Sustainability Appraisal, Main Mods 2017

2.0    APPROACH & METHODS

SA Issues raised at Resumed Examination (2016)

2.1 Comments made on the SA Addendum Report (February 2016) that accompanied the Proposed Modifications on consultation were considered and responses made in Appendix V of the finalised SA Addendum Report (June 2016) that was submitted to the Inspector – with no further actions identified for the SA.  

2.2 Issues for the SA were raised by one respondent (Nexus Planning for CEG) regarding their site option S1 (part of C31 in the SHLAA 2015 & Update 2016). There was concern that site S1 had not been assessed as a reasonable alternative to the allocated site H42 (option C13) at Westwood Heath.  Accordingly, a comparative SA was undertaken of the two sites – H42 and S1. The SA used the same SA framework of Objectives with key questions and significance criteria as detailed in the Submission SA Report (February 2015); the assessors sought to apply the same level of detail and style as had been used in the original comparative assessment of options for site allocations by settlement and as reported in detail in Appendix V of the Submission SA Report.

2.3 There was discussion at the Examination about delivery of secondary education requirements and the allocation for Kenilworth School (DS12-ED2) as a consequence of housing growth in proposed in the Plan with a suggestion that provision could be directed to Kings Hill. However, it is considered by both the District and the County Councils that this is not a reasonable alternative for a number of reasons, especially associated with its distance from the town, and therefore, there is no further action required for the SA.

2.4 A third issue was raised regarding land South of Coventry (alternatively known as land south of Baginton) – SHLAA Ref C10.  This site was assessed in the February 2015 SA (Appendix V).  However, as this SA was undertaken in the context of a lower housing requirement and specifically without detailed knowledge of the level of unmet need arising from Coventry, the site promoters have suggested that the SA of this site should have been updated.  This is not considered necessary since the option of additional housing to the south of Coventry has been appraised (June 2016 SA Addendum, SA11PM) and because the site specific appraisal of this site undertaken in 2015 remained unchanged.  

2.5 The Examination also found two minor errors with regard to SHLAA site C05 in the technical appendices of the Submission SA Report (SA11PM). SA Appendix IV pages 8-9 Westwood Heath, C05 is not part of the allocation; SA Appendix II page 9, C05 is not part of the allocation for H42. This Further SA Addendum provides the opportunity to report the correction of these errors. Overall, this is not significant with regard to the findings of the SA (Submission and Main Modifications).

Screening Proposed Main Modifications for SA Significance

2.6 Many of the proposed changes/modifications to the Warwick Local Plan are minor with regard to significance for the SA process; they are concerned with correcting errors, addressing omissions, providing more clarity, and updating of information. The proposed Main Modifications were screened for their significance with regard to SA using professional judgment, namely – do the changes, deletions and additions significantly affect the findings of the Submission SA Report (February 2015) and the SA Addendum Report (February & June 2016) accompanying the Proposed Modifications (February 2016), and/or do they give rise to significant environmental/sustainability effects?

2.7 A pragmatic and proportionate approach was taken, as relevant to this stage of plan-making and assessment. A professional judgment was made for SA significance taking into account the proposed change and using the same method and SA Framework of Objectives for sustainable development as the previous SA work, thus providing continuity and consistency of process. The work was undertaken to the same level and by the same independent specialist consultants and as detailed in the Submission SA Report [SA10].

SA of the Local Plan with Proposed Main Modifications 

2.8 The SEA Regulations require assessment of the overall implementation of the Plan, taking into account the aims, policies and site allocations. Professional judgment and the SA Framework were used to consider the overall implementation of the Local Plan with the proposed Main Modifications identified as being of any significance to the SA process.