North Somerset Council Sites and Policies Part 1: Development Management Policies

Habitat Regulations Assessment

June 2015

1

Contents Page

Introduction 3

Scope of the HRA 3

Status of the Sites and Policies Plan 3

Relevance of the Core Strategy HRA Screening 4

Policies which have been subject to more specific HRA Screening 5

Cumulative and in-combination effects 8

Liaison with Natural England 9

Conclusion 11

Appendices

Appendix 1: Map of European Sites within North Somerset 12

Appendix 2: European Sites and their qualifying features 13

Appendix 3: List of Policies in the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 23

Appendix 4: Table of main amendments to policies since Consultation Draft stage 26

Appendix 5: Core Strategy HRA Matrices 30

2

1. Introduction

1.1 This report documents the Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) work which has been carried out on the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1: Development Management Policies Publication Version, February 2015 (the “Sites and Policies Plan Part 1” for short). The relevant regulations are the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, which relate to Articles 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive.

1.2 The implications of the regulations (section 102) is that before a local authority can authorise a plan or project which is likely to have a significant effect on the integrity of a European site it must make an appropriate assessment of the implications for that site in view of its conservation objectives. Screening considers whether significant effects are likely, and hence whether an Appropriate Assessment is necessary. “European sites” are Natura 2000 sites. They include Special Protection Areas (SPAs), Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and Ramsar sites, under the EC Birds and Habitats Directives. This HRA document covers screening assessment of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1.

1.3 The document has been produced by North Somerset Council officers in liaison with Natural England, as indicated in section 7.

2. Scope of the HRA

2.1 The screening assessment considers whether significant effects would be likely regarding the four European Sites within/adjoining North Somerset which are the Severn Estuary European Marine Site (SAC, SPA and Ramsar), the Mendip Limestone Grasslands SAC, the Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC and North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC.

2.2 There are European Sites further afield outside North Somerset. However due to the distance of these sites to the plan area it was assessed that there would not be likely significant effects on these sites.

2.3 Consistent with the regulations, the screening exercise has taken account of whether significant effects are likely from the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 alone, and also whether in-combination effects are likely (taking account of other plans and projects in combination with it).

2.4 A map showing the location of the European Sites considered, and descriptions of their qualifying features and conservation objectives are included in Appendices 1 and 2 respectively.

3

3. Status of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1.

3.1 The Consultation Draft Sites and Policies Plan was subject to public consultation in February –April 2013. Further progress on the Sites and Policies Plan has been delayed pending resolution of the Core Strategy remitted policies. (Following a legal challenge to the adopted Core Strategy, Policy CS13 (housing requirement) was remitted back to the Planning Inspectorate for re-examination. In addition, eight other policies were also remitted on the grounds that should the housing requirement be increased then this may have consequences for one or more of these policies. The examination of the remitted policies is taking place in two stages. In March 2015 the Inspector reported on his consideration of Policy CS13 and concluded that the housing requirement should be 20,985 dwellings for 2006-2026. However, the Secretary of State subsequently indicated that he would be formally intervening in the process to review and consider the Inspector’s conclusions, and this will now be subject to the Secretary of State’s approval. The next stage of the process will be to consider any consequences for the other remitted policies. )

3.2 The Consultation Draft Sites and Policies Plan February 2013 comprised two sections: Development Management Policies and Place-making Policies (site allocations).

3.3 As the Core Strategy remitted policies primarily relate to site allocations, the decision was taken to split the plan into two parts, and to take forward the Development Management Policies first, as a Part 1 document. As a consequence the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 Development Management Policies (Publication Version) was published for public consultation in February 2015.

3.4 The site allocations part (2) of the plan will follow once the Core Strategy remitted policies have been resolved.

3.5 The first table in Appendix 4 summarises the policies which have been taken forward in the Part 1 (Publication) document, highlighting any significant changes made to them from the February 2013 Consultation Draft. These are the more generic development management policies against which planning applications and development proposals are assessed. They are generally less contentious as they generally don’t relate to specific sites or allocations.

3.6 Appendix 4 also includes a further table showing those policies from the Development Management Policies section of the Consultation Draft Sites and Policies Plan which, for various reasons, were not taken forward for inclusion within the Part 1 (Publication) document. The table gives the reasons.

4

4. Relevance of the Core Strategy HRA Screening

4.1 The North Somerset Core Strategy was adopted in April 2012 and was subject to a high level HRA assessment, which has since been updated to take account of subsequent changes to the housing requirement in policy CS13, (most recently the possible increased requirement of 20,985 dwellings for 2006-2026). The Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 is in conformity with the strategic policy approach of the Core Strategy, in terms of nature and location of development and the two plans cover largely similar topics and issues. Therefore in broad terms the HRA of the Core Strategy is very relevant to the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1.

4.2 In view of this, it was felt that it was not necessary to undertake a full screening assessment matrix for HRA, listing all the Sites and Policies Plan 1 policies. It was recognised that many of the policies relate to topics covered by more strategic policies in the Core Strategy, for which screening (consideration of the likelihood of significant effects) has already been addressed through the Core Strategy HRA screening assessment (see Appendix 5 below). It was also recognised that the Sites and Policies Plan 1 generally does not lend itself to a detailed or precise assessment, a point which Natural England have acknowledged. As indicated above, the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 generally does not allocate sites for development, and contains only limited site specific detail. The policies are mainly generic policies against which planning applications and development proposals are assessed across the district, and which are essentially about the management/control of development.

4.3 Therefore, for most policies in the Sites and Policies Plan 1, the screening which was carried out for the Core Strategy is considered relevant and adequate, and there is no need for further screening. From the conclusions that were drawn for the Core Strategy HRA, it can be assumed that, for those policies, with relevant mitigation measures identified in the screening matrices (see appendix 5), there would not be likely significant effects on European sites.

5. Policies which have been subject to more specific HRA Screening.

5.1 However, the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 does contain some policies which are more site specific, or which focus development into certain areas, and for these it was felt that further, more specific screening assessment is needed. They have been assessed below.

Policy DM16: Allocation of Land at the Spinney 5.2 Policy DM16 concerns continued allocation of land for mineral working at the Spinney, directly south of Stancombe Quarry, as a potential extension to that quarry. It is effectively a carry over of an existing allocation in the adopted Mineral Working in Avon Local Plan.

5

5.3 However a planning application for mineral working of the site (ref 14/P/1179/F2) has been granted (May 2015), so further consideration of the policy, in HRA terms, is not necessary. Also, having regard to Natural England’ comments on the planning application it is considered that the development would not have likely significant effects (LSEs) on European sites.

5.4 While the Spinney, distant from most of the European Sites, is within a 5km consultation zone of the North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC, around its component sites, in the adopted North Somerset Replacement Local Plan, the formal comments of Natural England, on the planning application, (in a letter dated 24 July 2014), stated: “This application is in close proximity to the North Somerset and Mendip Hills Special Area of Conservation (SAC) which is also notified as Brockley Hall Stables SSSI. Natural England is satisfied that the proposed development being carried out in strict accordance with the details of the application, as submitted, will not damage or destroy the interest features for which the site has been notified. We therefore advise your authority that this SAC/SSSI does not represent a constraint in determining this application”.

Policy DM20: Major Highways Schemes 5.5 Policy DM20 safeguards land for a number of major transport schemes. The HRA of the Core Strategy policy CS10 covered the same major highways schemes, (and more) and its findings are applicable to policy DM20. That HRA found that, from work undertaken by Halcrow, for the Severn Estuary European site, air pollution impacts are unlikely to be significant.

5.6 However, for the Mendip Limestone Grasslands and the North Somerset and Mendip Bats SACs the Halcrow work identified that transport schemes which could affect traffic on sections of the A38 and A371, and the A370 and A368 respectively, alongside component sites, are potentially significant with respect to airborne nitrogen deposition. However the Halcrow work suggests that with implementation of sustainable transport measures in the Joint Local Transport Plan, there would be unlikely to be significant effects on the SAC, alone or in combination with other plans and projects.

5.7 For the Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC, the Core Strategy HRA identified that transport schemes which could affect traffic on sections of the A4, A369, A4176 and B3129 alongside the site, were potentially significant in terms of air pollution impact. However again, Halcrow work predicted that with appropriate mitigation measures, including sustainable transport policies in the Bristol Core Strategy and the West of England Joint Local Transport Plan ( LTP), there would not be LSEs, alone or in combination. These points would also logically apply to policy DM20

6 Policy DM47: Proposals for economic development within towns and defined settlements 5.8 Policy DN47 sets out criteria to be met by proposals for economic development within the four towns of Weston super Mare, including Weston Villages, Clevedon, Nailsea and Portishead, and Service and Infill Villages. It requires that proposals “would not have unacceptable environmental effects”.

5.9 The Core Strategy HRA considered policy CS20 on supporting a successful economy, which concerns scale and broad distribution of employment development, so covers similar issues to policy DM47, including that of economic development at Weston Villages. The HRA predicted no significant air pollution impacts (such as traffic related) on any of the European Sites. It took account of the Halcrow work, including distance of the Weston Villages from the European sites.

5.10 There is potential for impact on bats from economic development regarding potential noise/light, particularly regarding the location of the Weston Villages within the 5km consultation zone of the North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC. However, the HRA of the Core strategy suggests that mitigation measures could be used to limit this impact including: retention of dark vegetated corridors within green infrastructure to form part of any large-scale development; a site wide lighting strategy, incorporating a lighting contour plan with details of light intensity and hours of lighting operation, on large scale developments; consideration for provision of green (living) roofs on suitable large buildings, covered with local substrates or grass rather than sedum species to maximise its value for wildlife conservation and foraging bats. It is considered that such mitigation measures, listed in the matrices (in appendix 5) against policy CS20, would similarly be applicable to policy DM47, and that with such measures there would not be LSEs on the SAC.

5.11 Similar measures have been included in the Weston Villages Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), as a result of HRA work. For example, that document refers to the importance of parts of the strategic rhyne network such as Grumblepill Rhyne, a Wildlife Site, and the Cross Rhyne, as commuting and foraging areas for bats. It refers to the retention of dark vegetated corridors, particularly along those rhynes, with a target illumination of less than 0.5 lux, to permit the continued commuting and foraging of horseshoe bats, and inclusion of suitably designed and oriented lighting. Natural England endorsed the HRA work on the SPD, and the resulting changes that were made to the SPD.

Policy DM49: Royal Portbury Dock 5.12 Policy DM49 concerns maintenance/enhancement of the role of the dock and expansion/intensification of associated employment

7 development where compatible with the Green Belt, plus development of safeguarded land to the south for port uses, subject to criteria, including satisfactory environmental safeguards. The Core Strategy HRA considered the dock (policy CS24) which covers similar issues, and predicted no significant air pollution impacts on the Severn Estuary to which it is adjacent, or to any of the other European Sites, having regard to the Halcrow work.

5.13 The fact that the dock already exists, and that policy DM49 refers to expansion/intensification of that existing use, plus the reference to satisfactory environmental safeguards should help to reduce the potential for other impacts like increased noise and disturbance to birds in the estuary, notably from construction. There is also scope for mitigation, such as best practice construction techniques to minimise impact. The Core Strategy HRA predicted no LSEs for policy CS24, with such mitigation, on the Severn Estuary site, and it is logical that this would also apply to policy DM49.

5.14 The significant distance of the dock from the other European sites means that significant effects on them are also unlikely.

Policy DM50: Bristol Airport 5.15 Policy DM50 concerns the possibility of expansion of the existing airport, if required, and permits development within a defined Green Belt inset at Lulgate where it is needed for airport related activity like aircraft maintenance, transport of passengers etc., subject to criteria, including minimising of environmental impacts and no unacceptable noise impact. The Core Strategy HRA considered the airport policy CS23 which covers similar issues, and predicted no significant air quality related effects on any of the European Sites.

5.16 The reference to minimising of environmental effects means that, as a policy, DM50 is unlikely to have other significant effects on European sites. Also there is already outline planning consent for major development at the airport, (application 09/P/1020/OT2, which was granted in 2009, and conditions imposed included mitigation measures for biodiversity, including a requirement for submission of a biodiversity action plan for the airport site for approval, and a site-wide lighting strategy identifying measures to control light pollution.

6. Cumulative and in-combination effects

6.1 The generally non-site specific nature of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 makes potential significant effects of policies, including cumulative or in-combination impacts, unlikely. As indicated above, the more site-specific policies have been subject to more specific screening, partly drawing on the HRA of relevant Core Strategy policies. The Core Strategy HRA took account of possible in-

8 combination effects of that plan with other plans and projects, largely focussing on possible air quality impacts, through work of Halcrow, but also covering wider possible effects, particularly when the HRA was updated regarding the housing increase to 20,985 dwellings. The other plans and projects considered in that update were ones which had themselves been subject to HRA, including the Sedgemoor, Mendip and Bristol Core Strategies, and the Hinkley Point C Connection Project, and the update was able to draw on that information.

6.2 As indicated above, regarding policy DM20 on major transport schemes, the Halcrow work suggests that there would be potential in- combination effects concerning air quality, for the Mendip Limestone Grasslands and Avon Gorge Woodlands SACs. However, the Halcrow work found that, with appropriate mitigation, such as implementation of policies in the West of England Joint Local Transport Plan, there would not be significant likely in-combination effects.

6.3 Regarding potential non-air quality impacts, the Core Strategy HRA found that implementation of mitigation measures in the other plans and projects, together with those in the Core Strategy screening matrices, would be likely to safeguard against cumulative and in- combination effects on European sites. This is relevant to the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1.

7. Liaison with Natural England

7.1 The HRA has been carried out in close liaison with Natural England, who responded to public consultation on the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1(Publication) and an initial draft version of this HRA report, in a letter of 27 March 2015, and generally made positive comments.

7.2 Natural England made some suggestions concerning some policies, which they felt would improve and strengthen the plan with respect to the natural environment and provide a helpful platform for further environmental assessment later in the plan process when more is known about potential locations. They felt that this is particularly relevant to the North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC and the Severn Estuary designated sites, stating that they appear to be the sites most likely to be affected by the plan. Their suggestions concerning policies DM8 and DM22 make reference to European sites, so are relevant to this HRA report.

7.3 Regarding policy DM8 on Nature Conservation, Natural England encouraged the council to consider including a reference to the preparation of detailed guidance for the North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC (should that be agreed) and to its relevance for future proposed development in and around the 5km consultation zone around the component sites. They stated that, as part of the improvement programme for England’s Natura 2000 sites (IPENS)

9 Natural England has identified that “development on the land between the sites that make up the North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC could have an impact on bats through loss of foraging habitat, loss of minor roost sites, and disruption of flight paths (the latter particularly through light pollution”). They have identified the following action to address this: “Produce and promote advice and guidance on development control and strategic planning”.

7.4 Natural England also encouraged the council to include specific reference in policy DM8 to ensuring the protection of the Severn Estuary SAC, SPA and Ramsar site, advising that the plan should make clear the need for adequate survey and assessment of cumulative, in-combination and offsite impacts (drainage, disturbance, run off, impacts on managed realignment etc.) where proposals that could affect the sensitive bird species and other habitats and species of the Estuary are brought forward. They stated that this would ensure there would be a hook in the overarching policy to support site specific policies for relevant site allocations when these are eventually determined in the site allocations part (2) of the plan.

7.5 Policy DM22 is on existing and proposed railway lines, and includes safeguarding of the existing Portishead–Pill railway line, ensuring that development would not prejudice its use for rail traffic. (It is likely that at some time in the future a scheme will come forward for reopening the line for passenger traffic, likely to involve more train traffic and improvements involving signalling etc.)

7.6 Regarding this policy, Natural England stated that parts of the line are located close to or within national and European designated sites, including the Severn Estuary SSSI, SAC, SPA and Ramsar site, and the Avon Gorge Woodlands SSSI and SAC. Natural England encouraged the council to include a reference to the proximity of the route and the need to ensure the interests of the site are protected.

7.7 The council’s planning policy officers are proposing to make amendments to the plan (Policy DM8) which accord with the suggestions of Natural England. The proposed amendments are as follows:

Add sentence to the policy under Sites of International and National Importance which reads:

"The Severn Estuary SAC, SPA and Ramsar site is defined on the Proposals Map. Any proposals that could affect the sensitive bird species and other habitats and species of the Estuary will need to carry out adequate surveys and assessments of the cumulative, in- combination and offsite impacts (drainage, disturbance, runoff, impacts on managed realignment etc.) of the scheme".

10 Add the following text to the end of the second paragraph of the supporting text: "Following consultation with Natural England North Somerset Council are looking into producing detailed guidance on the North Somerset & Mendip Bat SAC for future proposed development in and around the 5km zone."

7.8 Regarding policy DM22, the council considers that, as the need for assessment under European legislation is adequately covered by policy DM8, and the plan is meant to be read as a whole, no amendment is necessary.

8. Conclusion

8.1 This screening assessment has found that with appropriate mitigation, notably the mitigation measures identified in the Core Strategy HRA matrices, (see Appendix 5 below), no likely significant effects on European sites are predicted from the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 Development Management Policies (Publication Version), both alone and in combination with other plans or projects.

8.2 Therefore the screening suggests that there is not a need for Appropriate Assessment of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1.

8.3 However this is a high level assessment and there might be instances where a project level HRA is required. The Screening Assessment matrices in the Core Strategy HRA suggest that such detailed HRA may need to be carried out in respect of some individual planning applications.

8.4 This HRA report is a supporting document to the Publication Version of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1. The importance of protecting European Sites and of maintaining and enhancing biodiversity in general is reflected in the plan itself particularly in Policy DM8: Nature Conservation which states that “Development which would have an adverse impact on identified sites of international importance (which include Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and Ramsar sites) will not be permitted”.

8.5 As indicated above, the council is proposing to amend policy DM8 and its supporting text in line with comments of Natural England, which further demonstrate the council’s recognition of the importance of European sites.

11 Appendix 1: Map of European Sites within North Somerset

12 Appendix 2: European Sites and their qualifying features

The European Sites considered, their citations and conservation objectives

Severn Estuary SAC, SPA, Ramsar

EC Directive 92/43 on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora Citation for Special Area of Conservation (SAC) Name: Severn Estuary/ Môr Hafren Unitary Authority/County: England: Bristol City, Gloucestershire, Bath & North East Somerset, Somerset, South Gloucestershire. Wales: Bro Morgannwg/Vale of Glamorgan, Caerdydd/Cardiff, Casnewydd/ Newport, Sir Fynwy/ Monmouthshire. SAC status: Designated on 10 December 2009 Grid reference: ST321748 SAC EU code: UK0013030 Area (ha): 73715.40 Component SSSI: Upper Severn Estuary SSSI, Severn Estuary SSSI, Bridgwater Bay SSSI. Site description: The Severn Estuary lies on the south west coast of Britain at the mouth of four major rivers (the Severn, Wye, Usk, and Avon). The immense tidal range (the second highest in the world) and classic funnel shape make the Severn Estuary unique in Britain and very rare worldwide. This tidal range creates strong tidal streams and high turbidity, producing communities characteristic of the extreme physical conditions of liquid mud and tide-swept sand and rocks. The Estuary includes a wide diversity of habitats including Sandbanks which are slightly covered by sea water all the time, Mudflats and sandflats not covered by sea water at low tide , Atlantic salt meadows , and Reefs , which are identified as Annex I habitat types in their own right. The intertidal zone of mudflats, sand banks, rocky platforms and saltmarsh is one of the largest and most important in Britain. The estuary has a diverse geological setting and a wide range of geo-morphological features, especially sediment deposits. It is important for the interpretation of coastline dynamics and land-forms, and also past changes, in sea level, sediment supply, climate and river flow. The estuary’s overall interest depends on its large size, and on the processes and interrelationships between the intertidal and marine habitats and its fauna. The fluctuating salinity and highly mobile sediments with consequent high turbidity limits the benthic invertebrates of the mud and sandflats to relatively few species. Those which are tolerant of such conditions occur in very high densities on the more stable mudflats. Beds of eel-grass Zostera spp. also occur on some mudflats. A greater variety of invertebrates occurs on the intertidal rock platforms, a more stable habitat with rock pools and a relatively high cover of seaweeds.

Conservation objectives for SAC:

(Main source: Natural England web site: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/4513629940482048

With regard to the SAC and the natural habitats and/or species for which the site has been designated (the ‘Qualifying Features’ listed below), and subject to natural change;

13 Ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the Favourable Conservation Status of its Qualifying Features, by maintaining or restoring;
The extent and distribution of qualifying natural habitats and habitats of qualifying species
The structure and function (including typical species) of qualifying natural habitats
The structure and function of the habitats of qualifying species
The supporting processes on which qualifying natural habitats and the habitats of qualifying species rely
The populations of qualifying species, and,
The distribution of qualifying species within the site.

Qualifying features

H1110. Sandbanks which are slightly covered by sea water all the time; Subtidal sandbanks H1130. Estuaries H1140. Mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide; Intertidal mudflats and sandflats H1170. Reefs H1330. Atlantic salt meadows ( Glauco-Puccinellietalia maritimae ); Atlantic salt meadows S1095 . Petromyzon marinus ; Sea lamprey S1099 . Lampetra fluviatilis ; River lamprey S1103 . Alosa fallax ; Twaite shad

Citation for Severn Estuary SPA

EC Directive 79/409 on the Conservation of Wild Birds: Special Protection Area

Severn Estuary (Gloucestershire, Avon, Somerset, South Glamorgan, Mid Glamorgan, Gwent)

The Severn Estuary is one of the largest estuaries in Britain and it has the second largest tidal range inn the world. Its classic tunnel shape and south west orientation makes it susceptible to extreme conditions in the east Atlantic. There are large urban developments on the estuary including the cities of Bristol and Cardiff.

The Severn Estuary qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Birds Directive by regularly supporting an internationally important wintering population of Bwick’s Swan Cygnus columbianus bewicki , an Annex 1 species. During the period 1988/89 to 1992/93 a mean peak of 289 birds (1.7% of the north west European population, 4.1% of the British wintering population) used the estuary.

14 The Severn Estuary qualifies under Article 4.2 as a wetland of international importance by regularly supporting in winter over 20,000 waterfowl. In the five year period 1988/89 to 1992/93 the average peak count was 68,026 waterfowl comprising 17,502 wildfowl and 50,524 waders.

The Severn Estuary also qualifies under Article 4.2 by regularly supporting in winter internationally important numbers of the following 5 species of migratory waterfowl (average peak means for the period 1988/89 to 1992/93): 3,002 European white-fronted goose Anser albifrons albifrons (1.0% NW European, 50% British), 2,892 shelduck Tadorna tadorna (1.2% NW European, 3.9% British), 330 gadwall Anas strepera (2.8% NW European, 5.5% British), 41,683 dunlin Calidris alpine (2.9% east Atlantic flyway (EAF), 9.6% British) and 2,013 redshank Tringa totanus (1.3% EAF, 2.6% British).

The Severn Estuary also supports internationally important wintering populations of a further 10 species: 3,977 wigeon Anas Penelope (1.6% British, 1,998 teal Anas crecca (2% British), 523 pintail Anas acuta (2.1% British), 1,686 pochard Aythya ferina (3.8% British), 913 tufted duck Aythya fidigula (1.5% British), 227 ringed plover Charadrius hiaticula (1% British), 781 grey plover Pluvialis squatarola (3.7% British), 3,096 curlew Numenius arquata (3.4% British), 246 whimbrel N.phacopus (4.9% British total) and 3 spotted redshank Tringa erythropus (1.5% British).

In addition during passage periods, the estuary supports nationally important numbers of ringed plover (spring migration: 442 birds, (1.4% British passage), autumn migration: 1,573 birds (5.2% British passage), dunlin (spring: 3,510 birds (1.7% British passage), autumn 5,500 birds (2.7% British passage), whimbrel Numenius phaeopus (spring: 246 birds (4.9% British passage), autumn: 66 birds (1.3% British passage) and redshank (autumn 2,546 birds (2% British passage).

The Severn Estuary also supports a nationally important breeding population of a migratory species. In 1993 2040 pairs of lesser black-backed gulls Larus fuscus bred on the islands of Steep Holm and Flat Holm within the estuary. This represents 2.5% of the British total. (SPA Citation Dec 19893).

European Site Conservation Objectives for Severn Estuary Special Protection Area Site Code: UK9015022 With regard to the SPA and the individual species and/or assemblage of species for which the site has been classified (the ‘Qualifying Features’ listed below), and subject to natural change; Ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the aims of the Wild Birds Directive, by maintaining or restoring;
The extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features
The structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features

15
The supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely
The population of each of the qualifying features, and,
The distribution of the qualifying features within the site.

This document should be read in conjunction with the accompanying Supplementary Advice document, which provides more detailed advice and information to enable the application and achievement of the Objectives set out above. Qualifying Features: A037 Cygnus columbianus bewickii ; Bewick’s swan (Non-breeding) A048 Tadorna tadorna ; Common shelduck (Non-breeding) A051 Anas strepera ; Gadwall (Non-breeding) A149 Calidris alpina alpina ; Dunlin (Non-breeding) A162 Tringa totanus ; Common redshank (Non-breeding) A394 Anser albifrons albifrons ; Greater white-fronted goose (Non-breeding) Waterbird assemblage

16 This is a cross border site This site crosses the border between England and Wales Some features may only occur in one Country. This is a European Marine Site This SPA is a part of the Severn Estuary European Marine Site (EMS). These Conservation Objectives should be used in conjunction with the Regulation 35 Conservation Advice document for the EMS. For further details about this please visit the Natural England website at: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/marine/protectandmanage/mpa/europeans ites.aspx or contact Natural England’s enquiry service at [email protected] or by phone on 0845 600 3078.

Mendip Limestone Grasslands SAC

EC Directive 92/43 on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora

Citation for Special Area of Conservation (SAC) Name: Mendip Limestone Grasslands Unitary Authority/County: North Somerset, Somerset SAC status: Designated on 1 April 2005 Grid reference: ST401557 SAC EU code: UK0030203 Area (ha): 417.47 Component SSSI: Brean Down SSSI, Crook Peak to Shute Shelve Hill SSSI, Uphill Cliff SSSI Site description: This site comprises coastal and inland sections of the Carboniferous Limestone outcrops of the Mendips. It contains a wide range of habitats including ancient and secondary semi-natural broadleaved woodland, unimproved calcareous grassland and a complex mosaic of calcareous grassland and acidic dry dwarf- shrub heath. The coastal headland and inland hills support the largest area of sheep’s-fescue – carline-thistle ( Festuca ovina – Carlina vulgaris ) grassland in England, including two sub-types (the dwarf sedge Carex humilis and honewort Trinia glauca sub- communities) known from no other site in the UK. Areas of short-turf sheep’s- fescue – meadow oat-grass Helictotrichon pratense grassland also occur inland. The site is exceptional in that it supports a number of rare and scarce vascular plants typical of the oceanic southern temperate and Mediterranean elements of the British flora. These include white rock-rose Helianthemum apenninum , Somerset hair-grass Koeleria vallesiana and honewort. Transitions to limestone heath situated on flatter terrain also occur. Heath species such as heather Calluna vulgaris , bell heather Erica cinerea and western gorse Ulex gallii are well represented and bracken Pteridium aquilinum is often locally dominant. Rose Wood and King’s Wood (in Crook Peak to Shute Shelve Hill SSSI) are ancient woodlands. Canopy species include ash Fraxinus excelsior , pedunculate oak Quercus robur , small-leaved lime Tilia cordata and common whitebeam Sorbus aria agg. The understorey is dominated by hazel Corylus avellana with some field maple Acer campestre and spindle Euonymus europaeus . Ground flora species include dog’s mercury Mercurialis perennis , columbine Aquilegia vulgaris and meadow saffron Colchicum autumnale . The nationally rare purple gromwell Lithospermum purpurocaeruleum occurs at Rose Wood.

17 Qualifying habitats: The site is designated under article 4(4) of the Directive (92/43/EEC) as it hosts the following habitats listed in Annex I:
Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines. (Mixed woodland on base- rich soils associated with rocky slopes)*
Caves not open to the public
European dry heaths
Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia). (Dry grasslands and scrublands on chalk or limestone)

Qualifying species: The site is designated under article 4(4) of the Directive (92/43/EEC) as it hosts the following species listed in Annex II:
Greater horseshoe bat Rhinolophus ferrumequinum

Annex I priority habitats are denoted by an asterisk (*).

Conservation objectives:

With regard to the SAC and the natural habitats and/or species for which the site has been designated (the ‘Qualifying Features’ listed below), and subject to natural change; Ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the Favourable Conservation Status of its Qualifying Features, by maintaining or restoring;
The extent and distribution of qualifying natural habitats and habitats of qualifying species
The structure and function (including typical species) of qualifying natural habitats
The structure and function of the habitats of qualifying species
The supporting processes on which qualifying natural habitats and the habitats of qualifying species rely
The populations of qualifying species, and,
The distribution of qualifying species within the site.

. Qualifying Features:

H4030. European dry heaths H6210. Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia ); Dry grasslands and scrublands on chalk or limestone H8310. Caves not open to the public H9180. Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines; Mixed woodland on base- rich soils associated with rocky slopes* S1304 . Rhinolophus ferrumequinum ; Greater horseshoe bat

North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC EC Directive 92/43 on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora Citation for Special Area of Conservation (SAC) Name: North Somerset and Mendip Bats Unitary Authority/County: Bath and North East Somerset, North Somerset, Somerset

18 SAC status: Designated on 1 April 2005 Grid reference: ST480544 SAC EU code: UK0030052 Area (ha): 561.19 Component SSSI: Banwell Caves SSSI, Banwell Ochre Caves SSSI, Brockley Hall Stables SSSI, Compton Martin Ochre Mine SSSI, King’s Wood and Urchin Wood SSSI, The Cheddar Complex SSSI, Wookey Hole SSSI Site description: The Cheddar complex and Wookey Hole areas support a wide range of habitats which provide feeding grounds for bats. These include semi-natural dry grasslands of which the principal community present is sheep’s-fescue – meadow oat-grass ( Festuca ovina – Helictotrichon pratense ) grassland which occurs on rock ledges and on steep slopes with shallow limestone soil, especially in the dry valleys and gorges and on the south-facing scarp of the Mendips. King’s Wood and Urchin Wood have developed over limestone which outcrops in parts of the site and forms a steep scarp to the south-east. There is mostly oak Quercus robur and ash Fraxinus excelsior woodland, though some areas are dominated by small-leaved lime Tilia cordata with both maiden and coppice trees. Other canopy trees include yew Taxus baccata , cherry Prunus avium and wild service tree Sorbus torminalis . There is a rich ground flora including many ferns and mosses. The limestone caves and mines of the Mendips and the north Somerset hills provide a range of important breeding and hibernation sites for lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros and greater horseshoe bat Rhinolophus ferrumequinum . Qualifying habitats: The site is designated under article 4(4) of the Directive (92/43/EEC) as it hosts the following habitats listed in Annex I:
Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines. (Mixed woodland on base- rich soils associated with rocky slopes)*
Caves not open to the public
Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia ). (Dry grasslands and scrublands on chalk or limestone)

Qualifying species: The site is designated under article 4(4) of the Directive (92/43/EEC) as it hosts the following species listed in Annex II:
Greater horseshoe bat Rhinolophus ferrumequinum
Lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros

Annex I priority habitats are denoted by an asterisk (*).

Conservation objectives: With regard to the SAC and the natural habitats and/or species for which the site has been designated (the ‘Qualifying Features’ listed below), and subject to natural change;

Ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the Favourable Conservation Status of its Qualifying Features, by maintaining or restoring;
The extent and distribution of qualifying natural habitats and habitats of qualifying species
The structure and function (including typical species) of qualifying natural habitats

19
The structure and function of the habitats of qualifying species
The supporting processes on which qualifying natural habitats and the habitats of qualifying species rely
The populations of qualifying species, and,
The distribution of qualifying species within the site.

Qualifying Features: H6210. Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia ); Dry grasslands and scrublands on chalk or limestone H8310. Caves not open to the public H9180. Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines; Mixed woodland on base- rich soils associated with rocky slopes* S1303 . Rhinolophus hipposideros ; Lesser horseshoe bat S1304 . Rhinolophus ferrumequinum ; Greater horseshoe bat

Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC EC Directive 92/43 on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora Citation for Special Area of Conservation (SAC) Name: Avon Gorge Woodlands Unitary Authority/County: City of Bristol, North Somerset SAC status: Designated on 1 April 2005 Grid reference: ST560741 SAC EU code: UK0012734 Area (ha): 152.35 Component SSSI: Avon Gorge SSSI Site description: The Avon Gorge is in south-west England. Natural cliffs, quarries and scree of Carboniferous limestone dramatically rise about 100m either side from the tidal River Avon, with grassland and woodland where slopes are less sheer. The site is important because of the small-leaved lime Tilia cordata woodland and the associated species-rich transitions to scrub and herb-rich calcareous grasslands. The open limestone grassland and cliff ledges support a high number of uncommon species, including rare whitebeams Sorbus spp., with two unique to the Avon Gorge, S. bristoliensis and S. wilmottiana , and other important plants, such as Bristol rock-cress Arabis scabra and honewort Trinia glauca . Small groves of yew Taxus baccata also occur on some of the stonier situations. Qualifying habitats: The site is designated under article 4(4) of the Directive (92/43/EEC) as it hosts the following habitats listed in Annex I:
Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines (mixed woodland on base- rich soils associated with rocky slopes)*
Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia ) (dry grasslands and scrublands on chalk or limestone)

Annex I priority habitats are denoted by an asterisk (*)

Conservation objectives With regard to the SAC and the natural habitats and/or species for which the site has been designated (the ‘Qualifying Features’ listed below), and subject to natural change;

20 Ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the Favourable Conservation Status of its Qualifying Features, by maintaining or restoring;
The extent and distribution of qualifying natural habitats
The structure and function (including typical species) of qualifying natural habitats, and
The supporting processes on which qualifying natural habitats rely

This document should be read in conjunction with the accompanying Supplementary Advice document, which provides more detailed advice and information to enable the application and achievement of the Objectives set out above.

Qualifying Features: H6210. Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia ); Dry grasslands and scrublands on chalk or limestone H9180. Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines; Mixed woodland on base- rich soils associated with rocky slopes*

Appendix 3: Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 - List of Policies

Introduction

21

Development Management Policies

SP 1 Presumption in favour of sustainable development 1. Living within Environmental limits

DM1 Flooding and drainage DM2 Renewable and low carbon energy DM3 Conservation Areas DM4 Listed Buildings DM5 Historic Parks and Gardens DM6 Archaeology DM7 Non-designated heritage assets DM8 Nature conservation DM9 Trees DM10 Landscape DM11 Mendip Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty DM12 Development within the Green Belt DM13 Duration of planning consent for disposal of waste to land DM14 Mineral working exploration, extraction and processing DM15 Control of non-mineral development likely to affect active minerals sites or sites recently granted consent for mineral working DM16 Allocation of land at the Spinney, south of Stancombe Quarry, as a preferred area for minerals working DM17 Identification of minerals safeguarding areas for carboniferous limestone DM18 Identification of Minerals Safeguarding Area for surface coal DM19 Green Infrastructure 2. Transport

DM20 Major transport schemes DM21 Motorway junctions DM22 Existing and proposed railway lines DM23 Bus interchanges and park and ride facilities at existing railway stations DM24 Safety, traffic and provision of infrastructure, etc. associated with development DM25 Public rights of way, pedestrian and cycle access DM26 Travel plans DM27 Bus accessibility criteria DM28 Parking standards DM29 Car parks DM30 Off-airport car parking DM31 Air Safety 3. Delivering strong and inclusive communities

DM32 High quality design and place making DM33 Inclusive access to non-residential buildings and spaces DM34 Housing type and mix DM35 Nailsea housing type and mix DM36 Residential densities

22 DM37 Residential development in existing residential areas DM38 Extensions to dwellings DM39 Sub-division of properties 4. Older and vulnerable people

DM40 Retirement accommodation and supported independent living for older and vulnerable people DM41 Nursing and care homes for older people and other vulnerable people DM42 Accessible and adaptable housing DM43 Residential annexes 5. Dwellings in the countryside

DM44 Replacement dwellings in the countryside DM45 The conversion or re-use of redundant rural buildings to residential use DM46 Rural workers dwellings 6. Delivering a prosperous economy

DM47 Proposals for economic development within towns and defined settlements DM48 Broadband DM49 Royal Portbury Dock DM50 Bristol Airport 7. Agriculture

DM51 Agricultural and land-based rural business development in the countryside DM52 Equestrian development 8. Businesses in the countryside

DM53 Employment development on greenfield sites in the countryside DM54 Employment development on previously developed land in the countryside DM55 Extensions, ancillary buildings or the intensification of use for existing businesses located in the countryside DM56 Conversion and reuse of rural buildings for employment development DM57 Conversion, reuse and new build of rural buildings for visitor accommodation in the countryside DM58 Camping and caravan sites DM59 Garden centres and shops in the countryside 9. Retailing, town, district and local centres

DM60 Town centres (Clevedon, Nailsea, Portishead and Weston-super-Mare) DM61 District Centres DM62 Local Centres DM63 Primary shopping areas DM64 Primary shopping frontages DM65 Development at the retail parks DM66 The sequential approach for retail development within or adjacent to town, district and local centres and retail parks DM67 Retail proposals outside of or not adjacent to town, district or local centres 8. Ensuring safe and healthy communities

23 DM68 Protection of sporting, cultural and community facilities DM69 Location of sporting, cultural and community facilities Delivery

DM70 Development Infrastructure DM71 Development contributions, Community Infrastructure Levy and viability. 7. Appendices

Appendix Superseded Replacement Local Plan Policies A Appendix Glossary B

24 Appendix 4: Table of main amendments to policies from Consultation Draft Sites and Policies Plan, February 2013 to Part 1 Development Management Policies Publication Version, February 2015

Policies (revised policy numbers Summary of proposed changes as set out in Part 1 Publication version of document) Sustainable development - SP1. SP1: Presumption in favour of sustainable development - addition to refer to the need for meaningful consultation with local communities. Living within environmental limits DM12: Development within the – DM1-19: flooding, renewable Green Belt – amendments to clarify energy, heritage, nature approach to infilling on previously conservation, landscape, green developed sites, and changes of infrastructure AONB, development in use. the Green Belt, waste and minerals. DM17: Identification of Minerals Safeguarding Area for carboniferous limestone - background text extended to provide fuller information on what Mineral Safeguarding Areas (MSA) are, and on the sort of information which would be needed from applicants.

DM18: Identification of Minerals Safeguarding Area for surface coal (new policy) – added in response to representations made by Coal Authority.

Transport – DM20-31: highways, DM20: Major Transport Schemes – rail, public transport, rights of way, updated to include M5 J21 capacity travel plans, parking, air safety. improvements, Parklands N-S link and park and ride at Weston.

DM22: Existing and proposed railway lines – former goods yard at Pill safeguarded for station car park.

Delivering strong and inclusive DM34: Housing type and mix – more communities – DM32-39: design, detailed guidance about the mix of housing type and mix, densities, housing types and how this is development within settlement delivered. boundaries, extensions, Sub-division of properties DM35: Nailsea housing type and mix. A new specific policy for Nailsea on housing type and mix has been added following issues raised

25 by Nailsea Town Council regarding too many 4 bedroom homes in Nailsea and not enough mix of housing types to enable young people and families to stay in the town, or to allow retired people to downsize. This policy has been formulated with and approved by the Town Council.

DM39: Sub-division of properties– policy merged with WSM22.

DM37: Residential development in existing residential areas. This policy was originally called Residential development within settlement boundaries in existing residential areas and on garden land.

Older and vulnerable people – Minor changes and clarification to DM40-43: older people text. accommodation, care homes, accessible and adaptable housing, DM42: Accessible and adaptable residential annexes. housing. This is an updated version of the previous Lifetime homes policy which has been updated to reflect changes in legislation.

DM43: The policy has tightened up on the type and size of residential annexes in the countryside. They will now only be permitted if they are attached to the main dwelling and do not exceed 50% of the size of the existing dwelling.

Dwellings in the countryside – DM44-46: Replacement dwellings, The recent introduction of permitted conversion of rural buildings, rural development rights to allow changes workers dwellings. of use between use classes without the need the apply for planning permission means that some of these policies will only apply to developments which are above the threshold allowed for permitted development (PD change of use. A new disclaimer has been added to the beginning of the document to make this clear.

26

Delivering a prosperous economy Minor changes and clarification to – DM47-50: Economic development, text. Royal Portbury Dock and Bristol Airport DM48: Broadband – this is a new policy dealing with the provision of DM48: Broadband – NEW POLICY broadband in new residential and employment developments.

Agriculture – DM51-52: Agriculture, Minor changes and clarification to Local food production, Equestrian text. development. Businesses in the countryside – The recent introduction of permitted DM53-59: Rural businesses, Tourist development rights to allow changes accommodation, Camping and of use between use classes without caravan sites, Garden centres. the need the apply for planning permission means that some of these policies will only apply to developments which are above the threshold allowed for PD change of use. A new disclaimer has been added to the beginning of the document to make this clear.

DM57: Conversion, re-use and new build of rural buildings for tourist accommodation - now includes an extra paragraph setting out specific criteria for new build tourist accommodation in the countryside.

DM59: Garden centres and shops in the countryside – addition of requirement that non-garden related goods should not exceed 15% of sales floorspace area.

Retailing, town, district and local Includes new policies to reflect centres NPPF, and local retail issues. DM60- DM67: Town centres, district centres, local centres, sequential approach to retail, primary shopping areas, primary shopping frontages, development at retail parks, outside town, district or local centres.

Ensuring safe and healthy Minor changes and clarification to communities – DM68-69: sporting, text. Allocation of sites to await the cultural and community sites. Part 2 document.

27 Delivery DM70: Development Infrastructure – DM70 – DM71: Developer This is a new policy dealing with contributions and Development adoption of and long-term Infrastructure maintenance of infrastructure.

There are a number of policies which although they appeared within the Development Management Policies section of the Consultation Draft Sites and Policies Plan February 2013, were not taken forward for inclusion within the Part 1 Publication document, for various reasons. These are set out in the following schedule:

Policy number in Reason for non -inclusion in Part 1 February 2013 Sites and Publication document Policies Plan Consultation Draft DM3: Heritage Assets This was a general policy about heritage assets and was too repetitive of the NPPF. It was therefore not considered necessary. However, specific heritage policies for conservation areas, listed buildings, archaeology, historic parks and gardens and non-designated heritage assets remain. DM33: Settlement Must await outcome of Core Strategy re- Boundaries examination process. To be taken forward in Part 2 of the Sites and Policies Plan. DM34: Housing allocations Must await outcome of Core Strategy re- examination process. To be taken forward in Part 2. DM44: Gypsies and Additional work is currently in progress in Travellers respect of revisiting the needs evidence and looking at consistency across the West of England. To be taken forward in Part 2. DM48: Strategic Gaps Must await outcome of Core Strategy re- examination process as CS19 (Strategic Gaps) is a remitted policy. To be taken forward in Part 2. DM50- DM52: Allocated Some employment sites have development and safeguarded potential for housing so their allocation may Employment sites. be affected by the outcome of the Core Strategy process. To be taken forward in Part 2. DM56: Local food It was felt that this policy didn’t add anything production/community extra to the existing policies regarding orchards/allotments development in the countryside. Therefore it is proposed that this policy is removed. DM73/74: Local Green Some proposed LGS sites have development Space potential so their allocation may be affected by the outcome of the Core Strategy process. To be taken forward in Part 2.

28

Appendix 5

Screening Assessment Matrices

(Note: For each policy the upper row (black) text relates to the Consultation Draft North Somerset Core Strategy, November 2009, the lower row (red) to the Publication version, February 2011), the blue row to the proposed (November 2013) changes to the Core Strategy , and the purple row to the housing increase to 20,985 which was proposed in September 2014 .)

Screening Assessment Matrix for Severn Estuary SAC, SPA, Ramsar

Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Living within Environmental Limits Policy CS1: Renewable energy in Mostly neutral. N/A N/A N/A N/A Use of Potentiall Addressing Climate development ;e.g. C Some projects appropriate B y on Energy from Waste (Likely significant will need to be technology/desi (No individual Change and Carbon Plant at Weston urban effect alone) individually gn (through significant planning Reduction extension, green assessed as conditions on effect) applicatio infrastructure networks, part of the planning ns. sustainable transport, planning consents or Energy enhancing and process. Air Environmental from /protecting biodiversity, pollution Permits from Waste re-use of previously impacts Environment Plants developed land etc. unlikely to be Agency) . may significant (see require

1 Based on the Natural England Habitats Regulations Assessment of Local Development Documents by David Tyldesley, Jan 2009

29 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site HRA Air an HRA. Quality There is Appendix D). likely to Only specific be scope reference to and energy from flexibility waste plant is for for Weston proposal urban s to extension. include detailed mitigatio n measure s, as necessar y. Policy CS1 of As above As above As above. N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above As above Publication version of Note: Weston Villages now Core Strategy replace Weston Urban Extension Policy CS1 as at Effectively as above. As above, As above. N/A N/A N/A N/A As above. The As above As above November 2013. No changes are although the C Note: Weston mitigation as at proposed to adopted classification is Villages now Consultation policy which is not arguably replace Weston Draft stage is fundamentally different pessimistic, given Urb an still relevant, to Consultation Draft that the only Extension version. The additions reference to a that were made at particular type of Modifications stage are renewable energy likely to have is waste to energy environmental benefits : facilities at Weston (need for development Villages. They are to demonstrate water unlikely to impact

30 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site efficiency measures, on the Severn and promotion of public Estuary since the transport). Policy refers Weston Villages to creation of waste to area is 2km away energy facilities at from it, and the Air Weston Villages. Quality Assessment suggests that air pollution impacts on this European site are unlikely. Policy CS1 as at No changes are Note: The C Mostly neutral. N/A N/A N/A N/A Use of B As above September 2014. proposed to adopted assessment Some projects appropriate (No policy which promotes category is now will need to be technology/desi significant reducing carbon considered to be individually gn (through effect) emissions and tackling overly pessimistic, assessed as conditions on climate change. There is given that the only part of the planning reference to reference to a planning consents or reduction/recycling of particular type of process. Air Environmental waste, and creation of renewable energy pollution Permits from waste to energy facilities is waste to energy impacts Environment in Weston villages facilities at Weston unlikely to be Agency) . Villages. They are significant (see unlikely to impact HRA Air on the Severn Quality Estuary since the Appendix D). Weston Villages Only specific area is 2km away reference to from it, and the Air energy from Quality waste plant is Assessment for Weston suggests that air urban pollution impacts extension (now on this European referred to as site are unlikely to Weston be significant. The Villages)

31 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site assumed housing increase is unlikely to significantly alter the impacts of this policy.. Policy CS2: Delivering Sustainable design and N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Sustainable Design construction. Policy sets B targets e.g. for on site (No significant and Construction. renewable energy, Code effect) for Sustainable Homes BREEAM ratings, etc

CS2 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 2 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Modifications stage added requirement to apply best practice in sustainable urban drainage systems. No

32 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS2 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant policy which promotes effect) sustainable design and The assumed construction. . No LSEs housing increase were predicted at any is unlikely to stage of HRA.. . significantly alter the impacts of this policy.. Policy CS3: Sets out the Sequential N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Environmental Risk Test for development B with regard to flood (No significant Management. zones. effect) CS3 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Environmental Impacts and Flood Risk Assessment Policy CS 3 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Reference to NPPF rather than PPS25. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS3 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which requires effect) acceptable mitigation for

33 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site environmental impacts The assumed of development, and housing increase following the sequential is unlikely to test regarding flooding. significantly alter No LSEs were the impacts of this predicted at any stage of policy.. HRA . Policy CS4: Nature Maintain and enhance N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Conservation. biodiversity within the B district. (No significant effect) CS4 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 4 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Documents such as Green Infrastructure Strategy and Biodiversity and Trees SPD are referred to in supporting text. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS4 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which promotes effect) maintenance and enhancement of biodiversity. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

34 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Policy CS5: Protect and enhance the N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Landscape and the character, B distinctiveness, diversity (No significant Historic Environment. and quality of North effect) Somerset’s landscape and townscape. CS5 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 5 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Reference to heritage assets rather than just assets. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS5 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which promotes effect) protection and enhancement of the landscape. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.. Policy CS6: North Protect the existing N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Somerset’s Green Green Belt. B (No significant Belt effect)

CS6 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 6 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013.

35 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. A difference is that it no longer refers to possibility of taking land out of the Green Belt in exceptional circumstances, by local review. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS6 as at This policy, which states B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A September 2014. that the Green Belt will (No significant remain unchanged effect) during the plan period, was remitted but still carries “appropriate weight”. It is envisaged that the possible increase in housing number could be met without significant change to the existing spatial strategy, which does not imply changing the Green Belt. Policy CS7: Planning Support for sustainable C Mostly neutral. N/A N/A N/A N/A Use of No significant Potentiall for Waste in North management of waste, (Likely significant Some projects appropriate effect y on recovery of energy from effect alone) will need to be technology/desi individual Somerset waste in line with Joint individually gn (through planning Waste Core Strategy assessed as conditions on applicatio policies part of the planning ns. consents or Energy

36 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site planning Environmental from process. Permits from Waste Air pollution Environment Plants impacts Agency) . may unlikely to be require significant (see an HRA. HRA Air There is Quality likely to Appendix). be scope and flexibility for proposal s to include detailed mitigatio n measure s, as necessar y. CS7 Publication As above As above . As above N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above As above Planning for Waste Policy CS 7 as at Effectively as above As above . As above N/A N/A N/A N/A As above. The As above As above November 2013. No changes are mitigation as at proposed to adopted Consultation policy which is not Draft stage is fundamentally different still relevant. to Consultation Draft version. Refers to Sites and Policies DPD rather than “a Development Management DPD”.

37 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Policy CS7 as at No changes are C Mostly neutral. N/A N/A N/A N/A Use of Potentiall September 2014. proposed to adopted (Likely significant Some projects appropriate B y on policy, which promotes effect alone) . will need to be technology/desi (No individual prevention/minimisation The assumed individually gn (through significant planning of waste, design for housing increase assessed as conditions on effect) applicatio ease of waste collection, is unlikely to part of the planning ns. and use of Joint Waste significantly alter planning consents or Energy Core Strategy policies the impacts of this process. Environmental from and development policy. Air pollution Permits from Waste management policies Note: The C impacts Environment Plants on waste. Promotes assessment unlikely to be Agency) . may recovery of energy from category is now significant (see This mitigation require waste in line with Joint considered to be HRA Air is still relevant. an HRA. Waste Core Strategy overly pessimistic, Quality There is policies given that air Appendix). likely to pollution impacts be scope are unlikely to be and significant. flexibility for proposal s to include detailed mitigatio n measure s, as necessar y. Policy CS8: Minerals Provision will be made C Mostly neutral. N/A Potential impacts N/A N/A Use of Potentiall Planning in North for North Somerset to (Likely significant Some projects of quarrying appropriate B y contribute towards effect alone) will need to be activity technology. (No required Somerset approximately 40% of individually significant on the West of England’s assessed as Strict locational effect) individual aggregates requirement. part of the control of planning The council will seek to quarrying, applicatio

38 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site maintain a land bank for planning leaving ns. There crushed rock of at least process. adequate is likely 10 years. Air pollution minimum to be impacts distance adequate unlikely to be between quarry scope significant (see and European and HRA Air site flexibility Quality for Appendix (D)) proposal s to include detailed mitigatio n measure s, as necessar y. CS8 Publication As above As above As above N/A As above N/A N/A As above As above As above Minerals Planning Policy CS 8 as at Effectively as above As above As above N/A In theory N/A N/A As above . The As above As above November 2013. No changes are quarrying close to mitigation as at proposed to adopted the Severn Consultation policy which is not Estuary site could Draft stage is fundamentally different potentially cause still relevant. to Consultation Draft disturbance to version. The addition birds due to that was made at quarrying activity, Modifications stage to such as noise from quantify the crushed blasting. However rock apportionment for this is not North Somerset in particularly likely tonnes , did not alter the to occur; most earlier HRA conclusions. quarrying in North Somerset is for

39 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site carboniferous limestone, and currently occurs east of Backwell. The limited limestone areas near the Severn Estuary are largely constrained by factors like wildlife designations (eg LNRs), and settlements. Policy CS8 as at No changes are C Mostly neutral. N/A As above N/A N/A Use of Potentiall September 2014. proposed to adopted (Likely significant Some projects appropriate B y policy which sets out effect alone) . will need to be technology. (No required the requirement for The assumed individually significant on crushed rock provision, housing increase assessed as Strict locational effect) individual and maintenance of a is unlikely to part of the control of planning landbank, and promotes significantly alter planning quarrying, applicatio protection of mineraL the impacts of this process. leaving ns. There resources through policy.. Air pollution adequate is likely mineral safeguarding impacts minimum to be areas.. unlikely to be distance adequate significant (see between quarry scope HRA Air and European and Quality site. flexibility Appendix (D)) This mitigation for is still relevant. proposal s to include detailed mitigatio n measure s, as

40 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site necessar y. Policy CS9: Green Safeguard, improve and C N/A N/A Potential for N/A N/A Consider use of No Infrastructure enhance the existing (Likely increased interpretation if B network of green significant effect recreational use of necessary. (No infrastructure. alone) beaches and significant potential effect) disturbance of waders and wildfowl CS9 Publication As above As above As above N/A As above N/A N/A As above As above As above Policy CS 9 as at Effectively as above. No As above As above N/A More relevant to N/A N/A As above The As above As above November 2013. changes are proposed say: Potential for mitigation as at to adopted policy which increased Consultation is not fundamentally recreational use of Draft stage is different to Consultation green space still relevant. Draft version. Includes overlooking reference to tree Severn Estuary planting. Reference to and possibly of Green Infrastructure nearby beaches SPD in supporting text. and potential disturbance of waders and wildfowl Policy CS9 as at No changes are As above . C N/A N/A More relevant to N/A N/A Consider use of No September 2014. proposed to adopted (Likely say: Potential for interpretation if B policy which promotes significant effect increased necessary. This (No safeguarding, alone) recreational use of mitigation is still significant improvement and While the assumed green space relevant. effect) enhancement of the housing increase overlooking Consider the existing network of could potentially Severn Estuary potential for a green infrastructure. increase the and possibly of strategic likelihood of nearby beaches approach to recreational and potential visitor disturbance (see disturbance of management,

41 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site column 6) it is waders and including likely that this wildfowl appropriate could be zonation to satisfactorily protect mitigated; (see undisturbed column 9). areas

Policy CS10: Encouragement for Projects will N/A N/A N/A N/A Implementation B Potentiall Transport and travel management C need to be of measures to (No y policies and (Likely significant individually promote non-car significant required Movement development proposals effect alone) assessed as travel modes as effect) on that encourage an part of the promoted in individual improved and integrated planning policies such as planning transport network and process, CS10 and in applicatio allow for wide choice of However air LTP3. ns. transport modes. Lists pollution proposed transport impacts schemes over the plan unlikely to be period. significant (see HRA Air Quality Appendix)

CS10 Publication As above As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above As above Transportation and Movement Policy CS 10 as at Effectively as above. No As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above As above November 2013. changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Includes addition of requirement for transport schemes to contribute towards

42 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site carbon reduction, and support movement of freight by rail, which should have beneficial environmental effects. List of transport schemes is the same except for addition of Airfield Bridge Link (ABL) between Weston Airfield and Winterstoke Rd, and Weston Southern Rail Chord (WSRC). ABL is a more direct road link so should help reduce distance travelled and hence emissions. WSRC should help promote train rather than car transport which should have environmental benefits. Policy CS10 as at No changes are C Projects will N/A N/A N/A N/A Implementation B Potentiall September 2014. proposed to adopted (Likely significant need to be of measures to (No y policy which is the effect alone) individually promote non-car significant required same as described as It is now assessed as travel modes as effect) on blue text above. considered that part of the promoted in individual Encouragement of this classification is planning policies such as planning improved and integrated unduly pessimistic: process, CS10 and in applicatio transport network, and the air pollution However air LTP3. ns. reference to major impacts re the pollution transport schemes. Severn Estuary impacts Inclusion of reference to site are unlikely to unlikely to be reducing the adverse be significant; (see significant (see column 4). Also HRA Air

43 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site environmental impacts there is scope for Quality of transport. mitigation; (see Appendix) column 9). For these reasons the assumed housing increase is unlikely to significantly alter the impacts of this policy. Policy CS11: Parking Provision of adequate Projects will N/A N/A N/A N/A Implementation B Potentiall car parking to meet the B need to be of measures to (No y needs of anticipated (No significant individually promote non-car significant required users. effect) assessed as travel modes as effect) on part of the promoted in individual planning policies such as planning process. CS10 and in applicatio However, air LTP3. ns. pollution impacts unlikely to be significant (see HRA Air Quality Appendix).

CS11 Publication As above As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above Policy CS 11 as at Effectively as above. No As above As above N/A The policy is N/A N/A The above As above As above November 2013. changes are proposed seeking adequate comment at to adopted policy which provision of Consultation is not fundamentally parking and does Draft stage may different to Consultation not influence its overstating Draft version. Only locations, so no things, as difference is that policy LSEs are Halcrow’s work refers to Sites and predicted. suggests air Policies DPD rather than However it is pollution

44 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Development worth noting that impacts are Management DPD. location of car unlikely to be parks may significant for influence the Severn Estuary degree to which habitats. parts of the Severn Estuary While not site are affected addressing an by disturbance, LSE of this particularly policy, it may be disturbance to beneficial to birds from dogs, if promote dog walkers allow management of them to run location of car unrestrained on parks, intertidal sand and especially free mud flats car parks, to try important to the to minimise European site. potential for disturbance. Eg. Where car parks have to be located near areas of intertidal mud and sand flats important to the European site, promote use of interpretation boards requesting dogs on leads, and explaining why that is appropriate .

45 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Policy CS11 as at No changes are B Projects may N/A As above N/A N/A As above. Also B Potentiall September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant need to be consider the (No y policy which concerns effect) individually location of car significant required provision of adequate The assumed assessed as parks, as an effect) on car parking to meet the housing increase part of the access point to individual needs of anticipated is unlikely to make planning the coastline, planning users.) the impact of this process, regarding their applicatio policy significant, However air distance from ns. since it is the pollution high tide roost location of car impacts sites and bird parking, rather unlikely to be foraging sites than its quantity, significant (see where known. which is likely to HRA Air Consider the have the greater Quality potential for a potential to have Appendix) strategic impact ,regarding approach to bird disturbance, visitor and the policy management, does not influence including the location. appropriate However mitigation zonation to is suggested protect anyway. (See the undisturbed points in blue text areas above in columns 6 and 9). Also this policy is relevant regarding the potential for in- combination effects; (see Appendix x). Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities

46 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Policy CS12: High quality architecture N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Achieving High and urban design will be B expected from all (No significant Quality Design and developments. effect) Place Making

CS12 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 12 as at Effectively as above. No As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. While some paragraphs differ the thrust of the policy is on promoting well designed building and places, and there is still reference to environmental sustainability. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS12 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant (No policy which promotes effect) significant high quality design of effect) buildings and places. Reference to contribution to environmental sustainability. No LSEs

47 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site were predicted at any stage of HRA. . Policy CS13: Scale of Provision of 17,750 Projects will Water Disturbance to N/A N/A Encourage and N/A New Housing. dwellings across the C need to be abstraction has wading birds and facilitate B district over the plan (Likely significant individually been assessed wildfowl in the sustainable (No period. 3000 dwellings in effect alone) assessed as as part of the Severn Estuary, modes of significant Weston-super-Mare part of the Regional due to increased transport such effect) urban area and 9,000 planning Spatial noise and light as public dwellings as an urban process. Strategy and increased transport, extension to Weston- Habitats recreational walking and super-Mare. The Air pollution Regulations pressures from cycling. remainder of 5,750 impacts Assessment new development dwellings will be met by unlikely to be which in Weston-super- Require best land from existing significant (see concluded that Mare. practice identified sources and HRA Air despite the construction no additional allocation Quality amount of techniques at will be required in the Appendix) development sites close to plan period. proposed in the Estuary to North ensure minimal Somerset it disruption. won’t result in a likely significant Ensure (through effect on water planning abstraction. conditions etc) Further that key Specialist construction advice was activities which provided by the cause Environment significant Agency which vibration and confirmed this. noise, such as piling, is undertaken between April and August to

48 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site avoid disturbance to wading birds and wildfowl, if site is within 300 m (guideline only) of wading bird foraging zones.

Consider use of interpretation if necessary.

A site-wide lighting strategy, may be required CS13 Publication Provision of minimum of As above As above As above As above As above As above As above As above As above 13,400 dwellings across the district over the plan period. 3,300 net additional dwellings in Weston-super-Mare urban area and 5,500 dwellings at Weston villages. Outside Weston most additional development to occur in towns on existing site allocations, or new development in their settlement boundaries, or Nailsea through site allocations outside Green Belt

49 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Policy CS 13 Proposed change in As above As above LSEs unlikely As above As above As above As above. The As above As above as at November 2013. housing number from (see note on mitigation as at the minimum of 14,000 water issues Consultation in adopted plan (the after this table.) Draft stage is figure introduced at still relevant. Modifications stage) to minimum of 17,130 dwellings within North Somerset 2006 -2026 . (Note: while this is an increase, the 17,130 is less than the 17,750 dwellings at the Consultation Draft stage. The main issue regarding the Severn Estuary site is the same (possible disturbance of birds) and the same mitigation as at Consultation Draft stage (in black text above) is still relevant. Policy CS13 as at This policy , on the C Projects may LSEs unlikely As above, As above As above As above. The B N/A September 2014. housing number, was (Likely significant need to be (see note on regarding potential mitigation as at (No remitted for re- effect alone) individually water issues for disturbance. Consultation significant examination. The This concerns assessed as after this table.) Draft stage is effect) Inspector supported an potential for part of the still relevant. increase in the housing disturbance, but, planning In addition, requirement from 17,130 notwithstanding process. liaison with to 20,985 for 2006-2026. the increase in Natural England housing suggests that requirement, this is Air pollution measures mitigatable; see impacts on referred to in columns 6 and 9). Severn estuary the draft Site site unlikely to Improvement

50 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site be significant Plan (SIP) for (see HRA Air the Severn Quality Estuary Appendix, ) European site may also be appropriate, such as : Consider the potential for a strategic approach to visitor management, including appropriate zonation to protect undisturbed areas; Seek to plan the Aust to Brean Down stretch of the England Coast Path to help ensure the new route does not result in an adverse effect on the integrity of the site, including possible provision of an alternative winter route to take walkers

51 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site away from sensitive parts, like important high tide roosts. Policy CS14: New housing Projects will Water Disturbance to N/A N/A Encourage and N/A Distribution of New development will be C need to be abstraction has wading birds and facilitate B concentrated in Weston- (Likely significant individually been assessed wildfowl in the sustainable (No Housing super-Mare. At effect alone) assessed as as part of the Severn Estuary, modes of significant Clevedon, Portishead part of the Regional due to increased transport such effect) and Nailsea residential planning Spatial noise and light as public development will be process. Strategy and increased transport, acceptable within their Habitats recreational walking and existing settlement Air pollution Regulations pressures for new cycling. boundaries on impacts Assessment development in brownfield land. Within unlikely to be which Weston-super- Require best the Service Villages significant (see concluded that Mare. practice small scale infill HRA Air despite the construction development may be Quality amount of techniques at appropriate where it will Appendix) development sites close to support the retention of proposed in the Estuary to existing services. North ensure minimal Elsewhere housing Somerset it disruption. development will not be won’t result in a permitted unless it is for likely significant Ensure (through essential workers in effect on water planning rural enterprises, abstraction. conditions etc) replacement dwellings Further that key or affordable housing Specialist construction need. advice was activities which provided by the cause Environment significant Agency which vibration and confirmed this. noise, such as piling, is undertaken between April

52 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site and August to avoid disturbance to wading birds and wildfowl, if site is within 300 m (guideline only) of wading bird foraging zones.

Consider use of interpretation if necessary). CS1 4 Publication Weston will be focus of As above As above As above As above N/A N/A As above As above N/A new housing development. Outside Weston most additional development to occur at Clevedon, Portishead and Nailsea, on existing allocations, within their existing settlement boundaries, or in Nailsea at allocations outside Green Belt. Priority to previously developed land. Within the Service Villages small scale infill development or site allocations can occur. All new housing to not conflict with nature conservation policies

53 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Policy CS 14 Proposed policy wording As above As above LSEs unlikely As above N/A N/A As above. The As above N/A as at November 2013. is unchanged from the (see note on mitigation as at adopted plan except for water issues Consultation the housing figures in after this table.) Draft stage is the table. Weston will be still relevant. focus of new housing development. Outside Weston most additional development to occur at Clevedon, Portishead and Nailsea, on existing allocations, within their existing settlement boundaries, or in Nailsea at allocations outside Green Belt. Priority to previously developed land. At Service Villages small scale infill development or site allocations can occur. All new housing to not conflict with nature conservation policies. While the proposed distribution of the housing has changed slightly from the Consultation Draft stage, mainly due to a reduction in the amount of housing proposed at Weston Villages, the main issue regarding the Severn Estuary site is

54 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site the same (possible disturbance of birds) and the mitigation is still relevant. Policy CS14 As above. It is assumed C Projects may LSEs unlikely As above N/A N/A As above. The B N/A as at September 2014. that the increased (Likely significant need to be (see note on mitigation as at (No housing requirement effect alone) individually water issues Consultation significant would have a similar This concerns assessed as after this table.) Draft stage is effect) broad distribution to that potential for part of the still relevant. of the 17,130 dwellings disturbance, planning as in the November However, even process. 2013 changes. with the increase A significant proportion in housing of the new housing is requirement, this Air pollution likely to be on brownfield is mitigatable; see impacts on land within towns. columns 6 and 9). Severn estuary As before, the main site unlikely to issue regarding the be significant Severn Estuary site is (see HRA Air the same (possible Quality disturbance of birds) and Appendix, ) the mitigation in column 9 is still relevant. Policy CS15: Mixed The Council will seek to N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A and Balanced ensure a genuine mix of B housing types within (No significant Communities existing and future effect) communities. CS15 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 15 Effectively as above. No As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November 2013. changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version.

55 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS15 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September 2014. proposed to adopted B policy, which promotes (No significant a genuine mix of effect) housing types within existing and future communities. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS16: On-site affordable N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Affordable Housing housing will be sought to B meet local needs on all (No significant residential effect) developments of 15 dwellings or more (or site of 0.5ha or above). On other sites the Council will seek to negotiate a financial contribution towards the provision of affordable housing. CS16 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 16 Effectively as above. No As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November 2013. changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. The addition made at

56 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Modifications stage to widen the definition of affordable housing to include affordable rented did not have significant implications for HRA. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS16 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September 2014. proposed to adopted B policy, which promotes (No significant provision of on-site effect) affordable housing on all residential developments of 10 dwellings or more (or sites of 0.3ha or above). On sites of 5-9 dwellings the Council will seek to negotiate a financial contribution towards the provision of affordable housing. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS17: Housing schemes for N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Residential Sites 100% affordable B housing to meet local (No significant Providing Affordable need within small rural effect) Housing Only communities will be supported provided it meets certain criteria. Specific sites may also

57 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site be allocated in W-s-M, Portishead, Nailsea and Clevedon and the service villages for 100% affordable housing to meet an identified local need. CS17 Publication Housing schemes for As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Rural Exceptions 100% affordable housing to meet local Schemes need within small rural communities will be supported provided it meets certain criteria. Policy CS 17 Effectively as above. No As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November 2013, changes are proposed to adopted policy which Rural Exceptions is not fundamentally Schemes different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS17 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September 2014, proposed to adopted B policy. It promotes (No significant Rural Exceptions provision of housing effect) Schemes . schemes for 100% affordable housing to Notwithstanding meet local needs within the housing small rural communities increase, it is subject to criteria, unlikely that including one giving housing schemes priority to sites within of a scale settlement boundary, appropriate for a and one on scale being rural location

58 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site appropriate for location. would have Also states that rural significant effects exceptions schemes will on European Sites, be acceptable adjacent particularly the to the settlement Severn Estuary. boundaries of Service Note that planning Villages and Infill applications would Villages, and elsewhere be likely to be adjacent to main body of subject to policies settlement, but not in the on biodiversity Green Belt, unless justified by very special circumstances. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS18: Gypsies Provision will be made N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A and Travellers and for an additional 36 B residential and 10 transit (No significant Travelling Show pitches for Gypsies and effect) People travellers for the period 2006 – 2011. CS18 Publication Sets out considerations As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A for determination of locations for sites for Gypsies, travellers and travelling show people Policy CS 18 As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November 2013. Effectively as above. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version in so far as

59 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site the criteria are broadly similar. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS18 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September 2014 proposed to adopted B policy, which sets out (No significant considerations for effect) determination of locations for sites for Gypsies, travellers and travelling show people. This includes preference for brownfield sites. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS19: Green The Council will seek to N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Wedges/Strategic protect green B wedges/strategic gaps (No significant Gaps. to help retain the effect) separate identity, character or landscape setting of settlements. CS19 Publication As above, but reference As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Strategic gaps to strategic gaps, not green wedges Policy CS 19 Effectively as above. No As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November 2013. changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs

60 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS19 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September 2014 proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which promotes effect) protection of strategic gaps to help retain the separate identity, character or landscape setting of settlements.

Delivering a Prosperous Economy Policy CS20: Employment-led Air pollution Water Disturbance to N/A N/A Encourage and Projects Supporting a strategy to both deliver C impacts abstraction has wading birds and facilitate B will need significant employment (Likely significant unlikely to be been assessed wildfowl in the sustainable (No to be Successful Economy development and to effect alone) significant (see as part of the Severn Estuary, modes of significant individual ensure that new HRA Air Regional due to increased transport such effect) ly residential development Quality Spatial noise and light as public assessed is provided in Appendix) Strategy and increased transport, as part of association with Habitats population due to walking and the employment Regulations amount of new cycling. planning opportunities. The Core Assessment development in process. Strategy provides for which Weston-super- Require best around 29,500 jobs. concluded that Mare. practice Supporting text suggests despite the construction indicative employment amount of techniques at requirement for B1-B8 development sites close to uses would include 61 proposed in the Estuary to ha at Weston Urban North ensure minimal Extension Somerset it disruption. won’t result in a likely significant

61 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site effect on water Ensure (through abstraction. planning Further conditions etc) specialist that key advice was construction provided by the activities which Environment cause Agency which significant confirmed this. vibration and noise, such as piling, is undertaken between April and August to avoid disturbance to wading birds and wildfowl, if site is within 300 m (guideline only) of wading bird foraging zones.

CS20 Publication The Core Strategy As above As above As above As above N/A N/A As above As above As above seeks to provide for at least 10,100 additional jobs. Supporting text suggests indicative employment land allocations (B1-B8 uses) to be as in adopted Replacement Local Plan, plus about 38ha at Weston Villages.

62 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Policy CS 20 The policy is not As above As above LSEs unlikely As above N/A N/A As above. The As above As above as at November 2013. proposed to change (see note on mitigation as at from the adopted plan water issues Consultation version. It states that the after this table.) Draft stage is Core Strategy seeks to still relevant, provide for at least with the 10,100 additional jobs, possible which is less than at exception of the Consultation Draft stage, references to with consequentially promoting lower employment land sustainable implications. The main transport issue regarding the modes, since air Severn Estuary site is pollution the same (possible impacts are disturbance of birds) and unlikely to be the mitigation is still significant for relevant. the site. Policy CS20 No changes are C As above LSEs unlikely As above N/A N/A As above. B Projects as at September 2014 proposed to adopted (Likely significant (see note on (No may policy, which states that effect alone) water issues significant need to the Core Strategy seeks This concerns after this table.) effect) be to provide for at least potential for individual 10,100 additional jobs, disturbance, but, ly which is less than at this is mitigatable; assessed Consultation Draft stage, see columns 6 and as part of with consequentially 9). the lower employment land The housing planning implications. increase is not process. The main issue likely to affect the regarding the Severn impact of this Estuary site is the same policy. (possible disturbance of birds) and the mitigation is still relevant.

63 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Policy CS21: Retail Identifies retail hierarchy N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Hierarchy and across the district. B B (No significant (No Provision. effect) significant effect) CS21 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A Policy CS 21 N/A N/A It is considered N/A N/A The reference As above N/A as at November 2013. Effectively as above. No C that as the policy to mitigation changes are proposed (Likely significant refers to under policy to adopted policy which effect alone) regeneration of CS20 (in blue) is not fundamentally town centre sites, is appropriate. different to Consultation (see column 6) some of which are Draft version. on the seafront, this policy too could be judged to have potential impacts, regarding disturbance to birds from noise and light, without mitigation. This point was not recognised in earlier HRA work. Policy CS2 1 No changes are N/A N/A It is considered N/A N/A Require best B N/A as at September 2014 proposed to adopted C that as the policy practice (No policy, which identifies (Likely significant refers to construction significant retail hierarchy across effect alone) regeneration of techniques at effect) the district, and states in town centre sites, sites close to what circumstances (see column 6) some of which are the Estuary to proposals for town on the seafront, ensure minimal centre uses will be this policy too disruption. supported. . could be judged to Ensure (through While some of the have potential planning housing increase could impacts, regarding conditions etc)

64 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site be on town centre sites, disturbance to that key some of which are on birds from noise construction the seafront at Weston, and light, without activities which these sites are largely mitigation cause allocated already, and significant impacts are likely to be vibration and mitigatable. (See noise, such as columns 6 and 9). piling, is undertaken between April and August to avoid disturbance to wading birds and wildfowl, if site is within 300 m (guideline only) of wading bird foraging zones. . Policy CS22: Tourism Supports visitor facilities Projects may Water Disturbance to Some leisure The sites Encourage and Projects Strategy and accommodation C need to be abstraction has wading birds and developments that include facilitate B will need across the district (Likely significant individually been assessed wildfowl in the within the land take sustainable (No to be provided they meet effect alone) assessed as as part of the Severn Estuary, seafront area from the modes of significant individual certain criteria. part of the Regional due to increased in Weston- Severn transport such effect) ly planning Spatial noise and light super-Mare Estuary as public assessed process. Strategy and increased may have have transport, as part of Habitats recreational potential generally walking and the Regulations pressures. impacts had cycling. planning Assessment (including land Appropriate process. which take in some Assessmen Require best concluded that cases) on the ts practice despite the Severn undertaken construction amount of Estuary SAC. as part of techniques to development the

65 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site proposed in planning ensure minimal North application disruption. Somerset it process. won’t result in a Ensure key likely significant construction effect on water activities which abstraction. cause Further significant specialist vibration and advice was noise, such as provided by the piling, is Environment undertaken Agency which between April confirmed this. and August to avoid disturbance to wading birds and wildfowl, if site is within 300 m (guideline only) of wading bird foraging zones. Consider use of interpretation if necessary.

CS22 Publication As above As above As above As above As above As above As above As above As above As above Policy CS 22 Effectively as above. No As above As above LSEs unlikely As above As above As above As above. The As above As as at November 2013. changes are proposed (see note on mitigation as at above to adopted policy which water issues Consultation is not fundamentally after this table.) Draft stage is different to Consultation still relevant. Draft version The main issue regarding the

66 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Severn Estuary site is the same (possible disturbance of birds) and the mitigation is still relevant. Policy CS22 No changes are C Projects may LSEs unlikely Potential for Some leisure Careful Require best Projects as at September 2014 proposed to adopted (Likely significant need to be (see note on disturbance to developments considerati practice B may policy, which supports effect alone) individually water issues wading birds and within the on of construction (No need to new, improved and Mainly concerns assessed as after this table.) wildfowl in the seafront area location of techniques to significant be replacement visitor and scope for part of the Severn Estuary, in Weston- car parks ensure minimal effect) individual tourist facilities and disturbance, but planning due to possible super-Mare serving disruption. ly accommodation across this is mitigatable. process. increased noise may have access to Ensure key assessed the district provided they However air and light and potential potentially construction as part of meet certain criteria. The housing pollution increased impacts sensitive activities which the increase is unlikely impacts recreational (including land areas for cause planning Criteria include to increase the unlikely to be pressures. take in some SPA birds significant process. appropriate scale and no impact of the significant for cases) on the (eg vibration and adverse implications for policy. Severn Severn feeding/ noise, such as environment. Also (for Estuary; (see Estuary SAC. high tide piling, is Weston) the need to HRA Air roost sites, undertaken comply with sequential Quality to be between April approach giving priority Appendix) informed and August to to town centre or by results avoid seafront sites. of Natural disturbance to England wading birds review of and wildfowl, if high tide site is within 300 roost sites.) m (guideline only) of wading bird foraging zones. Consider use of interpretation if necessary.

67 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Policy CS23: Bristol Proposals will be Air pollution N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Projects International Airport required to demonstrate B impacts B may the satisfactory (No significant unlikely to be (No need to resolution of effect) significant (see significant be environmental issues, HRA Air effect) individual including the impact of Quality ly growth on surrounding Appendix) assessed communities and as part of surface access the infrastructure. planning process.

CS23 Publication As above As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above Bristol Airport Policy CS 23 Effectively as above. No As above As above LSEs unlikely N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above as at November 2013. changes are proposed (see note on to adopted policy which water issues is not fundamentally after this table.) different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. The airport is over 11km from the Severn Estuary (crow fly).

Policy CS23 No changes are Air pollution LSEs unlikely N/A N/A N/A N/A Projects as at September 2014 proposed to adopted B impacts (see note on B may policy for the airport (No significant unlikely to be water issues (No need to which requires effect) significant (see after this table.) significant be proposals to HRA Air effect) individual demonstrate the Quality ly satisfactory resolution of Appendix) assessed environmental issues, as part of including the impact of the

68 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site growth on surrounding planning communities and process. surface access infrastructure. Policy CS24: Royal Identified land will Dock located N/A Potential N/A N/A Require best Projects Portbury Dock continue to be C near to SAC disturbance of practice B will need safeguarded for port (Likely significant but dock uses wading birds and construction (No to be uses, subject to effect alone) not likely to be wildfowl in the techniques to significant individual demonstrable need for enough source Severn Estuary, ensure minimal effect) ly those uses that cannot of NOx air due to increased disruption. assessed be accommodated pollution to noise and light. as part of elsewhere within the have a Ensure (through the existing port estate. significant planning planning Further expansion of the effect (see conditions etc) process. port within North HRA Air that key Project- Somerset is not Quality construction level supported. Appendix) activities which HRA/EIA cause may be significant needed vibration and for any noise, such as develop piling, is ments at undertaken Royal between April Portbury and August to Dock. avoid disturbance to wading birds and wildfowl, if site is within 300 m (guideline only) of wading bird foraging zones.

69 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Use of appropriate technology/desi gn (through conditions on planning consents or Environmental Permits from Environment Agency) .

CS24 Publication As above As above As above N/A As above N/A N/A As above As above As above Policy CS 24 Effectively as above. No As above As above N/A As above N/A N/A As above. The As above As above as at November 2013. changes are proposed mitigation as at to adopted policy which Consultation is not fundamentally Draft stage is different to Consultation still relevant. Draft version; (only a difference in the name of the site allocations document referred to.) The main issue regarding the Severn Estuary site is the same (possible disturbance of birds) and the mitigation is still relevant. Policy CS24 No changes are Dock located N/A Some potential for N/A N/A Require best Projects as at September 2014 proposed to adopted C near to SAC disturbance of practice B will need policy, which continues (Likely significant but dock uses wading birds and techniques to (No to be to be to maintain and effect alone) not likely to be wildfowl in the ensure minimal significant individual enhance the role of the enough source Severn Estuary, disruption. effect) ly dock, and to safeguard The housing of NOx air due to increased assessed land at Court House increase is unlikely pollution to noise and light, as part of

70 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Farm for port uses, to increase the have a but may not be Ensure (through the subject to demonstrable impact of the significant significant given planning planning need for those uses that policy. effect (see that the dock conditions etc) process. cannot be HRA Air already exists, and that key Project- accommodated Quality Court House Farm construction level elsewhere within the Appendix) is inland of the activities which HRA/EIA existing port estate. Severn Estuary cause may be Further expansion of the site.. significant needed port within North vibration and for any Somerset is not noise, such as develop supported. piling, is ments at undertaken Royal between April Portbury and August to Dock, or avoid project disturbance to level wading birds consultati and wildfowl, if on with site is within 300 Natural m (guideline England. only) of wading bird foraging zones.

Use of appropriate technology/desi gn (through conditions on planning consents or Environmental Permits from Environment Agency) .

71 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Ensuring Safe and Healthy Communities Policy CS25: Provision of educational N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Children, Young facilities. B B (No significant (No People and Higher effect) significant Education effect)

CS25 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A Policy CS 25 Effectively as above. No As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A as at November 2013. changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS25 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September 2014 proposed to adopted B B policy, which seeks (No significant (No educational provision effect) significant where local provision will effect) be inadequate to meet the needs of new residential developments. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS26: Requires HIA on all N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Supporting Healthy large scale B B developments, Joint Living and the

72 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Provision of Health working with health (No significant (No Care Facilities. providers to deliver a effect) significant district wide network of effect) health facilities, reduce health inequalities in the district, encourage development that promotes active lifestyles. CS26 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A Policy CS 26 Effectively as above. No As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A as at November 2013. changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS26 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B N/A as at September 2014 proposed to adopted (No significant (No policy, which supports effect) significant strategies which effect) increase and improve health services , promote healthier lifestyles and aim to reduce health inequalities. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

73 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Policy CS27: Sport, Provision of sport, N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Recreation and recreation and B B community facilities (No significant (No Community Facilities. effect) significant effect) CS27 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A Policy CS 27 Effectively as above. No As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A as at November 2013. changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version.

Policy CS27 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B N/A as at September 2014 proposed to adopted (No significant (No policy, which promotes effect) significant additional provision of effect) sport, recreation and community facilities where local provision is inadequate to meet projected needs and standards. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Area Policies

Policy CS28: Weston - W-s-M will be the Water Disturbance of N/A N/A Encourage and Projects super-Mare primary focus for C Air pollution abstraction has wading birds and facilitate B will need development within (Likely significant impacts been assessed wildfowl in the sustainable (No to be North Somerset. The effect alone) unlikely to be as part of the Severn Estuary, modes of significant individual town will accommodate significant (see Regional due to increased transport such effect) ly 12,000 new dwellings HRA Air Spatial noise and light as public assessed and 10,000 new jobs Strategy and increased transport, as part of

74 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site between 2006-2026 as Quality Habitats recreational walking and the part of an employment- Appendix) Regulations pressures. cycling. planning led strategy to deliver Assessment process. improved self- which Require best containment and concluded that practice reduced out-commuting despite the construction over the plan period. amount of techniques to development ensure minimal proposed in disruption. Weston-super- Mare it won’t Ensure result in a likely (through significant planning effect on water conditions etc) abstraction. that key Further construction specialist activities which advice was cause provided by the significant Environment vibration and Agency which noise, such as confirmed this. piling, is undertaken between April and August to avoid disturbance to wading birds and wildfowl, if site is within 300m of (guideline only) wading bird foraging zones.

75 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Consider use of interpretation if necessary.

CS28 Publication W-s-M will be the As above As above As above As above N/A N/A As above As above As above primary focus for development within North Somerset. The town will accommodate around 5,850 additional new dwellings with approx 10,500 employment opportunities between 2010-2026 as part of an employment-led strategy to deliver improved self- containment and reduced out-commuting over the plan period. Policy CS 28 The only change being As above As above LSEs unlikely As above N/A N/A The reference As above As above as at November 2013. proposed to the adopted (see note on to mitigation plan policy is a change water issues under policy in the number of after this table.) CS20 (in blue) dwellings to be built in is appropriate. Weston from around 6,913 to 5,136 in Weston urban area, 2011-2026. The Consultation Draft plan had referred to a figure of 12,000 dwellings for 2006-2026, but this was reduced in the Publication version due

76 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site to determination of a locally derived housing requirement. The main issue regarding the Severn Estuary is the same: potential disturbance , without mitigation, for birds; (see 6 th column). Policy CS28 While prediction of C Air pollution LSEs unlikely Disturbance of N/A N/A Projects as at September 2014 numbers is difficult at (Likely significant impacts (see note on wading birds and Promote best B will need this stage, it is likely that effect alone) unlikely to be water issues wildfowl in the practice (No to be a significant proportion significant (see after this table.) Severn Estuary, construction significant individual of the increased housing HRA Air due to increased techniques to effect) ly requirement would be at Quality noise and light ensure minimal assessed Weston urban area Appendix) and increased disruption. as part of (assuming the broad recreational the distribution would be pressures. Ensure planning similar to that for the (through process. former housing target. ) planning The policy still focuses conditions etc) new development on that key two key locations in construction Weston: Weston activities which Villages and the town cause centre and gateway. significant However it is likely that vibration and a significant proportion noise, such as would be on brownfield piling, is sites . While some of undertaken these could be between April regeneration of town and August to centre sites, some of avoid which are on the disturbance to seafront, these sites are wading birds largely allocated and wildfowl, if

77 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site already, and impacts are site is within likely to be mitigatable. 300m of (See columns 6 and 9). (guideline only) wading bird foraging zones.

Consider use of interpretation if necessary.

Policy CS29: Weston - Town centre Water Disturbance of N/A N/A Encourage and Projects super-Mare Town regeneration: major C Air pollution abstraction has wading birds and facilitate B will need retail-led development (Likely significant impacts been assessed wildfowl in the sustainable (No to be Centre in retail core; effect alone) unlikely to be as part of the Severn Estuary, modes of significant individual entertainment and significant (see Regional due to increased transport such effect) ly leisure uses, tourist HRA Air Spatial noise and light as public assessed facilities and Quality Strategy and increased transport, as part of accommodation at Appendix) Habitats recreational walking and the seafront; creation of an Regulations pressures. cycling. planning office quarter within the Assessment process. gateway area which Require best concluded that practice despite the construction amount of techniques to development ensure minimal proposed in disruption. Weston-super- Mare it won’t Ensure (through result in a likely planning significant conditions etc) effect on water that key abstraction. construction Further activities which specialist cause advice was significant

78 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site provided by the vibration and Environment noise, such as Agency which piling, is confirmed this. undertaken between April and August to avoid disturbance to wading birds and wildfowl, if site is within 300m of (guideline only) wading bird foraging zones.

Consider use of interpretation if necessary.

CS29 Publication As above As above As above As above As above N/A N/A As above As above As above Policy CS 29 Effectively as above. No As above As above LSEs unlikely As above N/A N/A The reference As above As above as at November 2013. changes are proposed (see note on to mitigation to adopted policy which water issues under policy is not fundamentally after this table.) CS20 (in blue) different to Consultation is appropriate. Draft version. The main issue regarding the Severn Estuary is the same: potential disturbance , without mitigation, for birds; (see 6th column).

79 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Policy CS29 This is a remitted policy C LSEs unlikely Disturbance of N/A N/A Promote best Projects as at September 2014. and it is difficult to (Likely significant Air pollution (see note on wading birds and practice B may comment at this stage effect alone) impacts water issues wildfowl in the construction (No need to on what the number of unlikely to be after this table.) Severn Estuary, techniques to significant be dwellings to be built at significant (see due to increased ensure minimal effect) individual Weston might be. HRA Air noise and light disruption. ly While the housing Quality and increased assessed increase for the district Appendix recreational Ensure (through as part of would be likely to mean pressures. planning the more dwellings at conditions etc) planning Weston, it is likely that a that key process. significant proportion construction would be on brownfield activities which sites . While some of cause these could be significant regeneration of town vibration and centre sites, some of noise, such as which are on the undertaken seafront, these sites are between April largely allocated and August to already, and impacts are avoid likely to be mitigatable. disturbance to (See columns 6 and 9). wading birds and wildfowl, if site is within 300m of (guideline only) wading bird foraging zones.

Consider use of interpretation if necessary.

80 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Policy CS30: Weston A major mixed use, Air pollution Water Disturbance of N/A N/A Encourage and Projects Urban Extension employment-led urban C impacts abstraction has wading birds and facilitate B will need extension will be (Likely significant unlikely to be been assessed wildfowl in the sustainable (No to be developed south-east of effect alone) significant (see as part of the Severn Estuary, modes of significant individual Weston-super-Mare. HRA Air Regional due to increased transport such effect) ly This will include 9,000 Quality Spatial noise and light as public assessed homes, 42ha of Appendix) Strategy and increased transport, as part of employment land along Habitats recreational walking and the with other necessary Regulations pressures. cycling. planning community, social and Assessment process. transport infrastructure which Require best to support the concluded that practice development. despite the construction amount of techniques to development ensure minimal proposed in disruption. Weston-super- Mare it won’t Ensure (through result in a likely planning significant conditions etc) effect on water that key abstraction. construction Further activities which specialist cause advice was significant provided by the vibration and Environment noise, such as Agency which piling, is confirmed this. undertaken generally between April and August to avoid disturbance to wading birds and wildfowl, if

81 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site site is within 300 m (guideline only) of wading bird foraging zones.

Consider use of interpretation if necessary.

CS30 Publication Employment–led As above As above As above As above N/A N/A As above As above As above Weston Villages development in two villages on mainly previously developed land at Weston airfield and Locking Parklands (the “Weston Villages”). To include total of 5,500 new homes and at least 37.7ha of B use employment land. Policy CS 30 The only change being As above As above LSEs unlikely Some potential for N/A N/A The mitigation As above As above as at November 2013. proposed to the adopted (see note on increased as at plan policy is a slight water issues recreational Consultation change in the number of after this table.) pressure and Draft stage , dwellings to be built at hence disturbance regarding Weston Villages from to birds. possible use of about 5,500 to about interpretation . 5,800. The Consultation is still relevant. Draft plan had referred to a figure of 9,000 dwellings for that area , but this was reduced in the Publication version .

82 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Arguably the HRA assessments at both Consultation Draft and Publication stages were unduly pessimistic in predicting disturbance impacts from development without mitigation, since the Weston Villages area is 2km from the Severn Estuary. However there is potential for increased recreational pressure, but also scope for mitigation for that; (see columns 6 and 9). Policy CS30 This is a remitted policy. Air pollution LSEs unlikely Some potential for N/A N/A Mitigation Projects as at September 2014. It is unknown at this C impacts (see note on increased regarding B will need stage whether the (Likely significant unlikely to be water issues recreational possible use of (No to be housing increase would effect alone) significant (see after this table.) pressure and interpretation . significant individual mean an increase in the HRA Air hence disturbance is still relevant. effect) ly number to be built at Quality to birds. assessed Weston Villages from Appendix) as part of the 5,800 referred to the above. However it is still planning likely to be far less than process. the figure of 9,000 dwellings that was in the Consultation Draft Core Strategy. The policy still refers to possible provision of a waste to energy plant, but air quality impacts are unlikely to be

83 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site significant. (See column 4). Weston Villages area is 2km from the Severn Estuary and potential for increased recreational pressure is limited, with scope for mitigation (see columns 6 and 9). Policy CS31: Market Proposals for N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A and Coastal Towns development at B Clevedon, Nailsea and (No significant Portishead will be effect) supported if they increase self- containment, ensure the availability of jobs and services for the town and surrounding catchments, and improve the town’s role as a service centre. CS31 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Clevedon, Nailsea and Portishead Policy CS 31 The only changes being C N/A N/A Theoretically, N/A N/A Require best B Projects as at November 2013. proposed to the adopted (Likely significant given that the practice (No will need plan policy are the effect alone) settlement limits of construction significant to be following changes in the Clevedon and techniques to effect individual number of dwellings to Portishead extend ensure minimal ly be built from 2006-2026 to the seafronts, disruption. assessed as follows: there could be as part of Clevedon: change from scope for seafront Ensure (through the 454 to 493; development with planning planning associated conditions etc) process.

84 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Nailsea: change from potential for that key 210 to 647; disturbance of construction Portishead: change from birds from activities which 3,051 to 3,040. The construction. cause policy at Consultation However much of significant Draft stage did not the development vibration and specify housing proposed in these noise, such as numbers, although they towns has already piling, is were given in the been built or has undertaken supporting text . consent, generally The adopted policy particularly at between April permits development Portishead on key and August to within settlement limits sites like the avoid at all three towns, and harbourside. disturbance to mixed use schemes However there wading birds adjacent to the could be some and wildfowl, if settlement boundary at increased site is within 300 Nailsea outside the recreation m (guideline Green Belt, subject to pressure, from only) of wading criteria. development at all bird foraging It is considered that, three towns and zones. without mitigation there associated may be potential for potential for Consider use of impacts which were not disturbance. . interpretation if identified in the earlier necessary. HRA work, but which can be mitigated. (See columns 6 and 9.) Policy CS31 The assumed housing C N/A N/A As above N/A N/A As above B Projects as at September 2014. increase could in theory (Likely significant (No may raise the number of effect alone) significant need to dwellings to be built at effect be these towns, particularly individual if it assumed that the ly broad distribution would assessed be similar to that for the as part of

85 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site 17,130 dwellings target. the However it is difficult to planning predict this precisely, or process. the split. The relevant issues are still likely to be some potential for disturbance to birds from possible recreation pressure, and to some extent from seafront development, but this is mitigatable. (See column 9) Policy CS32: Service Proposals for N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Villages development which B support or enhance their (No significant roles as local hubs for effect) community facilities and services, employment and affordable housing, including public transport will be supported. CS32 Publication Support for small scale As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A development within settlement boundaries which supports and enhances village’s role as local hub. Policy CS 32 No changes are As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November 2013. proposed to adopted policy. Latter differs from Consultation Draft version in allowing small scale residential or mixed use

86 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site developments outside settlement boundaries subject to criteria. However reference to small scale and fact that only one of the proposed Service Villages (Easton in Gordano/Pill) is adjacent to the Severn Estuary site suggests that LSEs are unlikely. The Sites and Policies Plan which would make any allocations in Service Villages is likely to be subject to its own HRA. Policy CS 32 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September 2014 proposed to adopted (No significant policy, and the blue text effect) above applies. The housing increase is unlikely to significantly affect the impact of the policy. Policy CS33: Smaller Proposals for N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Settlements and development within the B rural areas outside of (No significant Countryside. Service Villages will be effect) strictly controlled in order to protect their character and prevent unsustainable development. CS33 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

87 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Infill Villages, smaller settlements and countryside Policy CS 33 No changes are As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November 2013. proposed to adopted policy. Latter differs from Consultation Draft version in allowing some market housing within infill villages but restricted to one or two infill dwellings or small scale residential development within the settlement limits, subject to criteria. Reference to small scale and fact that only one of the proposed infill villages (Kewstoke) is adjacent to the Severn Estuary site suggests that LSEs are unlikely. Policy CS 33 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September 2014 proposed to adopted (No significant policy, and the blue text effect) above applies. The housing increase is unlikely to significantly affect the impact of the policy. Delivery Policies

88 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Policy CS34: Financial contributions N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Developer will be sought in the B form of a standardised (No significant Contributions to tariff scheme applied effect) Infrastructure. across the district to ensure the effective and timely delivery of the key infrastructure requirements to support new development. CS34 Publication Concerns mechanisms As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Infrastructure delivery for funding and delivery of infrastructural and development elements, with regard to contributions the Weston villages, Weston urban area and rest of district Policy CS 34 Effectively as above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Policy CS 34 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September 2014 proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which concerns effect) the collection of development contributions towards infrastructure, rather than development itself. The blue text above applies.

89 Severn Estuary Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 1 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land take Other Mitigation Category requir post Air Quality Water to wildlife from Measures mitigation ed? Quality European site Policy CS35: Implementation will take N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Implementation place as part of a co- B ordinated strategy, (No significant provided in step with the effect) necessary infrastructure, utilities and service provision needed to support and enable the development. CS35 is deleted in the N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Publication version CS35 is deleted in the N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A adopted plan, and no change is being proposed to that situation CS35 is deleted in the N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A adopted plan, and no change is being proposed to that situation

90 Screening Assessment Matrix for Mendip Limestone Grasslands SAC

Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Living within Environmental Limits Policy CS1: Renewable energy Mostly neutral. N/A N/A N/A N/A Use of Potentiall Addressing in development; e.g. C Some projects appropriate B y on Energy from Waste (Likely will need to be technology/design (No individual Climate Change Plant at Weston significant effect individually (through significant planning and Carbon urban extension, alone) assessed as conditions on effect) applicatio Reduction green infrastructure part of the planning consents ns. networks, planning or Environmental Energy sustainable process. Only Permits from from transport, of possible Environment waste enhancing/protecting significance if Agency) . plants biodiversity, re-use energy facilities may of previously were to be require developed land etc. located < 10km an HRA. from site. Only There is specific likely to reference to be scope energy from and waste plant is flexibility for Weston for urban proposal extension, s to within that include distance of detailed Uphill Cliff. mitigatio

2 Based on the Natural England Habitats Regulations Assessment of Local Development Documents by David Tyldesley, Jan 2009

91 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site n measure s, as necessar y. Policy CS1 of As above As above As above. N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above As above Publication Note: Weston Villages now version of Core replace Weston Strategy Urban Extension Policy CS1 as at Effectively as above. As above As above. N/A N/A N/A N/A As above. The As above As above November 2013. No changes are Note: Weston mitigation as at proposed to adopted Villages now Consultation Draft policy which is not replace Weston stage is still fundamentally Urban relevant, different to Extension Consultation Draft version. Has addition of need for development to demonstrate water efficiency measures. Policy refers to creation of waste to energy facilities at Weston Villages. Policy CS1 as at No changes are C Mostly neutral. N/A N/A N/A Greater Use of Potentiall September 2014. proposed to adopted (Likely Some projects horseshoe appropriate B y on policy which significant effect will need to be bats are a technology/design (No individual promotes reducing alone) individually qualifying (through significant planning carbon emissions The assumed assessed as species. conditions on effect) applicatio and tackling climate housing increase part of the Potential for planning consents ns. change. There is is unlikely to planning renewable or Environmental Energy reference to significantly alter process. Only energy to Permits from from reduction/recycling of possible include wind waste

92 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site of waste, and the impacts of this significance if turbines; Environment plants creation of waste to policy. energy facilities bats could Agency) may energy facilities in were to be be at risk This mitigation is require Weston villages located < 10km from these, still relevant. an HRA. from site. Only although Locational There is specific horseshoe control. likely to reference to bats may be be scope energy from at lower risk . and waste plant is Natural flexibility for Weston England has for Villages, within produced proposal that distance of interim s to Uphill Cliff. guidance, include latest detailed TIN051 2014 mitigatio n measure s, as necessar y. Policy CS2: Sustainable design N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Delivering and construction. B B Policy sets targets (No significant (No Sustainable e.g. for on site effect) significant Design and renewable energy, effect) Construction. Code for Sustainable homes, BREEAM ratings etc CS2 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above As above Policy CS 2 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to

93 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Consultation Draft version. Addition of requirement to apply best practice in sustainable urban drainage systems. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS2 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A Reference to Strict locational B Project September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant renewable control for wind (No level policy, which effect) energy turbines. significant HRA promotes The assumed generation Natural England effect) may be sustainable design housing increase could include has produced needed. and construction. is unlikely to wind turbines interim guidance No LSEs were significantly alter which could regarding bats predicted at any the impacts of this potentially and wind stage of HRA.. . policy.. impact on turbines, latest greater TIN051 2014 horseshoe bats, a qualifying species for this site. Bats are known to be at risk of mortality from wind turbines, although horseshoe bats may be at lower risk .

94 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Policy CS3: Sets out the N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Environmental Sequential Test for B B development with (No significant (No Risk regard to flood effect) significant Management. zones. effect) CS3 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A Environmental Impacts and Flood Risk Assessment Policy CS 3 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Reference to NPPF rather than PPS25. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS3 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which effect) requires acceptable The assumed mitigation for housing increase environmental is unlikely to impacts of significantly alter development, and the impacts of this following the policy.. sequential test regarding flooding.

95 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS4: Maintain and B N/A N/A N/A N/A Part 5 of Planting needs to N/A Nature enhance biodiversity (No significant policy refers take into account B (No within the district. effect) to tree the possible risk significant Conservation. planting. of impact on effect) Inappropriate interest features planting of European could impact Sites. on features like grasslands, but policy is positive for biodiversity overall. CS4 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above As above N/A Policy CS 4 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version, but refers to well targetted woodland creation, reducing the likelihood of inappropriate tree planting. Documents such as Green Infrastructure Strategy and

96 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Biodiversity and Trees SPD are referred to in supporting text . No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS4 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant policy which effect) promotes maintenance and enhancement of biodiversity. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS5: Protect and enhance N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Landscape and the character, B B distinctiveness, (No significant (No the Historic diversity and quality effect) significant Environment. of North Somerset’s effect) landscape and townscape. CS5 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A Policy CS 5 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Reference to heritage assets rather than just assets. No LSEs

97 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS5 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant policy which effect) promotes protection and enhancement of the landscape. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS6: Protect the existing N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A North Somerset’s Green Belt. B B (No significant (No Green Belt effect) significant effect) CS6 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A Policy CS 6 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. A difference is that it no longer refers to possibility of taking land out of the Green Belt in exceptional circumstances, by local review. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

98 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Policy CS 6 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant (No policy, which states effect). significant that the Green Belt While this is a effect) will remain remitted policy, it unchanged. is envisaged that No LSEs were the assumed predicted at any housing increase stage of HRA. can be met within the existing spatial strategy which does not include change to the Green Belt.

Also the SAC component sites are not near the Green Belt. Policy CS7: Support for Mostly neutral. N/A N/A N/A N/A Use of Potentiall Planning for sustainable C Some projects appropriate B y on management of (Likely will need to be technology/design (No individual Waste in North waste, recovery of significant effect individually (through significant planning Somerset energy from waste in alone) assessed as conditions on effect) applicatio line with Joint Waste part of the planning consents ns. Core Strategy planning or Environmental Energy policies process. Only Permits from from of possible Environment Waste significance if Agency) . Plants energy facilities may were to be require located < 10km an HRA. from site. (See There is HRA air quality likely to appendix) be scope and

99 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site flexibility for proposal s to include detailed mitigatio n measure s, as necessar y. CS7 Publication As above As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above As above Planning for Waste Policy CS 7 as at Effectively as above As above . As above N/A N/A N/A N/A As above. The As above As above November 2013. No changes are mitigation as at proposed to adopted Consultation Draft policy which is not stage is still fundamentally relevant. different to Consultation Draft version. Refers to Sites and Policies DPD rather than “a Development Management DPD”. Policy CS7 as at No changes are C Mostly neutral. N/A N/A N/A N/A Use of B Potentiall September 2014. proposed to adopted (Likely Some projects appropriate (No y on policy which significant effect will need to be technology/design significant individual promotes alone) . individually (through effect) planning prevention/minimisat The assumed assessed as conditions on applicatio ion of waste, design housing increase part of the planning consents ns. for ease of waste is unlikely to planning or Environmental Energy collection, and use significantly alter process. Permits from from

100 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site of Joint Waste Core the impacts of this Only of Environment Waste Strategy policies and policy. possible Agency) Plants development significance if This mitigation is may management energy facilities still relevant. require policies on waste. were to be an HRA. Promotes recovery located < 10km There is of energy from from site. (See likely to waste in line with HRA air quality be scope Joint Waste Core appendix) and Strategy policies flexibility for proposal s to include detailed mitigatio n measure s, as necessar y. Policy CS8: Provision will be Mostly neutral. N/A N/A N/A N/A Use of Potentiall Minerals made for North C Some projects appropriate B y on Somerset to (likely will need to be technology. (No individual Planning in North contribute towards significant effect individually significant planning Somerset approximately 40% alone) assessed as Locational control effect) applicatio of the West of part of the of quarrying, ns. There England’s planning leaving adequate is likely aggregates process. distance between to be requirement. The quarry and scope council will seek to Unlikely to be European site and maintain a land bank significant air flexibility for crushed rock of pollution for at least 10 years. impacts (see proposal HRA air quality s to appendix) include

101 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site detailed mitigatio n measure s, as necessar y. CS8 Publication As above As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above As above Minerals Planning Policy CS 8 as at Effectively as above As above As above N/A N/A It is N/A As above . The As above As above November 2013. No changes are considered mitigation as at proposed to adopted that this entry Consultation Draft policy which is not should be stage is still fundamentally altered from relevant. different to N/A to “very Consultation Draft unlikely”. The version. The likelihood of addition that was adverse made at impact from Modifications stage quarrying on to quantify the this SAC is crushed rock very limited. apportionment for (It would only North Somerset in be probable if tonnes , did not alter habitat , such the earlier HRA as semi conclusions. natural dry grasslands, was lost due to direct land take from the SAC itself from quarrying ,

102 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site and being a European site that is extremely unlikely to occur.) Policy CS8 as at No changes are C Mostly neutral. N/A N/A Very unlikely; N/A Use of Potentiall September 2014. proposed to adopted (likely Some projects (see above) appropriate B y on policy which sets significant effect will need to be technology. (No individual out the requirement alone) . individually significant planning for crushed rock The assumed assessed as Locational control effect) applicatio provision, and housing increase part of the of quarrying, ns. There maintenance of a is unlikely to planning leaving adequate is likely landbank, and significantly alter process. distance between to be promotes protection the impacts of this quarry and scope of mineraL policy.. Unlikely to be European site . and resources through significant air flexibility mineral pollution This mitigation is for safeguarding areas.. impacts (see still relevant. proposal HRA air quality s to appendix) include detailed mitigatio n measure s, as necessar y. Policy CS9: Safeguard, improve N/A N/A Promoting an N/A N/A The NSC Green Potentiall Green and enhance the C accessible green Infrastructure B y on existing network of (Likely infrastructure Strategy is likely (No individual Infrastructure green infrastructure. significant effect network could to encourage significant planning alone) lead to extra provision of effect) applicatio pressure from opportunities for ns. increased visitor green numbers – eg. infrastructure

103 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site recreational elsewhere, such impacts including as public open trampling space provision, (physical which is likely to damage), erosion, provide collection/digging, alternative fires and litter on locations for Mendip Limestone recreation . Grasslands SAC.

CS9 Publication As above As above N/A N/A As above N/A N/A As above As above As above Policy CS 9 as at Effectively as As above As above N/A As above N/A N/A It is considered As above As above November 2013. above. No changes that the following are proposed to is more adopted policy which appropriate: is not fundamentally Promotion of different to opportunities for Consultation Draft informal version. Includes recreation reference to tree elsewhere on less planting. Reference sensitive sites to Green through policies Infrastructure SPD in and proposals for supporting text. provision of green infrastructure and public open space provision; eg. In DPDS, and SPDs.(For example, the Weston Villages SPD proposes provision of extensive green infrastructure at

104 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Weston Villages, including a network of green corridors with multifunctional recreational benefits including a strategic cycleway/footpath network, and community parks.) Encourage provision of interpretation boards at the SAC sites, encouraging restriction of walking to established public footpaths Policy CS9 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant (No policy. Concerns effect) significant safeguarding, It is considered effect) improving and that the policy has enhancing the been too existing network of pessimistically green infrastructure. assessed at Refers to protection earlier stages of and enhancement of HRA. Policy biodiversity. refers to protection and enhancement of biodiversity.

105 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Reference to green infrastructure is one of further provision, which would help to provide alternative areas to the SAC for recreation. Hence it is considered that a B categorisation is actually appropriate. Policy CS10: Encouragement for Transport N/A Potentially N/A N/A Encourage and Potentiall Transport and travel management C schemes which increased number facilitate B y on policies and (Likely would of visitors. sustainable (No individual Movement development significant effect significantly modes of significant planning proposals that alone) increase traffic transport such as effect) applicatio encourage an on sections of public transport, ns. improved and A38 and A371 walking and integrated transport alongside cycling. network and allow component site for wide choice of are potentially transport modes. significant with The NSC Green Lists proposed respect to Infrastructure transport schemes airborne Strategy will over the plan period. nitrogen identify deposition (see opportunities for HRA air quality green appendix) infrastructure elsewhere such as public open space provision, which is likely to

106 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site provide alternative locations for recreation .

CS10 Publication As above AS above As above N/A As above N/A N/A As above As above As above Transportation and Movement Policy CS 10 as at Effectively as C As above N/A As above N/A N/A Encourage and As above As above November 2013. above. No changes (Likely facilitate are proposed to significant effect sustainable adopted policy which alone) modes of is not fundamentally transport such as different to public transport, Consultation Draft walking and version. Includes cycling. addition of Regarding requirement for potential for transport schemes increased visitor to contribute towards numbers the carbon reduction, mitigation re and support policy CS9 is movement of freight appropriate. by rail, which should have beneficial environmental effects. List of transport schemes is the same except for addition of Airfield Bridge Link (ABL) between Weston Airfield and Winterstoke Rd, and

107 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Weston Southern Rail Chord (WSRC). ABL is a more direct road link so should help reduce distance travelled and hence emissions. WSRC should help promote train rather than car transport which should have environmental benefits. Policy CS 10 as at As above. No C Transport N/A Promotion of an N/A N/A Encourage and B Potentiall September 2014. changes are (Likely schemes which improved and facilitate (No y on proposed to adopted significant effect would integrated sustainable significant individual policy, which alone) significantly transport network modes of effect) planning concerns transport increase traffic , along with transport such as applicatio and transport on sections of housing increase, public transport, ns schemes. A38 and A371 could theoretically walking and alongside mean increased cycling. component site number of visitors Promotion of are potentially to the component opportunities for significant with sites, but location informal respect to of component recreation airborne sites could mean elsewhere on less nitrogen this would be sensitive sites deposition (see limited. through policies HRA air quality and proposals for appendix). The provision of green housing infrastructure and increase could public open space lead to provision; eg. In increased DPDS, and traffic. SPDs.(For

108 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site example, the Weston Villages SPD proposes provision of extensive green infrastructure at Weston Villages, including a network of green corridors with multifunctional recreational benefits including a strategic cycleway/footpath network, and community parks.) Encourage provision of interpretation boards at the SAC sites, encouraging restriction of walking to established public footpaths

Policy CS11: Provision of C Any parking N/A N/A N/A N/A Encourage and Potentiall Parking adequate car (Likely measures facilitate B y on parking to meet the significant effect which could sustainable (No individual needs of anticipated alone) increase traffic modes of significant planning users. on section of transport such as effect) applicatio A38 and A371 public transport, ns. alongside

109 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site component site walking and are potentially cycling. significant with regard to airborne nitrogen deposition (see HRA air quality appendix) CS11 Publication As above As above As above N/A N/A N/A. N/A AS above As above As above Policy CS 11 as at Effectively as As above As above N/A Potentially N/A N/A Encourage and As above As above November 2013. above. No changes increased number facilitate are proposed to of visitors. sustainable adopted policy which modes of is not fundamentally transport such as different to public transport, Consultation Draft walking and version. Only cycling. difference is that Regarding policy refers to Sites potential for and Policies DPD increased visitor rather than numbers the Development mitigation re Management DPD. policy CS9 is appropriate. Policy CS 11 as at No changes are C Any parking N/A Potentially N/A N/A Encourage and Potentiall September 2014. proposed to adopted (Likely measures increased number facilitate B y on policy. Provision of significant effect which could of visitors, sustainable (No individual adequate car alone) increase traffic particularly with modes of significant planning parking to meet the on section of the assumed transport such as effect) applicatio needs of anticipated A38 and A371 housing increase. public transport, ns. users. alongside However the walking and component site policy is not cycling. are potentially location specific, Regarding significant with and does not potential for

110 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site regard to specifically increased visitor airborne allocate parking numbers the nitrogen near the SAC mitigation re deposition (see sites. policy CS10 is HRA air quality appropriate. appendix) Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities Policy CS12: High quality N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Achieving High architecture and B urban design will be (No significant Quality Design expected from all effect) and Place Making developments.

CS12 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 12 as at Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. above. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. While some paragraphs differ the thrust of the policy is on promoting well designed building and places, and there is still reference to environmental sustainability. No

111 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS 12 as at No changes are C N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (Likely (No policy. significant effect significant Promotion of well alone) effect) designed building and places. Includes reference to environmental sustainability. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS13: Provision of 17,750 Weston urban Water Increased N/A N/A The NSC Green B Potentiall Scale of New dwellings across the C extension abstraction has population could Infrastructure (No y on district over the plan (Likely located been assessed lead to extra Strategy is likely significant individual Housing. period. 3000 significant effect generally over as part of the pressure from to identify effect) planning dwellings in Weston- alone) 2km from Regional increased visitor opportunities for applicatio super-Mare urban nearest Spatial numbers; eg. green ns. area and 9,000 component site Strategy recreational infrastructure dwellings as an (Uphill Cliff). Habitats impacts including elsewhere such urban extension to Traffic Regulations trampling as public open Weston-super-Mare. emissions Assessment (physical space provision, The remainder of unlikely to be which damage), erosion, which is likely to 5,750 dwellings will significant (see concluded that collection/digging, provide be met by land from HRA air quality despite the fires and litter on alternative existing identified appendix) amount of Mendip Limestone locations for sources and no development Grasslands SAC. recreation. additional allocation proposed in will be required in North the plan period. Somerset it Encourage and won’t result in a facilitate likely significant sustainable effect on water modes of

112 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site abstraction. transport such as Further public transport, specialist walking and advice was cycling. provided by the Environment Agency which confirmed this. CS13 Publication Weston will be focus As above As above, but As above As above As above N/A As above As above As above of new housing urban development . extension now Outside Weston replaced by most additional Weston development to Villages occur at Clevedon, Portishead and Nailsea, on existing allocations, within their existing settlement boundaries, or in Nailsea at allocations outside Green Belt. Priority to previously developed land. Within the Service villages small scale infill development or site allocations can occur. All new housing to not conflict with nature conservation policies Policy CS 13 Proposed change in As above As above LSEs unlikely As above As above As above It is considered As above As above housing number (see note on that the following

113 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site as at November from the minimum of water issues is more 2013. 14,000 in adopted after this table.) appropriate: plan to minimum of Promotion of 17,130 dwellings opportunities for within North informal Somerset 2006 - recreation 2026 . (Note: while elsewhere on less this is an increase, sensitive sites the 17,130 is less through policies than the 17,750 and proposals for dwellings at the provision of green Consultation Draft infrastructure and stage, referred to in public open space black above. The provision; eg. In main issue regarding DPDS, and the Mendip SPDs.(For Limestone example, the Grasslands site is Weston Villages the same (possible SPD proposes recreational impact provision of on habitats) . extensive green infrastructure at Weston Villages, including a network of green corridors with multifunctional recreational benefits including a strategic cycleway/footpath network, and community parks.) Encourage provision of

114 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site interpretation boards encouraging restriction of walking to established public footpaths.. Policy CS13 as at This policy, on the Weston urban LSEs unlikely Increased housing N/A N/A Promotion of B Potentiall September 2014. housing number, C extension (see note on could lead to extra opportunities for (No y on was remitted for re- (Likely located water issues pressure from informal significant individual examination. The significant effect generally over after this table.) increased visitor recreation effect) planning Inspector supported alone) 2km from numbers; eg. elsewhere on less applicatio an increase in the nearest recreational sensitive sites ns. housing requirement component site impacts including through policies from 17,130 to (Uphill Cliff). trampling and proposals for 20,985 for 2006- Traffic (physical provision of green 2026. emissions damage), erosion, infrastructure and unlikely to be collection/digging, public open space significant (see fires and litter on provision. HRA air quality Mendip Limestone eg. In DPDS, and appendix) Grasslands SAC. SPDs.(For example, the Weston Villages SPD proposes provision of significant green infrastructure at Weston Villages, including a network of green corridors with multifunctional

Encourage provision of interpretation

115 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site boards encouraging restriction of walking to established public footpaths..

Policy CS14: New housing Weston urban Water Increased N/A N/A The NSC Green B Potentiall Distribution of development will be C extension abstraction has population could Infrastructure (No y on concentrated in (Likely located been assessed lead to increased Strategy is likely significant individual New Housing Weston-super-Mare. significant effect generally over as part of the visitor numbers to identify effect) planning At Clevedon, alone) 2km from Regional resulting in opportunities for applicatio Portishead and nearest Spatial recreational green ns. Nailsea residential component site Strategy impacts. infrastructure development will be (Uphill Cliff). Habitats elsewhere such acceptable within Traffic Regulations as public open their existing emissions Assessment space provision, settlement unlikely to be which which is likely to boundaries on significant (see concluded that provide brownfield land. HRA air quality despite the alternative Within the Service appendix) amount of locations for Villages small scale development recreation. infill development proposed in may be appropriate North Encourage and where it will support Somerset it facilitate the retention of won’t result in a sustainable existing services. likely significant modes of Elsewhere housing effect on water transport such as development will not abstraction. public transport, be permitted unless Further walking and it is for essential specialist cycling. workers in rural advice was enterprises, provided by the replacement Environment dwellings or

116 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site affordable housing Agency which need. confirmed this. CS14 Publication Weston will be focus As above As above but As above As above N/A N/A As above As above N/A of new housing urban development . extension now Outside Weston replaced by most additional Weston development to Villages occur at Clevedon, Portishead and Nailsea, on existing allocations, within their existing settlement boundaries, or in Nailsea at allocations outside Green Belt. Priority to previously developed land. Within the Service Villages small scale infill development or site allocations can occur. All new housing to not conflict with nature conservation policies Policy CS 14 Proposed policy As above As above LSEs unlikely As above N/A N/A As in blue text for As above N/A as at November wording is (see note on policy CS13 . unchanged from the water issues 2013. adopted plan except after this table.) for the housing figures in the table. Weston will be focus of new housing

117 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site development. Outside Weston most additional development to occur at Clevedon, Portishead and Nailsea, on existing allocations, within their existing settlement boundaries, or in Nailsea at allocations outside Green Belt. Priority to previously developed land. At Service Villages small scale infill development or site allocations can occur. All new housing to not conflict with nature conservation policies. While the proposed distribution of the housing has changed slightly from the Consultation Draft stage, mainly due to a reduction in the amount of housing proposed at Weston Villages, the main

118 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site issue regarding the Mendip Limestone Grasslands site is the same (possible recreational impact on habitats) . Policy CS14 As above. Weston LSEs unlikely Increased N/A N/A Promotion of B Potentiall as at September It is assumed that, C Villages (see note on population could opportunities for (No y on the increased (Likely located water issues lead to increased informal significant individual 2014. housing significant effect generally over after this table.) visitor numbers recreation effect) planning requirement would alone) 2km from and potential for elsewhere on less applicatio have a similar broad nearest recreational sensitive sites ns. distribution to the component site impacts including through policies 17,130 dwellings in (Uphill Cliff). trampling and proposals for the November 2013 Traffic (physical provision of green changes. emissions damage), erosion, infrastructure and As before, the main unlikely to be collection/digging, public open space issue is the possible significant (see fires and litter. provision; eg. In recreational impact HRA air quality DPDS, and on habitats, and the appendix) SPDs.(For mitigation in column example, the 9 is still relevant. Weston Villages SPD proposes provision of significant green infrastructure at Weston Villages, including a network of green corridors with multifunctional recreational benefits including a strategic cycleway/footpath network, and

119 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site community parks.) Encourage provision of interpretation boards encouraging restriction of walking to established public footpaths. Policy CS15: The Council will N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Mixed and seek to ensure a B genuine mix of (No significant Balanced housing types within effect) Communities existing and future communities. CS15 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 15 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS15 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted B policy which (No significant 2014. promotes a genuine effect)

120 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site mix of housing types within existing and future communities. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS16: On-site affordable N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Affordable housing will be B sought to meet local (No significant Housing needs on all effect) residential developments of 15 dwellings or more (or site of 0.5ha or above). On other sites the Council will seek to negotiate a financial contribution towards the provision of affordable housing. CS16 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 16 Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November No changes are proposed to adopted 2013. policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. The addition made at modifications stage to widen the definition of

121 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site affordable housing to include affordable rented did not have significant implications for HRA. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS16 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted B policy which (No significant 2014. promotes provision effect) of on-site affordable housing on all residential developments of 10 dwellings or more (or sites of 0.3ha or above). On sites of 5-9 dwellings the Council will seek to negotiate a financial contribution towards the provision of affordable housing. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS17: Housing schemes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Residential Sites for 100% affordable B housing to meet

122 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Providing local need within (No significant Affordable small rural effect) communities will be Housing Only supported provided it meets certain criteria. Specific sites may also be allocated in W-s-M, Portishead, Nailsea and Clevedon and the service villages for 100% affordable housing to meet an identified local need. CS17 Publication Housing schemes As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Rural Exceptions for 100% affordable housing to meet Schemes local need within small rural communities will be supported provided it meets certain criteria. Policy CS 17 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

123 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Policy CS17 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted B policy . It promotes (No significant 2014, Rural provision of housing effect) Exceptions schemes for 100% Schemes. affordable housing It is unlikely that to meet local needs housing schemes within small rural of a scale communities subject appropriate for a to criteria, including rural location one giving priority to would have sites within significant effects settlement on European boundary, and one Sites, unless they on scale being were actually appropriate for sited on them location. which is most Also states that unlikely to be rural exceptions permitted. schemes will be Note that acceptable adjacent planning to the settlement applications boundaries of would be likely to Service Villages and be subject to Infill Villages, and policies on elsewhere adjacent biodiversity to main body of settlement, but not in the Green Belt, unless justified by very special circumstances. Policy CS18: Provision will be N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Gypsies and made for an B additional 36 (No significant Travellers and residential and 10 effect)

124 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Travelling Show transit pitches for People Gypsies and travellers for the period 2006 – 2011. CS18 Publication Sets out As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A considerations for determination of locations for sites for Gypsies, travellers and travelling show people Policy CS 18 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS18 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted B policy, which sets (No significant 2014 out considerations effect) for determination of locations for sites for Gypsies, travellers and travelling show people. This includes preference for brownfield sites. No LSEs were

125 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS19: The Council will N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Green seek to protect B green (No significant Wedges/Strategic wedges/strategic effect) Gaps. gaps to help retain the separate identity, character or landscape setting of settlements. CS19 Publication As above, but As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Strategic gaps reference to strategic gaps, not green wedges Policy CS 19 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS19 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which effect) 2014 promotes protection of strategic gaps to help retain the separate identity,

126 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site character or landscape setting of settlements. Delivering a Prosperous Economy Policy CS20: Employment-led Weston urban N/A Increased N/A N/A The NSC Green B N/A Supporting a strategy to both C extension population could Infrastructure (No deliver significant (Likely located lead to increased Strategy is likely significant Successful employment significant effect generally over visitor numbers to identify effect) Economy development and to alone) 2km from potentially having opportunities for ensure that new nearest recreational green residential component site impacts. infrastructure development is (Uphill Cliff). elsewhere such provided in Traffic as public open association with emissions space provision, employment unlikely to be which is likely to opportunities. The significant (see provide Core Strategy HRA air quality alternative provides for around appendix) locations for 29,500 jobs recreation . Supporting text suggests indicative employment requirement for B1- B8 uses would include 61 ha at Weston Urban Extension. CS20 Publication The Core Strategy As above As above but N/A As above N/A N/A As above As above N/A seeks to provide for urban at least 10,100 extension now additional jobs. replaced by Supporting text Weston suggests indicative Villages

127 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site employment land allocations (B1-B8 uses) to be as in adopted Replacement Local Plan, plus about 38ha at Weston Villages. Policy CS 20 The policy is not As above As above As above As above N/A N/A As in blue text for As above As above as at November proposed to change policy CS13 from the adopted 2013. plan version. It states that the Core Strategy seeks to provide for at least 10,100 additional jobs, which is less than at Consultation Draft stage, with consequentially lower employment land implications. As with the Consultation Draft stage, a consequence of employment development could be to attract more people into the district, and the main issue regarding the Mendip Limestone Grasslands site is the same ; (possible recreational impact on habitats) .

128 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Policy CS20 No changes are C Weston urban LSEs unlikely Employment N/A N/A Promotion of B N/A as at September proposed to adopted (Likely extension (see note on development opportunities for (No policy, which states significant effect located water issues could attract informal significant 2014 that the Core alone) generally over after this table.) people to live in recreation effect) Strategy seeks to This concerns 2km from the district and elsewhere on less provide for at least potential for nearest potentially lead to sensitive sites 10,100 additional disturbance, but, component site increased visitor through policies jobs, which is less this is mitigatable; (Uphill Cliff). numbers and and proposals for than at Consultation see columns 6 Traffic recreational provision of green Draft stage, with and 9). emissions impacts, such as infrastructure and consequentially unlikely to be trampling public open space lower employment significant (see (physical provision; eg. In land implications. HRA air quality damage), erosion, DPDS, and appendix) collection/digging, SPDs.(For As indicated above, fires and litter. example, the a consequence of Weston Villages employment SPD proposes development could provision of be to attract more extensive green people into the infrastructure at district, and the main Weston Villages, issue regarding the including a Mendip Limestone network of green Grasslands site is corridors with the same ; (possible multifunctional recreational impact recreational on habitats) . benefits including a strategic There could be an in cycleway/footpath combination effect network, and with the housing community increase, regarding parks.) this. However Encourage impacts should be provision of mitigatable; (see interpretation column 9). boards

129 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site encouraging restriction of walking to established public footpaths. Policy CS21: Identifies retail N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Retail Hierarchy hierarchy across the B district. (No significant and Provision. effect)

CS21 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 21 As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A as at November Effectively as above. No changes 2013. are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS21 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B N/A as at September proposed to adopted B (No policy, which (No significant significant 2014 Identifies retail effect) effect) hierarchy across the district. Retail centres are unlikely to be located in locations affecting the SAC sites.

130 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Policy CS22: Supports visitor N/A N/A Increased N/A N/A The NSC Green Potentiall Tourism Strategy facilities and C population could Infrastructure B y on accommodation (Likely lead to increased Strategy is likely (No individual across the district significant effect visitor numbers to identify significant planning provided they meet alone) resulting in opportunities for effect) applicatio certain criteria. recreational green ns. impacts. infrastructure elsewhere such as public open space provision, which is likely to provide alternative locations for recreation .

CS22 Publication As above As above N/A N/A As above N/A N/A As above As above As above Policy CS 22 Effectively as As above As above As above As above As above As above It is considered As above As as at November above. No changes that the following above are proposed to is more 2013. adopted policy which appropriate: is not fundamentally Promotion of different to opportunities for Consultation Draft informal version The main recreation issue regarding the elsewhere on less Mendip Limestone sensitive sites Grasslands site is through policies the same ; (possible and proposals for recreational impact provision of green on habitats) . infrastructure and public open space provision ; eg. In DPDS, and

131 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site SPDs. Encourage provision of interpretation boards encouraging restriction of walking to established public footpaths

Policy CS22 No changes are C N/A N/A Increased N/A N/A As above. This as at September proposed to adopted (Likely population could mitigation is still B Potentiall policy, which significant effect lead to increased relevant. (No y on 2014 supports new, alone) visitor numbers significant individual improved and Mainly concerns resulting in effect) planning replacement visitor scope for potentially greater applicatio and tourist facilities increased visitor likelihood of ns. and accommodation pressure, but this recreational across the district is mitigatable. impacts. provided they meet certain criteria. Criteria include appropriate scale and no adverse implications for environment, and (for Weston) need to comply with sequential approach giving priority to town centre or seafront sites. Policy CS23: Proposals will be N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Bristol required to B demonstrate the (No significant satisfactory effect)

132 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site International resolution of Airport environmental issues, including the impact of growth on surrounding communities and surface access infrastructure. CS23 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Bristol Airport Policy CS 23 Effectively as As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS23 No changes are Air pollution LSEs unlikely N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted B impacts (see note on B policy, which (No significant unlikely to be water issues (No 2014 requires proposals effect) significant (see after this table.) significant for development at HRA Air effect) the airport to Quality demonstrate the Appendix) satisfactory resolution of environmental issues, including the impact of growth on surrounding communities and

133 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site surface access infrastructure. Policy CS24: Identified land will Royal Portbury N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Royal Portbury continue to be B Dock located > safeguarded for port (No significant 10 km from Dock uses, subject to effect) site, unlikely to demonstrable need have significant for those uses that effect cannot be accommodated elsewhere within the existing port estate. Further expansion of the port within North Somerset is not supported. CS24 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 24 Effectively as above. As above As above N/A As above N/A N/A N/A As above As above as at November No changes are proposed to adopted 2013. policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version; (only a difference in the name of the site allocations document referred to.) No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS24 No changes are Royal Portbury N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A proposed to adopted B Dock located > policy, which 10 km from

134 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site as at September continues to (No significant site, unlikely to 2014 safeguard identified effect) have significant land at Court House effect . (See Air Farm near Royal Quality Portbury Dock for Appendix) port uses, subject to demonstrable need for those uses that cannot be accommodated elsewhere within the existing port estate. Further expansion of the port within North Somerset is not supported. Ensuring Safe and Healthy Communities Policy CS25: Provision of N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Children, Young educational facilities. B (No significant People and effect) Higher Education

CS25 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 25 Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A as at November No changes are proposed to adopted 2013. policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs

135 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS25 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted B B policy, which seeks (No significant (No 2014 educational effect) significant provision where effect) local provision will be inadequate to meet the needs of new residential developments. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS26: Requires Health N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Supporting Impact Assessment B (HIA) on all large (No significant Healthy Living scale developments, effect) and the Provision Joint working with of Health Care health providers to Facilities. deliver a district wide network of health facilities, reduce health inequalities in the district, encourage development that promotes active lifestyles. CS26 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 26 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A above. No changes

136 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site as at November are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version.

Policy CS26 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant (No policy, which effect) significant 2014 supports strategies effect) which increase and improve health services, promote healthier lifestyles and aim to reduce health inequalities. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS27: Provision of sport, N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Sport, Recreation recreation and B community facilities (No significant and Community effect) Facilities.

CS27 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 27 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to

137 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Consultation Draft version.

Policy CS27 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant (No policy, which effect) significant 2014 promotes additional effect) provision of sport, recreation and community facilities where local provision is inadequate to meet projected needs and standards. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Area Policies

Policy CS28: W-s-M will be the Impact from N/A Potential extra N/A N/A Encourage and N/A Weston-super- primary focus for C traffic unlikely pressure from facilitate B development within (Likely to be increased visitor sustainable (No Mare North Somerset. The significant effect significant. (see numbers; eg. modes of significant town will alone) HRA air quality recreational transport such as effect) accommodate Appendix D) impacts including public transport, 12,000 new trampling walking and dwellings and (physical cycling. 10,000 new jobs damage), erosion, between 2006-2026 collection/digging, The NSC Green as part of an fires and litter Infrastructure employment-led Strategy is likely strategy to deliver to identify improved self- opportunities for containment and green reduced out- infrastructure

138 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site commuting over the elsewhere such plan period. as public open space provision, which is likely to provide alternative locations for recreation .

CS28 Publication W-s-M will be the As above As above. N/A As above As above N/A As above As above N/A primary focus for Note: Weston development within urban North Somerset. The extension now town will replaced by accommodate Weston around 5,850 Villages additional new dwellings with approx 10,500 employment opportunities between 2010-2026 as part of an employment-led strategy to deliver improved self- containment and reduced out- commuting over the plan period. Policy CS 28 The only change Impact from N/A Potential extra N/A N/A It is considered N/A as at November being proposed to C traffic unlikely pressure from that the following B the adopted plan to be increased visitor is more 2013. policy is a change in significant. (see numbers; eg. appropriate:

139 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site the number of (Likely HRA air quality recreational Promotion of (No dwellings to be built significant effect Appendix D) impacts including opportunities for significant in Weston from alone) trampling informal effect) around 6,913 to (physical recreation 5,136, and a change damage), erosion, elsewhere on less in the period for that collection/digging, sensitive sites to occur from 2011- fires and litter. through policies 2026 to 2013-2026. and proposals for The Consultation provision of green Draft plan had infrastructure and referred to a figure public open space of 12,000 dwellings provision; eg. In for 2006-2026, but DPDS, and this was reduced in SPDs. Encourage the Publication provision of version due to interpretation determination of a boards locally derived encouraging housing restriction of requirement. The walking to main issue regarding established public the Mendip footpaths Limestone Grasslands site is the same ; (possible recreational impact on habitats) . Policy CS28 While prediction of Impact from N/A Potential extra N/A N/A Promotion of N/A as at September numbers is difficult C traffic unlikely pressure from opportunities for B at this stage, it is (Likely to be increased visitor informal (No 2014 likely that a significant effect significant. (see numbers; eg. recreation significant significant proportion alone) HRA air quality recreational elsewhere on less effect) of the increased Appendix D) impacts including sensitive sites housing requirement trampling through policies would be at Weston (physical and proposals for urban area, damage), erosion, provision of green

140 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site (assuming the broad collection/digging, infrastructure and distribution would be fires and litter on public open space similar to that for the Mendip Limestone provision; eg. In former housing Grasslands SAC. DPDS, and target). The policy SPDs. still focuses new Encourage development on two provision of key locations in interpretation Weston: Weston boards promoting Villages and the restriction of town centre and walking to gateway. However established public the main issue footpaths. regarding the Mendip Limestone Grasslands site is the same ; (possible recreational impact on habitats) . Policy CS29: Town centre Impact from N/A Potential extra N/A N/A Encourage and N/A Weston-super- regeneration: major C traffic unlikely pressure from facilitate B retail-led (Likely to be increased visitor sustainable (No Mare Town development in retail significant effect significant. (see numbers; modes of significant Centre core; entertainment alone) HRA air quality eg.recreational transport such as effect) and leisure uses, Appendix D) impacts including public transport, tourist facilities and trampling walking and accommodation at (physical cycling. seafront; creation of damage), erosion, an office quarter collection/digging, The NSC Green within the gateway fires and litter. Infrastructure area Strategy is likely to identify opportunities for green infrastructure elsewhere which

141 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site are likely to provide alternative locations for recreation.

CS29 Publication As above AS above AS above AS above AS above AS above N/A AS above AS above N/A Policy CS 29 Effectively as As above As above As above As above N/A N/A As in blue text for As above As above as at November above. No changes policy CS13 . are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. The main issue regarding the Mendip Limestone Grasslands site is the same ; (possible recreational impact on habitats) . Policy CS2 9 No change is Impact from N/A Reference to No – although N/A Promotion of N/A as at September proposed to adopted C traffic unlikely housing potential opportunities for B policy. Town centre (Likely to be development, disturbance to informal (No 2014 regeneration: major significant effect significant. (see tourist natural recreation significant retail-led alone) HRA air quality accommodation habitats due elsewhere on less effect) development in retail Appendix D) and facilities, to increased sensitive sites core; entertainment particularly with recreation through policies and leisure uses, assumed housing related and proposals for tourist facilities and increase, could activities. provision of green accommodation at theoretically mean infrastructure and seafront; creation of more residents public open space an office quarter and visitors to provision; eg. In area and possibly DPDS, and

142 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site within the gateway increased SPDs.(For area pressure on the example, the SAC sites: eg. Weston Villages recreational SPD proposes impacts including provision of trampling extensive green (physical infrastructure at damage), erosion, Weston Villages, collection/digging, including a fires and litter. network of green corridors with multifunctional recreational benefits including a strategic cycleway/footpath network, and community parks.) Encourage provision of interpretation boards encouraging restriction of walking to established public footpaths. Policy CS30: A major mixed use, Impact from N/A Potential for N/A N/A Encourage and N/A Weston Urban employment-led C traffic unlikely recreational facilitate B urban extension will (Likely to be impacts including sustainable (No Extension be developed south- significant effect significant. (see trampling modes of significant east of Weston- alone) HRA air quality (physical transport such as effect) super-Mare. This will Appendix D) damage), erosion, public transport, include 9,000 Point source air collection/digging, walking and homes, 42ha of pollution fires and litter on cycling.

143 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site employment land impacts could Mendip Limestone along with other be significant Grasslands SAC The NSC Green necessary from on site Infrastructure community, social energy Strategy is likely and transport generation (see to identify infrastructure to HRA air quality opportunities for support the appendix) green development. infrastructure elsewhere which are likely to provide alternative locations for recreation.

HRA/EIA may be needed for any renewable energy projects associated with urban extension

Ensure renewable energy plants are designed to minimise emissions.

CS30 Publication Employment–led As above As above but As above As above As above N/A As above As above As Weston Villages development in two urban above villages on mainly extension now previously replaced by developed land at Weston Weston airfield and Villages

144 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Locking Parklands (the “Weston Villages”). To include total of 5,500 new homes and at least 37.7ha of B use employment land. Policy CS 30 The only change As above As above As above As above N/A N/A The mitigation as As above As above as at November being proposed to at Consultation the adopted plan Draft stage is still 2013. policy is a slight relevant, but it is change in the considered that number of dwellings revised wording to be built at Weston regarding Villages from about mitigating 5,500 to about recreational 5,800. The pressures is Consultation Draft appropriate. plan had referred to Hence: a figure of 9,000 Encourage and dwellings for that facilitate area , but this was sustainable reduced in the modes of Publication version . transport such as The policy still refers public transport, to possible provision walking and of a waste to energy cycling. plant.

Promotion of opportunities for informal recreation elsewhere on less sensitive sites

145 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site through policies and proposals for provision of green infrastructure and public open space provision; eg. In DPDS, and SPDs.(For example, the Weston Villages SPD proposes provision of extensive green infrastructure at Weston Villages, including a network of green corridors with multifunctional recreational benefits including a strategic cycleway/footpath network, and community parks.)

Encourage provision of interpretation boards encouraging restriction of walking to established public footpaths..

146 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site

HRA/EIA may be needed for any renewable energy projects associated with urban extension

Ensure renewable energy plants are designed to minimise emissions.

Policy CS30 It is unknown at this Impact from N/A Potential for N/A N/A Promotion of N/A as at September stage whether the C traffic unlikely recreational opportunities for B assumed housing (Likely to be impacts including informal (No 2014. increase would significant effect significant. (see trampling recreation significant mean an increase in alone) HRA air quality (physical elsewhere on less effect) the number to be Appendix D) damage), erosion, sensitive sites built at Weston Point source air collection/digging, through policies Villages. However it pollution fires and litter on and proposals for is still likely to be far impacts could Mendip Limestone provision of green less than the figure be significant Grasslands SAC. infrastructure and of 9,000 dwellings from on site public open space that was in the energy provision; eg. In Consultation Draft generation (see DPDS, and Core Strategy. The HRA air quality SPDs.(For policy still refers to appendix) example, the possible provision of Weston Villages a waste to energy SPD proposes plant. Therefore the provision of issues are likely to extensive green

147 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site be the same: infrastructure at recreational Weston Villages, pressure from including a residents, and network of green possible air quality corridors with impacts from a multifunctional possible waste to recreational energy plant. benefits including a strategic cycleway/footpath network, and community parks.)

Encourage provision of interpretation boards encouraging restriction of walking to established public footpaths..

HRA/EIA may be needed for any renewable energy projects associated with urban extension

Ensure renewable energy plants are designed to

148 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site minimise emissions.

Policy CS31: Proposals for N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Market and development at B Clevedon, Nailsea (No significant Coastal Towns and Portishead will effect) be supported if they increase self- containment, ensure the availability of jobs and services for the town and surrounding catchments, and improve the town’s role as a service centre. CS31 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Clevedon, Nailsea and Portishead Policy CS 31 The only changes C N/A N/A Theoretically, N/A N/A Promotion of B N/A as at November being proposed to (Likely there could be opportunities for (No the adopted plan significant effect some increased informal significant 2013. policy are the alone) recreation recreation effect following changes in pressure, from elsewhere on less the number of development at all sensitive sites dwellings to be built three towns. through policies from 2006-2026 as However much of and proposals for follows: the development provision of green Clevedon: change proposed in these infrastructure and from 454 to 493; towns has already public open space

149 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Nailsea: change been built or has provision; eg. In from 210 to 647; consent, DPDS, and Portishead: change particularly at SPDs. from 3,051 to 3,040. Portishead on key Encourage The policy at sites like the provision of Consultation Draft harbourside. Also interpretation stage did not specify the towns are boards housing numbers, relatively distant encouraging although they were from the restriction of given in the component sites walking to supporting text . for this SAC, established public The adopted policy which are in the footpaths permits development south of the within settlement district. limits at all three towns, and mixed use schemes adjacent to the settlement boundary at Nailsea outside the Green Belt, subject to criteria. It is considered that, without mitigation there may be potential for impacts which were not identified in the earlier HRA work, but which can be mitigated. (See columns 6 and 9.) Policy CS31 The assumed C N/A N/A As above N/A N/A As above B N/A as at September housing increase (Likely (No could in theory raise significant effect significant 2014. the number of alone) effect

150 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site dwellings to be built at these towns, particularly if it assumed that the broad distribution would be similar to that for the 17,130 dwellings target. The issue is still likely to be one of possible recreation pressure, but may not be significant given the distance of these towns from the SAC sites. Policy CS32: Proposals for N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Service Villages development which B support or enhance (No significant their roles as local effect) hubs for community facilities and services, employment and affordable housing, including public transport will be supported. CS32 Publication Support for small As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A scale development within settlement boundaries which supports and enhances village’s role as local hub.

151 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Policy CS 32 No changes are As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November proposed to adopted policy. Latter differs 2013. from Consultation Draft version in allowing small scale residential or mixed use developments outside settlement boundaries subject to criteria. However reference to small scale and fact that none of the proposed Service Villages are adjacent to a component site for this SAC suggests that LSEs are unlikely. Policy CS 32 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant policy, and the blue effect) 2014 text above applies. Concerns Service Villages. However this is a remitted policy: it is impossible to say at this stage whether the policy is likely to change or not. Policy CS33: Strict control of N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Smaller development in rural B areas. New housing (No significant restricted to effect)

152 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Settlements and affordable housing Countryside. where a local need which cannot be met in an adjacent town or Service Village, replacement dwellings, or dwellings for workers in essential rural enterprises. CS33 Policy differs from As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Publication Consultaton Draft version in allowing Infill Villages, infill development smaller (one or two settlements and dwellings) or small countryside scale residential development within infill villages, where the proposal is community led, with clear community and environmental benefits. However reference to small scale and fact that only one of the SAC component sites is near an infill village (Uphill) suggests that LSEs are unlikely. Policy CS 33 No changes are As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November proposed to adopted policy. Latter differs 2013. from Consultation

153 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site Draft version in allowing some market housing within infill villages but restricted to one or two infill dwellings or small scale residential development within the settlement limits, subject to criteria. Reference to small scale and fact that only one of the proposed infill villages (Uphill) is adjacent to a component site for the SAC suggests that LSEs are unlikely. Policy CS 33 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which effect) 2014 concerns infill villages,.and the blue text above applies. However this is a remitted policy: it is impossible to say at this stage whether the policy is likely to change or not. Delivery Policies

154 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site

Policy CS34: Financial N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Developer contributions will be B sought in the form of (No significant Contributions to a standardised tariff effect) Infrastructure. scheme applied across the district to ensure the effective and timely delivery of the key infrastructure requirements to support new development. CS34 Publication Concerns As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Infrastructure mechanisms for funding and delivery delivery and of infrastructural development elements, with contributions regard to the Weston villages, Weston urban area and rest of district Policy CS 34 Effectively as above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November No changes are proposed to adopted 2013. policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Policy CS 34 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which effect) 2014 concerns the

155 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site collection of development contributions towards infrastructure, rather than proposing development. No LSEs are predicted. Policy CS35: Implementation will N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Implementation take place as part of B a co-ordinated (No significant strategy, provided in effect) step with the necessary infrastructure, utilities and service provision needed to support and enable the development. CS35 is deleted N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A in the Publication version CS35 is deleted N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A in the adopted plan, and no change is being proposed to that situation CS35 is deleted N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A in the adopted plan, and no change is being

156 Mendip Limestone Grasslands Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Impacts Avoidance/ Assessme HRA Category 2 Decreased Decreased Recreational Land Other Mitigation nt re Category Air Quality Water Disturbance take from Measures post equired Quality European mitigation ? Site proposed to that situation 7

Screening Assessment Matrix for North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC

157 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Living within Environmental Limits Policy CS1: Renewable energy N/A N/A N/A N/A Use of appropriate .N/A Addressing in development; e.g. C Only of technology/design B Energy from Waste (Likely possible (through (No significant Climate Change Plant at Weston significant significance if conditions on effect) and Carbon urban extension, effects alone) energy planning consents Reduction green infrastructure facilities were or Environmental networks, to be located Permits from sustainable <10km from Environment transport, site Agency) enhancing/protecting biodiversity, re-use of previously developed land etc.. Policy CS1 of As above but urban As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above As above Publication extension now replaced by Weston version of Core Villages Strategy Policy CS1 as at Effectively as above. As above As above. N/A N/A N/A N/A As above. The As above As above November 2013. No changes are Note: Weston mitigation as at proposed to adopted Villages now Consultation Draft policy which is not replace stage is still fundamentally Weston Urban relevant, different to Extension . Consultation Draft The NE part of version. Has the Weston addition of need for Villages site is

3 Based on the Natural England Habitats Regulations Assessment of Local Development Documents by David Tyldesley, Jan 2009

158 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area development to just within demonstrate water 10km of the efficiency measures. Kings Wood Policy refers to and Urchin creation of waste to Wood energy facilities at component Weston Villages. sites for the SAC. Policy CS1 as at No changes are C Only of N/A N/A N/A Greater Use of appropriate .N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (Likely possible horseshoe technology/design B policy which significant significance if bats are a (through (No significant promotes reducing effects alone) . energy qualifying conditions on effect) carbon emissions The housing facilities were species. planning consents and tackling climate increase is to be located Potential or Environmental change. There is unlikely to <10km from for Permits from reference to significantly alter site. renewable Environment reduction/recycling the impacts of The NE part energy to Agency) . of waste, and this policy. of the Weston include This mitigation, creation of waste to Villages site is wind as at Consultation energy facilities in just within turbines; Draft stage , is still Weston villages 10km of the bats could relevant. Kings Wood be at risk Locational control. and Urchin from Wood these, component although sites for the horseshoe SAC.. bats may be at lower risk . Natural England has produced interim

159 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area guidance, latest TIN051 2014 Policy CS2: Sustainable design N/A N/A N/A N/A Potential Location of wind Potentially Delivering and construction. C damage to turbines following B on Policy sets targets (Likely bat and best practice (No significant individual Sustainable e.g. for on site significant bird guidance effect) planning Design and renewable energy, effect alone) species monitoring of application Construction. Code for On site through impacts. s Sustainable homes, renewable killing or for wind BREEAM ratings energy could injuring by turbines. etc include wind wind turbines turbines. CS2 Publication AS above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above As above As above Policy CS 2 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Addition of requirement to apply best practice in sustainable urban drainage systems. Policy CS2 as at No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A Potential Location of wind Potentially September 2014. proposed to adopted C damage to turbines following B on policy, which (Likely bat and best practice (No significant individual promotes significant bird guidance; effect) planning sustainable design effect alone) species monitoring of application and construction, The assumed through impacts. s including use of on- housing killing or

160 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area site renewable increase is injuring by for wind energy. Potential for unlikely to wind turbines. latter to include wind significantly alter turbines. turbines is the impacts of potentially an ssue, this policy.. without mitigation. Policy CS3: Sets out the N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Environmental Sequential Test for B development with (No significant Risk regard to flood effect) Management. zones. CS3 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Environmental Impacts and Flood Risk Assessment Policy CS 3 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Reference to NPPF rather than PPS25. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS3 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which effect) . requires acceptable The assumed mitigation for housing

161 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area environmental increase is impacts of unlikely to development, and significantly alter for proposals to the impacts of follow the sequential this policy.. test regarding flooding. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.. Policy CS4: Maintain and N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Nature enhance biodiversity B within the district. (No significant Conservation. effect) CS4 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 4 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Documents such as Green Infrastructure Strategy and Biodiversity and Trees SPD are referred to in supporting text . No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

162 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Policy CS4 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant policy which effect) promotes maintenance and enhancement of biodiversity. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS5: Protect and enhance N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Landscape and the character, B distinctiveness, (No significant the Historic diversity and quality effect) Environment. of North Somerset’s landscape and townscape. CS5 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 5 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Reference to heritage assets rather than just assets. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS5 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant policy which effect) promotes protection

163 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area and enhancement of the landscape. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS6: Protect the existing N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A North Somerset’s Green Belt. B (No significant Green Belt effect)

CS6 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 6 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. A difference is that it no longer refers to possibility of taking land out of the Green Belt in exceptional circumstances, by local review. No

164 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS 6 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant (No significant policy, which states effect). effect) that the Green Belt While this is a will remain remitted policy, unchanged. No it is envisaged LSEs were predicted that the housing at any stage of HRA. increase can be met within the existing spatial strategy which does not include change to the Green Belt. Policy CS7: Support for C N/A N/A N/A N/A Use of appropriate .N/A Planning for sustainable (Likely Only of technology/design B management of significant possible (through (No significant Waste in North waste, recovery of effects alone ) significance if conditions on effect) Somerset energy from waste in energy planning consents line with Joint Waste facilities were or Environmental Core Strategy to be located Permits from policies <10km from Environment site Agency) .

CS7 Publication As above As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above As above Planning for Waste Policy CS 7 as at Effectively as above As above . As above. N/A N/A N/A N/A As above. The As above As above November 2013. No changes are Supporting mitigation as at proposed to adopted text refers to Consultation Draft

165 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area policy which is not JWCS and the stage is still fundamentally fact it relevant. different to identifies land Consultation Draft on SE side of version. Refers to Weston as a proposals for broad location of waste strategic area management within which facilities being proposals for subject to policies in residual waste Joint Waste Core treatment Strategy (JWCS). facilities may Refers to Sites and come forward. Policies DPD rather The NE part of than “a Development that area is Management DPD”. just within 10km of the Kings Wood and Urchin Wood component sites for the SAC. Policy CS7 as at No changes are C As above N/A N/A N/A N/A Use of appropriate B Potentially September 2014. proposed to adopted (Likely technology/design (No significant on policy, which significant (through effect) individual promotes effect alone) . conditions on planning prevention/minimisat However the planning consents application ion of waste, design housing or Environmental s. Energy for ease of waste increase is Permits from from collection, and use unlikely to Environment Waste of Joint Waste Core significantly alter Agency) Plants may Strategy policies and the impacts of This mitigation is require an development this policy.. still relevant. HRA.

166 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area management There is policies on waste. likely to be Promotes recovery scope and of energy from flexibility waste in line with for Joint Waste Core proposals Strategy policies to include detailed mitigation measures, as necessary. Policy CS8: Provision will be N/A N/A Potential Effects Locational control Potentially Minerals made for North C Unlikely to be impact of from of quarrying, B on Somerset to (Likely quarrying on quarrying leaving adequate (No significant individual Planning in North significant air contribute towards significant pollution horseshoe bat distance between effect) planning Somerset approximately 40% effect alone) impacts (see foraging area quarry and application of the West of HRA air European site s. England’s quality aggregates appendix) requirement. The council will seek to maintain a land bank for crushed rock of at least 10 years. CS8 Publication As above As above As above N/A N/A N/A As above As above As above As above Minerals Planning Policy CS 8 as at Effectively as above As above As above N/A N/A Potential for N/A The mitigation as As above As above November 2013. No changes are quarrying to at Consultation proposed to adopted impact on bats’ Draft stage is still policy which is not foraging area. relevant. Note that fundamentally it will be the

167 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area different to distance between Consultation Draft the quarry and the version. The component sites addition that was of the SAC which made at will be for Modifications stage consideration. to quantify the crushed rock apportionment for North Somerset in tonnes , did not alter the earlier HRA conclusions. Policy CS8 as at No changes are C N/A N/A Potential for N/A Potentially September 2014. proposed to adopted (likely Unlikely to be quarrying to Locational control B on policy which sets out significant significant air impact on bats’ of quarrying, (No significant individual the requirement for effect alone) . pollution foraging area. leaving adequate effect) planning crushed rock The assumed impacts (see distance between application. provision, and housing HRA air quarry and SAC maintenance of a increase is quality component sites . landbank, and unlikely to appendix) promotes protection significantly alter This mitigation is of mineraL the impacts of still relevant. resources through this policy.. mineral safeguarding areas. Policy CS9: Safeguard, improve N/A N/A Potential for Potential for N/A Best practice Potentially Green and enhance the C possible impact possible impact design of facilities B on existing network of (Likely of artificial of artificial to include (No significant individual Infrastructure green infrastructure. significant lighting of lighting of minimising light effect) planning effect alone) footpaths/cycle footpaths/cycle pollution. application ways on bats if ways on bats if s. inappropriately inappropriately designed designed

168 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area CS9 Publication As above As above N/A N/A As above As above As above As above As above Policy CS 9 as at Effectively as As above As above N/A Potential for Potential for N/A As above As above November 2013. above. No changes possible impact possible impact The above are proposed to of artificial of artificial mitigation as at adopted policy which lighting of lighting of Consultation Draft is not fundamentally footpaths/cycle footpaths/cycle stage is still different to ways on bats if ways on bats if relevant, Consultation Draft inappropriately inappropriately version. Includes designed. designed. reference to tree planting. Includes reference to network of green spaces, paths, cycleways and bridleways. Reference to Green Infrastructure SPD in supporting text.

169 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Policy CS9 as at No changes are C N/A N/A Potential for Possible impact N/A Best practice B N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (Likely possible impact of artificial design of facilities (No significant policy. Concerns significant of artificial lighting of to include effect) green infrastructure. effect alone) lighting of footpaths/cycle minimising light Includes reference The assumed footpaths/cycle ways on bats if pollution. to development of housing ways on bats if inappropriately network of paths. increase is inappropriately designed. Possible impact of unlikely to designed. lighting on paths is a significantly alter potential issue. the impacts of this policy.

170 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Policy CS10: Encouragement for Transport N/A Some potential Encourage and Potentially Transport and travel management C schemes for noise and Some facilitate B on policies and (Likely which could light disturbance potential sustainable (No significant individual Movement development significant affect traffic on to bats from for bat modes of effect) planning proposals that effect alone ) section of vehicles. collision transport such as application encourage an A370 and risk with public transport, s. improved and A368 vehicles walking and integrated transport alongside cycling. network and allow component for wide choice of sites are transport modes. potentially Lists proposed significant transport schemes over the plan period.

CS10 Publication As above As above As above N/A As above As above As above As above As above Transportation and Movement Policy CS 10 as at Effectively as As above As above N/A As above N/A N/A The above As above As above November 2013. above. No changes mitigation as at are proposed to Consultation Draft adopted policy which stage is still is not fundamentally relevant, different to Consultation Draft version. Includes addition of requirement for

171 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area transport schemes to contribute towards carbon reduction, and support movement of freight by rail, which should have beneficial environmental effects. List of transport schemes is the same except for addition of Airfield Bridge Link (ABL) between Weston Airfield and Winterstoke Rd, and Weston Southern Rail Chord (WSRC). ABL is a more direct road link so should help reduce distance travelled and hence emissions. WSRC should help promote train rather than car transport which should have environmental benefits. Policy CS10 as at As above. No Transport N/A Some potential Some Encourage and Potentially September 2014. changes are C schemes for noise and potential facilitate B on proposed to adopted which could light disturbance for bat sustainable (No significant individual policy, which affect traffic on collision modes of effect) planning

172 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area supports travel (Likely section of to bats from risk with transport such as application management significant A370 and vehicles. vehicles public transport, s. policies and effect alone ) A368 walking and development alongside cycling. proposals that component encourage an sites are integrated transport potentially network and allow significant for a wide choice of modes of transport.

Lists major transport schemes as described above. Policy CS11: Provision of Parking N/A N/A N/A N/A Encourage and N/A Parking adequate car C provision facilitate B parking to meet the (Likely which could sustainable (No significant needs of anticipated significant affect traffic on modes of effect) users. effect alone) section of transport such as A370 and public transport, A368 walking and alongside cycling. component sites is potentially significant CS11 Publication As above As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above Policy CS 11 as at Effectively as As above As above N/A N/A N/A The above As above As above November 2013. above. No changes mitigation as at are proposed to Consultation Draft adopted policy which stage is still is not fundamentally relevant, different to Consultation Draft

173 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area version. Only difference is that Policy refers to Sites and Policies DPD rather than Development Management DPD. Policy CS 11 as at No changes are Parking N/A N/A N/A Potential Encourage and N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted C provision for facilitate B policy. Provision of (Likely which could possible sustainable (No significant adequate car significant affect traffic on impact of modes of effect) parking to meet the effect alone) section of lighting transport such as needs of anticipated A370 and from car public transport, users. A368 parks on walking and alongside bats. cycling. component sites is Control of level potentially and orientation of significant lighting in car parks.

Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities Policy CS12: High quality N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Achieving High architecture and B B urban design will be (No significant (No significant Quality Design expected from all effect) effect) and Place Making developments.

CS12 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A

174 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Policy CS 12 as at Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A As above N/A November 2013. above. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. While some paragraphs differ the thrust of the policy is on promoting well designed building and places, and there is still reference to environmental sustainability. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS 12 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant (No significant policy. effect) effect) Promotion of well designed building and places. Includes reference to environmental sustainability. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

175 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Policy CS13: Provision of 17,750 Impacts from Water Potential Potential loss Retention of dark Scale of New dwellings across the C air pollution abstraction disturbance of foraging area vegetated B district over the plan (Likely not likely to be has been from increased particularly corridors within (No significant Housing. period. 3000 significant significant; assessed as noise/light. hedgerows and green effect) dwellings in Weston- effect alone) (see HRA air part of the pasture. infrastructure to super-Mare urban quality Regional Potential form part of any area and 9,000 appendix). Spatial recreational large-scale dwellings as an Strategy impacts on the development. urban extension to Habitats qualifying Weston-super-Mare. Regulations features have A site-wide The remainder of Assessment been lighting strategy, 5,750 dwellings will which considered. incorporating a be met by land from concluded These include lighting contour existing identified that despite erosion and the plan with details of sources and no the amount of impacts of dogs. light intensity and additional allocation development Natural England hours of lighting will be required in proposed in advise that they operation, will be the plan period. North consider that required on large- Somerset it these impacts scale won’t result in are De minimis. developments. a likely significant Consideration effect on should be given to water providing green abstraction. (living) roofs on Further suitable large specialist buildings. This advice was should be covered provided by with local the substrates or Environment grass rather than Agency which sedum species to confirmed maximise its value this. for wildlife

176 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area conservation and foraging bats.

CS13 Publication Provision of As above As above. As above As above As above As above As above As above As above minimum of 13,400 Note Weston dwellings across the urban district over the plan extension now period. 3,300 net replaced by additional dwellings Weston in Weston-super- Villages Mare urban area and 5,500 dwellings at Weston villages. Outside Weston most additional development to occur in towns on existing site allocations, or new development within their settlement boundaries, or at Nailsea through site allocations outside Green Belt Policy CS 13 Proposed change in As above As above LSEs unlikely It is considered As above As above The above As above As above as at November housing number (see note on that the main mitigation as at from the minimum of water issues potential for Consultation Draft 2013. 14,000 in adopted after this adverse impact stage is still plan to minimum of table.) relates to relevant. Some 17,130 dwellings artificial lighting such mitigation

177 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area within North associated with (such as proposed Somerset 2006 - new dark corridors) is 2026 . (Note: while development if included in the this is an increase, inappropriately Weston Villages the 17,130 is less designed. SPD, which was than the 17,750 produced in dwellings at the consultation with Consultation Draft Natural England. stage, referred to in black above. The main issue regarding the SAC is the same (possible impact of lighting from development on bats) . Policy CS13 as at This policy, on the Impacts from LSEs unlikely Potential Potential for Explore the September 2014. housing number, C air pollution (see note on disturbance impact on potential for B was remitted for re- (Likely not likely to be water issues from increased qualifying retention of dark (No significant examination. The significant significant; after this noise/light from species greater vegetated effect) Inspector supported effect alone) (see HRA air table.) development. horseshoe bat, corridors within an increase in the quality from potential green housing requirement appendix). Recreational loss of foraging infrastructure to from 17,130 to impacts on the area or form part of any 20,985 for 2006- qualifying disruption to large-scale 2026. features which commuting development. may result have route While the housing been particularly A site-wide number has considered. hedgerows and lighting strategy, increased, the main These include pasture. incorporating a issue regarding the erosion and the lighting contour SAC is the same as impacts of dogs. plan with details of before; (possible Natural England light intensity and impact of lighting advise that they hours of lighting

178 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area from development consider that operation, will be on bats) . these impacts required on large- are De minimis. scale developments.

Consideration should be given to providing green (living) roofs on suitable large buildings. This should be covered with local substrates or grass rather than sedum species to maximise its value for wildlife conservation and foraging bats.

Buffer zones with suitable habitat may be appropriate.

In addition , Natural England have drawn the council’s attention to the Site Improvement Plan (SIP) for the European Site

179 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area which refers to the value of production and promotion of advice on development control and strategic planning. The council is to explore the potential for preparing such guidance for the European Site.

Policy CS14: New housing Impacts from Water Potential Potential loss Retention of dark N/A Distribution of development will be C air pollution abstraction disturbance of foraging area vegetated B concentrated in (Likely not likely to be has been from increased particularly corridors within (No significant New Housing Weston-super-Mare. significant significant; assessed as noise/light. hedgerows. green effect) At Clevedon, effect alone) (see HRA air part of the infrastructure to Portishead and quality Regional Potential form part of any Nailsea residential appendix) Spatial recreational large-scale development will be Strategy impacts on the development. acceptable within Habitats qualifying their existing Regulations features have A site wide settlement Assessment been lighting strategy, boundaries on which considered. incorporating a brownfield land. concluded These include lighting contour Within the Service that despite erosion and the plan with details of Villages small scale the amount of impacts of dogs. light intensity and infill development development Natural England hours of lighting may be appropriate proposed in advise that they operation, will be where it will support North consider that required on large-

180 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area the retention of Somerset it these impacts scale existing services. won’t result in are De minimis. developments. Elsewhere housing a likely development will not significant Consideration be permitted unless effect on should be given to it is for essential water providing green workers in rural abstraction. (living) roofs on enterprises, Further suitable large replacement specialist buildings. This dwellings or advice was should be covered affordable housing provided by with local need. the substrates or Environment grass rather than Agency which sedum species to confirmed maximise its value this. for wildlife conservation and foraging bats.

Buffer zones with suitable habitat may be appropriate.

CS14 Publication Weston will be the As above As above Note As above As above As above As above As above As above As above focus of new Weston urban housing extension now development . replaced by Outside Weston Weston most additional Villages development to occur at Clevedon, Portishead and

181 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Nailsea, on existing allocations, within their existing settlement boundaries, or in Nailsea at allocations outside Green Belt. Priority to previously developed land. Within the Service villages small scale infill development or site allocations can occur. All new housing to not conflict with nature conservation policies Policy CS 14 Proposed policy As above As above LSEs unlikely Potential for N/A N/A Same comments As above N/A as at November wording is (see note on impact of for mitigation as unchanged from the water issues artificial lighting for policy CS13 2013. adopted plan except after this associated with above. for the housing table.) new figures in the table. development if Weston will be focus inappropriately of new housing designed. development. Outside Weston most additional development to occur at Clevedon, Portishead and Nailsea, on existing allocations, within

182 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area their existing settlement boundaries, or in Nailsea at allocations outside Green Belt. Priority to previously developed land. At Service Villages small scale infill development or site allocations can occur. All new housing to not conflict with nature conservation policies. While the proposed distribution of the housing has changed slightly from the Consultation Draft stage, mainly due to a reduction in the amount of housing proposed at Weston Villages, The main issue regarding the SAC is the same (possible impact of lighting from development on bats) ..

183 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Policy CS14 As above. Impacts from LSEs unlikely Potential for Potential for N/A Explore the N/A as at September It is assumed that, C air pollution (see note on impact of loss of pasture, potential for B the increased (Likely not likely to be water issues artificial lighting a foraging retention of dark (No significant 2014. housing significant significant; after this associated with habitat for vegetated effect) requirement would effect alone) (see HRA air table.) new greater corridors within have a similar broad quality development if horseshoe green distribution to the appendix) inappropriately bats, a infrastructure to 17,130 dwellings in designed. qualifying form part of any the November 2013 species for the large-scale changes. SAC. development. As before, the issues regarding the A site-wide SAC are the same, lighting strategy, notably possible incorporating a impact of lighting lighting contour from development plan with details of on bats, and the light intensity and mitigation in column hours of lighting 9 is still relevant. operation, will be required on large- scale developments.

Consideration should be given to providing green (living) roofs on suitable large buildings. This should be covered with local substrates or grass rather than sedum species to

184 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area maximise its value for wildlife conservation and foraging bats.

Buffer zones with suitable habitat may be appropriate.

Natural England have drawn the council’s attention to the Site Improvement Plan (SIP) for the European Site which refers to the value of production and promotion of advice on development control and strategic planning. The council is to explore the potential for preparing such guidance for the European Site.

185 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Policy CS15: The Council will N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Mixed and seek to ensure a B genuine mix of (No significant Balanced housing types within effect) Communities existing and future communities. CS15 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 15 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS15 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted B policy which (No significant 2014. promotes a genuine effect) mix of housing types within existing and future communities. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

186 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Policy CS16: On-site affordable N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Affordable housing will be B sought to meet local (No significant Housing needs on all effect) residential developments of 15 dwellings or more (or site of 0.5ha or above). On other sites the Council will seek to negotiate a financial contribution towards the provision of affordable housing. CS16 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 16 Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November No changes are proposed to adopted 2013. policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. The addition made at modifications stage to widen the definition of affordable housing to include affordable rented did not have significant implications for HRA.

187 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS16 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted B policy which (No significant 2014. promotes provision effect) of on-site affordable housing on all residential developments of 10 dwellings or more (or sites of 0.3ha or above). On sites of 5-9 dwellings the Council will seek to negotiate a financial contribution towards the provision of affordable housing. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS17: Housing schemes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Residential Sites for 100% affordable B housing to meet (No significant Providing local need within effect) Affordable small rural Housing Only communities will be supported provided it meets certain

188 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area criteria. Specific sites may also be allocated in W-s-M, Portishead, Nailsea and Clevedon and the service villages for 100% affordable housing to meet an identified local need. CS17 Publication Housing schemes As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Rural Exceptions for 100% affordable housing to meet Schemes local need within small rural communities will be supported provided it meets certain criteria. Policy CS 17 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS17 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted B policy, (No significant 2014. effect)

189 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area It promotes provision of housing It is unlikely that schemes for 100% housing affordable housing schemes of a to meet local needs scale within small rural appropriate for a communities subject rural location to criteria, including would have one giving priority to significant sites within effects on settlement European Sites, boundary, and one unless they on scale being were actually appropriate for sited on them location. which is most Also states that unlikely to be rural exceptions permitted. schemes will be Note that acceptable adjacent planning to the settlement applications boundaries of would be likely Service Villages and to be subject to Infill Villages, and policies on elsewhere adjacent biodiversity to main body of settlement, but not in the Green Belt, unless justified by very special circumstances. Policy CS18: Provision will be N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Gypsies and made for an B additional 36 (No significant Travellers and residential and 10 effect)

190 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Travelling Show transit pitches for People Gypsies and travellers for the period 2006 – 2011. CS18 Publication Sets out As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A considerations for determination of locations for sites for Gypsies, travellers and travelling show people Policy CS 18 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS18 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted B policy, which sets (No significant 2014 out considerations effect) for determination of locations for sites for Gypsies, travellers and travelling show people. This includes preference for brownfield sites.

191 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS19: The Council will N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Green seek to protect B green (No significant Wedges/Strategic wedges/strategic effect) Gaps. gaps to help retain the separate identity, character or landscape setting of settlements. CS19 Publication As above, but As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Strategic gaps reference to strategic gaps, not green wedges Policy CS 19 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS19 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which effect) 2014 promotes protection of strategic gaps to

192 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area help retain the The housing separate identity, increase is not character or likely to landscape setting of significantly settlements. affect the impact of the policy. Delivering a Prosperous Economy Policy CS20: Employment-led Impacts from N/A Some potential N/A N/A Retention of dark N/A Supporting a strategy to both C air pollution for impact from vegetated B deliver significant (Likely not likely to be increased corridors within (No significant Successful employment significant significant; noise/light. green effect) Economy development and to effect alone) (see HRA air infrastructure to ensure that new quality Potential form part of any residential appendix) recreational large-scale development is impacts. development. provided in Recreational association with impacts on the A site wide employment qualifying lighting strategy, opportunities. The features which incorporating a Core Strategy may result have lighting contour provides for around been plan with details of 29,500 jobs. considered. light intensity and Supporting text These include hours of lighting suggests indicative erosion and the operation, will be employment impacts of dogs. required on large- requirement for B1- Natural England scale B8 uses would advise that they developments. include 61 ha at consider that Weston Urban these impacts Consideration Extension. are De minimis. should be given to

193 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area providing green (living) roofs on suitable large buildings. This should be covered with local substrates or grass rather than sedum species to maximise its value for wildlife conservation and foraging bats.

CS20 Publication The Core Strategy As above As above. N/A As above N/A N/A As above As above N/A seeks to provide for Note Weston at least 10,100 urban additional jobs. extension now Supporting text replaced by suggests indicative Weston employment land Villages allocations (B1-B8 uses) to be as in adopted Replacement Local Plan, plus about 38ha at Weston Villages... Policy CS 20 The policy is not As above As above As above Some potential N/A N/A The same As above As above as at November proposed to change for impact from mitigation as at from the adopted artificial lighting Consultation Draft 2013. plan version. It associated with stage (above) is states that the Core new still relevant.

194 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Strategy seeks to development if Some such provide for at least inappropriately mitigation (such 10,100 additional designed. as proposed dark jobs, which is less corridors) is than at Consultation included in the Draft stage, with Weston Villages consequentially SPD, which was lower employment produced in land implications. consultation with However, as with the Natural England Consultation Draft stage, the main issue regarding the SAC is the possible impact of lighting from development on bats. Policy CS20 No changes are Impacts from N/A Potential for N/A N/A Explore the B As above as at September proposed to adopted C air pollution impact from potential for (No significant policy, which states (Likely not likely to be artificial lighting retention of dark effect) 2014 that the Core significant significant; associated with vegetated Strategy seeks to effect alone) (see HRA air new corridors within provide for at least quality development if green 10,100 additional appendix) inappropriately infrastructure to jobs, which is less designed. form part of any than at Consultation large-scale Draft stage, with development. consequentially lower employment Note: proposed land implications. dark corridors) is included in the However, as before, Weston Villages the main issue SPD, which was regarding the SAC is produced in

195 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area the possible impact consultation with of lighting from Natural England development on bats. However this A site wide should be lighting strategy, mitigatable; (see incorporating a column 9). lighting contour plan with details of light intensity and hours of lighting operation, will be required on large- scale developments.

Consideration should be given to providing green (living) roofs on suitable large buildings. This should be covered with local substrates or grass rather than sedum species to maximise its value for wildlife conservation and foraging bats.

196 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Policy CS21: Identifies retail N/A N/A Some potential N/A N/A Sensitive lighting N/A Retail Hierarchy hierarchy across the B for light in new B district. (No significant pollution, but developments to (No significant and Provision. effect) LSEs not minimise effect of effect) predicted light pollution. CS21 Publication As above As above N/A N/A As above N/A N/A As above As above N/A Policy CS 21 Effectively as As above. In N/A N/A As above N/A N/A As above As above N/A as at November above. No changes theory lighting are proposed to from to wn centre 2013. adopted policy which uses might is not fundamentally possibly affect different to bats. However Consultation Draft the policy, in version. The policy seeking to seeks to maintain confine such the vitality and uses to town viability of the centres, would existing and arguably help to proposed centres, lessen the and supports town potential for centre uses within impact, Also them of an only a few of the appropriate scale. many existing Town centre uses and proposed outside the centres centres are will be controlled by within the 5km the sequential consultation approach. zone for bats (Nailsea, Queensway, Worle, and a small part of the Marchfields Way centre), and

197 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area they are in built up areas. This accounts for the B classification, without mitigation. However it would still be beneficial for sensitive lighting to be used (column 9) as a positive measure. Policy CS2 1 No changes are N/A N/A Some potential N/A N/A While no LSEs B N/A as at September proposed to adopted B for artificial are predicted, (No significant policy, which (No significant lighting, but sensitive lighting effect) 2014 identifies retail effect) LSEs not in new hierarchy across the predicted developments district. See above. It is would be not considered beneficial to that the housing minimise effect of increase would light pollution. significantly affect the impact of this policy. Policy CS22: Supports visitor N/A N/A Potential N/A N/A Generally small As above N/A Tourism Strategy facilities and B disturbance scale accommodation (No significant from increased development likely across the district effect) noise/light. in rural area near provided they meet to SAC certain criteria. Potential component recreational habitats.

198 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area impacts on the Sensitive lighting qualifying in new features have developments to been minimise effect of considered. light pollution. These include erosion and the impacts of dogs. Natural England advise that they consider that these impacts are de minimis. CS22 P ublication As above As above N/A N/A As above N/A N/A N/A As above N/A Policy CS 22 Effectively as As above. While N/A N/A Possible impact N/A N/A The same As above N/A as at November above. No changes lighting from of artificial mitigation as at are proposed to tourism lighting Consultation Draft 2013. adopted policy which development associated with stage (above) is is not fundamentally could have an new still relevant. different to impact on bats, development if Consultation Draft the policy makes inappropriately version. The policy reference to designed. supports new and appropriate replacement visitor scale and also and tourist facilities states that across the district conservation subject to criteria, objectives including supporting should be conservation and supported. economic Nevertheless it development would be objectives. beneficial for development to have sensitive

199 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area lighting, as indicated in column 9. Policy CS22 No changes are B NA NA Possible impact N/A N/A While LSEs are B N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant of artificial not predicted, (No significant policy, which effect) lighting (particularly as the effect) 2014 supports new, associated with scale criterion improved and See above. The new would mean that replacement visitor housing development if generally small and tourist facilities increase is not inappropriately scale and accommodation likely to designed, but development is across the district significantly not considered likely in rural area provided they meet affect the impact to be LSE. near to SAC certain criteria. of the policy component Criteria include regarding the habitats), it is appropriate scale SAC. appropriate that and no adverse sensitive lighting implications for is used in new environment, and developments to (for Weston) comply minimise effect of with sequential light pollution. approach giving This same priority to town mitigation as at centre or seafront Consultation Draft sites. It is stage is still considered that relevant. these criteria help to ensure no LSE for this SAC. Policy CS23: Proposals for the Impacts from N/A Potential impact Potential loss N/A Dedicated land May be Bristol development of B air pollution of artificial of foraging managed for B required on Bristol Airport will be (No significant not likely to be lighting area. nature (No significant an International required to effect) significant; conservation may effect) individual Airport demonstrate the (see HRA air be appropriate.

200 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area satisfactory (Policy requires quality Retain a dark application resolution of satisfactory appendix) buffer for basis. environmental resolution of commuting and issues, including the environmental foraging impact of growth on issues, horseshoe bats. surrounding suggesting that communities and potential issues surface access (see columns to infrastructure. right) would be mitigated.) CS23 Publication As above As above As above N/A As above As above N/A As above As above As above Bristol Airport Policy CS 23 Effectively as As above. Policy As above N/A As above As above. N/A The same As above As above as at November above. No changes requires Airport is within mitigation as at are proposed to resolution of the 5km Consultation Draft 2013. adopted policy which environmental consultation stage (above) is is not fundamentally issues. However zone for the still relevant. different to it would still be SAC. Consultation Draft beneficial for version. development to include appropriate mitigation as in column 9. Policy CS23 No changes are Air pollution LSEs unlikely While potential While potential N/A While possible May be as at September proposed to adopted B impacts (see note on light pollution is loss of foraging mitigation B required on policy for Bristol (No significant unlikely to be water issues referred to area is referred measures are (No significant an 2014 airport, which effect) significant after this above (airport is to above referred to above, effect) individual requires proposals Policy requires (see HRA Air table.) within 5km (airport is within LSEs are not application to demonstrate the resolution of Quality consultation 5km predicted, and basis. satisfactory environmental Appendix) zone for SAC), consultation major resolution of issues. Also no LSE zone), no LSE development environmental outline planning predicted, and predicted, and already permitted

201 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area issues, including the consent was major major (application impact of growth on granted for development development 09/P/1020/OT2), surrounding major already already approved in 2009. communities and development permitted. permitted. The conditions on surface access increasing the permission infrastructure. passenger flight required numbers at the submission and airport in 2009, approval of a anyway, and the biodiversity action conditions plan for the airport imposed site, and a site- included wide lighting mitigation strategy measures for identifying biodiversity. measures to The assumed control light housing pollution , increase is not likely to significantly affect the impact of the policy on the SAC Policy CS24: Identified land at Dock located N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B N/A Royal Portbury Court House Farm B approximately (No significant will continue to be (No significant 9 km from site. effect) Dock safeguarded for port effect) Furthermore uses, subject to dock uses demonstrable need unlikely to be for those uses that significant cannot be sources of accommodated point source elsewhere within the air emissions. existing port estate. Significant

202 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Further expansion of effects from the port within North air pollution Somerset is not unlikely supported. CS24 Publication As above As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A As above As above N/A Policy CS 24 Effectively as above. As above . The As above N/A As above N/A N/A N/A As above As above as at November No changes are dock and Court proposed to adopted House Farm are 2013. policy which is not well beyond fundamentally (over 5km from different to the boundary of) Consultation Draft the 5km version; (only a consultation difference in the zone for the name of the site SAC. allocations document referred to.) No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS24 No changes are Dock located N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A B N/A as at September proposed to adopted B approximately (No significant policy, which (No significant 9 km from effect) 2014 continues to be to effect) nearest safeguard identified The dock and component land for port uses, Court House site. subject to Farm are well Furthermore demonstrable need, beyond (over dock uses for those uses that 5km) from the unlikely to be cannot be boundary of) the significant accommodated 5km sources of elsewhere within the consultation point source existing port estate. zone for the air emissions. Further expansion of SAC. Significant

203 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area the port within North The assumed effects from Somerset is not housing air pollution supported. increase is not unlikely likely to significantly affect the impact of the policy on the SAC. Ensuring Safe and Healthy Communities Policy CS25: Provision of N/A N/A Potential light Potential loss N/A Sensitive lighting Impact will Children, Young educational facilities B pollution of foraging in new B be to be sought where (No significant areas. developments to (No significant assessed People and local provision will effect) minimise effect of effect) on each Higher Education be inadequate to light pollution. individual meet the needs of planning new residential Green/living roofs application. developments. . on school and larger buildings to provide potential foraging habitats CS25 Publication As above As above N/A N/A As above As above N/A As above As above As above Policy CS 25 Effectively as above. C N/A N/A As above As above N/A The same As above As above as at November No changes are (Likely mitigation as at proposed to adopted significant Consultation Draft 2013. policy which is not effect alone) stage (above) is fundamentally It is now still relevant. different to considered that Consultation Draft a “C” version. classification, without mitigation, is

204 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area appropriate, as lighting of school buildings, if poorly designed. could affect bats, and the policy does not confine them to particular areas. Policy CS25 No changes are C N/A N/A Potential for Potential for N/A Sensitive lighting B Impact will as at September proposed to adopted (Likely some light some loss of in new (No significant be policy, which seeks significant pollution foraging areas. developments to effect) assessed 2014 educational effect alone) minimise effect of on each provision where light pollution. individual local provision will See above planning be inadequate to Green/living roofs application. meet the needs of While the on school and new residential assumed larger buildings to developments. housing provide potential increase would foraging habitats potentially raise the need for education buildings, impacts would still be mitigatable. (see column 9). Policy CS26: Requires Health N/A N/A Potential for Potential for N/A Sensitive lighting N/A N/A Supporting Impact Assessment B some light some loss of in new on all large scale (No significant pollution, but not foraging areas, developments to Healthy Living developments. Joint effect) LSEs. but not LSEs. minimise effect of and the Provision working with health light pollution. providers to deliver a

205 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area of Health Care district wide network Green/living roofs Facilities. of health facilities, on larger reduce health buildings to inequalities in the provide potential district, encourage foraging habitats development that promotes active lifestyles. CS26 Publication As above As above N/A N/A As above As above N/A As above N/A N/A Policy CS 26 Effectively as As above. N/A N/A As above As above N/A The same As above N/A as at November above. No changes While poorly mitigation as at are proposed to designed Consultation Draft 2013. adopted policy which lighting of health stage (above) is is not fundamentally facilities could still relevant. different to have an impact Consultation Draft on bats, the version. number of facilities is likely to be limited. Also much of the policy is about promoting provision of open space which could benefit bats. Development is encouraged to incorporate usable green space and contribute to enhancing the green

206 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area infrastructure network. This accounts for the B classification, but it would still be beneficial to have sensitive lighting, so this is still referred to in column 9 . Policy CS2 6 No changes are B N/A N/A As above As above N/A The same B N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant mitigation as (No significant policy, which effect) before is still effect) 2014 promotes strategies See above. relevant: sensitive which increase and While the lighting to improve health assumed minimise effect of facilities and housing light pollution. promote healthier increase would lifestyles , potentially raise Green/living roofs the need for on larger health facilities, buildings. the above comments apply. However it would still be beneficial to have sensitive lighting, so this is still referred to in column 9 . Policy CS27: Provision of sport, N/A N/A Potential light N/A N/A Sensitive lighting N/A Impact will Sport, Recreation recreation and B pollution in new be community facilities developments to assessed

207 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area and Community (No significant minimise effect of on each Facilities. effect) light pollution. individual planning application. CS27 Publication As above As above N/A N/A As above N/A N/A As above N/A As above Policy CS 27 Effectively as C N/A N/A As above N/A N/A The same As above N/A as at November above. No changes (Likely mitigation as at are proposed to significant Consultation Draft 2013. adopted policy which effect alone) stage (above) is is not fundamentally It is now still relevant. different to considered that Consultation Draft a “C” version. classification, without mitigation, is appropriate, as lighting of sports buildings and facilities could affect bats, and the policy does not confine them to particular areas. Policy CS2 7 No changes are C N/A N/A Potential light N/A N/A Sensitive lighting B Impact will as at September proposed to adopted (Likely pollution in new (No significant be policy, which significant developments to effect) assessed 2014 promotes provision effect alone) minimise effect of on of sport, recreation See above. light pollution. individual and community While the This mitigation is planning facilities to meet assumed still relevant: application. unmet needs arising housing from residential increase would development. potentially raise

208 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area the need for education buildings, impacts would still be mitigatable. (see column 9). Area Policies

Policy CS28: W-s-M will be the Impacts from N/A N/A Impacts of N/A Retention of dark N/A Weston-super- primary focus for B air pollution development. vegetated B development within (No significant not likely to be corridors within (No significant Mare North Somerset. The effect) significant; green effect) town will (see HRA air infrastructure to accommodate quality form part of any 12,000 new appendix) large-scale dwellings and development. 10,000 new jobs between 2006-2026 A site wide as part of an lighting strategy, employment-led incorporating a strategy to deliver lighting contour improved self- plan with details of containment and light intensity and reduced out- hours of lighting commuting over the operation, will be plan period. required on large- scale developments.

Consideration should be given to

209 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area providing green (living) roofs on suitable large buildings. This should be covered with local substrates or grass rather than sedum species to maximise its value for wildlife conservation and foraging bats.

CS28 Publication W-s-M will be the As above As above N/A N/A As above N/A As above As above N/A primary focus for development within North Somerset. The town will accommodate around 5,850 additional new dwellings with approx 10,500 employment opportunities between 2010-2026 as part of an employment-led strategy to deliver improved self- containment and reduced out-

210 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area commuting over the plan period. Policy CS 28 The only change C As above As above Possible impact N/A N/A The above As above As above as at November being proposed to (Likely of artificial mitigation as at the adopted plan significant lighting Consultation Draft 2013. policy is a change in effect alone) associated with stage is still the number of It is now new relevant. Some additional dwellings considered that development if such mitigation to be built in Weston a “C” inappropriately (such as proposed from around 6,913 to classification, designed. dark corridors) is 5,136, and a change without included in the in the period for that mitigation, is Weston Villages to occur from 2011- appropriate, as SPD, which was 2026 to 2013-2026. lighting of produced in The Consultation development consultation with Draft plan had could affect Natural England. referred to a figure bats, and the of 12,000 dwellings Weston Villages for 2006-2026, but area, and the this was reduced in southern part of the Publication the east area of version due to Weston are determination of a within the 5km locally derived consultation housing zone for the requirement. The SAC. policy still focuses new development on two key locations in Weston: Weston Villages and the town centre and gateway.

211 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Policy CS28 This policy is Impacts from N/A Possible impact Potential N/A Explore the N/A as at September remitted. While C air pollution of artificial impacts of potential for B prediction of (Likely not likely to be lighting development retention of dark (No significant 2014 numbers is difficult significant significant; associated with regarding vegetated effect) at this stage, it is effect alone) (see HRA air new potential loss of corridors within likely that a quality development if foraging area, green significant proportion appendix) inappropriately are now infrastructure to of the increased designed. considered to form part of any housing requirement be limited, large-scale would be at Weston, since most of development. urban area town centre Such mitigation is (assuming the broad and gateway included in the distribution would be area are Weston Villages similar to that for the outside the SPD, which was former housing 5km produced in target. consultation consultation with The policy still zone for the Natural England. focuses new SAC, and development on two largely A site wide key locations in developed. lighting strategy, Weston: Weston incorporating a Villages and the lighting contour town centre and plan with details of gateway. However light intensity and most of the town hours of lighting centre and gateway operation, will be areas are outside of required on large- the 5km consultation scale zone for the bats developments. SAC. The main issue regarding the Consideration SAC is the same: should be given to possible impact of providing green artificial lighting on (living) roofs on

212 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area bats. However this is suitable large mitigatable: see buildings. This column 9. should be covered with local substrates or grass rather than sedum species to maximise its value for wildlife conservation and foraging bats.

Policy CS29: Town centre Impacts from N/A N/A Negligible N/A N/A N/A Weston-super- regeneration: major B air pollution impact (de B retail-led (No significant not likely to be minimis) – (No significant Mare Town development in retail effect) significant; Already effect) Centre core; entertainment (see HRA air urbanised and and leisure uses, quality lacking tourist facilities and appendix) connectivity to accommodation at surrounding seafront; creation of habitats. an office quarter within the gateway area CS29 Publication As above As above As above N/A N/A As above N/A N/A As above N/A Policy CS 29 Effectively as As above As above N/A N/A As above N/A N/A As above N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version.

213 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Policy CS2 9 No change is Impacts from N/A Possible impact As above N/A Explore the Potentially as at September proposed to adopted C air pollution of artificial potential for B on policy. Town centre (Likely not likely to be lighting retention of dark (No significant individual 2014 regeneration: major significant significant; associated with vegetated effect) planning retail-led effect alone) (see HRA air new corridors within application development in retail quality development if green s core; entertainment (see left hand appendix) inappropriately infrastructure to and leisure uses, column for designed. form part of any tourist facilities and reason) large-scale accommodation at development. seafront; Such mitigation is development within included in the the gateway area to Weston Villages include an office SPD, which was quarter nearest the produced in town centre and consultation with mixed use Natural England. development elsewhere. A site wide It is now considered lighting strategy, that as the mixed incorporating a use development lighting contour could include plan with details of residential light intensity and development within hours of lighting the 5km consultation operation, will be zone for the SAC, required on large- particularly in view of scale the housing developments. increase, albeit in limited areas, there could be possible Consideration issues from lighting should be given to (hence the change providing green

214 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area to category C). (living) roofs on However this is suitable large mitigatable. buildings. This should be covered with local substrates or grass rather than sedum species to maximise its value for wildlife conservation and foraging bats.

Policy CS30: A major mixed use, Impacts from Water Potential loss of Weston urban Potential Retention of dark Potentially Weston Urban employment-led C air pollution abstraction or disturbance extension is impact of vegetated B on urban extension will (Likely not likely to be has been to foraging area within the 5km lighting on corridors within (No significant individual Extension be developed south- significant significant; assessed as particularly North Somerset foraging green effect) planning east of Weston- effect alone) (see HRA air part of the hedgerows. and Mendip Bat area infrastructure to application super-Mare. This will quality Regional Consultation form part of any s within the include 9,000 appendix) Spatial Potential Zone. large-scale Urban homes, 42ha of Strategy recreational development. Extension. employment land Habitats impacts. Comprehensive There is along with other Regulations Supplementary A site wide likely to be necessary Assessment Planning lighting strategy, scope and community, social which Document is to incorporating a flexibility and transport concluded be produced for lighting contour for infrastructure to that despite the whole site plan with details of proposals support the the amount of which will light intensity and to include development. development include hours of lighting detailed proposed in mitigation operation, will be mitigation Weston- measures. required on large- measures, super-Mare it scale as won’t result in developments. necessary.

215 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area a likely significant Encourage and effect on facilitate water sustainable abstraction. modes of Further transport such as specialist public transport, advice was walking and provided by cycling. the Environment Agency which Consideration confirmed should be given to this. providing green (living) roofs on suitable large buildings. This should be covered with local substrates or grass rather than sedum species to maximise its value for wildlife conservation and foraging bats.

CS30 Publication Employment–led As above As above As above As above As above N/A As above As above As above Weston Villages development in two Note Weston villages on mainly urban previously extension now developed land at replaced by Weston airfield and

216 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Locking Parklands Weston (the “Weston Villages Villages”). To include total of 5,500 new homes and at least 37.7ha of B use employment land. Policy CS 30 The only change As above As above LSEs unlikely As above As above N/A The above As above As above as at November being proposed to (see note on mitigation as at the adopted plan water issues Consultation Draft 2013. policy is a slight after this stage is still change in the table.) relevant. Some number of dwellings such mitigation to be built at Weston (such as proposed Villages from about dark corridors) is 5,500 to about included in the 5,800. The Weston Villages Consultation Draft SPD, which was plan had referred to produced in a figure of 9,000 consultation with dwellings for that Natural England. area , but this was reduced in the Publication version . The main issue regarding the SAC is still the same: possible impact of lighting from development on bats. Policy CS30 It is unknown at this Impacts from LSEs unlikely Potential loss of Weston Explore the Potentially stage whether the C air pollution (see note on or disturbance Villages potential for B on

217 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area as at September assumed housing (Likely not likely to be water issues to foraging area (formerly called retention of dark (No significant individual 2014. increase would significant significant; after this particularly Weston urban vegetated effect) planning mean an increase in effect alone) (see HRA air table.) hedgerows. extension) are corridors within application the number to be quality within the 5km green s within the built at Weston appendix) North Somerset infrastructure to Weston Villages. However it and Mendip Bat form part of any Villages. is still likely to be far Consultation large-scale There is less than the figure Zone. development. likely to be of 9,000 dwellings Such mitigation scope and that was in the (dark corridors) is flexibility Consultation Draft included in the for Core Strategy. The Weston Villages proposals policy still refers to SPD, which was to include possible provision of produced in detailed a waste to energy consultation with mitigation plant, but this is not Natural England. measures, likely to significantly as impact on the SAC ; A site wide necessary. (see 4 th column).. lighting strategy, The main issue incorporating a regarding the SAC is lighting contour still the same: plan with details of possible impact of light intensity and lighting from hours of lighting development on operation, may be bats. However this is required on large- mitigatable (see scale column 9), developments. particularly as mitigation measures Encourage and are in the Weston facilitate Villages SPD. sustainable modes of transport such as

218 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area public transport, walking and cycling.

Consideration should be given to providing green (living) roofs on suitable large buildings. This should be covered with local substrates or grass rather than sedum species to maximise its value for wildlife conservation and foraging bats.

Possible provision of buffers with suitable habitat.

Policy CS31: Proposals for N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Market and development at B Clevedon, Nailsea (No significant Coastal Towns and Portishead will effect) be supported if they increase self- containment, ensure the availability of

219 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area jobs and services for the town and surrounding catchments, and improve the towns role as a service centre. CS31 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Clevedon, Nailsea and Portishead Policy CS 31 The only changes C N/A N/A Potential for N/A N/A Retention of dark B N/A as at November being proposed to (Likely possible impact vegetated (No significant the adopted plan significant regarding corridors within effect 2013. policy are the effect alone) potential for green following changes in It is now significant infrastructure to the number of considered that greenfield form part of any dwellings to be built this development on large-scale from 2006-2026 as classification is the edge of development. follows: appropriate Nailsea, notably However where Clevedon: change regarding with regard to possible ensure from 454 to 493; possible possible impact that where any Nailsea: change disturbance to of lighting on planting is to from 210 to 647; habitat; (see bats, if occur to reinforce Portishead: change column 6). inappropriately /create dark from 3,051 to 3,040. designed/locate corridors, it does The policy at d. (Nailsea falls not cause Consultation Draft within the 5km overshadowing of stage did not specify consultation important rhynes housing numbers, zone for the to avoid depriving although they were SAC, whereas. light to water given in the Clevedon and insects. supporting text . Portishead do

220 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area The adopted policy not. ) Also A site wide permits development much of the lighting strategy, within settlement potential incorporating a limits at all three development at lighting contour towns, and mixed Clevedon and plan with details of use schemes Portishead has light intensity and adjacent to the already been hours of lighting settlement boundary built or has operation, will be at Nailsea outside consent, required on large- the Green Belt, particularly at scale subject to criteria. Portishead on developments. It is considered that, sites like the without mitigation harbourside. Promote sensitive there may be orientation of potential for impacts buildings to avoid which were not light spill, identified in the particularly on the earlier HRA work, periphery of but which can be significant sites mitigated. (See columns 6 and 9.) Within green infrastructure, where possible retain tall hedgerows and tree lines which bats tend to follow, and wetlands .

Encourage and facilitate sustainable modes of

221 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area transport such as public transport, walking and cycling.

Consideration should be given to providing green (living) roofs on suitable large buildings. This should be covered with local substrates or grass rather than sedum species to maximise its value for wildlife conservation and foraging bats.

Policy CS31 The housing C N/A N/A Potential for Potential for N/A The above B N/A as at September increase could in (Likely possible impact loss of pasture, mitigation is still (No significant theory raise the significant regarding a foraging relevant, plus effect 2014. number of dwellings effect alone) potential for habitat for possible provision to be built at these significant greater of buffers with towns, particularly if greenfield horseshoe suitable habitat. it assumed that the development on bats, a broad distribution the edge of qualifying would be similar to Nailsea, notably species for the that for the 17,130 with regard to SAC. This dwellings target. possible impact could occur at

222 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Regarding the SAC, of lighting on Nailsea for it is considered that, bats, if example, there may be inappropriately where there is , potential for impacts designed/locate much pasture concerning the d. (Nailsea falls adjoining the potential for within the 5km settlement. development at consultation Nailsea, but this zone for the should be SAC, whereas. mitigatable ; (See Clevedon and columns 6 and 9.). Portishead do not. ) Also much of the potential development at Clevedon and Portishead has already been built or has consent, particularly at Portishead on sites like the harbourside. Policy CS32: Proposals for N/A N/A Potential light N/A N/A Generally small B Impact will Service Villages development which B pollution, but not scale (No significant be support or enhance (No significant LSEs, as policy development. effect) assessed their roles as local effect) confines Sensitive lighting on each hubs for community housing in new individual facilities and development to developments to planning services, within minimise effect of application. employment and settlement light pollution. affordable housing, boundaries. including public

223 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area transport will be supported. CS32 Publication Support for small As above N/A N/A As above N/A N/A As above As above As above scale development within settlement boundaries which supports and enhances village’s role as local hub. Policy CS 32 No changes are As above . The N/A N/A Possible impact N/A N/A The above As above As above as at November proposed to adopted reference to of artificial mitigation as at policy. Latter differs small scale and lighting Consultation Draft 2013. from Consultation fact that none of associated with stage is still Draft version in the proposed new relevant. allowing small scale Service Villages development if residential or mixed actually adjoins inappropriately use developments a component designed. outside settlement site for this SAC boundaries subject suggests that to criteria LSEs are unlikely.The NE limits of Congresbury are close to the component site at Urchins Wood, but the intervening land, and the wood, are in the Green Belt, where significant development is unlikely. The

224 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area limits of Banwell are fairly close to the Banwell Caves sites, but the distances are greater than at Congresbury. Nevertheless sensitive lighting would be beneficial. (See column 9). Policy CS 32 No changes are B N/A N/A Possible impact N/A N/A Generally small B N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant of artificial scale (No significant policy, which effect) lighting development. effect) 2014 supports small Notwithstanding associated with Sensitive lighting scale development the assumed new in new appropriate to the housing development if developments to size and character of increase, the inappropriately minimise effect of the village and points above designed. light pollution. which supports or apply. enhances its role as Nevertheless a local hub for sensitive community facilities lighting would be and services, beneficial. (See employment and column 9). affordable housing, including public transport. However this is a remitted policy: it is impossible to say at this stage whether

225 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area the policy is likely to change or not. Policy CS33: Proposals for N/A N/A Potential light N/A N/A Generally small N/A Smaller development within B pollution, but not scale B the rural areas (No significant LSEs, as new development. (No significant Settlements and outside of Service effect) housing very Sensitive lighting effect) Countryside. Villages will be limited in new strictly controlled in (affordable developments to order to protect their housing, minimise effect of character and replacement light pollution. prevent dwellings, or unsustainable dwellings for development. workers in essential rural enterprises). CS33 Publication As above As above N/A N/A As above N/A N/A As above N/A A above Infill Villages, smaller settlements and countryside Policy CS 33 No changes are As above N/A N/A Possible impact N/A N/A The above N/A A above as at November proposed to adopted of artificial mitigation as at policy. Latter differs Reference to lighting Consultation Draft 2013. from Consultation small scale and associated with stage is still Draft version in fact that none of new relevant. allowing some the proposed development if market housing Infill Villages inappropriately within infill villages actually adjoins designed, but but restricted to one a component not LSEs; or two infill dwellings site for this SAC (housing or small scale suggests that development residential LSEs are restricted to development within unlikely . Cleeve small scale

226 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area the settlement limits, is close to the within subject to criteria. Kings Wood but settlement the village , limits, and wood and the points in 3 rd intervening land column apply.). are in the Green Belt, where significant development is unlikely. Nevertheless sensitive lighting would be prudent. (See column 9). Policy CS 33 No changes are B N/A N/A Possible impact N/A N/A Generally small (No significant N/A. as at September proposed to adopted (No significant of artificial scale effect) policy. Proposals for effect) lighting development. 2014 development within Notwithstanding associated with Sensitive lighting the rural areas the assumed new in new outside of Service housing development if developments to Villages will be increase, the inappropriately minimise effect of strictly controlled in points above designed, but light pollution. order to protect their apply. not LSES. character and Nevertheless prevent sensitive unsustainable lighting would be development. beneficial. (See Within infill villages , column 9). one or two infill dwellings or small scale residential redevelopment only to be permitted.

227 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area However this is a remitted policy: it is impossible to say at this stage whether the policy is likely to change or not. Delivery Policies

Policy CS34: Financial N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Developer contributions will be B sought in the form of (No significant Contributions to a standardised tariff effect) Infrastructure. scheme applied across the district to ensure the effective and timely delivery of the key infrastructure requirements to support new development. CS34 Publication Concerns As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Infrastructure mechanisms for funding and delivery delivery and of infrastructural development elements, with contributions regard to the Weston Villages,

228 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area Weston urban area and rest of district Policy CS 34 Effectively as above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November No changes are proposed to adopted 2013. policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Policy CS 34 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which effect) 2014 concerns the collection of development contributions towards infrastructure, rather than the proposal of development. No LSEs were identified at any stage of HRA. . . Policy CS35: Implementation will N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Implementation take place as part of B a co-ordinated (No significant strategy, provided in effect) step with the necessary infrastructure, utilities and service provision needed to

229 North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on SAC Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 3 Decreased Decreased Disturbance Land -take Other Mitigation Category required? Air Quality Water to habitat from Measures post Quality horseshoe mitigation bat foraging area support and enable the development. CS35 is deleted N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A in the Publication version CS35 is deleted N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A in the adopted plan, and no change is being proposed to that situation CS35 is deleted N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A in the adopted plan, and no change is being proposed to that situation

230 Screening Assessment Matrix for Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC

Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Living within Environmental Limits Policy CS1: Renewable energy Mostly N/A Use of appropriate Potentially Addressing in development; e.g. neutral. Some technology/design B on energy from waste C projects will (through conditions on (No significant individual Climate Change plant at Weston (Likely need to be planning consents or effect) planning and Carbon urban extension, significant individually Environmental Permits application Reduction green infrastructure effect alone) assessed as from Environment s. Energy networks, part of the Agency) . from waste sustainable planning plants may transport, process. require an enhancing/protectin HRA. g biodiversity, re-use Only of There is of previously possible likely to be developed land etc. significance if scope and energy flexibility facilities were for to be located proposals < 10km from to include site (see HRA detailed air quality mitigation appendix). measures, as necessary Policy CS1 of As above As above As above N/A As above As above As above Publication version of Core Strategy

4 Based on the Natural England Habitats Regulations Assessment of Local Development Documents by David Tyldesley, Jan 2009

231 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Policy CS1 as at Effectively as above. The C As above. N/A The above measures As above As above November 2013. No changes are classification is Note: Weston would be beneficial. proposed to adopted arguably Villages now policy which is not pessimistic, replace fundamentally given that the Weston different to only reference Urban Consultation Draft to a particular Extension. version. Has type of addition of need for renewable development to energy is waste demonstrate water to energy efficiency measures. facilities at Policy refers to Weston Villages. creation of waste to They would be energy facilities at unlikely to impact Weston Villages. on the SAC since the Air Quality Assessment suggests that air pollution impacts are unlikely unless such facilities are under 10km away. The Weston Villages area is over 20km from the SAC. Policy CS1 as at No changes are The category Mostly N/A Use of appropriate Potentially September 2014. proposed to adopted C neutral. Some technology/design B on policy which (Likely projects will (through conditions on (No significant individual promotes reducing significant need to be planning consents or effect) planning carbon emissions effect alone) has individually Environmental Permits application and tackling climate been cited in assessed as from Environment s. Energy change. There is earlier stages, part of the Agency) . from waste reference to but as indicated plants may

232 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation reduction/recycling above this is planning require an of waste, and pessimistic as process. HRA. creation of waste to the site referred There is energy facilities in to for waste to Only of likely to be Weston villages energy facilities possible scope and (Weston significance if flexibility Villages) is over energy for 20km from the facilities were proposals SAC. to be located to include The assumed < 10km from detailed housing site (see HRA mitigation increase is air quality measures, unlikely to appendix). as significantly alter necessary the impacts of this policy. Policy CS2: Sustainable design N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Delivering and construction. B Policy sets targets (No significant Sustainable eg. for on- site effect) Design and renewable energy, Construction. Code for Sustainable Homes BREEAM ratings, etc

CS2 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 2 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Addition of requirement to apply best practice in sustainable urban

233 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation drainage systems. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS2 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A B September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant (No significant N/A policy which effect) effect) promotes The assumed sustainable design housing increase and construction. is unlikely to No LSEs were significantly predicted at any affect the stage of HRA. impacts of this policy.. Policy CS3: Sets out the N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Environmental Sequential Test for B development with (No significant Risk regard to flood effect) Management. zones. CS3 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Environmental Impacts and Flood Risk Assessment Policy CS 3 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Reference to NPPF rather than PPS25. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

234 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Policy CS3 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which effect) requires acceptable The assumed mitigation for housing increase environmental is unlikely to impacts of significantly alter development, and the impacts of for proposals to this policy. follow the sequential test regarding flooding. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA . Policy Maintain and N/A Part 5 of policy Planting needs to take N/A N/A CS4:ensure that enhance biodiversity B refers to tree into account the within the district. (No significant planting. potential loss of interest Nature effect), although Inappropriate features of European Conservation. some mitigation planting could Sites. regarding tree lead to loss of planting would grasslands. be prudent; (see columns to right) CS4 Publication As above B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A (No significant effect) (Policy now refers to native tree planting and well targeted woodland creation)

Policy CS 4 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A. A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are difference proposed to adopted between the

235 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation policy which is not Consultation fundamentally Draft and later different to versions of the Consultation Draft policy is the version, although it reference in specifies “native” the latter to tree planting, which “well targeted was introduced at woodland Publication stage. creation” Documents such as which should Green Infrastructure help ensure Strategy and that Biodiversity and inappropriate Trees SPD are loss of referred to in grasslands to supporting text . woodland Policy is very planting is positive for avoided. biodiversity. Policy CS4 as at No changes are B N/A See above N/A N/A N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant policy which effect) promotes maintenance and enhancement of biodiversity. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS5: Protect and enhance N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Landscape and the character, B distinctiveness, (No significant the Historic diversity and quality effect) Environment. of North Somerset’s landscape and townscape. CS5 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

236 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Policy CS 5 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Reference to heritage assets rather than just assets. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS5 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant policy which effect) promotes protection and enhancement of the landscape. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS6: Protect the existing N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A North Somerset’s Green Belt. B (No significant Green Belt effect)

CS6 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 6 as at Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. A difference is that it no longer refers to

237 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation possibility of taking land out of the Green Belt in exceptional circumstances, by local review. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS 6 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which states effect). While that the Green Belt this is a remitted boundaries will policy, it is remain unchanged envisaged that through the plan the assumed period. No LSEs housing increase were predicted at can be met any stage of HRA. within the existing spatial strategy which does not include change to the Green Belt. Policy CS7: Support for Mostly N/A Use of appropriate Potentially Planning for sustainable B neutral. Some technology/design B on management of (No significant projects will (through conditions on (No significant individual Waste in North waste, recovery of effect) need to be planning consents or effect) planning Somerset energy from waste individually Environmental Permits application in line with Joint assessed as from Environment s. Energy Waste Core Strategy part of the Agency) . from waste policies planning plants may process. require an Only of HRA. possible There is significance if likely to be energy scope and facilities were flexibility to be located for

238 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation < 10km from proposals site (see HRA to include air quality detailed appendix mitigation D).Supporting measures, text refers to as Joint Waste necessary Core Strategy’s identified potential sites for residual waste treatment facilities at Weston, but these are well over 10km from the SAC. However, good design of facilities is still advocated. CS7 Publication As above As above As above N/A As above As above As above Planning for Waste Policy CS 7 as at Effectively as above As above . As above. N/A As above. As above. As above November 2013. No changes are Supporting proposed to adopted text refers to policy which is not JWCS and fundamentally the fact it different to identifies land Consultation Draft at Warne version. Refers to Road, Weston Sites and Policies for location of DPD rather than “a residual

239 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Development waste Management DPD”. treatment Refers to proposals facilities, and for location of waste land on the management SE side of facilities being Weston as a subject to policies in broad Joint Waste Core strategic area Strategy (JWCS). within which proposals for residual waste treatment facilities may come forward. However both these areas are well over 10km from the SAC. It would however be beneficial to design facilities to a high standard (see column 9). Policy CS7 as at No changes are B As above N/A Use of appropriate B Potentially September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant technology/design (No significant on policy which effect) (through conditions on effect) individual promotes planning consents or planning prevention/minimisat Also the Environmental Permits application ion of waste, design assumed from Environment s. Energy for ease of waste housing increase Agency) from collection, and use is unlikely to Waste of Joint Waste Core significantly Plants may Strategy policies affect the require an

240 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation and development impacts of this HRA. management policy. There is policies on waste. likely to be Promotes recovery . It would scope and of energy from however be flexibility waste in line with beneficial to for Joint Waste Core design facilities proposals Strategy policies to a high to include standard (see detailed column 9) mitigation measures, as necessary. Policy CS8: Provision will be Mostly N/A Use of appropriate Potentially Minerals made for North B neutral. Some technology/design B required Somerset to (No significant projects will (through conditions on (No significant on Planning in North contribute towards effect) need to be planning consents). effect) individual Somerset approximately 40% individually planning of the West of assessed as application England’s part of the s. aggregates planning requirement. The process. council will seek to maintain a land bank Unlikely to be for crushed rock of significant at least 10 years. effects on SAC (see HRA air quality appendix) CS8 Publication As above As above As above N/A As above As above As above Minerals Planning Policy CS 8 as at Effectively as above As above As above N/A. While the The measures below As above. As above November 2013. No changes are BGS Mineral are considered more proposed to adopted Resources appropriate: policy which is not Map suggests

241 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation fundamentally that high Use of appropriate different to quality technology. Consultation Draft limestone version. The exists near Locational control of addition that was and within part quarrying, leaving made at of the SAC it adequate distance Modifications stage is most between quarry and to quantify the unlikely that European site crushed rock land take from . apportionment for the SAC to North Somerset in quarrying tonnes, did not alter would be the earlier HRA permitted, it conclusions. being a European site. It would however s still be beneficial for the proximity of the site to be taken into account in assessing any proposals for quarrying in the vicinity. Hence the measures in column 9 are appropriate. Policy CS8 as at No changes are Mostly As above Use of appropriate Potentially September 2014. proposed to adopted B neutral. Some technology/design B required policy which sets (No significant projects will (through conditions on (No significant on out the requirement effect) need to be planning consents). effect) individual for crushed rock individually planning provision, and It would however assessed as Locational control of application maintenance of a still be beneficial part of the quarrying, leaving s.

242 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation landbank, and for the proximity planning adequate distance promotes protection of the site to be process. between quarry and of mineral resources taken into European site through mineral account in Unlikely to be . safeguarding areas.. assessing any significant proposals for effects on quarrying in the SAC (see vicinity. Hence HRA air the measures in quality column 9 are appendix) appropriate. Policy CS9: Safeguard, improve N/A Recreational N/A N/A N/A Green and enhance the B impacts on the existing network of (No significant SAC were Infrastructure green infrastructure. effect) considered in HRA of Bristol Core Strategy. This concluded that the site is not particularly vulnerable to trampling, and largely inaccessible due to steepness. CS9 Publication As above As above N/A As above N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 9 as at Effectively as As above As above As above. The N/A N/A As above November 2013. above. No changes Bristol Core are proposed to Strategy HRA adopted policy found that which is not recreational fundamentally pressure was different to not considered Consultation Draft a significant or version. Includes unmanageable reference to tree

243 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation planting. Reference risk to the to Green SAC. Infrastructure SPD in supporting text. Policy CS9 as at No changes are N/A Recreational N/A N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted B impacts on the B policy , which (No significant SAC were (No significant promotes effect) considered in effect) safeguarding , HRA of Bristol improvement and Also the Core Strategy. enhancement of the assumed This existing network of housing increase concluded that green infrastructure. is unlikely to the site is not .. significantly alter particularly the impacts of vulnerable to this policy. (See trampling, and column 5). largely inaccessible due to steepness. Policy CS10: Encouragement for Transport May be Encourage and facilitate May be Transport and travel management C Schemes potential to sustainable modes of B needed on policies and (Likely which could increase transport such as public (No significant individual Movement development significant affect traffic recreational transport, walking and effect) planning proposals that effect alone) on section of use of the site, cycling, (eg. through application encourage an A4, A369, from improved CS10 and LTP3) s. improved and A4176 and transport . integrated transport B3129 Transport Schemes network and allow alongside site which could affect traffic for wide choice of are potentially on section of A4, A369, transport modes. significant A4176 and B3129 Lists proposed alongside site have transport schemes been considered in over the plan period. terms of in combination effects and are unlikely to have a Likely Significant Effect, assuming

244 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation avoidance/mitigation; (see Table 15 of Appendix D) (See also HRA of Bristol Core Strategy,2010 , which suggests that even at worst case scenario, significant traffic growth would result in only marginal, non significant increases in critical pollutants regarding this SAC)

Recreational impacts on the SAC were considered in HRA of Bristol Core Strategy. This concluded that the site is not particularly to trampling, and largely inaccessible due to steepness.

CS10 Publication As above As above As above As above As above As above As above Transportation and Movement Policy CS 10 as at Effectively as As above As above As above, but The above mitigation as As above As above November 2013. above. No changes note that at Consultation Draft are proposed to recreational stage is still relevant. adopted policy impacts on the which is not SAC were fundamentally considered in different to HRA of Bristol Consultation Draft Core Strategy.

245 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation version. Includes This addition of concluded that requirement for the site is not transport schemes particularly to contribute vulnerable to towards carbon trampling, and reduction, and largely support movement inaccessible of freight by rail, due to which should have steepness. beneficial environmental effects. List of transport schemes is the same except for addition of Airfield Bridge Link (ABL) between Weston Airfield and Winterstoke Rd, and Weston Southern Rail Chord (WSRC). ABL is a more direct road link so should help reduce distance travelled and hence emissions. WSRC should help promote train rather than car transport which should have environmental benefits.

246 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Policy CS10 as at As above. No Transport The possibility Encourage and facilitate May be September 2014. changes are C Schemes that improved sustainable modes of B needed on proposed to adopted (Likely which could transport could transport such as public (No significant individual policy, which significant affect traffic increase transport, walking and effect) planning encourages policies effect alone) on section of recreational cycling, (eg. through application and proposals that A4, A369, pressure on CS10 and LTP3) s. encourage an A4176 and the site is only improved and B3129 slight; none of Transport Schemes integrated transport alongside site the transport which could affect traffic network. Lists major are potentially schemes refer on section of A4, A369, transport schemes significant to the A369, A4176 and B3129 in Joint Local the main road alongside site have Transport Plan of nearest the been considered in March 2011. site in North terms of in combination Somerset. effects and are unlikely Also, to have a Likely recreational Significant Effect, impacts on the assuming SAC were avoidance/mitigation; considered in (see Table 15 of HRA of Bristol Appendix D) Core Strategy. (See also HRA of Bristol This Core Strategy,2010 , concluded that which suggests that the site is not even at worst case particularly scenario, significant vulnerable to traffic growth would trampling, and result in only marginal, largely non significant inaccessible increases in critical due to pollutants regarding this steepness. SAC) While part of the site is more accessible ( Leigh Woods National

247 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Nature Reserve) there are lots of footpaths, offering the opportunity for walking without harming habitats.

Policy CS11: Provision of C Parking N/A As for CS10 above B N/A Parking adequate car (Likely provision (No significant parking to meet the significant which could effect) needs of anticipated effect alone) affect traffic users. on A4, A369, A4176 and B3129 alongside site is potentially significant

248 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation CS11 Publication As above As above As above N/A As above N/A N/A

Policy CS 11 as at Effectively as As above As above N/A The above mitigation as As above As above November 2013. above. No changes at Consultation Draft are proposed to stage is still relevant, adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Only difference is that the policy refers to Sites and Policies DPD rather than Development Management DPD.

249 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Policy CS 11 as at No changes are C Parking N/A Encourage and facilitate B N/A September 2014. proposed to adopted (Likely provision sustainable modes of (No significant policy. Provision of significant which could transport such as public effect) adequate car effect alone) affect traffic transport, walking and parking to meet the on A4, A369, cycling, (eg. through needs of anticipated A4176 and CS10 and LTP3) users. B3129 alongside site The housing is potentially increase could significant increase the demand for car parking. However impacts are mitigatable; (see column 9).

Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities Policy CS12: High quality N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Achieving High architecture and B urban design will be (No significant Quality Design expected from all effect) and Place Making developments.

CS12 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 12 as at Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A November 2013. above. No changes are proposed to adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version.

250 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation While some paragraphs differ the thrust of the policy is on promoting well designed building and places, and there is still reference to environmental sustainability. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS 12 as at No changes are B N/A N/A N/A B NA September 2014. proposed to adopted (No significant (No significant policy. effect) effect) Promotion of well Also the designed building assumed and places. Includes housing increase reference to is unlikely to environmental significantly alter sustainability. No the impacts of LSEs were predicted this policy. at any stage of HRA. Policy CS13: Provision of 17,750 Weston urban Potential to Recreational impacts on B N/A Scale of New dwellings across the B extension, increase the SAC were (No significant district over the plan (No significant Clevedon, recreational considered in HRA of effect) Housing. period. 3000 effect) Nailsea, use. Bristol Core Strategy. dwellings in Weston- Portishead This concluded that the super-Mare urban located > 6 site is not particularly area and 9,000 km from site. vulnerable to trampling, dwellings as an Unlikely to be and largely inaccessible urban extension to significant due to steepness. Weston-super-Mare. traffic impacts The remainder of (see HRA air 5,750 dwellings will quality be met by land from appendix) existing identified

251 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation sources and no additional allocation will be required in the plan period. CS13 Publication Provision of As above As above As above As above As above N/A minimum of 13,400 Note: Weston dwellings across the urban district over the plan extension period. 3, 300 net now replaced additional dwellings by Weston in Weston-super- Villages Mare urban area and 5,500 dwellings at Weston villages. Outside Weston most additional development to occur in towns on existing site allocations, or new development in their settlement boundaries, or Nailsea through site allocations outside Green Belt Policy CS 13 Proposed change in As above As above As above The above points as at As above N/A as at November housing number Consultation Draft stage from the minimum of are still relevant. 2013. 14,000 in adopted plan to minimum of 17,130 dwellings within North Somerset 2006 - 2026 . (Note: while this is an increase, the 17,130 is less than the 17,750

252 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation dwellings at the Consultation Draft stage, referred to in black above. Policy CS13 as at This policy, on the Weston super Potential to N/A B N/A September 2014. housing number, B Mare, Weston increase (No significant was remitted for re- (No significant urban recreational effect) examination. The effect) extension, use. Inspector supported Clevedon, However, an increase in the Nailsea and, recreational housing requirement Portishead impacts on the from 17,130 to are all located SAC were 20,985 for 2006- > 6 km from considered in 2026. site. Unlikely HRA of Bristol to be Core Strategy. While the housing significant This number has traffic impacts concluded that increased, it is not (see HRA air the site is not considered that quality particularly there is likely to be a appendix) vulnerable to significant effect on trampling, and the impact of the largely policy, having regard inaccessible to the location of the due to SAC and the points steepness. in column 9. While part of the site is more accessible ( Leigh Woods National Nature Reserve) there are lots of footpaths, offering the opportunity for walking

253 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation without harming habitats. Policy CS14: New housing Weston urban Recreational N/A B N/A Distribution of development will be B extension, impacts on the (No significant concentrated in (No significant Clevedon, SAC were effect) New Housing Weston-super-Mare. effect) Nailsea, considered in At Clevedon, Portishead HRA of Bristol Portishead and located > 6 Core Strategy. Nailsea residential km from site. This development will be Unlikely to be concluded that acceptable within significant the site is not their existing traffic impacts particularly settlement (see HRA air vulnerable to boundaries on quality trampling, and brownfield land. appendix) largely Within the Service inaccessible Villages small scale due to infill development steepness. may be appropriate where it will support the retention of existing services. Elsewhere housing development will not be permitted unless it is for essential workers in rural enterprises, replacement dwellings or affordable housing need. CS14 Publication Weston will be focus As above As above As above As above As above N/A of new housing development. Outside Weston most additional

254 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation development to occur at Clevedon, Portishead and Nailsea, on existing allocations, within their existing settlement boundaries, or in Nailsea at allocations outside Green Belt. Priority to previously developed land. Within the Service Villages small scale infill development or site allocations can occur. All new housing to not conflict with nature conservation policies Policy CS 14 Proposed policy As above As above As above N/A As above N/A as at November wording is unchanged from the 2013. adopted plan except for the housing figures in the table. Weston will be focus of new housing development. Outside Weston most additional development to occur at Clevedon, Portishead and Nailsea, on existing allocations, within

255 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation their existing settlement boundaries, or in Nailsea at allocations outside Green Belt. Priority to previously developed land. At Service Villages small scale infill development or site allocations can occur. All new housing to not conflict with nature conservation policies. While the proposed distribution of the housing has changed slightly from the Consultation Draft stage, mainly due to a reduction in the amount of housing proposed at Weston Villages, it is not considered that significant effects are likely. Policy CS14 As above. Weston urban Recreational N/A B N/A as at September It is assumed that, B extension, impacts on the (No significant the increased (No significant Clevedon, SAC were effect) 2014. housing effect) Nailsea, considered in requirement would Portishead HRA of Bristol have a similar broad located > 6 Core Strategy. distribution to the km from site. This

256 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation 17,130 dwellings in Unlikely to be concluded that the November 2013 significant the site is not changes. It is not traffic impacts particularly envisaged that the (see HRA air vulnerable to spatial strategy quality trampling, and would need to appendix) largely change, and it is not inaccessible considered that due to there is likely to be a steepness. significant effect on While part of the impact of the the site is policy, having regard more to the location of the accessible ( SAC and the points Leigh Woods in column 9. National Nature Reserve) there are lots of footpaths, offering the opportunity for walking without harming habitats.

Policy CS15: The Council will N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Mixed and seek to ensure a B genuine mix of (No significant Balanced housing types within effect) Communities existing and future communities. CS15 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 15 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy

257 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS15 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted B policy, which (No significant 2014. promotes a genuine effect) mix of housing types within existing and The housing future communities. increase is not No LSEs were likely to predicted at any significantly stage of HRA. affect the impact of the policy. Policy CS16: On-site affordable N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Affordable housing will be B sought to meet local (No significant Housing needs on all effect) residential developments of 15 dwellings or more (or site of 0.5ha or above). On other sites the Council will seek to negotiate a financial contribution towards the provision of affordable housing. CS16 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

258 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Policy CS 16 Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November No changes are proposed to adopted 2013. policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. The addition made at modifications stage to widen the definition of affordable housing to include affordable rented did not have significant implications for HRA. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS16 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted B policy which (No significant 2014. promotes provision effect) of on-site affordable housing on all residential developments of 10 dwellings or more (or sites of 0.3ha or above). On sites of 5-9 dwellings the Council will seek to negotiate a financial contribution towards

259 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation the provision of affordable housing. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS17: Housing schemes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Residential Sites for 100% affordable B housing to meet (No significant Providing local need within effect) Affordable small rural Housing Only communities will be supported provided it meets certain criteria. Specific sites may also be allocated in W-s-M, Portishead, Nailsea and Clevedon and the service villages for 100% affordable housing to meet an identified local need. CS17 Publication Housing schemes As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Rural Exceptions for 100% affordable housing to meet Schemes local need within small rural communities will be supported provided it meets certain criteria. Policy CS 17 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy

260 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS17 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted B policy. It promotes (No significant 2014, Rural provision of housing effect) Exceptions schemes for 100% Schemes . affordable housing It is unlikely that to meet local needs housing within small rural schemes of a communities subject scale appropriate to criteria, including for a rural one giving priority to location would sites within have significant settlement effects on the boundary, and one European Site, on scale being unless they were appropriate for actually sited on location. it Also states that which is most rural exceptions unlikely to be schemes will be permitted, acceptable adjacent notwithstanding to the settlement the housing boundaries of increase. Service Villages and Note that Infill Villages, and planning elsewhere adjacent applications to main body of would be likely to settlement, but not be subject to in the Green Belt,

261 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation unless justified by policies on very special biodiversity circumstances. Policy CS18: Provision will be N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Gypsies and made for an B additional 36 (No significant Travellers and residential and 10 effect) Travelling Show transit pitches for People Gypsies and travellers for the period 2006 – 2011. CS18 Publication Sets out As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A considerations for determination of locations for sites for Gypsies, travellers and travelling show people Policy CS 18 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS18 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted B policy, which sets (No significant 2014 out considerations effect) for determination of locations for sites for Gypsies, travellers

262 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation and travelling show people. This includes preference for brownfield sites. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS19: The Council will N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Green seek to protect B green (No significant Wedges/Strategic wedges/strategic effect) Gaps. gaps to help retain the separate identity, character or landscape setting of settlements. CS19 Publication As above, but As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Strategic gaps reference to strategic gaps, not green wedges Policy CS 19 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA.

Policy CS19 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which effect) 2014 promotes protection

263 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation of strategic gaps to help retain the separate identity, character or landscape setting of settlements. No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA . Delivering a Prosperous Economy Policy CS20: Employment-led Weston urban Potential for Recreational impacts on B N/A Supporting a strategy to both B extension, increased the SAC were (No significant deliver significant (No significant Clevedon, recreational considered in HRA of effect) Successful employment effect) Nailsea, use. Bristol Core Strategy. Economy development and to Portishead This concluded that the ensure that new located > 6 site is not particularly residential km from site. vulnerable to development is Unlikely to be trampling, and largely provided in significant inaccessible due to association with traffic impacts steepness. employment (see HRA air opportunities. The quality Core Strategy appendix) provides for around 29,500 jobs. Supporting text suggests indicative employment requirement for B1- B8 uses would include 61 ha at Weston Urban Extension CS20 Publication The Core Strategy As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A seeks to provide for Note: Weston at least 10,100 urban

264 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation additional jobs. extension Supporting text now replaced suggests indicative by Weston employment land Villages allocations (B1-B8 uses) to be as in adopted Replacement Local Plan, plus about 38ha at Weston Villages. Policy CS 20 The policy is not As above As above N/A The above points as at N/A N/A as at November proposed to change Consultation Draft stage from the adopted are still relevant. 2013. plan version. It states that the Core Strategy seeks to provide for at least 10,100 additional jobs, which is less than at Consultation Draft stage, with consequentially lower employment land implications. Policy CS20 No changes are Weston urban Slight potential NA B N/A as at September proposed to adopted B extension, for increased (No significant policy, which states (No significant Clevedon, recreational effect) 2014 that the Core effect) Nailsea, use. However, Strategy seeks to Portishead recreational provide for at least While a located > 6 impacts on the 10,100 additional consequence of km from site. SAC were jobs, which is less employment Unlikely to be considered in than at Consultation development, significant HRA of Bristol Draft stage, with could be to traffic impacts Core Strategy. consequentially attract more (see HRA air This lower employment people into the quality concluded that land implications. district, appendix) the site is not

265 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation potentially particularly increasing vulnerable to recreational trampling, and pressure, the largely potential for inaccessible much of this due to development to steepness. be located near While part of the Avon Gorge the site is site, in the Green more Belt is limited. accessible ( The policy states Leigh Woods that the focus of National employment Nature development will Reserve) there be at Weston, are lots of over 20km from footpaths, the SAC. Also offering the see column 9. opportunity for The assumed walking housing increase without is not likely to harming significantly habitats affect the impact of this policy, Policy CS21: Identifies retail N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Retail Hierarchy hierarchy across the B district. (No significant and Provision. effect)

CS21 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 21 Effectively as As above. There N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are no existing or are proposed to proposed 2013. adopted policy centres adjacent which is not to the SAC. The fundamentally nearest is at different to Easton in

266 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Consultation Draft Gordano/Pill, version. The policy over 2km away. seek to maintain the vitality and viability of the existing and proposed centres, and supports town centre uses within them of an appropriate scale. Town centre uses outside the centres will be controlled by the sequential approach.

Policy CS2 1 No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted B policy, which (No significant 2014 Identifies retail effect) hierarchy across the district. See above. It is not considered that the housing increase would significantly affect the impact of this policy. Policy CS22: Supports visitor N/A Slight potential N/A N/A N/A Tourism Strategy facilities and B for increased accommodation (No significant recreational across the district effect) use. However, provided they meet recreational certain criteria, impacts on the including SAC were appropriate scale, considered in support for HRA of Bristol

267 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation conservation Core Strategy. objectives , and no This adverse implications concluded that for environment.. the site is not particularly vulnerable to trampling, and largely inaccessible due to steepness CS22 Publication As above As above N/A As above N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 22 Effectively as As above. This N/A As above N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes classification, are proposed to without 2013. adopted policy mitigation, is which is not considered fundamentally appropriate different to since, while the Consultation Draft policy could version. The policy promote supports new and recreational replacement visitor activity, it makes and tourist facilities reference to across the district appropriate scale subject to criteria, and also states including supporting that conservation conservation and objectives should economic be supported. development Also note the objectives. comments about recreation in the “other” column. Policy CS22 No changes are B N/A Potential for N/A B N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant increased (No significant policy, which effect) recreational effect) 2014 supports new, use. However improved and recreational

268 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation replacement visitor See above. The impacts on the and tourist facilities housing increase SAC were and accommodation is not likely to considered in across the district significantly HRA of Bristol provided they meet affect the impact Core Strategy. certain criteria. of the policy This Criteria include regarding the concluded that appropriate scale SAC. the site is not and no adverse particularly implications for vulnerable to environment, and trampling, and (for Weston) comply largely with sequential inaccessible approach giving due to priority to town steepness. centre or seafront While part of sites. the site is more accessible ( Leigh Woods National Nature Reserve) there are lots of footpaths, offering the opportunity for walking without harming habitats Policy CS23: Proposals will be Unlikely to be N/A N/A B N/A Bristol required to B significant air (No significant demonstrate the (No significant quality effect) International satisfactory effect) impacts (see Airport resolution of HRA air environmental quality issues, including the appendix)

269 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation impact of growth on surrounding communities and surface access infrastructure. CS23 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Bristol Airport Policy CS 23 Effectively as As above As above. N/A. N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Policy CS23: Proposals for the Unlikely to be N/A N/A B N/A Bristol development of B significant air (No significant Bristol Airport will be (No significant quality effect) International required to effect) . SAC is impacts (see Airport as at demonstrate the over 8km from HRA air September 2014 satisfactory the airport. The quality resolution of housing increase appendix) environmental is not likely to issues, including the significantly impact of growth on affect the impact surrounding of the policy communities and regarding the surface access SAC. infrastructure. Also planning permission for major development at the airport has already been granted, (in 2009).

270 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Policy CS24: Identified land will B HRA Air N/A Use of appropriate B N/A. Royal Portbury continue to be (No significant Quality technology/design (No significant safeguarded for port effect) Appendix D (through conditions on effect) Dock uses, subject to states dock planning consents or demonstrable need located Environmental Permits for those uses that approx. 3km from Environment cannot be from SAC; Agency) . accommodated dock uses not elsewhere within the likely to be existing port estate. significant Further expansion of source of the port within North point source Somerset is not air emissions. supported. However use of appropriate technology/de sign would be prudent good practice CS24 Publication As above As above As above N/A As above N/A Policy CS 24 Effectively as above. As above . As above N/A Significant effects are As above N/A. as at November No changes are not likely, but use of proposed to adopted appropriate 2013. policy which is not technology/design fundamentally would be prudent good different to practice Consultation Draft version; (only a difference in the name of the site allocations document referred to.) No LSEs were predicted at any stage of HRA. Policy CS24: No changes are B HRA Air N/A Significant effects are B N/A Royal Portbury proposed to adopted (No significant Quality not likely, but use of (No significant policy. Identified effect) . Dock is Appendix D appropriate effect)

271 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Dock as at land will continue to over 4km from states dock technology/design September 2014 be safeguarded for the SAC. The located would be prudent good port uses, subject to housing increase approx. 3km practice. demonstrable need is not likely to from SAC; for those uses that significantly dock uses not cannot be affect the impact likely to be accommodated of the policy significant elsewhere within the regarding the source of existing port estate. SAC. point source Further expansion of air emissions. the port within North Somerset is not supported. Ensuring Safe and Healthy Communities Policy CS25: Provision of N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Children, Young educational facilities. B (No significant People and effect) Higher Education

CS25 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 25 Effectively as above. As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November No changes are proposed to adopted 2013. policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version.

Policy CS25 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which seeks effect) 2014 educational

272 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation provision where local provision will be inadequate to meet the needs of new residential developments. This is not likely to significantly impact on the SAC, given its location and qualifying interests, even with the housing increase. Policy CS26: Requires HIA on all N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Supporting large scale B developments, Joint (No significant Healthy Living working with health effect) and the Provision providers to deliver of Health Care a district wide Facilities. network of health facilities, reduce health inequalities in the district, encourage development that promotes active lifestyles. CS26 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 26 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version.

273 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Policy CS26: No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Supporting required to adopted B policy. (No significant Healthy Living Requires HIA on all effect) and the Provision large scale of Health Care developments, and Facilities. promotes joint working with health providers to deliver a district wide network of health facilities, work to reduce health inequalities in the district, and development that promotes active lifestyles. Policy CS27: Provision of sport, N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Sport, Recreation recreation and B community facilities (No significant and Community effect) Facilities.

CS2 7 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Policy CS 27 Effectively as As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version.

Policy CS27: No changes are N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Sport, Recreation proposed to B

274 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation and Community adopted policy, on (No significant Facilities. provision of sport, effect) recreation and community facilities. This is not likely to significantly impact on the SAC, given its location and qualifying interests, notwithstanding the housing increase. Area Policies

Policy CS28: W-s-M will be the Located > 20 Some possible N/A B N/A Weston-super- primary focus for B km from site. potential for (No significant development within (No significant Unlikely to be increased effect) Mare North Somerset. The effect) significant recreational town will traffic/energy use. However accommodate centre , recreational 12,000 new impacts (see impacts on the dwellings and HRA air SAC were 10,000 new jobs quality considered in between 2006-2026 appendix) HRA of Bristol as part of an Core Strategy. employment-led This strategy to deliver concluded that improved self- the site is not containment and particularly reduced out- vulnerable to commuting over the trampling, and plan period. largely inaccessible due to steepness CS28 Publication W-s-M will be the As above As above As above As above As above N/A primary focus for development within

275 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation North Somerset. The town will accommodate around 5,850 additional new dwellings with approx 10,500 employment opportunities between 2010-2026 as part of an employment-led strategy to deliver improved self- containment and reduced out- commuting over the plan period. Policy CS 28 The only change As above As above As above. As above . As above N/A as at November being proposed to While there is the adopted plan potential for 2013. policy is a change in increased the number of recreational dwellings to be built use, the in Weston from significant around 6,913 to distance of 5,136, and a change Weston from in the period for that the SAC, (over to occur from 2011- 20km crow fly) 2026 to 2013-2026. also suggests The Consultation no LSEs. Draft plan had referred to a figure of 12,000 dwellings for 2006-2026, but this was reduced in the Publication version due to

276 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation determination of a locally derived housing requirement. The policy still focuses new development on two key locations in Weston: Weston Villages and the town centre and gateway. Policy CS28 While prediction of Located > 20 Some possible N/A B N/A as at September numbers is difficult B km from site. potential for (No significant at this stage, it is (No significant Unlikely to be increased effect) 2014 likely that a effect) significant recreational significant proportion traffic/energy use. However of the increased centre , recreational housing requirement impacts (see impacts on the would be at Weston, HRA air SAC were urban area quality considered in (assuming the broad appendix) HRA of Bristol distribution would be Core Strategy. similar to that for the This former housing concluded that target.) The policy the site is not still focuses new particularly development on two vulnerable to key locations in trampling, and Weston: Weston largely Villages and the inaccessible town centre and due to gateway. This is not steepness. likely to significantly The significant impact on the SAC, distance of given its location Weston from and qualifying the SAC, (over interests, even with 20km crow fly)

277 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation the housing also suggests increase. no LSEs. Policy CS29: Town centre Located > 20 Some possible N/A B N/A Weston-super- regeneration: major B km from site. potential for (No significant retail-led (No significant Unlikely to be increased effect) Mare Town development in retail effect) significant recreational Centre core; entertainment traffic/energy use. However and leisure uses, centre recreational tourist facilities and impacts (see impacts on the accommodation at HRA air SAC were seafront; creation of quality considered in an office quarter appendix) HRA of Bristol within the gateway Core Strategy. area This concluded that the site is not particularly vulnerable to trampling, and largely inaccessible due to steepness.

CS29 Publication As above As above As above As above N/A As above N/A Policy CS 29 Effectively as As above As above As above N/A As above N/A as at November above. No changes are proposed to 2013. adopted policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Policy CS29: Town centre Located > 20 Potential NA B N/A Weston-super- regeneration: major B km from site. increased (No significant retail-led Unlikely to be recreational effect)

278 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Mare Town development in retail (No significant significant use. However, Centre core; entertainment effect) traffic/energy recreational and leisure uses, centre impacts on the tourist facilities and impacts (see SAC were accommodation at HRA air considered in seafront; creation of quality HRA of Bristol an office quarter appendix) Core Strategy. within the gateway This area This is not concluded that likely to significantly the site is not impact on the SAC, particularly given its location vulnerable to and qualifying trampling, and interests, even with largely the housing inaccessible increase. due to steepness. The significant distance of Weston from the SAC, (over 20km crow fly) also suggests no LSEs. Policy CS30: A major mixed use, Located > 20 Some possible N/A B N/A Weston Urban employment-led B km from site. potential for (No significant urban extension will (No significant Unlikely to be increased effect) Extension be developed south- effect) significant recreational east of Weston- traffic/energy use. However super-Mare. This will centre recreational include 9,000 impacts (see impacts on the homes, 42ha of HRA air SAC were employment land quality considered in along with other appendix) HRA of Bristol necessary Core Strategy. community, social This and transport concluded that infrastructure to the site is not

279 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation support the particularly development. vulnerable to trampling, and largely inaccessible due to steepness. CS30 Publication Employment–led As above As above . As above As above As above N/A Weston Villages development in two Note: Weston villages on mainly urban previously extension developed land at now replaced Weston airfield and by Weston Locking Parklands Villages (the “Weston Villages”. To include total of 5,500 new homes and at least 37.7ha of B use employment land. Policy CS 30 The only change As above As above As above. As above. As above N/A as at November being proposed to Also potential the adopted plan for increased 2013. policy is a slight recreational change in the use is limited number of dwellings since the to be built at Weston policy is for Villages from about employment 5,500 to about development, 5,800. The and Weston Consultation Draft villages are plan had referred to over 20km a figure of 9,000 (crow fly) from dwellings for that the SAC.. area , but this was reduced in the Publication version .

280 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Policy CS30 It is unknown at this Located > 20 Potential for NA B N/A as at September stage whether the B km from site. increased (No significant assumed housing (No significant Unlikely to be recreational effect) 2014. increase would effect) significant use is limited mean an increase in traffic/energy since the the number to be centre policy is for built at Weston impacts (see employment Villages. However it HRA air development, is still likely to be far quality and Weston less than the figure appendix) villages are of 9,000 dwellings over 20km that was in the (crow fly) from Consultation Draft the SAC. Core Strategy. This Also, is not likely to recreational significantly impact impacts on the on the SAC, given SAC were its location and considered in qualifying interests, HRA of Bristol even with the Core Strategy. housing increase.. This concluded that the site is not particularly vulnerable to trampling, and largely inaccessible due to steepness While part of the site is more accessible ( Leigh Woods National Nature Reserve) there

281 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation are lots of footpaths, offering the opportunity for walking without harming habitats Policy CS31: Proposals for N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Market and development at B Clevedon, Nailsea (No significant Coastal Towns and Portishead will effect) be supported if they increase self- containment, ensure the availability of jobs and services for the town and surrounding catchments, and improve the towns role as a service centre. CS31 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Clevedon, Nailsea and Portishead Policy CS 31 The only changes As above N/A As above. N/A N/A N/A as at November being proposed to While there is the adopted plan potential for 2013. policy are the increased following changes recreational in the number of use, none of dwellings to be built these towns is from 2006-2026: particularly Clevedon: change close to the from 454 to 493; SAC, the

282 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Nailsea: change nearest being from 210 to 647; Portishead at Portishead: change over 6km. Also from 3,051 to 3,040. recreational The policy at impacts on the Consultation Draft SAC were stage did not specify considered in housing numbers, the HRA of although they were Bristol Core given in the Strategy. This supporting text . concluded that The adopted policy the site is not permits particularly development within vulnerable to settlement limits at trampling, and all three towns, and largely mixed use schemes inaccessible adjacent to the due to settlement boundary steepness. at Nailsea outside This points to the Green Belt, the “B” subject to criteria. classification.

Policy CS31 No changes are B N/A As above. N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to this (No significant policy which effect) 2014. supports development within Clevedon, Nailsea and Portishead subject to criteria. The assumed housing increase could in theory raise the number of dwellings to be built at these towns, particularly if it

283 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation assumed that the broad distribution would be similar to that for the 17,130 dwellings target. However it is not considered that this is likely to significantly impact on the SAC, given its location and qualifying interests, notwithstanding the housing increase. Policy CS32: Proposals for N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Service Villages development which B support or enhance (No significant their roles as local effect) hubs for community facilities and services, employment and affordable housing, including public transport will be supported. CS32 Publication Support for small As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A scale development within settlement boundaries which supports and enhances village’s role as local hub. Policy CS 32 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November proposed to adopted (No significant policy. Latter differs effect) 2013. from Consultation The reference to Draft version in small scale and

284 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation allowing small scale fact that none of residential or mixed the proposed use developments Service Villages outside settlement are adjacent to boundaries subject this SAC, which to criteria is in the Green Belt, suggests that LSEs are unlikely.

Policy CS 32 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which effect) 2014 supports small Notwithstanding scale development the housing appropriate to the increase, the size and character points above of the village and apply. which supports or enhances its role as a local hub for community facilities and services, employment and affordable housing, including public transport. However this is a remitted policy: it is impossible to say at this stage whether the policy is likely to change or not. Policy CS33: Proposals for N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Smaller development within B the rural areas (No significant Settlements and outside of Service effect) Countryside. Villages will be

285 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation strictly controlled in order to protect their character and prevent unsustainable development. CS33 Publication As above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Infill Villages, smaller settlements and countryside Policy CS 33 No changes are As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November proposed to adopted policy. Latter differs Reference to 2013. from Consultation small scale and Draft version in fact that none of allowing some the proposed market housing Infill Villages are within infill villages adjacent to this but restricted to one SAC, which is or two infill dwellings within the Green or small scale Belt, suggests residential that LSEs are development within unlikely. the settlement limits, subject to criteria. Policy CS 33 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant policy. Proposals effect) 2014 for development Notwithstanding within the rural the housing areas outside of increase, the Service Villages will points above be strictly controlled apply. in order to protect their character and prevent

286 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation unsustainable development. Within infill villages, one or two infill dwellings or small scale residential redevelopment only to be permitted. However this is a remitted policy: it is impossible to say at this stage whether the policy is likely to change or not. Delivery Policies

Policy CS34: Financial N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Developer contributions will be B sought in the form of (No significant Contributions to a standardised tariff effect) Infrastructure. scheme applied across the district to ensure the effective and timely delivery of the key infrastructure requirements to support new development. CS34 Publication Concerns As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Infrastructure mechanisms for funding and delivery delivery and of infrastructural development elements, with contributions regard to the Weston villages,

287 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation Weston urban area and rest of district Policy CS 34 Effectively as above As above N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at November No changes are proposed to adopted 2013. policy which is not fundamentally different to Consultation Draft version. Policy CS 34 No changes are B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A as at September proposed to adopted (No significant policy, which effect) 2014 concerns the collection of development contributions towards infrastructure, rather than the proposal of development. No LSEs were identified at any stage of HRA. . . Policy CS35: Implementation will N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Implementation take place as part of B a co-ordinated (No significant strategy, provided in effect) step with the necessary infrastructure, utilities and service provision needed to support and enable the development.

288 Avon Gorge Woodlands SAC Assessment Matrix Policy/Proposal Description Assessment Potential Impacts on Avon Gorge Avoidance/ Assessment HRA Category 4 Decreased Other Mitigation Category required Air Quality Measures post ? mitigation CS35 is deleted N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A in the Publication version CS35 is deleted N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A in the adopted plan, and no change is being proposed to that situation CS35 is deleted N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A in the adopted plan, and no change is being proposed to that situation

289