Integrated Impact Assessment
Page contents
- Non technical summary
- 1. Introduction
- 2. The Local Transport Plan
- 3. Methodology
- 4. Baseline, issues and opportunities
- 5. Assessment
- 6. Monitoring
- A1. Appendix A - Scoping Responses
Non technical summary
Non-Technical Summary
East Sussex County Council is developing the fourth Local Transport Plan (LTP4). An Integrated Impact Assessment (IIA) is being undertaken as part of the LTP4 development. The IIA combines several sustainability appraisal processes, so that environmental and social impacts are identified and mitigated as part of plan development.
The results of these assessments are summarised below:
Natural Capital: Natural capital refers to the elements of the natural environment which provide valuable goods and services to people (also known as ecosystem services). It is an overarching theme across the IIA as it is fundamental to health, biodiversity, landscape, air quality, water, climate change, communities and other topics considered in the assessment.
Biodiversity: There are a number of terrestrial and marine protected sites for nature conservation that are designated at an international, national and local level, in addition to legally protected species. Outside of these, undesignated habitats and other species also contribute to biodiversity in the County. There are mixed positive and negative effects from LTP4, those that are significant include positive effects from LTP4 Policies relating to biodiversity and green/blue infrastructure (Policy A4 & B5). There is potential for negative effects, in relation to major new infrastructure through Policies D1 and D2.
Landscape: East Sussex has a unique and historic landscape, reflected in designations of national and international importance. However, the area is also highly populated creating pressure from development as well as demand for recreational and tourism access. There are mixed positive and negative effects, those that are significant include positive effects for LTP4 Policies listed under biodiversity above. Potential for significant negative effects have been identified where new transport infrastructure is located within designated landscapes, including the South Downs National Park and High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. There is potential to affect landscape character, dark skies and/or tranquillity.
Historic Environment: East Sussex has a rich cultural heritage reflected in the wealth of designated assets, historic landscapes, recorded sites, as well as non-designated and unknown assets. There are mixed positive and negative effects predicted for the LTP, those that are significant include positive effects from policies for biodiversity and green infrastructure (Policy A4 & B5), which can enhance transport corridors and improve the setting of heritage assets. Potential for significant negative effects have been identified for new infrastructure in proximity to designated sites, or has the potential to affect unknown archaeology..
Natural Resources – land, soil and water: These are important natural capital assets in East Sussex and are at risk of loss or degradation. Assets include best and most versatile agricultural land and river systems. Policies with significant positive effects include biodiversity and green infrastructure as described above, in addition to Public Rights of Way (Policy B7), which supports better land management to reduce impacts of erosion. Policies and projects which make best use of existing infrastructure have significant positive effects, as they reduce consumption and loss of new resources. New transport infrastructure can have polluting effects on land, soil and water and new infrastructure consumes natural resources and produces waste in construction.
Climate: There are global, national and local targets to reach ‘net zero’. Transport significantly contributes to emissions of carbon dioxide in East Sussex. Transport networks are also vulnerable to effects of climate change including rainfall, flooding, erosion, high winds and high temperatures.
Many of the policies and transport projects in the LTP support significant positive effects in relation to reductions in carbon emissions. Examples include policies for decarbonisation and projects that support active travel, public transport (bus and rail), as well as ease of use and better interchanges between these types of transport. It is recognised that new transport infrastructure, unless mitigated appropriately, has the potential to generate significant negative effects on emissions from road traffic.
Policy A3, Resilience and adaptation, has potential for significant positive effects in addressing risks to the transport network from climate change and includes measures for maintenance and use of technology. No significant negative effects were identified, although minor negative effects were identified where improvements to existing infrastructure were located within areas at risk from flooding or coastal erosion.
Air and Noise: While air quality is generally good, there are several areas in East Sussex where air emissions don’t meet national standards and noise levels are high due to transport (road and rail) or difficult to limit (cross-channel shipping). Policies and projects that have potential to significantly reduce CO2 emissions listed above, are also likely to have effects similar effects in relation to transport-related air pollution. Policy B3 and related measures focus on air quality and are likely to result in significant positive effects. New transport infrastructure could introduce a new source of noise and potential significant negative effects unless mitigated appropriately.
Communities, health and equalities: The population of East Sussex is increasing, with a growing proportion of older people. There are some areas of higher deprivation and LTP4 has a role in providing access to services and employment for disadvantaged groups. In terms of promoting a sense of place and providing connectivity between communities, employment and services, all potential effects were positive. Many policies and transport projects were predicted to have significant benefits. No negative effects were predicted.
In relation to health and well-being of residents, LTP4 policies and projects which provide active travel (and related physical and mental health benefits), social interaction, for example through public transport, and improved safety (e.g. Policy 11) have potential for significant positive effects. No significant negative effects were predicted, but minor negative effects were predicted for some highways schemes in relation to air quality and potential for reduced social interaction.
There were significant positive effects for groups vulnerable to road safety (Policy B1 - children, young people, the elderly). Policy C1 supports mobility, inclusion and affordability for residents. Projects which provide urban active travel, better public transport and rural services have significant positive effects on young people, older people, people with disabilities, pregnancy and maternity, those on lower incomes and geographically isolated people. No significant negative effects were predicted, although some minor negative effects were identified for projects which promote travel by private vehicle as these can disadvantage those on lower incomes or unable to drive.
1. Introduction
Background
East Sussex County Council is developing the fourth Local Transport Plan (LTP4). The plan will cover the period from 2024 to 2050.
An Integrated Impact Assessment (IIA) has been undertaken as part of the LTP4 development. IIA combines several sustainability appraisal processes, so that environmental and social impacts are identified and mitigated as part of plan development.
Integrated Impact Assessment (IIA)
The components of the IIA process are set out in Figure 1.1 below and each process is then briefly described.
Health Impact Assessment (HIA)
Health Impact Assessment is a process to identify the likely health effects of plans, policies or projects and to implement measures to avoid negative impacts and / or promote opportunities to maximise the benefits. An HIA which assesses the health outcomes of the LTP objectives has been undertaken.
Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA)
An EqIA has been undertaken by East Sussex County Council under the Equality Act 2010 to ensure that plans, policies or projects do not discriminate or disadvantage people. It applies to people with the following 'personal protected characteristics': age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race/ ethnicity, religion or belief, sex/gender and community cohesion. Rurality (e.g. isolation, access to services and employment, low income) and carers have been included within the EqIA as additional considerations.
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)
SEA is used to describe the application of environmental assessment to plans and programmes in accordance with the "Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations" (SI 2004/1633, known as the SEA Regulations). The SEA Regulations place an obligation on local authorities to undertake SEA for certain plans and programmes which are likely to have significant effects on the environment, this usually applies to Local Transport Plans. This report incorporates the SEA for LTP4.
Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA)
HRA is undertaken under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (SI 2017/1012, known as the Habitats Regulations) for plans or projects which are not directly connected to the management of the site and would be likely to have a significant effect on a European Site designated for nature conservation, either alone or in combination with other plans. These comprise Special Protection Areas (SACs), Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and Ramsar sites. A separate HRA has been undertaken for LTP4.
Purpose of this Report
This report represents the IIA undertaken according to the SEA Regulations and best practice1. It documents the SEA process, as well as drawing on the results of the HIA, EqIA and HRA.
2. The Local Transport Plan
East Sussex County Council has developed LTP4 which covers the period 2024-2050, with the previous LTP3 providing a 15-year strategy for the period 2011-2026. Since LTP3 was adopted, the policy context has changed significantly. Key changes include an increased emphasis on climate change and need to decarbonise transport, COVID-19 has impacted user needs and the way in which people choose to travel, and transport equity and inclusion has become a priority for transport investment.
The LTP comprises:
- A Strategy containing Vision and Objectives.
- An Implementation Plan setting out the interventions (projects and policy measures generated by the LTP documents), partnerships needed for delivery and timeframe.
- A Monitoring and Evaluation Plan
- A series of assessments, including this IIA and composite assessment set out in Chapter 1.
- A series of more specific plans: the review of the East Sussex Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan, East Sussex Bus Service Improvement Plan, the East Sussex Rail Strategy and the development of an Electric Vehicle Charging Strategy, Future Mobility Strategy and a Freight Strategy.
The vision for transport in East Sussex is:
‘An inclusive transport system that connects people and places, is decarbonised, safer, resilient and enhances our natural environments supporting our communities and businesses to be healthy, thrive and prosper.’
Six objectives have been identified for LTP4. There is no priority allocated to the objectives as they all have a role to play in achieving the vision for the East Sussex. The objectives are:
- Deliver safer and accessible journeys;
- Support healthier lifestyles and communities;
- Decarbonise transport;
- Conserve and enhance our local environment;
- Support sustainable economic growth; and
- Strengthen the resilience of our transport networks.
There are a number of outcomes under each objective which inform policies, assessed in Appendix B. The Implementation Plan includes an Action Plan for the next 5 years, as well as actions for the medium to long term. It sets out which projects will be studied, developed or delivered and the lead partner, including ESCC, bus and rail operators, National Highways and Network Rail. These are also assessed in Appendix B. The results of the assessments are summarised in Chapter 5.
3. Methodology
The IIA methodology, tends to be driven by the SEA process and other sustainability assessments are incorporated into this. SEA is an iterative process of gathering data and evidence, assessment of environmental effects, developing mitigation measures and making recommendations to refine plans or programmes in view of the predicted environmental effects.
The approach adopted for the SEA of the LTP follows that set out in Government Guidance2 and meets the requirements of the SEA Regulations. It involves the development of an assessment framework comprising a series of SEA objectives, assessment criteria and indicators. This framework is developed from an understanding of environmental issues and opportunities identified through a review of existing baseline information and other plans, programmes and environmental protection objectives relevant to the plan area.
Figure 3.1 shows the key steps of the SEA process and the relationship with the LTP development process. This report is the product of Stages B and C, selecting and assessing options for the SEA and producing an Environmental Report for consultation.
Stage A: Scoping
A Scoping Report was issued in June 2023 and represents Stage A of the process described in Figure 3.1 below.
Consultation on the scope of the IIA was undertaken and a summary of responses is presented in Appendix A.
Stage B: Assessment
The use of objectives is not a requirement of the SEA Regulations, but their use is a recognised method of assessing the effects of a plan. The objectives are focused on the issues and opportunities for LTP4. Each sustainability objective is supported by guide questions, which are intended to provide more direction and focus to the sustainability objectives. The guide questions will assist the overall assessment process and help to ensure that it covers all issues. The IIA Framework is presented in Table 3.1.
| Sustainability Topic | Objective | Guide questions - Will the policy or interventions…. |
|---|---|---|
| Biodiversity | 1. Protect and enhance terrestrial and marine biodiversity in East Sussex. |
Have an effect on designated sites for nature conservation? Have a potential effect on key habitats or species, including severance and disturbance? Provide opportunities for biodiversity net gain or contribution to Local Nature Recovery Strategies? |
| Landscape | 2. Protect and enhance valued landscapes in East Sussex. |
Have an effect on designated landscapes, including indirect effects such from lighting and noise? Have an effect on local landscape quality, character and visual amenity? |
| Historic Environment | 3. Protect and enhance the significance of East Sussex’s historic environment, heritage assets and their settings. |
Have an effect on designated heritage assets and their settings? Have an effect on the historic environment, including non-designated and unknown assets? |
| Land, soil and water resources | 4. Protect soil, land and water quality and resources. |
Have a polluting effect on soil, land and water quality? Cause loss of soil (including BMV) through construction or erosion? Increase run-off or modify watercourses? Provide opportunities to improve land, soils and water resources particularly through nature based solutions? Make best use of existing transport assets? |
| Climate change | 5. Deliver climate change mitigation in East Sussex through reduction in transport related CO2 emissions. 6. Support resilience of transport in East Sussex to the potential effects of climate change. |
Promote sustainable transport – public transport, walking and cycling? Use technology such as digital or low carbon energy sources? Reduce the need to travel and improve connectivity via non-vehicular transport modes? Avoid areas of flood risk and coastal erosion, including adaptation of existing network? Adapt to changes in climate such as more extreme weather events, precipitation and temperatures? Provide opportunities to incorporate green infrastructure? |
| Noise and air quality | 7. Reduce transport related air pollution and noise. |
Reduce emissions to air, particularly nitrogen oxides and fine particulate matter? Reduce noise? |
| Population and Communities | 8. Promote a sense of place and well-connected communities. |
Provide access to employment and services for existing and future residents? Support a sense of place and community hubs? Promote social and community interaction through active travel and public transport? |
| Health and wellbeing | 9. Improve health and wellbeing of residents. |
Provide active travel? Promote green infrastructure? Increase safety? |
| Equalities, diversity and inclusion | 10. Promote equality of access to transport. | Provide access to people including people with disabilities, reduced mobility, different ages, social and cultural backgrounds? |
The IIA Framework above incorporates the requirements of SEA as set out in the SEA Regulations. The assessment of LTP4 under some of the objectives above is also informed by other IIA processes:
- Objective 1 on biodiversity has been informed by the HRA.
- Objective 10 on health and well-being has been informed by the HIA.
- Objective 11 on equalities has been informed by the EqIA.
The IIA Framework has been used to assess the emerging options, policies and interventions for the Draft LTP4. Where any significant or uncertain effects are identified, mitigation and monitoring has been proposed (Table 5.1– Table 5.10 and Section 6).
Stages C & D: Reporting and Consultation
This report sets out the results of the SEA and constitutes the Environmental Report under the SEA Regulations.
An SEA Statement will be prepared following the consultation period to summarise how responses to consultation and the SEA has influenced the development of LTP4.
Stage E: Monitoring
This report sets out recommendations for monitoring the environment effects of implementing the LTP in Chapter 6 of this report.
Limitations and Assumptions
The LTP will apply to the plan period 2024-2050. The assessment will focus on effects likely to occur during the plan period but will also seek to identify longer term effects that may occur beyond this period. It is acknowledged that longer term effects generally have a greater level of uncertainly than shorter-term, more immediate effects.
The assessment assumes that construction of any infrastructure follows existing best practice and applicable environmental legislation and guidance (for example legislation for protected species). Therefore, it is assumed that construction of small scale infrastructure including improving footpaths and cycleways, online bus, rail and highway (minor online works) infrastructure would generally not give rise to significant environmental effects, unless adjacent to a sensitive receptor such as a designated site. Larger infrastructure such as new railways, roads, dualling and any offline bus infrastructure would have some significant effects, and these are identified in the assessment.
The project interventions are at various stages of development and delivery ranging from studies for some of the highways schemes (A27 Falmer Junction Improvements, Eastbourne A2270 Corridor Package, Hastings A2101 Corridor Package) through to completion for example, the package of smaller scale interventions on the A27 East of Lewes. The projects will be delivered by a number of different organisations. Network Rail and National Highways would also undertake separate assessments for projects where they are the lead partner, for example HS1 Hastings, Bexhill and Eastbourne and A27 Lewes-Polegate. For the latter, a worst case (offline) solution is assumed, although it is acknowledged that National Highways are undertaking optioneering.
Several of the interventions have come through the TfSE Strategic Investment Plan and IIA was also undertaken as part of the composite studies – namely Area Studies for the Outer Orbital, South East Radial and South Central Radial. While this information has been reviewed as part of this assessment, the results may differ for a number of reasons. At a regional level, there was less information on some of the projects, so a more precautionary approach may have been used (for example if it was not known whether a project was offline or online). The LTP for East Sussex only covers some elements of the TfSE schemes, for example those sections of projects within the county, or may split larger projects into discrete elements that would be delivered separately as stand-alone projects, although cumulative effects where schemes go beyond the County boundary are also captured in Table 5.11.
4. Baseline, issues and opportunities
Introduction
The SEA Regulations require the inclusion of:
- The relevant aspects of the current state of the environment and the likely evolution thereof without implementation of the plan or programme (Schedule 2, paragraph 2),
- The environmental characteristics of areas likely to be significantly affected (Schedule 2, paragraph 3),
- Any existing environmental problems which are relevant to the plan or programme (Schedule 2, paragraph 4), and
- The 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 considered during its preparation (Schedule 2, paragraph 5).
The Regulations cover the effects on the environment on issues such as: biodiversity, population, human health, fauna and flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, cultural heritage, including architectural and archaeological heritage and landscape (Schedule 2, paragraph 6).
This chapter provides an environmental overview of East Sussex and issues and opportunities associated with change over the plan period, which were used to generate the objectives in Table 3.1. The Scoping Report provides further information, including a full review of relevant legislation, polices and plans.
Overview
East Sussex is a county in the south east of England, which covers an area of 692 square miles (1,792 sq. km) and includes the administrative boroughs and districts of Lewes and Eastbourne, Wealden, Hastings and Rother. It is a largely rural county, with over 60% of the population concentrated on the coastal fringe in the three main urban areas of Eastbourne/South Wealden, Bexhill and Hastings, alongside Newhaven, Seaford and Peacehaven3.
The main coastal urban areas are linked east-west by parallel roads of the A27 and A259, which converge at Pevensey Bay east of Eastbourne and continues as the A259 through towards Bexhill, Hastings and Rye. By rail, the East Coastway route provides the major link along the coast, and into Kent (via the Marshlink) to the east and Brighton & Hove/West Sussex to the west. There are two strategic corridors from the county north towards London from Brighton via the A23/M23 and the Brighton Mainline (East) and from Hastings via the A21 and the Hastings to Tonbridge rail line. The Uckfield rail line provides a link to London from the centre of the county. There is a port at Newhaven, with ferries from Newhaven providing a direct link with mainland Europe for passengers and freight.
Nearly 80% of East Sussex is covered by environmental designations of local, national and international significance, including the large areas of the South Downs National Park in the south and the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty in the north of the county. There are a number of internationally designated site for nature conservation, including the Pevensey Levels Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Ramsar site; Ashdown Forest SAC and Special Protection Area (SPA); Lewes Downs SAC; and Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh, and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar. There are also a large number of nationally and locally designated sites of ecological importance. The south west of the county is partially covered by the Brighton & Lewes Downs UNESCO Biosphere Reserve4, designated as a learning place for sustainable development due to interactions between social and ecological systems. The County’s rich cultural heritage is evident, with two registered battle fields, over 330 nationally important Scheduled Monuments, in addition to a wealth of listed buildings, conservation areas and other heritage assets.
Natural Capital and Ecosystem Services
Natural capital refers to the elements of the natural environment which provide valuable goods and services to people (also known as ecosystem services). A natural capital approach is a way of describing, quantifying and valuing natural resources and the benefits they bring to people, to aid decision making. In this way the natural environment can be valued alongside other types of assets.
Examples of ecosystem services include provision of food, recreation, clean air and flood defence. Some ecosystem services fall across a number of sustainability topics, for example, recreational and aesthetic value services could be considered under the Health, Biodiversity, Landscape, Air Quality and Water Environment topics, amongst others.
A natural capital approach is therefore useful for understanding the inter-dependencies between nature, people, the economy and society, and ensuring that natural capital is considered as an integrated system. Degradation of natural capital (including biodiversity loss) has an adverse effect on the benefits that we receive from the natural environment. As such, natural capital is overarching across the IIA.
The Sussex Local Nature Partnership (LNP) has published a Natural Capital Investment Strategy for Sussex, 2019-20245. The LNP, working with the Sussex Biodiversity Record Centre has compiled an asset register of the Natural Capital found in Sussex, some of which were categorised as “at risk”. The Strategy highlighted seven priority services and benefits for investment as well as natural capital investment areas for:
- sufficient water supply,
- a clean water environment,
- reduced flood risk,
- accessible nature,
- healthy and productive inshore waters, and
- improved climate regulation through carbon storage and sequestration.
Sustainability Issues and Opportunities
Issues and opportunities for LTP4 identified during the scoping process are set out in Table 4.1 below, many of these are linked to natural capital.
| Topic | Issues and Opportunities for LTP4 |
|---|---|
| Biodiversity |
|
| Landscape |
|
| Historic Environment |
|
| Natural resources |
|
| Climate |
|
| Air quality and Noise |
|
| Population and Communities |
|
5. Assessment
The SEA Regulations require the inclusion of:
- 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, landscapes and the interrelationship between the above factors. These effects should include secondary, cumulative, synergistic, short, medium and long-term permanent and temporary, positive and negative effects (Schedule 2, para 6).
- 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 (Schedule 2, para 7)
- An outline of the reasons for selecting the alternatives dealt with, and a description of how the assessment was undertaken including any difficulties (such as technical deficiencies or lack of know-how) encountered in compiling the required information (Schedule 2, para 8).
Alternatives considered
As part of the development of LTP4, an initial ‘Long List’ of interventions and options was developed from three sources:
- input from the Project Team;
- desk research including review of TfSE’s Strategic Investment Plan; and
- an online engagement platform where stakeholders were asked to suggest schemes and policies that should be included.
A qualitative assessment of the proposed interventions was undertaken. A Multi-Criteria Assessment Framework (MCAF) was developed to provide a qualitative assessment of the strategic fit, economic viability, and deliverability of the interventions included in the Long List. The goal was to use the MCAF to sift out interventions that do not perform and to organise and compare options to help develop coherent packages of interventions.
The MCAF included three discrete sifts:
- a Strategic Assessment that considered the alignment of each intervention with the Objectives of the study, as well as with wider public policy;
- an Economic Assessment, based on DfT’s EAST framework; and
- a Deliverability Assessment, also based on DfT’s EAST framework.
Following analysis, all interventions were taken forward for the LTP, so in this case, all alternatives form part of the Plan.
Assessment results
The assessment covers LTP policies, projects and further policy interventions and is presented in Appendix B. It uses the IIA Framework shown in Table 3.1 above to assess each policy or intervention and is accompanied by a commentary to provide a description of effects. The results of the assessment are summarised for each of the IIA sustainability topics in Table 5.1 - presented in this Chapter. Figure 5.1 below sets out the scale for the assessment of effects.
| Assessment scale | Significance of effect |
|---|---|
| ++ | Significant positive effect |
| + | Positive effect |
| 0 | Negligible or no effect |
| - | Negative effect |
| -- | Significant negative effect |
| +/- ++/-- | Mixed effects |
| ? | Uncertain effects (in combination with above) |
Online and GIS sources were used as the basis for geographic assessments. Some of the key constraints are shown in Figure 5.2 – Figure 5.5 below (note that not all data sources are shown here).
The Tables include references to individual policies and projects that can be found in Appendix B (for example reference ‘AT1’ corresponds to an assessment row in Appendix B). A full list of acronyms used for interventions can also be found at Appendix B.
Proposed mitigation and enhancement measures are identified for each topic in the summary tables. Identification of monitoring for significant or uncertain effects is provided separately in Section 6.
Table 5.1 Summary of Assessment: Biodiversity
Objective: Protect and enhance terrestrial and marine biodiversity in East Sussex.
Guide Questions: Does the policy or project;
- Have an effect on designated sites for nature conservation?
- Have a potential effect on key habitats or species, including severance and disturbance?
- Provide opportunities for biodiversity net gain or contribution to Local Nature Recovery Strategies?
| ++ | Policies A4 and B5 of the LTP support protection of designated sites (through HRA), biodiversity net gain, and provision for blue and green infrastructure, alongside transport infrastructure, particularly active travel routes. These support nature recovery through providing greater connectivity of habitats. |
| + | Policies which support substantial modal shift to public transport/ active travel can reduce traffic-related disturbance and severance (Policies A1, B4, C6). Policies B6 & A4 support placemaking and provide opportunities for improving biodiversity in urban areas, for example through trees or wildflower planting on verges. Improvements to active travel routes such as access to the Cuckoo Trail (AT4) and Eastbourne-Polegate-Hailsham (AT2) enhancements, provide opportunities to support nature recovery through integration of linear green infrastructure. |
| 0 | Many of the policies and policy interventions have no effect on biodiversity, because they don’t introduce new infrastructure, are related to maintenance (Policy D6) or have no relationship with this objective, for example safety (Policy B1), accessibility (Policy C1). While some policies relate to improving public transport and could provide some modal shift, it is assumed that the indirect effect is negligible (Policies C2-C6). Several of the project interventions including those which use existing infrastructure such as active travel within urban areas e.g. Eastbourne, Bexhill and Hastings, etc (AT11-AT16); changes to existing services such as rail services on the East Coastway line or frequency of bus services (RW1,2, 6, 7, MT1-17); and mobility hubs within urban areas (MH1-12) are also unlikely to have effects on this objective. |
| - | Projects that involve minor highway and rail infrastructure improvements have potential for negative effects through small scale habitat loss, or in some cases a precautionary approach is taken to indirect effects where in proximity to designated sites. These include the A21 Safety Enhancements (HW7), A22 Corridor Junction Improvements (HW 11&12), A26 Lewes to Newhaven enhancements (HW13) and Hastings and Bexhill Distributor roads (HW10) for highways and for rail line improvements the Hurst Green to Uckfield Electrification (RW4) and Uckfield to Lewes reopening (RW5). These are likely to be limited as the footprint will be relatively small. |
| -- | Significant negative effects are predicted for interventions which support more substantial new infrastructure, including A27 Lewes-Polegate (HW2), A21 Kippings Cross to Lamberhurst Dualling and Flimwell and Hurst Green Bypasses (HW9), and A22 Uckfield Bypass Dualling (HW14), although some of these are delivered by National Highways; some of these yet to commence any development work whilst some are still undergoing optioneering. These can be direct through habitat loss and fragmentation, deposition of pollutants from air emissions on vegetation, disturbance during construction and from vehicle traffic, noise and lighting. Some routes have potential to affect designated sites including the Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SAC, Ramsar & SSSI which would be affected by the A259 Level crossings (HW8), High Speed 1 Hastings, Bexhill and Eastbourne (RW3) through effects such as habitat loss, potential pollution and changes to hydrology. Also refer to the HRA for information. |
| +/- ++/-- | Depending on how policy measures are implemented, some of the policies could have mixed effects on biodiversity. Improving strategic connectivity and supporting businesses and tourism economy (Policies D1 & D3), can make best use of existing infrastructure and provide opportunities for net gain through minor infrastructure works. They can also support new infrastructure and have significant negative effects on biodiversity as described above. Some active travel routes have potential to affect designated sites, for example including Ashdown Forest SAC, Pevensey Levels SAC, Ramsar and SSSI, Planchett Wood SSSI, (e.g. AT7 Avenue Verte, AT9 the A259 NCN) and effects will depend on final design, but there are also potential benefits, for example, in relation to air quality. Additional transport infrastructure to support development (Policy D4 Sustainable Development) can lead to minor works to improve connectivity, such as junctions and access provision for new development. However, there is potential for positive effects, for example where existing roads may benefit from additional blue/green infrastructure through addition of active travel routes and emphasis on public transport. While some interventions (Policy intervention 60 on improving rights of way and lanes in rural areas) provide opportunities for improving biodiversity, there may also be a conflict with access and disturbance to wildlife in some locations. |
Mitigation and Enhancement
Mitigation embedded in LTP4 includes Policy A4 biodiversity, provision of net-gain and environmental assessment in design; and blue/green infrastructure in Policy B5.
Additional measures comprise:
- Design to support connectivity in nature recovery areas such as the Seaford to Eastbourne Nature Recovery project.
- Management of disturbance in some areas, for example designated sites, ground-nesting or over-wintering birds. This would need to be designed per site, but can include consideration of routing, bird site-lines, signage (e.g. dogs on leads, pedestrians/ cyclists staying to paths).
- Consideration of routing and design of new infrastructure in relation to biodiversity- protected sites, habitats and species. Mitigation measures during construction include buffer zones, protected species, water pollution, air quality and dust, lighting, noise and vibration, etc. Design for operation can include minimising habitat loss, habitat type and species composition, habitat connectivity (including green bridges) and considerations such as lighting.
- Minor works and upgrade proposals could be used to enhance the biodiversity value and potentially provide opportunities to achieve biodiversity net gain.
Relationship with natural capital:
- Accessible nature is a priority ecosystem service in the Natural Capital Investment Strategy for Sussex. Improvements to inter-urban active travel routes will improve access to nature for walkers and cyclists.
- The natural environment and habitats also provide a range of services covered under separate topics below.
Table 5.2 Summary of Assessment: Landscape
Objective: Protect and enhance terrestrial and marine biodiversity in East Sussex.
Guide Questions: Does the policy or project;
-
Have an effect on designated landscapes, including indirect effects such from lighting and noise?
-
Have an effect on local landscape quality, character and visual amenity?
| ++ | The plan contains policies which have potential for significant positive effects on designated and local landscapes through promoting biodiversity and natural capital (Policy A4); provision for blue and green infrastructure (Policy B5); public realm and place-making (Policy B6); and connecting people with the landscape via Rights of Way (Policy B7). Interventions which have significant positive effects include the provision of better urban access to the existing Cuckoo Trail (AT4) which promotes active travel to the High Weald AONB through the Hailsham extension; and the Lewes and South Downs active travel enhancements (AT14) which provide greater connectivity to this landscape. Policy interventions which promote rural transport connectivity, also support better access to East Sussex’s landscapes using existing public transport and active travel infrastructure. |
| + | Policies and policy interventions which promote active travel (Policy B4) and placemaking (Policy B6) and greater connectivity between urban and rural areas have positive effects in promoting this mode of transport to bring people into nationally important landscapes such as the High Weald or SDNP. Policy D2 and policy interventions (70-73) which better manage freight movements, also have positive effects in terms of better use of rail and consolidation centres, reducing HGVs in rural areas. |
| 0 | Active travel routes along existing route corridors or in urban centres are predicted to have minimal or no effects on landscapes. Similarly, transport interventions which enhance existing services or utilise infrastructure such as bus services or priority lanes have negligible effects on landscapes, similar to examples listed for biodiversity above. There is unlikely to be an impact on the Biosphere Reserve as projects are limited to existing corridors in this area. |
| - | Minor road and rail infrastructure has potential for small scale changes to landscapes. Upgrade of existing tracks including changes to track bed, third rail electrification, or overhead lines, with some ancillary infrastructure has potential for small scale changes and a precautionary approach is taken at this stage in sensitive landscapes such as the High Weald AONB (RW4 Hurst Green to Uckfield Electrification, RW6 Spa Valley Line) and SDNP (RW5 Uckfield – Lewes Wealden Line reopening). Junction improvements can lead to small-scale vegetation loss and can potentially introduce new signage and lighting, although this is likely to be a minor change from existing. Examples include the A259 Eastbourne to Brighton (HW3), A2270 Corridor Package (HW5), Hasting A2101 Corridor Package (HW6), A21 Safety Improvements (HW7). |
| -- | New road infrastructure has the potential to impact designated landscapes including the A27 Lewes – Polegate (HW2) located on the edge of the South Downs National Park (SDNP). and A27 Falmer Junction (HW4) affecting setting, if not the designated landscape itself. The A21 Flimwell and Hurst Green bypasses are located in the High Weald AONB and have potential to impact visual amenity through new infrastructure and associated lighting, particularly in areas of dark skies. The A22 Uckfield dualling is not within a designated landscape but has potential for significant negative effects on local landscape character. The effect will largely be dependent on design of this schemes and a precautionary approach is used at this stage. |
| +/- ++/-- | Depending on how policy measures are implemented, some of the policies could have mixed effects on landscapes. Improving strategic connectivity and supporting businesses and tourism economy (Policies D1 & D3), can make best use of existing infrastructure and provide opportunities for landscape enhancement through small-scale works, they can also support major new infrastructure and have significant negative effects on landscapes as described above. A precautionary approach has been taken to new active travel routes, where there is potential for an offline route. Several routes are planned within the High Weald AONB: Uckfield - Heathfield and Crowborough - Tunbridge Wells (AT10); Tunbridge Wells – Hastings (AT6); Newhaven-Lewes-Uckfield (AT7). Routes can introduce new linear features in the landscape, lighting at junctions and result in loss of vegetation. However, there are also opportunities to reduce car-traffic in designated landscapes and if well designed, can enhance the landscape and attract visitors using this mode of transport. |
Mitigation and Enhancement
Mitigation embedded in LTP4 includes Policy A4 biodiversity, provision of net-gain and environmental assessment in design; and blue/green infrastructure in Policy B5.
Additional measures comprise:
- Design and routing to take into account national and local landscape character which varies throughout the county including pastoral farmland, open uplands, ancient woodland, coastal cliffs, floodplain and marshes.
- Design to consider use of materials, avoiding or reducing lighting where appropriate and sensitive siting of ancillary infrastructure such as signage.
- Enhance transport corridors through integration of green and/or blue infrastructure where appropriate in new active travel and highway works.
- Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment for major new works, and assessment of impacts on nationally designated landscapes, including setting, to develop bespoke mitigation, such screening, at a project level.
- Opportunities to mitigate for new roads should be undertaken at a landscape scale to support wider green infrastructure networks.
It is assumed that electrification will use a third rail rather than overhead lines. Any additional modernisation required along the line may need to be assessed in relation to High Weald AONB.
Relationship with natural capital:
- High quality landscapes, including South Downs National Park, provide tourism benefits and also provide recreation and amenity for local communities.
- Local landscapes and their features have benefits for mental health and wellbeing
Table 5.3 Summary of Assessment: Historic Environment
Objective: Protect and enhance the significance of East Sussex’s historic environment, heritage assets and their settings.
Guide Questions: Does the policy or project;
- Have an effect on designated heritage assets and their settings?
- Have an effect on the historic environment, including non-designated and unknown assets?
| ++ | Policy A4, Biodiversity and natural capital; and B5 Green and blue infrastructure, have potential to significantly enhance transport corridors and setting of adjacent historic assets but would need to be sensitive to historic landscapes. |
| + | Policies which reduce vehicle traffic and emissions (Policies A1, B3 and policy interventions for demand management, parking and freight) through reducing air pollution and improving setting of built assets. Policies B4 and B6, in addition to interventions which promote active travel, also provide opportunities to engage with the historic environment. Examples include Eastbourne (AT11), Bexhill and Hastings (AT12), Newhaven Coast (AT13), Lewes and South Downs (AT14), Battle and Rye (AT16) Urban Active Travel Enhancements which have potential benefits for Conservation Areas, Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings and an historic Battlefield. |
| 0 | Transport interventions which enhance existing services or utilise existing infrastructure such rail line improvements, bus services or priority lanes, have negligible effects on the historic environment, similar to examples listed under biodiversity above. |
| - ? | Minor road infrastructure has potential for negative impacts on the historic environment. The assessment identified Grade II listed buildings where there could be a potential effect on setting including from the A22 Junction Improvements (HW11) and A2101 Hastings Corridor (HW6). There is also the potential to affect unknown archaeology, while land adjacent to existing highway may have been previously disturbed, further assessment would be required to understand potential. Depending on the extent of these schemes, this could apply to interventions such as A21 Safety Enhancements (HW7), A259 Level Crossing Removals (HW8), A26 Lewes – Newhaven Enhancements (HW13), A22 Uckfield Dualling (HW14). |
| --? | Major new road infrastructure has the potential to impact designated assets particularly if there is a new offline route for the A27 Lewes – Polegate (HW2) which lies north of a series of Scheduled barrows situated on an escarpment with potential effects on setting. Firle Place and Wootton Manor Grade II Registered Park and Gardens is also adjacent to the existing A27 with potential for indirect effects on setting (National Highways are considering at a range of on-line and offline options). A27 Falmer Junction Improvements (HW4) lie in close proximity to Grade II Registered Stanmer Park. New offline infrastructure has greater potential to affect undisturbed ground and associated archaeology, this includes the A21 Flimwell and Hurst Green Bypasses (HW9). |
| +/- ++/- - | Depending on how policy measures are implemented, some of the policies could have mixed effects on historic environment. Improving strategic connectivity and supporting businesses and tourism economy (Policies D1 & D3), can make best use of existing infrastructure and provide opportunities for access to heritage assets, they can also support major new infrastructure and have significant negative effects on heritage as described above. A precautionary approach has been taken to new active travel routes, where there is potential for an offline route including Uckfield - Heathfield and Crowborough - Tunbridge Wells (AT10); Tunbridge Wells – Hastings (AT6); Newhaven-Lewes-Uckfield (AT7). Depending on route and construction, there may be negative effects on designated assets or unknown archaeology. However, there may also be positive effects through providing access to heritage assets and historic landscapes. |
Mitigation and Enhancement
Mitigation embedded in LTP4 includes Policy A4 biodiversity, provision of net-gain and environmental assessment in design; and blue/green infrastructure in Policy B5.
Additional measures comprise:
- Sensitive design of active travel, mobility hubs and other projects in relation to setting of designated assets such as Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings, Registered Parks and Gardens and Conservation Areas.
- Provision of opportunities in terms of design of active travel, mobility hubs and other measures to provide access to heritage assets. There may also be opportunities to integrate opportunities for interpretation.
- Desk based assessment and staged archaeological investigation to inform impact and mitigation for new infrastructure.
- Consideration of routing and design of new infrastructure in relation to direct and indirect impacts, including traffic, lighting and noise on the setting of heritage assets.
Relationship with natural capital:
- Historic landscapes provide cultural benefits to people, providing a sense of place and wellbeing.
Table 5.4: Summary of Assessment: Land, Soil and Water Resources
Objective 4: Protect soil, land and water quality and resources.
Guide Questions: Does the policy or project;
- Have a polluting effect on soil, land and water quality?
- Cause loss of soil, including Best and Most Versatile agricultural land (BMV), through construction or erosion?
- Increase run-off or modify watercourses?
- Provide opportunities to improve land, soils and water resources particularly through nature based solutions?
- Make best use of existing transport assets?
| ++ | The plan contains policies which have potential for significant positive effects on land, soil and water resources through promoting biodiversity and natural capital (Policy A4) and provision for blue and green infrastructure (Policy B5), which have potential to provide nature based solutions to drainage and soil conservation. Policy B7 on Rights of Way also supports better land management, particularly in relation to erosion. |
| + | Policies and projects which make best use of existing transport infrastructure, provide better capacity in the network, and protect natural resources from new development have positive effects. These include policies C3-C4 which support public transport and interventions which make better use of existing rail infrastructure. e.g. through electrification or faster services (RW1-RW4), bus priority and service enhancements (MT1-MT14), mobility hubs (MH1-12), online active travel enhancements (AT 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11-16). Policy D6 supports asset maintenance and renewal and related interventions, also minimises the need for major upgrades and provide opportunities to improve surface-run off and drainage. |
| 0 | Policy interventions such as digital connectivity, safety enhancements, accessibility and affordability are unlikely to have any effects on natural resources. Interventions which are online and have minimal land-take, for example A21 Safety enhancements (HW7), A22 Corridor package (HW11 & 12) and A26 Lewes to Newhaven enhancements (HW13) have negligible effects as they also make best use of existing infrastructure. |
| - | New highways infrastructure will involve a small amount of land-take, for example the A21 Flimwell and Hurst Green bypasses (HW9) and A22 Uckfield dualling (HW14), with potential for loss of small amounts of BMV agricultural land and new minor watercourse crossings. |
| -- | The A27 Lewes – Polegate (HW2) offline route has potential for larger scale impacts in relation to loss of land and soils, including BMV, and new watercourse crossings and increased run-off, with potential for significant negative effects. National Highways are currently undertaking optioneering, so impact will depend on final preferred option and its design. |
| +/- ++/-- | A precautionary approach has been taken to new active travel routes, where there is potential for an offline route. These include Uckfield - Heathfield and Crowborough - Tunbridge Wells (AT10), Tunbridge Wells – Hastings (AT6), Newhaven-Lewes-Uckfield (AT7). These can involve small-scale loss of land or erosion of soils from active travel, but also provide low-impact alternatives to travel by vehicle. |
Mitigation and Enhancement
Mitigation embedded in LTP4 includes Policy A4 biodiversity, provision of net-gain and environmental assessment in design; and blue/green infrastructure in Policy B5.
Additional measures comprise:
- Where possible, schemes and interventions should support the sustainable use of resources and circular economy opportunities.
- Use of nature based solutions such as Sustainable Drainage Systems or incorporating green/blue infrastructure in design and asset maintenance and renewal.
- Consideration of routing and design of new infrastructure in relation to minimising loss of soils, physical effects and run-off on watercourses.
- Construction mitigation to manage effects of pollution, run-off and damage to soils such as compaction and erosion.
Relationship with natural capital:
- The Sussex Natural Capital Investment Strategy identifies soil as a key resource vital to agricultural production, climate change mitigation and adaptation, clean water resources and supporting biodiversity.
- The Strategy identifies priority areas for protecting water resources (headwaters of rivers systems and key catchments) in addition to priority areas for water quality.
Table 5.5: Summary of Assessment: Climate Change Mitigation
Objective 5: Deliver climate change mitigation in East Sussex through reduction in transport related CO2 emissions.
Guide Questions: Does the policy or project;
- Promote sustainable transport – public transport, walking and cycling?
- Use technology such as digital or low carbon energy sources?
- Reduce the need to travel and improve connectivity via non-vehicular transport modes?
| ++ | One of the objectives of the LTP is to decarbonise transport. Policy A1 reduces emissions through minimising travel, encouraging modal shift, use of alternative fuels and Policy A2 supports zero emissions vehicles. Several other policies also focus on these areas: Policy B4 Active travel, Policy C2 Bus, coach and mass transit, Policy C3 Rail, and Policy C4 Integrating transport. These have potential for significant positive effects. Supporting policy interventions include demand management measures (road and emissions pricing,), placemaking and healthy living (e.g. pedestrianisation, car-free centres), EV charging infrastructure, e-bikes and e-mobility, and electrification of the rail network. It is assumed that active travel interventions which provide or enhance an alternative mode for regular journeys, such as commuting, are likely to have a bigger impact in terms of CO2 reductions than longer distance routes used for leisure. These include inter-urban Hailsham/Polegate - Lewes - Falmer - Brighton (A27/NCN90), Active Travel enhancements, Eastbourne - Pevensey - Bexhill - Hastings (A259/NCN2), Active Travel enhancements and urban enhancement in Eastbourne, Bexhill, Hastings and Newhaven Coast, Lewes, Uckfield, Heathfield, Crowborough, Battle and Rye (AT11-16). Similarly, improved rail services particularly along coastal routes (RW1-4,6-8), inter-urban mass transit service improvements and bus priority measures, connecting town centres and providing efficient journeys for commuting and accessing services (MT 1-7) are also predicted to have significant positive effects. Mobility Hubs also provide better interchanges and alternative transport modes and have potential to significantly reduce CO2 emissions (MH1-12). |
| + | Policies which promote green infrastructure and biodiversity (A4, B5, B6) are likely to provide minor reductions in CO2 emissions. Policy D2 which promotes rail freight and more efficient distribution, and policy interventions such as digital connectivity, car/e-scooter/cycle hire schemes, behavioural change programmes, integration of ticketing and fares are also expected to increase accessibility to sustainable transport and have minor benefits in terms of CO2 emissions. Restoration of rural bus services Hurst Green to Uckfield (A265/A272) (MT8) and enhanced rural bus services on several routes (MT9-17) would have positive effects in reducing CO2 emissions, when compared to travel by car. |
| 0 | Some policies and policy interventions have no effect on carbon emissions, primarily those that relate to safety and accessibility and climate resilience. |
| - | Minor road infrastructure such as A22 Junction Improvements (HW11&12), A21 Safety Enhancements (HW7), Hastings and Bexhill Distributor Road (HW10), A27 Falmer Junction Improvements (HW4), A26 Lewes – Newhaven Enhancements (HW13), A22 Uckfield Dualling (HW14), Flimwell and Hurst Green Bypasses (HW9) have potential for increasing carbon emissions. While improvements are in relation to safety and/or to ease congestion, there is both embodied carbon in construction and these may increase overall car traffic to some extent. Most of these improvements do allow better integration of footpaths and cycleways. |
| -- | Major new road infrastructure has the potential for significant negative effects on carbon emissions. Construction of the A27 Lewes – Polegate (HW2) would include embodied carbon in materials (potentially greater for an offline route) and can increase vehicle traffic. |
| +/- ++/-- | None of the assessments had mixed effects on CO2 emissions. |
Mitigation and Enhancement
Mitigation embedded in LTP4 includes policies under the Decarbonising Transport objective (Policy A1 Reducing emissions; Policy A2 Zero emission vehicles).
Additional measures comprise:
- Highway infrastructure options should incorporate enhanced walking, cycling and public transport improvements.
- Opportunities for reducing energy use should be incorporated into transport networks, for example solar technology (bollards, bus stops).
- Opportunities for carbon sequestration should be incorporated into provision of new infrastructure, for example through choice of landscaping.
Relationship with natural capital:
- Carbon sequestration is provided by a range of habitats, including woodlands, hedgerows, heathlands, grasslands, coastal and marine habitats.
- Soils also play a key role in carbon sequestration.
Table 5.6: Summary of Assessment: Climate Change Resilience
Objective 6: Support resilience of transport in East Sussex to the potential effects of climate change.
Guide Questions: Does the policy or project;
- Avoid areas of flood risk and coastal erosion, including adaptation of existing network?
- Adapt to changes in climate such as more extreme weather events, precipitation and temperatures?
- Provide opportunities to incorporate green infrastructure?
| ++ | Policy A3 Resilience and adaptation looks at risks to the transport network from climate change and includes measures for maintenance and use of technology. Policy A4 and B5 (natural capital and green/blue infrastructure) also provide opportunities for greater resilience in mitigating climate change impacts such as flooding and heatwaves. |
|---|---|
| + | Policies which have positive effects in relation to resilience of the transport network include those which minimise need to travel (Policy A1) or support improving the public realm (Policy B4 and B6) which provide opportunities through design for climate resilience. Mobility hubs (MH 1-12) provide greater resilience to climate change, as they can provide alternative transport options (e.g. bus, active travel, rail) as well as information on delays during weather related events. |
| 0 | Outside areas at risk of flood or coastal erosion, some transport projects are less impacted by climate change. These include some of the active travel routes and highways infrastructure. |
| - | Highways schemes which fall in areas at risk of flooding or coastal erosion were assessed as having negative effects as resilience may be affected in the long-term. This includes improvements to the A259 Eastbourne to Brighton (HW3), Access to Eastbourne A2270 Corridor Package (HW5), Access to Hastings A2101 Corridor Package (HW6), A259 Level Crossing Enhancements (HW8). The rail network is also vulnerable to climate events, with track flooding and obstructions in high winds leading to cancellations, so projects which offer increased frequency or faster services may be affected (RW1-3, 8, 9). |
| -- | No significant negative effects were identified for climate change resilience. |
| +/-, ++/ -- | While some active travel routes offer alternative transport which have potential to improve climate resilience, some coastal sections may be more susceptible to flooding and/or erosion from sea level rise and increased storms. This applies to Sussex Coast/A259/NCN2 (AT1), Eastbourne - Pevensey - Bexhill - Hastings A259/NCN2 (AT9) and potentially some of the urban schemes (e.g. Rye and Eastbourne) and those in flood zones. Some coastal areas , particularly urban areas, are supported by policies for long-term protection. Other lengths of coastline, particularly rural sections, are at greater risk in relation to no active intervention or managed realignment policies under Shoreline Management Plans. Active travel is also less likely to be used during storms or heatwaves. These projects were assessed as having mixed effects. |
Mitigation and Enhancement
Mitigation embedded in LTP4 includes Policy A3 on resilience and adaptation: identifying and managing the risks to the transport network presented by climate change, taking a sustainable approach to road network maintenance, and using technology.
Additional measures comprise:
- Transport projects, including improvements on existing routes, should consider effects of Shoreline Management Plans, particularly in areas of managed realignment or withdrawal of maintenance.
- ESCC should work with appropriate authority (e.g. Environment Agency) to manage risks related to coastal management and transport infrastructure.
- Design and maintenance to consider extreme events, such as flooding and heatwaves, and include choice of materials for resilience and design features such as drainage.
- Public realm and transport infrastructure to incorporate shade and shelter and improve drainage where possible, for example street trees, green roofs on mobility hubs, and Sustainable Drainage Systems.
- Consideration should be given to the resilience of the design, the materials used and the maintenance of interventions to ensure they can withstand chronic and acute effects of climate change (e.g., future precipitation and temperatures).
Relationship with natural capital:
- Trees and other green infrastructure have a cooling effect, particularly in urban areas.
- Natural vegetation cover in catchments, wetlands and coastal habitats reduce flood risk and provide buffers to storms.
- The Sussex Natural Capital Strategy identifies both reduced flood risk and improved climate regulation through carbon storage and sequestration as priorities for investment.
Table 5.7: Summary of Assessment: Air and Noise
Objective 7: Reduce transport related air pollution and noise.
Guide Questions: Does the policy or project;
- Reduce emissions to air, particularly nitrogen oxides and fine particulate matter?
- Reduce noise?
| ++ | Policies that have potential to significantly reduce CO2 emissions are also likely to have similar effects in relation to transport-related air pollution (Policy A1). Policy B3 focuses on air quality through traffic management, active travel, public transport, supporting implementation of Air Quality Strategies and Action Plans and improving vehicle technology. Several other policies also focus on these areas: Policy B4 Active travel, Policy C2 Bus, coach and mass transit, Policy C3 Rail and Policy C4 Integrating transport. Some of these are also beneficial to reducing vehicle noise. Related policy interventions include Air Quality Management Areas, road pricing, emissions zones, pedestrianisation, and mobility hubs, particularly in urban areas. Inter-urban mass transit service improvements and bus priority measures, connecting town centres and providing efficient journeys (MT 1-7) for commuting and accessing services will reduce air pollution, particularly in town centres. Mobility Hubs also provide better interchanges and alternative transport modes and have potential to significantly reduce emissions to air (MH1-12). |
| + | Policies which have positive effects on air and noise pollution, include those that are linked to reducing traffic, but potentially to a lesser extent such as Policy B2 Healthy lifestyles, Policy B6 Public realm and placemaking, Policy C5 Taxis and private hire, Policy D2 which promotes rail freight and more efficient distribution. Policy interventions with positive effects include reducing parking provision, EV charging infrastructure, digital connectivity, car/e-scooter/cycle hire schemes, travel behavioural change programmes, integration of ticketing and fares are also expected to increase accessibility to sustainable transport and have minor benefits in terms of reducing traffic related air and noise emissions. Active travel projects (AT1-16) will improve air quality and reduce noise by providing an alternative to use of a private vehicle. This particularly includes inter-urban active travel such as Hailsham/Polegate - Lewes - Falmer - Brighton (A27/NCN90), Eastbourne - Pevensey - Bexhill - Hastings (A259/NCN2) and urban enhancement in Eastbourne, Bexhill, Hastings and Newhaven Coast, Lewes, Uckfield, Heathfield, Crowborough, Battle and Rye (AT11-16). Positive effects were predicted for the Flimwell and Hurst Green Bypasses (HW9), as sources of air pollution and noise will be removed from communities in these villages. Rural mass transit service improvements and bus priority measures (MT 8-7) for commuting and accessing services will reduce overall emissions to air. Mobility Hubs also provide better interchanges and alternative transport modes and have potential to reduce air pollution (MH1-12). Restoration of rural bus services Hurst Green to Uckfield (A265/A272) and enhanced rural bus services on several routes (MT9-17) would have positive effects in reducing air pollution and noise, when compared to travel by car, although these are likely to be less significant than in urban areas. |
| 0 | Some policies and policy interventions have no effect on air pollution and noise, primarily those that relate to safety, accessibility and climate resilience. |
| - | None of the assessments had only negative effects on air quality and noise, negative effects identified alongside positive effects are assessed as part of mixed effects below. |
| -- | There is potential for highways schemes such as the A27 Lewes – Polegate (HW2) to induce more vehicle traffic and increase emissions to air, although this route is in a rural area and unlikely to result in exceedance of air quality targets. It will introduce a new source of noise in a rural area and protected landscape, with effects on tranquillity. |
| +/-, ++/ -- | Depending on how policy measures are implemented improving strategic connectivity (Policy D1), supporting businesses and tourism economy (Policy D3) can result in mixed effects. New rail provision is likely to improve air quality when compared to private vehicle, although may generate additional noise. Similarly supporting new development can help integrate sustainable transport, but also generate more traffic. The majority of road schemes are designed to ease levels of congestion, and subsequently reduce levels of noise and air pollution. However, they can also increase road capacity and journeys, with effects on air quality elsewhere. Mixed effects were reported for A22 Junction Improvements (HW11&12), A21 Safety Enhancements (HW7), Hastings and Bexhill Distributor Road (HW10), A27 Falmer Junction Improvements (HW4), A26 Lewes – Newhaven Enhancements (HW13), A22 Uckfield Dualling (HW14). Mixed effects were also predicted for some of the rail projects, as while use of rail can reduce air pollution from vehicle traffic, these can introduce new or a more frequent source of transport noise. |
Mitigation and Enhancement
Mitigation embedded in LTP4 includes policies under the Decarbonising Transport objective (Policy A1 Reducing emissions; Policy A2 Zero emission vehicles); and policies under the Objective to support healthier lifestyles and communities (Policy B2 Healthy lifestyles; Policy B3 air quality; Policy B6 public realm improvements) as well Policies which support active travel and public transport (Policy B3, C2, C3).
Additional measures comprise:
- Design of new infrastructure to include assessment of air and noise effects and identification of suitable measures such as vegetation or other screening, choice of surfacing material or site specific noise mitigation.
Relationship with natural capital:
- Reduction of air pollution is provided by a range of habitats, particularly trees and woodland.
- Trees and other vegetation also provide mitigation for noise, particularly road traffic.
Table 5.8: Summary of Assessment: Communities
Objective: Promote a sense of place and well-connected communities.
Guide Questions: Does the policy or project;
- Provide access to employment and services for existing and future residents?
- Support a sense of place and community hubs?
- Promote social and community interaction through active travel and public transport?
| ++ | Many of the policies have significant positive effects for communities – Policy B2 Healthy lifestyles, Policy B4 Active travel, Policy B6 Public realm and placemaking, Policy C1 Accessibility, policies relating to public transport C2-C4, Policy D1 strategic connectivity, Policy D3 on the business economy, Policy D4 on supporting sustainable development. Related policy interventions are also predicted to have significant positive effects, including interventions for managing traffic, placemaking and healthy living, mobility hubs, tackling affordability and integrated planning also support better access to employment and services, promoting community interaction and supporting a sense of place. Active travel routes (AT1-16) provide connectivity and community interaction for local journeys as well as amenity for leisure routes. Similarly, improved public transport services, including rail services (RW1-8), mass transit improvements (MT 1-16) and mobilities hubs (MH1-12) connect communities with employment and services and promote social interaction. |
| + | Several policies indirectly benefit a sense of place through improving environmental quality and reducing traffic. These include policies under objectives for decarbonisation (Policy A1 & A2), enhancing the local environment (Policy A3, A4, B2, B3, B5), improving movements of freight (Policy D2) and maintenance of assets (Policy D6). While many highways interventions (HW2-HW14) have positive effects in easing congestion and providing access to employment and services, they don’t deliver benefits related to community interaction or sense of place. |
| 0 | None of the assessments on policies or projects had no effect on the objective for connecting communities. |
| - | The LTP aims to improve transport for East Sussex, there are no negative effects relating to community connectivity |
| -- | The LTP aims to improve transport for East Sussex, there are no negative effects relating to community connectivity |
| +/- | No mixed effects were identified in the assessment for this objective. |
Mitigation and Enhancement
Many of LTP4 Policies already embed enhancement measures and significant positive effects have been identified above. No additional measures have been identified.
Relationship with natural capital:
- East Sussex’s coastal and marine environment, in additional to natural habitats such as those in the South Downs National Park, generate tourism benefits.
- These resources also have provided recreation and a place for social interactions for people living in East Sussex.
Table 5.9: Summary of Assessment: Health
Objective 9: Improve health and wellbeing of residents.
Guide Questions: Does the policy or project;
- Provide active travel?
- Promote green infrastructure?
- Increase safety?
| ++ | Policies which reduce emissions and encourage active travel are likely to have significant positive effects on health through reducing contributing factors to respiratory and heart disease and social, physical and mental health benefits of exercise. This applies to Policies A1, B2, B3, B4 and B7. Other policies which significantly benefit health aim to improve safety (Policy B6), including interventions for speed limits and safe active travel; climate resilience (Policy B5), including reducing risk from climate-related events and related anxiety. Indirect significant effects include policies which improve well-being through the built or natural environment (Policies A4, B5 and B6) and related interventions such as improving the public realm, pedestrianisation. Active travel routes can be used for both travel and leisure (AT1-16) and provide significant physical and mental health benefits as described above. Similarly, improved public transport services, including rail services (RW1-8), mass transit improvements (MT 1-16) and mobilities hubs (MH1-12) connect communities with employment and services and promote social interaction. |
| + | Policies which promote public transport, rail and integration of these (Policy C2, C3 and C4) will have health benefits. Active travel is usually used for connections to these modes, and they can also promote more social interaction, providing mental health benefits. Supporting policy interventions with positive effects include car/ cycle hire and e-scooter schemes, cycle hubs and cycle parking, improvements to digital connectivity and timetabling for easier journeys and behavioural change. Highways schemes which involve minor works that improve safety and enable active travel to be better incorporated, particularly at junctions. They can result in positive effects on health through improvements to air quality by easing congestion. This project interventions such as the A259 Eastbourne to Brighton (HW3), A27 Falmer Junction Enhancements (HW4), Eastbourne A2270 Corridor Package (HW5), Access to Hastings A2101 Corridor Package (HW6), and A21 Safety Improvements (HW7). |
| 0 | Health effects associated with policies for Freight (Policy D2) are anticipated to be negligible. |
| - | None of the assessments had only negative effects on health, negative effects identified alongside positive effects are assessed as part of mixed effects below. |
| -- | None of the assessments had significant negative effects on health. |
| +/- ++/ -- | Policies with mixed effects include Parking (Policy D5) as this will largely depend on how it is implemented, an increase in vehicular traffic can have negative effects on health and well-being but also may provide better access to health services. Reducing parking provision will have benefits as set out under positive effects above. Mixed effects from Policies D1 and D3 are related to those identified for air quality above. Highway schemes can have mixed effects on health, some of these are related to mixed effects on air quality above. Highways improvements can improve safety and reduce congestion. However, ease of travel by private vehicle can lead to less opportunities for active travel and social interaction, negatively affecting health. New highways and improvements generally include safer active travel, providing better opportunities for exercise. |
Mitigation and Enhancement
Many of LTP4 Policies already embed enhancement measures and significant positive effects have been identified above. These include Policy B2 Healthy lifestyles, Policy B4 Active travel, Policy B6 Public realm and placemaking and Policy B1 Safety.
Additional measures include:
- Incorporate and expand footpath and cycleway infrastructure alongside highway improvements and new infrastructure.
- Consider bike racks or cycle storage at mobility hubs (MH1-12) and interchanges such as new station at Stone Cross (RW7).
- Where relevant, way-marking can help with active travel.
Also refer to mitigation and enhancement for other objectives, including air quality and noise, above.
Relationship with natural capital:
- Trees and other vegetation reduce air pollution and noise and associated health effects, including respiratory disease, asthma, sleep deprivation, anxiety and annoyance.
- Green and blue spaces provide areas to exercise including walking, running, horse-riding, cycling, swimming and watersports; in addition to mental health benefits.
Table 5.10: Summary of Assessment: Equalities
Objective: Protect and enhance terrestrial and marine biodiversity in East Sussex.
Guide Questions: Does the policy or project;
-
Provide access to people including people with disabilities, reduced mobility, different ages, social and cultural backgrounds?
| ++ | Improved safety (Policy B1) has significant benefits, particularly for children, young people, the elderly, and other groups who are more vulnerable to road safety. Policy C1, Accessibility, supports mobility, inclusion and affordability for residents. Parking (Policy D5) can be essential for people with reduced mobility (older people, pregnancy/ maternity etc) so was also assessed as significant positive. Urban active travel improvements (AT11-16) are likely to have significant positive effects as provide opportunities for greater accessibility by a number of groups including young people, older people, disabilities and pregnancy and maternity. Projects which provide better public transport such as improving rail services (RW1-RW5) will also have significant positive effects as these tend to be accessible to a range of groups. Rural bus enhancements (MT13-MT17) provide access in otherwise isolated areas and an affordable service that can be accessed by groups less likely to drive. |
| + | Inter-urban active travel measures (AT1 -AT10) are likely to provide improved safety for young people, for example travelling to/from education. Minor highways infrastructure (HW3-7) which involves junction and safety improvements, provide opportunities to improve access through design and incorporate better safety which may benefit some protected characteristics, including those with reduced mobility. Similarly, inter-urban bus enhancements (MT1-7) provide a more reliable and affordable service and can be accessed by groups less likely to drive. |
| 0 | A number of policies and related interventions have no disproportionate effect or negligible effects on equalities, such as those for maintenance (Policy D6), Freight (Policy D2) and Biodiversity (Policy D4). Some minor highways works are likely to have a negligible effect on equalities, such as the A259 level crossing removals. |
| - | Parking interventions which prevent or dis-incentivise parking have potential for negative effects on people with reduced mobility, particularly when costs are increased. This can be mitigated through provision of blue badge or parent parking. |
| -- | None of the policies or projects had significant negative effects on equalities. |
| +/- ++ /-- | While major highway schemes may benefit those less able to travel by other means, travel by private vehicle can disadvantage those on lower incomes or unable to drive, for example the elderly or young people. There is the opportunity to incorporate other transport modes such as active travel and public transport into such major schemes. |
Mitigation and Enhancement
Mitigation embedded in LTP4 includes policies for safety and accessibility (Policy B1 and C1) above. Additional measures include:
Additional measures comprise:
- Potential to include both safety and accessibility measures (e.g. segregation form vehicles, dropped kerbs, accessible gates or textured paving) on Public Rights of Way (PRoW) and other active travel routes, benefitting young people and those with reduce mobility.
- Public transport including bus and rail should consider protected groups, including those with reduce mobility (pregnancy/maternity, older people, disabilities) in design.
- Public transport design should reflect accessibility (e.g. kerb height, use of buggies, signage, provision of information) for people with protected characteristics and also personal safety of travellers, by providing welcoming, well-lit spaces.
- Providing fair ticketing or discounts to ensure that the scheme provides viable transport options for lower income groups and help incentivise and encourage a modal shift to rail from road based transport.
- Retain parking spaces for blue badge holders and parent and child parking.
Relationship with natural capital:
- Green and blue infrastructure provides low cost and accessible benefits for health, social interaction and well-being. There are benefits for people on low incomes, young people and children, older people, people with learning difficulties, as well as other groups.
In addition to assessment of the LTP, cumulative effects with other plans and projects also need to be identified. Table 5.11 below sets out cumulative effects of the LTP.
| Plan | Potential for Cumulative Effects |
|---|---|
| Eastbourne Core Strategy (2013) and emerging New Eastbourne Local Plan 2019-2039 Lewes Core Strategy (2016) and emerging Lewes District Local Plan (to 2040) Hastings Planning Strategy (2014) and Draft new Local Plan 2019-2039 Rother Core Strategy (2014) and Emerging Local Plan 2019-2039 Wealden Core Strategy (2013) and New Local Plan South Downs Local Plan 2014-2033 |
Local Plans within East Sussex contain planning policies for sustainable development including environmental protection and enhancement. Proposed development within the County has been taken into account in the preparation of LTP4 so that transport infrastructure can facilitate proposed growth and environmental protection objectives were identified in the IIA Scoping for the LTP. Potential cumulative effects include effects on natural capital and greenhouse gas emissions as set out below: - Cumulative effects on natural capital (see below) - Direct and indirect effects on ecology, including designated or undesignated sites, habitats and species from new development. - Direct and indirect adverse effects on designated, non-designated or unknown heritage assets, for example due to land take or due to indirect effects on the setting of these assets. - Direct and indirect effects on landscape and townscape where proposed developments are located in close proximity to new transport schemes and in-combination erode character or introduce visual intrusion. - Adverse effects on surface water flooding due to increases in impermeable areas. - Increased greenhouse gas emissions from highways schemes and energy use from new development. - Adverse impacts from new development, including housing, land for economic growth and transport infrastructure identified in these plans will need to be mitigated and opportunities for environmental net gain maximised, in line with environmental policy in the plans. - Policy 20 of the LTP, supports sustainable development through Encouraging early engagement with developers, securing developer contributions for strategic and local infrastructure and delivering strategic transport and complementary connectivity infrastructure. |
| Transport Strategy for the South East, 2020 |
The Strategy covers 16 constituent local transport Authorities, 5 local enterprise partnerships, and 46 district and borough councils across the Transport for the South East region. The Strategy sets out a 30 year vision for region up to 2050 and the strategic economic, social and environmental goals and priorities that underpin it. These include net-zero, improved productivity, health and wellbeing, quality of life, accessibility and protection of the south-east unique natural and historic environment. An Integrated Sustainability Appraisal was undertaken for the Strategy and the ESCC LTP4 and IIA sits within this regional framework. A number of transport schemes have been proposed under the Strategy and its accompanying Strategic Investment Plan (SIP) and the projects which have come from TfSE are identified in Appendix B. The assessment of cumulative effects with the Strategy is therefore already covered in this IIA. |
| Kent Local Transport Plan 4: Delivering Growth without Gridlock 2016-2031 West Sussex Transport Plan 2022-2036 Surrey Local Transport Plan 4 (2022-2032) Brighton and Hove local Transport Plan 4 2015 and emerging LTP5 to 2030 |
Local Transport Plans in adjacent authorities also have the potential for cumulative effects. These transport plans also need to reflect national policy and the TfSE Regional Strategy and have cumulative positive effects with LTP4: - Promoting active travel to improve health and reduce greenhouse gas emissions; - Provide effective public transport to increase connectivity between communities, with employment and services; reduce inequalities and greenhouse gas emissions; - Providing safe transport systems to reduce accidents; - Improve health and quality of life through increasing vitality and reducing congestion in town centres; - Reduce car journeys to improve air quality, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase safety and benefit natural and built environment; - Increasing use of technology to reduce car journeys and emissions; improve efficiency of public transport and increase climate resilience; and - Protection of the natural and built environment. Major projects which cross authority boundaries, such as the A27 improvements, HS1 rail improvements are delivered by national bodies or specifically created organisations and therefore effects across boundaries are considered as part of feasibility and planning. |
6. Monitoring
The SEA Regulations require a description of measures envisaged concerning monitoring in accordance with regulation 17 (Schedule 2, para 9). This comprises monitoring the significant environmental effects of LTP4 with the purpose of identifying unforeseen adverse effects at an early stage and being able to undertake appropriate remedial action. The IIA for LTP4 has adopted key performance indicators used by Transport for the South East, where these are relevant to the assessments.
| Strategic Priorities | Indicators as applied to ESCC |
|---|---|
| Economic: A transport network that is more resilient to incidents, extreme weather and the effects of a changing climate. | Reduced delays on the highways network due to poor weather. Reduced number of days of severe disruption on the railway network due to poor weather. Metrics relating to reduced delay on road network suffering from Road Traffic Collisions. |
| Economic: A new approach to planning that helps our partners across the SE meet future housing, employment and regeneration needs sustainably. | The percentage of allocated sites in the ESCC Local Plans developed in line with LTP4. |
| Economic: A ‘smart’ transport network that uses digital technology to manage transport demand, encourage shared transport and make more efficient use of our roads and railways. | Increase in the number of bus services offering Smart Ticketing payment systems. Number of passengers using smart ticketing. Number of passengers using shared transport. |
| Social: A network that promotes active travel and active lifestyles to improve our health and wellbeing. | Increase in the length of the National Cycle Network in the County. Increase in the length of segregated cycleways in the County. Increase mode share of trips undertaken by foot and cycle. Number of bikeshare schemes in operation in the area Mode share of walking and cycling. |
| Social: Improved air quality supported by initiatives to reduce congestion and encourage further shifts to public transport. | Reduction in NOx, SOx and particulate pollution levels in urban areas. |
| Social: An affordable, accessible transport network for all that promotes social inclusion and reduces barriers to employment, learning, social, leisure, physical and cultural activity. | A reduction in the indicators driving the Indices of Multiple Deprivation in the County, particularly in the most deprived areas. |
| Social: A seamless, integrated transport network with passengers at its heart, making journey planning, paying for and using different forms of transport simpler and easier. | Increase in the number of cross-modal interchanges and/or ticketing options in the County. |
| Social: A safely planned, delivered and operated transport network with no fatalities or serious injuries among transport users, workforce or the wider public. | Reduction in the number of people Killed and Seriously Injured by road and rail transport. |
| Environmental: A reduction in carbon emissions to net zero by 2050 to minimise the contribution of transport and travel to climate change. | Reduction in carbon emissions by transport. |
| Environmental: A reduction in the need to travel, particularly by private car, to reduce the effect of transport on people and the environment. | A net reduction in the number of trip kilometres undertaken per person each weekday. A reduction in the mode share of the private car (measured by passenger kilometres). |
| Environmental: A transport network that protects and enhances our natural, built and historic environments. | Number of transport schemes or interventions result in net gain of the natural capital. |
| Environmental: Use of the principle of ‘biodiversity net gain’ in all transport initiatives. | Number of transport schemes or interventions result in net gain of biodiversity (and percentage of net gain). |
| Environmental: Minimisation of transport’s consumption of resources and energy. | Increase in renewable energy consumed by transport. |
A1. Appendix A - Scoping Responses
| Summary of comment | Response |
|---|---|
|
In terms of air quality, please see my comments below: The two AQAPs (Lewes and Newhaven) are currently in the process of being updated and combined into one district AQAP due for publication 2024. Every local authority without AQMAs will have to produce its own air quality strategy (instead of an air quality action plan) by 2024. It is good to see a map of NO2 levels across the county but given the concerns with PM and in particular, fine PM (PM2.5) I would ask that maps are also provided showing PM10 and PM2.5 levels across Sussex. |
Scoping Report and maps updated |
|
There could more emphasis on the role of green infrastructure in mitigating urban heating. Stress the point that better links between communities would be cycle paths and more frequent more joined up public transport. Coastal erosion threatens the roadway and there should be consideration to longer term adaptation and retreat (re-routing) Would encourage ESCC to work with RMA to explore the impact on coastal erosion to the road infrastructure with consideration to joint funding of projects to reduce and manage this risk. Didn’t see any mention of how road run-off pollutes our water courses and how nature-based solutions should be used to address this. I think the critical issue here to do with the coast is that as an SEA Scoping report it makes no reference how the environment might affect the road network. This risk can be best identified in 2 sources of information the Shoreline Management Plans. Likewise, they should ensure they have utilised appropriate Strategic Flood Risk Assessment maps |
Appraisal Framework in Table 3.1 of this report updated. Paras 3.58-3.59 in the Scoping Report cover erosion and flooding and transport. Added to mitigation. Paras 3.49 of Scoping Report Paras 3.58-3.59 cover erosion and flooding and transport infrastructure. The Pevensey Bay to Eastbourne Coastal Management Scheme is referenced at 3.59. References to the SMPs have been added. Figure 3.13 shows Flood Zones and references the SFRAs. |
|
I think the Scoping Report is comprehensive and covers the areas I would hope to see included. The sustainability-related issues are clearly presented with a sound evidence base. The influence LTP4 could have on reducing emissions cannot be overstated, this is a timely opportunity with regard to infrastructure and behavioural change. I support the IIA Framework for assessment however within the water resource section, there is a question about polluting water but there isn’t a question about supply. Water scarcity and drought are mentioned in the earlier text so it would be good to establish if the policies or interventions affect water supply. |
Agree that this is a key issue, but as the transport network doesn’t involve much water use, this topic hasn’t been covered. |
| Confirmed no comments | N/A |
|
1) Steer need to be consistent in using ‘CO2‘(e.g. see 3.53), NO2 etc (e.g. see 3.64). 2) Figure 3.12: there’s probably an updated version in SCATTER, as they’ve used a version from 2020. 3) In the pre-amble to the ‘issues & opportunities’ section on climate change I suggest including some discussion about roles and responsibilities, if only to manage expectations. I.e. who is responsible for decarbonising which aspects of transport? 4) Include the new air quality strategy in 3.64 (see: The air quality strategy for England - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)) 5) 3.65: the English isn’t clear (‘the local authorities within.’?). Also need to be clear which LAs have a statutory duty to report on AQ. 6) 3.66: ‘The council’ needs to be named as LDC. There are 7 continuous AQMSs. ASRs are available for 2022, not 2020. 7) 3.67: typo (2 x ‘by’) 8) 3.68: needs a comment about the new AQ thresholds set out in the Environment Act 2021 and the interim targets set out in the Environmental Improvement Plan 2023. 9) 3.70: need to state that Defra’s the responsible authority for producing noise action plans. 10) Figures 3.15 & 16: rename the ‘boundary’ lines as EBC & HBC. 11) Figure 3.19 makes figure 3.18 redundant. Re-title figure 3.19. |
1) Corrected throughout for consistency 2) Updated 3) Outlined in Section 2 of this report. 4) Reference to the Strategy added 5) amended 6) Amended. For the purposes of scoping, aligned to LTP evidence review at the time. 7) Deleted 8) Added to 3.67 9) Added to 3.69 10) Updated 11) Updated |
|
Para 3.37 would benefit from also including the following: • Burials Act 1857 • Protection of Wrecks Act 1973 • Protection of Military Remains Act 1986 Potential discrepancies in data depending on source. |
Legislation added to Scoping Report and Appendix A The number of designations seems to be a product of the Historic England dataset used. For scoping it still provides context in terms of potential for heritage to be affected by the LTP. Where detailed information is needed, this can be looked at in the assessment. Updated Scheduled Monuments and Listed Buildings. |
| HE is content that Scoping Report adequately covers the issues that may arise in respect of the potential effects of proposed development sites on heritage assets. | N/A |
|
Additional sites that may need to be covered beyond 25km of the boundary: The Mens SAC, Duncton to Bignor Escarpment SAC, Ebernoe Common SAC, North Downs Woodland SAC, Lydden and Temple Ewell Downs SAC, Dover to Kingsdown Cliffs SAC, Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay Special Protection Area (SPA). Have not reviewed the list of Plans but advise that the following types of plans relating to the natural environment should be considered where applicable to your plan area: Green infrastructure strategies, Biodiversity plans, Rights of Way Improvement Plans, Shoreline management plans, Coastal access plans, River basin management plans, AONB and National Park management plans., Relevant landscape plans and strategies. Issues & Opportunities: For resources, soil and water, under reference to ALC, should also identify BMV (Grades 1-3a). Climate change: Include reference to opportunities to incorporate nature-based solutions. Air quality and noise: recognise the potential impacts of air quality and noise pollution on habitats and species, as well as water courses and soils. Objectives and guide questions are quite broad and may not be conclusive to a comprehensive assessment of policies and projects, included a list of suggestions for additional questions. |
HRA has reviewed and updated list of sites. List of plans have been reviewed; most are captured but SMPs have been added. Individual Local Authority Plans have not been reviewed with the exception of Local Plans. Issues and Opportunities - sentence added on BMV at para 3.47. Nature based solutions for flood defence is referenced with regard to natural capital at para 3.61. Para added for air and noise at 3.68 and 3.70. The suggestion for the Framework has been reviewed, with long-list of policies and interventions in mind and guide questions incorporated where relevant. |
| Assessment scale | Significance of effect |
|---|---|
| ++ | Significant positive effect |
| + | Positive effect |
| 0 | Negligible or no effect |
| - | Negative effect |
| -- | Significant negative effect |
| +/- ++/-- | Mixed effects |
| ? | Uncertain effects (in combination with above) |
| AT | Active Travel |
|---|---|
| ES BSIP | East Sussex Bus Service Improvement Plan |
| FOCs | Freight Operating Companies |
| HW | Highway |
| LCWIP | Local Cycling and Walking Implementation Plan |
| LPA | Local Planning Authority |
| MH | Mobility Hub |
| MT | Mass Transit |
| NCN | National Cycle Network |
| NH | National Highways |
| NR | Network Rail |
| RW | Railway |
| TfSE | Transport for the South East |
| TOCs | Transport Operating Companies |