strategic environmental assessment€¦ · strategic environmental assessment of the hampshire ltp3...
TRANSCRIPT
STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
OF THE HAMPSHIRE LTP3
Environmental Report to accompany the Consultation on a Draft Local Transport Plan Strategy
for Hampshire
Client: Hampshire County Council
Report No.: UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
Status: Consultation Version
Date: 7th July 2010
Author: NCB
Checked: NJD
Approved: NEJP
Contents
Non-Technical Summary I
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Purpose of this Environmental Report 1
1.2 The Hampshire LTP3 1
1.3 Overview of LTP area 5
1.4 Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3 7
1.5 Stages of SEA 8
1.6 Presenting the SEA Information 9
2 Scoping 13
2.1 Scoping Report 13
2.2 Scoping Responses 13
2.3 Policy, Plan and Programme Review 14
2.4 Baseline Data 20
2.5 Key Sustainability Issues for Hampshire 20
3 SEA Framework 25
3.1 The SEA Framework 25
3.2 SEA Objectives 25
4 Assessment of Alternative Options 27
4.1 Assessment of Alternative Options for the LTP3 27
4.2 SEA Options Assessment Report 28
4.3 Summary of the Options Assessment Findings 28
4.4 Options Assessment and the development of the Draft Strategies for Development of the Draft Strategies for North Hampshire, Central Hampshire and the New Forest, and South Hampshire 31
5 Approach to the Assessment of the LTP3 Strategy 33
5.1 The LTP3’s vision and priorities for transport in Hampshire, and compatibility with the SEA Objectives 33
5.2 The Consultation Draft Strategies for North Hampshire, Central Hampshire and the New Forest, and South Hampshire 35
5.3 Interventions included in the Consultation Draft Strategies 36
5.4 Assessment of the Consultation Draft Strategies 40
5.5 Assessment of Cumulative Effects 43
5.6 Summarising the assessment of the Draft Strategies 43
5.7 Limitations of assessment 43
6 Assessment of the Interventions put forward through the Draft Strategy for North Hampshire 45
6.1 Results of the High Level Assessment for the North Hampshire Draft Strategy interventions 45
6.2 Results of the Detailed Assessment 46
6.3 Assessment of Cumulative Effects 48
6.4 Summary of the assessment of the Draft Strategy for North Hampshire 51
7 Assessment of the Interventions put forward through the Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and the New Forest 57
7.1 Results of the High Level Assessment for the Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and the New Forest interventions 57
7.2 Detailed Assessment for Intervention 28: Adequate parking at railway stations 57
7.3 Assessment of Cumulative Effects 58
7.4 Summary of the assessment of the Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and the New Forest 61
8 Assessment of the Interventions put forward through the Draft Strategy for South Hampshire 67
8.1 Results of the High Level Assessment for the Draft Strategy for South Hampshire interventions 67
8.2 Results of the Detailed Assessment 68
8.3 Assessment of Cumulative Effects 71
8.4 Summary of the assessment of the Draft Strategy for South Hampshire 75
9 Recommendations for the next stages of development for the LTP3 81
9.1 Recommendations 81
10 Monitoring 83
10.1 Monitoring Proposals 83
10.2 Links with the LTP3 Annual Progress Report 83
11 Next Steps 85
11.1 Consultation on the Draft Strategies 85
11.2 Commenting on the Environmental Report 85
Appendices
Appendix A: Annex I of the SEA Directive
Appendix B: Responses received on the Scoping Report and how they have been addressed
Appendix C: Updated SEA Framework
Appendix D: High level assessment of the interventions proposed under the Draft Strategy for North Hampshire Draft Strategy
Appendix E: Detailed Assessment Matrices for the Draft Strategy for North Hampshire
Appendix F: High level assessment of the interventions proposed under the Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and the New Forest
Appendix G: Detailed Assessment Matrices for the Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and the New Forest
Appendix H: High level assessment of the interventions proposed under the Draft Strategy for South Hampshire
Appendix I: Detailed Assessment Matrices for the Draft Strategy for South Hampshire
Appendix J: Proposed SEA monitoring framework
Appendix K: ODPM checklist
Appendix L: Policy plan and programme review
Appendix M: Baseline data
List of Tables and Figures
Tables:
Table 1.1: SEA stages, and stages covered in this Environmental Report.
Table 1.2: Key facts relating to the Hampshire LTP3.
Table 1.3: Environmental information themes.
Table 2.1: Summary of the policy, plan and programme Review.
Table 3.1: SEA Objectives.
Table 5.1: Compatibility matrix between the Strategic Transport Priorities for the wider Hampshire
area and the SEA Objectives
Table 5.2: Interventions included in the North Hampshire Draft Strategy
Table 5.3: Interventions included in the Central Hampshire and the New Forest Draft Strategy
Table 5.4: Interventions included in the South Hampshire Draft Strategy
Table 5.5: Significance Matrix
Table 6.1: Cumulative, Synergistic and Indirect Effects: Draft Strategy for North Hampshire
Table 7.1: Cumulative, Synergistic and Indirect Effects: Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and
the New Forest.
Table 8.1: Cumulative, Synergistic and Indirect Effects: Draft Strategy for South Hampshire
Figures:
Figure 1.1: Areas covered by the Draft Strategies
Figure 1.2: Area covered by the LTP3 for Hampshire
Abbreviations
AONB Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
AQMA Air Quality Management Area
BAP Biodiversity Action Plan
BRT Bus Rapid Transit
CO2 Carbon dioxide
DCLG Department of Communities and Local Government
Defra Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
EC European Commission
EU European Union
HCC Hampshire County Council
HGV Heavy Goods Vehicle
HRA Habitats Regulations Assessment
LDF Local Development Framework
LTP2 Hampshire Local Transport Plan 2006-11
LTP3 Hampshire Local Transport Plan 2011-2031
ODPM Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (now DCLG)
PAS Planning Advisory Service
PPPs Policies, plans and programmes
SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment
SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest
TfSH Transport for South Hampshire
WFD Water Framework Directive
This page is intentionally blank.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Non Technical Summary Page I
Non-Technical Summary
What is SEA?
A Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) has been carried out to inform the Hampshire Local
Transport Plan 3 (LTP3) as required the SEA Directive. Local Transport Authorities such as Hampshire
County Council (HCC) use SEA to assess Local Transport Plans against a set of environmental objectives
developed in consultation with interested parties and the public. This purpose of the assessment is to
avoid adverse environmental effects and identify opportunities to improve the environmental quality of
Hampshire through the Local Transport Plan.
What is the Hampshire Local Transport Plan 3?
The LTP3 will:
Set out HCC’s transport policies and their relationship with national and local policy objectives;
Concentrate on maintenance and road safety, supporting Hampshire’s economy, emerging Local
Development Framework priorities, sustainability and the worsening public finance outlook;
Be a corporate document, relevant to Hampshire but meeting Government expectations on
content;
Provide guidance on transport issues for the various Local Development Frameworks being
developed within Hampshire; and
Leave open the possibility of an early ‘refresh’ should funding allocations change significantly
from expected levels.
The LTP3 will start in 2011 and end in 2031. As part of the LTP3, Consultation Draft Strategies have
been prepared for: (1) North Hampshire; (2) Central Hampshire and the New Forest; and (3) South
Hampshire. Implementation plans will be prepared to deliver the aims of the strategy.
Purpose and content of this Environmental Report
This Environmental Report is the third document to be produced as part of the SEA process. The first
document was the SEA scoping report, which includes information about Hampshire’s environment.
The second document was a report which looked at different ways of identifying the content of the
strategy. The purpose of the Environmental Report is to:
Identify, describe and evaluate the likely significant effects of the LTP3; and
Provide an opportunity for statutory consultees, interested parties and the public to offer views
on any aspect of the SEA process which has been carried out to date.
The Environmental Report contains:
An outline of the contents and main objectives of the LTP3 and its relationship with other
relevant policies, plans and programmes;
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Non Technical Summary Page II
Relevant aspects of the current state of the environment and key sustainability issues;
The SEA Framework of objectives and indicators against which the LTP3 has been assessed;
The assessment of LTP3 policies for north, central and south Hampshire;
The likely significant effects of the LTP3 in environmental terms;
The measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and as fully as possible offset any significant adverse
effects as a result of the LTP3;
A description of the measures envisaged concerning monitoring; and
The next steps for the SEA.
Assessment of the LTP3 policies and interventions
A summary of the assessment of the LTP3 interventions and policies for the three Draft Strategies,
presented by SEA topic areas, is as follows:
Air Quality
Through their focus on promoting a reduction in congestion, encouraging modal shift, limiting peak
time travel, and promoting accessibility by non car modes, the Draft Strategy interventions have the
potential to support continued air quality improvements in Hampshire. Air quality may however in the
longer term be undermined at some locations:
Near motorway junctions due to the junction capacity and traffic flow management
improvements proposed by the Draft Strategy for North Hampshire;
Through the provision of improved parking at railways stations in central Hampshire; and
Surrounding new park and ride, potential road schemes, and proposals to increase parking at rail
stations in south Hampshire.
Biodiversity and Geodiversity
Hampshire’s biodiversity assets are likely to come under increasing pressures from new development.
In this context the Draft Strategies through supporting a reduction of traffic growth, promoting modal
shift, and supporting improvements to air quality have the potential to limit impacts on biodiversity
from new and existing transport infrastructure. However, there are potential issues relating to land take
and disturbance due to:
Proposed junction improvements near Basingstoke and the proposed new rail stations in north
Hampshire;
The provision of improved parking at railway stations in central Hampshire; and
Proposed transport infrastructure improvements, including the potential road schemes, park and
ride measures and the development of Bus Rapid Transit in south Hampshire.
These issues will be considered in more detail as part of the LTP3 Implementation Plan development, as
well as the project level environmental impact assessment (EIA).
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Non Technical Summary Page III
Climate Change
The Draft Strategies will support climate change mitigation. Through promoting a reduction in
congestion, supporting modal shift from the private car, facilitating a reduction in the need to travel,
and helping to reduce traffic flows, the interventions will support climate change mitigation by limiting
greenhouse gas emissions from transport. Proposed interventions for central and south Hampshire will
support climate change adaptation; however, it is unclear as to what extent the interventions for the
Draft Strategy for North Hampshire will help the area adapt to the effects of climate change.
Health
Health and wellbeing in Hampshire will be supported by the Draft Strategies’ encouragement of non-
car use and healthier modes of travel. This includes through the promotion of improved pedestrian and
cycle networks and enhanced public transport links, particularly in the Draft Strategy for South
Hampshire. Fear of crime, stress and insecurity has negative effects on health and wellbeing. The
health and wellbeing of residents will therefore be promoted by the Draft Strategies’ support for
improvements to the built environment and public realm, including south Hampshire’s Safer Routes to
Schools scheme. This will help improve the satisfaction of residents with the neighbourhoods in which
they live and support community cohesion, both of which are important contributors to health and
wellbeing.
Historic Environment
In general, the Draft Strategies’ interventions will support the protection and enhancement of the
historic environment. The setting of heritage features will be promoted by the interventions’ support
for improvements to the built environment, including from a reduction of traffic flows and the support
for modal shift from the private car. The Draft Strategies’ promotion of improved streetscapes and
signage improvements will also support the integrity of the historic environment.
As a strategic document, the LTP3 provides limited details about potential locations, designs or layout
for some interventions. Subsequently, it is unclear as to what extent local historic environment assets
(including archaeological features) may be affected. These include:
Junction improvements near Basingstoke and new railway stations in north Hampshire; and
Proposed transport infrastructure improvements, including the potential road schemes, park and
ride measures and the development of Bus Rapid Transit in south Hampshire.
The appraisal of the LTP3 Implementation Plans, and the project level EIAs will consider potential issues
such as visual impacts, light and noise pollution, and the loss of features important for
landscape/townscape character in more detail.
Landscape
The Draft Strategies will help limit effects from transport on landscape and townscape quality and
character through promoting modal shift, supporting a reduction in traffic flows and seeking to mitigate
the impacts of new development from transport. The interventions also seek to facilitate improvements
to the quality of the public realm, and facilitate streetscape and signage improvements. This will
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Non Technical Summary Page IV
support townscape and landscape quality in Hampshire. As with the Historic Environment, however, for
the above-mentioned interventions in north and south Hampshire, effects are unclear due to a lack of
detail on locations, design and layout. The appraisal of the LTP3 Implementation Plans, as well as the
project level EIAs, will consider these potential issues in more detail.
Material Assets
The interventions in central Hampshire will support the sustainable management of resources and waste
in the area through seeking to ‘provide a well-maintained, resilient highway network’. The same is true
of south Hampshire through the promotion of Transport Asset Management Plans, improving the
maintenance and energy efficiency of street lighting and the delivery of maintenance programmes.
One of the main Strategic Transport Priorities for the LTP3 is also to “Provide a safe, well-maintained,
and more resilient road network in Hampshire”.
Population
The Draft Strategies will support the quality of life of residents and social inclusion through a strong
focus on enhancing accessibility to services, facilities and opportunities by non car modes, reducing the
need to travel and promoting new and enhanced transport links. Accessibility from areas poorly served
by public transport networks, including rural areas, will also be supported by the interventions relating
to Community Transport.
Soil
Most interventions are unlikely to have effects in relation to soil and agricultural land quality.
Nevertheless, several interventions have some potential to lead to loss of good quality agricultural land.
Potential adverse effects are associated with:
Proposed junction improvements near Basingstoke and the proposed new rail stations in north
Hampshire;
The provision of improved parking at railway stations in central Hampshire; and
Proposed transport infrastructure improvements, including the potential road schemes, park and
ride measures and the development of Bus Rapid Transit in south Hampshire.
The appraisal of the LTP3 Implementation Plans, and the project level EIAs will consider these issues in
more detail.
Water
In central Hampshire, the interventions’ promotion of a ‘well-maintained, resilient highway network’ may
support water quality, water resources and flood risk management, whilst sustainable drainage systems
and other associated water management measures mentioned in the Draft Strategy for South
Hampshire mean that the new transport infrastructure schemes are unlikely to have any significant
effects on water quality, flood risk or the other aspects covered under the water environmental
information theme. It is uncertain whether the interventions proposed for north Hampshire are likely to
have any significant effects on water, however. Effects will largely depend on the use of measures
within transport schemes to regulate surface water runoff, such as sustainable drainage systems,
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Non Technical Summary Page V
interventions to reduce flood risk and other interventions. Proposed projects should revisit this issue in
the Implementation Plans.
Recommendations
A number of recommendations have been proposed to help the LTP3 further improve its performance.
These include the following:
The LTP3 should outline how it intends to address biodiversity considerations in Hampshire. This
includes through acknowledging the presence of internationally and nationally designated sites,
Priority Habitats and Species and Biodiversity Opportunity Areas in the county, and outlining
recommended approaches for securing biodiversity protection and enhancement.
Electric charging points should source electricity from renewable sources to support climate change mitigation.
The LTP3 should discuss how cultural heritage assets and their settings will be supported
through the implementation of the plan. This should include through utilising Historic Landscape
Characterisation work carried out in Hampshire, and seeking the views of stakeholders with an
interest in the historic environment before development commences.
New Park and Ride schemes, where taken forward by the LTP3, should have a focus on
improving accessibility for non car users. This can include through improving local bus services,
promoting enhanced walking and cycling links and supporting improvements to the public realm
on routes. Full consideration should be given to potential localised environmental effects of new
Park and Ride provision, with strategic alternatives considered for location and layout.
Improved parking provision at rail stations should be accompanied by measures to improve end-
to-end sustainable transport use and the appropriate pricing of car parking. The use of well
designed, decked, multi-level parking can reduce landtake from new parking on greenfield land
and areas of higher quality agricultural land.
The LTP3 should ensure that the benefits of capacity improvements on Hampshire's road
network are 'locked in' through relevant localised and sub-regional measures to help restrain
traffic growth, including through interventions to promote the use of non-car modes of
transport.
The reuse and recycling of waste and the use of recycled materials and should be maximised in
transport works wherever possible.
Car parking guidance systems should be accompanied by appropriate parking policies relating
to pricing and availability, and measures to support modal shift from the private car.
The location and design of High Occupancy Vehicle lanes should seek to limit impacts on historic
environment assets and their settings, and promote the use of sustainable modes of transport
through the incorporation of cycle routes and public transport priority. They should also seek to
support road safety for pedestrians and cyclists.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Non Technical Summary Page VI
Monitoring
Appendix J provides preliminary proposals for a monitoring programme for measuring the LTP3’s
implementation in relation to the areas where the SEA process has identified significant effects, and
where opportunities for an improvement in environmental performance may arise. The SEA guidance
suggests that SEA monitoring and reporting activities can be integrated into the regular planning cycle.
As part of the monitoring process for their LTP3, HCC will be required to prepare an Annual Progress
Report (APR). It is anticipated that elements of the SEA monitoring programme for the LTP3 will be
incorporated into this process.
Next Steps
This Environmental Report is due to be published alongside the LTP3. The public consultation period is
between 8th July and 30th September 2010. All responses to the consultation should be sent to:
LTP3 Environmental Report Consultation
Environment Department
Hampshire County Council
The Castle
Winchester
Hampshire
SO23 8UD
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 1
1 Introduction
1.1 Purpose of this Environmental Report
This Environmental Report has been prepared for Hampshire County Council as part of the
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the Hampshire Local Transport Plan 3 (LTP3).
It has been produced in compliance with the Environmental Assessment of Plans and
Programmes Regulations 2004 SI No. 1633 and as required by the SEA Directive 2001/42/EC.
It accompanies six consultation Strategy documents which have been released for consultation
for a period of twelve weeks.
The six consultation documents are as follows:
Part A: A long-term transport vision (Hampshire County Council, July 2010);
Part B: Emerging strategic transport priorities (Hampshire County Council, July
2010);
Part C: Wider Hampshire Challenges and Policy Context (Hampshire County Council,
July 2010);
Part D: The Future of Transport in North Hampshire (Hampshire County Council, July
2010);
Part E: The Future of Transport in Central Hampshire and the New Forest (Hampshire
County Council, July 2010); and
Part F: Local Transport Plan 3: Consultation on a draft Strategy for South Hampshire
(Hampshire County Council, Portsmouth City Council and Southampton City Council,
July 2010)
1.2 The Hampshire LTP3
Hampshire County Council (HCC), as the local transport authority for Hampshire, is currently
preparing the third Local Transport Plan (LTP3) for the County. This will replace Hampshire’s
second Local Transport Plan (LTP2), which was adopted in April 2006, and covers the five year
period between 2006-11.
The LTP3 will:
Set out HCC’s transport policies and their relation with national and local policy
objectives within a single document;
Take into account an increasing emphasis on maintenance and road safety, the need
to support Hampshire’s economy, emerging Local Development Framework
priorities, sustainability and the worsening public finance outlook;
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 2
Be a corporate document, relevant to Hampshire but meeting Government
expectations on content;
Provide guidance on transport issues for the various Local Development Frameworks
being developed within Hampshire; and
Leave open the possibility of an early ‘refresh’ should funding allocations change
significantly from expected levels.
The lifespan of the LTP3 will be from 2011 to 2031. This will help ensure consistency with the
timescale for the various Local Development Frameworks which are currently being developed
in Hampshire. The longer timeframe will also enable HCC to set, and help deliver, longer term
strategic priorities.
1.2.1 The LTP3 Draft Strategies
A key part of the LTP3 development process is the development of three Draft Strategies for
different parts of Hampshire. These are designed to reflect the long term strategic vision and
emerging strategic priorities in Hampshire1 at a local level and will encompass the area
covered by the Transport for South Hampshire (TfSH) transport body, priorities for central
Hampshire and the New Forest, and priorities for northern Hampshire. To ensure a
collaborative approach in the TfSH area, Hampshire County Council is currently working with
Portsmouth City Council and Southampton City Council to establish responses to common
sub-regional transport issues and challenges, and to set cross-boundary priorities for transport
across the three local transport authority areas.
The geographic areas covered by the Draft Strategies include:
North Hampshire: This Draft Strategy area includes Andover, Basingstoke, Fleet, Farnborough and Aldershot, the towns of Whitchurch, Hook, Tadley and Yateley and the rural hinterland of the area.
Central Hampshire and the New Forest: This comprises the largely rural central Hampshire and New Forest area. It incorporates: the New Forest and South Downs National Park within Hampshire, and Winchester, Ringwood, Brockenhurst, Lymington, Alton, Petersfield and New Alresford.
South Hampshire: Incorporating the mostly urban “Transport for South Hampshire” area, it includes Southampton, Portsmouth, Gosport, Fareham, Havant, Waterlooville, Romsey and the surrounding areas. The area mirrors the Partnership for Urban South Hampshire area2.
Figure 1.1 below sets out the geographic coverage of the three areas in Hampshire covered
by the Draft Strategies.
1 The long- transport vision for Hampshire is presented in Part A of the Consultation Strategy. The 16 strategic transport priorities for the county are presented in Part B of the Consultation Strategy. These have been discussed in more detail in Section 5.1. 2 The Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (PUSH) is a partnership between eleven local authorities in the south Hampshire area and outside stakeholders. The partnership was set up to help deliver sustainable growth and economic development in the sub-region.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 3
Figure 1.1: Draft Strategy areas to inform a coordinated approach to transport planning.
As highlighted in Section 1.1, this Environmental Report accompanies the consultation
versions of the Draft Strategies for the three areas. These documents, which present the
emerging approach to transport for the three areas to 2031, have been released for
consultation for a period of 12 weeks from mid-July 2010.
Following consultation on the Draft Strategies, the final LTP3 for Hampshire will be
developed. This will comprise the 20 year strategy element of the plan, and the first LTP3
Implementation Plan.
1.2.2 LTP3 Implementation Plan
In line with LTP3 guidance, the longer term strategy presented in the Hampshire LTP3 will be
delivered through implementation plans for the Hampshire County Council area. The first
implementation plan will focus on delivery of strategy for the LTP3 in the period 2011-14, and
will:
Set out clearly the projects to be pursued;
The projected funding and budget source;
Acknowledge programme and project risks; and
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 4
Consider possible remedial and mitigation measures if those risks materialise.
The implementation plan is designed to align with the next Comprehensive Spending Review
period.3 For this reason it will be shorter term than the strategy for the LTP3, and will cover a
three year period. The Implementation Plan will provide a comprehensive overview of the
investment HCC intends to make into local transport during 2011-14, guided by the overall
20-year LTP Strategy
Table 1.1: Key facts relating to the Hampshire LTP3
Name of Responsible
Authority
Hampshire County Council
Title of plan Hampshire Local Transport Plan 3 (LTP3)
What prompted the
plan (e.g. legislative,
regulatory or
administrative provision)
The LTP3 will be the third Local Transport Plan to be developed for
Hampshire. It follows the LTP1, which covered the period 2001-6, and
the LTP2, which covered the period from 2006-11.
The LTP3 is being developed following the implementation of the Local
Transport Act 2008. The Act retains the statutory requirement to
produce and review Local Transport Plans and policies, and requires
local transport authorities to produce an LTP3 by the end of March
2011.
Subject (e.g. transport) Transport Plan.
Period covered by the
plan
2011 to 2031. An implementation plan will cover the period between
2011/12 and 2014/15.
Frequency of updates When required.
Area covered by the
plan
The area covered by the local transport authority of Hampshire County
Council.
3 The Comprehensive Spending Review is due in 2010, and will set spending plans for 2011-12, 2012-13, and 2013-14.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 5
Purpose and/or
objectives of the plan
The LTP3 will:
• Set out Hampshire County Council’s transport policies and their
relation with national and local policy objectives within a single
document;
• Take into account an increasing emphasis on maintenance and
road safety, the need to support Hampshire’s economy,
emerging Local Development Framework priorities,
sustainability and the worsening public finance outlook;
• Be a corporate document, relevant to Hampshire, but meeting
Government expectations on content;
• Provide guidance on transport issues for Local Development
Frameworks; and
• Leave open the possibility of an early ‘refresh’ should funding
allocations change significantly from expected levels.
The LTP3 will be presented through a long term strategy and an
implementation plan.
Plan contact point
Geoff Hobbs, Senior Transport Planner, Environment Department,
Hampshire County Council
Telephone number: 01962 846811
Email: [email protected]
1.3 Overview of LTP area
Hampshire is located in central southern England and has borders with Dorset and Wiltshire to
the west, West Berkshire, Wokingham and Bracknell Forest to the north, and Surrey and West
Sussex to the east. The Unitary Authorities of Southampton City Council and Portsmouth City
Council border the County to the south, and the Isle of Wight is just off Hampshire’s southern
coastline. Covering approximately 3,700 square kilometres, the county extends 86km from
east to west, and 73km from north to south.
Significant settlements in Hampshire include: Basingstoke and Andover in the north of the
county; the towns and settlements of the Blackwater Valley in the north east including Fleet,
Farnborough and Aldershot; Winchester and Romsey in central southern Hampshire;
Ringwood, Brockenhurst and Lymington in the New Forest; Petersfield and Alton in the east of
the county; and the urbanised area of south Hampshire between Southampton and
Portsmouth, which includes the towns of Eastleigh, Fareham, Gosport, Havant and
Waterlooville. The 2010 population of Hampshire is approximately 1,297,000. This is forecast
to grow to 1,393,000 by 2026. 4
Hampshire is characterised by its high quality physical environment, and includes a number of
well known features and areas including the New Forest, the South Downs, the North
4 HCC Long Term Population Projections: http://www3.hants.gov.uk/planning/factsandfigures/population-statistics/long-term-proj.htm
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 6
Hampshire Downs, the south Hampshire harbours, and rivers such the Test, Itchen, Hamble
and Avon.
The coastline of Hampshire includes: parts of Portsmouth Harbour, Langstone Harbour and
Chichester Harbour; a number of estuaries including those of the rivers Lymington and
Hamble; Southampton Water; the coastline of the New Forest; and part of Christchurch Bay.
It is separated from the Isle of Wight by the Solent. Whilst the county’s coastline is 55km long
from east to west ‘as the crow flies’, with inundations (including creeks, estuaries and
harbours), it extends to over 370km in length (including the coastline of Portsmouth and
Southampton).
The high quality landscape of Hampshire is reflected by the designation of two national parks
(the New Forest National Park and the recently designated South Downs National Park) and
the presence of the North Wessex Downs, Chichester Harbour and the Cranborne Chase and
West Wiltshire Downs Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). Hampshire’s biodiversity
resource is reflected by the significant number of international and national nature
conservation designations in the county, centred on the New Forest, the coasts and estuaries
of south Hampshire, the chalk rivers of the Itchen and Test, the chalk downs in north and east
Hampshire and the heathlands of north east and east Hampshire. The county also has a rich
historic environment which includes important features such as Winchester Cathedral,
Mottisfont Abbey and Hurst Castle, as well as a wide range of other designated and non-
designated features and areas.
In May 2009, the final version of the South East Plan was published by the Government.
Setting out the vision for the future of the South East region to 2026, the Plan outlines how
the South East should respond to challenges facing the region such as housing, the economy,
transport and protecting the environment. Central to the Plan is the allocation of 32,700 new
homes a year in the region in the period to 2026 to meet housing needs. On this basis many
parts of Hampshire will experience significant growth in the next 15-20 years, an issue that will
need to be taken into close consideration by the LTP3. The new coalition government have
decided to abolish the South East Plan but significant growth is still anticipated.
Figure 1.2 sets out the area covered by the LTP3.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 7
Figure 1.2: Area covered by the LTP3 for Hampshire.
1.4 Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is a systematic process for evaluating the
environmental consequences of proposed plans or programmes to ensure environmental
issues are fully integrated and addressed at the earliest appropriate stage of decision making.
SEA was introduced to the UK through the EU Directive 2001/42/EC. In England this Directive
has been transposed via the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations
2004. SEA applies to Local Transport Plans produced by local transport authorities in
England. On this basis, the Hampshire LTP3 therefore requires an SEA under the Directive.
A Habitats Regulation Assessment process is also being carried out for the LTP3. Whilst the
HRA will support the findings of the SEA, the Habitats Regulations Assessment is being carried
out independently of the SEA process and will be reported on separately.
The approach for carrying out the SEA of the LTP3 is based on current best practice. Primarily
the approach applied to this SEA process draws on guidance from:
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (September, 2005): A Practical Guide to the SEA
Directive5; and
5 The SEA guidance can be found on : http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/practicalguide
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 8
Department for Transport (April, 2009): TAG Unit 2.11, Strategic Environmental Assessment for Transport Plans and Programmes (‘In draft’ Guidance).6
TAG Unit 2.11 presents a methodology for carrying out SEA of transport plans and
programmes. Whilst it sets out a broadly similar approach as the ODPM guidance, it adopts
more of a transport focus, and also suggests how SEA can complement and take further many
of the aspects promoted through the New Approach to Appraisal (NATA).7
In terms of best practice and added value, it is worth citing other useful guidance which has
influenced the approach to SEA for the assessment of the Hampshire LTP3:
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (November 2005) Sustainability Appraisal of
Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents8; and
Planning Advisory Service (September 2009): CLG Plan Making Manual: Sustainability Appraisal9.
1.5 Stages of SEA
TAG Unit 2.11, in common with other SEA and Sustainability Appraisal guidance documents,
sets out a five stage process for carrying out SEA.
Table 1.2 provides a summary of the key stages of the SEA process for LTP3 presented in
TAG Unit 2.11. Those shaded in green indicate the stages covered in this Environmental
Report. The second column indicates where information about each respective stage can be
found in this document.
6 TAG Unit 2.11 can be found on: http://www.dft.gov.uk/webtag/documents/project-manager/pdf/unit2.11d.pdf 7 NATA is an approach for improving the consistency and transparency with which transport decisions are made. It seeks to presents the key economic, environmental and social impacts of decisions in a clear, consistent and balanced way using an Appraisal Summary Table and associated worksheets. NATA is the basis for appraising multi-modal studies, Highways Agency road schemes, Local Transport Plans major road and public transport schemes, Strategic Rail Authority schemes, seaports, and the Government's airports strategy. 8 The RSS/LDF SA guidance can be found on: http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/142520 9 The PAS Guidance can be found on: http://www.pas.gov.uk/pas/core/page.do?pageId=152450
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 9
Table 1.2: SEA stages, and stages covered in this Environmental Report.
Stage A: Setting the context and objectives, establishing the baseline and deciding on the scope
Location in report
A1: Identify other relevant plans, programmes and environmental protection objectives
Scoping Report (see Section 2.1)
A2: Collecting baseline information Scoping Report (see Section 2.1)
A3: Identifying environmental problems Scoping Report (see Section 2.1)
A4: Developing the SEA framework Scoping Report (see Section 2.1)
A5: Consulting on the scope of the SEA Scoping Report (see Section 2.1)
Stage B: Developing and refining alternatives and assessing effects
B1: Testing the plan objectives against the SEA objectives Chapter 4 B2: Developing strategic alternatives Chapter 4 B3: Predicting the effects the draft plan, including alternatives Chapters 6 to 8 B4: Evaluating the effects of the draft plan, including alternatives Chapters 6 to 8 B5: Considering ways of mitigating adverse effects Chapters 6 to 8 B6: Proposing measures to monitor the environmental effects of plan implementation
Chapter 10
Stage C: Preparing the Environmental Report
C1: Preparing an Environmental Report All Chapters
Stage D: Consulting on the draft plan and Environmental Report
D1: Consultation on the draft plan and Environmental Report N/A D2: Assessing significant changes N/A D3: Decision making and providing information N/A
Stage E: Monitoring the implementation of the plan
E1: Developing aims and methods for monitoring N/A E2: Responding to adverse effects N/A
1.6 Presenting the SEA Information
Where appropriate, this Environmental Report has presented the SEA information through a
series of environmental information themes.
The selected environmental information themes incorporate the SEA ‘topics’ derived from
Annex I(f) of the SEA Directive (see Appendix A): biodiversity flora and fauna, population,
human health, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, cultural heritage (including
architectural and archaeological heritage), landscape and the inter-relationship between these
factors. These have been updated and expanded for clarity, and to mirror the purpose and
likely outcomes of the SEA process.
The environmental information themes are presented in Table 1.3.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 10
Table 1.3: Environmental information themes.
Environmental information theme
SEA topic included in Directive 2001/42/EC
What is Included in the environmental information theme?
Accessibility and Transport
Population Transportation infrastructure Traffic flows Travel to work Public transport accessibility
Air Quality Air Air quality management Air pollution sources Air quality hotspots
Biodiversity and Geodiversity
Biodiversity Fauna Flora
Nature conservation designations Landscape features Key species Geological features
Climate Change Climatic factors Greenhouse gas emissions by source Greenhouse gas emission trends Climate change adaptation
Health Human health Health indicators Health inequalities Road safety Open space and green infrastructure
Historic Environment
Cultural heritage, including architectural and archaeological heritage
Historic development of the area Designated and non designated sites and areas Townscape Archaeological assets
Landscape Landscape Landscape character Townscape character Noise and light pollution Tranquillity
Material Assets Material assets Minerals Waste and recycling Previously developed land Energy production
Population Population Population size and migration Population density Age structure Ethnicity Housing Deprivation Unemployment Crime
Soil Soil Soil type and quality Agricultural land quality
Water Water Water resources Water quality Flooding
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 11
It is anticipated that presenting the information through this approach will help enable the
reader to easily locate the SEA information representing their specific areas of interest.
The following chapters present an overview of the stages of the SEA carried out to date, the
appraisal findings, and the next steps for the development of the LTP3 and accompanying
SEA process.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 12
This page is intentionally blank.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 13
2 Scoping
2.1 Scoping Report
Scoping is the process of deciding the scope and level of detail of an SEA, including the
sustainability effects and alternatives to be considered, the assessment methods to be used,
and the structure and contents of the Environmental Report.
The purpose of the Scoping Report is to set the criteria for assessment (including the SEA
objectives), and establish the baseline data and other information, including a review of
relevant policies, programmes and plans. The scoping process involves an overview of key
issues, highlighting areas of potential conflict.
The Scoping Report covers the early stages of the SEA process and includes information
about:
Identifying other relevant policies, plans and programmes, and environmental
objectives;
Collecting baseline information;
Identifying environmental issues and problems; and
Developing the SEA Framework.
The Scoping Report was published for consultation for a period of six weeks between 19th
March 2010 and 30th April 2010. Responses were received from six organisations and
individuals. Following the receipt of responses, the information included in the Scoping
Report was updated to take into account these comments. The Scoping Report can be
viewed at http://www.ue-a.co.uk/ltp3.asp.
2.2 Scoping Responses
Consultee responses on the March 2010 Scoping Report were received from the following
organisations:
English Heritage;
Environment Agency;
Highways Agency;
Natural England;
New Forest National Park Authority; and
RSPB.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 14
Appendix B summarises the comments raised during the scoping consultation and details how
they have been taken into account through the subsequent SEA process for the LTP3.
2.3 Policy, Plan and Programme Review
A plan or programme may be influenced in various ways by other plans or programmes, or by
external environmental protection objectives such as those laid down in policies or legislation.
The SEA process takes advantage of potential synergies and addresses any inconsistencies
and constraints.
Appendix L represents an analysis of the objectives of the key policies, plans and programmes
(including legislation) that are relevant to LTP3 and the SEA appraisal process. These have
been presented by their geographic relevance, from international to local level, and include
additional policies, plans and programmes that have been introduced since the initial Scoping
Report was released for consultation in March 2010.
The policy, plan and programme review has been presented by the environmental information
themes outlined in Section 1.6, and assessed in relation to the main objectives and
sustainability requirements of the programme, and how it affects, or is affected by the LTP3.
Table 2.1 provides a summary of the PPP Review completed and updated as part of the
Scoping process.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 15
Table 2.1: Summary of the PPP Review
Summary of Objectives and Sustainability Requirements Implications for the Hampshire LTP3
Accessibility and Transport
European and UK transport policies and plans place emphasis on the modernisation and sustainability of the transport network. Specific objectives include reducing pollution and road congestion through improvements to public transport, walking and cycling networks and reducing the need to travel. National policy also focuses on the need for the transport network to support sustainable economic growth. Whilst the PPPs highlight that congestion and poor air quality resulting from transport are key issues for a number of areas of Hampshire, the South Hampshire sub-regional area has been highlighted as an area where these issues are a particular concern. Regional and local plans therefore focus on appropriate design, location and layout of development, increasing investment in infrastructure, improving the quality and accessibility of public transport, supporting walking and cycling, and enhancing road safety.
The LTP3 should seek to promote modal shift from the private car, through encouraging an increase in public transport and rail usage, supporting walking and cycling and improving intermodality. It should seek to reduce congestion and support more efficient movement of freight in the county The LTP3 should also support forward planning in Hampshire and promote the integration of new development with high quality sustainable transport infrastructure. The LTP3 should seek to minimise transport's effect on the environment and support climate change mitigation and adaptation.
Air Quality
A number of objectives have been established in relation to air quality at both the European and the UK level (emanating from the 1996 EC Directive). This includes the setting of targets for reducing emissions of specific pollutants to minimise negative impacts on health and the environment. At the county level emphasis is placed on reducing emissions of nitrogen dioxide, particularly from the transport sector.
The LTP3 should aim to reduce emissions from transport by seeking to reduce traffic flows and congestion and encouraging alternatives to car use. It should also have a close focus on improving air quality in the areas of poor air quality, including in Air Quality Management Areas designated due to emissions from transport.
Biodiversity and Geodiversity
The objectives of policies and plans at all levels focus on the conservation of biological diversity (including a reduction in the current rate of biodiversity loss), and the protection and monitoring of endangered and vulnerable species and habitats. Emphasis is also placed on the ecological importance of bownfield sites, geodiversity, and enhancing areas of woodland. The integration of biodiversity considerations into all environmental and socio-economic planning is strongly advocated. At a regional level, the South East Plan seeks to encourage local authorities to: ‘…actively pursue opportunities to achieve a net gain (of biodiversity) across the region’, ‘…give the highest level of protection to sites of international nature’; and ‘avoid damage to nationally important sites of special scientific interest and seek to ensure that damage to county wildlife sites and locally important wildlife and geological sites is avoided’ (policy NRM5). It should be noted though that the Government has made clear its intention to replace Regional Spatial Strategies with a new national policy framework complemented by plans at a local level. In this context
Biodiversity considerations should be fully considered by the LTP3. In particular development of transport infrastructure should avoid and mitigate effects against sensitive areas and support the provision of green infrastructure and biodiversity-friendly design and layout to promote and enhance biological and landscape diversity. The value of local geodiversity assets should also be recognised by the LTP3. Protected species are present throughout Hampshire, so the LTP3 should ensure that where transport schemes are necessary in areas containing these species, adequate mitigation is carried out before development commences. The LTP3 should seek to encourage an approach to transport infrastructure which supports a holistic approach to biodiversity requirements in Hampshire, incorporating green infrastructure, landscape protection and habitat provision.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 16
Summary of Objectives and Sustainability Requirements Implications for the Hampshire LTP3
the new national policy framework will need to address biodiversity issues. Biodiversity is also a key consideration of the PPPs promoting an improvement in green infrastructure networks.
Climate Change
Climate-related PPPs focus on both mitigating the causes of climate change and adapting to the effects of climate change. Commitments reducing greenhouse gas emissions range from the international level to the regional level. The PPPs address policy development across all sectors and at all levels, combining both demand management (reduced energy consumption and increased efficiency of use) and supply side measures (low carbon options including fuel mix and renewables). A number of the PPPs state specific targets to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. This is led at the national level by the Climate Change Act, which sets a legally binding target of at least a 34 percent cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 and at least an 80 percent cut by 2050 against a 1990 baseline. Adaptation measures proposed by the PPPs include a presumption against development in flood risk areas, appropriate design of new development, the promotion of new infrastructure such as sustainable urban drainage systems and improved maintenance to help address the changes that are likely to occur as a result of climate change. Through this approach PPS25 (Development and Flood Risk) seeks to ensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding, and to direct development away from areas of highest risk.
The LTP3 should promote a package of measures to support climate change mitigation, including public transport investment, demand management, the promotion of smarter travel choices and integration of land use and transport planning to reduce the need to travel. It should also seek to encourage the use of new technologies and consider the use of mechanisms such as carbon budgeting. The LTP3 should also facilitate climate change adaptation, through supporting the sustainable management of flood risk areas, facilitating a growth in green infrastructure and promoting the use of sustainable urban drainage systems.
Health
National and regional health related PPPs focus on improving rates of infant mortality and life expectancy; reducing work related illness and accidents; significantly improving levels of sport and physical activity, particularly among disadvantaged groups; promoting healthier modes of travel; supporting the public to make healthier and more informed choices in regards to their health; improving accessibility to healthcare and leisure/recreational facilities; and reducing health inequalities, particularly for children and older people.
The LTP3 should seek to improve accessibility to health, sporting, leisure and recreational facilities, promote healthier modes of travel such as walking and cycling and support the provision of open space and enhanced sub-regional green infrastructure networks.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 17
Summary of Objectives and Sustainability Requirements Implications for the Hampshire LTP3
Historic Environment
Historic environment priorities from international to local level include protecting designated resources and their settings (such as listed buildings, conservation areas, scheduled monuments, and registered parks and gardens); recognising the cultural aspects of landscape and establishing mechanisms for their protection against inappropriate development; recognising the potential value of unknown and undesignated resources; and preserving/enhancing sites and landscapes of archaeological and historic interest so that they may be enjoyed by both present and future generations.
The LTP3 should seek to support the integrity of the historic environment through facilitating the protection of assets, enhancing their settings and encouraging walking, cycling and improvements to the public realm. The LTP3 should also seek to protect and enhance historic transport features such as railway arches or canals and their surroundings. Archaeological assets, both potential and realised should be provided with full consideration by the LTP3.
Landscape
At the EU, national, regional and local level emphasis is placed on the protection of landscape as an essential component of people’s surroundings and sense of place. The PPPs seek to increase recognition of the linkages and interplay between the different aspects and roles of landscape, including: local distinctiveness; the historic environment; natural resources; farming, forestry and food; educational, leisure and recreation opportunities; transport and infrastructure; settlements and nature conservation. The link between landscapes and a range of other aspects is provided with a close focus by the PPPs’ focus on green infrastructure provision. In this respect policies advocate the provision of open space, green networks and woodland as opportunities for sport and recreation, creating healthier communities, supporting and enhancing biodiversity, reducing temperatures in built up areas in summer, reducing the impact of noise and air pollution, and limiting the risk of flooding.
The LTP3 should support the development of infrastructure which protects, and where possible improves the landscape character of the area. This should include augmenting historic landscapes and promoting landscape scale environmental protection. Similarly it should seek to reduce the impact of traffic and transport infrastructure on landscape quality, including from noise and light pollution, and a loss of tranquillity. The LTP3 should also seek to protect the highest quality landscapes of the area, including with the two National Parks and within the AONBs present in the county.
Material assets
National level PPPs seek to the protect minerals resources and promote appropriate after uses for minerals workings. PPPs at all levels seek to promote the ‘waste hierarchy’. This seeks to prioritise waste management in the following order: reduction; reuse; recycling and composting; energy recovery; and disposal. National and regional PPPs also support the use of previously developed land. At the county level, the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework is currently being developed. The LTP3 will provide the transport input to the Framework. An expansion of renewable energy production is strongly promoted by European and national PPPs. Under EU Directive 2001/77/EC, member states are overall required to achieve 22% of electricity production from renewable energies by 2010, with the UK-specific target 10%. This has been reinforced by the UK’s recent Renewable Energy Strategy which seeks to produce 15% of electricity from renewable sources by 2020.
The LTP3 should promote resource efficiency, encourage the reuse of materials used in transport schemes, and seek to utilise recycled materials where appropriate. It should also, where relevant, recognise the potential of former minerals sites for landscape and biodiversity/geodiversity-led restoration. It should also, where appropriate, aim to safeguard against the sterilisation of certain minerals resources. The LTP3 should seek to promote the use of renewable energy within transport infrastructure, and support the growth of low carbon technologies.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 18
Summary of Objectives and Sustainability Requirements Implications for the Hampshire LTP3
Population
PPPs on population include a range of different objectives, including tackling social exclusion, improving human rights and public participation, improving health, and ensuring every child has the chance to fulfil their potential by reducing levels of education failure, ill health, substance misuse, crime and anti-social behaviour. At the regional and local levels, support for cultural diversity and young people are key aims. The Equality Act 2006 sets out that people should not be disadvantage on the basis of age; disability; gender; proposed, commenced or completed gender reassignment; race; religion or belief and sexual orientation.
The LTP3 should seek to; improve public transport and walking and cycling networks; promote new infrastructure which improves accessibility to services, facilities and amenities; enhance the local environment through appropriate design and layout of transport infrastructure; and support sub regional green infrastructure networks. This will support community cohesion and help facilitate social inclusion. It should also seek to ensure than land use planning and transport infrastructure provision is integrated to ensure that new areas of housing are accessible to services, facilities and amenities by the full range of sustainable transport modes.
Soil
National and regional policies and strategies on soil seek to: prevent soil pollution; reduce soil erosion from wind and water; maintain soil diversity; improve the quality of soil, including through the remediation of contaminated land and through promoting an increase in organic matter in soil; protect and enhance stores of soil carbon and water; recognise soils’ role for natural systems; and increase the resilience of soils to a changing climate. The PPPs also have a focus on protecting the quality of agricultural land, through reducing soil degradation, maintaining soil productivity, limiting compaction and range of other approaches.
The LTP3 should seek to limit the loss of the highest quality agricultural land, support a reduction of soil loss and erosion, promote an improvement of soil quality, including a reduction of land contamination, and promote soil protection during the construction and development of transport infrastructure.
Water
National water policies are primarily driven by the aims of the EC Water Framework Directive, as translated into national law by the Water Framework Regulations 2003. Key objectives include improving the quality of rivers and other water bodies to 'good ecological status' by 2015; considering flood risk at all stages of the plan and development process in order to reduce future damage to property and loss of life; and incorporating water efficiency measures into new developments. PPS23 sets out how issues of pollution should be addressed in accordance with the Pollution Prevention and Control Act 1999 and the PPC Regulations 2000. National and regional strategies also have a strong focus on maintaining and protecting the availability of water in the South East. Southern Water’s Water Resource Management Plan and Bournemouth and West Hampshire Final Water Resource Management Plan also provides the means of enabling water to be supplied and treated in the area. Water supply and use is guided by Environment Agency’s Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies. These include the Test and Itchen CAMS; the Arun and Western Streams CAMS; the East Hampshire CAMS; and the New Forest CAMS.
The LTP3 should avoid the promotion of infrastructure which increases flood risk in existing or potential (due to climate change) flood risk areas. It should also seek to utilise the Strategic Flood Risk Assessments which have been carried out in Hampshire, including the sequential/exception test where appropriate. The LTP3 should also seek to limit the risk of flooding from surface run off through the incorporation of sustainable drainage systems and other measures. The LTP3 should seek to ensure that water quality is not negatively affected by planned transport infrastructure development, particularly regarding surface run-off during and after construction. It should also seek to incorporate water efficiency measures where appropriate. The LTP3 should treat potential pollution from the development of transport infrastructure as a material consideration, help reduce land contamination and promote the precautionary principle where uncertainties occur.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 19
Summary of Objectives and Sustainability Requirements Implications for the Hampshire LTP3
PPS25 (Development and Flood Risk) seeks to ensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding, and to direct development away from areas of highest risk. A number of Strategic Flood Risk Assessments in Hampshire have also been carried out.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 20
2.4 Baseline Data
A key part of the scoping process is the collection of baseline data. The purpose of this
exercise is to help identify key issues and opportunities facing the area which might be
addressed by the LTP3, and to provide an evidence base for the assessment.
The baseline section in the Scoping Report provided a review of current social, economic and
environmental conditions within Hampshire. One of the purposes of consultation on the
Scoping Report was to seek views on whether the data selected was appropriate. Helpful
comments were received from a range of stakeholders and in some cases new baseline
information was provided.
The baseline data included in the Scoping Report has therefore been updated to reflect
consultation comments and new data sources. The updated baseline data has been in
Appendix M.
2.5 Key Sustainability Issues for Hampshire
The policy and plan review and the baseline data (Sections 2.3 and 2.4 and Appendix L)
revealed a number of key environmental and socio-economic issues and problems for
Hampshire.
Boxes 2.1 to 2.11 below set out the key issues linked to the environmental information
themes (Table 1.3). These issues present the LTP3 with a wide number of opportunities for
achieving environmental gain within the area:
Box 2.1: Key Issues, Accessibility and Transport
Worsening congestion and need for mitigation of transport impacts of planned growth on strategic and local highway networks. In the north of the county, this includes cross-boundary flows to/from Reading, Woking and Guildford.
Ensuring the delivery of transport infrastructure to support planned growth in the Urban South Hampshire area, which has been designated as a New Growth Point and Regional Diamond for Investment and Growth. Two Strategic Development Areas have been identified, one to the north of Hedge End and another to the north of Fareham.
Delivery of appropriate transport solutions to support sustainable development in Whitehill-Bordon eco-town, which will accommodate 5,500 new dwellings and employment development offering 7,000 new jobs by 2026. There is a need to improve self-containment and reduce car dependency for existing and new residents.
Requirement to support the regeneration of Aldershot, including major development identified of up to 4,500 new dwellings.
Mitigation of the adverse impacts of traffic on rural communities and market towns. Enabling the rail network to play a greater role in catering for local commuter journeys. Improvement of public transport access to Heathrow from the west/south-west. Addressing journey time reliability on inter-urban motorway and trunk road corridors
and in centres such as Winchester and Lyndhurst. Reducing car dependency through the development of high-quality public transport
alternatives, in partnership with operators and smarter choices programmes, to
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 21
Box 2.1: Key Issues, Accessibility and Transport encourage behavioural change.
Addressing access issues for those without access to a car including through tackling problems of poor accessibility for disadvantaged people.
Managing transport services and investment within the two National Parks (New Forest and South Downs).
Providing adequate public transport links for recreational purposes. Improving accessibility for people without access to a car. The need to maintain the existing highway and public rights of way network to a high
standard, particularly in light of increased frequency of severe weather events. The management of the traffic that currently uses the road network in an efficient and
safe manner.
Box 2.2: Key Issues, Air Quality
Whilst air quality in many areas of Hampshire is very good, there are a number of air quality hotspots in the county.
AQMAs exist in Winchester, Eastleigh, Fareham, Lyndhurst, Totton, Fawley and Farnborough. Each of these AQMAs (with the exception of the AQMA designated at Fawley) have been designated due to emissions from transport. Emissions of nitrogen dioxide are a particular issue.
Enabling the delivery of transport infrastructure to support major growth areas in South Hampshire. Two Strategic Development areas have been identified, one to the north of Hedge End and another to the north of Fareham
Increasing traffic flows on the Strategic Road network have led to further air quality issues. For example the M3 has an effect on air quality in built up areas adjoining the motorway, including in Eastleigh and parts of Farnborough.
Box 2.3: Key Issues, Biodiversity and Geodiversity
Projections for housing growth outlined in the South-East Plan will place considerable pressure on biodiversity in some areas of Hampshire. This includes through the development of the Ecotown at Whitehill-Bordon, the Strategic Development Areas north of Hedge End and north of Fareham, and growth proposals for Aldershot.
Sea-level rise, erosion and coastal squeeze are posing a major threat to Hampshire’s internationally important coastal habitats.
There has been a decline in populations for 19 BAP priority species since 1995. A loss of SPA and RAMSAR area has taken place since 2008. There has been a loss of SSSI area since 2008. The majority of Hampshire’s SSSIs are
classified as ‘unfavourable recovering’. Loss of hedgerows. Pressures on heathland habitat. Potential impacts from habitat fragmentation resulting from new and improved
transport infrastructure. Effect of poor air quality on habitats and species. Road and rail corridors provide important corridors for wildlife and are vital biodiversity
linkages within a fragmented and intensively managed landscape. These have the potential to come under threat from transport improvements.
Impacts of road kills. Linked to this, the effect of animal accidents on Commoning in the New Forest.
Although a high proportion of chalk grassland SSSIs are in favourable condition, those
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 22
Box 2.3: Key Issues, Biodiversity and Geodiversity unimproved grasslands outside the SSSI system are declining in quality.
Recreational pressures on wildlife sites, in particular in the New Forest, the Thames Basin and coastal sites.
Freshwater and wetland habitats are under considerable pressure, with the majority of wetland SSSIs currently in unfavourable condition. Diffuse pollution via run-off and increased demand for water pose serious challenges.
Effects on biodiversity from increased noise and light pollution, resulting from an increase in traffic flows.
Box 2.4: Key Issues, Climate Change
In the districts of the Test Valley, Hart, Basingstoke and Deane, the New Forest, East Hampshire and Winchester, approximately 30% of CO2 emissions originate from transport. This is significantly more than averages for Hampshire and is higher than regional averages.
Per capita emissions of CO2 in East Hampshire, Basingstoke and Deane, the Test Valley and Winchester are amongst the highest in Hampshire, and are significantly higher than South East averages.
Traffic growth in the area has the potential to contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. This will undermine the realisation of the government target of a 34 percent cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.
Groundwater, which feeds the chalk streams of the Itchen and Test, has the potential to see a fall in levels through reduced overall rainfall. This may have an impact on the nature conservation value and tourism value of these assets.
Effect on transport infrastructure from climate change, including flooding of roads and railways, damage from landslips or erosion, and damage to road surfaces and rail from high temperatures.
Large areas of the South Hampshire sub-region lying within Hampshire County are susceptible to coastal flooding, including the sub-region’s most populated areas on low lying coastlines in Gosport, Havant, Fareham and Eastleigh. Parts of the New Forest are also susceptible.
A number of areas have a high sensitivity to increased risk of flooding from surface run off. Gosport, Havant, Totton and parts of Basingstoke are areas deemed to be particular risk from this type of flooding. Transport infrastructure will have a key influence on this risk.
Increased occurrence of drought as a result of climate change is likely to reduce water availability in Hampshire.
High quality landscapes, including in the New Forest and the South Downs have the potential to be affected by changes in rainfall, invasive species, changes in farming practices, soil erosion and renewable energy provision.
Box 2.5: Key Issues, Health
Whilst Hampshire in general has good quality health, levels of physical activity and obesity are increasing health issues.
Hampshire, in common with many other areas, is experiencing an ageing population. This will have implications for health service provision and accessibility to other services, facilities and amenities.
Gosport, Havant and the New Forest have a lower proportion of people reporting ‘good health’, a higher percentage reporting ‘not good health’ and higher rates of limiting long term illness than regional averages.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 23
Box 2.5: Key Issues, Health There is a need to encourage the use of healthier modes of travel, including walking
and cycling.
Box 2.6: Key Issues, Historic Environment
Increasing traffic flows and congestion in Hampshire have been affecting the integrity of historic environment assets and their settings. This has led to pressures on historic landscape quality and the loss of character and integrity of the historic built environment and its setting.
Distinctive historic environment assets are at risk from neglect or decay. This is particularly relevant for non-designated assets which are not afforded the same degree of protection as designated sites and areas.
Effects on the historic environment from poor design of transport infrastructure, including insensitively designed layouts, inappropriate signage or excessive clutter.
New and improved transport infrastructure has the potential to lead to effects on historic landscapes and cause direct damage to archaeological sites, monuments and buildings.
Archaeological remains, both seen and unseen have the potential to be affected by new transport infrastructure.
Box 2.7: Key Issues, Landscape
Effects on landscape quality from new transport infrastructure and increasing traffic flows and congestion.
Effects on the integrity of the New Forest and South Downs National Parks from new development and infrastructure.
Potential effects on the integrity of areas with landscapes designated as AONBs, including the Cranborne Chase and West Wiltshire Downs AONB, the North Wessex Downs AONB and the Chichester Harbour AONB.
Further loss of tranquillity from increasing traffic flows and new transport infrastructure. Effects on landscape quality from poor design of transport infrastructure, including
insensitively designed layouts, inappropriate signage or excessive clutter. Pressures on non-designated sites and landscapes: These sites and areas play an
important role in the cultural identity of the County and enable a wider understanding of the area’s historic development.
Loss of key landscape features such as woodland or hedgerows, Noise and light pollution issues from increases in traffic flows. Green Infrastructure: There are significant opportunities to improve linkages between
areas of open space, parks and the open countryside.
Box 2.8: Key Issues, Material Assets
Loss of greenfield land due to new transport infrastructure, including through the development of areas provided with enhanced access by new transport routes.
Whilst recycling rates in Hampshire have been steadily improving, they are less than regional or national averages. A key challenge will be to ensure improvements in recycling and reuse rates continue.
The LTP3 has the potential to support the use of recycled materials in new transport infrastructure.
The transport of waste in the county has the potential to affect those living near routes
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 24
Box 2.8: Key Issues, Material Assets used for this purpose.
Demand for materials from new areas of growth in Hampshire will place additional pressures on the county’s transport networks.
Opportunities exist across Hampshire for renewable energy generation.
Box 2.9: Key Issues, Population
The population of Hampshire is expected to increase significantly to 2026. Housing affordability is a major issue for the county. There is a particular shortage of
affordable housing in rural areas, with implications for rural communities. An ageing population in the county has the potential to lead to implications for service
provision and accessibility. Whilst deprivation is low across many parts of Hampshire, higher levels of deprivation
exist in Havant, and parts of Gosport, the New Forest and Rushmoor.
Box 2.10: Key Issues, Soil
The highest grade quality agricultural land (Grade 1-3a according to the Agricultural Land Classification system) is at threat from new growth areas in the county and associated infrastructure.
The development of new and improved transport infrastructure has the potential to lead to an increase in soil erosion and soil loss.
Box 2.11: Key Issues, Water
Increased occurrence of drought as a result of climate change is likely to reduce water availability in Hampshire through reducing groundwater levels. Groundwater is the main source of water in the county.
A significant area of Hampshire is covered by Source Protection Zones, indicating the risk to groundwater supplies from potentially polluting activities and accidental releases of pollutants. Groundwater is particularly vulnerable from diffuse pollution.
There is a periodic risk of groundwater flooding in many parts of the county. This particularly affects areas with chalk bedrock, including the catchment areas of the Rivers Itchen, Meon and Test.
Significant areas of the South Hampshire sub-region lying within Hampshire County are susceptible to coastal flooding, including the sub-region’s most populated areas on low lying coastlines in Gosport, Havant, Fareham and Eastleigh. Parts of the New Forest are also susceptible.
Whilst surface water run-off is a significant issue for many urban areas in the county, Gosport, Havant, Totton and parts of Basingstoke are deemed to be at particular risk of flooding.
Fluvial flooding is a risk for a number of Hampshire’s towns and cities, including Romsey, the Thames Basin settlements, Andover and Winchester.
Water quality has been fluctuating in Hampshire since 1990. Significant improvements in the county are therefore required to meet the target of all watercourses to reach ‘good’ biological and chemical water quality status by 2015, as required by the Water Framework Directive (WFD).
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 25
3 SEA Framework
3.1 The SEA Framework
The Hampshire LTP3 has been assessed through an SEA Framework of objectives, decision
making criteria, indicators and targets. The purpose of the SEA Framework is to provide a
way of ensuring that the LTP3 considers the needs of Hampshire in terms of its environmental
effects. It also enables the environmental effects of the LTP3 to be described, analysed and
compared.
One of the main purposes of the Scoping Report was to seek views on an initial version of the
SEA Framework. A number of suggestions for additional and revised indicators were provided
through the consultation exercise (Appendix B). Following the receipt of responses on the
Scoping Report, the SEA Framework was updated to address the comments received.
Appendix C presents the updated SEA Framework.
3.2 SEA Objectives
The SEA Framework consists of environmental objectives which, where practicable, have been
expressed in the form of targets, the achievement of which is measurable using indicators.
There is no statutory basis for setting objectives but they are a recognised way of considering
the environmental effects of a plan and comparing alternatives. In this context the SEA
Objectives provide the basis from which effects of the LTP3 can be tested.
The SEA Objectives have been developed through the PPP review, the baseline data
collection and the identification of key issues (Chapter 2). Alongside, the SEA topics
identified in Annex I (f) of the SEA Directive (Appendix A) were one of the key determinants
when considering which SEA Objectives should be used for appraisal purposes. The SEA
Objectives seek to reflect each of these topic areas and influences to ensure the assessment
process is robust and thorough.
The SEA Objectives included within the SEA Framework, and the environmental information
themes to which they relate (section 1.6) are presented in Table 3.1:
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 26
Table 3.1: SEA Objectives.
SEA Objective Relevance to SEA topic from Annex 1(f) of the Directive10
1 Reduce air pollution and ensure continued improvements to air quality.
Air Quality.
2 Maintain and improve the water quality of Hampshire’s rivers, coasts and groundwater, and achieve sustainable water resources management.
Water.
3 Protect and enhance Hampshire’s soils resource. Soil, Material Assets.
4 Protect, enhance and manage sites, features and areas of archaeological, historical and cultural heritage importance.
Historic Environment.
5 Protect, enhance and manage the character and appearance of the landscape and townscape, maintaining and strengthening distinctiveness and its special qualities.
Landscape, Historic Environment.
6 Protect, enhance and manage biodiversity and geodiversity. Biodiversity and geodiversity.
7 Minimise Hampshire’s contribution to climate change. Climate Change, Material Assets.
8 Plan for the anticipated levels of climate change. Climate Change, Water.
9 Reduce poverty and social exclusion and close the gap between the most deprived areas in Hampshire and the rest of the county.
Accessibility and Transport, Population.
10 Safeguard and improve community health, safety and well being. Health.
10 A discussion of the environmental information themes is included in Section 1.6.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 27
4 Assessment of Alternative Options
4.1 Assessment of Alternative Options for the LTP3
The SEA Directive requires that the Environmental Report should consider:
‘Reasonable alternatives taking into account the objectives and the geographical scope of the
plan or programme’ and give ‘an outline of the reasons for selecting the alternatives dealt
with’ (Article 5.1 and Annex I (h)).
Following discussions by the three Local Transport Authorities of Hampshire County Council,
Portsmouth City Council and Southampton City Council, the following three broad potential
scenarios were identified which were used as the basis for the assessment of alternative
options stage:
Scenario 1: Focus on the economy
This approach would reflect the economic reality of a heavy reliance on car-based mobility,
with targeted investment in highway maintenance and tackling the worst congestion
bottlenecks. It is based on a premise of:
‘supporting essential sustainable transport services and measures, but accepting that the
private motor vehicle will be the predominant mode of transport for the foreseeable future’.
Scenario 2: Focus on improving sustainability and tackling climate change
This approach would seek to move Hampshire much more quickly towards a future based on
sustainable mobility, for example by prioritising alternatives to the car for local journeys. The
priority would be on ‘reduce’ and ‘manage’ measures. It is based on a premise of:
‘Prioritise sustainable transport services and measures to offer attractive alternatives to the
private motor vehicle’.
Scenario 3: Mixed approach – sustainable growth
This approach would seek to support a more sustainable future combined with economic
growth by encouraging the most ‘fit for purpose’ transport mode for journeys and designing
new development with high-quality alternatives to the car in place from the outset. Walking,
cycling and bus would be encouraged for local journeys, and bus/coach, rail, lift-sharing or the
car would be promoted for longer inter-urban journeys. Its underlying premise is:
‘Improve sustainable transport services and measures, and help to reduce reliance on the
private motor vehicle in urban areas’.
Following consultation, in early 2010 these scenarios were developed further to incorporate
packages of potential interventions and transport measures for the three strategy areas which
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 28
would inform the LTP3 (Hampshire – Central and New Forest; Hampshire – North; and
Hampshire – South (Excluding Cities), see Section 1.2.1). In this context, the three scenarios,
or ‘options’ developed for each strategy area were assessed as part of the SEA process.
4.2 SEA Options Assessment Report
The assessment of the three options for each of the strategy areas engaged a ‘high-level’
assessment technique which utilised the SEA Framework, the baseline and the review of plans,
programmes and policies to assess each alternative option. Findings were presented in matrix
format and were accompanied by a commentary on identified effects. The outcomes of the
assessment were subsequently fed back to the LTP3 development team. Following the
outcome of this meeting between client and consultants, the findings were then presented in
a SEA Options Assessment Report (May, 2010). The purpose of this exercise was to ensure
proper iteration with plan-making and to provide comprehensive auditable assessment
findings.
Whilst not being a requisite part of the SEA Regulations or DfT SEA Guidance (TAG Unit
2.11)11 the preparation of the SEA Options Assessment Report followed the ‘spirit’ of SEA
through seeking to inform and influence the development of the LTP3 at an early stage to
help maximise the plan’s environmental value. The results of the assessment of the three
options helped the LTP3 development tram identify a “preferred option” approach.
The SEA Options Assessment Report can be accessed on the Hampshire LTP3 SEA webpage
at:
http://www.ue-a.co.uk/ltp3.asp
4.3 Summary of the Options Assessment Findings
The SEA Options Assessment Report presents an in-depth assessment of the three options for
each of the Area Strategies. It examines each of the interventions proposed for the options,
and presents a series of appraisal tables, accompanying commentary and an overview of the
likely significant effects likely to arise. A summary of the assessment, discussing the overall
environmental performance of each of the options is presented below.
It should be noted that the following summary provides only an overview of the options
assessment findings. For a more detailed discussion of the assessment the options, including
relating to each intervention and geographic area, the Options Assessment Report should be
referred to in the first instance.
4.3.1 Option 1: Focus on the economy
Option 1 for each of the strategy areas presented a strong focus on highway construction and
improvement schemes. Whilst potentially reducing congestion locally in the short term, the
11 Department for Transport (April 2009): TAG Unit 2.11, Strategic Environmental Assessment for Transport Plans and Programmes (‘In draft’ Guidance).
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 29
appraisal highlighted that taking this approach was likely to encourage traffic growth over a
wider area over the medium and long term. Traffic growth is also likely to take place as a
result of, and in combination with the Option’s promotion of the measures to reduce car
parking charges and increase interurban capacity. This has the potential to lead to a range of
significant adverse effects, including relating to air and noise quality, on landscape and
townscape quality, on the integrity of the historic environment, for biodiversity assets, for
residents’ health and wellbeing and for social inclusion.
Highway improvements will also, depending on the location and layout of proposed schemes,
lead to direct adverse effects locally, including on landscape and townscape quality, on
cultural heritage assets and their settings and on the size, quality and integrity of biodiversity
habitats. Effects on flora and fauna also have the potential to arise from a combination of air,
noise and water pollution, roadkills, behavioural modifications and the fragmentation and
isolation of species. This is significant due to the presence of a large number of internationally
and nationally designated sites in the Hampshire area. The measures proposed under Option
1 would also be likely to undermine climate change adaptation through directly increasing the
area of road surface and indirectly through increasing demand for other hard standing
surfacing such as car parking.
Significantly, the package of measures proposed through the option would undermine efforts
to meet the UK Government target of a 34% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020
and a 80% reduction by 2050. This will do little to support the range of current climate
change mitigation initiatives which are being carried out in Hampshire.
Whilst in many respects, the measures proposed through Option 1 are likely to lead to
significant adverse environmental effects, a number of the proposed interventions under this
option would have the potential to lead to positive effects in relation to the SEA Objectives.
These include the wide ranging measures to promote rail improvements in Hampshire, and
the promotion of freight quality partnerships, speed management, bus revenue support and
highway asset management.
Overall however, the appraisal highlighted that it would be unlikely that the implementation of
mitigation or avoidance measures, or the implementation of the option’s transport
interventions which perform well against the SEA Objectives would preclude or offset the
wide range of significant adverse effects that have the potential to occur if Option 1 were to
be taken forward by the LTP3.
4.3.2 Option 2: Focus on improving sustainability and tackling climate change
The Options appraisal highlighted that the interventions proposed for Option 2 perform well
against the SEA Objectives, suggesting that the implementation of the package of measures
proposed by the Option would lead to a range of beneficial effects. This is linked to the range
of ‘soft’ measures proposed through the Option, which would help achieve transport
objectives with limited effects on environmental assets. It also reflected Option 2’s focus on
modal shift from the private car to public transport and walking and cycling, and on demand
management. The Option also seeks to reduce the need to travel, through supporting
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 30
integration between land use planning and transport infrastructure, and aims to reduce the
impact of transport infrastructure on local environmental assets.
The appraisal highlighted that a number of the interventions proposed under Option 2 have
the potential to bring adverse or uncertain effects in relation to the SEA Objectives. This
includes potential effects on accessibility for those dependent on the private car from
increased parking controls, and the potential for traffic management and car park guidance
systems to encourage a measure of increased car use through an improvement of car user
experience. The assessment has also highlighted that the proposed Bus Rapid Transit, whilst
likely to lead to a range of significant beneficial effects in relation to the SEA Objectives, also
has the potential to have impacts on local environmental assets. The assessment also
highlighted the ‘double-edged sword’ nature of environmental effects associated with park
and ride schemes.
Overall however, the appraisal highlighted that taking forward Option 2 to the preferred
strategy for the LTP3 would perform particularly well against the SEA Objectives.
4.3.3 Option 3: Mixed approach – sustainable growth
The appraisal of Option 3 highlighted that, through taking forward many of the interventions
and measures included under Option 2, the option performs well against the SEA Objectives.
As highlighted for Option 2, the option’s focus on modal shift, reducing the need to travel,
demand management measures, and ‘soft’ measures will lead to a range of beneficial effects
for the three strategy areas.
As suggested by the appraisal, whilst the road improvement schemes put forward through
Option 3 focus on specific ‘hotspots’ on the area’s road network, and are therefore likely to
have fewer adverse effects than the highway proposals put forward through Option 1, a
number of potentially significant adverse effects remain. For example the option’s support of
motorway hard shoulder running on Hampshire’s motorway network has the potential to lead
to a significant increase in strategic road capacity. This has the potential to promote traffic
growth and undermine efforts to encourage modal shift in the area, aspects which are likely to
be given a further impetus by active traffic management. It is acknowledged however that
hard shoulder running and active traffic management is preferable in to motorway widening in
terms of potential environmental effects.
A number of road schemes were also proposed for this Option: for example the appraisal
highlighted that taking forward the Chickenhall Lane Relief Road would have the potential to
have significant effects on environmental assets present locally, including the River Itchen
Special Area of Conservation and SSSI. As with Option 2, the assessment has highlighted the
‘double-edged sword’ nature of park and ride schemes.
The appraisal highlighted that taking forward Option 3 to the preferred strategy for the LTP3
would require a recognition of the potential adverse environmental effects that may occur as a
result of promoting the road improvement schemes, other road capacity improvement
schemes and strategic park and ride schemes in Hampshire. In this context, the LTP3 would
need to seek to actively promote mitigation and avoidance measures to accompany the
proposed schemes and also highlight the mechanisms and processes that should be taken at
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 31
the programme and project level to minimise the adverse environmental effects of the
proposed schemes.
4.4 Options Assessment and the development of the Draft Strategies for Development of
the Draft Strategies for North Hampshire, Central Hampshire and the New Forest, and
South Hampshire
The Options Assessment Report presented an appraisal of the three alternative options
proposed for the strategy areas for North Hampshire, Central Hampshire and the New Forest,
and South Hampshire. In this context the assessment highlighted the potential beneficial and
adverse effects likely to arise as a result of taking forward different interventions through the
LTP3.
As highlighted in Section 4.2, the findings of this assessment process were fed back to and
considered by the LTP3 development team in April and May 2010. This enabled the SEA
process to inform and influence the development of the Draft Strategies for the three areas
and to ensure proper iteration with plan-making.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 32
This page is intentionally blank.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 33
5 Approach to the Assessment of the LTP3 Strategy
5.1 The LTP3’s vision and priorities for transport in Hampshire, and compatibility with the
SEA Objectives
As highlighted in Section 1.2.1, Parts A and B of the Consultation Strategy for Hampshire set
out a long term vision for Hampshire (“safe, efficient and reliable ways to get around a
prosperous and sustainable Hampshire”) and a series of 16 Strategic Transport Priorities for
the wider Hampshire area.
The 16 priorities are as follows:
Priority A: Provide a safe, well-maintained, and more resilient road network in Hampshire, as
the basic transport infrastructure of the county on which all forms of transport directly or
indirectly depend, and the key to continued casualty reduction.
Priority B: Manage traffic to maximise the efficiency of existing network capacity, improving
journey time reliability and reducing emissions, and thereby supporting the efficient and
sustainable movement of people and goods;
Priority C: Continue to apply a speed management philosophy and approach, aiming to
reduce the impact of traffic on community life and promote considerate driver behaviour.
Priority D: Work with district authorities to agree coherent policy approaches to parking,
including supporting targeted investment in ‘park and ride’ to provide an efficient and
environmentally sustainable alternative means of access to town centres, with small-scale or
informal park and ride arrangements being considered as well as major schemes;
Priority E: Promote, where they are stable and serve our other transport priorities, the
installation of new transport technologies, including navigational aids, e-ticketing and
smartcards, delivery of public transport information over the internet and on the move, and
electric vehicle charging points.
Priority F: Work with bus operators through the Quality Bus Partnership approach to grow
bus travel and reduce dependence on the private car for journeys on inter- and intra-urban
corridors;
Priority G: Maintain a ‘safety net’ of basic accessibility to services and support for
independent living in rural areas, with Community Transport Services as the primary
alternative to the private car, including car-based provision such as car clubs and shared taxis;
Priority H: Work with rail industry partners and Community Rail Partnerships to deliver
priorities for long-term rail investment; including improved parking and access facilities at
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 34
railway stations, movement of more freight by rail and (where viable) new or re-opened
stations or rail links, and upgrades of existing routes and stations;
Priority I: Ensure that travel from home to school affordably serves changing curriculum
needs, underpins sustainable schools and maximises individual opportunities for education
and training;
Priority J: Improve co-ordination and integration between transport modes through better
local interchanges, for example at rail stations;
Priority K: Introduce the ‘shared space’ philosophy, applying Manual for Streets design
principles, to support a better balance between traffic and community life in towns and
residential areas;
Priority L: Contribute, where it is possible and affordable and can make a practical difference,
to achieving local and national carbon targets through transport measures;
Priority M: Reduce the need to travel through encouragement of a high-speed broadband
network, support local delivery of services and in urban areas the application of ‘Smarter
Choices’ initiatives;
Priority N: Invest in walking and cycling infrastructure principally in urban areas, to provide a
healthy alternative to the car for local short journeys to work, local services or schools; and
work with health authorities to ensure that transport policy supports local ambitions for health
and well-being.
Priority O: Over the longer term, develop bus rapid transit and premium public transport
provision in South Hampshire as a strategic transport direction, including investigation of the
potential of water-borne transport, to reduce car dependence and improve journey time
reliability;
Priority P: Outline and implement a long-term transport strategy to enable sustainable
development in major growth areas.
These Strategic Transport Priorities have been screened for their compatibility with the SEA
Objectives. The following table presents a compatibility matrix between the priorities and the
SEA Objectives. A “ ” denotes that the priority and SEA Objective are compatible. A “?”
suggests where potential conflicts may arise.
Table 5.1: Compatibility matrix between the Strategic Transport Priorities for the wider
Hampshire area and the SEA Objectives
SEA Objectives Consultation Strategy Priorities
SEA1
SEA2
SEA3
SEA4
SEA5
SEA6
SEA7
SEA8
SEA9
SEA10
Priority A
Priority B
Priority C
Priority D ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 35
SEA Objectives Consultation Strategy Priorities
SEA1
SEA2
SEA3
SEA4
SEA5
SEA6
SEA7
SEA8
SEA9
SEA10
Priority E
Priority F
Priority G
Priority H
Priority I
Priority J
Priority K
Priority L
Priority M
Priority N
Priority O
Priority P
Key:
The Strategic Transport Priority and the SEA Objective are compatible.
? Compatibility uncertain.
As this compatibility assessment highlights, the majority of the Strategic Transport Priorities
are compatible with the SEA Objectives. However, a number of inconsistencies have the
potential to arise between the Priority D and the SEA Objectives. These relate to Priority D’s
promotion of the Park and Ride schemes, and the potential effect of new Park and Ride
facilities on local biodiversity assets, landscape and townscape quality, the historic
environment, and on the loss of agricultural land. It also reflects the potential ‘double edged
sword’ nature of Park and Ride where, whilst having a number of potential benefits for air
quality, congestion and the quality of the public in town and city centres, new facilities may
promote car use, with implications for traffic growth around new sites, and associated effects
such as a stimulation of an increase in greenhouse gas emissions. These potential issues have
been examined in more detail in the assessment of the proposed Draft Strategy intervention
for South Hampshire in Section 8, which considers the measure in depth.
Following Part A and B, Part C of the Consultation Strategy then sets out the wider challenges
for Hampshire and the policy context. As Part C only contains background policy context to
the Strategy, it has not been assessed as part of the SEA process.
5.2 The Consultation Draft Strategies for North Hampshire, Central Hampshire and the New
Forest, and South Hampshire
To help deliver the long term vision and 16 strategic priorities presented in Part A and B the
Consultation Strategy, Draft Strategies have been prepared for the following three areas:
North Hampshire;
Central Hampshire and the New Forest; and
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 36
South Hampshire.
The Draft Strategies are undergoing consultation for a period of twelve weeks from July to
October 2010.
These Draft Strategies set out the emerging approach to transport within the three strategy
areas through presenting a series of delivery interventions. These comprise a broad range of
transport measures containing a series of proposed packages of interventions for delivery.
From these Draft Strategies, HCC will select interventions for inclusion in the LTP3
Implementation Plans; the three year rolling programmes which set out which schemes will be
delivered during that time period.
5.3 Interventions included in the Consultation Draft Strategies
The following tables set out the proposed packages of interventions for the three areas.
Table 5.2: Proposed interventions included in the Draft Strategy for North Hampshire.
Proposed interventions for north Hampshire
The Road Network 1 Workplace Travel Planning in business park locations near the M3.
2 Targeted measures to improve capacity at congestion bottlenecks and optimise management of the highway network.
3 Investigate the potential for managed motorways on the M3 between Basingstoke and the Farnborough area.
4 Ramp Metering at junctions on the M3 between Basingstoke and the Farnborough area.
5 Measures to widen travel choice.
6 Mitigation of the travel impacts arising from new development.
7 Support for low-carbon vehicle technologies through provision of electric vehicle charging points in key centres.
The Rail Network 8 Improved station facilities and ticketing within north Hampshire.
9 New rail stations at locations such as Chineham.
10 Increased capacity on the Reading-Basingstoke rail corridor.
11 Increased capacity on main line rail corridor from Andover and Basingstoke towards London and international airport hubs.
12 Better interchange between rail routes in the Blackwater Valley.
The Bus Network 13 Improved inter-urban bus services in North Hampshire.
14 Improved access to public transport through better information and infrastructure.
15 Continued close working with bus companies to form Quality Bus Partnerships.
16 Identify and support Community Transport services to serve isolated areas.
Growth Area: Andover
17 Targeted measures to improve capacity at congestion bottlenecks and optimise management of the highway network.
18 Improvements to Andover bus and rail stations.
19 Investment in developing walking and cycling routes in Andover.
20 Streetscape and signage improvements in Andover.
Growth Area: Basingstoke
21 Targeted measures to improve capacity at congestion bottlenecks and optimise management of the highway network.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 37
Proposed interventions for north Hampshire
22 Delivery of the Basingstoke Town Access Plan.
23 Measures to reduce the need to travel at peak times.
24 Mitigation of the travel impacts arising from new development.
25 Investment in developing walking and cycling routes in Basingstoke.
26 Enhancement of existing Quality Bus Partnerships and development of new ones.
27 Investigation of the potential to develop a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) network.
28 Working with Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council to develop agreed approaches to parking for the town centre.
Growth Area: Fleet
29 Targeted measures to improve capacity at congestion bottlenecks and optimise management of the highway network.
30 Delivery of the Fleet Town Access Plan.
31 Measures to reduce the need to travel at peak times in Fleet.
32 Improvements to Fleet railway station.
33 Mitigation of the travel impacts arising from new development in Fleet.
34 Investment in developing walking and cycling routes.
Growth Area: Farnborough and Aldershot
35 Targeted measures to improve capacity at congestion bottlenecks and optimise management of the highway network.
36 Delivery of the Aldershot and Farnborough Town Access Plans.
37 Investment in developing walking and cycling routes.
38 Enhancement of existing Quality Bus Partnerships and development of new ones.
39 Mitigation of the travel impacts arising from new development, particularly the Aldershot Urban Extension.
40 Measures to reduce the need to travel at peak times.
41 Continued development of Farnborough Main station into a bus/rail interchange.
42 Encouragement of greater use of smaller rail stations in the Blackwater Valley for local journeys.
43 Car clubs.
Smaller Towns 44 Investment in developing walking and cycling.
45 Measures to reduce the need to travel at peak times.
46 Traffic management measures to mitigate adverse impacts of traffic.
47 Improved inter-urban bus services.
48 Support for Community Transport services.
Rural Hinterland 49 Support for Community Transport services.
50 Support for grass-roots community travel planning initiatives.
51 Improved safety measures on rural roads.
52 Measures to reduce adverse impacts of HGVs on rural communities.
Table 5.3: Proposed interventions included in the Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and
the New Forest.
Proposed interventions for central Hampshire and the New Forest
The National Parks
1 Closer partnerships with neighbouring counties to ensure co-ordinated approaches to transport for the National Parks.
2 Managing the road network to protect and enhance the area’s rural character.
3 Reduce ‘sign clutter’. 4 Supporting local tourism by enhancing the network to allow increased leisure use. Villages and rural areas 5 Providing a well-maintained, resilient highway network.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 38
Proposed interventions for central Hampshire and the New Forest
6 Further speed limit changes are likely to be progressed across Hampshire during the life of this strategy.
7 Support isolated areas with public and community transport.
8 Providing accessibility to services through community transport, neighbourcare car schemes, high-speed broadband and mobile banks or libraries.
9 Traffic management measures to address problems of rat-running. 10 Consideration of signage measures to discourage HGV use of unsuitable roads.
11 Produce a freight routing journey planner to help encourage freight operators to purchase SatNav systems designed for lorries.
12 Removal of unnecessary signage. Winchester and the Market Towns 13 Delivery of the measures contained within Town Access Plans.
14 Working closely with District Councils and other providers to encourage well signed and suitably located parking.
15 Support for Quality Bus Partnerships within Winchester and other towns. 16 Work with partners to enhance environmental and streetscape quality. 17 Improved access by all transport modes through travel plans. 18 Exploring the potential of providing ‘mini park and ride’ schemes.
19 Meeting the needs those with mobility difficulties through accessible bus services, and community transport.
Whitehill-Bordon Eco-Town
20 A Transport Strategy for the town bringing about significant improvements in the town’s transport system, focussing on ‘Reducing the Need to Travel’, ‘Managing Car Demand’ and ‘Enabling Sustainable Transport’.
21 Through careful planning locating jobs, shops and services within easy reach of the local population.
22 High-frequency town, local and sub-regional bus services. 23 Investigating the potential for direct rail connection to the town.
24 Providing a ‘Green Grid’ - a safe, direct and attractive network of walking and cycling routes linking residential areas with the town’s services.
25 Cycle hire schemes, car clubs and car share initiatives. The Strategic inter-urban network 26 Providing a well-maintained, resilient highway network. 27 Support for Quality Bus Partnerships on well used inter-urban bus routes. 28 Adequate parking at railway stations. 29 Improved access at stations and to rail services for people with disabilities. 30 Investigate the potential for direct rail connection to Bordon/Whitehill. 31 Support existing and encourage new Community Rail Partnerships (CRPs).
Table 5.4: Interventions included in the Draft Strategy for South Hampshire.
Interventions for south Hampshire
Policy A: Work with the Highways Agency, Network Rail, port and airport operators to ensure reliable access to and from South Hampshire’s three international gateways for people and freight
1 Investigate the potential for hard shoulder running and variable speed limits on busiest sections of motorway at peak times.
2 Traffic lights at busiest motorway onslips to improve traffic flow.
3 Work towards a joint traffic control centre.
4 Improvements to quality and availability of travel information.
5 Port Traffic Management Plans.
6 Provide extra capacity to enable movement of more freight by rail – (e.g. new ‘passing loops’).
Policy B: To optimise the capacity of the highway network and improve journey time reliability for all modes
7 Upgrading and enhancing Urban Traffic Control systems enabling bus priority and Real Time Passenger Information.
8 Improved road network operation.
9 Pre and in journey travel Information (using static and mobile media).
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 39
Interventions for south Hampshire
10 Improvements to Information Systems on the local highway network.
11 Car Park Guidance Systems (CPGS).
12 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes.
13 Investigation into the removal of traffic lights at specific locations.
Policy C: To achieve and sustain a high-quality, resilient and well-maintained highway network for all 14 Transport Asset Management Plans.
15 Maintenance contracts.
16 Improved maintenance and energy efficiency of street lighting.
17 Improvements to highway drainage.
18 Delivery of maintenance programmes.
Policy D: To deliver improvements in air quality 19 Air Quality Management Areas and Air Quality Action Plans.
20 Promotion of cleaner, greener vehicle technologies (e.g. alternative fuels).
21 Car Share Schemes.
22 Support for private car-hire schemes.
Policy E: To develop strategic sub-regional approaches to management of parking to support sustainable travel and promote economic development 23 Develop complementary policy approaches to parking.
24 Controlled Parking Zones.
25 Improved management and supply of residential parking.
26 Park and ride network.
27 Improved parking at some railway stations.
28 Car park guidance systems.
29 Workplace travel planning.
30 Car clubs.
31 Provision of electric vehicle charging points within car parks.
Policy F: To improve road safety across the sub-region 32 Speed Management measures.
33 Traffic Management measures.
34 Safer Routes to schools schemes.
35 Road Safety education and training to improve road user behaviour.
Policy G: To promote active travel modes and develop supporting infrastructure
36 A legible South Hampshire project to provide integrated, high-quality information for public transport, walking and cycling.
37 Delivery of comprehensive walking and cycling networks (e.g. Green Grid).
38 Crossing improvements for pedestrians and cyclists.
39 Cycle hire scheme for urban centres.
40 Delivery of improved secure cycle parking facilities at key destinations.
Policy H: To deliver high-quality road-based public transport networks that are accessible, easy to use and are supported by appropriate priority measures
41 Development of a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) network between main centres and other innovative public transport solutions.
42 Bus Priority measures.
43 Development of a comprehensive premium urban bus network offering high frequency services using high-quality vehicles.
44 Improved strategic interchanges and high quality bus stop Infrastructure.
45 Improved information in user-friendly formats.
46 Measures to support taxi services.
47 Improved ticketing (e.g. smartcards, ticket purchase via mobile phones).
48 Support for Community Transport services.
Policy I: To further develop the role of water-borne transport within the sub-region and across the Solent
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 40
Interventions for south Hampshire
49 Development of improved transport interchange facilities for buses and taxis and ferry terminals.
50 Provision of secure cycle parking in the vicinity of ferry terminals.
Policy J: To deliver targeted investment in rail infrastructure and service improvements
51 Investigate the potential for provision of passing loops at suitable locations where limited capacity is a problem, to enable movement of more freight by rail.
52 Re-opening freight only lines for passenger use (e.g. Waterside line).
53 Improving rail access to Southampton Airport from the east and west.
54 Increasing capacity on the rail route between Eastleigh and Fareham.
55 Improved station and key city centre interchange facilities.
56 Working with train operators to deliver station travel plans.
57 Further development of Community Rail Partnerships (CRPs).
58 Improved capacity for cycles, wheelchairs and pushchairs on trains.
59 Use of rolling stock suitable for the type of route across the network.
Policy K: To work with Local Planning Authorities to integrate planning and transport
60 The current and emerging local planning authorities’ Local Development Framework infrastructure delivery plans will be developed alongside the Implementation Plan sections of the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Local Transport Plans.
61 Seeking developer contributions from new development to mitigate the impact of new development on existing transport networks.
62 Residential and workplace travel planning.
Policy L: To develop and deliver high quality public realm improvements 63 Reducing street clutter (e.g. pedestrian guard railing).
64 Streetscape enhancements (e.g. lighting, paving, planting, and street furniture).
65 Delivering improvements that follow the design principles set out in current design guidance and informed by examples of best practice.
Policy M: To safeguard and enable the future delivery of highway improvements within the sub-region
66 Safeguarding routes of proposed bypasses for communities where heavy traffic causes problems of severance, noise and poor air quality (e.g. Botley, Stubbington).
67 Highway access solutions to unlock Eastleigh River Side for new employment uses.
68 Enabling developer-led road improvements to facilitate access to major development areas (e.g. North Whiteley).
69 Develop a new motorway junction on M275 serving Tipner, Portsmouth.
70 Providing a bridge link from Tipner to Horsea Island.
The SEA has undertaken an appraisal of these interventions included in the Consultation Draft
Strategies for the three areas. This followed the assessment of the alternative options for the
three strategy areas.
5.4 Assessment of the Consultation Draft Strategies
The Draft Strategy interventions have been assessed against the SEA Framework of objectives
and indicators developed through the Scoping stage of the SEA (Section 3.1 and Appendix
C). This has engaged a two-step process; a high level assessment and a detailed assessment.
5.4.1 High level assessment
The first step of the appraisal process, the high level assessment, has used the SEA
Framework, the baseline and the review of plans, programmes and policies to assess each
intervention. Findings are presented in matrix format.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 41
The high level assessment matrix is not a conclusive tool or model. Its main function is to
identify whether or not the Draft Strategy interventions are likely to bring positive, negative or
uncertain effects in relation to the SEA Objectives. A benefit of this approach is that a range
of policies may be assessed, which can then be scrutinised in further detail if a significant
number of uncertainties or potential adverse effects arise.
5.4.2 Detailed assessment
Whilst the high level assessment of the Draft Strategy interventions provide a broad indication
of some of the issues surrounding the proposed measures’ environmental performance, to
gain a closer understanding of these issues, a more detailed assessment process has been
carried out. The second step of the appraisal process uses Detailed Assessment Matrices to
scrutinize potential adverse or uncertain effects which have been identified by the high level
assessment.
Detailed Assessment Matrices address the range of criteria identified in Annex II of the SEA
Directive12 when determining the likely (positive or negative) significance of effects (see Box
5.1 below).
Box 5.1: Criteria for the assessment of significant effects
Criteria for determining the likely significance of effects referred to in Article 3(5) of the SEA Directive
The characteristics of plans and programmes, having regard, in particular, to
a. the degree to which the plan or programme sets a framework for projects and other activities, either with regard to the location, nature, size and operating conditions or by allocating resources;
b. the degree to which the plan or programme influences other plans and programmes including those in a hierarchy;
c. the relevance of the plan or programme for the integration of environmental considerations in particular with a view to promoting sustainable development;
d. environmental problems relevant to the plan or programme; e. the relevance of the plan or programme for the implementation of Community legislation on
the environment (e.g. plans and programmes linked to waste-management or water protection).
Characteristics of the effects and of the area likely to be affected, having regard, in particular, to
f. the probability, duration, frequency and reversibility of the effects; g. the cumulative nature of the effects; h. the transboundary nature of the effects; i. the risks to human health or the environment (e.g. due to accidents); j. the magnitude and spatial extent of the effects (geographical area and size of the population
likely to be affected); k. the value and vulnerability of the area likely to be affected due to: l. special natural characteristics or cultural heritage; m. exceeded environmental quality standards or limit values; n. intensive land-use; o. the effects on areas or landscapes which have a recognised national, Community or
international protection status.
12 This SEA is being carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Directive 2001/42/EC, the SEA Directive.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 42
The Detailed Assessment Matrices assess each of the Draft Strategy interventions where
potential adverse or uncertain effects have arisen (as established through the high level
assessment process) by considering the effects of their associated proposals on each of the
SEA Objectives in terms of, and by setting out:
A description of the predicted effect;
The duration of the effect: whether the effect is long, medium or short term;
The frequency of the effect: will it be ongoing?;
Whether the effect is temporary or permanent;
The geographic significance: whether the effect is of localised, regional, national or
international significance;
The magnitude of effect;
The severity of significance;
Whether mitigation is required/possible to reduce the effect; and
Suggestions for mitigating the effect, or potential improvements to the proposals.
The Detailed Assessment Matrices also include a summary of the assessment for each
intervention and, where appropriate, potential mitigation measures to limit potential adverse
effects where they arise.
At a strategic level it is usually difficult to assess significant effects in the absence of
widespread data. Instead, orders of magnitude are used based on geographic significance
and impact magnitude. Table 5.5 illustrates this order of magnitude for positive and negative
effects.
Table 5.5: Significance Matrix.
Impact magnitude
Adverse Positive
High Medium Low Negligible Neutral
Negligible Low Medium High
International Severe Severe Major Moderate
Moderate Major Severe Severe
National Severe Major Moderate Minor
Minor Moderate Major Severe
Regional Major Moderate Minor Negligible
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Geo
gra
phi
cal s
igni
fican
ce
Local Moderate Minor Negligible Negligible
Negligible Negligible Minor Moderate
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 43
Limitations in terms of the level of detail and confidence of assessment are cited in the
Detailed Assessment Matrices; where uncertainty exists, the worse case scenario has been
assumed in accordance with the precautionary principle13.
5.5 Assessment of Cumulative Effects
As required by the SEA Regulations, cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects have been
identified, assessed and evaluated during the assessment. An explanation of these is as
follows:
Indirect effects are effects that are not a direct result of the plan, but occur away
from the original effect or as a result of a complex pathway;
Cumulative effects arise where several developments each have insignificant effects
but together have a significant effect, or where several individual effects of the plan
have a combined effect;
Synergistic effects interact to produce a total effect greater than the sum of the
individual effects.
Whilst a number of these effects have been established and recorded through the assessment
of the Draft Strategy interventions, a number of these effects can only be established through
examining two or more of the proposed interventions together.
The appraisal has therefore summarised the cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects that
are likely to come about from the interaction of the interventions proposed by each Draft
Strategy. These are presented in association with the SEA Objectives.
5.6 Summarising the assessment of the Draft Strategies
Following the high level assessment, the detailed assessment and the cumulative effects
assessment, the assessment findings are presented in the following chapter. Whilst the
appendices present comprehensive assessment results, Chapter 6 provides an interpretation
of the findings. This is presented as a “Summary of the Assessment” (for each Draft Strategy)
and is arranged according to the environmental information themes presented in Section 1.6.
5.7 Limitations of assessment
It is important to acknowledge the limitations of the approach taken to the assessment. These
limitation relate to both the scope and coverage of the plan and the nature of the SEA
process.
The following considerations should therefore be acknowledged in relation to the assessment:
13 Where there is scientific uncertainty, and the consequences of an action, especially concerning the use of technology, are unknown but are judged by some scientists to have a high risk of being negative from an ethical point of view, then it is better not to carry out the action rather than risk the uncertain, but possibly very negative, consequences.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 44
Many of the proposed interventions are not specific to particular locations and are,
from a geographic perspective, not explicit. This in some instances reduces the
degree of certainty relating to potential environmental effects that may arise as
result of the interventions.
In some cases it has not been possible to carry out a meaningful assessment due to the level of detail within the proposed interventions, for example related to design, layout or size. For this reason the assessment has in a number of cases needed to make wider assumptions as to the detail of proposed interventions.
SEA seeks to make judgements based on limits beyond which irreversible effects can
arise. It is however sometimes difficult to do this when such limits are not properly
understood, for example due to a lack of baseline data, or where only limited levels
of information are currently available on certain proposed interventions. Where this
has occurred, the precautionary principle has been applied14.
At a strategic level, such as at the Local Transport Plan Strategy level, it is difficult to
assess significant effects. It is therefore likely that a meaningful assessment can only
occur when interventions have been developed further when proposed through the
Implementation Plan for the LTP3.
Where appropriate, the SEA process has acknowledged these limitations.
14 Where there is scientific uncertainty, and the consequences of an action, especially concerning the use of technology, are unknown but are judged by some scientists to have a high risk of being negative from an ethical point of view, then it is better not to carry out the action rather than risk the uncertain, but possibly very negative, consequences.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 45
6 Assessment of the Interventions put forward through the Draft Strategy for North Hampshire
6.1 Results of the High Level Assessment for the North Hampshire Draft Strategy
interventions
Appendix D presents the high level assessment matrix for the 52 interventions included in the
Consultation Draft Strategy for North Hampshire.
As the high level assessment highlights, the proposed interventions for north Hampshire are
likely to bring a range of positive environmental effects related to the full range of SEA
Objectives. These include through limiting traffic growth, facilitating modal shift, improving
accessibility to services and facilities, supporting enhancements to the public realm,
promoting social inclusion and promoting healthier modes of travel.
Whilst the majority of the proposed interventions support the SEA Objectives, seven have
raised potential negative and uncertain effects. These interventions are as follows:
Intervention 2: Targeted measures to improve capacity at congestion bottlenecks
and optimise management of the highway network (North Hampshire-wide);
Intervention 4: Ramp Metering at junctions on the M3 between Basingstoke and the
Farnborough area;
Intervention 9: New rail stations at locations such as Chineham;
Intervention 17: Targeted measures to improve capacity at congestion bottlenecks
and optimise management of the highway network in Andover;
Intervention 21: Targeted measures to improve capacity at congestion bottlenecks
and optimise management of the highway network in Basingstoke;
Intervention 29: Targeted measures to improve capacity at congestion bottlenecks
and optimise management of the highway network in Fleet; and
Intervention 35: Targeted measures to improve capacity at congestion bottlenecks
and optimise management of the highway network in Farnborough and Aldershot.
Whilst the high level assessment of the interventions provides a broad indication of some of
the issues surrounding their likely environmental performance, to gain a closer understanding
of these issues, a more in depth assessment has been carried out on these seven interventions
utilising Detailed Assessment Matrices (Section 5.4.2). This enables a clearer understanding
of the potential negative or uncertain effects which have been raised by the high level
assessment.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 46
6.2 Results of the Detailed Assessment
A summary of the main assessment outcomes for each of the Draft Strategy interventions
which have highlighted potential uncertain or adverse effects is as follows. These should be
read alongside the Detailed Assessment Matrices in Appendix E where full assessment
findings, including mitigation, is presented.
Interventions 2, 17, 29 and 35: Targeted measures to improve capacity at congestion
bottlenecks and optimise management of the highway network
The proposed intervention, which will be applied in Andover, Fleet, Farnborough and
Aldershot, will focus on improving traffic flows through improved signalling and traffic
management. In the shorter term, this will support a reduction in congestion at hotspots, with
benefits for journey times, accessibility for car users, and for air and noise quality. In a number
of locations, bus priority measures will also be a key part of the proposals. This will support
journey times and reliability, promoting accessibility by public transport.
In the longer term however, through improving capacity at bottlenecks and optimising the
management of the highway network, the measures have the potential to lead to traffic
growth as journey times and reliability improve. This has the potential to have some
implications for longer term air and noise quality, the quality of landscape, townscape and the
public realm, and have limited effects on the integrity of the historic environment. Potential
effects are however likely to be insignificant due to the nature and scope of the measures,
including through the introduction of no additional construction activities or a physical
expansion of junctions.
Intervention 4: Ramp Metering at junctions on the M3 between Basingstoke and the
Farnborough area
The introduction of ramp metering on the M3 between Basingstoke and the Farnborough area
has the potential to stimulate increased traffic flows at key junctions on the M3. Whilst the
measures are likely to reduce motorway congestion, particularly in the short term, the
measures may have implications for the quality of neighbourhoods located adjacent to routes
leading to and from motorway junctions through an increase in traffic at these locations.
Locations where this may particularly have implications include in the vicinity of Junctions 4
and 4a near Farnborough, and in the area close to Junction 6 at Basingstoke, where the
surrounding areas are relatively more built up than in areas surrounding other junctions on the
M3.
Intervention 9: New rail stations at locations such as Chineham
New rail stations in north Hampshire will promote modal shift from the private car and support
accessibility. This will help reduce and limit traffic flows and congestion, supporting
improvements to air and noise quality, and enhancements to quality of the built environment,
public realm and townscape and landscape, and improving the quality of life for communities
affected by high traffic flows.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 47
The development of new rail stations has the potential to lead to effects on landscape,
townscape, historic environment and biodiversity assets locally. The effect of new rail stations
on their immediate vicinities however depends on the location, design and layout of new
stations. Potential effects on air quality in the vicinities of new rail stations also depend on the
degree of car parking provision and the provision of new public transport and walking and
cycling links. There may be the need to investigate the potential for new stations in the
Basingstoke or Andover area to support possible planned growth depending on the proximity
of major development to the rail network - the only location within North Hampshire where a
specific location for a new station has been identified is at Chineham. Once firm business
cases have been established for new stations (such as Chineham), agreement of the rail
industry obtained to deliver them and funding identified, then further work will be required
to examine environmental effects and seek to mitigate effects either through SEA of the
Implementation Plan or the relevant project level Environmental Impact Assessment.
A new station at Chineham will promote accessibility to Basingstoke town centre and Reading
and support modal shift from the private car. Due to its location near Crockford Lane (within
the urban boundary of Basingstoke), the development of the new station is unlikely to have
significant effects on biodiversity assets, the historic environment or landscape quality.
Intervention 21: Targeted measures to improve capacity at congestion bottlenecks and
optimise management of the highway network in Basingstoke
Whilst the proposed intervention is similar to inventions 2, 17, 29 and 35, it differs in that it is
likely to also involve some junction improvements in the Basingstoke area; the locations of
these proposed junction improvements have not been made explicit by the Draft Strategy.
Through supporting a reduction in congestion at hotspots in Basingstoke in the short term,
the intervention is likely to have benefits for journey times, accessibility for car users, and for
air and noise quality. Bus priority measures are also likely be a key part of the proposals. This
will support journey times and reliability, promoting accessibility by public transport.
In the longer term however, through improving capacity at bottlenecks and optimising
management of the highway network, the measures have the potential to lead to traffic
growth as journey times and reliability improve. This may have implications for longer term air
and noise quality, undermine the quality of landscape, townscape and the public realm, and
have effects on the quality of neighbourhoods.
Junction capacity improvements in the Basingstoke area also have the potential to lead to
environmental impacts. This however depends on the proposed location, layout and design of
schemes, and their proximity to sensitive features locally, including for example priority
habitats and BAP species, and the presence of other local features and areas of historic,
landscape or agricultural value. The SEA of the Implementation Plans for the LTP3 will
examine the potential effects of more detailed proposals under this intervention. Likewise,
the relevant project level EIAs will identify and examine potential environmental effects and
seek to mitigate effects.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 48
6.3 Assessment of Cumulative Effects
As required by the SEA Regulations, cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects have been
identified and evaluated during the assessment (Section 5.5).
Whilst a number of these effects have been established and recorded through the assessment
of the Draft Strategy interventions, a number of these effects can only be established through
examining two or more of the proposed interventions together. The table below therefore
summarises the cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects that are likely to come from the
interaction of the interventions as proposed by the Draft Strategy for North Hampshire. These
are presented in relation to the ten SEA Objectives.
Table 6.1: Cumulative, Synergistic and Indirect Effects: Draft Strategy for North Hampshire.
SEA Objective Interventions which combine to bring cumulative/ synergistic/ indirect effects
Significance
1. Reduce air pollution and ensure continued improvements to air quality.
Interventions 1, 5-15, 18-20, 22-28, 30-34 and 36-52 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects for air quality through supporting a reduction in traffic flows in north Hampshire.
Interventions 2, 4, 17, 21, 29 and 35 will support cumulative effects on improved air quality at congestion hotspots. The interventions may however have wider impacts on air quality through promoting localised increases in traffic flows.
Significant positive effects in the short, medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the short term. Possible adverse effects in the medium and long term, depending on the performance of other measures on supporting modal shift.
2. Maintain and improve the water quality of Hampshire’s rivers, coasts and groundwater, and achieve sustainable water resources management.
No significant cumulative, synergistic or indirect effects have been highlighted for this SEA Objective from the Draft Strategy for North Hampshire interventions.
3. Protect and enhance Hampshire’s soils resource.
Interventions 9 and 21 have the potential to lead to cumulative effects on the area of best and most versatile agricultural land in north Hampshire through introducing new transport infrastructure in the area.
Potential adverse effects over the short, medium and long term.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 49
SEA Objective Interventions which combine to bring cumulative/ synergistic/ indirect effects
Significance
4. Protect, enhance and manage sites, features and areas of archaeological, historical and cultural heritage importance.
Interventions 18, 19, 20, 25, 32, 34, 37, 44, 46 and 52 have the potential to have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on the setting of cultural heritage assets in the north Hampshire area through promoting improvements to the built environment and townscape.
Interventions 9 and 21 have the potential to have cumulative effects on archaeological assets and other features and areas of historic environment interest through the development of land for transport infrastructure.
Significant positive effects over the medium and long term.
Uncertain but potentially adverse effects over the short, medium and long term.
5. Protect, enhance and manage the character and appearance of the landscape and townscape, maintaining and strengthening distinctiveness and its special qualities.
Interventions 1, 5-15, 18-20, 22-28, 30-34 and 36-52 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on landscape and townscape quality through reducing the effect of traffic on the built and natural environment, including from noise and visual intrusion.
Interventions 9 and 21 have the potential to have cumulative and synergistic effects on landscape and townscape quality interest through the development of new transport infrastructure.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term
Uncertain but potentially adverse effects over the short, medium and long term.
6. Protect, enhance and manage biodiversity and geodiversity.
Interventions 9 and 21 have the potential to have cumulative and synergistic effects on species and habitats through the development of new transport infrastructure.
Uncertain but potentially adverse effects over the short, medium and long term.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 50
SEA Objective Interventions which combine to bring cumulative/ synergistic/ indirect effects
Significance
7. Minimise Hampshire’s contribution to climate change.
Interventions 1, 5-15, 18-20, 22-28, 30-34 and 36-52 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on limiting greenhouse gas emissions from transport through limiting traffic flows.
Interventions 1, 5, 8-15, 18-20, 22, 25, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36-38, 41-44, 46, 47, and 50-52 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on limiting greenhouse gas emissions from transport through encouraging modal shift from the private car.
Interventions 23, 24, 31, 33, 39, 34 and 45 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on limiting greenhouse gas emissions from transport through reducing the need to travel in north Hampshire.
Interventions 2, 4, 17, 21, 29 and 35 however will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on increasing greenhouse gas emissions in north Hampshire through encouraging car-based travel.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
Positive effects over the medium and long term.
Adverse effects over the medium and long term.
8. Plan for the anticipated levels of climate change.
No significant cumulative, synergistic or indirect effects have been highlighted for this SEA Objective from the Draft Strategy for North Hampshire interventions.
9. Reduce poverty and social exclusion and close the gap between the most deprived areas in Hampshire and the rest of the county.
Interventions 1, 5, 8-15, 18-20, 22, 25, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36-38, 41-44, 46, 47, and 50-52 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on encouraging walking, cycling and the use of public transport. This will support accessibility for all.
Interventions 1, 5-15, 18-20, 22-28, 30-34 and 36-52 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on improving the quality of neighbourhoods through supporting enhancements to the quality of the public realm and the built environment.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 51
SEA Objective Interventions which combine to bring cumulative/ synergistic/ indirect effects
Significance
10. Safeguard and improve community health, safety and well being.
Interventions 1, 5, 8-15, 18-20, 22, 25, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36-38, 41-44, 46, 47, and 50-52 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on improving health and wellbeing through improving accessibility to leisure and recreational activities.
Interventions 1, 5, 8, 19, 20, 22, 25, 30, 34, 36, 37 and 44 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on improving health and wellbeing through promoting healthier modes of travel including walking and cycling.
Interventions 1, 5-15, 18-20, 22-28, 30-34 and 36-52 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on improving health and wellbeing through supporting improvements to the quality of the public realm and local neighbourhoods.
Interventions 20, 25, 34, 37, 44 and 51 will have cumulative and synergistic effects on improving road safety in the area.
Significant positive effects over the medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the medium and long term.
In summary, the cumulative effects assessment has shown that the interaction of the
interventions proposed for the north Hampshire area will bring a wide range of beneficial
cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects in relation to the SEA Objectives. A number of
adverse effects have however been highlighted by the assessment, including relating to
cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on air quality and greenhouse gas emissions from
traffic growth stimulated by Interventions 2, 4, 17, 21, 29 and 35, and relating to possible
losses of the best and most versatile agricultural land, landscape and townscape quality, and
features and areas of historic interest and biodiversity assets from proposed new rail stations
and the junction improvements. These effects are however uncertain, and will depend on the
location, design and layout of proposed new rail stations and junction improvements. The EIA
process will examine these effects further before proceeding with development.
6.4 Summary of the assessment of the Draft Strategy for North Hampshire
This section summarises the results of the assessment of the interventions included in the
Draft Strategy for North Hampshire. This summary is presented by the environmental
information themes discussed in Section 1.615. A range of mostly positive effects have been
identified; occasional negative effects also feature in the following sections.
15 The summary of the appraisal has not included the Accessibility and Transportation environmental information theme as this theme is the focus of the LTP3.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 52
6.4.1 Air Quality
Air quality issues in north Hampshire are closely related to nitrogen dioxide (NO2) emissions
from transport. Areas of high congestion in north Hampshire are consistent with the presence
of air quality ‘hotspots’. These are centred on the M3 corridor, including at Basingstoke and
Farnborough.
Through its focus on promoting a reduction in congestion, encouraging modal shift, limiting
peak time travel, and promoting accessibility by non car modes, the Draft Strategy
interventions have the potential to support continued air quality improvements in north
Hampshire.
Air quality may however in the longer term be undermined at some locations, including near
motorway junctions, by the junction capacity and traffic flow management improvements
proposed by the Draft Strategy.
6.4.2 Biodiversity and Geodiversity
North Hampshire is rich in biodiversity assets, reflected by the presence of internationally and
nationally designated nature conservation sites, and a large number of BAP Priority Habitats
and Species. Likewise, the 13 Biodiversity Opportunity Areas (BOAs) located in the area
highlight that there are a significant number of areas of good potential for the restoration and
enhancement of habitats. Many of these areas are adjacent or close to the most congested
parts of the road network.
North Hampshire’s biodiversity assets (including both greenfield and brownfield biodiversity)
are likely to come under increasing pressures from new development in north Hampshire. In
this context, the Draft Strategy, through supporting a reduction of traffic growth, promoting
modal shift, and supporting improvements to air quality has the potential to limit impacts on
biodiversity from new and existing transport infrastructure.
It is unclear to what extent the proposed junction improvements near Basingstoke or the
proposed rail stations will have effects on biodiversity assets as more detail will emerge at a
later stage as to locations of these interventions in light of confirmation of where new areas of
development will occur through the land use planning process. The appraisal of the LTP3
Implementation Plans, as well as the project level EIAs will consider these issues in more
detail.
The HRA being carried out alongside the LTP3 has examined potential effects on European
designated nature conservation sites in more detail.
6.4.3 Climate Change
The Draft Strategy will support climate change mitigation. Through promoting a reduction in
congestion, supporting modal shift from the private car, facilitating a reduction in the need to
travel, and helping to reduce traffic flows, the interventions will support climate change
mitigation by limiting greenhouse gas emissions from transport. This is significant as transport
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 53
in Basingstoke, Hart and the Test Valley comprises over 30%, 26% and 32% of total
greenhouse gas emissions in each district respectively. There is however some potential for
traffic management improvements promoted by the Draft Strategy to contribute to an
increases in emissions through supporting longer term traffic growth.
Climate change in north Hampshire has the potential to lead to a range of environmental
impacts. Adapting to the effect of climate change in the area will involve forward planning
which considers future trends in the climate, including more extreme weather events,
increased winter rainfall and increased occurrences of summer drought. In this context,
effects on transport infrastructure from climate change include flooding of roads and railways,
damage from landslips or erosion, and damage to road surfaces and rail from high
temperatures.
The proposed interventions for north Hampshire will therefore need to support effective
climate change adaptation. However, as highlighted by the assessment relating to SEA
Objective 8 (climate change adaptation), where no cumulative effects have been recorded, it
is unclear as to what extent the interventions for the Draft Strategy will help north Hampshire
adapt to the effects of climate change.
6.4.4 Health
Whilst health is in general is very good in north Hampshire, and compares well with national
averages, there are some inequalities, including within more deprived areas.
Health and wellbeing in north Hampshire will be supported by the Draft Strategy’s
encouragement of non-car use and healthier modes of travel. This includes through the
intervention’s promotion of improved pedestrian and cycle networks and enhanced public
transport links. Health and wellbeing will also be supported by the improvement of
accessibility by non-car modes.
Fear of crime, stress and insecurity have negative effects on health and wellbeing. The health
and wellbeing of residents will therefore be promoted by the Draft Strategy’s support for
improvements to the built environment and public realm. This will help improve the
satisfaction of residents with the neighbourhoods they live and support community cohesion,
both of which are important contributors to health and wellbeing.
6.4.5 Historic Environment
The historic environment of north Hampshire is defined by individual heritage assets, both
designated and non-designated, and the setting of these assets through the area’s built
environment, townscape and landscape.
North Hampshire’s historic environment extends beyond individual sites and features. The
area’s historic landscapes and townscapes must be considered as a whole in order to
understand what gives the area its sense of place and identity. Alongside, the setting of a site
and its features is fundamental to its integrity.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 54
In general, the Draft Strategy interventions will support the protection and enhancement of
the historic environment. The setting of heritage features will be promoted by the
interventions’ support for improvements to the built environment, including from a reduction
of traffic flows and the support for modal shift from the private car. The Draft Strategy’s
promotion of improved streetscapes and signage improvements will also support the integrity
of the historic environment.
It is unclear as to what extent the proposed junction improvements near Basingstoke or the
proposed new rail stations in north Hampshire will have effects on local historic environment
assets (including archaeological features) as more detail will emerge at a later stage as to
locations of these interventions in light of confirmation of where new areas of development
will occur through the land use planning process. The appraisal of the LTP3 Implementation
Plans, and the project level EIAs will consider these issues in more detail.
6.4.6 Landscape
Transport infrastructure and traffic flows have a strong influence on landscape character and
quality, and effects on landscape quality can occur from poor design of transport
infrastructure, including insensitively designed layouts, inappropriate signage, noisy road
surfaces or excessive clutter.
Studies of tranquillity in Hampshire have established that north east Hampshire, the M3
corridor, and the area around Andover have been established as the least tranquil areas of the
county. In this context noise and light pollution in these areas has contributed to a general
loss of tranquillity.
The Draft Strategy for North Hampshire will help limit similar effects from transport on
landscape and townscape quality and character through promoting modal shift, supporting a
reduction in traffic flows and seeking to mitigate the impacts of new development from
transport. The interventions also seek to facilitate improvements to the quality of the public
realm, and facilitate streetscape and signage improvements. This will support townscape and
landscape quality in north Hampshire. In addition, the built environment and landscape of
rural communities will benefit from the Draft Strategy’s focus on reducing the effects of HGVs
on these locations.
It is unclear however as to what extent the proposed junction improvements near Basingstoke
or the proposed new rail stations in north Hampshire will have effects on local landscape and
townscape quality as more detail will emerge at a later stage as to locations of these
interventions in light of confirmation of where new areas of development will occur through
the land use planning process. The appraisal of the LTP3 Implementation Plans, as well as the
project level EIAs, will consider these issues in more detail.
6.4.7 Material Assets
Materials assets address resource and waste issues, the use of previously developed land and
energy provision.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 55
It is uncertain as to what effect the interventions will address material assets in north
Hampshire as the interventions proposed for the Draft Strategy have not sought to address
aspects such as network maintenance, transport asset management or other aspects. Whilst
the North Hampshire Strategy does not itself explicitly mention maintenance, it should be
notes that Priority A of Part B of the Consultation Strategy (Section 5.1) addresses the topic.
6.4.8 Population
The Draft Strategy for North Hampshire will support the quality of life of residents and social
inclusion through a strong focus on enhancing accessibility to services, facilities and
opportunities by non car modes, reducing the need to travel and promoting new and
enhanced transport links. Accessibility from areas poorly served by public transport networks,
including rural areas, will also be supported by the interventions relating to Community
Transport.
Through promoting improvements to the quality of the public realm and built environment,
the Draft Strategy will support the quality of life of residents and promote community
cohesion. This will be supported in rural communities by the Draft Strategy seeking to reduce
the impact of HGVs in these areas.
By facilitating accessibility, promoting social inclusion and community cohesion, and
supporting the health and wellbeing of residents, the Draft Strategy therefore has the
potential to bring a range of benefits for quality of life in north Hampshire.
6.4.9 Soil
Whilst most of the interventions presented under the Draft Strategy are unlikely to have
effects in relation to soil and agricultural land quality, two interventions have some potential to
lead to loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land in north Hampshire: the proposed
junction improvements near Basingstoke; and the proposed new rail stations. It is unclear
however to what extent these measures will have effects in relation to this environmental
information theme as more detail will emerge at a later stage as to locations of these
interventions in light of confirmation of where new areas of development will occur through
the land use planning process. The appraisal of the LTP3 Implementation Plans, and the
project level EIAs will consider these issues in more detail.
6.4.10 Water
It is uncertain whether the interventions proposed under the Draft Strategy are likely to have
any significant effects on the water environmental information theme at this level of detail.
Effects will largely depend on the use of measures within transport schemes to regulate
surface water runoff, such as sustainable drainage systems, interventions to reduce flood risk
and other interventions. Proposed projects should resist this issue in the Implementation
Plans.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 56
This page is intentionally blank.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 57
7 Assessment of the Interventions put forward through the Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and the New Forest
7.1 Results of the High Level Assessment for the Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and
the New Forest interventions
Appendix F presents the high level assessment matrix for the 31 interventions included in the
Consultation Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and the New Forest.
As the high level assessment highlights, the proposed interventions for central Hampshire and
the New Forest are likely to bring a range of positive environmental effects related to the full
range of SEA Objectives. This reflects the Draft Strategy’s focus on meeting the needs of the
area’s two National Parks, rural areas and market towns through protecting environmental
quality, improving accessibility by alternatives to the private car and reducing the impact of
traffic on local areas. The Draft Strategy also has a strong focus on supporting the
development of the Whitehill-Bordon Eco-town with a comprehensive and high quality
sustainable transport network.
Whilst the majority of the proposed interventions support the SEA Objectives, one
intervention, Intervention 28, Adequate parking at railway stations, has raised potential
negative and uncertain effects against the SEA Objectives.
7.2 Detailed Assessment for Intervention 28: Adequate parking at railway stations
Appendix G presents the Detailed Assessment Matrix for Intervention 28. This sets out the in-
depth assessment of this intervention; the following summary should be read alongside the
Detailed Assessment Matrix.
Improved parking at central Hampshire and the New Forest's rail stations will promote a
measure of modal shift. The intervention however has the potential to lead to increased traffic
flows in the vicinity of rail stations, including before and after the morning and evening peak
travel period. This may lead to effects on air quality near rail stations, and on routes to and
from stations. This has the potential to be significant at Winchester, where the Air Quality
Management Areas covers the rail station. However, by encouraging modal shift (primarily on
longer journeys served by rail), the intervention may have some benefits for air quality through
stimulating some reduction in vehicle mileage.
Increased traffic flows near to rail stations also have the potential to have effects on local
townscape and landscape quality, with implications for the quality of neighbourhoods and the
setting of the historic environment. The measures also have the potential to undermine end-
to-end sustainable transport use, although increased patronage of rail services stimulated by
the intervention may lead to rail service enhancements which benefit all users.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 58
The impact of the proposed intervention on many of the SEA Objectives however depends on
the extent to which journeys that were previously undertaken solely by car are instead
undertaken by a mix of car and rail. In this respect, the intervention’s effect on supporting
climate change mitigation is largely dependent on this factor.
The provision of improved public transport and enhanced walking and cycling links to rail
stations should be a priority over increasing car parking provision in the first instance. This will
help promote the viability of alternatives to the car for travel to rail stations and support end
to end sustainable transport use. This should be accompanied by appropriate pricing of car
parking at rail stations.
7.3 Assessment of Cumulative Effects
As required by the SEA Regulations, cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects have been
identified and evaluated during the assessment (Section 5.5).
Whilst a number of these effects have been established and recorded through the assessment
of the Draft Strategy interventions, a number of these effects can only be established through
examining two or more of the proposed interventions together. The table below therefore
summarises the cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects that are likely to come from the
interaction of the interventions as proposed by the Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and
the New Forest. These are presented in relation to the ten SEA Objectives.
Table 7.1: Cumulative, Synergistic and Indirect Effects: Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and the
New Forest.
SEA Objective Interventions which combine to bring cumulative/ synergistic/ indirect effects
Significance
1. Reduce air pollution and ensure continued improvements to air quality.
Interventions 1, 4, 8, 13-25, 27 and 31 will have cumulative effects for air quality through supporting a reduction in traffic flows in central Hampshire and the New Forest.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
2. Maintain and improve the water quality of Hampshire’s rivers, coasts and groundwater, and achieve sustainable water resources management.
Interventions 1, 4 and 26 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects for supporting improvements to water quality by supporting effective maintenance of the road network. This is likely to reducing the amount of diffuse and point source pollution entering waterbodies through promoting high quality drainage.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
3. Protect and enhance Hampshire’s soils resource.
No significant cumulative, synergistic or indirect effects have been highlighted for this SEA Objective from the Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and the New Forest interventions.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 59
SEA Objective Interventions which combine to bring cumulative/ synergistic/ indirect effects
Significance
4. Protect, enhance and manage sites, features and areas of archaeological, historical and cultural heritage importance.
Interventions 1-3, 9-12 and 16 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on the setting and integrity of the historic environment assets in central Hampshire and the New Forest through promoting improvements to the public realm, built environment and townscape.
Significant positive effects over the short medium and long term.
5. Protect, enhance and manage the character and appearance of the landscape and townscape, maintaining and strengthening distinctiveness and its special qualities.
Interventions 1, 4, 8, 13-25, 27 and 31 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on landscape and townscape quality through reducing the effect of traffic on the built and natural environment, including from noise and visual intrusion.
Interventions 1-3, 9-12 and 16 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on the quality of central Hampshire and the New Forest’s landscape and townscape through rationalising and improving signage and street curtilage and promoting improvements to the public realm.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
6. Protect, enhance and manage biodiversity and geodiversity.
Interventions 1, 4, 6, 9 and 10 will support cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on reducing road kills in the National Parks.
Positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
7. Minimise Hampshire’s contribution to climate change.
Interventions 1, 4, 8, 13-25, 27 and 31 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on supporting a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from transport through limiting traffic flows.
Interventions 1, 4, 6, 13, 15-17, 19-25, 27 and 31 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on limiting greenhouse gas emissions from transport through promoting modal shift from the private car.
Interventions 8 and 20 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on limiting greenhouse gas emissions from transport through reducing the need to travel in Whitehill-Bordon.
Interventions will have cumulative effects on reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the operation of transport infrastructure through supporting maintenance, lighting and asset management efficiency.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
Positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
8. Plan for the anticipated levels of climate change.
Interventions 5 and 26 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on climate change adaptation by promoting a well-maintained, resilient highway network.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 60
SEA Objective Interventions which combine to bring cumulative/ synergistic/ indirect effects
Significance
9. Reduce poverty and social exclusion and close the gap between the most deprived areas in Hampshire and the rest of the county.
Interventions 1, 4, 6, 13, 15-17, 19-25, 27 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on encouraging walking, cycling and the use of public transport. This will support accessibility for all.
Interventions 1-3, 9-12 and 16 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on improving the quality of neighbourhoods through supporting enhancements to the quality of the public realm and the built environment.
Interventions 7, 8 and 29 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects for supporting social inclusion for those living in rural areas.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
10. Safeguard and improve community health, safety and well being.
Interventions 1-3, 9-12 and 16 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on improving health and wellbeing through supporting improvements to the quality of the public realm and local neighbourhoods.
Interventions 1, 4, 8, 13-25, 27 and 31 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on improving health and wellbeing through improving accessibility to leisure and recreational activities.
Interventions 4, 6, 9, 13, 16, 17, 20, 21, 24 and 25 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on improving health and wellbeing through promoting healthier modes of travel including walking and cycling.
Interventions 4, 9, 10, 11 and 24 will have cumulative and synergistic effects on improving safety for vulnerable road users in the area.
Significant positive effects over the medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the medium and long term.
In summary, the cumulative effects assessment has shown that the interaction of the
interventions proposed as part of the Draft Strategy for the Central Hampshire and New
Forest area will bring a wide range of beneficial cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects in
relation to the SEA Objectives.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 61
7.4 Summary of the assessment of the Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and the New
Forest
This section summarises the results of the assessment of the interventions included in the
Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and the New Forest. This summary is presented by the
environmental information themes discussed in Section 1.616.
7.4.1 Air Quality
Air quality issues where they exist in central Hampshire and the New Forest are closely related
to NO2 emissions from transport. Air Quality Management Areas exist in Winchester and
Lyndhurst. These AQMAs have been designated due to emissions from transport.
In general, the interventions proposed for central Hampshire and the New Forest will support
improvements towards meeting air quality objectives in the area. Through the Draft
Strategy’s focus on promoting a reduction in congestion, encouraging modal shift, reducing
the need to travel, and promoting accessibility by non car modes, the Draft Strategy
interventions have the potential to support continued air quality improvements in central
Hampshire and the New Forest.
Growth areas in central Hampshire and the New Forest have the potential to lead to impacts
on air quality from increased traffic flows. This includes from the proposed Eco-town at
Whitehill-Bordon. Therefore the Draft Strategy’s close focus on supporting sustainable
transport use in the Eco-town will help limit effects on air quality from transport in the area.
The measure promoting the provision of adequate parking at rail stations may have some
implications for air quality in the vicinity of rail stations and on main routes to and from
stations, including through potentially extending the morning and evening peak traffic
periods. However, by encouraging modal shift- primarily on longer journeys served by rail-
the intervention may have some benefits for air quality through stimulating some reduction in
vehicle mileage. The impact of the proposed intervention on air quality therefore depends on
the extent to which journeys that were previously undertaken solely by car are instead
undertaken by a mix of car and rail.
7.4.2 Biodiversity and Geodiversity
The area covered by the Draft Strategy for Central Hampshire and the New Forest supports a
wide range of important habitats and species, as reflected by the presence of a significant
number of internationally and nationally designated nature conservation sites, and Biodiversity
Action Plan Priority Habitats and Species. A significant proportion of the area is covered by
Biodiversity Opportunity Areas, which are areas of good potential for the restoration and
enhancement of habitats.
16 The summary of the appraisal has not included the Accessibility and Transportation environmental information theme as this theme is the focus of the LTP3.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 62
Biodiversity assets in central Hampshire and the New Forest will benefit from the proposed
interventions through supporting a reduction of traffic growth and supporting improvements
to air quality. The absence of proposed road network improvements will also prevent impacts
on biodiversity from landtake, habitat loss and fragmentation and disturbance.
Biodiversity in the National Parks will also benefit from modal shift, a limitation in traffic flows
and improved traffic management through helping to reduce animal road kills (especially
horses and ponies). This may have particular benefits for the New Forest, where one of the
key issues relating to biodiversity and transport locally is the impact of animal accidents on
Commoning.
The provision of improved parking at railway stations has the potential to have some
implications for local biodiversity assets through potential landtake, habitat loss and
fragmentation and disturbance. Potential effects depend however on the location, scale and
design of new parking provision.
The HRA being carried out alongside the LTP3 has examined potential effects on European
designated nature conservation sites in more detail.
7.4.3 Climate Change
The Draft Strategy will support climate change mitigation. Through promoting a reduction in
congestion, supporting modal shift from the private car, facilitating a reduction in the need to
travel, and a limitation of traffic flow the interventions will support climate change mitigation
by limiting greenhouse gas emissions from transport. This is significant as per capita emissions
in each of the districts making up the central Hampshire and the New Forest area are
significantly higher that Hampshire and South East averages. Alongside transport in East
Hampshire, Winchester, the New Forest and Test Valley comprises 35%, 31%, 30% and 33% of
total greenhouse gas emissions in each district respectively.
Climate change in central Hampshire and the New Forest has the potential to lead to a range
of impacts. Adapting to the effect of climate change in the area will involve forward planning
which considers future trends in the climate, including more extreme weather events,
increased winter rainfall and increased occurrences of summer drought. In this context,
effects on transport infrastructure from climate change include flooding of roads and railways,
damage from landslips or erosion, and damage to road surfaces and rail from high
temperatures.
The proposed interventions for central Hampshire and the New Forest will support climate
change adaptation. This include through the measures to promote a well maintained network
and the interventions’ aim to ‘improve the resilience of the highway network’.
7.4.4 Health
Whilst health is in general is very good in central Hampshire and the New Forest, and
compares well with national averages, there are some inequalities, including within more
deprived areas.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 63
Health and wellbeing in central Hampshire and the New Forest will be supported by the Draft
Strategy’s encouragement of non-car use and healthier modes of travel. This includes through
the intervention’s promotion of improved pedestrian and cycle networks and enhanced public
transport links. Health and wellbeing will also be supported by the Draft Strategy’s support
for an improvement of accessibility to services, facilities and amenities by non car modes.
Neighbourhoods adversely affected by traffic issues and a poor quality public ream have
negative effects on health and wellbeing. The health and wellbeing of residents will therefore
be promoted by the Draft Strategy’s support for improvements to the built environment and
public realm, and reducing traffic impacts at a number of locations, including in villages and
rural areas. This will help improve the satisfaction of residents with the neighbourhoods they
live and support community cohesion, both of which are important contributors to health and
wellbeing.
The Draft Strategy also has a strong focus on improving road safety, and reducing the impacts
of HGVs on villages and rural areas. This will also support health and wellbeing.
7.4.5 Historic Environment
The historic environment of central Hampshire and the New Forest is defined by individual
heritage assets, both designated and non-designated, and the setting of these assets.
Central Hampshire and the New Forest’s historic environment extends beyond individual sites
and features, and landscape and townscape quality and character has a close relationship to
the historic environment through providing a link between the historic evolution of the area
and local distinctiveness. Likewise, the individual setting of sites and their features is
fundamental to their integrity. In this context the historic environment of central Hampshire
and the New Forest is closely associated with the area’s exceptional nationally important
landscape quality.
The Draft Strategy interventions will support the protection and enhancement of the historic
environment. The setting of heritage features will be promoted by the interventions’
promotion of improvements to the built environment, including from a reduction of traffic
flows and the support for modal shift from the private car. The Draft Strategy seeks to limit
the effects of HGV flows through villages and rural areas, which will promote additional
benefits for the historic environment.
The Draft Strategy seeks to support physical improvements to the public realm, including
through reducing signage ‘clutter’ and enhancing streetscape quality. This will support the
integrity of the historic environment. In the National Parks, this will be supported by the Draft
Strategy’s aim to manage the road network to protect and enhance the respective areas’ rural
character.
7.4.6 Landscape
The high quality landscape present in the area covered by the Draft Strategy is reflected by
the presence of the New Forest National Park and the recently designated South Downs
National Park.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 64
Transport infrastructure and traffic flows have a strong influence on landscape character and
quality, and effects on landscape quality can occur from poor design of transport
infrastructure, including insensitively designed layouts, inappropriate signage, noisy road
surfaces or excessive clutter. In this context the Draft Strategy’s focus on reducing signage
‘clutter’ and enhancing streetscape quality will help reduce effects on landscape quality from
transport. This will be supported in the National Parks by the Draft Strategy’s aim to manage
the road network to protect and enhance the respective areas’ rural character.
The Draft Strategy will help limit effects from transport on landscape and townscape quality
and character through promoting modal shift, supporting a reduction in traffic flows and
seeking to mitigate the impacts of new development such as at Whitehill-Bordon from
transport. In addition, the built environment, townscape and landscape of rural communities
and their surrounding areas will benefit from the Draft Strategy’s focus on reducing the effects
of HGVs on these locations.
7.4.7 Material Assets
Materials assets address resource and waste issues, the use of previously developed land and
energy provision. In this context, the interventions will support the sustainable management
of resources and waste in the area through seeking to ‘provide a well-maintained, resilient
highway network’.
7.4.8 Population
The Draft Strategy for central Hampshire and the New Forest will support the quality of life of
residents and social inclusion through a strong focus on enhancing accessibility to services,
facilities and opportunities, reducing the need to travel and promoting new and enhanced
transport links. Reflecting the area’s rural nature, and associated local issues relating to
community severance and poor accessibility, the Draft Strategy has a close focus on
supporting isolated areas with public and community transport and reducing the need to
travel through the provision of high-speed broadband, and mobile services and facilities.
The Draft Strategy’s promotion of improvements to the quality of the public realm and built
environment, including in rural communities, will support the quality of life of residents. This
will be supported in rural communities by the Draft Strategy seeking to reduce the impact of
HGVs in these areas. Improvements in the quality of neighbourhoods promoted by the Draft
Strategy will also support community cohesion.
By facilitating accessibility, promoting social inclusion and community cohesion, and
supporting the health and wellbeing of residents, the Draft Strategy therefore has the
potential to bring a wide range of benefits for quality of life in central Hampshire and the
New Forest.
7.4.9 Soil
Whilst most of the interventions presented under the Draft Strategy are unlikely to have
significant effects in relation to soil and agricultural land quality, the provision of new areas of
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 65
parking at rail stations may lead to loss of some areas of land. It is unclear however to what
extent these measures will have effects in relation to this environmental information theme as
no detail has been provided as to potential locations or layout. The appraisal of the LTP3
Implementation Plans, and where relevant, the project level EIAs will consider these issues in
more detail.
7.4.10 Water
The interventions proposed under the Draft Strategy are unlikely to have any significant
effects on water quality, flood risk or the other aspects covered under the water
environmental information theme. Effects will largely depend on the use of measures to
regulate surface water runoff such as sustainable drainage systems, interventions to reduce
flood risk and other measures. In this context the interventions’ promotion of a ‘well-
maintained, resilient highway network’ may support water quality, water resources and flood
risk management.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 66
This page is intentionally blank.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 67
8 Assessment of the Interventions put forward through the Draft Strategy for South Hampshire
8.1 Results of the High Level Assessment for the Draft Strategy for South Hampshire
interventions
Appendix H presents the high level assessment matrix for the 70 interventions included in the
Consultation Draft Strategy for South Hampshire.
As the high level assessment highlights, the proposed interventions for south Hampshire are
likely to bring a range of positive environmental effects related to the full range of SEA
Objectives. These include through limiting traffic growth, facilitating modal shift, improving
accessibility to services and facilities, supporting enhancements to the public realm,
promoting social inclusion and encouraging the use of healthier modes of travel.
Whilst the majority of the proposed interventions support the SEA Objectives, eleven have
raised potential negative and uncertain effects against the SEA Objectives. These
interventions are as follows:
Intervention 2: Traffic lights at busiest motorway onslips to improve traffic flow;
Intervention 11: Car Park Guidance Systems (CPGS);
Intervention 12: High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes;
Intervention 26: Park and ride network;
Intervention 27: Improved parking at some railway stations;
Intervention 28: Car park guidance systems;
Intervention 41: Development of a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) network between main
centres and other innovative public transport solutions;
Intervention 67: Highway access solutions to unlock Eastleigh River Side for new
employment uses;
Intervention 68: Enabling developer-led road improvements to facilitate access to
major development areas (e.g. North Whiteley);
Intervention 69: Develop a new motorway junction on M275 serving Tipner,
Portsmouth; and
Intervention 70: Providing a bridge link from Tipner to Horsea Island.
Whilst the high level assessment of the interventions provides a broad indication of some of
the issues surrounding their likely environmental performance, to gain a closer understanding
of these issues, a more in depth assessment has been carried out on these eleven
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 68
interventions utilising Detailed Assessment Matrices (Section 5.4.2). This enables a clearer
understanding of the potential negative or uncertain effects which have been raised by the
high level assessment.
8.2 Results of the Detailed Assessment
A summary of the main assessment outcomes for each of the Draft Strategy interventions
which have highlighted potential uncertain or adverse effects is presented below. These
should be read alongside the Detailed Assessment Matrices in Appendix I where full
assessment findings, including mitigation, are presented.
Interventions 2: Traffic lights at busiest motorway onslips to improve traffic flow
The introduction of traffic lights on the busiest motorway onslips has the potential to lead to
increased traffic flows at key junctions on the M3, M27, M271, M275 and A3(M). Whilst the
measures are likely to reduce motorway congestion, particularly in the short term, the
measures may have longer term implications for the quality of neighbourhoods near motorway
junctions.
Interventions 11 and 28: Car Park Guidance Systems
Car park guidance systems will help optimise the use of parking spaces in south Hampshire
through providing drivers with information relating to car parking space availability. These
may: support the management of congestion through reducing travel time and a
redistribution of traffic; support a limitation of localised air and noise pollution; and improve
road safety through a reduction in driver frustration.
It is uncertain to what extent the measure will support modal shift from the private car
however, as the measure will help improve driver experience, and promote car use. This issue
should be revisited at the Implementation Plan preparation stage.
Intervention 12: High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes
High occupancy vehicle lanes will promote car sharing and public transport use. This has the
potential to reduce the number of vehicles on the road, particularly at peak times. This will
help improve air and noise quality and help limit greenhouse gas emissions over the longer
term. Effects on congestion and associated issues such as air and noise quality and the quality
of the public realm are uncertain however, particularly in the shorter term, as less road space is
likely to be available through the implementation of such measures.
Intervention 26: Park and ride network
The potential effects of park and ride sites in south Hampshire largely depend on the location,
layout and design of new facilities. Potential adverse effects of new sites include impacts on
landscape and townscape, biodiversity assets, and air quality in the vicinity of proposed sites,
and for climate change adaptation.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 69
Park and ride sites are likely to be developed in conjunction with quality bus corridors
between the sites and town and city centres, with significant bus priority improvements
benefiting all bus services. Under this intervention, it is also likely that park and ride buses will
be open to other bus passengers. In this context, the park and ride schemes have the
potential to promote accessibility and social inclusion, and have some influence in reducing
greenhouse gas emissions.
Intervention 27: Improved parking at some railway stations
Improved parking at south Hampshire’s rail stations will promote a measure of modal shift.
The intervention however has the potential to lead to increased traffic flows in the vicinity of
rail stations, including before and after the morning and pm evening travel period. This may
lead to effects on air quality near rail stations, and on routes to and from stations. The
provision of improved parking at out of town railway stations may also lead to changes in
traffic flows, as people travel further to access faster and more frequent rail services.
However, by encouraging modal shift (primarily on longer journeys served by rail), the
intervention may have some benefits for air and noise quality through stimulating some
reduction in vehicle kilometres.
Increased traffic flows near to rail stations also have the potential to have effects on local
townscape and landscape quality, with implications for the quality of neighbourhoods and the
setting of the historic environment. The measures also have the potential to undermine end-
to-end sustainable transport use, although increased patronage of rail services stimulated by
the intervention may lead to rail service enhancements which benefit all users.
The impact of the proposed intervention on many of the SEA Objectives however depends on
the extent to which journeys that were previously undertaken solely by car are instead
undertaken by a mix of car and rail. In this respect, the intervention’s effect on supporting
climate change mitigation is largely dependent on this factor.
Intervention 42: Development of a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) network between main centres
and other innovative public transport solutions
The development of a Bus Rapid Transit network and 'other innovative public transport
solutions', will promote modal shift in south Hampshire, and support a reduction of traffic
growth in the sub-region. This will support an overall improvement in air and noise quality,
and help limit greenhouse gas emissions from transport. Through improving public transport
choice, the measures will also support accessibility and social inclusion.
Whilst the proposed schemes will support a number of beneficial effects in relation to the SEA
objectives, there are potential effects on local biodiversity habitats and species and historic
environment features from new schemes. The measures also have the potential to have
impacts on landscape and townscape quality through impacts on noise and light pollution, and
visual impacts. The effect of the measures on receptors will depend on the route, design and
layout of the schemes, and avoidance and mitigation measures implemented to avoid and
offset effects. It should be noted however that whilst some of the proposed BRT schemes will
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 70
take place on new or underutilised routes (including disused rail routes) most BRT related
schemes will utilise existing highways. This will help limit potential effects.
Intervention 67: Delivering highway access solutions to unlock Eastleigh River Side for
new employment uses
The development of potential access roads will help improve access to a number of existing
and proposed employment areas and development/regeneration sites. By forming links from
Junction 5 of the M27, including through improvements to the A335, new highway solutions
will open up large areas of development potential around and including Southampton
International Airport. In this respect potential access roads are likely to encourage increased
traffic flows in the area, including HGV flows. This will have implications of noise and air
quality along the route (the A335 is already an Air Quality Management Area) and greenhouse
gas emissions. There are also potential impacts on biodiversity in the local area: the area is in
close proximity to the River Itchen, which is an internationally designated Special Area of
Conservation and a nationally designated SSSI. In terms of soil and water quality, the railway
yard present in the area may lead to issues relating to drainage and contamination from the
leaching of contaminants.
Highway access solutions in the area will however promote improvements to noise and air
quality and the quality of the built environment in Eastleigh town centre through supporting a
reduction of traffic at this location. This will help improve neighbourhood quality, support
community cohesion and promote the health and wellbeing of local residents.
Intervention 68: Enabling developer-led road improvements to facilitate access to major
development areas (e.g. North Whiteley)
Developer-led road improvements will stimulate traffic growth by opening up the proposed
housing and employment areas, including at North Whiteley. In this respect road
improvements are likely to encourage increased traffic flows in the area, with implications for
noise and air quality along the proposed routes and over a wider area. This will also have
implications for greenhouse gas emissions.
Potential impacts on biodiversity should be a significant consideration: for example, the North
Whiteley area is in close proximity to the River Hamble, which is an internationally designated
Special Area of Conservation and Special Protection Area and a nationally designated Site of
Special Scientific Interest. Potential route options are also adjacent to the Botley Wood and
Everett's and Mushes Copses SSSI, and are within a Biodiversity Opportunity Area, and have
the potential to affect areas of ancient and semi-natural woodland.
Highway improvements in the area will support access to and from new areas of development
for both car users and public transport users.
Intervention 69: Develop a new motorway junction on M275 serving Tipner, Portsmouth
The development of a new motorway junction on the M275 serving Tipner will help improve
access to the proposed development/regeneration sites in the area. The combination of new
development and the new junction is likely to stimulate increased traffic flows in the area, with
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 71
implications for wider air and noise quality and climate change mitigation. The new junction is
however likely to reduce through traffic on routes such as Twyford Avenue, Stamshaw Road,
Northern Parade, supporting the quality of the public realm and neighbourhood quality at
these locations. It also incorporates public transport priority measures and supports local
walking and cycling networks. This will support accessibility by non-car modes of transport.
In terms of potential effects on local environmental assets, Natural England considers that in
its current form the proposal is unlikely to have a significant effect on the interest features of
the adjacent Portsmouth Harbour SPA. Likewise, effects on the historic environment are likely
to be limited. The main physical changes resulting from the scheme are likely to result from
the construction of the new noise barriers, retaining walls, lighting and additional landscaping.
The current scheme design intends to ensure these are integrated into the scheme to
minimise their impact on existing views.
Intervention 70: Port Solent – Horsea Link Bridge, Portsmouth
A new local bridge linking Horsea Island and Tipner will improve linkages between the two
development areas at these locations. This will help limit traffic kilometres, with benefits for
air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and the quality of the public realm. Through enhancing
public transport and walking and cycling links and improving journey time and reliability, this
will also support access to services facilities and amenities and promote health, wellbeing and
social inclusion. An alignment of the bridge close to the existing motorway bridge will help
limit effects on biodiversity assets and landscape quality.
8.3 Assessment of Cumulative Effects
As required by the SEA Regulations, cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects have been
identified and evaluated during the assessment (Section 5.5).
Whilst a number of these effects have been established and recorded through the assessment
of the Draft Strategy interventions, a number of these effects can only be established through
examining two or more of the proposed interventions together. The table below therefore
summarises the cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects that are likely to come from the
interaction of the interventions as proposed by the Draft Strategy for South Hampshire. These
are presented in relation to the ten SEA Objectives.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 72
Table 8.1: Cumulative, Synergistic and Indirect Effects: Draft Strategy for South Hampshire
SEA Objective Interventions which combine to bring cumulative/ synergistic/ indirect effects
Significance
1. Reduce air pollution and ensure continued improvements to air quality.
Interventions 3-10, 14, 21-25, 29, 30, 33, 36, 37, 39, 41-43, 49, 50 and 52-62 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects for air quality through supporting a reduction in traffic flows in south Hampshire.
Interventions 26, 27, and 67-70 will have cumulative and synergistic effects on air quality through encouraging a growth of traffic in the sub-region.
Significant positive effects in the short, medium and long term.
Significant adverse effects in the medium and long term, depending on the performance of other measures on supporting modal shift.
2. Maintain and improve the water quality of Hampshire’s rivers, coasts and groundwater, and achieve sustainable water resources management.
Interventions 14, 17, 18 and 65 will have cumulative effects on supporting the quality of south Hampshire’s watercourse through promoting sustainable drainage.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
3. Protect and enhance Hampshire’s soils resource.
Interventions 26, 27 and 68 have the potential to lead to cumulative effects on the area of best and most versatile agricultural land in south Hampshire through introducing new transport infrastructure in the area.
Potential adverse effects over the short, medium and long term.
4. Protect, enhance and manage sites, features and areas of archaeological, historical and cultural heritage importance.
Interventions 18, 37, 63, 64 and 65 have the potential to have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on the setting of cultural heritage assets in south Hampshire through improving the quality of the built environment and townscape.
Interventions 3-10, 14, 21-25, 29, 30, 33, 36, 37, 39, 41-43, 49, 50 and 52-62 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on the setting of cultural heritage assets through reducing the effect of traffic on the built and natural environment, including from noise and visual intrusion.
Interventions 26, 27, 41 and 67-70 have the potential to have cumulative effects on archaeological assets and other features and areas of historic environment interest through the development of land for transport infrastructure.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the medium and long term.
Uncertain but potentially adverse effects over the short, medium and long term.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 73
SEA Objective Interventions which combine to bring cumulative/ synergistic/ indirect effects
Significance
5. Protect, enhance and manage the character and appearance of the landscape and townscape, maintaining and strengthening distinctiveness and its special qualities.
Interventions 3-10, 14, 21-25, 29, 30, 33, 36, 37, 39, 41-43, 49, 50 and 52-62 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on landscape and townscape quality through reducing the effect of traffic on the built and natural environment, including from noise and visual intrusion.
Interventions 18, 37, 63, 64 and 65 have the potential to have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on landscape and townscape quality in south Hampshire through improving the quality of the built environment and townscape.
Interventions 26, 27, 41 and 67-70 have the potential to have cumulative and synergistic effects on landscape and townscape quality interest through the development of new transport infrastructure.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term
Uncertain but potentially adverse effects over the short, medium and long term.
6. Protect, enhance and manage biodiversity and geodiversity.
Interventions 26, 27, 41 and 67-70 have the potential to have cumulative and synergistic effects on species and habitats through the development of new transport infrastructure.
Interventions 26, 27, and 67-70 have the potential to have cumulative and synergistic effects on biodiversity through impacts on air quality through encouraging a growth of traffic in the sub-region.
Uncertain but potentially adverse effects over the short, medium and long term.
Uncertain but potentially adverse effects over the short, medium and long term.
7. Minimise Hampshire’s contribution to climate change.
Interventions 3-10, 14, 21-25, 29, 30, 33, 36, 37, 39, 41-43, 49, 50 and 52-62 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on limiting greenhouse gas emissions from transport through limiting traffic flows.
Interventions 2, 3, 5, 7, 8 and 11 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on limiting greenhouse gas emissions from transport through supporting more efficient traffic flows in south Hampshire.
Interventions 16, 20, 31 will support a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by encouraging energy and resource efficiency in the functioning of transport infrastructure.
Interventions 26, 27, and 67-70 have the potential to have cumulative and synergistic effects on increasing greenhouse gas emissions in north Hampshire through encouraging car-based travel.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
Positive effects over the short and medium term.
Positive effects over the short and medium term.
Significant adverse effects over the medium and long term.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 74
SEA Objective Interventions which combine to bring cumulative/ synergistic/ indirect effects
Significance
8. Plan for the anticipated levels of climate change.
Interventions 17, 18 and 65 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on helping south Hampshire adapt to the potential effects of climate change.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
9. Reduce poverty and social exclusion and close the gap between the most deprived areas in Hampshire and the rest of the county.
Interventions 7, 9, 12, 22, 26, 29, 32, 33, 34, 36-50, 52-62, 64, 67-70 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on encouraging walking, cycling and the use of public transport. This will support accessibility for all.
Interventions 18, 37, 63, 64 and 65 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on improving the quality of neighbourhoods through supporting enhancements to the quality of the public realm and the built environment.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the short, medium and long term.
10. Safeguard and improve community health, safety and well being.
Interventions 7, 9, 12, 22, 26, 29, 32, 33, 34, 36-50, 52-62, 64, 67-70 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on improving health and wellbeing through improving accessibility to leisure and recreational activities.
Interventions 29, 32, 33, 34-40, 44, 50, 55, 58, 60, 64, 65 and 70 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on improving health and wellbeing through promoting healthier modes of travel including walking and cycling.
Interventions 18, 37, 63, 64 and 65 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on improving health and wellbeing through supporting improvements to the quality of the public realm and local neighbourhoods.
Interventions 16, 18, 32-35, 37, 38, 64 and 65 will have cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects on improving road safety in south Hampshire.
Significant positive effects over the medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the medium and long term.
Significant positive effects over the medium and long term.
In summary, this appraisal exercise has shown that the interaction of the interventions
proposed for the south Hampshire area will bring a wide range of positive cumulative,
synergistic and indirect effects in relation to the SEA Objectives. A number of negative effects
have however been highlighted by the assessment, relating to cumulative and synergistic
effects of new transport infrastructure on landscape and townscape, biodiversity assets and
the historic environment. The proposed transport infrastructure schemes also have the
potential to encourage cumulative and synergistic increases in traffic, with implications for
greenhouse gas emissions and air quality.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 75
8.4 Summary of the assessment of the Draft Strategy for South Hampshire
This section summarises the results of the assessment of the interventions included in the
Draft Strategy for South Hampshire. This summary is presented by the environmental
information themes discussed in Section 1.617.
8.4.1 Air Quality
Air quality in south Hampshire are closely related to NO2 emissions from transport. 26 Air
Quality Management Areas exist in the area, each of which have been designated due to
nitrogen dioxide emissions from transport.
In general, the interventions proposed for south Hampshire will support improvements
towards meeting air quality objectives in the area. Through the Draft Strategy’s focus on
promoting a reduction in congestion, encouraging modal shift, reducing the need to travel,
and promoting accessibility by non car modes, the Draft Strategy interventions have the
potential to support continued air quality improvements in south Hampshire.
A number of the transport infrastructure schemes and measures have the potential to lead to
localised air quality issues through stimulating an increase in traffic in certain locations. These
interventions include park and ride, potential road schemes, and proposals to increase parking
at rail stations. It should also be noted however that a number of these schemes will support
other air quality improvements locally; for example the delivery of highway solutions to unlock
Eastleigh River Side for new employment uses has the potential to support air quality in
Eastleigh town centre, and the development of a new motorway junction on M275 serving
Tipner will limit impacts of increased traffic from new development areas on locations such as
Twyford Avenue, Stamshaw Road and Northern Parade in Tipner. Park and ride will also
support air quality improvements in town and city centres.
For the transport infrastructure schemes and measures proposed through the Draft Strategy
for South Hampshire, further work will be required to examine effects on air quality and seek
to mitigate effects either through SEA of the Implementation Plans of the three respective
Local Transport Authorities or at the relevant project level Environmental Impact Assessments.
8.4.2 Biodiversity and Geodiversity
The area covered by the Draft Strategy for South Hampshire supports a wide range of
important habitats and species, as reflected by the presence of a significant number of
internationally and nationally designated nature conservation sites and BAP Priority Habitats
and Species.
Biodiversity assets in south Hampshire will benefit from the proposed interventions through
supporting a limitation of traffic growth and supporting improvements to air quality. The
17 The summary of the appraisal has not included the Accessibility and Transportation environmental information theme as this theme is the focus of the LTP3.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 76
integrity of some biodiversity habitats are also likely to benefit from the Draft Strategy’s focus
on improvements to road drainage, and associated benefits for water quality.
The proposed transport infrastructure improvements, including the potential road schemes,
park and ride measures and the development of Bus Rapid Transit (where it takes place on
new routes) has the potential to impact on biodiversity through landtake, habitat loss and
fragmentation and disturbance. Effects on biodiversity will depend on the mitigation and
avoidance measures proposed to accompany the schemes. Further work will be required to
examine and mitigate effects on biodiversity assets either through SEA of the Implementation
Plans of the three respective Local Transport Authorities or at the relevant project level
Environmental Impact Assessments.
The HRA being carried out alongside the LTP3 has examined potential effects on European
designated nature conservation sites in more detail.
8.4.3 Climate Change
The Draft Strategy will support climate change mitigation. Through promoting a reduction in
congestion, supporting modal shift from the private car, facilitating a reduction in the need to
travel, and helping to limit traffic flows the interventions will support climate change
mitigation by limiting greenhouse gas emissions from transport.
The Draft Strategy will also support the expansion of electric vehicles in the sub-region
through encouraging new charging points and alternative fuel vehicles. It should be noted
however that the provision of electric charging points will only support a significant reduction
in greenhouse gas emissions if electricity provided is from renewable sources.
Climate change in south Hampshire has the potential to lead to a range of impacts. In
particular, parts of the sub-region have a high susceptibility from an increased risk of flooding
(including fluvial, coastal and surface water flooding). Adapting to the effect of climate
change in the area will involve forward planning which considers future trends in the climate,
including more extreme weather events, increased winter rainfall and increased occurrences of
summer drought. Effects on transport infrastructure from climate change include flooding of
roads and railways, damage from landslips or erosion, and damage to road surfaces and rail
from high temperatures.
In this context, the proposed interventions for south Hampshire will support climate change
adaptation. This include through the interventions promoting improvements to highway
drainage, the delivery of maintenance programmes, and through seeking to deliver
improvements that follow the design principles set out in current design guidance and
informed by examples of best practice.
8.4.4 Health
South Hampshire experiences significant health inequalities between the most and least
deprived areas of the sub-region.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 77
Health and wellbeing in south Hampshire will be supported by the Draft Strategy’s
encouragement of healthier modes of travel such as walking and cycling. This includes
through the Draft Strategy’s promotion of: improved and new pedestrian and cycle links
through the ‘Green Grid’; enhanced pedestrian and cyclist crossing points; improvements in
cycle parking and transport; cycle hire schemes; improved integration with other transport
modes; and improvements in the quality of the public realm. Health and wellbeing will also be
supported by the Draft Strategy’s support for an improvement of accessibility to services,
facilities and amenities by non-car modes.
Neighbourhoods adversely affected by traffic issues and a poor quality public realm have
negative effects on residents’ health and wellbeing. The health and wellbeing of local
residents will therefore be promoted by the Draft Strategy’s support for improvements to the
built environment and public realm, including through the following of high quality design
principles incorporating best practice, the removal of signage clutter, and improvements in
streetscapes. This will be supported by the Draft Strategy’s promotion of modal shift and a
reduction of traffic flows, which will lead to further improvements to the quality of local
neighbourhoods. Localised air and noise quality improvements supported by the
interventions will also support health and wellbeing.
The Draft Strategy also has a strong focus on improving road safety through speed and traffic
management measures, the introduction of Safer Routes to Schools schemes, road safety
training and improvements in walking and cycling networks.
In this context the Draft Strategy for South Hampshire will bring a range of benefits for health
and wellbeing.
8.4.5 Historic Environment
The historic environment of south Hampshire is defined by individual heritage assets, both
designated and non-designated, and the setting of these assets through the areas built
environment and townscape and landscape.
The sub-region’s historic environment extends beyond individual sites and features, and
townscape and landscape quality and character has a close link to the historic environment.
The Draft Strategy interventions will support the protection and enhancement of the historic
environment. The setting of heritage features will be promoted through the following of high
quality design principles incorporating best practice, the removal of signage clutter, and
improvements in streetscapes. The integrity of the historic environment will further be
supported by the Draft Strategy’s promotion of modal shift and a reduction of traffic flows.
Localised air and noise quality improvements supported by the interventions will also support
the fabric and setting of the historic environment.
The proposed transport infrastructure improvements, including the potential road schemes,
park and ride measures and the development of Bus Rapid Transit (where it takes place on
new routes) however have the potential to have impacts on cultural heritage assets and their
settings. Effects on the historic environment from these interventions will depend on design,
layout and scale of the schemes, and mitigation and avoidance measures proposed to
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 78
accompany the schemes. Further work will be required to examine and mitigate effects on
the historic environment either through SEA of the Implementation Plans of the three
respective Local Transport Authorities or at the relevant project level Environmental Impact
Assessments.
8.4.6 Landscape
Transport infrastructure and traffic flows have a strong influence on townscape and landscape
character and quality, and effects on landscape quality can occur from poor design of
transport infrastructure, including insensitively designed layouts, inappropriate signage or
excessive clutter. In this context the Draft Strategy’s focus on reducing signage ‘clutter’ and
enhancing streetscape quality will help reduce the effects on landscape quality from transport.
This will be supported by the Draft Strategy’s promotion of high quality design principles
incorporating best practice.
Townscape and landscape quality will further be supported by the Draft Strategy’s promotion
of modal shift and a reduction of traffic flows. In this context localised air and noise quality
improvements supported by the interventions and a reduction of visual impacts will support
the quality of the public realm and built environment.
The proposed transport infrastructure improvements, including the potential road schemes,
park and ride measures and the development of Bus Rapid Transit (where it takes place on
new routes) has the potential to affect townscape and landscape quality. The significance of
the effect will depend on design, layout and scale of the schemes, and mitigation and
avoidance measures proposed. Further work will be required to examine and mitigate effects
on townscape and landscape quality and character either through SEA of the Implementation
Plans of the three respective Local Transport Authorities or at the relevant project level
Environmental Impact Assessments.
8.4.7 Material Assets
Materials assets address resource and waste issues, the use of previously developed land and
energy provision. In this context, the interventions will support the sustainable management
of resources and waste in the area through promoting Transport Asset Management Plans,
improving the maintenance and energy efficiency of street lighting and the delivery of
maintenance programmes.
8.4.8 Population
The Draft Strategy for South Hampshire will support the quality of life of residents and social
inclusion through a strong focus on enhancing accessibility to services, facilities and
opportunities, promoting new and enhanced transport links, and reducing the need to travel.
Through promoting the use of high quality design principles incorporating best practice in
new transport infrastructure, facilitating the removal of signage clutter, and supporting
improvements in streetscapes, the Draft Strategy will improve neighbourhood quality The
quality of local neighbourhoods will further be supported by the Draft Strategy’s promotion of
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 79
modal shift and a reduction of traffic flows. In this context localised air and noise quality
improvements supported by the interventions will promote residents’ quality of life.
Residents’ quality of life will also be supported by the Draft Strategy’s encouragement of
healthier modes of travel such as walking and cycling. This includes through the interventions’
promotion of: improved and new pedestrian and cycle links through the ‘Green Grid’;
enhanced pedestrian and cyclist crossing points; improvements in cycle parking and transport;
cycle hire schemes; improved integration with other transport modes; and improvements in
the quality of the public realm.
By improving accessibility, promoting social inclusion and community cohesion, and
supporting the health and wellbeing of residents, the Draft Strategy therefore has the
potential to bring a wide range of benefits for quality of life in south Hampshire.
8.4.9 Soil
The proposed transport infrastructure improvements, including the potential road schemes,
park and ride measures and the development of Bus Rapid Transit (where it takes place on
new routes) has the potential to lead to effects on soil quality and quantity. Significance of
effect will depend on design, layout and scale of the schemes, and mitigation and avoidance
measures proposed to accompany the schemes. Most of the interventions are however
unlikely to lead to loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land.
The appraisal of the LTP3 Implementation Plans, and where relevant, the project level EIAs will
consider issues related to soil in more detail.
8.4.10 Water
The interventions proposed by the Draft Strategy seek to support improvements to highway
drainage. This will promote the management of flood risk and help protect water quality in
south Hampshire. This will be further supported by the delivery of maintenance programmes.
The success of these interventions will depend on the types of measures introduced under
these proposals.
Whilst the proposed transport infrastructure improvements, including the potential road
schemes, park and ride measures and the development of Bus Rapid Transit (where it takes
place on new routes) have the potential to lead to effects on water quality and flood risk, it is
likely that sustainable drainage systems and other associated water management measures
will be incorporated in scheme design. In this respect the new transport infrastructure
schemes are unlikely to have any significant effects on water quality, flood risk or the other
aspects covered under the water environmental information theme.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 80
This page is intentionally blank.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 81
9 Recommendations for the next stages of development for the LTP3
9.1 Recommendations
This chapter provides recommendations for taking forward the identified environmental issues
which were raised through the SEA process. Taking forward these recommendations will
enable subsequent versions of the LTP3 to place further added value on its environmental
performance.
The recommendations include as follows:
The LTP3 should outline how it intends to address biodiversity considerations in
Hampshire. This includes through acknowledging the presence of internationally and
nationally designated sites, Priority Habitats and Species and Biodiversity
Opportunity Areas in the county, and outlining recommended approaches for
securing biodiversity protection and enhancement.
Electric charging points should source electricity from renewable sources to support climate change mitigation.
The LTP3 should discuss how cultural heritage assets and their settings will be
supported through the implementation of the plan. This should include through
utilising Historic Landscape Characterisation work carried out in Hampshire, and
seeking the views of stakeholders with an interest in the historic environment before
development commences.
New Park and Ride schemes, where taken forward by the LTP3, should have a focus
on improving accessibility for non car users. This can include through improving
local bus services, promoting enhanced walking and cycling links and supporting
improvements to the public realm on routes. Full consideration should be given to
potential localised environmental effects of new Park and Ride provision, with
strategic alternatives considered for location and layout.
Improved parking provision at rail stations should be accompanied by measures to
improve end-to-end sustainable transport use and the appropriate pricing of car
parking. The use of well designed, decked, multi-level parking can reduce landtake
from new parking on greenfield land and areas of higher quality agricultural land.
The LTP3 should ensure that the benefits of capacity improvements on Hampshire's
road network are 'locked in' through relevant localised and sub-regional measures to
help restrain traffic growth, including through interventions to promote the use of
non-car modes of transport.
The reuse and recycling of waste and the use of recycled materials and should be
maximised in transport works wherever possible.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 82
Car parking guidance systems should be accompanied by appropriate parking
policies relating to pricing and availability, and measures to support modal shift from
the private car.
The location and design of High Occupancy Vehicle lanes should seek to limit
impacts on historic environment assets and their settings, and promote the use of
sustainable modes of transport through the incorporation of cycle routes and public
transport priority. They should also seek to support road safety for pedestrians and
cyclists.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 83
10 Monitoring
10.1 Monitoring Proposals
The SEA Directive states that ‘member states shall monitor the significant environmental
effects of the implementation of plans and programmes…..in order, inter alia, to identify at an
early stage unforeseen adverse effects, and to be able to undertake appropriate remedial
action’ (Article 10.1). In addition, the Environmental Report should provide information on a
‘description of the measures envisaged concerning monitoring’ (Annex I (i)).
The monitoring requirements typically associated with the SEA process are recognised as
placing heavy demands on authorities with SEA responsibilities. For this reason, the proposed
monitoring framework should focus on those aspects of the environment that are likely to be
negatively impacted upon, where the impact is uncertain or where particular opportunities for
improvement might arise.
Appendix J provides preliminary proposals for a monitoring programme for measuring the
Area Strategy’s implementation in relation to the SEA Objectives against which the SEA
process has identified potential significant effects, and where significant opportunities for an
improvement in sustainability performance may arise (see Chapters 6 to 8 and Appendices F
to I).
Monitoring is particularly useful in answering the following questions:
Were the assessment’s predictions of environmental effects accurate?
Is the LTP3 contributing to the achievement of desired sustainability objectives?
Are mitigation measures performing as well as expected?
Are there any unforeseen adverse effects? Are these within acceptable limits, or is
remedial action required?
The purpose of monitoring is to measure the environmental effects of a plan, as well as to
measure success against the plan’s objectives. It is therefore beneficial if the monitoring
strategy builds on monitoring systems which are already in place. To this end, many of the
indicators of progress chosen for the SEA require data that is already being routinely collected
at a local levels by HCC and its partner organisations. It should also be noted that monitoring
can provide useful information for future plans and programmes.
10.2 Links with the LTP3 Annual Progress Report
The SEA guidance suggests that SEA monitoring and reporting activities can be integrated
into the regular planning cycle. As part of the monitoring process for their LTP3, HCC will be
required to prepare an Annual Progress Report (APR). It is anticipated that elements of the
SEA monitoring programme for the LTP3 will be incorporated into this process.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 84
The monitoring programme is, at this stage, preliminary and may evolve over time based on
the results of consultation and the identification of additional data sources (as in some cases
information will be provided by outside bodies). A more detailed monitoring programme will
be included in the Implementation Plans for the LTP3. The monitoring of individual
schemes/proposals should also be addressed at project level.
Consultees are invited to suggest any further indicators, or propose amendments to this
monitoring programme.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 85
11 Next Steps
11.1 Consultation on the Draft Strategies
This Environmental Report has been published alongside and at the same time as the
Consultation Draft Strategies for North Hampshire, Central Hampshire and the New Forest
and South Hampshire. Consultation will take place for a period of twelve weeks.
Following the consultation period, comments will be reviewed and analysed. The final LTP3
will then be developed in the period to July 2011. Any changes arising to the LTP3 following
consultation will need to be assessed as part of the SEA process.
SEA Regulations 16.3c)(iii) and 16.4 require that a ‘statement’ be made available to
accompany the plan, as soon as possible after the adoption of the plan or programme. The
purpose of the SEA Statement is to outline how the SEA process has influenced and informed
the LTP3 development process and demonstrate how consultation on the SEA has been taken
into account.
As the regulations outline, the statement should contain the following information:
The reasons for choosing the preferred strategy for the LTP3 as adopted in the light
of other reasonable alternatives dealt with;
How environmental considerations have been integrated into the LTP3;
How consultation responses have been taken into account; and
Measures that are to be taken to monitor the significant environmental effects of the
LTP3.
To meet these requirements, a Post Adoption Statement will be published with the adopted
version of the LTP3.
11.2 Commenting on the Environmental Report
The Draft Strategies for the LTP3 are available to download at:
http://www3.hants.gov.uk/ltp-consultation
This Environmental Report and accompanying appendices can be accessed at:
http://www.ue-a.co.uk/ltp3.asp
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 86
Alternatively, hard copies can be viewed at:
Environment Department Hampshire County Council The Castle Winchester SO23 8UD
The SEA team would welcome any comments on the SEA process carried out to date.
Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Hampshire LTP3: Environmental Report July 2010
UE-0072_Hampshire ER_3_070710NCB
UE Associates Ltd © 2010 Page 87
This page is intentionally blank.