Other environmental considerations 6.22
Biodiversity, water and soil could also suffer adverse environmental effects when opportunity locations are developed. This would depend on specific locations, siting and design, however, it considered that these elements and any associated mitigation measures are most appropriately dealt with at local and project level.
Alternative 6.23
An alternative scenario for the more centralised strategic economic locations is to continue with the more fragmented approach of the 2006 Structure Plan by rolling forward all of the SIBL sites, some 53 sites. The MIR regards this option as the least sustainable in terms of centralisation and accessibility. It also considers that it dilutes the strategic importance of key locations in terms of role and function. The key question for the assessment is whether a decentralised resource offers reduced travel distance. From an environmental perspective, each option presents different challenges and opportunities.
6.24
The argument is whether the centralisation SEILs are better environmentally than the less centralised SIBLs. All 53 SIBL sites remain in Industrial or business use but some are promoted for role and function reasons to be more strategically important. All 53 locations require to be accessed by public transport but accessibility analysis was also a main factor in the assessment and only those with good accessibility were selected as SEILs. SEILs are the locations where the employment projections show the greatest increase in employment thus ensuring that the future economic locations which will generate proportionally greater employment are located on the more sustainable Public Transport corridors. Centralisation and job growth and the local authorities desire to safeguard sites (providing certainty for investment) to focus growth roles and functions at these SEILs locations should encourage more resources to fit these locations into the Public Transport network.
6.25
The remaining former SIBL locations with less attraction for the growing employment sectors and being generally less accessible by public transport, more dispersed, are less likely to be safeguarded from other competing land uses and are more likely to fall out of industry or business use and therefore less likely to get resources for integration into the public transport system. In terms of an environmental perspective, over the course of the plan the SEILs are expected to have a positive effect in reducing CO2 emissions compared to SIBLs. Focusing on centralised SEILs should speed up the fall out of unsustainable dispersed SIBL locations with them moving quickly to other productive uses and a faster reduction of blight. It is also possible that unsustainable former industrial locations will move to a green soft end use rather than a hard end one. This speeding up of the process should have a positive effect on biodiversity, water resources, soil management and landscape.
6.26
The current economic climate provides further uncertainty in terms of funding for strategic infrastructure. Therefore, any potentially significant environmental effects resulting from strategic and local industrial allocations are more appropriately assessed at local or project level in order to fully take account of climatic factors, biodiversity, water, soil and landscape issues. 41