Permitted development rights to support the provision of new homes: SEA Environmental Report

Appendix A – Justification tables

Table 1: PDR for rural homes – Extending PDR for conversion of agricultural and forestry buildings

This SEA has considered the following options:

• No change in PDR
• Removal of existing PDR restriction on the cumulative number of units created
• Removal of existing PDR footprint limits (including new ancillary buildings, removal of 150 sqm area/unit limit, and extending external dimension)
• Revision to existing PDR to exclude the conversion of buildings only within/on Scheduled Monuments rather than on all sites of archaeological interest^[153]

For completeness, as the consultation also invites views on whether additional locational restrictions should be removed, the following options have also been assessed:

• Extension of existing PDR by removing the locational restrictions for buildings on croft land
• Removing the locational restriction for a safety hazard area
• Removing the locational restriction for a military explosives storage area
• Removing the locational restriction for listed buildings
• Removing the locational restriction for buildings situated within the curtilage of a listed building

Objective

Air: To avoid adverse effects on air quality.

Justification

Negligible effects identified

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To avoid adverse effects on all habitats and species

Justification

Some protected species, for example birds and bats, may nest in existing buildings and forage in the surrounding landscape. Key issues include the potential scale of development and cumulative impacts, particularly relating to habitat loss and disturbance

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of biodiversity through the planning application process. NPF4 policy aims to protect biodiversity, reverse biodiversity loss, deliver positive effects from development. This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR (across all options) has potential to result in minor negative effects as a result of increased potential impact on species including wild birds and bats. This is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of the location and value and vulnerability of the species and habitats affected.

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To protect, maintain, and enhance biodiversity

Justification

Extending PDR (across all options) would remove the opportunity to consider existing biodiversity and its enhancement through the planning application process. Potential for minor negative effect is identified as this opportunity would be removed.

Objective

Climatic Factors: To avoid new greenhouse gas emissions.

Justification

Agricultural and forestry buildings are typically located in rural areas and may be distant from services and have no or limited public transport leading to reliance on use of private vehicles and greater distances required for travel.

All buildings contain a level of embodied carbon, which is the emissions associated with the lifecycle of the building materials, including the production, transportation, installation, maintenance and disposal of building materials.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of issues such as the increased need to travel and re-use of existing building. A minor positive effect is identified.

Removing the restriction on the cumulative number of units created may increase greenhouse gas emissions associated with reliance on private vehicles including those powered by fossil fuels. Potential for minor negative effects at a local level from greenhouse gas emissions is identified.

Removing development footprint limits (including new ancillary buildings, removal of 150 sqm area/unit limit, and extending external dimension) may further support the reuse and retention of existing buildings. Potential for minor positive effects is identified.

Objective

Climatic Factors: To support climate change adaptation

Justification

No effect identified

Objective

Cultural heritage: To avoid adverse effects on designated and undesignated heritage assets and their settings.

Justification

Agricultural and forestry units may contain buildings and other designated and non-designated assets of cultural heritage significance. Unknown below surface remains which may indicate human habitation and settlement are found across Scotland.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of cultural heritage. NPF4 policy aims to protect and enhance historical assets. It also requires that non-designated historic environment assets, places and their setting should be protected and preserved in situ wherever feasible. Where there is potential for non-designated buried archaeological remains to exist below a site, it requires developers to provide an evaluation of the archaeological resource. This is a minor positive effect.

Expanding PDR across all options, there is potential for a minor positive effect if buildings at risk are brought back into beneficial use, supporting their ongoing maintenance.

Removing development footprint limits (including new ancillary buildings, removal of 150 sqm area/unit, and extending external dimension) also has potential to result in minor negative effects for cultural heritage. Development may impact the appearance, structure or setting of the agriculture or forestry building. This is uncertain and will depend on the design of the development (e.g. footprint, height, massing and location relative to original building and surrounding), the sensitivity of the location and the value of the area impacted. The potential effects would be in areas of heightened sensitivity such as Conservation Areas, Gardens and Designed Landscapes, Historic Battlefields, Scheduled Monuments, World Heritage Sites, and locations with archaeological interest.

Removing the locational restriction for within the curtilage of a listed building also may result in impacts to the setting of a listed building and could have significant negative effects. The general duty^[154] placed on decision makers when considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed buildings or its setting would not be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Removing the locational restrictions for listed buildings is also anticipated to result in a minor negative effect as the listed building consent^[155] would continue to be required for works affecting listed buildings regardless of whether a planning application was required

Revision to exclude the conversion of buildings only within/on Scheduled Monuments rather than on all sites of archaeological interest also has potential to result in a significant negative effect related to the provision of underground service necessary to facilitate the conversion (e.g. water and sewerage connections) and potential loss of historic assets. The current restriction on PDR for sites of archaeological interest plays a vital role in safeguarding Historic Environment Records (HERs). It enables planning authorities to assess potential impacts and, where necessary, require archaeological mitigation or investigation through the planning process. Removing this restriction could result in the unregulated loss of archaeological data. The extend of this effect is uncertain, as there is no comprehensive data on the number or distribution of HERs in proximity to agricultural and forestry buildings. There is currently no land designated as an area of archaeological importance in Scotland.

Objective

Cultural heritage: To enhance, where appropriate, heritage assets and their settings and to improve the quality of the wider built environment.

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission, supports consideration of design and cultural heritage through the planning application process. This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR across all options would remove this opportunity, and a minor negative effect is identified. The potential effects would be greater for Listed buildings, Gardens and Designed Landscapes, Historic Battlefields and World Heritage Sites, reflecting the greater sensitivity of these heritage assets and their settings. Effects to design/external appearance would be minimised where the existing prior notification/prior approval mechanism continues to apply

Objective

Landscape and geodiversity: To avoid adverse effects on landscapes and geodiversity.

Justification

Conversion of agricultural and forestry buildings into residential units can result in changes to the character of the rural landscape through the introduction of features which are out of context within a rural environment such as formal entrances, hard surfaces, gates, fencing and hedging.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of development context. For new homes in rural areas, NPF4 policy supports development where it is suitably scaled, sited and designed to be in keeping with the character of the area. This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR across all options is anticipated to result in minor negative effects where this leads to changes in landscape character. This effect would be greater in areas of heightened sensitivity such as Conservation Areas, Gardens and Designed Landscapes, Historic Battlefields, Scheduled Monuments, World Heritage Sites, and locations with archaeological interest.

Objective

Material assets: To avoid adversely impacting on material assets through the loss of resources or the generation of waste.

Justification

No effect identified

Objective

Material assets: To promote sustainable design, reduce vacant and derelict land/buildings, and promote long term use and management of new and existing assets/infrastructure.

Justification

Agricultural and forestry buildings may include unused buildings due to changes in agricultural and forestry practices, and the incompatibility of older buildings with modern need.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports consideration of matters such as the design of development and the reuse of existing buildings. This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR across all options is anticipated to have minor mixed effects. It could promote the sustainable management of existing assets as buildings are brought back into use and maintained resulting in a minor positive effect. It would also remove the opportunity provided through the planning application process to consider sustainable design resulting in a minor negative effect. This effect would be minimised where existing prior notification/prior approval mechanisms which supports consideration of the design or external appearance of the building continue to apply.

Objective

Population and human health: To protect people and places from environmental harm;

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of issues such as environmental harm and amenity. A minor positive effect is identified.

Removing the locational restrictions within a safety hazard area and military explosives storage area could have a significant negative effect where there are such sites. This is uncertain as the number of such sites in proximity to agricultural and forestry buildings is unknown.

Objective

Soil: To protect and avoid adverse effects on valuable soil resources, (including peatland, carbon rich soils, priority peatland habitat and prime agricultural land)

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports consideration of loss of soils (including peatland, carbon rich soils and prime agricultural land/land of lesser quality that is culturally or locally important). This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR across all options may have a minor negative effect on soils where this leads to impacts on valuable soil resources.

Objective

Soil: To reduce contaminated land

Justification

Where land is known or suspected to be contaminated, the existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports consideration of whether the site is, or can be made, safe and suitable for the proposed new use. This is a minor positive effect.

Expanding PDR across all options has potential to result in minor negative effects reflecting the loss of opportunity to consider contamination through the planning process though this effect would be minimised where the existing prior notification/prior approval mechanism which supports the consideration of risks to occupiers of the proposed dwelling from contamination from the site continues to apply.

Objective

Water: To avoid adverse effects on the quality and quantity of watercourses and waterbodies.

Justification

Water abstraction and storage can place a burden on water resources. Extending PDR across all options would remove the opportunity to consider sustainable water sources for drinking water through the planning application process. Overall, potential for a minor negative effect is identified.

Objective

Water: To avoid and reduce flood risk.

Justification

SEPA classifies buildings used for dwellings as highly vulnerable to flooding^[156]. Changes which lead to increases in impermeable areas can exacerbate surface water flooding.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of flood risk and management of surface water. This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR across all options has potential to result in minor negative effects reflecting the vulnerability of residential use to flooding and the loss of opportunity to consider flood risk and surface water management for the conversion of existing buildings through the planning application process. This effect would be minimised where existing prior notification/prior approval mechanisms which supports consideration of risk of flooding of the site continue to apply. The existing prior notification/prior approval mechanisms however not consider the effect of the development on flood risk elsewhere, off-site. Overall, effects are uncertain and will depend on the vulnerability of the area to flooding as well as the consideration to be given to flood risk through the siting and design process. The potential negative effects would be greater where existing PDR building footprint limits are removed and there is an increase in impermeable surfaces.

Table 2: PDR for rural homes – Introducing PDR for new homes in rural areas

This SEA has considered the following options:

• No change in PDR
• Introducing PDR for the replacement of agricultural and forestry buildings in rural areas with new-build homes
• Introducing PDR for the replacement of any buildings in rural areas with new-build homes
• Introducing PDR in rural areas for new-build homes on previously developed land only
• Introducing PDR in rural areas for new-build homes on any land

Objective

Air: To avoid adverse effects on air quality.

Justification

Negligible effects identified

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To avoid adverse effects on all habitats and species

Justification

Some protected species, for example birds and bats, may nest in existing buildings and forage in the surrounding landscape. Other protected species may be more common in rural areas. NPF4 defines ‘brownfield land’ as ‘land which has previously been developed. The term may cover vacant or derelict land, land occupied by redundant or unused buildings and developed land within the settlement boundary where further intensification of use is considered acceptable. Brownfield land which has naturalised may have biodiversity value. Key issues include the potential scale of development and cumulative impacts, particularly relating to habitat loss and disturbance.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of biodiversity through the planning application process. NPF4 policy aims to protect biodiversity, reverse biodiversity loss, deliver positive effects from development. This is a minor positive effect.

Introducing PDR for the replacement of buildings (across both options) has potential to result in minor negative effects on habitats and species. This is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of location and value and vulnerability of the species and habitats affected.

Introducing PDR for new-build homes (across both options) whether on previously developed land only or on any land in rural areas has the potential to result in a significant negative effect on habitats and species. This is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of location and the scale of development permitted.

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To protect, maintain, and enhance biodiversity

Justification

Introducing PDR (across all options) would remove the opportunity to consider biodiversity enhancements through the planning application process. Overall, potential minor negative effects are identified.

Objective

Climatic Factors: To avoid new greenhouse gas emissions.

Justification

Some rural areas may be distant from services and have no or limited public transport leading to reliance on use of private vehicles and greater distances required for travel. This is particularly likely in remote rural areas.

All buildings contain a level of embodied carbon, which is the emissions associated with the lifecycle of the building materials, including the production, transportation, installation, maintenance and disposal of building materials.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports development that minimises emissions and adapts to the current and future impacts of climate change. NPF4 policy supports the consideration of lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions.

Introducing PDR (across all options) is anticipated to result in minor negative effects from greenhouse gas emissions associated with reliance on private vehicles in rural areas, this is however uncertain depending on the scale of new development taking place.

Objective

Climatic Factors: To support climate change adaptation

Justification

No effect identified

Objective

Cultural heritage: To avoid adverse effects on designated and undesignated heritage assets and their settings.

Justification

Rural areas, including agricultural and forestry units, may contain buildings and other designated and non-designated assets of cultural heritage significance. Cultural heritage features at or below ground level can be impacted by development.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of cultural heritage. NPF4 policy aims to protect and enhance historic environment assets and places. This is a minor positive effect.

Introducing PDR (across all options) has potential to result in significant negative effects on both designated and undesignated heritage assets and their settings. The effects are uncertain. The scale and significance would vary depending on the sensitivity of the location and the heritage value of the assets affected. While in many cases the impact may be minor, there is potential significant harm, particularly in areas of heightened sensitivity such as Conservation Areas, Gardens and Designed Landscapes, Historic Battlefields, Scheduled Monuments, World Heritage Sites, and locations with archaeological interest.

Objective

Cultural heritage: To enhance, where appropriate, heritage assets and their settings and to improve the quality of the wider built environment.

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports consideration of design and cultural heritage through the planning application process. This is a minor positive effect.

Introducing PDR for the replacement of buildings (across both options) is anticipated to result in minor negative effects as this opportunity is lost. This is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of location and value of area impacted.

Introducing PDR for new-build homes (across both options) has potential to result in a significant negative effect reflecting the potential scale of PDR and lost opportunity. This is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of location and value of area impacted

Objective

Landscape and geodiversity: To avoid adverse effects on landscapes and geodiversity.

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of development context. For new homes in rural areas, NPF4 policy supports development where it is suitably scaled, sited and designed to be in keeping with the character of the area. This is a minor positive effect. Key issues include the potential scale of development, and cumulative impacts, particularly on protected landscapes.

Introducing PDR for the replacement of buildings (across both options) is anticipated to result in a minor negative effect where this leads to changes in the character of the rural landscape, or changes to dwelling density, and through the introduction of features which are out of context within a rural environment. This is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of location and value of area impacted. The potential effects would be greater in Local Landscape Areas, National Parks and National Scenic Areas reflecting the greater sensitivity of these landscapes.

Introducing PDR for new-build homes (across both options) has potential to result in significant negative effects reflecting the potential scale of PDR and opportunity for such development to lead to changes in the landscape character. The potential effects would be greater in Local Landscape Areas, National Parks and National Scenic Areas reflecting the greater sensitivity of these landscapes.

Objective

Material assets: To avoid adversely impacting on material assets through the loss of resources or the generation of waste.

Justification

Introducing PDR for the replacement of buildings (across all options) is anticipated to result in minor negative effects where this incentivises the demolition rather than reuse of existing buildings.

Objective

Material assets: To promote sustainable design, reduce vacant and derelict land/buildings, and promote long term use and management of new and existing assets/infrastructure.

Justification

Agricultural and forestry buildings may include unused buildings due to changes in agricultural and forestry practices, and the incompatibility of older buildings with modern need. There may also be other buildings in rural areas, for example those relating to industry, that have fallen out of use.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission for new build homes supports consideration of matters such as the design of the development and the reuse of existing buildings. This is a minor positive effect.

Introducing PDR for the replacement of buildings (across both options) has potential to result in mixed effects overall on material assets. The replacement of vacant/derelict buildings can lead to minor positive effects, however the opportunity to consider sustainable design through the planning application process is lost leading to a minor negative effect.

Introducing PDR for new-build homes (across both options) has potential to result in significant negative effects reflecting the potential scale of PDR and the lost opportunity to consider sustainable design as part of the requirement to apply for planning permission.

Objective

Population and human health: To protect people and places from environmental harm;

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of issues such as environmental harm and amenity. A minor positive effect is identified.

Introducing PDR for the replacement of buildings across both options has potential to result in a minor negative effect reflecting the loss of opportunity to consider matters such as environmental harm and amenity though the planning process.

Introducing PDR for new-build homes (across both options) is anticipated to result in a significant negative effect reflecting the potential scale of PDR, loss of opportunity to consider matters such as environmental harm and amenity though the planning process. This is uncertain and potential effects would be greater where there are hazardous sites in the vicinity.

Objective

Soil: To protect and avoid adverse effects on valuable soil resources, (including peatland, carbon rich soils, priority peatland habitat and prime agricultural land)

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports consideration of loss of soils (including peatland, carbon rich soils and prime agricultural land/land of lesser quality that is culturally or locally important). This is a minor positive effect.

Introducing PDR for the replacement of buildings (across both options) and introducing PDR for new-build homes on previously developed land may have a minor negative effect on soils where this leads to impacts on valuable soil resources.

Introducing PDR for new-build homes on any land in rural areas is anticipated to result in a significant negative effect where this leads to impacts on valuable soil resources reflecting the potential scale of PDR. The effects are uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of location and value of the areas affected.

Objective

Soil: To reduce contaminated land

Justification

Where land is known or suspected to be contaminated, the existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports consideration of whether the site is, or can be made, safe and suitable for the proposed new use. This is a minor positive effect.

Introducing PDR (across all options) has potential to result in a minor negative effect reflecting the loss of opportunity to consider contamination through the planning application process. The effects are uncertain and will depend on the nature of any previous land use, such as where a site/building has an industrial history.

Objective

Water: To avoid adverse effects on the quality and quantity of watercourses and waterbodies.

Justification

Water abstraction and storage can place a burden on water resources. Introducing PDR across all options would remove the opportunity to consider sustainable water sources for drinking water purposes through the planning application process. Overall, potential for a minor negative effect is identified.

Objective

Water: To avoid and reduce flood risk.

Justification

SEPA categorises buildings used for dwellings as highly vulnerable to flooding^[157]. For surface water flooding, the increase in impermeable surfaces and potential cumulative effects are key issues.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of flood risk and management of surface water. This is a minor positive effect.

Introducing PDR for the replacement of buildings (across both options) has potential to result in minor negative effects reflecting the vulnerability of residential uses to flooding and loss of opportunity to consider flood risk and surface water management through the planning process. This is uncertain and will depend on the character of the area and its vulnerability to flooding. The potential effects will be greater where the replacement of a building increases the area of impermeable surface.

Introducing PDR for new-build homes (across both options) has potential to result in a significant negative effect where this leads to an increase in the area of impermeable surfaces and taking into account the vulnerability of residential uses to flooding. This is uncertain and will depend on the character of the area and its vulnerability to flooding but the potential scale of the PDR is substantial.

Table 3: PDR for Town centre living – introducing PDR for town centre living

This SEA has considered the following options:

• No change in PDR
• Introducing PDR for change of use for ground floor Class 1A units to residential
• Introducing PDR for change of use for upper floors above Class 1A units to residential
• Introducing PDR for external alternations to facilitate conversion

Objective

Air: To avoid adverse effects on air quality.

Justification

Negligible effects identified

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To avoid adverse effects on all habitats and species

Justification

Negligible effects identified

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To protect, maintain, and enhance biodiversity

Justification

Negligible effects identified.

Objective

Climatic Factors: To avoid new greenhouse gas emissions.

Justification

All buildings contain a level of embodied carbon, which is the emissions associated with the lifecycle of the building materials, including the production, transportation, installation, maintenance and disposal of building materials.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports development that minimises emissions and adapts to the current and future impacts of climate change. NPF4 policy supports the consideration of lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions. A minor positive effect is identified.

Introducing PDR for changes of use (both options) has potential for minor mixed effects. Encouraging the reuse and retention of existing buildings has a minor positive effect in terms of embodied carbon. Loss of shops and financial, professional and other services from town/city centres may have a negative effect on vehicle emissions if trade is displaced to out-of-town locations. Increased town centre living may have positive effects associated with less commuting and vehicle emissions. These effects are uncertain and will depend on the character of the area

Objective

Climatic Factors: To support climate change adaptation

Justification

Negligible effects identified

Objective

Cultural heritage: To avoid adverse effects on designated and undesignated heritage assets and their settings.

Justification

Town/City centres can include a historic core and some traditional services and activities (e.g. banks) may have distinctive premises.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of cultural heritage. NPF4 policy aims to protect and enhance historic environment assets and places. This is a minor positive effect.

Introducing PDR for changes of use (both options) has potential to result in minor mixed effects on both designated and undesignated heritage assets and their settings. There is potential for a minor positive effect if buildings at risk are brought back into beneficial use, supporting their ongoing maintenance. There is also potential for minor negative effects where PDR impacts the setting of an asset. The effects are uncertain and would vary depending on the sensitivity of the location and the heritage value of the assets affected.

Introducing PDR for external alterations to facilitate conversion has potential to result in minor negative effects on both designated and undesignated heritage assets and their settings from physical alterations to the buildings and where PDR impacts the setting of an asset. The effects are uncertain and would vary depending on the sensitivity of the location and the heritage value of the assets affected.

Objective

Cultural heritage: To enhance, where appropriate, heritage assets and their settings and to improve the quality of the wider built environment.

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission, supports consideration of design and cultural heritage through the planning application process. NPF4 policy 27 supports a ‘town centre first’ approach to help town centres adapt to long term change. Policy 27 part f) sets out criteria for development proposals for residential use at ground floor level in town centres, including that they should not result in an undesirable concentration of uses or ‘dead frontages. This is a minor positive effect.

Introducing PDR for changes of use of ground floor Class 1A units to residential has potential to result in minor negative effects where these lead to ‘dead frontages’.

Introducing PDR for external alterations to facilitate conversion has potential to result in minor negative effects from physical alterations to the buildings.

Introducing PDR for changes of use for upper floors above Class 1A units to residential is anticipated to have negligible effects.

Objective

Landscape and geodiversity: To avoid adverse effects on landscapes and geodiversity.

Justification

No effect identified

Objective

Material assets: To avoid adversely impacting on material assets through the loss of resources or the generation of waste.

Justification

Negligible effects identified

Objective

Material assets: To promote sustainable design, reduce vacant and derelict land/buildings, and promote long term use and management of new and existing assets/infrastructure.

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports consideration of matters such as the design of development and the reuse of existing buildings. This is a minor positive effect.

Introducing PDR for changes of use (both options) is anticipated to have minor mixed effects. They could promote the sustainable management of existing assets as buildings are brought back into use and maintained resulting in a minor positive effect. They would also remove the opportunity provided by the existing requirement to apply for planning permission to consider sustainable design resulting in a minor negative effect.

Introducing PDR for external alterations to facilitate conversion has potential for minor negative effects associated with removing the opportunity provided by the existing requirement to apply for planning permission to consider sustainable design

Objective

Population and human health: To protect people and places from environmental harm;

Justification

Negligible effect identified

Objective

Soil: To protect and avoid adverse effects on valuable soil resources, (including peatland, carbon rich soils, priority peatland habitat and prime agricultural land)

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Soil: To reduce contaminated land

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Water: To avoid adverse effects on the quality and quantity of watercourses and waterbodies.

Justification

Water abstraction and storage can place a burden on water resources. Introducing PDR for changes of use (both options) would remove the opportunity to consider sustainable water sources for drinking water through the planning application process. Overall effects are however likely to be negligible where existing buildings have access to the public water mains.

Objective

Water: To avoid and reduce flood risk.

Justification

SEPA classifies buildings used for dwellings as highly vulnerable to flooding^[158]. Where conversion is restricted to the upper levels, safe access and egress are still required. For surface water flooding, the increase in impermeable surfaces is a key issue.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of flood risk and management of surface water. This is a minor positive effect.

Introducing PDR for changes of use (both options) has potential to result in minor negative effects reflecting the vulnerability of residential use to flooding and the loss of opportunity to consider flood risk through the planning process. This is uncertain and will depend on the character of the area and its vulnerability to flooding, as well as the suitability of provision for safe access and egress.

Introducing PDR for external alterations to facilitate conversion is anticipated to result in a minor negative effect where there is an increase in impermeable surfaces.

Table 4: Householder PDR – Extending PDR for single storey ground floor extensions

This SEA has considered the following options:

• No change in PDR
• Extending existing PDR for single storey ground floor extensions to Conservation Areas
• Removing the requirement for extensions to be to the rear of a property (i.e. not in front of the principal elevation or side elevation where said elevation fronts a road) - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Removing the requirement for extensions to be to the rear of a property (i.e. not in front of the principal elevation or side elevation where said elevation fronts a road) – in all areas
• Removing the restriction on the height of the eaves - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Removing the restriction on the height of the eaves – in all areas
• Removing the restriction on the height of any part of the development - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Removing the restriction on the height of any part of the development - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Removing the restriction on footprint relative to the size of the original dwellinghouse - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Removing the restriction on footprint relative to the size of original dwellinghouse – in all areas
• Removing the restriction on footprint relative to curtilage - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Removing the restriction on footprint relative to curtilage – in all areas
• Removing the restrictions on size within 1m of the boundary - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Removing the restrictions on size within 1m of boundary – in all areas

Objective

Air: To avoid adverse effects on air quality.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To avoid adverse effects on all habitats and species

Justification

Some protected species, for example birds and bats, may nest close to or within the eaves of residential dwellings and forage in domestic gardens. Key issues include the potential scale of development and cumulative impacts relating to habitat loss and disturbance.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of biodiversity through the planning application process. NPF4 policy aims to protect biodiversity, reverse biodiversity loss, deliver positive effects from development. This is a minor positive effect.

Removing restrictions on where (within the curtilage of a dwelling) an extension can be built could result in minor mixed effects. It could provide greater flexibility to avoid features such as trees and shrubs, resulting in a minor positive effect but may result in minor negative effects where development impacts species, such as garden birds, and their habitats. This is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of the location and value and vulnerability of the species and habitats affected.

Extending PDR (across all other options) has potential to result in minor negative effects where development impacts species, such as garden birds, and their habitats. This is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of location and value and vulnerability of the species and habitats affected.

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To protect, maintain, and enhance biodiversity

Justification

Negligible effects identified

Objective

Climatic Factors: To avoid new greenhouse gas emissions.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Climatic Factors: To support climate change adaptation

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Cultural heritage: To avoid adverse effects on designated and undesignated heritage assets and their settings.

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of cultural heritage. NPF4 policy aims to protect and enhance historic environment assets and places. This is a minor positive effect.

Applying existing PDR to conservation areas has potential to result in minor negative effects for cultural heritage. Although there is potential for single storey ground floor extensions to impact appearance, structure and setting of buildings within conservation areas this would be limited by PDR being applicable only for extensions at the rear of the property and being limited in height and size relative to the original dwelling and its curtilage. This effect is uncertain and would depend on the sensitivity of location and design and scale of the extension.

Extending PDR outside conservation areas has potential to result in a minor negative effect. Single storey extensions could become more visible by virtue of their size (footprint, massing, height) or location (not at rear). This effect is uncertain and would depend on the sensitivity of location and design and scale of the extension. Effects would be greater in areas of heightened sensitivity such as Conservation Areas, and World Heritage Sites.

Applying extended PDR within conservation areas could result in a significant increase in the scale of impact on designated heritage assets and their settings, with increased potential for schemes that prominently impact on the appearance, structure and setting of buildings within conservation areas. Potential for significant negative effects is identified. This effect is uncertain and would depend on the sensitivity of location and design and scale of the extension.

Objective

Cultural heritage: To enhance, where appropriate, heritage assets and their settings and to improve the quality of the wider built environment.

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission, supports consideration of design and cultural heritage through the planning application process. This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR across all options is anticipated to result in minor negative effects as this opportunity is lost. This is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of location and value of area impacted.

Objective

Landscape and geodiversity: To avoid adverse effects on landscapes and geodiversity.

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of development context. This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR (across all options) is anticipated to result in minor negative effects where this leads to changes in landscape character. These effects would be greater in Local Landscape Areas, National Scenic Areas and National Parks, reflecting the greater sensitivity of these landscapes.

Objective

Material assets: To avoid adversely impacting on material assets through the loss of resources or the generation of waste.

Justification

Extending PDR (across all options) is anticipated to have a minor positive effect on material assets as they will result in the enlargement of existing properties, reducing the need to construct larger new properties.

Objective

Material assets: To promote sustainable design, reduce vacant and derelict land/buildings, and promote long term use and management of new and existing assets/infrastructure.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Population and human health: To protect people and places from environmental harm;

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Soil: To protect and avoid adverse effects on valuable soil resources, (including peatland, carbon rich soils, priority peatland habitat and prime agricultural land)

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports consideration of loss of soils (including peatland, carbon rich soils and prime agricultural land/land of lesser quality that is culturally or locally important). This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR (across all options) may have a minor negative effect on soils where this leads to impacts on valuable soil resources.

Objective

Soil: To reduce contaminated land

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Water: To avoid adverse effects on the quality and quantity of watercourses and waterbodies.

Justification

No effect identified

Objective

Water: To avoid and reduce flood risk.

Justification

For surface water flooding, the increase in impermeable areas is a key issue.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of flood risk and management of surface water. This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR (across all options) is anticipated to result in a minor negative effect related to a potential increase in impermeable surfaces. This is uncertain and will depend on the character of the area and its vulnerability of the area to flooding.

Table 5: Householder PDR – Extending PDR for ground floor extensions of more than one storey

This SEA has considered the following options:

• No change in PDRs
• Extending existing PDRs to Conservation Areas
• Removing the requirement for extensions to be to the rear of a property (i.e. not in front of the principal elevation or side elevation where said elevation fronts a road) - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Removing the requirement for extensions to be to the rear of a property (i.e. not in front of the principal elevation or side elevation where said elevation fronts a road) - all in areas
• Removing the restriction on height - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Removing the restriction on height - in all areas
• Removing the restriction on footprint relative to size of original dwellinghouse - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Removing the restriction on footprint relative to size of original dwellinghouse – in all areas
• Removing the restriction on footprint relative to curtilage - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Removing the restriction on footprint relative to curtilage - in all areas
• Removing or reducing restrictions on size within 10m of boundary – excluding in Conservation Areas
• Removing or reducing restrictions on size within 10m of boundary - in all areas

Objective

Air: To avoid adverse effects on air quality.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To avoid adverse effects on all habitats and species

Justification

Some protected species, for example birds and bats, may nest close to or within the eaves of residential dwellings and forage in domestic gardens. Key issues include the potential scale of development and cumulative impacts, particularly relating to habitat loss and disturbance.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of biodiversity through the planning application process. NPF4 policy aims to protect biodiversity, reverse biodiversity loss, deliver positive effects from development. This is a minor positive effect.

Removing restrictions on where (within the curtilage of a dwelling) an extension can be built could result in minor mixed effects. It could promote could provide greater flexibility to avoid features such as trees and shrubs, resulting in a minor positive effect but may result in minor negative effects where development impacts species, such as garden birds, and their habitats. This is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of the location and value and vulnerability of the species and habitats affected.

Extending PDR (across all other options) has potential to result in minor negative effects where development impacts species, such as garden birds, and their habitats. This is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of location and value and vulnerability of the species and habitats affected.

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To protect, maintain, and enhance biodiversity

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Climatic Factors: To avoid new greenhouse gas emissions.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Climatic Factors: To support climate change adaptation

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Cultural heritage: To avoid adverse effects on designated and undesignated heritage assets and their settings.

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of cultural heritage. NPF4 policy aims to protect and enhance historic environment assets and places. This is a minor positive effect.

Applying existing PDR to conservation areas has potential to result in minor negative effects for cultural heritage. Although there is potential for ground floor extensions of more than one storey to impact appearance, structure and setting of buildings within conservation areas this would be limited by PDR being applicable only for extensions at the rear of the property and being limited in height and size relative to the original dwelling and its curtilage. This effect is uncertain and would depend on the sensitivity of location and design and scale of the extension.

Extending PDR outside conservation areas has potential to result in a minor negative effect. Ground floor extensions of more than one storey could become more visible by virtue of their size (footprint, massing, height) or location (not at rear). This effect is uncertain and would depend on the sensitivity of location and design and scale of the extension. Effects would be greater in Gardens and Designed Landscapes, Historic Battlefields, World Heritage Sites and where there are HERs reflecting the greater sensitivity of these assets.

Allowing extended PDR within conservation areas could result in a significant increase in the scale of impact on designated heritage assets and their settings, with increased potential for schemes that prominently impacted in the appearance, structure and setting of buildings within conservation areas. Potential for a significant negative effect is identified. This effect is uncertain and would depend on the sensitivity of location and design and scale of the extension.

Objective

Cultural heritage: To enhance, where appropriate, heritage assets and their settings and to improve the quality of the wider built environment.

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission, supports consideration of design and cultural heritage through the planning application process. This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR (across all options) is anticipated to result in minor negative effects as this opportunity is lost. This is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of location and value of area impacted.

Objective

Landscape and geodiversity: To avoid adverse effects on landscapes and geodiversity.

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of development context. This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR (across all options) is anticipated to result in minor negative effects where this leads to changes in landscape character, for example where properties are located on the edge of settlements or in the open countryside. These effects would be greater in Local Landscape Areas, National Scenic Areas and National Parks, reflecting the greater sensitivity of these landscapes

Objective

Material assets: To avoid adversely impacting on material assets through the loss of resources or the generation of waste.

Justification

Extending PDR (across all options) is anticipated to have a minor positive effect on material assets as it will result in the enlargement of existing properties, reducing the need to construct larger new properties.

Objective

Material assets: To promote sustainable design, reduce vacant and derelict land/buildings, and promote long term use and management of new and existing assets/infrastructure.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Population and human health: To protect people and places from environmental harm;

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Soil: To protect and avoid adverse effects on valuable soil resources, (including peatland, carbon rich soils, priority peatland habitat and prime agricultural land)

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports consideration of loss of soils (including peatland, carbon rich soils and prime agricultural land/land of lesser quality that is culturally or locally important). This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR (across all options) may have a minor negative effect on soils where this leads to impacts on valuable soil resources.

Objective

Soil: To reduce contaminated land

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Water: To avoid adverse effects on the quality and quantity of watercourses and waterbodies.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Water: To avoid and reduce flood risk.

Justification

For surface water flooding, the increase in impermeable areas is a key issue.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of flood risk and management of surface water. This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR (across all options) is anticipated to result in a minor negative effect related to the increase in impermeable surfaces.

Table 6: Householder PDR – Extending PDR for Roof Enlargement

This SEA has considered the following options:

• No change in PDR
• Extending existing PDR to Conservation Areas
• Removing the requirement for roof enlargement to be to the rear of a property (i.e. not in front of the principal elevation or side elevation where said elevation fronts a road) - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Removing the requirement for roof enlargement to be to the rear of a property (i.e. not in front of the principal elevation or side elevation where said elevation fronts a road) – in all areas
• Allowing height enlargement higher than the existing dwelling house - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Allowing height enlargement higher than the existing dwelling house - in all areas
• Allowing roof enlargement covering more than half of the roof - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Allowing roof enlargement covering more than half of the roof - in all areas
• Removing the restriction on the distance between the enlargement and the edge of the roof - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Removing the restriction on the distance between the enlargement and the edge of the roof - in all areas
• Reducing or removing the requirement for at least 10m between enlargement and boundary - excluding in Conservation Areas
• Reducing or removing the requirement for at least 10m between enlargement and boundary - in all areas

Objective

Air: To avoid adverse effects on air quality.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To avoid adverse effects on all habitats and species

Justification

Some protected species, for example birds and bats, may nest close to or within the eaves of residential dwellings and forage in domestic gardens. Key issues include the potential scale of development and cumulative impacts, particularly relating to habitat loss and disturbance.

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of biodiversity through the planning application process. NPF4 policy aims to protect biodiversity, reverse biodiversity loss, deliver positive effects from development. This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR (across all options) has potential to result in minor negative effects where development impacts species, such as garden birds and bats, and their habitats. This is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of location and value and vulnerability of the species and habitats affected.

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To protect, maintain, and enhance biodiversity

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Climatic Factors: To avoid new greenhouse gas emissions.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Climatic Factors: To support climate change adaptation

Justification

Negligible effect identified

Objective

Cultural heritage: To avoid adverse effects on designated and undesignated heritage assets and their settings.

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of cultural heritage. NPF4 policy aims to protect and enhance historic environment assets and places. This is a minor positive effect.

Applying existing PDR to conservation areas has potential to result in a minor negative effect on cultural heritage. Although there is potential for roof extensions to impact appearance, structure and setting of buildings within conservation areas this would be limited by PDR being applicable only for roof extensions at the rear of the property, not exceeding more than half the total width of the room and meeting the height and criteria and limitations. This effect is uncertain and would depend on the sensitivity the sensitivity of location and design and scale of the roof alteration

Extending PDR outside conservation areas has potential to result in a minor negative effect. Roof extensions could become more visible by virtue of their height or location (on sides of front of properties/relative to the existing building and curtilage). This effect is uncertain and would depend on the sensitivity of location and design and scale of the roof alteration. Effects would be greater in areas of heightened sensitivity such as Gardens and Designed Landscapes, Historic Battlefields, Scheduled Monuments, World Heritage Sites, and locations with archaeological interest.

Applying extended PDR within conservation areas could result in a significant increase in the scale of impact on designated heritage assets and their settings, with increased potential for schemes that prominently impact on appearance, structure and setting of buildings within conservation areas. Potential for a significant negative effect is identified. This effect is uncertain and would depend on the sensitivity of location and design and scale of the roof alteration

Objective

Cultural heritage: To enhance, where appropriate, heritage assets and their settings and to improve the quality of the wider built environment.

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission, supports consideration of design and cultural heritage through the planning application process. This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR (across all options) is anticipated to result in minor negative effects as this opportunity is lost. This is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of location and value of area impacted.

Objective

Landscape and geodiversity: To avoid adverse effects on landscapes and geodiversity.

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of development context. This is a minor positive effect.

Extending PDR (across all options) is anticipated to result in minor negative effects where this leads to changes in landscape character, for example where properties are located on the edge of settlements or in the open countryside. These effects would be greater in Local Landscape Areas, National Scenic Areas and National Parks, reflecting the greater sensitivity of these landscapes.

Objective

Material assets: To avoid adversely impacting on material assets through the loss of resources or the generation of waste.

Justification

Extending PDR (across all options) is anticipated to have a minor positive effect on material assets as it will result in the enlargement of existing properties, reducing the need to construct larger new properties.

Objective

Material assets: To promote sustainable design, reduce vacant and derelict land/buildings, and promote long term use and management of new and existing assets/infrastructure.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Population and human health: To protect people and places from environmental harm;

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Soil: To protect and avoid adverse effects on valuable soil resources, (including peatland, carbon rich soils, priority peatland habitat and prime agricultural land)

Justification

No effect identified

Objective

Soil: To reduce contaminated land

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Water: To avoid adverse effects on the quality and quantity of watercourses and waterbodies.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Water: To avoid and reduce flood risk.

Justification

No effects identified

Table 7: Low/zero carbon heating and cooling – Expanding PDR for domestic air source heat pumps

This SEA has considered the following options:

• No change to PDR
• Removing the restriction for air source heat pumps (ASHPs) within conservation areas
• Applying existing PDR within the curtilage of a listed building
• Applying existing PDR within world heritage sites
• Extending existing PDR to facilitate two ASHPs on detached houses - with existing restrictions for listed buildings, world heritage sites and conservation areas
• Extending existing PDR to facilitate two ASHPs on detached houses – in all areas
• Extending existing PDR to facilitate heating and cooling - with existing restrictions for listed buildings, world heritage sites and conservation areas
• Extending existing PDR to facilitate heating and cooling – in all areas

Objective

Air: To avoid adverse effects on air quality.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To avoid adverse effects on all habitats and species

Justification

Negligible effects identified

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To protect, maintain, and enhance biodiversity

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Climatic Factors: To avoid new greenhouse gas emissions.

Justification

The development of domestic ASHP indirectly contributes to tackling climate change through reducing greenhouse gas and carbon emissions associated with heating and cooling, particularly when compared to the fossil fuel based heating or cooling systems.

Extending PDR (across all options) is anticipated to result in a minor positive effect associated with uptake of this type of technology.

Objective

Climatic Factors: To support climate change adaptation

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Cultural heritage: To avoid adverse effects on designated and undesignated heritage assets and their settings.

Justification

Dwellings and/or their surroundings may be designated assets of cultural heritage significance. The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of cultural heritage. NPF4 policy aims to protect and enhance historic environment assets and places. This is a minor positive effect.

Removing the restriction for ASHPs within conservation areas or applying existing PDR within the curtilage of a listed building or in a world heritage site has potential to result in a significant negative effect where this impacts a heritage asset or its setting. This is uncertain and will depend on the size and siting of the ASHP, and the sensitivity of the location, the reasons for designation, and heritage value of the assets affected

Extending PDR (with existing restrictions for listed buildings, world heritage sites and conservation areas) is anticipated to result in minor negative effects where this impacts a heritage asset or its setting. This effect is uncertain and will depend on the siting and scale of proposed development. Effects would be greater in areas of heightened sensitivity such as Gardens and Designed Landscapes, Historic Battlefields, Scheduled Monuments and locations with archaeological interest.

Extending PDR (in all areas) is anticipated to result in significant negative effects where this impacts a heritage asset or its setting. This is uncertain and will depend on the size and siting of the ASHP and the sensitivity of the location and heritage value of the assets affected. Effects would be greater in areas of heightened sensitivity, including Listed buildings, World Heritage Sites and Conservation areas

Objective

Cultural heritage: To enhance, where appropriate, heritage assets and their settings and to improve the quality of the wider built environment.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Landscape and geodiversity: To avoid adverse effects on landscapes and geodiversity.

Justification

Negligible effects identified

Objective

Material assets: To avoid adversely impacting on material assets through the loss of resources or the generation of waste.

Justification

The development of domestic ASHP indirectly contributes to the prudent use of energy resources, particularly when compared to fossil fuel based heating or cooling systems.

Extending PDR (across all options) is anticipated to result in a minor positive effect associated with uptake of this type of technology.

Objective

Material assets: To promote sustainable design, reduce vacant and derelict land/buildings, and promote long term use and management of new and existing assets/infrastructure.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Population and human health: To protect people and places from environmental harm;

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Soil: To protect and avoid adverse effects on valuable soil resources, (including peatland, carbon rich soils, priority peatland habitat and prime agricultural land)

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Soil: To reduce contaminated land

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Water: To avoid adverse effects on the quality and quantity of watercourses and waterbodies.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Water: To avoid and reduce flood risk.

Justification

Negligible effects identified

Table 8: Low/zero carbon heating and cooling – Introducing PDR for connections to heat networks

This SEA has considered the following options:

• No change to PDR
• Introducing PDR for heat network connections from individual buildings

Objective

Air: To avoid adverse effects on air quality.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To avoid adverse effects on all habitats and species

Justification

Negligible effects identified

Objective

Biodiversity, flora and fauna: To protect, maintain, and enhance biodiversity

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Climatic Factors: To avoid new greenhouse gas emissions.

Justification

The development of heat networks indirectly contributes to tackling climate change through reducing greenhouse gas and carbon emissions associated with heating and cooling, particularly when compared to the fossil fuel based heating or cooling systems.

The introduction of PDR has potential to result in a minor positive effect associated with uptake of this type of technology.

Objective

Climatic Factors: To support climate change adaptation

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Cultural heritage: To avoid adverse effects on designated and undesignated heritage assets and their settings.

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports the consideration of cultural heritage. NPF4 policy aims to protect and enhance historic environment assets and places. This is a minor positive effect.

The introduction of PDR has potential to result in minor negative effects where there is impact to a heritage asset or its setting. The effect would be greater in areas of heightened sensitivity underground such as Historic battlefields, World Heritage Sites or where there are archaeological assets. This effect is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of the location and the heritage value of the assets affected, the siting and scale of proposed development, and restoration of land following installation of pipework.

Objective

Cultural heritage: To enhance, where appropriate, heritage assets and their settings and to improve the quality of the wider built environment.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Landscape and geodiversity: To avoid adverse effects on landscapes and geodiversity.

Justification

Negligible effects identified

Objective

Material assets: To avoid adversely impacting on material assets through the loss of resources or the generation of waste.

Justification

The introduction of PDR indirectly contributes to the prudent use of energy resources, particularly when compared to the fossil fuel based heating or cooling systems. This is a minor positive effect.

Objective

Material assets: To promote sustainable design, reduce vacant and derelict land/buildings, and promote long term use and management of new and existing assets/infrastructure.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Population and human health: To protect people and places from environmental harm;

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Soil: To protect and avoid adverse effects on valuable soil resources, (including peatland, carbon rich soils, priority peatland habitat and prime agricultural land)

Justification

The existing requirement to apply for planning permission supports consideration of loss of soils (including peatland, carbon rich soils and prime agricultural land/land of lesser quality that is culturally or locally important). This is a minor positive effect.

The introduction of PDR has potential to result in minor negative effects where below ground works leads to impacts on valuable soil resources. This is uncertain and will depend on the sensitivity of the location and the heritage value of the assets affected, siting and scale of proposed development, and restoration of land following below ground works.

Objective

Soil: To reduce contaminated land

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Water: To avoid adverse effects on the quality and quantity of watercourses and waterbodies.

Justification

No effects identified

Objective

Water: To avoid and reduce flood risk.

Justification

The introduction of PDR has potential to result in minor negative effects on flooding associated with changes to drainage from below ground works. This effect is uncertain and will depend on the siting and scale of proposed development and restoration of land.