QMS & EMS London

After the launch of the IEMA quality mark scheme in 2011, opportunities arose to improve practice among environment impact assessment (EIA) professionals in the UK. In particular, it was felt that guidance was needed on the role EIA played in shaping design before a project was granted consent. IEMA EIA Guide to Shaping Quality Development aims to promote the assessment as a design tool and establish the principles and framework for maximising the interaction between the environmental technical team and the master planning or architectural team. LDA Design worked with the Environment Agency and IEMA on the guide, which was launched at the institute’s EIA masterclass conference in November 2015. LDA is a design, environment and sustainability consultancy that works on development and infrastructure projects, and has a good understanding of how the environmental impact assessment and design processes interact.

This article explores the role of environmental impact assessments (EIAs) in complex urban sites, in particular, how an ES can ensure that local planning authorities are fully aware of likely effects and can balance those against other considerations.  Nexus Planning has recently secured approval for one of the largest regeneration projects in the London borough of Haringey, at St Ann’s Hospital. The project, for Barnet, Enfield and Haringey Mental Health NHS Trust, will deliver 470 new homes, a shop, and new healthcare facilities, including a mental health inpatient building on an 11 hectare site.

Jo Baker, senior environmental manager and Emma Robinson, associate director at Terence O'Rourke consider the best timing for EIA screening to take place. EIA screening, the procedure used to determine whether a proposed project is likely to have significant effects on the environment, is traditionally considered an exercise to be completed early on in the development of a project. Indeed, it is often the first involvement an EIA practitioner has in a scheme.  The online planning practice guidance from the communities department (DCLG) states: “EIA screening should normally take place at an early stage in the design of the project. However, it can also occur after a planning application has been made or even after an appeal has been made.” 

Ecosystem services (ES) are being increasingly addressed in international impact assessments, particularly for major infrastructure and extractive industry projects. This follows the International Finance Corporation’s (IFC) inclusion of ES criteria in the 2012 versions of its performance standards, which are widely applied by development finance institutions and Equator Principles adherents to their funding clients. Consequently, any project which has to meet the environmental and social standards of participating financial institutions to secure funding must address ES requirements.

Investigating the number of documents typically included in applications for major infrastructure projects. Major infrastructure projects are an important part of the political agenda, demonstrated by the government’s recent commitment to Hornsea Project One (part of a 4GW offshore wind farm) and Hinkley C, which will be the first new nuclear power station in the UK for a generation. Developers of these nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) are required by the Planning Act 2008 to submit a Development Consent Order (DCO) application to the Planning Inspectorate (PINS). A total of 32 NSIPs have been determined since this new regime became effective in October 2009 (31 of which were granted consent and one was refused). A further 22 projects are currently going through the examination process and 50 are at the initial pre-application stage.

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) and strategic environmental assessment (SEA) are well-established tools for assessing environmental impacts from developments. So too are sustainability assessments (SA) for local plans in the UK. However, do they go far enough, given what we now know about the many values that natural systems confer on humanity? Importantly, do they omit to address the many benefits that flow from protected or restored natural systems and processes, unintentionally framing “nature” as a constraint on legitimate economic and social development rather than the most fundamental resource assuring it?

Pit your wits against colleagues on important environmental developments in 2014.

Chris Queen Most airport development projects will require EIA given the size and nature of the works. Airport development commonly gives rise to a range of potentially significant environmental impacts prior to mitigation, including: noise disturbance to local residents and wildlife; pollutant emissions; increased energy and fuel demand; increased surface access traffic; landscape and visual effects; and enhanced risks of water pollution, flooding, contamination and ecological effects. At the same time, most airports are major contributors to local and regional employment and economies and their planned growth can give rise to significant socioeconomic benefits, while aircraft manufacturers and the main airport operators have made considerable investment in innovative measures to help mitigate adverse environmental effects.

NASA Landscape intelligence is how earth observation data specialist Rezatec describes its use of satellite and other remote-sensing technologies to help businesses manage their land-based assets and respond to environmental changes. Since its formation two years ago, the company, which originated at University College London (UCL), has used earth observation (EO) techniques on projects ranging from measuring carbon stock to mapping Mallorca’s bio-economy. Partners include organisations as diverse as the European Space Agency (ESA), green cleaning products manufacturer Ecover, British Sugar and power generator Drax.

Most new developments, regardless of scale, will generate noise. Noise has the potential to affect people’s health and quality of life, property, such as historic buildings, and locations valued for their tranquility and wildlife.  While standards and guidance on addressing noise are readily available, none has been developed to assist with undertaking a noise impact assessment. Consequently, there is no guidance on how to undertake one.

IEMA's latest update on environmental impact assessment (EIA) practice including new online practice guidance for English planning authorities In March, the European parliament voted in favour of amendments to the revised EIA Directive (see pp.16–18). The final step is a vote by the council of ministers, which is expected this month. Under the timeframe agreed by MEPs and the European commission, member states have until spring 2017 to implement the revisions. If you missed the IEMA webinar on 18 March, which analysed the main changes to Directive 2011/92/EU, catch up at iema.net.

On 11 September, IEMA hosted its third EIA Quality Mark Forum, bringing together environmental impact assessment (EIA) professionals from across the UK to discuss the future of EIA and debate how the process could be delivered more proportionately. The day was opened by IEMA’s practice and policy lead on EIA, Josh Fothergill, who revealed that the quality of non-technical statements from the EIA Quality Mark’s 48 participants had improved over the previous 12 months. However, he warned: “EIAs can still be unfocused and complex, with lengthy environmental statements that make it difficult for the public and consenting authorities to access the information they contain.”

IEMA launched its position on proposed revisions to the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive in April, after a series of 2013 member events.  IEMA’s position recognises the need for mandatory scoping. However, it calls for changes to article 5 (on scoping) to create a developer-led process based on pre-application consultation. By contrast, the European Commission is proposing that planning authorities lead on determining scoping decisions. 

The EIA process, whether or not it results in a statutory environmental statement, has traditionally been seen by some parts of the development sector as just another hoop to jump through in getting a project delivered.  EIA was sometimes considered as the proverbial “spanner in the works” when the masterplan or design was close to completion, complicating things through the introduction of unexpected environmental mitigation measures which could compromise the intended design.