While Option 6 is predicted to have the same impacts as option 5 but the in-combination effect of construction with the Third Crossing may adversely impact commercial/ leisure activities/ investments to the Riverside, Inner Habour areas in the medium term- split assessment for economic development (medium term minor negative effect and long term major positive effect). Construction of 4km defence wall will consume significant construction materials and may generate construction waste- as well as affect landscape character of the local area minor negative effect on material assets and landscape character objectives. Table 2-2 provides summary of the assessment scores, for detailed summary reference should be made to Appendix C. Table 2-2 Tidal Flood Risk Management Short-Listed Options Assessment Summary /waste Use health and Land development efficiency Tourism heritage quality Abridged SEA Objective/ Contamination Tidal option Water Geology Population Resource Biodiversity Cultural Support Economic Land Safeguard Landscape Infrastructure xx xx xx x x xx N xx xx x N Option 1: Do-nothing Option 2: Do-minimum – xx xx xx xx x x x N xx x N maintain + + x Option 3: Improve – flood walls x + x x x N + x x only N N + Option 4: Improve – Outer x + N ++ + N N + + ? + N Harbour barriers & walls + x x + + + ? ++ ++ ++ N N ++ + N Option 5: Improve – Bascule x x N Bridge barrier and walls x + ++ + x Option 6: Improve – Third ? ++ ++ x x N + + + N N x bridge crossing barrier & walls N
While Option 6 is predicted to have the same impacts as option 5 but the in-combination effect of construction with the Third Crossing may adversely impact commercial/ leisure activities/ investments to the Riverside, Inner Habour areas in the medium term- split assessment for economic development (medium term minor negative effect and long term major positive effect). Construction of 4km defence wall will consume significant construction materials and may generate construction waste- as well as affect landscape character of the local area minor negative effect on material assets and landscape character objectives. Table 2-2 provides summary of the assessment scores, for detailed summary reference should be made to Appendix C. Table 2-2 Tidal Flood Risk Management Short-Listed Options Assessment Summary Abridged SEA Objective/ Tidal option Population and health Support Tourism Economic development Infrastructure Resource efficiency /waste Biodiversity Geology Land Contamination Safeguard Land Use Water quality Cultural heritage Landscape Option 1: Do-nothing xx xx xx x x xx N xx xx x N Option 2: Do-minimum – maintain xx xx xx x x x N xx xx x N Option 3: Improve – flood walls only + + x x x + N + x x x x N N + Option 4: Improve – Outer Harbour barriers & walls ++ x + + N N N + + ? + N + x x Option 5: Improve – Bascule Bridge barrier and walls ++ + ++ ++ N + N ++ + ? + N x N x x Option 6: Improve – Third bridge crossing barrier & walls ++ + ++ ++ x + N + + ? x N N x x + N