Free Sample

Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping Report and Assessment of the Likely Impactsin a Selected Impact Area

Solution.pdf

You are required to produce an individual report which contains:

A full EIA scoping of the case study sitewhich identifies the likely impacts that would result from the proposed development and any requirements for further investigation to fully assess the significance of the impacts.This should take the form of a table, and a written summary of up to 1000 words(40% of assessment marks)

An impact assessment for a selected impact area associated with the case study site considered in the EIA scoping report. The impact area to be considered should be made in agreement with the module leader;it should be an impact area which was identified in the scoping report as being a potentially significant impact. The impact assessment should be presented as a 1,000-1,500 word report (60% of assessment marks) which covers:

An introduction to the chosen impact area/ type – why it is important that impacts on this area/type are considered?e.g. why consider protected species in EIAs? (5% marks).
Summary of current conditions/status relating to the chosen impact area/type – this should cover the current conditions in and around the site, e.g. what species are or could be found on and next to the site? (10% marks).
Reference to relevant local/national/international standards and guidelines for the chosen impact area/type, including legal, e.g. what is the legal protection of species, what government and local guidelines are there on protected species in development? (5% marks).
Identification of standard methods for assessing significance in the chosen impact area, e.g. CIEEM guidelines on ecological impact assessment for species (10% marks).
Initial assessment of the likely character and significance of impactsfrom development on the chosen impact area/type, e.g. what protected species will be affected, in what way and to what extent? (10% marks).
Review of potential methods for minimising and mitigating impacts, e.g. how can impacts on protected species be reduced? (10% marks).
With mitigation what residual impacts will remain?andconclusions as to whether the development would lead to unacceptably significant impacts (10% marks).

Site for Scoping Assessment:

You are required to consider the current condition of the

exBretts Oil Works Gateshead, and the

design brief and outline proposal for redevelopment/regeneration given on eLP and available at https://www.newcastle.gov.uk/sites/default/files/wwwfileroot/planning-and-buildings/planning/gc_0.13_brett_oils_pipewellgate_site_development_brief_december_2007.pdf

The location of the ex-Bretts Oil site is shown in red on the map below.

Figure: Map showing location of ex-Bretts Oil site

The proposal for regeneration of the site would be of mixed use potential, containing the following:

Ground floor - Restaurants / Cafes [Use Class A3] or Drinking Establishments [Use Class A4]
Upper floors - Office and Research and Development [Use Classes B1a & B1b] or Hotels [Use Class C1] or Residential [Use Class C3]
Also potential for other Leisure [Use Class D2]

AdditionalInstructionstostudents:

We will be undertaking a group site visit to complete the scoping part of the assessment. You may need to undertake individual surveys around the site, depending on what impact you chose to investigate in more detail at a later date.

Please note that due to site safety issues we have not been able to get agreement to survey on-site, we are able to survey around the site and up to the site borders. Depending on your chosen impact area you may need to undertake individual risk assessments. For some impact types you may need to collect samples and bring them back to analyse.

You may find it difficult to answer some scoping questions without visiting the site, but remember that in the early part of scoping, one of the aims is to determine what additional information you need to obtain in order to determine likely impacts. Where impacts are uncertain please indicate what further information you believe is required to determine impact significance.

You may find that the same impact and reasons apply to whole sections of the scoping, in such cases you can merge the cells for the rows and make a single statement on impact and reasons.

A wide range of documents which relate to the development site and its surrounds have been made available on eLP. It is important you consider these documents in assessing impact significance and refer to the documents as cited sources in your assessment.

Further Information about Scoping Assessment:

EIA scoping is the preliminary assessment carried out in the early stages of planning a development project. The scoping process is often undertaken initially as a desk exercise based on existing site information and the proposed development plan.

Full details on the European scooping process can be found at –

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/archives/eia/eia-guidelines/g-scoping-full-text.pdf

In completing Part 1 of the assessment (EIAreport)remember that you can make the following decisions at this stage:

Significant impact – probably (give reasons)

No significant impact – probably (give reasons)

Unknown level of impact – due to lack of information on… specify what information is needed to be collected.

The checklists in the EU documentation set out the questions to be considered in Scoping; you should use this checklist in completing Part 1 of the assessment – an editable word version of the checklist can be found on the eLP. For each question you should indicate whether there is an impact. You should then state which characteristics of the project environment could be affected and how? Finally you should state whether the effect is likely to be significant and your reasons for this conclusion.

Further Information about Assessment of Individual Impacts

In completing Part 2 of the assessment you need to firstly review the main ‘probable impact areas’, and identify the impact area you would like to assess further. Secondly to determine the standard methods/approaches for characterising and assessment of the impacts in your chosen impact area. You should discuss this in detail with the Module Tutor and agree a plan of action. Further guidance on EIA methods can be found at:

Defra guidance on EIA https://www.gov.uk/guidance/assessing-environmental-impact-guidance

CIEEM guidance on EIA – ecological impacts:for guidance on ecological impact assessment

https://www.cieem.net/data/files/Publications/EcIA_Guidelines_Terrestrial_Freshwater_and_Coastal_Jan_2016.pdf

Difid guide to screeninghttp://www.cartografia.regione.lombardia.it/silvia/doc/documentazione/linee_guida/DFID_environment_guide.pdf

Planning guidance on screening Schedule 2 projectshttp://planningguidance.communities.gov.uk/blog/guidance/environmental-impact-assessment/screening-schedule-2-projects/

In identifying methods for assessing the extent of the impacts which you have identified as being significant you will find it useful to refer toMorris, P. and Therivel, R. (2009) Methods of Environmental Impact Assessment, Taylor and Francis – copies available in the university library.

There is a wide range of guidance for different impact areas/types and advice will be given in the tutorials as to which guidance to consider.

When gathering existing information about the site and surrounds it is suggested that you look at:

http://www.magic.gov.uk/the Defra site covers lots of information about site designations, species etc.
https://www.gateshead.gov.uk/article/2957/Planning-Policy-and-Local-PlanGateshead Council Local Planning – for local policy and site information
https://gis.gateshead.gov.uk/gatesheadmaps/LDP/app.htmlInteractive local council planning map

FurtherInformation

LearningOutcomesassessedinthisassessment:The assessment will assess the following module learning outcomes, i.e. students’ ability to:

MLO 2: Identify likely impacts of proposed development/plans, evaluate the significance of such environmental impacts and recommend appropriate mitigation, minimisation and compensation methods.

MLO 4: Work effectively as part of a team to undertake cross disciplinary assessment of the environmental impacts and risks associated with proposed plans, policies or programmes and provide justified practical advice/recommendations.

MLO 5: Develop a deeper and more critical awareness of the role of sustainability and the environment within an organisation context and act to raise awareness of these with others.

AssessmentCriteria/MarkScheme:See thestandardMSc / Level Sevenmarkingcriteriaat the back of this assessment brief.

ReferencingStyle:Whenincludingreferencematerial,please use an acceptedstyleofreferencingi.e.Harvard,APA,BritishStandard).For more information on referencing and plagiarism see:

https://cragside.northumbria.ac.uk/Everyone/skillsplus/database_uploads/87.pdf

https://cragside.northumbria.ac.uk/everyone/skillsplus/55388728/story.html

Expectedsizeofthesubmission:

Part 1: 1000 words

Part 2: 1500 words

See the University’s policy on word limits here: https://www.northumbria.ac.uk/-/media/corporate-website/new-sitecore-gallery/services/academic-registry/documents/qte/assessment/guidance-for-students/word-limits-policy.pdf?la=en&hash=D06E866BA9C788D7B1FD8EE3E7E3F34026CE9673

The following are not included in the word count:

Titles and headings
Contents page
Tables, figures, illustrations, footnotes and legends
Reference list, bibliography, appendices, glossary

Assignmentweighting:The two elements of the assessment combined are worth 50%ofthemodulemarks.

AcademicIntegrityStatement:Youmustadheretotheuniversityregulationsonacademicconduct.Formalinquiryproceedingswillbeinstigatedifthereisanysuspicionofplagiarismoranyotherformofmisconductinyourwork.RefertotheUniversity’sAssessmentRegulationsforNorthumbriaAwardsifyouareunclearastothemeaningoftheseterms.ThelatestcopyisavailableontheUniversitywebsite.

Failure to submit: The University requires all students to submit assessed coursework by the deadline stated in the assessment brief. Where coursework is submitted without approval after the published hand-in deadline, penalties will be applied as defined in the University Policy on the Late Submission of Work. https://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/arpdf/lateappr

Anonymous Marking:University policy requires that work be marked anonymously. In order to facilitate this, we request that only your student number is included on work submitted for summative assessment.

Department of Geography Level 7Generic Grade Descriptors

	Knowledge & understanding of subject content	Use of evidence & exemplification	Narrative & argument	Written quality and clarity of expression	Technical aspects: Layout, presentation & referencing
90-100%	Exceptional content of professional quality. Knowledge of subject shows outstanding breadth and depth, gained from extensive wider reading. Novel, creative and original contribution. Knowledge explained clearly in the context of complex narrative, theories or paradigms. Criticality is clear.	Wide ranging, insightful and highly effective use of appropriate, novel and well-chosen evidence and examples/case studies that are drawn extensively from scholarly and other suitable sources beyond taught materials and core module reading list. Evidence and examples are well integrated, and the importance, relevance and meaning of the examples to the topic are made clear. Demonstrates original insights.	Excellent, sophisticated and coherent narrative that really holds the work together and is weaved effortlessly throughout the assignment. The introduction provides a superb starting point, clearly setting out the argument or position taken. The introduction gives clear signposting about the forthcoming structure and content. The conclusion is sharp and insightful. If required it provides a crisp and concise summary and a comprehensive and satisfactory ending to the work. It includes insightful, novel and sophisticated reflections with some nod to future directions if applicable. Recommendations are insightful, novel and sophisticated, clearly linked to conclusions.	Professionally and elegantly written. Cannot be improved.	Professionally presented, shows originality. All required elements present, including title, name, word count. Appropriate selection of font and careful attention to formatting, including table/figure titles and numbering. In text citations are accurately, consistently and appropriately used. Faultless reference list in Harvard format.
80-89%	Knowledge of subject shows outstanding breadth and depth, gained from extensive wider reading. Novel and/or original approaches and insights. Knowledge explained clearly in the context of complex narrative, theories or paradigms. Criticality is clear.			Professional piece of written work. Meaning is conveyed elegantly. Organisation of thoughts adheres strictly to an effective structure. Of publishable standard with minor adjustments.
70-79%	Knowledge of subject shows breadth and depth, gained from extensive wider reading. Knowledge content strongly focused on significant themes and demonstrates strong grasp of complex narrative, theories or paradigms. Criticality is clear.	Wide ranging and highly effective use of appropriate and well-chosen evidence and examples/case studies that are drawn extensively from scholarly and other suitable sources beyond taught materials and core module reading list. Evidence and examples are well integrated, and the importance, relevance and meaning of the examples to the topic are made clear.	A clear and coherent narrative or argument present throughout the essay that holds the work together. Introduction clearly sets out the argument or position taken, with clear signposting. Concise and insightful conclusion which shows unambiguous critical reflection. Recommendations are insightful and clearly linked to conclusions.	Writing conveys a clear expression of thought. Writing is polished and to a high standard. Logical structure, well planned and executed.	Excellent presentation. All required elements present, including title, name, word count. Appropriate selection of font and careful attention to formatting, including table/figure titles and numbering. In text citations are accurately, consistently and appropriately used. Faultless reference list in Harvard format.
60-69%	Good knowledge and understanding, showing breadth and depth. Knowledge mainly comes from wider reading beyond taught materials. Shows criticality and willingness to engage with theory, concepts or paradigms.	Wide ranging and effective use of appropriate and well-chosen evidence and examples/case studies, including exemplars that are drawn from scholarly and other suitable sources beyond taught materials and core module reading list. Evidence and examples are well integrated, and the importance, relevance and meaning of the examples to the topic are made clear.	A mostly explicit and coherent narrative or argument present throughout the essay that holds the work together. Clear and effective use of signposting. A clear introduction which sets out the argument or position taken and the structure of the essay. Conclusion is complimentary to the introduction and does not introduce new evidence. The conclusion provides a sharp and coherent summary of the work and offers good or insightful reflections. Recommendations are logical and clearly linked to conclusions.	Clear writing. Meaning effectively conveyed. Well executed structure provides logical organisation of thoughts.
50-59%	Satisfactory knowledge and understanding of subject, showing breadth and depth. Knowledge comes from wider reading as well as taught materials. Content is correct and accurate. Content may be substantial, but the descriptive and general nature means criticality can be developed further. May contain occasional errors.	Effective use of appropriate and well-chosen evidence and examples/case studies, some of which are drawn from scholarly sources and other suitable beyond taught material and core module reading list. Evidence and examples are largely integrated, and the importance, relevance and meaning of the examples to the topic are generally made clear. Level of detail provided may be variable.	A limited narrative or argument, neither of which is consistent throughout the essay. The argument is weak or muddled in parts. Parts of the essay can be difficult to follow. Signposting is weak or inconsistent. Introduction and conclusion are related. Introduction should clearly set out the argument and position taken in the essay but there is a minimal outline of the structure of what is to come. Conclusion is summative and analytical. May offer a weak or minimal attempt at offering reflections and insights. Recommendations are limited and linked to conclusions.	Meaning is conveyed, although the work is let down by occasional spelling/grammatical errors. Ambiguous statements are avoided. A recognisable structure is used well to organise thoughts.	Very good presentation and formatting with no, or only a few, minor issues. In text citations largely accurate and consistently used. Accurate reference list in Harvard format.
40-49%	Unsatisfactory knowledge of subject and sufficient material to demonstrate understanding of the topic, but based predominantly on taught material, supplemented by recommended core reading. Content is accurate, but primarily descriptive lacking insight, relevance and meaning. Lacks criticality. Some errors and/or omissions.	Use of a limited range of evidence and examples/case studies, mostly drawn from taught material and core module reading list. Evidence may not be appropriate and may lack integration, with the relevance and meaning of examples not always made clear. Level of detail provided is likely to be variable.	Minimal or discernible argument or narrative. Essay is difficult to follow, often loses its way. The signposting is weak or missing. Introduction or conclusion may be missing or irrelevant. Weak or minimal attempt at offering reflections and insights in the conclusion. Recommendations are limited and may not be linked to conclusions.	Meaning is mostly conveyed, but not effectively. The work is let down by frequent examples of poor writing, ambiguous sentences and/or poor spelling and grammar. Recognisable structure, but not used to best effect (i.e. sections may be in a muddled order).	Presentation generally good but may have one or more of the following faults, for example: no title, absence of name/student number, failure to include required word count, lacking clear paragraphs, inconsistent formatting, inconsistent font and font size, missing table/figure captions and numbers. In text citations largely accurate and consistently used. Reference list in Harvard format is presented but contains a few minor errors.
30-39%	Weak content that is descriptive and general. Insufficient material to demonstrate basic knowledge and understanding of the subject. Key material omitted or mistaken.	Evidence and examples/case studies used but to limited effect and drawn almost exclusively from taught material and core module reading list. Evidence may not always be appropriate and discussion of evidence is likely to contain significant errors and/or misunderstandings.	No clear or obvious narrative. Weak or no argument. Introduction conclusion and recommendations are irrelevant, poorly matched or entirely missing.	Multiple examples of ambiguous writing, frequently obscuring the meaning. Structure is weak and/or difficult to follow.	Presentation acceptable but with several of the following faults, for example: no title, absence of name/student number, failure to include required word count, lacking clear paragraphs, inconsistent formatting, inconsistent font and font size, missing table/figure captions and numbers. In text citations included but there may be inaccuracies and inconsistency in format. Reference list in Harvard format, but contains some inaccuracies.
0-29%	Very little relevant content. No evidence of subject knowledge or understanding.	Supported by very little and/or irrelevant evidence and examples/case studies. Evidence used is largely anecdotal rather than from taught materials and literature.	No argument or position taken. No narrative to hold the essay together. Introduction, conclusion and recommendations are irrelevant or entirely missing.	Meaning is obscured by poor writing. Structure is weak or not apparent.	Poorly presented work containing many of the following faults, for example: no title, absence of name/student number, failure to include required word count, lacking clear paragraphs, inconsistent formatting, inconsistent font and font size, missing table/figure captions and numbers. Minimal in text citation. Reference list absent or at best consisting of a poorly presented list that is not in Harvard format.

Tired of the boring assignments to be submitted to colleges and universities? MyAssignmentMart.com gives you multiple reasons to trust it with your orders. We employ PhD experts handpicked from prestigious universities over the globe. We cater to quality assignment help, dissertation writing services and online essay help, covering more than 100 academic subjects. We pledge to complete your assignments on time and never compromise when it comes to deadline. Our prices for assignments are the most competitive in the market and make sure the cost suits your budget.

Get Assignment Help Now...!

Number of pages/words

Free Sample

Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping Report and Assessment of the Likely Impactsin a Selected Impact Area

FurtherInformation

Get Assignment Help Now...!

Subjects We Offer

What Do we give you ?