Dibden Terminal Flashcards
Proposal
1.8km deep water quay
connect to existing deep water navigation channel
-container transfer, storage, distribution and ass port infra ~202 hectares
1.3 km double track railway proposed terminal with Fawley branch
10m wide access road ~1.4 km long terminal-A326 (new junction)
improve road and rail network (separate application
Contents required
Harbour revision order SoS (transport)
dredging and ocatal navigation licences UKDEFRA
statutory advice from Gov agencies incl Natural England, EA
planning permission LPA
licences and permissions required a full environmental impact ass Appropriate under habitat directive
Scope of EIA
employment, traffic and transport, ecology and nature conservation, the marine environment, navigation, landscape and visual amenity, lighting, noise and vibration, air quality, agriculture, archaeology and cultural heritage, recreation and tourism, freshwater and drainage, ground quality and contamination, services.
Site and surroundings
dibden reclaim- created by deposits and dredging from river test and soton water (1940-1980)
flat, poor quality pasture (grazed under short term licence)
W- fawley branch railway line then A326
nearest footpath runs along western edge
River test joins river itchen form southampton water . Broad entry 10km and 2.5 km wide (widest point)
internationally important commercial waterway.
estuary- support human commercial, envt and recreational activities and resources
former shoreline marks boundary new forest heritage area
govt policy - planning purposed= should be treated as status of national park
bibden reclaim bought in 1967, whilst reclamation was in progress- nationalised British Docks Board strategic reserve for future needs of the port of soton
Primary use:
import, export and distribute unitised freight in containers
import of aggregates
roll-on/roll-off (roro) cargo
lift-on/light-off (lolo)
185 ha inc planting, landscaping, nature conservation enhancements and agri
Principle land uses within terminal
~1.8 km of quay providing 6 deepwater berths, cranes, storage areas, railway yards, offices parking and landscaping
The need for development
UK ports handel 95% of the Uks trade by volume (75% by value)
projected increase in containerised trade
Bigger ships anticipated
southampton seeking to maintain hub port status (capitalise on geographical advantages and multimodal transport)
southtmaptons economy is dependent on the port 6% (volume) of Uk trade passes through it
Alternatives
increase existing capacity- deciding change of use, efficiency
extend exsiting docks- little space or scope of reclamation
develop elsewhere- none viable reclamation and transport links needed
do nothing
Dibden Update
6 editions delivered to 100000 homes (may 1997-may2000)
dibden forum established- invite stakeholders (national and local government, NGOs, businesses, resident groups, single interest groups) seven meetings plus site visits.
5 local public exhibitions (1998) attended by 2500 visitors, comment sheets collected (366)
Limits to the area
The site
transport links
the estuary
region
Employment
1100 people over 9 years of phased construction
1700 jobs in new facilities or with supporting industry (1% of Soton/ winchester area labour force)
unemployment high locally
worth £20 million a year to the local economy
Traffic and transport
Terminal will Handel ~1.4 million containers per annum.
-30% of which expected to be transhipment traffic (arrive on ship leave on ship)
remaining 70% will require land transport
65% (road)
35%(rail)
70% employees expected to travel to work by car
4700 trips per day, 67% expected to be heavy goods (+48 trains per train)
Trasnport stratergy
Park and ride
ferry connection to southampton
cycle ways
road and rail improvements
(no material impacts on local road networks anticipated after improvements, some benefits for sustainable transport)
Protected areas
New forsest/SSSI Ramsar/SPA/SSSI SAC SINC (ecological system is v large, wading birds is southampton water, SPA and greater solent)
appropriate assessment under the habitats directive was required
Phase 1 (Habitat Survey) key findings
importance species and habitats unimproved species rich grassland grazing marsh and richer areas broad-leaved woodland scrub other small elements
Solent wetlands
Ancient mixed saltmarshed and mudflats: relict of much greater system, still declining rapid erosion at hither near by
Birds
1100 wintering waterfowl in the solent some breeding birds on the reclaimed land (i.e. redshank)
ABP took functional approach to solent ecosystem for wading birds
Plants
155 spp on teh site
1 nationally rare
5 nationally scarce species
Impacts
loss of Debden foreshore (part of Ramsar/SPA?SSSI)
birds likely to be accommodated within the SPA w/p further displacement to the greater solent
plants some nationally rare species on the reclaimed site
230 ha of the site designated SSSI in sept 2001
reclaim was incl in proposed national park boundary
ecological mitigation
Dibden tidal creek 32ha interidal to MLW (habitat for wildfowl)
todal recharge at hythe 22ha to MLW gain salt marsh habitat, plus stabilisation
Church farm nature conservation area
137ha Wetland/ wey meadow complex, incl redeemed lagoon, organic low inout farm, landscaping to screen the terminal
Marine Environmetn
dedging of the re dock frontage and channel likely to have most effects
effect migratory fish will be minmised by monitoring suspended sediment level during dredging- if thresholds exceed dredging will be suspended
calm beds will be restocked after construction and bait creation at hythe
cumulative effects (marine)
total direct loss of intertidal habitat- 7 ha (maj of which is within soton water, 1 ha within designated sites)
capital dredging ~100000 m3 will be required- reduce tidal prism and increase maintenance dredging
reduction in tidal range v small–> 0.1% mean tidal range- minimal affect on intertidal area
increased deposition as a result of capital dredging will lead to v small increase in maintenance dredging of ~0.2%
negligible combined chanege on water qualtiy.
landsacpe and visual
construction and operation investigated and day.night
limited adverse effects on views i.e. from New forest
significant effects from southampton but in character ‘vibrant views of international shipping that are not out of place in a port city”
Lighting
24 hour operation
design
design s to minimise pollution
landscape and nature conservation proposal, including the creek will be dark areas at night time
generally it will add to existing light pollution
from a few individual locations close to the operational area there will be substantially adverse impact (residential houses, gold course)
ie marchwood
