Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission
Search representations
Results for Natural England search
New searchObject
Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission
Policy NE7 Development and Disturbance of Birds in Chichester and Langstone Harbours, Pagham Harbour, Solent and Dorset Coast Special Protection Areas and Medmerry Compensatory Habitat
Representation ID: 5802
Received: 17/03/2023
Respondent: Natural England
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Yes
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Natural England welcomes this policy and the improvements that have been made to it following our
advice from Regulation 18 onwards, particularly the inclusion of the Solent and Dorset Coast SPA and the Medmerry Compensatory Habitat. However, we raised a number of relevant points that do not appear to have been addressed and would reiterate them again as necessary to improve the clarity of the policy [see changes to plan].
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.
Objection and comments noted. i) We will consider a modification to policy NE7 (as it relates to Pagham and Medmerry) to remove reference to LNR Management Plan within point a) to avoid confusion with mitigations ii) We will consider minor modifications to policy NE7 to expand references to loss or degradation of functionally linked land to improve clarity, including in relation to the separate consideration of this impact pathway from recreational disturbance iii) We will consider a minor modification to paragraph 4.39 as follows: “All development (not just residential or tourism related) on or adjacent to these areas could potentially impact the SPAs, separate and in addition to the impact of recreational disturbance” to improve clarity. iv) We will consider a minor modification to Policy NE7 (as it relates to Pagham and Medmerry) to remove the sentence “Net increases in residential development, which incorporate appropriate avoidance/mitigation measures, which would avoid any likelihood of a significant effect on the SPA, will not require Appropriate Assessment” to avoid contradiction of AA screening process.
Support
Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission
Policy NE8 Trees, Hedgerows and Woodlands
Representation ID: 5803
Received: 17/03/2023
Respondent: Natural England
We support this policy and welcome the inclusion of our previous advice
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.
Support noted
Support
Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission
Policy NE9 Canals
Representation ID: 5804
Received: 17/03/2023
Respondent: Natural England
Natural England welcomes the council’s confirmation in paragraph 4.47 of the supporting text that this plan is not introducing any proposals to re-interpret or re-align the canals. Since through navigation ceased to be possible through this network of rivers and canals the surrounding landscape has changed, protected sites have been designated and reconnection could now lead to a number of significant issues for nature recovery, including, but not limited to:
• The spread of invasive, non-native species between river basin districts;
• Risk of exacerbating the water resources issues in Sussex North through the need for water supply to the canals in summer;
• Loss or damage to designated nature conservation sites should particular sections of the route be re-opened or re-aligned:
• Disturbance of wildlife through increased boat traffic.
We would suggest that the final sentence in the supporting text which refers to the potential need for
development to undergo Appropriate Assessment be removed. It is currently incorrect as it implies it is impacts on the canals themselves which would require assessment – certainly within the plan area the canals are not subject to any statutory nature conservation designation. Rather it is the case that development proposals which aim to re-instate lengths of the canal and/or associated features could have impacts on other designated nature conservation sites. We consider the policy wording itself along with other key policies such as NE5 sufficient to address this issue.
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.
Support and comments noted
Object
Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission
Policy NE10 Development in the Countryside
Representation ID: 5805
Received: 17/03/2023
Respondent: Natural England
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Yes
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Natural England support the inclusion of this policy but reiterate our comments from November 2021 in respect of linkages to green infrastructure” (NPPF 2021 para 174), impacts on Nature Recovery Networks (NPPF para 179) and impacts to biodiversity (NPPF paras 174, 179).
Criterion 1 - additional of the phrase "and linking to green infrastructure".
Criterion 3 - inclusion of additional requirement that proposals should demonstrate they will not adversely impact Nature Recovery Networks (NPPF para 179)
Inclusion of impacts to biodiversity as a consideration as inappropriate development in the Countryside can have significant impacts (NPPF para 174 and 179)
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.
Amendments suggested are agreed and will be incorporated into the policy.
Object
Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission
Policy NE11 The Coast
Representation ID: 5806
Received: 17/03/2023
Respondent: Natural England
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Yes
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
We are pleased to note that much of our previous advice on this key policy has been incorporated but would advise additions to the policy.
Advise that the following additions should still be made for completeness and clarity:
• Expand supporting paragraph 4.65: “Since designation, almost half (46%) of the saltmarsh has been lost, with the remainder of poor quality. Coastal defences are constraining the natural processes within the harbour, that allows it to respond to climate change.”
• Include reference to Chichester Harbour Conservancy in paragraph 4.66 as one of the key partners Natural England is working with.
• In relation to the final sentence in paragraph 4.66 we would like to point out that in it’s ability to control the amount and type of development in the district (including coastal defences, housing etc) the Local Plan has significant scope to contribute to addressing the various
issues affecting Chichester Harbour.
• Expand first policy bullet to read “ongoing habitat protection, restoration, enhancement, and creation, including both compensatory and new coastal and wetland habitats to help meet the 30 by 30 targets set out in the Environmental Improvement Plan (2023); and opportunities to connect coastal and freshwater habitats and floodplain habitats at a catchment scale to facilitate wider nature recovery.”
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.
1. Agreed – further revised wording agreed in discussion with NE.
-
2. agreed.
3. Insert additional text here and in supporting text – further additions were suggested in discussion with Natural England.
Object
Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission
Policy NE12 Development around the Coast
Representation ID: 5818
Received: 17/03/2023
Respondent: Natural England
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Yes
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
Set back requirement of “at least 25m” is key tenet of policy. Advise that distance should not be changed but supporting text should reference National Coastal Erosion Risk Management (NCERM) work carried out by the Environment Agency (maps and measurements for projected coastal erosion).This information may not be captured in latest Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) or Coastal Defence Strategy (CDS). Development should be set back in line with expected property lifetime and the estimated erosion rates.
Either NE12 or E9 should clarify the expectation that new caravans or camping sites in coastal locations will not result in the creation of new defences but expected to move landward or removed if they become at risk from coastal change / flooding.
We would also strongly advise that the policy requirements are amended / expanded as follows (a
number of these points were made previously in our non-statutory response dated 7th February 2022):
Policy Requirement 2 to include the following additional wording “The development provides recreational opportunities (requiring a coastal location), that do not adversely affect…”
Policy Requirement 6 to include the following additional wording “Where relevant, the development would result in improvements to or redistribution of moorings, marine berths or launch on demand facilities (dry berths) in the harbours whilst also ensuring that any small-scale loss of mudflat within the designated sites is compensated for. Small-scale but cumulative losses of mudflat habitat within the harbours is an issue and beyond this policy
wording we would appreciate the opportunity to work with your authority to find a strategic way to address it.
Inclusion of an additional requirement “Wherever possible the development secures opportunities for the enhancement/creation/restoration of coastal/wetland habitats (guided by any local nature recovery strategy) and contributes to Biodiversity Net Gain.
Inclusion of an additional requirement “Undeveloped areas on low lying land around Chichester Harbour are prioritised for opportunities that actively restore coastal habitats or works with natural processes to address climate impacts and loss of biodiversity”
Inclusion of an additional requirement “The development can demonstrate consideration of
and adaptation to future climate scenarios and their potential impacts, including (but not limited to) shading, surface water flooding, wind- blown sand, wave-driven shingle.
Policy paragraph to be expanded as follows “Replacement buildings will be permitted unless there is evidence that the existing or demolished property has been damaged as a result of the effect of wind and waves. Replacement buildings should be set further back in line with NCERM erosion prediction and coastal flooding and should not hinder coastal processes with regard to designated sites if applicable.
Policy Requirement b. (in relation to boatyard and marina sites) to include the following additional wording “Harm nature conservation (particularly in relation to loss of mudflat), landscape or heritage interests;
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.
Revised wording has been discussed and agreed with Natural England.
Support
Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission
Policy NE13 Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
Representation ID: 5820
Received: 17/03/2023
Respondent: Natural England
NE welcome this policy which recognises the significance of the AONB and its setting. NE supports this policy which details a set of robust criteria for development proposals in this location which is in line with the purpose of the AONB’s designation and management plan (NPPF paras 176, 177).
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.
Support noted
Support
Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission
Policy NE14 Integrated Coastal Zone Management for the Manhood Peninsula
Representation ID: 5821
Received: 17/03/2023
Respondent: Natural England
Natural England strongly supports the inclusion of this policy to help guide development in this particularly sensitive location.
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.
Support noted
Support
Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission
Policy NE15 Flood Risk and Water Management
Representation ID: 5822
Received: 17/03/2023
Respondent: Natural England
Natural England welcome the recognition of the flood defence challenges in particular we welcome the recognition of developments ability to influence flood risk elsewhere and the cumulative impacts of flood risk. We strongly support the policy requirements relating to SuDs (particularly long-term management arrangements), coastal squeeze and the consideration of natural flood management.
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.
Comment noted
Object
Chichester Local Plan 2021 - 2039: Proposed Submission
Policy NE16 Water Management and Water Quality
Representation ID: 5824
Received: 17/03/2023
Respondent: Natural England
Legally compliant? Not specified
Sound? Yes
Duty to co-operate? Not specified
We strongly support encouragement of lower water efficiency rates for new development, but advise that the policy wording be made stronger.
Greater encouragement should be given for new developments to achieve lower water efficiency ratings. We therefore advise that additional signposting of the Waterwise UK Water Efficiency Strategy to 2030, should be included.
We support the policy wording relating to water quality which states ‘no adverse impact on the quality of water bodies and groundwater, nor will it prevent future attainment of favourable conservation status.” However, we encourage you to include reference to Pagham Harbour so relevant designated sites are covered.
Strengthen policy wording to emphasise that 110 litres per person per day is the maximum rate.
Signposting of the Waterwise UK Water Efficiency Strategy to 2030 within policy or supporting text to provide greater encouragement of lower water efficiency rates in new development.
Expansion of supporting text to reference Pagham Harbour so all designated sites relevant to the plan which reply on water quality and water support are covered.
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.
The policy already describes 110lppd as a maximum and encourages lower water use.
The Water Efficiency Strategy will be added to supporting text