« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Environmental Assessment of Development Plans: Interim Planning Advice
Appendix F
Example of an assessment of a plan's proposals
South East Wedge Joint Development Study 1999
F.1 This appendix is particularly relevant to stage 9 ( see paragraphs 111 - 124).
F.2 A full sustainability assessment was undertaken, on behalf of the Edinburgh City and Midlothian Councils, of the Draft Proposals for the Development of the "South East Wedge", in 1999. The South East Wedge Joint Development Study was an important part of the planning process in the preparation of Local Plans in the City of Edinburgh and Midlothian. The Study translated the strategic planning proposals for the area contained in the Lothian Structure Plan into a more detailed and coordinated framework of land allocations and development principles which would be included in Local Plans prepared separately by each of the two planning authorities. The Study ensured that the strategic vision of the Structure Plan for the extension of Edinburgh and the redevelopment of the Craigmillar Estate was co-ordinated at Local Plan level.
F.3 Consequently, although not a development plan itself, the Joint Development Study (JDS) had detailed land allocations and site specific proposals within an overall locational strategy based on a series of guiding principles (similar to policies). These were all supported by more detailed development principles and proposals under a range of topic headings eg, housing, schools and infrastructure. It therefore makes a good case study for the assessment of proposals in development plans because it shows how environmental objectives and criteria can be adapted to fit the key issues relevant to particular plan proposals and how they can be applied at both strategic and detailed levels. It also shows how a plan that is not a formal development plan but an essential part of a suite of plans intended to influence or implement the development plan should be subject to environmental assessment.
F.4 Eleven sustainability aims were drawn up and from these 22 sustainability objectives and criteria (two per aim) were established to test the JDS proposals. Five of the aims and 10 of the objectives/criteria related primarily to socio-economic issues and these are not reproduced in the matrix below, although they were in the original assessment matrix and are reproduced in the example below. Furthermore, in this example, in order to save space, not all elements of the proposals tested are shown in the matrix.
F.5 The following Table F.1 shows how the environmental criteria were drawn from the aims and objectives.
Table F.1
Environmental sustainability aims, objectives and criteria for the assessment of the South East Wedge Joint Development Study |
Sustainability Aims | Sustainability Objectives | Sustainability Criteria |
1. Environmental protection | 1.A To protect water courses and their catchment areas 1.B To protect ground water resources | Is the proposal likely significantly to help or to hinder the protection of a] water courses and their catchment areas or b] ground water resources |
2. Environmental capacity precautionary principle. | 2.A To contain development within the capacity of the landscape resource. 2.B To protect undeveloped ridge lines | Is the proposal likely significantly to help or to hinder a] containing development within the capacity of the landscape or b] the protection of ridge lines? |
3. Environmental historical cultural assets/stock. | 3.A To protect potential archaeological resources including industrial archaeology. 3.B To protect historic buildings and their settings | Is the proposal likely significantly to help or to hinder the protection of a] potential archaeological resources including industrial archaeology or b] historic buildings and their settings? |
4. Renewable non renewable resources | 4.A To protect prime agricultural land. 4.B To create energy efficient development layouts utilising aspect, reducing elevation and exposure | Is the proposal likely significantly to help or to hinder a] the protection of prime agricultural land or b] energy efficient development layouts utilising aspect, reducing elevation and exposure? |
5. Environmental equity. | 5.A To enhance the local path network and accessibility to countryside of green belt. 5.B To enhance understanding of the City, its surroundings, views, geology, and history | Is the proposal likely significantly to help or to hinder a] enhancement of the local path network and accessibility to countryside of green belt b] enhancement of understanding of the City, its surroundings, local views, geology, and history? |
11. Quality of life | 11.A To provide high quality design in the built environment. 11.B To improve opportunity for local people to contribute art accessible and relevant to their community. | Is the proposal likely significantly to help or to hinder a] high quality design in the built environment or b] opportunity for local people to contribute art accessible and relevant to their community? |
Environmental assessment of key proposals of the locational strategy for the South East Wedge |
Environmental Sustainability Criteria | Ec Dev Monkton-hall Colliery | Ec Dev Newcraighall | Ec Dev Scotway | Ec Dev Whitehill Mains | Public Transport Corridor | Path network |
1. Environmental protection | O | ? | O | O | O | O |
2. Environmental capacity | 
| X | O | X | O | O |
3. Environmental etc stock | O | ? | O | ? | ? | O |
4. [Non] Renewable resources | 
| O | O | X | O | O |
5. Environmental equity | O | O | O | O | O | 
|
11. Quality of Life | O | O | O | O | O | 
|
Comments | Benefits of redeveloping brownfield/derelict land and possible remediation of contamination | Landscape Character Assessment indicated this area required substantial mitigation, located in a "most visually sensitive area" Adjacent to a water course | Compatible with sustainability criteria | Prime Agricultural Land 3.1 Landscape Character Assessment indicated this area required substantial mitigation, located in a "most visually sensitive area" | Highly compatible with sustainability criteria | Highly compatible with sustainability criteria |
Likelihood of significant beneficial effect(s)
O Criterion not relevant, or likelihood of no significant or only neutral effect(s)
X Likelihood of significant adverse effect(s), and/or likelihood of policy divergence or potential conflict with sustainability aims and objectives, or with other policies or principles in the plan which are consistent with sustainable development principles and aims.
? Uncertain or unpredictable effect(s) and/or some potential for policy divergence or potential conflict with sustainability aims and objectives. High reliance on cross compliance in the application of the principle or proposal.
« Previous | Contents | Next »