Scottish Government

Environmental Assessment of Development Plans: Interim Planning Advice

PART 2
THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

The key stages of assessment

31. The assessment process involves the 14 key stages set out in Figure 2. They are necessarily presented as a sequence but assessment works best as an iterative process. For example, as the assessment reveals potentially significant environmental effects, the plan makers will return to earlier stages to consider whether policies and proposals need altering in light of the assessment findings, they may adjust the plan accordingly and where necessary will need to reassess the environmental effects of the alterations. The rest of the advice explains what is necessary at each stage.

Figure 2 Key stages of the assessment process

32. The assessment process has to be integrated into the wider process of plan preparation while also satisfying the requirements of the Directive. This is summarised in Table 1 which sets the 14 key stages alongside the planning process and the requirements of the Directive. It also refers to the detailed steps in the assessment process. It is based on local plan processes but is applicable to structure plans.

Table 1
Plan making and the assessment process
The relationship between the 14 key assessment stages and the plan making process

NB. Whilst the method set out in this guidance is intended to help to ensure compliance with the Directive, planning authorities are encouraged to adapt it to suit local circumstances and priorities. Most of the steps in Table 1 must be completed to ensure compliance, but there is some flexibility in, for example, the setting of criteria, the scope and format of the environmental report and the determination of methods and scope of monitoring.

33. This step only relates to cases where a planning authority resolves to prepare an alteration or any other modification of an existing plan, whether or not that plan, originally, was subject to assessment during its preparation. All new and replacement structure and local plans will require to be assessed in accordance with the Directive.

34. Article 3.3 of the Directive provides for "plans ... which determine the use of small areas at local level and minor modifications to plans ... Shall require an environmental assessment only where the Member States determine that they are likely to have significant environmental effects." The determination may be made on a case-by-case basis or the Member State may determine that all plans or programmes of a specified type must be subject to assessment, or they may combine both approaches.

35. It is expected that almost all revisions will need to be subject to assessment. It is for the planning authority to satisfy itself that a particular revision is exempt from assessment for one of two reasons: firstly, the revision is a very minor one that could not have any significant effects on the environment; or secondly, the revision to a local plan has already been assessed at structure plan stage. It may also be appropriate not to assess again a structure plan alteration relating only to a new proposal already assessed in a local plan.

36. In considering whether the alteration would have significant environmental effects, the planning authority must take account of Article 3(5) and every relevant criterion in Annex II of the Directive. These include consideration of the characteristics of the plan itself, or in this case, the alteration, having regard, in particular, to the following points.

37. Firstly, the degree to which the plan alteration sets a framework for development and land use change with regard to the location, nature, size and operating conditions of its proposals, or by allocating resources. Most development plan alterations will fall to be assessed under this criterion because they are likely to allocate land for development or provide a framework, which will influence the determination of planning applications.

38. Secondly the degree to which the plan influences other plans including those in a hierarchy. Many development plan alterations will fall to be assessed under this criterion because of the influence of development plans on other plans and strategies. Conversely, where a local plan alteration is only to include a proposal set out in a structure plan, that has already been assessed in accordance with the Directive, it is unlikely it will need further assessment at local plan level unless there is reason to believe the significant environmental effects may be different, or there has been a substantial lapse of time since the assessment of the proposal in the structure plan.

39. Thirdly, the relevance of the alteration to the integration of environmental considerations, in particular with a view to promoting sustainable development. Almost all development plan alterations are likely to fall to be considered for assessment under this criterion because of their integration with the sustainable development objectives of SPP/NPPG and other development plans.

40. Fourthly, environmental problems relevant to the plan alteration. Thus, if the alteration is intended to address a particular environmental problem it is highly likely it will fall to be assessed under this criterion.

41. Fifthly, the relevance of the plan alteration to the implementation of Community legislation. For example, a plan alteration introducing or modifying policies for the protection of internationally designated nature conservation sites, or project environmental impact assessment policies, or water protection/improvement or waste management is highly likely to fall to be assessed under this criterion.

42. Merely dealing with a small area of land at a local level, or a minor modification (see Article 3(3)) are not, in themselves, enough to exempt a plan alteration from assessment. The test is whether the alteration would be likely to have significant environmental effects, irrespective of its nature, location or size, and taking account of the five factors discussed above.

43. The designated consultation authorities must also be consulted in any case where it is considered that an alteration may be exempt from assessment, and the planning authority must have regard to their representations. However, consultation with the designated consultation authorities is not required where a planning authority resolves that a development plan alteration will be subject to assessment. Where a planning authority decides that a development plan alteration does not need to be appraised in accordance with the Directive it must publish the decision and the reasons for it.

Collation and updating of environmental information

44. Article 5.1 and Annex I of the Directive require the environmental report to include relevant aspects of the current state of the environment. These requirements should be seen in the context of the obligations on planning authorities to review and maintain up-to-date environmental information, relevant to the preparation of their development plans required by sections 4 and 11 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. The planning authority must carefully review and consider what surveys may need to be carried out and what further information may be needed to inform the development plan process, including the assessment. PAN 49 at paragraphs 14-16 provides further guidance on the reviews and surveys for development plans.

45. Article 5.2 indicates that the environmental report should include information that "may reasonably be required taking into account current knowledge and methods of assessment, the contents and level of detail in the plan programme" so recognising that there are limitations to the information that can be collated. The baseline environmental information should be matched to that reasonably available and necessary for the assessment.

46. Environmental information already held by planning authorities in existing data and records (though not always in the planning department) are likely to be sufficient to provide the information required by the environmental report. Most development plans already contain a summary of environmental information which usually covers most of these aspects at a level of detail likely to be sufficient for the environmental report or requiring only modest expansion. For example, it may be necessary to be more explicit about how the environment of the plan area may change in the absence of the implementation of the development plan. There is no requirement to produce complex data, the information presented in the report should be that most relevant to the issues and the use of existing environmental information is encouraged by the Directive.

47. The information required for an environmental report will vary from area to area and it is likely that the information required for a structure plan will not need to be as detailed as that for a local plan. Consequently, no fixed specification can be provided. However, as a general guide, planning authorities may find the following points helpful in reviewing the environmental information to be included in the environmental report and therefore to be collated at this stage to ensure it fully influences the assessment.

48. Annex I (c) and (d) of the Directive require the environmental report to include information about the environmental characteristics of areas likely to be significantly affected and any existing environmental problems which are relevant to the plan including in particular, those relating to any areas of particular environmental importance, such as Special Protection Areas under the Birds Directive (79/409/EEC) and Special Areas of Conservation under the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC). This may imply that, whilst the environmental report should have a general overview of the environment of the plan area, and how it may evolve in the absence of plan implementation, there should be a more detailed examination of the areas likely to be affected by the plan and specially designated areas.

49. The environmental report should be comprehensive in its coverage of existing significant environmental issues and should reflect the Directive's requirement for the assessment to report on "the likely significant effects on the environment, including on issues such as biodiversity, population, human health, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, cultural heritage including architectural and archaeological heritage, landscape and the interrelationship between the above factors" (Annex I (f)). The planning authority may wish to add to them but should not omit any without good justification. Designated areas and other areas of special sensitivity, such as those where environmental limits, classifications or thresholds of air or water quality are exceeded, should be featured in the environmental report, illustrated by maps or spatial diagrams as appropriate.

50. The information should be relevant to land use planning and to matters which the development plan will address, at a scale appropriate to the scale of the plan. The information should include, as relevant, that indicated in Appendix A (which is drawn primarily from the relevant NPPGs/SPPs and PANs) and which is relevant to the plan and its area. Appendix A is intended to provide a starting point rather than a complete and fully inclusive list. Again, the level of detail and possibly the scope of issues appropriate for a structure plan is likely to be less than that required for a local plan.

51. Some planning authorities will be able to draw extensively on existing work such as published or draft "State of the Environment Reports" where these are up-to-date. Where such a document is published, and still obtainable by the public, it may be sufficient to summarise its contents in the environmental report and provide a cross-reference to its availability. However, care should be taken to ensure the information is as up-to-date as possible and in checking this, SEPA, for example, will be generating more readily available and up-to-date data about the water environment, as a result of the Water Framework Directive, than may have been available at the time of the State of the Environment Report

52. There is a very large volume of environmental information available and planning authorities will need to be selective about the type of information and the level of detail they collate and include or summarise in the environmental report. A useful question to ask in gathering the information is "will this be likely to influence land use planning policies, or spatial strategies, or allocations, or the assessment of any of them for their significant environmental effects?". If the answer is "no" it is highly unlikely that the information will be required for the environmental report.

53. Thus, for example, areas of contaminated land should be included perhaps with a general indication of the nature of the contamination, but a detailed analysis of the contaminants would not be necessary. Similarly, areas with poor levels of air quality should be identified with a brief indication of the likely causes, but the details of the discharges of each individual source of air pollution is unlikely to be necessary. Watercourses, or parts of them, that will be graded by SEPA below the target "good" category, under the provisions of the Water Framework Directive should be included but, in most cases, it will be sufficient to summarise the reasons for degradation, rather than detailing them. Natural and cultural heritage designations should be included with an indication of the reasons for the designation and whether the interests are of international, national or local importance. This is particularly important to comply with the requirements of Annex I(d).

Forecast of environmental change

54. Article 5.1 and Annex I(b) of the Directive require the environmental report to include how relevant aspects of the current state of the environment may evolve without the implementation of the plan. Thus, it is appropriate to consider trends and pressures on the environment of an area and what may happen if the plan's proposals and policies, including the environmental protection policies, were not implemented, ie in the absence of planning control.

55. It is important to undertake an analysis of environmental change over the plan period because this will influence the assessment of the effectiveness of policies in avoiding or reducing significant environmental effects. It will help to highlight potential gaps in the scope of the plan's policy framework and improve the ability of the plan to make positive contributions to environmental protection and enhancement that may otherwise be overlooked.

56. There are likely to be some important environmental trends and changes, which may be evident despite the development plan already being in place. It may be that some of these changes are directly relevant to land use planning (e.g. increasing levels of urban dereliction or loss of townscape or landscape character through poor design and use of inappropriate building materials). Others may not be directly attributable to the planning system but may be capable of being remedied, at least in part, by new or different planning policies (eg planning permission will not be given for development involving the loss of ancient or long-established, semi-natural woodlands and conditions will be imposed to restrict the felling of trees in new planning permissions where there is a trend of such losses).

57. Whilst some effects, for example those resulting from climate change, may be only slightly detectable over a normal plan period they should nevertheless be included in the projection of environmental change where relevant. For example, any increased incidence or risk of coastal or fluvial flooding, or the effects of rising sea level requiring the raising of sea defences, would be relevant changes to include.

58. PAN 49 paragraph 49 explains that a separate Report of Survey is not required, but publicity should be undertaken in respect of surveys for new or replacement plans. The publicity could be achieved by way of consultation draft plans. The Directive will not change this, but planning authorities may wish to carry out some consultation with bodies that are well informed about the environment to help to improve the forecasting involved, see Case study 9.

59. Planning authorities must consult the designated consultation authorities (likely to be SEPA and SNH and the Scottish Ministers (Historic Scotland)) and are urged to consult any others who might usefully contribute to defining the scope of the assessment. The object is to seek consensus of opinion about the scope of environmental issues and the level of detail to be included in the environmental report. The consultation at this stage might usefully also include reference to the adequacy of the baseline information and forecasts of environmental change, before these are finalised, and could further extend to include discussion on environmental objectives and criteria to be used in the assessment process.

60. It will be evident that the development plan cannot address every environmental issue. Neither can the environmental report or the assessment process. The critical point is to be clear about what may comprise a likely significant effect in the context of the Directive. A key message of this advice is to urge planning authorities to maintain an overview of the influence of development plans on the environment. It will be necessary to scope the report in terms of its content and how it will address the significant environmental effects. Obviously, this can only be done when there is at least a general indication of what the plan is likely to cover, but that will be reasonably apparent in the case of most development plans at an early stage in the plan process. The sooner the environmental report can be scoped the better. As experience of assessment and monitoring improve it is likely that development plans will improve in their effectiveness for protecting and enhancing the environment. In the early stages of applying assessment, often for the first time in the plan-making process, authorities will need to consider which environmental effects are likely to be significant in the context of the development plan. The Directive does not require effects other than significant ones to be considered but determining significance in this context is not always easy.

61. "Significant" is not defined in this Directive, or the Directive relating to project environmental impact assessment, so it has to be a case-by-case judgement. However, as a general guide, an example of a significant adverse environmental effect likely to arise from implementing a development plan, might be an adverse effect on a feature which led to a statutory designation (for example, a National Scenic Area, Site of Special Scientific Interest, Conservation Area or Scheduled Monument). Another example might concern policy for employment sites and the likely effects of large scale industrial buildings on a landscape character of small scale. It is likely that such effects would be internally inconsistent with the plan's own policies for environmental protection. Inconsistency with one of the plan's environmental protection policies may be one useful indicator of a significant adverse environmental effect.

62. Clearly "significant" effects will not include trivial, negligible, inconsequential or other minor effects - they are insignificant. Likely significant effects will be those that can reasonably be predicted as a consequence of the plan's policies or proposals (not fanciful possibilities) that may affect the environment in ways that are noteworthy and important in the circumstances. An effect that would be of a nature, scale or duration that would not trigger any need to avoid or reduce it (by mitigation measures) in a planning application decision, would probably not be a significant effect in this context. Equally, however, any effect that, if considered in the context of a planning application would be capable of leading to a refusal of planning permission, or the imposition of a condition to substantially restrict its nature, scale or duration, would be likely to be significant.

63. Where a judgement about significance is marginal or uncertain, the precautionary principle should be applied. Thus, despite uncertainty, or relatively low risk of occurrence, if the effects could be of importance if they did occur, the principle would indicate that the effect should be regarded as a significant effect to be assessed.

64. Significance will depend on many factors. It is a judgement to be made in each case. It will depend on, amongst other things, the nature, scale and duration of the effect, whether the effect will be reversed (and if so, how quickly) how sensitive to change or recovery the environmental factors affected (eg wildlife or landscapes) may be and how important they are. Significance can also depend, in some cases, on the type of development or land use change that is proposed and its location. For example, the proposed use of land for a noisy recreation or sport would be more significant if located near to housing areas or a hospital, or in an area enjoyed for its tranquility. If located next to a site of heavy industry the increase in noise may not be significant.

65. It is not possible to identify in this guidance the full range of all development plans' potentially significant environmental effects, be they positive or negative. In some cases the significance of an effect may be affected by local environmental priorities. For example, in some areas the priority will be to improve the quality and safety of the urban environment in town centres, or to reduce the amount of derelict or contaminated urban land. In other areas the priority may be to enhance wildlife habitats or restore the distinctiveness of local landscape character. In these cases any effects that would exacerbate the problems may be more significant than they would be elsewhere but, equally, any effects that would reduce these problems may be significant positive environmental effects.

66. Whilst the effects on all relevant environmental factors (see Annex I(f) of the Directive) must be considered in the assessment process, it is important to identify which of these are likely to be significantly affected by the plan, either negatively e.g. by development proposals; or positively e.g. through the application of environmental enhancement policies. The significant environmental effects and local environmental priorities are likely also to influence the selection and wording of environmental objectives and criteria and should be considered again in monitoring (see stages 4 and 14 below).

67. In determining what is significant planning authorities should also guard against trying to offset adverse environmental effects with compensation measures. They are to be welcomed where environmental effects are likely to be significant and cannot be avoided or further reduced by mitigation measures. However, they should not be used to argue that the effects on the environmental resource would not be significant, because they have been offset.

68. If the harm that needs to be offset is significant it should be recorded as a negative effect in the assessment, with an explanation as to how any proposed compensation measures will help to compensate for the harm or loss. Similarly, mitigation and compensation measures should only be taken into account in the assessment where they are explicitly proposed in, or required by, the plan.

Identifying the scope and level of detail of information to be included in the environmental report

69. Planning authorities will need to consider and identify the scope and level of detail of information to be included in the environmental report. This should flow from the previous steps which should have collated and forecast the relevant information about the current and future state of the environment and identified the scope for significant environmental effects.

70. Each environmental report is likely to be different and to reflect the house style and local circumstances of the planning authority. As a general guide, the relevant aspects of the current state of the environment, as required by Annex I(b) to (d), (NB. not the whole Environmental Report) may be adequately covered in about 5 to 10 pages. Maps, plans, diagrams, charts and other illustrations will help to present the information succinctly and effectively, in addition to the text.

71. This stage defines an agreed set of environmental objectives and the criteria for testing the plan against the objectives. Article 5.1 and Annex I(e) of the Directive require the environmental report to include "environmental protection objectives, established at international, Community or Member State level, which are relevant to the plan or programme and the way those objectives and any environmental considerations have been taken into account during its preparation". In light of the fact that all development plan assessments completed in Scotland to date have adopted a method using environmental or sustainability objectives and criteria, it is recommended as an appropriate, and well tried method.

72. This is a critical part of the assessment process and Appendix B and Table B.1 provides recommended environmental objectives and criteria appropriate for the assessment of all Scottish development plans, derived from international, European and national environmental policies. Whilst they are not comprehensive of every environmental issue, at each of these levels, they cover all of the environmental factors listed in Annex I(f) of the Directive. They are not confined to environmental protection aims but include environmental enhancement and restoration.

73. Table 2 below summarises the number of criteria used in a selection of assessments of development plans in Scotland between 1995 and 2002. It distinguishes between environmental assessment (EA) and fuller sustainability appraisals (SA) where, on average, about half the criteria used related to environmental issues and half to socio-economic issues. Examples of objectives and criteria are provided in the Appendices.

74. In this context "objectives" are synonymous with "aims", both here meaning simply "that which it is intended to be achieved, what is being aimed at". In order to ensure the development plan is moving towards sustainable development, the planning authority should be clear about what it wants to achieve in terms of the protection, conservation, restoration and enhancement of the environment. Unless the planning authority has a clear environmental vision and a set of environmental objectives it is not possible to formulate criteria that can be used to assess the development plan's environmental performance.

75. There are a total of 18 environmental objectives suggested in Table B.1 ( Appendix B). In any particular assessment some will be more important than others. One or two may be irrelevant, or not likely to relate to significant environmental effects in the local circumstances. It is for the planning authority to judge which environmental objectives should be adopted and which criteria flowing from them should be applied, or whether some may be merged or separated to suit local circumstances. However, compliance with the Directive's requirements is essential and planning authorities must ensure that all relevant environmental factors listed in Annex I of the Directive are covered. Clearly, it would aid consistency of assessment, monitoring of assessment standards and research involving many development plans if the objectives (and the criteria) in Table B.1 were adopted widely.

76. The objectives and criteria in Table B.1 are considered to include all the factors listed in the Directive. If planning authorities use these criteria it is expected that they would comply with the requirements of the Directive. Using more criteria, or making them more explicitly relevant to the policies or proposals to be assessed would make the assessment more detailed but more than about 20 criteria will make the assessment process more time consuming and cumbersome. On the other hand, reducing the number of criteria whilst maintaining comprehensive coverage of issues tends to make each criterion longer, more complex and more difficult to apply. Generally it will be inadvisable to try to combine more than one main environmental factor into a single criterion and those indicated in Table B.1 should be regarded as the most complex that can be managed in most assessments.

77. If alternative, or fewer criteria are used it is for the planning authority to satisfy itself that the assessment would be compliant. Planning authorities should, therefore, only depart from the scope of the objectives and criteria in Appendix B where they have good reason to do so, related to the nature of the plan or issues it has to address or to the area.

78. It will be appreciated that the development plan may have little scope to significantly influence some environmental factors such as human health, compared to other plans or programmes. It must be recognised that development plans are only one way, albeit a very important one, of achieving environmental objectives. It may be more practical to apply some objectives and criteria only to the specific proposals, rather than general policies. There are limits to the scope, influence and effect of development plans. They cannot be expected to achieve more for environmental protection and enhancement than they are designed and intended to do. Consequently, the environmental objectives should represent a set of relevant, realistic and practical aims, which the development plan might reasonably be expected to help to achieve.

79. In respect of some objectives we do not always understand the links between some factors, such as human health and the location of some developments and land uses, such as mineral or waste management operations and differing types of industrial activity. In order to comply with Annex I(h) the environmental report will need to refer to limitations in the selection of environmental objectives and other constraints on the assessment process.

Adopting the environmental criteria

80. In order to test the plan's content against the environmental objectives it is necessary to draw up a list of environmental criteria. These are derived directly from the environmental objectives as shown in Table B.1. The criteria take the form of a question which is then used to test the environmental effects of the plan's vision and aims, and later its policies and proposals.

81. A great deal of energy and resources has been expended, in some past assessments, generating the environmental criteria with which to test the plan. Whilst planning authorities may wish to adapt the criteria in Table B.1, they are considered to comprise a satisfactory basis on which to test any development plan in Scotland. Again, as explained above, consistency between plans in respect of the environmental objectives and criteria applied in assessments would be advantageous. However, if the environmental objectives are adapted to suit local circumstances, then the environmental criteria must be similarly adjusted; there should always be a clear relationship between the environmental objectives required by Annex I(e) and the environmental criteria used to test the plan.