draft habitat regulations appraisal

8/14/2019 Draft Habitat Regulations Appraisal

1/126

Clackmannanshire Council proposed Local Development PlanCommittee Draft August 2013Habitat Regulations Appraisal

Incorporating Appropriate AssessmentDraft October 2013

(v2.1)


2/126


3/126

Clackmannanshire Council Proposed LDP HRA Record & Appropriate Assessment- Committee Draft

Document Control RecordDate Version

Number

Version Title Distribution Details

June 2013 V1.1 Clackmannanshire Councilproposed Local DevelopmentPlan Committee Draft March May 2013. Habitats RegulationsAppraisal incorporatingappropriate assessment. DraftJune 2013

1) ClackmannanshireCouncil (G. Finlay)2) SNH

First draft of HRArecord & AA, whichaccompaniedCommittee draft ofLDP.

August 2013 V1.2 Clackmannanshire Councilproposed Local DevelopmentPlan Council Draft August 2013.Habitats Regulations Appraisalincorporating appropriateassessment. Draft August 2013

1) ClackmannanshireCouncil

Revised draft of HRArecord & AA, whichtakes account of:a) minor changes tospatial allocationsarising from initialcommittee reviews;b) comments receivedfrom SNH in responseto the screening andV1 reports in relationto

(i) mitigationwording for somespatial allocations;

(ii) terminologyrelating to HRAprocess.

October 2013 V2.1 Clackmannanshire Councild L l D l t

1) ClackmannanshireC il

Revised draft of HRAd & AA hi h


4/126


Contents

Contents ............................................................................................................... ii

1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Habitats Regulations Appraisal ........................................................................ 1

1.2 The Habitats Regulations Appraisal (HRA) process and Guidance .............................. 1 1.2.1 Terminology ............................................................................................ 1 1.2.2 Guidance ................................................................................................ 2 1.2.3 Structure of the assessment process .............................................................. 2 1.2.4 Reporting and consultation process ................................................................ 2 1.2.5 Limitations of the assessment ...................................................................... 3

1.3 European sites ............................................................................................ 3 1.3.1 Firth of Forth SPA ..................................................................................... 3 1.3.2 River Teith SAC ........................................................................................ 5

1.4 Other projects and plans that may act in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP 6

1.5 Structure of document .................................................................................. 6

2 Conclusions of screening exercise ......................................................................... 7

2.1 Need for HRA and AA .................................................................................... 7

2.2 European sites ............................................................................................ 7

2.3 Screening process ........................................................................................ 7

2.4 Criteria for the identification of LSE ................................................................ 7 2.4.1 Firth of Forth SPA ..................................................................................... 7 2 4 2 Ri T ith SAC 9


5/126


3.2 Proposals identified as having likely significant effects ........................................ 27 3.2.1 M02 The Shore, Alloa ................................................................................ 27

3.2.2 B02 Alloa West Business Park (Pavilions)......................................................... 29 3.2.3 B12 Garvel Farm, Blackgrange ..................................................................... 33 3.2.4 B13 Midtown business proposal, Alloa ............................................................ 37 3.2.5 B14 Kennetpans....................................................................................... 40

3.3 Proposals within the LDP which may act in combination (cumulatively) to have likelysignificant effects on site integrity ........................................................................... 41

3.3.1 Housing developments within 5 km of the coast that could contribute to increasedrecreational use of the coast ............................................................................... 41 3.3.2 Proposals on sites that have the potential to provide high tide roosting/feeding sites forpink-footed goose ............................................................................................. 44 3.3.3 Development proposals on sites that have the potential to provide high tideroosting/feeding sites for wader species that are a qualifying interest feature of the SPA ..... 46

3.4 Proposals within the Clackmannanshire LDP that may act in combination with other plans, projects and proposals to have likely significant effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA ..... 47

3.4.1 In combination effects with other LDPs loss of/disturbance to pink-footed goose atinland roost sites .............................................................................................. 47 3.4.2 In combination e ffects with other LDPs loss of habitat/disturbance to qualifying

wader species at inland roost sites ........................................................................ 48 3.4.3 In combination effects with other LDPs increased recreational disturbance at thecoast 49 3.4.4 In combination effects with proposals for Co ckenzie Power station....................... 49 3.4.5 In combination effects with proposals for Rosyth International Container ............. 50 3.4.6 In combination effects in relation to proposals for Grangemouth biomass Plant ...... 51

4 Appropriate Assessment of effects of Clackmannanshire LDP on the River Teith SAC ...... 51

4.1 Qualifying interests .................................................................................... 51 4 1 1 D 51


6/126


Appendix D: Other developments or projects considered for likely significant effects uponEuropean sites in combination with the Clackmannanshire proposed LDP. ........................ 101

a) Firth of Forth SPA .......................................................................................... 101 b) River Teith SAC.............................................................................................. 114


7/126


1 IntroductionThis document provides a record of the Habitats Regulations Appraisal of theClackmannanshire Council Proposed Local Development Plan (LDP) including appropriateassessment. This is a draft document to accompany the Committee draft of the LDP; it willbe updated as new information becomes available.

1.1 Habitats Regulations AppraisalUnder the terms of the Habitats Directive (Article 6 (3)), any plan or project, which is notconnected to the management of a European Site, but is likely to have a significant effecton that site, either on its own or in combination with other projects and plans, must besubject to an appropriate assessment of its implications for that site in respect of thesites conservation objectives. These requirements are implemented in Scotland throughthe Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended). European sitesinclude Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) and Special Protection Areas (SPA).

The Clackmannanshire Local Development Plan is a land use plan, not connected to themanagement of a European Site, and hence is subject to Habitats Regulations Appraisal.

1.2 The Habitats Regulations Appraisal (HRA) process and Guidance1.2.1 TerminologyIn the UK, the process of considering whether a plan will have an effect on a European siteand determining the implications of that plan for the sites conservation objectives isknown as Habitats Regulations Appraisal (HRA). The term appropriate assessment(AA) describes one stage of this process: the determination of effects of the plan/projectupon the integrity of the European site and is only conducted on those aspects of a plan(or project) which are considered likely to have a significant effect alone, or in

bi i


8/126


1.2.2 GuidanceGuidance on the application of HRA to plans in Scotland has recently been published by

Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH)4

. The Scottish Government has also produced advice forplan-making bodies in Scotland 5. These Guidance documents have been used as the basisfor the approach used in the HRA of the Clackmannanshire proposed LDP.

Judicial rulings also provide clarity on the interpretation of particular terms within theHabitats Directive and the scale of the assessment process.

1.2.3 Structure of the assessment process

The SNH approach divides HRA into 13 stages, which are described in Figure 2 of SNHsGuidance. This document primarily covers stages 8 10 of that process:Stage 8 Undertake an appropriate assessment in view of conservation objectives.Stage 9 Apply mitigation measures until there is no adverse effect on siteintegrity.Stage 10 Prepare a draft record of the HRA.

It also summarises the findings of Stages 1 7:Stage 1 Decide whether plan is subject to HRA.

Stage 2 If plan is subject to appraisal, identify European sites that should beconsidered in the appraisal.Stage 3 Gather information about the European sites.Stage 4 Discretionary consultation on the method and scope of the appraisal.Stage 5 Screen the plan for likely significant effects on a European site.Stage 6 Apply mitigation measures.Stage 7 Re-screen the plan after mitigation measures applied.

1 2 4 R i d l i


9/126


work commenced on the first draft of the HRA record and Appropriate Assessment prior toreceipt of comments on the draft screening report.

The first draft of this HRA record and Appropriate Assessment (V1), which was also basedon the Draft LDP (March May 2013), was issued to SNH in July 2013. Initial commentswere received from SNH in late July 2013. Those relating to mitigation wording andterminology in respect of the Habitats Regulations were incorporated within a revisedversion (V1.2) of the HRA record and Appropriate Assessment, for use by staff ofClackmannanshire Council. Meetings were held with SNH to discuss the commentsreceived on the first draft reports, and these, together with written comments, have been

incorporated into this version of the HRA record. This document will accompany the LDPthat is presented to Full Committee of Clackmannanshire Council in October 2013 andtakes account of changes in site allocations and proposal numbering that have occurredbetween production of the initial draft LDP (March May 2013) and August 2013.

1.2.5 Limitations of the assessmentThe HRA and AA have used existing data sets that have been collected by a variety ofagencies over different timescales. These include national recording schemes run by theBritish Trust for Ornithology and undertaken by volunteers. These data are supplied to thestatutory conservation agencies, following quality checks undertaken by BTO. It has beenassumed that the data are correct, and no further checks have been undertaken.

Data concerning the use of the coast by qualifying bird species have been collected forrecording units that are of unequal size. In some cases, these recording units includeareas of land beyond the limit of Clackmannanshire. The nature of the data means that itis not possible to identify the precise areas that support individual species.

Th i l d di ib i f lif i bi d i h b d b l


10/126


The site has been designated for populations of wintering and migratory bird species. Itqualifies as an SPA under Article 4.1 of the Birds Directive by regularly supporting

wintering populations of European importance of four Annex 1 species (red-throated diverGavia stellata , Slavonian grebe Podiceps auritus , golden plover Pluvialis apricaria and bar-tailed godwit Limosa lapponica ) and regularly supporting a post-breeding population ofEuropean importance of sandwich tern Sterna sandvicensis . It also qualifies under Article4.2 by regularly supporting wintering populations of both European and internationalimportance of five migratory species (pink-footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus , shelduckTadorna tadorna , knot Calidris canutus , redshank Tringa totanus and turnstone Arenariainterpres ), and for regularly supporting a wintering waterfowl assemblage of European

importance. Further details about the numbers of these species recorded from the siteare provided in Appendix A.

Some of the qualifying features also contribute to the selection of the Firth of Forth as aRamsar site (wintering waterfowl assemblage, wintering populations of goldeneye, knot,pin-footed goose, redshank, shelduck, Slavonian grebe, turnstone, bar-tailed godwit andpassage sandwich tern).

The conservation objectives for the Firth of Forth SPA are:

To avoid deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying species or significantdisturbance to the qualifying species, thus ensuring that the integrity of the site ismaintained; and

To ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the longterm:

Population of the species as a viable component of the site;


11/126


Table 1.1: Summary of condition of qualifying features of the Firth of Forth SPA

Condition Assessment Qualifying FeatureUnfavourable Declining Long-tailed Duck

Common scoterGoldeneyeKnotGreat-crested grebeScaupMallard

Favourable Declining Red-breasted merganserSlavonian grebeBar-tailed godwitSandwich ternShelduckEiderGrey ploverDunlin

Waterfowl assemblageFavourable Maintained Velvet scoterRed-throated diverGolden ploverPink-footed gooseRedshankTurnstoneCormorantOystercatcher


12/126


To ensure for the qualifying species that the following are maintained in the longterm:

Population of the species, including range of genetic types for salmon, as aviable component of the site.

Distribution of the species within site.Distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species.Structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the

species.No significant disturbance of the species.

The condition of the qualifying features has been assessed against these conservationobjectives. Atlantic salmon was assessed as in Unfavourable Recovering condition in 2003.The three species of lamprey were assessed as in Favourable Maintained condition (Riverand Brook lamprey were assessed in 2003, and the river lamprey in 2000).

1.4 Other projects and plans that may act in combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP The Forth covers a large area, and there are many projects and proposals being developedor implemented around its shores and in its waters, including development of land use

plans by other local authorities. Each of these may give rise to minor residual effects uponthe qualifying interests of the Firth of Forth. These have been screened for their potentialto act in combination with the minor residual effects arising from the ClackmannanshireLDP to produce a likely significant effect upon the SPA.

A list of potential projects that should be considered for in combination effects has beendeveloped by the Scottish Government (available via the Knowledge hub). This has beenused as the basis for identification of plans that may act in combination with theClackmannanshire LDP.


13/126


2 Conclusions of screening exercise2.1 Need for HRA and AAThe Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 requires local authorities to publish LocalDevelopment Plans (LDPs). This will require a complete revision of the existingClackmannanshire Local Plan. As this is unconnected to the management of any Europeansite, it is subject to the requirements of the Habitats Directive Article 6 (3) asimplemented through the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (asamended).

2.2 European sitesThe European sites identified for consideration during the screening process are the Firthof Forth SPA and the River Teith SAC (see Section 1.3).

2.3 Screening processThe screening process identifies those aspects of a plan that require further considerationfor their effects upon a European site. The process applied to the Clackmannanshire LDPwas documented in the draft screening report, and involved a sequential consideration of

proposals against the seven criteria included in the guidance for HRA published by SNH12

.Proposals were allocated to one of three categories: those that have no effects upon aEuropean site, and which did not require to be considered further; those identified ashaving Minor Residual Effects (MRE) requiring further consideration for in combinationeffects; or those identified as ha ving Likely Significant Effects (LSE) and hence subjectto appropriate assessment. Mitigation was introduced, where possible, into the policiesand proposals identified as having LSE, and these were then re-screened to see if theycould be removed from further consideration.


14/126


unless it contributes to significant disturbance of the qualifying species which is one ofthe Conservation Objectives for the Firth of Forth SPA. The level of disturbance of

qualifying species is not always directly linked to the numbers of people using an area.Thus the same level of recreational activity may, or may not have likely significant effectsdepending on the nature, timing and location of the recreational activity.

To provide an initial screening of spatial proposals that may act in combination tocontribute to significant disturbance at the coast, some simple, map-based tools weredeveloped, based on the proximity of proposal sites to the coast, and research into use ofareas for recreation:

Any housing proposal within 5 km of the coast has the potential to contribute to coastalrecreation and hence to have minor residual effects on qualifying interest species, andshould be considered for in combination effects in respect of significant disturbance ofqualifying species at the coast. This distance of 5 km to define the zone within whichmost recreational activity originates, has been previously used and tested through PublicInquiry into the South East of England Regional Spatial Strategy. Research in Scotland hasshown that 5 km is consistent with typical distances travelled for recreation (around threequarters of outdoor recreational visits involved travelling a distance of less than 5 miles (8km) and around 44% of outdoor visits involved a journey of less than 2 miles (3.2 km) 13).

Obviously, not all areas of the Clackmannanshire coast are of equal attractiveness topotential visitors, and not all areas of the coastline can easily be accessed by the public.Likewise, not all areas of the coastline are used by equal numbers of the qualifyingspecies. Nevertheless, this broad-brush rule provides a precautionary approach toidentifying potential sources of increased recreation. The assessment of the risks ofsignificant increased disturbance from recreation will be considered further at the next


15/126


appears, based on the Phase 1 data or aerial photographs, to contain potentiallysuitable habitat.

Development sites are identified as potentially having a likely significant effect on pink-footed goose via impacts on their high tide roosting/feeding sites if:

the site lies within a 10 km square/ tetrad from which the qualifying species hasbeen recorded OR the site lies within c. 15 km of the coast and there have been nocounts for pink-footed goose; andthe site appears, based on Phase 1 data or aerial photographs, to containpotentially suitable habitat; and

the site contains open areas of suitable habitat that are at least 6 ha in size (orcombined with adjacent open areas will reach this size).Small sites (c. 2 ha) in the middle of urban areas have been excluded, as the qualifyinginterest species favour wide views in order to scan for predators.

2.4.2 River Teith SACAlthough the River Teith SAC is located approximately 10 km upstream at its closest pointto the boundary of Clackmannanshire, the qualifying interest features are a number of

migratory fish species. As the integrity of the SAC relies, in part, on the ability of thesespecies to have unimpeded access along the Forth, the proposals have been screened toidentify those that may have a direct or indirect effect upon the passage of fish. Thisincludes proposals that could alter the quality of water (including chemical quality,temperature, presence of suspended materials), that could create physical barriers to fishmovement (including those arising from noise/vibration) or patterns of water movement.

2.5 Mitigation wording


16/126


EA14 Supporting the Delivery of Community Growing SpacesEA16 Waste Management Facilities

NE01 Alva Woodland Park Expansion

2.6 Conclusions of screening exerciseAppendix C lists the conclusions of the screening exercise for the proposals within thedraft Clackmannanshire LDP. Many of the proposals within the Clackmannanshire LDP aregeneral policy statements, setting out the criteria under which proposal applications willbe viewed favourably. Some policies are general in nature, but are supported by specificspatial proposals (e.g. SC1 Maintaining a Housing Land Supply). In these cases the focus of

the screening has been on the individual spatial locations rather than the general policy.Where the precise location of a policy is not clear, but the policy specifies criteria as tothe types of development that will be permitted and/or the types of location that arelikely to be acceptable, then these have been treated as general policy statements andscreened out as such. Where the policy is not specific about the locations where it will beimplemented, but does not contain a clause specifically excluding locations which mightlead to effects on a European site these have also been screened out as the effects cannotbe identified as the policy is too general.

Proposals which have been identified as having Likely Significant Effects on their own onthe qualifying interest features of either the Firth of Forth SPA and/or the River Teith SACare highlighted in red. Those proposals that will result in Minor Residual Effects, andhence require consideration for in combination effects are shown highlighted in brown.A summary of the proposals that will require further consideration is provided below.

There are some changes between the screening report and the screening in this documentrelating to the proposals likely to give rise to significant effects. Some of these changes


17/126


Table 2.1: Summary of Likely Significant Effects arising from proposals within the

Clackmannan LDP.Proposal Source and nature of Likely SignificantEffect

Qualifying Speciesrecorded from

vicinity of proposalM02 The Shore, Alloa Scheme could lead to effects on qualifying

species of the Firth of Forth SPA through:Release of pollutants during constructionleading to changes in(a) changes in distribution and extent ofhabitats that support the species; and/or(b) changes to the structure, function andsupporting processes of habitats supportingthe species.

Wigeon, cormorant,shelduck, mallard,goldeneye, red-breasted merganser,oystercatcher, curlew,redshank.

Noise, vibration and human activity duringconstruction leading to significantdisturbance of qualifying species.

Pink-footed goose,shelduck, wigeon,cormorant,oystercatcher, lapwing,curlew, redshank,mallard, goldeneye,red-breastedmerganser, goldenplover, dunlin

Noise and human activity during operationof the scheme leading to significantdisturbance of qualifying species.

As above.

Loss of high tide roost sites on adjoiningland if it results in changes to the

Qualifying speciesrecorded from the


18/126


Proposal Source and nature of Likely SignificantEffect

Qualifying Speciesrecorded from

vicinity of proposalmerganser, goldenplover, dunlin

Noise and human activity during operationof the scheme leading to significantdisturbance of qualifying species.

As above.

Loss of habitat within and outwith theboundary of the site that could lead tochanges to the distribution and extent ofhabitats supporting the qualifying speciesand changes to the distribution of qualifyingspecies within the SPA.

Pink-footed goose,curlew, lapwing, goldenplover, redshank,

oystercatcher

B12 Garvel Farm,Blackgrange

Scheme could lead to effects on qualifyingspecies of the Firth of Forth SPA through:

Release of pollutants during constructionleading to(a) changes in distribution and extent ofhabitats that support the species; and/or(b) changes to the structure, function andsupporting processes of habitats supportingthe species.

Pink-footed goose,shelduck, mallard,goldeneye, red-breasted merganser,cormorant,oystercatcher, lapwing,curlew, redshank

Noise, vibration and human activity duringconstruction leading to significantdisturbance of qualifying species.

Pink-footed goose,shelduck, wigeon,mallard, goldeneye,red-breastedmerganser, cormorant,oystercatcher, lapwing,


19/126


20/126


Table 2.2: Aspects of the Clackmannanshire proposed LDP that may act in combination tohave a likely significant effect on the qualifying interests of the Firth of Forth SPA

Combinations of policies/proposals Likely Significant Effect onqualifying interests of the Firth ofForth SPA

Proposals within 5 km of the coast that couldcontribute to increased recreational use of thecoast both within and outwith the SPA boundary:AlloaH01 Sunnyside, Alloa

H02 Ashley Terrace, AlloaH03 Carsebridge Road North, AlloaH04 Carsebridge, AlloaH05 South Earlsfield 2 (Alloa SE Plot 7), AlloaH06 Alloa Park Phase 4, AlloaH07 Earlsfield 1, AlloaH08 Earlsfield West, AlloaH09 Elm Grove 2, AlloaH10 Central Parkland, AlloaH11 St Johns Primary School H12 ClaremontH13 Claremont Primary SchoolH14 Patons Bowling Club, Tullibody Road M01 Alloa Co-op site, AlloaS04 Pine Grove, AlloaB01 Forthbank, AlloaSauchie

Significant disturbance ofqualifying species at the coast(both within and outwith theSPA) arising from increasedrecreational use of theshoreline. (Species affected indifferent areas are discussedlater in the report).


21/126


Combinations of policies/proposals Likely Significant Effect onqualifying interests of the Firth of

Forth SPAH34 Ochil Road, MenstrieH35 Mains Farm Steading, MenstrieAlva ProposalsH36 Brook Street/Beauclerc Street, AlvaH37 Brook Street/Back Road, AlvaH38 Berryfield, AlvaH39 Former Alva Glen Hotel, Alva

H40 Park Street, AlvaDevelopment proposals on sites that have thepotential to provide high tide roosting/feedingsites for pink-footed goose 17.

Housing & Business DevelopmentsAlloaB01 ForthbankForth Rural and Area Wide ProposalsB15 MeadowendTillicoultry and CoalsnaughtonH45 Coalsnaughton North, CoalsnaughtonEast Ochils Rural and Area WideH50 Forestmill (includes S14 Fo restmill - newPrimary School & S15 Forestmill golf course andhotel)

Loss of habitat used as high tideroosting/feeding sites by aqualifying species (pink-footed

goose). (&/or)Disturbance to a qualifyingspecies (pink-footed goose)whilst using a high tidefood/roost site.


22/126


Combinations of policies/proposals Likely Significant Effect onqualifying interests of the Firth of

Forth SPAH12 ClaremontCambusS07 Cambus Park and RideForth Rural and Area WideB11 Kilbagie

Significant disturbance to aqualifying species whilst using ahigh tide roost site(oystercatcher, curlew, goldenplover, redshank & lapwing).

Aspects of the Clackmannanshire LDP that could act in combination with other projects, policiesand plans to have a significant effect on the Firth of Forth SPAA list of projects that should be considered for in combination effects has been developedby the Scottish Government, and is stored on the Knowledge Hub. The list, which was lastupdated in October 2012, was used as the basis for identification of plans that may act incombination with the Clackmannanshire LDP 19. Appendix D screens these proposals fortheir potential to act in combination with the minor residual effects arising from theClackmannanshire LDP. Plans that are likely to have LSE are excluded, as these will besubject to separate appropriate assessment as part of their consenting process.

Those plans which have been identified as potentially resulting in likely significant effectsin combination with the Clackmannanshire LDP are:

Falkirk LDP in relation to:significant disturbance of the qualifying species at the coast as a result ofrecreational pressure 20;loss of habitat/disturbance to pink-footed goose and/or qualifying wader species atinland roost sites.


23/126


Grangemouth biomass plant in relation to:significant disturbance of qualifying species.

In addition, there are a number of projects, which are at a pre-application phase, butwhich might have the potential for in combination effects. The status of these projectswill be kept under review during the preparation of the LDP and HRA. If further detailsbecome available on these schemes, they will be re-screened for effects. These are:

Leith Docks N-RIPMethil Docks N-RIPBurntisland N-RIP

Burntisland Granton FerryKinneil Kerse Bioenergy plantPort Edgar RedevelopmentDunbar Harbour RedevelopmentFoxlake Adventure DevelopmentCaptain Clean Energy Coal vaporisation plantNeart na Gaoithe offshore windfarmSeaGreen Phases, 1, 2 & 3Methil offshore demonstration wind turbineGrangemouth wind farm developmentWind turbine at Boness

2.6.2 River Teith SACProposals identified as having Likely Significant Effects on their ownThree proposals have been identified as having Likely Significant Effects upon qualifyinginterests of the River Teith SAC (see Appendix C). These are:


24/126


Aspects of the Clackmannanshire LDP that could act in combination with other projects, policiesand plans to have a likely significant effect on the River Teith SACAppendix D contains a list of other projects around the Forth and screens these for theirlikelihood of contributing to in combination effects.

Following discussions with SNH it was agreed that the appropriate assessment shouldconsider the combined effects of the Clackmannanshire LDP with the effects arising fromthe Grangemouth biomass plant.

A watching brief will be maintained on proposals for Leith N-RIP as preliminary work forthis project did identify the River Teith SAC as a potential receptor of effects.

3 Appropriate assessment of the likely significant effects ofClackmannanshire LDP on the Firth of Forth SPA

3.1 Qualifying interestsA summary of the qualifying interests of the Firth of Forth SPA as a whole was provided insection 1.3.1. Further details about the distribution of those species within the scope of

influence of the Clackmannanshire LDP are provided below.

3.1.1 Data sourcesA variety of data have been used to provide details about the distribution and abundanceof the qualifying bird species.

Wetland Bird SurveyThe Wetland Bird Survey 22 (WeBS) monitors non-breeding birds in the UK through core


25/126


shoreline are used for feeding. They comprise both the mean of the numbers of eachspecies recorded each month during a single winter and the maximum count achieved at

that site during the winter. These data can be related to the amount of habitat favouredby an individual species within each count unit to produce relative density maps.

WeBS data have some weaknesses. Geese usage of coastal sites may be underestimated asthese species tend to travel inland during daylight hours and tern populations are notaccurately assessed as counting of these species is optional within the scheme. Also, thecount units are not a uniform size or area; some are small, whilst others may be severalkilometres long and span administrative boundaries. This means that caution is needed ininterpreting these data as low numbers of species may be linked to the size of the countunit, rather than the importance of the site. It is also impossible to pinpoint the preciselocations where particular species have been recorded. Nevertheless, WeBS data doprovide a good general guide to which areas within an estuary are of relative importancefor different species. Both core count and low tide data have been reviewed to assist inidentifying the likely effects of the Clackmannanshire LDP.

Table 3.1 (page 25) summarises the relative importance of WeBS count units withinClackmannanshire in two ways. Firstly, the proportion of the qualifying population thathas been recorded from particular sections of the Clackmannanshire coastline is indicatedby blue shading in Table 3.1. For example, sites shown in dark blue are those where thefive year mean peak count is greater than 1% of that required for the site to qualify as ofinternational importance for the species in question. The 1% threshold is traditionallyused as an indicator of important sites or locations for species. It has been used in thiscontext to help identify stretches of coastline that are relatively important for individualqualifying species within the Firth of Forth. This relative importance of different areashas also been demonstrated by ranking each core count unit according to their five year


26/126


Phase 1 23 habitat information was used to provide an indication of which areas supporthabitats of potential value to the qualifying species. These were commissioned by the

Inner Forth Landscape Initiative (IFLI) and comprise habitat maps24

for the LandscapeInitiative area (approximately 202 km 2). The maps are focused on the River Forth and theland within a few miles of the river between Stirling and the Forth bridges, and only coverpart of the land within Clackmannanshire. They have been generated using existing Phase1 data held by the relevant local authorities, supplemented with Phase 1 mapping held bySNH. These data were compared against aerial photographs to identify and fill gaps in theinformation or changes in land cover since the surveys were completed.

Arable land, marsh and grassland (including neutral semi-improved grassland, poor semi-improved grassland, and marshy grassland) are all considered potentially suitable habitattypes for the qualifying species.

The Phase 1 data have been supplemented by details of current land use and aerialphotographs of each proposal site, which are included within the draft LDP. These havebeen supplemented with the personal knowledge of the Clackmannanshire Planners andaerial photography available through Google maps.

Within Clackmannanshire the Phase 1 maps cover land lying within approximately 1 2 kmof the coast 25, covering an area in the order of 3569 ha, which represents around 22% ofthe local authority area (15900 ha). Whilst this provides an incomplete picture of thedistribution of potentially suitable habitat for qualifying species, it is the best data thatare currently available, and have been used to assist in interpreting likely effects of theproposals.

Other sources


27/126


Sandwich terns are not routinely monitored as part of the WeBS scheme. However, it isunderstood that the main distribution for this species is further east along the Forth.

3.1.3 Pink-footed gooseThe upper reaches of the Forth are important for pink-footed goose. This species hasbeen recorded from all the core count units along the Clackmannanshire coast, often inappreciable numbers. Highest numbers were recorded between Kincardine Bridge andAlloa, which is the 2 nd highest ranked site in the Forth based on winter five year meanpeak counts (2006/07 2010/11).

At low tide, pink-footed goose tend to move inland; only a single individual was recordedfrom an area of shoreline during low tide counts conducted in winter 2003/04. Inlandareas from which pink-footed goose have been recorded are:

undeveloped land lying adjacent to the shore between Tullibody Inch and InchIsland Farm, within the broad area where proposal B02 is situated;tetrads lying south, north and north-east of Clackmannan; andtetrads around Menstrie and Alva.

Anecdotal information suggests that the following areas also support high numbers of pink-footed goose:

Fields at Blackgrange (NS840923; NS849924).Fields at Rhind (NS862918).Fields at Kennetpans (NS916889).

The numbers associated with individual proposal sites are discussed later in the report.

3.1.4 Shelduck


28/126


3.1.7 Goldeneye

Goldeneye has been recorded from five of the seven core count sections inClackmannanshire, but in relatively low numbers. Highest numbers were recorded fromthe coast between Kincardine Bridge and Alloa, and this count unit was ranked 6 th out ofthe 35 core count sections in the Forth. Goldeneye was recorded from all the areas ofcoast that were surveyed at low tide.

3.1.8 Red-breasted MerganserRed-breasted merganser was recorded from six of the core count sections withinClackmannanshire, with highest numbers being recorded between Kincardine Bridge andAlloa. This is also the highest ranked site in the Forth for this species (where it isrecorded from 36 core count units). However, the rest of the Clackmannanshire coastlineis of lower importance for this species, with the sites being ranked 27 th or lower. Therelative importance of the Forth between Alloa and Kincardine Bridge for red-breastedmerganser is also demonstrated by the low tide count data.

3.1.9 CormorantCormorant has been recorded from four of the five core count sections withinClackmannanshire. Highest numbers were recorded from the South Alloa and Cambuscount unit, which is ranked 2 nd (out of 36 count units) in the Forth for this species. Therest of the Clackmannanshire coastline has relatively low importance for this speciesbased on core counts. Cormorant was also recorded from along the Clackmannanshirecoast, at low numbers, during the low tide count (2003/04).

3.1.10 OystercatcherOystercatchers are widespread around the Forth (recorded from 38 count units) and have


29/126


2003/04, or from tetrads surveyed as part of the BTO Atlas survey. Grey plover has beenrecorded from 29 core count units around the Forth.

3.1.13 Golden ploverThis species also has a restricted occurrence within Clackmannanshire. It has beenrecorded between South Alloa and Cambus, although the winter five year mean peakcount is less than one bird. It was not recorded during the low tide counts (winter2003/04). The BTO Atlas data recorded golden plover from a tetrad that includesundeveloped land lying adjacent to the shore between Tullibody Inch and Inch IslandFarm, within the broad area where proposal B02 is situated.

3.1.14 LapwingLapwings are widely distributed around the Forth, being recorded from 31 core countsections, including all those within Clackmannanshire. The highest numbers inClackmannanshire were recorded between Upper Taylorton and Fallin, and Fallin toCambus ranking these sites 5 th and 6 th respectively within the Forth for this species.Lapwings appeared to be less widely distributed along the Clackmannanshire coast duringthe low tide counts (2003/04), being confined to the count unit that includes TullibodyInch (29 birds) and between Inch of Ferryton and the Kincardine Bridge (2 birds).

Lapwings were recorded from a number of inland locations during the BTO Atlas survey:undeveloped land lying adjacent to the shore between Tullibody Inch and InchIsland Farm, within the broad area where proposal B02 is situated;land south of Cambus (this tetrad also includes an area south of the Forth, outwiththe boundary of Clackmannanshire);tetrads that include the east and west of Alva;tetrad that includes Midtown (B13) (this also includes land outwith the boundary of


30/126


The coast between Fallin and Cambus is ranked 3 rd in the Forth for this species and allcount units in Clackmannanshire are ranked in the top 16 locations within the Forth for

this species. Curlew was also recorded from all count sections within Clackmannanshireduring the low tide counts winter 2003/04, and was recorded in appreciable numbers frominland tetrads during the BTO Atlas surveys in the following locations:

undeveloped land lying adjacent to the shore between Tullibody Inch and InchIsland Farm, within the broad area where proposal B02 is are situatedsouth and south-east of Cambus (tetrad includes Cambus Pools, and also land onthe south shore of the Forth outwith the Clackmannanshire boundary);south-east of Alloa.

Anecdotal information also suggests two additional areas that are important for curlew:Fields at Rhind (NS862918).Fields at Kennetpans (NS916889).

3.1.19 RedshankRedshank is widely distributed around the Forth (recorded from 38 core count units), andhas been recorded from all the core count units within Clackmannanshire. Whilst it occurs

in appreciable numbers in Clackmannanshire, the coastline is of relatively lowerimportance for this species, compared to other areas in the Forth. The highest ranked sitein Clackmannanshire is the core count unit lying between Kincardine Bridge to Alloa,which was ranked 17 th . Redshank was recorded from all areas of the Clackmannanshirecoastline during the low tide counts (winter 2003/04) in varying numbers. It was alsorecorded at various locations, at low numbers, during the BTO Atlas survey:

undeveloped land lying adjacent to the shore between Tullibody Inch and InchIsland Farm, within the broad area where proposal B02 is situatedsouth-east of Cambus (tetrad includes Cambus Pools, and also land on the south


31/126


25

Table 3.1: Qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA recorded from the Clackmannanshire coastline based on WeBS core counts for thefive year period 2006/07 2010/11

Core Count Unit Upper Taylortonto Fallin

Fallin to Cambus South Alloa toCambus

stretches

Kennetpans KincardineBridge to Alloa

Cambus Pool

LDP Proposal Number B12 1 M02; B02 B14 B13

Pink-footed goose 5 7 6 10 2 8Shelduck 19 15 7 8 11 19Wigeon P 9 18 2 P

Mallard 19 4 16 20 7 26Goldeneye 15 9 7 6 27Red-breasted Merganser 34 34 30 27 1Cormorant 24 35 2 22 12Oystercatcher 36 38 33 31 27 37Ringed plover 25Grey plover 14Golden plover 14

Lapwing 5 6 8 26 19 22Knot 25Dunlin 23 10 12Bar-tailed Godwit 16Curlew 16 3 14 11 8 15Redshank 38 34 28 19 17 36Totals 10 11 13 14 13 8

KeyPresent at low numbers (where winter 5yr mean of peaks represents


32/126


26

Table 3.2: Qualifying species of the Firth of Forth SPA present along the Clackmannanshire coastline based on WeBS low tide count dataLow tide count unit BF003 BF004 BF005 BF006 Total for

the ForthLDP Proposal Number Preferred

habitatB02; B12 M02 B14

Mean

count(rank)

Peak

count(rank)

Mean

count(rank)

Peak

Count(rank)

Mean

count(rank)

Peak

count(rank)

Mean

count(rank)

Peak

count(rank)

Total

numberof countunits

Mean

count

Maximum

count

Cormorant All 5 (24) 6 (35) 4 (30) 6 (35)) 2 (41) 6 (35) 1 (53) 2 (54) 82 409 455Pink-footed goose All 0 1 (4) 1 (4) 6 713 2849Shelduck All 17 (12) 44 (12) 7 (16) 20 (15)) 1 (33) 2 (38) 5 (18) 11 (20) 43 793 876Wigeon All 25 (19) 32 (22) 497 (2) 700 (2) 84 (8) 250 (6) 19 (21) 75 (18) 37 2613 3110Mallard All 35 (3) 101 (3) 6 (24) 21 (18) 14 (11) 0.08

(16)10 34 (8)) 59 647 756

Goldeneye Sub-tidal 8 (8) 14 (12) 1 (34) 65 (3) 7 (11) 29 (8) 4 (14) 16 (11) 74 309 386Red-breastedmerganser

Sub-tidal 1 (34) 3 (37) 2 (26) 4 (29) 72 184 240

Oystercatcher Intertidal 1 (128) 3 (127) 11 (85) 32 (70) 5 (99) 18 (88) 134 5907 5944Lapwing Intertidal

& non-tidal

29 (13) 115(12)

2 (26) 9 (26) 32 1957 3330

Dunlin Intertidal 1 (54) 2 (56) 59 6377 7840Curlew Intertidal

& non-tidal

54 (6) 208 (4) 7 (40) 27 (30) 0 (121) 1 1 (119) 28 (16) 80 (11) 128 1643 2493

Redshank Intertidal& non-tidal

14 (53) 27 (53) 37 (25) 96 (17) 1 (115) 4 (105) 67 (14) 97 (16) 131 3647 3830

Total Number ofspecies

9 9 9 10

There are no low tide data for the count unit adjacent to proposal B13 for the year in question.


33/126


3.2 Proposals identified as having likely significant effects

3.2.1 M02 The Shore, AlloaThis proposal is for a brownfield site that borders the shores of the Forth for around 200 300m and is surrounded on three sides by other developments. It allows for mixed usedevelopment, including housing, leisure, recreation and business. There is the potentialfor recreational access to the River Forth. It may also include repairs to the sea wall andinvestigation of flood alleviation measures.

The site lies outwith the boundary of the SPA, and is located within the South Alloa toCambus WeBS core count unit and low tide count unit BF004. The qualifying species thathave been recorded in these count units are shown in Tables 3.1 & 3.2.

Thirteen qualifying species have been recorded from the WeBS core count unit. Thisincludes high numbers of pink-footed goose; and important numbers of shelduck, wigeon,cormorant, oystercatcher, lapwing and curlew. Fewer species have been recorded duringthe low tide counts. Wigeon was recorded in the highest numbers, but this site was onlyranked 14 th in terms of the mean density of this species within the Forth.

Whilst qualifying species have been recorded from the wider area, and may feed along theshoreline, these species are unlikely to be using the proposal site. This is because it is abrownfield site, and based on the Phase 1 data available, there are no habitats ofpotential value to qualifying species present. Also, it is smaller than 6 ha in size, so isunlikely to be of value for pink-footed goose.

Few details of the scheme are available, but the sources of likely significant effects andthe implications of these for the qualifying interest features of the SPA in light of its


34/126


for qualifying interest species will depend on the nature and timing of the disturbance andcan also be affected by prevailing weather conditions. These effects can be avoided by

timing construction operations to occur outwith the wintering period of the qualifyingspecies and/or through the use of particular construction techniques.

Disturbance during operation of the scheme is mainly likely to arise from recreational useof the coast or use of lighting around the houses. Recreational impacts can be avoided bysiting footpaths and access points back from the shoreline and the use of planting toscreen the coast from footpaths. Lighting effects can also be mitigated by the use oflamps that limit light pollution.

Given the strategic nature of the proposals, it is difficult to quantify the scale of effects,however, it is predicted that the numbers of species present adjacent to the proposal sitewill be low, given the length of shoreline affected. The proposals also include arequirement to provide recreational space in the middle of the site, which will help toreduce the scale of increased use of the coast. To avoid adverse effects upon the SPA,additional mitigation will be included within the site schedule and proposals. New textthat has been added is shown in italics. This also includes text to address issues inrelation to the River Teith SAC (see Section 4.3.1):

Creating Sustainable CommunitiesProposals should include details of house numbers and sizes , and any affordablehousing provision and details of how the design (including landscaping and lighting)will avoid significant disturbance effects upon birds that are a qualifying interestsof the Firth of Forth SPA and passage of migratory fish that are a qualifyinginterest of the River Teith SAC. Sea wall should be investigated and repaired if necessary and if it can be


35/126


3.2.2 B02 Alloa West Business Park (Pavilions)This is a large business site (53.48 ha), which has been identified as suitable for business,

industrial, storage or distribution uses (Classes 4, 5 and 6). Office development hasalready commenced to the north of the site.

The bulk of the land comprises areas of agricultural land.

The south-western edge of the site abuts the coastline of the Firth of Forth, within theboundary of the SPA and close to the mudflats of Tullibody Inch, which are known to beimportant for the qualifying species. The site lies within the South Alloa to Cambus corecount unit and low tide count unit BF003. Thirteen of the qualifying features of the Firthof Forth SPA have been recorded in the vicinity of the proposal site during core counts andnine species were recorded during the low tide counts (see Tables 3.1 & 3.2). Thisincludes significant numbers of pink-footed goose and curlew. The counts by the BTO alsorecorded significant numbers of pink-footed goose and curlew within the relevant tetrad.Lapwing, golden plover, redshank, and oystercatcher were also recorded from the tetrad.

Few details of the scheme are available, but the sources of likely significant effects andthe implications of these for the qualifying interest features of the SPA in light of itsconservation objectives are listed below and then considered in more detail.The sources of likely significant effects are:

Pollution during construction. This could result in: (a) deterioration of habitats ofthe qualifying species; (b) changes in distribution and extent of habitats supportingthe species; and/or (c) changes to the structure, function and supporting processesof habitats supporting the species.Noise, vibration and human activity during construction and operation of thescheme leading to significant disturbance of qualifying species particularly species


36/126


Table 3.3 sets out the numbers of qualifying species that may be potentially affected by

the proposal. This includes numbers of qualifying species that have been recorded fromWeBS counts, the BTO tetrad data and anecdotal information supplied by a number oflocal bird recorders. It should be remembered that both the WeBS and tetrad data covera greater area than the proposal site, whilst the anecdotal information is specific to thesite.

Table 3.3 also includes a summary of the total numbers of qualifying species recorded forthe SPA as a whole at the time it was classified and how the numbers recorded contributeto the classification of the site as of International importance in order to provide somecontext of the numbers of qualifying species recorded from the coastline adjacent to thissite. For example, the numbers of pink-footed goose that have been recorded from thecoast near this site represent 20% of the numbers of this species required for this site tobe identified as of International importance. Also, a maximum of 1200 pink-footed goosehave been recorded from the tetrad that includes this site, whilst a total of 10,852 pink-footed goose were thought to be present within the SPA as a whole at the time that it wasclassified.

Table 3.3: Maximum numbers of qualifying species recorded from vicinity of proposal areacompared to numbers present at the time of classification of the Firth of Forth SPA (N.B.

These surveys cover different areas and were undertaken over different time periods usingvarying methods)

Species WeBS corecount winter5yr mean of

peaks 2006/07

WeBS lowtide

countpeak

Maximumcount in

the tetrad

Anecdotalcounts*

Numbers ofindividuals

presentwithin SPA at


37/126


38/126


qualifying species may vary between season, and is generally likely to be of lower value toqualifying species than other sites in the vicinity that receive less disturbance.

The area of this site allocation (52.83 ha) is equivalent to 1.7% of the potentially suitablehabitat for waders and pink-footed goose within the IFLI area.

Discussions have been held with SNH about the level of bird use at the site and whetherloss of this site would have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA.SNH has advised that there is remaining uncertainty about (a) the level of use of the siteby qualifying species and therefore (b) the effect of loss of the site upon the integrity ofthe SPA 29.

To address this dual issue of uncertainty, SNH has proposed that conditional wording isadded to the site schedule. This acts to remove the presumption in favour of thedevelopment if it was implemented in a way that could adversely affect site integrity 30.This is consistent with a High Court Ruling that considered the use of conditional wordingor a safeguard condition within a strategic plan 31. In this case, a Local Authority, withthe support of the statutory Nature Conservation Body (Natural England) had addressedthe issue of uncertainty within the appropriate assessment for the plan by includingqualifying wording into a proposal. The judge ruled that The adoption, in the CoreStrategy, of the qualifying wording as recommended by the Joint Statement, ensures thatno such harm can or will arise. 31

Mitigation wording To address the uncertainty relating to information about the use of the site, andconsequently to remove reasonable doubt about the consequence of the proposal upon theintegrity of the SPA, the following wording has been added to the site schedule (new text


39/126


Environmental Assets

This site includes areas that can be used by important numbers of qualifyingspecies of the Firth of Forth SPA and lies adjacent to other areas that are used bysignificant numbers of pink-footed goose and curlew. The Development Brief and application will be subject to a Habitats Regulations Appraisal and Appropriate

Assessment and will need to demonstrate that the proposals will not have anadverse effect upon the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or incombination with other proposals within this plan (including, but not necessarilyrestricted to B12 & B13). Developers will be required to provide information toenable this appropriate assessment to be undertaken. This may include (but notbe limited to):

providing information about the use of this site and other suitable areasalong the coast in Clackmannanshire by qualifying species of the SPA overat least one full wintering and migration season;

providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoidedduring operation of the proposals;

providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoidedduring construction of the scheme (e.g. constraints on the construction

period).

3.2.3 B12 Garvel Farm, BlackgrangeThis site is on agricultural land and has been identified for business, industrial, storage ordistribution uses (Classes 4, 5 and 6). It abuts the River Forth upstream of the SPAboundary and lies within the Upper Taylorton to Fallin WeBS core count unit (see Table 3.1and discussion below for identity of species).


40/126


BTO tetrad data and anecdotal information supplied by a number of local bird recorders.There are no WeBS low tide count data available for this length of shore. It should be

remembered that both the WeBS and tetrad data cover a greater area than the proposalsite, whilst the anecdotal information is specific to the site.

Table 3.4 also includes a summary of the total numbers of qualifying species recorded forthe SPA as a whole at the time it was classified and how the numbers recorded contributeto the classification of the site as of International importance in order to provide somecontext of the numbers of qualifying species recorded from the coastline adjacent to thissite. For example, the numbers of pink-footed goose that have been recorded from thecoast near this site represent 20% of the numbers of this species required for this site tobe identified as of International importance. Also, a maximum of 1200 pink-footed goosehave been recorded from the tetrad that includes this site, whilst a total of 10,852 pink-footed goose were thought to be present within the SPA as a whole at the time that it wasclassified.

Table 3.4: Maximum numbers of qualifying species recorded from vicinity of proposal areacompared to numbers present at the time of classification of the Firth of Forth SPA (N.B.

These surveys cover different areas and were undertaken over different time periods usingvarying methods)

Species WeBS core countwinter 5yr mean

of peaks2006/07

2010/11 (winter5 yr mean of

Maximumcount in

the tetrad

Anecdotalcounts*

Numbers ofindividuals

presentwithin SPA at

time ofclassification


41/126


This area of coastline has been ranked 5 th in the Forth for the winter five year meancounts of both pink-footed goose and lapwing. Low numbers of this species have also been

recorded from the tetrad.ConclusionsThe site supports habitats of potential value to the qualifying species (cropped agriculturalland and grassland (estimated as around 1.6 ha)), and represents around 1% of thepotentially suitable habitat for qualifying species that has been measured within theportion of Clackmannanshire that lies within the IFLI area. In addition, the site isconsidered sufficiently large (> 6 ha) to be used by pink-footed goose.

Whilst there is some uncertainty about the use of the site by qualifying species of the SPA,information obtained from local bird recorders suggests that the main area used by birdslies adjacent to the coast. This area is remote from most sources of disturbance andsupports habitat that is suitable for qualifying species.

The short length of coastline near the site, means that the risk of significant disturbanceduring operation of the site can be avoided through design of the site e.g. by use of abuffer zone of suitable width along the coast (to be determined by local conditions) toretain key habitat features and use of screen planting. Disturbance during constructioncan also be avoided by timing the works to avoid the autumn/winter periods whenqualifying species are present.

This site, together with other sites in the LDP (e.g. B02), forms part of the network ofopen areas along the northern shore of the Forth. The use of individual sites will varydepending on a variety of factors such as weather, cropping regime, season anddisturbance.


42/126


qualifying wording as recommended by the Joint Statement, ensures that no such harmcan or will arise. 34


43/126


Mitigation wording To address the uncertainty relating to information about the use of the site, andconsequently to remove reasonable doubt about the consequence of the proposal upon theintegrity of the SPA, the following wording has been added to the site schedule (new textin italics).

Development RequirementsProposals within this site will not be in accordance with this development plan unless itcan be demonstrated, by means of an appropriate assessment, that the proposal will nothave an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA or River Teith SAC, eitheralone or in combination with other parts of this or other plans and projects.

Developers will be expected to provide such information as the Council deems necessaryto inform the appropriate assessment. In respect of the Firth of Forth SPA, Developersshould be aware that this information is likely to include detailed information about theuse of this site by qualifying species of the SPA over a minimum of one wintering andmigratory season. In addition, it may involve assessment of the pattern of usage of thissite in relation to other sites beyond the boundary of this site allocation. Consequently,developers are encouraged to collaborate in undertaking research for these areas.

Environmental AssetsProposals will be subject to Habitats Regulations Appraisal. The application willneed to demonstrate that the proposals will not have an adverse effect upon theintegrity of either the Firth of Forth SPA or River Teith SAC either alone or incombination with other proposals in this plan (Including, but not necessarilylimited to B02 and B13) or other projects. Developers will be required to provide


44/126


the Forth (Upper Taylorton to Fallin and Fallin to Cambus) (see Table 3.1). Low tide countunits are only available for a section of the Forth from Cambus Pools downstream (BF003)(see Table 3.2).

Eight qualifying species have been recorded from Cambus Pools during the core counts,and nine species have been recorded during the low tide counts (see Table 3.1 andbelow).

The sources of likely significant effects arising from this development were identified as:Pollution during construction. This could result in (a) deterioration in habitats ofthe qualifying species; (b) changes in the distribution and extent of habitatssupporting the species; and/or (c) changes in the structure, function andsupporting processes of habitats supporting the species.Loss of habitat used as high tide roost sites leading to changes in the distribution ofthe species within the site.Significant disturbance of qualifying species during construction.Significant disturbance of qualifying species during operation.

Pollution during construction can arise from unregulated releases of fuels or chemicals,accidental spills, and run-off of sediment from disturbed ground. These impacts can beavoided by good construction practice.

Disturbance effects during construction can be avoided by timing the works to occuroutwith the wintering period of the qualifying species.

The greatest risks of adverse effects are from the loss of habitat that supports thequalifying species and from significant disturbance of the qualifying species during


45/126


suggests that numbers of curlew may reach the 100 39s. Oystercatchers have also beenrecorded from this area 40.

Disturbance has been noted to alter the behaviour of qualifying species in this area;numbers using this area, which is subject to disturbance from nearby constructionactivities, farming, and recreational access are observed to be lower than the numbersusing the Haugh of Blackgrange peninsula.

Consequently it appears that this site nay act as a buffer zone between the disturbed,built up areas to the north of the site, and the heavily used areas around the Haugh ofBlackgrange.

ConclusionsThe site supports habitats of potential value to the qualifying species and is thought tosupport these species.

Discussions have been held with SNH about the level of bird use at the site and whetherloss of this site would have an adverse effect on the integrity of the Firth of Forth SPA.SNH has advised that there is remaining uncertainty about (a) the level of use of the siteby qualifying species and therefore (b) the effect of loss of the site upon the integrity ofthe SPA 41.

To address this dual issue of uncertainty, SNH has proposed that conditional wording isadded to the site schedule. This acts to remove the presumption in favour of thedevelopment if it was implemented in a way that could adversely affect site integrity 42.This is consistent with a High Court Ruling that considered the use of conditional wordingor a safeguard condition within a strategic plan 43. In this case, a Local Authority, with


46/126


migratory season. In addition, it may involve assessment of the pattern of usage of thissite in relation to other sites beyond the boundary of this site allocation. Consequently, developers are encouraged to collaborate in undertaking research for these areas.

Environmental AssetsProposals will be subject to Habitats Regulations Appraisal. The application willneed to demonstrate that the proposals will not have an adverse effect upon theintegrity of either the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination withother proposals in this plan (including, but not necessarily limited to B02 and B12)or other projects. Developers will be required to provide information to enablethis appropriate assessment to be undertaken. This may include (but not belimited to):

providing information about the use of this site and other suitable areasalong the coast in Clackmannanshire by qualifying species of the SPA overat least one full winter and migratory period;

providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoidedduring operation of the proposals;

providing details of how disturbance to qualifying species will be avoidedduring construction of the scheme (e.g. constraints on the construction

period). Flood Risk Assessment required to determine area at risk from coastal flooding

including issue of sea level rise. Potential for managed realignment should beinvestigated. These aspects will require a Habitats Regulations Appraisal inrespect of likely effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA. Proposals which createhabitat of value to the qualifying interest features of the Firth of Forth will be

preferred.


47/126


At this stage, the types of development that may be introduced are not known. However,the implications for the qualifying interest features of the SPA in light of its conservationobjectives are likely to arise from:

Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significantdisturbance of qualifying species at the coast (Pink-footed goose, cormorant,shelduck, wigeon, mallard, goldeneye, red-breasted merganser, oystercatcher,ringed plover, lapwing, knot, dunlin, bar-tailed godwit, curlew, redshank).

Noise and human activity during operation of the scheme leading to significantdisturbance of qualifying species at nearby high tide roost sites and hencechanges to distribution of species within the SPA. Oystercatcher, curlew,redshank and lapwing have been recorded from the tetrad & it appears that thereare areas of suitable habitat (based on aerial photos). Pink-footed goose hasbeen recorded for the tetrad, but the site is considered too small to support thisspecies.

To avoid adverse effects upon the SPA, additional mitigation will be included within thesite schedule and proposals. This also includes text relevant to the River Teith SAC (seeSection 4.3.1). New text that has been added is shown in italics:

Environmental AssetsThe existing bullet point relating to ecological appraisal will be replaced with thefollowing text:

Proposals will be subject to Habitats Regulations Appraisal. The DevelopmentBrief and application will need to demonstrate that the proposals will not have anadverse effect upon the integrity of either the Firth of Forth SPA or River TeithSAC. This may include providing information about use of the site and surroundingarea by qualifying species of the SPA, and how disturbance to qualifying species


48/126


49/126


The stretch of core path that extends from the River Devon to Tullibody Inch extendsalong the shore of the Forth for a distance of around 1.5 km. This lies within the SouthAlloa to Cambus WeBS core count unit. Thirteen of the qualifying species have beenrecorded from this count unit, including high numbers of pink-footed goose, cormorant,ringed plover, lapwing, curlew and redshank. There are no data to confirm which of thesespecies use the stretch of coastline next to the core path, or which use the adjacent fieldsas high tide roost sites. However, based on the information about use of fields in thewider area, it seems reasonable to assume that pink-footed goose, lapwing, curlew andredshank may all use the adjacent fields.

The core path at Kennetpans provides access to the shore, but does not extend along theshoreline. Fourteen qualifying species 45 have been recorded from Kennetpans during theWeBS core counts (see Table 3.1). Several of these species are associated with the inter-tidal zone, and are most likely to be found on the mudflats present in this area (e.g.wigeon). There is no local anecdotal information to identify which of these species maybe using adjacent fields as high tide roost sites.

Whilst these locations correspond to areas that support important numbers of some of thequalifying species, these areas all currently experience a degree of recreational use andconsequent disturbance. All the core paths are located outwith the boundary of the SPA,although the disturbance around the Kennetpans site may extend to within the SPAboundary. The question is whether any additional recreational use of these paths wouldlead to significant disturbance of qualifying species with a consequent decline inpopulation numbers or distribution within the SPA.

There has been research into identifying the way in which birds respond to different forms


50/126


The qualifying species are present during the winter months, when there is reduced daylength and inclement weather, which will act to reduce the times when people are likelyto be using the paths and hence contribute to disturbance. Also, during the coldest timesit is anticipated that the numbers of recreational users will decline.

Birds appear to be more sensitive to disturbance within the inter-tidal zone than activitiesalong the shore itself 48. Walking, accompanied by a dog off a lead, is one of the activitiesmost likely to disturb birds. For example, in the Solent, walkers with dogs off leadsaccounted for over half of recorded disturbance on the Solent, although these onlyrepresented one third of all users 49. Also, walking with a dog off the lead in the inter-tidalzone accounted for around a third of recorded disturbance on the Exe Estuary 50.

Based on aerial photographs, it appears that the core paths are set back from theshoreline by a few metres, thus avoiding the inter-tidal zone. It is not known how manywalkers are accompanied by dogs, but much of the main habitat of the inter-tidal zone ismud, which is less attractive for walking. Hence, it is surmised that there is unlikely to besignificant disturbance to qualifying species in the inter-tidal zone of the SPA.

Local bird observers have indicated that qualifying species will use fields behind the seawall along the Forth as high tide roost sites. As the core paths are already established,and hence birds are likely to be habituated to use of these area, the housingdevelopments are not considered to give rise to significant disturbance on the qualifyingspecies outwith the boundary of the SPA to the level where it would have an effect uponthe numbers or distribution of the qualifying species within the SPA.

In conclusion, the housing proposals within the LDP will not have an adverse effect upon


51/126


52/126


53/126


Table 3.7: Area of potential supporting habitat to be affected by development proposals

Proposals Site area(% ofpotentiallysuitablehabitat)

Maximum count of wader species

GoldenPlover

GreyPlover*

Lapwing* Curlew* Redshank Oyster-catcher*

H07 Earlsfield 1,Alloa

4.95 ha 0 0 0 0 0 0

H08 EarlsfieldWest, Alloa

2.36 ha 0 0 0 0 0 0

H12 Claremont 4.48 ha(0.2%)

14 0 81 242 6 2

B11 Kilbagie 19.27 ha 0 0 0 0 2* 0B18 AlvaIndustrial Estate

3.57 ha 0 0 50 1 1 9

Tetrads withinClackmannanshire

1 0 9 7 8 5

Totals 34.63 ha* B11 Kilbagie spans two recording tetrads. The count of 2 redshank was recorded fromone of the tetrads, which also includes an area of the coast; there were zero counts forthis species from the other tetrad that spans the site.

3.4 Proposals within the Clackmannanshire LDP that may act in combination with otherplans, projects and proposals to have likely significant effects upon the Firth of Forth SPA


54/126


A number of factors influence the choice of inland feeding and loafing areas including theweather, size of the site and cropping regime. Whilst the choice of preferred sites canvary on an almost daily basis, broad areas that are popular with geese are generally knownby the bird-watching community. Other than the proposals that have been considered foreffects on their own (see sections 3.2.1 -3.2.6), none of the other proposals within theFalkirk, Stirling and Clackmannanshire LDPs are for sites that are known to be importantas inland roost sites for pink-footed goose.

It is therefore concluded that there will not be an adverse effect upon the integrity of theFirth of Forth SPA from these development proposals, either alone or in combination withother projects and plans.

3.4.2 In combination effects with other LDPs loss of habitat/disturbance to qualifyingwader species at inland roost sitesFive of the qualifying wader species of the Firth of Forth SPA are known to use inland roostsites 52. Based on anecdotal information, it appears that the sites that support the highestnumbers of these qualifying species are generally located close to the sea wall.

A precautionary approach has been taken to identifying the maximum scale of loss ofpotentially suitable habitat. It has been estimated that less than 0.2% of potentiallysuitable habitat within the IFLP area of Clackmannanshire will be lost to proposalsincluded in the Clackmannanshire LDP. This compares to around 1.5% of potentiallysuitable habitat that is affected by the Falkirk LDP and 3.8% of potentially supportinghabitat within 5 km of the coast within the City of Edinburgh Council area. Similar figuresare not available for Stirling, but the number of proposals that may affect potentiallysuitable habitat is low.


55/126


improvement of the Cambus Pools Nature Reserve habitat. These habitat enhancementproposals are independent of the other proposals included within the LDP (includinghousing proposals) and are NOT compensation measures. Habitat creation andimprovement may act to mitigate the scale of any minor residual effects that arise fromthe LDP. This is consistent with the a high Court ruling that provision of new feeding areasoutside a European site to make up for impacts outside the European site should beconsidered as mitigation as the measures would mean that there would be no adverseeffect on the integrity of the European Site 53.

In conclusion, the housing proposals within the LDP will not adversely affect the integrityof the Firth of Forth SPA either alone or in combination with other projects or plans. Thisis the case even if the habitat improvement proposals are not implemented.

3.4.3 In combination effects with other LDPs increased recreational disturbance atthe coastSection 3.3.1 considered the likely effects of the LDP on recreational use of the coastlineof Clackmannanshire, and resultant disturbance on qualifying species both within andoutwith the SPA boundary. Whilst it was concluded that the proposals within the planwould not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the SPA, there is also a need to

consider whether any minor residual effects will act in combination with minor residualeffects from other LDP.

There are limited opportunities to access the coast in Clackmannan. A number of thequalifying species were identified as using these areas (refer to Table 3.1 for full list), ofwhich pink-footed goose, shelduck, wigeon, red-breasted merganser, cormorant, dunlin,curlew, lapwing, redshank and oystercatcher were thought to be at greatest risk ofdisturbance. All these species (except red-breasted merganser) were also identified as


56/126


conservation status of the SPA. There is the potential for minor adverse impacts on theSPA bird assemblage and qualifying species as a result of disturbance during theconstruction phase, but these impacts could be mitigated through controls on workinghours. SNH has indicated that it has concerns that the proposals may have an effect ifchanges to the management of the ash lagoons result in a decreased ability to supportqualifying species of the SPA.

There are few details in the public domain about the species that currently use the ashlagoons, and any changes to management that are likely. The main species located oninland areas in Clackmannanshire are pink-footed goose and curlew. Whilst these speciesare recorded in the vicinity of the lagoons, based on anecdotal information, only lownumbers of these species have been recorded from the lagoons.

In conclusion, the Clackmannanshire LDP will not act in combination with the proposalswith Cockenzie Power Station to have an adverse effect upon the integrity of the Firth ofForth.

3.4.5 In combination effects with proposals for Rosyth International ContainerThere are proposals for a new container terminal at Rosyth 55. The Harbour Order

application has been subject to a Public Inquiry, and a decision is expected shortly. It isanticipated that the scheme will be consented, with amendments. During the PublicInquiry, the scope and need for an appropriate assessment of the scheme was debated.The Report of the Inquiry states that Ministers have carried out an appropriate assessmentin relation to the terrestrial elements of the project and have concluded that, subject toinclusion of mitigation measures, there will be no adverse impacts upon the integrity ofthe Firth of Forth SPA. Minor residual effects are likely to be limited to disturbance ofqualifying species during operation. The appropriate assessment for the scheme does not


57/126


3.4.6 In combination effects in relation to proposals for Grangemouth biomass PlantConsent has been granted for Forth Energy Ltd to construct and operate a combined heatand power plant at Grangemouth. As part of the consenting process, Scottish Ministersundertook an appropriate assessment of the proposals in respect of a number of Europeansites including the Firth of Forth SPA and the River Teith SAC. The appropriate assessmentconcluded that potentially adverse effects on qualifying species of the SPA (shelduck,knot, redshank, dunlin and curlew) arising from disturbance during construction of coolingpipes could be avoided by carrying out the construction works during the summermonths 57. This has been included as a condition of the consent 58. Thus there is not scopefor in combination effects with proposa ls within the Clackmannanshire LDP.

Effects of thermal pollution on the availability of prey species of selected qualifyingspecies (shelduck, knot, redshank, dunlin and curlew) were also considered. The effectson prey species were considered to be negligible and consequently the assessmentconcluded that there would be no significant decrease in the food available to qualifyingspeci es. Thus there is not scope for in combination effects with proposals within theClackmannanshire LDP.

The assessment further considered the effects of nitrogen and acid deposition arising from

the plant. It concluded that large salt-water estuaries are capable of chemical buffering ofthe level of emissions that would result from the plant, and that the current levelsdischarged to the Forth have not altered the structure and functioning of the intertidalhabitats. Thus, there is no scope for in combination effects with proposals within theClackmannanshire LDP.

4 Appropriate Assessment of effects of Clackmannanshire LDP


58/126


off-shore waters. They appear to feed on a variety of marine and migratory fish includingsturgeon ( Acipenser sturio ), herring ( Clupea harengus ), salmon ( Salmo salar ), cod ( Gadusmorhua ) and haddock ( Melanogrammus aeglefinus 60). Migration back to freshwater usuallystarts in late spring 61, and spawning takes place in late May or June, depending on watertemperature.

4.1.3 River lampreyRelatively little is known about the habits of river lamprey in estuaries and the s

draft habitat regulations appraisal

Documents