EIA Regulations 2017, Regulation 6(4) and Schedule 3

🏛️ Citation:

Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017

  • Regulation 6(4):
    “When forming an opinion as to whether development is EIA development, the relevant planning authority must take into account the selection criteria set out in Schedule 3.”
  • Schedule 3 – Selection Criteria for Screening Schedule 2 Development
    Includes consideration of:
    1(b): “The cumulation with other existing and/or approved development.”
    2: “The environmental sensitivity of geographical areas likely to be affected by development.”
    3(a–d): “Characteristics of the potential impact (e.g. size of area affected, magnitude of impact, resource use, pollution, risk of accidents).”

🥇 1. Paragraph 1(b): Cumulative Impact

“The cumulation with other existing and/or approved development.”

âś… Why it matters most for Medstead:
This is your strongest argument. Medstead has experienced non-plan-led, fragmented development, and Bargate clearly phased the current site following an adjacent build. Cumulative effects were foreseeable, quantifiable, and obligated under law. EHDC’s failure to screen this development cumulatively is likely the clearest and most actionable legal error.

🥉 2. Paragraph 2: Environmental Sensitivity

“The environmental sensitivity of geographical areas likely to be affected…”

✅ Why it’s significant:
Medstead is a rural village with weak infrastructure, proximity to biodiversity, and no robust mitigation plan. While not designated AONB or Green Belt, its vulnerability increases the significance of even “moderate” impacts. This supports your cumulative argument by showing the setting amplifies the impact.

🏅 3 Paragraph 3: Magnitude and Scale

“The magnitude and spatial extent of the impact…”

✅ This reinforces the argument that scale is relative. 62 homes in a city might be minor; in Medstead, it’s substantial. This clause helps debunk EHDC’s claim that “most housing schemes don’t need EIA” — showing they’ve ignored the context-driven logic required by law.