DRAFT Sustainability Appraisal Report for the Emerging Local Plan ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Receptor Key Issues, challenges and potential responses for the Local Plan In February 2012 21,603 residential and commercial properties within the borough were at risk of flooding. Issues and Challenges: Urban development and supporting infrastructure networks, such as those being proposed, and are likely to be enhanced as a result of induced development. All of which can affect both the use and quality of the water environment. The siting of urban development and supporting infrastructure such as roads can interrupt the natural flows of both surface and ground waters, and can add to problems on flood plains. Common construction practice is to use piling which creates preferential pathways for groundwater. The quality of both ground and surface water can be affected by the run-off which is often laden with pollutants including fuel oils and as well as seasonal road treatments (e.g. salt in the winter). Possible LP Response: The LP could tighten the policies that it is bringing forward policies to further minimise the risks of development and infrastructure interfering with the water regime by not only avoiding inappropriate development in flood plains but proactively encouraging appropriate development and flood protection. Policies could also propose that all developments incorporate systems to capture and filter surface water run-off into the design of urban hard landscapes, roads and other supporting infrastructure as appropriate. How LP Responded: Policy SP10 looks specifically to address inappropriate development in areas likely to flood. It confines itself to the standards as set in the NPPF. Evolution of Baseline in Absence of Plan 8.26 The projected impacts of climate change for the South East of England, coupled with a growing population, would have a range of implications for the freshwater environment and water resources. If average temperatures were to increase in the projected range, and summers to become hotter and drier the region’s water resources and freshwater environments would be placed at increased risk of adverse effect due to scarcity of resource coinciding with a likely increase in demand from the population. 8.27 High demand in periods of hot weather coupled with restricted availability of surface water supplies could also adversely affect groundwater and aquifers, the depletion of which would, in turn adversely affect the base flows of rivers and streams. There have been several hosepipe bans over the last few years to conserve water resources lasting from spring until late summer. 8.28 In the event of the projected scenario of warmer and wetter winters being realised, the likely surfeit of incident rainfall could result in a rise in the risks of flooding from fluvial sources and non‐fluvial sources (i.e. surface water runoff during periods of heavy rain). 8.29 Whilst there is a cumulative effect potential on this receptor, the situation is unlikely to be significantly affected by the absence of the plan alone. The ‘effect lock‐in’ of climate change, means that the effects over the life of the plan, i.e. up to 2026 are already set. Potential Impact Pathways WRM1: Impacts on the flow of water 8.30 The physical provision of development and supporting infrastructure within Runnymede will increase the risk of adverse effects as a result of changes to water flow through impedance or acceleration of flow of generally surface water. WRM2: Impacts on water quality 8.31 Pressure for development within Runnymede will increase the risk of adverse effects to water quality through the development process and use of buildings WRM3: Demand for water resources Page | 114 Runnymede BC FINAL Sustainability Appraisal Report – Feb 2013
8.32 An increase in population within Runnymede will increase demand for water resources which in turn will increase scarcity. Consideration of Policy and its Alternatives on ER04 Policy LP01: Strategy for the Location of Development 8.33 With regard to the SEA (Appendix 4) all policy options have an adverse impact on the receptors. The implication is that any development is likely to have an impact on water resource and management due to the scale of development and the potential supply issues. The adverse impact on pathways WRM1 and 3 have regard to technical issues on water flow and water supply. However, this is a technical issue that can be resolved with the provision of investment in the infrastructure. 8.34 The Level 6 HRA assessment has provided the Council with sufficient evidence for it to ascertain no adverse affect on the integrity of either Thames Basin Heaths SPA or Thursley, Ash, Pirbright and Chobham SAC as a result of the implementation of the Local Plan. The Level 6 HRA Report is presented in Appendices 8 and 9. 8.35 Having regard to the conclusion of SA in Appendix 3, overall, all the policy approaches have a mixed beneficial impact. It is noted that the impact on the air quality is adverse (RSF 16), whilst it also has a negative impact on the desire to conserve and enhance the region’s biodiversity (RSF 19). 8.36 LP01 overall does not have a significantly different impact to the alternatives. Policy LP02: Housing Provision and Distribution 8.37 With regard to the SEA (Appendix 4) alternatives LP02 and LP02‐A1 have a neutral impact. The remaining policy options have an adverse impact. It is not clear why the policy options vary in their impact but it is likely that the comprehensive approach that is offered by the former DERA site addresses the key infrastructure issues. The assessment however clearly supports an option that is able to positively address the physical infrastructure issues. 8.38 The Level 6 HRA assessment has provided the Council with sufficient evidence for it to ascertain no adverse affect on the integrity of either Thames Basin Heaths SPA or Thursley, Ash, Pirbright and Chobham SAC as a result of the implementation of the Local Plan. The Level 6 HRA Report is presented in Appendices 8 and 9. 8.39 Having regard to the conclusion of SA in Appendix 3, overall, all the policy approaches have a neutral impact. It is noted that the impact on RSF 14 (the reuse of urban land) is undermined by the green field alternatives, whilst the impact on air quality is adverse (RSF 16) for all alternatives. There is again an adverse impact on RSF 20 – the impact on the natural and heritage environment. The need to accommodate growth will have a consequence for all the receptors, but the impact of the alternatives is not different for planned or unplanned growth. 8.40 LP02 overall in the SA consideration does not have a different impact to the alternatives. They are all neutral. Policy LP03: Development in Addlestone Urban Area 8.41 With regard to the SEA (Appendix 4) LP03 has a neutral impact, whilst LP03‐A1 and LP03‐A2 have an adverse impact. When consideration is given to the affect on the pathways LP03‐A1 and LP03‐A2 have an adverse impact on pathway WRM 1 – the flow of water and WRM 3 – the demand for water. These issues are not present with the alternative A reflecting the proposed modest planned approach to development in the town. The reactive impact of LP03‐A1 and the larger impact of the significant development are less easy to quantify and manage. 8.42 Having regard to the conclusion of SA in Appendix 3, overall, all the policy approaches have a neutral impact. The impact on air quality is uncertain/adverse (RSF 16) for all alternatives and this is reflected on the impact on the pathways. The need to accommodate growth will have a consequence for all the receptors, but the impact of the alternatives is not different for planned or unplanned growth. Page | 115 Runnymede BC FINAL Sustainability Appraisal Report – Feb 2013
Page 1 and 2:
2013 DRAFT Sustainability Appraisal
Page 3 and 4:
Draft Sustainability Appraisal Repo
Page 5 and 6:
CONTENTS List of Tables ...........
Page 7 and 8:
SECTION 8. [ER04] WATER RESOURCES A
Page 9 and 10:
Local Plan Policy Context Conclusio
Page 11 and 12:
Table 59 - ER04 - Water Resource an
Page 13 and 14:
Commenting on this SAR Report Pleas
Page 15 and 16:
Glossary of terms TERM Baseline Dat
Page 17 and 18:
Section 1. Section 1 Introduction t
Page 19 and 20:
Section 16 Conclusions 1.17 This se
Page 21 and 22:
Section 2. Legal and Statutory Requ
Page 23 and 24:
effects on the environment of certa
Page 25 and 26:
Box 1 ‐ Elements of an Environmen
Page 27 and 28:
Table 2 - Assessment Chapter Compon
Page 29 and 30:
Date Key stage in SA/SEA Effect on
Page 31 and 32:
Section 3. Introduction Framework a
Page 33 and 34:
3.16 Monitoring reports will be aug
Page 35 and 36:
Figure 4 - Compatibility between SA
Page 37 and 38:
Table 6 - Meeting the requirements
Page 39 and 40:
Environmental Receptor ER03 Land an
Page 41 and 42:
the SEA. Each policy and its altern
Page 43 and 44:
Table 10 - Additive and interactive
Page 45 and 46:
3.43 In terms of environment, asses
Page 47 and 48:
Section 4. Assessment of RBC’s Lo
Page 49 and 50:
LP Objective Strategic Policy Objec
Page 51 and 52:
No. Policy LP04 Development in Egha
Page 53 and 54:
Location Policy 2 (LP02) - Housing
Page 55 and 56:
4.41 The approach in Policy LP04 ac
Page 57 and 58:
4.56 Policy LP08 seeks to provide
Page 59 and 60:
4.73 To summarise, Policy SP03 prom
Page 61 and 62:
4.90 However, the policy appears to
Page 63 and 64: Policy and Alternatives Considered
Page 65 and 66: Section 5. Introduction [ER01] Natu
Page 67 and 68: Protecting and enhancing valued lan
Page 69 and 70: Sites of International Importance a
Page 71 and 72: SSSI Area (ha) Reason for designati
Page 73 and 74: Evolution of Baseline in Absence of
Page 75 and 76: scenario) will have a similar impac
Page 77 and 78: 5.63 LP07 overall in the SA conside
Page 79 and 80: Policy SP08 - Employment Developmen
Page 81 and 82: Cumulative Effects Assessment 5.100
Page 83 and 84: Section 6. Introduction [ER02] Welf
Page 85 and 86: European Nitrates Directive (1991)
Page 87 and 88: Figure 8 ‐ Projected Population i
Page 89 and 90: for community gain. Across the rang
Page 91 and 92: alternative to leave the site in th
Page 93 and 94: the policy requires all development
Page 95 and 96: 6.96 With regard to WHWB5 (opportun
Page 97 and 98: Section 7. Introduction [ER03] Land
Page 99 and 100: County 7.12 Surrey Waste Plan (2008
Page 101 and 102: Evolution of Baseline condition in
Page 103 and 104: through the appropriate re‐use of
Page 105 and 106: Policy SP07: Thames Basin Heaths Sp
Page 107 and 108: Table 52 - Suggested Monitoring of
Page 109 and 110: Section 8. Introduction [ER04] Wate
Page 111 and 112: Local 8.11 Strategic Flood Risk Ass
Page 113: Figure 11 - Source Protection Zone
Page 117 and 118: the final development schemes. Ther
Page 119 and 120: encourages proposals that enhance t
Page 121 and 122: Cumulative Effects Assessment 8.87
Page 123 and 124: Section 9. Introduction [ER05] Air
Page 125 and 126: 9.11 The Air Quality Strategy for E
Page 127 and 128: to 23 μg/m 3 in 2011 55 . It is as
Page 129 and 130: 9.45 LP02 overall in the SA conside
Page 131 and 132: 9.67 The overall conclusion of the
Page 133 and 134: Policy SP08: Employment Development
Page 135 and 136: and from ER06 Climate change. Syner
Page 137 and 138: The dispersion software used to mod
Page 139 and 140: not been approved yet and can be re
Page 141 and 142: Table 66 - Suggested Monitoring of
Page 143 and 144: Section 11. Introduction [ER06] Cli
Page 145 and 146: 11.8 The Directive requires buildin
Page 147 and 148: Local to reduce distance travelled
Page 149 and 150: 11.36 By the 2050s, it has been pro
Page 151 and 152: is a reflection of the scale of dev
Page 153 and 154: the receptors, but the impact of th
Page 155 and 156: 11.83 SP06 has a neutral effect on
Page 157 and 158: No. Policy Impact 66 Location Polic
Page 159 and 160: Suggested Monitoring Regime Table 7
Page 161 and 162: Section 12. Introduction [ER07] Mat
Page 163 and 164: 12.14 With regard to waste manageme
Page 165 and 166:
(MEW2). However, the impact is unce
Page 167 and 168:
Policy SP06: Tourism, Recreation an
Page 169 and 170:
Cumulative Effects Assessment 12.67
Page 171 and 172:
Section 13. Introduction [ER08] Bui
Page 173 and 174:
Runnymede Urban Area Character Appr
Page 175 and 176:
13.29 Having regard to the conclusi
Page 177 and 178:
13.52 Having regard to the conclusi
Page 179 and 180:
Table 83 - Summary of Local Plan Po
Page 181 and 182:
Section 14. Introduction [ER09] His
Page 183 and 184:
Table 87 - ER09 Summary Key Environ
Page 185 and 186:
whilst it also has a negative impac
Page 187 and 188:
14.53 LP07 overall in the SA consid
Page 189 and 190:
14.74 SP06 has an adverse effect on
Page 191 and 192:
No. Policy Impact 73 Location Polic
Page 193 and 194:
Section 15. Introduction [ER10] Lan
Page 195 and 196:
15.11 Soil Strategy for England (20
Page 197 and 198:
whilst it also has a negative impac
Page 199 and 200:
Policy SP01: Green Belt Areas 15.44
Page 201 and 202:
No. Policy Impact 74 Location Polic
Page 203 and 204:
Section 16. Introduction Conclusion
Page 205 and 206:
16.14 Cumulative effects are consid
Page 207 and 208:
covers the capacity to create oppor
Page 209 and 210:
Provision of sustainable homes for
Page 211 and 212:
16.70 Policy LP03 and its two alter
Page 213 and 214:
of urban developments and supportin
Page 215 and 216:
of their natural beauty). Runnymede
Page 217 and 218:
SEA and SA Conclusion of the Local
Page 219 and 220:
the Core Strategy have identified s
Page 221 and 222:
16.154 The overall conclusion in th
Page 223 and 224:
16.173 The approach in LP07‐A1 is
Page 225 and 226:
16.191 Alternative SP02 ‐ A1 does
Page 227 and 228:
16.210 The overall conclusion of SE
Page 229 and 230:
16.232 The overall conclusion of SA
Page 231 and 232:
team saw a positive effect due in p
Page 233 and 234:
Section 17. Data Used Data, Data Un
Page 235 and 236:
Section 18. Plan Uncertainty and Ri
Page 237 and 238:
Section 19. Monitoring 19.1 The SEA
Page 239 and 240:
Section 20. Next Stages 20.1 A key
show all

DRAFT Sustainability Appraisal Report for the Emerging Local Plan ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?