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

9.45 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
9.46 The adverse impact of LP02‐A2 is noted. The particular issue to examine is the impact of
LP02‐ A2 on the pathways AQ1‐3, whilst LP02‐A1 impacts adversely on AQ1‐2. The particular
impact on air quality reflects the impact of increased traffic, construction and heating, etc
derived from the forms of development (See Appendix 4). The lesser impact of LP02 ‐ is a
significant factor when reaching a final view.
9.47 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.
9.48 LP03 overall in the SA consideration does not have a different impact to the alternatives. The
alternatives have a mixed positive impact.
Policy LP04: Development in Egham / Englefield Green Urban Area
9.49 The adverse implication of LP04 may require attention when the fuller assessment is
undertaken. However, the key impact on the pathways of LP04 is due to the quantum of
growth versus no growth in LP04‐A1 (See Appendix 4). The need to meet growth reflects the
imperative for planned expansion in the town.
9.50 Having regard to the conclusion of SA in Appendix 3, overall, all the policy approaches have a
neutral impact. 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.
9.51 LP04 overall in the SA consideration does not have a different impact to the alternative, apart
from being more positive.
Policy LP05: Royal Holloway UOL
9.52 The SEA conclusion for the Air Quality receptor, is that LP05 will have an uncertain effect,
LP05‐A1 will have a neutral effect and LP05‐A2 will have an adverse effect (See Appendix 4).
This reflects the level of development likely to take place under each option, LP05‐A1
presuming against any development, the preferred option allowing a controlled amount of
development subject to an approved masterplan, and LP05‐A2 taking the site out of the
Green Belt and thereby removing all constraint to development. The SA reflects a similar
pattern, scoring a neutral effect for LP05 and LP05‐A1, and an uncertain effect for LP05‐A2.
9.53 These scores are reflected in those for the impact pathways AQ1 and AQ2, emissions to air
associated with traffic on the roads in the borough, and emissions to air associated with
construction/maintenance of the Borough’s infrastructure, including residential and
commercial assets. Again these scores are to be expected against the level of development
proposed by each option.
9.54 The third impact pathway, emissions to air associated with heating proposed residential and
commercial property in Runnymede (AQ3), has scores an uncertain effect for both LP05 and
LP05‐A2 and a neutral effect for LP05‐A1. This is because LP05‐A1 to keep the site in the
Green Belt will presume against development and so will have no effect on this pathway (or
on AQ1 and AQ2) while the other two options will involve development. However quantities
or methods of heating are not known at this stage, so an uncertain score must be given.
9.55 Policy option LP05 therefore has an uncertain score across all the impact pathways because
until the type and level of development is known the effects cannot be assessed or
quantified. LP05‐A1 has scored better across the receptor because we know that no
development will have a neutral effect. However, as identified across this proposed policy,
the aspiration of the plan (and therefore the policy) is to allow the college to develop and
grow, and LP05‐A1 does not meet this aspiration.
Page | 129 Runnymede BC FINAL Sustainability Appraisal Report – Feb 2013