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

14.74 SP06 has an adverse effect on impact pathway HEA4 (impacts on heritage assets due to
disturbance), as the boost in tourist numbers visiting heritage assets (including the River
Thames and other water bodies) if not managed properly could adversely impact on these
assets due to disturbance. SP06‐A1 also has an adverse effect on the impact pathway for the
same reason as the preferred policy.
14.75 No SA discussion.
Policy SP07: Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area
14.76 There are considered to be no reasonable alternative to the policy, as it provides a tested
mechanism to facilitate development. However, the impact on the receptor is neutral with
regard to the SEA (Appendix 4)
14.77 No SA Discussion.
Policy SP08: Employment Development
14.78 With regard to the SEA (Appendix 4) both policy SP08 and SP08‐A1 have an uncertain impact.
14.79 Having regard to the conclusion of SA in Appendix 3, overall, all the policy approaches have a
neutral/positive impact. However, there is an adverse affect form the SP08‐A1 on RSF 3
(reducing poverty) , RSF 6 (creating vibrant communities), RSF 9 and 11 (stimulating the
economy), and RSF 12 (developing a dynamic economy), RSF 13 (maintaining a skilled
workforce), RSF 21 (improving transport), SP08‐A1 is less acceptable in the SA analysis. The
need to accommodate growth will have a consequence for all the receptors, but the impact
of the alternatives is different in a negative way and so SP08 is clearly more acceptable.
14.80 SP08 overall in the SA consideration does not have an overall different impact to the
alternative but it is more positive.
Policy SP09: Sustainable Transport
14.81 With regard to SEA receptor ER09, the overall conclusion for the policy is an adverse effect
(Appendix 4). The policy has an adverse effect on impact pathway HEA1 (impacts on heritage
assets due to land take), as the provision of new roads may negatively impact on existing
heritage assets.
14.82 SP09 has an adverse effect on impact pathway HEA2 (impacts on heritage assets due to
inappropriate development), as the routes of new roads/existing roads could be near to
heritage assets, and would therefore cause disturbance.
14.83 Policy SP09 has an adverse effect on impact pathway HEA3 (impacts on heritage assets due to
decreased air quality and related climate change), because the amount and location of new
infrastructure provision is not stated in this policy, and although SP09 requires more use of
sustainable modes of transport, the existing amount of particulates in the air has already
caused damage to heritage assets, such as listed buildings. However, new infrastructure may
minimise energy consumption and prevent increases in poor air quality, and the policy makes
provision for new development (where it is appropriate to do so) be located near to
sustainable forms of transport.
14.84 SP09 has a neutral effect on impact pathway HEA4 (impacts on heritage assets due to
disturbance), as the roads that already exist in locations near to heritage assets and will be
used regardless of the amount of public transport put in place.
14.85 Overall policy SP09 has a mixed effect on SA objectives (Appendix 3). With regard to RSF
objectives, the policy has a neutral, beneficial or significantly beneficial effect in SA terms,
with the exception of RSF8 (to encourage increase engagement in cultural activity across all
sections of the community in Runnymede, and promote sustainable tourism), where the
policy has an uncertain effect on the objective. This effect is seen because promoting
sustainable tourism is difficult when the tourism policy does not require recreation and
leisure facilities to be accessible by public transport. In addition, the transport policy although
has sustainable principles, makes no specific requirement for tourism facilities to be
accessible by public transport, therefore its effects would be unknown.
Page | 189 Runnymede BC FINAL Sustainability Appraisal Report – Feb 2013