NE2 Protecting Designated Biodiversity and Geodiversity Assets

Showing comments and forms 1 to 4 of 4

Support

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 65093

Received: 23/06/2014

Respondent: Sport England

Representation Summary:

I would like to support this policy. For many years sport has taken place on SSSIs and the like through the development of management plans, which are reviewed on a regular basis. The management plans have dealt with the migration which, if required, would be implemented prior to the sport taking place.

Full text:

I would like to support this policy. For many years sport has taken place on SSSIs and the like through the development of management plans, which are reviewed on a regular basis. The management plans have dealt with the migration which, if required, would be implemented prior to the sport taking place.

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 65398

Received: 26/06/2014

Respondent: Warwickshire Wildlife Trust

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

Warwickshire Wildlife Trust is broadly supportive of policy NE2 but believes:

1) The final paragraph of the policy needs clarifying

2) The policy or supporting text needs to outline the status of pLWS and how they will be addressed as part of the ecological assessment.

Recommendations are given.

Full text:

Warwickshire Wildlife Trust is supportive of the policy protection afforded to statutory and non-statutory wildlife sites and assets outlined in policy NE2.

We believe the policy is consistent with paragraph 113 of the National Planning Policy Framework in that it distinguishes between nationally and locally important sites and that it assigns a level of protection that is commensurate with the status of each site or feature. We are also pleased to note the reference to 'connectivity' and 'contribution to wider biodiversity objectives' in the policy wording. We believe this will help to ensure that the additional role these features play in supporting ecological networks is recognised when applying the provisions of the policy to planning applications.

The wording of the final paragraph of the policy is difficult to interpret. We assume that the recommendation for the ecological assessment is to ensure that the biodiversity value of the site or asset is effectively assessed. Furthermore, our understanding of the penultimate sentence is to ensure that any mitigation or compensation measures proposed uphold the value assigned to the site or asset in the ecological assessment. In this respect, we support the retention of the final paragraph but recommend that the wording is changed to avoid any misinterpretation of what the policy is trying to achieve.

Policy NE2 does not currently address the status or value of potential Local Wildlife Sites (pLWS). PLWS are features considered to be of up to county importance for wildlife but which have not been formally assessed using the Warwickshire Local Wildlife Site Criteria Assessment. PLWS can therefore be of equal importance to other designated Local Wildlife Sites but do not afford the same policy protection under the provisions of policy NE2.

The Trust believes it is best practice to undertake a LWS criteria assessment for any pLWS threatened by development so that the value of the asset is determined before a decision is made on the application. In this respect, the LWS criteria assessment should form part of the ecological assessment that is recommended in the final paragraph of policy NE2. However, final decisions on LWS notifications are, in accordance with the LWS criteria, made by the Warwickshire, Coventry and Solihull Local Sites Partnership and so these specific requirements for developments concerning pLWS will need to be clarified within the policy or supporting text.

Support

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 65565

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Keith Wellsted

Representation Summary:

Good idea

Full text:

Good idea

Object

Publication Draft

Representation ID: 66428

Received: 23/06/2014

Respondent: Woodland Trust

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

The caveat about the benefits of development clearly outweigh the nature conservation value removed in respect of ancient woodland, aged and veteran trees.
Would like to see the policy or supporting text reference the Forestry commisions standing advice on ancient woodland'
Would like to see the policy or supporting text commit to production of a trees and woodland SPD.

Full text:

see attached

Attachments: