In summary, the reference to bird bricks is welcome but please be more definite about what is required, as swift bricks are the only integral nest brick that meet best-practice guidance BS 42021.

Therefore please add to the policy:

Swift bricks to be installed in new developments including extensions, in accordance with best practice guidance such as BS 42021 or CIEEM which require at least one swift brick per home on average for each development. Artificial nest cups for house martins may be proposed instead of swift bricks where recommended by an ecologist.

In more detail, the reason for this is that bird boxes/ bricks and other species features are excluded from the DEFRA Biodiversity Net Gain metric,
so require their own clear policy.

Swift bricks are the only type of bird box specifically mentioned as valuable to wildlife in national planning guidance, along with bat boxes and hedgehog highways (NPPG Natural Environment 2019 paragraph 023). The National Model Design Code Part 2 Guidance Notes (2021) also recommends bird bricks (Integrating Habitats section on page 25, and Creating Habitats section on page 26).

Swift bricks are considered a universal nest brick suitable for a wide range of small bird species including swifts, house sparrows and starlings (e.g. see NHBC Foundation: Biodiversity in New Housing Developments (April 2021) Section 8.1 Nest sites for birds, page 42: https://www.nhbcfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/S067-NF89-Biodiversity-in-new-housing-developments_FINAL.pdf ).

Schwegler 1A swift bricks also support house martins.

Swift bricks are significantly more beneficial than external bird boxes as they are a permanent feature of the building, have zero maintenance requirements, are aesthetically integrated with the design of the building, and have improved thermal regulation with future climate change in mind.

Therefore, swift bricks should be included in all developments following best-practice guidance (which is available in BS 42021:2022 and from CIEEM (https://cieem.net/resource/the-swift-a-bird-you-need-to-help/)).

Many other Local Authorities are including detailed swift brick requirements in their Local Plan, such as Tower Hamlets Local Plan Regulation 18 stage (paragraph 19.70, page 311 - https://talk.towerhamlets.gov.uk/17424/widgets/82097/documents/50138 ),

which follows the exemplary swift brick guidance implemented by Brighton & Hove since 2020,

and Wiltshire Local Plan Regulation 19 stage, which requires an enhanced number of 2 swift bricks per dwelling (policy 88: Biodiversity in the built environment, page 246 - "As a minimum, the following are required within new proposals: 1. integrate integral bird nest bricks (e.g., swift bricks) at a minimum of two per dwelling;" https://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/article/8048/Current-consultation-Reg-19 ),

and Cotswold District Council are proposing three swift bricks per dwelling in their current Local Plan consultation (Policy EN8 item 6, and paragraph 0.8.4, https://www.cotswold.gov.uk/planning-and-building/planning-policy/local-plan-update-and-supporting-information/ ),

so such an enhanced level should also be considered.

We request that, for clarity, bird bricks are referred to as swift bricks. This is because, for example, national planning policy guidance NPPG Natural Environment 2019 paragraph 023 specifically refers to swift bricks -
swift bricks are the only types of bird bricks that comply with best-practice guidance BS 42021, as all small birds can safely use them. Swifts can become trapped in a standard starling box for example. Swift bricks are a universal nest brick for small bird species, as set out in NHBC Foundation: Biodiversity in New Housing Developments (2019) and elsewhere.

Support this policy approach, including the specification of minimum buffers and impact assessments for development close to ancient woodland or ancient & veteran trees. This policy should be referenced in LAN2.
Where development sites are adjacent to ancient woodland, we recommend that as a precautionary principle, a minimum 50 metre buffer should be maintained between a development and the ancient woodland, including through the construction phase, unless the applicant can demonstrate very clearly how a smaller buffer would suffice. A larger buffer may be required for particularly significant engineering operations, or for after-uses that generate significant disturbance.