communities

1.3.35 It is proposed to encourage the natural development of appropriate NVC (National Vegetation

Classification) plant communities through management techniques to encourage the spread of

those plant species of importance to grazing herbivorous wildfowl.

1.3.36 The preferred species include Common Saltmarsh Grass (Puccinellia maritima), Sea Aster

(Aster tripolium), Sea Purslane (Atriplex portulacoides), Herbaceous Seablite (Suaeda maritima)

and Glasswort (Salicornia europaea).

1.3.37 Natural development of the following NVC communities will be encouraged by management and

in line with the method statements provided at Appendix 2 of the BDMP:

Saltmarsh plant communities

SM8 Annual Salicornia saltmarsh community

SM9 Suaeda maritima saltmarsh community

SM11 Aster tripolium saltmarsh community on creek sides, and pool and scrape margins

SM13 Puccinellia maritima saltmarsh community

SM14 Atriplex portulacoides (Sea Purslane) saltmarsh community SM16 Festuca rubra saltmarsh community (SM16a Puccinellia maritima sub-community)

SM16 Festuca rubra saltmarsh community (SM16c Glaux maritima sub-community)

Aquatic plant communities

A21 Ranunculus baudotii (Brackish Water-crowfoot) aquatic community

1.3.38 The anticipated management regimes to create and maintain the saltmarsh and brackish water

plant communities are summarised below:

a. Intensity and duration of grazing and/or cutting management, including types of grazing livestock and height of cutting and/or strimming.

b. Control of water regimes and drainage by means of creek blocking, shallow scrape excavation and localised soil consolidation or compaction.

c. Improvement of soil drainage by agricultural techniques such as tining or by shallow creek/ditch excavation and integration with the natural creek system.

d. Introduction of selected native saltmarsh plants.

1.4 Consideration of Other Related Issues

1.4.1 Related issues include the following:

Contamination and erosion issues

a. The release of contaminated sediments in the superficial layers of the saltmarshes should be avoided. Heavy metals (arsenic, cadmium, copper and zinc etc), metalloids and organic contaminants such as PCBs and PAHs are concentrated in the upper two metres of the saltmarsh sediments. Thereafter concentrations reduce with depth.

b. The distribution of the pools and scrapes will be close to the New Bridge because there are detailed analytical data on the concentrations of metal and organic contaminants in the saltmarsh inter-tidal sediments along the New Bridge alignment corridor. This gives confidence to avoid any risks relating to contamination of sediments.

c. The proposals are designed to avoid increasing the risk of saltmarsh erosion, particularly along the outer (river channel) margins of Astmoor Saltmarsh and to a lesser extent at Widnes Warth Saltmarsh.

Soft and wet ground issues

1.4.2 Consideration has been given to the perceived uncertainties of mechanical excavation of pools

and scrapes outside the New Bridge construction corridor because of the possibility of soft and

wet ground in which machines may become bogged-down or cause severe rutting of the

saltmarsh surface. Habitat creation will be limited to the construction corridor for reasons of

safe and easy access.

Co-ordination of ecological mitigation with New Bridge construction

1.4.3 For ecological as well as engineering reasons, it will be necessary to balance cut and fill during

physical works affecting the saltmarshes. Ideally this should be as follows:

a. Saltmarsh vegetation (turf) removed during scrape and pool excavation should be used for access track and coffer-dam restoration, and for screenbank covering and stabilisation.

b. Saltmarsh scrape and pool arisings (sediments) should also be used for coffer-dam restoration and screenbank vegetation establishment.

1.5 Mersey Gateway Project and the UME Reserve

1.5.1 It is anticipated that a Mersey Gateway Environmental Trust will be established under the

Charities Act 2006. This Trust will be the vehicle through which the mitigation outlined above

for the Upper Estuary will be delivered. The exact workings of this Trust are subject to

confirmation, however, it is likely that the Trust will also be involved in the delivery of wider long-

term nature conservation initiatives within the Mersey Estuary. The Trust was incorporated in

September 2010, and is registered with Companies House and the Charity Commission. It has

been specifically created by Halton Borough Council to assist the Project Company to manage

its long term environmental planning commitments and its ecological assets, including all the

hectares of saltmarsh to be managed for nature conservation purposes on both sides of the

estuary.

1.6 Mechanism for Delivery

Nature Reserve Initiatives

1.6.1 The Mersey Gateway Environmental Trust will be secured through the adoption of planning

conditions.

1.7 Interactions with Existing Wildlife Sites

1.7.1 The Astmoor Saltmarsh element of the mitigation area is located adjacent to Wigg Island and

very close to the visitor centre. Opportunities will therefore be sought to promote the value of

the Wigg Island with the mitigation area.

1.7.2 The Widnes Warth Saltmarsh element of the mitigation area will be easily accessible from Spike

Island and at a location where hides can be provided to allow local people and visitors to study

and enjoy the new landscape provided by the mitigation package and the birdlife that it will

attract.

a. Predicated Residual Effects

1.7.3 Table 1 below summarises some indicative measurements of the predicted residual effects of

the proposed avian mitigation.

1.7.4 These residual effects are subject to the following caveats and more realistic targets will be

established following the implementation of the monitoring programme which is provided at

Appendix A3 of the COPE.

a. The national trends of the WeBS survey suggest declines in the number of some of the SPA species. This has to be factored into the predicted increases in wintering Teal, Dunlin and Redshank numbers;

b. The use of regular and up to date information is the ideal prerequisite for predicting, measuring and reviewing success. Now that the 28.5 hectare nature area has been secured, a more concentrated monitoring and recording effort can be carried out over a long period of time. This has started in March 2009 with a Common Bird Census survey, to be followed by a winter 2009 survey to monitor high tide roosts; and

c. External factors such as weather conditions, periodic peaks in the tidal system, longer term climate change conditions and the possible use of the nature area by other species such as canada geese, require predictions to be flexible and not set in stone.

Table 1: Predicted Effects of Mitigation on Birdlife throughout the New Bridge Project

BIRD

SPECIES

RELEVANT

MITIGATION

PREDICTION NOTES

SPA WADING AND WILDFOWL SPECIES

Shelduck There are no specific

mitigation measures for

Shelduck.

Peak bird counts within the Upper

Mersey Estuary to be comparable to

those recorded during the 2002-

2005 period.

Through habituation, they will

move back and continue feed

and loaf on the Intertidal

mudflats.

Teal The grazed saltmarsh will

increase their food supply

1.Peak bird counts within the Upper

Mersey Estuary to increase beyond


2005 period. The highest recorded

count was 801. An appropriate

prediction could be a 30% increase

2.The length of time of Teal feeding

on the nature area to increase. No

existing figures to compare with so

will be subject to monitoring.

The numbers will be subject to

national trends in Teal

distribution as reported through

the annual WeBS updates.

Pintail There are no specific


Shelduck.

As at present, there will be an

occasional sighting of this species

within the UME

It is now an uncommon winter

visitor

Golden Plover There are no specific


Golden Plover. The low

sward of the grazed

saltmarsh may attract

roosting birds on

occasion.

Peak bird counts within the Upper

Mersey Estuary to increase beyond


2005 period. The highest recorded

count was 225. An appropriate

prediction could be a 30% increase

The larger flocks from Fiddlers

Ferry lagoons may take

advantage of the mitigation

area during periods of

disturbance.

Black-tailed

Godwit

There are no specific


There will be an occasional increase

in the recording of this species

It is an uncommon winter

visitor.

BIRD

SPECIES

RELEVANT

MITIGATION

PREDICTION NOTES

this species within the UME

Dunlin Invertebrate food supply

will be increased through

the provision of scrapes.

As the food supply for this species

will be increased, there will be

greater use of the nature area.

Feeding flocks of over 100 birds

during high tides during July and

August would be a significant

increase on current counts.

Redshank Invertebrate food supply

will be increased through

the provision of scrapes.

1.As the food supply for this species

will be increased, there will be

greater use of the nature area.

2.One to 2 nesting pairs in summer

The 2009 – 2011 breeding

surveys revealed no

successful nests despite

displaying pairs. This

suggests the issue of predation

needs to be included in

management plans.

OTHER WADERS AND WILDFOWL

Lapwing,

Curlew, Green

Sandpiper,

Snipe



these species, although

they will all benefit from

the grazed regime

A slight increase of recorded

species.

The grazing effects will be to

increase diversity of possible

food supply, and create better

visibility for roosting periods.

NESTING BIRDS

Skylark Grazed saltmarsh, at the

appropriate density, can

create an optimal

condition for this species,

and other ground nesting

birds.

1.Number of nesting pairs to remain

at approx. 10 pairs for Widnes

Warth.


at approx. 10 pairs for Astmoor

Any increase will be monitored

Based on existing bird

densities as recorded in the

ES. To be reviewed based on

CBC survey conducted from

2009. This figure is in line with

the results of the breeding bird

surveys carried out between

2009 and 2011. Successful

nesting pairs in any one year is

variable dependant on a

number of environmental

factors.

Meadow Pipit Grazed saltmarsh, at the

appropriate density, can

create an optimal

condition for this species,

and other ground nesting

birds.


at approx. 6 pairs for Widnes Warth.

2. Number of nesting pairs to remain

at approx. 2-3 pairs for Astmoor




ES. To be reviewed based on

CBC survey from 2009. This

figure is in line with the results

of the breeding bird surveys

carried out between 2009 and

2011. Successful nesting pairs

in any one year is variable

dependant on a number of

environmental factors.

Reed Bunting Allowance of reedbed

areas to develop on the

upper areas of saltmarsh

will provide suitable

habitat.

1.Two to 3 nesting pairs on the

saltmarsh margins, especially once

reed habitat becomes established.




ES. This figure is in line with

the results of the breeding bird

surveys carried out between

2009 and 2011

POTENTIAL SPECIES

Avocet



this species, although it

may benefit from the

scrapes

Habitat may be suitable for feeding

Avocet, a species not yet recorded

in the Upper Mersey Estuary.

The avocet is increasing its

range within the North West.

Cetti’s Warbler

Habitat may be suitable for Cetti’s

Warbler, a new species for the

Upper Mersey Estuary.

The species was recorded in

Halton during 2008.

BIRD

SPECIES

RELEVANT

MITIGATION

PREDICTION NOTES

Long Eared

Owl


mitigation measures

This species will continue to breed

in this part of the Upper Mersey

Estuary but the exact location will

change during and after

construction.

A pair successfully bred in

2011. Nesting baskets to be

placed in suitable locations

prior to the construction period.

Cetti’s Warbler

Habitat may be suitable for Cetti’s

Warbler, a new species for the

Upper Mersey Estuary .

The species was recorded in

Halton during 2008.

APPENDIX 2

2. SPECIFICATION OF THE DESIRED SALTMARSH PLANT COMMUNITIES TO RESTORE

SALTMARSH TO FAVOURABLE ECOLOGICAL CONDITION, AND THEIR MANAGEMENT

REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Introduction

2.1.1 The following are Outline Method Statements for the conversion of the SM24 Sea Couch

(Elytrigia atherica) saltmarsh community to saltmarsh communities that are representative of

saltmarsh in favourable ecological condition in terms of botanical species-richness and natural

saltmarsh topography, and as roosting and feeding habitats for wildfowl and waders.

2.2 Method Statements

Method Statement for the creation and maintenance of the SM13 Puccinellia maritima

saltmarsh community

Objectives

2.2.1 Eliminate Elytrigia atherica, reduce Festuca rubra, and increase the amounts of Puccinellia

maritima and other saltmarsh plants, particularly Glaux maritima, Agrostis stolonifera, Plantago

maritima, Glaux maritima, Aster tripolium, Atriplex prostrata and other saltmarsh plants of the

SM13 NVC community.

Methods

a. Cut and remove Elytrigia atherica and other plants to approximately 50mm above

saltmarsh level.

b. Graze aftermath at moderate intensity, preferably using sheep but possibly using cattle or

horses provided poaching is avoided.

c. Continue grazing, preferably with sheep, to maintain a short sward and to prevent the

development of rank vegetation.

d. Manage to encourage natural colonisation from existing saltmarsh species, vegetatively

and from seed, including regeneration of vegetation uprooted by grazing livestock, and by

colonisation of saltmarsh species from seed and vegetative fragments carried in and

deposited by the tide.

e. Remove grazing livestock temporarily to avoid excessive poaching and at times when

herbivorous wildfowl are present and when there are large numbers of roosting wildfowl

and waders.

Method Statement for the creation and maintenance of the SM16 Festuca rubra saltmarsh

community (SM16a Puccinellia maritima sub-community)

Objectives


maritima and other saltmarsh plants, particularly Glaux maritima, Agrostis stolonifera, Plantago

maritima, Glaux maritima, Aster tripolium, Atriplex prostrata and other saltmarsh plants of the

SM16 NVC community (SM16a sub-community)..

Methods


saltmarsh level.




development of rank vegetation and a high proportion of Festuca rubra.

d. Increase the intensity of grazing to control and reduce the proportion of Festuca rubra if

necessary.

e. Cut and remove the vegetation if the sward becomes too dense and tall due to an

increased proportion of Festuca rubra.

f. Manage to encourage natural colonisation from existing saltmarsh species, vegetatively




g. Remove grazing livestock temporarily to avoid excessive poaching and at times when


and waders.

Method Statement for the creation and maintenance of the SM16 Festuca rubra saltmarsh

community (SM16c Glaux maritima sub-community)

Objectives


maritima and other saltmarsh plants, particularly Glaux maritima, Plantago maritima, Agrostis

stolonifera, Triglochin maritima, Armeria maritima, Aster tripolium and other saltmarsh plants of

the SM16 NVC community (SM16c sub-community).

Methods


saltmarsh level.




development of rank vegetation and a high proportion of Festuca rubra.


necessary.









and waders.

Method Statement for the creation and maintenance of the SM11 Aster tripolium

saltmarsh community on creek sides, and pool and scrape margins

Objectives

2.2.4 Eliminate Elytrigia atherica and Festuca rubra, increase the amounts of Aster tripolium,

Puccinellia maritima and other saltmarsh plants, particularly Salicornia agg., Suaeda maritima,

Atriplex portulacoides, Plantago maritima and Spergularia media, and other saltmarsh plants of

the SM11 NVC community.

2.2.5 Establish and maintain a total saltmarsh vegetation cover within the range of 45% to 100%,

preferably about 80%, depending on local environmental and management conditions. Maintain

a vegetation height within the range of 5 to 150cms, preferably about 28cms above the

saltmarsh ground level.

Methods

a. Cut and remove Elytrigia atherica and other plants to at least 50mm above saltmarsh

level.

b. Graze aftermath at low intensity, preferably using sheep but possibly using cattle or

horses provided poaching and excessive disturbance is avoided.


development of rank vegetation and colonisation by Festuca rubra and species not

characteristic of the SM11 community.


necessary.









and waders.

Method Statement for the creation and maintenance of the A21 Ranunculus baudotii

aquatic community

Objectives

2.2.6 Create brackish standing water habitats by excavation of scrapes and pools, and by blocking of

creeks, followed by the introduction of Ranunculus baudotii to form the A21 aquatic community.

2.2.7 Introduce other associates of the A21 community, including some or all of the following as

appropriate:- Zannichellia palustris, Lemna minor, Ceratophyllum submersum, Potamogeton

pectinatus, Lemna gibba, Callitriche stagnalis, C. obtusangula, C. obtusangula, Ruppia

maritima, Hippuris vulgaris, Sparganium emersum, Glyceria fluitans and Myriophyllum spicatum.

Methods

a. Create scrapes and pools in the saltmarsh by the removal of saltmarsh vegetation and

excavation of sediment to a depth of up to 50-80cms with shallow margins of 20-20cms

depth.

b. Allow the excvations to fill with water and give time for the settlement of suspended solids

and for complete water clarification.

c. Introduce Ranunculus baudotii and associated A21 community plant species.

d. Allow R. baudotii to establish.

e. Graze the surrounding saltmarsh and pool with sheep to disturb the terrain and maintain

open conditions to promote the growth of the prostrate Brackish Water Crowfoot plants.

f. Introduce other characteristic plant species of the A21 aquatic community, as listed

earlier.

APPENDIX 3

3. MITIGATION SCHEME FOR THE ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT ON

TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY RECEPTORS

3.1 Introduction

3.1.1 This Appendix sets out mitigation measures which will be implemented during the construction

and operation of the Project to mitigate effects on terrestrial ecology receptors as outlined at

Table 2 of the BDMP.

3.2 Wigg Island LWS

3.2.1 During operation of the Project, tree and shrub planting will be implemented along both sides of

the New Bridge crossing of Wigg Island to minmise the reduction in aesthetic and intrinsic

appeal. This planting will be through the use of tall and fast-growing tree species. To

encourage fast growth the soil conditions will be improved through physical and organic means.

This habitat will be managed during operation to maximise its screening effect and suitability as

bird-breeding habitat. This will be carried out in accordance with the landscaping proposals for

the Project approved by the local planning authority

3.2.2 The three species described in Table 1 below are examples of suitable species for early

screening

Table 1: The Fastest Growing Tree Species for the Core Planting on Both

Sides of the New Bridge.

Scientific name Common name Attributes

Populus nigra ‘ italica’ Lombardy Poplar

Fast grower if planted on fertile soil but growth could be stunted by a limited root run so ripping and drainage may help to speed-up growth, plus fertilisation.

Populus nigra Manchester Poplar Fast grower that will form a large tree if soil conditions are favourable.

Populus x canadensis ‘Serotina’

Black Italian Poplar

Can grow two metres in the first year and be over 30 metres high in 30 years, producing an early landscape effect in conjunction with planting of the preceding species.

3.2.3 Lombardy Poplar can be very fragile if planted in lines so will be planted in groups to cope with

the relatively exposed situation.

3.2.4 Manchester Poplar is another fast-growing species that is best planted in groups, as part of the

proposed “broken-up” planting design.

3.2.5 The additional species described in Table 2 are intended to provide structural and species

diversity in the planting, and to act as longer-living trees, although some such as Silver Birch

are very fast growers.

Table 2: Additional Tree Species for the Core Planting on Both Sides of the New Bridge.


Betula pendula Silver Birch Fast-growing and can grow to 15 metres in 20 years or less.


Alnus glutinosa Common Alder

Exhibits very rapid growth and can grow 1 metre a year when young, especially if given a moist and fertile soil, preferably with phosphate fertiliser to stimulate root growth and nitrogen fixation.

Quercus ilex Holm Oak or Evergreen Oak

Will not grow as fast as the preceding species but is suited to coastal or near coastal areas and has the benefit of growing to a large size and is evergreen.

Quercus robur English Oak

Can grow at a reasonable rate although nothing like the rapidity of the poplars etc, but it is a tree for the longer term to replace the poplars and birches when they start to shed branches or become damaged by wind.

3.2.6 The areas between the core plantings of dense poplars and associated Birch, Alder, Evergreen

Oak and English Oak will be planted with tall scrub and shorter trees, such as those listed in

Table 3.

3.2.7 A further advantage of English Oak and Evergreen Oak is that they are used by the larvae of

the Purple Hairstreak butterfly.

3.2.8 Additional species to those listed in Table 3 will be planted, particularly Elm (Ulmus) species to

provide foodplant for the larvae of the White-letter Hairstreak, and Common Buckthorn

(Rhamnus cathartica) and Alder Buckthorn (Frangula alnus) which are the larval foodplants of

the Brimstone butterfly

3.2.9 The foraging and commuting bat survey carried out in 2011 has identified a number of habitat

enhancement measures for loss of bat habitat during the construction period, and these are

reproduced in Table 4.

Table 3: Shorter Tree and Shrub Species to be Planted Between the Core Plantings and

on the Outer Margins of the Tall Tree Species.


Acer campestre Field Maple Native species that ultimately forms a small to medium-sized tree.

Crataegus monogyna Hawthorn Fast-growing dense species good for nesting, feeding and roosting birds.

Malus sylvestris Crab Apple Small attractive tree with numerous small apples.

Sorbus aucuparia Rowan Attractive berried tree of value to feeding birds.

Corylus avellana Hazel Can be coppiced, and of significant longevity.

Ilex aquifolium Holly Dense evergreen foliage, good for nesting birds and berries for feeding birds.

Populus tremula Aspen Attractive small tree and an interesting feature in a nature reserve.

Prunus spinosa Blackthorn Forms very dense of value for breeding, feeding and roosting birds.

Table 4: Habitat enhancements: planting for bat and other species

3.3 St Helens Canal

3.3.1 There will be a pre-contract survey of the canal banks by an experienced ecologist for evidence

of Water Vole activity because the possibility of recolonisation by Water Voles cannot be

discounted. If Water Vole presence is detected, there would need to be translocation of the

voles to a suitable receptor site.

3.3.2 There will be mitigation of the reduction in biodiversity and wildlife interest of the canal section

beneath the bridge by the construction of suitable ponds and linear aquatic habitats on Wigg

Island. These new aquatic habitats will be designed to support the types of flora and fauna

found in the canal, including aquatic and emergent water-margin plants such as Common Reed,

Bulrush, Common Water-plantain and Water Starwort. The ponds will be allowed to colonise

naturally to provide breeding habitats for dragonflies and damselflies, Common Toad and

associated amphibians, but not fish because coarse and other fish interests of the canal will be

less affected by the shading effect of the New Bridge.

Trees and Shrubs (local provenance) Scientific name

Oak Quercus robur

Ash Fraxinus excelsior

Silver Birch Betula pendula

Field Maple Acer campestre

Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna

Alder Alnus glutinosa

Goat Willow Salix caprea

Guelder Rose Viburnum opulus

Hazel Coryllus avellana

Blackthorn Prunus spinosa

Elder Sambucus nigra

Night-scented flowers

Nottingham Catchfly Silene nutans

Night -flowering Catchfly S. noctiflora

Bladder Campion S. vulgaris

Night-scented Stock Matthiola bicornis

Dame’s-violet Hesperis matronalis

Common Evening-primrose Oenothera biennis

Soapwort Saponaria officinalis

Scented herbs

Chives Allium schoenoprasum

Sage Salvia officinalis

Marjoram Origanum vulgare

Borage Borago officinalus

Mint Mentha sp.

Climbers

Honeysuckle (native) L. periclymenum

Traveller’s-joys Clematis vitalba

Dog-rose Rosa canina

Sweet-briar R. rubiginosa

Field-rose R. arvensis

Ivy Hedera helix

Bramble Rubus fruticosos agg

3.4 Manchester Ship Canal

3.4.1 As specified in Chapter 10 of the ES (10.19.106 to 10.19.119) the following mitigation will be

implemented at the Manchester Ship Canal.

Translocation of Important Vegetation and Individual Species including Orchids

3.4.2 The main effect during construction will be mechanical and trampling damage to soils and

vegetation, causing adverse changes to soil structure and potential damage to important orchid

populations and herb-rich plant communities including the scarce Grass Vetchling.

3.4.3 Where possible, important plant communities and orchid populations will be avoided by

protective fencing which will be maintained throughout construction period. If avoidance is not

feasible, there will be translocation of the plant communities and populations of species affected

to a suitable local receptor site.

3.4.4 To avoid double handling of the communities and populations of species affected, which

increases the risk of losses of plants, the receptor site(s) should be selected at other locations

in the Manchester Ship Canal Bank LWS where the vegetation is species-poor but where the

soils and ground conditions are suitable. The vegetation of these sites will be stripped and

removed to a depth of approximately 50 to 100 mms, as directed by the supervising ecologist,

and where necessary the underlying ground material should be loosened by ripping or tining to

remove compaction.

3.4.5 Translocation will be by macroturfing or other suitable mechanical means to a depth of about

100 mms, with direct placement of the translocated turf to the receptor site(s). The translocated

material should be lightly consolidated by means of a low ground-pressure tracked machine.

Translocation will be carried out during suitable weather and soil moisture conditions, and not

when the soils are waterlogged or during rain because such conditions can cause damage to

soil structure. Translocation will also avoid times when the surface soils are dry to a depth of

approximately 20 mm because this would cause shrinkage of the turves and dieback of the

translocated vegetation.

3.4.6 There will also be transplanting by hand, using spades and or trowels, of very small populations

of orchids and other plants, and of single plants that are worthy of conservation.

3.4.7 Following the completion of the New Bridge construction works affecting the canal bank

vegetation, the ground of the affected areas will be ripped and tined, and cultivated to form a

seedbed suitable for natural recolonisation.

3.4.8 Where appropriate there will be manual transplanting of orchids, Grass Vetchling and other

important plants to the restored areas. This will involve the translocation of small numbers of

plants to each affected area, to avoid significant reductions in the sizes of plant colonies at the

donor sites in the LWS. However sufficient numbers of plants will be translocated to each

affected area to initiate the development of viable colonies of the species concerned.

Conservation of Breeding Butterflies

3.4.9 To protect species such as the Common Blue butterfly and the Burnet moths whose larvae feed

on Common Bird’s-foot-trefoil, there will be translocation of turf containing an abundance of this

species from areas that cannot be protected by fencing. Translocation will be as described for

orchid colonies and other species, but using mechanical methods only.

3.4.10 Further mitigation will involve the stripping of further areas of species-poor and unimportant

vegetation elsewhere in the canal bank LWS to remove the vegetation that does not contribute

significantly to the interest features of the LWS. Stripping will also remove any enriched and

superficial soil material, including its seedbank of undesirable species. Recolonisation of the

stripped habitat to species-rich vegetation including orchids, Common Bird’s-foot-trefoil and

calcicolous plants will be encouraged by the application of ground calcitic limestone to the

surface of the stripped ground, at a rate in the range of to 10 to 20 tonnes per hectare (1 to 2

kilograms per square metre).

3.5 Great Crested Newts at Rocksavage

3.5.1 Great Crested Newts (GCN) and their habitat are protected under European and National

legislation.

3.5.2 It will be necessary to carry out licensed GCN mitigation because of the close proximity of the

development to the breeding ponds and the established GCN meta-population. This will require

an application to NE for a GCN Mitigation Licence and preparation of a mitigation method

statement. This method statement will comprise the following measures as specified at Chapter

10 of the ES (paragraphs 10.19.146 to 10.19.151).

3.5.3 There will be exclusion of newts during the works by the erection of a temporary newt exclusion

fence to ensure that there will be no killing or injury of GCNs. This fencing will be permanent

and one-way newt exclusion fencing and will be located along the boundary of the highway

land, between the GCN ponds and the Expressway. This will run for a distance of 800 metres,

i.e. 400 metres in each direction from the point closest to the centre of the GCN breeding pond

group. This will be designed to prevent newts and other amphibians from entering the

Expressway whilst allowing any amphibians trapped on the wrong side of the newt exclusion

fence to cross the fence and return to the breeding ponds.

3.5.4 There will be licensed removal of GCNs from the junction improvement works at the Central

Expressway/Weston Point Expressway Junction at Rocksavage. This will involve pitfall trapping

in conjunction with drift newt exclusion fences, and associated capture methods including

placement of carpet tiles or other artificial refugia, hand searches amongst vegetation and

beneath land surface debris, and destructive searches of below-ground cavities including

mammal burrows. Torchlight searches along drift fences at night during warm and humid

conditions may also be appropriate.

3.5.5 The GCNs caught by trapping and searching will be translocated to suitable terrestrial habitats

in the vicinity of the GCN breeding ponds. Any other amphibians caught by trapping and

searching will also be trqanslocated to similar habitats close to the ponds.

3.5.6 In addition, following construction a permanent newt exclusion fence will be erected along the

boundary of the highway land to protect Great Crested Newts from injury or killing as a result of

existing and increased traffic volumes.

3.6 Bat Populations

3.6.1 Bats and their habitat are protected under European and National legislation. Prior to

construction, and during the appropriate survey season, a bat survey of all potential bat roosts

in buildings for demolition will be undertaken.

3.6.2 Depending on the results of this survey and where necessary, a European Protected Species

mitigation licence will be sought from NE to permit the works at this location.

3.6.3 Mitigation (as specified in Chapter 10 of the ES (paragraphs 10.19.140 to 10.19.145)) during

construction will involve retention of carriageway vegetation, particularly trees and shrubs,

wherever possible.

3.6.4 The greatest effect on bats is considered to be on Wigg Island because the habitat is

concentrated and easily fragmented. However construction activities will be centred on the four

piers to be constructed which will involve limited tree removal and no significant fragmentation

of the continuity of the woodland. Further the New Bridge will be 25 metres high making it

possible to retain the developing woodland vegetation, subject to pruning and reducing the

height of the tree canopy if and where necessary.

3.6.5 At the Rocksavage Expressway the trees and associated woody vegetation including any tall-

herb vegetation will be retained because there is active bat foraging and commuting in this area.

Tree loss will be avoided at the northern end of the roundabout to safeguard the Soprano

Pipistrelles which cross at this location.

3.6.6 At Ditton Junction the sheltered flyway used by Common Pipistrelles will be retained.

3.6.7 During the operational phase the crossings of the St. Helens Canal, the Manchester Ship Canal

and the Bridgewater Canal will be illuminated using direct and screened lighting to avoid light

spillage over the water and canal bank vegetation, to avoid disorientation of bats and to reduce

collisions with traffic.

3.7 St Michael’s Golf Course and Water Voles

3.7.1 Water voles and their habitat are protected under European and National legislation. A repeat

water vole survey will be undertaken prior to construction to identify any potential Water Vole

recolonisation.

3.7.2 As specified in Chapter 10 of the ES (paragraphs 10.19.152 to 10.19.158) should the repeat

surveys reveal that Water Voles have recolonised the St.Michael’s Golf Course ditch system

prior to Mersey Gateway Project construction, mitigation will be necessary.

3.7.3 The culverting of a section of the ditch system on the south side of Speke Road will make

habitat conditions along the affected section unsuitable for Water Voles because of the loss of

vegetation that provides cover and foraging habitat. Consequently there will also be loss of

suitable burrowing habitat. This loss of habitat cannot be avoided.

3.7.4 However it will be possible to retain the Water Vole population(s) on the site by the construction

of replacement habitat.

3.7.5 Compensation for the loss of burrowing and foraging habitat as well as cover will be provided by

the excavation of a length of ditch system at least as long and wide as that affected by

culverting. This will be provided with suitable banks for burrowing Water Voles based on advice

published in the Water Vole Conservation Handbook (Strachan & Moorhouse 2006).

3.7.6 The new ditch section will be planted to species that are considered to be important for Water

Voles (Strachan & Moorhouse 2006), examples being Reed Canary-grass, Common Reed,

Reed Sweet-grass, rush and sedge species, Yellow Iris and various aquatic and water-margin

plants.

3.7.7 Strimming will be used to discourage Water Vole colonisation of the ditch section to be

culverted. Trapping and translocation will used only if strimming proves to be ineffective.

Mitigation will be monitored as advised by Strachan and Moorhouse (2006).

3.7.8 If Water Voles are present and mitigation becomes necessary, a Method Statement will be

prepared to provide the results of Water Vole surveys and maps showing their habitats and

distribution within the site. This will include plans and sections of the water-courses and their

vegetation, and will describe the predicted effects of the development on the Water Voles and

their habitats. There will be a full description of the mitigation methods to be employed and

subsequent monitoring of the success or otherwise of mitigation.