18 Policies and Plans 18.1 Introduction 18.2 Approach and Methods 18.3 Summary of Plans and Policies 18.4 Potential Mitigation 18.5 Assessment of Route Corridor Options Compliance 18.6 Summary of Policy Assessment 18.7 Scope of Stage 3 Assessment 18.8 References
18 Policies and Plans
18.1 Introduction
18.1.1 This chapter presents the assessment of the Stage 2 route corridor options for the Forth Replacement Crossing in the context of national, regional and local planning policies. This includes a review of national, regional and local planning policy and guidance documents, and consideration of the project in terms of potential policy conflicts or compliance.
18.1.2 The Scottish planning policy framework is at present provided by the ‘Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997’ and the ‘Planning and Compensation Act 1991’, and is underpinned by the general principle that decisions on development and land use planning should be taken at the most local administrative level wherever possible. The ‘Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006’ received Royal Assent in December 2006 (not implemented) and once enacted will update the 2006 Act and other primary legislation. The National Planning Framework 2 (NPF 2) will be a statutory document under the new 2006 Act once adopted, replacing the current, non-statutory, National Planning Framework (NPF).
18.1.3 The Scottish Government influences the planning system through legislation, White Papers, Scottish Planning Policy documents (SPPs), Circulars, Planning Advice Notes (PANs), approval of strategic planning documents and through powers to call in planning applications SPPs are new policy documents that replace National Planning Policy Guidelines (NPPGs). Existing National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG) documents have continued relevance to decision making, until such time as they are replaced by an SPP. These policy documents identify key priorities for the planning system in respect of various aspects of land use. These documents may, so far as relevant, be material considerations to be taken into account in the consideration of planning applications or development proposals which do not require planning permission.
18.1.4 Sections 25 and 37 (2) of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 require that planning decisions be made in accordance with the Development Plan (regional and local planning policy as described in paragraphs 18.3.12-18.3.14) unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Therefore, if a proposal accords with the Development Plan and there are no material considerations indicating that it should be refused, permission should be granted and vice versa.
18.2 Approach and Methods
18.2.1 The assessment was undertaken in accordance with DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 12 (The Highways Agency et al., 1994). This chapter therefore:
- describes the existing and, where appropriate, emerging planning policy guidance framework as applicable to the Forth Replacement Crossing;
- describes the existing, and where appropriate, emerging development plan framework as applicable to the Forth Replacement Crossing; and
- considers the likely conflicts or compliance of the Forth Replacement Crossing with key strategic and local planning policy objectives.
18.2.2 An assessment of potential impacts on identified development land (based on development plan allocations, proposals and current planning consents) is provided in Chapter 6 (Land Use).
18.2.3 In-confidence views of local authorities regarding the potential impact on local development policies were not specifically obtained as part of the environmental assessment. However, the project team (including Traffic and Roads Teams) and Transport Scotland have held meetings with the local authorities to obtain views and these have been taken into account as appropriate during development of the Stage 2 route corridor options.
Summary of Plans and Policies
18.2.4 Baseline information has been obtained via a desk study in which relevant policies and plans at national, regional and local level were identified and reviewed. Section 18.3 (Summary of Plans and Policies) contains a brief overview of all the relevant policies and plans and Figure 6.2 shows relevant land use allocations and planned developments.
18.2.5 A summary of the theme and objectives of each relevant policy is presented in Appendix A18.1.
Assessment of Route Corridor Options Compliance
18.2.6 The methodology used for this Stage 2 assessment was derived from DMRB and included the following:
- reviewing information gathered for the STAG and SEA assessments;
- obtaining copies of local plans for all of the areas affected;
- reviewing and updating, where required, the schedule of policies produced at Stage 1;
- assessing the likely impacts of the route corridor options on the achievement of the objectives and policies listed; and
- reporting the likely effects of the route corridor options on plans and policies.
18.2.7 The assessment of policies and plans was undertaken through an appraisal of policy objectives and whether the development of the route corridor would comply or conflict with these policy objectives.
Limitations to Assessment
18.2.8 The route corridor option designs do not provide access to the site of a proposed 352ha mixed-used development (up to 5500 homes and 40ha for employment land) at Winchburgh. However, the assessment assumes that neither southern route corridor options would preclude this access, with access gained either by the later installation of a dedicated junction on the M9 (for South Corridor Option 1) or a slip road from the M9 junction under South Corridor Option 2.
18.3 Summary of Plans and Policies
National Policies
18.3.1 National land use planning policy in Scotland is provided through a series of documents (SPPs and NPPGs) that are material considerations in the assessment of planning applications. These documents also direct the form and content of structure plans and local plans. An overview of NPPGs and SPPs is provided in Table 18.1, with a brief summary of each of these documents in Appendix A18.1.
Scotland’s Transport Future
18.3.2 The Scottish Executive White Paper, ‘Scotland’s Transport Future’ (2004) establishes the policy framework for transport in Scotland with a clear overall aim to ‘promote economic growth, social inclusion, health and protection of our environment through a safe, integrated, effective and efficient transport system’.
18.3.3 Paragraph 71 of the White Paper states that ‘in order to enhance Scotland's global competitiveness and to enable Scotland's economy to maximise its productivity, Scotland needs to ensure that it has a well-connected, sustainable transport network. Transport needs to support major Scottish industries. Transport can help unlock the economic and regeneration potential of particular places. It can also ensure connections for people who live and work in more remote and rural areas’.
National Planning Framework
18.3.4 The first NPF was published by the Scottish Executive in April 2004. It is a framework to guide the spatial development of Scotland to 2025 and it is intended to complement the Executive's Framework for Economic Development in Scotland (2004). The NPF identifies priorities for investment in strategic infrastructure to reach goals set in relation to competitiveness, fairness and sustainability. This document is a material consideration in policy and is to be taken into account for decisions on planning applications, appeals and spending decisions by the Scottish Government and its agencies.
18.3.5 Paragraph 71 of the current NPF states that ‘[economic] success will bring more planning challenges than failure, with a growing economy generating increased traffic and transport capacity problems’. Paragraph 72 states that ‘…the trunk road network and public transport systems require investment to address problems of congestion and unreliability’. In particular, Paragraph 98 recognises the importance of long term transport options as a key element of the spatial strategy to 2025.
National Planning Framework 2
18.3.6 NPF 2 will become statutory under the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 once it is approved by the Scottish Parliament. Paragraph 4 of the document states that ‘It [NPF 2] will guide Scotland's spatial development to 2030, setting out strategic development priorities to support the Scottish Government's central purpose - to promote sustainable economic growth.’ The document reviewed for this assessment is the consultation draft which was published in January 2008 and is expected to be adopted at the end of 2008.
18.3.7 In relation to east central Scotland, NPF 2 states that there will be a need to accommodate a substantial growth in the number of households in the Edinburgh City region and the Upper Forth area over the next 25 years. Investment will be needed in transport and environmental infrastructure to support planned development to the east of the city. Priority is being given to developing the complementary locations which make up the Lothian Science Zone and improving the connectivity of the gateway facilities at Edinburgh Airport, Grangemouth and Rosyth.
18.3.8 The action programme for NPF 2 will specify how, when and by whom national developments will be taken forward. The Forth Replacement Crossing is listed as a national development and the need for this project is described as follows: ‘The Forth Road Bridge has been an essential part of the national road infrastructure for over 40 years. It is vital to the economy of Fife, an essential link for the East Coast Corridor and crucial to the connectivity of Perth and the Highlands and Islands. The main suspension cables of the bridge are showing significant signs of deterioration as a result of corrosion. While a programme of works has been identified to dry out the cables and thus prolong the life of the bridge, there is a considerable risk that this work will not be successful. If that proves to be the case, restrictions to heavy goods vehicles may be needed as early as 2013, with the bridge closing to all traffic by 2019. Complete loss of the road crossing would have very significant adverse economic impacts, both nationally and regionally’. Therefore the Forth Replacement Crossing is designated as ‘an essential element of national infrastructure’.
18.3.9 Finally, NPF 2 requires that the combined effects of the Forth Replacement Crossing and the developments at Rosyth and Grangemouth will need to be considered under the terms of the Habitats Directive, effects on the historic environment and cultural heritage. The historic environment and cultural heritage will be considered through DMRB Stage 3 assessment, and Information to Inform an Appropriate Assessment reports will be prepared under the terms of the Habitats Directive in the context of the Firth of Forth and Forth Islands SPAs (Council Directive 92/43/EEC; refer to Chapter 9: Ecology and Nature Conservation). The Forth Replacement Crossing proposal was borne out of Scotland’s Transport Future, NPF and NPF 2. As the goals and objectives of these government policies have been described in some detail above, additional assessment has been included in Appendix A18.1.
18.3.10 Other relevant national planning policies and guidance, such as Scottish Historic Environment Policies (SHEP), SPPs and NPPGs have been considered as part of this assessment, as listed in Table 18.1 below. An overview has been provided in this report, with details of the assessment provided in Appendix A18.1.
Table 18.1: Relevant National Planning Guidance
| Policy |
Title |
Date |
|---|---|---|
SHEP 1 |
Scotland’s Historic Environment |
2008 |
SHEP 2 |
Scheduling: protecting Scotland’s nationally important monuments |
2008 |
SHEP 3 |
Gardens and Designed Landscapes |
2008 |
SPP 1 |
The Planning System |
November 2002 |
SPP 2 |
Economic Development (2002) |
November 2000 |
NPPG 5 |
Archaeology and Planning (1994) |
October 1998 |
SPP 7 |
Planning and Flooding (2004) |
February 2004 |
SPP 11 |
Open Space and Physical Activity |
November 2007 |
NPPG 13 |
Coastal Planning |
August 1997 |
NPPG 14 |
Natural Heritage (1999) |
January 1999 |
SPP 17 |
Planning for Transport |
August 2005 |
NPPG 18 |
Planning and the Historic Environment |
April 1999 |
SPP 20 |
Role of Architecture and Design Scotland |
February 2005 |
SPP 21 |
Green Belts |
April 2006 |
18.3.11 In addition, PANs support respective NPPGs and SPPs and provide advice on good practice and other relevant information to planning authorities. An overview of relevant PANs is provided in Table 18.2 and a summary of each is provided in Appendix A18.1.
Table 18.2: Relevant Planning Advice Notes
| Policy |
Title |
Date |
|---|---|---|
PAN 40 |
Development Control |
Revised 2001 |
PAN 42 |
Archaeology- the Planning Process and Scheduled Monument Procedures |
1994 |
PAN 47 |
Community Councils and Planning |
1996 |
PAN 50 |
Controlling The Environmental Effects Of Surface Mineral Workings |
1996 |
PAN 51 |
Planning and Environmental Protection |
Revised 2006 |
PAN 53 |
Classifying the coast for planning |
1998 |
PAN 56 |
Planning and Noise |
1999 |
PAN 58 |
Environmental Impact Assessment |
1999 |
PAN 60 |
Planning for Natural Heritage |
2000 |
PAN 65 |
Planning and Open Space |
2003 |
PAN 69 |
Planning and Building Standards Advice on Flooding |
2004 |
PAN 75 |
Planning for Transport |
2005 |
Regional and Local Policies
18.3.12 The development plan consists of structure and local plans. Together they form the basis on which decisions about development and future land uses are made and effectively incorporates national, regional and strategic policies within a local development framework.
18.3.13 Structure Plans can be prepared by a single planning authority or by a collaboration of neighbouring authorities. These documents set out the strategic policies and major proposals for the development and use of land, and incorporate the principles of European and UK legislation and national planning policies.
18.3.14 Each planning authority is also required to prepare one or more local plans. These create a framework of policies and proposals for land use to provide guidance and promote change in the locality, and to apply national and strategic planning policies at a local level.
18.3.15 In this regard, the route corridor options for the Forth Replacement Crossing intersect the administrative boundaries of three local authorities: City of Edinburgh Council and West Lothian Council to the south of the Firth of Forth; and Fife Council to the north. Table 18.3 lists the documents that comprise the development plan covering these local authority areas.
Table 18.3: Development Plan Documents
| Document |
Title |
Status |
|---|---|---|
Structure Plans |
Edinburgh and the Lothians Structure Plan (ELSP) 2015 |
Adopted 17 June 2004 |
Fife Structure Plan (FSP) 2001 — 2011 |
Adopted 8 July 2002 |
|
Finalised Fife Structure Plan (FFSP) 2006 - 2026 |
Finalised April 2006 |
|
Local Plans |
Rural West Edinburgh Local Plan (RWELP) |
Adopted June 2006 |
Finalised West Lothian Local Plan (FWLLP) 2005 |
Finalised 2005, anticipated for adoption in late 2008 |
|
Linlithgow Area Local Plan |
Adopted December 1994 |
|
Broxburn Local Plan |
Adopted 1989 |
|
Dunfermline and the Coast Local Plan (DCLP) |
Adopted April 2002 |
|
Development Briefs |
Port Edgar, Consultation Draft |
Consultation period ended 29 May 2008 |
North Kirkliston |
Approved October 2006 |
Transportation Proposals
18.3.16 There are a number of proposals relating to transportation included in various policy documents and government framework documents. The key documents are NPF 2, Scotland’s National Transport Strategy and various transportation proposals contained within the Structure and Local Plans. A list of all relevant plans is provided in table 18.4.
Table 18.4: Strategic Transport Policy
| Document |
Title |
Published |
|---|---|---|
National Transport Policy |
Scotland’s National Transport Strategy |
December 2006 |
Scotland’s Transport Future |
2004 |
|
Second National Planning Framework |
January 2008 |
|
SEStran Regional Transport Strategy 2008-2023 |
2005 |
|
Local Transport Strategies |
Edinburgh Local Transport Policy 2007-2011 |
Adopted March 2007 |
Fife West Area Transport Plan 2005 - 2010 |
2005 |
|
Local Transport Strategy for Fife 2006-2026 |
2007 |
|
West Lothian Local Transport Strategy |
Adopted 2000 |
|
Corporate Strategies |
Edinburgh Airport Surface Access Strategy 2007-2011 |
2007 |
18.3.17 The Regional Transport Strategy covering the SEStran (South East Scotland Transport Partnership) area indicates that at present very few significant trunk road schemes are being progressed. The main proposals include the A68 Dalkeith bypass, the A876 Upper Forth Crossing at Kincardine and schemes addressing problems on the A68, A7, A8 and M80, none of these schemes will have a direct impact on the Forth Replacement Crossing. The key transportation proposals contained within the relevant documents, as listed in Table 18.4, include the following:
- Forth Replacement Crossing: national transport scheme, supported by NPF2, Scotland’s National Transport Strategy and SEStran Regional Transport Strategy.
- Park and Ride schemes at Halbeath and Rosyth: identified at Halbeath and Rosyth. The site at Rosyth is currently subject to a planning application. The Park and Ride proposal at Ferrytol has been abandoned following the completion of the extension of facilities at Inverkeithing Station.
- Rosyth bypass: identified in the Fife Local Transport Strategy and the Fife Structure Plan.
- Edinburgh Tram Project: delivery of tram project serving the urban area Edinburgh, linking the airport to the city centre and Leith.
- Edinburgh Airport Surface access: development of rail access to Edinburgh Airport through the introduction of the Dalmeny chord supported in the Regional Transport Strategy (RTS).
- M9 Junction at Winchburgh: significant investment in roads will be needed to support the Core Development Area (CDA) strategy. The key requirements anticipated are set out in the CDA Action Plan (Appendix 7.1 of the Finalised West Lothian Local Plan (FWLLP).Proposals include new railway station at Winchburgh and associated park and ride and public transport interchange, new four way junction on M9 with associated park and ride and new distributor road network linking new housing at Winchburgh with new housing at East Broxburn. Proposals supported in FWLLP and RTS.
18.4 Potential Mitigation
18.4.1 Mitigation will be developed, where necessary, in accordance with the relevant policies and guidance during the detailed design of the Forth Replacement Crossing at DMRB Stage 3. At DMRB Stage 2 a preferred route corridor has not been selected. The assessment for each environmental topic area reported at Stage 2 therefore takes into account ‘standard’ or ‘anticipated’ mitigation to ensure that the options assessment is robust. Section 18.5 (Assessment of Options Compliance) considers compliance or conflict with policy taking into account the anticipated mitigation as described in the relevant chapters of this report.
18.4.2 Specific issues relating to plans and policies which should be considered during the development of the detailed design are as follows:
- access provision for the proposed Winchburgh development;
- access provision for the Rosyth dockyard and Ferrytoll park and ride site; and
- impact on established employment area at Belleknowes Industrial Estate.
18.4.3 In addition, the landing site for the bridgehead on the southern shore is likely to affect land zoned for housing. However, it may be possible to find alternative sites within the South Queensferry area to mitigate for this.
18.5 Assessment of Route Corridor Options Compliance
18.5.1 The assessment against national, regional and local development planning policies for the development as a whole, the bridge structure and each route corridor option is summarised in this section. Any potential conflicts with the objectives of the land use policies relevant to each corridor option are identified. The general acceptability of the development as a whole is assessed highlighting any issues that would be common to all elements of the scheme.
The Principle of Development
National Policy
18.5.2 The Forth Replacement Crossing meets national planning objectives regarding economic development and maintaining and improving accessibility. The bridge would maintain the current trunk road network and improve the connectivity of gateway facilities at Edinburgh Airport, Grangemouth and Rosyth. It meets the Scottish Government objectives for economic development and improvement to the national transport network.
18.5.3 Safety zones, hazard consultation zones and consultation zones associated with Edinburgh Airport, the Ministry of Defence base at Rosyth and high pressure gas pipelines would also be taken into consideration.
Regional Policy
18.5.4 The primary objective of the ELSP is to protect and enhance the region’s environmental assets whilst promoting beneficial development. The policies within the structure plan aim to achieve a more sustainable pattern of development by providing a framework within which the key elements of the built and natural environment can be protected and enhanced. The key elements are the coast, the Green Belt, the landscape and the countryside.
18.5.5 In terms of transport policy, the ELSP identifies Edinburgh as an area of restraint because of its Green Belt designation, its high quality landscapes, environmental objectives and existing traffic problems. The exceptions are the Newbridge/Kirkliston/Ratho core development area, where allocations are made for substantial residential and business development, Edinburgh Airport and the Royal Highland Showground areas which are established Green Belt uses. The Transport Strategy set out in the structure plan aims to reduce the need to travel by car and maximise accessibility by foot, cycle and public transport. As no land has been safeguarded with reference to a second Forth Crossing, the plan strongly advocates against development in the Green Belt. Assessment of significant adverse effects on the qualities for which the area has been designated must be weighed against potential social and economic benefits of national importance.
18.5.6 The Forth Replacement Crossing falls within areas designated as developed coast (ENV5 of the ELSP, N5 and N6 of the FSP) as well as the undeveloped coast. The policy for the undeveloped coast would normally not support any development unless the development requires a coastal location, outweighs environmental impact and that no other site is available. Previous studies have shown that the proposed location of the bridge structure is the most suitable location in terms impact, viability and access. It could therefore be considered that no other site can be considered to be available. Obviously the bridge would need a coastal location. Finally, detailed mitigation measures will be developed during Stage 3 to avoid or reduce environmental impacts. It can therefore be considered that the Forth Replacement Crossing is broadly compliant with the coastal policies.
18.5.7 The prime objective of the FSP is based on the need to locate new development for job creation and housing in the most sustainable locations. It focuses development within the Dunfermline Eastern Expansion Area for residential and business development. Port and port related development and industrial, business and environmental regeneration is planned at the Rosyth Military Estate, it is also proposed to create a deep water port facility with good connection to road and rail links.
18.5.8 There are also some transport schemes for which land has been safeguarded, for example, land safeguarded for the Rosyth Eastern bypass and new park and ride schemes at Ferrytoll and Halbeath. These transport schemes will link in with the A90 infrastructure with the aim to improve links with the Edinburgh City Region.
18.5.9 Policy T2 of the FFSP 2006-2026 acknowledges the implications of the Forth Replacement Crossing and safeguards land for a new multi modal crossing and associated approach infrastructure. Within the Fife context, the principle of a multi-modal crossing is considered vitally important for Fife’s economic and social inclusion agendas.
Local Policy
Transport Policies
18.5.10 The RWELP area is a key location in the transport network of east-central Scotland. A number of major roads pass through it as do four passenger railway lines. A network of local roads supplements the major roads. The RWELP refers in paragraph 7.10 to the possibility of a replacement bridge across the Firth of Forth as a project of national importance. Further, the policy states that a feasibility study with potential for a new bridge would be required within the plan period (which is assumed to be the statutory 5 year review period). When the local plan was adopted (June 2006), a feasibility study had not yet been undertaken and the plan does not safeguard any land for the bridge and associated approach networks.
18.5.11 The thrust of transport policies contained within the RWELP relate to the A8 corridor and improving access to and from the City of Edinburgh and Edinburgh Airport by road and public transport. The schedule of transport proposals includes the West Edinburgh tram, the Edinburgh Airport rail link, park and ride facilities at Hermiston and Gogar, Edinburgh Airport road links and the A8000 road improvement scheme.
18.5.12 The local plan requires that the impact of transport proposals on the environment must be minimised. Policy TRA9 states that ‘careful consideration will be given to the proposed alignment, noise mitigation, siting, and design and adequate levels of high quality screening and landscaping must be provided’.
18.5.13 The DCLP identifies the Firth of Forth bridgehead as being located within one of the most important transport corridors in Scotland. The ‘bridgehead’ is where road and rail routes from Fife and eastern Scotland converge and bisect the area. The locational benefits and ease of access to this area are essential to the major development opportunities in East Dunfermline, Rosyth and Dalgety Bay. It is noted that central to these developments and the long term sustainable development of the local plan areas is for an integrated transport network that minimises road use by promoting shorter journeys as well as journeys on public transport or on foot or bicycle.
18.5.14 Policies and proposals concerning transport in the DCLP mainly relate to proposals to improve accessibility and increase the use of public transport such as the Ferrytoll and Rosyth Station park and ride facility (Policy T7 and T8) and proposals relating the Rosyth Waterfront development (Policy PR22 and T6).
18.5.15 The relevant transport policies in the WLLP are related to the Winchburgh development which has been planned to include a junction providing direct access onto the M9, park and ride facilities and public transport proposals including a interchange facility with access to rail and bus services (Policies CDA9 and TRAN29).
Environmental Policies
18.5.16 The focus of the local policy documents is on environmental protection of the landscape, the Green Belt and countryside policy areas, biodiversity (in particular the Firth of Forth Special Protection Area (SPA)), and open space. A number of environmental policies may be affected, with potential effects relating to visual impact and impact on species within the Firth of Forth SPA. Therefore, mitigation may be required.
18.5.17 The setting of designed landscapes of Hopetoun House and Dundas Estate, and North Queensferry, South Queensferry and Inverkeithing town centre Conservation Areas may be affected by the Forth Replacement Crossing. However, the extent of the impact on these areas would be limited due to the existing Forth rail and road bridges which dominate the Forth skyline. The Forth Replacement Crossing would not in itself significantly alter the setting of the designed landscapes and conservation areas (refer to Chapter 12: Cultural Heritage, Chapter 10: Landscape and Chapter 11: Visual). The purpose of the policies contained within the RWELP (E14) and the WLLP (HER22-23) are to protect these areas and their setting. Development affecting the setting of these areas is subject to consultation with Historic Scotland and SNH. . Proposed development would only be permitted if it would not adversely affect the artistic merit, historical, arboricultural, archaeological, architectural, nature conservation or scenic value of the landscape unless ‘the adverse effect is outweighed by public benefits arising from the development’. Mitigation proposals addressing the particular cultural heritage, landscape and visual impacts will be developed during Stage 3 assessment.
Development Briefs
18.5.18 A development comprising of residential development and business development associated with the marina, has been planned at Port Edgar. This proposal is subject to a planning brief which will carry the status of supplementary planning guidance once approved. It is expected that the planning brief will be approved by City of Edinburgh Council in September 2008. Supplementary planning guidance, once approved, becomes a material consideration and carries the same weight as a land use allocation in the local plan. For the avoidance of doubt, at present no planning applications have been submitted in relation to this proposal. If approved, there may be cumulative impacts on the environment which would need to be taken into account. The Forth Replacement Crossing may also impact on the planned development in terms of noise, dust and visual impact, but this would be subject to further and more detailed assessment.
18.5.19 Within South Queensferry, the bridgehead landing would cut through two additional sites that have been allocated for residential development. These sites are located at Springfield and at Society Road (planning policy allocations HSG2 and HSG7 of the RWELP respectively).
Proposed Replacement Bridge
National Policy
18.5.20 The proposed replacement bridge meets national planning objectives regarding economic development and maintaining and improving accessibility as stated previously. However, the bridge and bridgehead landing sites will need further consideration to avoid conflicts with national policies that aim to protect landscape and environmental designations. The Firth of Forth coastline is a nationally and internationally designated site and is part of the Firth of Forth SPA, Forth Islands SPA, Ramsar site and Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). Assessment of significant adverse effects on the qualities for which the area has been designated must be weighed against potential social and economic benefits of national importance.
Regional Policy
18.5.21 In the ELSP, no land has been safeguarded for the development of a second Forth Crossing. Policies relating to development of the coastline support development of the ‘developed coastline’ if a coastal location is required. Development of the undeveloped coast will only be permitted where the benefits outweigh any detrimental environmental impact and that there is no alternative site. The Forth Replacement Crossing falls within an area designated as ‘developed coast’, it can therefore be considered that the Forth Replacement Crossing is broadly compliant with the coastal policies.
18.5.22 Policy T2 of the FFSP 2006-2026 recognises the implications of the Forth Replacement Crossing and safeguards land for a new multi modal crossing and associated approach infrastructure. Within the Fife context, the principle of a multi-modal crossing is considered vitally important for Fife’s economic and social inclusion agendas.
Local Policy
Transport Policies
18.5.23 The RWELP refers in paragraph 7.10 to the possibility of a replacement bridge across the Firth of Forth as a project of national importance. Further, the policy states that a feasibility study with potential for a new bridge would be required. At the time when the local plan was adopted (June 2006), a feasibility study had not yet been undertaken and the plan does not safeguard any land for the bridge and associated approach networks.
18.5.24 The DCLP identifies the Firth of Forth bridgehead as being located within one of the most important transport corridors in Scotland. The ‘bridgehead’ is where road and rail routes from Fife and eastern Scotland converge and bisect the area. The proposed replacement bridge is not included in the adopted local plan, however in May 2008 Fife Council published the Dunfermline and West Fife Local Plan Issues and Options report in preparation for the replacement plan. This report states Fife Council’s support the multi-modal Forth Replacement Crossing as an infrastructure project of national importance and strategic importance to the economy of Fife.
18.5.25 The WLLP does not contain any policies with specific reference to the proposed replacement bridge.
Environmental Policies
18.5.26 Impacts on listed buildings primarily relate to the Forth Road Bridge and Forth Rail Bridge, both of which are Category A listed structures. Mitigation measures may be required. Listed Building Consent may be required where a development affects the setting or any section of the listed fabric of a listed building. Further discussion with Historic Scotland would need to clarify if Listed Building Consent would be required and which authority would determine such application.
Planned Development
18.5.27 Within South Queensferry, the bridgehead landing would cut through two additional sites that have been allocated for residential development. These sites are located at Springfield and at Society Road (planning policy allocations HSG2 and HSG7 of the RWELP respectively). The development of these sites is supported by Policy H1 which relates to housing sites. The preamble to Policy H1 however states that ‘HSG 2 was acquired by the Scottish Executive to facilitate the second Forth Crossing’. As such any use for this acquired land for housing is unlikely.
Northern Route Corridor Options
Impacts Common to Both Northern Route Corridor Options
18.5.28 The main policy designations of importance to all route corridor options relate to international nature conservation sites and policies relating to the undeveloped coast. The coastal zone is substantially developed but still retains important landscape, ecological, historical and recreational attractions which are protected by Areas of Great Landscape Value (AGLV), SSSI, Conservation Areas and other heritage designations. The majority of the coastal area of the Firth of Forth is designated as a SPA and a Ramsar site under European and International Convention and also as a SSSI. Policies in the DCLP in the north and the RWELP and the WLLP in the south have a presumption against adverse effects on these designations.
18.5.29 The DCLP states that there are only a few remaining stretches of undeveloped coast and these require protection from further development. Any coastal development must bring benefits to the coastal zone which may be in the form of pollutant clearance or habitat creation, recreational opportunities, public access, coastal defence and enhanced environmental quality.
18.5.30 Policy COU9 of the DCLP is relevant to the replacement bridge and all of the northern route corridor options. It seeks to protect the various SSSIs and requires that mitigation measures should be put in place to reduce the impact on these sites. The area to the east of the Forth Road Bridge and North Queensferry contains three SSSIs namely Firth of Forth, Carlingnose and Long Craig Island, a section covered by policies related to the undeveloped coast and a Natura 2000 site. The Firth of Forth is also a Ramsar site and an SPA (Policies COU8 and COU17). Two further SSSIs are located at Ferry Hills (Policy COU9) and on a disused tip northeast of the woodland at Fairy Kirk (Policy COU9). There are no Historic Gardens or Designed Landscapes that would be affected on the northern side of the Firth of Forth.
18.5.31 Fife Council is committed through national, regional and local policies to safeguard the 42ha site at Calais Muir South at Dunfermline (Figures 6.2a-b) as a large, single user high amenity site of national importance for employment and economic development (proposal PR20). The Rosyth 2000 partnership will develop the Rosyth Waterfront in accordance with the land uses supported by Policy BIT1 which identifies undeveloped employment land to meet demand for employment land within the DCLP area. The proposed Rosyth International Container Terminal is identified in NPF and the NPF 2 (consultation draft) as a development of national economic importance. The Rosyth Waterfront Area extends from the RD57 Dry Dock to the Forth Road Bridge and incorporates:
- Rosyth Dockyard;
- Rosyth Europarc;
- Port of Rosyth;
- the Oil Fuel Depot and East tip;
- Orchardhead Wood; and
- St. Margaret’s Marsh SSSI.
18.5.32 The proposed replacement bridge and the northern route corridor options are within the Rosyth Waterfront regeneration area and will need to take into account both NPF and Fife Council’s Proposal 22 requirements regarding the proposals for the Rosyth Waterfront Regeneration Project.
18.5.33 The northern route corridor options do not cross over and are not adjacent to any active mineral extraction areas, however, continued access to the major opencast sites found north of Dunfermline at Colton and St Ninians and Cruicks Quarry, Jamestown, Lochead Quarry, north of Wellwood and Prestonhill Quarry, east of Inverkeithing will be required during construction.
18.5.34 At Rosyth, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has established a consultation zone around the Naval Dockyard. The consultation procedure requires certain categories of planning application, which lie within 2.5km of the dockyard, to be referred to the HSE. All of the northern route corridor options just fall within the safeguard consultation zone between Whinny Hill and Hillwood Terrace and therefore the HSE will be consulted.
North Corridor Option 1
18.5.35 All northern route corridor options cross some town and village envelopes as designated in the DCLP. North Corridor Option 1 may affect the envelopes at Rosyth and possibly at East Dunfermline. The policies related to the protection of the town and village envelopes require that development will have to be integrated into the built and natural environment. North Corridor Option 1 is online at these locations and no significant conflict has been identified.
18.5.36 North Corridor Option 1 online upgrade of the M90 is immediately adjacent to Middlebank Souterrain, located at NT 131846 and designated as a Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM) under the prehistoric domestic and defensive category. Policy BE15 of the DCLP states that support will not be given to development affecting SAMs unless under exceptional circumstances. The alignment and earthworks at this location would require further consideration at Stage 3 to avoid impacts on the SAM and to prevent conflict with this policy.
18.5.37 Fife Council recognises open space as a major urban land use and an essential part of the townscape requiring protection from development. It can act as an amenity buffer between developments and between housing and traffic, and allows views of surrounding features. North Corridor Option 1 skirts an area designated under policy CLR6 of the DCLP for open space, just north of the Masterton Junction to the east of Dunfermline, and this would require to be taken into account in terms of policy compliance. The allocation has been shown on Figure 6.2a.
North Corridor Option 2
18.5.38 North Corridor Option 2 crosses the town and village envelopes of North Queensferry, Inverkeithing and Rosyth as designated in the DCLP. The policies related to the protection of the town and village envelopes require that development will have to be integrated into the built and natural environment. The envelope will primarily be breached at Belleknowes Industrial Estate and the policy would thus be affected.
18.5.39 With regard to transportation policies, the DCLP notes that the Ferrytoll park and ride (adjacent to the west of North Corridor Option 2) is used by commuters and shoppers travelling into Edinburgh and is therefore an important part of the measures being implemented by the local authority to relieve pressure on the Forth Road Bridge. The DCLP therefore safeguards the field directly west of Ferrytoll to enable this service to be extended and both northern route corridor options would clip the allocated site. However, Fife Council has subsequently decided to extend the park and ride facility at Inverkeithing station to the east of the M90 and therefore the Ferrytoll site will now not be required and the proposal has been abandoned.
18.5.40 North Corridor Option 2 would not comply with policies protecting the employment area designated at Belleknowes Industrial Estate. The industrial estate is identified in DCLP as an established employment area (Policy BIT3) and brownfield site (Policy BE7); these policies protect this area from development that would restrict the range of uses that can be carried out by businesses or that would affect their amenity. North Corridor Option 2 crosses the town and village envelopes of North Queensferry, Inverkeithing and Rosyth as designated in the DCLP. The policies related to the protection of the town and village envelopes require that development will have to be integrated into the built and natural environment. The envelope will primarily be breached at Belleknowes Industrial Estate and the policy would thus be affected.
18.5.41 Junction modification at Whinny Hill, as shown on Figure 6.2b, may impact on proposal PR22 in the DCLP which relates to the Rosyth Waterfront Regeneration Area, as access to and from the new M90 may be affected.
18.5.42 Assuming that the existing M90 is no longer in use, North Corridor Option 2 would have a slightly beneficial impact on the development at the Eastern Dunfermline Expansion Area due to the slightly increased distance between the planned mixed use development and the route corridor. The actual level of benefit would depend on forecast traffic volumes and associated noise levels.
Southern Route Corridor Options
Impacts Common to Both Southern Route Corridor Options
18.5.43 Landscape quality and the rural character and amenity of rural west Edinburgh will need to be protected and this should be achieved through mitigation measures taking into account design, landscaping and appropriate screening in order to integrate the development into the existing landscape.
18.5.44 The proposed junction to serve the Forth Replacement Crossing runs along the northern boundary of the proposed mixed use development at Winchburgh. Policies CDA9 and TRAN29 of the WLLP allocate a motorway junction near Duntarvie Castle to be developed to support the development of the Winchburgh Core Development Area for 40ha employment land and up to 5500 homes. The assessment assumes that neither route corridor option would preclude this access. Therefore the proposed development would comply with CDA9 and TRAN29.
South Corridor Option 1
18.5.45 The proposal for South Corridor Option 1 would not comply with policies protecting the Green Belt and the countryside (Policies E5-E6, E23, E24 of the RWELP) to the west of Edinburgh, and the Forth Replacement Crossing and associated infrastructure may compromise the policy’s function to maintain a defensible boundary to the City of Edinburgh. RWELP Policy E5 would only permit development in the Green Belt related to and within the defined boundaries of Edinburgh Airport, Royal Highland Showground and Heriot Watt University’s Riccarton Campus which are recognised as areas of strategic economic importance. The areas of countryside not covered by the Green Belt policies are considered of equal environmental importance even though they do not fulfil Green Belt objectives. Therefore, the same level of protection will be accorded to countryside areas within the plan area. Infrastructure development is not identified as an acceptable use of the Green Belt and countryside areas within the RWELP. South Corridor Option 1 requires the least amount of land for development and also has the least impact on the Green Belt and countryside designations. There may be some loss of amenity for the residents of the Echline area of South Queensferry due to increased levels of noise as a result of the proximity to the route corridor. However, as most of the route corridor runs online with the existing route the impacts are not significantly greater than the current situation.
South Corridor Option 2
18.5.46 The proposal for South Corridor Option 2 would not comply with policies protecting the Green Belt and the countryside (Policies E5-E6, E23, E24 of the RWELP) to the west of Edinburgh, and its function as a defensible boundary to the city may be compromised as a result of the Forth Replacement Crossing. RWELP Policy E5 would only permit development in the Green Belt related to and within the defined boundaries of Edinburgh Airport, Royal Highland Showground and Heriot Watt University’s Riccarton Campus which have a status of strategic economic importance. The areas of countryside not covered by the Green Belt policies are considered of equal environmental importance even though they do not fulfil Green Belt objectives. Therefore, the same level of protection will be accorded to countryside areas within the plan area. South Corridor Option 2 requires a greater amount of land to be developed compared to South Corridor Option 1. It also runs through a substantial area protected by countryside policy and an Area of Outstanding Landscape Quality (AOLQ) at Muiriehall Wood. AOLQs are protected through policy E8 of the RWELP which states that development proposals will be considered against those landscape features which contribute to landscape quality.
18.6 Summary of Policy Assessment
Northern Route Corridor Options
North Corridor Option 1
18.6.1 The northern route corridor option with the least conflict with policy is North Corridor Option 1. This option is predominantly online and would therefore present the least impact on future development patterns and planning allocations and would broadly comply with planning policies. Some land take may be required at St Margaret’s Marsh SSSI though it would be less than that required for North Corridor Option 2. There are some impacts in relation to listed buildings, cultural heritage and the developed coast, all of which conflict with planning policy to a greater or lesser extend. Of particular importance is Middlebank Souterrain SAM, which is in closer proximity to North Corridor Option 1 than on North Corridor Option 2.
North Corridor Option 2
18.6.2 North Corridor Option 2 is less compliant with policies and plans compared to North Corridor Option 1. North Corridor Option 2 would lead to a loss of employment land and breach of settlement envelope at Belleknowes Industrial Estate in Rosyth. Following landfall the route corridor runs west of the current alignment up towards Belleknowes Industrial Estate and would therefore have a greater impact on St. Margaret’s Marsh SSSI as some land take may be required in this location. Similarly to North Corridor Option 1, there are some impacts in relation to listed buildings, cultural heritage and the developed coast, all of which conflict with planning policy to a greater or lesser extent.
Southern Route Corridor Options
South Corridor Option 1
18.6.3 The southern route corridor option with the least conflict with policy is South Corridor Option 1. It would have some impact on Dundas Estate in terms of conflict with designed landscape, Site of Importance to Nature Conservation (SINC), SAMs and Green Belt planning policies. The impacts are mainly confined to the area north of Dundas Estate where the route corridor clips the SINC.
18.6.4 South Corridor Option 1 runs offline for a shorter distance than South Corridor Option 2 and therefore has the slightest impact on the current development pattern. However, as discussed previously two allocations for residential and one allocation for open space development are affected in South Queensferry.
South Corridor Option 2
18.6.5 South Corridor Option 2 would have more potential for planning policy conflict than South Corridor Option 1. This corridor option has a substantially higher amount of land take. The route corridor would cut through a substantial area of land which is currently protected by policies relating to the countryside and the AOLQ. The western section of the route corridor runs primarily offline. Two allocations for residential and one allocation for open space development are affected in South Queensferry as discussed previously.
18.7 Scope of Stage 3 Assessment
18.7.1 The Stage 3 assessment will include the following components as set out in DMRB Volume 11, Section 3, Part 12:
- update on status of policies and plans obtained for Stage 2 assessment;
- assessment of the impact of the preferred route corridor on policies and plans;
- review of compliance or non-compliance of policies by the preferred route corridor;
- consultation with City of Edinburgh Council, Fife Council and West Lothian Council on the preferred route corridor and its implications on the preferred route corridor on planning policy objectives;
- review of the effects of mitigation proposals on any identified potential conflicts with policies and plans.
18.8 References
Edinburgh City Council (2004). Edinburgh and the Lothians Structure Plan 2015, Approved 17 June 2004.
Edinburgh City Council (2006). North Kirkliston Development Brief, Approved October 2006.
Edinburgh City Council (2006). Rural West Edinburgh Local Plan, Adopted June 2006.
Edinburgh City Council (2008). Port Edgar, Consultation Draft, Approved for consultation February 2008.
Fife Council (2002). Dunfermline and the Coast Local Plan, Adopted April 2002.
Fife Council (2002). Fife Structure Plan 2001 — 2011, Approved 8 July 2002.
Fife Council (2002). Finalised Fife Structure Plan 2006 — 2026, Finalised April 2006.
Ordnance Survey (2006). Explorer Map 1:25000, Sheet 350: Edinburgh, Musselburgh & Queensferry.
The Highways Agency et al. (1994). DMRB Volume 11 Impact of Road Schemes on Policies and Plans, Section 3, Part 12, August 1994. The Highways Agency, Scottish Executive Development Department, The National Assembly for Wales and The Department of Regional Development Northern Ireland.
West Lothian Council (2005). West Lothian Local Plan, Finalised 2005.
West Lothian District Council (1994). Linlithgow Area Local Plan, Adopted December 1994.
West Lothian District Council (1989). Broxburn Area Local Plan, Adopted 1989.