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

population as it requires some form of growth. This requires an acceptance that mitigation is
required as part of future development schemes.
11.54 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.
11.55 The preferred approach overall in the SA consideration does not have a different impact to
the alternative, apart from being more positive.
Policy LP05: Royal Holloway UOL
11.56 The SEA conclusion for ER06 (Appendix 4), Climate Change, is that the policy LP05 will have
an uncertain effect. LP05‐A1 scores a neutral effect and alternative LP05‐A2 an adverse
effect. These scores are reflected across the individual impact pathways CC1 and CC2, relating
to greenhouse gas emissions associated with changes in the volume and distribution of traffic
and the construction/maintenance of infrastructure in Runnymede, including transport,
residential and commercial. Similarly, impact pathway CC3, greenhouse gas emissions
associated with heating, electricity use and waste management from residential and
commercial use in the borough, scores an uncertain effect and a neutral effect respectively
for LP05 and LP05‐A1 but also an uncertain effect for LP05‐A2. These scores reflect the fact
that LP05‐A1, to keep the site in the Green Belt will presume against development and so will
not give rise to greenhouse gas emissions, hence the neutral score, whereas development, as
suggested by LP05 and LP05‐A2, may give rise to emissions. LP05 suggests a limited amount
of development relating solely to the academic use of the site, the uncertain scores reflecting
the lack of detail at this stage in order to ascertain if the level and type of construction will
give rise to greenhouse gas emissions across the impact pathways. LP05‐A2 would allow
greater levels and type of development, hence the overall adverse score in this respect.
11.57 Again the conclusion can be drawn from the SEA that LP05‐A1 is the best alternative because
it can be determined with certainty that it will not give rise to greenhouse emissions, but this
alternative does not meet the aspirations of the plan to retain the college in the borough. The
uncertain score for LP05 indicates that this option may not give rise to greenhouse gas
emissions, and methods to mitigate this effect will be considered as a part of implementation
of this policy.
11.58 With regard to SA, overall, the preferred policy has a mixed effect on SA objectives, and the
alternatives both have a neutral effect. RSF 16 (to reduce air pollution and ensure continued
air quality improvement) scores an uncertain effect for LP05 while LP05‐A1 has a neutral
effect. LP05‐A2 scores an adverse effect. For RSF 19 – to conserve and enhance the region’s
biodiversity – LP05 has an adverse effect and LP05‐A2 a significantly adverse effect. LP05‐A1
again has a neutral effect. For both these objectives LP05‐A1 scores better than the preferred
option but again these are environmentally based objectives and do not take account of the
social and economic benefits of the preferred policy option. Mitigating measures can be
taken to enable any development of the site meet these environmental objectives.
Policy LP06: Development in Chertsey Urban Area
11.59 With regard to SEA receptor ER06, the overall conclusion for LP06 is a neutral effect on the
receptor (Appendix 4). This is because it has been judged that climate change is unlikely to be
materially affected by the scale of development envisaged for the settlement area. LP06‐A1 is
categorised as uncertain, as the location and scale of not specified in the policy.
11.60 No SA discussion
Policy LP07: Development in Virginia Water
11.61 With regard to the SEA (Appendix 4) the neutral impact is noted on LP07. LP07 also has a
neutral impact on the pathways. Given that there is a neutral impact on climate change this
can be viewed as a positive signal about development.
11.62 Having regard to the conclusion of SA in Appendix 3, overall, all the policy approaches have a
neutral/positive impact. The need to accommodate growth will have a consequence for all
Page | 152 Runnymede BC FINAL Sustainability Appraisal Report – Feb 2013