Report for Scottish Environment Protection Agency/ Neil Deasley Planning and European Affairs Manager Scottish Natural Heritage Scottish Environment Protection Agency Erskine Court The Castle Business Park Identification of Pressures and Impacts Stirling FK9 4TR Arising From Strategic Development Proposed in National Planning Policy Main Contributors and Development Plans Andrew Smith John Pomfret Geoff Bodley Neil Thurston Final Report Anna Cohen Paul Salmon March 2004 Kate Grimsditch Entec UK Limited Issued by ……………………………………………… Andrew Smith Approved by ……………………………………………… John Pomfret Entec UK Limited 6/7 Newton Terrace Glasgow G3 7PJ Scotland Tel: +44 (0) 141 222 1200 Fax: +44 (0) 141 222 1210 Certificate No. FS 13881 Certificate No. EMS 69090 09330 h:\common\environmental current projects\09330 - sepa strategic planning study\c000\final report.doc In accordance with an environmentally responsible approach, this document is printed on recycled paper produced from 100% post-consumer waste or TCF (totally chlorine free) paper COMMISSIONED REPORT Summary Report No: Contractor : Entec UK Ltd BACKGROUND The work was commissioned jointly by SEPA and SNH. The project sought to identify potential pressures and impacts on Scottish Water bodies as a consequence of land use proposals within the current suite of Scottish development Plans and other published strategy documents. The report forms part of the background information being collected by SEPA for the River Basin Characterisation Report in relation to the Water Framework Directive. The project will assist SNH’s environmental audit work by providing an overview of trends in strategic development across Scotland. MAIN FINDINGS Development plans post 1998 were reviewed to ensure up-to-date and relevant information. All 17 structure plans covering Scotland and 65 local plans were examined. Thirty one local plans were too far out of date to provide useful input. From these plans and other sources, 691 strategic development sites were identified, based on a set of criteria for defining ‘strategic’. They represent about 0.35% of Scotland’s land area. Sites are mainly concentrated in the Central belt, with a lower density in the Borders and lower lying areas of north east Scotland. Residential (39%), Industrial (22%) and Mixed use (15%) make up the majority of strategic development site allocations identified. Approximately 61% of the 691 strategic development sites identified are allocated on greenfield sites. Over 70% of residential and mixed use developments proposed are on greenfield sires. 39% of the identified sites are for residential use, 22% are for industrial use and 15% are for mixed use schemes; The Highland Council area has the largest number of strategic site allocations at 14% of the total, but land take from those allocations will only be 0.2% of the Council area. The area has the highest number of strategic greenfield allocations; Glasgow City Council has the largest land take by allocated strategic developments, at approximately 8.5% of the total area. The land take by strategic site allocations in Dundee is approximately 5.6% and in Aberdeen 2.2%. Edinburgh has only 0.3% by comparison. Of the principal development types, between 24% and 38% of strategic development sites are within 1km of a water dependent wildlife receptor. Risk to a defined series of receptors was predicted using a GIS based source-pathway- receptor model approach. Receptors considered were different types of water body, water dependent wildlife sites (including SPA, cSAC and Ramsar sites) and other protected areas, as defined in the Directive. Based on the modelled risk scores for development construction or operation, the 152 development sites predicted to present the highest risk to the water environment contain a higher proportion of industrial and mixed use sites than the overall balance in the 691 development sites identified. Rivers, nitrate vulnerable zones, bog/fen/marsh/swamp sites, and water dependent cSACs, SPAs and Ramsar sites make a large contribution to the aggregate risk score across all strategic development sites. A high number of development sites are also in or adjacent to flood risk areas. Examination of a representative range of development sites in more detail indicated that the model was conservative in its risk assessment, due to consideration of the pathway element of the model simply in terms of straight-line distance. Recommendations are made for further refinement of the model and further information that will be needed to complete the risk assessment is identified. This includes the definitions of individual water bodies, including heavily modified and artificial water bodies, and their current status. TO BE COMPLETED BY SNH NOMINATED OFFICER For further information on this project contact : A Nominated Officer, SNH Office: tel.no. For further information on the SNH Research & Technical Support Programme, contact: The Co-ordination group, Advisory Services, 2 Anderson Place, Edinburgh, EH6 5NP. Tel: 0131 446 2400 CONTENTS CONTENTS i Executive Summary vii 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Purpose of the project 1 1.2 Water framework directive 2 1.2.1 Overview 2 1.2.2 Pressures and Impacts 3 1.2.3 Risk assessment 5 1.3 The Scottish planning system 6 1.3.1 The current system 6 1.3.2 A changing system 8 2. Methodology 9 2.1 Introduction 9 2.1.1 Project tasks 9 2.1.2 Process 10 2.1.3 Pilot study 11 2.2 Part 1 - Defining strategic development 11 2.2.1 Development types 11 2.2.2 Strategic development 13 2.3 Part 2 – Identifying strategic development proposal locations from Scottish development plans and reporting on trends 16 2.3.1 Overall approach 16 2.3.2 Development plans 17 2.3.3 Other sources of data 17 2.3.4 GIS map base 18 2.3.5 Strategic development site database 18 2.3.6 Source derived risk 19 2.4 Part 3A - Collation of information on the local water environment23 2.4.1 Baseline datasets 23 2.4.2 Water bodies 23 2.4.3 Protected sites 24 2.4.4 GIS datasets 25 2.5 Part 3B - Preliminary risk assessment on the effects of the developments on the water environment 26 2.5.1 Basis of risk assessment model 26 2.5.2 Source risk factors 28 2.5.3 Pathway risk term 32 2.5.4 Receptor risk factors 33 2.5.5 Calculation of overall risk for each site 35 i 2.5.6 Initial Sensitivity analysis 36 2.5.7 Overall risk assessment and site prioritisation 37 2.5.8 Examination of case study sites for overall model verification 37 2.6 Part 4 – Review of project methodology 37 2.6.1 Availability of data on development sites 37 2.6.2 Environmental data 38 2.6.3 Risk model 38 2.6.4 Applicability 38 3. Results of site identification and PRELIMINARY risk assessment 41 3.1 Identification of strategic sites 41 3.1.1 Sites Identified 41 3.1.2 Development Plan Review 41 3.2 Development trends 41 3.2.1 Introduction 41 3.2.2 Geographical distribution of strategic development sites 41 3.2.3 Strategic development sites identified by local authority area 41 3.2.4 Local authorities by development category 42 3.2.5 Land take by type 42 3.2.6 Land take of strategic development sites 43 3.2.7 Strategic development sites by development category 43 3.2.8 Relationship of development sites to water dependent wildlife sites 44 3.3 Summary of Development Trends 44 3.3.1 Overall conclusions 44 3.4 Initial risk assessment modelling 45 3.4.1 Risk scores for all sites 45 3.4.2 Prioritisation of sites with potentially significant impact 45 3.5 Sites with potentially significant impact 46 3.5.1 Principal types of development involved. 46 3.5.2 Principal water related features contributing to risk 46 4. Model verification – case studies on some key sites 67 4.1 Selection of sites for case studies 67 4.2 Additional criteria considered 67 4.3 Sites selected 68 4.4 Results by site 68 4.4.1 Leith Docks 68 4.4.2 Ravenscraig 70 4.4.3 Royal Ordnance, Renfrew 71 4.4.4 Galashiels rail link 73 4.4.5 Polkemmet Opencast Coal Site and Regeneration 74 4.4.6 Inverclyde waterfront 76 4.5 Model verification 77 ii 5. Conclusions and Recommendations 79 5.1 Underlying assumptions 79 5.2 Conclusions 79 5.3 Screening risk assessment model review 81 5.4 Uses of the database and model 81 5.4.1 SEPA 81 5.4.2 SNH 82 5.4.3 Overall 82 5.5 Recommendations for further work 82 5.5.1 Compatibility of data for source, pathway and receptor. 82 5.5.2 Improving consideration of water issues in the planning system 83 5.5.3 Further identification of strategic development sites 83 5.5.4 Suggested further model development 83 5.5.5 Site-based rapid appraisal 85 5.5.6 Database maintenance 86 5.6 Risk assessment approach for detailed studies 86 5.7 Overall Conclusion 86 6. References 87 Tables Table 2.1 Fields established in the sites database 19 Table 2.2 Environmental datasets imported into GIS system 25 Table 2.3 Source risk factors (from sites database) 30 Table 2.4 Water environment receptor sensitivity ratings for Options 2 and 3 34 Table 3.1 Strategic development types by land-take 42 Table 3.2 Strategic development sites within 5km of a water dependent wildlife receptor 44 Table 3.3 Strategic development types within 1km of a water dependent wildlife receptor 44 Table 4.2 Comparison of model and verification of results for Leith Docks 69 Table 4.3 Comparison of model and verification of results for Ravenscraig 71 Table 4.4 Comparison of model and verification of results for Renfrew 72 Table 4.5 Comparison of model and verification of results for Galashiels Railway 74 Table 4.6 Comparison of model and verification of results for Polkemmet 75 Table 4.7 Comparison