mitigating ecological impacts during construction for a … new section of railway to connect the...

Copyright of RSK 01 July 2016 1

Mitigating Ecological Impacts during

Construction for a Large Linear Rail Scheme;

Constraints and Lessons Learnt

Tanith Cook BSc (Hons), MSc, CEcol, MCIEEM


What large linear rail scheme?

East West Rail (EWR) Phase 1

Part of a larger scheme to improve the railway connections

between East Anglia, Central, Southern and Western England.

Project to improve the rail line between Oxford and Bicester.

Being delivered by Network Rail, Chiltern Railways, and a joint

venture led by Carillion and Buckingham Group Contracting

(CBJV).


EWR Phase 1


EWR Phase 1

A new section of railway to connect the Bicester to Oxford line to the

Chiltern main line.

Widening the existing track bed.

Doubling over 18 km of track.

Closure of 37 level crossings.

4 new overbridges, underbridges and footbridges.

A new railway station – Oxford Parkway.

Upgrading Bicester Town and Islip stations.

A new signalling system.


EWR Phase 1 History

2008-2010• Full EIA and specialist surveys undertaken

2010

• Application submitted to Secretary of State for Transport

2010 and 2012

• Two public inquiries held

October 2012

• Permission granted for work to begin on EWR Phase 1

January 2014

• Construction Phase. RSK started work on EWR Phase 1

Copyright of RSK

What was RSKs involvement?

01 July 2016 7

RSK formed part of the CBJV. RSK has provided:

a comprehensive environmental and consents management service:

a full-time environmental and consents manager and ecologist.

ecology survey and mitigation work;

landscaping design, implementation and planting;

large-scale noise monitoring, modelling and reporting;

asbestos surveying;

materials management and testing;

CEEQUAL assessment for the civil engineering elements of the project.

looked after stakeholder communications

Set up project website

www.bicestertooxfordcollaboration.com

http://www.bicestertooxfordcollaboration.com/


Topics

• Great Crested Newts

• Badgers

• Constraints and lessons learnt


Great Crested Newts

Water Eaton

Mill Stream

Oddington

Holts Farm

Wendlebury

MOD

Gavray Drive

7 EPS licences were approved for the project.

Licences were prepared by another consultancy from 2011.

Receptor site works and newt fence installation started in 2013 and

translocation was completed for all 7 sites by 2014.

GCN licences transferred to RSK during the summer of 2014 .


GCN Constraints: location of newt fence

1. GCN EPS licence produced in some cases before detailed

design of drainage, haul roads, Network Rail perimeter

fencing.

2. Newt fencing was too close to the construction corridor, the

contractors did not have enough space to work.

3. Newt fencing installed adjacent to active line with open ends,

potential for re-entry of translocated newts.


GCN Lessons Learnt: location of newt fence

1. Be realistic and anticipate future additions to the design – earlier

collaboration between designers, engineers, construction and ecology

teams.


GCN Lessons Learnt: location of newt fence

2. Ensure that there is enough space between the construction footprint and

newt perimeter fencing – likely to require the purchase of more offline land

3. Use of project-wide mitigation licences on large linear route. EWR Phase

1 were able to extend the area covered in the licences.


GCN Constraints: Habitat compensation

Habitat compensation plans produced as part of the GCN EPS licences

were submitted before the final detailed design and didn’t always take

into account:

Drainage

Network Rail’s strict planting policy

Temporary land take agreements

This meant:

Habitat ratios were incorrect – specifically for woodland and scrub

planting.

Terrestrial habitat compensation measures were not realistic under

the confines of the scheme.

5 of the 7 licences had to be modified.



Temporary land take



Network Rail 5 m

planting policy


GCN Lessons Learnt: Habitat compensation

1. Bring in a landscape architect early on in the habitat compensation planting

proposal process.

2. Realistically very difficult to re-plant rail embankments with trees and scrub

due to the necessary Network Rail 5 m planting policy.



3. Plant embankments with grass seed mix and install more hibernacula/

refugia to compensate for less scrub and tree planting.



4. Plant hedgerows along boundaries and focus on adjacent structures to include

tree planting.


Badgers

54 setts (8 main, 5

annexe, 5 subsidiary,

36 outlying).

13 social groups.

9 artificial setts were

built.

46 Badger setts

closed in 2013.

Copyright of RSK

Badgers: What have RSK done?

01 July 2016 20

Jan 2014

• RSK started monthly monitoring surveys

Feb – Mar 2014

• Found that a number of closed setts had become re-occupied

• RSK identified 25 setts

July – Sept 2014

• 10 setts closed and excavated under licence

• 7 setts excavated - not under a licence as disused

• RSK constructed 10th artificial sett and closed/excavated 1 main sett

Copyright of RSK

Badger Constraints: Timeframe

01 July 2016 21

Copyright of RSK

Badger Constraints: Location of artificial

setts

01 July 2016 22

Copyright of RSK

Badger Constraints: Location of artificial

setts

01 July 2016 23


Badgers – Lessons Learnt

1. Monthly walkover of the route by an ecologist and the extensive use of camera

traps very worthwhile.



2. More space needed between construction footprint and artificial setts, but

Badgers do tolerate what we would perceive as high levels of disturbance.

Copyright of RSK


01 July 2016 26

3. The project benefitted from the use of an integrated online GIS mapping

application. The application delivered improved communication,

collaboration, planning and enhanced understanding of the Badger sett issues.


We could communicate visually which setts had been re-opened and where,

and the weeks that the setts were due to be closed.

Allowed the teams on site and in the office to better plan their works.

Mobile mappers were used by ecologists on site.

Online GIS mapping application


Online GIS mapping application


Conclusion

Difficulties arose due to the EcIA being completed by one company and

construction led by another.

More collaboration needed between engineers, designers, construction

contractors, ecologists, and landscape architects earlier on in the process.

GCN EPS licence produced before detailed final design completed, such as

drainage, acoustic barriers and Network Rail perimeter fencing.

Meant habitat compensation plans had to be modified during construction.

Large infrastructure developments do unfortunately require extensive areas of

vegetation to be cleared. There cannot be a compromise for rail safety and the

smooth running of the rail service. E.g. in 2013 Network Rail reported that:

- vegetation management and incidents caused by vegetation cost the railway

£100 million;

- around 600 trains collided with a fallen tree or large branch; and

- leaves caused 4.5 million hours delays to passengers.


Conclusion

EWR Phase 1 adapted to the restrictions. We modified the habitat

compensation plans for 5 of the 7 GCN EPS licences to a planting scheme that

would be suitable for newts, but also realistic and deliverable under the confines

of the scheme.

May need to see a shift and acceptance of habitat change along rail corridors.

Greater emphasise perimeter planting and species rich grasslands on rail

embankments.

Biodiversity offsetting may be the future for rail improvement schemes like EWR

Phase 1.

Project-wide protected species licences.

The presence of a full-time environmental manager and ecologist was beneficial

to ensure compliance and a swift resolution of issues.

Use of Web-GIS delivered improved communication, collaboration, planning,

and enhanced management of protected species issues. Visually allowed

progress tracking and better understanding of constraints.


Q & A

mitigating ecological impacts during construction for a … new section of railway to connect the...

Documents