Appendix A

Pla

Appendix E

Environmental Baseline

Table E1 provides a summary of the issues scoped into and out of the LFRMS SEA at the scoping stage. For the issues that were scoped in, the environmental baseline for these issues is provided in this Appendix.

Hampshire LFRMS SEA Environmental Report Appendix E 1 Table E-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 have been 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.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 2

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.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 3

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.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 4

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 or bordering the study area.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 5

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.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 6

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

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 7

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

1.1 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.

1.2 Population and Human Health

1.2.1 Population

The topic of population is considered first in the baseline collection 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. i In 2011 there were 3.5 people per hectare living in Hampshire and 23% of the population live in rural areas. ii

Population density is shown in Figure E1:

Figure E1: Population Density in Hampshire

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 8

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

Copyright: HCC 1000191802011. Source: Hampshire County Council iii

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 E2. 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;

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 9

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental 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 E2 Planned housing developments in Hampshire (excluding Portsmouth and Southampton) Source: see endnotes iv

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

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 2

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

development and new infrastructure which has wider benefits to existing local communities.

1.2.2 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. v 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. vi

1.2.3 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

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 3

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

experience problems accessing healthcare, are not further impeded by flooding issues. vii

The Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA) for Hampshire identifies areas considered to be at significant risk of flooding. These are shown in Table E3.

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 E3 Populations at risk of flooding in Hampshire

Source: See endnotes. viii

1.2.4 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. The New Forest National Park is the most visited National Park in the country, with total visitor volumes estimated at 13,555,400 visitor days annually ix . In addition to the tourism associated with Hampshire’s urban centres and key tourist hotspots, Hampshire has the following country parks and nature reserves x;

• Staunton Country Park;

• Manor Farm Country Park;

• Queen Elizabeth Country Park;

• Royal Victoria Country Park;

• Lepe Country Park;

• Titchfield Haven and Visitor Centre;

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 4

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

• Yateley Common;

• Farley Mount.

Hampshire County Council also owns or manages various areas of common land,xi 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. xii Under the Marine and Coastal Access Act (2009), Natural England has a duty to secure a long distance walking trail around the English coast. Natural England has found that at least two thirds of the Hampshire coast does not have satisfactory access. xiii

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 7 of the Environmental Report main document.

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.

1.2.5 Influence of the LFRMS on Population and Human Health

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 5

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

There are various ways in which the population and their health may be affected by flooding, as outlined by Lancaster et al . (2004) xiv ;

• 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.

LFRMS measures taken to manage flood risk may have impacts on both individuals and communities and can help to reduce risk to human health from the impacts listed above.

The measures could also affect public access to recreational features, goods and public services that can make a material difference to people’s quality of life. The perceived level of flood risk and fear of flooding that communities experience may also affect levels of stress and impact on their quality of life.

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 which results in loss of land and increased flood risk (to the new development or the surrounding local area). However, new development could also bring opportunities – for example the retro- fitting of SuDS to adjacent existing development or installing SuDS on new developments.

Careful planning and management of flood risk and water management related infrastructure will be required considering the pressure that population growth and increased tourism will place on the environment.

Maintaining or improving access to places of employment or areas used for tourism and recreation should be a priority for the LFRMS. HCC will also need to consider potential funding opportunities to improve recreation areas or access routes to them in conjunction with LFRMS measures.

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.

1.2.6 Likely Evolution of the Baseline Environment without the LFRMS

From a review of the baseline information it appears likely that the direct and indirect risks to population and human health are likely to increase if no further action was taken to reduce flood risk from LFRMS sources. This risk is likely to be especially high in the hotspots of flood risk identified.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 6

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

1.3 Material Assets

1.3.1 Introduction

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.

1.3.2 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. xv Waste management infrastructure could also be described as critical infrastructure; these assets are described in section 1.3.7. Minerals and waste site allocations in Hampshire are also described in section 1.3.6.

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.

Like many counties, Hampshire has a considerable amount of infrastructure that is critical to the health, safety and accessibility of the population. Table E4 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

• A&E Hospitals • Electricity generating power stations 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

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 7

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

Management Control Centre • Police Stations

• Fire & Rescue Stations • Power Stations

• Hampshire Fire & Rescue Service • Prison Headquarters • Schools • HCC Prepared Rest Centres • South Central Ambulance Services • Maritime & Coastguard Agency • Supermarket Distribution Centres • Important mineral reserves • Waste management infrastructure

Table E4 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.

1.3.3 Housing

Areas of high population density are shown in Figure 5.3 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.

1.3.4 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.

1.3.5 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.xvi

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 E2, as well as for Fareham and Eastleigh.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 8

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

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. xvii

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.

1.3.6 Mineral Resources

The county possesses a wide variety of mineral resources, but the following list represents the principal resources in Hampshire xviii ;

• 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;

• Silica sand - found in Folkestone formation in east Hampshire. Resources have qualities of silica and were previously considered to be soft sand.

• Brick clay - see Minerals in Hampshire study for more information

• 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, malmstone, clunch, 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 from Somerset. xix 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 mineral and waste site allocations;

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

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 9

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

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 E5 Minerals and Waste Site Allocations 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 9 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 and Waste Site Allocation Areas and the transport networks connected with them.

Policy 32 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.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 10

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

1.3.7 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. xx

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. xxi

The LFRMS will need to consider flood risk to existing facilities, proposed changes to existing facilities xxii 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.

1.3.8 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 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. xxiii Southampton International Airport is also of national significance.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 11

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

1.3.9 Influence of the LFRMS on Material Assets

The LFRMS will seek to manage flood risk to critical infrastructure, housing and other material assets within the county. However, the implementation of LFRMS measures has the potential to disrupt critical transport infrastructure. HCC will need to work closely with the Highways Agency and its own Highways team in order to fully understand the principal flood risk issues that relate to transport infrastructure. The construction of new roads, improvement to existing roads or increased urbanisation in general could all potentially lead to an increase in surface run-off from impermeable surfaces.

The LFRMS will need to consider flood risk to existing waste and minerals facilities, proposed changes to existing facilities xxiv 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. The influence of mineral extraction on the water environment is, in part, dependent on the sensitivity of local water bodies. The geological setting at a particular site will influence the vulnerability of groundwater and associated surface waters to contamination. The extent of future mineral extraction is likely to continue to be a formative influence on the water environment. Similarly, any LFRMS measures that aim to improve and restore morphological characteristics of water bodies may have implications for future mineral extraction.

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.

Finally, the LFRMS should also consider whether it could potentially increase demand for mineral resources or lead to an increase in waste production, for example during scheme construction of LFRMS measures. Although these issues would be considered at EIA stage, the strategic impacts and potential enhancements of multiple schemes on a county scale should be considered. LFRMS measures should seek to maximise use of recycled aggregates, and to minimise the requirements for primary aggregates.

1.3.10 Likely Evolution of the Baseline Environment without the LFRMS

The risk of flooding to key infrastructure, land assets and properties is likely to continue to increase without the LFRMS. This could potentially increase risks to receptors that fall under other SEA topics, for example an increased risk of pollution to soil and water resources from the inundation of contaminated land.

1.4 Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna

1.4.1 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. xxv

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 12

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

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.xxvi

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. xxvii

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. xxviii

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. xxix Heathland in the New Forest is also home to some of the UK’s rarest vertebrates, such as sand lizard and smooth snake. xxx

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. xxxi

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. xxxii

1.4.2 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 are also partly within Hampshire and partly in neighbouring counties. SACs cover 36,531 hectares xxxiii of the county and cover a wide range of terrestrial and coastal habitats;

• Special Protection Areas (SPA) xxxiv and Ramsar sites xxxv : 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

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 13

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

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 Reserves (NNRs) xxxvi ; (Ashford Hangers, Ashford Hill, Beacon Hill, Butser Hill, Castle Bottom, Kingston Great Common, Martin Down, North Solent, Old Winchester Hill, Titchfield Haven). xxxvii NNRs cover 2,173 hectares of the county;

• 48 Local Nature Reserves (LNRs) xxxviii . 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).xxxix

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. xl All internationally designated sites are also comprised of underlying SSSI designations. The New Forest SSSI designation has been singled out in a national survey of SSSI condition as 3,823 hectares of land have now been upgraded to ‘favourable condition’ status, the largest improvement in England from March 2011 to April 2012. Natural England attributed this to the recent securing of a ten year Higher Level Stewardship agreement. The scheme provides £1.6 million per year to secure grazing through the commoning community, wetland restoration and improvements to the historic environment. xli

1.4.3 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 xlii , provide general information on the BAP in order to provide a better overview of the county’s biodiversity as a whole.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 14

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

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.

The BAP priority species in Hampshire are too numerous to quote in this Environmental 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 xliii

• 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

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 15

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

• General/all habitats

1.4.4 Biodiversity Opportunity Areas (BOAs)

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/east 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).

1.4.5 Influence of the LFRMS on Biodiversity

The LFRMS measures may include land use change, changes in flood risk, frequency or changes in water levels that have the potential to adversely affect habitats or species at designated sites. 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 or inundation of contaminated land. Many habitats, including coastal, heathland and river valleys, are very sensitive to water flow regime change, and water quality changes, which are the specific issues that the SEA needs to recognise and the LFRMS needs to address. Any LFRMS options that will affect water levels or flows on designated sites will need to be assessed in light of the conservation objectives of the designated sites. The LFRMS also needs to ensure that LFRMS measures do not increase the risk of spreading invasive species, for example through the provision of new culverts. Water quality and water resources are discussed further in section 1.6 of this Appendix.

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. Opportunities for habitat creation or enhancement may include creating new wetlands or improving existing ones. River restoration opportunities for ordinary watercourses could also be explored, for example by restoring more natural flows, improving bankside restoration or removing structures or impoundments. 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 1.4.4 and also shown in Figures 2 and 3 of the Appendix B maps.

1.4.6 Likely Evolution of the Baseline Environment without the LFRMS

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 16

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

Trends in biodiversity can be due to a wide variety of factors, including climate change and land management activities. As noted in section 1.6.6, Hampshire is an area of serious water stress. Water dependant habitats will come under increasing pressure as demand for water increases alongside population increase. The River Itchen SAC has already experienced such abstraction pressures. Climate change is likely to affect all habitats, for example through sea level rise, changes in flood risk from all sources and frequency or changes in water levels. While direct loss of habitats in the county has slowed, many semi-natural habitats have deteriorated in condition either through lack of management or intensive management. xliv The proliferation of invasive species is also likely to continue.

1.5 Soil, Geology and Geomorphology

1.5.1 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 1.3.5 of this report.

1.5.2 Geology and Geomorphology

Hampshire has five distinct geological ‘blocks’ that define the land character and use of the county xlv . 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

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 17

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

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. xlvi

There are 25 Geological Conservation Review Sites in the county xlvii, 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;

• 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 xlviii and they will be discussed in more detail 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.

1.5.3 Influence of the LFRMS on Soil, Geology and Geomorphology

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.

Soil quality and quantity is affected by changes in land use, groundwater levels and susceptibility to flood risk, all of which the LFRMS may have an influence on. There is therefore potential for the LFRMS to enhance as well as protect soil resources in the county.

LFRMS measures may need to take the Hydrology of Soil Types (HOST) classification xlix into account as the nature and permeability of soil will be of particular importance when trying to predict the effects of climate change on the flows of ordinary water courses and run-off rates of flood water.

The LFRMS will need to protect or enhance geological designated sites. It will also need to take areas of contaminated land into account when considering the location of LFRMS schemes in order to reduce the potential risk of contaminating the soil or water environment.

1.5.4 Likely Evolution of the Baseline Environment without the LFRMS

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 18

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

It is likely that soil erosion will continue due to surface water flash flooding and other causes. Compaction and sealing will also continue to occur, for example through an increase in developed areas and impermeable surfaces. Catchment sensitive farming (described in section 1.6.7) should help to reduce nutrient enrichment of soil and help to maintain or improve soil quality.

1.6 Water

1.6.1 Overview

The LFRMS needs to ensure that, by improving drainage and reducing flood risk in the county, 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 is protected. The SEA of the South East RBMP l reports the following key facts for water resources in the region;

• Diffuse pollution is threatening the condition of rivers and aquifers in the region; • The amount of water available per person is less than Morocco and Egypt; • There is an over-reliance on groundwater for public water supplies; and • Low flows in rivers often affect in-channel biodiversity.

The following water bodies are located in the LFRMS area: -

• 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.

1.6.2 Water Framework Directive

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 setting 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 E2. 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.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 19

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

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.

Source: Environment Agency; South East River Basin Management Plan (RBMP) (2009) and South West RBMP (2008). Figure E2 The components of overall status of surface water bodies

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.

1.6.3 Potential Impacts on Water Quality

There are various impact sources that could affect ecological status. The most relevant to the LFRMS are;

Reason for failure Key elements impacted Point source water Ammonia, phosphate, dissolved oxygen industry sewage works Physical modification Fish, invertebrates urbanisation Diffused source mixed Dissolved oxygen, invertebrates, phosphate, urban run-off benzo (ghi) perelyene and indeno (123-cd) pyrene Diffuse source Ammonia (phys-chem), dissolved inorganic agricultural nitrogen, dissolved oxygen, fish, invertebrates, macrophytes, phosphate, phytobenthos, phytoplankton, total phosphorus

Physical modification Fish barriers to fish migration

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 20

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

Reason for failure Key elements impacted Physical modification Dissolved oxygen, fish land drainage Physical modification Fish, invertebrates flood protection Physical modification Fish water storage and supply

Table E6: Principal reasons for surface water bodies not achieving good ecological status or potential

Source: Adapted from Environment Agency, 2009; River Basin Management Plan, South East River Basin District.

Deterioration of existing drainage structure or lack of drainage capacity throughout the county could lead to overflow or leakage of contaminants into the water environment. Pressures on water quality are discussed further in section 1.6.8.

1.6.4 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;

• 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.

1.6.5 Groundwater Quality

Groundwater provides vital resources for public water supply, industry, agriculture and for numerous rural communities, and also feeds rivers and supports wetlands.

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.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 21

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

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. li The quality of groundwater can therefore affect the quality of surface water as well as the reverse.

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.

Groundwater Source Protection Zones (SPZs) indicate the risk to groundwater supplies from potentially polluting activities and accidental release of pollutants. SPZs have been defined for groundwater sources such as wells, boreholes and springs used for public drinking water supplies. There are three main areas within the zone; inner, outer and total catchment. There are several 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.

1.6.6 Water Supply

Southern Water is the principal water supply company in Hampshire. Southern Water’s Water Resource Management Plan (WRMP) shows how Hampshire’s water resources are used and their proposals for managing these resources to 2035. WRM planning takes place at the level of Water Resource Zones (WRZs). Within Hampshire there are three WRZs in the Western sub-regional area (Western area);

• Hampshire Andover WRZ;

• Hampshire Kingsclere WRZ; and

• Hampshire South WRZ;

The majority (68%) of Southern Water’s supplies comes from groundwater, predominantly from the chalk aquifer which is widespread across the region. A further 28% comes from river abstractions, principally from the Test and Itchen in

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 22

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

Hampshire. Sources are predominantly groundwater in the Hampshire Kingsclere and Andover WRZs, but in the Hampshire South WRZ there is a balance of around 40% groundwater : 60% surface water.

In the Hampshire South WRZ there is currently a Minimum Residual Flow constraint on the Test abstraction, but there are no flow-related constraints in the abstraction licences for the Lower Itchen sources. Flows in the River Itchen can be supported by the Candover and Alre groundwater augmentation schemes which are owned and operated by the Environment Agency. Confirmation of ‘Sustainability Reductions’ were advised by the Environment Agency in 2008 for Southern Water’s abstractions from the River Itchen in order to protect the integrity of the River Itchen SAC and comply with the EU Habitats Directive.

The whole of Hampshire falls within a wide region designated by the EA as being an area of serious water stress. lii

1.6.7 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. liii

1.6.8 Influence of the LFRMS on Water Resources

The LFRMS will need to consider whether any LFRMS options, such as modifications to surface water drainage, will lead to any adverse impacts on the receptors listed in Table E6 or reduce risks for those receptors. The quality of water in rivers, streams, rhines and ditches in the county could potentially be directly affected by;

• Redirected drainage water containing pollutants reaching new receptors; and • New surface water conveyance over contaminated land (including agricultural land with nitrates and pesticides), enabling pollutants to enter water courses. • Land management that reduces runoff of both contamination (including soil particles as “contaminants” of surface waters) and downstream flood risk; • Flood risk management solutions that enhance groundwater recharge or otherwise improve water resource availability.

The LFRMS will need to consider whether any LFRMS measures will lead to adverse impacts on the water bodies within the county and whether the LFRMS can contribute to delivering some of the mitigation measures set out within the RBMP’s

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 23

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

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.

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. Consequently, strategic LFRMS measures proposed by the LFRMS will need to consider these issues. The LFRMS should also have regard to ground water Source Protection Zones.

1.6.9 Likely Evolution of the Baseline Environment without the LFRMS

There are likely to be continuing pressures on the water environment as demand for water increases alongside population increase. However, the Environment Agency is aiming to achieve improve water quality to ensure water bodies meet Good Ecological Status in line with the WFD, for example through catchment and river basin management planning. Catchment sensitive farming and the wider implementation of SuDS should also continue to improve water quality.

1.7 Climate change adaptation

1.7.1 Introduction

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.

As Hampshire has approximately 230 miles of coastline, sea level rise, extreme weather and tidal surges could lead to increased coastal flooding. liv It is also possible that coastal and fluvial flooding could combine with flooding from LFRMS sources (groundwater, ordinary water courses, and surface water). Hotter, drier summers could lead to reduced water resource availability for abstraction at a time when population and demand for water may be increasing.

Hampshire falls within the South East River Basin District (RBD). The UKCP09 projections for the 2050s, for a medium greenhouse gas emissions scenario, show that;

• winter precipitation is likely increase by around 18% and is very likely to be between 2 and 39%; and

• precipitation on the wettest day in winter is likely to increase by around 16% and is very unlikely to be more than 34%.

More intense rainfall causes more surface runoff, increasing localised flooding and erosion. In turn, this may increase pressure on drains, sewers and water quality. Inland surface water flooding may be exacerbated by blockages in culverts, gutters and drains (sometimes due to inadequate maintenance). There are therefore clear

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 24

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

links between climate change and other SEA topics, such as Soil, Geology and Geomorphology (erosion), Water, Biodiversity and Population and Human Health (water quality and resource availability).

Groundwater supplies are also potentially threatened by climate change, with Environment Agency predictions suggesting that recharge rates will reduce in coming years. The Agency has developed groundwater models which can be used to assess the impact of climate change. The two models have been used to consider the impact of change on groundwater levels and river-flow. The Test and Itchen Groundwater model was run with the UKCIP02 medium/high scenarios and suggested that by the 2020s recharge to the chalk aquifer may fall by 5%, and already low summer flows in the Test and Itchen may fall by a further 5 - 7%. It is likely that using the groundwater models to make predictions beyond 2020 will show more dramatic reductions in recharge and river-flow. lv Green infrastructure is one way of providing important water retention functions to help capture water during short heavy rainfalls and flood events.

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. lvi

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. lvii

The Hampshire-wide Climate Change Partnership is in the process of preparing a Climate Change Adaptation Action Plan, which will include around 25 strategic actions. lviii

1.7.2 Influence of the LFRMS on Climate Change Adaptation

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.

1.7.3 Likely Evolution of the Baseline Environment without the LFRMS

As described in section 1.7.1, Hampshire is likely to experience hotter and drier summers, warmer and wetter winters, sea level rise and more weather extremes. HCC and other organisations will work, for example, through the Hampshire-wide

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 25

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

Climate Change Partnership, to help the county become more resilient and better adapted to climate change.

1.8 The Historic Environment

1.8.1 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 Deleted: . 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). Paragraph 126 of the National Planning Policy Framework explains that heritage assets are an ‘irreplaceable resource’ and should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance.

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.

1.8.2 Cultural Heritage Assets

Table E7 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.

Paragraph 139 of the National Planning Policy Framework requires the same consideration for non-designated heritage assets of archaeological interest that are demonstrably of equivalent significance to scheduled monuments as for designated heritage assets. Therefore, all heritage assets, whether designated or not, will require attention when developing and implementing the LFRMS. However, the SEA will

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 26

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

focus on nationally important designated and undesignated sites and locally important undesignated sites will be considered further at the EIA stage.

Designated Assets Total in Hants

Listed Buildings (all) lix 14,265 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 E7 Cultural Heritage Sites in Hampshire (Sites and Monuments Record)

Cultural heritage designations are shown in Figure 8 of the Appendix B maps.

1.8.3 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.

1.8.4 Influence of the LFRMS on Cultural Heritage

The LFRMS should ensure that the most important heritage assets are protected from the impacts of flooding and protected from the direct impact of any construction works and, where appropriate, any indirect effects on setting.

The LFRMS should seek to ensure that where the public benefits arising from proposed works are considered to outweigh the presumption in favour of the conservation of heritage assets, the significance of the asset should be properly recorded and understanding of that significance advanced, and this evidence be made publicly accessible.

The LFRMS should also utilise the existing historic environment to guide or enhance design, e.g. wall treatment of culverts in historic urban centres. Scheme design can also be used to reflect historic landscape character, for example utilising orientation and patterns of existing drainage, or reflecting local landscape character traits.

The LFRMS may also 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.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 27

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

The LFRMS will need to maintain or improve the condition or setting of cultural heritage as well as access routes to these resources.

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. Flood damage to the setting of the assets.

The role of historic structures within water and flood management

The degree to which flooding and its control might be impacted (positively or negatively) 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 associated with watercourses.

Impact of flood prevention and mitigation on the historic environment.

The physical impact of flood risk management structures and operation 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 or the influence that a Conservation Area has on the location and design of a structure.

1.8.5 Likely Evolution of the Baseline Environment without the LFRMS

Cultural heritage is likely to face a continuation of the same threats it currently faces. These include direct impacts, such as loss or damage of important features, as well as indirect impacts, such as change of water table levels which may affect the preservation of archaeological and built heritage in situ. Threats include inadequate management of features, landscapes or nearby resources, neglect and inappropriate development within or near historic features or landscapes. Air pollution, physical or chemical erosion and pressure from tourists can also pose threats to cultural heritage. However, the positive effects of cultural heritage management and restoration are also likely to continue in the absence of the LFRMS.

1.9 Landscape and Visual Amenity

1.9.1 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 1.5. 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

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 28

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

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 E8.

1.9.2 National Character Areas

NCAs define the landscape of each area in individual descriptions. These explain the differences between areas and show how landscape character has developed 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.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 29

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

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, 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). lx

Table E8: 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 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.

1.9.3 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

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 30

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

• Chichester Harbour. lxi

Landscape designations are shown in Figure 4 of Appendix B.

1.9.4 Influence of the LFRMS on Landscape

The LFRMS measures may include new (or modified) flood risk management structures, land use change, changes in flood risk/frequency or changes in water levels that have the potential to adversely or positively affect existing landscape features or settings, and to create new features, for example flood storage areas.

1.9.5 Likely Evolution of the Baseline Environment without the LFRMS

The county’s landscape is likely to continue to face threats from inappropriate development or management. However, the National Park and AONB Management Plans and land use plans will aim to continue protecting and enhancing the landscape. The South Downs Way Ahead Nature Improvement Area and smaller scale biodiversity or recreation enhancements have the opportunity to improve landscape. Environment Agency plans also have potential to improve landscape, for example by creating flood meadows or improving the natural hydromorphology of rivers, in line with WFD requirements.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 31

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

Footnote References

i Source: Demographic facts and figures for Hampshire. Available on: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/factsheet_2011_-_hampshire_cc.pdf Accessed on 31/7/2012 ii Source: Demographic facts and figures for Hampshire. Available on: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/factsheet_2011_-_hampshire_cc.pdf. Accessed on 31/7/2012 iii Source: A Profile of Hampshire 2011 (Chapter 7, Environmental Aspects) http://www3.hants.gov.uk/factsandfigures/othertopics.htm iv Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/large_housing_sites_2011.pdf, accessed on 30/8/2012. v 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 vi 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 vii Source: Hampshire Health Profile 2011 Available on: http://www.apho.org.uk/resource/item.aspx?RID=105514 Viewed on: 31/7/2012 viii 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 ix Source: Natural England, 2012. Spotlight on SSSIs; Working towards the goals of Biodiversity 2020. Issue 1, October 2012 x Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/countryside/countryside-service/service461, accessed on 22/8/2012 xi Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/countryside/countryside-service/commons-registration.htm, accessed on 22/8/2012. xii Source: A Profile of Hampshire 2011 (Chapter 7, Environmental Aspects) http://www3.hants.gov.uk/factsandfigures/othertopics.htm , accessed on 22/8/2012. xiii Hampshire County Integrated Character Assessment, March 2010, Part 1: An Overview of the Hampshire Landscape. xiv Lancaster, J.W., Preene, M., Marshall, C.T., 2004. Development and flood risk – guidance for the construction industry. CIRIA London. xv 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. xvi Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Submission version, February 2012). xvii Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Submission version, February 2012). xviii McEvoy et al ., 2003. Mineral Resource Information in Support of National, Regional and Local Planning. (British Geological Survey Commissioned Report CR/02/129N). xix Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Submission version, February 2012). xx Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Submission version, February 2012). xxi Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Submission version, February 2012). xxii 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. xxiii Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Submission version, February 2012). xxiv 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. xxv Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/biodiversity/hampshire.htm, accessed on 23/7/2012. xxvi Hampshire County Integrated Character Assessment, March 2010, Part 1: An Overview of the Hampshire Landscape. xxvii Hampshire County Integrated Character Assessment, March 2010, Part 1: An Overview of the Hampshire Landscape.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 2

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

xxviii Hampshire County Integrated Character Assessment, March 2010, Part 1: An Overview of the Hampshire Landscape. xxix Source: http://www.newforestnpa.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/26653/conservation1-forweb.pdf , accessed on 21/7/2012. xxx 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 xxxi 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 xxxii 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 xxxiii Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/profile_of_hampshire_2011_final_version.pdf, accessed on 30/8/2012. xxxiv Designated, under EC Directive 79/406/EEC on the Conservation of wild birds (The Birds Directive) xxxv Designated under the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, Ramsar, 1971 xxxvi Designated under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 xxxvii Source: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/conservation/designatedareas/nnr/regions/southeast.aspx , accessed on 20/7/2012. xxxviii Source: Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust; http://www.hwt.org.uk/pages/our-reserves.html , accessed on 20/7/2012. xxxix Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/biodiversity/hampshire/sincs/important_sites_identifying_sincs.htm , accessed on 20/7/2012. xl Source: http://www.newforestnpa.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/26653/conservation1-forweb.pdf , accessed on 21/7/2012. xli Source: Natural England, 2012. Spotlight on SSSIs; Working towards the goals of Biodiversity 2020. Issue 1, October 2012. xlii Source: Hampshire Biodiversity Action Plan. Available on: http://www.hampshirebiodiversity.org.uk/pdf/vol1/Biodiversitypages01- 09.pdf, accessed on 21/7/2012. xliii Source: Hampshire Biodiversity Action Plan http://www.hampshirebiodiversity.org.uk/pdf/vol1/Biodiversitypages64-78.pdf, accessed on 21/7/2012. 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: Hampshire Historic Landscape Character Assessment. Available on http://www3.hants.gov.uk/hcc_historic_landscape_1- 4.pdf, accessed on 21/7/2012. xlvi Halcrow 2002. Winter 2000-2001 Flooding in Hampshire. Final Overview Report (Environment Agency). xlvii Source: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=4177&authority=UKJ33, accessed on 20/7/2012. xlviii Email received from Natural England, 4/9/2012 . xlix Source: http://www.macaulay.ac.uk/host/ , accessed on 9/10/2012. l Source: http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Research/South_East_Environmental_report.pdf , accessed on 9/10/2012. li Halcrow 2002. Winter 2000-2001 Flooding in Hampshire. Final Overview Report (Environment Agency). lii Source: South East Water’s Water Resources Management Plan, 2010 – 2035 (December 2010). Available on http://www.southeastwater.co.uk/pls/apex/PROD.download_file?p_doc_id=242 . accessed on 19/10/2012. liii Source: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/farming/csf/default.aspx , accessed on 23/7/2012. liv Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/climatechange.htm, accessed on 23/7/2012. lv UE Associates, 2010. Green Infrastructure Strategy for the Partnership for Urban South Hampshire. Final Strategy, June 2010. Available on: http://www.push.gov.uk/push_gi_strategy_adopted_june_10-3.pdf , accessed on 23/10/2012. lvi Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/climatechange.htm, accessed on 23/7/2012.

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 3

Hampshire LFRMS SEA: Environmental Report

lvii Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/climatechange.htm, accessed on 23/7/2012. lviii Source: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/climatechange/environment-energy-climate-change-partnerships/environment-climate_change- newpage.htm , accessed on 22/10/2012. lix This figure has been updated to 14,265 (from 14,197) on the advice of English Heritage in their Scoping Report consultation response, dated 19 th October 2012. lx All NCA profiles available on Natural England website: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/publications/nca/southeast.aspx , accessed on 20/7/2012. lxi Source: Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Submission version, February 2012).

SEA of Hampshire LFRMS Appendix E 4