The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

4. IMPLICATIONS OF THE CANDIDATE NATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS FOR THE BROADER CONTENT OF THE NATIONAL PLANNING FRAMEWORK

4.1 Having identified the environmental effects of each of the individual Candidate National Developments and their potential cumulative effects, it is also important to consider their compatibility with the wider content of the NPF. Where the NPF includes aspirations for the environment, such as climate change mitigation or landscape protection, it is important to recognise where some of candidates may or may not complement these aims. Whilst this need not necessarily preclude their selection, it is important that stakeholders are made aware of the potential for such conflicts to arise.

Compatibility Analysis

4.2 In order to achieve this:

• each of the developments was firstly reviewed in relation to the core components of the NPF Discussion Draft, to identify whether they compliment or conflict with the less spatially focused aims of the strategy (compatibility test 1).
• this was followed by consideration of the relationship between the Candidate Projects and the sub-regional spatial strategies within the NPF (compatibility test 2).
• finally, the potential for conflict arising between the projects themselves was explored (compatibility test 3).

4.3 It is not the purpose of this exercise to define whether or not the proposals support the NPF strategy overall, or to draw conclusions on their merits or otherwise. Instead, it explores whether their environmental effects could undermine any of the environmental aspirations of the NPF as a whole. In some cases, developments might strengthen the environmental contribution of the NPF, whilst in others it might be weakened by their inclusion.

Compatibility test 1 - Candidate National Developments and the broader aims of the NPF

4.4 The following paragraphs describe how the Candidate National Developments may or may not support the wider aims of the NPF.

4.5 In taking forward the principle of sustainable economic growth focusing on city regions, paragraphs 155 to 157 of the Discussion Draft NPF explain where there are key concentrations of business activity (Clyde Waterfront and Clyde Gateway, West Edinburgh, the Upper Forth, the Dundee Waterfront and the Inverness to Nairn Corridor), and emphasise the need for investment in new or improved infrastructure to support this. The importance of reducing journey times between the Central Belt and Aberdeen to support the role of the latter as an energy centre is emphasised. None of the Candidate National Developments are expected to conflict with this broader aim of the NPF, whilst several would contribute positively to its delivery. As a result, little change to the predicted environmental effects of this part of the NPF, as documented in the Environmental Report, is currently expected.

4.6 Paragraph 158 of the Discussion Draft NPF aims to reduce regional disparities, and to reduce particular pressure in high growth areas such as Edinburgh to provide opportunities in Ayrshire, Inverclyde, West Dunbartonshire and Dundee. Several projects would positively support this aim, but others have the potential to contribute to further growth in Edinburgh (e.g. Edinburgh Airport including the West Edinburgh business area), thereby potentially raising contradictions. This is not expected to generate conflict, however, as the project is being proposed in order to manage pressure within the Edinburgh area. Similar environmental effects to those set out in the Environmental Report are predicted.

4.7 The NPF notes the close relationship between economic diversification and environmental stewardship in defining the future of rural areas (paragraph 160). Many of the developments are expected to contribute positively to rural areas, by increasing connectivity and by supporting diversification including through support for the renewable energy sector. However, this assessment has also shown that some of the Candidate National Developments may have adverse environmental effects, which could in turn undermine the quality of some rural environments and thereby reduce the benefits of this aspect of NPF strategy. Given that environmental quality is recognised as a key economic driver for rural areas, it is important that the environmental effects of these projects are mitigated as far as possible if they are designated as National Developments, to ensure they do not undermine the broader strategy that is proposed within the NPF.

4.8 Some of the developments raise uncertainty about the extent to which they support the NPF's aspiration to support the sustainable growth of small and medium sized towns through economic diversification (paragraph 163). This includes the Forth Replacement Crossing and Grid Reinforcements as they may have adverse environmental impacts on some small and medium sized towns, either temporarily during construction or more permanently. However, many of the other developments could contribute positively to this part of the NPF, including proposals which focus on improving the connectivity of rural areas. Similarly positive environmental effects to those identified in the Environmental Report are therefore expected.

4.9 Paragraph 166 of the NPF Discussion Draft supports a locally-driven approach to minerals, reflecting wider policy commitments to reducing the distance over which extracted materials are transported. It is not expected that any of the candidate developments would significantly undermine this aim or reduce its environmental benefits. The potential for loss or sterilisation of any key minerals resources will require further consideration at a more local level.

4.10 Some of the developments are potentially in conflict with the NPF's support for carbon capture and storage, by technological advances and through natural carbon storage within the environment (paragraphs 167 and 168 of the Discussion Draft). This includes a number of Candidate National Developments that could disturb significant peatland areas, including the A9 Improvements, Highland Line upgrade, Far North Rail Line and the Outer Hebrides Energy Zone. If any of these proposals are taken forward within the proposed NPF, it is important that scheme-level mitigation is explored, to minimise these effects and therefore ensure that the projects do not significantly undermine this broader aim of the NPF. Other Candidate Developments proactively support this part of the NPF, including those that focus on clean coal and carbon sequestration.

4.11 Paragraphs 169 to 172 of the Discussion Draft NPF focus on housing. This section reflects the Scottish Government's proposed increase in house building rates, and emphasises the importance of ensuring that the right houses are built in the right locations and delivering sufficient affordable housing. It is not currently expected that any of the proposed National Developments would undermine the aims set out in this section of the NPF overall. Paragraph 173 focuses on sustainable communities, proposing that new houses should generally be built in and around existing settlements to make best use of brownfield land and existing infrastructure. The NPF also makes reference to the Scottish Sustainable Communities Initiative, noting its potential to create exemplar communities that demonstrate low impact approaches to place creation which are accessible by sustainable transport, and make use of renewable and clean energy technologies. As the location of any such community remains unclear at this stage, it is not possible to determine whether or not the Candidate National Developments will support or conflict with this part of the NPF. However, it should be noted that there may be some tensions arising from proposals which have a different focus from this part of the spatial strategy, for example those which aim to improve connectivity by road or air. Conversely, there may also be positive interactions with some of the Candidate National Developments that aim to support the development of renewable energy. The Central Scotland Green Network is likely positively to complement any major proposal for settlement expansion that comes forward within the Central Belt.

4.12 Paragraphs 174 to 177 of the Discussion Draft NPF link the built environment with climate change, particularly emphasising the need for mitigation and adaptation, and the role of the planning system in helping to deliver this. This could provide significant positive environmental effects, as documented in the Environmental Report. However, some of the Candidate National Developments are potentially in conflict with this part of the NPF, including the air and road transport related proposals that could individually and cumulatively detract from climate change mitigation. Some other projects could undermine climate change adaptation in the long term, although the significance of this relationship is difficult to define with any level of certainty at this stage in the process. For example, a road or rail connection may prove to be physically vulnerable over the long term as a result of climate change impacts, but could equally help to improve the accessibility of development areas which reflect a long-term pattern of sustainable settlement that takes into account climate change impacts. Several projects, particularly those which support the development of renewable energy and sustainable waste management including energy from waste, would contribute positively to this broad aim of the NPF. In addition, the Central Scotland Green Network is specifically designed to contribute to climate change adaptation. More mixed effects than those described in the Environmental Report might therefore be expected for this element of the NPF strategy.

4.13 Paragraphs 178 to 180 of the Discussion Draft focus on vacant and derelict land, emphasising the benefits of reusing brownfield in preference to greenfield areas. The NPF also notes, however, that the availability of brownfield land is more limited in the North East, Stirling, Edinburgh and the Lothians, and recognises therefore that opportunities for this type of prioritisation may therefore be limited in some areas. Many of the Candidate National Developments positively support this aspect of the NPF by promoting the reuse of brownfield land (e.g. Glasgow Strategic Drainage Plan, 2014 Commonwealth Games Facilities, Ardeer Energetics Cluster, Grangemouth and Rosyth Freight Hubs, developments at Hunterston, and Fife Energy Park). However, other developments conflict with this aim by being located on greenfield land. In most cases other options are not feasible and the use of greenfield land is likely to be justifiable as a result of the locational requirements of the developments themselves (i.e. improvements to existing infrastructure or facilities).

4.14 Paragraphs 181 to 184 support the greening of the environment. The NPF makes reference to the Scottish Forestry Strategy and the aim of expanding woodland cover nationally. It also refers to the multiple benefits of greening initiatives specifically within Central Scotland, and highlights the long-term aspiration to develop a national habitat network. The NPF views 'hard' infrastructure projects as opportunities to strengthen 'softer' green infrastructure. Clearly, this part of the NPF would be strongly supported by the Candidate National Development covering the Central Scotland Green Network. However, conflicts may arise from other Candidates, particularly those which would increase the barrier effect of linear infrastructure on habitat networks. The proposed airport projects would result in loss of greenfield land, and several of the projects could adversely impact on key parts of coastal and inshore ecological networks. However, if the advice in the broader text of the NPF is followed, the adverse effects of most of these projects could be mitigated. Therefore, it is expected that the positive effects of this part of the NPF should still be achievable, regardless of which of the candidate projects are taken forward.

4.15 Some of the proposed developments might undermine the NPF's support for protecting and enhancing Scotland's landscapes (paragraphs 185 and 186 of the Discussion Draft). These include the Forth Replacement Crossing, Edinburgh and potentially Glasgow airports, the various road improvements, the Highland Rail Upgrade, Borders Rail Link, Far North Railway, the Dundee Bypass and the Outer Hebrides National Energy Zone. If several of these projects were included in the NPF, its potential benefits for landscape overall might be reduced, although it is not expected that it would eliminate them entirely. Some of the projects could equally reinforce this part of the NPF, and facilitate its delivery on the ground - specifically the Central Scotland Green Network and several other Candidate National Developments which focus on addressing problems in currently degraded areas.

4.16 Paragraph 187 of the Discussion Draft aims to protect the marine and coastal environment, focusing on protecting and promoting the enjoyment of the natural heritage of these areas, and emphasising the need for planning with the capacity of these areas in mind. Some of the Candidate National Developments could reduce the positive effects predicted for this part of the Discussion Draft NPF, depending on the effectiveness of local level, project specific mitigation. This includes the installation of a Subsea Supergrid and other renewable energy related grid improvements (e.g. the Hunterston to Carradale cable), and the proposals for enhancements at ports: Grangemouth, Rosyth, Scapa Flow, Sullom Voe, Peterhead, Loch Ryan, Hunterston and Dundee. A number of other developments are located on the coast, including the Fife Energy Park, Ardeer, the five potential clean coal power stations and coastal protection for the Firth of Forth, and these have the potential for positive or negative environmental effects on this environment, thereby supporting or conflicting with this part of the NPF strategy. The compatibility of the Candidate Developments with this part of the strategy would depend on the effectiveness of local implementation and site specific environmental mitigation.

4.17 Paragraphs 219 to 225 of the NPF Discussion Draft promote sustainable transport linked with land use. They support the creation of accessible urban environments, and the provision of improved connections and interchange facilities, to provide better services for the population and for visitors. They particularly support inter-city rail travel and long-distance commuting as the most sustainable alternative to the car, but it also recognise that public transport options may be more limited in some rural areas, reducing the potential for this type of benefit. This part of the NPF supports the role of rail as a sustainable freight transport option, and also reflects on the potential role of the canal network. Many of the Candidate National Developments would reinforce this element of the NPF strategy, particularly rail transport projects and long-distance walking routes. However, the projects that seek to enhance the road network could undermine the commitment to improved accessibility by sustainable transport modes. The balance which is struck between improving overall accessibility and promoting sustainable transport patterns will only become clear when the suite of proposed National Developments has been defined.

4.18 Paragraphs 238 to 241 of the Discussion Draft NPF address Water and Drainage. This part of the strategy aims to deliver enhanced infrastructure through positive investment which links with spatial development priorities identified by local authorities. It anticipates that infrastructure capacity should no longer be a constraint to development proceeding. It is not expected that any of the Candidate National Developments will generate conflicts with this part of the NPF strategy. Some of the projects, including the Glasgow Strategic Drainage Plan and the A96 Growth Area, incorporate proposals for upgrading this type of infrastructure, thereby helping to further the strategy. It is expected that the predicted positive effects of this part of the NPF are unlikely to be undermined by the Candidate National Developments.

4.19 Paragraphs 242 to 244 of the Discussion Draft address Flooding and Water Resource Management. The NPF notes the importance of taking into account current and future flood risk when considering development proposals, and reflects wider ongoing work to develop River Basin Management Plans. Sustainable catchment management and flood management are also specifically supported. Some of the Candidate National Developments conflict with these broader policy proposals, as they are located within areas which are known to be at risk of flooding, or because longer term flooding issues are currently anticipated. These include: the Forth Replacement Crossing, Edinburgh Airport, Prestwick Airport, the A9, A96 Growth Area, the Highland Line, the East Coast Line, the Dundee Bypass, A90 improvements, Grangemouth, Hunterston, Sullom Voe, the Port of Dundee, Westfield and Fife Energy Parks and the Ardeer project. Scheme-level flood risk assessment and mitigation would be required, together with measures such as SUDS to help ensure that existing problems are not exacerbated by further developments that include significant levels of soil sealing or coastal alteration, for example. Other Candidate Developments would provide positive support for this part of the NPF strategy, notably the Glasgow Strategic Drainage Plan, potentially the Central Scotland Green Network, and Coastal Protection for the Firth of Forth (depending on the measures which are used). These are therefore more compatible with the broader aims of the NPF.

4.20 Paragraphs 245 and 246 of the Discussion Draft NPF support enhancement of the digital communications network, including by linking the laying of new cables with major infrastructure projects. Many of the Candidate National Developments have the potential to support this part of the NPF strategy, thereby providing significant benefits, although in most cases this opportunity has not yet be explicitly recognised and built into the proposals. However, the Stornoway West Harbour Candidate National Development has recognised the scope to link energy infrastructure development with this policy objective, and would therefore help to deliver this part of the NPF.

4.21 This compatibility assessment has not been undertaken for paragraphs 188 to 218 of the Discussion Draft Document, as these paragraphs set out proposals for transport infrastructure which generally correlate with the Candidate National Developments themselves. Similarly, the policies in paragraph 226 to 232 set the overall framework for energy within the NPF and paragraphs 233 to 237 focus on waste management, largely reflecting the relevant Candidate National Developments.

Compatibility test 2 - Candidate National Developments and their respective spatial perspectives

4.22 It is very unlikely that any national development would be selected which could conflict with the spatial perspectives that have been defined for different regions of Scotland. However, given that the Candidate National Developments have been proposed by a wide range of stakeholders, it is important to consider whether their environmental effects would support or undermine the potential environmental effects of the spatial perspectives included in the NPF. It is also useful for stakeholders to note where some developments could exacerbate some of the more negative environmental effects that are predicted in relation to each of the spatial perspectives, as documented in the Environmental Report. The following analysis focuses on the content of the Discussion Draft NPF, although it is likely that the spatial perspectives will be revised as part of the process of finalising the proposed NPF.

Spatial Perspective: Central Belt

4.23 The Environmental Report noted that the content of the Central Belt spatial perspective could have mixed effects on biodiversity as a result of the combination of increased levels of development with positive policy support for the green network. Similarly, mixed effects on health and population were predicted, with improved opportunities for physical activity and access to services, but potential for an overall increase in travel distances to exacerbate problems associated with air quality and quality of life more generally. Mixed effects on CO ₂ emissions and water quality and negative effects on soils were also predicted, due to increased levels of travel and development. Negative effects on cultural heritage and landscapes were also predicted (but largely unknown), with more positive effects arising from the emphasis on reusing brownfield land.

4.24 The following Candidate National Developments could have direct implications for the Central Belt:

• Forth Replacement Crossing;
• Edinburgh Airport;
• Glasgow Airport;
• Improved Rail Connectivity in the West of Scotland;
• Edinburgh - Glasgow Rail Improvements Programme;
• Highspeed rail to London;
• Edinburgh Tram;
• Haymarket Station upgrading;
• Rail Service Enhancements between Glasgow and Inverclyde/Ayrshire;
• Grangemouth Freight Hub;
• Rosyth International Container Terminal;
• New non-nuclear baseload capacity at existing power station sites;
• Glasgow Strategic Drainage Plan;
• Commonwealth Games Facilities;
• Central Scotland Green Network;
• Development of the Canal Network (Lomond Canal) ;
• National network of waste facilities;
• Coastal protection - Firth of Forth; and
• Edinburgh Bioquarter.

4.25 These developments could have mixed effects on the Central Scotland area. Most of these effects have already been identified as the majority of the projects were included within the Discussion Draft text (although not necessarily as Candidate National Developments). Some of the additional developments could generate quite positive as well as negative environmental effects, including the provision of a network of waste facilities, and the Lomond Canal.

4.26 The proposal for coastal protection on the Firth of Forth could complement wider proposals for the area such as the general support given to Edinburgh Waterfront and the Grangemouth project, but this may also generate further adverse environmental effects in addition to those recorded in the assessment of the Discussion Draft. The remaining projects relate primarily to transport infrastructure, with several providing relatively sustainable transport improvement options which would potentially reduce the predicted negative effects of this part of the Discussion Draft NPF on greenhouse gas emissions, and benefit the population and human health by increasing accessibility.

Spatial Perspective: East Coast

4.27 The Environmental Report suggested that there may be generally positive environmental effects from the strategy for the East Coast, including for population and health and the efficient use of land and resources. More mixed effects were expected for landscape, cultural heritage, biodiversity, and climate change. Negative effects were predicted in relation to water as a result of increased flood risk and potential effects of some coastal and marine projects. Negative effects on soil were also expected, partly as a result of the relative lack of brownfield land to accommodate future development in this part of the country but also due to the overall scale of growth which was proposed.

4.28 The following Candidate National Developments could have direct implications for the East Coast:

• Forth Replacement Crossing;
• Aberdeen Airport ;
• Highspeed rail to London;
• Rail Links within Aberdeen;
• Rail Service Enhancements between Aberdeen and Inverness;
• National Long Distance Trails Network;
• Rail Service Enhancements between Aberdeen and the Central Belt;
• Further Rail Electrification;
• Reducing Conflict between Strategic and Local Traffic in Dundee;
• A90 Aberdeen to Dundee;
• Peterhead Deep Water Port;
• Sub-sea super-grid;
• Energy Transmission Infrastructure;
• New non-nuclear baseload capacity at existing power station sites;
• Peterhead Carbon Sequestration;
• Westfield Energy Park;
• Fife Energy Park, Methil;
• National network of waste facilities; and
• The Energetica Corridor.

4.29 Some of these developments have the potential to exacerbate the predicted negative effects of this spatial perspective, by contributing to pressure on coastal habitats, the water environment, soils and landscapes. Some of the projects could also increase the level of emissions from the transport sector (e.g. Aberdeen Airport, the Dundee road improvements), whilst others could provide improved sustainable transport options, namely those focusing on rail improvements, thereby improving the effects of this part of the NPF. The cumulative effects of the Candidate Developments on the East Coast landscape could undermine the NPF's aspiration to protect farming and coastal landscapes, with particular issues arising from the proposed on-shore electricity transmission grid improvements, connections to the sub-sea super-grid, and the road improvements around Dundee. Some of the Candidate Projects may be broadly compatible with the NPF's overall aspirations for the East Coast, but could also generate further significant additional adverse environmental effects.

Spatial Perspective: Highlands and Islands

4.30 Generally positive effects were predicted to arise from the spatial perspective for the Highlands and Islands that was set out in the Discussion Draft NPF. This included potentially significant positive effects on population and human health as a result of improved connectivity, affordable housing investment and sustainably planned growth. The spatial perspective, and in particular the growth of the A96 corridor was considered to represent a relatively sustainable settlement pattern. However, negative effects on water were expected, largely as a result of flooding issues. Mixed effects on CO ₂ emissions were also predicted, from an increase in transport movements (including road use), alongside a commitment to renewable energy developments. Soils were predicted to be adversely affected by soil sealing, although it was also expected that this would be mitigated to some extent, including within the proposals for the A96 corridor. Some localised adverse effects were also expected, but the protection which the NPF accords to cultural heritage and the landscape value of the area was expected to reduce the potential for this.

4.31 The following Candidate National Developments could have direct implications for the Highlands and Islands:

• A9 Upgrading: Dunblane - Inverness;
• Targeted Road Improvements: Glasgow - Fort William;
• A96 growth area;
• Rail Service Enhancements between Aberdeen and Inverness;
• Rail Service Enhancements on the Highland Mainline to Inverness;
• Further Electrification of the Strategic Rail Network;
• Far North Rail Line;
• Scapa Flow;
• Sullom Voe Oil Transfer Facility;
• Energy Transmission Infrastructure;
• Outer Hebrides National Energy Zone;
• Stornoway West Harbour;
• Nigg Complex; and
• National network of waste facilities.

4.32 Some of these Candidate National Developments have the potential to generate more significant and adverse environmental effects than had previously been envisaged for this spatial perspective in the assessment of the Discussion Draft. The road improvements proposed could increase CO ₂ emissions and have more localised adverse effects on landscape, cultural heritage, soil and water, and may have mixed effects on population and human health by improving access to services but also generating adverse effects for some areas during construction. The predicted effects of the A96 corridor proposals were set out in the Environmental Report, although the subsequent more detailed assessment of the project as a Candidate National Development has identified some potentially more negative effects that will require further mitigation. The proposed National Energy Zone for the Outer Hebrides is broadly referred to in the Discussion Draft, but again this assessment has raised some further environmental effects which could be in conflict with other aspirations for the area, including protection of the islands' outstanding scenery and marine habitats and species. The development at Sullom Voe was not envisaged within the Discussion Draft, and this has the potential to generate additional adverse environmental effects for the offshore and coastal environment. It should therefore be noted that the Candidate National Developments may generate further adverse environmental effects for the Highlands and Islands area, and that these could be cumulatively significant if all of the above candidate projects were all taken forward as National Developments.

Spatial Perspective: Ayrshire and the South West

4.33 The assessment of the spatial perspective for Ayrshire and the South West anticipated positive effects on biodiversity as a result of references to environmental conservation and enhancement and woodland expansion. Population and health were also expected to benefit from the proposals for regeneration, environmental enhancement, and enhanced transport connections. More mixed effects were predicted in terms of increased CO ₂ emissions, due to increased travel distance overall, and effects on soils, water and landscape effects were expected to be mixed, partly due to lack of explicit measures to address issues such as flooding.

4.34 The following Candidate National Developments could have direct implications for the Ayrshire and the South West:

• Prestwick Airport;
• Improved Rail Connectivity in the West of Scotland;
• Rail Service Enhancements between Glasgow and Inverclyde/Ayrshire;
• Hunterston Transhipment Facility and Clean Coal Power Station;
• Loch Ryan Gateway Port;
• Energy Transmission Infrastructure;
• Hunterston Clean Coal Power Station;
• Hunterston - Carradale Subsea Cable;
• Energetics Cluster on the Ardeer Peninsula;
• Central Scotland Green Network; and
• National network of waste facilities.

4.35 Some of these developments are already specifically or more generally alluded to within the spatial strategy. However, on closer examination it appears that many of the Candidate Developments could result in further significant environmental effects. The enhancement of Prestwick airport could generally support the aim of export-related economic development in the area, but could also generate further adverse environmental effects including on climatic factors, soils, water and cultural heritage, thereby increasing the potential for negative effects. The developments at Hunterston could provide benefits for the local and national population, but may also have significant adverse effects on biodiversity, the coastal environment and cultural heritage. The overall contribution of this part of the country to reducing emissions of CO ₂ from the transport sector could be significantly reduced as a result of the proposals for the airport and road transport improvements, but these would be offset to a degree by the opportunities that improved rail infrastructure and services would provide for more sustainable travel. This could also provide further benefits for population and health in this area, improving the performance of this part of the NPF. Similarly, both positive and negative environmental effects would arise from the Ardeer Energetics Cluster, which could exacerbate some of the issues identified in the Environmental Report for the water environment and coastal areas, but may also increase its positive effects on population and human health.

Spatial Perspective: South of Scotland

4.36 The Environmental Report showed that generally positive environmental effects were expected for biodiversity from the South of Scotland Spatial Perspective, due to its support for woodland and floodplain habitats and recognition of the value of the environment for this largely rural area. Population and human health were also expected to benefit from measures such as affordable housing, recreation resources, and improved access to services. The Discussion Draft's emphasis on improving accessibility by rail was expected to benefit air quality and climate change, a well as the local population. The water environment was also positively supported by the reference to restoring flood plain habitats. However, negative effects on soils were identified as a result of the likely rates of development of previously undeveloped land that would be facilitated by improved rail accessibility, Mixed effects on cultural heritage were also expected, with support for initiatives such as the Market Towns Investment Programme in Dumfries and Galloway, but possible impacts arising from development proposals at a local scale. Similarly, landscape effects were predicted to be potentially both positive and negative.

4.37 The following Candidate National Developments could have direct implications for the South of Scotland:

• A1, A68 and A7 route improvements;
• Highspeed rail links to London;
• Borders Rail link including an extension to Carlisle;
• National Long Distance Trails Network;
• Loch Ryan;
• Energy Transmission Infrastructure; and
• National network of waste facilities.

4.38 These proposed developments could result in further positive and negative environmental effects. The improved transport accessibility that would be delivered by a number of the Candidate National Developments could provide benefits for the local population overall by improving accessibility, but may also generate some potentially significant adverse effects on communities, particularly during construction. Other environmental effects may include adverse effects on water, including the River Tweed. There may also be negative effects on biodiversity, soil, water, landscape and cultural heritage from the improvements to energy transmission infrastructure and high speed rail links. These may be particularly significant for this area given the importance of cross border connections and the sensitivity of the environmental context. Inclusion of some or all of these Candidate National Developments may therefore result in a shift in the balance within this spatial perspective, from a conservation centred approach to a more development-oriented agenda, potentially generating more negative environmental effects.

Compatibility test 3 - Interrelationships between Candidate National Developments

4.39 Consideration has been given to the compatibility of the projects with one another. No obvious conflicts appear to exist between them at this stage, although at a more detailed level there would be a need to reconcile the potential difficulties arising from delivery of the Central Scotland Green Network alongside, or ideally integrated with, transport infrastructure improvements. Furthermore, local-level design and mitigation measures may be required to avoid conflict between road and rail transport infrastructure improvements and other large-scale developments, and the completion of a national network of long-distance walking routes.

« Previous | Contents | Next »