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

the policy on all the other pathways within this receptor, the accepted policy was considered
more sustainable than the alternative.
6.83 With regard to SA, overall, the preferred policy has a neutral effect on SA objectives, and the
alternative has mixed effects. With regard to RSF objectives, where the preferred policy and
the alternative differ in their evaluation, is RSF objective 15 (reduce risk of flooding and
resulting detriment to public well‐being, the economy and the environment). Alternative one
has a neutral impact on RSF15, but the preferred policy has a significantly beneficial effect
because it encourages proposals that enhance the use and access of waterways, that would
lead to their improvement. The preferred policy is not very different to alternative one, as
more hotel provision will be viewed positively, and existing facilities will be utilised more,
making a contribution towards social aspects within Runnymede.
Policy SP07: Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area
6.84 Policy SP07 does not have any alternatives to consider in either the SEA or SA.
6.85 The policy team felt that there was no reasonable alternative to the policy, as it provides a
tested mechanism to facilitate development. However, the overall impact on the receptors is
mixed positive.
6.86 In terms of SA (Appendix 3) policy SP07 returns a neutral impact.
6.87 No SEA Discussion.
Policy SP08: Employment Development
6.88 Policy SP08 has one alternative policy SP08‐A1 to consider in addition to itself in terms of SEA
and SA.
6.89 Both policy SP08 and SP08‐A1 result in an overall neutral impact (Appendix 4). The impact on
the pathways is generally uncertain.
6.90 Having regard to the conclusion of SA in Appendix 3, overall, all policy SP08 and SP08‐A1 have
a neutral/positive impact. However, there is an adverse affect expected from 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). Policy 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 which would imply that SP08 is clearly
more acceptable.
Policy SP09: Sustainable Transport
6.91 Policy SP09 does not have any alternatives to consider in either the SEA or SA.
6.92 The overall conclusion for policy SP09 is a mixed effect on environmental receptor ER02
(Appendix 4). The policy has a beneficial effect on WHWB1 (opportunities for life chances) as
the opportunity to use varied modes of transports will make the Borough generally more
accessible to more people.
6.93 The policy is expected to result in a beneficial effect on WHWB2 (risk to respiratory health,
related to air pollution), as the policy requires high trip generated development to be
accessible by more sustainable modes of transport than the car, with the desired effect of
reducing car trips, and therefore having positive impacts on air pollution.
6.94 The policy is expected to result in mixed effects on impact pathway WHWB3 (health and
wellbeing from environmental noise), as environmental noise will be reduced through the
policy as it requires to reduce car use, however there could be associated increases in noise
from other more sustainable modes of transport.
6.95 The policy is expected to result in a beneficial effect on impact pathway WHWB4 (risks from
environmental stress) as the policy with its requirements to reduce car use, provision of new
public transport and making on site provision for cycle parking in new high trip‐generating
development will be capable of increasing health and well‐being.
Page | 94 Runnymede BC FINAL Sustainability Appraisal Report – Feb 2013