The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) welcomes the opportunity to comment on Rother District Council's Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan.

We note that on page 80 the DaSA states that "The policies in this Plan have been assessed to determine that they will not adversely affect the integrity of any of the international sites". The footnote refers to the Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA).
The HRA concludes in respect of each of the 10 site allocations that were subjected to an Appropriate Assessment in the HRA that there is no adverse effects on the integrity of internationally designated sites (i.e. Special Protection Areas (SPAs), Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and Ramsar Sites). The HRA reaches this conclusion because it concludes that in each case an adequate protective framework exists. For the five site allocations in the Pevensey Levels Hydrological Catchment Area (PLHCA) this is because there is a Sustainable Drainage Policy (Policy DEN5) set out in the DaSA. However, the HRA also states that impact of BEX9 on the SAC can only be assessed at the project-specific stage (page 39). We assume that the same applies to the other four site allocations. Also, the HRA concludes by stating that;

For the Pevensey Levels, monitoring of water quality and associated pollution is principally undertaken by Natural England and the Environment Agency. In terms of proposed developments in the Council's local plan, it is not possible at this stage to be certain of the effectiveness of SuDS proposals for individual developments to maintain water quality. Hence, site-specific Appropriate Assessments may be necessary. This would be advised by Natural England (page 47).

It therefore appears to us that the opinion that a conclusion of no adverse effect on the Pevensey Levels cannot be reached at this stage.

For the five sites (including the Rye Neighbourhood Plan) that are situated close to the Dungeness SPA, SAC, Ramsar Site and SSSI the HRA concludes that in each case an adequate protective framework exists in large part because of the presence of the Strategic Access and Recreation Management Strategy (SARMS). Whilst we welcome the development of a robust strategy for mitigating issues of recreational disturbance to EU designated sites, the SARMS has not yet been finalised or adopted and there is currently no plan for its implementation. In our view it is also premature to conclude that there are no adverse effects on the integrity of the Dungeness sites.

On the limited information available at this stage, it seems possible that applications for development in these allocated sites could adversely impact the integrity of internationally designated sites. Therefore, the DaSA should contain wording that confirms that proposals for development will not be permitted if they would adversely affect the integrity of an internationally designated site.