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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

concept is a probabilistic description of how likely it is, given certain factors such as access to resources, education and health care that an individual's life will turn out a certain way. Clearly, the lack of opportunities resulting from inappropriate or dysfunctional existing development or infrastructure can be rectified by providing new development and thus improving the life‐chances of Runnymede residents. WHWB2: Risks respiratory health related to air pollution 6.29 Continued use of development and some infrastructure such as transport, can give rise to increases in the risk of respiratory illness in the population. The council has designated three areas as Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) as a result of poor air quality and these have been detailed in Section 11. WHWB3: Risks to health and well‐being from environmental noise 6.30 According to the EU, noise above a certain volume threshold (from 60Ldn dB(A)) affects both health and well‐being of individuals. Continued use of existing and new development and infrastructure (including transport) will give rise to an increased risk of noise exposure. WHWB4: Risks to health and well‐being from environmental stress 6.31 Stress is a common feature of the daily lives of individuals. Whilst some stress can be considered positive, prolonged or frequent bouts of stress can have a negative impact on health and well‐being. Continued use of existing inappropriate or dysfunctional development and infrastructure (including transport) congestion will give rise to an increased risk of stress exposure. WHWB5: Opportunities to increase physical activity 6.32 The lack of physical activity is also a common feature of the daily lives of many individuals. Whether it is due to location fear, motivation or an underlying condition, the benefits to health and well‐being of engaging in some physical activity have been widely documented. The lack of opportunities that are a result of inappropriate or dysfunctional existing development and infrastructure can be rectified by new or re‐development. Consideration of Policy and its Alternatives Policy LP01: Strategy for the Location of Development 6.33 The overall impact of all alternatives range between uncertain and neutral within the SEA for the policy options (see Appendix 4). However, this masks the impact of LP01 on pathway WHWB 2 that considers effect of air pollution, as well as LP01‐A2 having a significant adverse impact on the same receptor. With regard to LP01‐A1 and LP01‐A2 and their impact on pathway WHWB 3 – the risk to health due to noise pollution – both have scored adverse. All other receptors are in the range of uncertain to beneficial. In view of the mix of impacts, no policy approach avoids a negative impact on this receptor. Overall the effect of any new development will have both a positive and negative impact on ER02. 6.34 Having regard to the conclusion of SA in Appendix 3, overall, 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). 6.35 Overall LP01 does not have a significantly different either worse or better impact to its alternatives as considered. Policy LP02: Housing Provision and Distribution 6.36 Considering the conclusions of the SEA in Appendix 4, alternatives LP02 and LP02‐A3(b) have neutral impacts on this environmental receptor. LP02‐A2(a) – LP02‐A3(a) all would result in a mixed positive effect and LP02‐A1 has an uncertain impact. The effect on the pathways of the alternatives is varied but none exhibit significantly adverse effects. LP02‐A2(a) does exhibit potentially adverse effects on WHWB1 – the opportunities for life chances. This probably reflects the scattering of development on the urban perimeter and the lesser opportunities Page | 88 Runnymede BC FINAL Sustainability Appraisal Report – Feb 2013
for community gain. Across the range of other pathways there are in there are in the round general positive impacts. 6.37 With 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 overall significantly different. 6.38 Overall policy LP02 in the SA consideration will not result in a different impact to that of its alternatives. In contrast in terms of the SEA on this particular environmental receptor, LP02 appears to score less well than 4 of its other alternatives. Policy LP03 – Development in Addlestone Urban Area 6.39 In terms of SEA, LP03 has an uncertain impact in comparison to the neutral impacts of LP03‐ A1 and LP03‐A2. With regard to the impact on the pathways it is noted that all alternatives adversely affect WHWB2 ‐ the health risk associated with air pollution (see Appendix 4). Any level of growth will give rise to this impact and so it is an impact that has to be mitigated in the most effective way when detailed schemes are submitted. 6.40 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, reflecting the resulting impact on the air quality pathways. The need to accommodate growth in housing will have potential consequences for all receptors, however, in SA terms the impact of the alternatives is no different. 6.41 Overall policy LP03 in SA terms does not have a different impact to its alternatives ‐ all have potentially mixed beneficial effects. In contrast, LP03 scores lower than either of its alternatives in terms of SEA. Policy LP04: Policy Development in Egham / Englefield Green Urban Area 6.42 In terms of SEA, both LP04 and LP04‐A1 score a neutral impact on this environmental receptor (see Appendix 4), this is in spite of a potential adverse effect on WHWB2 from LP04‐ A1. 6.43 Having regard to the conclusion of SA in Appendix 3, overall, all the policy approaches also have a neutral impact. The need to accommodate growth presents opportunities to have a consequence for all the receptors, and this is borne out by the uncertainty in terms of RSF 16 – Air Quality. 6.44 Overall policy LP04 in SA terms has a more beneficial effect in contrast to its alternative. In terms of SEA both approaches score equal. Policy LP05: Royal Holloway UOL 6.45 The SEA conclusion is that LP05 and LP05‐A1 will have a neutral effect, whilst alternative LP05‐A2 is considered to result in an uncertain effect (see Appendix 4). 6.46 Alternative LP05‐A1 scores a neutral effect on all the impact pathways except for WHWB1 – opportunities for life chances. This neutral effect is because the alternative presumes against development, and so there is little effect on risks to health, and there is no change to opportunities to increase physical activity. This alternative scores a mixed effect for opportunities for life chances because the alternative effectively maintains the status quo; some opportunities will be lost by the lack of the expansion and development of the academic facility, to be weighed against a less developed site with fewer people using it and more open space available. There would also be a mixed effect for the wider community from this option, in terms of an increase in the local population versus increased facilities available locally. The other two options, the LP05 and LP05‐A2 both provide a beneficial score, reflecting the enhanced offer that would be available to a greater number of people both on the site and off. Page | 89 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: Figure 8 ‐ Projected Population i
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 and 114: Figure 11 - Source Protection Zone
Page 115 and 116: 8.32 An increase in population with
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:
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:
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?