Rother Local Plan 2020-2040 (Regulation 18)

Comment

Representation ID: 28294

Received: 23/07/2024

Respondent: Natural England

Plan- Making for Biodiversity in the Climate Emergency
Given the severity of the decline in biodiversity and the climate change emergency, local plans have
a key role to play in planning for resilience, forecasting, and making space for nature to adapt to a
changing climate. Plans should seize the opportunity to help to reverse this decline through
ambitious and integrated plan-making which demonstrably avoids and minimises impacts and seeks
all opportunities to help reverse the biodiversity decline. Plans must adopt a strategic approach
through multifunctional green infrastructure provision and nature recovery networks. To this end, we
welcome the incorporation of green and blue infrastructure provision within both your 'Health and
Wellbeing' and 'Environmental Management' policies. In particular, we welcome the embedding of
Natural England's GIF within some of the policies but would recommend further use, both within
policies and within the related Monitoring Framework measures (see below for more detailed
advice).

Comment

Representation ID: 28295

Received: 23/07/2024

Respondent: Natural England

HWB i): We welcome the commitment to safeguarding existing green and blue infrastructure from
development.
HWB5 iii) b.: We also welcome the embedding of the Natural England GIF and its Principles and
Standards in this policy.
HWB5 iv): The inclusion of the requirement for developments of two hectares or more, or 50
dwellings or more, to produce a Green Infrastructure masterplan as part of their proposals, is also
welcome. We recommend reference to the GI Design Guide and to the GI Strategy Standard in
particular in relation to the content of these GI masterplans. (See also the GIF extract below*)

Note 41: We recommend extending the definition of GI given in this note, to include features for
species, such as bird and bat boxes, swift bricks and hedgehog holes. This would also strengthen
the wording in relation to the NPPF definition of GI.

Strategic Green Infrastructure:
We welcome the use by the authority of Natural England's GIF Principles and Standards as a tool to
review and update their 2006/7 Green Spaces, Sport and Recreation Study, 2011 Green
Infrastructure Study and 2016 Addendum (as stated in section 6.36). We would again recommend
reference to the GI Design Guide and to the GI Strategy Standard in particular (and in support of
NPPF paragraphs 20 and 175), to inform and guide any future work.

We also recommend the inclusion of the requirements for green infrastructure information (for
example as required by any GI Strategy document and the GI masterplans for 2 ha or more or major
development) within the local requirements of your planning validation checklist.

*Additional advice on GI Strategies and GI Design Guide:
The following advice is taken from the Process Journeys for Local Planning Authorities and is
particularly relevant to the development of GI Strategies:
"Each major new development has a Green Infrastructure Plan (which may be part of a Design and
Access Statement) setting out how the development will deliver the Green Infrastructure
Framework’s 15 Green Infrastructure Principles and the Green Infrastructure Standards as set out in
local green infrastructure policies, proposals and development requirements in development plans
and local design codes. The green infrastructure delivered within (or associated with) major new
developments should be managed, maintained and monitored for a minimum of 30 years."
The GI Design Guide aims to provide evidence based practical guidance on how to plan and design
good GI and it complements the National Model Design Code and National Design Guide. The GI
Design Guide can also be used by planners (and designers) to develop local design codes with
multifunctional GI at its heart.

Comment

Representation ID: 28296

Received: 23/07/2024

Respondent: Natural England

Monitoring of Policy HWB5: Green and Blue Infrastructure

Monitoring Framework measures:
We recommend the use of the GIF Standards as a means to measure the effectiveness of this
policy; in particular the Accessible Greenspace Standards (in relation to HWB5 iv) for example) but
also the Urban Nature Recovery, Urban Greening Factor and Urban Tree Canopy Standards.
We note the tendency for your measures to focus on failure to meet related policy requirements,
however, in relation to testing whether the GIF standards have been met, we recommend a positive
measure. For example, a measure to test the meeting of the Accessible Greenspace Standard
could be worded: 'x % of people to have access to good quality parks, green and blue spaces close
to home for health and wellbeing, to meet the Accessible Greenspace Standards, with an initial
focus on access to green and blue spaces within 15 minutes' walk from home by 2030, and y % by
2040'. This advice also applies to GIF related monitoring framework measures in ENV5 below.

Comment

Representation ID: 28297

Received: 23/07/2024

Respondent: Natural England

We welcome the inclusion of a habitats and species policy and (in relation to the focus of this
advice) in particular, the following:
ENV5 i) a.: The requirement that "development proposals must ...conserve, enhance and provide
the appropriate management for the biodiversity and ecological value of:... international, national,
regional and local designated sites of biodiversity and geological value;..." We note that the
supporting text details the above designated sites located within the district but would recommend in
addition to the Local Wildlife Sites mentioned, that Local Nature Reserves also be included here.
ENV5 i) d.: The requirement that "development proposals must ...conserve, enhance and provide
the appropriate management for the biodiversity and ecological value of... Any other ecological
feature or network (either green or blue in character) that is deemed appropriate to consider,
including areas that could become of importance for biodiversity, as mapped in the Local Nature
Recovery Strategy (LNRS)." However, this policy wording would be strengthened by including the
improvement of biodiversity within existing urban areas, as part of urban nature recovery delivery.
Such wording could be "...including areas that could become of importance for biodiversity (and
nature recovery) within existing urban areas, or as mapped in the Local Nature Recovery
Strategy (LNRS).
ENV5 iv): The requirement that "development proposals must... Have regard to Natural England’s
Green Infrastructure Framework and associated standards and guidance." However, this policy text
could be strengthened, for example: "development proposals must... Contribute to Natural
England’s Green Infrastructure Framework

Interactive Policies Map:

There are two omissions from your existing policies map 'designations'
layers, which need to be added:
• Local Nature Reserves; and
• Beachy Head East (Royal Sovereign Shoals) Marine Conservation Zone.

Comment

Representation ID: 28298

Received: 23/07/2024

Respondent: Natural England

Monitoring Measures for Policy ENV5: Habitats and Species

Monitoring Framework measures:
There is an opportunity to use the GIF standards within these measures, in particular:
ENV5 i) d. - The Urban Nature Recovery Standard in relation to urban development.
ENV5 iv). - The Accessible Greenspace Standards; Urban Nature Recovery Standard; Urban
Greening Factor Standard; and the Urban Tree Canopy Cover Standard.

Comment

Representation ID: 28299

Received: 23/07/2024

Respondent: Natural England

We note that we have previously provided advice on this matter, in relation to earlier documents and
we summarise the advice that remains valid, below:
If the supporting evidence for the SARMS continues to shows that the vast majority of visitors to the
area come from outside the Folkestone and Hythe and Rother districts, and are tourists, attracted to
the area for the variety of recreational activities on offer; for there to be certainty as to the
effectiveness of any mitigation, it will need to be targeted at those visitors causing or likely to cause,
the disturbance based upon the evidence underpinning the SARMS.
Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA): We note that the supporting HRA (April 2024) includes
the following recommendation:
"6.23 It is recommended that the Draft Dungeness Complex SARMS is reviewed and updated to
allow effective implementation of Proposed Policy ENV6. In particular it is recommended that the
governance and funding arrangements for the management of the Dungeness Complex SARMS
measures are formalised. This should include a body for delivery of the measures, a charging tariff,
a mechanism for collecting funds from affected developers, and a regular review process to inform
future reviews of measures. The tariff would be informed by consideration of the cost of
implementing the identified measures and the number of dwellings that are likely to be affected.
Since the SARMS is a joint exercise between Rother and Folkestone & Hythe, this exercise should
also be done jointly."
Whilst we support the need to review and update the 2017 SARMS work, the use of a mechanism
for collecting funds from affected developers would, for the reasons set out above, be of concern
with regard to HRA compliance.
Given the comments within the HRA accompanying the Local Plan consultation, Natural England
would advise that a greater degree of certainty is provided as to how the SARMS will be funded and
implemented to give certainty that the mitigation measures will be effective. We would be pleased
to continue working with the Council on this to help ensure these concerns are resolved.

Comment

Representation ID: 28300

Received: 23/07/2024

Respondent: Natural England

Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) - Policy GTC8
We welcome the inclusion of this policy and note the requirement for development proposals to
deliver 'at least 20% measurable biodiversity net gain'. Our advice is that any higher policy
requirement than 10% should be evidence based and shown to be achievable. Evidence should
justify the target proposed and demonstrate that development is deliverable. We welcome your
statement that to this end, your authority is collating an evidence base to justify the higher target, in
collaboration with the Sussex Nature Partnership and neighbouring local planning authorities. We
note your statement that this higher target is justified by the local availability of off-site opportunities,
should they be needed and would expect your evidence base to include details of such available
opportunity sites and the viability of delivering 20% net gain.

Comment

Representation ID: 28301

Received: 23/07/2024

Respondent: Natural England

Monitoring measures for Policy GTC8: Biodiversity Net Gain


Monitoring framework measures (Appendix 4):
We welcome the use of the given measures, subject to the addressing of the above comments
in relation to further work needed in relation to demonstrating the viability over 10% BNG.