Hampshire Local Flood Risk Management Strategy (LFRMS) Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)
Document: 0 Version: 2
Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Hampshire County Council
September 2012
Hampshire LFRMS SEA
Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Hampshire County Council
September 2012
Halcrow Group Limited Burderop Park, Swindon, Wiltshire SN4 0QD tel 01793 812479 fax 01793 812089 halcrow.com
Halcrow Group Limited has prepared this report in accordance with the instructions of client Hampshire County Council for the client’s sole and specific use. Any other persons who use any information contained herein do so at their own risk.
© Halcrow Group Limited 2012
Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Document history
Hampshire Local Flood Risk Management Strategy: SEA Scoping Report
Hampshire County Council
This document has been issued and amended as follows:
Version Date Description Created by Verified by Approved by
v.0.1 18/09/2012 First draft report S J Isaac S Hedgecott S Hedgecott
Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Contents
1 Introduction 1 1.1 Project Background 1 1.2 Study Area 1 1.3 Strategic Environmental Assessment 1 1.4 Habitats Regulations Assessment 2 1.5 Water Framework Directive (WFD) Assessment 2 1.6 Limitations 3
2 Consultation 4 2.1 Consultation Requirements 4 2.2 Consultation Undertaken to Date 4 2.3 Scoping Report Consultation 5
3 Hampshire LFRMS 6 3.1 Overview and Purpose of Strategy 6 3.2 Integration of Environmental Considerations 6
4 Baseline Information 8 4.1 Scoping of Environmental Issues 8 4.2 Inter-relationships of Environmental Issues 8 4.3 Baseline Information by Topic 17 4.3.1 Introduction 17 4.3.2 Population and Human Health 17 4.3.3 Material Assets 23 4.3.4 Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna 29 4.3.5 Soil, Geology and Geomorphology 32 4.3.6 Water 34 4.3.7 The Historic Environment 38 4.3.8 Landscape and Visual Amenity 40 4.4 Policies, Plans and Programmes Review 43
5 Proposed SEA Approach 44 5.1 Draft SEA Objectives 44 5.2 Assessment Approach 51
6 Next Steps 57 6.1 Summary 57 6.2 Consultation Questions 57
7 Abbreviations 58
Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
8 Glossary 59
Footnotes
Tables
4.1 Summary of issues scoped into and out of the Hampshire LFRMS SEA
4.2 Planned housing developments in Hampshire (excluding Portsmouth and Southampton)
4.3 Populations at risk of flooding in Hampshire
4.4 Indicative list of critical infrastructure in Hampshire
4.5 Minerals Safeguarding Areas in Hampshire
4.6 Designated cultural heritage assets in Hampshire
4.7 Hampshire’s National Character Areas
5.1 LFRMS SEA objectives
5.2 Proposed Structure of the SEA Environmental Report
Figures
4.1 Principal impacts of the LFRMS on the SEA topic areas and Inter-relationships
4.2 The water cycle in the urban and natural environment
4.3 Population density in Hampshire
4.4 The components of overall status of surface water bodies
4.4 Archaeology in Hampshire (Sites and Monuments Record)
5.1 Proposed Assessment Criteria
Appendix A: Plans and Programmes Review
Appendix B: Figures
Appendix C: LFRMS/SEA Workshop
Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
1 Introduction
1.1 Project Background
Hampshire County Council (HCC), now a Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) is currently in the process of preparing its Local Flood Risk Management Strategy (LFRMS) for the County. Background information on the LFRMS is provided in section 3 of this report.
HCC commissioned Halcrow to undertake a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the LFRMS in April 2012. The SEA considers the potential impact of the strategy on various environmental receptors. This report represents the scoping stage, which summarises the environmental baseline for the County and proposes draft SEA ‘objectives’ which will be used to assess the environmental performance of the LFRMS. Further description of the SEA process is provided in section 1.3. The SEA should be read in parallel with the main LFRMS report, i.e. the Hampshire Local Flood Risk Management Strategy.
1.2 Study Area
The study area for this LFRMS is the area within the administrative boundary of Hampshire County Council. Hampshire is made up of 11 District and Borough authorities; Basingstoke, East Hampshire, Eastleigh, Fareham , Gosport, Hart, and Deane, Havant, New Forest, Rushmoor, Test Valley, and Winchester City.
1.3 Strategic Environmental Assessment
SEA is the systematic appraisal of the potential environmental impacts of policies, plans, strategies and programmes, before they are approved. It ensures that any implications for the environment are fully and transparently considered before final decisions are taken and is required by an EC Directive (2001/42/EC) ‘on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment’, known as the ‘SEA Directive’, which came into force in 2004. The Directive is implemented in England through the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations (SI 1633 2004). This legislation makes SEA a legal requirement for certain plans and programmes which are likely to have significant effects on the environment.
Local flood risk management strategies are statutory plans and are subject to the requirements of SEA. LLFAs need to take a proportionate approach to applying SEA to local flood risk management strategies, particularly when environmental effects are not evident in the early stages of plan development. As the strategy develops more detail, the scope of the SEA should be reviewed. i Consultation with the statutory consultees for SEA (see section 2) should assist with the methodology and scope of the SEA.
The environmental effects of alternative flood risk management approaches and mitigation measures (including potential policies and objectives) will be assessed and the results used to help select a preferred strategy option or LFRMS measure which is economically viable, meets environmental objectives and complies with legal requirements to protect designated sites of nature conservation, cultural heritage,
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 1 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
water bodies or landscape interest. The approach used is based on our knowledge of the area, professional judgement and supported by published literature.
This Scoping Report summarises the environmental baseline for the County, focusing on issues that are specifically relevant to flood risk associated with ordinary water courses and surface and ground water. However, the second principal output of the SEA, the Environmental Report, will also include consideration of the cumulative environmental effects of flood risk from the LFRMS in addition to flood risk from main rivers, the sea and the sewerage network, where these sources are relevant.
The statutory consultees for SEA (English Heritage, the Environment Agency and Natural England) and key stakeholders will have opportunity to comment on the SEA findings. Further detail on the consultation process is provided in section 1.7.
1.4 Habitats Regulations Assessment
Due to the potential for the LFRMS to have significant effects on sites of international nature conservation importance (Ramsar sites and Natura 2000 sites – Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), Special Protection Areas (SPAs)) in the Hampshire area, a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) is being carried out in parallel with this SEA. The HRA is required under the EU Habitats Directive (EU Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and Wild Fauna and Flora) and the EU Birds Directive 2009/147/EC (on the Conservation of Wild Birds), and the transposing U.K. Regulations (The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations, SI 2010 No. 490). The HRA will be integrated with the SEA process and the conclusions of the HRA will be provided in the SEA Environmental Report.
1.5 Water Framework Directive (WFD) Assessment
The Water Framework Directive (WFD) ii is a European Directive which introduces a new strategic planning process to manage, protect and improve the water environment. It came into force on 22 December 2000 and was transposed into UK law in 2003. The Directive will help to protect and enhance the quality of:
• surface freshwater (including lakes, streams and rivers);
• groundwaters;
• groundwater dependant ecosystems;
• estuaries; and
• coastal waters out to one mile from low-water.
It establishes a framework for the protection of water bodies (including terrestrial ecosystems and wetlands directly dependent on them) which aims to;
• prevent deterioration in the classification status of aquatic ecosystems, protect them and improve the ecological condition of waters;
• achieve at least ‘good’ status for all waters by 2015. Where this is not possible, ‘good’ status should be achieved by 2021 or 2027;
• promote sustainable use of water as a natural resource;
• conserve habitats and species that depend directly on water;
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 2 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
• progressively reduce or phase out release of individual pollutants or groups of pollutants that present a significant threat to the aquatic environment;
• progressively reduce the pollution of groundwater and prevent or limit the entry of pollutants; and
• contribute to mitigating the effects of floods and droughts iii
The LFRMS needs to be assessed for WFD compliance to ensure that local measures to reduce flood risk comply with the WFD, and should contribute to achieving WFD objectives.
The WFD is aimed at protecting physical, chemical and biological water quality.
The LFRMS is unlikely to need a detailed WFD Assessment. The Environment Agency has advised that ‘WFD assessment can be incorporated into the SEA’ iv . Therefore, the SEA Objectives covering water quality, resource availability and hydromorphology and their underlying assessment criteria are designed in order to fulfil the requirements of the WFD. In general, the spirit of the WFD is to work with natural processes or soft engineering solutions to flood management, rather than hard engineering. v The LFRMS may therefore need to consider this in relation to its policies and action plans.
The WFD is described in relation to the environmental baseline in section 4.2.6.1.
1.6 Limitations
It should be noted that there is a plethora of environmental information available. However, the information presented in this review has been selected on the basis that it may be influenced or affected by the LFRMS. Effort has been made to avoid including baseline information or plans and programmes which are of no clear relevance to the LFRMS, for example on SEA topics that have been scoped out.
The information presented in this report is the result of a desk-based review and no formal requests for records have been made. It may be necessary to collect further data against which to assess the potential environmental effects of the LFRMS with regard to specific LFRMS measures, as they develop, and also post-construction monitoring requirements. For example, a formal data request may need to be made to Hampshire’s Historic Environment Record (HER) team to ensure all cultural heritage assets relevant to each LFRMS measure are identified and taken account of in the assessment.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 3 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
2 Consultation
2.1 Consultation Requirements
The statutory consultees for SEAs in England are Natural England, the Environment Agency and English Heritage. Although not a requirement of the SEA Directive or the UK SEA Regulations to consult at the SEA Scoping stage, it is best practice to do so. It is a requirement to consult on the SEA Environmental Report, which includes an assessment of the key elements of the LFRMS. It is also a requirement of the SEA Regulations to consult with stakeholders who, ‘in the authority’s opinion, are affected or likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the decisions involved in the assessment and adoption of the plan or programme concerned…’
In the case of this SEA, consultation on the Scoping Report and Environmental Report will take place via email to the key stakeholders and statutory consultees and both reports will be made available on the HCC website. Informal consultation will also continue to take place. Informal consultation undertaken to date is described in section 2.2.
2.2 Consultation Undertaken to Date
The methodology for the SEA was consulted upon during a recent SEA for a very similar county level LFRMS, the Gloucestershire LFRMS. The responses from the Environment Agency vi and Natural England vii in December 2011 gave broad suggestions regarding the scope and methodology for an SEA of this nature. The Environment Agency advised that it is ‘up to the lead local flood authority to decide on the scope as this will depend on the local issues in the area and the scope of the local strategy. SEA should be integrated into the development of the local strategy’. They also recommended reference should be made to the DCLG guidance on SEA viii and guidance within Local Government Association guidance on developing strategies for LFRM.ix Natural England recommended the SEA should follow the advice provided in joint guidance produced by the Environment Agency, the former Countryside Agency, English Nature (sic) and English Heritage, ‘Environmental Quality in Spatial Planning’ x, in particular, Supplementary File 14 within it, which details how to protect or enhance receptors that fall under all of the SEA topics. All of these guidance sources have been examined and the scope and SEA objectives have been developed accordingly.
The statutory SEA consultees were introduced to the Hampshire LFRMS and consulted on draft SEA objectives for the Hampshire LFRMS SEA in July 2012. Natural England has confirmed that they are broadly happy with the SEA objectives and reiterated the SEA topic areas that the objectives need to cover. xi English Heritage has also submitted a response xii to the proposed draft SEA objectives and suggested minor wording changes to three of the underlying assessment criteria for the cultural heritage SEA objective. These changes have now been made.
A combined LFRMS and SEA workshop was also held at the HCC offices on August 6th 2012. The workshop gave a range of stakeholders an opportunity to comment on the draft SEA objectives. An attendance list of the workshop and the changes to the SEA objectives made as a result of the workshop are provided in Appendix C.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 4 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Hampshire CC also provided comments on the first draft of this Scoping Report in September 2012. As a result, several minor amendments were made, the cultural heritage section (section 4.3.7) of the baseline was revised and an appendix dedicated to the LFRMS and SEA workshop was added.
2.3 Scoping Report Consultation
This SEA Scoping Report will be subject to consultation between September and October 2012. The information contained in the Scoping Report will subsequently need to be updated to take into account the consultation comments of the statutory consultees. The following consultees will be invited to comment on the Scoping Report;
• Environment Agency: Solent and South Downs Area Office, Guildbourne House, Chatsworth Road, Worthing, Sussex, BN11 1LD;
• English Heritage;
• Natural England: consultation hub: [email protected] ; and
• LFRMS Steering Group and Stakeholder Group
The assessment of the LFRMS against the SEA objectives will be documented in the Environmental Report.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 5 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
3 Hampshire LFRMS
3.1 Overview and Purpose of Strategy
In accordance with the requirements of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 xiii (FWM Act), HCC is now a Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA). Under the FWM Act, HCC, as a LLFA, must ‘develop, maintain, apply and monitor a strategy for local flood risk management in its area’. Local flood risk management includes flooding from surface runoff, ordinary watercourses and groundwater, but does not include flooding from main rivers and the sea.
The purpose of the LFRMS is to identify the extent of flood risk in Hampshire, how it will be managed in partnership with others and therefore outline HCC’s approach to local flood risk management in the county, ultimately forming a policy document.
The LFRMS will provide the framework for sustainable flood risk management across the county but also refer to the actions to be taken for flood response and recovery. It will also consider the future resilience that will be required due to increasing flood risk arising from climate change and the role that spatial planning can play in reducing existing and future flood risk.
The LFRMS will build upon the Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA), produced in June 2011. The PFRA provided a high level overview of flood risk from a variety and combination of flood sources including surface water, ground water and ordinary watercourses as well as the interaction with main rivers, the sea and reservoir flooding. The work undertaken to date on the surface water management plans of Basingstoke, Eastleigh and Rushmoor and the chalk catchment (ground water flooding risk area) will also be taken into account in the LFRMS.
The LFRMS has and will continue to include significant stakeholder engagement and partnership working. Once the LFRMS has identified the priority hotspot areas of flooding, the planning and operational risks of management and the investment options available, an Action Plan of priority schemes will be prepared (in 2013). An Annual Implementation Plan will be produced annually thereafter.
3.2 Integration of Environmental Considerations
The FWM Act aims to improve the sustainability of flood risk management – for example by setting new requirements and the basis for national standards for sustainable drainage systems (SuDS). The Act includes a duty for local authorities, highways authorities, and internal drainage boards to contribute to sustainable development in discharging their flood and coastal erosion risk management (FCERM) functions. The Act also provides environmental powers for works that (a) have a net beneficial impact, (b) are consistent with the national FCERM Strategy and, (c) are deemed by the relevant authority to be desirable for the natural environment, the historic environment, landscape, or have amenity or leisure benefits. xiv The LFRMS should in principle, therefore, have a positive impact on the environment. It can also influence and complement existing spatial planning policy and inform decisions on where development can and should not occur.
The SEA will be fully integrated into the development of the LFRMS to ensure that environmental considerations are taken into account and, in the Environmental
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 6 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Report, show how the SEA has influenced the LFRMS process. Where possible, the SEA will identify opportunities for environmental enhancement as well as mitigating any potentially adverse effects of the LFRMS. It will also propose a monitoring framework that is fit for purpose for a strategy of this nature.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 7 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
4 Baseline Information
4.1 Scoping of Environmental Issues
The SEA Regulations identify environmental receptors that must be initially considered for all SEAs. These include:
• Population and human health
• Biodiversity, flora and fauna;
• Soil;
• Water;
• Air;
• Climatic factors;
• Material assets;
• Cultural, architectural and archaeological heritage
• Landscape; and the
• Inter-relationship between the above factors (described in section 5.2.1.5)
This list serves as a starting point from which issues have been scoped out of, or into, the SEA, depending on whether or not they are considered likely to affect or be affected by the LFRMS.
The SEA will not address any impacts likely to result during the implementation of any built solution, for example construction impacts that might arise during the building or raising of flood defences. These issues are more appropriately considered during project level Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) undertaken for specific schemes. However, if environmental opportunities or constraints of built solutions are broadly identifiable they will be highlighted in the SEA in order to avoid adverse effects and facilitate positive environmental opportunities at an early stage of planning.
4.2 Inter-relationships of Environmental Issues
Figure 4.1 is intended to simplify the depiction of potential impacts and not portray all conceivable indirect impacts. The thickness of the line shows the relative importance of the link and influence between the topic areas. For example, it has been assumed that the LFRMS could have greater influence on water quality and hydromorphology than on soils and geology due to the expected nature of LFRM measures. Effects on soils were considered to be more indirect, for example, changes in soil quality as a result of changes in water quality. Green arrows represent the links between SEA topic areas. For example, if the LFRMS were to reduce flood risk to material assets, such as housing or infrastructure, there would also be a beneficial impact on human health. This would result from there being less direct physical risk to people from flooding and less potential for standing water and sewerage pollution caused by flooding to aid the spread of waterborne diseases near population centres. To take another example, cultural heritage is seen as closely linked to landscape as
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 8 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
heritage features, such as medieval field systems and historic buildings, are often an integral part of the people’s perception of landscape and aesthetics. Finally, any changes to water quality could have a significant effect on aquatic and water-margin habitats and species.
Climatic Factors is outside of the core diagram area as it has been assumed that the LFRMS would likely lead to better climate change adaptation and resilience, through reduced flood risk, and be in harmony with this topic rather than have a potentially negative influence on it in the same way as the other SEA topics.
There are clearly many, often more subtle, relationships that are not represented in this diagram – for example flood risk to areas with high levels of deprivation may disproportionately affect human health if people, or their neighbourhoods, are less able to address the consequences of flooding. Conversely, environmental opportunities may also be delivered through the LFRMS that deliver multiple benefits, including environmental, economic (e.g. through increased tourism) and social benefits. These enhancement opportunities are described further in 5.2.1.5 but will be examined in more detail at the Environmental Report stage of the SEA.
Figure 4.1 Principal impacts of the LFRMS on the SEA topic areas and Inter-relationships
Key:
Impact on (+ve or –ve):
Connections with:
Strong impact or connection:
Figure 4.2 shows some of the interactions between water runoff and management and soil, biodiversity and water quality.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 9 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Figure 4.2 The Water Cycle in the Urban and Natural Environment xv
Table 4.1 Error! Reference source not found. examines the SEA topics in more detail and summarises the issues which are currently proposed to be addressed within the SEA, and those that will be scoped out, subject to the agreement of stakeholders and consultees.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 10 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Table 4-1 Summary of Issues Scoped into and out of the Hampshire LFRMS SEA
Receptor/Topic Scope and Justification Scoped out Scoped In Population and Population and properties Actions arising from the LFRMS will affect the Human Health at risk from flooding population and properties within flood risk areas
Quality of life/social Quality of life is affected by flooding; more socially deprivation deprived communities are likely to be more significantly affected by the impact of flooding Employment Level of flood risk could have a significant effect on existing industry and employment. Noise The LFRMS will not have a significant effect on noise. The effects of any local flood risk management activities on noise would be considered further at project EIA stage. Tourism and recreation of Actions arising from the LFRMS could affect important national and regional tourist, recreational and amenity resources and could importance present opportunities to deliver recreational benefits. Material Assets Infrastructure Actions arising from the LFRMS have the potential to affect key transport routes within the study area.
Biodiversity, International nature An HRA will be undertaken separately, the results Basic data collection on internationally designated sites Flora and Fauna conservation sites (e.g. of which will be incorporated into the SEA for the HRA will be included in the SEA to avoid SAC, SPA, Ramsar site) and Environmental Report. duplication. The SEA, HRA and LFRMS will be known supporting sites integrated processes and the SEA and HRA will be able to influence the development of the LFRMS. National nature Actions arising from the LFRMS could have direct or conservation sites (e.g. indirect effects on the features of nationally designated National Nature Reserves sites. The SEA will focus on those sites potentially (NNRs), Sites of Special affected (positively or negatively) by current or future Scientific Interest (SSSIs) flooding. The LFRMS has the potential to contribute to achieving favourable condition status of a SSSI.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 11 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Receptor/Topic Scope and Justification Scoped out Scoped In Local nature conservation Locally designated sites of nature conservation sites (e.g. Local Nature importance may be affected (positively or negatively) Reserves (LNR)s, Sites of by current or future flooding. Where data is made Importance for Nature available on these sites they will be included. Conservation (SINCs) and RSPB Reserves) Nationally and regionally Detailed information on BAP species and habitats important habitats and should be considered at the EIA stage. species (UK and local Biodiversity Action Plan, BAP) Key habitat areas Flooding could potentially change the nature of habitats and therefore needs to be taken into account
Soil, Geology Soils LFRMS measures could alter the extent or duration of and flooding and therefore have implications for soil Geomorphology quality. Impacts on soil quality could subsequently affect other environmental receptors that fall under other SEA topics, such as Biodiversity, Water (water quality) and Population and Human Health. Designated earth heritage LFRMS measures could have direct impacts on sites (e.g. geological SSSIs) designated geological sites by changes in flooding or erosion or sedimentation.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 12 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Receptor/Topic Scope and Justification Scoped out Scoped In Geology The LFRMS will not have a significant effect on geology. The interactions between flood risk and erosion management and geology would be considered further at project EIA stage.
Water resource issues linked to geology will be considered as part of the Water receptor where relevant. Geomorphology is considered under the sub-criteria of SEA objective 6: ‘ Minimise adverse effects on water hydromorphology and natural processes .’ Contaminated land Changes in water management could result in improved protection for areas of known contaminated land or landfill sites, or could negatively affect these sites, by flooding or erosion, which may cause pollution of water bodies and designated conservation sites. Land Use and Land use Strategic LFRM measures could be affected by, and Land have direct or indirect effects on, land use. Management Water Water quality LFRM measures could have direct and indirect effects on surface and groundwater quality Water Framework Although the LFRMS could have direct and The SEA objectives will incorporate the basic Directive indirect effects on water resources (surface and requirements of the WFD in their underlying ground) this SEA does not have the scope for a assessment criteria. See also ‘inter-relationships’ at the detailed WFD Assessment, which may need to be end of this table undertaken separately, depending on the findings of the SEA. Flood Risk Strategy and measures should mitigate flood risk Water resources Water resource issues linked to local geology (e.g. groundwater levels) will be considered where relevant. Overall water resources also need to be considered.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 13 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Receptor/Topic Scope and Justification Scoped out Scoped In Catchment Sensitive Strategic LFRM measures provide opportunities to link Farming (CSF) with CSF initiatives to protect water bodies and the environment. Air and Climate Air quality The chemical of predominant concern for all Air Quality Management Areas in Hampshire is nitrogen dioxide, which is associated with traffic emissions. LFRMS strategy and measures will not be affected by or have a significant effect on air quality. Climatic factors LFRMS has the potential to enhance resilience to climate change, through reducing flood risk or environmental enhancement measures. Opportunities to improve climate change adaptation will be explored in the SEA. The Historic Historic Landscape LFRMS measures could potentially affect the character Environment Character of the historic landscape and also directly affect statutory and non-statutory historic buildings and archaeological features. Impacts on historic landscape will be considered within the SEA. Scheduled Monuments LFRMS measures could potentially affect Scheduled Monuments. Direct impact could result from the development or enhancement of defences. The impact on the setting of Scheduled Monuments should also be considered. Indirect impacts may be caused by flooding, although the significance of the effect will differ depending on the nature of the monument. Registered Parks and LFRMS measures may affect the physical attributes, Gardens character and setting of Registered Parks and Gardens. The SEA will only consider those sites within the study area.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 14 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Receptor/Topic Scope and Justification Scoped out Scoped In Listed Buildings LFRMS measures may directly affect Listed Buildings or indirectly affect views and setting. Conservation Areas LFRMS measures may affect the character and setting of Conservation Areas. Other known and Non-designated sites and HER sites of national unknown features of importance, which may be particularly vulnerable or archaeological and/or that may offer opportunities for mitigation or heritage interest conservation. Clusters of sites that aren’t individually of national importance but are cumulatively important will also be considered.
It is not practicable to determine the effects of the LFRMS measures on every known feature of heritage interest and therefore the SEA will not consider non- designated sites of local or regional importance. The effects on these features would be considered further at project EIA stage. The effects of local flood risk management on as yet unidentified heritage resources will be considered at project level assessment . Landscape and Designated landscapes Country Parks and Green Belts have been scoped The SEA will address impacts of the LFRMS measures Visual Amenity out of further assessment. on the AONBs, National Parks and county landscape character assessments, as appropriate. Assessment of impacts on landscape will help to guide and influence the choice of strategy and LFRMS measures. Wider countryside The SEA will address the impacts of the LFRMS on the wider countryside of Hampshire not covered by designation. It will make use of landscape character assessments for Hampshire and for the AONBs and National Parks to assess impacts.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 15 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Receptor/Topic Scope and Justification Scoped out Scoped In Inter- e.g. Water quality and Inter-relationships will be included where relevant i.e., where LFRMS measures give rise to the potential for relationship biodiversity; Land Use secondary or cumulative impacts. The WFD has been considered as an ‘inter-relationship’ between the SEA between the change and landscape; topics, as compliance with the WFD is influenced by impacts to ecology, water quality and above factors Quality of life and hydromorphology recreation/biodiversity
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 16 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
4.3 Baseline Information by Topic
4.3.1 Introduction
The data collected to characterise the baseline environment of Hampshire has been derived from numerous secondary sources which are referenced as footnotes in this report. No new investigations or surveys have been undertaken.
Baseline information for Southampton or Portsmouth has been excluded, unless the information would clearly have a bearing on the baseline information for the rest of the county. This is because both of these cities will be producing their own respective LFRMS.
4.3.2 Population and Human Health 4.3.2.1 Population
The topic of population is considered first in this Scoping Report since the over- arching objective of the Strategy is to reduce flood risk to people and property.
Hampshire is one of the largest Counties in England with an estimated population of 1,303,000 in 2011 (excluding Portsmouth and Southampton). It is expected to rise 2.1% between 2011 and 2018. Including Southampton and Portsmouth the total population in 2011 was 1,738,000. This figure is predicted to rise by 1.8% by 2018. xvi In 2011 there were 3.5 people per hectare living in Hampshire and 23% of the population live in rural areas. xvii
Population density is shown in Figure 4.3:
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 17 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Figure 4.3: Population Density in Hampshire
Copyright: HCC 1000191802011. Source: Hampshire County Council xviii
There are a number of significant development proposals that will, as they move forward, affect the population numbers, distributions and patterns across the County. In particular, the Whitehill Bordon Eco town will include 4,000 homes, 5,500 new jobs and 30,000 sq m of retail space (East Hampshire Local District Plan: Joint Core Strategy). A new community of around 6,000 dwellings is planned in Fareham District over the next 15-20 years (Fareham Core Strategy)
In addition to these, proposals for new developments of over 500 new houses are in place for the areas shown in Table 4.2. This table is current as at the 1 st April 2011 which is the most up to date published information currently available. Please note that the status of some of these development sites is subject to change and the figures of 500 houses is an arbitrary choice, however the table is intended to provide a general picture of where the more significant developments are expected in the county, excluding Southampton and Portsmouth districts;
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 18 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
District Population Area Estimated number of new Centre residential dwellings Basingstoke Basingstoke Park Prewett 1330 and Deane Basingstoke Basingstoke Popley 950 and Deane (Sherborne Road) Basingstoke Basingstoke Popley 751 and Deane (Chineham Lane) Basingstoke Basingstoke Chineham 960 and Deane Basingstoke Basingstoke Rooksdown 750 and Deane Lane Gosport Gosport Weevil Lane 698 Gosport Gosport Rowner 700 units (including retail) (Renewal Project) Eastleigh Southampton Hedge End 765 Hart Fleet Church 872 Crookham Rushmoor Aldershot Aldershot urban 4500 extension Test Valley Andover Land east of 2500 Icknield Way Test Valley Andover Land at Picket 1200 Twenty Test Valley Romsey Abbotswood 800 Winchester Waterlooville Grainger 2114 development site Winchester Winchester City Andover Road 2000 North Winchester Fareham Whiteley Farm 1054 Winchester Fareham Knowle village 707
Table 4.2 Planned housing developments in Hampshire (excluding Portsmouth and Southampton) Source: see endnotes xix
Population growth is likely to result in increased demand on existing infrastructure and services, such as sewerage networks and local water supplies. The requirement for additional housing can result in new development that causes land take of Greenfield (and brownfield) land, visual intrusion, and increased flood risk (to the new development or the surrounding local area) or development unsympathetic to the surrounding landscape or built heritage. In turn this can increase pressure on biodiversity and ecosystems. However, new development could also bring opportunities – most notably the retro-fitting of SuDS to adjacent existing
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 19 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
development and new infrastructure which has wider benefits to existing local communities. 4.3.2.2 Social Deprivation
The 2010 Indices of Deprivation for Hampshire suggest that much of the County is relatively prosperous with ‘…large swathes of the central rural belt and north Hampshire being amongst the least deprived areas in England.’ However, there are pockets of deprivation which are important to note. “Deprivation, where it exists, is clearly centred in the main urban centres. However, it would be misleading to dismiss the existence of deprivation in the rural hinterland.” The more deprived areas tend to be neighbourhoods of well documented socio-economic disadvantage (such as Leigh Park and Wecock in Havant) or small areas (streets or small estates) within areas less widely associated with deprivation. xx The Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (2012) also names Gosport as an area containing pockets of deprivation.
Generally, urban areas such as Havant have quite different distributions of deprivation to the rest of Hampshire and even to the South East as a whole, with much higher proportions of greater deprivation. Hart, however has a very different distribution for the opposite reason i.e. effectively no deprivation at all.
These patterns of deprivation are important as they may affect the ability of people and communities to proactively deal with or respond to flooding events. xxi 4.3.2.3 Health
The largest hospitals in Hampshire (excluding Southampton and Portsmouth) are the Andover War Memorial Hospital, the Basingstoke and North Hampshire Hospital and the Royal Hampshire County Hospital in Winchester. These are run by the Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation.
There are a further 16 hospitals spread across the County run by the Hampshire Primary Care Trust (PCT). These are located at Alton, Andover, Bordon, Emsworth, Lyndhurst, Fleet, Fordingbridge, Gosport, Havant, Hythe, Lymington, Milford on Sea, Odiham (Hook), Petersfield, Romsey and Sarisbury Green. Other health care services include doctors’ surgeries and health centres, nursing homes, specialist hospitals, and dentists. It is important to ensure that access to these important facilities is maintained during flood events.
The Hampshire Health Profile shows that health of the people of Hampshire is generally better than the England average. Over the last 10 years, all causes of mortality have fallen. Early death rates from cancer and from heart disease and stroke have also fallen and are better than the England average.
However, there are particular issues in the more deprived areas of the County. Whilst deprivation is generally lower than the English average, 31,910 children live in poverty. Life expectancy for both men and women is higher than the England average. However, life expectancy is 5.7 years lower for men and 3.5 years lower for women in the most deprived areas of Hampshire than in the least deprived areas (based on the Slope Index of Inequality published on 5th January 2011). It will be important to ensure that people from the more deprived areas, who may already experience problems accessing healthcare, are not further impeded by flooding issues. xxii
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 20 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
There are various ways in which the population and their health may be affected by flooding, as outlined by Lancaster et al. (2004) xxiii ;
• Drowning, injuries and falls resulting from direct exposure to deep and/or flowing flood waters, lack of adequate warning and fast flowing water carrying debris;
• Respiratory disease, shock hypothermia and cardiac arrest may occur as a result of flooding;
• Contact with polluted waters and damp conditions can lead to wound infections, dermatitis, conjunctivitis, gastrointestinal illness, ear/nose/throat infections and the possibility of serious waterborne diseases;
• Contamination to water supply from combined sewer overflows and disruption to services such as electricity, gas, public lighting and water; and
• Physical and emotional stress due to loss of property, evacuation and disturbances as a result of injury.
Actions taken to manage flood risk may have impacts on both individuals and communities and may increase the possibility of waterborne infection as a result of damage to water supply/sewage systems.
The Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA) for Hampshire identifies areas considered to be at significant risk of flooding. These are shown in Table 4.3.
Cluster location No of people potentially at risk
Camberley/Farnborough 11955 Basingstoke 9021
Aldershot (including parts of Surrey) 8429 Horndean 4296
Fleet 3980
Winchester 3477 Andover 2279
Alton 2104 Source: Hampshire County Council, PFRA 2011 to 2017.
Table 4.3 Populations at risk of flooding in Hampshire
Source: See endnotes. xxiv
The PFRA identified significant numbers of people were at risk of flooding throughout Hampshire. The LFRMS itself will seek to provide an account of populations at risk. The SEA will take into account this risk in combination with the risk associated with tidal flooding and flooding from main rivers.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 21 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
4.3.2.4 Recreation
Hampshire contains significant areas used for coastal recreation, including coastal paths, beaches and the marine environment. The county also has a large number of rights of way, a National Trail and two National Parks. Many sites designated for their nature conservation or landscape and historical interest are also used for recreation. It is therefore necessary to maintain public access to such sites in terms of quality of life and improving levels of physical activity, but the environmental pressures associated with this recreation must be avoided or minimised. In addition to the tourism associated with Hampshire’s urban centres and key tourist hotspots such as the New Forest, Hampshire has the following country parks and nature reserves xxv ;
• Staunton Country Park;
• Manor Farm Country Park;
• Queen Elizabeth Country Park;
• Royal Victoria Country Park;
• Lepe Country Park;
• Titchfield Haven and Visitor Centre;
• Yateley Common;
• Farley Mount.
Hampshire County Council also owns or manages various areas of common land,xxvi all of which are accessible to the public through the provisions of the Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act (2000), namely;
• Bramshill Common;
• Broxhead Common;
• Shortheath Common;
• Yateley Common;
• Hyde, Gorley, Rockford and Ibsley Commons;
• Martin Down;
• Rye and Hillside Commons; and
• Silchester Common
Many sites without formal designations are frequently used for recreation, including woodlands, urban playing fields, parks, cemeteries, allotments and rivers (principally the Solent, Avon, Itchen, Test and Hamble). Many of these fall within the definitions of green infrastructure, or blue infrastructure in the case of watercourses. In terms of access to coastal frontage, the amount of frontage in private ownership that is accessible to the public is not known. Of the length with known ownership, 60.6% of this is accessible. xxvii Under the Marine and Coastal Access Act (2009), Natural England has a duty to secure a long distance walking trail around the English coast.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 22 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Natural England has found that at least two thirds of the Hampshire coast does not have satisfactory access. xxviii
There are numerous long distance footpaths in Hampshire, including those which follow the coast or rivers or canals, such as the Solent Way, Test Way, the Avon Valley and Blackwater Valley paths and Basingstoke Canal towpath. The South Downs Way also passes through Hampshire. In addition there are numerous, shorter, Rights of Way. These are evaluated in Hampshire’s Countryside Access Plans (Rights of Way Improvement Plans). Retaining or improving access to and along all of the county’s Rights of Way will need to be considered by the LFRMS in terms of the developing strategy and eventual LFRMS measures. Areas used for recreation and access to them will also need to be considered in any plans to improve the standard or provision of green or blue infrastructure, a topic covered in section 5.2.1.5.
The National Trail and Rights of Way in the county are shown in the map figures (Figure 10) of Appendix B. Additionally, important areas used for recreation are also shown in the maps showing nature conservation and landscape designations, also included in Appendix B.
4.3.3 Material Assets
The term “material assets” is not defined in the SEA Directive. For the purposes of this SEA the term is used in relation to buildings and infrastructure in the county that could potentially be affected by flooding. However, the LFRMS should also consider whether any of its policy themes or other elements could potentially increase demand for mineral resources or lead to an increase in waste production, for example during scheme construction at a later stage. For the purposes of this SEA, material assets has been split into the categories of (a) critical infrastructure, (b) housing, (c) economy, (d) agriculture and land use, (e) mineral resources, (e) waste management and (f) transport infrastructure. 4.3.3.1 Critical Infrastructure
The UK Climate Change Risk Assessment shows that flooding as a result of climate change is likely to pose an increasing threat to critical UK infrastructure. As a result, transport networks, water supplies and sewage treatment, energy supplies, hospital and schools will all face a higher risk. There is a high risk of confidence in the ‘significant likelihood of flooding’ risk posed to roads and a medium level of confidence in relation to power stations, hospitals and schools. xxix Waste management infrastructure could also be described as critical infrastructure; these assets are described in section 4.3.3.6. Minerals safeguarding areas are also described in section 4.3.3.5.
The LFRMS will seek to manage flood risk to critical infrastructure and material assets within Hampshire. The implementation of LFRMS measures has the potential to disrupt critical transport infrastructure (such as road or rail networks), utilities (such as clean water) or access to community care facilities (hospitals or health centres). The location of critical infrastructure may influence the range of available LFRMS management options and measures. The location of LFRMS-related infrastructure, if any new build is required, will also need to consider access to and use of critical infrastructure.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 23 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Like many counties, Hampshire has a considerable amount of infrastructure that is critical to the health, safety and accessibility of the population. Table 4.4 does not provide an exhaustive list of the county’s critical infrastructure but is intended to provide an overview of infrastructure types;
Critical Infrastructure in Hampshire
• Electricity generating power stations • A&E Hospitals and grid and primary substations • Airports • Medical Centres • Ambulance Stations • Mental health service • Community Hospitals • National Air Traffic Control Centres • Day Care Centres • Police Control • Enterprise Mouchel Traffic • Police Stations Management Control Centre • Power Stations • Fire & Rescue Stations • Prison • Hampshire Fire & Rescue Service Headquarters • Schools
• HCC Prepared Rest Centres • South Central Ambulance Services
• Maritime & Coastguard Agency • Supermarket Distribution Centres
• Important mineral reserves • Waste management infrastructure
Table 4.4 Indicative List of Critical Infrastructure in Hampshire
GIS data on these categories of infrastructure were received from Hampshire County Council and these data are provided in Figure 9 of Appendix B. 4.3.3.2 Housing
Areas of high population density are shown in Figure 4.3 in the Population and Human Health section of the baseline. The risk of flooding to the population, whether the housing is high or low density, will be considered further during the assessment of the LFRMS. This will also include consideration of areas used by the population, such as recreation areas, places of work and transport routes. 4.3.3.3 Economy
The impact of the LFRMS on the County’s economy will be assessed principally through an assessment of flood risk to critical infrastructure and places or work with large numbers of employees. However, the impacts of flooding and the LFRMS on the tourist economy will also be considered, for example through SEA objectives that relates to areas used for recreation or areas recognised for their biodiversity or landscape importance.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 24 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
4.3.3.4 Agriculture and Land Use
According to the Agricultural Land Classification of the county, there is very little Grade 1 (i.e. highest quality) agricultural land, with only small pockets in the south east of the County. The majority of Grade 2 land is on the south coast and in the north east of the County. There is a large amount of Grade 4 and Grade 5 (i.e. the lowest quality) agricultural land in the south west of the county and also a significant amount of Grade 4 land following the line of Hampshire’s rivers. In total almost 60% of Hampshire’s agricultural land is graded 1 to 3a.xxx
Urban developed areas are primarily along the coast, with areas such as Fareham, and Gosport in addition to the cities of Southampton and Portsmouth. Inland, there is also significant existing and planned development for Basingstoke, Aldershot, Andover, Winchester and Romsey, as shown in Table 4.2, as well as for Fareham and Eastleigh.
There are a number of largely undeveloped open areas between settlements in Hampshire. The County has one green belt, the South West Hampshire Green Belt, designated to contain development pressures from the Bournemouth urban area. xxxi
The LFRMS measures may change the frequency and extent of flooding, leading to consequent changes in the suitability of land for certain uses, for example by affecting its versatility, productivity, soil quality and mineral resources. For instance, construction activities or increasing the seasonal period during which soil is waterlogged could lead to impacts such as these. 4.3.3.5 Mineral Resources
The county possesses a wide variety of mineral resources, but the following list represents the principal resources in Hampshire xxxii ;
• Sand and gravel. These resources are found as superficial or ‘drift’ deposits (e.g. river terrace deposits) from the Quaternary period or bedrock deposits from the Palaeogene period. The most important gravel deposits are in the Avon Valley;
• Brick clay. This is predominantly extracted, in small quantities, from the London Clay Formation at Rowlands Castle and from the Palaeogene Headon and Osbourne Beds at Lymington, for use in landfill containment;
• Chalk. Extracted in small quantities from Monk Sherborne in the north of the county and Somborne Lime quarry in the west;
• Building stone. Historically flint, chalk and sandstone were extracted for building purposes, with flint still extracted; and
• Hydrocarbons. Hampshire has been extensively explored for oil and gas since the 1960s. The presence of the Mesozoic Weald basin in the north and centre of the county and the Mesozoic Wessex basin in the south and south-west has led to both of these areas being explored and extracted from. The oilfields still producing are at Humbly Grove, Horndean and Stockbridge.
Hampshire does not contain hard rock or other specialist aggregates or minerals and these are primarily imported by sea or rail, for example limestone imported by rail
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 25 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
from Somerset.xxxiii The Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (2012) lists various aggregate wharves and rail depots, principally in Southampton, but also in Fareham, Marchwood, Eastleigh, Botley and Havant.
The Minerals and Waste Plan also lists the following Minerals Safeguarding Areas;
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 26 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
District or Borough Site Name Grid Reference Council Area
Basingstoke and Deane Basingstoke Sidings 4627 1524 Borough Council New Forest District Bleak Hill Quarry 4130 1113 Council Extension Hart Borough Council Bramshill Quarry 4805 1585 Extension Test Valley Borough Cutty Brow 4413 1445 Council New Forest District Forest Lodge Farm 4428 1057 Council Eastleigh Borough Hamble Airfield 4477 1078 Council Winchester City Council Micheldever Sidings 4518 1433
Test Valley Borough Michelmersh Brickworks 4340 1258 Council
Basingstoke and Deane Mortimer Quarry 4623 1637 Borough Council Extension
New Forest District Purple Haze 4115 1069 Council
New Forest District Roeshot 4187 9484 Council
East Hampshire District Selborne Brickworks 4765 1343 Council
Test Valley Borough Squabb Wood Landfill 4330 1214 Council
East Hampshire District Whitehill Bordon 4790 1360 Council
Table 4.5 Minerals Safeguarding Areas in Hampshire
At the end of their life, mineral sites can offer opportunities for restoration for the benefit of the environment, local communities or the economy. Quarries can present opportunities to act as agricultural reservoirs or flood water storage. Policy 8 of the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan has restoration aims for quarries and landfill sites that include consideration of their use for these purposes. The Ringwood and Frith End quarries have both won restoration awards for their contribution to local biodiversity. The LFRMS aims to look at whether the LFRMS measures could co- ordinate with restoration plans, nature conservation plans (e.g. Biodiversity Opportunity Areas) and green infrastructure provision. The LFRMS will also need to take account of flood risk to Minerals Safeguarding Areas and the transport networks connected with them.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 27 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Policy 31 of the Minerals and Waste Plan states that proposals for existing and new non-hazardous waste landfill sites will only be considered where they do not affect a Principal Aquifer and is outside Groundwater Protection and Flood Risk zones. However, the LFRMS team will need to liaise with minerals and waste planners at HCC and refer to the key diagram of the Minerals and Waste Plan to cross-check the existing and indicative search areas for minerals and waste management in Hampshire. 4.3.3.6 Waste Management
Total waste arisings in Hampshire comprise the following (approximate) breakdown;
• Municipal Solid Waste (MSW): 17%;
• Commercial & Industrial (C&I) waste: 34%; and
• Construction, Demolition and Excavation (CDE) waste: 49%
The non-municipal element is managed through a network of commercial Waste Transfer Stations and Materials Recovery Facilities which collect and sort commercial waste, with the remainder going to landfill. Hampshire has three energy recovery facilities for municipal waste, one for commercial waste and a high temperature incinerator for hazardous wastes, Fawley Treatment Centre. There are also landfill sites for non-hazardous waste at Blue Haze (Ringwood Forest), Squabb Wood (near Romsey) and Pound Bottom (Redlynch). There is also a reserve site, Purple Haze (Ringwood Forest) listed in the Minerals and Waste Plan. xxxiv
LFRMS plans that include the waste management network will be examined in terms of their potential impacts on all SEA topic areas. For the treatment of liquid waste, Hampshire’s major wastewater treatment sites are at Budds Farm (Havant), Peel Common (Fareham) and Basingstoke. The forecast long term growth in population and housing will lead to an increased demand for wastewater treatment in the county. Planned growth areas, such as those at Whitehill Bordon, Fareham and Aldershot will also need to have supporting local waste facilities. xxxv
The LFRMS will need to consider flood risk to existing facilities, proposed changes to existing facilities xxxvi and proposed new waste management facilities, including the sewerage network. Inundation of sites that contain contaminated land could potentially release and spread contaminants into the environment through floodwater. Historic landfill sites are predominantly in the southern half of the county. All historic landfill sites are shown in Figure 11 of the Appendix B maps. 4.3.3.7 Transport Infrastructure
The development of a well-functioning, reliable transport network plays a crucial role in supporting wider economic prosperity and competitiveness, enabling healthy social interaction, and reducing carbon emissions. Flooding of transport links can cause significant economic and social disruption as well as potential pollution to the natural environment, for example through highway runoff containing winter salt, fuel spillages, litter or other contaminants.
A number of strategic transport routes pass through Hampshire, including the M3/A3, M27/A27, A31, A303, A339, A33, A331, A34 and the A272. Access to and along these routes is critical for population health (for example, access to hospitals) as
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 28 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
well as the economy. In addition there are mainline railway routes linking Hampshire with other parts of southern England and Wales.
Although Southampton and Portsmouth are not strictly included in the baseline collection for the Hampshire LFRMS SEA, the transport links to these cities need to be considered. For example, national policy recognises the Port of Southampton as a major international deep sea gateway port with significant global and economic importance. xxxvii Southampton International Airport is also of national significance.
4.3.4 Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna 4.3.4.1 Introduction
Hampshire is one of the richest counties in lowland England in terms of extent of semi-natural habitat and designated land. The county also has the greatest diversity of species of any county in England. xxxviii
Most of the habitats in Hampshire are managed by human intervention, such as heathlands, water meadows and coppiced woodlands. Many saline lagoons were once created for saltworks or oysterbeds and are still extant in places.xxxix
The geology of the river catchments has an effect on their biodiversity character. The rivers which originate in the chalk and flow through it are internationally important for their biodiversity. xl
The New Forest National Park contains the largest area of ancient semi-natural woodland in the UK and the largest area of heathland and both habitats are important for their biodiversity. xli
There are many different types and scale of nature conservation designation in the county, including local (Hampshire), national and international designations. The types of habitat that they designate also vary considerably.
Coastal areas of the county contain important breeding colonies of birds, such as the sandwich tern and little tern, along with wintering populations of waterfowl such as dark bellied Brent geese. xlii Heathland in the New Forest is also home to some of the UK’s rarest vertebrates, such as sand lizard and smooth snake. xliii
In many areas important habitats remain fragmented, particularly in the landscapes dominated by arable farmland. A diverse range of ancient hedgerows, sunken lanes, streams and flower-rich road verges help provide a connecting network for wildlife. While direct loss of habitats has slowed, many semi-natural habitats have deteriorated in condition either through lack of management or intensive management. xliv
Invasive plant and animal species are well established in all of Hampshire’s terrestrial and marine habitats, either through natural processes or accidental introduction. In most cases the effects are benign, but some species are highly damaging to native species and communities. xlv
The LFRMS needs to ensure that LFRMS measures do not adversely affect flow levels to water dependent habitats or increase levels of pollution reaching aquatic environments, for example through highway runoff. For example, many habitats, including coastal, heathland and river valleys, are very sensitive to water flow regime
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 29 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
change, and water quality changes, which are the specific issues that the SEA/HRA of the LFRMS needs to address. Water quality and water resources are discussed further in section 4.3.6 of this Scoping Report. These potential impacts will also be considered in the HRA with respect to potential impacts on internationally designated sites. However, there are also a number of national and locally designated sites that could be affected.
In addition to protecting wildlife sites in the county, the LFRMS has potential to improve biodiversity on the ground, either through creating new biodiversity areas or restoring existing ones, as well as linking up biodiversity sites as part of plans for improving green infrastructure and fostering ‘living landscapes’, as promoted by the UK wildlife trusts. The LFRMS may also have the potential to improve local biodiversity areas, such as SINCs, or progress the aims of larger areas such as the county’s Biodiversity Opportunity Areas (BOAs) or the ‘South Downs Way Ahead Nature Improvement Area’ (NIA). BOAs and the NIA are described in section 4.3.4.4 and also shown in Figures 2 and 3 of the Appendix B maps. 4.3.4.2 Designated Sites
The preliminary screening for the Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) being carried out in tandem with this SEA found that there are seventeen sites of international importance covering three designation types within and around Hampshire:
• Special Areas of Conservation (SAC): Butser Hill, East Hampshire Hangers, Emer Bog, Mottisfont Bats, River Itchen, Shortheath Common, Solent and Isle of Wight Lagoons, Solent Maritime, the New Forest and Woolmer Forest. Dorset Heaths, River Avon, Salisbury Plain SACs also lie partly within Hampshire and partly in neighbouring counties. SACs cover 36,531 hectares xlvi of the county and cover a wide range of terrestrial and coastal habitats;
• Special Protection Areas (SPA) xlvii and Ramsar sites xlviii : Avon Valley, Chichester and Langstone Harbours, New Forest, Portsmouth Harbour, Solent and Southampton Water, Wealden Heaths Phase 2. Only Wealden Heaths has an SPA but no Ramsar designation, the rest have both. Salisbury Plain SPA also lies partly within Hampshire. SPA and Ramsar sites cover 39,974 hectares and 35,175 hectares of the county respectively. However, all Ramsar sites in the county are also designated as SPAs.
Under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (the “Habitats Regulations”) (SI No. 2010/490) there is a legal requirement to assess whether there are any likely significant effects of plans and/ or programmes on Natura 2000 (SACs and SPAs) and Ramsar Sites. This will be undertaken as part of the LFRMS HRA process.
In addition to internationally designated conservation sites, there are also nationally and locally designated sites within Hampshire, as follows:
• Ten National Nature Reservesxlix ; (Ashford Hangers, Ashford Hill, Beacon Hill, Butser Hill, Castle Bottom, Kingston Great Common, Martin Down, North Solent, Old Winchester Hill, Titchfield Haven).l NNRs cover 2,173 hectares of the county;
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 30 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
• 48 Local Nature Reserves (LNRs) li . Four of these were designated by Hampshire County Council in 2010; Danebury Hillfort near Andover, Lepe Point in the New Forest, Shawford Down in Winchester and Hayling Billy Line on Hayling Island. LNRs cover 1727 hectares;
• 117 Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)(shown in the maps in Appendix B) SSSIs cover 48,553 hectares of the county; and
• Over 3700 sites Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs), covering 9% of Hampshire's land area (34353 hectares).lii
The international, national and local nature designations are shown in separate figures (Figures 1 to 3) provided in Appendix B.
Many sites cover more than one biodiversity or landscape designation. For example, within the New Forest National Park, there are four Special Area of Conservation designations (New Forest, Solent Maritime, Solent and Isle of Wight Lagoons, River Avon), a Special Protection Area and a Ramsar site (New Forest, Solent and Southampton Water) as well as National Nature Reserve (North Solent, Kings Great Common, Langley Wood) and Local Nature Reserve (Boldre Foreshore, Lymington- Keyhaven Marshes, Calshot Marshes) designations. liii All internationally designated sites are also comprised of underlying SSSI designations. 4.3.4.3 Priority Habitats and Species
Although detailed information on Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) habitats and species has been scoped out, the following boxes, taken from the BAP liv , provide general information on the BAP in order to provide a better overview of the county’s biodiversity as a whole.
Habitats Of the UK’s 37 broad habitat types, 23 are found in Hampshire. Within the broad habitat types, ‘key’ habitats of priority importance have been identified. In Hampshire, 18 key habitats of UK conservation concern are present, and there are an additional 3 habitats of local concern. Detailed habitat action plans will be written for these 21 priority habitats to fully review their current status and set objectives and targets for action.
Species The richness of habitats in Hampshire is reflected in the wide range of species found. The UK Biodiversity Programme has identified 1288 species of national conservation concern, and of these, 489 priority species require urgent conservation action. Of the 489 national priority species, 196 are found in Hampshire, and the audit has identified an additional 248 priority species which are particularly important in the local context. Action for most of the priority species in Hampshire will be covered by relevant habitat action plans. Where national species action plans exist, these will be translated into specific action in Hampshire. For those species not covered by national plans or which can not be easily accommodated by a habitat action plan, a specific species action plan will be prepared.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 31 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
The BAP priority species in Hampshire are too numerous to quote in this Scoping Report and the groups that they fall under are broad. However, the BAP priority habitats are shown in the following box to show the diversity of habitat types in the county:
Hampshire BAP Priority Habitats lv
• Ancient semi-natural woodland • Canals
• Lowland pasture • Maritime cliffs woodland/parkland • Shingle • Ancient hedgerows • Saltmarsh • Arable field margins • Coastal grazing marsh • Unimproved neutral grassland/fen • Sand dunes • Calcareous grassland • Mudflats and eelgrass beds • Floodplain grazing marsh • Saline lagoons • Lowland heath/bog/acid grassland • Road verges • Fen/carr/marsh/swamp/reedbed • Urban • Standing open water • Marine • Chalk rivers • General/all habitats
4.3.4.4 Biodiversity Opportunity Areas
These are specific geographical areas identified by HCC as offering the best opportunity to restore or create habitats of regional importance. The purpose of BOAs is to guide support for land management to areas where restoration would have particular biodiversity benefit. They do not have any statutory protection. In addition to the large parts of the county that fall under the BOAs, Natural England has also defined twelve ‘Nature Improvement Areas’ (NIAs) in England. One of these, the ‘South Downs Way Ahead NIA’, is a large tract of land that passes through Sussex and mid Hampshire, mostly as a narrow band but broadening out before it finishes in the Winchester area. Although they are not strictly ‘designations’ with statutory protection, the BOAs and the NIA, they may offer opportunities for the LFRMS to complement their objectives, for example, through the delivery of priority schemes. These areas are shown on the Local Nature Conservation Designations and National Nature Conservation Designations maps respectively due to their spatial scale. These can be found in Appendix B (figures 2 and 3).
4.3.5 Soil, Geology and Geomorphology
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 32 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
4.3.5.1 Soils
The type of soil and underlying geology influence the likelihood of surface and groundwater flooding in an area. In addition, due to the difference in soil structures vulnerability to erosion varies.
Soil erosion is an increasing problem throughout the UK, for example through inappropriate land management or agricultural practices. Floodwater can also remove soil from areas, for example through surface water flash flooding. Compaction, sealing, nutrient enrichment and pollution can also affect soils. Detailed information on soil quality in Hampshire does not appear to be available. However, the most productive agricultural land and urbanised or non-agricultural land is shown in the Agricultural Land Classification map (Figure 6) of Appendix B. This map is described in section 4.2.3.4 of this report. 4.3.5.2 Geology and Geomorphology
Hampshire has five distinct geological ‘blocks’ that define the land character and use of the county lvi . These are as follows;
• A central block of chalk with carrying degrees of clay with flint surface;
• North of the central chalk block, an area of tertiary sands and clays;
• To the east, the western end of the Weald, consisting of Upper Greensand, Gault Clay and Lower Greensand;
• To the south of the chalk, a broad band of tertiary sands and clays (forming the underlying strata of the New Forest); and
• A small area of chalk, representing part of the eastern edge of Cranborne Chase
The geology of Hampshire is also influential on the nature and extent of flood risk in the county. Geological structure, catchment shape, valley topography, land use, soil and drift cover can all influence the rate and magnitude of groundwater response.
The importance of geology in influencing groundwater levels is shown in the significant variations in the levels of wells located at similar elevations in the Itchen and Wallington catchments. There seem to be different regional aquifer characteristics in the eastern catchments of the county. The Lower Chalk is generally a poorer aquifer than the Upper Chalk, which is more prominent in the Test and Itchen catchments. The Eastern catchments are also more likely to suffer from regular flooding and flooding earlier in the year than in the Test and Itchen catchments. However, there is generally a more rapid retreat of groundwater flooding in the Eastern catchment. lvii
There are 25 Geological Conservation Review Sites in the county lviii, of which six are also designated as geological SSSIs, mixed biological/ geological SSSIs or SSSIs that have a geological component. These are as follows;
• New Forest (Cranes Moor);
• Downend Chalk Pit (near Wallington);
• Dunbridge Pit;
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 33 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
• Duncroft Farm Pit;
• Hurst Castle and Lymington River Estuary;
• Lee on Solent to Itchen Estuary.
The SSSI citations for these sites have been received from Natural England lix and they will be discussed in more detail in the Environmental Report should the LFRMS show any influence in these geographical areas.
A map of the bedrock geology of Hampshire is provided as Figure 7 in Appendix B.
4.3.6 Water 4.3.6.1 Water Framework Directive
The LFRMS needs to ensure that, by improving drainage and reducing flood risk in the county, the requirements of the WFD are considered at all stages in the strategy, and that there are no adverse impacts on water quality or the hydrological regime of aquatic habitats. It also needs to ensure that drinking water quality, groundwater and human health are protected.
One of the key objectives under the WFD, is the requirement to prevent deterioration in status and achieve at least Good Ecological Status (GES) in inland and coastal waters by set deadlines ranging from 2015 to 2027. The WFD similarly requires all Artificial or Heavily Modified Water Bodies (HMWB) to achieve ‘good ecological potential’ (GEP). Definitions of GES and GEP are provided in the glossary at the end of this report.
The quality status of water bodies in terms of the WFD, is dependent upon various underlying factors, as shown in figure 4.3. Any activity which has the potential to impact on ecology (as defined by biological, physico-chemical and hydromorphological Quality Elements) will need consideration in terms of whether it could cause deterioration in the Ecological Status or Potential of a water body.
With this in mind, an SEA objective has been developed that assesses whether the LFRMS is likely to have an impact on the chemical or ecological status or potential of water bodies.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 34 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Source: Environment Agency; South East River Basin Management Plan (RBMP) (2009) and South West RBMP (2008). Figure 4.4 The components of overall status of surface water bodies
The LFRMS area falls across both the South West River Basin Management Plan (RBMP) and the South RBMP. Significant pressures identified within one or both plans include abstraction and artificial flow regulation, diffuse and point pollution (from nitrates, organic pollution, pesticides and phosphate), commercial fisheries, non-native species, physical modification to the structure of water bodies, sediment and urban/transport pollution.
The following water bodies are located in the LFRMS: -
• New Forest catchment - 30 river water bodies and 2 lakes; of which 14 are artificial or heavily modified;
• Test and Itchen catchment – 6 groundwater bodies, 52 river water bodies and 3 lakes; of which 18 rivers and 2 lakes are heavily modified;
• East Hampshire catchment – 5 groundwater bodies, 28 river water bodies and 1 lake, of which 10 rivers are heavily modified;
• Hampshire Avon catchment – 39 river water bodies;
• Coastal water bodies: Southampton Water, Solent and Dorset/Hampshire coastal water.
The LFRMS will need to consider whether any flood risk management measures will lead to adverse impacts on the water bodies within the strategy area and whether the LFRMS can contribute to delivering some of the mitigation measures set out within the RBMPs’ Programme of Measures e.g. through improvement to fish passage. The environmental assessment will consider the possible changes to the water bodies within the study area resulting from the proposed management options. 4.3.6.2 Surface Water Quality
The water quality of the catchments within the LFRMS area, are classified as follows:
• New Forest catchment – 44% of rivers and lakes currently achieve good or better ecological status/potential, including the Avon Water, Bartley Water and Danes Stream. 69% of rivers assessed for biology are at good or high biological status, with only 8% at poor biological status, and no assessed waters at bad status;
• Test and Itchen catchment – 38% of rivers and lakes currently achieve good or better ecological status/potential. 46% assessed for biology are at good or high biological status. This includes the River Test (Middle), River Blackwater and Old Alresford Pond;
• East Hampshire catchment – 17% of rivers and lakes currently achieve good or better ecological status/potential. 42% of waters assessed are at good or high biological status. This includes the River Meon, River Wallington and Warnford Lake;
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 35 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
• Hampshire Avon catchment – Currently, 30% of surface waters achieve good or better ecological status/potential. Waters at good status include the Upper Avon, the Till and the Nadder.
If flooding in the LFRMS area occurs on a regular basis, there is the potential that water quality will deteriorate.
As well as general consideration of water quality in terms of the WFD status classes, the quality of shellfish waters and designated bathing waters will specifically be considered further during the preparation of the SEA Environmental Report. 4.3.6.3 Groundwater Quality
Groundwater levels in Hampshire’s chalk vary seasonally, either in response to “normal” variations in rainfall and evapotranspiration or to extreme flood or drought conditions. They generally reach a peak at around March and are lowest in October. Increased levels of groundwater can result in the emergence of new springs, increased seepage to valley bottoms and increased groundwater contribution (baseflow) to surface water flows. lx The quality of groundwater can therefore affect the quality of surface water as well as the reverse.
Groundwater provides vital resources for public water supply, industry, agriculture and for numerous rural communities, and they also feed rivers and support wetlands. One of the most problematic and widespread groundwater contaminants is nitrates. Nitrates are regularly found in groundwater in some areas at concentrations exceeding the drinking water limit as established in the European Commission’s Directive on Drinking Water (80/778/EEC).
Agriculture is thought to be the primary source of nitrate presence in groundwater, although other sources include waste, particularly through old landfills, septic tanks and leaking sewers.
The majority of Hampshire is designated as a Eutrophic Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZ) under the Nitrate Pollution Prevention Regulations 2008, whereby it is known the rivers drain into nitrate polluted waters. The regulations implementing the Nitrates Directive are currently being reviewed and new regulations will replace them from January 2013.
There are several Groundwater Source Protection Zones (SPZs), identified by the Environment Agency for groundwater sources used for public drinking water supply within the County. These zones show the risk of contamination from any activities that might cause pollution in the area. Issues potentially affecting groundwater quality include:
• Tidal influence within coastal areas, which could result in saline intrusion into freshwater bodies (if an aquifer is over-abstracted);
• Increased levels of nitrate and phosphates in agricultural areas; and
• Industrial land use or landfills.
Information on the location of SPZs, major abstractions and consented discharges will be collated for consideration during later stages of the SEA.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 36 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
4.3.6.4 Catchment Sensitive Farming
Catchment Sensitive Farming (CSF) is a voluntary initiative between the Environment Agency and Natural England to deliver practical solutions and targeted support to enable farmers and land managers to deal with diffuse pollution from agriculture to protect waterbodies and the environment.
CSF looks at: best practice on manure and pesticide usage; promoting good soil structure; protecting watercourses from run-off; and best practice on stock management. Priority catchments for CSF funding in the strategy area include;
• Hampshire Avon catchment with target areas in the Wylye, Nadder and East and West Avon; and
• Rivers Test and Itchen catchment with target areas in River Blackwater, River Dun, Wallop Brook, and the Pillhill Brook, Bourne Rivulet and the Upper Test, and the Candovers, River Arle, Cheriton Stream, Itchen Valley and Bow Lake. 4.3.6.5 Water Availability in Hampshire
Water resources within the LFRMS area are likely to be under increasing pressure from a growing population and increased demand for wastewater treatment and drinking water over the duration of the strategy. In addition, increased flood risk could affect water supply or treatment facilities, resulting in the loss of service or contamination of water supplies. Consequently, strategic flood risk management measures proposed by the LFRMS will need to consider these issues as the strategy progresses. 4.3.6.6 Climate change adaptation
The UK Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP) has carried out modelling that shows detailed climate probability for each 25km 2 of land in the UK. The latest (UKCP09) projections confirm that the UK is likely to experience:
• hotter/ drier summers;
• warmer/wetter winters;
• sea level rises;
• more weather extremes.
In Hampshire, increased precipitation will increase the risk of inland surface water flooding, which may be exacerbated by blockages in culverts, gutters and drains (sometimes due to inadequate maintenance). As Hampshire has approximately 230 miles of coastline, sea level rise, extreme weather and tidal surges could lead to increased coastal flooding. lxi It is also possible that coastal and fluvial flooding could combine with flooding from LFRMS sources (groundwater, ordinary water courses, and surface water).
Expected changes in the climate may have major impacts on the built infrastructure of Hampshire, such as roads, sewers, railways and buildings, and could cause damage to trees, plants and crops. Shorter, more intense rainfall could also have an impact on flooding and recharging aquifers in the county. People’s health could be affected by high temperatures, higher pollen levels and more or different pests. lxii
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 37 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
In the longer term it is likely that there will also be changes to where and how people live and work, and changes to the way we care for the elderly and children. The opportunities for tourism and for growing different crops in the county are likely to increase. lxiii
The LFRMS should assist the county in becoming better adapted to the impacts of climate change, particularly in relation to flood risk. However, there may also be opportunities, through LFRMS measures, to improve the resilience of biodiversity to climate change, for example by creating or improving flood storage areas for wildlife potential. The LFRMS could also potentially facilitate the migration of habitats and species, especially in coastal areas where some habitats and species are under pressure from coastal squeeze as well as other impacts. For example, new flood storage areas could effectively expand the amount of wetland habitat. Tree planting at the location of LFRMS measures could also contribute to cooling and shading.
Opportunities to link up green and blue infrastructure and improve its resilience to climate change impacts will also be explored.
4.3.7 The Historic Environment 4.3.7.1 Introduction
The historic environment includes archaeological remains, historic structures like buildings and bridges, historic parks and gardens, and the historic landscapes and townscapes all around, including hedgerows, boundaries, ditches and culverts. Whilst much is recorded on the Historic Environment Record, the evidence base for this assessment, other structures are not recorded, and many archaeological sites exist which have not yet been discovered. This is referred to as archaeological potential. In areas of high archaeological potential there is the potential to encounter archaeological remains that are as yet unknown.
Some of the heritage assets are protected by designation. Scheduled Ancient Monuments, Listed buildings, Registered Parks and Gardens, Protected Wrecks, Registered Battle Fields and Conservation Areas. Some buildings which are not listed nationally may be locally listed and so enjoy some status and protection. The majority of archaeological remains are considered on merit with only 1200 archaeological sites enjoying scheduled status of the 20,000 archaeological sites recorded on the Hampshire Historic Environment Record (HER).
River corridors are often archaeologically rich, where they have been favoured for their resources, as places of settlement and as routes of trade and population movement. In addition waterlogged parts of the landscape frequently in river valleys have an archaeological potential associated with the survival of palaeo- environmental remains. These can be seeds and pollens which can describe the landscape at periods in the deep past, or organic artefacts like leather or wood, which don’t survive on dry land.
Some archaeological remains and historic structures are directly linked to the issues of water management and flood control. For example Mills and mill leats, canals and navigations, man made urban streams through historic settlements, bridges, sluices, locks, aqueducts, water meadows, fish ponds and their dams, and pumping and sewage infrastructure from the 19 th century.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 38 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
The issues that arise that the LFRMS might need to address can be divided into four areas.
The impact of flooding on heritage assets.
Flooding damage to structures, such as buildings, bridges, culverts, sluices to historic settlements, to archaeological sites and to palaeo-environmental survival.
The role of historic structures within water and flood management
The degree to which flooding and its control might be impacted by the management of historic structures. For example maintenance of existing systems, utilisation of water meadows as flood capacity.
The impact of historic structures on water management
The degree to which the historic environment might inform or constrain the options available, such as bridge maintenance or adaptation , conservation areas, and listed or scheduled structures astride steams.
Impact of flood prevention and mitigation on the historic environment.
The physical impact of structures and construction on the heritage, buildings archaeological sites and palaeo-environmental remains. The impact of flood structures on the setting of buildings, towns and monuments. For example the impact of a flood barrier adjacent to an iconic building, such as an Abbey, or the impact of a conservation area on the location and design of a structure. 4.3.7.2 Cultural Heritage Assets
Table 4.6 details the designated heritage features in Hampshire. In addition the HER provides an evidence base of undesignated heritage assets as well as providing some insight into the archaeological potential of an area.
All heritage assets, whether designated or not, will require attention when developing and implementing the LFRMS.
The LFRMS should ensure that the most important heritage assets are protected from the impacts of flooding.
The LFRMS should ensure that the most important heritage assets are protected from the direct impact of works and where appropriate the indirect effects on setting.
The LFRMS should seek to ensure those heritage assets not meriting preservation, but impacted by direct works are properly recorded before their loss.
The LFRMS should also utilise the existing historic environment to guide or enhance design, e.g. wall treatment of culverts in historic urban centres.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 39 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Designated Assets Total in Hants
Listed Buildings (all) 14,197
Grade I 226
Grade II* 657 Grade II 13,382
Protected Wrecks (inland water) 1 Conservation Areas 337
Registered Parks and Gardens 62 Registered Battlefields 1 Scheduled Ancient Monuments 1223
Table 4.6 Cultural Heritage Sites in Hampshire (Sites and Monuments Record)
Cultural heritage designations are shown in Figure 8 of the Appendix B maps. 4.3.7.3 Historic Landscape Character
Historic Landscape character is the degree to which any place reflects within its character the historic processes that have lead it to the present state. In particular the patterns of roads, tracks, paths, property boundaries, woods, and field boundaries will together reflect a history of that place. For example the regulated and ruled landscapes of parliamentary enclosure; the wooded and hedged small scale irregular landscape of medieval assart; the structured catch work of water meadows. Each part reveals the landscapes evolution.
The LFRMS may be able to utilise aspects of the historic environment in relation to flood control, in particular identifying areas of the landscape that have historically been used to accept flood water.
The LFRMS may be able to reflect historic landscape character as an influence on scheme design, for example utilising orientation and patterns of existing drainage, or reflecting or mimicking local landscape character traits.
4.3.8 Landscape and Visual Amenity 4.3.8.1 Introduction
The underlying geology of Hampshire has a significant influence upon the landscape we see today, through its influence on topography, soil types, vegetation and hydrology. Geology is described in more detail in section 4.3.5.2. At a very general level the landscape of Hampshire is characterised by four broad zones: the Hampshire Weald to the east, the Hampshire Basin to the south, a wide band of chalk across the centre, and the Thames Basin to the north. Within these broad zones there is a significant degree of variation which is captured, at a national level, by the National Character Areas (NCAs) defined by Natural England, as shown in Table 4.7.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 40 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
4.3.8.2 National Character Areas
NCAs define the landscape of each area in individual descriptions. These explain what makes one area different from another and shows how landscape character has arisen and how it is changing. The following table summarises the NCAs that fall within Hampshire.
New Forest The New Forest is at the heart of a broad and shallow syncline (geological basin) known as the Hampshire Basin which broadly delineates the catchment of rivers draining in to the Solent and Christchurch Bay. Sedimentary features such as shingle spits, beaches and saltmarshes and eroding coastlines, along the New Forest shore, provide classic examples of these features and opportunities to study modern coastal processes. The landscape and habitat types of the NCA are diverse and complex, including open heath and grazed wood pastures. Within the open Forest, the complex of heathland, mire and pasture woodland do not occur anywhere else on so large a scale and nowhere else do they occur in this combination. It is designated as a National Park. South Coast Plain Landform is dominated by the low relief of Tertiary sands, silts and clays that overlie the chalk. The east- west fold of chalk known as the Littlehampton anticline forms an isolated ridge to the north of Portsmouth known as Portsdown Hill. This rises from near sea level to over 100m and creates a dramatic backdrop to Portsmouth Harbour. South Downs The South Downs consist of a gentle but broad rolling dip-slope inclined to the south and a steep, narrow and mostly northerly-facing scarp that is broken by the Meon, Arun, Adur, Ouse and Cuckmere river valleys. Processes of erosion and deposition during the Ice Ages contributed significantly to the formation of the present landscape. Wealden Greensand The highest point within the Wealden Greensand NCA is 294 m above sea level. The lowest point is 0.20 m below sea level. The greensand ridge is highest in the West, becoming lower with a gentler slope towards the east. Leith Hill in Surrey is the highest point in south east England. South Hampshire The Hampshire Lowlands occupies the low lying land Lowlands between the chalk outcrops of the South Downs and Hampshire Downs and the coast of the Solent and English Channel. The highest point within the NCA is 123m above sea level. Hampshire Downs The Hampshire Downs are part of the broad belt of chalk downland which runs through central/southern England. The belt extends east to the South Downs,
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 41 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
north to the Berkshire and Marlborough Downs, and west to the South Wessex Downs. The northern boundary of the Hampshire Downs forms a ridge rising to over 290m and forming a dramatic escarpment overlooking the Thames Basin. To the east the chalk forms an escarpment at the western edge of the Weald. Through this the Test and Itchen Rivers have cut distinctive, deep, generally north-east/south- west parallel valleys. Source: Natural England (adapted and extracted from individual NCA profiles). lxiv
Table 4.7: Hampshire’s National Character Areas
Figure 5 in Appendix B shows the distribution of the National Character Areas in Hampshire, which is the broad framework for landscape character assessment at a smaller scale. The Hampshire Integrated Character Assessment (HCC 2011) provides descriptions and evaluation of the Hampshire landscape and 23 of its main towns. A series of District and Borough Landscape Assessments, undertaken at various times, are available on the respective council’s websites. Finally, each of the Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (protected landscapes) in Hampshire (see section 4.3.8.3) and the National Parks has published Landscape Character Assessments as part of their management planning process.
All of the Character Assessment data will be cross-referenced in this SEA with regard to potential avoidance, mitigation and enhancement measures. The LFRMS or SEA team will also need to liaise with HCC’s Strategic Environmental Delivery Group to determine potential impacts and opportunities. 4.3.8.3 Landscape Designations
Approximately half of Hampshire is covered by national landscape designations. Two National Parks, which offer statutory protection to conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage value of the parks, and represent the highest status of protection afforded to landscape and scenic beauty, fall partly within the county, as follows;
• New Forest - covers 14.2% of Hampshire. The New Forest is a diverse and complex landscape comprising unenclosed ancient woodland, enclosures, open heaths and lawns, mires and ponds, back-up grazing land, coastal plain landscapes and scattered dwellings and villages;
• South Downs – covers 15.2% of Hampshire and combines a diverse landscape of heritage coast, nature reserves, historic monuments and conservation areas with bustling market towns, villages and small farms.
The county also contains the New Forest Heritage Area and the following AONBs:
• Cranborne Chase and West Wiltshire Downs;
• North Wessex Downs; and
• Chichester Harbour.lxv
Landscape designations are shown in Figure 4 of the appendices.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 42 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
4.4 Policies, Plans and Programmes Review
A review of the policies, plans and programmes (PPP) most relevant to the LFRMS is provided as Appendix A.
The review of the PPP objectives shows that there are no policies, plans or programmes that have a direct conflict of interest with the likely objectives of the LFRMS. However, the PPP review has shown that specific plans theoretically could lead to cumulative flooding impacts – for example, Catchment Flood Management Plans and Shoreline Management Plans could, by alleviating flooding in one area, potentially increase flooding in another – this flood water from rivers or the sea could potentially combine with flooding water from other sources – for example, if a new flood storage area was created it could potentially receive flood waters from various sources.
In general the LFRMS has the potential to complement existing and proposed plans. The LFRMS will also need to harmonise with development site allocations and policies associated with the County’s Local Development Framework and Minerals and Waste Core Strategies. The LFRMS has significant potential to enhance the biodiversity and landscape associated with future LFRM measures, as well as complement plans to boost local economies, for example by enhancing the recreational amenity associated with schemes.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 43 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
5 Proposed SEA Approach
5.1 Draft SEA Objectives
A series of draft SEA objectives has been developed for the purposes of this project. These are based on experience of SEAs of surface water management plans and flood risk plans and are shown in Table 5.1. The underlying assessment criteria that are proposed to be used to assess the LFRMS are also shown.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 44 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Table 5-1 Draft LFRMS SEA objectives
SEA Topic(s) Draft LFRMS SEA Objective Underlying Assessment Criteria (showing changes as result of workshop in tracked changes) Would the LFRMS, in combination with other plans…
Biodiversity, Flora and 1. Conserve and seek to enhance the • reduce damage to, fragmentation or loss of existing designated Fauna biodiversity, flora and fauna of Hampshire. wildlife sites, wildlife corridors and priority habitats • support opportunities to enhance biodiversity? • maintain or improve existing water levels and water quality? • address biodiversity risk associated with low flow conditions? • reduce the risk of spreading non-native invasive species?
The Historic Environment 2. Conserve and seek to enhance the County’s • cause visual intrusion to historic landscapes, or the loss of or Landscape and Visual historic environment and heritage assets of damage to the significance of other heritage assets and their Amenity historic, archaeological, architectural or artistic setting? interest and their settings • promote schemes that enhance the condition and character and promote understanding of the significance of conservation areas and other heritage assets and their settings? • cause any direct or indirect physical impacts on the County's features of historic, archaeological, architectural or artistic interest, or their settings?
Landscape and Visual 3. Protect and seek to enhance the unique • cause permanent visual intrusion in areas of notable landscape Amenity setting and landscape character of Hampshire character or alter the character of locations regarded as locally distinctive?
• relieve intrusion or disturbance from existing areas of high
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 45 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
SEA Topic(s) Draft LFRMS SEA Objective Underlying Assessment Criteria (showing changes as result of workshop in tracked changes) Would the LFRMS, in combination with other plans…
landscape value? • enhance the range and quality of the public realm, including viewpoints and open spaces?
Water and 4. Minimise adverse effects on water quality Drainage Hydromorphology • result in improved drainage and attenuation (e.g. installation of SuDS), so that surface run-off is controlled to reduce pollution of soils and watercourses as well as run-off rates? Water quality • improve water retention in dry areas? • reduce flood risk (from surface, groundwater and ordinary water courses) to sewerage network, including sewage treatment works?
• reduce flood risk for known areas of contaminated land? • result in deterioration of the physical, chemical or biological status of surface freshwater (including lakes, streams and rivers), groundwaters, estuaries, or coastal waters out to one mile from low-water? • improve the ecological conditions of water bodies, with respect to the Water Framework Directive? • prevent or assist future improvement of the physical, chemical or biological status of surface freshwater, groundwaters, estuaries, or coastal waters out to one mile from low-water?
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 46 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
SEA Topic(s) Draft LFRMS SEA Objective Underlying Assessment Criteria (showing changes as result of workshop in tracked changes) Would the LFRMS, in combination with other plans…
Water and 5. Minimise adverse effects on water resource • result in changes in flow regime (e.g. low flow, variability of Hydromorphology availability flow/ levels) Population and Human • affect the quantity (total storage capacity) or quality of water Health, Biodiversity, Flora used for abstraction? and Fauna • improve groundwater recharge?
Water and 6. Minimise adverse effects on water • improve or reduce the morphological status of ordinary water Hydromorphology hydromorphology and natural processes courses – i.e., will it; a) minimise changes to hydromorphology and/or improve
current status?; b) cause changes to bank structure; c) result in opening of existing culverts?; d) increase potential for bankside erosion?; d) lead to loss of floodplain wetlands; e) lead to loss of bankside vegetation;
f) result in removal of sediment or gravels; g) result in the installation of in-channel structures? • help restore riparian corridors, including floodplain connectivity and natural processes?
Climate change 7. Adapt new and existing development to the • take into account UKCP09 and other climate change scenarios (if impacts of climate change available) with respect to predicted maximum high and low
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 47 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
SEA Topic(s) Draft LFRMS SEA Objective Underlying Assessment Criteria (showing changes as result of workshop in tracked changes) Would the LFRMS, in combination with other plans…
temperatures, freeze-thaws, rainfall and storminess? • help reduce flood risk to receptors across the range of SEA topic areas? • help reduce the impact of flood risk across the range of SEA topic areas?
Soils, Geology and 8. Protect soils and geological resources in the • require or encourage LFRM scheme construction on previously Geomorphology county undeveloped land? • reduce risk of soil contamination, e.g. through remediation of contaminated land, or reducing flood risk for known areas of contaminated land? • retain or affect sections of geological or geomorphological importance (SSSIs and RIGS)? • retain or enhance groundwater levels to improve soils?
• retain or enhance flood attenuation rates and water retention capacity of soil where necessary to protect soil structure or soil biodiversity? • protect or increase vegetation and/or organic debris cover of soil? • protect soil function and structure, i.e. reduce risk of compaction and sealing and promote best practice land management during construction of any FRM measures? • reduce soil erosion caused by flooding?
Material Assets 9. Minimise adverse impacts of local flood risk • improve protection of existing or proposed key transport routes on key infrastructure, land assets and (recreational and commercial) or infrastructure e.g. closures/
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 48 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
SEA Topic(s) Draft LFRMS SEA Objective Underlying Assessment Criteria (showing changes as result of workshop in tracked changes) Would the LFRMS, in combination with other plans…
properties restrictions? • ensure the protection of services, including water, power and telecommunications? • reduce flood risk to properties? • have a positive impact on the local economy? e.g. through
improved flood protection or enhanced recreation opportunities • reduce flood risk to areas of high quality agricultural land? • reduce flood risk to areas important for their mineral resources? • reduce flood risk to the access routes used to access any of the above assets?
Population and Human 10. Conserve and seek to enhance open spaces, • protect open spaces, recreational areas, facilities and rights of Health recreational areas and rights of way way in the long term? • affect any recreational fisheries associated with ordinary watercourses?
Population and Human 11. Protect human health • reduce flood risk and the risk of direct physical impacts of Health flooding on people? • restrict people’s access to medical services, such as hospitals, doctor’s surgeries and pharmacies? • help provide safe development?
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 49 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
SEA Topic(s) Draft LFRMS SEA Objective Underlying Assessment Criteria (showing changes as result of workshop in tracked changes) Would the LFRMS, in combination with other plans…
• reduce fear of flooding? • create areas of standing water or new water channels that could become a potential health hazard due to safety or increased disease risk?
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 50 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
5.2 Assessment Approach 5.2.1.1 Developing Alternatives
The SEA Directive requires an assessment of the plan and its “reasonable alternatives.” In order to assess reasonable alternatives, different strategy options for delivering the LFRMS will be developed and assessed at a strategic level against the established SEA objectives and environmental baseline. The results of this assessment will be used to inform the decision making process in choosing a preferred way of delivering the LFRMS.
In deciding what constitutes a “reasonable alternative” the predicted funding envelope and existing legislation and Government policy will be considered. Options which go against existing national policy or are financially unachievable will not be considered “reasonable.” The LFRMS objectives and measures (in SEA terms called ‘alternative options’) are not sufficiently developed to include in this scoping report. However, they will be assessed at a later stage and included in the draft Environmental Report.
The SEA will also consider a ‘without plan’ scenario. This will represent what would occur if no further plans were put in place beyond existing projects, government policies and statutory obligations. A description of the “Without Plan” scenario and assumptions used in its formulation will be developed prior to assessment. 5.2.1.2 Assessment Approach
The LFRMS measures will be evaluated in light of their potential cumulative, synergistic and indirect environmental effects on the different SEA topics. The assessment of these environmental effects will be informed by professional judgement and experience with other flood risk related SEAs, as well as an assessment of national, regional and local trends. In some cases, the assessment will draw upon mapping data to identify areas of potential pressure, for example due to flood risk or presence of environmental designations.
For all LFRM measures, the table will be used to evaluate how the environment would be affected, positively or negatively, from the implementation of the LFRMS in relation to the objectives and indicators that comprise the environmental baseline. All LFRMS measures will be assessed based on their type and their likely impact duration and magnitude. Results of the assessment will then be considered in light of the evolution of the environment in the absence of the plan.
Effects of the LFRMS will be described in terms of their:
(a) Nature: whether they are anticipated to be:
• Positive (+)
• Neutral (N)
• Negative (x) or
• Uncertain (?)
(b) Duration: the duration of potential effects are presented in terms of the timescale over which they are anticipated:
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 51 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
• Short term effects: effects expected in the next 1-6 years (plan life);
• Medium term effects: effects expected in the next 6-12 years; and
• Long term effects: effects expected in the next 12+years.
(c) Permanence and Reversibility:
• A permanent effect is one which results from a physical change that is anticipated to last beyond the six year life of the LFRMS;
• A temporary effect is one which results from an operational change which could change if there is a change of policy, or a short term condition such as a construction phase related impact;
• A reversible effect is an environmental effect that can be reversed, for example an incident of water pollution can be cleaned up over time;
• An irreversible effect is an environmental effect that cannot be reversed such as the loss of a historic feature or the loss of agricultural soil due to permanent development.
(d) Spatial Scale:
• Local: effect is restricted to the immediate location of the proposal or to a specific site or settlement within Hampshire;
• Regional: effect is anticipated to cover a significant proportion of the counties surrounding Hampshire;
• National: effect covers the whole of England and/or the UK (also includes international), or an asset which is relevant at this scale.
The significance of effects upon each of the SEA objectives will then be evaluated using the scoring criteria outlined below (Figure 5.1). The determination of significance would take into account the criteria set out in the SEA Directive’s Annex II.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 52 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
++ The option would be significantly beneficial to the SEA objective by Major resolving an existing environmental issue and/or maximising Positive opportunities for environmental enhancement.
+ The option would be partially beneficial to the SEA objective by contributing to resolving an existing environmental issue and/or Minor offering opportunity for some environmental enhancement. This effect Positive would not be considered to be of significance.
N The option would have a neutral effect on the SEA objective. Neutral
? There is insufficient detail available on the option or the baseline situation in order to assess how significantly the SEA objective would Uncertain be affected by the option.
x The option would partly undermine the SEA objective by contributing to an environmental problem and/or partially undermine opportunities Minor for environmental enhancement. This effect would not be considered to Negative be of significance.
xx The option would severely undermine the SEA objective by contributing to an environmental problem and/or undermining Major opportunities for environmental enhancement. This would be Negative considered to be a significant effect.
Figure 5.1: Proposed Assessment Criteria 5.2.1.3 Cumulative, Synergistic and Secondary Effects
Many environmental problems result from the accumulation of multiple, small and often indirect effects, rather than a few large and obvious ones. These effects are difficult to deal with on a project-by-project basis through EIA. It is at the SEA level that they are most effectively identified and addressed. Annex I of the SEA Directive requires that the assessment of effects includes secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects.
Secondary or indirect effects are effects that are not a direct result of the plan, but occur away from the original impact or as a result of a complex pathway. Examples of secondary effects include a development that changes the water table and thus affects the ecology of a nearby wetland; and construction of one project (such as a road) that facilitates or attracts other developments.
Cumulative effects arise where several developments each have insignificant effects but together have a significant effect, for example carbon emissions leading to climate
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 53 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
change; or where several individual effects of the plan (e.g. several minor visual effects) have a combined effect.
Synergistic effects interact to produce a total effect greater than the sum of the individual effects. Synergistic effects often happen as habitats, resources or human communities get close to capacity. For instance a wildlife habitat can become progressively fragmented with limited effects on a particular species until at last fragmentation makes the areas too small to support the species at all.
A variety of SEA techniques can be applied to help with the assessment of these types of effects and the techniques used will depend upon the type of potential effects identified and the results of consultation. The use of network diagrams may be employed for the assessment of indirect effects and cumulative effects. 5.2.1.4 In-combination Effects
In-combination effects may also occur as a result of activities and measures in other (existing and future) policies, plans, programmes and schemes. The policies, plans and schemes which are likely to have direct (positive and negative) effects on some of the topic areas that are being addressed in the Hampshire LFRMS will be identified where possible. Examples of plans that would be considered are the draft emerging Core Strategies, Sustainable Community Strategies and River Basin Management Plans. The review of plans and programmes considered to date as part of the SEA is included as Appendix A. 5.2.1.5 Identifying Environmental Opportunities with Multiple Benefits
The LFRMS will look at a range of opportunities to deliver social and environmental benefits as part of the strategy and its delivery. Improving green or blue infrastructure, biodiversity, recreation areas or access to these areas is likely to complement schemes such as the ‘Living Landscapes’ project promoted by the Wildlife Trusts and Natural England’s ‘Access to Nature’ grant scheme lxvi , which is aimed at encouraging people from all backgrounds to understand, access and enjoy the natural environment. It may also complement the countryside and coastal access provisions of the Marine and Coastal Access Act (2009), the CRoW Act (2000) and Natural England’s plans for an all-England coastal path.
In Hampshire, the following three projects have been identified to potentially provide multiple benefits, although the search for opportunities to provide multiple benefits will not be restricted to these three.
• Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (PUSH) Green Infrastructure Strategy – This GIS based research framework identifies where there is a need for investment in Green Infrastructure in the PUSH area of South Hampshire. It sets out where opportunities exist to maximise the potential of local green space, make more effective use of existing assets to absorb pressure from new development and reduce the impacts on sensitive landscapes. PUSH is in the process of working with a wide range of partners to develop an implementation plan and begin to implement the strategy;
• Green Infrastructure Study for East Hampshire - This study was prepared to support the sustainable development of communities, towns and villages throughout East Hampshire and that part of the South Downs National Park
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 54 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
that lies within East Hampshire. It is an essential part of the evidence to support the work of the South Downs National Park (SDNP) Authority;
• Total Environment Hampshire (TE) is one of 11 DEFRA national pilots. In response to significant reductions in government grant to local authorities, funding to Government agencies and the knock-on impact that this has on the voluntary and not-for-profit sector, a range of partners including local authorities, the Environment Agency, Natural England, Forestry Commission, English Heritage and the voluntary sector are working together to maximise opportunities for collaborative working to deliver environmental programmes more effectively and economically, including securing delivery of blue and green infrastructure.
As an example of how TE works, HCC is working with the Environment Agency and other partners in the East Hampshire Catchment to address Water Framework Directive objectives. It is intended that the project will address wider environmental opportunities including land management, community resilience to flooding, community engagement, delivery of biodiversity and historic environment objectives, access and climate change, delivering Green/Blue Infrastructure at a landscape scale. 5.2.1.6 Proposed Structure of the Environmental Report
Table 5.2 shows the principal proposed elements of the SEA;
Structure of Information to be included report • Non-technical summary of the SEA process, and the likely Non-technical significant effects of the strategy summary • The difference the process made • How to comment on the report • Who carried out the SEA, how, who was consulted, and Methodology when used • Difficulties in collecting data or assessment • Purpose of the SEA and integration with LFRMS Background • Strategy objectives • Coverage of the Environmental Report with respect to plan SEA objectives, components baseline and • Links to other plans, programmes and relevant context environmental protection objectives, and how they have been incorporated • Baseline environmental data, including the future baseline without the plan • Existing and foreseeable future environmental problems • Limitations of the data, assumptions etc. • SEA objectives, targets and indicators • Description of significant environmental effects of the Plan issues and strategies alternatives • Assessment matrix for each strategy/alternative • How environmental problems were considered in developing the strategies and choosing the preferred
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 55 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
Structure of Information to be included report alternatives • Other alternatives considered, and why these were rejected • Proposed mitigation and enhancement measures to deliver objectives • Links to project environmental impact assessment, design Implementation guidance etc. • Proposals for monitoring and reporting
Table 5.2: Proposed Structure of the SEA Environmental Report
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 56 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
6 Next Steps
6.1 Summary
The Scoping Report will be consulted on between September and October 2012, after which the comments received will be taken into account into the Environmental Report. The Environmental Report will be the next output in the SEA process and it will document the assessment of the LFRMS against the SEA objectives.
6.2 Consultation Questions
We are seeking responses to the following questions from this Scoping Report consultation.
Do you agree with?;
• The identification of key features included within the baseline information presented in this report;
• The completeness of the coverage of the plans and programmes review in Appendix A;
• The proposed SEA methodology, including the SEA objectives; and
• The proposed structure of the Environmental Report.
Consultation responses should be directed to Pete Errington at HCC on;
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 57 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
7 Abbreviations
ALC Agricultural Land Classification
AONB Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
BAP Biodiversity Action Plan
CEMP Construction Environmental Management Plan
CFMP Catchment Flood Management Plan
Defra Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
EA Environment Agency
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
ESA Environmentally Sensitive Area
EU European Union
HER Historic Environment Register
HLC Historic Landscape Characterisation
HMWB Heavily Modified Water Body
HRA Habitat Regulations Assessment
JNCC Joint Nature Conservancy Council
LBAP Local Biodiversity Action Plan
LLFA Lead Local Flood Authority
LNR Local Nature Reserve
LFRMS Local Flood Risk Management Strategy
NNR National Nature Reserve
RBD River Basin District
RBMP River Basin Management Plan
RSPB Royal Society for the Protection of Birds
SAC Special Area of Conservation
SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment
SINC Site of Importance for Nature Conservation
SPA Special Protection Area
SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest
SWMP Surface Water Management Plan
WFD Water Framework Directive
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 58 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
8 Glossary
Term Description
Artificial Water Bodies These water bodies have had physical alterations for a (AWBs and HMWBs) particular purpose (e.g. water storage, coast or flood defence, navigation, etc). If this purpose is still valid the Water Body may be designated as a HMWB. AWBs are Water Bodies which have been constructed only for a specific use (e.g. reservoir). Any of the surface Water Body types (rivers, coastal, lake or transitional) can be designated as HMWBs or AWBs, and have separate environmental objectives under the WFD than ordinary Water Bodies.
Good Ecological Status Ecological Status is expressed in terms of five status (GES) classes – high, good, moderate, poor or bad. These classes are established on the basis of specific criteria and boundaries defined against biological, physico- chemical and hydromorphological elements, which are set out in Annex V of the WFD.
Good Ecological Potential The Environment Agency has applied a separate (GEP) classification process for HMWBs and AWBs as opposed to ordinary Water Bodies. This was based on separate guidance developed by UKTAG. The steps that this guidance set out for identifying whether a HMWB or AWB meets its Ecological Potential or not are as follows; Stage 1: Identifying the impacts of physical modification affecting the water Body Stage 2: Identifying possible mitigation measures necessary to ensure the hydromorphological characteristics of a water body are consistent with Good or Maximum Ecological Potential Stage 3: Assessing whether all of those measures have been taken. Where all applicable mitigation measures have already been taken or screened out, the Water Body can be classified as Good Ecological Potential or better. A Water Body where one or more applicable
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 59 Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Scoping Report
mitigation measure(s) remain to be taken is classified as of Moderate Ecological Potential or worse.
UKTAG The UK Technical Advisory Group (UKTAG) is a partnership of the UK environment and conservation agencies which was set up by the UK Administrations. It was created to provide coordinated advice on the science and technical aspects of the Water Framework Directive.
Water Framework The European Water Framework Directive (Directive Directive (WFD) 2000/60/EC) came into force in December 2000 and became part of UK law in December 2003.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 60
Footnotes
i Local Government Association (LGA), 2011. Framework to assist the development of the Local Strategy for Flood Risk Management ‘A Living Document’. November 2011. ii Directive 2000/60/EC Establishing a Framework for Community Action in the Field of Water Policy. It was implemented in England and Wales by the Water Environment (Water Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Regulations (SI 2003 No. 3212). iii LGA, 2011. Ibid. iv Email received from Raahil Javaheri, LFRM Capacity Building, Environment Agency, 28/3/2012. v Environment Agency, 2011. Understanding the risks, empowering communities, building resilience: the national flood and coastal erosion risk management strategy for England . vi Email received from Sarah Smith, Environment Agency, 19/12/2011. vii Email received from Sally King, Natural England, 30/12/2011. viii A Practical Guide to the SEA Directive (2006), produced by Communities and Local Government, available on http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/practicalguidesea . ix Available on http://www.local.gov.uk/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=a2538b94-d3c1-4cec-81b0-8aefd2996c5e&groupId=10171 , accessed on 22/12/2011. x Available on http://environment-agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Research/envquaplanning_main_1351823.pdf , accessed on 22/12/2011. xi Email received from Amanda Grundy (Natural England), 17/2/2012. xii Email received from Martin Small (English Heritage) 23/7/2012. xiii Flood and Water Management Act 2010. Available on: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/29/ , accessed on 19/12/2011. xiv Flood and Water Management Act 2010. What does the Flood and Water Management Act mean for local authorities? Available on: http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/flooding/documents/policy/fwmb/fwma-local-authority-factsheet-110721.pdf , accessed on 19/12/2011. xv Source: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/nps/watercyclefacts.pdf , accessed on 18/5/2012. xvi Source: Demographic facts and figures for Hampshire. Available on: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/factsheet_2011_-_hampshire_cc.pdf Accessed on 31/7/2012 xvii Source: Demographic facts and figures for Hampshire. Available on: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/factsheet_2011_-_hampshire_cc.pdf. Accessed on 31/7/2012 xviii Source: A Profile of Hampshire 2011 (Chapter 7, Environmental Aspects) http://www3.hants.gov.uk/factsandfigures/othertopics.htm xix Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/large_housing_sites_2011.pdf, accessed on 30/8/2012. xx Source : 2010 Indices of Deprivation Hampshire, September 2011 Available on: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/2010_indices_of_deprivation_compressed.pdf Viewed on 31/7/2012 xxi Source : 2010 Indices of Deprivation Hampshire, September 2011 Available on: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/2010_indices_of_deprivation_compressed.pdf Viewed on 31/7/2012 xxii Source: Hampshire Health Profile 2011 Available on: http://www.apho.org.uk/resource/item.aspx?RID=105514 Viewed on: 31/7/2012 xxiii Lancaster, J.W., Preene, M., Marshall, C.T., 2004. Development and flood risk – guidance for the construction industry. CIRIA London. xxiv Hampshire County Council, Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment 2011 to 2017. Available on: http://www.hants.gov.uk/pdf/PFRA- final.pdf. Viewed on 31/7/2012
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 61
xxv Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/countryside/countryside-service/service461, accessed on 22/8/2012 xxvi Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/countryside/countryside-service/commons-registration.htm, accessed on 22/8/2012. xxvii Source: A Profile of Hampshire 2011 (Chapter 7, Environmental Aspects) http://www3.hants.gov.uk/factsandfigures/othertopics.htm , accessed on 22/8/2012. xxviii Hampshire County Integrated Character Assessment, March 2010, Part 1: An Overview of the Hampshire Landscape. xxix Defra, 2012. UK Climate Change Risk Assessment: Floods and Coastal Erosion. Available on: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climate/government/risk-assessment/#keyfindings , accessed on 10/2/2012. xxx Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Submission version, February 2012). xxxi Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Submission version, February 2012). xxxii McEvoy et al ., 2003. Mineral Resource Information in Support of National, Regional and Local Planning. (British Geological Survey Commissioned Report CR/02/129N). xxxiii Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Submission version, February 2012). xxxiv Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Submission version, February 2012). xxxv Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Submission version, February 2012). xxxvi Nationally, the government expects all counties to consider disposal of Low-level radioactive waste, which is likely to be disposed of at existing waste management facilities. xxxvii Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Submission version, February 2012). xxxviii Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/biodiversity/hampshire.htm, accessed on 23/7/2012. xxxix Hampshire County Integrated Character Assessment, March 2010, Part 1: An Overview of the Hampshire Landscape. xl Hampshire County Integrated Character Assessment, March 2010, Part 1: An Overview of the Hampshire Landscape. xli Hampshire County Integrated Character Assessment, March 2010, Part 1: An Overview of the Hampshire Landscape. xlii Source: http://www.newforestnpa.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/26653/conservation1-forweb.pdf , accessed on 21/7/2012. xliii Source: The State of Hampshire’s Biodiversity. Available on: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/the_state_of_hampshire_s_biodiversity.pdf , accessed on 15/8/2012 xliv Source: The State of Hampshire’s Biodiversity. Available on: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/the_state_of_hampshire_s_biodiversity.pdf , accessed on 15/8/2012 xlv Source: The State of Hampshire’s Biodiversity. Available on: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/the_state_of_hampshire_s_biodiversity.pdf , accessed on 15/8/2012 xlvi Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/profile_of_hampshire_2011_final_version.pdf, accessed on 30/8/2012. xlvii Designated, under EC Directive 79/406/EEC on the Conservation of wild birds (The Birds Directive) xlviii Designated under the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, Ramsar, 1971 xlix Designated under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 l Source: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/conservation/designatedareas/nnr/regions/southeast.aspx , accessed on 20/7/2012. li Source: Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust; http://www.hwt.org.uk/pages/our-reserves.html , accessed on 20/7/2012. lii Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/biodiversity/hampshire/sincs/important_sites_identifying_sincs.htm , accessed on 20/7/2012. liii Source: http://www.newforestnpa.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/26653/conservation1-forweb.pdf , accessed on 21/7/2012. liv Source: Hampshire Biodiversity Action Plan. Available on: http://www.hampshirebiodiversity.org.uk/pdf/vol1/Biodiversitypages01- 09.pdf, accessed on 21/7/2012. lv Source: Hampshire Biodiversity Action Plan http://www.hampshirebiodiversity.org.uk/pdf/vol1/Biodiversitypages64-78.pdf, accessed
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 62
on 21/7/2012. lvi Source: Hampshire Historic Landscape Character Assessment. Available on http://www3.hants.gov.uk/hcc_historic_landscape_1- 4.pdf, accessed on 21/7/2012. lvii Halcrow 2002. Winter 2000-2001 Flooding in Hampshire. Final Overview Report (Environment Agency). lviii Source: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=4177&authority=UKJ33, accessed on 20/7/2012. lix Email received from Natural England, 4/9/2012. lx Halcrow 2002. Winter 2000-2001 Flooding in Hampshire. Final Overview Report (Environment Agency). lxi Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/climatechange.htm, accessed on 23/7/2012. lxii Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/climatechange.htm, accessed on 23/7/2012. lxiii Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/climatechange.htm, accessed on 23/7/2012. lxiv All NCA profiles available on Natural England website: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/nca/southeast.aspx , accessed on 20/7/2012. lxv Source: Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Submission version, February 2012). lxvi Source: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/enjoying/linkingpeople/communities/accesstonature/default.aspx , accessed on 18/9/2012.
Doc no: 0 Version: 1 Date: 17 Sept 2012 Filename: LFRMS SEA 2nd draft Scoping Report 25,9,2012 63