Land Use and
- Identify the type and number of properties which
might need to be demolished
- Estimate (for each route option) the number of residential,
commercial (including farming), industrial and other properties at
risk of demolition or land take.
- Identify the location, status and importance of land used by
the public which could be lost
- Identify areas of land which fall within local planning
authority development designations
- Agricultural land take for all options
- Effect on farm units for all options
- Annotated land use map
- Identify impact of each route option on un-navigable, disused
or abandoned waterways present or developed
- Map showing waterways
Sub-option 3 in close proximity to one property,
No parks or recreation grounds affected, however
informal footpaths and bridleways may be affected.
There are no major water bodies or rivers, the
majority of the watercourses within the study area are small burns
and drain eastwards towards the coast. Those in the north drain to
the Ythan which is designated for its European nature conservation
Traffic Noise and
An assessment was undertaken in
general accordance with DMRB Stage 2. Given the similarities of the
proposed sub-options and the project specifics (e.g. common
junction designs and common start and finish points for the
scheme), the adopted assessment method was based on DMRB Stage 2
but tailored to highlight the differences in noise impact that
would result from each sub-option and facilitate direct
The following methodology was adopted:
- Between the common start and finish points for each sub-option,
road traffic routes/route sections subject to re-alignment
(including both the A90 and local side roads) were identified.
- Proposed new road links / sections (including both the A90 and
local side roads) were identified for each sub-option.
- The commonality of the side road re-alignments and new local
links between each of the sub-options was investigated.
- Maps were prepared for each sub-option showing 100, 200 and
300m distance bands. These distance bands were drawn to encompass
each new road link and each re-alignment that was not common
between the sub-options(See Figure 5.2 – 5.5).
- A map was prepared for the baseline scenario with 100, 200 and
300 distance bands from the common start and end points used for
each of the sub-options.
- For each sub-option and the baseline scenario, residential
property counts were undertaken for each distance band.
- Receptors which are especially sensitive to noise and
vibration, e.g. schools, hospitals, homes for the blind or aged
persons or outdoor areas judged to be commonly used and subject to
a noise level below 50 dB(A) were identified for each sub-option
and the baseline scenario. These receptors were also categorised
according to the distance bands.
- Detailed noise maps were prepared for each sub-option (See
Figures 5.10-5.13) and the baseline scenario to allow accurate
noise predictions for the year of opening +15. Each noise map
extended beyond the 300m distance bands to allow the affect of more
distant road traffic sources to be accounted for. Each noise map
was based on the detailed sub-option cut and fill design and ground
contour data for the site and surrounding area down to 1m
intervals. OS mapping of the site and surrounding area was used in
conjunction with detailed property counts and a site walkover such
that the affect of existing buildings could be accounted for.
- Ambient and future noise levels were predicted for all
receptors within the identified distance bands
- For each receptor, the noise level change was identified and
categorised as an increase of greater than 1dB, a decrease of
greater than 1 dB, and a neutral change of less than 1 dB.
- The results of the assessment were tabulated as follows to
1. the numbers of residential receptors within
each individual distance band (0 to 100m, 100 to 200m and 200 to
300m) and the total number of receptors within 300m, for each
sub-option and the baseline scenario.
2. the number of receptors particularly
sensitive to noise within each distance band and within 300m
3. the number of receptors subject to an
increase of greater than 1 dB, a decrease of greater than 1 dB and
a neutral change of less than 1 dB
- Conclusions were drawn based upon the tabulated assessment
In addition to the above, an assessment in full
accordance with DMRB Stage 2would require the following:
- Noise level changes to be depicted on noise maps for the
selected sample receptors
- An estimate of the distances from the road at which noise
changes will not be discernible.
- An assessment of likely vibration nuisance to be undertaken for
unscreened buildings within 40m of each sub-option.
- On rare occasions where ground-borne vibration on existing
routes is likely to be a problem, measure vibration levels at the
foundation of a sample of buildings considered to be at high risk,
to identify whether levels are likely to exceed the threshold of
perception. Based on these measurements, an estimate of the number
of buildings likely to be exposed to perceptible vibration levels
is to be made.
- A statement on the significance of potential noise changes both
to local people in general and to sensitive locations in particular
should be provided, considering both noise increases and noise
decreases. The statement should consider possible reductions and
increases in noise levels along the existing road network
- Route options that could require extensive noise mitigation
measures to be identified
- Statements on potential vibration impacts to be provided for
Comments on Adopted
DMRB Stage 2 requires that 100, 200 and 300m
distance bands are drawn from the ‘centre line’. The
guidance does not provide advice on whether the bands should
consider the centre of just the primary route section, or all
affected local routes. To highlight differences in the sub-options,
it was considered most robust to include all new routes and
realigned routes that were not common between the sub-options.
The DMRB states that property numbers can be
estimated. In the interests of accuracy, property numbers were
based on detailed counts.
The DMRB does not require that especially
sensitive receptors properties are categorised by distance. This
was completed to add extra clarity.
The Stage 2 assessment requires that a sample of
representative receptors is adopted, but for robustness, noise
predictions were carried out at all receptors within the identified
distance bands. These tabulated changes were considered appropriate
for comparing directly the relative merits of the various
Comments on DMRB Stage 2 assessment
components not included in the adopted methodology
As noise level changes were calculated and
tabulated for every individual receptor, the identification of
noise level changes at sample receptors was considered not to
provide any additional information to that already considered in
It is anticipated that the distances at which
noise level changes from the sub-options would be discernible would
depend upon the local topography and distance between the current
and proposed route alignments. These factors would vary across the
length of each sub-option and would relate directly to the numbers
of properties subject to noise increases and decreases. Therefore,
this part of the assessment was considered not to provide any
additional information to that already considered in the
The Stage 2 vibration assessment is based upon
the predicted LA10 18 hour noise levels, which have been used to
determine the preferred sub-option. In addition, each of the route
options would result in fewer receptors within the 40m distance
criteria for the assessment than the baseline scenario.
Consequently, should airborne vibration be a problem at the present
time, each of the sub-options is likely to result similar
improvements. Therefore this assessment was considered not to be
critical to the selection of the preferred sub-option.
Regardless of whether ground-borne vibration is
an issue with the current alignment, all of the sub-options would
result in fewer receptors in close proximity to the A90. Therefore
this assessment was considered not to be critical in the
identification of the preferred sub-option.
The Stage II assessment requires a statement be
made on the significance of noise impacts on local people and
sensitive locations in particular. To ensure a robust assessment,
the preferred sub-option was selected based on the numbers of
individual receptors subject to noise level increases, decreases
and neutral changes.
The significance statement requires
consideration be given to noise level changes on the existing
network. In the case of this development, each sub-option had the
same junction alignments at the start and finish points and a
similar junction towards the centre. As such, it was anticipated
that similar noise level changes would results on the local network
for each sub-options.
Where the sub-options are significantly
different from each other, the nature of the surrounding area is
rural. As such, it was considered unlikely that any sub-option
would require significantly different levels of noise
Water Quality And
- Map showing: route options, areas sensitive to
impacts, surface watercourses, classifications, extent of
floodplains, groundwater protection zones, designated fisheries,
areas of high amenity value
- Spill risk
- Pollution risk
- Effects of each route option on water quality and most
- Proposed mitigation explained and quantified
All are described in Section
2.6.10 and 5.12
All sub-options cross the same major water
courses including those which drain to the Ythan Estuary. Spill
risk and pollution risk appraisals have therefore not been carried
out for Stage 2 as it was not considered that these would be a
useful decision tool. Detailed assessments, including calculations
will be carried out for the preferred route for the Environmental
Further detailed mitigation will be included in
the Environmental Statement. Commitments to best practice and
design considered to be adequate at Stage 2.