Draft Habitat Regulations Appraisal

Clackmannanshire Council proposed Local Development Plan Committee Draft August 2013 Habitat Regulations Appraisal Incorporating Appropriate
Assessment Draft October 2013 (v2.1)
Prepared by: Sue Bell Ecology 7 Bangholm Park Edinburgh EH5 3BA
For: Clackmannanshire Council Kilncraigs Greenside Street Alloa FK10 1EB
Clackmannanshire Council Proposed LDP HRA Record & Appropriate Assessment- Committee Draft
Document Control Record Date Version Version Title Number

June 2013 V1.1 Clackmannanshire Council proposed Local Development Plan Committee Draft March May 2013. Habitats Regulations Appraisal incorporating appropriate assessment. Draft June 2013 Clackmannanshire Council proposed Local Development Plan Council Draft August 2013. Habitats Regulations Appraisal incorporating appropriate assessment. Draft August 2013
Distribution
Details
1) Clackmannanshire First draft of HRA Council (G. Finlay) record & AA, which 2) SNH accompanied Committee draft of LDP.
August 2013
V1.2
October 2013 V2.1
1) Clackmannanshire Revised draft of HRA Council record & AA, which takes account of: a) minor changes to spatial allocations arising from initial committee reviews; b) comments received from SNH in response to the screening and V1 reports in relation to (i) mitigation wording for some spatial allocations; (ii) terminology relating to HRA process. Clackmannanshire Council 1) Clackmannanshire Revised draft of HRA proposed Local Development Council record & AA, which Plan takes account of: Committee Draft August 2013 a) all points noted Habitat Regulations Appraisal above; Incorporating Appropriate b) addition of new site Assessment allocations; Draft September 2013 c) comments received (v2.1) from SNH in response to the screening and v1 reports not included in previous version d) further comments from SNH received during meetings and emails August October 2013
Contents
Contents ............................................................................................................... ii 1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Habitats Regulations Appraisal ........................................................................ 1 1.2 The Habitats Regulations Appraisal (HRA) process and Guidance .............................. 1 1.2.1 Terminology ............................................................................................ 1 1.2.2 Guidance ................................................................................................ 2 1.2.3 Structure of the assessment process .............................................................. 2 1.2.4 Reporting and consultation process ................................................................ 2 1.2.5 Limitations of the assessment ...................................................................... 3 1.3 European sites ............................................................................................ 3 1.3.1 Firth of Forth SPA ..................................................................................... 3 1.3.2 River Teith SAC ........................................................................................ 5 1.4 1.5 2 Other projects and plans that may act in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP 6 Structure of document .................................................................................. 6
Conclusions of screening exercise ......................................................................... 7 2.1 2.2 2.3 Need for HRA and AA .................................................................................... 7 European sites ............................................................................................ 7 Screening process ........................................................................................ 7
2.4 Criteria for the identification of LSE ................................................................ 7 2.4.1 Firth of Forth SPA ..................................................................................... 7 2.4.2 River Teith SAC ........................................................................................ 9 2.5 Mitigation wording ..................................................................................... 9 2.6 Conclusions of screening exercise .................................................................... 10 2.6.1 Firth of Forth SPA .................................................................................... 10 2.6.2 River Teith SAC ....................................................................................... 17 3 Appropriate assessment of the likely significant effects of Clackmannanshire LDP on the Firth of Forth SPA ................................................................................................. 18 3.1 Qualifying interests .................................................................................... 18 3.1.1 Data sources .......................................................................................... 18 3.1.2 Numbers of species recorded from Clackmannanshire ........................................ 20 3.1.3 Pink-footed goose .................................................................................... 21 3.1.4 Shelduck ............................................................................................... 21 3.1.5 Wigeon ................................................................................................. 21 3.1.6 Mallard ................................................................................................. 21 3.1.7 Goldeneye ............................................................................................. 22 3.1.8 Red-breasted Merganser ............................................................................ 22 3.1.9 Cormorant ............................................................................................. 22 3.1.10 Oystercatcher ...................................................................................... 22 3.1.11 Ringed plover ...................................................................................... 22 3.1.12 Grey plover ......................................................................................... 22 3.1.13 Golden plover ...................................................................................... 23 3.1.14 Lapwing ............................................................................................. 23 3.1.15 Knot ................................................................................................. 23 3.1.16 Dunlin ............................................................................................... 23 3.1.17 Bar-tailed Godwit ................................................................................. 23 3.1.18 Curlew............................................................................................... 23 3.1.19 Redshank ........................................................................................... 24
ii
3.2 Proposals identified as having likely significant effects ........................................ 27 3.2.1 M02 The Shore, Alloa ................................................................................ 27 3.2.2 B02 Alloa West Business Park (Pavilions)......................................................... 29 3.2.3 B12 Garvel Farm, Blackgrange ..................................................................... 33 3.2.4 B13 Midtown business proposal, Alloa ............................................................ 37 3.2.5 B14 Kennetpans....................................................................................... 40 3.3 Proposals within the LDP which may act in combination (cumulatively) to have likely significant effects on site integrity ........................................................................... 41 3.3.1 Housing developments within 5 km of the coast that could contribute to increased recreational use of the coast ............................................................................... 41 3.3.2 Proposals on sites that have the potential to provide high tide roosting/feeding sites for pink-footed goose ............................................................................................. 44 3.3.3 Development proposals on sites that have the potential to provide high tide roosting/feeding sites for wader species that are a qualifying interest feature of the SPA ..... 46 3.4 Proposals within the Clackmannanshire LDP that may act in combination with other plans, projects and proposals to have likely significant effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA ..... 47 3.4.1 In combination effects with other LDPs loss of/disturbance to pink-footed goose at inland roost sites .............................................................................................. 47 3.4.2 In combination effects with other LDPs loss of habitat/disturbance to qualifying wader species at inland roost sites ........................................................................ 48 3.4.3 In combination effects with other LDPs increased recreational disturbance at the coast 49 3.4.4 In combination effects with proposals for Co ckenzie Power station....................... 49 3.4.5 In combination effects with proposals for Rosyth International Container ............. 50 3.4.6 In combination effects in relation to proposals for Grangemouth biomass Plant ...... 51 4 Appropriate Assessment of effects of Clackmannanshire LDP on the River Teith SAC ...... 51 4.1 Qualifying interests .................................................................................... 51 4.1.1 Data sources .......................................................................................... 51 4.1.2 Sea lamprey ........................................................................................... 51 4.1.3 River lamprey ......................................................................................... 52 4.1.4 Atlantic salmon ....................................................................................... 52 4.1.5 Areas used ............................................................................................. 52 4.2 Proposals which are likely to have an effect on their own ..................................... 52 4.2.1 M02 The Shore, Alloa ................................................................................ 52 4.2.2 B02 Alloa West Business Park ...................................................................... 54 4.2.3 B13 Midtown .......................................................................................... 55 4.3 Proposals within the LDP which may have in combination (cumulative) effects ........... 56 4.3.1 Housing & business developments close to the coastline ..................................... 56 4.4 Proposals that may have in combination effects with other plans, projects and proposals 58 4.4.1 In combination effects in relation to proposals for Grangemouth biomass Plant ...... 58 Conclusions ................................................................................................... 58 References .................................................................................................... 58
5 6
Appendix Ai: Qualifying Interests of Firth of Forth SPA ................................................. 63 Appendix Aii: Qualifying Interests of River Teith SAC .................................................... 64 Appendix B: Proposals which were amended during the screening exercise to avoid significant effects upon European sites .................................................................................... 65 Appendix C: Preliminary Screening of proposals for effects (alone) on the Firth of Forth SPA and River Teith SAC ............................................................................................... 70
iii
Appendix D: Other developments or projects considered for likely significant effects upon European sites in combination with the Clackmannanshire proposed LDP. ........................ 101 a) Firth of Forth SPA .......................................................................................... 101 b) River Teith SAC.............................................................................................. 114
iv
1 Introduction
This document provides a record of the Habitats Regulations Appraisal of the Clackmannanshire Council Proposed Local Development Plan (LDP) including appropriate assessment. This is a draft document to accompany the Committee draft of the LDP; it will be updated as new information becomes available.
1.1 Habitats Regulations Appraisal
Under the terms of the Habitats Directive (Article 6 (3)), any plan or project, which is not connected to the management of a European Site, but is likely to have a significant effect on that site, either on its own or in combination with other projects and plans, must be subject to an appropriate assessment of its implications for that site in respect of the sites conservation objectives. These requirements are implemented in Scotland through the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended). European sites include Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) and Special Protection Areas (SPA). The Clackmannanshire Local Development Plan is a land use plan, not connected to the management of a European Site, and hence is subject to Habitats Regulations Appraisal.
1.2 The Habitats Regulations Appraisal (HRA) process and Guidance
1.2.1 Terminology In the UK, the process of considering whether a plan will have an effect on a European site and determining the implications of that plan for the sites conservation objectives is known as Habitats Regulations Appraisal (HRA). The term appropriate assessment (AA) describes one stage of this process: the determination of effects of the plan/project upon the integrity of the European site and is only conducted on those aspects of a plan (or project) which are considered likely to have a significant effect alone, or in combination. HRA requires the identification of likely significant effects upon the qualifying interests of a European site. The precautionary principle is applied to the identification of the likelihood and significance of effects. The European Court of justice has ruled that likely effects are those consequences which cannot be ruled out on the basis of objective information1. The Court of Session has ruled that the competent authority should identify the potential risks to European sites, as far as they may be reasonably foreseeable, in light of such information as can reasonably be obtained.2 Aspects of a plan or project, which are identified as having Likely Significant Effects, are assessed in terms of whether they could undermine the integrity of the European Site. The integrity of a site is defined as the coherence of its ecological structure and function, across its whole area, that enables it to sustain the habitat, complex of habitats and/or the levels of populations of the species for which it was classified.3 This is interpreted as whether the qualifying features are able to meet their conservation objectives over the full area of the European site. Where a number of European sites are within the influence of a plan, which have different qualifying interest features, it is likely that the effect of proposals will vary between the sites.
1 2
Paragraph 45 European Court of Justice case C-127/02 dated 7th September 2004 WWF-UK Ltd and RSPB Scotland v Secretary of State for Scotland et al, 1999 3 European Communities, 2000
1.2.2 Guidance Guidance on the application of HRA to plans in Scotland has recently been published by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH)4. The Scottish Government has also produced advice for plan-making bodies in Scotland5. These Guidance documents have been used as the basis for the approach used in the HRA of the Clackmannanshire proposed LDP. Judicial rulings also provide clarity on the interpretation of particular terms within the Habitats Directive and the scale of the assessment process. 1.2.3 Structure of the assessment process The SNH approach divides HRA into 13 stages, which are described in Figure 2 of SNHs Guidance. This document primarily covers stages 8 10 of that process: Stage 8 Undertake an appropriate assessment in view of conservation objectives. Stage 9 Apply mitigation measures until there is no adverse effect on site integrity. Stage 10 Prepare a draft record of the HRA. It also summarises the findings of Stages 1 7: Stage 1 Decide whether plan is subject to HRA. Stage 2 If plan is subject to appraisal, identify European sites that should be considered in the appraisal. Stage 3 Gather information about the European sites. Stage 4 Discretionary consultation on the method and scope of the appraisal. Stage 5 Screen the plan for likely significant effects on a European site. Stage 6 Apply mitigation measures. Stage 7 Re-screen the plan after mitigation measures applied. 1.2.4 Reporting and consultation process The primary objective of the LDP is to create the conditions within which sustainable economic and population growth can take place. As the first stage in preparing the LDP, the Council issued a Main Issues Report6, Monitoring Statement7, Environmental Report8, Site Assessment Report, and an Open Space Framework9 for public consultation during January - March 2011. Responses to those documents (including comments from SNH) informed the development of the proposed LDP. A Draft LDP was produced (March May 2013), which was reviewed by Council Committees (May July 2013). The LDP was amended in the light of comments made by the Committees (including the addition and deletion of proposal sites), prior to submission of the revised draft LDP to full Council in October 2013. At that stage, the proposed LDP will be issued for public representations. HRA is an iterative process, and has been conducted in tandem with the revisions to the draft LDP. The preliminary stages of the HRA process (Stages 1 7) were documented in a draft screening report10. The screening report was based on the Draft LDP (March May 2013) and was issued to SNH for comment. However, owing to the timing of the LDP production,
4 5
David Tyldesley and Associates. 2012 Scottish Government, 2012 6 Clackmannanshire Council, 2011a 7 Clackmannanshire Council, 2011b 8 Clackmannanshire Council, 2011c 9 Clackmannanshire Council, 2011d 10 Clackmannanshire Council, June 2013
work commenced on the first draft of the HRA record and Appropriate Assessment prior to receipt of comments on the draft screening report. The first draft of this HRA record and Appropriate Assessment (V1), which was also based on the Draft LDP (March May 2013), was issued to SNH in July 2013. Initial comments were received from SNH in late July 2013. Those relating to mitigation wording and terminology in respect of the Habitats Regulations were incorporated within a revised version (V1.2) of the HRA record and Appropriate Assessment, for use by staff of Clackmannanshire Council. Meetings were held with SNH to discuss the comments received on the first draft reports, and these, together with written comments, have been incorporated into this version of the HRA record. This document will accompany the LDP that is presented to Full Committee of Clackmannanshire Council in October 2013 and takes account of changes in site allocations and proposal numbering that have occurred between production of the initial draft LDP (March May 2013) and August 2013. 1.2.5 Limitations of the assessment The HRA and AA have used existing data sets that have been collected by a variety of agencies over different timescales. These include national recording schemes run by the British Trust for Ornithology and undertaken by volunteers. These data are supplied to the statutory conservation agencies, following quality checks undertaken by BTO. It has been assumed that the data are correct, and no further checks have been undertaken. Data concerning the use of the coast by qualifying bird species have been collected for recording units that are of unequal size. In some cases, these recording units include areas of land beyond the limit of Clackmannanshire. The nature of the data means that it is not possible to identify the precise areas that support individual species. The inland distribution of qualifying bird species has been assessed by counts at a large scale, meaning that the precise locations used by these species are not known. Habitat data have been obtained from a variety of sources. These data have been assumed to be correct, and have not been checked on the ground.
1.3 European sites
HRA considers the effect of a plan on all European sites even those beyond the administrative boundary of the plan. Based on preliminary consultation responses with SNH11, there are two European sites that may come within the influence of the Clackmannanshire LDP: Firth of Forth Special Protection Area (SPA). River Teith Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Other European sites in the wider area e.g. Forth Islands SPA, have been considered, but excluded from further consideration as they are not likely to experience effects arising from this plan. 1.3.1 Firth of Forth SPA The Firth of Forth SPA was designated in 2001 and extends from the River Forth at Alloa eastwards towards Fife and East Lothian. It includes much, but not all, of the coastline within Clackmannanshire. A map showing the boundary of the site can be found on SNHs SiteLink website (http://gateway.snh.gov.uk/sitelink/).
11
Letter from SNH to Clackmannanshire Council 9 March 2011
The site has been designated for populations of wintering and migratory bird species. It qualifies as an SPA under Article 4.1 of the Birds Directive by regularly supporting wintering populations of European importance of four Annex 1 species (red-throated diver Gavia stellata, Slavonian grebe Podiceps auritus, golden plover Pluvialis apricaria and bartailed godwit Limosa lapponica) and regularly supporting a post-breeding population of European importance of sandwich tern Sterna sandvicensis. It also qualifies under Article 4.2 by regularly supporting wintering populations of both European and international importance of five migratory species (pink-footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus, shelduck Tadorna tadorna, knot Calidris canutus, redshank Tringa totanus and turnstone Arenaria interpres), and for regularly supporting a wintering waterfowl assemblage of European importance. Further details about the numbers of these species recorded from the site are provided in Appendix A. Some of the qualifying features also contribute to the selection of the Firth of Forth as a Ramsar site (wintering waterfowl assemblage, wintering populations of goldeneye, knot, pin-footed goose, redshank, shelduck, Slavonian grebe, turnstone, bar-tailed godwit and passage sandwich tern). The conservation objectives for the Firth of Forth SPA are: To avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species or significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained; and To ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: Population of the species as a viable component of the site; Distribution of the species within site; Distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; Structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species; No significant disturbance of the species. The condition of the qualifying features was last assessed against these conservation objectives in 2010 (see Table 1.1).
Table 1.1: Summary of condition of qualifying features of the Firth of Forth SPA Condition Assessment Qualifying Feature Unfavourable Declining Long-tailed Duck Common scoter Goldeneye Knot Great-crested grebe Scaup Mallard Favourable Declining Red-breasted merganser Slavonian grebe Bar-tailed godwit Sandwich tern Shelduck Eider Grey plover Dunlin Waterfowl assemblage Favourable Maintained Velvet scoter Red-throated diver Golden plover Pink-footed goose Redshank Turnstone Cormorant Oystercatcher Ringed plover Curlew Lapwing Favourable Recovered Wigeon 1.3.2 River Teith SAC The River Teith SAC was designated in 2005. The site covers River Teith to its mouth with the River Forth at Stirling and showing the boundary of the site can be found on (http://gateway.snh.gov.uk/sitelink/). It has been notified for species: River lamprey Lampetra fluviatilis. Brook lamprey Lampetra planeri. Sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus. Atlantic salmon Salmo salar. the lower reaches of the major tributaries. A map SNHs SiteLink website the presence of four fish
The three species of lamprey are Annex II species that are a primary reason for selection of the site as a SAC, whilst Atlantic salmon is an Annex II species that is present as a qualifying feature, but is not a primary reason for site selection. The Conservation Objectives of the River Teith SAC are: To avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species or significant disturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site is maintained and the site makes an appropriate contribution to achieving favourable conservation status for each of the qualifying features; and
To ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the long term: Population of the species, including range of genetic types for salmon, as a viable component of the site. Distribution of the species within site. Distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species. Structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species. No significant disturbance of the species. The condition of the qualifying features has been assessed against these conservation objectives. Atlantic salmon was assessed as in Unfavourable Recovering condition in 2003. The three species of lamprey were assessed as in Favourable Maintained condition (River and Brook lamprey were assessed in 2003, and the river lamprey in 2000).
1.4 Other projects and plans that may act in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP
The Forth covers a large area, and there are many projects and proposals being developed or implemented around its shores and in its waters, including development of land use plans by other local authorities. Each of these may give rise to minor residual effects upon the qualifying interests of the Firth of Forth. These have been screened for their potential to act in combination with the minor residual effects arising from the Clackmannanshire LDP to produce a likely significant effect upon the SPA. A list of potential projects that should be considered for in combination effects has been developed by the Scottish Government (available via the Knowledge hub). This has been used as the basis for identification of plans that may act in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP.
1.5 Structure of document
This document contains the record of the HRA process including supporting information used for the appropriate assessment of relevant proposals. Section 2 provides a summary of the screening exercise that was undertaken, documented, and issued to SNH. It identifies the proposals that require further consideration for their effects upon European sites either alone or in combination with other projects, policies and plans. It also provides a summary of mitigation that was added into proposals to remove likely effects. This chapter draws upon information in the screening report that was produced, updated to take account of new information identified since that report was produced and comments received from SNH. Section 3 provides the appropriate assessment of those proposals that were identified as having Likely Significant Effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA, either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. This includes comments provided by SNH. Section 4 provides the appropriate assessment of those proposals identified as having Likely Significant Effects upon the River Teith SAC, either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. Section 5 provides a summary of the conclusions of the HRA and appropriate assessment.
2 Conclusions of screening exercise

2.1 Need for HRA and AA
The Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 requires local authorities to publish Local Development Plans (LDPs). This will require a complete revision of the existing Clackmannanshire Local Plan. As this is unconnected to the management of any European site, it is subject to the requirements of the Habitats Directive Article 6 (3) as implemented through the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended).
2.2 European sites
The European sites identified for consideration during the screening process are the Firth of Forth SPA and the River Teith SAC (see Section 1.3).
2.3 Screening process
The screening process identifies those aspects of a plan that require further consideration for their effects upon a European site. The process applied to the Clackmannanshire LDP was documented in the draft screening report, and involved a sequential consideration of proposals against the seven criteria included in the guidance for HRA published by SNH12. Proposals were allocated to one of three categories: those that have no effects upon a European site, and which did not require to be considered further; those identified as having Minor Residual Effects (MRE) requiring further consideration for in combination effects; or those identified as having Likely Significant Effects (LSE) and hence subject to appropriate assessment. Mitigation was introduced, where possible, into the policies and proposals identified as having LSE, and these were then re-screened to see if they could be removed from further consideration. The conclusions were the production of a list of policies and proposals that required appropriate assessment, either as they have LSE in their own right, or as a result of in combination effects within the Clackmannanshire LDP or with other plans. Further information about each of these proposals was obtained, and this was considered in the light of information about the qualifying interest features of the relevant European site.
2.4 Criteria for the identification of LSE
To assist in identifying those aspects of the proposals that would have LSE, a series of criteria were developed. These were based on the conservation objectives of each European site. The criteria for the Firth of Forth SPA had been previously used and discussed with SNH during the HRA of the Falkirk LDP. Some of the proposal sites within the LDP are being rolled forward from the current local plan. Based on advice from SNH it was agreed that these sites could be screened out as they had already undergone HRA previously. 2.4.1 Firth of Forth SPA Not all of the shoreline of the Firth of Forth lies within the SPA boundary; however, effects on the qualifying features of the SPA need to be considered, even when these occur beyond the boundary of the SPA. The criteria used to identify areas that should be considered are:
Recreational Pressures at the coast
An increase in housing developments may give rise to increased recreational use of the coast. The level of recreational use of the coast per se is not necessarily a concern,
12
David Tyldesley and Associates, 2012
unless it contributes to significant disturbance of the qualifying species which is one of the Conservation Objectives for the Firth of Forth SPA. The level of disturbance of qualifying species is not always directly linked to the numbers of people using an area. Thus the same level of recreational activity may, or may not have likely significant effects depending on the nature, timing and location of the recreational activity. To provide an initial screening of spatial proposals that may act in combination to contribute to significant disturbance at the coast, some simple, map-based tools were developed, based on the proximity of proposal sites to the coast, and research into use of areas for recreation: Any housing proposal within 5 km of the coast has the potential to contribute to coastal recreation and hence to have minor residual effects on qualifying interest species, and should be considered for in combination effects in respect of significant disturbance of qualifying species at the coast. This distance of 5 km to define the zone within which most recreational activity originates, has been previously used and tested through Public Inquiry into the South East of England Regional Spatial Strategy. Research in Scotland has shown that 5 km is consistent with typical distances travelled for recreation (around three quarters of outdoor recreational visits involved travelling a distance of less than 5 miles (8 km) and around 44% of outdoor visits involved a journey of less than 2 miles (3.2 km)13). Obviously, not all areas of the Clackmannanshire coast are of equal attractiveness to potential visitors, and not all areas of the coastline can easily be accessed by the public. Likewise, not all areas of the coastline are used by equal numbers of the qualifying species. Nevertheless, this broad-brush rule provides a precautionary approach to identifying potential sources of increased recreation. The assessment of the risks of significant increased disturbance from recreation will be considered further at the next stage of the analysis. This will consider the complexities of which areas of the coast can be accessed easily, how these areas relate to use of the coastline by qualifying features and hence whether any increases in recreational activity are likely to give rise to significant disturbance of the qualifying species.
Inland roost sites
Pink-footed goose will travel around 15 20 km daily to reach inland roost and feeding sites, whilst redshank, golden plover, grey plover, curlew, oystercatcher and lapwing will also travel inland, but for shorter distances14. Pink-footed geese also favour large, open areas of suitable habitat; the research suggests that sites need to be at least 6 ha in area15. Existing information about bird numbers and distribution and habitats was used to help identify areas that may be important for the qualifying species as inland roosting and feeding sites (see Section 3.1.1 for more information about the data sources). Development sites are identified as potentially having a likely significant effect on qualifying wader species via their inland roosting/feeding sites if the site: lies within a tetrad from which that qualifying species has been recorded, OR the site lies within c. 5 km16 of the coast and the numbers of qualifying species has not been counted; and
13 14
TNS, 2012 Turner & Loughrey, 2011. 15 Gill, 1996 16 Although some species of wader, e.g. Golden Plover, will travel further inland, a distance of 5 km has been selected for this study.
appears, based on the Phase 1 data or aerial photographs, to contain potentially suitable habitat. Development sites are identified as potentially having a likely significant effect on pinkfooted goose via impacts on their high tide roosting/feeding sites if: the site lies within a 10 km square/ tetrad from which the qualifying species has been recorded OR the site lies within c. 15 km of the coast and there have been no counts for pink-footed goose; and the site appears, based on Phase 1 data or aerial photographs, to contain potentially suitable habitat; and the site contains open areas of suitable habitat that are at least 6 ha in size (or combined with adjacent open areas will reach this size). Small sites (c. 2 ha) in the middle of urban areas have been excluded, as the qualifying interest species favour wide views in order to scan for predators. 2.4.2 River Teith SAC Although the River Teith SAC is located approximately 10 km upstream at its closest point to the boundary of Clackmannanshire, the qualifying interest features are a number of migratory fish species. As the integrity of the SAC relies, in part, on the ability of these species to have unimpeded access along the Forth, the proposals have been screened to identify those that may have a direct or indirect effect upon the passage of fish. This includes proposals that could alter the quality of water (including chemical quality, temperature, presence of suspended materials), that could create physical barriers to fish movement (including those arising from noise/vibration) or patterns of water movement.
2.5
Mitigation wording
During the screening process, the wording of a number of proposals was amended to either: a) avoid any uncertainty or ambiguity about likely consequences of the proposal; b) clarify the legislative differences between European sites and other sites of nature conservation importance. The revised proposals were then re-screened. The proposals which were amended are listed below, and further details of the way in which these were amended are provided in Appendix B: SC14 Renewable Energy SC15 Wind Energy Development SC16 Hydro-electricity Development SC17 Biomass SC18 Large Solar Arrays SC19 Deep Geothermal SC22 Hazardous Substances Consent SC23 Development in the Countryside - General Principles EP3 Alternative Employment Generating Uses on Allocated Sites EP4 Business and Industrial Uses Outwith Allocated Sites EP8 Telecommunications Development Criteria EP11 Minerals General Principles (including Table EP1) EP12 Opencast Coal Extraction EP14 Coal Bed Methane EP16 New Retail and Commercial Leisure Development EA3 Protection of Designated Sites and Protected Species EA8 Green Belt EA9 Managing Flood Risk EA10 Coastal Planning 9
EA14 Supporting the Delivery of Community Growing Spaces EA16 Waste Management Facilities NE01 Alva Woodland Park Expansion
2.6 Conclusions of screening exercise
Appendix C lists the conclusions of the screening exercise for the proposals within the draft Clackmannanshire LDP. Many of the proposals within the Clackmannanshire LDP are general policy statements, setting out the criteria under which proposal applications will be viewed favourably. Some policies are general in nature, but are supported by specific spatial proposals (e.g. SC1 Maintaining a Housing Land Supply). In these cases the focus of the screening has been on the individual spatial locations rather than the general policy. Where the precise location of a policy is not clear, but the policy specifies criteria as to the types of development that will be permitted and/or the types of location that are likely to be acceptable, then these have been treated as general policy statements and screened out as such. Where the policy is not specific about the locations where it will be implemented, but does not contain a clause specifically excluding locations which might lead to effects on a European site these have also been screened out as the effects cannot be identified as the policy is too general. Proposals which have been identified as having Likely Significant Effects on their own on the qualifying interest features of either the Firth of Forth SPA and/or the River Teith SAC are highlighted in red. Those proposals that will result in Minor Residual Effects, and hence require consideration for in combination effects are shown highlighted in brown. A summary of the proposals that will require further consideration is provided below. There are some changes between the screening report and the screening in this document relating to the proposals likely to give rise to significant effects. Some of these changes are due to amendments in site proposals, which has led to a change in the numbering of spatial proposals for housing and business. Other changes are highlighted below. 2.6.1 Firth of Forth SPA
Proposals identified as having Likely Significant Effects on their own
Based on the screening exercise, the following proposals were identified as having Likely Significant Effects on the SPA on their own, and hence subject to Appropriate Assessment. M02 The Shore, Alloa B02 Alloa West Business Park B12 Garvel Farm, Blackgrange B13 Midtown business proposal, Alloa B14 Kennetpans The nature of the likely significant effect and the qualifying interests likely to be affected were set out in Appendix C and are summarised in Table 2.1 below. These are considered in more detail in Section 3.
10
Table 2.1: Summary of Likely Significant Effects arising from proposals within the Clackmannan LDP. Proposal Source and nature of Likely Significant Qualifying Species Effect recorded from vicinity of proposal
M02 The Shore, Alloa Scheme could lead to effects on qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA through: Release of pollutants during construction leading to changes in (a) changes in distribution and extent of habitats that support the species; and/or (b) changes to the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species. Noise, vibration and human activity during construction leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Wigeon, cormorant, shelduck, mallard, goldeneye, redbreasted merganser, oystercatcher, curlew, redshank.
B02, Alloa Business Park
West
Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Loss of high tide roost sites on adjoining land if it results in changes to the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species; deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species, or significant disturbance of the qualifying species. Works to flood walls if it results in changes to the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species; deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species, or significant disturbance of the qualifying species. Scheme could lead to effects on qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA through: Release of pollutants during construction potentially leading to (a) deterioration of habitats of the qualifying species; (b) changes in distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and/or (c) changes to the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species. Noise, vibration and human activity during construction leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species.
Pink-footed goose, shelduck, wigeon, cormorant, oystercatcher, lapwing, curlew, redshank, mallard, goldeneye, red-breasted merganser, golden plover, dunlin As above. Qualifying species recorded from the tetrad are: pink-footed goose, oystercatcher, curlew, redshank and lapwing Wigeon, cormorant, shelduck, mallard, goldeneye, redbreasted merganser, oystercatcher, curlew, redshank Cormorant, shelduck, wigeon, mallard, goldeneye, oystercatcher, lapwing, curlew, redshank
Pink-footed goose, shelduck, wigeon, cormorant, oystercatcher, lapwing, curlew, redshank, mallard, goldeneye, red-breasted
11
Proposal
Source and nature of Likely Significant Effect
Qualifying Species recorded from vicinity of proposal

merganser, plover, dunlin As above. golden
B12 Garvel Blackgrange
Farm,
Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Loss of habitat within and outwith the boundary of the site that could lead to changes to the distribution and extent of habitats supporting the qualifying species and changes to the distribution of qualifying species within the SPA. Scheme could lead to effects on qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA through: Release of pollutants during construction leading to (a) changes in distribution and extent of habitats that support the species; and/or (b) changes to the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species. Noise, vibration and human activity during construction leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species.
Pink-footed goose, curlew, lapwing, golden plover, redshank, oystercatcher Pink-footed goose, shelduck, mallard, goldeneye, redbreasted merganser, cormorant, oystercatcher, lapwing, curlew, redshank Pink-footed goose, shelduck, wigeon, mallard, goldeneye, red-breasted merganser, cormorant, oystercatcher, lapwing, curlew, redshank As above. Curlew, lapwing. Pink-footed goose has also been recorded from the tetrad and the site is considered to be large enough to support this species Pink-footed goose, oystercatcher, curlew, redshank, lapwing
Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Loss of high tide roost sites adjacent to the coast (if fields are used as roost sites) that could contribute to a change in the distribution of the species within the site.
B13 Midtown business proposal, Alloa
Scheme could lead to effects on qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA through: Pollution during construction if it results in deterioration in habitats of the qualifying species; the distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species. Loss of habitat used as high tide roost sites leading to changes in the distribution of the species within the site: the site lies within tetrad for which Pink-footed goose has been recorded. Whilst site itself is < 6 ha in size, it adjoins other open areas to create a space that is > 6 ha and includes suitable habitat (based on Phase 1 survey). Oystercatcher, curlew, redshank and lapwing been recorded from tetrad & site is on suitable habitat.
As above
12
Proposal
Source and nature of Likely Significant Effect

Noise, vibration and human activity during construction leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Scheme could lead to effects on qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA through: Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species at the coast.
Qualifying Species recorded from vicinity of proposal

As above As above Pink-footed goose, cormorant, shelduck, wigeon, mallard, goldeneye, redbreasted merganser, oystercatcher, ringed plover, lapwing, knot, dunlin, bar-tailed godwit, curlew, redshank. Oystercatcher, Curlew, Redshank, lapwing
B15 Kennetpans
Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species at nearby high tide roost sites and hence leading to changes to distribution of the species within the SPA. Oystercatcher, curlew, redshank and lapwing have been recorded from the tetrad & it appears that there are areas of suitable habitat (based on aerial photos). Pink-footed goose has been recorded for the tetrad, but the site is considered too small to support this species. Proposals that may act in combination to have Likely Significant Effects
The combinations of proposals that have been identified as having a likely significant effect upon the Firth of Forth SPA, and hence require further consideration are set out in Table 2.2. These combinations have been identified as having an in combination Likely Significant Effect on the qualifying features arising from: significant disturbance of qualifying species at the coast arising from increased recreational use of the shoreline; loss of habitat/ disturbance of areas used as high tide roosting/feeding sites by pink-footed goose; loss of habitat/ disturbance of areas used as high tide roosting/feeding sites by qualifying wader species. The Table incorporates some changes to the combinations of proposals included in the screening report following amendments to proposed site allocations to be included within the LDP. In addition to screening out some additional sites, it was agreed, following discussions with SNH, to add two additional proposal sites (H07 and H08) into the screening process. Although none of the qualifying species have been recorded from the tetrads that include these sites, the sites do contain potentially suitable habitat and lie within 5 km of the coast.
13
Table 2.2: Aspects of the Clackmannanshire proposed LDP that may act in combination to have a likely significant effect on the qualifying interests of the Firth of Forth SPA Combinations of policies/proposals Likely Significant Effect on qualifying interests of the Firth of Forth SPA Proposals within 5 km of the coast that could contribute to increased recreational use of the coast both within and outwith the SPA boundary: Alloa H01 Sunnyside, Alloa H02 Ashley Terrace, Alloa H03 Carsebridge Road North, Alloa Significant disturbance of H04 Carsebridge, Alloa qualifying species at the coast H05 South Earlsfield 2 (Alloa SE Plot 7), Alloa (both within and outwith the H06 Alloa Park Phase 4, Alloa SPA) arising from increased H07 Earlsfield 1, Alloa recreational use of the H08 Earlsfield West, Alloa shoreline. (Species affected in H09 Elm Grove 2, Alloa different areas are discussed H10 Central Parkland, Alloa later in the report). H11 St Johns Primary School H12 Claremont H13 Claremont Primary School H14 Patons Bowling Club, Tullibody Road M01 Alloa Co-op site, Alloa S04 Pine Grove, Alloa B01 Forthbank, Alloa Sauchie H15 Former FV College, Sauchie H16 Sauchie West, Sauchie (H16 includes S105 Sauchie West new primary school) H17 Fairfield School, Sauchie H18 Main Street B, Sauchie H19 Sauchie Nursery, Sauchie H20 Former Scout Hall, Holton Square, Sauchie H21 Todds Yard, Sauchie H22 Preston Terrace, Sauchie H23 The Manse, Main Street, Sauchie Tullibody, Cambus and Glenochil H24 Tullibody By-pass, Tullibody H25 Baingle Brae, Tullibody H26 Muirside, Lethen View, Tullibody M04 Alloa Road, Tullibody Clackmannan H27 Main Street/North Street, Clackmannan H28 Helensfield, Clackmannan Devon Village H29 Blackfaulds, Devon Village H30 Blackfaulds Steading, Devon Village Forth Rural and Area Wide Proposals H31 Lornshill Steading, Alloa H32 Ditch Farm, Tullibody Menstrie Proposals H33 Middletonkerse 14
Combinations of policies/proposals H34 Ochil Road, Menstrie H35 Mains Farm Steading, Menstrie Alva Proposals H36 Brook Street/Beauclerc Street, Alva H37 Brook Street/Back Road, Alva H38 Berryfield, Alva H39 Former Alva Glen Hotel, Alva H40 Park Street, Alva Development proposals on sites that have the potential to provide high tide roosting/feeding sites for pink-footed goose17. Housing & Business Developments Alloa B01 Forthbank Forth Rural and Area Wide Proposals B15 Meadowend Tillicoultry and Coalsnaughton H45 Coalsnaughton North, Coalsnaughton East Ochils Rural and Area Wide H50 Forestmill (includes S14 Forestmill - new Primary School & S15 Forestmill golf course and hotel) Services/Infrastructure Forth Rural and Area Wide Proposals T11 Fishcross Bypass T13 Carsebridge area, Alloa T16 Helensfield via Jellyholm linking to Carsebridge Menstrie T19 Completion of road link between A91 and C101 via Menstrie Mains Tillicoultry and Coalsnaughton T24 Coalsnaughton Bypass T25 Menstrie-Stirling Active Travel Route T26 A91 Alva-Tillicoultry Active Travel Route Development proposals on sites that have the potential to provide high tide roosting/feeding sites for wader species that are a qualifying interest feature of the SPA18 Alloa B01 Forthbank H07 Earlsfield 1, Alloa H08 Earlsfield West, Alloa
17
Likely Significant Effect on qualifying interests of the Firth of Forth SPA
Loss of habitat used as high tide roosting/feeding sites by a qualifying species (pink-footed goose). (&/or) Disturbance to a qualifying species (pink-footed goose) whilst using a high tide food/roost site.
Loss of habitat used as high tide roosting/feeding sites by a qualifying species (oystercatcher, curlew, golden plover, redshank & lapwing). (&/or)
Applies to sites that are within 15 km of the coast, are 6 ha in size, and are located within tetrads/ 10 km squares from which pink-footed goose has either been recorded, or has not been assessed and which are considered to have potentially suitable habitat. 18 Applies to sites that are located within tetrads from which qualifying bird species have been recorded by the BTO Atlas project, or lie within 5 km of the coast from tetrads that have not been counted and the site contains potentially suitable habitat.
15
Combinations of policies/proposals H12 Claremont Cambus S07 Cambus Park and Ride Forth Rural and Area Wide B11 Kilbagie
Likely Significant Effect on qualifying interests of the Firth of Forth SPA Significant disturbance to a qualifying species whilst using a high tide roost site (oystercatcher, curlew, golden plover, redshank & lapwing).
Aspects of the Clackmannanshire LDP that could act in combination with other projects, policies and plans to have a significant effect on the Firth of Forth SPA
A list of projects that should be considered for in combination effects has been developed by the Scottish Government, and is stored on the Knowledge Hub. The list, which was last updated in October 2012, was used as the basis for identification of plans that may act in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP19. Appendix D screens these proposals for their potential to act in combination with the minor residual effects arising from the Clackmannanshire LDP. Plans that are likely to have LSE are excluded, as these will be subject to separate appropriate assessment as part of their consenting process. Those plans which have been identified as potentially resulting in likely significant effects in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP are: Falkirk LDP in relation to: significant disturbance of the qualifying species at the coast as a result of recreational pressure20; loss of habitat/disturbance to pink-footed goose and/or qualifying wader species at inland roost sites. Stirling LDP in relation to: significant disturbance of qualifying species at the coast as a result of recreational pressure18. City of Edinburgh LDP in relation to: loss of inland high tide roost sites for qualifying wader species (curlew, lapwing, oystercatcher, golden plover and redshank). Mid Fife Local Plan Modifications Burntisland settlement Plan in relation to: significant disturbance of qualifying species at the coast as a result of recreational pressure21. Cockenzie Power Station in relation to: potential loss of habitat for qualifying species. Rosyth International Container Terminal (RICT) in relation to: significant disturbance of qualifying species during construction and operation; changes to habitat quality.
19
The list of projects held on the Knowledge Hub is updated periodically as new schemes come forward. 20 The qualifying species that potentially will be affected will vary along different stretches of the coastline. More details of which species might be affected are identified in Section 3.4.3. 21 The qualifying species that will potentially be affected will vary along different stretches of the coastline. More details of which species might be affected are identified in Section 3.4.3.
16
Grangemouth biomass plant in relation to: significant disturbance of qualifying species. In addition, there are a number of projects, which are at a pre-application phase, but which might have the potential for in combination effects. The status of these projects will be kept under review during the preparation of the LDP and HRA. If further details become available on these schemes, they will be re-screened for effects. These are: Leith Docks N-RIP Methil Docks N-RIP Burntisland N-RIP Burntisland Granton Ferry Kinneil Kerse Bioenergy plant Port Edgar Redevelopment Dunbar Harbour Redevelopment Foxlake Adventure Development Captain Clean Energy Coal vaporisation plant Neart na Gaoithe offshore windfarm SeaGreen Phases, 1, 2 & 3 Methil offshore demonstration wind turbine Grangemouth wind farm development Wind turbine at Boness 2.6.2 River Teith SAC
Proposals identified as having Likely Significant Effects on their own
Three proposals have been identified as having Likely Significant Effects upon qualifying interests of the River Teith SAC (see Appendix C). These are: M02 The Shore, Alloa B02 Alloa West Business Park B13 Midtown. For all three sites the LSE are predicted to originate from (a) pollution during construction, which could alter the quality of the receiving waters and/or (b) noise and/or vibration during construction, if these activities affect the migratory passage of Atlantic Salmon, Sea lamprey and/or Brook lamprey.
Proposals that may act in combination to have Likely Significant Effects
The combinations of proposals that are considered to give rise to likely significant effects upon the River Teith SAC, and hence require further consideration are set out in Table 2.3. Further details about individual policies, and the reasons why they have been screened as having minor residual effects, are included in Appendix C. Table 2.3: Policies within the Clackmannanshire proposed LDP that may act in combination to have a significant effect on the qualifying interest features of the River Teith SAC Combinations of policies/proposals Likely Significant Effect on qualifying interests of the R. Teith SAC B12 Garvel Farm, Blackgrange Disturbance of qualifying B14 Kennetpans species when passing adjacent to development site Changes to water quality arising from pollution during construction
17
Aspects of the Clackmannanshire LDP that could act in combination with other projects, policies and plans to have a likely significant effect on the River Teith SAC
Appendix D contains a list of other projects around the Forth and screens these for their likelihood of contributing to in combination effects. Following discussions with SNH it was agreed that the appropriate assessment should consider the combined effects of the Clackmannanshire LDP with the effects arising from the Grangemouth biomass plant. A watching brief will be maintained on proposals for Leith N-RIP as preliminary work for this project did identify the River Teith SAC as a potential receptor of effects.
3 Appropriate assessment of the likely significant effects of Clackmannanshire LDP on the Firth of Forth SPA
3.1 Qualifying interests
A summary of the qualifying interests of the Firth of Forth SPA as a whole was provided in section 1.3.1. Further details about the distribution of those species within the scope of influence of the Clackmannanshire LDP are provided below. 3.1.1 Data sources A variety of data have been used to provide details about the distribution and abundance of the qualifying bird species.
Wetland Bird Survey
The Wetland Bird Survey22 (WeBS) monitors non-breeding birds in the UK through core counts and low tide counts. Information from the scheme is used by the statutory conservation agencies in the selection, monitoring and management of coastal bird sites. Core Counts are collected every month, at high tide, from pre-defined lengths of shoreline. Data for individual core count units are usually averaged over a five-year period to provide an indication of the frequency of use of particular areas by individual species. It is these data that are used to determine the international importance of sites. The most recent five-year period for which data are available is winter 2006/07 2010/11. The Clackmannanshire shoreline falls within the following WeBS core count sections: River Forth, Upper Taylorton to Fallin (part of North shore only part of count section lies within Stirling & Falkirk Council areas). Cambus Pool. Fallin to Cambus (northern shore southern shore lies within Falkirk Council area). South Alloa to Cambus (northern shore southern shore lies within Falkirk Council area). Forth Kincardine Bridge to Alloa (part of northern shore only remainder of site lies within Falkirk Council area). Kennetpans. Low tide counts are undertaken every six years. During count years the numbers of birds are recorded once a month, at low tide. The most recent data that are available are for 2003/04. Count sections differ from those used for core counts. Low count data provide useful additional information to the core counts, by illustrating which areas of the
22
This is a partnership between the British Trust for Ornithology, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (on behalf of the Council for Nature Conservation and the Countryside, Natural Resources Wales, Natural England and Scottish Natural Heritage) in association with the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust.
18
shoreline are used for feeding. They comprise both the mean of the numbers of each species recorded each month during a single winter and the maximum count achieved at that site during the winter. These data can be related to the amount of habitat favoured by an individual species within each count unit to produce relative density maps. WeBS data have some weaknesses. Geese usage of coastal sites may be underestimated as these species tend to travel inland during daylight hours and tern populations are not accurately assessed as counting of these species is optional within the scheme. Also, the count units are not a uniform size or area; some are small, whilst others may be several kilometres long and span administrative boundaries. This means that caution is needed in interpreting these data as low numbers of species may be linked to the size of the count unit, rather than the importance of the site. It is also impossible to pinpoint the precise locations where particular species have been recorded. Nevertheless, WeBS data do provide a good general guide to which areas within an estuary are of relative importance for different species. Both core count and low tide data have been reviewed to assist in identifying the likely effects of the Clackmannanshire LDP. Table 3.1 (page 25) summarises the relative importance of WeBS count units within Clackmannanshire in two ways. Firstly, the proportion of the qualifying population that has been recorded from particular sections of the Clackmannanshire coastline is indicated by blue shading in Table 3.1. For example, sites shown in dark blue are those where the five year mean peak count is greater than 1% of that required for the site to qualify as of international importance for the species in question. The 1% threshold is traditionally used as an indicator of important sites or locations for species. It has been used in this context to help identify stretches of coastline that are relatively important for individual qualifying species within the Firth of Forth. This relative importance of different areas has also been demonstrated by ranking each core count unit according to their five year mean peak counts. Low tide count data are only available for parts of the Clackmannanshire coastline, collected from four count units, which extend downstream from Cambus Pools. The mean and peak counts recorded for each qualifying species present in Clackmannanshire were ranked with all sites in the Forth to identify the relative importance of areas within Clackmannanshire (see Table 3.2).
Surveys of distribution of waders and geese at inland sites
SNH provided copies of data collected by BTO, in association with BirdWatch Ireland and the Scottish Ornithologists Club during surveys to inform the Bird Atlas 2007-11. These data cover either 10-km squares (geese) or tetrads (2 km squares). Pink-footed geese were counted within approximately 20 km of the coast, whilst the other qualifying species were mapped within about 5 km, or three tetrads from the coast. Birds were counted at least twice during the winter; once in November-December and once in January-February; at some point over the four winters 2007/08 to 2010/11. Additional counts could be made at the discretion of the surveyor. Whilst not all tetrads within Clackmannanshire were sampled, there is good coverage close to the coast.
Phase 1 habitat data
Some of the qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA are known to use areas of suitable habitat several kilometres from the coast as high tide roost and resting sites. Potentially suitable habitat has been identified in two ways Phase 1 survey and aerial photography.
19
Phase 123 habitat information was used to provide an indication of which areas support habitats of potential value to the qualifying species. These were commissioned by the Inner Forth Landscape Initiative (IFLI) and comprise habitat maps24 for the Landscape Initiative area (approximately 202 km2). The maps are focused on the River Forth and the land within a few miles of the river between Stirling and the Forth bridges, and only cover part of the land within Clackmannanshire. They have been generated using existing Phase 1 data held by the relevant local authorities, supplemented with Phase 1 mapping held by SNH. These data were compared against aerial photographs to identify and fill gaps in the information or changes in land cover since the surveys were completed. Arable land, marsh and grassland (including neutral semi-improved grassland, poor semiimproved grassland, and marshy grassland) are all considered potentially suitable habitat types for the qualifying species. The Phase 1 data have been supplemented by details of current land use and aerial photographs of each proposal site, which are included within the draft LDP. These have been supplemented with the personal knowledge of the Clackmannanshire Planners and aerial photography available through Google maps. Within Clackmannanshire the Phase 1 maps cover land lying within approximately 1 2 km of the coast25, covering an area in the order of 3569 ha, which represents around 22% of the local authority area (15900 ha). Whilst this provides an incomplete picture of the distribution of potentially suitable habitat for qualifying species, it is the best data that are currently available, and have been used to assist in interpreting likely effects of the proposals.
Other sources
The distribution of feeding areas around SPAs selected for geese species in Scotland has been mapped26, but this is at a very broad scale. Areas around Clackmannan are identified as important feeding areas for birds associated with Skinflats. A number of local bird recorders and observers were contacted in order to identify information for specific sites. This complemented the broader scale data collected as part of national recording schemes. Information was obtained from the Clackmannanshire Ranger Service, the Reserve Warden for Scottish Wildlife Trust and in the order of six local bird recorders. The following areas as potentially important for qualifying species: Mudflats around Tullibody Inch. Fields at Blackgrange (NS840923; NS849924) mainly for pink-footed geese. Fields at Rhind (NS862918) waders at high tide, particularly curlew and pinkfooted geese. Fields at Kennetpans (NS916889) for curlew and pink-footed goose. Details about the use of specific proposal sites by qualifying species are included within the discussion of each individual proposal. 3.1.2 Numbers of species recorded from Clackmannanshire Based on the WeBS core count data, seventeen of the qualifying interest species of the Firth of Forth SPA have been recorded from at least one count area within Clackmannanshire, although fewer species (12) were recorded during the low tide counts.
23 24
JNCC, 2010 Central Environmental Surveys, 2013 25 http://www.clacksweb.org.uk/council/press/?release=3582 26 Mitchell, 2012.
20
Sandwich terns are not routinely monitored as part of the WeBS scheme. However, it is understood that the main distribution for this species is further east along the Forth. 3.1.3 Pink-footed goose The upper reaches of the Forth are important for pink-footed goose. This species has been recorded from all the core count units along the Clackmannanshire coast, often in appreciable numbers. Highest numbers were recorded between Kincardine Bridge and Alloa, which is the 2nd highest ranked site in the Forth based on winter five year mean peak counts (2006/07 2010/11). At low tide, pink-footed goose tend to move inland; only a single individual was recorded from an area of shoreline during low tide counts conducted in winter 2003/04. Inland areas from which pink-footed goose have been recorded are: undeveloped land lying adjacent to the shore between Tullibody Inch and Inch Island Farm, within the broad area where proposal B02 is situated; tetrads lying south, north and north-east of Clackmannan; and tetrads around Menstrie and Alva. Anecdotal information suggests that the following areas also support high numbers of pinkfooted goose: Fields at Blackgrange (NS840923; NS849924). Fields at Rhind (NS862918). Fields at Kennetpans (NS916889). The numbers associated with individual proposal sites are discussed later in the report. 3.1.4 Shelduck Shelduck are widely distributed around the Forth, being recorded from 31 core count sections including all count units within Clackmannanshire. Whilst it has been recorded in appreciable numbers, other areas of the Forth support higher numbers of this species. Highest numbers from Clackmannanshire were recorded from the South Alloa to Cambus and Kennetpans count units, which are ranked 7th and 8th within the Forth for the winter five year mean peak counts (2006/07 2010/11) for this species. Shelduck are also recorded from all areas of the Clackmannanshire coast (that were surveyed) during the low tide counts in 2003/04, with highest numbers being recorded from the more upstream areas of the Forth. 3.1.5 Wigeon Wigeon are also widely distributed around the Forth, with the species being recorded from 26 core count sections, although it is more restricted within Clackmannanshire. The area of coast lying between Kincardine Bridge to Alloa is ranked 2nd within the Forth based on the winter five year mean peak counts 2006/07 2010/11. However, the numbers of birds recorded (winter five year mean peak = 147 birds) only represents around 1% of that required for the site to qualify as internationally important. Wigeon were also recorded from along the Clackmannanshire coastline during the low tide counts, with particularly high counts being recorded from around the river at Inch Island Farm. 3.1.6 Mallard Mallard has been recorded from all the count units along the Clackmannanshire coast and has been recorded from a total of 33 core count sections around the Forth. Appreciable numbers occur in some count sections within Clackmannanshire the highest counts were recorded from the Fallin to Cambus core count units, which was ranked joint 4th in the Forth based on the winter five year mean peak counts 2006/07 2010/11. Mallard was also recorded from all coastal sections (that were recorded) during the low tide counts. 21
3.1.7 Goldeneye Goldeneye has been recorded from five of the seven core count sections in Clackmannanshire, but in relatively low numbers. Highest numbers were recorded from the coast between Kincardine Bridge and Alloa, and this count unit was ranked 6th out of the 35 core count sections in the Forth. Goldeneye was recorded from all the areas of coast that were surveyed at low tide. 3.1.8 Red-breasted Merganser Red-breasted merganser was recorded from six of the core count sections within Clackmannanshire, with highest numbers being recorded between Kincardine Bridge and Alloa. This is also the highest ranked site in the Forth for this species (where it is recorded from 36 core count units). However, the rest of the Clackmannanshire coastline is of lower importance for this species, with the sites being ranked 27th or lower. The relative importance of the Forth between Alloa and Kincardine Bridge for red-breasted merganser is also demonstrated by the low tide count data. 3.1.9 Cormorant Cormorant has been recorded from four of the five core count sections within Clackmannanshire. Highest numbers were recorded from the South Alloa and Cambus count unit, which is ranked 2nd (out of 36 count units) in the Forth for this species. The rest of the Clackmannanshire coastline has relatively low importance for this species based on core counts. Cormorant was also recorded from along the Clackmannanshire coast, at low numbers, during the low tide count (2003/04). 3.1.10 Oystercatcher Oystercatchers are widespread around the Forth (recorded from 38 count units) and have been recorded from all core count units within Clackmannanshire. The Clackmannanshire coastline appears to be of relatively low importance for this species: the highest ranked core count unit lies between Kincardine Bridge and Alloa, which is ranked 27th in the Forth. Low numbers of oystercatcher have been recorded from most sections of the Clackmannanshire coast at low tide. Based on the BTO Atlas data, oystercatchers appear to be using a variety of inland roost/feeding sites. Low numbers have been recorded from: around Alva; undeveloped land lying adjacent to the shore between Tullibody Inch and Inch Island Farm, within the broad area where proposal B02 is situated; and south of Cambus (in a tetrad that also includes land on the south of the Forth and outwith the Clackmannanshire area). Higher numbers have also been recorded from a tetrad located to the south-east of Alloa. This also includes land on the south of the Forth and outwith the Clackmannanshire area. 3.1.11 Ringed plover The coastline of Clackmannanshire is relatively unimportant for this species. Ringed plover has been recorded from one core count unit within Clackmannanshire (Kennetpans) (compared to 29 sites in the Forth as a whole), with a winter five year mean peak count of 1 bird. This species was not recorded during the low tide counts (winter 2003/04). 3.1.12 Grey plover The Clackmannanshire coastline is also relatively unimportant for Grey plover. It has been recorded from a single core count unit (Kincardine Bridge and Alloa) with a winter five year mean peak count of 1 bird. It was not recorded during the low tide counts in winter
22
2003/04, or from tetrads surveyed as part of the BTO Atlas survey. Grey plover has been recorded from 29 core count units around the Forth. 3.1.13 Golden plover This species also has a restricted occurrence within Clackmannanshire. It has been recorded between South Alloa and Cambus, although the winter five year mean peak count is less than one bird. It was not recorded during the low tide counts (winter 2003/04). The BTO Atlas data recorded golden plover from a tetrad that includes undeveloped land lying adjacent to the shore between Tullibody Inch and Inch Island Farm, within the broad area where proposal B02 is situated. 3.1.14 Lapwing Lapwings are widely distributed around the Forth, being recorded from 31 core count sections, including all those within Clackmannanshire. The highest numbers in Clackmannanshire were recorded between Upper Taylorton and Fallin, and Fallin to Cambus ranking these sites 5th and 6th respectively within the Forth for this species. Lapwings appeared to be less widely distributed along the Clackmannanshire coast during the low tide counts (2003/04), being confined to the count unit that includes Tullibody Inch (29 birds) and between Inch of Ferryton and the Kincardine Bridge (2 birds). Lapwings were recorded from a number of inland locations during the BTO Atlas survey: undeveloped land lying adjacent to the shore between Tullibody Inch and Inch Island Farm, within the broad area where proposal B02 is situated; land south of Cambus (this tetrad also includes an area south of the Forth, outwith the boundary of Clackmannanshire); tetrads that include the east and west of Alva; tetrad that includes Midtown (B13) (this also includes land outwith the boundary of Clackmannanshire); and tetrad to the south-east of Alloa. 3.1.15 Knot The coastline of Clackmannanshire is relatively unimportant for this species. Knot has only been recorded from one core count unit, Kennetpans, in low numbers, giving this site a rank of 25 out of a total of 30 core count units around the Forth. Knot was not recorded from the Clackmannanshire coast during the winter 2003/04 low tide counts. 3.1.16 Dunlin Dunlin has only been recorded from three of the core count units within Clackmannanshire. Highest numbers were recorded from Kennetpans, ranking this site as 10 out of 28 core count units in the Forth where this species is recorded. A single bird was recorded from the coast between Inch of Ferryton and Kincardine Bridge during the winter 2003/04 low tide count. 3.1.17 Bar-tailed Godwit The occurrence of bar-tailed godwit within Clackmannanshire is restricted to Kennetpans. Although the numbers of birds recorded are low, (winter five year mean peak 11 birds), these represent 1% of the qualifying level for international importance. This core count unit is ranked joint 16th of the 28 core count units around the Forth from which this species has been recorded. This species was not recorded from the Clackmannanshire coast during the low tide counts in winter 2003/04. 3.1.18 Curlew Curlew are widely distributed around the Forth (recorded from 39 core count units), including all parts of the Clackmannanshire coast, where it occurs in appreciable numbers. 23
The coast between Fallin and Cambus is ranked 3rd in the Forth for this species and all count units in Clackmannanshire are ranked in the top 16 locations within the Forth for this species. Curlew was also recorded from all count sections within Clackmannanshire during the low tide counts winter 2003/04, and was recorded in appreciable numbers from inland tetrads during the BTO Atlas surveys in the following locations: undeveloped land lying adjacent to the shore between Tullibody Inch and Inch Island Farm, within the broad area where proposal B02 is are situated south and south-east of Cambus (tetrad includes Cambus Pools, and also land on the south shore of the Forth outwith the Clackmannanshire boundary); south-east of Alloa. Anecdotal information also suggests two additional areas that are important for curlew: Fields at Rhind (NS862918). Fields at Kennetpans (NS916889). 3.1.19 Redshank Redshank is widely distributed around the Forth (recorded from 38 core count units), and has been recorded from all the core count units within Clackmannanshire. Whilst it occurs in appreciable numbers in Clackmannanshire, the coastline is of relatively lower importance for this species, compared to other areas in the Forth. The highest ranked site in Clackmannanshire is the core count unit lying between Kincardine Bridge to Alloa, which was ranked 17th. Redshank was recorded from all areas of the Clackmannanshire coastline during the low tide counts (winter 2003/04) in varying numbers. It was also recorded at various locations, at low numbers, during the BTO Atlas survey: undeveloped land lying adjacent to the shore between Tullibody Inch and Inch Island Farm, within the broad area where proposal B02 is situated south-east of Cambus (tetrad includes Cambus Pools, and also land on the south shore of the Forth outwith the Clackmannanshire boundary); east Alva; and south-east of Alloa.
24
Table 3.1: Qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA recorded from the Clackmannanshire coastline based on WeBS core counts for the five year period 2006/07 2010/11
Core Count Unit LDP Proposal Number Pink-footed goose Shelduck Wigeon Mallard Goldeneye Red-breasted Merganser Cormorant Oystercatcher Ringed plover Grey plover Golden plover Lapwing Knot Dunlin Bar-tailed Godwit Curlew Redshank Totals Key Present at low numbers (where winter 5yr mean of peaks represents <1% of that required for the site to qualify as of international importance) Present at numbers where the winter 5yr mean of peaks represents between 1 9% of that required for the site to qualify as of international importance Present at appreciable numbers (where the winter 5yr mean of peaks represents 10% of that required for the site to qualify as of international importance) Rank of site for the species listed compared to all core count units in the Forth Upper Taylorton to Fallin B12 5 19 P2 19 15 34 24 36 Fallin to Cambus
1
South Alloa to Cambus stretches M02; B02 6 7 9 16 7 30 2 33 14 8 23
Kennetpans B14 10 8 18 20 27 22 31 25 26 25 10 16 11 19 14
Kincardine Bridge to Alloa
Cambus Pool B13
7 15 4 9 34 35 38
2 11 2 7 6 1 12 27 14
8 19 P2 26 27
37
19 12 8 17 13
22
16 38 10
3 34 11
14 28 13
15 36 8
14
1: Site is located 1 km from the coast, but this indicates the discharge point of the River Devon, which runs adjacent to the proposal site 2: The species has been recorded in at least one of the five winters assessed, but in such low numbers that the winter five year mean of peak counts is <1. 25
Table 3.2: Qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA present along the Clackmannanshire coastline based on WeBS low tide count data
Low tide count unit LDP Proposal Number Preferred habitat BF003 B02; B12 Mean count (rank) Cormorant Pink-footed goose Shelduck Wigeon Mallard Goldeneye Red-breasted merganser Oystercatcher Lapwing Dunlin Curlew Redshank Total species Number of All All All All All Sub-tidal Sub-tidal Intertidal Intertidal & nontidal Intertidal Intertidal & nontidal Intertidal & nontidal 5 (24) 17 (12) 25 (19) 35 (3) 8 (8) 1 (128) 29 (13) Peak count (rank) 6 (35) 44 (12) 32 (22) 101 (3) 14 (12) 3 (127) 115 (12) 208 (4) 27 (53) Mean count (rank) 4 (30) 01 (4) 7 (16) 497 (2) 6 (24) 1 (34) 11 (85) Peak Count (rank) 6 (35)) 1 (4) 20 (15)) 700 (2) 21 (18) 65 (3) 32 (70) BF004 BF005 M02 Mean count (rank) 2 (41) 1 (33) 84 (8) 14 (11) 7 (11) 1 (34) 5 (99) Peak count (rank) 6 (35) 2 (38) 250 (6) 0.08 (16) 29 (8) 3 (37) 18 (88) 2 (26) 1 (54) 28 (16) 67 (14) 10 9 (26) 2 (56) 80 (11) 97 (16) BF006 B14 Mean count (rank) 1 (53) 5 (18) 19 (21) 10 4 (14) 2 (26) Peak count (rank) 2 (54) 11 (20) 75 (18) 34 (8)) 16 (11) 4 (29) Total number of count units 82 6 43 37 59 74 72 134 32 59 128 131 Mean count 409 713 793 2613 647 309 184 5907 1957 6377 1643 3647 Maximum count 455 2849 876 3110 756 386 240 5944 3330 7840 2493 3830 Total for the Forth
54 (6) 14 (53) 9
7 (40) 37 (25) 9
27 (30) 96 (17)
0 (121)
1 (119) 4 (105)
1 (115) 9
There are no low tide data for the count unit adjacent to proposal B13 for the year in question.
26
3.2
Proposals identified as having likely significant effects
3.2.1 M02 The Shore, Alloa This proposal is for a brownfield site that borders the shores of the Forth for around 200 300m and is surrounded on three sides by other developments. It allows for mixed use development, including housing, leisure, recreation and business. There is the potential for recreational access to the River Forth. It may also include repairs to the sea wall and investigation of flood alleviation measures. The site lies outwith the boundary of the SPA, and is located within the South Alloa to Cambus WeBS core count unit and low tide count unit BF004. The qualifying species that have been recorded in these count units are shown in Tables 3.1 & 3.2. Thirteen qualifying species have been recorded from the WeBS core count unit. This includes high numbers of pink-footed goose; and important numbers of shelduck, wigeon, cormorant, oystercatcher, lapwing and curlew. Fewer species have been recorded during the low tide counts. Wigeon was recorded in the highest numbers, but this site was only ranked 14th in terms of the mean density of this species within the Forth. Whilst qualifying species have been recorded from the wider area, and may feed along the shoreline, these species are unlikely to be using the proposal site. This is because it is a brownfield site, and based on the Phase 1 data available, there are no habitats of potential value to qualifying species present. Also, it is smaller than 6 ha in size, so is unlikely to be of value for pink-footed goose. Few details of the scheme are available, but the sources of likely significant effects and the implications of these for the qualifying interest features of the SPA in light of its conservation objectives are listed below and then considered in more detail. The sources of likely significant effects are: Release of pollutants during construction leading to (a) changes in distribution and extent of habitats that support the species; and/or (b) changes to the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species. Noise, vibration and human activity during construction leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Loss of or disturbance to qualifying species using high tide roost sites on adjoining land if this contributes to a decline in the distribution and extent of habitats supporting species and changes to the distribution of the species within the site. Works to flood walls if it results in changes to the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species; deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species, or significant disturbance of the qualifying species. Pollution during construction can arise from unregulated releases of fuels or chemicals, accidental spills, and run-off of sediment from disturbed ground. These can act to change the habitat quality or functioning on a temporary or permanent basis, depending on the nature of the pollutant. Changes in the availability of prey as a result of pollution events would impact on the distribution of qualifying bird species. These impacts can be avoided by good construction practice. Birds using the shoreline may be disturbed during construction as a result of people and machinery on site, and also from any piling operations that are required. Works to the sea wall could also result in disturbance. The level of disturbance and the significance of this 27
for qualifying interest species will depend on the nature and timing of the disturbance and can also be affected by prevailing weather conditions. These effects can be avoided by timing construction operations to occur outwith the wintering period of the qualifying species and/or through the use of particular construction techniques. Disturbance during operation of the scheme is mainly likely to arise from recreational use of the coast or use of lighting around the houses. Recreational impacts can be avoided by siting footpaths and access points back from the shoreline and the use of planting to screen the coast from footpaths. Lighting effects can also be mitigated by the use of lamps that limit light pollution. Given the strategic nature of the proposals, it is difficult to quantify the scale of effects, however, it is predicted that the numbers of species present adjacent to the proposal site will be low, given the length of shoreline affected. The proposals also include a requirement to provide recreational space in the middle of the site, which will help to reduce the scale of increased use of the coast. To avoid adverse effects upon the SPA, additional mitigation will be included within the site schedule and proposals. New text that has been added is shown in italics. This also includes text to address issues in relation to the River Teith SAC (see Section 4.3.1): Creating Sustainable Communities Proposals should include details of house numbers and sizes, and any affordable housing provision and details of how the design (including landscaping and lighting) will avoid significant disturbance effects upon birds that are a qualifying interests of the Firth of Forth SPA and passage of migratory fish that are a qualifying interest of the River Teith SAC. Sea wall should be investigated and repaired if necessary and if it can be demonstrated that the repair works will not have an adverse effect upon the qualifying interests of the Firth of Forth SPA and River Teith SAC. Opportunity to create recreational access to River Forth. Any proposals for increased access must demonstrate that they will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA. Environmental Assets The site lies adjacent to the Firth of Forth. Proposals will be subject to a Habitats Regulations Appraisal, and may require an appropriate assessment. Developers will be required to provide adequate information to inform the appraisal and to demonstrate that the proposals will not have an adverse effect upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA or the River Teith SAC. This may include aspects of design and use of the site, in addition to constraints on construction periods and techniques to avoid the most sensitive times to the qualifying species of the SPA and SAC and additional pollution control measures during construction. Public river frontage should include flood alleviation measures. Residential development should have sufficient freeboard to avoid impacts. All proposals must demonstrate that they will not have an adverse effect on the qualifying interest features of the Firth of Forth SPA or River Teith SAC either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. Assuming that these mitigation measures are included, this proposal is not predicted to have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA, either alone or in combination with other projects and plans.
28
3.2.2 B02 Alloa West Business Park (Pavilions) This is a large business site (53.48 ha), which has been identified as suitable for business, industrial, storage or distribution uses (Classes 4, 5 and 6). Office development has already commenced to the north of the site. The bulk of the land comprises areas of agricultural land. The south-western edge of the site abuts the coastline of the Firth of Forth, within the boundary of the SPA and close to the mudflats of Tullibody Inch, which are known to be important for the qualifying species. The site lies within the South Alloa to Cambus core count unit and low tide count unit BF003. Thirteen of the qualifying features of the Firth of Forth SPA have been recorded in the vicinity of the proposal site during core counts and nine species were recorded during the low tide counts (see Tables 3.1 & 3.2). This includes significant numbers of pink-footed goose and curlew. The counts by the BTO also recorded significant numbers of pink-footed goose and curlew within the relevant tetrad. Lapwing, golden plover, redshank, and oystercatcher were also recorded from the tetrad. Few details of the scheme are available, but the sources of likely significant effects and the implications of these for the qualifying interest features of the SPA in light of its conservation objectives are listed below and then considered in more detail. The sources of likely significant effects are: Pollution during construction. This could result in: (a) deterioration of habitats of the qualifying species; (b) changes in distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and/or (c) changes to the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species. Noise, vibration and human activity during construction and operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species particularly species using the mudflats around Tullibody Inch. Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Loss of habitat. This will have an effect if the habitat is used by qualifying species as high tide roost or feeding sites. Habitat loss could result from (a) direct replacement of semi-natural habitats by hard surfaces, (b) replacement of seminatural habitats with unsuitable landscape planting, (c) indirect loss as a result of fragmentation of existing areas into plots that are too small for pink-footed goose, and/or (d) indirect loss as a result of disturbance to birds in undeveloped areas. Loss of habitat outwith the boundary of the SPA that is used as high tide roost/feeding sites could alter the distribution of qualifying species within the site as a result of changes to the distribution and extent of habitats supporting the qualifying species. Pollution during construction can arise from unregulated releases of fuels or chemicals, accidental spills, and run-off of sediment from disturbed ground. These impacts can be avoided by good construction practice. Likewise, significant disturbance during construction can easily be avoided, by timing works to take place outwith the winter period. Disturbance of qualifying species at the coast during operation of the site can also be avoided through careful design of the proposals on the site. The greatest potential for LSE arising from this proposal is related to the loss (and fragmentation) of habitat outwith the boundary of the SPA, which is used as a high tide roosting area by some of the qualifying species, particularly pink-footed goose, and curlew. 29
Table 3.3 sets out the numbers of qualifying species that may be potentially affected by the proposal. This includes numbers of qualifying species that have been recorded from WeBS counts, the BTO tetrad data and anecdotal information supplied by a number of local bird recorders. It should be remembered that both the WeBS and tetrad data cover a greater area than the proposal site, whilst the anecdotal information is specific to the site. Table 3.3 also includes a summary of the total numbers of qualifying species recorded for the SPA as a whole at the time it was classified and how the numbers recorded contribute to the classification of the site as of International importance in order to provide some context of the numbers of qualifying species recorded from the coastline adjacent to this site. For example, the numbers of pink-footed goose that have been recorded from the coast near this site represent 20% of the numbers of this species required for this site to be identified as of International importance. Also, a maximum of 1200 pink-footed goose have been recorded from the tetrad that includes this site, whilst a total of 10,852 pinkfooted goose were thought to be present within the SPA as a whole at the time that it was classified. Table 3.3: Maximum numbers of qualifying species recorded from vicinity of proposal area compared to numbers present at the time of classification of the Firth of Forth SPA (N.B. These surveys cover different areas and were undertaken over different time periods using varying methods) Species WeBS core WeBS low Maximum Anecdotal Numbers of count winter tide count in counts* individuals 5yr mean of count the tetrad present peaks 2006/07 peak within SPA at 2010/11 count time of (winter 5 yr (winter classification mean of peaks 2003/04) as percentage of International threshold) Pink-footed 710 (20%) 1200 Used by this 10852 goose species Curlew 165 (2%) 208 242 Up to 300 1928 Lapwing 170 (1%) 115 81 4148 Golden plover 14 2949 Redshank 25 (1%) 6 4341 Oystercatcher 41 (1%) 3 2 <30 7846 * These figures are based on anecdotal reports provided by a number of local bird recorders. Local bird observers report that the fields experience a high degree of human disturbance from farming operations and recreational users. Consequently, it is considered to have limited value for qualifying species of the SPA. Also, much of the site is located on agricultural land. Pink-footed goose, are known to favour cropped land, particularly winter cereals, for feeding during the winter months27. However, the attractiveness of these areas to pink-footed goose varies, depending on the cropping regime.
27
http://monitoring.wwt.org.uk/species/pinkfoot.php
30
Land lying to the south of the proposal site (along the dismantled railway and the Rhind) are believed to be important high tide roosting/feeding sites particularly for curlew and pink-footed goose. In this respect, the proposal site acts as a buffer between the disturbance and built up areas near Alloa and the coast. Pink-footed goose High numbers of pink-footed goose have been recorded from the WeBS count unit at high tide; this stretch of coast was ranked 6th within the Forth for the winter five year mean peak numbers of this species (2006/07 2010/11). Substantial numbers of pink-footed goose were recorded from the tetrad including this area (BTO maximum count 1200 birds).The importance of this area of coastline to the SPA is demonstrated by the fact that these numbers exceed the 1% threshold for the site to qualify as of international importance, and is equivalent to 20% of the threshold for the site to qualify as of international importance. These important numbers of pink-footed goose have been recorded from count areas that are much larger than the proposed development site. There is no way to interrogate this information in order to determine whether pink-footed goose use the proposed development site, and the coast that adjoins it, or are just present in the wider area. However, local bird observers and recorders have provided anecdotal information about the use of the fields covered by this proposal. This suggests that the development area is of limited value for pink-footed goose. Curlew Appreciable numbers of curlew have been recorded from the wider area (see Table 3.3). The WeBS core count unit was ranked 8th within the Forth for the winter five year mean peak count of this species and this area of coastline was ranked 4th in the Forth for the peak counts at low tide. A maximum of 242 curlew (BTO max count) were recorded from the tetrad that includes these proposal sites. Curlews are usually associated with areas of permanent grassland, rather than arable land, and hence it is likely that these counts were associated with land outwith these allocations. However, there is anecdotal information that the autumn stubbles in the fields may attract flocks of up to 300 curlew28. Other species of wader Lapwing (Maximum count 81 birds), golden plover (maximum count 14 birds), redshank (maximum count 6 birds) and oystercatcher (maximum count 2 birds) were also recorded from the tetrad. The relatively low numbers of these qualifying species is supported by anecdotal information provided by local bird observers. Small numbers of Oystercatchers (fewer than 30 birds) have been recorded using the southern part of the area when it is under grass. Conclusions This site allocation forms part of the network of open areas along the northern shores of the Forth. Whilst there is some uncertainty about the level of use of the site, high numbers of some qualifying species (principally pink-footed goose, curlew and lapwing) have been recorded from the vicinity. Areas to the south and south-west of the site (The Rhind and Tullibody Inch) are known to support high numbers of qualifying species. In this respect, the land acts as a buffer between the developed areas of Alloa and the coast. The site is mainly agricultural land that is actively managed. Disturbance from various sources, combined with the changing cropping regime, means that the value of the area to
28
D. Bryant pers comm
31
qualifying species may vary between season, and is generally likely to be of lower value to qualifying species than other sites in the vicinity that receive less disturbance. The area of this site allocation (52.83 ha) is equivalent to 1.7% of the potentially suitable habitat for waders and pink-footed goose within the IFLI area. Discussions have been held with SNH about the level of bird use at the site and whether loss of this site would have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA. SNH has advised that there is remaining uncertainty about (a) the level of use of the site by qualifying species and therefore (b) the effect of loss of the site upon the integrity of the SPA29. To address this dual issue of uncertainty, SNH has proposed that conditional wording is added to the site schedule. This acts to remove the presumption in favour of the development if it was implemented in a way that could adversely affect site integrity30. This is consistent with a High Court Ruling that considered the use of conditional wording or a safeguard condition within a strategic plan31. In this case, a Local Authority, with the support of the statutory Nature Conservation Body (Natural England) had addressed the issue of uncertainty within the appropriate assessment for the plan by including qualifying wording into a proposal. The judge ruled that The adoption, in the Core Strategy, of the qualifying wording as recommended by the Joint Statement, ensures that no such harm can or will arise.31 Mitigation wording To address the uncertainty relating to information about the use of the site, and consequently to remove reasonable doubt about the consequence of the proposal upon the integrity of the SPA, the following wording has been added to the site schedule (new text in italics). Development Requirements Business site on which office development has commenced on the northern part of the site. Suitable for business, industrial, storage or distribution uses (Classes 4, 5 and 6). Core path through the site forms part of the National Cycle Network and the Round the Forth Route. With the exception of the undeveloped land within The Pavilions development in the northernmost part of the site, proposals within this area will not be in accordance with this development plan unless it can be demonstrated, by means of an appropriate assessment, that the proposal will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA. Developers will be expected to provide such information as the Council deems necessary to inform the appropriate assessment. Developers should be aware that this information is likely to include detailed information about the use of this site by qualifying species of the SPA over a minimum of one wintering and migratory season. In addition, it may involve assessment of the pattern of usage of this site in relation to other sites beyond the boundary of this site allocation. Consequently, developers are encouraged to collaborate in undertaking research for these areas.
29 30
Email from SNH dated 1/10/2013 Para 5.24, page 33, SNH Guidance, Tyldesley, 2012 31 Feeney v Oxford City Council & Others, 2011, EWHC 2699
32
Environmental Assets This site includes areas that can be used by important numbers of qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA and lies adjacent to other areas that are used by significant numbers of pink-footed goose and curlew. The Development Brief and application will be subject to a Habitats Regulations Appraisal and Appropriate Assessment and will need to demonstrate that the proposals will not have an adverse effect upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other proposals within this plan (including, but not necessarily restricted to B12 & B13). Developers will be required to provide information to enable this appropriate assessment to be undertaken. This may include (but not be limited to): providing information about the use of this site and other suitable areas along the coast in Clackmannanshire by qualifying species of the SPA over at least one full wintering and migration season; providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoided during operation of the proposals; providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoided during construction of the scheme (e.g. constraints on the construction period). 3.2.3 B12 Garvel Farm, Blackgrange This site is on agricultural land and has been identified for business, industrial, storage or distribution uses (Classes 4, 5 and 6). It abuts the River Forth upstream of the SPA boundary and lies within the Upper Taylorton to Fallin WeBS core count unit (see Table 3.1 and discussion below for identity of species). Although there are few details of the types of development that may be introduced, it is thought that the proposal may have Likely Significant Effects on a selection of the qualifying species arising from: Release of pollutants during construction leading to (a) changes in distribution and extent of habitats that support the species; and/or (b) changes to the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species Noise, vibration and human activity during construction leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Loss of high tide roost habitat and/or disturbance to birds at high tide roost sites. This includes land within and outwith the boundary of the SPA. This could contribute to changes in the distribution and extent of habitats supporting the qualifying species and changes to the distribution of qualifying species within the site. Ten qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA have been recorded from the core count unit that includes this site (pink-footed goose, shelduck, wigeon, mallard, goldeneye, redbreasted merganser, cormorant, oystercatcher, lapwing, curlew, redshank). Several of these species occur in relatively low numbers or are mainly associated with the sub-tidal zone (shelduck, mallard, goldeneye, red-breasted merganser) and hence are less vulnerable to disturbance on the shore. Only a small section of the shoreline of the WeBS core count unit (around 300 m), adjoins the boundary of the site. Table 3.4 sets out the numbers of qualifying species that may be potentially affected by the proposal, focusing on those species that are known to use high tide roost sites. This includes numbers of qualifying species that have been recorded from WeBS counts, the 33
BTO tetrad data and anecdotal information supplied by a number of local bird recorders. There are no WeBS low tide count data available for this length of shore. It should be remembered that both the WeBS and tetrad data cover a greater area than the proposal site, whilst the anecdotal information is specific to the site. Table 3.4 also includes a summary of the total numbers of qualifying species recorded for the SPA as a whole at the time it was classified and how the numbers recorded contribute to the classification of the site as of International importance in order to provide some context of the numbers of qualifying species recorded from the coastline adjacent to this site. For example, the numbers of pink-footed goose that have been recorded from the coast near this site represent 20% of the numbers of this species required for this site to be identified as of International importance. Also, a maximum of 1200 pink-footed goose have been recorded from the tetrad that includes this site, whilst a total of 10,852 pinkfooted goose were thought to be present within the SPA as a whole at the time that it was classified. Table 3.4: Maximum numbers of qualifying species recorded from vicinity of proposal area compared to numbers present at the time of classification of the Firth of Forth SPA (N.B. These surveys cover different areas and were undertaken over different time periods using varying methods) Species WeBS core count winter 5yr mean of peaks 2006/07 2010/11 (winter 5 yr mean of peaks as percentage of International threshold) 819 (23%) Maximum count in the tetrad Anecdotal counts* Numbers of individuals present within SPA at time of classification
Pink-footed 610 goose Curlew 136 (2%) 1 Lapwing 250 (1%) 15 Golden plover Redshank 1 (<1%) Oystercatcher 13 (<1%) * These are estimates based on anecdotal information
c. 1000 c. 300
10852 192 4148 2949 4341 7846
Pink-footed goose This area of coastline has been ranked 5th in the Forth for the winter five year mean counts of pink-footed goose. Appreciable numbers have also been recorded from the tetrad that includes the site (max count 610 birds). Significant numbers have also been recorded by local bird recorders. Curlew Appreciable numbers of curlew have been recorded from the shoreline during the WeBS core counts. Up to 300 curlew have also been recorded from the site by local bird recorders. Lapwing
34
This area of coastline has been ranked 5th in the Forth for the winter five year mean counts of both pink-footed goose and lapwing. Low numbers of this species have also been recorded from the tetrad. Conclusions The site supports habitats of potential value to the qualifying species (cropped agricultural land and grassland (estimated as around 1.6 ha)), and represents around 1% of the potentially suitable habitat for qualifying species that has been measured within the portion of Clackmannanshire that lies within the IFLI area. In addition, the site is considered sufficiently large (> 6 ha) to be used by pink-footed goose. Whilst there is some uncertainty about the use of the site by qualifying species of the SPA, information obtained from local bird recorders suggests that the main area used by birds lies adjacent to the coast. This area is remote from most sources of disturbance and supports habitat that is suitable for qualifying species. The short length of coastline near the site, means that the risk of significant disturbance during operation of the site can be avoided through design of the site e.g. by use of a buffer zone of suitable width along the coast (to be determined by local conditions) to retain key habitat features and use of screen planting. Disturbance during construction can also be avoided by timing the works to avoid the autumn/winter periods when qualifying species are present. This site, together with other sites in the LDP (e.g. B02), forms part of the network of open areas along the northern shore of the Forth. The use of individual sites will vary depending on a variety of factors such as weather, cropping regime, season and disturbance. The limited information available suggests that bird usage is mainly associated with the largest field lying closest to the coast. The two small fields that lie further back from the shore are used to a lower level, but may form an important buffering role, creating an area of separation between disturbance and human activity around the built-up areas and the coast. If these two fields were developed, this would act to bring disturbance closer to the. Discussions have been held with SNH about the level of bird use at the site and whether loss of this site would have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA. SNH has advised that there is remaining uncertainty about (a) the level of use of the site by qualifying species and therefore (b) the effect of loss of the site upon the integrity of the SPA32. To address this dual issue of uncertainty, SNH has proposed that conditional wording is added to the site schedule. This acts to remove the presumption in favour of the development if it was implemented in a way that could adversely affect site integrity 33. This is consistent with a High Court Ruling34 that considered the use of conditional wording or a safeguard condition within a strategic plan. In this case, a Local Authority, with the support of the statutory Nature Conservation Body (Natural England) had addressed the issue of uncertainty within the appropriate assessment for the plan by including qualifying wording into a proposal. The judge ruled that The adoption, in the Core Strategy, of the
32 33
Email from SNH dated 1/10/2013 Para 5.24, page 33, SNH Guidance, Tyldesley, 2012 34 Feeney v Oxford City Council & Others, 2011, EWHC 2699
35
qualifying wording as recommended by the Joint Statement, ensures that no such harm can or will arise.34
36
Mitigation wording To address the uncertainty relating to information about the use of the site, and consequently to remove reasonable doubt about the consequence of the proposal upon the integrity of the SPA, the following wording has been added to the site schedule (new text in italics). Development Requirements Proposals within this site will not be in accordance with this development plan unless it can be demonstrated, by means of an appropriate assessment, that the proposal will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA or River Teith SAC, either alone or in combination with other parts of this or other plans and projects. Developers will be expected to provide such information as the Council deems necessary to inform the appropriate assessment. In respect of the Firth of Forth SPA, Developers should be aware that this information is likely to include detailed information about the use of this site by qualifying species of the SPA over a minimum of one wintering and migratory season. In addition, it may involve assessment of the pattern of usage of this site in relation to other sites beyond the boundary of this site allocation. Consequently, developers are encouraged to collaborate in undertaking research for these areas. Environmental Assets Proposals will be subject to Habitats Regulations Appraisal. The application will need to demonstrate that the proposals will not have an adverse effect upon the integrity of either the Firth of Forth SPA or River Teith SAC either alone or in combination with other proposals in this plan (Including, but not necessarily limited to B02 and B13) or other projects. Developers will be required to provide information to enable this appropriate assessment to be undertaken. This may include (but not be limited to): providing information about the use of this site and other suitable areas along the coast in Clackmannanshire by qualifying species of the SPA over at least one full winter and migratory period; providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoided during operation of the proposals; providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoided during construction of the scheme (e.g. constraints on the construction period); providing details of how impacts on qualifying interests of the River Teith SAC will be avoided. Flood Risk Assessment required to determine area at risk from coastal flooding including issue of sea level rise. Potential for managed realignment should be investigated. These aspects will require a Habitats Regulations Appraisal in respect of likely effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA and River Teith SAC. Proposals which create habitat of value to the qualifying interest features of the Firth of Forth will be preferred. 3.2.4 B13 Midtown business proposal, Alloa The site is proposed for business development; suitable for business, industrial, storage or distribution uses (Classes 4, 5 and 6) It is located adjacent to the Cambus Pools nature reserve and lies on an area of land close to the River Forth, but outwith the boundary of the SPA. Birds associated with Cambus Pool are counted separately to those that use the shoreline of the Forth during core counts. The proposal site lies close to two core count units on 37
the Forth (Upper Taylorton to Fallin and Fallin to Cambus) (see Table 3.1). Low tide count units are only available for a section of the Forth from Cambus Pools downstream (BF003) (see Table 3.2). Eight qualifying species have been recorded from Cambus Pools during the core counts, and nine species have been recorded during the low tide counts (see Table 3.1 and below). The sources of likely significant effects arising from this development were identified as: Pollution during construction. This could result in (a) deterioration in habitats of the qualifying species; (b) changes in the distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and/or (c) changes in the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species. Loss of habitat used as high tide roost sites leading to changes in the distribution of the species within the site. Significant disturbance of qualifying species during construction. Significant disturbance of qualifying species during operation. Pollution during construction can arise from unregulated releases of fuels or chemicals, accidental spills, and run-off of sediment from disturbed ground. These impacts can be avoided by good construction practice. Disturbance effects during construction can be avoided by timing the works to occur outwith the wintering period of the qualifying species. The greatest risks of adverse effects are from the loss of habitat that supports the qualifying species and from significant disturbance of the qualifying species during operation of the scheme. The implications of these effects on qualifying species particularly pink-footed goose, curlew and lapwing are considered below. The Upper Taylorton to Fallin and Fallin to Cambus core count units were ranked 5th and 7th respectively based on the winter five year peak mean numbers of pink-footed goose. Appreciable numbers of lapwing and curlew have been recorded from the core count units along the Forth near the site and from the tetrad. The low tide count unit is ranked 4th based on the peak count of curlew. The site is used as agricultural land, which, depending on its cropping regime, may be of value to pink-footed goose. The site is 16.08 ha35 in size, making it large enough to be suitable for this species. The site spans two different recording tetrads. The maximum count of pink-footed goose from one of these tetrads is 276 birds. However, there is no information as to which parts of the tetrad supported these birds, and whether pinkfooted geese ever use the proposed development site. Further information about the use of this site was sought from local bird observers. The site is believed to be used hundreds of pink-footed goose over the winter months36; with a maximum count of 500 being recorded in 201237. Up to 80 curlew and lapwing are also regularly found feeding at this site and in the adjoining fields38, although one observer
35 36
Land Use Consultants, 2013 R. Gooch pers comm 37 D. Bryant pers comm 38 R. Gooch pers comm
38
suggests that numbers of curlew may reach the 10039s. Oystercatchers have also been recorded from this area40. Disturbance has been noted to alter the behaviour of qualifying species in this area; numbers using this area, which is subject to disturbance from nearby construction activities, farming, and recreational access are observed to be lower than the numbers using the Haugh of Blackgrange peninsula. Consequently it appears that this site nay act as a buffer zone between the disturbed, built up areas to the north of the site, and the heavily used areas around the Haugh of Blackgrange. Conclusions The site supports habitats of potential value to the qualifying species and is thought to support these species. Discussions have been held with SNH about the level of bird use at the site and whether loss of this site would have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA. SNH has advised that there is remaining uncertainty about (a) the level of use of the site by qualifying species and therefore (b) the effect of loss of the site upon the integrity of the SPA41. To address this dual issue of uncertainty, SNH has proposed that conditional wording is added to the site schedule. This acts to remove the presumption in favour of the development if it was implemented in a way that could adversely affect site integrity42. This is consistent with a High Court Ruling that considered the use of conditional wording or a safeguard condition within a strategic plan43. In this case, a Local Authority, with the support of the statutory Nature Conservation Body (Natural England) had addressed the issue of uncertainty within the appropriate assessment for the plan by including qualifying wording into a proposal. The judge ruled that The adoption, in the Core Strategy, of the qualifying wording as recommended by the Joint Statement, ensures that no such harm can or will arise.42 Mitigation wording To address the uncertainty relating to information about the use of the site, and consequently to remove reasonable doubt about the consequence of the proposal upon the integrity of the SPA, the following wording has been added to the site schedule (new text in italics). Development Requirements Proposals within this site will not be in accordance with this development plan unless it can be demonstrated, by means of an appropriate assessment, that the proposal will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA, either alone or in combination with other parts of this or other plans and projects. Developers will be expected to provide such information as the Council deems necessary to inform the appropriate assessment. In respect of the Firth of Forth SPA, Developers should be aware that this information is likely to include detailed information about the use of this site by qualifying species of the SPA over a minimum of one wintering and
39 40
D. Bryant pers comm D. Bryant pers comm 41 Email from SNH dated 1/10/2013 42 Para 5.24, page 33, SNH Guidance, Tyldesley, 2012 43 Feeney v Oxford City Council & Others, 2011, EWHC 2699
39
migratory season. In addition, it may involve assessment of the pattern of usage of this site in relation to other sites beyond the boundary of this site allocation. Consequently, developers are encouraged to collaborate in undertaking research for these areas. Environmental Assets Proposals will be subject to Habitats Regulations Appraisal. The application will need to demonstrate that the proposals will not have an adverse effect upon the integrity of either the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other proposals in this plan (including, but not necessarily limited to B02 and B12) or other projects. Developers will be required to provide information to enable this appropriate assessment to be undertaken. This may include (but not be limited to): providing information about the use of this site and other suitable areas along the coast in Clackmannanshire by qualifying species of the SPA over at least one full winter and migratory period; providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoided during operation of the proposals; providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoided during construction of the scheme (e.g. constraints on the construction period). Flood Risk Assessment required to determine area at risk from coastal flooding including issue of sea level rise. Potential for managed realignment should be investigated. These aspects will require a Habitats Regulations Appraisal in respect of likely effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA. Proposals which create habitat of value to the qualifying interest features of the Firth of Forth will be preferred. 3.2.5 B14 Kennetpans This small site, which lies adjacent to the shore at Kennetpans, has been identified as suitable for commercial tourism development. There are no details of what types of activity may be developed. The species recorded from the shore at Kennetpans during the WeBS core and low tide counts are listed in Tables 3.1 & 3.2 (Kennetpans and B006 low count units respectively). Fourteen species were recorded from the Kennetpans core count unit the greatest number for a single count unit within Clackmannanshire. This included significant numbers of pink-footed goose and this site was ranked 10th within the Forth based on the winter mean five year peak numbers of this species. Significant numbers were also recorded from the tetrad during the BTO Atlas surveys. However, the site is considered too small, and does not contain sufficient suitable habitat, to support this species. High numbers of curlew were also recorded (winter 5yr mean peak count of 192 birds). Ten qualifying species were recorded from the low tide count unit. The count unit was ranked 8th in the Forth for the peak count of mallard (winter 2004/05). Appreciable numbers of curlew and redshank have been recorded from the tetrad during the BTO Atlas surveys. However, given the size of the plot, and nature of habitat, it is not likely that these species will be using the proposal site. Anecdotal evidence provided by local bird recorders suggests that fields close to Kennetpans (NS916889), which are located to the east and outwith the boundary of the proposal site, are important for pink-footed goose and curlew.
40
At this stage, the types of development that may be introduced are not known. However, the implications for the qualifying interest features of the SPA in light of its conservation objectives are likely to arise from: Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species at the coast (Pink-footed goose, cormorant, shelduck, wigeon, mallard, goldeneye, red-breasted merganser, oystercatcher, ringed plover, lapwing, knot, dunlin, bar-tailed godwit, curlew, redshank). Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species at nearby high tide roost sites and hence changes to distribution of species within the SPA. Oystercatcher, curlew, redshank and lapwing have been recorded from the tetrad & it appears that there are areas of suitable habitat (based on aerial photos). Pink-footed goose has been recorded for the tetrad, but the site is considered too small to support this species. To avoid adverse effects upon the SPA, additional mitigation will be included within the site schedule and proposals. This also includes text relevant to the River Teith SAC (see Section 4.3.1). New text that has been added is shown in italics: Environmental Assets The existing bullet point relating to ecological appraisal will be replaced with the following text: Proposals will be subject to Habitats Regulations Appraisal. The Development Brief and application will need to demonstrate that the proposals will not have an adverse effect upon the integrity of either the Firth of Forth SPA or River Teith SAC. This may include providing information about use of the site and surrounding area by qualifying species of the SPA, and how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoided during operation of the proposals. There may also need to be constraints on the construction period to avoid sensitive times for birds. Flood Risk Assessment required to determine area at risk from coastal flooding including issue of sea level rise. Potential for managed realignment should be investigated. These aspects will require a Habitats Regulations Appraisal in respect of likely effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA and River Teith SAC. Proposals which create habitat of value to the qualifying interest features of the Firth of Forth will be preferred. Assuming that this mitigation is included in the plan, the proposal is not predicted to have an adverse effect upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects or plans.
3.3 Proposals within the LDP which may act in combination (cumulatively) to have likely significant effects on site integrity
3.3.1 Housing developments within 5 km of the coast that could contribute to increased recreational use of the coast Recreational activity of coastal areas can contribute to disturbance of birds (defined as any human activity that influences a birds behaviour or survival). Disturbance, even outwith the boundary of an SPA, can compromise the ability of the site to meet its conservation objectives, but only if it is significant and leads to changes in the distribution of the species within the site and/or the species remaining a viable component of the site. As noted in Section 2.4.1, a distance of 5 km from the coast has been chosen as a broadbrush screening tool for identifying new housing developments that may give rise to 41
increased levels of recreational activity at the coast. Forty four proposals were identified as falling within this 5 km zone (See Table 2.2. and Appendix C). Eight of these proposals include the provision or upgrading of recreational facilities as part of the development, and ten of the proposals require developer contributions to create recreational opportunities (see Table 3.5). In addition, the LDP includes a number of specific proposals for enhancing or expanding recreational opportunities away from the coast (e.g. N01 Alva Woodland Park Expansion). One of the most significant of these is N02, Meadowhill opencast restoration. The IFLI will also contribute to habitat improvements for qualifying species. Consequently, not all residents of the new housing may visit the coast for recreation. Table 3.5: Proposals that include a requirement for open space or access provision or a contribution for provision of such facilities Proposals that require upgrade/provision Proposals that require developer of recreational facilities as part of the contributions to create off-site recreation development and open space provision/ upgrading H01 Sunnyside, Alloa M01 Alloa Co-op site, Alloa H03 Carsebridge Road North, Alloa H02 Ashley Terrace, Alloa H04 Carsebridge, Alloa H07 Earlsfield 1, Alloa H05 South Earlsfield 2 (Alloa SE Plot 7), H08 Earlsfield West, Alloa Alloa H16 Sauchie West, Sauchie* (includes major H10 Central Parkland, Alloa new park) H28 Helensfield, Clackmannan H15 Former FV College, Sauchie H33 Middletonkerse H18 Main Street B, Sauchie H38 Berryfield, Alva H21 Todds Yard, Sauchie M04 Alloa Road, Tullibody H30 Blackfaulds Steading, Devon Village Not all areas of the Clackmannanshire coast are equally accessible, or attractive to visitors. Data concerning visitor use of paths and recreational activity of the coast is not available, but some indication of the areas that are used can be obtained by reference to the core path network and anecdotal information. The core path network provides relatively few access points to or along the shoreline in Clackmannanshire. These are limited to: access to the shore near Cambus Pools; between the River Devon and Tullibody Inch; and at Kennetpans. The core path near Cambus Pools follows the western bank of the River Devon to its confluence with the River Forth and then runs along the bank of the Forth for a distance of a little over 100 m before diverting north-westwards past Cambus Pools Nature Reserve and then around the edge of the land identified for proposal B13 Midtown in the LDP. The WeBS core count and low tide data cover a much larger area of land than the core path. Eight qualifying species44 have been recorded in WeBS counts for Cambus Pools, of which pink-footed goose and curlew occur in greatest numbers. Anecdotal information provided by local bird recorders suggests that qualifying species, particularly pink-footed goose, curlew, lapwing and oystercatchers may be found in this area, although numbers are lower than on the Haugh of Blackgrange owing to the level of disturbance (from agriculture & recreation).
44
Pink-footed goose, shelduck, wigeon, oystercatcher, lapwing, curlew, and redshank
mallard,
goldeneye,
red-breasted
merganser,
42
The stretch of core path that extends from the River Devon to Tullibody Inch extends along the shore of the Forth for a distance of around 1.5 km. This lies within the South Alloa to Cambus WeBS core count unit. Thirteen of the qualifying species have been recorded from this count unit, including high numbers of pink-footed goose, cormorant, ringed plover, lapwing, curlew and redshank. There are no data to confirm which of these species use the stretch of coastline next to the core path, or which use the adjacent fields as high tide roost sites. However, based on the information about use of fields in the wider area, it seems reasonable to assume that pink-footed goose, lapwing, curlew and redshank may all use the adjacent fields. The core path at Kennetpans provides access to the shore, but does not extend along the shoreline. Fourteen qualifying species45 have been recorded from Kennetpans during the WeBS core counts (see Table 3.1). Several of these species are associated with the intertidal zone, and are most likely to be found on the mudflats present in this area (e.g. wigeon). There is no local anecdotal information to identify which of these species may be using adjacent fields as high tide roost sites. Whilst these locations correspond to areas that support important numbers of some of the qualifying species, these areas all currently experience a degree of recreational use and consequent disturbance. All the core paths are located outwith the boundary of the SPA, although the disturbance around the Kennetpans site may extend to within the SPA boundary. The question is whether any additional recreational use of these paths would lead to significant disturbance of qualifying species with a consequent decline in population numbers or distribution within the SPA. There has been research into identifying the way in which birds respond to different forms of disturbance, but there is no guidance on how to define whether these responses represent a significant level of disturbance. Typical bird responses to disturbance include switching from feeding to being alert or to leaving the feeding area for other (probably inferior) feeding areas. This reduces the food intake of the bird, and may increase energy use if the bird flies off. It may result in a reduction in the condition of the bird, death, or reduced breeding success in the following spring. The effects of disturbance are likely to be greater during the winter months, when birds experience other stresses from cold temperatures and reduced day length for feeding. Research suggests that the level of disturbance is unlikely to be related to the numbers of visitors, but is linked to the type of activity undertaken and its location on the shoreline. For example, there was no significant correlation between the total number of people present at a site or the numbers of groups of people and the level of disturbance to birds on the Solent46 and research in the Netherlands suggests that a single user, disturbing birds on a regular basis, may be sufficient to cause the decline of a roost47. There are no data for the current level of use of the core paths or the types of activity undertaken; however, it is known that qualifying species are found in the vicinity of these core paths. Whilst the housing proposals may cause some changes to the level of recreational use of the core paths, the types of activity are not likely to be affected by the proposal.
45
Pink-footed goose, shelduck, wigeon, mallard, red-breasted merganser, cormorant, oystercatcher, ringed plover, lapwing, knot, dunlin, bar-tailed godwit, curlew and redshank 46 Liley et al, 2010 47 Wolff et al 1982
43
The qualifying species are present during the winter months, when there is reduced day length and inclement weather, which will act to reduce the times when people are likely to be using the paths and hence contribute to disturbance. Also, during the coldest times it is anticipated that the numbers of recreational users will decline. Birds appear to be more sensitive to disturbance within the inter-tidal zone than activities along the shore itself48. Walking, accompanied by a dog off a lead, is one of the activities most likely to disturb birds. For example, in the Solent, walkers with dogs off leads accounted for over half of recorded disturbance on the Solent, although these only represented one third of all users49. Also, walking with a dog off the lead in the inter-tidal zone accounted for around a third of recorded disturbance on the Exe Estuary50. Based on aerial photographs, it appears that the core paths are set back from the shoreline by a few metres, thus avoiding the inter-tidal zone. It is not known how many walkers are accompanied by dogs, but much of the main habitat of the inter-tidal zone is mud, which is less attractive for walking. Hence, it is surmised that there is unlikely to be significant disturbance to qualifying species in the inter-tidal zone of the SPA. Local bird observers have indicated that qualifying species will use fields behind the sea wall along the Forth as high tide roost sites. As the core paths are already established, and hence birds are likely to be habituated to use of these area, the housing developments are not considered to give rise to significant disturbance on the qualifying species outwith the boundary of the SPA to the level where it would have an effect upon the numbers or distribution of the qualifying species within the SPA. In conclusion, the housing proposals within the LDP will not have an adverse effect upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects or plans. 3.3.2 Proposals on sites that have the potential to provide high tide roosting/feeding sites for pink-footed goose Pink-footed goose can use inland sites for roosting and feeding. There is a potential for loss of such sites or disturbance to species whilst using these sites. This could lead to changes in the distribution of the qualifying species within the SPA. Table 2.2 identified a number of proposals that individually were assessed as having Minor Residual Effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA, but which were considered to have a cumulative Likely Significant Effect upon the SPA. The cumulative effect of these proposals is considered below. There is little knowledge about which inland areas are used by pink-footed goose, but an estimation of potential areas has been made. These are defined as proposal sites within 15 km of the coast, that are located within tetrads from which pink-footed goose have been recorded (or not counted) and contain areas of habitat considered to be potentially suitable for this species. Following discussions with SNH, an extra site, that does not meet these criteria, has been included (B01). This site is too small to meet the size criterion and does not support suitable habitat. However, it is located adjacent to areas that are known to be used by high numbers of geese as a high tide roost/ foraging/loafing site, and so has been considered for in combination effects in terms of disturbance.
48 49
Liley et al, 2011 Fearnley, et al 2010 50 Liley et al, 2010
44
Whilst there is no evidence that any of these sites are actually used by pink-footed goose, the absence of information has not been considered to provide sufficiently certainty about a lack of effects, so using a precautionary approach, the cumulative effect of loss of this amount of habitat has been considered. Table 3.6 summarises the proposal sites that meet these criteria and the maximum counts of pink-footed goose recorded from the tetrads. Table 3.6: Proposals from tetrads within 15 km of the coast from which pink-footed goose have been recorded (or not counted) and contain areas of habitat considered to be potentially suitable for this species Site Area & Land Use Maximum count of pink-footed goose from tetrad including site Housing proposals H45 Coalsnaughton Site area: 10.75 ha 2 North, Coalsnaughton Land use: mainly agricultural land H50 Forestmill Site area: 121.65 ha 74 (site spans 4 count Land use: part of site is agricultural areas, not all of use; part is reclaimed land. which have been counted) Business Proposals B01 Forthbank Site area: 1.08 ha 1200 Land use: Previously developed land B15 Meadowend Site area: 8.24 ha 1000 Land use: mainly agricultural land Social Infrastructure S07 Cambus Park and Location and land area not yet known 88 1200 depending Ride on location Totals 140.64 ha Pink-footed goose has been recorded from 13 tetrads within Clackmannanshire, of which 4 contain housing and business proposals, and contain habitat of potential value to pinkfooted goose and are of a sufficient size to be potentially suitable to this species. It is estimated that the total area to be lost to the housing and business development proposals listed in Table 3.6 is in the order of 140 ha. Only one of the proposal sites lies within the IFLI area (B15). This site represents less than 0.3% of the potentially suitable habitat (grassland and arable habitats) within the IFLI area within Clackmannanshire (c. 3071 ha). This is an over-estimation of the loss of potentially suitable habitat, as not all habitats present on these sites is considered to be suitable for pink-footed goose. Pink-footed geese will use a variety of sites throughout the winter. Some areas are wellknown as roost sites, where geese can reliably be recorded during the winter (e.g. Haugh of Blackgrange). The use of other sites will vary depending on the cropping regime. Weather and disturbance will also influence use of sites on a day to day basis. Based on anecdotal information from local bird recorders, it appears that there are a number of potential feeding and roosting areas that lie between Skinflats on the southern shore of the Forth and Stirling in the West, including several sites in Clackmannanshire. However, the main areas favoured by the birds tend to be areas of extensive and open farmland to the south, east, north and west of the River Forth. Consequently, the loss of the small areas of potentially suitable habitat outwith the boundary of the SPA will not have an adverse effect upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA with respect to its conservation objectives. 45
In addition, nine of the proposals for upgrade to services or social infrastructure are located within tetrads from which pink-footed goose have been recorded, and may be located close to or on potentially suitable habitat. These are: T11 Fishcross Bypass T13 Carsebridge area, Alloa T16 Helensfield via Jellyholm linking to Carsebridge T19 Road between A91 and C101 via Menstrie Mains T24 Coalsnaughton Bypass T25 Menstrie-Stirling Active Travel Route T26 A91 Alva-Tillicoultry Active Travel Route These proposals are for linear routes and comprise, for the main part, upgrading of existing tracks and cycle routes and hence will not involve any loss of habitat. As they are existing routes, they will not create new locations for disturbance or fragmentation. The locations are set back from the coast, and whilst geese have been recorded from the tetrads, none of these sites are thought to be in locations important for qualifying species. They developments will not have an adverse effect upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA. 3.3.3 Development proposals on sites that have the potential to provide high tide roosting/feeding sites for wader species that are a qualifying interest feature of the SPA The cumulative effect of the loss of habitat considered suitable for use as high tide roost/ foraging sites by qualifying wader species has been considered. Two of these sites are located within tetrads from which qualifying wader species have been recorded during the BTO Atlas counts. One site (B11) spans two tetrads, only one of which has records for a single qualifying species (redshank). The other two sites are located within tetrads from which there have been zero counts for the qualifying wader species. Originally these two sites were screened out from the analysis, but SNH has indicated that they should be included considering their proximity to the coast and presence of potentially suitable habitat. A further site (B01) does not have potentially supporting habitat of qualifying wader species, but is located to such areas that lie within tetrads from which qualifying species have been recorded. Following discussions with SNH it was agreed that the potential Minor Residual Effects on qualifying species that could arise as a result of disturbance during construction works on B01 should be considered for in combination effects. The numbers of each qualifying species recorded from each tetrad are summarised in Table 3.7, together with details of the total number of tetrads from which each qualifying species has been recorded. (Site B01 has been omitted from the table as the loss of habitat on the site is not the issue). Whilst there is no evidence which, if any, of these qualifying species, use these proposal sites, the cumulative effect of loss of this amount of habitat has been considered. Based on Table 3.7 it can be seen that the developments do not affect all the tetrads from which particular species have been recorded. Only one of the sites, H12 lies within the IFLI area. This represents the loss of a maximum of 0.2% of the potentially suitable habitat. This site is already undergoing development, as it was included in the previous local plan, and hence has been subject to HRA previously. In conclusion, the housing proposals within the LDP will not give rise to adverse effects upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects or plans.
46
Table 3.7: Area of potential supporting habitat to be affected by development proposals Proposals Site area (% of potentially suitable habitat) Maximum count of wader species
H07 Earlsfield 1, 4.95 ha Alloa H08 Earlsfield 2.36 ha 0 0 0 0 0 0 West, Alloa H12 Claremont 4.48 ha 14 0 81 242 6 2 (0.2%) B11 Kilbagie 19.27 ha 0 0 0 0 2* 0 B18 Alva 3.57 ha 0 0 50 1 1 9 Industrial Estate Tetrads within 1 0 9 7 8 5 Clackmannanshire Totals 34.63 ha * B11 Kilbagie spans two recording tetrads. The count of 2 redshank was recorded from one of the tetrads, which also includes an area of the coast; there were zero counts for this species from the other tetrad that spans the site.
3.4 Proposals within the Clackmannanshire LDP that may act in combination with other plans, projects and proposals to have likely significant effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA
Golden Grey Lapwing* Curlew* Redshank OysterPlover Plover* catcher* 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other plans and proposals that have the potential to act in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP to have effects upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA were identified in Section 2.6.1. 3.4.1 In combination effects with other LDPs loss of/disturbance to pink-footed goose at inland roost sites Pink-footed geese that have been recorded from WeBS core count units in Clackmannanshire may also utilise inland feeding areas in other local authority areas, notably Falkirk Council and Stirling Council. Each of these local authorities has published draft LDPs that include proposals, which will lead to small-scale losses of habitat of potential value to pink-footed goose. The City of Edinburgh has also published a draft LDP and HRA, but as pink-footed goose is rarely recorded from the local authority area, it is not considered likely to be significantly affected by that plan. The total area of potentially suitable habitat for pink-footed goose around the Forth is not known. The HRA Record of the Falkirk LDP estimated that a maximum of 1.4% of the total area of potentially suitable habitat within Falkirk would be affected by the LDP. Similar figures are not available for the Stirling LDP, but sites at Throsk/Bandeath and Durieshill 51 were identified as having minor residual effects upon the qualifying interest species in terms of disturbance of high tide roost sites. Less than 0.5% of the potentially suitable habitat lying within the IFLI area will be affected by the Clackmannanshire LDP. These projections represent a precautionary worst case scenario as there is no evidence that these areas are actually used by pink-footed goose. Whilst the projections suggest that only a small proportion of the potential habitat may be affected, small scale losses can have large effects on qualifying species if those sites support large numbers of the species.
51
Stirling Council, 2012
47
A number of factors influence the choice of inland feeding and loafing areas including the weather, size of the site and cropping regime. Whilst the choice of preferred sites can vary on an almost daily basis, broad areas that are popular with geese are generally known by the bird-watching community. Other than the proposals that have been considered for effects on their own (see sections 3.2.1 -3.2.6), none of the other proposals within the Falkirk, Stirling and Clackmannanshire LDPs are for sites that are known to be important as inland roost sites for pink-footed goose. It is therefore concluded that there will not be an adverse effect upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA from these development proposals, either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. 3.4.2 In combination effects with other LDPs loss of habitat/disturbance to qualifying wader species at inland roost sites Five of the qualifying wader species of the Firth of Forth SPA are known to use inland roost sites52. Based on anecdotal information, it appears that the sites that support the highest numbers of these qualifying species are generally located close to the sea wall. A precautionary approach has been taken to identifying the maximum scale of loss of potentially suitable habitat. It has been estimated that less than 0.2% of potentially suitable habitat within the IFLP area of Clackmannanshire will be lost to proposals included in the Clackmannanshire LDP. This compares to around 1.5% of potentially suitable habitat that is affected by the Falkirk LDP and 3.8% of potentially supporting habitat within 5 km of the coast within the City of Edinburgh Council area. Similar figures are not available for Stirling, but the number of proposals that may affect potentially suitable habitat is low. Based on these figures, it can be seen that the Clackmannanshire LDP contributes very little additional loss of potentially suitable habitat around the Forth as a whole. As noted above (Section 3.4.1), even small scale losses can have adverse effects on integrity if they affect sites that support high numbers of the qualifying species. Based on anecdotal information from bird recorders, other than the proposals that have been considered for effects on their own (see sections 3.2.1 3.2.6), none of the other proposals within the Falkirk, Stirling and Clackmannanshire LDPs are for sites that are known to be important as inland roost sites for oystercatcher, curlew, golden plover, redshank or lapwing. It is important to stress, that these losses refer to habitat that occurs outwith the boundary of the SPA. Loss of these areas would only represent an adverse effect on the integrity of the SPA if their loss (or disturbance to birds whilst using these areas) led to a decrease in either the numbers or distribution of the qualifying species within the boundary of the SPA. It is also important to stress that the net loss of potential habitat outwith the boundary of the SPA as a result of the proposals within the LDP will be less than the estimated area figures outlined above. This is because the Clackmannanshire (and Falkirk) LDP includes proposals to create new areas of habitat, some of which will be suitable for use by qualifying species of the SPA. Clackmannanshire is also participating in the IFLI. One of the likely projects is conservation and enhancement of natural heritage, such as creation of new and enhanced wetland areas at the mouth of the River Black Devon and the
52
Oystercatcher, curlew, golden plover, redshank, lapwing
48
improvement of the Cambus Pools Nature Reserve habitat. These habitat enhancement proposals are independent of the other proposals included within the LDP (including housing proposals) and are NOT compensation measures. Habitat creation and improvement may act to mitigate the scale of any minor residual effects that arise from the LDP. This is consistent with the a high Court ruling that provision of new feeding areas outside a European site to make up for impacts outside the European site should be considered as mitigation as the measures would mean that there would be no adverse effect on the integrity of the European Site53. In conclusion, the housing proposals within the LDP will not adversely affect the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects or plans. This is the case even if the habitat improvement proposals are not implemented. 3.4.3 In combination effects with other LDPs increased recreational disturbance at the coast Section 3.3.1 considered the likely effects of the LDP on recreational use of the coastline of Clackmannanshire, and resultant disturbance on qualifying species both within and outwith the SPA boundary. Whilst it was concluded that the proposals within the plan would not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the SPA, there is also a need to consider whether any minor residual effects will act in combination with minor residual effects from other LDP. There are limited opportunities to access the coast in Clackmannan. A number of the qualifying species were identified as using these areas (refer to Table 3.1 for full list), of which pink-footed goose, shelduck, wigeon, red-breasted merganser, cormorant, dunlin, curlew, lapwing, redshank and oystercatcher were thought to be at greatest risk of disturbance. All these species (except red-breasted merganser) were also identified as occurring in areas that may experience disturbance as a result of proposals within the Falkirk LDP. Shelduck, wigeon and cormorant are usually associated with the inter-tidal or sub-tidal area, which means that they are less liable to disturbance from recreation above the hightide mark. It is difficult to enumerate the scale of any increased recreational use of the coast, and whether this will enhance the level of disturbance of qualifying species above that which they currently receive. As was noted in Section 3.3.1, they type of activity can be more important in causing disturbance, rather than the number of people who use an area. The types of recreational activity that will occur following introduction of the LDPs are not anticipated to change from those that occurred before, although the numbers of people taking part in that activity may increase. Furthermore, the scale of additional use of the Clackmannanshire coastline as a result of the LDP is considered to be very low, given the limited number of opportunities to access the shore. Consequently, it is concluded that there will be no adverse effects on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA. 3.4.4 In combination effects with proposals for Cockenzie Power station Cockenzie Power Station is being converted from a coal-fired to a gas-fired station. The Environmental Statement54 concluded that the there will be no significant impact on the
53
Hargreaves v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Wyre Borough Council, Cornwall Light and Power Company Ltd (2011) EWHC 1999 (2 nd August 2011) 54 Scottish Power, 2009.
49
conservation status of the SPA. There is the potential for minor adverse impacts on the SPA bird assemblage and qualifying species as a result of disturbance during the construction phase, but these impacts could be mitigated through controls on working hours. SNH has indicated that it has concerns that the proposals may have an effect if changes to the management of the ash lagoons result in a decreased ability to support qualifying species of the SPA. There are few details in the public domain about the species that currently use the ash lagoons, and any changes to management that are likely. The main species located on inland areas in Clackmannanshire are pink-footed goose and curlew. Whilst these species are recorded in the vicinity of the lagoons, based on anecdotal information, only low numbers of these species have been recorded from the lagoons. In conclusion, the Clackmannanshire LDP will not act in combination with the proposals with Cockenzie Power Station to have an adverse effect upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth. 3.4.5 In combination effects with proposals for Rosyth International Container There are proposals for a new container terminal at Rosyth55. The Harbour Order application has been subject to a Public Inquiry, and a decision is expected shortly. It is anticipated that the scheme will be consented, with amendments. During the Public Inquiry, the scope and need for an appropriate assessment of the scheme was debated. The Report of the Inquiry states that Ministers have carried out an appropriate assessment in relation to the terrestrial elements of the project and have concluded that, subject to inclusion of mitigation measures, there will be no adverse impacts upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA. Minor residual effects are likely to be limited to disturbance of qualifying species during operation. The appropriate assessment for the scheme does not list the individual qualifying species that will experience effects, but does record the presence of all the qualifying species (except grey plover and Slavonian grebe). The Clackmannanshire LDP is unlikely to contribute to in combination effects with the proposals at Rosyth to result in significant disturbance of the qualifying species. This is because Rosyth is located in the order of 18 km to the east of Clackmannanshire. Any birds that are displaced, temporarily, as a result of disturbance arising out of either scheme, are likely to use sites close to the centre of disturbance. Also, the proposals within the Clackmannanshire LDP are unlikely to cause levels of disturbance that will cause displacement of birds from sites. Thus the disturbance will not result in a decline in the numbers or distribution of qualifying species using the SPA. SNH raised objections during the Public Inquiry process about the likely effects of dredging activities upon the SPA. The scheme applicants have stated that they believe that any HRA of this aspect of the scheme would form part of the application to Marine Scotland for a dredging licence. The Inquiry Report56 indicates that this is a matter for the Scottish Ministers to decide, but conclude that additional information would be required in order to determine the effects of dredging on the SPA. As the appropriate assessment of the marine dredging aspects of the RICT has not been undertaken, it is not possible to undertake an in combination assessment at this stage.
55 56
www.transportscotland.gov.uk Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals, 2012
50
3.4.6 In combination effects in relation to proposals for Grangemouth biomass Plant Consent has been granted for Forth Energy Ltd to construct and operate a combined heat and power plant at Grangemouth. As part of the consenting process, Scottish Ministers undertook an appropriate assessment of the proposals in respect of a number of European sites including the Firth of Forth SPA and the River Teith SAC. The appropriate assessment concluded that potentially adverse effects on qualifying species of the SPA (shelduck, knot, redshank, dunlin and curlew) arising from disturbance during construction of cooling pipes could be avoided by carrying out the construction works during the summer months57. This has been included as a condition of the consent58. Thus there is not scope for in combination effects with proposals within the Clackmannanshire LDP. Effects of thermal pollution on the availability of prey species of selected qualifying species (shelduck, knot, redshank, dunlin and curlew) were also considered. The effects on prey species were considered to be negligible and consequently the assessment concluded that there would be no significant decrease in the food available to qualifying species. Thus there is not scope for in combination effects with proposals within the Clackmannanshire LDP. The assessment further considered the effects of nitrogen and acid deposition arising from the plant. It concluded that large salt-water estuaries are capable of chemical buffering of the level of emissions that would result from the plant, and that the current levels discharged to the Forth have not altered the structure and functioning of the intertidal habitats. Thus, there is no scope for in combination effects with proposals within the Clackmannanshire LDP.
4 Appropriate Assessment of effects of Clackmannanshire LDP on the River Teith SAC

4.1 Qualifying interests
The qualifying interests of the River Teith SAC were summarised in section 1.3.2. The following section provides further information about these features as they may occur within the scope of influence of the Clackmannanshire LDP. The River Teith SAC is located in the order of 9 km upstream of the Clackmannanshire boundary. All of the qualifying interest species breed and spawn in freshwater, beyond the scope of the Clackmannanshire plan. Three of the qualifying interest features (sea lamprey, river lamprey and Atlantic salmon) spend part of their life cycle at sea or feeding in estuaries and will migrate along the Forth past the shores of Clackmannanshire. These three species, therefore, could be affected by any aspect of the LDP that influences migration in the Forth. 4.1.1 Data sources The assessment is based on information that is publically available through SNHs SiteLink website and details of water quality and threats that are available from SEPAs website. 4.1.2 Sea lamprey The sea lamprey is the largest of the lamprey species. The timing of the main downstream migration appears to vary from river to river59. Little is known about the species once it reaches the sea, although they are found in both shallow coastal and deep
57 58
Scottish Government Energy & Climate Change, 2012 DPEA Decision Letter 3rd http://dpea.scotland.gov.uk/Documents/qJ14364/A6071863.pdf 59 Applegate & Brynildson, 1952
June
2013.
51
off-shore waters. They appear to feed on a variety of marine and migratory fish including sturgeon (Acipenser sturio), herring (Clupea harengus), salmon (Salmo salar), cod (Gadus morhua) and haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus60). Migration back to freshwater usually starts in late spring61, and spawning takes place in late May or June, depending on water temperature. 4.1.3 River lamprey Relatively little is known about the habits of river lamprey in estuaries and the sea. Adult river lamprey may be found in the estuaries of major rivers in significant numbers, where they feed on a variety of estuarine fish including herring (Clupea harengus), sprat (Sprattus sprattus) and flounder (Platichthys flesus). They spend one to two years in estuaries or the sea, before migrating into freshwater October to December, with spawning occurring in spring, mainly April. 4.1.4 Atlantic salmon Like the river and sea lamprey, the Atlantic salmon spawns in freshwaters and the adults move to the sea to feed, prior to returning to freshwater to breed. Fish such as capelin (Mallotus villosus) and sandeels, and crustacea are the main prey items at sea62. Migration usually takes place at night, and is triggered by increased river flows63. Salmon return to their home rivers to spawn throughout the spring to autumn. The Rivers Forth and Teith have an early run of spring salmon, which lasts until May. In excess of 1000 salmon/grilse with an average weight of 11lb are caught annually from the Forth/Teith system64. 4.1.5 Areas used The Forth adjacent to Clackmannanshire varies in width from around 60 m to a maximum width in excess of 600 m. Details of the parts of the river channel that are used by each of the qualifying species are not known. However, there is some evidence that adult lamprey swim in the shallow margins of rivers when they migrate upstream against the current65.
4.2 Proposals which are likely to have an effect on their own
4.2.1 M02 The Shore, Alloa Details of this proposal were provided in Section 3.2.1; it allows for mixed use development of a site adjacent to the Firth of Forth. Repairs to the sea wall, and investigation of flood alleviation measures also form part of the proposal. As the site borders the River Forth, at a point where the channel is narrow (< 500 m), it has been identified as having Likely Significant Effects in relation to: releases of chemicals, soils or other pollutants during construction that would act to impair movement of river lamprey, sea lamprey and/or Atlantic salmon along the River Forth and hence affect the populations of the qualifying species as viable components of the site; noise and/or vibration during construction that would act to impair movement of river lamprey, sea lamprey and/or Atlantic salmon along the River Forth and hence affect the populations of the qualifying species as viable components of the site.
60 61
Maitland, 2003. Hardisty, 1969 62 Hendry & Cragg-Hine, 2003. 63 Moore et al 1995 64 Fishpal website. http://www.fishpal.com/Scotland/FirthOfForth/Teith.asp 65 Hardisty & Potter, 1971.
52
Such effects could compromise the ability of the site to meet its conservation objectives in terms of maintaining the qualifying species as a viable component of the site. Pollution during construction can arise from unregulated releases of fuels or chemicals, accidental spills, and run-off of sediment from disturbed ground. These can act to change the habitat quality or functioning on a temporary or permanent basis, depending on the nature of the pollutant. Three of the qualifying species (sea lamprey, river lamprey & Atlantic salmon) will pass along the river during migration. It is not known whether the River Lamprey also feeds or breeds in the vicinity of the proposal site. The effects of pollution can be avoided via good construction practice. Disturbance to fish species may take the form of noise or vibration either generated within the water column itself or externally, and lighting. Sources of vibration are unknown at this stage, but could originate from works to the sea wall. Artificial light and sound has been observed to trigger avoidance behaviour in salmon 66. Although Atlantic salmon do not have special organs for hearing, they are sensitive to acoustic particle motion, and have been observed to avoid infrasound frequencies in freshwater environments (510 Hz). Typical responses are diving to a deeper level and accelerated swim rates to move away from the stimulus. The extent to which lampreys are able to hear sound is unclear. There is some research that suggests that they may be able to hear clicks of low frequency (20 and 100 Hz), although they did not appear to respond to noises in the water column67. Larval forms of lampreys also demonstrate a startle-response to vibratory stimulus68. At this stage it is difficult to predict the scale of any effects that might arise from the proposal, however, adverse effects upon the integrity of the SAC can be avoided by careful design and timing of works. Consequently, the wording of the schedule has been amended to highlight the need to consider effects upon the SAC. This mitigation was highlighted in Section 3.2.1 but is reproduced below. New text is shown in italics. Creating Sustainable Communities Proposals should include details of house numbers and sizes, and any affordable housing provision and details of how the design (including landscaping and lighting) will avoid significant disturbance effects upon birds that are a qualifying interests of the Firth of Forth SPA and passage of migratory fish that are a qualifying interest of the River Teith SAC. Sea wall should be investigated and repaired if necessary and if it can be demonstrated that the repair works will not have an adverse effect upon the qualifying interests of the Firth of Forth SPA and River Teith SAC. Opportunity to create recreational access to River Forth. Any proposals for increased access must demonstrate that they will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA.
66
67
Bui et al 2013. Lennhardt, & Sismour, 1995. 68 Currie & Carlsen, 1987
53
Environmental Assets The site lies adjacent to the Firth of Forth. Proposals will be subject to a Habitats Regulations Appraisal, and may require an appropriate assessment. Developers will be required to provide adequate information to inform the appraisal and to demonstrate that the proposals will not have an adverse effect upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA or the River Teith SAC. This may include aspects of design and use of the site, in addition to constraints on construction periods and techniques to avoid the most sensitive times to the qualifying species of the SPA and SAC and additional pollution control measures during construction. Public river frontage should include flood alleviation measures. Residential development should have sufficient freeboard to avoid impacts. All proposals must demonstrate that they will not have an adverse effect on the qualifying interest features of the Firth of Forth SPA or River Teith SAC either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. The inclusion of this mitigation means that it can be concluded that the proposal will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the River Teith SAC. 4.2.2 B02 Alloa West Business Park The details of this proposal were set out in Section 3.2.2. SNH has indicated that the proximity of part of this site to the coast, at a point where the river narrows, means that there is the potential for LSE on qualifying species of the SAC as a result of pollution, noise or disturbance during construction. Such effects could compromise the ability of the site to meet its conservation objectives in terms of maintaining the qualifying species as a viable component of the site. Disturbance to fish species may take the form of noise or vibration either generated within the water column itself or externally, and lighting. The effects of noise and vibration were noted in section 4.2.1. As this is a strategic plan, there are few details about construction locations, methods and timing within the site. However, the wording of the schedule has been amended to ensure that the detailed design and construction methods take account of the need to avoid adverse effects upon the SAC. This text, which also addresses potential effects on the River Forth SPA (See Section 3.2.2) is reproduced below (new text in italics): Development Requirements Business site on which office development has commenced on the northern part of the site. Suitable for business, industrial, storage or distribution uses (Classes 4, 5 and 6). Core path through the site forms part of the National Cycle Network and the Round the Forth Route. With the exception of the undeveloped land within The Pavilions development in the northernmost part of the site, proposals within this area will not be in accordance with this development plan unless it can be demonstrated, by means of an appropriate assessment, that the proposal will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA. Developers will be expected to provide such information as the Council deems necessary to inform the appropriate assessment. Developers should be aware that this information is likely to include detailed information about the use of this site by qualifying species of the SPA over a minimum of one wintering and migratory season. In addition, it may 54
involve assessment of the pattern of usage of this site in relation to other sites beyond the boundary of this site allocation. Consequently, developers are encouraged to collaborate in undertaking research for these areas. Environmental Assets This site includes areas that can be used by important numbers of qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA and lies adjacent to other areas that are used by significant numbers of pink-footed goose and curlew. The Development Brief and application will be subject to a Habitats Regulations Appraisal and Appropriate Assessment and will need to demonstrate that the proposals will not have an adverse effect upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other proposals within this plan (including, but not necessarily restricted to B12 & B13). Developers will be required to provide information to enable this appropriate assessment to be undertaken. This may include (but not be limited to): providing information about the use of this site and other suitable areas along the coast in Clackmannanshire by qualifying species of the SPA over at least one full wintering and migration season; providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoided during operation of the proposals; providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoided during construction of the scheme (e.g. constraints on the construction period). 4.2.3 B13 Midtown Details of this proposal were provided in Section 3.2.4. SNH has indicated that this proposal should be screened in for potential effects upon the River Teith SAC as a consequence of noise, vibration, disturbance and pollution during construction. Details of construction methods and timescales are not available at this time, however, adverse effects upon the integrity of the SAC can be avoided by careful design and timing of works. Consequently, the wording of the schedule has been amended to highlight the need to consider effects upon the SAC. This mitigation was highlighted in Section 3.2.4 but is reproduced below. New text is shown in italics: Development Requirements Proposals within this site will not be in accordance with this development plan unless it can be demonstrated, by means of an appropriate assessment, that the proposal will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA, either alone or in combination with other parts of this or other plans and projects. Developers will be expected to provide such information as the Council deems necessary to inform the appropriate assessment. In respect of the Firth of Forth SPA, Developers should be aware that this information is likely to include detailed information about the use of this site by qualifying species of the SPA over a minimum of one wintering and migratory season. In addition, it may involve assessment of the pattern of usage of this site in relation to other sites beyond the boundary of this site allocation. Consequently, developers are encouraged to collaborate in undertaking research for these areas. Environmental Assets Proposals will be subject to Habitats Regulations Appraisal. The application will need to demonstrate that the proposals will not have an adverse effect upon the integrity of either the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other proposals in this plan (including, but not necessarily limited to B02 and B13) 55
or other projects. Developers will be required to provide information to enable this appropriate assessment to be undertaken. This may include (but not be limited to): providing information about the use of this site and other suitable areas along the coast in Clackmannanshire by qualifying species of the SPA over at least one full winter and migratory period; providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoided during operation of the proposals; providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoided during construction of the scheme (e.g. constraints on the construction period). Flood Risk Assessment required to determine area at risk from coastal flooding including issue of sea level rise. Potential for managed realignment should be investigated. These aspects will require a Habitats Regulations Appraisal in respect of likely effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA. Proposals which create habitat of value to the qualifying interest features of the Firth of Forth will be preferred.
4.3 Proposals within the LDP which may have in combination (cumulative) effects
4.3.1 Housing & business developments close to the coastline A number of housing and business proposals are located close to the coastline69. Some of these have been assessed individually as having likely significant effects on the River Teith SAC (e.g. M02 The Shore Alloa (see Section 4.2.1. above)). This section considers the cumulative Minor Residual Effects from two other schemes (B12 Garvel Farm, Blackgrange & B14 Kennetpans), as they have been identified as having a likely significant effect in relation to: Disturbance of qualifying species when passing adjacent to development site. Changes to water quality arising from pollution during construction. Such effects could compromise the ability of the site to meet its conservation objectives in terms of maintaining the qualifying species as a viable component of the site. Disturbance to fish species may take the form of noise or vibration either generated within the water column itself or externally, and lighting. The effects of noise and vibration were noted in section 4.2.1. None of the developments is likely to require any piling or dredging activities. Precise details about the types of business activity that will take place at each allocation are not known at this stage, but it is anticipated that the main potential source of noise disturbance is likely to arise during the construction phase and result from construction machinery during daylight hours. Whilst the scale and effect of any impacts is anticipated to be low, these can be further reduced (or avoided) by including additional mitigation within the wording for certain proposals. This new text is shown in italics: B12 Garvel Farm, Blackgrange: Development Requirements Proposals within this site will not be in accordance with this development plan unless it can be demonstrated, by means of an appropriate assessment, that the proposal will not
69
M02 The Shore, Alloa; B02 Alloa West Business Park (Pavilions); B03 Alloa West; B04 Alloa West (Orchard Farm); B13 Midtown Proposal; B12 Garvel Farm, Blackgrange; B15 Kennetpans. 56
have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA or River Teith SAC, either alone or in combination with other parts of this or other plans and projects. Developers will be expected to provide such information as the Council deems necessary to inform the appropriate assessment. In respect of the Firth of Forth SPA, Developers should be aware that this information is likely to include detailed information about the use of this site by qualifying species of the SPA over a minimum of one wintering and migratory season. In addition, it may involve assessment of the pattern of usage of this site in relation to other sites beyond the boundary of this site allocation. Consequently, developers are encouraged to collaborate in undertaking research for these areas. Environmental Assets Proposals will be subject to Habitats Regulations Appraisal. The application will need to demonstrate that the proposals will not have an adverse effect upon the integrity of either the Firth of Forth SPA or River Teith SAC either alone or in combination with other proposals in this plan (Including, but not necessarily limited to B02 and B13) or other projects. Developers will be required to provide information to enable this appropriate assessment to be undertaken. This may include (but not be limited to): providing information about the use of this site and other suitable areas along the coast in Clackmannanshire by qualifying species of the SPA over at least one full winter and migratory period; providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoided during operation of the proposals; providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoided during construction of the scheme (e.g. constraints on the construction period); providing details of how effects on qualifying interests of the River Teith SAC will be avoided. Flood Risk Assessment required to determine area at risk from coastal flooding including issue of sea level rise. Potential for managed realignment should be investigated. These aspects will require a Habitats Regulations Appraisal in respect of likely effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA and River Teith SAC. Proposals which create habitat of value to the qualifying interest features of the Firth of Forth will be preferred. B14 Kennetpans: Environmental Assets Proposals will be subject to Habitats Regulations Appraisal. The Development Brief and application will need to demonstrate that the proposals will not have an adverse effect upon the integrity of either the Firth of Forth SPA or River Teith SAC. This may include providing information about use of the site and surrounding area by qualifying species of the SPA, and how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoided during operation of the proposals. There may also need to be constraints on the construction period to avoid sensitive times for birds. Flood Risk Assessment required to determine area at risk from coastal flooding including issue of sea level rise. Potential for managed realignment should be investigated. These aspects will require a Habitats Regulations Appraisal in respect of likely effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA and River Teith SAC. Proposals which create habitat of value to the qualifying interest features of the Firth of Forth will be preferred.
57
4.4
Proposals that may have in combination effects with other plans, projects and proposals
None of the proposals contained within the proposed Clackmannanshire LDP have been identified as likely to have significant effects in their own right. 4.4.1 In combination effects in relation to proposals for Grangemouth biomass Plant As noted in section 3.4.6, consent has been granted for this scheme, following an appropriate assessment of effects upon the River Teith SAC undertaken by Scottish Ministers. The assessment concluded that chemical pollution can be avoided and that thermal pollution would be limited to a short stretch of the river and would not affect fish migration in the Forth and would not cause significant disturbance to the qualifying interests of the SAC. The scheme was identified as having Likely Significant Effects in relation to noise and vibration effects on migratory qualifying species. Mitigation has been added to the scheme. These include a requirement to demonstrate that the anticipated noise levels associated with any planned percussive piling do not exceed 95dBht at the mouth of the River Carron; to monitor noise levels during construction; to employ soft start measures; and restrictions on the timing and duration of operations on a temporal and seasonal basis. Provided this mitigation is included, it was included that the scheme would not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the SAC. Section 4.3.1 considered the likely significant effects on qualifying species of the SAC as a result of noise and disturbance during construction of the schemes. If these schemes were implemented at the same time as construction of the Grangemouth Biomass plant there could be significant effects upon the qualifying interests of the SAC. Mitigation has been included into those proposals to avoid the schemes being developed concurrently. No effects on the integrity of the SAC are anticipated.
5 Conclusions
A Habitats Regulations Appraisal of the Clackmannanshire LDP has been undertaken. The plan was screened for likely significant effects upon European sites. A number of proposals within the plan were identified as likely to have significant effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA and/or the River Teith SAC, either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. An appropriate assessment was undertaken. Mitigation measures were applied to a number of the proposals. With the inclusion of this mitigation, it has been concluded that the Clackmannanshire LDP will not have an effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA or River Teith SAC in light of each sites conservation objectives.
6 References
Applegate, V. A. & Brynildson, C. L. 1952. Downstream movement of recently transformed sea lampreys in the Carp Lake River, Michigan. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 81, 275290. Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting Ltd. 2010. Methil Offshore Demonstration Wind Turbine. Environmental Statement. Non-Technical Summary. On behalf of 2-B Energy http://77.68.107.10/Renewables%20Licensing/2B_Energy_Ltd_Methil_Offshore_Windfarm/ 2B_Renewables_Offshore_Windfarm_Methil_EIA.pdf 58
Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting Ltd. 2012. Fife Energy Park Offshore Demonstration Wind Turbine Scoping Report. February 2012 produced on behalf of Scottish Enterprise Bui, S., Oppedal, F., Korsen, .J., Sonny, D., & Dempster, T. 2013 Group Behavioural Responses of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar L.) to Light, Infrasound and Sound Stimuli. PLoS ONE 8(5): e63696. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0063696 Central Environmental Surveys. 2013. An Updated and Digitised Phase One Habitat Survey of the Inner Forth Landscape Initiative Area. January 2013 City of Edinburgh Council. 2010. Habitats Regulations Appraisal for the Rural West Edinburgh Local Plan Alteration Draft February 2010. City of Edinburgh Council. 2013. Regulation Appraisal. March 2013. Edinburgh Local Development Plan. Draft Habitat
Clackmannanshire Council. 2013. Local Development Plan. Proposed Plan. Committee Draft. March May 2013. www.clacksweb.org.uk Clackmannanshire Council. 2011a. Local Development Plan. Main Issues Report. January 2011. www.clacksweb.org.uk Clackmannanshire Council. 2011b. Local Development Plan. January 2011. www.clacksweb.org.uk Clackmannanshire Council. 2010c. Local Development Plan Environmental Report December 2010. www.clacksweb.org.uk Monitoring Statement. Main Issues Report
Clackmannanshire Council. 2011d. Local Development Plan. Open Space Framework. January 2011. www.clacksweb.org.uk Currie, S. N. & Carlsen, R. C. 1987. Functional significance and neural basis of larval lamprey startle behaviour. J Exp Biol. 1987 Nov; 133:121-35. Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals. 2012. Report to the Scottish Ministers Harbours Act 1964 The Rosyth International Container Terminal (Harbour Revision) order 201[x] 28 December 2012 www.transportscotland.gov.uk David Tyldesley and Associates. 2012. Habitats Regulations Appraisal of Plans. Guidance for Plan-making bodies in Scotland. Version 2.0 August 2012. SNH. European Communities. 2000. Managing Natura 2000 sites: the provisions of Article 6 of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC European Court of Justice. 2004. Judgement of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 7 September 2004 in Case C-127/02 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State): Landelijke Vereniging tot Behoud van de Waddenzee, Nederlandse Vereniging tot Bescherming van Vogels v Staatssecretaris van Landbouw, Natuurbeheer en Visserij http://eur-lex.europa.eu EWHC 2699. High Court Ruling before Mr Stephen Morris QC between S. Feeney & (1) Oxford City Council & (2) The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. 27 July 2011. [2011] EWHC 2699 Admin 59
Falkirk Council. 2013. Falkirk Local Development Plan Draft Habitats Regulations Appraisal Record April 2013. Fearnley, H., Clarke, R. & Liley, D. 2010. The Solent Disturbance and Mitigation Project, Phase II on-site visitor survey results from the Solent region. Forth Energy. 2010a. Section 36 Rosyth Renewable Energy Environmental Statement. Forth Energy. 2010b. Grangemouth Renewable Energy Plant. Volume 1. Non Technical Summary. September 2010. Gill, J. A. 1996. Habitat Choice in Pink-footed Geese: quantifying the constraints determining winter site use. J. Appl. Ecol 33 884-894 Hardisty, M.W. (1969). Information on the growth of the ammocoete larvae of the anadromous sea lamprey, Petromyzon marinus , in British rivers. Journal of Zoology 159, 139144 Hardisty, M.W. & Potter, I.C. (eds) 1971. The biology of lampreys . Academic Press, London. Hendry, K. & Cragg-Hine, D. 2003. Ecology of the Atlantic Salmon Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Ecology Series No. 7. English Nature, Peterborough. Holt, C., Austin, G., Calbrade, N., Mellan, H., Hearn, R., Stroud, D., Wotton, S. & Musgrove,A. 2012. Waterbirds in the UK 2010/11 The Wetland Bird Survey Published by British Trust for Ornithology, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and Joint Nature Conservation Committee in association with Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust Jacobs, Faber Maunsell & Aecom. 2007. Forth Replacement Crossing Study Strategic Environmental Assessment. Information to inform appropriate assessment. 7 December 2007. For Transport Scotland. Jacobs. 2011. Rosyth International Container Terminal. Report to Inform an Appropriate Assessment for the Firth of Forth, Forth Islands and Imperial Dock Lock, Leith SPAs and River Teith SAC. January 2011. JNCC. 2010. Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey - a technique for environmental audit, ISBN 0 86139 636 7 Land Use Consultants. 2010. Clackmannanshire Council Main Issues Report Site Appraisal October 2010. www.clacksweb.org.uk Lenhardt, M. L. & Sismour, E. 1995. Hearing in the sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) and the long nose gar (Lepisosteus spatula). The Association for Research in Otolaryngology Abstracts, 259 Liley, D., Stillman, R. & Feanley, H. 2010. The Solent Disturbance and Mitigation Project Phase 2: Results of Bird Disturbance Fieldwork 2009/10. Footprint Ecology / Solent Forum Liley, D. Cruickshanks, D., Waldon, J. & Fearnley, H. 2011. Study. Footprint Ecology Exe Estuary Disturbance
60
Mainstream Renewable Power. Undated. Neart na Gaoithe proposed offshore wind farm. Non-technical summary. Maitland, P. S. 2003. Ecology of the River, Brook and Sea Lamprey . Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Ecology Series No. 5. English Nature, Peterborough. Mitchell, C. 2012. Mapping the distribution of feeding Pink - footed and Iceland Greylag Geese in Scotland. A report by the Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust, as part of a programme of work jointly funded by WWT and Scottish Natural Heritage. http://monitoring.wwt.org.uk/pdf/mitchell_2012b.pdf Moore A, Potter ECE, Milner NJ & Bamber S (1995).The migratory behaviour of wild Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) smolts in the estuary of the River Conwy, North Wales Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 52,19231935. Scottish Government. 2012. Habitats Regulations Appraisal (HRA) Advice Sheet. Screening general policies and applying simple mitigation measures. Advice Sheet No. 2 (Version 1). July 2012 Scottish Enterprise & Highlands and Islands Enterprise. 2010. Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005 National Renewables Infrastructure Plan: Stage 2 Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report. 31 August 2010. National Renewables Infrastructure Plan: Environmental Report Appendix 3. Scottish Government. 2009. National Planning Framework for Scotland 2. Appropriate Assessment Report June http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/283240/0085767.pd Strategic 2009.
Scottish Government Energy & Climate Change Directorate. 2012. Directorate Habitats Regulations Appraisal of the Implications of the proposed Forth Energy Grangemouth Biomass development Firth of Forth SPA 07 December 2012 SEPA. 2009. RBMP Water body information sheet for water body 4500 in Forth. Scottish Power. 2009. Application for consent under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 to construct and operate a gas-fired CCGT generating station with a nominal output of 1,000MW, and associated works, and deemed planning permission under Section 57 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, at Cockenzie Power Station, East Lothian. Non-Technical Summary. December 2009 Sea Green. 2012. Non-Technical Summary. SESplan. 2012. The Strategic Development Plan Authority for Edinburgh, East Lothian, Fife, Midlothian, Scottish Borders and West Lothian. Habitats Regulations Appraisal Record of Proposed Plan for SESplan March 2012 Stephen Hargreaves v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Wyre Borough Council, Cornwall Light and Power Company Ltd (2011) EWHC 1999 (2nd August 2011) Stirling Council. 2012. Stirling Local Development Plan: Habitats Regulations Appraisal September 2012 http://www.stirling.gov.uk/__documents/temporary-uploads/economy,planning-_and_-regulation/draft-proposed-ldp/habitats-regulations-appraisal-finalised.pdf
61
TNS Research International. 2012. Scottish Recreation Survey: annual summary report 2011. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 55 Turner, C. & Loughrey, J. 2011. Literature review to assess bird species connectivity to Special Protection Areas. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No 390 Wolff, W. J., Reijnders, P. J. H & Smit, C. J. 1982. The effects of recreation on the Wadden Sea ecosystem: many questions but few answers. In: G. Luck & H. Michaelis (eds.), Schriftenreihe M.E.L.F., Reihe A: Angew. Wissensch. Nr. 275 85-107. WWF-UK and RSPB v Secretary of State for Scotland et al. 1999. 1 C.M.L.R. 1021 [1999] Env LR 632. Court of Session, Edinburgh 28th October 1998
62
Appendix Ai: Qualifying Interests of Firth of Forth SPA

Qualifying Interests under Article 4.1 of the Birds Directive (79/409/EEC): populations of European importance during winter and passage
Common name Bar-tailed Godwit (wintering) Golden Plover (wintering) Red-throated Diver (wintering) Slavonian Grebe (wintering) Oystercatcher (wintering) Sandwich Tern (passage) Scientific Name Limosa lapponica Pluvialis apricaria Gavia stellata Podiceps auritus Haematopa ostralegus Sterna sandvicensis Qualification features 4% of the GB population 5 year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98 1% of the GB populations 5 year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98 2% of the GB populations 5 year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98 21% of the GB population 5 year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98 2% of the GB populations 5 year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98 5 year peak mean 1993/94-1997/98
Qualifying Interests under Article 4.2 of the Birds Directive (79/409/EEC): populations of European importance of migratory species
Common name Pink-footed Goose Turnstone Knot Shelduck Redshank Scientific Name Anser brachyrhynchus Arenaria interpres Calidris canutus Tadorna tadorna Tringa totanus Qualification feature 6% of the population 5 year peak mean 1993/94 - 1997/98 1% of the population 5 year peak mean 1993/94 - 1997/98 3% of the population 5 year peak mean 1991/92-1995/96 2% of the population 5 year peak mean 1993/94 - 1997/98 3% of the population 5 year peak mean 1993/94 - 1997/98
Qualifying Interests under Article 4.2 of the Birds Directive (79/409/EEC): wintering waterfowl assemblage of European importance including the following species
Common name Great Crested Grebe Cormorant Scaup Eider Long-tailed Duck Common Scoter Velvet Scoter Goldeneye Red-breasted merganser Oystercatcher Ringed Plover Grey Plover Dunlin Curlew Wigeon Mallard Lapwing Scientific Name Podiceps cristatus Phalacrocorax carbo Aythya marila Somateria mollissima Clangula hyemalis Melanitta nigra M. fusca Bucephala clangula Mergus serrator Haematopus ostralegus Charadrius hiaticula Pluvialis squatarola Calidris alpina Numenius arquata Anas penelope A. platyrhnchos Vanellus vanellus Population estimate 720 (7% of GB population) 682 (5% of GB population) 437 (4% of GB population) 9,400 (13% of GB population) 1,045 (4% of GB population) 2,880 (8% of GB populations) 635 (21% of GB population) 3,004 (18% of GB population) 670 (7% of GB population) 7,846 (2% of GB population) 328 (1% of GB population) 724 (2% of GB population) 9,514 (2% of GB population) 1,928 (2% of GB population) 2,139 (1991/2-95/96) 2,564 (1991/2-95/96) 4,148 (1991/2-95/96)
63
Appendix Aii: Qualifying Interests of River Teith SAC

Annex II species that are a primary reason for selection of this site Common name Scientific name Qualification features Sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus For which this is considered to be one of the best areas in the United Kingdom. Brook lamprey Lampetra planeri For which this is considered to be one of the best areas in the United Kingdom. River lamprey Lampetra fluviatilis For which this is considered to be one of the best areas in the United Kingdom. Annex II species present as a qualifying feature, but not a primary reason for site selection Common name Scientific name Qualification features Atlantic salmon Salmo salar For which the area is considered to support a significant presence.
64
Appendix B: Proposals which were amended during the screening exercise to avoid significant effects upon European sites
The wording of the following aspects of the LDP were amended during the screening exercise in order to avoid likely significant effects upon either the qualifying interests of the Firth of Forth SPA and/or River Teith SAC.
Proposal Policy SC14 Renewable Energy Purpose of proposal Aims to encourage the incorporation and use of renewable energy technology. Likely source of effects This sets out criteria for when renewable energy developments will be supported. Although the original draft included criteria to safeguard features of natural, built and historical value, it did was not considered to fully meet the requirements of the Habitats Regulations. The policy included reference to Areas of Constraint for wind development, but it was not considered to fully meet the requirements of the Habitats Regulations. Amendments A new clause has been added: The development would not impact upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA or River Teith SAC either alone or in combination with other projects and plans.
Policy SC15 - Wind Energy Development
Aims to provide details of areas where wind energy development proposals will be likely to be most acceptable.
Policy SC16 - Hydroelectricity Development
Aims to identify the circumstances under which hydro-electricity schemes may be supported.
Although the original draft included criteria to safeguard features of natural, built and historical value, it was not considered to fully meet the requirements of the Habitats Regulations.
Policy SC18 Solar Arrays
Large
Aims to identify the circumstances under which large solar array proposals may be supported.
Although the original draft included criteria to safeguard features of natural and amenity value, it was not considered to fully meet the requirements of the Habitats Regulations. Although the original draft included criteria to safeguard features of natural and amenity value, it was not considered to fully meet the requirements of the Habitats Regulations.
Policy SC19 Geothermal
Deep
Aims to identify the circumstances under which deep geothermal proposals may be supported.
A new clause has been added for the circumstances under which proposals for wind energy development will be supported: Proposals for wind energy development, including associated infrastructure, will normally only be supported where the proposal: (3) will not have adverse effects on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA, either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. A new clause has been added for the circumstances under which proposals for hydro-electric generation will be acceptable: It would not result in any significant adverse direct or cumulative impact on the water environment, including flood risk, river flow standards, fish passage and habitat, and protected species, or have adverse effects on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. A new clause has been added for the circumstances under which proposals will be acceptable: The location and siting of the arrays and any associated works will not lead to adverse effects on the integrity of the qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. A new clause has been added: The applicant has demonstrated that the impacts from the development on residential amenity, visual amenity, the quality and distinctive character of the surrounding landscape, air quality, the water environment, protected species and recreational use and enjoyment are acceptable or could be
65
Proposal
Purpose of proposal
Likely source of effects
Amendments satisfactorily mitigated using planning conditions or a planning agreement and that there are no significant effects on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. A new clause has been added: Applications for new developments which will require Hazardous Substances Consent should be in locations where they: (4) Avoid adverse effects on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. A new clause has been added: the proposals will not contribute to adverse effects on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects and plans.
Policy SC22 Hazardous Substances Consent Policy SC23 Development in the Countryside - General Principles
Aims to ensure that developments requiring Hazardous Substances Consent are located on the most appropriate sites. The primary aim of Policies SC23SC26 is to safeguard the countryside by supporting developments which meet the criteria of the relevant policies. The aim of this policy is to set out criteria for consideration of other employment generating uses on allocated sites. The aim of this policy is to set out criteria for consideration of other employment generating uses outwith allocated sites. The aim of this policy is to set out criteria for the consideration of proposals for telecommunications developments.
Although the policy includes criteria relating to the selection of sites, it does not include criteria to protect European sites. Although the policy includes criteria relating to the selection of sites, it does not include criteria to protect European sites.
Policy EP3 - Alternative Employment Generating Uses on Allocated Sites Policy EP4 - Business and Industrial Uses Outwith Allocated Sites Policy EP8 Telecommunications Development Criteria
Although the policy includes criteria relating to the selection of sites, it does not include criteria to protect European sites. Although the policy includes criteria relating to the selection of sites, it does not include criteria to protect European sites. Although the original draft included criteria to safeguard features of natural, built and historical value, it was not considered to fully meet the requirements of the Habitats Regulations.
A new proposal has been added: The use would not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other proposals A new clause has been added. The proposed development would not result in adverse effects upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. A new clause has been added: Proposals for telecommunications development will normally be approved, provided all of the following criteria are met: (4) the development would not have a significant adverse effect on areas of ecological interest, special landscape areas, archaeological sites, conservation areas or listed buildings or their setting or have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. A new clause has been added: 1. The proposal would not result in a significant adverse impact on any of the following: (b) The natural and built environment, including; i) Designated areas of nature conservation value and special
Policy EP11 - Minerals General Principles
The aim of this policy is to ensure that minerals extraction does not have a significant adverse impact on Clackmannanshire's environment
Although the original draft included criteria to safeguard features of natural, built and historical value, it was not considered to fully meet the requirements of the Habitats Regulations.
66
Proposal
Purpose of proposal and communities.
Policy EP12 - Opencast Coal Extraction
The aim of this policy is to set out additional criteria in relation to opencast coal extraction.
Although the original draft included criteria to safeguard features of environmental sensitivity, it was not considered to fully meet the requirements of the Habitats Regulations. Although the original draft included criteria to safeguard features of environmental sensitivity, it was not considered to fully meet the requirements of the Habitats Regulations.
Policy EP14 - Coal Bed Methane
The aim of this policy is to set out additional criteria in relation to coal bed methane.
Policy EP16 - New Retail and Commercial Leisure Development
The aim of this policy is to set out criteria for the assessment of new retail and commercial leisure developments, in accordance with the LDP Strategy.
This proposal does not set out criteria for the protection of European Sites.
Policy EA3 - Protection of Designated Sites and Protected Species
This policy aims to protect designated sites and protected species.
The policy did include clauses relating to International Designations, but these were not thought to comply fully with the Habitats Regulations.
Amendments landscape ii) the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects and plans iii) listed buildings and their settings, conservation areas, scheduled monuments, historic gardens, designed landscapes or sites of archaeological or historic importance. A new clause has been added: Proposals for opencast coal mining will not normally be supported in either of the following circumstances: 3. Where the scheme would have an adverse effect upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects and plans . A new clause has been added: Proposals for the extraction of coal bed methane will be supported where the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Council that the proposal meets all of the following criteria: 3. The proposal would not result in a significant adverse impact on residential amenity or the built and natural environment or have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. A new clause has been added: Proposals that do not accord with Policy EP16 or would be located outwith the network of centres will not be permitted unless the applicant satisfactorily demonstrates that the proposal meets all of the following criteria: 7. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. The policy relating to International Designations (also known as Natura sites) has been modified to read: Where a proposal is likely to have a significant effect upon a site designated for its international biodiversity importance, the applicant will be required to carry out a Habitats Regulations Appraisal (HRA) and possibly an Appropriate Assessment. Development will only be permitted where the HRA has demonstrated that the proposed development will not have a significant adverse effect on the integrity of the site either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. Where this cannot be demonstrated, there are limited circumstances (Imperative Reasons of Overriding Public Interest), when permission can be granted, depending on the qualifying interest
67
Proposal Policy EA8 - Green Belt
Purpose of proposal This policy explains restrictions on development within areas designated as Green Belt, the exceptions to these restrictions and requirements where development is permitted within the Green Belt. This policy aims to manage the risk of flooding from all sources: river, coastal, surface water, sewers, groundwater, reservoirs and other infrastructure.
Likely source of effects This policy included criteria for protection of certain features, but did not address impacts upon European Sites.
Policy EA9 - Managing Flood Risk
Although the original draft included criteria to safeguard features of environmental sensitivity, it was not considered to fully meet the requirements of the Habitats Regulations.
Policy EA10 - Coastal Planning
This policy aims to promote an integrated approach to development in the coastal zone, supporting the provisions of the Forth Area Management Plan, and ensuring protection of designated habitat sites and the landscape, open space and cultural heritage of the coastal margin
Although the original draft included criteria to safeguard features of environmental sensitivity, it was not considered to fully meet the requirements of the Habitats Regulations.
Amendments features of the site. A new paragraph has been added: Green Belt areas may also contain areas of habitat used by qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA. Developments in areas used by qualifying species will be required to demonstrate that they will not have an adverse effect upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. One of the clauses has been amended: Development proposals on brownfield and previously developed sites that are at risk of flooding will be supported where the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Council that the proposal meets all of the following criteria: 3. These measures would not cause a detrimental impact on the environment including no adverse effects on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA or River Teith SAC either alone or in combination with other projects or plans. And Sustainable flood management measures which are part of any approved national or local Flood Risk Management Plan or measures, including managed realignment on the coast, will be supported, providing that these will have no adverse effects on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects or plans. The Council will ensure that areas of land required to provide flood alleviation are protected from other development pressures. The policy has been amended in a number of places to address this: Development proposals will normally be supported within the Alloa settlement boundary, provided they do not negatively impact on the protection of the landscape, amenity and habitat value of the coastal zone, and do not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA and associated Ramsar site or River Teith SAC either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. Where proposals may be subject to significant flood risk, a Flood Risk Assessment may be required. There will be a presumption against development elsewhere in the coastal zone. However, proposals for the following types of development will normally be supported: managed coastal realignment projects which are compatible with the provisions of the flood risk management
68
Proposal
Purpose of proposal
Policy EA14 Supporting the Delivery of Community Growing Spaces
This policy aims to support the delivery of community growing spaces, and direct them to locations that encourage active travel and sustainable development.
The criteria within the policy include effects upon priority species, but do not address likely effects upon European sites.
Policy EA16 - Waste Management Facilities
This policy aims to support the development of suitable waste management facilities while safeguarding the environment and amenity.
Although the policy includes criteria for the protection of features of environmental, landscape and visual importance, it does not specifically refer to sites of European Importance.
Policy NE01 Woodland Expansion
Alva Park
This proposal promotes the expansion of a Woodland Park.
The proposal allows for the promotion of habitat creation and management and creation of active travel routes. Pinkfooted goose, a qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA, has been recorded from the tetrad that includes this proposal. It is important that any development of opportunities is not at the expense of habitat value for this species. In addition, the proposal provides opportunities to create new, attractive areas for recreation. These could act as an alternative source of recreational opportunities, helping to guide people away from the coast.
Amendments plans for the Upper Forth and with the Clackmannanshire Biodiversity Action Plan recreational access provision, where this is compatible with amenity and nature conservation policies and will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. The policy has been amended: Applications for community growing spaces such as allotments, community gardens and orchards, or the conversion of underused open spaces for such purpose, will be supported if the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Council that the development meets all of the following criteria: 3. there will be no significant detrimental impacts on habitat networks and/or priority habitats and species or adverse effects on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects and plans. A new clause has been added: Proposals for waste management facilities, including energy from waste proposals and sites for the recycling of construction or demolition wastes, will normally be supported where the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Council that all of the following criteria can be met: 6. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects or plans. New sentences have been added: Proposals will take into account any current use of areas by qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA (specifically pinkfooted goose) and provide suitable recreational opportunities.
69
Appendix C: Preliminary Screening of proposals for effects (alone) on the Firth of Forth SPA and River Teith SAC
The following table provides the screening conclusions for all the policies and proposals within the LDP for their likely effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA and River Teith SAC. The likely effects of policies and spatial proposals will vary between sites, depending on what the qualifying interest features are. Thus a policy may be identified as having Likely Significant Effects on the qualifying features of, for example, the Firth of Forth SPA, but no conceivable effects upon the River Teith SAC. The first column lists the policy or proposal. The comments column provides details of the facts that have influenced the decision as to the outcome of the screening exercise. The screening column uses a series of codes to indicate whether the proposal should be screened in or out of further consideration. Proposals marked in white are those that have been screened out from the analysis as unlikely to have significant effects upon the European site being considered. Proposals shown in orange are those that, alone, are unlikely to have significant effects, but may act in combination to have an effect. Those proposals marked in red are those which, at this stage, are considered to have likely significant effects upon the European site being considered and hence will require appropriate assessment. A series of codes (1 3e) are used to explain why proposals have been screened out of the appropriate assessment. These codes are based upon the screening choices set out in Tyldesley (2012).
Proposal Comments Creating Sustainable Communities Housing SC1: Maintaining a Housing Land Supply Allows for maintenance of housing land supply (5 years). Screening depends on individual allocations in terms of likely effects on recreational disturbance, loss of high tide roost sites for waders & pinkfooted goose. Criteria for when affordable housing should be included developments. Criteria for tests to be met in identifying sites for travellers within General policy is 3e: Individual allocations included in the plan are considered separately below. 1 3e 3e 1 1 3e Screening SPA SAC
SC2: Affordable Housing SC3: Gypsies and Travellers Travelling Showpeople SC4: Residential Care Facilities SC5: Layout and Design Facilities SC6: Additional Design Information and
1 3c 3c 1 1
Criteria for locating residential care facilities Defines features that must be included in proposals for new residential developments Defines additional design criteria to be met for developments in particular
70 1= General policy statements; 2 = projects referred to in, but not proposed by, the plan; 3 = aspects of a plan that could have no likely significant effect on a site, alone or in combination with other aspects of the same plan, or with other plans or projects because (a) policies are intended to protect the natural environment; (b) policies will not themselves lead to development or other change; (c) policies make provision for change but could have no conceivable effect because there is not link or pathways between them; (d) policies make provision for change but which could have no conceivable effect because effects are small scale, restricted or remote (minor residual effects); (e) effects cannot be identified because the policy is too general.
Proposal
Comments areas. Defines targets for reducing energy use in new buildings. Sets out criteria for considering applications for domestic developments. Sets out criteria for when developer contributions are likely to be required and the potential nature of these. Policy to retain and enhance certain facilities within developments. Allows for upgrade of roads. Defines criteria for inclusion of transport and access routes within developments Sets out the criteria for when decentralised energy proposals will be acceptable or need to be incorporated into development proposals. Sets out criteria for when renewable energy projects are likely to be acceptable. Wording of proposal was amended to include mitigation during the screening process Sets out criteria for consideration of wind energy developments. Wording of proposal was amended to include mitigation during the screening process. Sets out criteria for consideration of hydro developments. Wording of proposal was amended to include mitigation during the screening process. Sets out criteria for consideration of biomass proposals. Wording of proposal was amended to include mitigation during the screening process. Sets out criteria for consideration of PV proposals.
Screening SPA 1 1 1 but scope to use this as mitigation. 1 Look at individual proposals 1 3e 1
SAC 1 1 1 1 Look at individual proposals 1 3e 1
SC7: Energy Efficiency and Low Carbon Development SC8: Domestic Developments Social Infrastructure SC9: Developer Contributions SC10: Education, Community Facilities and Open Spaces Services SC11: Transport Networks SC12: Development Proposals Access and Transport Requirements SC13: Decentralised Energy SC14: Renewable Energy
SC15: Wind Energy Development SC16: Hydro-electricity Development SC17: Biomass SC18: Large Solar Arrays
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
Proposal
Comments Wording of proposal was amended to include mitigation during the screening process. Sets out criteria for consideration of proposals for deep geothermal heat or energy development. Wording of proposal was amended to include mitigation during the screening process. Sets out criteria for drainage requirements associated with new developments. Sets out criteria for when developments in these areas will be considered. Sets out criteria for the selection of sites for developments requiring Hazardous Substances Consent. Wording of proposal was amended to include mitigation during the screening process. Sets out general principles for the location of new developments, particularly those outwith existing settlements. Wording of proposal was amended to include mitigation during the screening process. Additional criteria for assessing applications for residential development in the countryside. Additional criteria for assessing applications for business development in the countryside. Additional criteria for assessing applications for enabling development in the countryside. Business and Employment Identifies 5 strategic locations for promotion of business and industrial developments. Pavilions (Alloa) (B02) Orchard Farm (Alloa) (B04)
Screening SPA 1
SAC 1
SC19: Deep Geothermal
SC20: Water and Drainage Infrastructure and Capacity SC21: Pipeline and Hazard Consultation Zones SC22: Hazardous Substances Consent
1 1 1
1 1 1
Development in the Countryside and Rural Economy SC23: Development in the Countryside General Principles SC24: Residential Development in the Countryside SC25: Business Development in the Countryside SC26: Enabling Development in the Countryside EP1 Strategic Land for Business
1 1 1 See individual allocations
1 1 1 See individual allocation s
Proposal
Comments Dumyat (Tullibody) (B09) Carsebridge (B03) Kilbagie (B11) Provides support for business and industrial developments on particular sites.
Screening SPA
SAC
EP2
Existing Business Sites
See individual allocations 1
EP3 Business and Industrial Uses Outwith Existing or Allocated Business Sites EP4 Non-Employment Generating Uses on Existing or Allocated Business Sites EP5 Home Working EP6 Green Business
Sets out criteria for consideration of employment generating uses on sites not allocated for Business and Industrial use. Wording of proposal was amended to include mitigation during the screening process. Sets out criteria for considering change in use of buildings/land on business and industrial sites from employment generating use to other activities.
See individual allocation s 1
1 3e 1 1 1 1 1
1 3c 1 1 1 1 1
Policy in support of enabling home working. Policy supporting the development of green business. Telecoms Infrastructure and Integrating Technology Into New Development EP7 Telecommunications Sets out criteria for the consideration of telecommunications developments. Development Criteria Wording of proposal was amended to include mitigation during the screening process. EP8 Telecommunications Provides guidance on the level of information required to be submitted in Development - Additional Information support of telecommunications developments. Minerals EP9 Protection of Minerals This policy protects mineral resources from sterilisation by development. Resources EP10 Minerals - General Principles Sets out criteria for the protection of environment and communities from adverse effects of minerals extraction. Wording of proposal was amended to include mitigation during the screening process. EP11 Opencast Coal Extraction Sets out additional criteria for the consideration of applications for opencast coal extraction.
Proposal
Comments Wording of proposal was amended to include mitigation during the screening process. Sets out additional criteria for the consideration of applications for aggregate minerals. Sets out additional criteria in relation to coal bed methane. Wording of proposal was amended to include mitigation during the screening process. Retail and Town Centres Defines a hierarchy of retail network centres, which will be protected and enhanced. Policy supporting developments that will contribute to regeneration of town centres. Defines criteria for considering new retail and commercial leisure developments. Wording of proposal was amended to include mitigation during the screening process. Sets out criteria for consideration of supermarket and superstore developments. Sets out criteria for consideration of proposals for food and drink. Sets out criteria for the siting of mobile snack vans. Sets out criteria for locating motor vehicle sales and motorist service areas. Sets out measures to protect local shops. too vague to know where will occur Sets out criteria for the appearance and protection of shops. Sets out criteria for the regeneration of town centres. Environmental Assets Policy supporting the implementation of the Central Scotland Green Network. The Natural Environment
Screening SPA 1 1
SAC 1 1
EP12 EP13
Aggregate Minerals Coal Bed Methane
EP14 Retail Network Centre and Hierarchy EP15 Promoting Town Centre Regeneration EP16 New Retail and Commercial Leisure Development EP17 Supermarket and Superstore Development EP18 Food and Drink EP19 Siting of Mobile Snack Bars EP20 Motor Vehicle Sales and Service Areas EP21 Local Shops EP22 Shop Front Design, Advertising and External Security Measures EP23 Promoting Town Centre Regeneration EA1 Clackmannanshire Network Green
1 1
1 1
1 1 3e 3e 3e 1 3c 3a
1 1 3c 3c 3c 1 3c 3c
Proposal EA2 Habitat Networks and Biodiversity EA3 Protection of Designated Sites and Protected Species EA4 Landscape Quality
Comments Policy to protect and enhance biodiversity and habitat networks. Policy to protect designated sites and protected species. Wording of proposal was amended during the screening process to clarify the distinction between European sites and other designations. Policy to protect and enhance landscape quality and sites designated for their landscape value. Policy to safeguard sites of geological importance. Policy to protect and expand woodland resources. Policy to promote retention of trees, woodlands and hedgerows.
Screening SPA 3a 3a 3a 3a 3a 3a 3a
SAC 3a 3a 3a 3a 3a 3a 3c
EA5 Geological Conservation Review Sites EA6 Woodlands and Forestry EA7 Hedgerows, Trees and Tree Preservation Orders EA8 Green Belt
Sets out protection for the green belt and defines criteria when development will be permitted in these areas. Wording of proposal was amended during the screening process to clarify the distinction between European sites and other designations. EA9 Managing Flood Risk Measures to manage risk of flooding from all sources. Wording of proposal was amended during the screening process to clarify the distinction between European sites and other designations. EA10 Coastal Planning Promotion of integrated planning for the coastal zone. Wording of proposal was amended during the screening process to clarify the distinction between European sites and other designations. Protecting Environmental Resources EA11 Environmental Quality Policy to protect environmental quality. EA12 Water Environment Policy to protect and enhance the water environment. EA13 Significant Soil Resources Policy to protect areas of prime agricultural land and carbon rich soils. EA14 Supporting the Delivery of Promotes the protection or creation of allotments, community gardens, Community Growing Spaces orchards etc. Wording of proposal was amended during the screening process to clarify the distinction between European sites and other designations. EA15 Classification of Land that has Policy governing remediation of land previously used for community growing.
3e 3a
3e 3a
3a 3a 3e 3e
3a 3a 3c 3c
3e
3c
Proposal been used for Community Growing EA16 Waste Management Facilities EA17 Energy from Waste Facilities EA18 Minimising Waste in New Development EA19 Scheduled Monuments
Comments
Screening SPA 3e 3e 1 3a 3a 3a 3a 3a 1 3e
SAC 3c 3c 1 3a 3a 3a 3a 3a 1 3c
EA20 Other Archaeological Resources EA21 Historic Gardens and Designed Landscapes EA22 Listed Buildings EA23 Conservation Areas EA24 Buildings at Risk and NonDesignated Heritage Assets EA25 The Development of Brownfield and Contaminated Land Alloa Proposals: H01 Sunnyside, Alloa H02 Ashley Terrace, Alloa H03 Carsebridge Road North, Alloa
Policy for the development of waste management facilities. Wording of the policy was amended during the screening process. Defines criteria for consideration of energy from waste proposals. Policy promoting the reduction of waste generated during construction and use of new developments. The Built Environment Policy for protection of protected archaeological sites and nationally important features. Policy for protection of undesignated archaeological resources. Policy for the protection of historic gardens and designed landscapes. Policy to protect listed buildings. Policy to protect conservation areas. Policy to support renovation and re-use of buildings at risk. Policy to encourage the re-use of brownfield and contaminated land. Schedule of Sites Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. No waders recorded from relevant tetrad; site too small to support Pinkfooted goose although not counted in this tetrad). Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. No waders recorded from relevant tetrad; site too small to support pinkfooted goose. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. No waders recorded from relevant tetrad. Pink-footed goose numbers not counted from this tetrad. The site is surrounded by trees. There are no grassland habitats present on the site and the area of arable land is less than 6 ha in area.
3d MRE for recreational disturbance 3d MRE for recreational disturbance 3d MRE for recreational disturbance.
3c 3c 3c
Proposal H04 Carsebridge, Alloa
Comments Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. No waders recorded from relevant tetrad. Pink-footed goose numbers not counted from this tetrad & the area of potentially suitable habitat is below the 6 ha threshold. Under construction Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. No waders recorded from relevant tetrad. Pink-footed goose numbers not counted from this tetrad, & although suitable habitat is present, site is considered too small to be used by this species. Under construction Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. No waders recorded from relevant tetrad. Site too small for Pink-footed goose Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. No waders recorded from relevant tetrad, but given the size of the site and presence of potentially suitable habitat it was agreed with SNH that this site should be screened in for loss of habitat. Pink-footed goose numbers not counted from this tetrad. Although suitable habitat is present the site is not considered large enough to support them. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. No waders recorded from relevant tetrad, but given the size of the site and presence of potentially suitable habitat it was agreed with SNH that this site should be screened in for loss of habitat. Pink-footed goose numbers not counted from this tetrad. Although part of site may support suitable habitat, the site is not considered large enough to support them. A development brief will be required for this site. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. No waders recorded from relevant tetrad. Pink-footed goose numbers not counted from this tetrad. Although part of site may support suitable habitat, the site is not considered large enough to
Screening SPA 3d MRE for recreational disturbance. 3d MRE for recreational disturbance 3d MRE for recreational disturbance 3d MRE for recreational disturbance & loss of potentially suitable habitat 3d MRE for recreational disturbance & loss of potentially suitable habitat 3d MRE for recreational disturbance
SAC 3c
H05 South Earlsfield 2 (Alloa SE Plot 7), Alloa
3c
H06 Alloa Park Phase 4, Alloa
3c
H07 Earlsfield 1, Alloa
3c
H08 Earlsfield West, Alloa
3c
H09 Elm Grove 2, Alloa
3c
Proposal
Comments support them A development brief will be required for this site. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. No waders recorded from relevant tetrad. Pink-footed goose numbers not counted from this tetrad. Although part of site may support suitable habitat, the site is not considered large enough to support them Small, brownfield site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. Site lies within tetrad from which oystercatcher, curlew, golden plover, redshank and lapwing have been recorded, but site does not support suitable habitat for these species (based on Phase 1 data). Site also lies within tetrad from which pink-footed goose has been recorded, but is too small to support this species. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. Site lies within tetrad from which oystercatcher, curlew, golden plover, redshank and lapwing have been recorded. Site does support Phase 1 habitats considered to be suitable for these species. Site also lies within tetrad from which pink-footed goose has been recorded, but is too small to support this species. This site is being rolled forward from the previous local plan, and is under development. Small, brownfield site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. Site lies within tetrad from which oystercatcher, curlew, golden plover, redshank and lapwing have been recorded, but site does not appear to support suitable habitat (based on Phase 1 survey and aerial photos). Site also lies within tetrad from which pink-footed goose has been recorded but site is considered too small to support this species and habitat does not appear to be suitable (based on Phase 1 and aerial photos).
Screening SPA 3d MRE for recreational disturbance
SAC 3c
H10 Central Parkland, Alloa
H11 St Johns Primary School
3d MRE for recreational disturbance
3c
H12 Claremont
3d MRE for recreational disturbance & loss of wader high tide roost sites
3c
H13 Claremont Primary School
3c
Proposal H14 Patons Bowling Club, Tullibody Road
Comments Small, brownfield site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. Site lies within tetrad from which oystercatcher, curlew, golden plover, redshank and lapwing have been recorded, but no suitable habitat present (based on Phase 1 & aerial photos). Site also lies within tetrad from which pink-footed goose has been recorded, but site is considered too small to support this species & no suitable habitat present (based on Phase 1 & aerial photos). Brownfield site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. No waders recorded from relevant tetrad; site too small to support Pinkfooted goose (although not counted in this tetrad). Brownfield site bordering shores of the Forth, although the site is outwith the boundary of the SPA and SAC. Scheme could lead to effects on qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA through: Release of pollutants during construction leading to (a) changes in distribution and extent of habitats that support the species; and/or (b) structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species. Qualifying species recorded from mudflats at low tide in highest numbers are wigeon; other qualifying species recorded are: cormorant, shelduck, mallard, goldeneye, red-breasted merganser, oystercatcher, curlew and redshank); Noise, vibration and human activity during construction leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Qualifying species recorded from shoreline during high & low tides are: pink-footed goose, shelduck, wigeon, cormorant, oystercatcher, lapwing, curlew, redshank and lower numbers of mallard, goldeneye, red-breasted merganser, golden plover, dunlin; Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Qualifying species
Screening SPA 3d MRE for recreational disturbance
SAC 3c
M01 Alloa Co-op site, Alloa
3d MRE for recreational disturbance LSE
3c
M02 The Shore, Alloa
LSE
Proposal
Comments potentially affected are listed above. Loss of high tide roost sites on adjoining land if it results in changes to the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species; deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species, or significant disturbance of the qualifying species.. Qualifying species recorded from the tetrad are: Pink-footed goose, oystercatcher, curlew, redshank and lapwing been recorded from the tetrad.
Screening SPA
SAC
Works to flood walls if it results in changes to the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species; deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species, or significant disturbance of the qualifying species (wigeon, cormorant, shelduck, mallards, goldeneye, red-breasted merganser, oystercatcher, curlew, redshank). Scheme could also lead to effects on qualifying species of the River Teith SAC through:
Release of pollutants during construction leading to changes in habitat quality that could impact on migratory route of Atlantic salmon, Sea Lamprey & River Lamprey and hence have impacts upon the distribution of the qualifying interests within the SAC. Noise and vibration during construction if this affects migration and the distribution of the qualifying interests within the SAC. Sets out criteria for use of existing Council building and parkland once the Council staff are re-located. Proposal for new school building on greenfield site. Site lies Within 5 km of coast. Site lies within tetrad from which oystercatcher, curlew, golden plover and lapwing have been recorded but no suitable habitat present (based on Phase 1 survey).
M03 Greenfield, Alloa S01 Redwell new primary school
3c 3c
3c 3c
Proposal
Comments Site also lies within tetrad from which pink-footed goose been recorded, but no suitable habitat present (based on Phase 1 & aerial photos). Located within plot H04. Site located within 5 km of shore. Site is located within a tetrad that has not been surveyed for presence of pink-footed goose. Part of the site has potentially suitable habitat (based on phase 1 & aerial photos), which extends into an adjacent tetrad where pinkfooted goose has been recorded, but site is considered too small for this species. Zero counts for wader species within the tetrad. Acquisition of adjacent former bowling greens & safeguarding these as open space. Undisclosed development proposals, possibly involving social housing and/or community growing. Site lies within 5 km of coast, so could contribute to recreational disturbance. Site is located within a tetrad where pink-footed goose has not been counted, but site is considered too small to support this species. Zero counts for wader species within this tetrad. Improvement of existing road Improvement of existing road Safeguarding of small brownfield site. Site is located within a tetrad where pink-footed goose has not been counted, but site is considered too small to support this species. Zero counts for wader species within this tetrad. Cycle infrastructure. Site within 5 km of coast. Oystercatcher, curlew, redshank & lapwing been recorded from tetrad, but site does not contain suitable habitat (based on Phase 1 & aerial photos).
Screening SPA 3c
SAC 3c
S02 Carsebridge safeguarding of land for new secondary school
S03 Sunnyside Primary School S04 Pine Grove Alloa
3b 3d MRE for recreational disturbance
3b 3c
T01 A908 Corridor T02 Shillinghill T03 Alloa Station Car Park
3c 3c 3c
3c 3c 3c
T04 Clackmannan (NCN76) to Alloa B01 Forthbank, Alloa
3c 3d MRE for recreational disturbance &
3c 3c
Proposal
Comments Pink-footed goose has been recorded from tetrad, but site is considered too small to support this species. Site is close to fields known to be used as high tide roost sites. Potential for disturbance of qualifying species using these fields during construction. Part of large site that extends up to shoreline of Firth of Forth within the boundary of the SPA, at a point where the river is narrow. Scheme could lead to effects on qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA through: Release of pollutants during construction potentially leading to (a) deterioration of habitats of the qualifying species; (b) changes in distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and/or (c) changes to the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species. Qualifying species recorded from the coastline are: cormorant, shelduck, wigeon, mallard, goldeneye, oystercatcher, lapwing, curlew, and redshank. Noise, vibration and human activity during construction leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Qualifying species recorded from shoreline during high & low tides are: pink-footed goose, shelduck, wigeon, cormorant, oystercatcher, lapwing, curlew, redshank, mallard, goldeneye, red-breasted merganser, golden plover, and dunlin. Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Qualifying species potentially affected are listed above. Loss of habitat within and outwith the boundary of the site that could lead to changes to the distribution and extent of habitats supporting the qualifying species and changes to the distribution of qualifying species within the SPA. Qualifying species recorded from the tetrad are: pink-footed goose, curlew, lapwing, golden plover, redshank and
Screening SPA disturbance of qualifying species70 during construction LSE
SAC
B02 Alloa West Business Park
LSE
70
Pink-footed goose, curlew, lapwing
Proposal oystercatcher.
Comments
Screening SPA
SAC
B03 Carsebridge South
B04 North Castle Street B05 The Oval, Alloa
B06 Hilton Road/Clackmannan Road
As site abuts larger development area that adjoins the coast, at a point where the river is very narrow, there will be further checks for in combination effects upon migratory fish that are qualifying features of R. Teith SAC arising from sediment releases during construction. Site within 5 km of coast. Zero records for waders from the tetrad. Part of the site lies within a tetrad that has not been counted for pink-footed goose. Although the site is > 6 ha, part of it is currently developed and hence it is not considered likely to support this species. Site within 5 km of coast. Site is built up. Zero records for waders within the tetrad. Pink-footed goose has not been counted within the tetrad, but the site is considered too small to support this species. Allows for development of more units adjacent to existing units. Site is within 5 km of coast. Oystercatcher, curlew, golden plover, redshank and lapwing have been recorded from the tetrad, but site does not support suitable habitat (based on Phase 1 & aerial photos). Pink-footed goose has been recorded from the tetrad, but the site is too small to support this species & no suitable habitat present (based on Phase 1 & aerial photos). The site is located close to fields that are known to act as high tide roost/foraging sites for high numbers of qualifying species (e.g. curlew). However it is not considered likely to have minor residual effects in relation to disturbance as: The site is already partially developed and so is used by people The site is separated from fields that may be used by qualifying species by a road. This is considered to act as a barrier between any disturbance arising from the site and qualifying species using the fields. Site has planning permission.
3c
3c
3c 3c
3c 3c
3c
3c
Proposal
Comments Site lies within 5 km of coast, but is unlikely to contribute to coastal recreational disturbance. Zero records for waders from tetrad including this site. Pink-footed goose has not been counted within the tetrad that partially covers this site, but the site is considered too small to support this species. Currently developed site. Site lies within 5 km of coast, but is unlikely to contribute to coastal recreational disturbance. Zero records for waders from tetrad including this site. Pink-footed goose has not been counted within the tetrad that partially covers this site, but the site is considered too small to support this species. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance. Zero counts for wader species. Pink-footed goose not been counted within the tetrad, but site is less than 6 ha in size. Big open site within 2 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records of waders or pink-footed goose from the tetrad. The site appears to be under a cropping regime. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records of waders or pink-footed goose from the tetrad Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records of waders or pink-footed goose from the tetrad. Site too small for use by pink-footed goose. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records of waders or pink-footed goose from the tetrad. Site too small for use by pink-footed goose.
Screening SPA
SAC
B07 Clackmannan Road Retail Park
3c
3c
Sauchie Proposals H15 Former FV College, Sauchie
H16 Sauchie West, Sauchie
3d MRE for recreational disturbance at coast) 3d MRE (for recreational disturbance at coast) 3d MRE (for recreational disturbance at coast) 3d MRE (for recreational disturbance at coast) 3d MRE (for recreational disturbance at coast)
3c
3c
H17 Fairfield School, Sauchie H18 Main Street B, Sauchie
3c 3c
H19 Sauchie Nursery, Sauchie
3c
Proposal H20 Former Scout Hall, Holton Square, Sauchie H21 Todds Yard, Sauchie
Comments Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records of waders or pink-footed goose from the tetrad. Site too small for use by pink-footed goose. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential for recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records of waders from the tetrad. Pink-footed goose not counted within tetrad, but site too small for use by this species. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential for recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records of waders or pink-footed goose from the tetrad. Site too small for use by pink-footed goose. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential for recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records of waders or pink-footed goose from the tetrad. Site too small for use by pink-footed goose. To be included within H16 Improvements to existing roads Creation of new roads. The routes appear to cut through areas of open habitat, but are located in tetrads for which there are zero counts of wader species and pink-footed goose. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential for recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records for waders within tetrad. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from tetrad, but site is too small to support this species. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential for recreational disturbance of qualifying
Screening SPA 3d MRE (for recreational disturbance at coast) 3d MRE (for recreational disturbance at coast) 3d MRE (for recreational disturbance at coast) 3d MRE (for recreational disturbance at coast) Part of H16 3c 3c
SAC 3c
3c
H22 Preston Terrace, Sauchie
3c
H23 The Manse, Main Street, Sauchie
3c
S05 Sauchie West new primary school T05 Sauchie Junctions T06 Sauchie to Lornshill Links
3c 3c 3c
Tullibody, Cambus and Glenochil Proposals H24 Tullibody By-pass, Tullibody
3d MRE (for recreational disturbance at coast) 3d
3c
H25 Baingle Brae, Tullibody
3c
Proposal
Comments species. Zero records for waders within tetrad. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from tetrad, but site is considered too small to support this species. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential for recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records for waders and pink-footed goose within tetrad Site within 5 km coast. Potential for recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records for waders and pink-footed goose within tetrad. Proposal allows for moving facilities to an existing building, although there may be a need for a small extension to existing buildings to accommodate this. Site is located within a tetrad where pink-footed goose has been recorded. However, owing to small size of site and location of site within an urban area it is not considered likely to be suitable for this species. Zero counts for waders within this tetrad. Site safeguard for future transport interchange facilities. The precise location is not set, but the proposed site is likely to be located north of the railway line. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from one of the tetrads that overlaps part of the area & suitable habitat is present. SNH has indicated that depending on the final location of the site, an HRA may be required. Upgrades to an existing road Site is under development, with approx. one quarter of site to be developed. Site is less than 5 km from coast. Zero records for wader species from tetrad that includes this site. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from the tetrad that includes this site, but the site area is considered too small to support this species. Site less than 5 km from coast. Zero counts for waders from tetrad that includes the site.
Screening SPA MRE (for recreational disturbance at coast) 3d MRE (for recreational disturbance at coast) 3d MRE (for recreational disturbance at coast) 3c
SAC
H26 Muirside, Lethen View, Tullibody M04 Alloa Road, Tullibody S06 Tullibody Civic Centre
3c 3c 3c
T07 Cambus Park and Ride
3d MRE for potential loss/disturbance of high tide roost sites 3c 3c
3c
T08 B9140 Road Safety B08 Dumyat Business Park
3c 3c
B09 Station Road, Cambus
3c
3c
Proposal
Comments Pink-footed goose has been recorded from the tetrad that includes the site, but the area of the site is considered too small to support this species.
Screening SPA
SAC
Clackmannan Proposals H27 Main Street/North Street, Clackmannan
H28 Helensfield, Clackmannan
T09 A907/B910 T10 Clackmannan Rail Halt
Site within 5 km of coast. Potential for recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records for waders from this tetrad. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from the tetrad, but the site is considered too small to support this species. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential for recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records for waders from this tetrad. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from this tetrad & site is considered large enough to be used as a roost; but the area of potentially suitable habitats is less than 6 ha. Potential to use site for mitigation for SEPA/CSGN project? Junction improvement at Helensfield and cycle crossing on A907 to connect with Clackmannan Safeguarding land for rail halt. Site is located within urban area. Zero records for qualifying wader species from the tetrad. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from the tetrad, but the size of the site and its urban location means that it is not likely to be used by this species. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential for recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records for waders from this tetrad. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from this tetrad, but the site is too small to support this species. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential for recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records for waders from this tetrad.
3d MRE for recreational disturbance 3d MRE for recreational disturbance
3c
3c
3c 3c
3c 3c
Devon Village Proposals H29 Blackfaulds, Devon Village
3d MRE for recreational disturbance 3d MRE for recreational disturbance
3c
H30 Blackfaulds Village
Steading,
Devon
3c
Proposal
Comments
Screening SPA 3c
SAC 3c
Pink-footed goose has been recorded from this tetrad, but the site is too small to support this species. B10 Devon Village Site within 5 km of coast. Presence of waders has not been assessed within the tetrad, but suitable habitat is not present (based on aerial photos). Zero counts for pink-footed goose for the tetrad and the site is considered too small to support this species. Forth - Rural and Area Wide Proposals H31 Lornshill Steading, Alloa Site within 5 km of coast. Potential for recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records for waders or pink-footed goose from this tetrad. H32 Ditch Farm, Tullibody Site within 5 km of coast. Potential for recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records for waders from the tetrad. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from the tetrad, but the site is considered too small to support this species. T11 Fishcross Bypass Safeguarding land for new by-pass. The precise location of the route is not known. Site is within 5km of site. Zero counts of waders from the tetrads through which the route will be located. Low numbers of pink-footed goose been recorded from one of the tetrads through which the route will pass; habitat appears to be potentially suitable for the species (depending on cropping regime) (based on aerial photographs). T12 Gartmorn Dam access road from New road through area of woodland. Unsuitable habitat for waders/geese. B9140 T13 Carsebridge area, Alloa Upgrading the route which runs east-west between sites H03 and H04 up to Gartmorn Dam. May include a car park close to the proposed housing sites where people could park and walk/cycle up to the Dam, as an alternative to driving through Sauchie and along Gartmorn Road.
3d MRE for recreational disturbance 3d MRE for recreational disturbance 3d MRE for high tide roost site for pink-footed goose
3c 3c
3c
3c 3d MRE for loss of high tide roost sites for pinkfooted goose
3c 3c
Proposal
Comments Zero records for qualifying wader species from the tetrad. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from the tetrad & habitat may be suitable for this species (depending on cropping regime) (based on aerial photos). Bend realignment of B9140 east of Collylands Provision of cycle link along disused railway line and cycle crossing on A907. Provision of cycle route alongside existing road. Zero records for qualifying wader species from the tetrad. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from the tetrad & habitat may be suitable for this species (depending on cropping regime) (based on aerial photos). Safeguarding of former rail line in support of the reopening of the branch line to Fife, including replacement of NCN764. Provision of cycle route. Route passes through tetrads where pink-footed goose, oystercatcher, curlew, redshank & lapwing have been recorded & suitable habitat is present in the wider area, but not along proposed route. Site within 5 km of coast. Low numbers of Redshank have been recorded from tetrad that includes this site. Whilst most of site is brownfield, some areas of suitable habitat are present (based on Phase 1 & aerial photos). Pink-footed goose has been recorded from the tetrad, and the site is large enough to support this species; however, much of site is already developed & only a small amount of potentially suitable habitat present. The site adjoins the Firth of Forth, but lies outwith the boundary of the SPA. Scheme could lead to effects on qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA through: Release of pollutants during construction leading to (a) changes in distribution and extent of habitats that support the species; and/or (b) changes to the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species. Qualifying species recorded from
Screening SPA
SAC
T14 B9140 Road Safety T15 NCN764 to Helensfield T16 Helensfield via Jellyholm linking to Carsebridge
3c 3c 3d MRE for loss of high tide roost sites for pinkfooted goose 3c 3c
3c 3c 3c
T17 Alloa Oakley Railway Line T18 Sauchie to Alva cycle route
3c 3c
B11 Kilbagie
3d MRE for possible loss of inland high tide roost site for redshank
3c
B12 Garvel Farm, Blackgrange
LSE for disturbance of qualifying species & loss of habitat
3d MRE
Proposal
Comments mudflats at low tide are pink-footed goose, shelduck, mallard, goldeneye, red-breasted merganser, cormorant, oystercatcher, lapwing, curlews, and redshank. Noise, vibration and human activity during construction leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Qualifying species recorded from shoreline during high & low tides are: pink-footed goose, shelduck, wigeon, mallards, goldeneye, red-breasted merganser, cormorant, oystercatcher, lapwing, curlew, and redshank. Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Qualifying species potentially affected are listed above. Loss of high tide roost habitat and/or disturbance to birds at high tide roost sites. This includes land within and outwith the boundary of the SPA. This could contribute to changes in the distribution and extent of habitats supporting the qualifying species and changes to the distribution of qualifying species within the site. Qualifying species listed above. As site is adjacent to the Forth, in an area where the river is narrow, screen for in combination effects on migratory fish of the R. Teith SAC arising from disturbance and pollution during construction & operation The site lies close to the Firth of Forth, but outwith the boundary of the SPA. It also adjoins the Cambus Pools Nature Reserve. Scheme could lead to effects on qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA through: Pollution during construction. This could result in (a) deterioration in habitats of the qualifying species; (b) changes in the distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species; and/or (c) changes in the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species. Loss of habitat used as high tide roost sites leading to changes in the
Screening SPA
SAC
B13 Midtown Proposal
LSE
LSE
Proposal
Comments distribution of the species within the site: the site lies within tetrad for which Pink-footed goose has been recorded. Whilst site itself is < 6 ha in size, it adjoins other open areas to create a space that is > 6 ha and includes suitable habitat (based on Phase 1 survey). (list as above) Noise, vibration and human activity during construction leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species (list as above). Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species. Qualifying species potentially affected are listed above. Site is close to coast, at a point where the river is narrow. Consider for in combination effects upon migratory fish species of the R. Teith SAC as a result of effects on sediment levels during construction. This site lies adjacent to the Firth of Forth, within the SPA boundary. Scheme could lead to effects on qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA through: Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species at the coast. Qualifying species recorded from the shoreline during WeBS core and low tide counts are pinkfooted goose, cormorant, shelduck, wigeon, mallard, goldeneye, redbreasted merganser, oystercatcher, ringed plover lapwing, knot, dunlin, bartailed godwit, curlew and redshank. Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species at nearby high tide roost sites and hence changes to distribution of the species within the SPA. Oystercatcher, curlew, redshank and lapwing have been recorded from the tetrad & it appears that there are areas of suitable habitat (based on aerial photos). Pink-footed goose has been recorded for the tetrad, but the site is considered too small to support this species. As site is adjacent to the Forth, in an area where the river is narrow, screen for in combination effects on migratory fish of the R. Teith SAC arising from
Screening SPA
SAC
B14 Kennetpans
LSE for loss of habitat and disturbance of qualifying species
3d MRE
Proposal
Comments disturbance and pollution during construction & operation Site within 5 km of coast. Zero records for waders from this tetrad. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from this tetrad and the site is considered to be large enough to support this species & habitat is considered suitable (based on Phase 1 & aerial photos). Menstrie Proposals Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records for waders from tetrad. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from the tetrad, but the site is too small to support this species. Near to watercourses that discharge to Forth water pollution. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records for waders from tetrad. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from the tetrad, but the site is too small to support this species. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Zero records for waders from tetrad. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from the tetrad, but the site is too small to support this species. Within 5 km of coast. Zero records for waders from the tetrad. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from tetrad, but site is considered too small to support this species. Completion of road link between A91 and C101 via Menstrie Mains (through undeveloped areas). Within 5 km of coast. Zero counts for qualifying wader species for the tetrad.
Screening SPA 3d MRE for loss of inland roost/ feeding sites & disturbance of pinkfooted goose 3d MRE recreational disturbance at coast & water quality effects and hence knock on effects on qualifying species 3d MRE for recreational disturbance of qualifying species at coast 3d MRE for recreational disturbance at coast 3c
SAC 3c
B15 Meadowend
H33 Middletonkerse, Menstrie
3c
H34 Ochil Road, Menstrie
3c
H35 Mains Farm Steading, Menstrie
3c
B16 Glenochil Yeast
3c
T19 Menstrie Mains Link Road
3d MRE for loss of inland roost/feeding sites of
3c
Proposal
Comments Pink-footed goose has been recorded from the tetrad & suitable habitat may be present (based on aerial photos)
T20 C101 Re-alignment T21 Roundabout at A91/C101 H36 Brook Street/Beauclerc Street, Alva
H37 Brook Street/Back Road, Alva
H38 Berryfield, Alva
H39 Former Alva Glen Hotel, Alva
Re-alignment of existing road. Construction of roundabout on existing road at junction of the A91 and C101. Alva Proposals Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Oystercatcher, curlew, redshank and lapwing been recorded from the tetrad, but there appears to be little suitable habitat (based on aerial photos). Pink-footed goose has been recorded from tetrad, but site is too small to support this species. Planning permission approved. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Oystercatcher, curlew, redshank and lapwing been recorded from the tetrad, but little suitable habitat present (based on aerial photos). Pink-footed goose has been recorded from tetrad, but site is too small to support this species. Planning permission approved. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Oystercatcher, curlew, redshank and lapwing been recorded from the tetrad, but little suitable habitat available (based on aerial photos) Pink-footed goose has been recorded from tetrad, but site is too small to support this species. Planning permission approved Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Oystercatcher, curlew, redshank and lapwing been recorded from the tetrad, but no suitable habitat present (based on aerial photos).
Screening SPA pink-footed goose or disturbance of that species 3c 3c 3d MRE for recreational disturbance
SAC
3c 3c 3c
3c
3c
3c
Proposal
Comments Pink-footed goose has been recorded from tetrad, but site is too small to support this species. Planning permission approved. Site within 5 km of coast. Potential to contribute to recreational disturbance of qualifying species. Oystercatcher, curlew, redshank and lapwing been recorded from the tetrad, but no suitable habitat present. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from tetrad, but site is too small to support this species. Planning permission approved Site safeguarded for cemetery. Site lies within tetrad from which oystercatcher, curlew, redshank and lapwing have been recorded, but site is > 5 km from the coast, so considered unlikely to support these species. Site lies within a tetrad where pink-footed goose has not been counted, but site is considered too small to support this species. Planning permission for burial site. Site lies within tetrad from which oystercatcher, curlew, redshank and lapwing have been recorded, but site is > 5 km from the coast, so is considered unlikely to support these species. Site lies within a tetrad where pink-footed goose has not been counted, but site is considered too small to support this species Junction improvements including pedestrian crossings, signalisation of Queens Street and Brook Street Junctions Infrastructure for NCN 768 Redevelopment of site. Site is within 5 km of the coast. Oystercatcher and lapwing have been recorded from the tetrad, but as the site is currently developed, it is not considered likely to support high tide roost sites. Pink-footed goose has also been recorded from the tetrad, but the site is
Screening SPA
SAC
H40 Park Street, Alva
3c
S07 Alva Cemetery Extension
3c
3c
S08 Woodland Burial Site
3c
3c
T22 A91 Corridor T23 Back Road, Alva B17 Glentana
3c 3c 3c
3c 3c 3c
Proposal
Comments
Screening SPA 3c
SAC 3c
considered too small to support this species. N01 Alva Woodland Park Expansion Expansion of Woodland Park, habitat networks to Gartmorn Dam. As yet there are no details for this proposal. The wording of the proposal was amended during the screening phase. There is potential to develop the site to help provide suitable alternative green space. Tillicoultry and Coalsnaughton Proposals H42 Lower Mill Street, Tillicoultry Site > 5 km from coast & is considered too far to contribute to recreational effects or be a candidate high tide roost site. Zero records for pink-footed goose from the tetrad. H43 Middleton Mill/Upper Mill Street, Site > 5 km from coast & is considered too far to contribute to recreational Tillicoultry effects or be a candidate high tide roost site. Zero records for pink-footed goose. H44 Former Tillicoultry Community Site > 5 km from coast & is considered too far to contribute to recreational Centre, Tillicoultry effects or be a candidate high tide roost site. Zero records for pink-footed goose. H45 Coalsnaughton North, Site > 5 km from coast & is considered too far to contribute to recreational Coalsnaughton effects or be a candidate high tide roost site. Pink-footed goose has been recorded in low numbers from a tetrad that partially overlaps the site; site is large enough to support this species and suitable habitat appears to be present (based on aerial photos). H46 Coalsnaughton North (The Glen), Site > 5 km from coast & is considered too far to contribute to recreational Coalsnaughton effects or be a candidate high tide roost site. Zero records for pink-footed goose. S09 Playing Fields Extension Area identified for safeguarding as playing fields. Site is > 5 km from coast. Site lies within tetrad from which there are zero counts for pink-footed goose. The site is also considered to be too small to support this species. T24 Coalsnaughton Bypass Safeguarding of land to south of Coalsnaughton for a bypass. No specific locational information at this stage. Site mostly > 5 km from coast.
3c 3c 3c 3d MRE for loss of high tide roost/ feeding sites for pink-footed goose 3c 3c
3c 3c 3c 3c
3c 3c
3d MRE for loss of inland roost site used by pink-
3c
Proposal
Comments
Zero or no counts for qualifying wader species from tetrads along route. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from one of the tetrads that cover the route & suitable habitat appears to be present (based on aerial photos). West Ochils - Rural and Area Wide Proposals T25 Menstrie-Stirling Active Travel Improved active travel route from the edge of Menstrie westwards to the Route Council boundary. No specific locational information at this stage. Zero counts for qualifying wader species from tetrads through which route passes. Pink-footed goose been recorded from tetrads through which route passes & potentially suitable habitat appears to be present (based on aerial photos). T26 A91 Alva-Tillicoultry Active Travel New remote active travel route alongside the A91 between Alva Academy and Route Tillicoultry Public park. Few details available. Site > 5 km of coast. Low numbers of pink-footed goose recorded from one tetrad through which route passes & potentially suitable habitat appears to be present (based on aerial photos).. (T18 Alva to Sauchie cycle route) See above B18 Former Glenochil Nursery Site within 5 km of site. Oystercatcher and curlew been recorded from the tetrad, but no suitable habitat present. Pink-footed goose been recorded from the tetrad, but the site is considered too small to support this species. Dollar Proposals H47 Dollar Village Expansion Site > 5 km from coast & is considered too far to contribute to recreational effects or be a candidate high tide roost site for waders. The site is large enough to support pink-footed goose, and contains areas of grassland. However, use of the site by pink-footed goose is considered unlikely owing to the fact that the geese are known to favour sites along the coast and inland sites to the west of this area, and there have been zero counts for pink-footed goose in this and the adjoining tetrads. H48 Dollar Golf Club, Dollar Site > 5 km from coast & is considered too far to contribute to recreational
Screening SPA footed goose or disturbance of this species 3d MRE for loss of inland roost site used by pinkfooted goose or disturbance of this species 3d MRE for loss of inland roost site used by pinkfooted goose or disturbance of this species 3c
SAC
3c
3c
3c
3c
3c
3c
3c
Proposal
Comments effects or be a candidate high tide roost site for waders. Part of the site is covered by a tetrad that has not been counted for the presence of pink-footed goose, but the site is considered too small to support this species. Small site surrounded by development; likely to be too small & disturbed for pink-footed goose, & too far from coast for waders & recreational impacts. Lies within area allocated for H47. Site > 5 km from coast. Site lies within tetrad where there are zero counts for pink-footed goose. New clubhouse associated with H48. Proposal for inclusion of community sports facility as part of the expansion of Dollar Village. Junction improvements on existing road Site > 5km from coast. Zero records for pink-footed goose from tetrad and site is considered too small to support this species. General requirement that within masterplan to implement H48 (see above) details of employment provision are included.
Screening SPA
SAC
S10 Strathdevon Primary School S11 Lovers Loan Playing Field S12 New Clubhouse S13 Dollar Village Community Sports Facility T27 A91 Corridor B19 Devon Road
3c 3c 3c 3e 3c 3c 1 3c
3c 3c 3c 3c 3c 3c 1 3c
Expansion
B20 Dollar Expansion Employment Muckhart Proposals H49 South and East of Pool of Muckhart
T28 Golf Course Road, Muckhart T29 Muckhart (S29 on map) H50 Forestmill
Site > 5 km from coast & is considered too far to contribute to recreational effects or be a candidate high tide roost site for waders. The site is large enough to support pink-footed goose, and contains areas of grassland. However, use of the site by pink-footed goose is considered unlikely owing to the fact that the geese are known to favour sites along the coast and inland sites to the west of this area, and there have been zero counts for pink-footed goose in this and the adjoining tetrads. Alter existing road to make cycle friendly Cycle infrastructure East Ochils - Rural and Area Wide Proposals Site > 5 km from coast & is considered too far to contribute to recreational effects or be a candidate high tide roost site for waders.
3c 3c 3d MRE for loss of or high
3c 3c 3c
Proposal
Comments Part of site lies within a tetrad from which pink-footed goose has been recorded; the remaining part of the site lies within a tetrad that has not been assessed for that species. The site is large enough to support this species and includes areas of potentially suitable habitat (based on aerial photos). Planning permission granted. Site > 5 km from coast & is considered too far to contribute to recreational effects or be a candidate high tide roost site for waders. Zero counts for pink-footed goose from tetrad. Part of H50 see above Part of H50 see above Provision of roundabouts on existing road. Junction improvements in Dollar Location to be checked Realignment of existing road east of Tillicoultry. No details of route corridor. Site is > 5 km from coast. Zero counts for pink-footed goose from the tetrads. Upgrading of Devon Way Site is > 5 km from coast. Zero records for pink-footed goose from the tetrads Road safety measures of existing road Cycle provision involving upgrading of existing farm tracks and creation of new route through agricultural land. Site is > 5 km from coast. Zero counts for pink-footed goose from the tetrads. Connections to NCN764 and Gartmorn Dam for new developments. Site is > 5 km from coast. Zero counts for pink-footed goose from the tetrads. Cycle infrastructure. No details of route. Route > 5 km from coast. Zero counts for pink-footed goose from the tetrads. Cycle infrastructure. Details of route not available. Route linked to S15 & H50 (see above)
Screening SPA tide roost site for pinkfooted goose or disturbance of this species 3c
SAC
H51 Solsgirth
3c
S14 Forestmill - new Primary School S15 Forestmill golf course and hotel T30 A977 Roundabouts T31 B913/A977 T32 A91 Road Safety T33 Devon Way T34 A91 Cowden Bends Road Safety T35 Dollar to Vicars Bridge Cycle Route T36 Forestmill to Gartmorn Dam Cycle Links T37 Dollar to Council Boundary at Blairingone T38 Forestmill to NCN764
3c 3c 3c 3c 3c 3c
3c 3c 3c 3c 3c 3c
3c 3c
3c 3c 3c
Proposal T39 A823 Bends Road Safety B21 Bridge Business Park
Comments Improvements to existing road Site within 5 km of the coast. Zero records for waders from tetrad. Pink-footed goose has been recorded from one of the tetrads that partially covers the site, and parts of the site lie within a tetrad that has not been counted for this species,. Site is considered large enough to support this species but habitat is not considered suitable for this species (based on aerial photos). Screen for habitat suitability. Planning permission granted. Part of H51 Site > 5 km from coast. Zero counts for pink-footed goose for the tetrad and the site is considered too small to support this species. There is an approved restoration plan for the site, but this has expired and may be reviewed. The current plan does not allow for housing or recreation. Site lies > 5 km from coast. Part of site extends into a tetrad from which pink-footed goose has been recorded screen habitat. Potential to use for habitat creation and to provide Suitable Alternative Greenspace for recreational purposes?
Screening SPA 3c 3c
SAC 3c 3c
B22 Solsgirth N02 Meadowhill opencast restoration
3c 3c
3c 3c
Appendix D: Other developments or projects considered for likely significant effects upon European sites in combination with the Clackmannanshire proposed LDP.
The Tables are based on a list of developments around the Firth of Forth that is maintained on the Knowledge Hub a collaboration of local authorities and agencies working on habitats regulations appraisals around the Firth of Forth. This list was last updated 27.02.2013 and was viewed 1st May 2013. Status of plans is assessed as: Pre-application a) the incomplete parts of projects that have been started but which are not yet completed; b) projects given consent but not yet started; c) projects that are subject to applications for consent; d) projects that are subject to outstanding appeal procedures; e) any known unregulated projects that are not subject to any consent; f) ongoing projects subject to regulatory reviews, such as discharge consents or waste management licenses; g) development that has recently been completed but where any residual effects may not form part of the environmental baseline; h) policies and proposal that are not yet fully implemented in plans that are still in force; and i) draft plans that are being brought forward by other public bodies and agencies. a) Firth of Forth SPA Development/Plan
Summary description of plan
Status of proposal
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP Likely effects on qualifying features were identified as: habitat loss; changes in processes supporting habitat (e.g. water quality or sedimentation); disturbance of
Screening
Strategic Plans National Planning Framework for Scotland 2
Sets out strategic plans for Scotland. Projects in or near the Forth are: - Forth Replacement Crossing; - Upgrade of Edinburgh airport; - Grangemouth Freight Hub; freight capacity on the Forth; capacity improvements at
Specific proposals included in the plan that could act in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP will be
101
Development/Plan
Status of proposal
National Renewables Infrastructure Plan (NRIP)
Cockenzie power station; and Central Scotland Green Network71. An Appropriate Assessment was undertaken, which concluded that mitigation to avoid effects from individual projects will be achievable at the project level. Individual project-based Appropriate Assessment will be required72. Strategy for development of Scottish off-shore renewables industry. Plan includes for 11 locations in 3 clusters. Leith and Methil have been identified as prime locations within the Forth (see below). Strategic policies to affect the development issues around Edinburgh City to 2032. Plan covers City of Edinburgh, East Lothian, Midlothian, Fife, Scottish Borders and West Lothian Councils.
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP qualifying species.
Screening
considered individually.
Few details of the types of development are available. The Strategic Environmental Assessment for the plan indicates that scheme specific HRA will be required. An HRA was undertaken73. The plan could give rise to likely significant effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA as a result of housing allocations. The strategic nature of the document means that detailed assessment has been deferred to LDPs.
SESplan
Specific proposals relevant to the Forth will be screened for effects if they come forward prior to adoption of the LDP. Specific proposals that give rise to MRE within LDP will be considered for in combination effects (see below).
71
NPF2 also included proposals for Longannet Power Station, including carbon capture. Whilst proposals were approved, plans to implement carbon capture have been suspended. Some upgrading works have been undertaken at the Power Station in 2012. Consequently, these have been considered as part of the baseline conditions against which changes in the Falkirk LDP are assessed. 72 Scottish Government, 2009 73 Habitats Regulations Appraisal Record of Proposed Plan for SESplan March 2011
102
Development/Plan
Status of proposal
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP In combination effects of disturbance arising from increased recreational use associated with housing developments will be considered for each LFP (see below) Likely effects on qualifying features were identified as74: Changes to habitat processes (effects on the River Almond). No significant effects upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA are anticipated, if mitigation is included. As the Clackmannanshire LDP is not considered to give rise to MRE in relation to water quality or sediment movements in the Forth, no in combination effects are anticipated. The HRA considered likely effects of policies on their own and in combination. Likely significant effects in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP are: Disturbance of qualifying species at the coast arising
Screening
Local Development Plans & Local Plans (including alterations) Rural West Edinburgh Local Plan Alteration Draft Includes policy for a second Feb 2010 runway at Edinburgh Airport.
Screened out
Falkirk LDP
Draft LDP and accompanying HRA were published April 2013 and are now subject to public consultation.
Screened in
74
As reported in the Appropriate Assessment to accompany the scheme, City of Edinburgh Council, 2010
103
Development/Plan
Status of proposal
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP from increased recreational pressure; Disturbance of qualifying species at high tide roost sites; Loss of high tide roost sites.
Screening
Stirling Local Development Plan: Proposed Plan Draft (October 2012)
Mid Fife Local Plan Modifications: Burntisland settlement Plan proposed modification West Lothian LDP
Includes policies and spatial proposals. The HRA was published for consultation in October 2012. A number of housing proposals were considered for likely effects upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA (and other European Sites). This includes long-term proposals for Throsk and the Bandeath Industrial Estate (just upstream of the Falkirk Council area on the banks of the Forth). It was concluded that the plan will have no adverse effects upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA. This plan is currently going through modifications75. The proposal is for mixed use, including housing in a harbour area adjacent to the Firth of Forth. The plan is under preparation and no spatial proposals have yet been published.
Likely significant effects in combination are: Cumulative effects of disturbance at the coast resulting from increased population numbers from housing developments.
Screened in
Cumulative effects in terms of disturbance to birds within the SPA. No details are yet available.
Screened in
Preapplication
Screened out
75
http://fife-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/mflp-pre-exam-mods?pointId=d1179973e271
104
Development/Plan
Status of proposal i
City of Edinburgh LDP
The plan has been published for public consultation and a HRA record has recently been published76.
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP Minor Residual Effects upon the qualifying interest features of the Firth of Forth SPA are identified, which arise from loss of inland sites used as high tide roost sites by qualifying wader specie. Likely effects on qualifying interest features were identified in an Environmental Report77: Permanent habitat loss adjacent to eastern breakwater; Localised alteration of processes (erosion and deposition patterns) Temporary disturbance of qualifying species during construction Permanent disturbance of qualifying species during operation (artificial lighting). No firm proposals have been
Screening
Screened in
Specific projects or locational proposals Leith Docks N-RIP
Prime location for implementation of N-RIP
Preapplication
Scheme is preapplication at this stage and MRE have not been identified. If detailed proposals are brought forward prior to adoption of the LDP they will be considered for in combination effects. Watching brief.
76 77
Proposed Edinburgh Local Development Plan Draft Habitats Regulations Appraisal Record March 2013 www.edinburgh.gov.uk/localdevelopmentplan Scottish Enterprise & Highlands and Islands Enterprise, 2010.
105
Development/Plan
Status of proposal
Methil Docks N-RIP
Identified for development in NRIP. Masterplan in preparation.
Preapplication
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP produced. A scheme-specific HRA will be required. Likely effects on qualifying interest features were identified in an Environmental Report: temporary disturbance during construction; permanent disturbance during operation; changes to hydrology and sedimentation permanent habitat loss Land reclamation is considered to possibly result in a significant effect. No details available at this stage.
Screening
Scheme is preapplication at this stage and MRE have not been identified. If detailed proposals are brought forward prior to adoption of the LDP they will be considered for in combination effects. Watching brief.
Burntisland N-RIP
This location has a possible site offshore wind Phase Possible implementation.
been identified as for assembly of turbines during 2 of the plans
Preapplication
Cockenzie Power Station
Replacement of coal-fired boilers with Gas-powered turbines. An Appropriate Assessment has been undertaken.
Appropriate Assessment concluded that effects upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA could be avoided by applying mitigation measures linked to timing of works;
Screen out at this stage as preapplication, but keep a watching brief in case proposals come forward. Watching brief. Screened in and review whether there are in combination effects for qualifying species
106
Development/Plan
Status of proposal
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP however, further consideration was required of management of ash lagoons. Likely effects on qualifying features identified in the AA: changes to water quality arising from pollution during construction and operation, changes to sedimentation and flow patterns arising from pier construction, and disturbance of qualifying species during construction. Mitigation measures have been included in the design, construction methods and timing of works. Given the localised nature of likely effects, their timing in relation to the implementation of the LDP, and distance between the bridge and LDP area, there are unlikely to be cumulative effects with the LDP. Likely effects identified in the AA:80
Screening
Forth Replacement Crossing
New bridge across the Forth78
found at the lagoons and in Clackmannanshire . Screened out
Rosyth International Container Terminal (RICT)
Creation of a tidal basin with new berths. Piling and dredging will be
Screened in
78 80
Jacobs, Faber Maunsell, & Aecom, 2007. Jacobs, 2011.
107
Development/Plan
Status of proposal
required. A Public Inquiry was held in 2012. Ministers are minded to consent the Order for the works, with modifications79. The consultation period for these amendments ended 2nd May 2013.
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP Short-term disturbance of qualifying species using the inter-tidal area. Additional likely effects identified by consultees at the Public Inquiry are: disturbance of qualifying species during construction and operation; and changes to habitat quality and functioning (sediment movement) arising from dredging. The Order is likely to include mitigation for effects. The Environmental Statement 81 for the scheme concluded that there would be no significant effects upon the notified features of the Firth of Forth SPA. Copies of the HRA do not appear to be in the public domain, but likely effects on qualifying species arise from: Changes to food supply within the Carron Estuary arising from release of cooling water.
Screening
Rosyth Biomass Plant
Proposal for construction and operation of a Renewable Energy Plan at Rosyth involving water abstraction from the Forth. (Proposed by Forth Energy).
The nature of the predicted Minor Residual Effects from this proposal and the limited numbers of individuals of qualifying species that may experience these effects means that in combination effects with the
79 81
http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/files/PBR_decision_letter_final.pdf Forth Energy, 2010a.
108
Development/Plan
Status of proposal
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP
Screening
Burntisland Granton Ferry Beauly to Denny Powerline
Development of a cross-Forth ferry service between Burntisland and Granton. Construction of a major electricity line. The scheme crosses the Forth to the west of the study area.
Preapplication b
Plans not published. The Appropriate Assessment 82 identified a number of likely effects upon two of the qualifying interest features (Pink-footed goose & cormorant): potential collision with the line or electrocution during flight from SPA through the development; potential disturbance during construction. Mitigation measures have been included in the consent process, minimising these effects.
Clackmannanshire LDP are not likely. Screened out. Watching brief. The scheme is located outwith the influence of the LDP. Potential for in combination effects will be rescreened once further information about effects of the LDP on pink-footed goose has been assessed.
Kinneil Kerse Landfill Restoration
Proposals for restoring an area of landfill. There is also a separate application for a recycling building.
Application not yet consented
Scheme is outline only, but is included within Falkirk draft LDP as a site that can be developed for benefit of qualifying species of the Firth
Screened out.
82
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Business-Industry/Energy/Infrastructure/Energy-Consents/Beauly-Denny-Index/BDEnvironmental/Firth-Of-Forth-
SPA
109
Development/Plan
Status of proposal
Kinneil Kerse bioenergy plant
Port Edgar Redevelopment
Proposal by Scottish Water to establish a small bioenergy plant adjacent to a waste water treatment works. The proposals include extension of the eastern breakwater and housing development.
Preapplication Preapplication
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP of Forth SPA. Building will not contribute to effects on qualifying interest features of SPA. Potential to contribute to disturbance. Detailed proposals have yet to be produced. It is anticipated that effects would be localised and would not act in combination with the Falkirk LDP. The small scale of each individual development means that any effects will be localised to the vicinity of the turbine, but will not influence the number or broad distribution of qualifying interest features of the SPA. No details available.
Screening
Watching brief.
Watching brief.
Small scale wind farm developments
Numerous applications for single turbines have been submitted to local authorities around the Forth. The scale of these developments means that they are rarely subject to HRA.
Various
Screened out
Dunbar Harbour Redevelopment
Grangemouth Biomass Plant
A Trust has been established to develop proposals for the regeneration of the harbour through various projects. An EIA is in preparation. Application for a biomass plant 83. A Public Inquiry has been held, and a Ministerial Decision is awaited.
Preapplication
Watching brief.
d project subject to outstanding appeal
Likely effects have identified as: localised effects
been on
Screened in for potential in combination effects of
83
Forth Energy, 2010b
110
Development/Plan
Status of proposal procedure
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP availability of prey species; localised disturbance of qualifying interest species.
Screening
disturbance of qualifying species of SPA and SAC. Watching brief.
Foxlake Adventure Development
Development of outdoor activities near Dunbar. Planning application submitted March 201384
Captain Clean Energy coal vaporisation plant Coastal & Offshore Wind Energy Projects Neart na Gaoithe
Proposal for carbon capture and storage plant. EIA in preparation The site lies c. 15 km off the Fife coast and covers c. 100 km2. The onshore connection point is Thorntonloch. Application for the marine elements was submitted in July 2012 & for onshore connection in January 2013. It is hoped that construction will commence in 201585.
Preapplication C
Environmental data have been submitted with the planning application. These suggest that small amounts of habitat of potential value to pink-footed goose may be lost to the development, but these are not considered to be significant. Response from SNH awaited. Not known at this stage. The ES states that the proposals are not likely to have significant effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA, and has screened this site out from the HRA process86.
Watching brief Some qualifying species of the Firth of Forth have been recorded from the vicinity of the development (Red-throated Diver, Eider, pink-footed Goose, Wigeon, Oystercatcher, Ringed Plover,
84 85
http://pa.eastlothian.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=MJCEV8GN7T000 http://www.neartnagaoithe.com/about.asp 86 Neart na Gaoithe Offshore Wind Farm Environmental Statement http://www.neartnagaoithe.com/environmental-statement.asp
111
Development/Plan
Status of proposal
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP
Screening
SeaGreen Phase 1
Applications submitted for two offshore wind farms in Phase 1 of the Firth of Forth Offshore Wind Zone. Project Alpha is located 27 km from the Angus coastline. Project Bravo is located 38 km from the Angus coastline. The onshore connection point will be at Carnoustie on the Angus coast87. Projects being developed for c. 25 km from the Berwickshire coastline. Permission was granted for installation of prototype 2-bladed wind turbine and ancillary equipment approximately 20 m offshore from Fife Energy Park, Methil (2011). A scoping report for a revised
HRA for the scheme still in preparation, although an EIA has been produced. NonTechnical Summary88 does not identify the effects upon the qualifying interest features of the Firth of Forth SPA. ES does not indicate effects upon qualifying interest features of Firth of Forth SPA. Unknown. The ES91 identified: displacement of small numbers of eider, longtailed duck, redthroated diver, and cormorant,
Golden Plover, Dunlin, Bar-tailed Godwit, Curlew, Redshank, Turnstone). Data will be reviewed for potential for in combination effects. Retain watching brief and seek to identify more details of MRE of scheme.
SeaGreen Phases 2 & 3 Methil Offshore Demonstration Wind Turbine (a)
Preapplication Consented, not built?
Watching brief. Status of scheme unclear. Watching brief.
87 88
http://www.seagreenwindenergy.com/news.asp?s=2&nid=SWE-N10011 Sea Green, 2012.
112
Development/Plan
Status of proposal
Grangemouth wind farm development
application covering a slightly larger area was submitted by Scottish Enterprise in 201289. The original application was by 2-B Energy, but this may have now been passed to Samsung Heavy Industry (May 2012)? Funding support has recently been announced by the Scottish Government90. Proposal for 8 turbines within Grangemouth
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP It was concluded that this would not result in any significant impacts on their populations because of the small numbers of birds affected.
Screening
Preapplication
Wind turbine at Boness
Proposal for a single turbine (87 m to tip) and ancillary development within c. 100 m of the Forth shoreline.
Forthbank windfarm
Erection And Operation Of 2 No. Wind Turbines and Anemometry Mast and associated facilities Managed retreat & Habitat enhancement projects
91
Refused
This project is at SEA scoping stage, but no planning application has yet been submitted. unlikely to come forward at same time as biomass Decision on planning application not made yet. The proposal is close to the shoreline in an area important for Redshank. SNH has commented, although this could not be viewed in the public domain. Application has been refused
Watching brief.
Watching brief.
Screened out
Methil Offshore Demonstration Wind Turbine. Environmental Statement. Non-Technical Summary. March 2010. Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting Ltd on behalf of 2-B Energy http://77.68.107.10/Renewables%20Licensing/2B_Energy_Ltd_Methil_Offshore_Windfarm/2B_Renewables_Offshore_Windfarm_Methil_EIA.pdf 89 FIFE ENERGY PARK OFFSHORE DEMONSTRATION WIND TURBINE SCOPING REPORT February 2012 produced by Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting Ltd on behalf of Scottish Enterprise 90 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-22440411
113
Development/Plan
Status of proposal g Preapplication
Skinflats Inner Forth Landscape Initiative (IFLI)
Tidal exchange project to create areas of habitat for qualifying species of the SPA. This is a partnership programme to conserve, enhance and celebrate the landscape of the Inner Forth Estuary. The Partnership comprises government agencies, local authorities and charities, led by RSPB Scotland. Clackmannanshire Council. A variety of projects are being developed, some of which are aimed at managing or creating habitats of value to qualifying species of the SPA.
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP May have beneficial effects, but no data available. May have beneficial effects in terms of habitat management and creation.
Screening
Note for potential for beneficial effects. Watching brief
b) River Teith SAC Development/Plan for description & status see listing in previous table Strategic Plans National Planning Framework for Scotland 2
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP Teith SAC Likely effects on qualifying features were identified as: Increased water pollution; altered sediment and hydrological regimes. These could create barriers to fish migrating up the Forth and into the Teith. Few details of the types of development are available. The Strategic Environmental Assessment for the plan indicates that scheme specific HRA will be required.
Screening
Specific proposals included in the plan that could act in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP will be considered individually. Specific proposals relevant to the Forth will be screened for effects if they come forward prior to adoption of the LDP.
National Renewables Infrastructure Plan (NRIP)
114
Development/Plan for description & status see listing in previous table SESplan
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP Teith SAC An HRA was undertaken92. The aspects of the plan could give rise to likely significant effects upon the River Teith SAC: Waste water, sewage, pollutants and sediment entering watercourses; flooding mobilising sediments/contaminants. The strategic nature of the document means that detailed assessment has been deferred to LDPs.
Screening Specific proposals that give rise to MRE within LDP will be considered for in combination effects (see below).
Local Development Plans & Local Plans (including alterations) Rural West Edinburgh Local Plan Alteration Draft Feb 2010
Likely effects on qualifying features were identified as93: Changes to habitat processes (effects on the River Almond). No significant effects upon the integrity of the River Teith SAC are anticipated, if mitigation is included. Any changes to water quality or sediment movement arising from the Clackmannanshire LDP are predicted to be low level and localised and hence are not predicted to act in combination with the localised effects arising from the upgrade to the runway. The HRA considered likely effects of policies on their own and in combination. Likely effects on qualifying interest features of the River Teith SAC were identified as: Changes to water quality arising from pollution from upgraded waste water treatment works and other developments; changes to water quality arising from increased levels of
Screened out
Falkirk LDP
Screened out
92
93
Habitats Regulations Appraisal Record of Proposed Plan for SESplan March 2012 As reported in the Appropriate Assessment to accompany the scheme, City of Edinburgh Council, 2010
115
Development/Plan for description & status see listing in previous table
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP Teith SAC sediment during construction of certain developments; disturbance activities. arising from piling and construction
Screening
Stirling Local Development Plan: Proposed Plan Draft (October 2012)
With the inclusion of mitigation measures, none of these factors was identified as impacting on the integrity of the SAC. Any changes to water quality or sediment movement arising from the Clackmannanshire LDP are predicted to be low level and localised and hence are not predicted to act in combination with the localised effects arising from proposals in the Falkirk LDP. Likely effects on qualifying features: changes to water environment from surface water runoff or diffuse pollution, discharges from waste water treatment, sedimentation and litter. The AA concluded that there would be no adverse effects on the integrity of the River Teith SAC or any residual effects upon the site. As there are no predicted residual effects of the Stirling LDP, and any effects from the Clackmannanshire LDP will be small scale and localised, no in combination effects are likely. Likely effects on qualifying interest features: Changes to water quality and sediment levels influencing movement up the estuary; Noise and disturbance during construction. Any changes to water quality or sediment movement arising from the Clackmannanshire LDP are predicted to be low level and localised and hence are not predicted to act in combination with any changes arising from development at Burntisland.
Out
Mid Fife Local Plan Modifications: settlement Plan proposed modification
Burntisland
Out
116
Development/Plan for description & status see listing in previous table West Lothian LDP Edinburgh LDP Specific projects or locational proposals Leith Docks N-RIP
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP Teith SAC No details are yet available. The HRA has screened the River Teith SAC out of the assessment as no effects upon this European site are likely. Likely effects on qualifying interest features were identified in an Environmental Report94: Potential disturbance to species travelling through Firth of Forth to River Teith SAC, resulting from noise and vibration caused by piling. Adverse effects from potential oil spillages etc. No firm proposals have been produced. A scheme-specific HRA will be required. The Environmental Report has not identified any effects on the River Teith SAC (i.e. this site has been screened out). No details available at this stage. No impacts upon the qualifying features of the River Teith SAC are predicted. Likely effects on qualifying features identified in the AA: changes to water quality arising from pollution during construction and operation, disturbance of qualifying species during construction from piling and vibration. Mitigation measures have been included in the design, construction methods and timing of works. Given the localised nature of likely effects, their timing in relation to the implementation of the LDP, and distance
Screening Out Screened Out Scheme is pre-application at this stage and MRE have not been identified. If detailed proposals are brought forward prior to adoption of the LDP they will be considered for in combination effects.
Methil Docks N-RIP
Burntisland N-RIP Cockenzie Power Station Forth Replacement Crossing
As the scheme is not predicted to give rise to any effects on the River Teith SAC it will not contribute to in combination effects. Screen out at this stage as preapplication, but keep a watching brief in case proposals come forward. Screened out Out
94
Scottish Enterprise & Highlands and Islands Enterprise, 2012.
117
Rosyth International Container Terminal (RICT)
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP Teith SAC between the bridge and LDP area, there are unlikely to be cumulative effects with the LDP. Likely effects identified in the AA:95 Disturbance arising from noise and vibration from piling activities; Pollution including releases of sediment; Changes to sediment regime. The Order is likely to include mitigation for effects. The Environmental Statement96 for the scheme concluded that there would be no significant effects upon the qualifying interest features of the River Teith SAC. Copies of the HRA do not appear to be in the public domain, but likely effects on qualifying species arise from: disturbance to migrating fish arising from piling during construction; loss of individuals arising from capture on screens on inflow pipes during operation. Mitigation within the proposals means that there will be no effect on the integrity of the SAC. Plans not published. The scheme is not anticipated to have any effect on the River Teith SAC and was screened out of the Appropriate Assessment. Scheme is outline only, but is unlikely to not contribute to effects on qualifying interest features of SAC.
Screening
Given the localised nature of effects arising from the Clackmannanshire LDP, these are not considered to act in combination with residual impacts arising from RICT. Screen out.
Rosyth Biomass Plant
As the MRE from the Clackmannanshire LDP are small scale and localised these are not anticipated to act in combination with residual effects arising from the biomass plant. Screen out.
Burntisland Granton Ferry Beauly to Denny Powerline Kinneil Kerse Landfill Restoration
Maintain a watching brief, but unlikely to give rise to in combination effects. Screen out. Screen out.
95 96
Jacobs, 2011. http://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/Documents/qJ13769/A2453526.pdf Forth Energy, 2010a.
118
Development/Plan for description & status see listing in previous table Kinneil Kerse bioenergy plant Port Edgar Redevelopment Small scale wind farm developments Dunbar Harbour Redevelopment Grangemouth Biomass Plant
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP Teith SAC Potential for in combination effects not clear at this stage. Detailed proposals have yet to be produced. It is anticipated that effects would be localised and would not act in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP There is unlikely to be a link between these projects and the qualifying interests of the River Teith SAC. No details available. An appropriate assessment was undertaken by Scottish Ministers. LSE arising from noise and vibration were identified, but following inclusion of mitigation these were not considered to have an adverse effect on the integrity of the SAC . No link between the qualifying interest features of the River Teith SAC and the project. Not known at this stage. The ES identified the following types of effect on the qualifying features of the River Teith SAC: Noise during construction; Electromagnetic interference from subsea cables . These were considered to be of minor significance. SNH in its response to Marine Scotland re the need for HRA 98 has indicated that there is no link between the proposal and the qualifying features of the SAC. HRA for the scheme still in preparation, although an EIA has been produced. Non-Technical Summary99 does not identify the effects upon the qualifying interest features of the
97
Screening Screened out at this stage as preapplication. Retain a watching brief. Screen out, but maintain a watching brief. Screen out Screen out, but maintain a watching brief. Screen in.
Foxlake Adventure Development Captain Clean Energy coal vaporisation plant Coastal & Offshore Wind Energy Projects Neart na Gaoithe
Screen out. Retain a watching brief Screen out
SeaGreen Phase 1
Retain watching brief.
97 98
Neart na Gaoithe Offshore Wind Farm Environmental Statement http://www.neartnagaoithe.com/environmental-statement.asp SNH & JNCC joint scoping advice. Letter dated 30 April 2010. http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A394854.pdf 99 Sea Green, 2012.
119
SeaGreen Phases 2 & 3 Methil Offshore Demonstration Wind Turbine (a) Grangemouth wind farm development Wind turbine at Boness Forthbank windfarm Managed retreat projects Skinflats
Potential for likely significant effects on Firth of Forth SPA in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP Teith SAC River Teith SAC. A link between the qualifying interest features of the SAC and the project is unlikely. Unknown. No effects identified in the ES100. No link between the project and the qualifying interest features of the River Teith SAC. No link between the project and the qualifying interest features of the River Teith SAC Application has been refused No link between the project and the qualifying interest features of the River Teith SAC
Screening
Retain watching brief. Screen out Screen out Screen out. Screen out Screen out.
100
Methil Offshore Demonstration Wind Turbine. Environmental Statement. Non-Technical Summary. March 2010. Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting Ltd on behalf of 2-B Energy http://77.68.107.10/Renewables%20Licensing/2B_Energy_Ltd_Methil_Offshore_Windfarm/2B_Renewables_Offshore_Windfarm_Methil_EIA.pdf
120

Draft Habitat Regulations Appraisal

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Draft Habitat Regulations Appraisal

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Clackmannanshire Council proposed Local Development Plan Committee Draft August 2013 Habitat Regulations Appraisal Incorporating Appropriate

Assessment Draft October 2013 (v2.1)

For: Clackmannanshire Council Kilncraigs Greenside Street Alloa FK10 1EB

Document Control Record Date Version Version Title Number

October 2013 V2.1

Letter from SNH to Clackmannanshire Council 9 March 2011

2 Conclusions of screening exercise

David Tyldesley and Associates, 2012

B02, Alloa Business Park

Source and nature of Likely Significant Effect

Qualifying Species recorded from vicinity of proposal

B12 Garvel Blackgrange

B13 Midtown business proposal, Alloa

Source and nature of Likely Significant Effect

Qualifying Species recorded from vicinity of proposal

Likely Significant Effect on qualifying interests of the Firth of Forth SPA

JNCC, 2010 Central Environmental Surveys, 2013 25 http://www.clacksweb.org.uk/council/press/?release=3582 26 Mitchell, 2012.

South Alloa to Cambus stretches M02; B02 6 7 9 16 7 30 2 33 14 8 23

Kincardine Bridge to Alloa

Cambus Pool B13

Proposals identified as having likely significant effects

D. Bryant pers comm

10852 192 4148 2949 4341 7846

Pink-footed goose, shelduck, wigeon, oystercatcher, lapwing, curlew, and redshank

Liley et al, 2011 Fearnley, et al 2010 50 Liley et al, 2010

Golden Grey Lapwing* Curlew* Redshank OysterPlover Plover* catcher* 0 0 0 0 0 0

Stirling Council, 2012

Oystercatcher, curlew, golden plover, redshank, lapwing

www.transportscotland.gov.uk Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals, 2012

4 Appropriate Assessment of effects of Clackmannanshire LDP on the River Teith SAC

Appendix Ai: Qualifying Interests of Firth of Forth SPA

Appendix Aii: Qualifying Interests of River Teith SAC

Policy SC15 - Wind Energy Development

Policy SC16 - Hydroelectricity Development

Policy SC18 Solar Arrays

Policy SC19 Geothermal

Likely source of effects

Policy EP11 - Minerals General Principles

Purpose of proposal and communities.

Likely source of effects

Policy EP12 - Opencast Coal Extraction

Policy EP14 - Coal Bed Methane

Policy EP16 - New Retail and Commercial Leisure Development

Policy EA3 - Protection of Designated Sites and Protected Species

This policy aims to protect designated sites and protected species.

Proposal Policy EA8 - Green Belt

Policy EA9 - Managing Flood Risk

Policy EA10 - Coastal Planning

Likely source of effects

Policy EA14 Supporting the Delivery of Community Growing Spaces

Policy EA16 - Waste Management Facilities

Policy NE01 Woodland Expansion

This proposal promotes the expansion of a Woodland Park.

SAC 1 1 1 1 Look at individual proposals 1 3e 1

SC19: Deep Geothermal

1 1 1 See individual allocations

1 1 1 See individual allocation s

Existing Business Sites

See individual allocations 1

See individual allocation s 1

Aggregate Minerals Coal Bed Methane

Proposal H04 Carsebridge, Alloa

H05 South Earlsfield 2 (Alloa SE Plot 7), Alloa

H06 Alloa Park Phase 4, Alloa