Strasbourg, 24 September 2001
CO-DBP (2001) 2 revised
[CO-DBP/documents/codbp2001/02eREV]
Bureau of the Committee for the
activities of the Council of Europe
in the field of biological and
landscape diversity
(CO-DBP)
7th Meeting
29 October
2001
Room 2,
Palais de l'Europe, Strasbourg,
CODE
OF PRACTICE FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF BIOLOGICAL
AND
LANDSCAPE DIVERSITY CONSIDERATIONS
INTO
THE TRANSPORT SECTOR
Document by the Secretariat
General
established by
the Directorate of Culture and
Cultural and Natural Heritage
At their 769th
meeting on 17 October 2001, the Ministers' Deputies took note of the Code of
Practice for the Introduction of Biological and Landscape Diversity
Considerations into the Transport Sector and agreed to transmit it to the
Ministerial Conference "An Environment for Europe" (Kyiv, 2003) for
endorsement.
CODE
OF PRACTICE FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF BIOLOGICAL
AND
LANDSCAPE DIVERSITY CONSIDERATIONS
INTO
THE TRANSPORT SECTOR
FOREWORD
In 1998, the Committee for the Activities of the Council
of Europe in the Field of Biological and Landscape Diversity CO-DBP established
a group to examine the relationship between transport and the environment. This
Group of Specialists - Transport and Environment met in Strasbourg on 29-30
October 1998, 21-22 October 1999 and 13-14 November 2000.
The Group was chaired by Mr L WYATT (United Kingdom) and
composed of Mr C RANKL (Austria), Mrs C ALIBERT (France), Mr T VERSTAEL (The
Netherlands), Mr S RYBAKOV (Russian Federation), Mr S GUBAR (Ukraine). The
Group concentrated its work on developing a Code of Practice for the
introduction of biological diversity and landscape considerations into the
transport sector. This was in accordance with the objectives of Action Theme 2
in the first Action Plan 1996-2000 of the Pan-European Biological and Landscape
Diversity Strategy.
The Code of Practice provides a practical instrument
that will help national governments and others involved in the linear transport
sector to consider and implement measures relating to the maintenance and
enhancement of biological and landscape diversity. The Code sets a political
and social framework and proposes policy options for the development of new,
and the maintenance of existing linear transport systems in relation to
biological and landscape diversity. By building on examples, the Code has
developed a series of Practice Pointers.
A number of specialist studies were completed in
relation to the Code of Practice. These included the introduction of biological
and landscape diversity considerations in the development of road, rail
transport and navigable waterways and the legal aspects. In addition, a pilot
project was carried out in the Losiny Ostrov National Park, Moscow. For a
greater level of detail about the subjects involved, technical readers should
refer to these and other reports arising from a number of international and
national initiatives.
The Council of Europe Secretariat General appointed the
following consultants to prepare the specialist studies and the Code itself:
Mr G BERTHOUD (Switzerland)
Ms C BICKMORE (United Kingdom)
Mr R COOPER (United Kingdom)
Mr G de SADELEER (Belgium)
Mr J FAUCONNIER (France)
Mr G KURSTJENS (The Netherlands)
Mr S RYBAKOV (Russian Federation)
CONTENTS
FOREWORD
SUMMARY
MAIN TEXT
INTRODUCTION
Aims and objectives of
the code
Structure of the code
Scope of the code
THE TRANSPORT NETWORK
AND ASSOCIATED POLICIES
Introduction
The extent of the
network the European transport context
Transport policy and
sustainable development
Other relevant
initiatives
COMMON PRINCIPLES
Introduction
Strategic and
environment impact assessment
Protection
(conservation+ enhancement) of habitats, species and landscapes
Knowledge +
understanding
WAYS TO ADDRESS COMMON
EFFECTS TO LINEAR TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
Introduction
Planning
Design
Implementation +
construction
Site Management and
maintenance
APPLYING THE CODE;
COMPARATIVE EFFECTS AND SOLUTIONS
Introduction
Context
Problems +
opportunities-Landscape
Problem +
opportunities-Habitats/species
Implications of
construction and improvement
Implications of use and
management
RESEARCH
Introduction
Technical manuals and
experience
Research
Monitoring and feedback
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES AND FURTHER
READING
APPENDIX SUMMARY OF
TECHNICAL PAPERS
SUMMARY
The Pan-European
Biological and Landscape Strategy (1996) aims to halt the degradation of
landscape and biological diversity across the European region. Action Theme 2
of the Strategy relates to the integration of landscape and biological
diversity into other sectors including transport. This Code of Practice is a
contribution to progress taking forward this Action Theme forward. The Code
relates to linear transport systems, comprising roads, railways and inland
navigation along waterways, such as canals and rivers. It aims to assist
elected representatives, decision makers, and practitioners as well as nature
conservation bodies in the understanding of the main issues and solutions associated
with the planning, design and use of linear transportation networks i.e.
roads, railways and inland navigation channels, in relation to the landscape
and biological diversity. Other modes of transport are outside the scope of
this Code.
The Code consists of
three parts at different levels of detail:
- this summary
including the Code of Practice Pointers – provides the main recommendations of
the Code in an easily accessible form;
- the main text of the
Code;
- supporting technical
papers giving more detail and examples – provided the main source of
information for the Code. A summary of each paper is included with the main
text of the Code. The full versions are available separately.
The main text of the
Code provides background information on the existing and proposed extent of the
Strategic Pan-European transport network; and on the legal and policy
background to transport and landscape and biological diversity within a
sustainable development context.
Across the pan-European
Region, the linear transport network is characterised by areas of growth and of
consolidation. Both can result in significant adverse or beneficial effects for
landscape and biological diversity. Importantly the effects of construction,
and use of types linear transport systems extend beyond the immediate confines
of the scheme. Examples include land use changes and the loss and fragmentation
of habitats. Associated with construction the main negative impact on the
landscape and biological diversity arises from differences in scale, land take
and fragmentation.
The ongoing user
effects in particular relate to vehicle frequency and associated noise, air and
water pollution. User safety can be affected by wildlife crossing the road/
track. Levels of animal mortality resulting from collisions can significantly
affect populations of wildlife already under stress. Monotonous alignments and
roadside landscapes can induce sleep resulting in accidents.
Areas protected for
landscape and biological diversity are particularly vulnerable to transport
schemes and should be avoided. As such areas only protect a small proportion of
diversity the effects to the wider countryside should not be overlooked.
Transport planning and design should adopt an approach which seeks to avoid
impacts, where this is not possible, it should identify the best practical
mitigation options and as a last resort use compensation measures such as
translocation. With adequate planning, proposed and existing transport networks
may be able to incorporate positive measures for enhancing landscape and
biological diversity.
The planning of
transport schemes is supported by legislation and conventions including for
protected areas landscapes, habitats and species. Strategic Environmental
Assessment provides an early overview of the implications of transport plans
and is required under the Espoo Convention and the subject of a draft European
Union Directive. Its application reduces the potential risk of transport
infrastructure conflicting with valued protected landscapes and habitats.
Environmental impact
assessment is a legal requirement for the approval of the majority of major
transport schemes particularly in the European Union. Also, it is required by a
number of Conventions. Regardless of any legal obligations Environmental Impact
Assessment is recommended to aid decision-making in all transport schemes
including those supported by donors. The Environmental Impact Assessment
procedure should permeate every stage of the planning, design, construction and
maintenance of schemes to enable sound decisions to be made in the light of the
best information. This necessitates co-ordination across disciplines and an
understanding of the dynamic character of the landscape, habitats and species
as well as the design and user characteristics of the scheme itself. The
attention to detail is all-important.
During the construction
and maintenance stages environmental management procedures including monitoring
assist with the successful incorporation of measures on the ground to reduce
adverse effects.
Although sometimes
restricted by land acquisition, a number of opportunities for landscape and
wildlife enhancement are associated with the design and management of the soft
estate particularly in degraded landscapes and to provide connections with
networks such as the Pan-European Ecological Network.
The Code recognises
that a number of principles are applicable across the transport sector, however
in addition there are a number of significant differences between road, rail
and waterways. Also, the application in detail will vary between states
depending on the economy, landscape character, biological diversity and
capacity. The Code of Practice Pointers presented below, are included in the
main text in the section to which they relate. They have been subdivided under
four headings: procedures affecting decision making including conservation,
enhancement, knowledge and understanding. Project development and management,
assessment, review and research. Inevitably there is a degree of overlap in
their application between these headings.
Code of Practice
Pointers
Procedures
affecting decision-making including conservation + enhancement
- Greater integration
of landscape and biological diversity is required in the development of
transport policies and infrastructure. Its inclusion is fundamental to the
development of a more sustainable transport network across the European region.
Already tested procedures are available to assist with sound decisions making
but these need wider application.
Procedures affecting
decision-making
- For all
infrastructure developments governments and/or their agencies must apply
strategic environmental assessment (SEA) and the more detailed environmental
impact assessment (EIA). This should enable informed, sound decision making on
the selection of modal choice, route corridors and subsequent fuller assessment
of the effects of proposed schemes together with alternatives.
- Financial institutions/donors
must require an EIA of transport projects that they propose to sponsor and
consider SEA carried out, previously.
Protection
(conservation + enhancement) of landscapes, habitats and species
- Transport routes
should seek to avoid legally protected areas and species including under the
European Union’s Habitats Directive, and Birds Directive, and those protected
by international agreements including the Convention on Biological Diversity,
the Berne, Ramsar and World Heritage Conventions.
- Throughout the
planning, design and implementation of transport schemes there is a need to
promote an awareness and implement legislation relating to protected
landscapes, habitats and species.
- Consideration of the
wider countryside should include developing opportunities for enhancement of
landscapes and habitats, and the establishment of links with the Pan
European Ecological
Network.
Knowledge +
understanding
Greater integration
requires specialist knowledge and understanding. It emphasises the need for
dialogue between members of the engineering and environmental teams; and the
need for public participation within the process including with those living
locally. There is a particular need to understand and accommodate the dynamic
nature of both landscape and biological diversity.
- Document and
communicate base data locating valued and/or sensitive landscapes, habitats and
species including data from national and local voluntary sources. Encourage the
establishment of databases for biological records.
- Understand landscape
and ecological processes including the spatial and temporal aspects of
landscape, habitat and species.
- Progress the level of
data in relation to the stage of scheme design, but when collecting data
remember to accommodate seasonal constraints.
- Understand the
interactions with other aspects such as the engineering requirements and
socio-economic linkages.
- Consult and inform
those affected and interested in the scheme as soon as possible and throughout
the process.
- Develop a mutual
understanding between the client, engineer and environmental specialists
including using techniques such as training and workshops.
Project
development + management
In the development of
transport schemes a multidisciplinary approach is required at all stages with a
need to incorporate an interactive approach to both the design and subsequent
management. Environmental management and risk assessment procedures assist in
informing those involved with constructing and managing schemes as well as
those living in the locality. Project development and management subdivide into
the stages of planning, design, implementation, and site management.
Planning
- Adopt an approach,
which seeks to avoid, mitigate and compensate. In the first instance consider
the less harmful options.
- Include an early
consideration of landscape and biological diversity within the planning
process.
- Focus on significant
landscapes/habitats species, for example resolving the effects on threatened
species; but do not overlook commonly occurring features of the wider
landscape.
- Co-ordinate schemes
in transboundary locations
Design
- Relate scheme design
and management to the character of the landscape/ scenery and biological
diversity in the area
- Adopt a flexible
approach to engineering design standards/criteria to accommodate the character
and value of the landscape/habitat/species in the area. Consider the
appropriateness of standard solutions in the local context.
- Be reactive to
opportunities for enhancement/maximising benefits, and minimising disbenefits
including fitting the scheme into the wider landscape and relating it to the
biological context.
Implementation +
construction
- Pay attention to
detailed design with respect to the visual and ecological aspects including the
use of fauna-friendly designs.
- Initiate/implement
procedures to enable the acquisition of appropriate land for environmental
mitigation.
- Apply best available
technology, including surface materials, feasibility of recycling and recycling
of materials/surplus spoil.
- Assess the
environmental effects of siting construction camps, storage areas and future
associated developments, e.g. service station/marinas, maintenance depot.
- Retain specialists to
monitor environmental compliance on site, including during the construction
period.
- Inform and involve
local organisations/people in these stages.
Site management + maintenance
- Incorporate natural
life cycles into maintenance plans, for example the long term development of
vegetation.
- Understand and
incorporate maintenance requirements and relate to local practices,.
- Establish and review
management practices with respect to opportunities for landscape and wildlife
enhancement.
- Monitor
functioning/performance of environmental measures, for example passages for
wildlife, water quality, and adjust as necessary.
Assessment,
review and research
To ensure that
effective solutions are being applied, monitoring and research is required. The
findings of tested and tried methods should be disseminated to a wide audience
and include an exchange of ideas.
- Co-ordinate and
encourage a pan-European-wide exchange of Design Manuals and Method Statements.
Relate these to landscape and habitat types, and encompass languages.
- Encourage an exchange
of approach between those involved with the design of roads, railways and
waterways.
- Monitor and evaluate
the effectiveness of environmental measures and disseminate information
relating to new or improved techniques.
- Encourage the
application of scientific research to the development of practical procedures
and methods.
- Promote further
research into the special ecological and landscape implications associated with
railways and waterways.
"The
biological and landscape diversity of Europe – the variety of flora, fauna,
ecosystems and landscapes – is one of our greatest riches. The importance of
European nature extends far beyond the boundaries of the continent – it is a
vital element in the global ecosystem.
In
recent years, European biological and landscape diversity has been in decline:
important natural habitats and man-made landscapes have been lost, plant and
animal species are under threat. Stopping and reversing this decline is the
shared responsibility of the people and nations of Europe. We must pass on our
natural heritage – in all its diversity – to future generations as a
sustainable system."
Philosophy
of the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy, Council of
Europe 1996
INTRODUCTION
Aims and objectives
of the Code
The Code of Practice
has been produced as part of the Pan-European Biological and Landscape Strategy
(Council of Europe 1996). It aims to assist elected representatives, decision
makers, and practitioners as well as nature conservation bodies in the
understanding of the main issues and solutions associated with the planning,
design and use of linear transportation networks i.e. roads, railways
and inland navigation channels, in relation to the landscape and biological
diversity.
The Code addresses
concerns over a number of planned transport routes in Europe, which threaten
protected areas and species. The effects of existing poorly planned and
designed transport routes are only too apparent including;
- scars on the
landscape visible over a wide area;
- dramatic change of
landscape character particularly on account of differences of scale resulting
from built structures;
- fragmentation of the
landscape/ habitats;
- reduction in
tranquillity;
- direct loss of
protected and therefore valued habitats and species;
- indirect and
cumulative/more subtle detrimental effects on landscapes/habitats and species
with implications relating to the environment as well as the vehicle/ user
safety.
Such effects can reduce
the value of the natural environmental capital or features of an area and add
to the problems of conserving and enhancing already threatened protected areas
and species. These detrimental effects can be more exaggerated by lack of
coordination in trans boundary locations. Improved planning and knowledge can
provide solutions by adopting an approach, which seeks to avoid, mitigate, and
for negative effects. Also, improved planning and maintenance along existing and new routes can realise
the value of the soft estate areas usually with some form of vegetation within
transport corridors but which transport users do not travel along provide the catalyst
to enhance degraded landscapes and habitats.
Structure of the
Code
By way of background
the rest of this section provides details on the Pan-European Biological and
Landscape Strategy and the extent of the transport network across its region.
Related transport and sustainable development policies, and other initiatives
are described in Section 2. Section 3 considers a number of common principles
applicable to roads, railways and waterways including critical legislation and
requirements for knowledge. A comparison of common effects is given in Section
4.
By way of illustration
Section 5 examines problems and opportunities arising from the design,
construction and use of roads, railways and waterways. Section 6 considers
monitoring the need for exchanges of experience and research requirements.
Conclusions are presented in the final section. Code of Practice Pointers have
been inserted at the beginning of each sub section and are printed in italics..
Summaries of supporting technical papers are given in the Appendix and the full
versions of the papers are presented in a separate volume.
The Pan-European
Biological and Landscape Strategy
The Pan-European
Biological and Landscape Strategy is an initiative developed in response to the
Convention on Biological Diversity (UNCED 1992). The Strategy aims to halt the
degradation of landscape and biological diversity in Europe through the
encouragement of the conservation and sustainable use of the natural
environment.
The initiative was
endorsed by the Ministerial Conference in Sofia in 1995. It is co-ordinated by
the Council of Europe and runs for a 20-year period from 1996-2016. The
Strategy has a joint secretariat provided by the Council of Europe and United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). It is part of the European implementation
of the Convention on the Biological Diversity.
Within the Strategy
biological and landscape diversity are defined as follows;
- Biological Diversity; the variability among living organisms from
all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic
ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes
diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems (Article 2 of the
Convention Biological Diversity).
- Landscape
Diversity; the formal
expression of the numerous relations existing in a given period between the
individual or a society and a topographically defined territory, the appearance
of which is a result of the action, over time, of natural and human factors and
a combination of both (Council of Europe Recommendations on the Integrated
Conservation of Cultural
Landscape Areas as part of Landscape Policies). (Council of Europe (1996) No.
R (95) 9).
The Strategy sets out
ten Principles for action:
- careful decision
making,
- avoidance,
- precaution,
- translocation,
- ecological
compensation,
- ecological integrity,
- restoration and
(re)creation,
- best available
technology and best environmental practice,
- polluter pays,
- public participation
and public access to information.
"To
achieve wise management of biological and landscape diversity it requires the
application of these principles through all sectors using natural resources
including transport."
(Council
of Europe 1996).
The Strategy comprises
a series of five-year action plans, that for the period 1996-2001 relates to 12
action themes. Theme 2 considers the integration of biological and landscape
diversity into a number of socio-economic sectors, one of which is transport,
the subject of this Code of Practice. The action theme requires each sector to
be examined with respect to the positive and negative implications for
landscape and biological diversity.
The Strategy attempts
to build on existing legal instruments and considers landscape and biological
diversity in relation to socio-economic factors. With respect to transport the
Strategy seeks to:
"Integrate
biological and landscape diversity considerations into transport policies and
infrastructure development, avoiding areas of high value as much as possible,
prevent or mitigate negative impacts of infrastructure works and transportation
activities on landscapes and ecosystems."
(Council
of Europe 1996)
Scope of the Code
For the purpose of this
Code of Practice transport includes existing and proposed linear transport
comprising roads, railways and inland navigable waterways along rivers and
canals. It concentrates on major transport infrastructure although many of the
principles are applicable also to minor facilities such as byways or narrow
gauge railways. To avoid repetition the Code identifies a number of similar
features associated with the three types. It illustrates the differences
between the types by way of comparison.
Transport terminals
such as harbours, stations and airports are omitted from the Code as are marine
shipping and aviation. Also, a number of indirect impacts of transport are
outside the scope of this Code including the use of fuel, aggregate quarrying,
improved access to remote areas,
the increase in development potential and land compensation. These omissions
are designed to enable the Code to focus on certain transport issues and do not
reflect their environmental effects which can be far ranging.
The pan-European region
covers an extensive area comprising a physically and culturally diverse
landscape. This Code recognises the major differences in approach between
countries reflecting the development of the transport network and the economy
as well as natural characteristics such as the scale of the landscape and types
of habitat. Thus, a number of recommendations of the Code apply throughout the
Pan-European region, but the application of certain details will differ between
countries depending on the economy, landscape, biological diversity and traffic
flow capacity.
THE TRANSPORT
NETWORK AND ASSOCIATED POLICIES
Introduction
This section by way of
background considers the extent of the Pan-European transport network.
Associated policies including recent Declarations and other initiatives are
described.
The extent of the
network: the European transport context
The size and
variability of the pan-European region significantly influences landscape and
biological diversity and needs to be understood in the context of the transport
sector. For the most part Western Europe has an established, highly developed
transport infrastructure dominated by roads with relatively few proposals for
strategic expansion. For example, both Austria and the Netherlands consider
that saturation has been reached. The Netherlands is concentrating on enhancing
its existing network for biological diversity (Ministerie van Vekeeren
Waterstaat 2001). In comparison many Central and Eastern European states are
seeking to improve access with plans to upgrade and expand the transport
networks.
The density of
motorways in Western Europe is two to five times as high as in Central and
Eastern Europe (CEE) (Ruppert, 2000) and emphasises the differences between
these two parts of the Region. However, in CEE there has been a dramatic growth
both in car passengers and in road freight, for example between 1990 and 1995
from 9 to 102 billion car passenger kilometres. Ownership has likewise
increased; for example in Slovenia between 1980 and 1994 car ownership increased
by 57 per cent. In Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic levels of car
ownership are approaching those typical of EU countries (Fergusson 2000) with the associated problems of
congestion. Likewise, the growth in road freight in CEE exceeds the average yearly
increase of 3.5 per cent in Western Europe. This is partly related to the
decline in rail freight.
The extent of the
railway and navigable waterway network across Europe is more variable than
highways. Following a rapid growth in the nineteenth century, sections of the
network, partly outmoded to transport requirements, either became redundant or
in need of modernisation. Recent technological advances have enabled some
upgrading to a system capable of supporting high speed and/or larger trains/boats
with associated infrastructure. There are plans to expand the waterway network,
especially in connecting East/Central Europe to Western Europe.
Transport policy and
sustainable development
A basic concept of the
Common European Market is the free movement of people, goods and services. In
1992, the European Union issued a White Paper on transport. This identified the
serious imbalances in Europe’s transport system including bottlenecks such as
the Brenner transalpine route in Austria and the poor network in a number of
peripheral parts of the Union. In addition, road transport was creating
significant increases to atmospheric pollution and dangerous roads resulted in
44,000 deaths a year.
To address these
problems the common transport policy established a Trans-European Network for
Transport (TEN-T). Other objectives of the policy embrace the concept of modal
choice and related to the integration of transport networks to encourage
switching to less polluting or underused modes including rail and inland
waterways; protecting the environment relating principally to pollution
control; and safety including the harmonisation of construction standards and
improved infrastructure. Also the European Union is encouraging a reversal to
the decline in rail freight.
Seven objectives were
approved for TEN-T, in particular objective 1 states:
“Ensure
the sustainable and safe mobility of persons and goods within the area without
internal frontiers under the best possible social conditions, while
contributing to the attainment of the Community’s environmental objectives”.
The associated
guidelines approved by the European Parliament in 1996 support the objective
under Article 2 which requires that TENs should contribute to the Community’s
environmental objectives.
The 1996 extent of the
TEN-T throughout EU member states comprised the construction and upgrading of
140 road schemes including:
- c. 15,000 km of new
motorway;
- 11 rail links;
- 57 combined transport
projects;
- 26 inland waterways.
The development of the
TEN-T remains one of the European Union’s top priorities and has received
significant funding; for example ECU 38.4 billion in 1996-97 from Community
funds and European Investment Bank loans. For the period 2000-2006 the
Commission’s budget is ECU 5 billion and it seeks to encourage public – private
partnerships.
A more recent
initiative of the European Union and arising from TEN-T is the Pan-European
Corridor for Central and Eastern Europe. The planning and development of these
routes is known as TINA (Transport Infrastructure Needs Assessment).
Alpine Convention
The Convention on the
Protection of the Alps (Alpine Convention) 1991 recognises the ecological
importance of the Alps including for a number of endangered species. In
addition it appreciates the importance of transport routes across the region.
Article 2 of the Convention requires signatories to undertake a number of
measures such as to protect and conserve the natural environment and the
countryside, and reduce the volume and dangers of Alpine traffic so that it is
not harmful to humans or animals or plants, in particular by encouraging road
freight traffic to use the railways. To meet these objectives a number of Protocols
have been established, with one for transport in 2000.
Vienna Declaration
The Vienna Declaration
was adopted in 1997 by the Regional Conference on Transport and the Environment
of the UN-ECE. Within the context of an anticipated increase in demand for
transport, the Declaration called for its development to be undertaken “within
the framework of sustainable development” including the principles of
protection, precaution, prevention and ‘polluter pays’ to meet objectives such
as preserving public health and ecosystems.
The Declaration sets
out recommendations and an Action Plan relating to the promotion of energy
efficient and less polluting vehicles and fuels including:
III Efficient and
sustainable transport systems
IV Protection of
sensitive areas
V Safe transport of
dangerous goods
VI Prevention of water
pollution
The Action Plan
encourages the application of strategic environmental assessment in the
transport planning process at the international and national level, with
obligatory environmental impact assessment relating to individual schemes at a
national level. Also at the national level, it calls for the protection of
landscape and ecologically sensitive areas with respect to the existing and proposed road and rail
infrastructure. A review of the Action Plan is proposed in 2002 and 2007.
“Environment for
Europe”, Aarhus
In 1998, the year
following the Vienna Declaration, the fourth Ministerial Conference
“Environment for Europe” held at Aarhus declared that further action was
required with respect to the growth in traffic, the associated biological
diversity/habitat loss and the need “to secure a sustainable and
environmentally sound pattern of transport”. The same conference saw the
requirement to develop economic and financial incentives to assist with the
integration of biological diversity and landscape conservation into sectional
policies.
Hanover Conference
(CEMAT)
The Guiding Principles
for Sustainable Spatial Development of the European Continent, adopted in 2000
at the Hanover Conference of the European Conference of Ministers responsible
for Regional Planning (CEMAT), emphasise the importance of both the TEN-T and
TINA network, in particular the need for a rapid completion of missing links so
as to improve regional accessibility (Council of Europe 2000, para 20, 21, 34).
Euro-corridors are
presented as a priority in the implementation of the Guiding Principles on
account of the perceived (but not necessarily proven) association with economic
development. Importantly (para. 61) states that the investment in
Euro-corridors should take account of the ‘needs of environmental protection’.
It goes on to say:
“Major
transport projects should not therefore be undertaken without assessing their
direct and indirect impact. Structural planning measures must be introduced to
reduce any negative effects and highlight their positive impact at local and
regional level. Such measures should include spatial and environmental impact assessments
for plans, programmes and projects, the co-ordination of regional and inter
regional major infrastructure, large-scale landscape planning, securing
protected areas or concentrations of roads, railway lines and navigable
waterways in a single corridor.”
With respect to transport paragraph 61 is particularly important as
it directly relates to one of the main objectives of the Guiding Principles. In
relation to the transport network the ten point programme stresses that:
“the
networks should, if necessary, be reviewed and augmented taking
sustainable development and environmental aspects into account.”
In addition to the
consideration of transport needs CEMAT recognised the role of enhancing and
protecting natural resources and the natural heritage in an integrated spatial
planning policy.
European Landscape
Convention
Recognition is given to
landscapes in Europe including the importance of “protecting, managing and
enhancing landscapes” thereby introducing the European Landscape Convention
(Council of Europe 2000). Signatories to the Convention undertake to encourage
public authorities to adopt policies to protect, maintain and improve landscape
quality including the need to consider landscapes in public decision making, of
particular relevance to this Code of Practice. Article 9 of the Landscape
Convention emphasises the need for trans-frontier co-operation including to
establish joint programmes. For the purposes of the Convention landscape is
defined as:
"an
area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and
interaction of natural and/or human factors".
Thus, in the last
decade of the 20th century in the context of the increased demand for transport
and the development/upgrading of transport infrastructure, the European region
has made Declarations and implemented laws and policies in response to repeated
environmental concern including aspects relating to biological diversity and
landscape. The Code of Practice provides support for and the delivery of these
policies and contributes to the development of a more sustainable transport
system.
Other relevant
initiatives
Also, the Code of
Practice should be viewed in the light of a number of other European and
national initiatives such as those summarized below.
COST
The European Union has
initiated a number of research programmes including the European Co-operation
in the fields of Scientific and Technical Research (COST). Transport forms a
principle component of the programme. The associated Technical Committee is
made up of representatives of 32 national governments and co-ordinates COST
Actions. COST Action 341, “Habitat Fragmentation due to Transport
Infrastructure” is of direct relevance and compliments this Code. In
particular, it provides a greater level of detail at a technical level on
fragmentation (European Commission 2000).
Action 341 seeks to
address issues arising from transport-related schemes causing habitat
fragmentation including adverse effects on habitats and species as well as on
vehicular accidents. The outputs of the programme due for completion in 2003
will comprise:
- the production of a
European review of habitat fragmentation due to linear transport
infrastructure;
- the production of a
European handbook of best practice providing solutions for dealing with the
fragmentation effect of existing and proposed linear transport;
- the establishment of
an online database of research and expertise in the subject to include existing
literature, projects, mitigation measures and databases across Europe.
OECD
The Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has a road transport research
programme. This provides member countries with an opportunity to contribute to
the development of transport policies. Programmes encompass activities relating
to sustainable transport development. Publications include the “Environmental
Impact Assessment of Roads” (1994) and “Strategic Environmental Assessment –
the Transport Sector” (1998). The latter arose from a European Conference of
the Ministers of Transport.
Other OECD work on transport includes the
‘Environmentally Sustainable Transport’ project. This involved partners from 25
countries and UNEP. The project resulted in a series of guidelines, which
received Ministerial endorsement. UNEP Regional Office for Europe is continuing
this work on Environmentally Sustainable Transport.
National initiatives
At a national level,
several governments and research institutions have co-ordinated research
programmes relating to the landscape and biological diversity implications of
transport schemes, some forming part of the COST 341 programme. A number of
technical manuals have been produced including Norway, Scotland, England and Wales,
Switzerland, Netherlands, France and Spain (Cur (1999), Dinetti (2000),
Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions (1993) Ministerio de
Medio. Ambiente (2000) Muller and Berthoud (1999)). Mostly these relate to
highways but may have application to railways and navigable waterways.
Following the example set by COST Action 341; a comprehensive list of such
Pan-European documents should be compiled to enable their use by a wider
audience and encompassing languages.
COMMON PRINCIPLES
Introduction
The previous section
provided some illustrations of the extent of the existing transport network
together with an indication of planned proposals and noted the major
differences in requirements within the Pan-European region. This section seeks
to describe a number of principles common to the planning and design of
transport schemes. The first part considers the legal framework and methods of
approach.
Strategic and
environmental impact assessment
Code of Practice
Pointers
- For all
infrastructure developments governments and/ or their agencies must apply
strategic environmental assessment (SEA) and the more detailed environmental
impact assessment (EIA). This should enable informed, sound decision making on
the selection of modal choice, route corridors and subsequent fuller assessment
of the effects of proposed schemes together with alternatives.
- Financial
institutions/donors must require an EIA of transport projects that they propose
to sponsor, and consider SEA carried out previously.
Background
Environmental impact
assessment (EIA) has been variously defined and comprises a method and process
whereby information about the environmental effects of a scheme is collected,
assessed and used to inform decision-making. As such it should be a continuous
process related to the various stages of scheme design and implementation. The
application to strategic plans and policies is known as ‘strategic
environmental assessment’ (SEA).
The formal application
of EIA was first required in the United States in 1969, under the National
Environmental Policy Act, since when it has been made a legal requirement in a
number of other states world wide including the European Union. A draft
European Directive has been prepared on SEA.
Strategic
Environmental Assessment
The building of new
transport routes requires funding and consent including compliance with legal
obligations. Environmental assessment and protected area status therefore are
particularly important with respect to the maintenance of landscape and
biological diversity.
Strategic environmental
assessment (SEA) enables an appraisal of plans policies and programmes
including strategic alternatives or groups of transport projects and multi-modal
networks. SEA is an essential step in the delivery of the transport policies
discussed earlier and is particularly relevant for plans, policies and
programmes covering several states (trans-boundary). Such forward planning
should provide a logical basis for decision-making, including the avoidance of
sensitive environmental components like protected areas possibly in the
adjoining state.
In isolation the
environmental impact assessment of short sections of strategic routes can
result in major problems on account of the lack of an overview. The Via Egnatia
Motorway across Greece (Box
3.1) and the road/rail Øresund link between Denmark and Sweden are two examples of how strategic environmental assessment could
have informed decision makers of the consequences on habitats of European
importance (Bina et al,1997).
The application of geographical
information systems (GIS) (a type of software for managing and displaying
geographical information often using a thematic layering technique) in SEA has
proved a useful tool (Box 3.2). However, as with any data its value is
dependent on the quality of the database with interpretation guided by
understanding the context and limitations of that data. For example, planning a
route only to avoid protected areas could overlook the dynamic aspects of
landscapes such as migration paths between protected areas, or the relationship
between protected areas and other dependent landscapes, such as a river
catchment.
The Declaration of the
Fourth Ministerial conference at Aarhus in 1998 clearly recognised:
"strategic
environmental assessment facilitates the systematic analyses of the
environmental impacts of proposed policies, plans and programmes and invite
countries and international finance institutions to introduce and/or carry out
strategic environmental assessments with the appropriate participation of NGOs
and citizens. We emphasise that –with a view to the integration of
environmental considerations in the decision-making process in other policies –
assessments of international sectorial policies, plans and programmes in the
UN/ECE region in areas such as transport, energy and agriculture should be
undertaken as a matter of priority".
Much of the European
Union network crosses through accession states seeking to join the Union. Under
the Espoo Convention (1991) signatories from 34 states agreed to co-operate in
assessing the environmental impact of trans-boundary projects. This includes
major highways and long distance railways as well as policies, plans and programmes.
The Community
Guidelines for TEN-T (No 1692/96/EC, CEC 1996) under Article 8 require the
Commission to develop methods for the analysis of the environmental effects of
the whole transport network and corridors. A manual has been produced setting
out an overview of strategic environmental assessment methods to be used for
transport infrastructure (CEC 1998). Currently there is no legal requirement
for its use in assessing transport plans, policies and programmes other than in
certain member states such as France. A SEA Directive is due to be accepted by
the European Union for the assessment of transport plans and programmes.
A meeting of the
European Federation for Transport and the Environment (Fergusson 2000) noted
the current absence of SEA for the TINA proposals. With the advancement of the
proposals, concern was expressed that the undertaking of SEA would not
necessarily ensure that significant changes could be made. A variety of other
organisations, in particular Birdlife International, have likewise expressed
concern.
Box 3.1 Example of where SEA would have
been beneficial
Strategic environmental assessment
would have been beneficial in the case of 780 km Via Egnatia motorway across
Greece. The entire motorway was divided into short 25 km sections to assess the
environmental effects. This piecemeal approach prevented an assessment of the
cumulative effects including meaningful alternatives. In particular, the
assessments of sensitive nature conservation areas were omitted. One section of
the motorway would have crossed the habitat of brown bear, a species protected
under the EC Habitats Directive. However, as a result of the action of a
non-governmental organisation, this particular section was cancelled. (Bina et al, 1995), (EC DG VII
1998)
Box 3.2 Examples of the use of SEA
In Germany an ecological risk assessment
was undertaken of the Federal Transport Infrastructure Plan. The risk analysis
included consideration of information on land use and conflicts with protected
areas. Alternatives with a low score were downgraded or rejected. A similar
approach using GIS has been applied in Flanders, Belgium, for a new highway
between Jabbeke and Knokke.
A pilot study undertaken by BirdLife
International examined the potential impacts of some of the TEN-T programme.
Also this used a SEA in combination with GIS but was frustrated at a European
level by the lack of availability of data sets including sites protected under
the Habitats Directive. A more detailed assessment was undertaken of France on
account of a more complete data base. The findings indicated that a large
number of designated sites would be in close proximity to, and therefore at
risk from, proposed roads and railways. (Bina et al, 1997)
Environmental Impact
Assessment
At a more detailed level than SEA, EIA
tends to be applied on an individual project basis and can be informed by the
findings of SEA. Numerous EIA publications and Good Practice Guides have been
produced and indicate how to apply the method in a general way, and in
accordance with legal requirements, including some specific guidance on the
application to transport schemes.
European Union
Directive on Environmental Impact Assessment (85/337/EEC) (CEC 1985) as amended
by Directive 97/11/EEC (CEC1997) requires member states to assess the
significant environmental effects of certain public and private projects. This
is compulsory for the types of transport project listed under Annex I and
discretionary for projects listed under Annex II including inland waterways,
railways and roads not covered by Annex I (Box 3.3).
The requirement for an
environmental assessment for Annex II projects either can be determined on a
case by case basis, or by adopting a threshold criteria, or by a combination of
the two, Special attention is needed in environmentally sensitive locations
including those covered by the Birds Directive (79/409/ECC), and Habitats
Directive (92/43/EEC).
The amended EC
Directive on EIA (97/11/EEC) demands consideration of the main alternatives
studied and the reasons for the final choice – for example, to avoid a
protected area. The developer is required to provide certain specified
appropriate information to the case to enable a decision to be made by the
authorities. The information supplied should consider significant direct and
indirect effects including to flora, fauna and landscape and the
interrelationship of these with other aspects. Details of measures to reduce
significant adverse effects should be included within the assessment.
Cumulative effects must be assessed also (Box 3.4).
Cumulative effects can result in significant changes in the landscape and to
biological diversity. For example, an existing railway and a proposed road
crossing the same valley together may exacerbate the visual effects and
severance problems.
Public consultation forms an important part
of the process of environmental impact assessment. The application for consent
and the information received should be made available for comment by the
“public concerned”.
The EIA Directive
(85/337/EEC) has been variously implemented by EU member States (IUCN 1990)
with particular laws relating to transport schemes. Under the acquis
communautaire States are required to take on a variety of legislation
relating to transport and the environment. This includes adopting the
Environmental Impact Assessment Directive. The Vienna Declaration requires the
implementation of EIA in planning and building transport infrastructure and is
in line with the Espoo Convention 1991. Thus, throughout the European region
the application of EIA is strongly recommended even in cases where there is no
legal requirement.
Care is needed to
ensure that compliance with the legal/ funding requirements of an EIA do not
overlook the need to continue the EIA process in subsequent post planning
stages of scheme design and implementation. This is very important if features
relating to the landscape and biological diversity are to be maintained.
Post construction
monitoring provides a check on whether proposals put forward in the EIA have
been implemented and are functioning. Feedback can enable fine adjustments to
be made. Secondary benefits of monitoring include improvements in prediction
techniques. A shortcoming is that the EIA Directive makes no provision for the “posteriori
examination” included in Article 7 of the Espoo Convention. Generally
monitoring is omitted unless supported by a legal requirement/agreement as part
of the consent (as in Spain, France and the Netherlands (Fauconnier 2000 2e).
In addition to EIA,
other relevant European Directives need to be considered including those on
local air quality, noise and water pollution (CEC 2000).
Box 3.3 Type of transport schemes requiring
EIA under 97/11/EEC
Annex 1
Construction of lines of long-distance
railway traffic.
Construction of motorways and express roads
Construction of a new road of four or more
lanes, or realignment and/or widening of an existing road of two lanes or less
so as to provide four or more lanes, where such new road, or realigned and/or
widened section of road would be 10 km or more in a continuous length
Inland waterways and ports for inland
waterway traffic which permit the passage of vessels of over 1,350 tonnes.
Annex II
10.
Infrastructure projects:
c) Construction of railways and intermodal
trans shipment facilities, and of intermodal terminals (included projects not
in Annex I);
(e) Construction of roads, harbours and
port installations, including fishing harbours (projects not included in Annex
I);
(h) Tramways, elevated and underground
railways, suspended lines or similar lines of a particular type, used exclusively
or mainly for passenger transport;
Box 3.4 Types
of environmental impact
Indirect
Impacts: Impacts on the environment, which are not a direct result of the
project, often produced away from or as a result of a complex pathway.
Sometimes referred to as second or third level impacts, or secondary impacts.
Cumulative
Impacts: Impacts that result from incremental changes caused by other past,
present or reasonably foreseeable actions together with the project.
Impact
Interactions: The reactions between impacts whether between the impacts of just
one project or between the impacts of other projects in the areas".
(From European
Commission DGXI (1999) Guidelines for the assessment of indirect and cumulative
impacts as well as impact interactions.)
Protection
(conservation + enhancement) of habitats, species and landscapes
Code of Practice
Pointers
– Transport routes should seek to avoid legally protected
areas and species including under the European Union’s Habitats Directive and
Birds Directive, and those protected by international agreements including the
Convention on Biological Diversity, the Bern, Ramsar and World Heritage
Conventions.
– Throughout the planning, design and implementation of
transport schemes there is a need to promote an awareness and implement
legislation relating to protected landscapes, habitats and species.
– Consideration of the wider countryside should include
developing opportunities for enhancement of landscapes and habitats, and the
establishment of links with the Pan-European Ecological Network.
Habitats, species and
landscapes receive varying degrees of protection at a European and local level.
Protected sites and species may be adversely affected by transport schemes and
therefore are of particular relevance during the planning and construction
phases.
The alignment of a
proposed transport route is a crucial consideration in the assessment of the
magnitude and significance of the effects particularly in environmentally
sensitive locations. In these areas such routes should be screened for the need
for an EIA.
The Habitats
Directive and the Birds Directive
Within the European
Union, the Habitats Directive (92/43/ECC) and the Birds Directive (79/409/EEC)
establish a network of protected areas (Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and
Special Areas of Conservation (SACs)) together forming the Natura 2000 series.
This series aims to maintain and restore those listed habitats and species at a
favourable conservation status.
Under the Habitats
Directive appropriate action must be taken by Member States to avoid the
significant deterioration of, or disturbance to the designated habitats and
species:
"Member
States shall take appropriate steps to avoid, in special areas of conservation,
the deterioration of natural habitats and the habitats of species as well as
disturbance of the species for which the areas have been designated, in so far
as such disturbance could be significant in relation to the objectives of this
Directive."
(Article
6 (2) 92/43/ECC April 2000).
Member states are encouraged to establish
corridors and other landscape features between the protected areas. This could
include land associated with transport schemes.
"Member
States shall endeavour, where they consider it necessary, in their land-use
planning and development policies and, in particular, with a view to improving
the ecological coherence of the Natura 2000 network, to encourage the management
of features of the landscape which are of major importance for wild fauna and
flora. Such features are those which, by virtue of their linear and continuous
structure."
Article
10 92/43/ECC.
To preserve listed
habitats from developments likely to alter their ecological balance, Article 6
(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive provides for an appropriate assessment:
"any
plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of
the site but likely to have a significant effect thereon, either individually
or in combination with other plans or projects..."
This requirement is
irrespective of the EIA Directive and is much more stringent. If the assessment
predicts a negative effect the development may go ahead only if there are no
alternatives, or if there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest,
including those of an economic or social nature. In such cases the state
concerned must still reduce the impact of the project and adopt compensatory
measures.
In addition to sites,
the Habitats Directive protects certain priority species listed in Annex IVa.
The list is subject to review. Listed animal species living in the wild must be
protected from deliberate capture or killing, disturbance, destruction or
taking of eggs and the deterioration or destruction of breeding sites or
resting places (Article 12 and 13 of 92/43/EEC). Listed plants growing in the
wild must be protected from deliberate picking, collecting, cutting or
uprooting or selling or exchanging. These conditions may be waived to enable a
development to proceed if there is no satisfactory alternative and the
development will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the listed population
at a favourable conservation status in their natural range. They may be waived
also if the development is required:
"for
imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social
or economic nature and beneficial consequences of primary importance for the
environment".
The application of
Articles 12 and 13 in this section of the Directive is strict, often with
significant effects for pending development, for example the presence of a
protected species can stop construction works with consequential delay to the
programme and with associated additional costs to the developer. A survey
immediately prior to tendering or construction should help alleviate such
consequences and is especially important when there has been a significant time
lapse between the completion of the EIA and the start of construction works. In
this intervening period, which for transport schemes can sometimes amount to
around ten years, significant changes can occur in the landscape particularly
as a response to other development pressures. For similar external reasons the
protected status of species can change.
Convention on
Biological Diversity
The Convention on
Biological Diversity 1992 (UNCED 1992) was a significant outcome of the UNEP
Earth Summit held in Rio Janeiro in 1992. At least 175 countries are
signatories to the Convention. Article 14 of the Convention requires an EIA for
policies and projects that are likely to have significant adverse effects on
biological diversity.
The Ramsar
Convention
The Ramsar Convention
on Wetlands (1971) came into force in 1975 and is concerned with wetlands,
particularly those of importance for waterfowl. Contracting Parties are
required to designate sites - ‘Ramsar Sites’. In Europe, these cover over 5
million ha.
The Convention includes
a stringent condition with respect to development:
"designate
alternative sites of the original habitat type should the development of any of
the presently designated sites become necessary in the urgent national
interest".
Bern Convention
The Convention on the conservation of
European wildlife and natural habitats, known as the Bern Convention (1979),
aims to conserve wild flora and fauna and their natural habitats, especially
those species and habitats whose conservation requires the co-operation of
several States, and to promote such co-operation. Particular emphasis is given
to endangered and vulnerable species, including endangered and vulnerable
migratory species. Signatories to the Convention must implement measures to
maintain populations of wild flora and fauna. (Council of Europe 1996) Such
listed habitats and species should be considered in the planning, design and
implementation of transport schemes.
Areas of Special Conservation Interest are
established through the Bern Convention 1979. The network of these areas is
known as the Emerald Network (Council of Europe 1989). The network makes
special reference to transport routes and the need to safeguard crossing routes
for migrating animals.
World Heritage
Convention
Other international
designations protecting habitats or areas of landscape include sites nominated
under the World Heritage Convention, adopted by United Nations Education,
Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) in 1972. The Convention includes
Natural and Cultural Sites as well as more recently combined works of ‘nature
and man’-Cultural Landscapes. Within Europe there are some 15 natural sites.
Mainly on account of the prestigious nature (rather than legal) of such a
designation the Convention has assisted in the prevention of damage of
designated sites (IUCN 1994 Parks for Life) and as such may have political
implications in the planning of transport infrastructure.
Biosphere Reserves
and other designations
A world network of
biosphere reserves has been designated under the UNESCO Man and Biosphere
Programme 1971. The reserves represent the world’s major biological diversity
regions. They are selected on a number of defined criteria and under Article 9
of the Statutory Framework each reserve is subject to a review on a ten-year
cycle. Following the Review, if the reserve does not satisfy the criteria it
can be excluded from the network, for example as a result of significant
detrimental changes from a transport route.
The European Diploma of Protected Areas is
an award given to protected areas on account of their outstanding landscape or
biological diversity and the efficiency of their protection system. This
prestigious award is reviewed every five years and can assist in the protection
of sites (Council of Europe 1965).
The Baltic Sea and the
Mediterranean Sea are associated with two separate conventions (Helsinki
Conventions Helsinki Convention (1974) and Barcelona Convention (1976/1995) and
Geneva/Barcelona Protocol (1982 & 1995)). These establish a system of
coastal and marine protected areas to conserve biological diversity.
National legislation
At a national level
there is a range of legislation providing varying degrees of protection for
landscapes, habitats and individual species (ICUN 1992), and Council of Europe
2000). Such legislation may encompass a series of national parks and nature
reserves including those on a very local level of importance, and other
protected landscapes with an estimated 10,000-20,000 across Europe.
The IUCN World
Conservation Union has provided an international classification system for
protected areas defined as:
"Area
of land and /or sea especially dedicated to the protection of biological
diversity, and of natural and associated cultural resources, and managed
through legal or other effective means." (IUCN 1994)
These areas have been
classified into six management categories. Category II National Parks, Category
IV Habitat/Species Management Area, and Category V Protected Landscape are
those most used in Europe. In spite of such status, many legally protected
areas are under strong pressure from development proposals including transport
schemes but also from inadequate management (IUCN 1994 Parks for Life). Their
ultimate protection from adverse development is dependent on the robustness of
the legal system, including the application as appropriate of the Habitats, or
Birds Directives, the EIA process, for example the European Union can enforce
these Directives.
Pan-European Ecological
Network
Valued landscapes and
habitats are not restricted to protected areas and there is a need to consider
the wider countryside. In this respect, the Pan-European Network was
established to form a network of linked areas to ensure the favourable
conservation status of traditional landscapes, habitats and species. It was set
up as part of the Pan-European Landscape and Biological Diversity Strategy and
aims to encourage the coherence and complementarity of the different networks
in an ambitious initiative which covers the entire pan-European geographical
area and which brings together diverse partners at the different decision
levels. The Network is made up of three tiers: core areas, corridors and buffer
zones.
Transport networks
provide an opportunity to form sections of the corridor and/or buffer areas, in
particular by adapting the associated green estate to form specified habitats.
Such opportunities can apply to proposed and existing schemes and in both cases
landscape management is likely to be a critical issue. To some extent the
realising of such opportunities may partly offset other negative effects
directly, or indirectly arising from transport schemes.
Knowledge +
understanding
Code of Practice
Pointers
– Document and communicate base data locating valued and/or
sensitive landscapes, habitats and species including data from national and
local voluntary sources. Encourage the establishment of databases for
biological records.
– Understand landscape and ecological processes including the
spatial and temporal aspects of landscape, habitat and species.
– Progress the level of data in relation to the stage of
scheme design, but when collecting data remember to accommodate seasonal
constraints.
– Understand the interactions with other aspects such as the
engineering requirements and socio-economic linkages.
– Consult and inform those affected and interested in the
scheme as soon as possible and throughout the process
– Develop a mutual understanding between the client, engineer
and environmental specialists including by training and workshops.
Application of SEA or
EIA should assist in balanced decision making for the approval of transport
plans and projects. Greater emphasis needs to be given to the application of
environmental assessment where required, throughout the decision making
process, rather than a one-off examination required for building consent only.
Within this process knowledge and understanding are essential at a political
and technical level.
Knowledge
Knowledge is a
fundamental part of the planning process associated with the development of the
linear transport schemes (Box 3.5) Three perspectives interplay:
- an understanding of
what the scheme comprises in relation to the overall objectives including aspects
such as design and safety standards with associated implications relating to
vertical and horizontal alignment, construction method, and user
characteristics i.e. type and quantity;
- an understanding of
the landscape and biological diversity features involved, including their
importance, internal dynamics and external influences; and the effects of the
transport infrastructure on them.
- an understanding of
the effects of the infrastructure beyond the immediate confines of the
proposals within the assessment.
Data relating to
biological and other environmental records are essential in the application of
EIA. The co ordination and establishment of such data bases greatly assists
with EIA and should be encouraged. The level of detail required for this
information partly relates to the stage of the scheme as well as what is
practicable and reasonable. ‘’Snap shot’’ biological records can be misleading
and seasonal constraints to data collection need to be accommodated in the
overall programme of the scheme. Apparently premature or on going collection of data can be importanteven
if the collection is not in line with requirements of the proposals at that
time. Statutory and non-governmental bodies may be able to assist in the
provision of data.
Knowledge of the
geographical distribution of assets should be accompanied by specialist
knowledge on the functioning of the landscape/habitat /species. On account of
the indirect wide reaching effects of transport schemes this needs to relate to
an area beyond the immediate confines of the engineering structures depending
on the features involved.
Early involvement of specialists within the
design team assists with developing cost-effective solutions in an interactive
way; for example the location and type of crossing facility for animal movement
(Box 3.6) and user safety; or the alignment over steeply sloping land so as to
minimise long distance views; or the need to acquire land in order to implement
mitigation measures outside the immediate confines of the engineering structure
or boundary fence line. Sometimes little scientific information is available on
the distribution or habitat requirements of a particular species affected by
the scheme. In such cases the precautionary principle should apply.
Understanding
Actions of the
client/developer can be driven by legislation and funding as well as advice
from the technical team and/or public pressure, neither of which the client
need accept. Traditionally, engineers have led the design and construction of
transport schemes, with some fine results. Today, the speed of development
pressures together with the multi-faceted and technical nature of schemes
demands specialist knowledge including that relating to environmental
considerations and legal requirements. Balanced mixed discipline teams assist
in this process, but ultimately it is the “client” who has overall control of
the work.
The client needs to
understand the basis for decisions and any legal requirements. Mutual
understanding between the client, engineer and the environmental specialists is
needed. For example, so that the engineer understands the broad ecological and
landscape objectives and constraints. Likewise, in order to make practical rather
than theoretical recommendations, the landscape or biological specialist should
have a pragmatic understanding of the nature and scale of large civil
engineering transport schemes, including the contractual process. An
interactive approach to design and management together with team meetings are
advocated to develop an understanding of requirements as well as keeping
abreast of the range of ongoing issues.
In a similar way at the
construction stage, a relationship needs to be developed between the designer
and the contractor to make certain that specified written environmental
objectives are correctly implemented on the ground. A culture of awareness is
required to ensure that the right
messages are passed through to the machine operators on the “cutting face”. The
application of environmental management for example ISO 14001, training and
workshops are ways of assisting in this process.
Box 3.5 General landscape and biodiversity effects
associated with the structural and user characteristics of linear transport.
Structural Characteristics
Horizontal and vertical alignment
influenced by safety/speed standards of user, e.g. steam v. high-speed train.
Land take affected by alignment.
Tunnels/ bridges have set clearance
standards.
Ancillary structures and equipment
including lighting, fencing, provision of drainage,
Construction activity dominated by
earthworks.
Cut across landscapes/habitats providing
linkages or fragmentation.
Potential to fragment habitats and
landscapes with associated wide-reaching implications.
Potential to disturb natural drainage
patterns and microclimate,
Embankments and cuttings available for
habitat creation and/or visual integration,
Land acquisition/ redistribution can limit
scope of mitigation measures.
Habitat destruction can result in wider
indirect effects.
User Characteristics
Linear conduits provide access for
goods/people/services as part of transport hierarchy.
Link centres of population or economic
activity.
May contain and/or encourage other
development resulting in changes in land use.
Structural characteristics influenced by
type of locomotive/ vehicle and this is subject to technological change.
Out-moded infrastructure such as abandoned
railways or canals may have associated wildlife/ historical/ amenity value,
including for recreation.
Air, water and soil/vegetation pollution
risk associated with users.
Maintenance programmes of verges essential
for users, but provide opportunities for enhancement of associated
wildlife/amenity/historical value.
Box 3.6 Animal crossings
In Estonia, until recently traffic has not
been a problem to animals. This has changed. An underpass was built on the
Tallinn to Tartu road but is not used, largely on account of insufficient study
of their movements.
In the United Kingdom, a proposed motorway
passed between two separate woodlands. A large roe deer population were present
in both woods and moved between them. Deer fencing was required along the road
and an underpass incorporating a small stream was identified as a crossing
point, however the original proposed dimensions would have been off putting for
use by roe deer. A change in embankment design enabled a more suitable size of
underpass with associated cost savings.
In the Netherlands, the dense transport
network has partly caused the fragmentation of green spaces with associated
detrimental effects to certain wildlife. In an attempt to reverse the process
the government has established a policy of de-fragmentation covering existing
and proposed sections of the network. Work has included the construction and
enhancement of eco ducts (special animal crossings), and verge management.
Monitoring is undertaken to check for the effectiveness of the measures.
WAYS TO ADDRESS
COMMON EFFECTS TO LINEAR TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
Introduction
This section provides a
summary of ways to address common effects to landscape and biological diversity
of transport and infrastructure. This is discussed in terms of the planning,
design, construction and subsequent management of schemes. Inevitably there is
an overlap between these four stages, partly dependent on local permits and
procurement procedures.
Planning
Code of Practice Pointers
– Adopt an approach, which seeks to avoid, mitigate and
compensate. In the first instance consider the less harmful options.
– Include an early consideration of landscape and biological
diversity within the planning process.
– Focus on significant landscapes/habitats and species, for
example resolving the effects on threatened species; but do not overlook
commonly occurring features of the wider landscape.
– Co-ordinate schemes in transboundary locations.
The benefits of
strategic and scheme environmental assessment have been discussed in section 3.
The planning of a scheme should aim to avoid sensitive valued landscapes and
habitats. Inevitably a balance is required with these and other factors. To
complete an assessment requires knowledge of the characteristics of the scheme,
the likely effects and the measures required to reduce the negative effects.
Examples of this type of information are summarised in Table 5.1 to 5.4. The
earlier the involvement of landscape and ecological specialists the easier it
is to accommodate changes to the engineering scheme, In the first instance
least harmful alternatives should be considered.
Whilst initial effort
should focus on specially protected areas and species, still it is
necessary to consider more commonly occurring features which contribute to the
diversity of the locality, for example the type of field boundary. Positive
benefits can be achieved by co-ordinating the transport infrastructure with
adjacent land uses, for example to assist with the development of
landscape/habitat corridors (as suggested for the Pan-European Ecological
Network).
Where schemes cross
national boundaries differences in legislation can lead to a double standard
and unnecessary confusion. Co-ordination is required and for practical reasons
it is easier to adopt one set of standards. Other problems relate to the
mismatch of a scheme either side of the border with one section/terminal
unknowingly determining the alignment of the section in the adjacent state with
potential repercussions for protected areas. These matters should be addressed
during the planning stage.
Design
Code of Practice
Pointers
– Relate scheme design and management to the character of the
landscape/scenery and biological diversity in the area.
– Adopt a flexible approach to engineering design
standards/criteria to accommodate the character and value of the
landscape/habitat/species in the area. Consider the appropriateness of standard
solutions in the local context.
– Be reactive to opportunities for enhancement/maximising
benefits, and minimising disbenefits including fitting the scheme into the
wider landscape and relating it to the biological context.
Roads are associated
with greater environmental effects than either rail or water transport but this
largely reflects the demand and associated extent of the network. In some
locations railways and waterways can be equally or more damaging than roads.
Strategic environmental assessment should help to draw out such major
differences as part of the evaluation of alternative solutions. At a much more
detailed level, the application of EIA to the design process of the scheme should enable decisions to be taken
to accommodate local characteristics.
The engineering design
standards of a scheme relate to the provision of safe conditions for the user
with consequential differences in landtake (Table 4.1). Thus the need for
gentle curves and gradients on motorways or high-speed trains (HST) have the
potential to cause a greater negative effect than a more local scheme. However,
larger schemes are associated with a greater need for funding and legal
control, including an EIA. Such control can regulate the need for the scheme
and ensure the quality of detailed design including adopting a flexible
approach to engineering and other design criteria and/or standards in order to
accommodate local features of landscape and ecological value. As new
technologies are developed the design will need to consider their environmental
effects.
Minor (local) and
upgrading transport schemes may be subject to fewer legal restrictions but can
cause significant negative effects, particularly in locations where the scale
of the landscape is small and the value of biological diversity high. Such
effects should be identified in an environmental impact assessment. This
highlights the benefits of following the environmental assessment approach in
all cases.
Table 4.1 Comparative
land take for different design standards of road and rail
|
|
Design Standard |
Total cross-section
(m) |
Surface area (ha/km) |
|
Rail |
classic |
25 |
2.5 |
|
|
AST upgraded |
32 |
3.2 |
|
|
HST |
35 |
3.5 |
|
Road |
2x1 traffic lanes |
60 |
6.0 |
|
|
2x2 |
90 |
9.0 |
|
|
2x3 2x4 |
100 120 |
10.0 12.0 |
Source:
CEC 1993
Particularly in
degraded or intensively developed localities opportunities for the enhancement
of landscape or biological diversity can result from the construction of
transport infrastructure (Verheyden and Meunier, 1998). This can be more
successful when enhancement focuses on particular landscape features, habitats
or species. Other initiatives may be able to achieve such enhancement outside
of the transport corridor for example, agri environment schemes which change
agricultural practice.
Implementation and
construction
Code of Practice
Pointers
– Pay
attention to detailed design with respect to the visual and ecological aspects
including the use of fauna-friendly designs.
– Initiate/implement
procedures to enable the acquisition of appropriate land for environmental
mitigation.
– Apply
best available technology including surface materials, feasibility of recycling
and recycling of materials/surplus spoil.
– Assess
the environmental effects of siting construction camps, storage areas and
future associated developments, e.g. service station/marinas, maintenance
depot.
– Retain
specialists to monitor environmental compliance on site, including during the
construction period.
– Inform
and involve local organisations/people in these stages.
Land acquisition is a
crucial stage in the construction process. The procedures vary between states
but where possible the area acquired should include land needed to ensure the
implementation of mitigation and compensation measures. Without the acquisition
of such land there is no certainty that land occupiers will agree to the
proposed measures with a greater risk of consequential long-term environmental
problems.
Available information
on the scheme at the approved time of submission for planning approval can
vary. The level of detail in the environmental impact assessment can vary and
also is mostly led by the engineering design including information on ground
conditions from the site investigation. Prior to construction work there in is
an opportunity for a further level of detail design where landscape and ecological
matters need to be re considered alongside engineering, for example the design
of the drainage to integrate with the setting or protect wildlife including
water balancing facilities, and the benefits of different types of surface
materials. Just before construction starts the need for additional surveys
should be considered, especially for species which may have moved since the
original surveys were undertaken.
The best environmental
and cost benefits are achieved where there is a balance in the earthworks i.e.
cuttings and embankments. But this is not always possible, for example site
investigation may find that excavated material is unsuitable to re-use for
construction purposes and requires land for disposal. Knowing that this is
likely will assist the development of more sustainable solutions and the
application of best available technology. For example, using surplus or
recycled material to integrate the scheme into the landscape, or restoring
borrow pits to benefit waterfowl. The ‘need’ to import material can extend the
ripple of environmental effects of the scheme but is outside the scope of this
Code.
Transport
infrastructure differs from many other forms of development on account of its
linear nature and the associated extensive interface of construction works.
Earth storage areas/borrow pits and plant may be established along the route to
reduce haulage costs. Access for construction vehicles may require
widening/upgrading of the local transport network so spreading the
environmental effects of the transport line over a wider corridor. The fine
detail of such proposals may be known only at a relatively late date in the
programme but at the time of scheme approval can be controlled by the placement
of “no go” areas within and adjacent to the construction corridor. As an
absolute minimum it is important to locate sensitive areas in the corridor to
avoid risk of damage.
Procurement and
contractual arrangements vary with the traditional separation between the
client, “designer” and the builder where the designer acts on behalf of the
client supervising the works. More recent arrangements include “design and
build” where the contractor is responsible for the detailed design and
construction to meet the overall objectives of the scheme. In this case, an
agent may represent the client. The agent checks that construction work is
implemented following procedures set out in a number of agreed method
statements. This approach can provide a closer relationship between those
advising on landscape and ecological aspects, and those directly undertaking
construction work. It requires the retention of specialists within the
construction team.
The application of
Environmental Management, i.e. ISO 14001 (1S0 1996), enables the planning of
construction operations so as to reduce the environmental risk including
programming of work, for example, to relate to the seasonal requirements of
certain species, such as clearing trees outside the bird breeding season.
Compliance with legal requirements gives greater weight to the management
system and this in turn is fundamentally dependent on the robustness of the
local legislation and regulations.
Inevitably,
construction activities directly affect land occupiers as well as local
residents. Relationships with both these groups will be eased considerably if
they are kept informed. This assists with community relations and can have
additional environmental benefits with respect to monitoring and early warnings
of accidents. Specialist interest groups, for example local conservation or
hunting organisations can assist with monitoring movement patterns of certain
species and supplement other data collected on a professional basis.
Site management and
maintenance
Code of Practice
Pointers
– Incorporate
natural life cycles into maintenance plans, for example the long term
development of vegetation.
– Understand
and incorporate maintenance requirements and relate to local practices.
– Establish
and review management practices with respect to opportunities for landscape and
wildlife enhancement.
– Monitor
the functioning/performance of environmental measures, for example passages for
wildlife, water quality, and adjust as necessary.
For the safe
functioning of the scheme, ongoing management is required for the hard and soft
estate. This too can have environmental consequences, for example combating icy
conditions by application of salt, or the application of herbicides can result
in the pollution of local watercourses and/or the contamination of the soil
with consequential affects to the flora and fauna.
For landscape
maintenance programmes the setting and reviewing of management objectives for
the soft estate is helpful in order to accommodate the growth of vegetation.
Functional or safety
requirements can be combined with those for visual purposes and wildlife i.e.
to include regular checking of fence designed to protect the road from crossing
vertebrates, or relate the cutting frequency of grassland maintenance to
encourage butterflies.
Opportunities are
available to enhance the soft estate within the scheme boundary. These should
form part of the long-term management plan over say a 20-30 year period.
Enhancement of existing transport infrastructure may be driven by wider
environmental objectives (Box 3.6) although associated cost advantages have a
role also, for example the provision of a wildlife crossing can reduce
accidents and thereby save money. These measures have been implemented on some
roads and there is a need for similar considerations along both the rail and
waterway network.
The design of a scheme
may include special measures to protect biological diversity and landscape. In
addition to checking that these measures have been constructed correctly,
monitoring should be undertaken as to the effectiveness. This is needed on
account of unpredictable responses of wildlife to external changes and to
changes arising from the route itself. Monitoring should enable the
effectiveness of measures to be reviewed and adapted if necessary.
Box 4.1 Pilot Project:Losiniy ostrov
National Park
The “Losiniy ostrov” National Park is
located on the north-eastern side of Moscow, between Moscow and the cities of
Korolyov and Miytischi. The Park includes a variety of ecosystems including
primary forest. A large number of types of animals are present in the Park
including those that use it for a migration route. The Park has an important
social and educational function.
The Park is influenced by the presence of
built up areas, and by the Moscow Ring Highway (MKAD)/Lesser Ring of the Moscow
Railway (MK MZhD) on its boundaries. The proposed Third High Speed Ring
Expressway is likely to cross the park, and will require interchanges/crossings
of the existing roads and railway line.
The pilot project reviewed the current MKAD
and proposed Expressway with respect to animal movements along existing and
potential crossing points; and wider environmental effects.
The conclusions and recommendations were
that there was a need to:
1.Ensure that the crossing points are
situated on routes where animals are known to cross, and the surfacing of those
routes is as natural as possible.
2.Ensure the animal crossing points are
clear of snow and rubbish dropped by human beings, with the necessary
coordination between road maintenance workers and park wardens.
3. Provide Buffer zones between the road
and forest, with consideration given to pollutant resistant trees to reduce the
pollution of primary forest areas.
4. Ensure that the highway maintenance
protects the surrounding environment in the park, from problems caused by the
overuse of herbicides and pesticides; dust from the road; and the overuse of
de-icing materials.
5. Design landscape measures to maximise
the wildlife benefit rather than for purely aesthetic reasons.
6. Ensure that all contract documentation
relating to the new project, its design, construction and maintenance, fully
take into account the importance of the Park.
(Rybakov 2000)
APPLYING THE CODE;
COMPARATIVE EFFECTS AND SOLUTIONS
Introduction
By way of illustration,
this section makes comparisons between the effects associated with roads, rail
and navigable waterways and suggests solutions applying principles of the
Practice Pointers relating to landscape and biological diversity. Further
detail is included in the specialist technical reports (Appendix). Tables 5.1
to 5.4 located at the end of the section provide a comparative summary of much
of the information.
Context
There are a number of
essential differences between roads, railways and waterways. The context for
the differences needs to be understood particularly when considering modal
choice (Table 5.1).
Roads
Possibly on account of the extent of the
road network, the associated implications relating to landscape and biological
diversity have been studied in greater detail than for rail or waterways. The
road network is well-documented and characteristically hierarchical including
ancient lanes a few metres wide with occasional use. At the other extreme are
motorways with numerous lanes in each direction with rapid movement of traffic,
although occasionally it can standstill on account of the lack of traffic
capacity.
Continued building of further roads is not
an automatic solution to congestion and more radical solutions are being
sought, for example road pricing, modal split. In other cases roads are
associated with specific types of development, for example the short-term
abstraction of timber or minerals, or military objectives, or to benefit
tourism.
Apart from obvious differences in the
hierarchy such as the dimensions and the level of use, other differences relate
to characteristics of interchanges (nodes) and (Table 4.1) associated
facilities. Usually motorways have minimum curvature and gradients, junctions
are grade separated often with lighting, service stations and resting areas are
integral, the motorway is fenced and users are restricted i.e. no horses or
learner drivers. Local roads may include sharp bends and steep gradients, have
few crossing or entry restrictions, need not be fenced and generally service
areas form part of adjacent development i.e. alongside housing etc. Such
differences can have consequential implications with respect to the effects on
landscape and biological diversity including those resulting from cumulative
effects.
Railways
The extent of the
European railway network is considerably less that that of the road network.
The turn of the 21st century heralds a period of growth with
technological advancements enabling faster trains with associated upgrading or
construction of new tracks and rolling stock, and intermodal facilities. Rail
freight is being encouraged to revitalise. A number of abandoned tracks are
being re-opened for recreational purposes, for example cycle routes; as well as
for new roads and commercial rail traffic.
A typical cross section
width of a railway is about half that of the equivalent road (Table 4.1). Most
lines are associated with additional land for sidings, maintenance depots and
stations. Generally the line is accompanied by overhead cables and is fenced.
Crossing points are either at
grade (level) or grade separated. High-speed trains require the most stringent
standards of track with implications for the horizontal and vertical alignment.
Waterways
Inland navigable
waterways comprise canals and navigable rivers. After an early expansion in the
Industrial Revolution waterways were unable to compete with railways and later
road freight. Subsequently recreational uses developed. Other uses of canals
relate to drainage, routes for telecommunication cables and water transfer. The
multi-purpose use of waterways distinguishes them from roads and railways.
Within the pan-European
region the extent of waterways is a fraction of both the road and rail network.
However, the waterway network plays a greater transport role in some lowland
states and in the lower reaches of large rivers it is the main form of access,
for example in parts of northern Siberia. In the Netherlands about a fifth of
the total inland freight tonnage is conveyed by boat and half of the 5000 km of
waterway is available for boats over 1000 tonnes but even here much of the
network is used for recreational purposes. In contrast, in England and Wales
well over half of the waterways are either abandoned or not navigable (DETR
2000); navigable sections contribute to the carriage of one percent of the
domestic freight.
The carriage of freight
along larger navigations seems set to continue and the size requirements of the
industry increase, with implications for the upgrading or construction of new
navigable waterways. Large vessels set the requirements for other users (Bekker
G et al 1991).
Canals are artificial
in origin although some have developed from watercourses; in contrast navigable
rivers are natural. Compared with road and rail, the alignment of canals has
the least flexibility due to the need to maintain the same level. This has
resulted in some dramatic aqueducts as well as extensive embankments. Locks
provide the means of descending slopes. Their width determines the maximum
width of boats using the waterway. As with roads and railways some features on
canals can be of historic or landscape importance e.g. aqueducts and pump
houses.
Bank protection is
required particularly for canals to accommodated shipping loads. Some canals
need access tracks for maintenance purposes. Regulation of flows and the
creation of navigation channels by dredging are required to enable transport
use of rivers.
Long distance sight
lines are necessary in the vicinity of structures over the channel which in
themselves need a high clearance to accommodate boats. Such bridges may need
large approach embankments. As with railways, terminals (ports, harbours,
marinas) are an essential part of the network and require land.
Problems and
opportunities - Landscape
Protected landscapes,
beauty spots and sites of cultural significance (views in and out) including
IUCN Category V (National Parks) and World Heritage Sites are areas where
perhaps most care should be exercised in the planning of new schemes but not
exclusively. Care needs to be exercised along the boundaries of such areas
depending on their robustness; strict avoidance or breaching a boundary line
could result in a greater landscape impact than an alignment within it. Much
depends on landscape character, scale and grain in relation to the direction of
the route, for example avoid creating nicks by earthwork cuttings and vegetation
clearance on the skyline of an escarpment, avoid the need for great embankments
on the valley floor or cuttings creating scars on bluffs of hillsides, avoid
alignments along the immediate foreshore in lakeside locations (Cooper 2000).
The landscape
assessment as part of the EIA requires an understanding of the character and
the dynamics of the wider area through which a route passes including the way
that the landscape is likely to respond in the longer term – for example loss
of hedgerows in the adjacent area through land exchange, or pressures for built
development associated with improved access. Early anticipation can assist in
safeguarding significant features of landscape, historical and cultural value.
Where possible the environmental assessment should enable the selection of an
alignment which can flow with the landscape.
At a further level of
detail, and to improve integration into the wider landscape is the design of
structures. These should respond to the local landscape character and small
adaptations may be able to provide facilities for wildlife crossings (Highways
Agency (1996). Other structures such as noise barriers associated with certain
roads and railways require integration and can double up as visual barriers
(false embankments).
Roads
Roads can cause
significant changes in the landscape with consequential implications to
diversity. The assessment of roads in the landscape needs to be considered both
from the road and of the road. The former relates the road user experience and
influences driver safety for example induced drowsiness from a long straight
alignment. The view of the road can dramatically alter the landscape with
respect to the road itself and day and night time movement from vehicles.
Lighting can be particularly disruptive in a remote landscape on account of the
night-time "glow" and regular occurrence of lighting columns.
Upgraded roads are vulnerable to future built development on account of
improved access.
Planting of the road
embankments and off site areas can provide screening for both the engineered
structure and traffic movement but should be related to the landscape
character. Close liaison with the ecologist should assist with the appropriate
habitat enhancement/creation, for example species rich grassland, planting
associated with animal crossing points as well as the longer term management of
the soft estate.
Railways
Compared with roads,
the more restrictive vertical and horizontal alignment required for the railway
track reduce its flexibility to easily integrate with the landscape. In
addition crossing structures may need to be substantial, and clearance zones,
including cuttings are required to ensure safety from avalanches, falling rocks
and trees. Safety requirements can reduce the potential screening benefit of
planting on such embankments. Integration is simpler when the line is able to
follow the landscape grain e.g. round the side of a hill.
There is a need to
distinguish between long established parts of the network and those subject to
recent upgrading or construction. With the benefit of time some sections may
have integrated into the landscape but in other cases there is still discord
between the alignment and the present day landscape character.
Legislation relating to
land take associated with construction differs on a national basis. In some
states compulsory purchase of land is restricted to that required directly for
rail building with proposals for wider scale remedial planting being the responsibly
of the municipality and the agreement of landowners therefore is less certain
(Bakker 1997).
Waterways
The artificial
structures associated with canals cut across the landscape with little relation
to the natural scale (depending on the size of the channel). In lowland areas
relatively small increases in height of an embankment are obvious over a wide
area, and can form a regular skyline dam-type feature across the landscape.
In contrast, the
natural origins of navigable rivers mean they are most closely linked with the
landscape character. However, the visual effects of canalisation, dams, bank
works and regularity of the flow for both navigation and flood prevention
purposes should not be underestimated, for example the loss of seasonal changes
associated with freezing, flooding, and low flow; irregular channels are
associated with braiding, islands, and marsh land (Travers Morgan, 1987). Such
regulation directly erodes the landscape diversity of river valleys. This is
particularly important to understand on account of the relatively few remaining
natural rivers.
Large bridges are often
associated with navigations. These provide an opportunity for spectacular
structures, which can unify a landscape or create an eye sore! As with roads
and railways, bridges need to be appropriate to the landscape character and
attention to detail is all important (Highways Agency 1996).
Problems and
opportunities - Habitats/species
Direct land take
causing loss of habitat and possibly fragmentation are common to all forms of
linear transport infrastructure, but mostly the land take footprint of roads is
larger. The direct land take effects depend on the diversity of the landscape.
However, compared to railways and canals, the roads have the most flexible
alignment, providing more opportunities to avoid valued habitats.
Barrier effects arise
whereby animals are unable to easily cross the route as a result of fencing,
structures, traffic flow and, in colder climates, walls of snow or steep banks
in the case of waterways. The consequences can result in:
– a threat
to the viability of affected populations as a result of genetic isolation
and/or of isolation from a seasonal food source particularly for migrating
species,
– a risk of
accidents to road and rail users when larger animals attempt to cross the
carriageway/line,
– negative
affects to measures designed to rescue vulnerable populations (as an indirect
consequence of a barrier).
To accommodate animal movements requires a
knowledge of the behaviour and territories of affected /vulnerable populations.
In the case of larger mammals like the moose (Alces alces) it can relate
to an extensive area. The incorporation of crossing points is easiest if known
about early in the design process. To channel their use, crossing facilities
need to be accompanied by protective fencing and associated planting. Fencing
requires a long-term maintenance commitment if it is to be effective.
Subsequent monitoring can check the appropriateness of the particular design
and result in fine adjustments taking place. Spatial planning in the wider area
must protect ecological corridors connecting the crossing points. This may be
the responsibility of a different authority to that concerned with transport
related issues.
The physical
construction of a transport route can block natural drainage patterns of water
and of air. This can cause changes to the adjacent habitat, for example drying
out of a valued wetland with resultant changes to the associated flora and
fauna including loss of species. Other changes to wetland habitats can result
from the diversion of numerous small streams into one side ditch. Early
in the project design specialist skills are required to assess the ecological
consequences of such changes, and the need for remedial measures as well as
areas of opportunity. In an impoverished habitat this can be put to good effect
through habitat creation.
In landscapes adversely
affected by development or economic activities, opportunities should be taken
for positive landscape enhancement to develop new landscape qualities and
structures in association with the route, rather than the more limited
screening or integration function. Such planning can be undertaken in
conjunction with enhancement of biological diversity including as a
contribution to specific targets in biological diversity action plans or
strategies. To ensure implementation, wider scale works outside the boundary
fence need to be related to land acquisition, or undertaken by agreement on a
voluntary basis, and/or with fiscal incentives/ grants etc.
In areas of intensive
agricultural production or degraded landscapes, the design of transport schemes
can provide major opportunities for improving the wildlife value of the
adjacent area; for example planting along the embankment/verge to provide a
linkage between two woodlands important for butterflies but otherwise separated
by arable production (Bickmore 1992). Verges can be designed as a linear nature
reserve with possibilities for the Emerald Network. Small severed areas of
adjacent land can likewise be developed and managed for wildlife benefit. Care
needs to be exercised to ensure that such enhancement will not attract species
that subsequently get killed by road or rail traffic.
Roads
The frequency of
vehicles along roads creates the greatest risk for animal crossing movements
with consequential danger to drivers and the species concerned. Crossing
facilities for low-flying animals, e.g. lesser horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus
hipposideros), barn owl (Tyto alba) can be problematic particularly
for roads, although in some areas roadside verges can be important hunting
grounds for these species.
In addition to negative
changes arising from land take and fragmentation are those caused by effects on
land beyond the road boundary such as lighting. For reasons of safety lighting
is associated with roads in built up areas or around junctions and can be
disruptive to the behaviour of certain species of bird, bat and night flying
insects, a problem particularly near known populations of rare species.
Similarly effects to adjacent land are associated with emissions arising from
vehicles causing air and water contamination. Some studies have suggested that
breeding birds are affected by the noise of traffic. Clearly knowledge of
adjacent sensitive habitats and species is critical.
The large surface area
of roads can result in a surge of surface water run-off into neighbouring
watercourses. Water balancing/attenuation ponds are designed to minimise this
effect. They can be adapted also to provide a beneficial wetland habitat;
however, maintenance of the primary function of the ponds is crucial to their
success. Water storage ponds may be required for fire control and can similarly
be adapted. Such opportunities may provide positive benefits for wildlife at
little extra cost and can help offset other negative effects. The application
of best available technology has resulted in the use of porous tarmac, which
can reduce surface water run off as well as have other benefits such as reduced
spray and traffic noise.
Railways
The effects of
railway-induced fragmentation and associated habitat severance have not been
extensively examined. Compared with roads the intermittent frequency of the
trains provides certain wildlife with a greater opportunity to safely cross the
track. (Tunnelling is discussed on the section on construction). Work to date
suggests the ability to cross is quite variable between species. Migrating
amphibians are known to have difficulties in crossing railway ballast (COST
341). One monitoring study confirmed that greater attention to fine detail
would have increased use of the crossing facility by certain vertebrates, for
instance the planting of cover near the entrances. More important was the
relative location of the crossing to the particular species concerned
(Rodriguez et. al. 1996). Fencing did not always prevent vertebrates gaining
access onto the line.
In some locations
railway embankments are associated with a relatively diverse specialist flora.
The embankments provide some opportunities for the development of wildlife
corridors but unlike roads these can be of limited length (compartments) on
account of the restricted distance
between the ballast and the side wall of culvert bridges, on some bridges the
track bed may include holes. Efforts to link areas of semi-natural habitat
outside the fence line can be thwarted by the reliance on adjacent land
occupiers (Bakker 1997).
Other measures are
under study include adapting ballast size in selected places to facilitate the
crossing of amphibians, reptiles and small mammals, the use of anti-perch
devices, and extra large insulators to reduce the risk of electrocution, and
winter feeding of certain species of wildlife to encourage them to stay away
from railway lines (Berthoud 2001).
Railway embankments may
be attractive to certain species that accept disturbances caused by the trains
but this is not beneficial always. For example local rabbit populations have
reached unacceptable levels, damaging adjoining crops.
Waterways
Canals can cause
wide-scale hydrological changes to the surrounding area including drying out of
the flood plain with associated changes to sensitive wetland habitats and
species. Changes to species can occur when waterways from different river
catchments are connected with the risk of introducing aggressive species, or a
modified biochemical composition (Kurstjens 2000).
Many long established
canals have developed a diverse aquatic and bank side flora and fauna including
species typical of lakesides. On this account a number of canals have been
given legal protection, including as Special Areas of Conservation. This has
implications if boat traffic increases.
Regularisation of flow,
canalisation and over widening/deepening required to meet navigation objectives
of rivers have resulted in the loss of riverine forests, filter feeding macro invertebrates, and natural herbivores and
their associated predators. An alternative more sustainable approach is that
the condition of the river dictates the type of vessel that can use it for
navigation.
Both canals and navigable rivers can provide
a barrier to movement on account of steep sided banks preventing animals from
getting out of the water. Dams can prevent the movement of fish along the water
course with wide reaching consequences for the rest of the river, for example
in the case of migrating salmonids.
Along canals
adjustments to the bank profile can assist crossing animals and thereby reduce
the effects of severance. At the same time such adjustments can provide an area
for the development of an emergent flora (Alberts 1991, and CUR 1999).
New dams and locks
associated with waterways are of concern on account of the ecological
consequences from regularisation of flow. Recent development of the use of
screens to reduce erosion can lead to the loss of groins to give the river a
more natural appearance. Other examples of measures to lessen the adverse
effects caused by navigation include the construction of side channels to avoid
the need for dams, to create a fish pass, or to re- establish the riverine
flora and fauna.
Implications of
construction and improvement
Extensive earth moving
is the main feature of most transport construction works (Table 5.3). This
requires large machinery and land for temporary storage of topsoil, subsoil and
dredgings in the case of waterways. Climatic conditions can cause short-term
dust and/or run-off from the exposed surfaces with watercourses and sensitive
habitats at risk from long-term damage. Large machinery emphasises the need to
clearly protect/fence off the adjacent sensitive habitats or features from “straying” vehicles.
Environmental management systems should assist in identifying these and other
such risks.
The construction of a
railway is similar to a road but tunnelling or cut and cover may be more
frequent. This can assist with long term visual and biological integration,
provided adequate consideration is given to the disposal of large amounts of
surplus material. Such effects should not be under estimated. With imagination
surplus spoil may provide a positive opportunity. The long term benefits of cut
and cover tunnels need to be assessed in terms of the destruction (loss) of the
habitat during the construction phase. With high speed passenger trains,
passenger pressure pulses cause discomfort and from this aspect tunnels are
undesirable.
Upgrading the existing
railway lines may be constrained to the present land ownership take resulting
in the loss of valuable bank side habitat. Access for ecological surveys along
railways can be restricted on account of Health and Safety and disruption to
existing services (Railtrack 2000) with implications for the quality of EIA and
management. Longer trains associated with upgrading may require the extension
of station platforms. Upgrading may provide opportunities for adapting crossing
points for use by certain species.
Construction of new
canals is relatively infrequent. Construction works are of a similar nature to
road and rail and relate to earthworks. Upgrading of rivers for navigation
includes activities such as the construction of dams and dredging. Over
deepening to accommodate larger sized vessels can be a specific problem. The
disposal of the arising wet material requires large areas of land nearby.
Implications of use
and management
Roads
User associated
problems relate to user characteristics including the physical attributes and
the frequency of the mode of transport, for example visual intrusion, noise and
air pollution including dust, light and water pollution (Table 5.4). Management
is a necessary requirement to maintain optimum functionality. This too has
wider implications affecting the landscape and biological diversity. In
particular, the management of the soft estate and the good repair of special
installations for fauna.
The frequency and type
of vehicle along roads is not always a function of the size of the road. For
example, in parts of CEE large roads were constructed for strategic purposes
and have low traffic flows, elsewhere, small roads may be over capacity with
high traffic flows. The latter can be problematic on account of associated air
and water pollution, and the lack of crossing facilities for wildlife.
Thus, a gradual
increase in use to over capacity may be associated with negative effects by
default. Such effects may be less easy to control than with the construction of
a new road but this is a question of balance. On line widening schemes likewise
are not automatically better than a new road – on line improvements can result
in the destruction of verges associated with a diverse flora or significant
feature trees.
The wider environmental
effects of highway maintenance can be overlooked with implications for the
realisation of the original design i.e. habitat creation and/ or protection of
features of value. For example, maintenance depots on strategic routes require
additional land take. Where possible these should be located with other
services, e.g. service stations. Oil interceptor tanks and balancing ponds need
clearing in order to function and assist in reducing water pollution.
In cold climates, salt
is applied to the carriageway with consequential run-off into the adjacent
watercourses. The maintenance of a snow free carriageway can cause a barrier
(snow-wall) for wildlife wanting to cross. Also it can attract wildlife to the
snow free carriageway causing a hazard to road users. With heavy snowfall
wildlife underpasses and fences can become blocked diverting animals across the
road and causing a traffic hazard also.
Routine verge
maintenance is required to maintain sight lines for safety and the maintenance
of firebreaks, and for access to telematics. This can be restricted to a narrow
width with the remaining verge area managed to benefit identified/particular
species of wildlife.
Railways
With railways regular
maintenance is required to keep the track line clear for safe use. The passage
of trains results in contamination of the track bed including herbicides,
faecal matter, metal dust and lubricants. This can cause pollution of the
ground water, streams and soil, the significance of which depends on the level
of contamination and vulnerable species but little data is available on this
aspect. Track ballast has to be replaced regularly and is difficult to recycle
creating disposal problems.
Mostly a minimalist
approach is taken to bank maintenance of railways to meet operational
requirement only, for example clearance of scrub on a 5-10 year cycle. Also
bank vegetation is subject to accidental or intentional burning. As with road
and canal embankments, there may be opportunities to relate the management of
the soft estate to landscape and wildlife objectives.
Waterways
As previously noted,
waterways may serve several objectives in addition to transport and these
affect use. Pollution and bank erosion from the wash of boats are some of the
main effects associated with
navigation. Also, pollution includes problems relating to the importing of
exotic species in ballast water or through the mixing of waters from other
ecosystems. Exotics can thrive, for example an aggressive alien macrophytes can
submerge the native flora in a relatively short space of time leading to a
significant decline in habitat quality. Control can result in huge maintenance
problems and be expensive (Newman J 2000). Greater awareness of problems associated
with exotics could assist with their more timely removal.
Regular occurrence of
water pollution from boats includes oil, antifouling paints and other chemicals
as well as domestic waste causes problems. Maintenance dredging is an ongoing
requirement of such navigations, with associated disposal problems.
Maintenance of canal
bank sides may be important to retain their engineering integrity (dam
function). As with roads and railways, embankments can provide a valuable
habitat in their own right. Unlike road and rail, mostly this area is not
subject to contaminants arising from transport users.
Table 5.1 Comparison of
main physical and user characteristics of strategic linear transport systems :
structural aspects
|
Aspect |
Roads |
Railways |
Waterways |
|
Hierarchy type of
network |
Extensive network
related to size and user figures |
Truncated network |
Ruderal network |
|
Harmonisation of
freight standards influences the scale of the scheme including the need for
larger structures/clearances and speed |
Larger class of
freight vehicle Growth in user
numbers |
Development of high
speed rail links Internodal railway
links |
Larger class of
river/sea ships |
|
Linear feature |
May conflict with
scale of natural land form and pattern of features |
May conflict with
scale of natural land form and pattern of features |
May conflict with
scale of natural land form and pattern of features. Cross watersheds and
floodplains |
|
Track type |
Constructed: pavement
– engineered surface tarmac and concrete; broad and flat |
Constructed: load
bearing flat track, ballast bed, metal rails and sleepers |
Water- natural
element but regulated. Canals have vertical edges and access tracks along the
banks for maintenance |
|
Earth works
influenced by topography affecting land take including valued
habitats/species |
Most responsive to
changes in topography |
Highly responsive to
changes in topography |
Least responsive to
changes in topography Tend to increase with
boat size |
|
Head room
requirements influence scale of earthworks/crossing structures |
Tend to increase with
traffic and vehicle size |
Generally larger than
for roads Tend to increase with
speed. |
Generally larger than
roads Tend to increase with
boat size |
|
Aspect |
Roads |
Railways |
Waterways |
|
Ancillary structures |
Signs, Lighting,
Barriers, Fencing Communication network
in verge Drainage structures |
Electric traction
requires overhead cabling and gantries Fencing Communication network
alongside track Drainage structures Occasional need for
maintenance track |
Dams and locks Bunding Reinforced banks Maintenance track |
|
Embankment slopes |
Angle of slope
affects land take, habitat loss and fragmentation. Opportunity for
creating wildlife habitats/corridors in keeping with local habitat and soils Maintenance required
for sight lines |
Angle of slope
affects land take and habitat loss/fragmentation. Opportunity for
creating wildlife habitats/corridors between structures in keeping with local
habitats and soils Maintenance of woody
vegetation to protect overhead cables, includes slope clearance every 5-10
years Regular maintenance
of trackside vegetation to keep track clear |
Angle of slope
affects land take and habitat loss/fragmentation. Opportunity for
creating wildlife habitats/corridors in keeping with local habitats and soils Bank erosion from
boat traffic affects marginal aquatic vegetation |
|
Pattern of traffic movement |
Continuous and/or
peaked Fast with noise and
light |
Intermittent, fast
and noisy |
Intermittent |
Table 5.2 Examples of
the physical and user effects on landscape and biological diversity
|
Effect |
Roads |
Railways |
Waterways |
|
Microclimate |
Embankments may dam
or channel air movements Increased heat from
road surface Build up of cold air
in winter Air turbulence
generated by traffic |
Embankments may dam
or channel air movements Increased heat from
track surface Heat accumulation in
ballast Irregular but large
displacements of air (the woosh effect) dependent on speed of train |
Embankments may dam
or channel air movements Increased air
humidity |
|
Hydrology |
Canalisation/straightening
of adjacent water courses including deepening to assist drainage Changes to natural
groundwater regimes Increased flooding of
water through surface water collection Drying out and
damming of natural drainage Opportunities for
habitat enhancement |
Canalisation/straightening
of adjacent water courses including deepening to assist drainage Changes to natural
groundwater regimes Changes to surface
water run-off patterns Opportunities for
habitat enhancement |
Regulation of river
flows Possible risk of
drying out of floodplains/ marshlands Changes to natural
groundwater regimes Mixing of water
quality across catchments |
|
Introduction of
exotic species |
Conduit for seed
dispersal from wheels Development of salt
loving species in verge |
Conduit for seed
dispersal from carriages and freight transport |
Conduit for fauna/
flora dispersal from ballast water, and interconnecting watersheds |
|
Barrier effects |
Embankments and
ancillary structures disrupt views Fencing, width of
structure and intensity of traffic flow prevent crossing movements Habitat
fragmentation affecting population viability Deviation of animals
seeking to circumvent obstacle. |
Embankments and
ancillary structures disrupt views Fencing, track
surface inhibit crossing movements Habitat
fragmentation affecting population viability Deviation of animals
seeking to circumvent obstacle |
Embankments and
ancillary structures disrupt views Bank profile inhibits
crossing movements Habitat
fragmentation affecting population viability Deviation of animals
seeking to circumvent obstacle |
|
Wildlife mortality |
Risk of animal
mortality from attempts to cross and also because wildlife is attracted to
embankments |
Risk of animal
mortality from attempts to cross and also because wildlife is attracted to
embankments |
Zero risk by
collision but very high risk of drowning |
|
Water pollution and
accidental spillages |
Surface water
run-off/spray includes hydrocarbons, tyre residues, suspended solids and
de-icing salts with implications for soil pollution Increased risk of
accidental spillage associated with increased volumes of traffic |
Contaminated track
bed run-off including herbicides, faecal matter, metal dust and lubricants is
fed into adjacent drains/groundwater Increased risk of
accidental spillage associated with transport of hazardous substances |
Domestic waste, oil
from users Increased risk of
accidental spillage associated with increased volumes of traffic |
|
Lighting |
Attracts insects and
bats, and can create barrier Permanent light at
night even in remote rural areas Continuous lighting
of road by vehicle headlights General disturbance
of wildlife activities |
Non-continuous light Little effect on wildlife |
Little or no light
except at some marinas etc No effect on wildlife |
|
Noise |
Can be continuous
disturbs wildlife and tranquil areas |
Intermittent short
"whoosh" effect |
Variable in duration
and levels |
Outmoded or abandoned
network |
Ancient roads/track
ways may form a cultural landscape feature Less frequently
abandoned upgrading more likely |
Early structures may
form cultural landscape feature especially viaducts Colonised by variety
of species and can provide green links in urban areas or degraded landscapes Alternative uses for
recreation may have negative consequences for biological diversity.
Occasionally reinstated for commercial use. |
Early structures may
form cultural landscape feature especially aqueducts Colonised by variety
of species and can provide green links in urban areas or degraded landscapes Alternative uses for
recreation or water transfer may have negative consequences for biological
diversity |
Table 5.3 Examples of
typical solutions to problems affecting landscape and biological diversity
arising during the design and construction period of roads, railways and
waterways
|
Typical problem |
Roads |
Railways |
Waterways |
|
Land take |
Redesign
embankments/cuttings to reduce land take in sensitive areas, and amount of
surplus material |
Redesign
embankments/cuttings to reduce land take in sensitive areas, and amount of
surplus material |
Redesign embankments
to reduce land take in sensitive areas, and amount of surplus material |
|
Integration into
landscape |
Design profile to
provide natural appearance and wildlife benefit |
Design profile to
provide natural appearance and wildlife benefit |
Design profile to
provide natural appearance and wildlife benefit |
|
Habitat loss/damage |
Avoid, mitigate and
compensate for habitat/species Before start of
construction works erect protective fencing around features to be retained or
re located eg trees |
Avoid, mitigate and
compensate for habitat/species Before start of
construction works erect protective fencing around features to be retained or
re located eg trees |
Avoid, mitigate and
compensate for habitat/species Before start of
construction works erect protective fencing around features to be retained or
re located eg trees |
|
Habitat severance |
Design crossings for
wildlife Maintain temporary
crossing facilities for animals for duration of works. |
Design crossings for
wildlife Maintain temporary
crossing facilities for animals for duration of works |
Design crossings for
wildlife Maintain temporary
crossing facilities for animals for duration of works |
|
Water pollution |
Porous tarmac can
reduce spray and run off Provide areas to
retain and treat surface water and spillages Protect soil stores
to reduce erosion |
Waterproof plain and
collect surface water in risk areas Provide areas to
retain and treat surface water and spillages Protect soil stores
to reduce erosion |
Supervise earthmoving
sites and equipment Protect soil stores
to reduce erosion |
|
Air pollution |
Wash down surfaces to
reduce dust including wheel wipe |
Wash down surfaces to
reduce dust including wheel wipe |
Wash down surfaces to
reduce dust including wheel wipe |
Table 5.4 Examples of
typical solutions to problems arising from the use of roads, railways and
waterways
|
Typical problem |
Roads |
Railways |
Waterways |
Traffic movement in
the landscape |
Vertical adjustment,
artificial mounding in character with local landscape e.g. field boundaries Tree and shrub
planting in character with local landscape vegetation type. |
Vertical adjustment,
artificial mounding character with local landscape e.g. field boundaries Tree/shrub planting
in character with local landscape and vegetation type |
Reduce speed of boat
traffic to reduce bank erosion. Tree and shrub
planting in character with local landscape and vegetation type Relate size of vessel
to depth and width of water/channel |
|
Animal movement (ref
COST 341) |
Adaptation of
existing structures e.g. underpasses/culverts, green bridges, ledges in
relation to wildlife movement patterns and habitats Fence to suit certain
types of species Consider providing
tunnels (note additional cost and excavated material) Verges provide
linkages across degraded habitats |
Adaptation of
existing structures e.g. underpasses/culverts, green bridges, ledges in
relation to wildlife movement patterns and habitats Overhead train power
lines may reduce opportunities for bridges/overpasses Fence to suit certain
species Consider provision of
tunnels (note associated economic penalties and excavated material) Verges provide
linkages across degraded habitats |
Less opportunity for
crossing structures Include fauna
stepping out structures and species protection measured on banks Fish passes and side
channels enable free migration of aquatic organisms round dams |
|
Noise |
Adjustment of
alignment and addition of bunds and noise barriers – check landscape and
ecological consequences Review type of
surface material |
Adjustment of
alignment and addition of bunds and noise barriers – check landscape and
ecological consequences |
|
|
Typical problem |
Roads |
Railways |
Waterways |
|
Water pollution and
accidental spillages |
Interceptor drains
with regular maintenance required linked to areas to retain and treat surface
water and spillages Engineering and
vegetative system to store, ameliorate and treat run off Use of porous tarmac
reduces spray Develop emergency
contingency plan |
Interceptor drains
with regular maintenance required linked to areas to retain and treat surface
water and spillages Engineering and
vegetative system to store, ameliorate and treat run off Develop emergency
contingency plan |
Install free
collection points for waste from users Develop emergency
contingency plan |
|
Air pollution |
Dependent on type of
fuel, traffic flow free and microclimate-vegetation can provide a natural
filter Use of porous tarmac
reduces spray |
Vegetation can
provide a natural filter |
|
|
Lighting |
Adopt best available
technology and in rural areas restrict to essential locations Use methods which
minimize spillage of light and where possible avoid lighting on link sections |
Adopt best available
technology and in rural areas restrict to essential locations |
Adopt best available
technology and in rural areas restrict to essential locations eg
marinas |
|
Maintenance |
Adapt verges and
access ways to enhance wildlife value Assess the
implications of changes for maintenance and improvement work to enhance
wildlife value of verges and drainage facilities Assess the wildlife
implications of maintenance for adverse weather conditions |
Adapt to enhance
wildlife value of verges and drainage facilities Assess the
implications of changes for maintenance and improvement work to enhance
wildlife value of verges and drainage facilities Assess the wildlife
implications of maintenance for adverse weather conditions |
Adapt to enhance
wildlife value of verges and drainage facilities Organise dredging
outside fish reproduction period Select dredging
access and disposal points in relation to zones of activity and types of
riparian habitat |
ASSESSMENT, REVIEW
AND RESEARCH
Code of Practice
Pointers
– Co-ordinate
and encourage a Pan-European-wide exchange of Design Manuals and Method
Statements. Relate these to landscape and habitat types, and encompass
languages.
– Encourage an
exchange of approach between those involved with the design of roads, railways
and waterways.
– Monitor and
evaluate the effectiveness of environmental measures and disseminate
information relating to new or improved techniques.
– Encourage the
application of scientific research to the development of practical procedures
and methods.
– Promote
further research into the special ecological and landscape implications
associated with railways and waterways
Introduction
The production of this
Code has brought to light the need for further applied research to assist with
the process of planning, designing and implementing transport schemes.
Monitoring forms an essential part of this with feedback used to assess the
effectiveness of measures. In addition monitoring is valuable to evaluate new
and improved techniques particularly relating to mitigation measures.
Technical manuals
and exchange of experience
A relatively recent
development in highway planning is the inclusion of landscape and wildlife
issues within the assessment, in particular, for strategic routes. A number of
states have published technical manuals (Box 6.1), but to be of wider value
greater dissemination and exchange is required between practitioners and
countries. The COST 341 programme could be one such outlet.
Such dissemination
should consider the accessibility of information with respect to language, with
a focus relating to broad landscape and habitat types. With significant
differences in landscape ecology across Europe the application of a landscape
character approach to transport planning is useful. For example, the Norwegian
technical manual considers roads around lakes, across agricultural land, etc
(Norwegian Public Rods Administration).
Manuals focus mostly on
the planning and design stages of major roads with few considering minor roads,
or the practicalities of construction and maintenance, and this needs to be
addressed. Method statements as to how to undertake construction work are a
recent development of
procurement/contractual arrangements and part of environmental management.
There would be benefits if these were co-ordinated and appraised i.e. what
techniques are effective and why.
Monitoring and
feedback
Monitoring is a legal
requirement in relatively few states e.g. Rosette 1998, SETRA 1993, but is
essential if mistakes are to be corrected and lessons learnt. Success stories
may make good headlines but investigation of failures and the application of
lessons learnt, can lead to future success stories. Such monitoring is essential
to check the function of a scheme, for example the integrity of protective
fencing, or the appropriateness of special crossings for fauna.
Also, monitoring is
required to assess the technical value and appropriateness of innovative
techniques, for example translocated areas, or measures to reduce severance of
low flying bat.
There is a relatively
large body of scientific research which has examined the effects of highways on
particular species. Much of this needs to be put in a user-friendly format to
assist practitioners, i.e. to consider the significance of the findings and
their wider practical application.
Research
Relatively few
publications relate to the effects of railways. This may be a consequence of
the historical development of the network and the administrative structure.
COST 341 should provide further research relating to aspects of fragmentation.
While much road-related
research may be applicable to railways, significant structural and user
differences merit more specific work. In view of the proposals to upgrade
and/or extend the network for high-speed trains and freight, such research is
required urgently.
Over the last 20 years
or so, concern about the degrading landscape of river valleys and associated
wetlands from drainage and related engineering works has lead to a number of
publications e.g. Ward et al (1994), and initiatives involved with the
restoration of rivers. Such work is applicable to navigable waterways and there
would be benefits in a greater exchange of this information.
Technical guidance for
capital and maintenance works along waterways need to encompass other uses in
addition to those of transport, as well as rehabilitating of abandoned
waterways. Evidence to date suggests there are few monitoring studies which
have examined the significance of the barrier effects of canals on the movement
of animals and needs to be examined further.
“The principles applied in road planning
aim to conserve the biodiversity and natural and cultural environments, the
scenery and opportunities for outdoor recreation when road building affects the
countryside.
Seven principles for environmental-friendly
road planning
1. The developer has the principal
responsibility for taking environmental concerns into account. Concern for
natural assets must be evaluated on an equal footing with technical and
financial aspects.
2. Planning should be based
on a good knowledge of nature and the environment. Mapping protected areas and
protected objects is not sufficient. Experts should evaluate the
scientific consequences of the various alternatives. Co-operation with
specialist authorities early in the process is a prerequisite for a good
environmental result.
3. Analyse and evaluate the entire area
affected by the road. Road works affect the natural and cultural environments,
the scenery and outdoor recreation over larger areas than the road itself
covers. Evaluate the consequences for longer stretches and larger areas than
the actual road works will directly involve.
4. Avoid disturbing or cutting through
valuable areas of countryside.
Division and fragmentation can lead to loss
of assets for the natural and cultural environments, the landscape and outdoor
pursuits. The remaining areas must have a form and size which make them
functional for the natural environment.
5.Protect animal migration routes,
opportunities for fish to swim freely and links between areas of open
countryside. Ecological interplay which has evolved over a long period and
which is perfectly adapted to the location and the surroundings can never be
fully restored.
6.Accommodate the road to the natural and
cultural environments, the scenery and opportunities for outdoor recreation.
Choose alignment, standard, materials and details which safeguard the assets of
the countryside.
7. Use alleviatory measures if undesirable
encroachment is unavoidable.
Revise plans which do not take the environmental
viewpoint into account.”
CONCLUSIONS
Landscape and biological diversity is one
of Europe’s greatest assets. However the extent and the value of this asset has
been significantly diminished by the activities of man. To maintain the asset
for the future generations a reverse in the decline must take place.
Responsibility for the reversal includes those involved with linear transport.
At a strategic level
across Europe a framework is in place to incorporate environmental
considerations into transport infrastructure so to influence the processes
which affect landscape and biological diversity. However, there is a gulf
between Declarations, legislation and subsequent implementation.
Effective use of
environmental assessment and other procedures need to permeate all levels of
decision-making in the process of planning, designing, constructing and
managing transport infrastructure. This will assist with anticipating problems
and opportunities, and design solutions. Attention to detail is important.
This Code of Practice
has highlighted and presented examples of best practice in taking forward
linear transport infrastructure within the context of landscape and biological
diversity. It should assist the conservation and enhancement of the diversity
of landscape and biological features and contribute towards more
sustainable transportation systems.
This Code of Practice
is recommended to all those individuals in linear transport systems within the
pan-European Region.
REFERENCES AND
FURTHER READING
Alberts, W. (1991)
Civil engineering works and the care for nature in Nature Engineering
and Civil Engineering Works – Centre for Agricultural Publishing and
Documentation, Wageningen
Asheim Vidar (1972) Landskab
No.6 1972
Bakker, R. (1997) Reinforcement
of environmental values along railway-infrastructure: An integrated approach in
Proceedings Habitat Fragmentation and Infrastructure, ed. Kees Canters.
Ministry of Public Works and Water Management, Delft.
Bekker, G.J., van
Bohemen, H.D. (1991) Shaping and management of banks and bank protection
structures of state-owned waters in Nature Engineering and Civil Engineering
Works – Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation, Wageningen
Beltran J (1999) Nature
conservation sites designated in application of international instruments at
pan-European level. Nature and Environment, No. 95 Council of Europe
Berthoud, G (1999) Introduction
of biological and landscape diversity consideration in the development and
management of rail transport networks in Europe, CO-DBP, PE-S-TE(99)5,
Council of Europe.
Bickmore, C.J (1992)
M40 Waterstock – Wendlebury: planning, protection and provision for wildlife. Proc.
Instn. Civ. Engrs.Mun.Eng 1992, 93 June p75-83, UK
Bina, O. Briggs, B.
& Bunting, G. (1995) The impact of Trans-European Networks on nature
conservation: a pilot project. RSPB, UK
Bina, O. Briggs, B.
& Bunting, G. (1997) Towards an assessment of Trans-European Transport
Networks’ impact on nature conservation in Proceedings Habitat
Fragmentation and Infrastructure, ed. Kees Canters. Ministry of Public
Works and Water Management, Delft.
Byron H (2000) Biological
diversity and environmental impact assessment: A good practice guide for road
schemes. RSPB, WWF-UK, English Nature and the Wildlife Trusts, Sandy. UK
Canters, K. Piepers, A.
& Hendriks-Heersma, D Edited (July 1997), Proceedings Habitat
Fragmentation and Infrastructure Ministry of Transport (Netherlands).
CEC (1979) Council
Directive 79/409/EEC (Birds Directive)
CEC (1985) Council
Directive 85/337/EEC EIA Directive Brussels
CEC (1991) Convention
on the Protection of the Alps (Alpine Convention)
CEC (1992) Council
Directive 92/43/EEC Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and
flora.
CEC (1996) Parliament
and Council decision NO.1692/96/EC on Community guidelines for the development
of the trans-European transport network. Also 1998 Report on Progress COM
(1998) 356; Bull.6-1998, point 1.3.91
CEC (1997) Council
Directive 97/11/EEC EIA Directive
CEC (1999) Amended
proposal for a Council Directive on the assessment of the effects of certain
plans and programmes on the environment (COM (99) 73 Final).
CEC (2000) Air
quality Framework Directive
CEC (2000) Noise
Framework Directive
CEC (2000) Water
Framework Directive
CIRPA
Info. (1998) La Convention alpine-quel avenir? No. 48-Mars 1998, Edition
française.
Conference on Fauna and
Traffic (1999) Proceedings (18-20 October 1999) Lausanne.Laboratoire des voies de circulation
de l’Ecole polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne, ECONAT, ECOTEC, INSECTA et S.
Müller)
Convention on Wetlands
of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat. 1971 Ramsar.
Cooper, R (2000) Code
of practice for the introduction of biological and landscape diversity
considerations into the transport sector, CO-DBP, PE-S-TE (2000) 7, Council
of Europe.
Council of Europe
(1965) European Diploma of Protected Areas
Council of Europe
(1991) The Bern Convention on nature conservation
Council of Europe
(1996) Convention on the conservation of European Wildlife Habitats, (Bern
Convention). Strasbourg.
Council of Europe
(1996) Pan-European Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy
Council of Europe
(1998) Ministerial Conference Environment for Europe
Council of Europe
(1999) European Conference of Ministers responsible for Regional Planning
Guiding principles for sustainable spatial development of the European
continent
Council of Europe
(2000) Convention on the conservation of European wildlife and natural
habitats: Group of experts for the setting up of the Emerald Network of Areas
of Special Conservation Interest (February 2000) Building up the Emerald
Network: a guide for Emerald Network country team leaders
Council of Europe (2000)
Convention on the conservation of European wildlife and natural habitats
Standing Committee (December 1999) The Emerald Network – a network of Areas of
Special Conservation Interest for Europe. T-PVS (99) 36 rev.
Council of Europe
(2000) European Landscape Convention and Explanatory Report
Council of Europe
(2000) General guidelines for the development of the Pan-European ecological
network. Nature and environment, No.107
Council of Europe
(2000) Nature conservation sites designated in application of international
instruments at pan-European level. Nature and environment, No.95
CUR (1999) Handboek
Natuurvriendelijke oevers. 6 delen.`
de Sadeleer,N (2000) Study
of the approaches adopted at national and international level to promote
consideration of biological and landscape diversity in the transport sector.
CO-DBP, PE-S-TE (2000) 1e,Council of Europe.
de
Vries Hans J. G. (1998) - La fragmentation des habitats : les Pays-Bas sur
la voie des solutions.
Department of the
Environment Transport and the Regions (1998) A new deal for trunk roads in
England: guidance on the new approach to appraisal. HMSO, UK.
Department of the
Environment, Transport and the Regions (2000) Code of Practice on
Conservation, Access and Recreation. HMSO
Department of the
Environment, Transport and the Regions (2000) Waterways for tomorrow.
HMSO, UK
Department of Transport
(1993) Design manual for roads and bridges (Vol II environmental
assessment). HMSO
Dinetti
M (2000) Infrastructutture ecologiche. Mauale pratico per progettare e costruire le opere urbane
ed extraurbane nel rispetto della conservazione della biodiversita. LIPU, Italy
English Nature (1994), Research
report 178: The significance of secondary effects from roads and road transport
on nature conservation, UK.
ERM/VEEN (2000)
Ecology/DLG Guidance on Environmental Impact Assessment: towards sustainable
rural development in the context of SAPARD
European Commission
(2000) COST 341 European State of the art report on habitat fragmentation
due to transportation infrastructure Consultation of first draft.
European Commission
(2000) Managing Natura 2000 series, The provisions of Article 6 of the
Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC
European Commission DG
for Environment (1996) 1994 Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping
checklist” and “EIA screening checklist”.
European Commission
DGVII Transport (1998) Manual on SEA in the framework of the Trans-European
transport network report phase d: Strategic Environmental Assessment of
Transport Infrastructure
European Commission
DGXI (1999) Guidelines for the assessment of indirect and cumulative impacts
as well as impact interactions.
European Conference of
Ministers responsible for Regional Planning (2000) Guiding principles for
sustainable spatial development of the European continent. Council of
Europe, Strasbourg
European Union (1992) White
Paper on Transport
European Union (1995) The
Common Transport Policy Action Plan 1995-2000 COM (95/302 revised in 1998).
Fauconnier, J (2000) Consideration
of biological and landscape diversity in the development of road transport.
CO-DBP, PE-S-TE (2000) 2e, Council of Europe.
Ferguson, M (2000)
Conference Proceedings T & E Conference Transport, enlargement and
the environment. European Federation for Transport and Environment. IEEP,
Brussels and London UK.
Harrison, C. (1997)
Management of Communications and Transport Procedures in the Peak District
National Park. Council of Europe Colloquy on Protected Areas, 1997.
Helsinki Commission
(1974/1992) The Convention on the protection of the marine environment of
the Baltic sea area (Helsinki Convention).
Highways Agency (1996) The
appearance of bridges and other highways structures HMSO, UK
Highways Agency (1999) Toward
the balance with nature. UK
International
Organization for Standardization (1996) ISO 14001 – Environmental management
systems – specifications with guidance for use. CEN
IUCN (1990) Review
of the European environmental impact assessment Directive implementation in the
EEC member states. CEPLA, IUCN Gland.
IUCN (1992) Protected
areas of the world: A review of national systems, Volume 2 Palaearctic IUCN
Gland and Cambridge, UK.
IUCN (1994) Parks
for Life. Action for Protected Areas – Europe IUCN.
Kavtaradze D, Nikolaeva
L, Porshneva Y, Florova N (1999) Automobile Roads in Ecological Systems
(Problems of interaction). CheRo.
Kurstjens, G (2000) Introduction
of biological and landscape diversity considerations in the development of
navigable waterways, CO-DBP, PE-S-TE (2000) 3e, Council of Europe.
Ministère
de l’Equipement, des Transports et du Logement et Ministère de l’Aménagement du
Territoire et de l’Environnement. (1999) Actes des 3e rencontres, Routes et
faune sauvage. Strasbourg, 3 Septembre au 2 Octobre 1998.
Ministerie van Verkeer
en Waterstaat (2001) De-fragmentation by bits and pieces
Ministerie van Verkeer
en Waterstaat (2001) National highway verges, national treasures Delft
Ministerio
de Medio Ambiente (2000) Guias metodologicas para la elaboracion de estudios
de impacto ambiental
Mott MacDonald (1996) Environmental
impacts of management and maintenance affecting the soft estate. UK
Muller S & Berthoud
G (4e éd. 1999) Sécurité Faune/Trafic, Manuel pratique à l’usage des
ingénieurs civils (1995) Sicherheit Fauna/Verkehr, Praktisches Handbuch für
Bauingenieure (reprint 1997)
Fauna/Traffic Safety Manual for Civil Engineers EPA/LAVOC, Lausanne
NATO (1996) Committee
on the challenges of modern society: Effects of large construction projects
on the environment
Neuwenhuizen W, Van
Apeldoorn RC. (1995) Mammal use of fauna passages: a national road A1 at
Oldenzaal
Newman, J. (2000) Suggested
legislative controls on invasive alien aquatic plants – an opinion in
vegetation management in changing landscapes. The Association of Applied
Biologists.
Norwegian Public Roads
Administration (1996) Impact assessment of road projects.
OECD (1994) Environmental
Impact Assessment of roads, road transport research, Paris.
OECD (1998) Strategic
Environmental Assessment – the Transport Sector
Pages
C and Rivas J (1999), Manual de prevencio i correccio dels impactes de les
infrastructures viaries sobre la fauna. Departament de Medi Ambient,
Generalitat de Catalunya
Penny Anderson
Associates (1993) Roads and Nature Conservation: guidance on impacts,
mitigation and enhancement. English Nature. UK.
Railtrack (1999) Thameslink
2000 (variation) Environmental Statement Scoping and Methodology Report, UK.
Rijkowaterstaat (1995) Nature
over motorways, Delft.
Rodruiguez, A. Crema,
G. Delibes, M. (1996) Use of non-wildlife passages across a high-speed
railway by terrestrial vertebrates.
Rosell C. (1998) - Procedure
of environmental impact assessment in Spain. Minuartia, estudis
ambientals SL. 4th IENE meeting - Brig. Switzerland, 22 - 26 avril 1998.
Royal Fine Art
Commission: Official advisory body machinery of government to provide
independent view on the impact and quality of design in construction projects
Ruppert (2000) in
Ferguson 2000
Rybakov, S.N (2000). Preserving
biological diversity on the territory of Losiniy ostrov National Park and
minimising the undesirable impact of the linear transit infrastructure construction
on wildlife-A thematic report. PE-S-TE (2000) CO-DBP, Council of Europe.
Sangwine, A.P (1996) The
management of the roadside verge estate. Proceedings Institute of Civil
Engineers, England.
Scottish Executive
(1999) Trunk Road Biological Diversity Action Plan. UK.
Scottish Office (1998)
Cost effective landscape: learning from nature. UK.
Seiler, A. &
Eriksson, I-M. (1997) New approaches for ecological consideration in Swedish
road planning in Proceedings Habitat Fragmentation and Infrastructure,
ed. Kees Canters. Ministry of Public Works and Water Management, Delft.
SETRA
- (1993) Ministère français de l'Environnement - Passages pour la grande
faune (Guide technique). 121 p.
SETRA
- Ministère français de l'Environnement (1994) - Gestion des dépendances
vertes. 119 p.
SociétésSuisse
de Biologie de la Faune (1995) Faune, construction de routes et trafic
Travers Morgan (1987) Changing
River Landscapes. Countryside Commission, UK
UNCED (1992) Convention
onBbiological Diversity.
UNEP (1976/1995) Convention
for the protection of the marine environment and the coastal region of the
Mediterranean. (Barcelona Convention)
UNESCO (1971) Biosphere
Programme
UNESCO (1972) World
Heritage Convention
UNESCO (1996) Biosphere
Reserves: The Seville Strategy and the Strategy Framework for the World Network,
UNESCO, Paris
UNESCO (1997) Convention
concerning the protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage
UNESCO (1997) Regional
Conference on Transport and the Environment – Vienna Declaration.
Verheyden,
& C. Meunier, F. (1998) Dépendances vertes autoroutières et paysages
traversés: comparaison en terme de biodiversité et de fonctionnement écologique
in Actes des 3e rencontres “routes et faune sauvage"
Conseil de l’Europe, Strasbourg.
Ward D, Holmes N, Jose
1(994) The new rivers and wildlife handbook. RSPB. UK.
WWF (1993) Living
Rivers. WWF the Netherlands, Zeist.
WWF (1996) Green
Danube Programme. WWF Austria, Vienna
WWF (2000)
Recommendations on sustainable use of rivers for navigation and transportation.
International conference: Waterways and sustainable development.
APPENDIX: SUPPORTING
TECHNICAL PAPERS - SUMMARIES
I. Résumés rédigés par
les auteurs des études préliminaires /
Summaries written by the authors of the preliminary
studies
Legal aspects of procedures for assessing the effects of
transport projects and their impact on biological and landscape diversity
by Mr Nicolas de
Sadeleer, Director of the Centre d’étude du droit de l’environnement, Belgium
This legal study is a survey of recent
regulatory and case-law developments in international and Community law
concerning procedures for assessing the effects of transport projects and their
impact on biodiversity.
The scope and limits of the legal instruments
currently in force at national and international level are highlighted with
respect to the impact of transport networks on flora and fauna and their
habitats.
The author uses this descriptive study as a
starting point for suggesting a procedural structure that could be used as a
basis for new legislation in this field at national and international level.
Consideration
of biological and landscape diversity in the development of road transport
by Mr Jean-Marc
Fauconnier, Conseil en Environnement, France
Whether directly
or indirectly, roads and motorways have an adverse influence on diversity, both
by the fact of their existence and as a consequence of their use by traffic and
their maintenance, causing negative (and occasionally positive) effects on land
areas (biotopes and landscapes) and ecosystems (biocenoses and plant and animal
species).
The impact of
road transport on biological and landscape diversity
1.
The impact on land areas
This impact directly
concerns the areas crossed in terms of landscape (human environment) and
biotopes (supporting biocenoses) and falls into the following main categories:
2.
The impact of construction sites
Construction work may
disturb habitats, affect the species which they harbour and adversely influence
biodiversity in areas varying in distance from the construction zone. The
causes are, in particular, site clearing and earthworks, activity and noise,
uncontrolled liquid wastes, as well as borrow pits and storage areas for
materials.
3. The
impact of toxic emissions
Directly
related to traffic, these emissions have an adverse effect on air, water and
soil quality, and consequently on biotopes and ecosystems, mainly in the areas
along both sides of the road (local influence over 50 to 100 metres), but
they may also affect more distant areas (depending on methods of transfer, in
particular through the air).
4.
The direct impact on fauna
For the habitats which
it crosses, which are occupied by animal species of varying mobility, the road
represents a hostile zone (fragmentation effect) that animals may try to cross
in response to their biological needs (access to traditional feeding or
breeding grounds, or migration routes). This being so, the risk of animal
mortality due to collisions will depend on infrastructure characteristics,
traffic density and habitat type.
5.
The indirect impact
Indirect effects
(away from the actual road area) which may be created by spatial changes and
the redistribution of human activities in the area concerned (industrial
estates at intersections and agricultural consolidation) often account for a
not inconsiderable part of the impact on biological and landscape diversity.
Necessary
policies and practices
1.
The need for a common approach in the various policies pursued
2.
Better implementation of the principle of continuous assessment
Although
the principle of continuous environmental assessment is generally accepted, in
practice environmental experts work consecutively on separate studies without
any real continuity. This leads to a damaging loss of information between
the various project stages. A sole co-ordinator responsible for
interdisciplinary dialogue and the temporal continuity of environmental
assessments would prove more effective.
3.
Development of operational methodologies and tools
Ecology
and landscape experts often lack reference material and tools for analysing,
assessing and planning. This dearth contrasts with proven practices in
road engineering and means that ecological and landscape factors are given
inadequate consideration in the choices made and measures taken.
4.
Guidelines for biodiversity-oriented professional practices
· When deciding whether a new road is justified, account must be taken
of alternative modes of transport and serious consideration given to the zero
option.
· Environmental impact studies must offer choices in terms of spatial
planning.
· The study area must be large enough to include all effects and allow
a functional approach to landscapes and ecosystems.
· Crucial issues, key species and sensitive areas must be defined
according to scientific criteria alone, disregarding pressure groups.
· When choosing a new route, account must be taken of biological and
landscape diversity, and the areas of least impact first ascertained.
· The importance of ecological and landscape criteria must be
sufficient to balance that of economic and technical requirements.
·
Ecological and landscape requirements
for preserving biodiversity must be taken into consideration at all stages of
the project (from initial design studies to the actual opening of the road).
Consideration
of biological and landscape diversity in the development of navigable waterways
by Mr Gijs Kurstjens, Wissel Consultancy, The Netherlands
In this study
the effects of navigable waterways on landscape and biodiversity are presented.
Two types of navigable waterways are distinguished: canals and regulated
rivers.
Negative and
positive effects of both types of waterways
The construction
of canals (mainly in the past) has caused great loss of natural biotopes and a
big barrier problem in the area being traversed. The problems are very similar
to the ones caused by motorways and high speed trains. Besides this canals can
have severe hydrologic effects (drying up of natural floodplains and
marshlands) and negative effects on native species (by connecting seperated
catchments and giving opportunities for exotic species to invade new
areas).
Normally canals
have little variation in biotopes but in some sections new, sometimes
exceptional nature values have developed. In regulated rivers a large variation
of biotopes and populations can occur depending on the degree of regulation.
The measures for normalization and canalization can cause severe negative
effects on the natural morphology and hydrology of river ecosystems as well as
on natural biotopes for the typical flora and fauna of floodplains. The worst
effects are caused by dams changing rivers into nearly standstill canals and a
chain of oblonged lakes hardly passable for aquatic organisms.
Measures to
solve the negative effects
Regulated rivers
can be restored with the natural river in mind. Morphologic and hydrologic
processes play an important role in natural rivers as well as biotic processes.
For instance flooding and the occurence of alluvial forest are typical for
rivers. In dammed rivers streaming side channels can be constructed around dams
as fish passage ánd biotope for rheophile species. In normalized rivers without
dams old side channels can become alive by stimulating morphological processes
or active digging out by man. In many places stony bank protection can be
replaced by natural spontaneously grown alluvial forest with exception of
locations where navigable problems can occur (in river bends) and bottle-necks
in the river bed where savity problems can occur during floods.
Proposals of measures to ensure protection of biological
and landscape diversity in future
In the case of
canals possibilities to compensate for negative barrier effects of canals which
fragmentate core areas of the Pan-European Ecological Network should be
investigated. On the other hand management authorities for waterways should
introduce ‘natural management’ along canals to gain a lot of ecological benefit
and landscape improvement. In case authorities are planning to build a new
canal it should be compulsory to carry out an impact assessment study as is the
case with new motorways and railways. This legislation does not exist
sufficiently in many countries outside the EU.
Impact
assessment studies for large-scale regulation works (dams and locks) in rivers
should be made obliged by national law in all member states of the Council of
Europe. Attention should be paid to conflicting laws existing in some
countries. The legislation should be adjusted in order that both the barrier
effect and the loss of (flowing) aquatic habitats due to dam construction
should be compensated.
Governments should put more efforts on the large-scale
restoration of regulated river systems and emphasize measures based on the
natural reference of particular rivers. For instance it is preferred to
construct natural side channels in stead of fish passages to compensate for the
barrier effect caused by dams. Financial means for restoration and nature
development can be generated to combine measures for navigation with measures
for safety, extraction of drinking water and tourism.
Introduction of Biological and Landscape diversity
considerations in the development and management of rail transport networks in
Europe
by Guy Berthoud, ECONAT, Switzerland
Our study is based on information compiled in their national reports by
the countries taking part in the COST 341 project, “Habitat fragmentation due
to transportation infrastructure”, interviews with national officials and the
results of questionnaire surveys conducted among them, our own data on railway
routing in Switzerland gathered in the course of environmental impact studies,
and a summary analysis of a few lines chosen as being representative of the
European rail network.
After a period of rapid development, from the
1950s to the 1970s European rail networks suffered a decline and low profit
lines were closed as the first motorways were built and road freight traffic
developed. The construction of high-speed lines has given rail transport a new
boost, but there are still a few countries where rail is losing out to road,
particularly in the passenger sector. These countries are now trying to make
public transport more attractive.
Railway infrastructure affects the environment
in several ways during both the construction phase and once lines are in
operation. In an attempt to limit the impact on the environment, most
countries have enacted laws and introduced guidelines and/or procedures that
are designed to protect the environment and natural landscapes, principally on
the basis of environmental impact assessments and strategic environmental
assessments.
The main problems encountered during the
construction phase are loss of landscape and loss of biotopes, as a result of
the large areas of land needed to build railway lines, technical constraints
that make it difficult for lines to blended into the landscape, and the use and
storing of materials, notably ballast and tunnel-building materials.
Ballast is also a problem once a line is in service, as it has to be regularly
replaced and is difficult to recycle, creating a need for more dumps.
Railway operations bring more problems,
including the risk of collisions, in particular involving large mammals, the
barrier effect, noise, animal movements along the track, and
electrocution. Other problems encountered are colonisation of the track
by numerous plant species, and the presence of vegetation that can hamper
operations as well as representing an attractive food source for animals,
bringing a risk of collisions. Such vegetation is often kept at bay by
the use of herbicides, but these, along with faecal lavatory waste, metal dust
and lubricants from passing trains, can be a source of pollution, particularly
for the groundwater and soil.
A number of measures have been taken to combat
these harmful effects. They include the construction of special wildlife
crossings (under- and overpasses), track fencing, covered cuttings, moderate
and reasonable use of chemical herbicides, machine mowing at times likely to
cause least disturbance to wildlife, and landscaping of embankments.
Other measures are still under study.
They include adapting ballast size in selected places to facilitate the
crossing of amphibians, reptiles and small mammals, the use of anti-perch
devices, and extra large insulators to reduce the risk of electrocution, and
winter feeding of certain species of wildlife to encourage them to stay away
from railway lines.
Landscape
aspects
by Mr Roger J. Cooper, United Kingdom
The landscape we
see is an expression of the participation of mankind in the shaping of his
environment. One instrument for landscape change is the power of socio-economic
forces. Transport is an agent for such change by permitting the equalisation of
socio-economic systems and with it the homogenisation of landscapes.
The Pan-European
Biological and Landscape Diversity Strategy (1996) notes that one of Europe’s
greatest riches lies in its biological and landscape diversity, but also notes
that this diversity is under threat. Its vision is to reduce that threat,
partly by seeking to strengthen biological and landscape considerations in all
socio-economic sectors, including transport. More recently, the European
Landscape Convention (2000) acknowledges that European landscapes represent a
common resource. It is important therefore to co-operation towards its
protection, management and planning. This applies to all landscapes: natural,
rural, urban, peri-urban and transfrontier. Specifically, Article 5 lays
down the general measures necessary to implement the Convention. Actions
include the systematic accommodation of landscape consideration into various
policy sectors, which may either directly or indirectly impact upon it,
including transport.
Such recognition
in the framing and implementation of socio-economic policies is of vital
importance. History has shown us that transport is a key factor in changing the
relationship between town and country, such that local responses are exposed to
and potentially overwhelmed by external influences.
The overall
transport corridor consists of the on-line element viz the vehicle; the track;
the accommodation works (ie. all those required to engineer the route into the
landscape) and the ancillary structures; and the off line element – that is the
zone around the route which is impacted by it. The characteristics of the
on-line elements, and consequently some of the potential for impact on its
surrounds, will vary from mode to mode. All modes, however, share certain
characteristics which impact upon the landscape, namely: movement; linearity;
geometry; disturbance; externality. Each mode, however, will have a
characteristic signature. Modal choice can thus influence impact.
Movement in the
landscape will always attract the eye. The movement of transport is highly
directional and concerted. It penetrates rather than permeates the landscape,
although perhaps less so for water borne traffic. The linearity of transport
systems can exhibit great continuity through the landscape which tends to be
divisive. It challenges the coherence of a landscape and has fragmentary
effects. Transport also brings disturbance to the landscape as a source of
noise, movement and light, thus compromising tranquillity and the natural order
of systems through which it passes. Externality is a marked characteristic of
modern transport systems. Indeed the inter-urban transport corridor, by its
very raison d’être, is inherently alien to the countryside through which it
passes.
It is often the
very remoteness, either actual or relative inaccessibility, of Europe’s
wildscapes that has helped to preserve them as such. The same is true of
distinctive, traditional landscapes. At strategic level, therefore, it is
important that where policies or programmes either directly or indirectly
extend or improve the transport linkages of such sensitive areas, so making
them more permeable to external influences, that the potentially destabilising
effects on their landscape equilibrium is recognised.
Where
implemented, the transport route imposes its own aesthetic on the immediate
landscape. A multi-disciplinary approach to mitigation at all scales and stages
of the development process is necessary therefore if integration with the
landscape is to be successful. The guiding principle should be that although
the mitigation is targeted at off setting the characteristics of the transport
corridor, its method of delivery should have its origins in the character of
the landscape that is affected.
Moreover,
mitigation should not simply just figure as applied treatments, but rather be
fully integrated with scheme engineering. Design and operating standards need
to be flexible. Harmonisation of standards across Europe in the interest of
operational efficiency must be matched in areas of recognised threat to
landscape diversity by the ability to design infrastructure in recognition of
the capacity of the affected landscape to absorb it.
In respect of
the characteristics of the transport corridor, the impact of movement can
really only be mitigated by screening. For linearity, the objective should be
to break down the directionality and continuity through the corridor.
Recognition of the local characteristics, rather than standardised solutions,
is important to reducing externality. Moreover, it is usually better to harness
or channel the natural processes of the area in pursuit of scheme design
objectives so as the sooner to achieve an equilibrium and a seamless blend into
its surroundings. Finally the successful mitigation of a scheme’s principal
landscape impacts should not be undermined by lack of attention to its
ancillary elements.
Integration of
the landscape considerations and objectives into the frameworks, policies,
standards, and actions involved in the development and management of transport
infrastructure in Europe would be an important contribution towards preserving
landscape diversity and reducing the risk of the continent’s landscapes
becoming uniform and monotonous. Respect for, and understanding of, the
influence of transport projects is a fundamental requirement that underpins the
future of European landscapes as a continuing source of natural and economic
productivity – as well as pleasure – wonderment and inspiration.