Part 5: Sustainability Assessment 22 Sustainability Assessment Overview 22.1 Introduction 22.2 Methodology 22.3 Key Findings 22.4 References

Part 5: Sustainability Assessment

22 Sustainability Assessment Overview

22.1 Introduction

22.1.1 Scotland signed up to the UK shared framework for sustainable development — One future — different paths - in 2005, and this framework set out a common goal for sustainable development across the UK:

" to enable all people throughout the world to satisfy their basic needs and enjoy a better quality of life without compromising the quality of life of future generations"

The framework commits the Scottish Government to promoting a clear understanding of, and commitment to, sustainable development in all that it does so that everyone can contribute to the overall goal.

22.1.2 The UK Framework sets out five key principles for delivering sustainable development - living within environmental limits and ensuring a strong healthy and just society, by means of a sustainable economy, good governance and sound science. These five principles form the basis of all sustainable development policy in the UK.

22.1.3 The importance of including sustainable development principles in civil engineering projects has long been widely recognised. Scottish Planning Policy 1 (SPP 1) emphasised the fact that sustainable development was a key objective of the planning system: "Planning decisions should favour the most sustainable option, promoting development that safeguards and enhances the long term needs of the economy, society and the environment." The more recent Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) updates the Government’s position and emphasises the focus that planning will have on helping to deliver the central purpose of sustainable economic growth.

22.1.4 Transport Scotland are committed to ensuring that sustainability is integrated into all the key stages of the project throughout the lifecycle of the Forth Replacement Crossing (see Section 1.4) and so this section of the report describes how sustainability considerations have been included in this options appraisal stage of the project.

22.2 Methodology

22.2.1 A sustainability framework has been developed to assist with testing the sustainability of the various stages in the project. This framework consists of a matrix of sustainability objectives, that nest within the scheme objectives, and which are derived from the sustainable development policy objectives (refer to Part 1, Chapter 1, Section 1.4), together with associated targets and indicators. The overarching scheme sustainability objectives are listed within this section of the DMRB Stage 2 Corridor Report.

22.2.2 This framework has been used in the DMRB Stage 2 assessment making use of those objectives that are relevant to assessing the road connections and arriving at a preferred corridor. For the DMRB Stage 2 assessment the objectives used in the framework were primarily the suites of environmental and social objectives.

22.2.3 Reference has been made to relevant chapters of the DMRB Stage 2 Environmental Assessment (Part 3) and the Engineering Assessment (Part 2) to consider the route corridor options against the key sustainability objectives.

Sustainability Objectives

22.2.4 The following sustainability objectives have been used in assessing alternatives in the DMRB Stage 2 design process:

Economic Objectives

1. To design, build and operate a reliable crossing
2. To improve cross-Forth access to economic opportunities
3. To improve cross-Forth transport integration
4. To minimise land take and severance of land holdings
5. To adopt sustainable resource management in design and construction
6. To optimise balance between environmental and economic costs

Social Objectives

7. To ensure that community engagement takes place at all the key stages in the FRC project process
8. To improve local accessibility and reduce community severance
9. To provide a scheme that accommodates those with special needs
10. To promote healthy lifestyles and minimise health and social exclusion impacts of the scheme
11. To provide a safe design for both road users and non-motorised users

Environmental Objectives

12. To reduce, reuse and recycle materials
13. To minimise embodied and in-use carbon
14. To minimise operational carbon in line with carbon efficiency commitments
15. To protect and enhance the natural heritage including local biodiversity
16. To protect the landscape, historic environment and cultural heritage
17. To reduce noise and air emissions
18. To protect water quality and maximise the use of sustainable drainage systems for environmental and hydrological benefit

22.3 Key Findings

22.3.1 From a sustainability perspective the key issues and objectives with regard to the various options related to consideration of:

ecology and biodiversity — in particular sites designated for their nature conservation value and protected species (refer to Objective 15);
communities — in particular community severance and local accessibility (refer to Objective 8);
materials/resources — in particular the volume and balance between cut and fill in the earthworks and the environmental implications (including carbon emissions) of this (refer to Objectives 5 and 13).

Ecology

22.3.2 Due to being mostly online, North Corridor Option 1 would result in less impact on sites of nature conservation value compared to North Corridor Option 2. There is little difference between the northern route corridor options in terms of potential impacts on protected species.

22.3.3 In reviewing the southern route corridor options it is clear that the shorter route corridor option (South Corridor Option 1) would result in fewer impacts on the natural environment including potential impacts on designated sites and protected species.

Communities

22.3.4 The northern route corridor options would not directly sever any communities, catchment areas or result in the loss of any community facilities.

22.3.5 In the south, South Corridor Option 1 would result in the least number of paths being directly affected and would have least impact on rights of way. However, no communities would be directly affected in terms of severance or loss of community facilities by either southern route corridor option.

Materials/Resources

22.3.6 To the north, the generally online nature of North Corridor Option 1 means that there should be reduced earthworks and less requirement for materials compared to North Corridor Option 2.

22.3.7 In the south the shorter length of South Corridor Option 1 means that there should be reduced earthworks and less demand for materials compared to South Corridor Option 2.

22.3.8 Minimising the total volume of earthworks and demand for materials both mean that there are likely to be less transportation journeys and therefore less use of fossil fuels, contributing to reducing carbon emissions.

Sustainability Summary

22.3.9 The high level evaluation of the north and south route corridor options against the key DMRB Stage 2 sustainability objectives is summarised in the Table 5.1.

Table 22.1: Summary of Route Corridor Options against Sustainability Objectives

Sustainability Objective	North Corridor Options		South Corridor Options
Sustainability Objective	North Corridor Option 1	North Corridor Option 2	South Corridor Option 1	South Corridor Option 2
15. To protect and enhance the natural heritage including local biodiversity	Preferred		Preferred
8. To improve local accessibility and reduce community severance	No preference	No preference	Preferred
5. To adopt sustainable resource management in design and construction	Preferred		Preferred
13. To minimise embodied and in-use carbon	Preferred		Preferred

22.4 References

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). One Future Different Paths: The UK’s Shared Framework for Sustainable Development, 2005

The Scottish Executive/The Scottish Government. Scottish Planning Policy 1 (SPP 1): The Planning System, 2002, Crown copyright