Habitats Regulations Assessment for the Portsmouth Core Strategy
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Habitats Regulations Assessment for the Portsmouth Core Strategy Submission Stage July 2011 Client: Portsmouth City Council Report No.: UE-0046_PCC_AA_12_190711NP Status: Final Date: July 2011 Author: NEJP Checked: NACB Approved: NJD Contents Executive Summary i E1.1 Background i E1.2 Scope i E1.3 Findings and Recommendations ii E1.5 Conclusions ii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Habitats Regulations Assessment 1 1.3 Guidance and Best Practice 2 1.4 Scope, Method and Consultation 3 1.5 Purpose and Structure of this Document 5 2 The Portsmouth Core Strategy 7 2.1 Background to the Core Strategy 7 2.2 Core Strategy Objectives 7 2.3 Character and Geography of the City 8 2.4 Likely Key Outcomes of the Plan 8 2.5 The South Hampshire Sub-Regional Strategy and In Combination Effects 9 3 European Site Information 11 3.1 Introduction 11 3.2 Ecological Information about the European Sites 11 4 Appropriate Assessment 19 4.1 Introduction 19 4.2 Findings of the Screening Stage 19 4.3 The Appropriate Assessment Stage 19 UE Associates Ltd 2011 4.4 Related Studies 22 4.5 Overview of Core Strategy Effects 22 5 Atmospheric Pollution 25 5.1 Impact Source 25 5.2 Impact Pathway 25 5.3 Effects on Site Integrity 26 5.4 Other Considerations 27 5.5 Assumptions and Limitations 34 5.6 Appropriate Assessment Findings 34 5.7 Recommendations 35 5.8 Residual and In Combination Effects 37 6 Disturbance from Recreation 39 6.1 Impact Source 39 6.2 Impact Pathway 39 6.3 Effects on Site Integrity 40 6.4 Other Considerations 41 6.5 Assumptions and Limitations 50 6.6 Appropriate Assessment Findings 50 6.7 Recommendations 50 6.8 Residual and In Combination Effects 50 7 Flood Risk and Coastal Squeeze 59 7.1 Impact Source 59 7.2 Impact Pathway 59 7.3 Effects on Site Integrity 61 7.4 Other Considerations 61 7.5 Assumptions and Limitations 64 UE Associates Ltd 2011 7.6 Appropriate Assessment Findings 64 7.7 Recommendations 65 7.8 Residual and In Combination Effects 65 8 Water Abstraction and Consumption 67 8.1 Impact Source 67 8.2 Impact Pathway 67 8.3 Effects on Site Integrity 68 8.4 Other Considerations 69 8.5 Assumptions and Limitations 70 8.6 Appropriate Assessment Findings 71 8.7 Recommendations 71 8.8 Residual and In Combination Effects 71 9 Waste Water Pollution 73 9.1 Impact Source 73 9.2 Impact Pathway 73 9.3 Effects on Site Integrity 75 9.4 Other Considerations 75 9.5 Assumptions and Limitations 77 9.6 Appropriate Assessment Findings 79 9.7 Recommendations 79 9.8 Residual and In Combination Effects 79 10 Site-Specific Displacement and Collision Mortality Risk 81 10.1 Impact Source 81 10.2 Impact Pathway 81 10.3 Effects on Site Integrity 85 10.4 Other Considerations 86 UE Associates Ltd 2011 10.5 Assumptions and Limitations 89 10.6 Appropriate Assessment Findings 89 10.7 Recommendations 89 10.8 Residual and In Combination Effects 89 11 Bridge Link from Tipner to Horsea Island 95 11.1 Impact Source 95 11.2 Impact Pathway 95 11.3 Effects on Site Integrity 95 11.4 Other Considerations 96 11.5 Assumptions and Limitations 98 11.6 Appropriate Assessment Findings 98 11.7 Recommendations 99 11.8 Residual and In Combination Effects 100 12 Summary and Outcomes of the HRA 101 12.1 Overview of Findings 101 12.2 Summary of Outcomes 102 13 Conclusions 103 13.1 Conclusions 103 References and Bibliography 105 UE Associates Ltd 2011 Appendices Appendix I List of Core Strategy Policies Appendix II European Site Descriptions Appendix III Qualifying Features Appendix IV Conservation Objectives Appendix V Key Environmental Conditions Supporting Site Integrity Appendix VI South Hampshire Development Contributions to Atmospheric Pollution UE Associates Ltd 2011 List of Tables and Figures Table 1.1: Stages in the HRA process drawing on guidance from DCLG and Natural England Table 1.2: Summary of iterative HRA stages Table 3.1: Qualifying features of European sites around Portsmouth Table 3.2: Status of SSSIs coinciding with the European sites (Source: Natural England, April 2010) Table 4.1: Summary of likely significant effects of the plan (Source: adapted from UE Associates, 2008) [square brackets indicate changes from the screening stage: additional / removed sites or impacts] Table 4.2: Overview of likely significant effects [square brackets indicate changes from the screening stage: additional / removed effects] Table 5.1: Increases in Portsmouth-origin traffic flow on roads passing within 200m of European sites (Source: PBA, 2009) Table 5.2: Avoidance and mitigation relevant to atmospheric pollution, and Core Strategy response Table 6.1: Changes to Hilsea coast that would make it more or less attractive to visit (Source: Solent Forum) Table 6.2: Avoidance and mitigation measures relevant to disturbance, and Core Strategy response Table 6.3: Possible measures for use at site level, as part of a coordinated Solent-wide strategy of interventions Table 7.1: Shoreline Management Plan policies in Portsmouth Table 7.2: Habitat losses and gains around Portsmouth as a result of SMP policies (Source: NFDC, 2010, Appendix J, pp.68-85) Table 7.3: Summary of other effects on habitat features as a result of SMP policies (Source: NFDC, 2010, Appendix J, pp.68-85) Table 7.4: Avoidance and mitigation relevant to coastal squeeze, and Core Strategy response Table 9.1: Predicted quality consents on the basis of scenario 1 2025/26 flows (Source: Atkins, 2009) Table 10.1: Overview of displacement effects at Tipner, Port Solent and Horsea Island Table 10.2: Possible mitigation measures to be considered for lower-tier assessments relating to displacement at Tipner, Port Solent and Horsea Island Table 10.3: Avoidance and mitigation measures relevant to displacement, and Core Strategy response Table 11.1: Avoidance and mitigation measures relevant to a Tipner-Horsea Island bridge, and Core Strategy response UE Associates Ltd 2011 Table 12.1: Residual Core Strategy effects Figure 3.1: Location of Portsmouth in relation to European sites Figure 5.1: Chichester Harbour broad habitats Figure 5.2: Eling and Bury Marshes broad habitats Figure 5.3: Langstone Harbour broad habitats Figure 5.4: Lee-on-Solent to Itchen Estuary broad habitats Figure 5.5: Lower Test Valley broad habitats Figure 5.6: New Forest broad habitats Figure 5.7: Portsmouth Harbour broad habitats Figure 5.8: River Itchen broad habitats Figure 5.9: Upper Hamble Estuary and Woods broad habitats Figure 6.1: Housing density around the Solent coastline (Source: Stillman et al, 2009) Figure 6.2: Estimate of 2026 population density in areas surrounding the New Forest (Source, Sharp et al, 2008) Figure 8.1: Portsmouth Waters‟ Baseline Critical Period Peak Supply-Demand Balance (Source: Portsmouth Water, 2010) Figure 8.2: Portsmouth Waters‟ Modelled Critical Period Peak Supply-Demand Balance (Source: Portsmouth Water, 2010) Figure 9.1: Forecast flow growth and quality consents at Budds Farm, Havant (Source: Atkins, 2009) Figure 10.1: Location of Brent goose and wader sites in and around Portsmouth (Source: Portsmouth City Council with data from SWBGPSG, 2010) UE Associates Ltd 2011 Abbreviations AMP Asset Management Planning BAT Best Available Technique BREEAM Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method DWF Dry Weather Flow ELP Ecological Light Pollution ha Hectare IWMS Integrated Water Management Strategy l/h/d Litres per household per day Ml/d Megalitres per day MRF Minimum Residual Flow N Nitrogen NH4 Ammonia PCS Portsmouth Core Strategy (proposal) PUSH Partnership for Urban South Hampshire RHCP Regional Habitat Creation Programme RoC Review of Consents SDA Strategic Development Area SDCP Solent Dynamic Coast Project SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment SMP Shoreline Management Plan SuDS Sustainable Drainage System WAFU Water Available for Use WRMP Water Resource Management Plan WWTW Waste Water Treatment Works UE Associates Ltd 2011 Portsmouth Core Strategy Habitats Regulations Assessment: Appropriate Assessment July 2011 Executive Summary UE-0046_PCC_AA_12_190711NP Executive Summary E1.1 Background This report presents the findings and recommendations of the Habitats Regulations Assessment for the Portsmouth Core Strategy. It follows a screening and scoping exercise published in August 2008 (UE Associates, 2008). E1.2 Scope The HRA screening exercise for the Core Strategy identified the following European sites for consideration: Solent and Isle of Wight Lagoons (Special Area of Conservation, SAC); Solent Maritime (SAC); South Wight Maritime (SAC); Chichester and Langstone Harbours (Special Protection Area, SPA); Portsmouth Harbour (SPA); Solent and Southampton Water (SPA); The New Forest (SPA); Chichester and Langstone Harbours (Ramsar site); Portsmouth Harbour (Ramsar); Solent and Southampton Water (Ramsar); and The New Forest (Ramsar). South Wight Maritime (SAC) was screened out from further consideration, largely due to its distance from the City boundaries, and is not considered further during the assessment. Natural England concurred with these findings in its screening opinion on the plan. The likely significant effects identified during the screening exercise were: Atmospheric pollution; Disturbance from recreational pressure and tall buildings; Flood risk and coastal squeeze; Habitat loss and/or damage; Light pollution; Other effects of urbanisation; Water abstraction and consumption; and Waste water pollution. UE Associates Ltd 2011 i Portsmouth Core Strategy Habitats Regulations Assessment: Appropriate Assessment July 2011 Executive Summary UE-0046_PCC_AA_12_190711NP E1.3 Findings and Recommendations The findings of initial assessments recommended a series of avoidance and mitigation measures for resolving adverse effects in relation to the identified impacts of the plan. The recommendations were examined and changes subsequently made to the Core Strategy. The HRA Report demonstrates that there will be no adverse effects on the ecological integrity of any European site as a result of the Portsmouth Core Strategy in relation to the following impact types: Water abstraction; and Waste water pollution.