A1(T) Elkesley Junction Improvements - Highways Agency

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The results of the consultation process are given in the Stage 2 EnvironmentalAssessment Report (EAR) (April 2009).There was no further environmental consultation regarding the Preferred Versionafter the Stage 2 assessment was completed.24
3 Air Quality3.1 Findings at Stage 2 AssessmentThe Stage 2 assessment indicated that during construction phase of the PreferredVersion, there would be the potential for intermittent dust impacts at sensitivereceptors depending on meteorological conditions. The impact rating indicated thatdust nuisance would be temporary, medium term and local in effect. It is consideredtherefore, that impacts would be of a slight adverse significance, once mitigationmeasures are implemented.During the operational phase of the Preferred Version, the assessment indicated thatair quality would not cause any exceedence of the annual mean objective limit foreither NO2 or PM10.3.2 Reason for Scoping outThe DMRB Simple Level Assessment carried out at stage 2 demonstrated that whilstthe proposed scheme is predicted to result in small to medium increases in pollutantconcentrations (neutral to moderate adverse) there would be no exceedence of thehuman-health based national air quality objectives for the two characteristic roadrelatedpollutants, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), or particulate matter (PM10), nor anyaffect on areas currently designated for poor air quality (termed an Air QualityManagement Area). Regional emissions are predicted to deteriorate with regards toNOX, PM10 and C with the Preferred Version.It was therefore considered that there would be no significant impacts as a result ofthe proposals and that no further assessment is required.25
Page 1: A1(T) Elkesley JunctionImprovements
Page 4 and 5: Document ControlProject Title:Docum
Page 6: km 2Kilometres squaredLAQMLocal Air
Page 9 and 10: L 10 hourly dB(A)L AeqL A1(T)0,18hL
Page 11 and 12: Wildlife CorridorsZone of Visual In
Page 13 and 14: 5.4 Assessment of Environmental Imp
Page 15 and 16: Introduction and Background1.1 Intr
Page 17 and 18: 1.5 Scope of AssessmentThe followin
Page 19 and 20: 2 Development of the Preferred Opti
Page 21 and 22: In 2007 a simpler scheme was develo
Page 23: It is anticipated that these amendm
Page 27 and 28: Policy 6/12Permission will not be g
Page 29 and 30: Table 4.3: Significance of Effects
Page 31 and 32: Assessment of Environmental Effects
Page 33 and 34: 5 Disruption Due to Construction5.1
Page 35 and 36: 5.6 Residual EffectsDisruption duri
Page 37 and 38: 7 Landscape Effects7.1 Assessment M
Page 39 and 40: Table 7.1: Landscape Character Sens
Page 41 and 42: Inclusion of an area within the vis
Page 43 and 44: MagnitudeHighMediumLowNo ChangeDefi
Page 45 and 46: • rolling landforms with numerous
Page 47 and 48: associated with Jockey Lane forms a
Page 49 and 50: • Properties along the High Stree
Page 51 and 52: 7.5 Implication of New Lighting Pro
Page 53 and 54: Area F: Enclosed Arable Farmland (G
Page 55 and 56: Table 7.7: Summary of Impacts on Vi
Page 57 and 58: Discussion of Impacts:Visual effect
Page 59 and 60: • To optimise protection for resi
Page 61 and 62: Detailed Mitigation ProposalsThe fo
Page 63 and 64: 8 Land Use8.1 Findings at Stage 2 A
Page 65 and 66: The frequency response of the human
Page 67 and 68: oad traffic. It does not provide pr
Page 69 and 70: The results of the Scoping Assessme
Page 71 and 72: operations. If the total noise leve
Page 73 and 74: Table 9.4 - Significance criteria o
Page 75 and 76:
noise levels are below 58 dB LA1(T)
Page 77 and 78:
climate for a typical day on the ex
Page 79 and 80:
identified receptors within the stu
Page 81 and 82:
presented are also based upon a 100
Page 83 and 84:
Operational PhaseTable 9.9 and Tabl
Page 85 and 86:
Table 9.11 - Predicted noise levels
Page 87 and 88:
Table 9.14 - Predicted number of dw
Page 89 and 90:
Air-borne vibration is more common
Page 91 and 92:
10 Pedestrians, Cyclists, Equestria
Page 93 and 94:
12 Road Drainage and the Water Envi
Page 95 and 96:
LowAttribute with a low quality and
Page 97 and 98:
Table 12.3 Criteria for Estimating
Page 99 and 100:
Table 12.5: Water Framework Directi
Page 101 and 102:
The greatest potential remains the
Page 103 and 104:
13 Geology and Soils13.1 Findings a
Page 105 and 106:
Annex 4Figure 4.1 - Constraints Map
Page 107 and 108:
Annex 9Figure 3.1 - 3.9: Noise Cont
Page 109:
Annex 12Figure 12.1 - Groundwater V
show all

A1(T) Elkesley Junction Improvements - Highways Agency

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?