Scottish Government

3. ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS AND MEASURES ENVISAGED FOR PREVENTION, REDUCTION AND OFFSETING OF ANY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECTS

Summary of assessment methods

3.1 As noted in Section 1, the NPFSEA has included several stages of assessment, reflecting the different levels of detail included in various parts of the NPF. The assessment ran alongside the development of the NPF, allowing for full integration of environmental considerations from the outset.

3.2 During the first stage of the assessment, the strategic alternatives were identified and considered in relation to the SEA objectives and secondary criteria. A simplified assessment framework was used to assess the effects of a range of policy alternatives, with limited characterisation of each effect to reflect their strategic level. The assessment considered the effects of each alternative and these findings were fed back into the policy making process. Consultees were invited to provide comments on the outcome from this process, and this provided useful insights into the assessment, and helped to clarify key environmental issues.

3.3 This was followed by ongoing advice and iteration, as the content of the Discussion Draft NPF itself evolved. An early draft was assessed, with findings from this interim assessment also being fed into the policy making process and used to inform ongoing revisions of the policy.

3.4 National developments were initially subjected to a separate review process. The criteria used to identify and assess projects for designation as national developments were reviewed in relation to the SEA objectives, so that any potential environmental issues could be highlighted at an early stage. This was followed by an assessment of each proposed national development, which involved collating and reviewing previous assessment work, as most had already been subject to at least options analysis and more detailed project design work. Finally, the assessment focused on the potential cumulative effects of the suite of national developments.

3.5 The last stage in the SEA process has involved rolling forward the preceding assessments and supplementing them, to provide a more detailed review of the content of the Discussion Draft of the NPF. The fuller findings from this part of the assessment are summarised in the matrices in Appendix 3.

Limitations of available baseline data / methodological problems

3.6 The baseline findings would have benefited from some additional sources of information. Further information on the scale and spatial implications of soil sealing would have helped to improve our understanding of the spatial characteristics of soil vulnerability. Climate change predictions referred to in the assessment will be updated and spatially interpreted at a finer grain within the coming year - in the meantime the assessment has focused on the best available data provided by the UKCIP02 scenarios. Similarly, further data on energy generation sources were anticipated at the time of the assessment, but their publication was scheduled too late to allow for them to be incorporated. The assessment would have benefited from the availability of further research on the impacts of carbon sequestration projects and their implications for environments.

SEA Objectives

3.7 Objectives can be used to help structure the SEA process, and ensure that the assessment is systematic and relevant. SEA objectives, together with more detailed sub-criteria, were identified on the basis of the contextual and baseline analysis. They were set out in the scoping report and refined to reflect comments from the Consultation Authorities as far as possible. They build on those used in the assessment of the first NPF, by including more up to date sub criteria that reflect the changing baseline and policy context, as shown in the table below.

Table 3 SEA Objectives

Findings of the assessment of strategic alternatives

3.8 SEA is required to assess the effects of a plan, programme or strategy, and the effects of reasonable policy alternatives to it. Alternatives should not just be 'made up' to satisfy SEA requirements ¹, and they need not necessarily test each and every specific component of a plan. They should represent reasonable and realistic policy options ².

3.9 As the SEA alternatives were developed before the drafting of the NPF itself had commenced, they became an integral part of the policy development process - indeed the SEA helped to structure early thinking on the NPF by making policy options explicit and advising on their implications. It was acknowledged that although the alternatives contain a series of realistic components, it was very unlikely that any one of the five 'themed alternatives' would be adopted in its entirety as the basis of the NPF strategy. Instead, it was envisaged that the NPF would be a mix of components selected from across the range of alternatives.

3.10 At the beginning of the process of developing the NPF, a series of themes were identified and used to structure early consultation on the potential content of the plan: economy, sustainability, communities and connectivity. These themes built upon the content of the first NPF, and were used to structure participative workshops held at the initial consultation seminars which were held across Scotland in February - March 2007. These four thematic alternatives were developed so that each formed an outline NPF, comprising a series of specific policies and proposals. In addition, a fifth alternative of 'business as usual' was identified for testing, allowing future options to be compared with the effects that continuation of the first NPF might have on today's environmental baseline. The alternatives were later amended and expanded to reflect comments made by a wide range of stakeholders during the early consultation seminars. An overview of each alternative was written, followed by a listing of key components for testing in the assessment. These components included policies, proposals and possible spatial emphases that might be associated with each alternative.

3.11 Further information on the alternatives assessed and the related assumptions is provided in the assessment of alternatives paper, which is available for public review and comment on the NPF website ³. This also sets out the detailed findings of the assessment of alternatives, and explains how the alternatives were reviewed and taken forward or discounted within the policy development process.

3.12 The alternatives identified for the Stage 1 assessment reflected a very strategic level of thinking. Further projects that could potentially be taken forward as national developments were subjected to considerable internal scrutiny and debate, prior to finalising a list for inclusion in the Discussion Draft of the NPF. At an early stage, the NPF considered the environmental implications of the criteria for selecting national developments. With these potential effects in mind, an assessment of the initial list of proposals was undertaken, followed by more detailed reviews of the final list of projects. As mentioned above, much of this part of the assessment drew together existing or ongoing assessment work, rather than attempting to duplicate it. This allowed the assessment to maintain a broader focus, allowing potential sectoral or spatial cumulative effects to be considered further.

Reasons for the choice of preferred alternative

3.13 The Discussion Draft constitutes the preferred alternative for the NPF. However, other options, including those identified in the earlier assessment of alternatives, remain open for further debate during the Environmental Report consultation period.

3.14 In addition to the SEA findings, the NPF is informed by a wide range of other national level policies and plans. Indeed, its primary function is to provide a spatial and land use planning dimension to sectoral policies, and its key drivers go beyond environmental considerations to include a particular emphasis on achieving sustainable economic growth. Some of the SEA alternatives have been taken forward into the Discussion Draft NPF, others have been partially retained at this stage, and some have not been included. Several of the alternatives that have been included in the draft also represent the best possible policy option for the environment. Others could have more negative environmental effects, but have nevertheless been retained at this stage on the basis of their contribution to sustainable economic growth.

3.15 In summary, the factors that led to the choice of preferred alternatives are as follows:

• Several key components which were suggested as early NPF alternatives have been retained specifically because they contribute to economic growth, notwithstanding their potential negative (as well as positive) environmental effects. This includes a continuing emphasis on cities as drivers of economic growth, higher levels of development, road and rail improvements and improved internal and external connectivity.
• Some of the alternatives have been taken forward because they represent the best long term option for the environment. These include policies for a decentralised network of renewable energy generation and associated transmission infrastructure, and support for strategic green networks for city regions that contribute to improved biodiversity networks. Throughout the NPF, reference is also made to developing thinking on more sustainable patterns of development that take into account future capacity in light of climate change, accessibility by sustainable modes of transport, and other aspects of environmental sensitivity. An emphasis on climate change as a key driver of the NPF has been retained and developed, particularly where it supports the key aim of delivering sustainable economic growth.
• Conversely, some components have been excluded from the draft as a result of their potential adverse environmental impacts. This includes allowing continuing patterns of development of onshore wind as the key delivery mechanism, relaxation of planning controls in strategic economic development areas, exclusive and unguided private sector delivery of waste management facilities.
• Some of the components included have emerged more recently as a result of the need to implement new and emerging Scottish policy statements. This includes those relating to a proposed increase in housing land supply to reflect the aspirations of the Housing Green Paper, transport projects, freight-related proposals and a commitment to the delivery of facilities and infrastructure for the 2014 Commonwealth Games. Several of the national developments also fit within this category.
• Conversely, rejected alternatives include those which do not reflect feasible policy options as a result of sectoral commitments and established policy, fiscal and environmental controls. This includes more ambitious plans for climate change emissions reductions from the transport, and energy sectors.
• Some components which were tested as alternatives have not been included as a result of a lack of sectoral policy clarity or limitations in technical knowledge at this stage. This includes more specific commitments to strategic waste management facilities and further action on affordable housing. Similarly, the provisions for climate change aim to take the land use planning contribution to reducing emissions and achieving adaptation as far as possible, but should be reviewed in the future to reflect policy and legislative commitments anticipated over the coming year.

3.16 Together with wider Scottish Government policies, the SEA has played a key role in defining the final content of the Discussion Draft NPF. Where its influence has been more limited as a result of wider policy imperatives, it has made the environmental implications of the policies more explicit for consultees to consider further. As noted previously, the alternatives remain open for further debate in light of the environmental information provided here.

Effects of the Discussion Draft National Planning Framework on the Environment

3.17 A more detailed assessment of the Discussion Draft NPF has been undertaken, in order to explore its environmental effects, and the interactions between them, more fully. In order to achieve this, the NPF was reviewed, and key policy components were identified and run through the assessment matrices. The identification of key policy components included those policies where the NPF was considered to be the main delivery mechanism for the policy. Other parts of the NPF merely reflect wider policy commitments, as established in other plans and strategies that have or will be subjected to their own SEAs. To avoid duplication and maintain a focus on the most important elements of the NPF, these components have not been assessed to the same level of detail. However, where appropriate, they have been taken into account by considering their secondary and cumulative implications.

3.18 The full findings emerging from the latter stages of the work are provided in Appendix 3. The tables assess each key component in relation to the SEA objectives. This reflects more detailed underlying work where each component was reviewed in relation to the more detailed SEA sub criteria (see Table 3 above), and these were aggregated up to provide a broader summary conclusion. As a result, some of the summary conclusions suggest some mixed effects, with some components potentially having both positive and negative effects. Predicted effects generally build in mitigation proposals (i.e. represent residual effects), where a clear commitment to mitigation already exists. Where mitigation is less certain and is likely to require further work (e.g. dependent on development plan interpretation), the summary assessment of effects has not generally been adjusted to take this into account. A positive environmental effect on one criterion does not 'cancel out' a negative effect. As agreed at the scoping stage, the following summary symbols have been used:

3.19 The significance of the predicted effects has been assessed through the application of professional judgement. As far as possible, the criteria noted in the Scottish Government's SEA toolkit (Section 9) have been incorporated into the evaluation of effects. In particular, effects have been viewed as significant as a result of their magnitude, permanence, duration, scope for mitigation or enhancement and the sensitivity of the receiving environment (including reference to any designated or protected areas). Given the uncertainties arising at this level of assessment, it has not been possible to draw robust conclusions on environmental limits or capacity being threatened or beached by any of the NPF components.

3.20 The effects of the Discussion Draft NPF on each of the SEA topic areas are summarised below. These amalgamate findings in relation to the SEA objectives within the more detailed effects identified for each of the criteria.

Biodiversity, flora and fauna

3.21 The baseline assessment noted the wide range of protected habitats and species in Scotland, and the ongoing commitments to ensuring these reach favourable condition. Contextual analysis also underlined wider environmental protection objectives relating to biodiversity, from formal commitments to designating and protecting Natura 2000 sites, to a less formal policy emphasis on improving habitat networks to help adaptation to climate change and reduce fragmentation.

3.22 The NPF could have both positive and negative effects on biodiversity - much of this remains uncertain as actual impacts will depend on implementation at a more local level. The Discussion Draft includes high level policies which seek to reinforce the role of the planning system in protecting habitats and species. Its broader environmental aims, such as landscape and water protection and improvement, provide scope for secondary benefits for biodiversity. These should help to ensure that any development or strategic decisions emerging as a result of the NPF are inherently compatible with this aspect of the environment. However, aspirations for city-driven economic development, strategic housing land allocations, improved connectivity, carbon sequestration and renewable energy generation all have the potential to lead to negative effects as a result of their development implications. The more detailed assessment notes that many of these effects could be mitigated through careful consideration within development plans and appropriate locational and design choices at the project level.

3.23 A review of the spatial policies for the five identified regions also suggests potentially mixed effects on biodiversity. An emphasis on economic development in the Central Belt and improved connectivity on the east coast could lead to loss of habitats and displacement of species. However, these potential problems are balanced by the accompanying provisions for strategic green network enhancement. Plans for Ayrshire and the South West and the South of Scotland attach a high priority to habitat restoration, particularly in terms of woodland networks, but also for wetlands. This should again offset the potential negative effects of an overall emphasis on increased levels of development to accommodate economic investment and regeneration in these areas. In the Highlands and Islands the natural environment is recognised as a key part of rural sustainability, and the assessment notes that plans for strategic development corridors have already been developed with their potential effects on biodiversity having been considered in detail.

3.24 The suite of national developments raise some potentially more significant issues for biodiversity. Some could result in negative effects on some designated sites, including SPAs and SACs. Cumulative impacts on the protected sites and species on the Firth of Forth are a concern in respect of the Replacement Forth Crossing and enhanced port facilities at Grangemouth and Rosyth. The safeguarding of green belt land for enhancement of Edinburgh and Glasgow airports could ultimately result in loss of habitats where this leads to longer term development, with secondary effects on species for which a nearby SPA has been designated arising from the latter. Similarly, the effects of shipping on the sensitive marine and coastal environment of Scapa Flow are potentially significant, requiring further consideration at the project level. Renewable energy related grid enhancements may lead to negative effects on terrestrial and marine habitats and species. In contrast, generally more positive secondary effects are envisaged from the combined impacts of the Glasgow Strategic Drainage Plan and most components of the Commonwealth Games Facilities and Infrastructure.

Population and Human Health

3.25 The baseline analysis highlighted the need to take into account population change, and to accommodate changing household aspirations for housing, and emphasised a continuing demand for affordable housing. The policy context implies a possible future need to achieve significantly higher rates of housing development, whilst ensuring new housing is much more sustainably designed. Ongoing problems of poor health require to be addressed across policy sectors. Although there continues to be particular concentrations of social and economic deprivation in urban areas, rural deprivation has also grown slightly in recent years. Social policy is closely linked to economic policy aspirations, which are focused on achieving significant levels of growth in a sustainable way.

3.26 The NPF performs generally positively in relation to population and human health. Many of the high level policies will provide secondary benefits for health. This may arise from improved economic wellbeing, which can reduce social deprivation and therefore indirectly benefit the health of those at greatest risk of health disadvantage. Wider environmental improvements, including reduced water, air and soil pollution may also provide indirect health and social benefits. Direct benefits are predicted as a result of the NPF's emphasis on maintaining local health services and facilities. The assessment shows the importance of ensuring that strategic and local development plans and the development management process are effectively used to avoid adverse effects on communities that could potentially arise due to unplanned settlement expansion and large scale developments. Benefits extend across the range of spatial perspectives and should be supported by the largely positive effects of national developments. However, the plans for enhancement of Glasgow and Edinburgh airports could have long-term implications for health and community well-being arising from increased localised noise and air pollution, which require further consideration at a more detailed level of planning.

3.27 Social inclusion remains an underlying objective of the NPF, and as a result of the emphasis on sustainable economic development, largely positive effects are predicted. Secondary benefits from environmental improvements, including continued prioritisation of brownfield land for development, derelict land remediation, natural heritage protection, sustainable water and waste management are expected. These could be particularly significant within the Central Belt, East Coast and Highlands and Islands. Overall, however, some of the findings of the assessment suggest that urban communities may benefit more from the NPF than their rural counterparts: this may be justifiable given current concentrations of social and economic need as identified in the baseline analysis.

3.28 All of the national developments offer scope to provide significant benefits for Scotland's population, partly due to their economic emphasis. It is important, however, that appropriate project design and mitigation is undertaken to ensure that quality of life benefits are not undermined by secondary adverse effects arising from environmental damage associated with growth and infrastructure enhancement. This is particularly the case for the Replacement Forth Crossing, the plans for enhancing Edinburgh and Glasgow Airports, and the grid reinforcements.

Climatic factors and air quality

3.29 The baseline and contextual analysis showed that climate change is already having an impact on Scotland, and emphasised the need for a more ambitious programme of action to deliver on mitigation and achieve positive adaptation at a strategic level. Possible key impacts of relevance to NPF include changes to resources, soil composition and vulnerability, increased flood risk both on the coast and inland, and greater fragmentation and sensitivity of ecological networks.

3.30 In terms of climate change mitigation, the SEA objectives particularly focus the assessment on the effects of the NPF on the wider commitment to reducing harmful emissions from the transport and energy sectors. Overall, the Discussion Draft NPF makes some contributions to these goals, but may stop short of delivering significant positive effects. This is partly due to the need for the NPF to reflect and assist with the delivery of committed transport plans and programmes which will contribute to carbon emissions. This includes commitments to road improvements across the country (which are being separately assessed within the STPRSEA), and some aspects of the national developments. Whilst many of these projects could reduce emissions in the short to medium term by helping to address current road congestion, in the longer term they may have more negative effects, particularly where enhanced road capacity leads to increases in traffic volumes and distances travelled.

3.31 The NPF reflects established transport infrastructure commitments. However, its stated aims of prioritising land allocations which are accessible by more sustainable transport modes, and encouraging a shift towards increased walking and cycling by promoting sustainable settlement patterns and accessible green networks, could help to reduce some of the potentially adverse effects of transport infrastructure developments. Whilst negative effects might be expected from the plans for enhancement of Edinburgh and Glasgow airports, the NPF seeks to reduce the overall impacts of these developments by supporting improvements to surface transport for airport users. Options for freight aim to reduce emissions by promoting more sustainable modes of transport, but even shipping and rail borne freight transport generate emissions which require to be offset as far as possible. There is limited scope to go further within the NPF by taking forward alternative, more radical sustainable transport policies and projects, as these national developments follow on from wider national transport policies, supporting the overall aim of sustainable economic development.

3.32 The contribution of the energy sector to climate change mitigation is positively supported by the NPF. Plans range from improved energy efficiency within new build housing and support for a more dispersed pattern of energy generation and supply, to larger scale renewable energy generation proposals including nation-wide improvements to transmission infrastructure to unlock the potential of Scotland's natural resources. Carbon capture and storage are also strongly supported, as an environmental solution and a potentially strong economic sector for the future. These measures could, however, lead to secondary effects on other aspects of the environment, and therefore require careful consideration within development plans and rigorous application of project-level mitigation measures. SPP6 already sets a policy framework for achieving this.

3.33 Climate change adaptation measures have proved more difficult to integrate into the NPF, partly due to the high level of uncertainty and current gap in national adaptation policies. However, some practical opportunities, including improved habitat networks, sustainable water management, and an emphasis on innovative approaches to settlement patterns, should go some way towards ensuring the long-term robustness of the spatial strategy in relation to climate change.

Soil

3.34 The baseline analysis highlighted concerns for soils, including soil sealing arising from urban development and infrastructure provision. Within this context, many aspects of the NPF will inevitably lead to damage to or loss of soil resources, as some development will require to be accommodated on land which has not previously been developed. It is not possible to determine whether or not cumulative effects of the various sectoral developments will be significant at a national scale, as a result of a lack of clear data on previous and anticipated levels of loss and future capacity. Whilst the NPF proposes higher levels of development to achieve sustainable economic growth, this should be managed through development plans to minimise potential effects on vulnerable resources.

3.35 There should be scope for some positive synergistic effects on soil arising from proposals to protect and enhance water quality and landscape, the promotion of more sustainable drainage solutions and the expansion of woodland cover. The continuing emphasis on prioritising brownfield sites for development should continue to be beneficial as a result of the scope for remediation of contaminated land, although this partly depends on the choice of appropriate remediation methods to minimise temporarily negative effects on soil.

3.36 Spatial priorities could have negative implications across different parts of the country, with particular pressures arising from the relatively low availability of brownfield sites in the east, the Highlands and Islands and the South of Scotland. The national developments could lead to a mix of positive and negative effects. Airport enhancement plans could have negative effects as a result of their potential land take and requirement to make use of previously undeveloped land. There may be negative cumulative effects from renewable energy developments and associated transmission infrastructure, with significance depending on the sensitivity of receiving soil resources, and use of appropriate mitigation at the project design and site selection stages. Secondary implications related to the role of soil as a carbon sink have also been noted.

Water

3.37 The baseline analysis showed that whilst on the whole Scotland's water quality is good, RBMPs are likely to propose additional measures to reduce the risk of specific water bodies not reaching good ecological status. SEA criteria for the water environment focus on water supplies and quality, and aim to promote sustainable water management solutions at a strategic level. Again, uncertain or mixed effects are expected from the high level policies, with negative implications of additional development being balanced by protective policies that aim to complement the measures likely to be progressed within River Basin Management Plans.

3.38 The marine environment is also broadly considered, and the assessment has identified potentially negative effects from an emphasis on marine renewable energy generation and transmission, and a degree of uncertainty regarding impacts from untested carbon storage proposals linked to the North Sea. The emphasis on shipping that is reflected in three of the proposed national developments also has implications for the marine environment, including water quality and biodiversity, that may only be partly addressed by improved shipping practices and pollution prevention regimes. As noted previously, potential cumulative effects on the Firth of Forth of national developments requires further consideration and careful management given the protected status of this area.

3.39 Flood management issues have been raised by the assessment. Although it is not possible to fully identify the likely effects of strategic development proposals, conclusions have been drawn which have obvious spatial implications for catchment-wide and sub-catchment approaches to flood management. The Glasgow Strategic Drainage Plan represents an innovative approach to water management which should help to reduce flooding and provide numerous other secondary environmental benefits: inclusion as a national development should help to secure its delivery within timescales that will ensure it contributes to regeneration plans. The Edinburgh airport expansion plan, combined with economic development proposals and future risk of flooding arising from climate change, suggests the need for mitigation that allows for strategic level flood management extending across local authority boundaries taking into account future capacity for development, water and environmental management on a catchment-wide scale. Further work at the plan and project level is required to identify how this might be achieved.

Material Assets

3.40 Under the heading of material assets, the assessment has taken into account potential impacts on derelict and vacant land, waste management, transport and rural development.

3.41 The baseline analysis shows that although there has been considerable progress towards reducing derelict and vacant land, there continues to be a need to prioritise brownfield reclamation and redevelopment, particularly within parts of the Central Belt. As noted previously, the NPF maintains an emphasis on derelict and vacant land restoration which should deliver long-term benefits. The NPF also aims to balance this with a need to identify settlement expansion and development opportunities which are accessible, noting that in some cases the development of greenfield land may prove to be the best environmental option. High level commitments are followed through to many of the national developments, with the port developments providing new uses for currently derelict land, the 2014 Commonwealth Games facilities and infrastructure also making use of vacant sites, and the Strategic Drainage Plan providing secondary benefits by helping to unlock disused areas for future development.

3.42 Waste management criteria aim to ensure that the planning system contributes as much as possible to achieving a shift to more sustainable resource management options, in line with wider sectoral policy such as the National Waste Plan and SPP10, and in relation to the ongoing challenges identified in the baseline analysis. The NPF goes some way towards achieving this in principle, but stops short of providing significant benefits as it has not been possible to build in proposals for specific infrastructure and facilities that would more practically address this agenda. Some developments could also generate significant levels of waste that will require sustainable management.

3.43 In addition to the discussion on transport emissions (above), the NPF aims to help deliver the high level objectives of the National Transport Strategy, and to help to progress improvements in transport infrastructure which require to be delivered before 2012. The Discussion Draft NPF generally supports these policies and proposals, facilitating the planning contribution to the delivery of key projects by conferring national development status and providing statements of need. As far as possible, the NPF seeks to link future accessibility resulting from transport plans with strategic land use decisions, in order to minimise travel distance and support economic development. Proposals for a significantly improved freight network, strategic road and rail network improvements and airport enhancement should also provide improved external and internal connectivity for Scotland in the longer term, thereby supporting further investment. This will, however, also potentially lead to localised impacts on other environmental resources, which require careful management within strategic and local development plans, the design of transport projects and delivery through the development management process.

3.44 The impacts of the NPF on rural development are more subtle, partly due to the continuing emphasis on cities as economic drivers. Secondary benefits are expected from high level policies that emphasise a need for ongoing environmental protection and local distinctiveness, and the NPF is clear in its intention for rural areas to develop in a sustainable way that promotes environmental stewardship closely allied with diversification. The assessment remains inconclusive at this stage in terms of the potential benefits or disbenefits for rural communities of improved urban connectivity. Providing that their impacts are appropriately mitigated, some of the national developments should indirectly support rural development - for example by increasing the scope for travelling to and from commuter, intermediate and peripheral rural areas, and by supporting industries that could provide particular benefits for the rural economy, including some proposals for shipping and port facilities and the renewable energy sector.

Cultural Heritage

3.45 As with biodiversity and landscape, the NPF could have both negative and positive effects on the historic environment. Most of its impacts will ultimately depend on appropriate decision making at a more local level. Potential adverse effects include direct loss of or damage to archaeological resources, as well as the effects on listed buildings and historic townscapes, and changes to their settings. Whilst many effects may be mitigated, there may also be residual and cumulative impacts arising from significant levels of economic development and associated land take. Policies which improve air quality and the water environment could provide secondary benefits for the historic environment, whilst some processes such as derelict land remediation and regeneration may have negative consequences if the potential value of underlying archaeological resources is not recognised.

3.46 Most of the national developments could have negative effects on cultural heritage, including impacts on historic gardens and designed landscapes, scheduled monuments and listed buildings. The significance of these effects cannot be fully defined at this stage, in the absence of detailed siting and design proposals, but it is important to recognise that negative effects on cultural heritage resources tend to be permanent, and the resources irreplaceable. Vulnerable resources include known and unknown coastal and offshore archaeological remains, given the proposals for offshore energy transmission cables and marine renewables, port developments and their associated construction and operational processes such as dredging.

3.47 Although the NPF recognises the value of the historic environment as a tourism resource, there remains scope for further recognition of its value as a contributor to environmental quality and in particular in defining local distinctiveness and cultural identity. By doing so, NPF could set a clearer agenda for strategic and local development plans to take forward, thereby reducing risk of loss of or damage to resources.

Landscape

3.48 As with biodiversity, water, soil and cultural heritage, Scotland's landscapes may be positively or negatively affected by the NPF. The Discussion Draft has sought to ensure that proposals take into account spatial variations in capacity to accommodate strategic development proposals. However, further development, which may be particularly concentrated on the edge of settlements including our cities, has the potential to either undermine landscape character, or offer a major opportunity for landscape enhancement that actively improves visual amenity of settlements and contribute to a strengthening of sense of place. The latter is clearly an aspiration of the NPF, given its emphasis on place-making, but actual benefits will depend on the effectiveness of implementation through strategic and local development plans. The NPF seeks to support this by specifically highlighting the role of planning in maintaining and enhancing landscape quality and distinctiveness.

3.49 Some of the proposals will be particularly difficult to manage in terms of mitigating landscape effects. In particular, the continuing promotion of renewable energy generation and the national development of grid reinforcement will inevitably lead to change, potentially affecting some of the country's most highly valued landscapes and seascapes and resulting in cumulative negative effects. Mitigation measures, including those identified in the SEAs of SPP6 and the Marine Renewables Strategy, should be used to avoid such effects.

3.50 More subtle secondary effects might also arise. The NPF emphasises a need to focus development on accessible areas, and whilst this may help to reduce travel distance, it could result in particular impacts on vulnerable areas including green belts and transport corridors. This reflects a key challenge for the NPF that is likely to become more significant as the climate change agenda progresses - the need to balance localised environmental impacts with reaching the most sustainable development solution for the global environment in long term. It will continue to be important to avoid the incremental and cumulative effects of a series of large scale developments and land use change in areas which are relatively vulnerable to landscape change as a result of previous loss of character and visual decline. In this regard, potential cumulative effects on the landscape to the west of Edinburgh raise issues requiring further consideration and mitigation through compensatory measures, project-level mitigation and broad scale enhancement.

Measures envisaged for the prevention, reduction and offsetting of significant adverse effects

3.51 Schedule 3 paragraph 7 of the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005 requires an explanation of "the measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and as fully as possible offset any significant adverse effects on the environment of implementing the plan or programme."Appendix 4 summarises key environmental impacts arising from the NPF and identifies proposed measures for the prevention, reduction and offset of significant adverse effects. In many cases such measures may already be taken forward as a matter of course, particularly those proposed for development plans and development management. However, those identified for the national developments may be of particular interest, given that they aim to address cumulative as well as individual impacts of developments, the latter having generally been previously explored.

SEA recommendations which have already been built into the NPF

3.52 As well as the review of alternatives informing the drafting of the Discussion Draft NPF, more recently the SEA findings have been fed into the policy making process. Often the influence has been quite subtle, particularly in relation to the specifically environmentally driven proposals within the NPF. In other cases the SEA has led to specific amendments and additions to the emerging draft being made, including:

• Additional references to climate change mitigation and adaptation measures, taking the content of the NPF as far as possible in relation to current predictions, targets and general good practice on adaptation. Making the difficult choices between fulfilling global environmental commitments and maintaining local environmental quality more explicit. Further references to the need for strategic development locational decisions to take account of possible future vulnerability arising from climate change.
• Further references to the role of planning in relation to biodiversity, including reference to both rural and urban areas and support for including this as a consideration in defining sustainable settlement patterns.
• Further links with broader initiatives to promote strategic habitat network enhancement.
• Clarification of the scope of strategic green networks for the Central Belt, and reference to potentially adverse effects of some positive environmental enhancement measures.
• Emphasising the importance of achieving a shift to more sustainable modes of transport, to balance NPF commitments to potentially less positive transport projects.
• Highlighting the links between development and water infrastructure and impacts, including clearer links with the River Basin Management Planning process.
• Further consideration of nationally important minerals planning issues.
• Ensuring the NPF can go as far as possible towards helping to deliver strategic waste management facilities required to meet ongoing waste reduction and recycling targets.
• Further references to the nationally significant environmental resources of rural areas, and comments on the importance of their ongoing conservation and positive planning within them.
• Additional references to landscape character, vulnerability and distinctiveness in order to emphasise the role of planning in safeguarding these qualities.

SEA recommendations to be reviewed for possible inclusion in the finalised NPF

3.53 In addition to the above, some issues have been raised in the assessment of the Discussion Draft, which have not yet been integrated, but could be explored further within the next stage of drafting. These include:

• Further exploration of the value of the historic environment at a national scale, ensuring that its role in defining a sense of place and contributing to environmental quality is fully recognised.
• Further references to the specific challenges and opportunities in rural areas, to ensure that the emphasis on city region growth does not mean that their needs are overlooked. There may also be scope to improve links with other land use sectors, such as agriculture to ensure the planning contribution to wider environmental objectives is considered 'in the round'.

3.54 In addition, the findings of the Appropriate Assessment ( AA) of the NPF should provide clearer conclusions about the significance of some project-specific and cumulative effects on Natura 2000 sites. The findings from the AA will inform the finalised draft of the NPF.

Further proposals for mitigation

3.55 Further proposals for mitigation are set out in Appendix 4. In summary, they include the following:

• Recommendations for supporting ongoing action by the Scottish Government, or for new initiatives, including issues of relevance to the ongoing SEA of the effects of improvements in transport infrastructure and projects that the STPR will be seeking to deliver, and further opportunities for developing the carbon sequestration sector as a means of meeting targets on emissions. National guidance and more detailed assessment of flood management solutions and the cumulative impacts and co-ordination of electricity transmission infrastructure which extends across local authority and strategic planning boundaries and into the marine environment would also be useful. The Scottish Government's role in supporting the waste management sector is also reiterated within the mitigation measures.
• Recommendations for strategic development plans and their associated SEAs. This includes a need for further consideration of sustainable patterns of development at a strategic level, and of the cumulative effects of a combination of infrastructure enhancement, economic development and settlement expansion plans from a city region perspective. Strategic development plans also have a particular role to play in defining the capacity of landscapes to accommodate development, reflecting integrated catchment and coastal planning, and taking forward cross-boundary flood management solutions that build in longer term capacity to adapt to climate change.
• Recommendations for local development plans, including scope to resolve potentially adverse environmental impacts where they can be anticipated before they become masterplanning issues or development management. The SEA of each local development plan should help to deliver this to some extent. Particular issues of concern include the need to ensure full recognition of existing and future environmental sensitivity when making land allocations, and the need to adopt policies which reflect wider environmental commitments to deliver more sustainable housing alongside an increase in overall land allocations.
• Issues to be considered further at the detailed scheme design level or within project specific mitigation. This should be achieved through the development management system. Many of these issues relate to avoiding or mitigating specific impacts on environmental resources, including protected habitats and species, cultural heritage resources, landscapes, water and soil. Positive environmental management should also be encouraged in this way, including progressing SUDS schemes based on best practice and prioritisation of brownfield sites for development. This will be more practical if effective assessments of local and strategic development plans have been made.
• Issues requiring further consideration and guidance from other agencies and environmental bodies. This includes support for ongoing commitments to good environmental practice in forestry by FCS, Forest Enterprise and other woodland managers, and recognition of the day to day management role that SEPA plays, particularly in relation to the water and air environments. Recommendations are also made for further specialist environmental advice and guidance for plans and development management decisions by Historic Scotland and SNH.
• Scope for the private sector to play a role in minimising environmental impacts. This includes recommendations for the shipping and air transport sectors which aim to reduce emissions through good practice and improved technology. The development sector should also be recognised as sharing responsibility for environmental mitigation.

Appropriate assessment

3.56 The SEA findings have raised a number of concerns that should be explored further in the appropriate assessment of the NPF. Particular issues may arise from national developments, including:

• potential effects on the Firth of Forth and Forth Islands SPAs, including the combined effects of the Replacement Forth Crossing, and port developments at Grangemouth and Rosyth;
• potential effects of the proposed container transhipment terminal and associated levels of shipping activity on Scapa Flow on qualifying features of Switha and Hoy SPAs;
• impacts arising from the enhancement of Glasgow Airport on the qualifying features of the Black Cart SPA (whooper swans);
• cumulative effects potentially arising from energy transmission infrastructure. This could have particular implications for coastal and marine SPAs and SACs.

3.57 These and other issues will be explored in more detail in the Appropriate Assessment of the Discussion Draft NPF, to be undertaken over winter 2007/8.

Monitoring

3.58 The NPF and its impacts are already subject to regular monitoring. The purpose of SEA monitoring should be to ensure that mitigation is effective and that any early or unexpected effects are recognised and addressed. A review of the NPF monitoring data sources used in the 2006 review has been undertaken in order to identify where this could be supplemented in the next phase of monitoring to take on board issues arising for the SEA. It is important to note that in most cases, these data may not specifically define the impact of the NPF on environmental problems. However, they should highlight any particular areas of concern, which could be investigated further through additional, more tailored monitoring and data analysis.

Table 4. Proposed monitoring data sources to be referred to in the next round of NPF monitoring

Next Steps

3.59 Table 5 lists milestones in the development of the NPF and its SEA, and the dates when these are expected to be completed.

Table 5. Anticipated plan-making and SEA milestones

Advice to Consultees

3.60 This Environmental Report has sought to define the environmental effects of the Discussion Draft National Planning Framework, and of the alternatives to it that have been considered to date. The purpose of the report is to provide consultees with the information they require to make an informed judgement on the content of the NPF as it currently stands. It should therefore be read and referred to alongside the Discussion Draft NPF itself.

3.61 In considering the findings of the assessment and responding to the Discussion Draft NPF, consultees may wish to give further consideration to the following key questions:

• Do you disagree with any of the assessment findings?
• Should any further baseline evidence, wider environmental policies or sources of information be taken into account?
• Do you have concerns about significant or cumulative environmental effects on particular areas or environmental resources?
• Are there opportunities to limit the adverse effects of the NPF that have not so far been noted in the proposals for mitigation?
• Can the NPF deliver more positive aims and aspirations for the environment in the long term?