UK agency and legislative context - Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment - page 69

• whether the development is proposed for a particularly environmentally sensitive or
vulnerable location [for example, a national park or a site of special scientific interest];
• whether the development is likely to have unusually complex and potentially hazardous
environmental effects [for example, in terms of the discharge of pollutants].
The guidebook (DETR 2000) includes indicative criteria and thresholds for a range of
Schedule 2 projects which “should provide a starting point for consideration by the
developer and the planning authority of the need for EIA”. For instance, pig-rearing
installations for more than 750 sows, industrial estate developments of more than 20 ha
and new roads of over 2 km not located in a designated area may require EIA, according
to the guidebook. The UK Government was one of the first to revise its thresholds in the
context of the amended Directive. This followed extensive research commissioned from
the Oxford Brookes' Impacts Assessment Unit (IAU), leading to a Government
Consultation Paper (DETR 1997b). Table 3.3 lists the indicative thresholds and criteria.
Table 3.3 Indicative thresholds and criteria for
identification of Schedule 2 development requiring
EIA (1999)
The criteria and thresholds are only indicative. In determining whether significant effects are likely,
the location of a development is of crucial importance. The more environmentally sensitive the
location, the lower will be the threshold at which significant effects will be likely.
1. Agriculture and aquaculture
In general, agricultural operations fall outside the scope of the Town and Country Planning
system and, where relevant, will be regulated under other consent procedures. The descriptions
below apply only to projects that are considered to be “development” for the purposes of the
T&CP Act 1990.
(a) Use of uncultivated or semi-natural land for intensive agricultural purposes. Development
(such as greenhouses, farm buildings, etc.) on previously uncultivated land is unlikely to
require EIA unless it covers more than 5 ha. In considering whether a particular
development is likely to have significant effects, consideration should be given to impacts
on the surrounding ecology, hydrology and landscape.
(b) Water management for agriculture, including irrigation and land drainage works. EIA is
more likely to be required if the development would result in permanent changes to the
character of more than 5 ha of land. In assessing the significance of any likely effects,
particular regard should be had to whether the development would have damaging wider
impacts on hydrology and surrounding ecosystems. It follows that EIA will not normally be
required for routine water management projects undertaken by farmers.
(c) Intensive livestock installations. The significance or otherwise of the impacts of intensive
livestock installations will often depend upon the level of odours, increased traffic and the
arrangements for waste handling. EIA is more likely to be required for intensive livestock
installations if they are designed to house more than 750 sows, 2,000 fattening pigs, 60,000
broilers or 50,000 layers, turkeys or other poultry.
(d) Intensive fish farming. Apart from the physical scale of any development, the likelihood of
significant effects will generally depend on the extent of any likely wider impacts on the
hydrology and ecology of the surrounding area. Developments designed to produce more
than 100 tonnes (dead weight) of fish per year will be more likely to require EIA.