For the Pagham policy section, reference to the LNR Management Plan should be removed in clause a. The joint scheme of mitigation is separate from the Management Plan, the latter is focused on managing the current visitor experience, not mitigating additional visitor
pressure. Therefore, whilst the joint scheme of mitigation should not hinder the LNR Management Plan, it does not need to be in accordance with it.

It would be helpful to expand the parts of the policy on loss of functionally linked land and make them more distinct from the consideration of recreational disturbance impacts.

It should also be made clear that the recreational disturbance part of the policy applies only to residential or tourist accommodation, whereas any type of development could impact functionally linked land (we suggest that this could be addressed in the supporting text through an expansion of paragraph 4.39.

In addition to the above points which have been raised previously we would also recommend the removal of the first sentence in the second paragraph of the Pagham policy section which reads “Net increases in residential development, which incorporates appropriate
avoidance/mitigation measures, which would avoid any likelihood of a significant effect on the SPA, will not require Appropriate Assessment.” This appears to be contrary to the current interpretation of the Habitats Regulations following the People over Wind ruling
which found that avoidance/mitigation measures could not be taken into account at the screening stage (determination of likely significant effect) but instead required the proposal to be taken through to Appropriate Assessment.

Summary of advice
While we have raised some queries and recommended some further modifications to certain policies we do not find the Plan unsound on any grounds relating to our remit.
Natural England has reviewed the Proposed Submission Local Plan and accompanying appendices together with the Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) and Sustainability Appraisal (SA). Our detailed comments on the policies and site allocations are provided as follows:
• Annex 1 - Chapter 2 – Vision and Strategic Objectives
• Annex 2 - Chapter 4 – Climate Change and the Natural Environment
• Annex 3 - Chapter 5 (Housing) and Chapter 6 – (Place-making, Health and Well-being)
• Annex 4 - Chapter 7 (Employment and Economy) and Chapter 8 (Transport and
Accessibility)
• Annex 5 - Chaper 10 – Strategic and Area Based Policies
Please note that we have not provided comments on all policies but those which have most influence on environmental issues. Natural England has no comment to make on the policies not covered in this response. Other than confirming that we have referred to it when considering our advice on specific policies and site allocations Natural England has no general comments to make on the SA.
Unfortunately due to unforeseen resourcing issues while we have reviewed the associated HRA we are not in a position to provide detailed comment on it as part of this response. We will rectify this as soon as possible and can confirm that we have seen nothing in it that raises any major concerns.
The Plan has many positive aspects including standalone policies on Green Infrastructure (GI) and
wildlife corridors and an incredibly extensive suite of natural environment policies more generally.
We are hugely appreciative of the opportunity that we were given to work with you on shaping key policies post-Regulation 18. However, we believe that the plan needs to go further in it’s recognition of coastal squeeze as a key issue for the district, should include policy hooks for the forthcoming Local Nature Recovery Strategy (LNRS) and make up to date references to both the Environment Act (2021) and the Environmental Improvement Plan (EIP, 2023). Given how recent the publication of the EIP is we would be happy to discuss with your authority how this could best be achieved but
we believe given the wealth of natural capital within Chichester District it is vitally important that this latest iteration of the Local Plan is set in its full policy and legislative context.
We have suggested a significant number of amendments and additions to both policies and
supporting text throughout the Plan. In our view these could all be taken forward as minor modifications but if they were all acted upon they would leave the Plan much stronger and more coherent in delivering for the natural environment, one of the three central tenets of genuinely
sustainable development as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF 2021,
paragraph 8c).

See attachment for representations on paragraphs/policies.