habitats regulation assessment screening report - … · ashfield district council habitats...

Habitats Regulation Assessment

Screening Report

September 2016

Ashfield District Council Habitats Regulation Assessment Screening Report

http://www.jupiterimages.com/RoyaltyFreePhotos (copyright free images)


Contents Section 1: Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and S pecial Protection Area (SPA) Page i. Non-Technical Summary……………………………………………………. 1

1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………… 3

2. The Need for a Habitat Regulations Assessment:

Legislative Context…………………………………………………………... 5

3. Stages of the Habitat Regulations Assessment………………………….. 7

4. Planning Policy Context……………………………………………………...10

5. Methodology………………………………………………………………….. 15

6. Air Quality…………………………………………………………………….. 20

7. Recreational Pressures……………………………………………………… 24

8. Water Abstraction / Quality…………………………………………………. 29

9. In Combination Effects………………………………………………………. 32

10. Conclusions…………………………………………………………………… 36

Section 1: Appendices Appendix 1: Glossary of Abbreviations………………………………………. 39

Appendix 2: Summary of Ashfield Publication Local Plan Policies………... 41

Appendix 3: Screening exercise for the Birklands and Bilhaugh Special

Area of Conservation (SAC)…………………………………….. 47

Appendix 4: Screening exercise for the South Pennine Moors Special

Area of Conservation (SAC) and Special Protection

Area (SPA)………………………………………………………... 55

Appendix 5: In-combination Effects…………………………………………… 63

Habitats Regulation Assessment Screening Report September 2016


Section 2: Sherwood Forest possible potential Speci al Protection Areas (ppSPA)

Page 1. Introduction……………………………………………………………….. 71

2. Context……………………………………………………………………. 71

3. Existing designations within the Sherwood Forest Region………….. 75

4. Methodology……………………………………………………………… 75

5. The Issues………………………………………………………………… 76

6. Air Quality…………………………………………………………………. 76

7. Water Abstraction / Quality……………………………………………… 80

8. Recreational Pressures………………………………………………….. 83

9. Pet Predation……………………………………………………………... 87

10. Habitat loss and fragmentation…………………………………………. 87

11. Lighting……………………………………………………………………. 88

12. Conclusions………………………………………………………………. 89

Section 2: Appendices

Appendix A: Natural England’s Advice Note to Local Planning Authorities regarding the consideration of likely effects on the breeding population of nightjar and woodlark in the Sherwood Forest region (March 2014)…………………………………………….. 93

Appendix B: Screening exercise for the Sherwood Forest Possible

Potential Special Protection Area (ppSPA)…………………… 99

Annex 1: Natural England letter dated 3rd November 2016 (received

by email on 3rd November 2016)……………………………….. 107

1

Ashfield District Council is currently working towards completion of the Publication document for the Local Plan, in order to adopt a robust development plan to guide development within for the District to 2032 (2017-2032).

The principal aim of this report is to ascertain whether any of the policies and proposed site allocations contained within the Ashfield Local Plan will have any significant adverse impact on any of sites of European Significance, in combination with any other plans and projects.

i. Non-Technical Summary

Section 1 Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and

Special Protection Area (SPA)


2

This page is intentionally left blank.


3

1.1 Ashfield District Council is currently working towards the Publication Draft document of

the Ashfield Local Plan, formulated from assessment of local needs and the findings of relative evidence bases, the plan will ultimately replace the saved policies contained in the Ashfield Local Plan Review (2002). Upon completion, this 15 year development plan will be the principal planning document for the District, providing a Local Plan which will guide appropriate development in the District up until 2032.

1.2 The principal aim of this report is to form a screening record of the policies and allocations within the Ashfield Local Plan Publication, in order to ascertain whether any of the policies and proposals contained will have any significant adverse impact on any of the surrounding Natura 2000 Sites, designated to protect the most seriously threatened habitats and species across Europe.

1.3 In the instance that any detrimental impacts upon these sites of international conservation value are identified, it will be necessary to undertake further ‘Appropriate Assessment’ to enable the modification or omission of policies and allocations prior to finalising the pre submission draft.

1.4 By virtue of the Districts geographical location, there are three sites which have been considered within this report (see table below). However, of these only two have been formally adopted with the other representing a site which is not currently designated as a protected site, but which has the potential for future classification. Consequently, the authority has decided to take a risk-based approach as advocated by Natural England, and undertaken a robust assessment all sites, in order to ‘future proof’ the Local Plan in the instance that it is afforded Proposed Special Protection Area (pSPA) or Special Protection Area (SPA) status.

1.5 As such, this report has been divided into two distinct sections; the foremost provides a screening report for the currently designated sites and the latter providing an assessment of the as yet unclassified site. The sites concerned are listed below in Table 1: Table 1: Screening Report Sites

Section 1

Site Name Current Status

Birklands and Bilhaugh, Special Area of Conservation (SAC)

Formally adopted as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC)

South Pennines Moors, Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Special Protection Area (SPA)

Formally adopted as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC)

Section 2 The Sherwood Forest, possible potential Special Protection Area (ppSPA)

Identified as having the potential to be classified as a Special Protection Area (SPA)

1. Introduction


4

1.6 The report will first detail the policy and legislative context for the Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA) and outline the stages of the HRA. A methodology will then be given as to how the screening stages of this report will progress, followed by an outline of the local context and issues. Finally the report will provide recommendations and overall conclusions.

1.7 The key objectives of this report are to:

• Confirm a robust methodology;

• Identify whether the implementation of the Ashfield Local Plan policies and proposals will adversely affect the integrity of European sites;

• Present appropriate mitigation measures and recommendations where necessary;

• Provide a screening record;

• Contribute towards an audit trail for HRA related work.

1.8 It is important to note that for ease of reading and to reduce the complexity of this screening report, links to significant documents and legislation affiliated with the Habitats Regulations will be referenced with footnotes, for additional perusal of the reader if required.


5

The Habitats Directive

2.1 The Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora (otherwise known as the Habitats Directive) was adopted in 1992 by the then European Community, and forms ‘the cornerstone’ of European nature conservation policy. The objective of this piece of supranational wildlife legislation is principally for the protection of biodiversity of natural habitats through conservation, along with species of wild flora and fauna. It forms the foundations for the management, protection and exploitation of such habitats and species, making sure that measures are taken to maintain and restore natural habitats and wild species to a favourable conservation status. The principle objectives of the Directive are set out below:

2.2 The transposition of the UK Directive into Legislation was done through the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended), informally referred to as the Habitats Regulations and as it will be referred to henceforth. The regulations apply to land and territorial waters up to 12 nautical miles from the coast and came into force in October 1994, they have since been amended several times. Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations, 2 010 (Habitats Regulations)

2.3 The protection given by the Habitats Directive is transposed into UK legislation through the 2010 Habitats Regulations (as amended). Article 2 of the Habitats Directive requires the protected habitats and species to be kept in favourable condition through appropriate maintenance and restoration. Implementation of this occurs through a network of protected areas called Natura 2000 sites.

2.4 The 2010 Habitats Regulations (as amended) require the competent authority (in this case, Ashfield District Council), before deciding to authorise a project or proposal which is likely to have a significant effect on a European site, or directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site “to make an appropriate assessment of the implications for that site in view of that site’s conservation objectives”.

Article 2.1:

“…to contribute towards ensuring biodiversity throu gh the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora in the European territory of the

Member States to which the Treaty applies” Article 2.2:

“…to maintain or restore, at favourable conservatio n status, natural habitats

and species of wild fauna and flora of Community in terest”

2. The Need for a Habitat Regulation Assessment : Legislative Context


6

2.5 In accordance with the 2010 Habitats Regulations (as amended) 61(2) anyone applying for development consent must provide the competent authority with such information as may reasonably be required “for the purposes of the assessment” or “to enable them to determine whether an Appropriate Assessment is required”.

2.6 Sites afforded protection under the 2010 Habitats Regulations (as amended) are designated in the UK as:

• Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) support rare, endangered or vulnerable natural habitats, plants and animals (other than birds).

• Special Protection Areas (SPAs) support significant numbers of wild birds and their habitats.

2.7 In addition to the above, sites listed or proposed under the Ramsar Convention (known

as Ramsar sites) and Potential Special Protection Areas (pSPAs) also receive the same degree of protection under the National Planning Policy Framework (2012). SPAs and SACs are known as European sites and are part of the Natura 2000 network and all three types of site are also referred to as International sites.


7

Introduction

3.1 The Local Plan must consider the potential effects of European sites of importance

for nature conservation. The principle role of this document is to report on the screening process of the Natura 2000 sites and as such whether a full Appropriate Assessment will need to be undertaken. The entire process of assessing the effects of a Local Plan on European sites is referred to as the ‘Habitats Regulations Assessment’ (HRA).

3.2 Notwithstanding the safeguards that exist at the project level, it will be important to

demonstrate that the Local Plan provides sufficient safeguards/measures to avoid potential issues down the line. This is essential to demonstrate the Local Plan is ‘sound’ - a requirement of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), 2012.

3.3 Paragraph 182 of the NPPF states that a local planning authority should submit a

plan for examination which it considers is ‘sound’ – namely that it is: • Positively prepared – the plan should be prepared based on a strategy

which seeks to meet objectively assessed development and infrastructure requirements, including unmet requirements from neighbouring authorities where it is reasonable to do so and consistent with achieving sustainable development;

• Justified – the plan should be the most appropriate strategy, when considered against the reasonable alternatives, based on proportionate evidence;

• Effective – the plan should be deliverable over its period and based on effective joint working on cross-boundary strategic priorities; and

• Consistent with national policy – the plan should enable the delivery of sustainable development in accordance with the policies in the Framework.

The Stages of a Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA )

3.4 In accordance with the Habitats Regulations Guidance Note1 a HRA needs to be undertaken prior to any competent authority (in this case, Ashfield District Council):

• Deciding to undertake the plan or project, in cases where no consent,

permission or other authorisation is required;

• Deciding to give any consent, permission or other authorisation for the plan or project;

• Reviewing the decision to undertake a plan or project or reviews consents, permissions or other authorisations for plans or projects that are incomplete;

• Deciding whether to approve an application for development that would otherwise be permitted development.

3. Stages of the Habitat Regulations Assessment


8

3.5 The purpose of a HRA is to assess the potential effects of a proposed project or plan on one or more sites of international nature conservation importance (Natura 2000 sites). Projects and plans can only be permitted where the competent authority is satisfied that there will be no adverse effect on the integrity of the relevant sites.

3.6 The approach is based on the EU document 'Assessment of plans and projects

significantly affecting Natura 2000 sites: Methodological guidance on the provision of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC' (Oxford Brookes University, for European Commission Environment DG. 2001), in particular the Annex 2 Assessment forms.

3.7 There are three stages of carrying out a HRA, these are;

1. Stage 1 : Screening of proposed plans or projects for likely significant

effects.

2. Stage 2: Appropriate Assessment of the proposed plans or project to ascertain the effect on site integrity.

3. Stage 3: Mitigation and alternative solutions , and, only in exceptional circumstances, imperative reasons of overriding public interest (IROPI)

Article 6(3) “Any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site but likely to have a signifi cant effect thereon, either individually or in combination with other pl ans or projects, shall be subject to Appropriate Assessment of its implica tions for the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives. In the light of the conclusions of the assessment of the implications for the site and subject to the provisions of paragraph 4, the competent national a uthorities shall agree to the plan or project only after having asce rtained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site concerne d and, if appropriate, after having obtained the opinion of the general pu blic”.

Article 6(4) “If, in spite of a negative assessment of the impli cations for the site and in the absence of alternative solutions, a plan or project must nevertheless be carried out for imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of social or economic nat ure, the Member State shall take all compensatory measures necessary to e nsure that the overall coherence of Natura 2000 is protected. It s hall inform the Commission of the compensatory measures adopted.”

“Where the site concerned hosts a priority natural habitat type and/or a priority species the only considerations which may be raised are those relating to human health or public safety, to benef icial consequences of primary importance for the environment or, further to an opinion from the Commission, to other imperative reasons of over riding public interest”.


9

3.8 Stage 1 of the HRA process is the screening of proposed plans or projects for likely significant effects. Assessment of the significance of effects is undertaken in relation to the designated interest features and conservation objectives of the European site. Any effect that would compromise the functioning and viability of a site and prevent it from sustaining those features in a favourable condition is judged to create a significant effect. Where no significant effects are identified, then no further assessment is necessary.

3.9 Where it is concluded that a policy will not have a significant effect when considered

alone, the assessment of significant effects of a policy will then need to take into account its impact in-combination with other plan and projects. In the case of Ashfield District, the most relevant plans and policies will be those prepared by the planning authorities closest to the relevant European sites. Chapter 9 of this report outlines the issues, the authorities and plans screened and the results of the in-combination effect.

3.10 Where significant effects seem likely, a more detailed Appropriate Assessment of the

proposed plan or project is necessary (Stage 2). If insufficient information is available to make a clear judgement, the precautionary principle should be adopted. This process will often establish mitigation measures or alternatives (Stage 3), which can offset all significant adverse effects and enable the plan or project to go forward.

3.11 In the rare case where significant adverse effects cannot be mitigated, compensatory

measures are required, but only where the plan has proved that it is necessary for imperative reasons of overriding public interest (IROPI), including those of a social or economic reason. The IROPI test is a difficult test which a plan or its relevant components are generally considered unlikely to pass.

3.12 This report covers Stage 1: Screening of proposed plans or projects for likely significant

effects.

3.13 It should be noted that, as in the case of Ashfield, the plan does not have to be located within a designated area of nature conservation. It is possible that the effects of implementing the plan and its policies may be exhibited some distance away and even beyond any consultation area defined by Natural England. It is therefore good practice to comprehensively explore the potential effects of implementing the development plans, no matter how far reaching they may be. Ashfield District Council feels that this is particularly important in light of the requirements of the Duty to Cooperate. These effects may be direct or indirect, temporary or permanent, beneficial or harmful to a site, or even a combination of these.


10

Introduction

4.1 This section identifies relevant policies in the National Planning Policy Framework

(NPPF), together with a brief description of the main elements of the Local Plan.

Regional Spatial Strategy

4.2 At a regional level the East Midlands Regional Plan was published in March 2009, however in July 2010 the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government announced the abolishment of Regional Spatial Strategies following the Coalition’s decision to return decision-making powers to individual planning authorities.

4.3 The East Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy was abolished in March 2013 however it is worth briefly referring to it as a HRA screening report was carried out for the Plan (2009). The HRA provides base line information with regards to potential impacts on European sites from the cumulative growth proposed for the East Midlands Region, and although the Spatial Strategy has been revoked, its housing allocations still provide a good introduction to proposals for areas surrounding and including Ashfield.

4.4 On the basis of the HRA conclusions, it was concluded that the East Midlands Regional Plan will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of European sites in the Region (provided certain actions are taken). The National Planning Policy Framework (2012)

4.5 Section 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is dedicated to ‘Conserving and enhancing the natural environment. Paragraph 114 states that:

”Local Planning Authorities should set criteria base d policies against which proposals for any development on or affecting prote cted wildlife or geodiversity sites or landscape areas will be judge d. Distinctions should be made between the hierarchy of international, nation al and locally designated sites, so that protection is commensurat e with their status and gives appropriate weight to their importance and th e contribution that they make to wider ecological networks.”

4.6 The NPPF also states that:

”The following wildlife sites should be given the sa me protection as European Sites:

• Potential Special Protection Areas (pSPA);

• Listed or proposed Ramsar sites; and

• Sites identified, or required, as compensatory meas ures for adverse effects on European sites, potential Special Protec tion Areas, possible Special Areas of Conservation and listed or propose d Ramsar sites.”

4. Planning Policy Context


11

4.7 The golden thread of ‘presumption in the favour of Sustainable Development’ which runs throughout the National Planning Policy Framework however, does not apply where development requiring appropriate assessment under the Birds or Habitats Directive is being considered, planned or determined. Local Plan Publication Stage

4.8 The Council is currently working towards the Publication Stage of developing the Local Plan. The Plan sets out a vision, strategic objectives, policies and proposals for the future development of Ashfield and is supported by a draft Policies Map. A summary of all the Local Plan policies are in Appendix 2.

4.9 Reflecting its history and geography, the Vision or picture for Ashfield identifies what the Council is looking to achieve for the District through the Local Plan and other strategies. One of the key aspirations of the Council’s Vision is to ensure that:

“Growth will be accommodated in a manner that achie ves the protection, restoration and enhancement of environmental assets including Green Infrastructure networks and habitat creation”.

4.10 Strategic Local Plan Policies S1: Sustainable Development Principles, S2: Overall

Strategy for Growth and S3: Settlement and Town Centre Hierarchy, relate to economic, social, environmental and other issues, which apply across the whole of Ashfield. They have a number of purposes including providing guidelines for local development and a framework for future development.

4.11 Area Based Strategic Policies also apply to Hucknall, Kirkby-in-Ashfield and Sutton-in-Ashfield, and the Rurals (the wards of Selston, Jacksdale and Underwood). For each area they include the anticipated new homes required for the period 2016 to 2032, employment requirements, town centre priorities and green infrastructure priorities.

4.12 The Local Plan identifies in Strategic Policy S2: Overall Strategy for Growth, that a net increase of at least 7,683 dwellings will be delivered within the period 2016 to 2032, dispersed across the District with approximately 5% in the Rurals, 30% in Hucknall and 65% in Sutton and Kirkby. Dwellings will be provided within or adjacent to the existing urban area taking the opportunity to prioritise the effective use of brownfield land in sustainable locations.

4.13 Policies HA3, SKA3 and RA2 over the page identify proposed housing land allocations (of

ten or more dwellings) chosen by the Council to meet the new homes required for the District.


12

Policy HA3: Housing Land Allocations for Hucknall Area

Strategic Objectives SO8, SO9, SO10, SO19, SO20 Residential development will be permitted on the si tes listed below as shown on the Policies Map, subject to detailed plan ning consent where it has not already been granted, or where it has lapse d.

Ref. Site Name Approximate Yield

(dwellings)

HA3a South of Broomhill Farm/North of A611 480

HA3b Land South of Papplewick Lane 26 HA3c Former Bamkin factory site 14 HA3d Ruffs Farm 10 HA3e Broomhill Farm, Nottingham Road 151 HA3f Land at Bolsover Street 16 HA3g High Leys Road 10 HA3h Seven Stars PH & adjoining land, West Street 25 HA3i Land adjacent to the Arrows Centre, Annesley

Road 60

HA3j Daniels Way 50

HA3k 100 Nottingham Road 37

HA3l Land off Papplewick Lane 110 HA3o 135-137, Beardall Street 14 HA3p Grange Farm, Moor Road 14 HA3q Broomhill Farm (north), Nottingham Road 90 HA3s The Harrier, Christchurch Road 10 HA3t Rolls Royce, Watnall Road 900 HA3u Lingford Street 33 HA3MU Hucknall Town Football Club, Watnall Road 108


13

Policy SKA3: Sutton & Kirkby Housing Allocations

Strategic Objectives SO8, SO9, SO10, SO19, SO20 Residential development will be permitted on the sites listed below as shown on the Policies Map, subject to detailed plan ning consent where it has not already been granted, or where it has lapse d.

Ref.

Site Name

Approximate Yield

(dwellings)

SKA3a North of Kingsmill Hospital, Sutton 250 SKA3b Blackwell Road, Huthwaite 65 SKA3c Ashland Road West, Sutton 235 SKA3d Clegg Hill Drive, Huthwaite 100

SKA3e Newark Road, Sutton 266 SKA3f Priestic Road Road/ Northern View 24 SKA3g Rookery Farm, Alfreton Road, Sutton 184 SKA3h Beck Lane, Skegby 400

SKA3i Clare Road, Sutton 50 SKA3j Fisher Close/Stanton Crescent, Skegby 100 SKA3k Hilltop Farm, Skegby 20 SKA3l Alfreton Road, Sutton 117

SKA3m The Avenue, Sutton 15 SKA3n Quantum Clothing, North Street, Huthwaite 90 SKA3o Land Adjacent to Stubbin Hill Farm/Brand

Lane, Stanton Hill 216

SKA3p South of West Notts College, Cauldwell Road 207 SKA3q Common Road, Huthwaite 20 SKA3r Former Social Club, Davies Avenue, Sutton 19

SKA3s Station House, Outram Street, Sutton 28 SKA3t Former Courtaulds Factory and Adjacent

Land, Unwin Road, Sutton 30

SKA3u Land at Cross Row, Stanton Hill 12 SKA3v Off Gillcroft Street/St Andrews Street & Vere

Avenue, Skegby 180

SKA3x Land at Unwin Road (Co-op site), Sutton 18 SKA3y land between Pleasley Road/Mansfield Road,

Skegby 37

SKA3z land at 57 Stoneyford Road, Skegby 50 SKA3aa land off Mansfield road/Unwin Road, Eastfield

Side 50

SKA3ac rear 249-251 Alfreton Road, Sutton 102 SKA3ad Land off High Hazels Drive, Huthwaite 22 SKA3ae Adj Blue Bell PH, Carsic Ln, Sutton 11


14

SKA3ag Royal Foresters PH, Coronation St, Sutton 14 SKA3ah East of Sutton Parkway Station, Lowmoor Rd 495

SKA3ai Former Lowmoor Inn/Wheatley’s Yard, Kirkby 62 SKA3aj Warwick Close, Kirkby 24 SKA3ak Skegby Road, Kirkby Woodhouse 23 SKA3al Mowlands, Kirkby 900

SKA3am Kirkby House, Chapel Street, Kirkby 16 SKA3an (part)

Laburnum Avenue, Kirkby 24

SKA3an (part)

Laburnum Avenue, Kirkby 7

SKA3ao Walesby Road, Kirkby 150 SKA3ap Diamond Avenue, Kirkby 67 SKA3aq Sidings Road, Kirkby 81 SKA3ar Southwell Lane, Kirkby 60 SKA3as Land Off Lindley’s Lane 39 SKA3at Annesley Colliery, Newstead Road 54 SKA3au East of Sutton Road, Kirkby (Larwood) 188

SKA3aw Former Larwood Nursing Home, Main Road, Nuncargate

10

4.14 The above policies are relevant to the assessment of potential effects.

Policy RA2: Housing Land Allocations for the Rurals (Selston, Jacksdale, Bagthorpe and Underwood Area)

Strategic Objectives SO8, SO9, SO10, SO19, SO20 Residential development will be permitted on the si tes listed below as shown on the Policies Map, subject to detailed plan ning consent where it has not already been granted, or where it has lapse d.

Ref. Site Name Approximate Yield (dwellings)

RA2a Church Lane, Underwood 21 RA2b Westdale Road, Jacksdale 60 RA2c Westdale Road /Rutland Road ,

Jacksdale 15

RA2d Park Lane, Selston 110 RA2e Land rear of the Bull and Butcher

Public House, Selston 137

RA2f Former Brick & Tile PH, Palmerston St, Underwood

15


15

Introduction 5.1 Ashfield’s HRA commenced during the preparation of the Local Plan Preferred Approach

stage. This allowed the HRA to influence the policy content of this stage if the Local Plan and also the content of the current Local Plan Publication document. The HRA is an iterative process and this report will need to be reviewed and amended as the Local Plan develops.

5.2 When devising the methodology for this report, regard has been taken to the relevant

guidance and recent practice: • Guidance from the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG)

on Appropriate Assessment of Regional Plans and Local Development Documents*

• Assessment of Plans and Projects Significantly Affecting Natura 2000 Sites (European Union November 2001)

*Please note the DCLG guidance is currently in draft form. 5.3 In line with the relevant guidance the following tasks have been undertaken:

1. Brief description of the plan that is being considered;

2. Characteristics of the sites that might be affected;

3. Identification of policies that can be screened out, this included:

•••• Screening out European sites using the correct criteria;

•••• Identification of all European sites within 15m of the local authority boundary and acquire, examine and understand the conservation objectives of each interest feature of each site potentially effected;

•••• A detailed consideration of certain policies to highlight potential effects and any opportunities for avoidance measures to be incorporated in policies within the Local Plan, lower level plans and projects. This comprised:

i. An assessment of the significance of potential effects with respect to the features (either or both primary habitats and species) for which a European site has been designated;

ii. Consideration of opportunities for avoidance/mitigation measures;

iii. The assessment of potential effects also took account of the likelihood of such effects occurring, this is consistent with the precautionary approach;

iv. Consideration of the potential for in-combination effects; and

v. Recommendations for the development of the Local Plan.

5. Methodology


16

Identifying European Sites Potentially Affected 5.4 In order to identify the European sites that may be affected by the Local Plan it is

necessary to cast a wide net around the plan area and to understand how land and development that is proposed by the Local Plan may affect land that is outside the plan boundaries as well as land within it. It is necessary to identify all European sites:

(a) in the plan area; and (b) outside the plan area that may be affected, for example, through related

infrastructure such as water supply reservoirs or treatment works or other waste stream infrastructure that receive waste or discharges from the plan area; and

(c) outside the plan area that may experience significant indirect effects, such as increased pollution or disturbance from recreational pressure.

Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC

5.5 The Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC is a European site which is 11.2 km from the Ashfield boundary and is the main focus of this report. The site extends to 271.84ha and lies within Sherwood Forest, as part of Newark and Sherwood District Councils administrative boundary.

5.6 Birklands and Bilhaugh is an important ecological and recreational resource and

supports the largest remnant of ancient wood pasture, selected for ‘old acidophilous oak woods’. Both native oak species, penduculate oak (Quercus robur) and sessile oak (Quercus petraea), are present. It is one of only four outstanding dry oak dominated woodlands in the UK it owes much of its exceptional interest to the presence of many rare dead wood invertebrates and lichens.

5.7 Due to the location of the site within the Sherwood Forest it is popular for recreational

pursuits. Visitor pressure can damage the fragile habitat. Air pollution from the industrial towns can cause a reduction in lichen diversity. Coal-mining has been undertaken beneath the site from Welbeck and Thoresby collieries and may recur again, subject to Habitats Regulations procedures; this can cause surface subsidence which has the potential to affect woodland conditions.

5.8 The screening exercise for the Birkland and Bilhaugh SAC can be found in Appendix

3 of this report. South Pennine Moors SAC and SPA (Phases 1 and 2)

5.9 The South Pennine Moors is both a SAC and a SPA. The site is approximately 15km from the Ashfield boundary and extends to 64,983ha in the counties of Cheshire, Derbyshire, Lancashire, Staffordshire and Yorkshire. Around two-thirds of the SAC is within the Peak District National Park.


17

5.10 The SAC is selected as one of the best areas in the UK for European dry heaths, blanket bogs and old sessile oak woods with Ilex and Blechnum and for the significant presence of North Atlantic wet heath, transition mires and quaking bogs.

5.11 The SPA covers extensive tracts of semi-natural moorland habitats including upland heath and blanket mire. The site is important for several upland breeding species, including birds of prey and waders. Approximately two-thirds of the (Phase 1) moorlands are open to public access and are visited by large numbers of people for a variety of recreational activities. Habitat damage through physical erosion or fire, combined with disturbance of breeding birds, can be significant. Maintenance of the ecosystem on which the birds depend relies on appropriate grazing levels and burning regimes, and overgrazing by sheep is a key pressure on the site.

5.12 The screening exercise for the South Pennines Moors SAC and SPA can be found in

Appendix 4. 5.13 Map 1 on page 18, shows the location of European protected sites in relation to Ashfield

and neighbouring authorities, together with the proposed housing sites in Ashfield. Possible Potential Special Protection Area (ppSPA)

5.14 In addition to the classified SPA and designated SACs referred to in paragraphs 5.5 to 5.13, there is also a possible potential SPA in Sherwood Forest (ppSPA). The unclassified site is of interest due to its breeding population of nightjar and woodlark and comprises acid grassland and heathland, oak and birch woodland and coniferous plantations.

5.15 Natural England has confirmed that Sherwood Forest satisfies Stage 1 of the SPA

Selection Guidelines for breeding nightjar and woodlark and therefore advocates further consideration of Sherwood Forest against Stage 2 of the SPA Selection Guidelines at the appropriate stage during the UK SPA Review process. However, the full SPA selection process has yet to be formally implemented and the formal UK Review of the existing suite of sites for nightjar and woodlark is pending. Accordingly, the Review Panel (JNCC) has not yet formed a view on whether a site within the Sherwood Forest region is one of the ‘most suitable territories’ for these species and therefore has not so far provided any advice to the Secretary of State on the selection of any SPA in the Sherwood Forest Area.

5.16 There is no provision in domestic legislation or expressed policy for any protection to

be afforded to sites that appear to have some ornithological interest (unless they are already notified as an SSSI) prior to them being considered as a potential SPA by the Secretary of State. Nevertheless, there is a real possibility of Sherwood Forest being recommended for future classification as a SPA, on the basis of evidence from the national species surveys and the interpretation of that data and therefore Natural England advocates that a risk-based approach or similar be adopted until such a time that the full SPA Review process has been completed and an announcement has been made by the Secretary of State on the future classification of Sherwood Forest as a SPA. A copy of Natural England’s Advice Note to Local Planning Authorities regarding the consideration of likely effects on the breeding population of nighjar and woodlark in the Sherwood Forest region, can be seen in Appendix A (Section 2) of this report.


18

5.17 In light of this, and in order to “future-proof‟ the Ashfield Local Plan, it has been decided that, on a precautionary basis, the Sherwood Forest ppSPA will be treated as if it was a pSPA, thus affording it the equivalent to the highest level of protection during appraisal that it would have at any stage in its potential route to classification. Section 2 of this report detailed the appraisal of the Sherwood Forest ppSPA.


19

Screening Categories 5.18 Natural England has developed a series of categories that can be used as the basis for

screening out policies and proposals. All aspects of the Local Plan are systematically checked and assigned to a category from A to D according to the potential for effects on the European sites potentially affected. The categories are:

• Category A1: No negative effect on a European Site at all. The policy will not

itself lead to development e.g. because it relates to design or other qualitative criteria for development;

• Category A2: No negative effect on a European Site at all. The policy is intended to protect the natural environment, including biodiversity;

• Category A3: No negative effect on a European Site at all. The policy is intended to conserve or enhance the natural, built or historic environment, where enhancement measures will not be likely to have any negative effect on a European Site;

• Category A4: No negative effect on a European Site at all. The policy would positively steer development away from European sites and associated sensitive areas;

• Category A5: No negative effect on a European Site at all. The policy is a general statement which only expresses general intentions or political aspirations.

• Category B: No significant negative effect on a European Site, either alone or in combination with other elements of the same plan, or other plans or projects.

• Category C: Likely to have a significant effect alone.

• Category D: Likely to have a significant effect in combination.

5.19 A number of policies in the Local Plan typically cover a range of policy issues and

may have several ‘parts’ to them, which could have differing effects on European sites. Consequently, some policies and proposals in the Local Plan could be assigned to more than one category. Should a policy or proposal fall into category C or D, then the assessment will indicate which part of the policy or proposal would be likely to have that effect, so that the scope of the ‘appropriate assessment’ is clear.

5.20 It is acknowledged that this exercise is subject to value judgments associated with all

environmental assessments and although guided by criteria is still subjective.


20

Air Quality: Issues

6.1 Both the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC and the South Pennine Moors SAC and SPA are

sensitive to changes in air quality. It is therefore important to establish background concentrations of existing air pollution and whether any critical loads or levels are currently being exceeded. Background concentrations were obtained from the UK Air Pollution Information System (APIS). APIS is a support tool for staff in the UK conservation and regulatory agencies, industry and local authorities for assessing the potential effects of air pollutants on habitats and species.

6.2 Table 2 below details the background concentrations of the key pollutants which are relevant to natural ecosystem of the European sites.

• CL = Critical Loads, The threshold level for the deposition of a pollutant above which harmful indirect effects can be shown on a habitat or species. Additional deposition above the Critical Load is termed Critical Load Exceedance.

Table 2 - Approximate Concentration of Key Air Poll utants

Site Features

Nitrogen Oxide NOx

(ug/m3)

Sulphur Dioxide

SO2 (ug/m3)

Ammonia NH3

(ug/m3)

Nitrogen Deposition

N (Kg/ha/yr)

Acid Deposition

Exceedance

Birklands and

Bilhaugh SAC

Old Acidophilous Oak Woods

2.8 CLe = 30

2.91 CLe = 20

1.16 CLe = 1 - 3

28.42 CL = 10 - 15

Max CL exceeded due to N

South Pennine

Moors SAC

European Dry Heaths

15.37 CLe = 30

2.7 CLe = 20

0.65 CLe = 1 - 3

28.84 CL = 10 - 20


Blanket Bogs 15.37

CLe = 30 2.7

CLe = 20 0.65

CLe = 1 - 3 28.84

CL = 5 - 10


Old Sessile Oak Woods with Ilex and Blechnum in the British

Isles

15.37 CLe = 30

2.7 CLe = 20

0.65 CLe = 1 - 3

46.76 CL = 10 - 20


Northern Atlantic Wet Heaths with

Erica Tetralix

15.37 CLe = 30

2.7 CLe = 20

0.65 CLe = 1 - 3

28.84 CL = 10 - 20


Transition Mires and Quaking

Bogs

15.37 CLe = 30

2.7 CLe = 20

0.65 CLe = 1 - 3

28.84 CL = 5 - 10


6. Air Quality


21

• CLe = Critical Levels, The threshold level for the atmospheric concentration of a pollutant above which harmful direct effects can be shown on a habitat or species. Pollutant air concentrations above the Critical Level are termed Critical Level Exceedances

• Measurements for both of the Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) have

been taken from the centroid grid reference of each SAC. This is the approximate central point of the SAC (In the case of large, linear or composite sites, this may not represent the location where a feature occurs within the SAC). For Birklands and Bilhaugh this is SK618679 and for the South Pennine Moor SAC this is SK144960.

Air Quality: Implications

6.3 Negative effects on air quality will be mainly due to increased traffic levels as a result of an increased population. Certain industrial processes can also have a negative effect on air quality. The Environment Agencies document - Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) H1, indicates that designated sites which are located within 10km of a pollutant source should be considered as a sensitive receptor. The Local Plan does not identify any industrial sites of this nature.

Nitrogen Oxide (NOx)

6.4 Nitrogen Oxide comes from industrial processes; it is formed when certain fuels (oil, gas and coal) are burned at a high temperature, such as combustion. Concentrations of Nitrogen Oxide are well within their critical levels at both sites; the additional contributions from pollutant emissions associated with the Local Plan are not considered to be sufficient to result in any exceedances.

Sulphur Dioxide (SO2)

6.5 Sulpher Dioxide comes from industrial process; it is formed by burning sulphur, which is an impurity in coal and crude oil, with oxygen in the air. Concentrations of Sulphur Dioxide are well within their critical levels at both sites; the additional contributions from pollutant emissions associated with the Local Plan are not considered to be sufficient to result in any exceedances.

Ammonia (NH3) emissions

6.6 Concentrations of Ammonia (NH3) are also within their critical levels across both sites. Whilst trace emissions of NH3 could hypothetically be associated with some of the policies (from sources of sewage and catalytic converters in motor vehicles), it is considered that on the basis of objective information, there is no likelihood of a significant effect as a result of emissions of NH3, even in light of the in-combination provisions.

Nitrogen (N) deposition

6.7 In considering the implications of the Local Plan for impacts associated with nitrogen deposition, the dispersion properties and impact pathways of pollutants that contribute to Nitrogen deposition need to be fully appreciated. The primary pollutant that can be associated with policies within the Local Plan that could contribute towards Nitrogen


22

deposition at the European sites is Nitrogen Oxides (NOx). Nitrogen Oxides are produced in combustion processes and are therefore present in vehicle emissions.

6.8 An assessment needs to be made therefore, in light of the scale and locations of policies

that can be associated with increased emissions of Nitrogen Oxide, as to whether the Local Plan is likely to have a significant effect (either alone or in-combination) with respect to Nitrogen deposition. In light of their respective locations in relation to the area affected by the Local Plan, it is considered that both the South Pennine Moors SAC/SPA and the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC can be considered together.

6.9 Ashfield’s boundary is located approximately 15km from the South Pennine Moors, and

approximately 11km from Birklands and Bilhaugh. At these distances the dispersion properties of Nitrogen Oxide means that any contribution to Nitrogen deposition at the sites as a result of the Local Plan can be considered to be negligible, even from an in-combination perspective.

Acid deposition

6.10 Whilst the critical loads for acidity are showing exceedances, a similar rationale exists to that outlined above for Nitrogen deposition, on the basis of which significant effects can be excluded. Acid deposition is a function of the combined deposition of nitrogen and sulphur containing pollutants, the primary source of which is industrial processes. The Local Plan has no policies which can be associated with significant releases of sulphur dioxide. The contribution to acid deposition from the Local Plan is therefore limited to the contribution from nitrogen based pollutants, primarily Nitrogen Oxide. As outlined above, the dispersion properties of Nitrogen Oxide means that any contribution to acid deposition at the sites as a result of the Local Plan can be considered to be negligible (even from an in-combination perspective).

Air Quality: Conclusions 6.11 In respect of both Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) and Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) it can be concluded

that no likely significant effect can be recorded for the South Pennine Moors and Birklands and Bilhaugh SACs as a result of the provisions of the Ashfield Local Plan.

6.12 On the basis that the implementation of the Local Plan will not result in any further credible

contributions of Ammonia (NH3) within the South Pennine Moors SAC/SPA and Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC, a conclusion of no likely significant effect can be recorded.

6.13 It can reasonably be concluded that there will be no likely significant effect as a result of

Nitrogen (N) deposition on the South Pennine Moors and Birklands and Bilhaugh SACs as a result of the provisions of the Ashfield Local Plan. This conclusion can be supported by the following:

1. Emissions from traffic have been shown to be linked to impacts on vegetation within

200m of the road edge (English Nature Research Report 580: The ecological effects of diffuse air pollution from road transport). Beyond 200m significant vegetation level effects associated with traffic emissions (including deposition) have not been observed in scientific studies.


23

The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB), Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1 (May 2007) looks at the effect of road traffic emissions on local air quality and notes that road traffic emissions quickly reduce as the distance from the road increases. The DMRB states in paragraph 3.13 that “Only properties and Designated Sites within 200m of roads affected by the project need be considered”. Beyond 200m, the contribution of traffic emissions to local pollutant concentrations is considered to be negligible (although this is not to say that local pollutant concentrations will not exceed that statutory air quality objective level).

Natural England also recognises that emissions are not likely to be significant beyond 200m.

2. Total Nitrogen deposition can be split into both reduced nitrogen (mainly NH3) and

oxidised nitrogen (NOx). For all vegetation types however, reduced nitrogen dominates the input. These different forms of nitrogen have very different average lifetimes and travel distances. The mean residence time of reduced nitrogen is 5 hours, while that of oxidised nitrogen is approximately 30 hours mean travel distances for reduced and oxidised nitrogen are 150km and 1000km respectively. The different atmospheric behaviour of reduced and oxidised nitrogen results in significant differences in terms of the distance from the source of environmental effects associated with deposition. With regard to reduced nitrogen, with its short atmospheric lifetime, the effects of UK emissions occur largely within the UK. In the case of oxidised nitrogen however, with its longer atmospheric lifetime, 85% is exported from the UK along with its associated effects (Source: Transport Air Pollution (NEGTAP Report) 2001, prepared by the National Expert Group on Transboundary Air Pollution on behalf of DEFRA). There will be no likely significant effect as a result of acid deposition on the South Pennine Moors SAC and SPA, and the Birklands and Bilhaugh SACs as a result of the provisions of the Ashfield Local Plan.


24

Recreational Pressure: Issues

7.1 The distance people are prepared to travel needs to be taken into consideration and

although there is a gap in visitor survey data, it can be assumed that the most frequent users of the site travel from settlements up to 15km from the SACs.

7.2 The effects of recreational pressure on the SACs is mainly related to damage to habitats

for which the site is designated. This will usually arise from trampling which, over a period of time, can cause loss of habitat through the establishment of and subsequent widening of paths and tracks. The wearing down of paths and tracks can also cause or accelerate erosion leading to further habitat loss or damage. Access can also increase the likelihood of invasive, non-native species penetrating into the SAC. Dog walking can cause localised eutrophication (enrichment) of habitats, especially in the first few hundred metres from access points as a result of dog facies deposition. Some species for which SACs are designated may also be affected by disturbance. The effects of recreational pressures on SPAs are mainly related to damage to habitats, similar to that described above, for bird species for which the site is classified rely, and disturbance of the birds within the SPA or when using supporting habitat outside the SPA.

Recreational Pressures: Implications

7.3 The Local Plan proposals will increase the population of Ashfield by approximately 17,670 (based on 7,683 (2015 – 2032) new homes x approximately 2.3 people). A proportion of these new residents will pursue recreational activities on green open spaces. Areas potentially affected could include designated areas such as Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC and the South Pennine Moors SAC and a SPA, which contains habitats and species that may be sensitive to disturbance from increases in recreational pressure.

7.4 However, there are many other recreational resources within and adjacent to the district which provides a recreational resource; some of these are listed below:

• Newstead Abbey - Ravenshead, Nottinghamshire: a former medieval priory, now a

historic house set in magnificent gardens with parkland extending over 300 acres. The Abbey is best known as being the ancestral home of the poet Lord Byron;

• Brierley Forest Park, Skegby Road Huthwaite - Originally a former colliery site, Brierly Forest Park has been transformed into a wildlife haven with nature walks. The park also provides recreation facilities, a sculpture trail, areas of local interest as well as a visitor centre;

• Sherwood Pines Forest Park - Off the B6030 at Clipstone between Clipstone and Ollerton Sherwood Pines Forest Park: a large area of woodland with way marked walking and cycling trails and other outdoor activities;

• Sherwood Forest Country Park - Edwinstowe Off B6034 just North of Edwinstowe;

7. Recreational Pressure


25

• Sutton Lawn - The lawn pleasure grounds encompass the grounds of former Sutton Hall;

• Portland Park - A country park with sites of importance for nature conservation (SINC) and a local nature reserve it is significant for its ecological and educational value. The site is unique in Nottinghamshire being located on a band of magnesium limestone. This enables many rare plant species to grow, creating an area, which is abundant with fascinating natural flora and making it is a Site of Specific Scientific Interest (SSSI);

• Vicker Water Country Park - located to the south of Clipstone Village, 5 kilometres from Mansfield: the 80 ha park has been mainly formed on the site of former colliery spoil tips and lies in the shadow of the headstocks of Clipstone Colliery;

• Clumber Park - National Trust location set in a 4000 acre park. Located to the north of Edwinstowe and Ollerton;

• Rufford Abbey and Country Park - Located south of Edwinstowe and Ollerton off the A614 near the B6034. The Abbey remains and gardens surrounded in woodland.

Recreational Pressures on the Birklands and Bilhaug h SAC

Erosion and Disturbance 7.5 In June 2009 a visitor survey for Sherwood Forest was undertaken by ACK Tourism and

RJS Associates Ltd. The survey consisted of face to face interviews with 284 visitors to the Sherwood Forest Country Park. The survey showed that 30% of visitors to the site were from within the Nottingham (NG) postcode area, 72% of visitors were day visitors travelling from home, and 9% of visitors come on a weekly or more frequent basis. Table 3 below shows the areas within Ashfield and their distance from the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC.

7.6 It is considered that most visitors to the site do stay on paths and therefore the effects of

erosion would be likely to be negligible. However there are areas within the SAC that attract significant numbers of visitors. The Sherwood Forest Visitor Centre is a main point of interest and it is currently causing unacceptable ecological harm to the SAC. This is in the form of car parking as vehicle and pedestrian movement has the potential to compact soil and root zones around veteran trees in the area. As a consequence the visitor centre is to be demolished and removed from the forest together with the

Table 3

Post Code Area Includes

Distance from NG21 (Birklands

and Bilhaugh)

NG17 Huthwaite, Kirkby-in-Ashfield, Skegby, Stanton Hill, Sutton-in-Ashfield, Teversal, Annesley and Annesley Woodhouse.

10.8km

NG15 Butlers Hill and Hucknall 12.5km

NG16 Bagthorpe, Selston and Underwood 17.9km


26

associated car parking and play area. This will be reconstructed across the B6034 from its present location, and the previous area will then be restored to oak /headland habitat typical of the area. It is anticipated that the development will increase visitor numbers from the current figure of approximately half a million per year, to as much as one million per year each year but levelling off at 800,000 per year. The development will allow visitors into the forest but in a controlled way to help protect the forest.

7.7 The HRA Report for the Sherwood Forest Living Legend concluded:

‘ Whilst it is likely that existing local users of the wider SAC will continue to use minor paths, no significant adverse impacts to SAC habitats are anticipated to result from increased visitor numbers associated wi th the proposed campus development’.

7.8 The new visitor centre scheme includes improvement to the existing access to the SAC. Evidence suggests that the existing footpath network generally coped during times of peak usage in the early 1990s following the release of the film “Robin Hood- Prince of Thieves”, with visitor numbers reaching 1 million per annum.

7.9 There have been areas within the park that have not weathered as well as expected due to several factors. Pooling and rutting has occurred on paths that have been poorly constructed. Paths that exist on a gradient have experienced surface erosion due to water run-off. Due to the poor condition of the footpaths visitors have avoided obstacles and therefore widened the footpaths causing soil compaction over a wider area. As a result water run-off which would otherwise have percolated down through the soil to the benefit of the sites ecology has been lost, adding to the stresses placed on the ecology of the site. The worst affected areas of are subject to repair, maintenance and improvement works, limiting the extent of damage.

7.10 Newark and Sherwood District Council are proposing that measures will be taken within the park to ensure that visitor activity is focused around the Major Oak, and is recognised as a high profile cultural and heritage asset and high visitor demand already exist, along with high levels of disturbance. There are proposed access plans to alleviate this, especially to more remote and sensitive areas of the SAC. There are also plans in place to reopen access paths outside of the site, which help to reduce footfall within the SAC. Risk of Fire

7.11 Increased visitor numbers also increases the risk of fire and therefore has the potential to be a significant effect on the moorland European sites. Impacts of fire on the SAC habitats and the SPA supporting habitats can be significant, long term or even permanent.

Mitigation Measures

7.12 In terms of mitigation measures for the site, there are several inter-related factors and measures all capable of reducing the likelihood of significant effects. These include but are not limited to:

a) Management Plans (some plans will need to be cross boundary to tackle issues such as developing sustainable transport options);

b) Visitor management (e.g. access locations, controlling parking, education, voluntary agreements, and ranger patrols); and


27

c) Providing and promoting adequate networks of green space (green infrastructure) outside the SAC for existing and future residents.

7.13 Even in light of a potential increase in visitors to the European site, it is considered that

the existing raft of management initiatives referred to above and the relocation of the visitors centre in Sherwood Forest will be sufficient to avoid a significant effect on the European site in the foreseeable future, and in any event within the life of the Local Plan.

Recreational Pressures on the South Pennine Moors S AC and SPA

Erosion 7.14 Around two-thirds of the South Pennine Moors SAC and SPA is within the Peak District

National Park, which is a regional and national recreation destination, with over 10 million visitors* per year (*staying for 3 hours or more). The site is therefore used by two distinct types of visitors; those who are accessing the European site because they are the most convenient green spaces from settlements which are located within or on the edge of the European site, and those visitors accessing the European site because of their intrinsic value as a national or regional recreation destination. Residents visiting the site from Ashfield clearly fall into the latter category.

7.15 Most visitors do stay on paths and therefore the effects of erosion would be likely to be

negligible. The worst affected areas are and would be subject to repair, maintenance and improvement works, limiting the extent of damage.

7.16 In order to manage the level of visitors the Peak District National Park Authority has recently developed a Management Plan (2012- 2017) for the area. The Management Plan aims to find solutions that make the best use of all resources, meet the needs of communities and businesses, and conserve, enhance and increase understanding of the national park’s special qualities.

Disturbance

7.17 Defining the effects of disturbance as a result of increased visitors is not straightforward and appears not to be proportional to a defined increase in visitor numbers (apart from core “honey pot” sites). The net effect of the current National Park Management Plan and Recreation Strategy (2012 -17) is to openly encourage increased access to the National Park and in doing so to facilitate the uptake of more active recreation uses which may increase visitor pressure to more remote parts – which may include the European site moorlands. The strategy does however stress the importance of sustainable access and if an activity causes significant environmental harm, and cannot be effectively managed, greater weight is attached to the first of the two national park purposes, to conserve and enhance the national park. Therefore disturbance to the European site could be potentially significant.

Risk of Fire

7.18 Increased recreational pressures also increase the risk of fire and therefore have the potential to be a significant effect on the moorland European sites. Impacts of fire on the SAC habitats and the SPA supporting habitats can be significant, long term or even permanent.


28

Mitigation Measures 7.19 In terms of mitigation measures for the site, there are several inter-related factors and

measures all capable of reducing the likelihood of significant effects. These include but are not limited to:




7.20 Even in light of a potential increase in visitors to the European site, it is considered that

the existing raft of management initiatives referred to above will be sufficient to avoid a significant effect on the European site in the foreseeable future, and in any event within the life of the Local Plan.

Recreational Pressures: Conclusions

7.21 It can therefore be concluded, on the basis of objective information, that there would be no likely significant effect on the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC or the South Pennine Moors SAC/SPA as a result of the provisions of the Ashfield Local Plan.


29

Water Abstraction / Quality: Issues

8.1 In terms of water there is a need to consider whether there are any water related

linkages or pathways between the Ashfield Local Plan provisions and the sites at South Pennines Moors SAC and SPA, and the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC.

8.2 Both groundwater and surface water levels can be affected by abstraction for public

water supply, for industrial uses and for agricultural. The water requirements for the East Midlands, including Ashfield, are set out in Severn Trent Water Ltd’s Water Resources Management Plan (WRMP) and the Environment Agency’s Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies (CAMS).

Water Abstraction / Quality: Implications Water Resource Management Plan

8.3 Severn Trent Water’s Water Resource Management Plan (WRMP) 2014 builds on the strategy set out in their previous WRMP published in 2010. The 2014 Plan explains Severn Trent’s proposals for making sure there is enough water available, in the right place and at the right time to supply their customers in an affordable way over the next 25 years.

8.4 Ashfield is located within the East Midlands Water Resource Zone (WRZ6), which

serves almost 3 million people. The WRMP assesses the water supply and demand balance throughout the region based on long term projections which include housing and population growth, commercial requirements and climate change. The WRMP Habitat Regulation Assessment (HRA) 2014 is the first stage of the HRA process (Stage 1 Screening) of Severn Trent Water’s Feasibility List of schemes in the final WRMP. The HRA has been undertaken in accordance with currently available guidance and is based on a precautionary approach as required under the Habitats Regulations.

8.5 The HRA screening assessment of schemes that were included in the WRMP concluded

that, with mitigation taken into account, the preferred programmes (i.e. the WRMP) are unlikely to have a significant effect on the integrity of any European sites. It is also considered unlikely that there would be any in-combination effects of the WRMP with other plans.

Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies 8.6 The Environment Agency (EA) has been reviewing the effects of water abstractions

upon aquifers and associated watercourse flows through 'Restoring Sustainable Abstraction’ programme (RSA). The purpose is to make sure that the amount of water being taken (or abstracted) from rivers or out of the ground can be sustained without damaging the environment. The South Pennines Moors, and the Birklands and Bilhaugh fall within or are impacted by the river catchments of the Don and Rother, The Idle and Torne and the Lower Trent and Erewash. The approach of the Environment Agency to water in these areas is set out in Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies (CAMS) for the:

8. Water Abstraction / Quality


30

• Idle and Torne • Lower Trent and Erewash • Don and Rother, as updated

8.7 CAMS undertake an assessment of water availability on a catchment by catchment

basis which influences the approach to water abstraction licences. The RSA programme specifically investigates sites that are designated for protection under European and UK legislation and CAMS assess the effects of existing abstraction licences and any new applications to make sure they are not impacting on internationally important nature conservation sites. In this context the EA has undertaken the Review of Consents process to identify where abstractions and discharges are impacting on such sites. Changes to abstraction and discharge regimes as a result of new development would not be permitted unless the applicant can demonstrate that there are no likely significant effects upon the designated sites.

8.8 At a local level, part of the evidence base for the Local Plan is sets out in The Greater

Nottingham Scoping Water Cycle Study 2009 and The Greater Nottingham and Ashfield Outline Water Cycle Study 2010. The Outline Water Cycle Study 2010 took into account the housing requirements set out in the East Midlands Regional Plan 2009. This reflected a requirement for the period from 2006 to 2026 of 68,200 dwellings over Greater Nottingham and Ashfield. The Study concluded that:

• Water resource situation in the East Midlands is significantly constrained with

Severn Trent Water forecasting a shortfall of supply against demand if no interventions are made.

• The company plans a programme of measures that will maintain a surplus of

supply over demand. This should not constrain growth at the strategic level, provided that strategic water resources infrastructure is implemented in a timely manner in relation to growth.

8.9 The Study recommends that as a result of the constraint in the region on water resources, all new homes are built to the water consumption standards of the Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3/4 as a minimum in order to reduce demand from new households. This is reflected in the Ashfield Local Plan, which includes measures to reduce the demand for water and reduce water consumption in new housing and commercial development. Policy CC2: Water Resource Management - identifies the following in relation to water efficiency:

a. Residential development proposals will implement water efficiency measures to

minimise water consumption, to achieve a requirement of 110 litres per person per day.

b. For non-residential development the meeting of the BREEAM requirement in

Policy CC1 will include reducing water consumption through the use of meters, leak detection, water efficient appliances, or other appropriate measures.

c. Water efficient features and equipment should be incorporated into new development. Rainwater should be harvested and retained for re-use on site as ‘grey water’.


31

8.10 Water quality can be affected by a number of factors, including toxic chemicals, pesticides and nutrient enrichment and discharges from sewage treatment works, and over-flowing foul water systems at times of high rainfall and flooding. However, many of the most significant risks to water quality are as a result of agricultural activity, which largely falls outside the remit of the Local Plan. The increase in proposed households may affect water quality by placing extra loads at surface treatment works and potentially increasing run-off. The Outline Water Cycle Study 2010 identifies that potentially the only potential constraint relating to wastewater treatment in Ashfield is at Huthwaite Waste Water Treatment Works (WWTW). There is limited or no existing hydraulic capacity and limited scope to extend the WWTW due to the footprint of the site close proximity of an industrial development. In terms of water quality, the Study concludes there are some issues associated with current performance of some WWTW although Severn Trent Water has indicated that they perceive no quality issues in the future.

8.11 Policy CC2 of the Ashfield Local Plan also includes measures to protect water quality

and development will not be permitted where it would adversely affect the water quality, or delay or prevent schemes to improve water quality. The Council will work with the Environment Agency and other partners to determine whether a development may have an unacceptable adverse impact on water quality.

8.12 Impacts may arise from flood water management schemes altering flows in rivers and

water courses. However, they may also have a positive impact, for example restoring flood plains. Ashfield is located upstream of the Trent valley with a number of the River Trent’s tributaries rising in Ashfield. The Ashfield Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) concluded that the risk of flooding from watercourse in Ashfield is relatively low, although flood risk is an issue in specific areas. Given the flood risk in the District it is not anticipated that any major flood prevention schemes will be undertaken in Ashfield which will have a pathway to the sites in question.

Water Abstraction / Quality: Conclusions

8.13 It can therefore be concluded, on the basis of objective information, that there would be no likely significant effect on the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC or the South Pennine Moors SAC/SPA as a result of the provisions of the Ashfield Local Plan.


32

9.1 As well as assessing the Local Plan policies for any likely significant effects alone, an

assessment also needs to be undertaken ‘in-combination’ with other plans to assess whether the ‘in-combination’ effects will create a likely significant effect on any of the identified European (Natura 2000) sites. This is a requirement of Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive.

9.2 Where it is concluded that a policy or proposal will not have a significant effect when

considered alone, the assessment of significant effects of a policy or proposal will then need to take into account its impact in-combination with other plans and projects.

Key Plans and Projects Assessed for In-combination Effects

9.3 It is clearly neither practical nor necessary to assess the in-combination effects of the

Local Plan within the context of all the other plans and projects within the East Midlands. In practice therefore, in-combination assessment is of greatest relevance when the Plan would otherwise be screened out because its individual contribution is inconsequential. For the purposes of this assessment, it has been determined that, due to the nature of the identified impacts, the key other plans and projects relate to the additional housing, transportation and commercial/industrial allocations proposed for other neighbouring authorities over the lifetime of the Ashfield Local Plan.

9.4 The neighbouring authorities are those which lie within the 15km buffer as identified on

Map 1 on page 21 of this report. Rushcliffe has not been included as only a small part of the Borough lies within the 15km buffer.

For the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC these includes:

• Mansfield District Council, • Newark & Sherwood District Council, • Gedling Borough Council, • Broxtowe Borough Council • Nottingham City Council, • Erewash Borough Council, and

For the South Pennine Moors SPA & SAC these include:

• Bolsover District Council, • Chesterfield Borough Council, • North East Derbyshire District Council, and • Amber Valley Borough Council.

In-combination Effects: Issues Air Quality

9.5 Cumulative effects on the South Pennine Moors SAC and SPA, and the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC could occur through reduced air quality. Chapter 6 of this report confirms

9. In-combination Effects


33

that current concentrations of Nitrogen Oxide, Sulpher Dioxide and Ammonia are within their critical levels for both of the European sites and it is unlikely that these will be affected as a result of Ashfield Local Plan. However, concentrations of Nitrogen are currently being exceeded.

9.6 Nitrogen deposition is mainly as a result of vehicle emissions, which are expected to

increase as a result of an increased population from proposals in the Ashfield Local Plan and the adjacent local authorities planning documents. However, emissions from traffic have been shown to be linked to impacts on vegetation within 200m of the road edge (English Nature Report 580: The ecological effects of diffuse air pollution from road transport). Ashfield lies approximately 15km from the South Pennine Moors and approximately 11km from Birklands and Bilhaugh.

Water Abstraction / Quality 9.7 Cumulative effects on the South Pennine Moors SAC and SPA, and the Birklands and

Bilhaugh SAC could occur through changes in water abstraction and quality. However, Seven Trent Water’s Resource Management Plan (WRMP) 2014 and its accompanying Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) 2014 concluded that, with mitigation taken into account, the preferred programmes (i.e. the WRMP) are unlikely to have a significant effect on the integrity of any European sites. It is also considered unlikely that there would be any in-combination effects of the WRMP with other plans.

9.8 The Ashfield Local Plan includes measures to reduce the demand for water and reduce

consumption in new housing and commercial development. Paragraph 8.8 of this report provides details on this.

9.9 In terms of water quality, many of the most significant risks are as a result of agricultural

activity, which largely falls outside the remit of planning legislation. Proposals within the Ashfield Local Plan and the adjoining local authority planning document, may impact on water quality where development is proposed and there is limited capacity at Waste Water Treatment Works. However, Policy CC2 of the Ashfield Local Plan includes measures to protect water quality and development will not be permitted where it would adversely affect water quality, or delay or prevent schemes to improve water quality. The Council will also work with the Environment Agency and other partners to determine whether a development may have an unacceptable adverse impact on water quality. It is anticipated that other surrounding authorities will take a similar approach to water quality issues.

Recreation Pressures

9.10 Cumulative effects on the South Pennine Moors SAC and SPA, and the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC could occur through the large catchment of the two European sites for recreational visits. However, the bulk of these sites lie within the Peak District National Park and within Sherwood Forest, where active and collaborative approaches are in place to ensure that the needs of recreational users are maintained in balance with the conservation needs of the landscape and biodiversity.

9.11 The Peak District National Park Authority (South Pennine Moors SAC and SPA) has

measures in place designed to cope with a visitor catchment that includes 16 million


34

residents within a one hour drive. The strategies to manage this include partnership working and therefore the potential for in combination effects arising is reduced by the knowledge and understand of regional development and tourism brought to management and focus groups within any partnerships.

9.12 Sherwood Forest (Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC) also has measures in place to cope

with increased visitor numbers to the area. The Sherwood Forest Visitor Centre is to be demolished and removed from the forest together with the associated car parking and play area. This will be reconstructed across the B6034 from its present location, and the previous area will then be restored to oak /headland habitat typical of the area. There are also measures proposed within the park to ensure that visitor activity is focused around the Major Oak, together with plans to reopen access paths outside of the site, which will help to reduce footfall within the SAC.

In-combination Effects: Conclusions

9.13 The table in Appendix 5 highlights the list of ‘other plans’ and assesses the description of the plan; any likely effects; and the in-combination effect on the identified European (Natura 2000) sites. The assessment results are summarised in table 4 below.

Table 4: Summary of the in -combination effects

Plans Assessed Screening Conclusion Broxtowe Borough, Gedling Borough and Nottingham City Aligned Core Strategy Publication Version

No likely significant effect.

Erewash Core Strategy Submission Version


Mansfield District Council Core Strategy Issues and Options Report


Newark and Sherwood LDF Allocations & Development Management DPD


Bolsover Local Plan Strategy Proposed Submission


Amber Valley Local Plan Part 1 – The Draft Core Strategy


Chesterfield Borough Council Core Strategy


North East Derbyshire Local Plan No HRA available at this stage.

9.14 Of those planning authorities listed in table 4, at the time of writing, North East Derbyshire District Council had not published a HRA document. Consequently it is difficult to ascertain the potential impacts that might arise on European Sites as a result of policies and proposals for these authorities. However, considering the likely location of development within North East Derbyshire - as identified in their Core Strategy/Strategic Policies Development Plan Documents – it seems unlikely that there would be significant effects in combination with Ashfield District’s policies and


35

proposals. This is primarily because both authorities are likely to put forward polices for sustainable water management, policies and proposals which encourage sustainable travel patterns (e.g. walking and cycling) and provide access to a comprehensive green infrastructure network (to discourage outside travel for recreation).

9.15 The conclusion arrived at by the other authorities was that the screening carried out in

association with Natural England confirmed that there were no likely significant effect and therefore there was no requirement to carry out an Appropriate Assessment of their Development Plan Document.

9.16 Given that Ashfield lies further from the European sites at which adverse effects could

conceivably occur, then it may be concluded that in combination effects are less likely than from authorities closer to the SACs and SPA. It is therefore considered that there are unlikely to be any significant in-combination effects on the two European Sites as a result of Ashfield District’s policies and proposals.


36

Conclusion: Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC

10.1 The conclusion is of no likely significant effect on the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC, as a

result of increased air pollution, recreational pressure or water abstraction/quality arising from development provided for by the Ashfield Local Plan, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects.

Conclusion: South Pennine Moors SAC and SPA 10.2 The conclusion is of no likely significant effect on the South Pennine Moors SAC and

SPA, as a result of increased air pollution, recreational pressure or water abstraction/quality arising from development provided for by the Ashfield Local Plan, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects*.

Overall Conclusion 10.3 Through the work undertaken for this Habitat Regulation Assessment it is concluded that

an Appropriate Assessment of the Ashfield Local Plan is not required for the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC or the South Pennine Moors SAC and SPA.

10. Conclusions


37



38

This page is intentionally left blank


39

ACS Aligned Core Strategy

CROW Act The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000

cSAC Candidate Special Area of Conservation

EC European Commission

ECJ European Court of Justice

EPS European Protected Species

FCS Favourable Conservation Status

HRA Habitats Regulation Assessment

IBA Important Bird Area

JNCC Joint Nature Conservation Committee

LIFE The EU Financial Instrument for the Environment

MPA Marine Protected Areas

NE Natural England

N Nitrogen

NH3 Ammonia

NOX Nitrogen Oxide

NWT Nottinghamshire Wildlife Trust

OMS Off-Shore Marine Site

PSA Public Service Agreement

pSPA Potential Special Protection Area

SAC Special Area of Conservation

SO2 Sulphur Dioxide

SPA Special Protection Area

SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest

SUE Sustainable Urban Extension

Appendix 1: Glossary of Abbreviations


40



41

STRATEGIC POLICIES

S1 Sustainable Development Principles

General strategy for the Local Plan which ensures that the proposal does not conflict with other policies, does not sterilise other land and enhances the local character.

S2

Overall Strategy For Growth

Sets out the District’s growth requirement, the priorities for sustainable travel, investment in infrastructure and services, green infrastructure and the principles for good design and sustainable development to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

S3

Settlement and Town Centre Hierarchy

Sets out the Districts hierarchy where development will be located. Identifies Hucknall, Sutton and Kirkby as the major centres for growth, with the villages of Selston, Jacksdale and Underwood accommodating a smaller level of growth and the smaller rural settlements of Teversal and Fackley supporting limited infill development. Also sets out the Town Centre retail hierarchy.

Strategic Area Policies - Hucknall

HA1

Hucknall Town Centre

Sets out the priority projects including Piggins Croft and Bolsover Street. Supports town centre developments of high quality, which respect the local distinctiveness of Hucknall.

HA2 Hucknall Economy and Jobs

Sets out the number of jobs/land required for the future, identifies specific sites for protection and how sites will be allocated in future.

HA3 Hucknall Housing Allocations

Sets out the future housing requirement for Hucknall and how/where it will be met.

HA4

Green Infrastructure in and around Hucknall

Sets out requirement for GI in and around Hucknall including the Leen Corridor, South Hucknall and Central Hucknall former railway line links. It also refers to the Council’s GI strategy.

Strategic Area Policies - Kirkby & Sutton

SKA1

Sutton-In-Ashfield and Kirkby-In-Ashfield Town Cent res Sets out the priority projects for both Town Centres including civic space and public realm in Kirkby and development of the area between Low Street and High Pavement and public realm in Sutton.

SKA2 Economy and Jobs in Sutton and Kirkby

Sets out the number of jobs/land required for the future, identifies specific sites for protection and how sites will be allocated in future.

Appendix 2: Summary of Publication Local Plan Policies


42

SKA3 Sutton and Kirkby Housing Allocations Sets out the future housing requirement for Kirkby and Sutton and how/where it will be met.

SKA4 Gypsy and Traveller Site Allocation Sets out provision for Gypsy/Traveller accommodation pitches at Park Lane, Kirkby-In-Ashfield.

SKA5

Green Infrastructure in and around Sutton-In-Ashfie ld and Kirkby-In-Ashfield Sets out requirement for GI in and around Kirkby and Sutton including trails links, links between Kirkby and the Rurals and other key links in and out of the area. It also refers to the Council’s GI strategy.

Strategic Area Policies – The Rurals (Selston, Jack sdale and Underwood)

RA1

The Rurals Economy and Jobs Supports economic development as long as it is appropriate to the character of the settlement. Also supports tourism related industries.

RA2

The Rurals Housing Allocations (Selston, Jacksdale, Bag thorpe and Underwood Area) Sets out the future housing requirement for Selston, Jacksdale and Underwood and how/where it will be met.

RA3

Green Infrastructure in the Rurals Sets out requirement for GI in and around Selston, Jacksdale and Underwood including links to and from Kirkby, along the Erewash Valley and between Jacksdale and Ironville. It also refers to the Council’s GI strategy.

DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES

Adapting to Climate Change

CC1

Zero and Low Carbon Developments and Decentralised, Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Generation Supports proposals for renewable energy sources where it does not impact on the character, landscape, amenity, highway safety etc. Sets out that large scale would not be permitted in or adjoining SSSI’s but would allow smaller scale which includes mitigation measures.

CC2

Water Resource Management

Includes incorporating measures for water efficiency, sets out the requirement for developments regarding water infrastructure (foul, waste and surface water) and also includes developments which may affect water quality.

CC3 Flood Risk and SuDS

Sets out the approach to development and flood risk and lists the factors to be considered for new development. Also sets out the sequential approach to flood risk.


43

Protecting and Enhancing the Environment

EV1

Green Belt

Restricts inappropriate development in the Green Belt and lists appropriate development. Also states that any development must be located and designed so as to not adversely affect the character of the Green Belt, in particular its openness.

EV2

Countryside

Restricts inappropriate development in the Countryside and lists appropriate development. Also states that any development must be located and designed so as to not adversely affect the character of the Countryside.

EV3

Re-use of Buildings in the Green Belt and Countrysi de

Sets out the criteria where reuse or adaptation would be supported and that any proposals that support employment, recreation and tourism will be particularly supported.

EV4 Green Infrastructure, Biodiversity and Geodiversity

Includes measures to ensure GI corridors, assets and sites of biological and geological value are protected and enhanced.

EV5

Protection of Green Spaces and Recreation Facilitie s

Protects the green spaces and recreation facilities that are identified on the proposals map. Discusses how the Council will resist the loss or fragmentation of small open green spaces (not identified on the proposals map).

EV6

Trees, Woodland and Hedgerows

Sets out that development should avoid the loss and minimise risk of harm to trees, woodland and hedgerows. Development will not be permitted which results in the loss of trees or woodlands subject to a TPO, Ancient Woodland etc.

EV7 Provision and Protection of Allotments

Supports the provision of new allotments and does not support the development of allotment sites for other uses which are either public owned or held in trust.

EV8 Equestrian and Other Rural Land Based Activities

Sets out the criteria whereby recreational equestrian and other rural land based activities development will be supported.

EV9

Agricultural Land Quality

Sets out how considerable weight will be given to the loss of Grades 1, 2 and 3a land through development proposals. Development on the best and most fertile land will only be permitted where there is an overriding sustainability benefit.

EV10

The Historic Environment

All development must have regard to its impact on the historic environment. Sets out designated and non-designated heritage assets that the policy covers and supports development proposals which preserve and enhance the heritage assets of the District.

EV11

Protection and Enhancement of Landscape Character

Refers to the Landscape Character Assessment and refers to how any development should by sympathetic to the distinctive LCA areas.


44

Providing Jobs

PJ1

Business and Economic Development

Provides criteria for assessing proposals for business or economic development. Sets out how proposals which have a significant economic benefit will be considered favourably.

PJ2

Business and Employment Development Sites

Lists uses that would be supported on employment allocations, locally significant business areas and other employment sites. Sets out the need for a contribution if, in exceptional circumstances, an alternative use is proposed. Protects employment allocations and locally significant business parks but provides criteria for redevelopment of other employment sites.

PJ3

Rural Business Development

Supports measures which promote a flexible approach which maintains local employment opportunities, sustains viability and facilitates new technologies and home working. Sets out criteria where economic development outside settlements will be permitted.

PJ4 Agricultural, Forestry or Horticultural Development and Farm Diversification

Supports proposals for these uses and sets criteria which need to be adhered to. Also sets criteria for Farm Shops.

PJ5

Education, Skills and Training

Seeks to support educational institutions, allows development of employment sites for educational facilities, planning for the provision of schools of sufficient size for future population requirements and also requires developer contributions when former employment land is developed for potentially higher valued uses to support skills development for the local workforce.

Shopping

SH1

Retail, Leisure, Commercial and Town Centre Uses

Supports development which enhances the vitality and viability of town and local centres. Sets the criteria in which retail, leisure and commercial development in town centres will be acceptable.

SH2

Local Shopping Centres , Shopping Parades and Single Shops

Seeks to protect convenience shops in local centres and protects frontages in certain areas (listed). Sets criteria for retail development meeting local need through single out of centre shops.

SH3

Food, Drink and the Evening Economy Supports these uses in the 3 town centres and local centres. Encourages proposals where there is a diverse range, licensed premises assist in preventing crime and disorder. Does not support proposals which have a singular or cumulative impact on the local amenity.

SH4

Shopfronts Sets out criteria for the design of shopfronts in Ashfield, recognising the importance of well-designed individual shops in contributing towards the character and appearance of shopping areas. Requires shopfront development to consider impacts upon architectural integrity, implications upon safety/perception, and visual or pollution impacts which could impact the wider amenity.


45

Providing Homes

HG1 Provision for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Sh owpeople

Provides for sufficient pitches to meet requirement identified in GTAA. Sets criteria for meeting requirement through planning permissions and site allocations (if required).

HG2 Affordable Housing (Including Starter Homes)

Sets the thresholds for affordable housing in the District. Allows for off site, including commuted sums, where appropriate.

HG3

Public Open Space in New Residential Development s

Makes provision and sets the criteria for open space, sport and recreation facilities in new residential development. Allows for contributions to be negotiated where appropriate. Refers to the Council’s Green Space, GI and Biodiversity and Playing Pitch Strategies.

HG4 Housing Mix

Provides for a mix of type, tenures and size in new residential development. Requires developments to adhere to lifetime homes.

HG5

Housing Density Requires developments to optimise density whilst reflecting local characteristics of the site and surrounding area. Sets criteria where higher and lower densities will be required.

HG6

Conversions to Houses in Multiple Occupation, Flats and Bedsits

Sets out the criteria against these types of proposals will need to adhere to, including no adverse effect on character of dwelling or local area and car parking provision.

Contributing to Successful Development

SD1 Good Design Considerations for Development

Ensures that all new development is designed to make a positive contribution to the existing area. Sets out criteria for development form, movement, safety and standards

SD2 Amenity

Assesses all new development and lists factors which need to be considered in assessing all new developments.

SD3

Recycling and Refuse Provision in New Development

Sets out how the location and design of recycling and refuse provision should be integral to the design of all development and states the requirements for residential, commercial and non-residential. Provides a list of considerations.

SD4

Infrastructure Provision and Developer Contribution s

Ensures that sufficient physical, social and environmental infrastructure is provided to support the development. Sets out the types of infrastructure provision and states that the Council will work towards the preparation of the CIL.


46

SD5

Assessing Viability

Ensures that development complies with Local Plan policies, unless it can be demonstrated that these policies result in the development being unviable. In cases where a Viability Assessment demonstrates unviability, this policy further ensures a flexible Council approach in relation to planning obligations.

SD6 Telecommunications

Lists criteria where the Council will support telecommunication proposals.

SD7

Contaminated Land and Unstable Land

Sets out information required by the Council for development on land which is unstable or contaminated. States that proposals will be considered in the context of cumulative impact.

SD8

Environmental Protection

Sets out that impacts arising from noise, light and air or any other form of pollution must not be harmful to health, wellbeing or amenity of the environment. Sets out requirements in regard to noise, light and air quality.

SD9

Traffic Management and Highway Safety

Sets out criteria in which development will be supported including reducing the need to travel by car, well designed highways, suitable parking provision, safe flow of transport and cyclist provision. Allows for contribution towards improvements to transport infrastructure where the development places additional demands on it. Requires the submission of transport assessments where appropriate

SD10

Parking

Sets out the criteria which new developments are required to meet including; well- designed spaces, safe off street parking, be in accordance with local parking standards and parking provision for cyclists.

SD11

Advertisements Supports the provision of advertising boards and signs where they do not have a negative impact on visual amenity of the street-scene, do not affect road safety and do not have a negative impact on the character of an area or building.

SD12

Provision and Protection of Health and Community Fa cilities Seeks to ensure that developers and strategic partners work with the Council to provide District wide high quality accessible and inclusive health and community facilities. Also seeks to ensure that existing facilities are not lost where they are still required.

SD13

Designing Out Crime and the Fear of Crime Sets out criteria ensuring that major developments do not undermine the quality of life or community cohesion of their surroundings. This policy ensures that such developments do not increase anti-social behaviour and fear of crime; that Secure by Design principles are applied appropriately; and that development does not exacerbate existing issues.


47

Appendix 3: Screening exercise for the Birklands and Bilhaugh Special Area of Conservation (SAC)

Birklands and Bilhaugh Special Area of Conservation (SAC)

Local Plan Policy Assessment Category Assessment Justification

Is an appropriate assessment

required?

Strategic Policies

S1: Sustainable Development Principles

A5

This policy sets out sustainable development principles for future development in the District and provides the necessary framework for subsequent Development Management policies. It is a general statement of policy.

No

S2: Overall Strategy for Growth A5

This policy sets out the overall strategy for future growth in the District and provides the necessary framework for subsequent Development Management policies. It is a general statement of policy.

No

S3: Settlement and Town centre Hierarchy A5

This policy sets out the Districts hierarchy where development will be located and provides the necessary framework for subsequent Development Management policies. It is a general statement of policy.

No

Strategic Area Based Policies - Hucknall

HA1: Hucknall Town Centre A1 / B

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria in which new retail, leisure and commercial development in town centres will be acceptable. B – Development in town centres is unlikely to have any significant effect on any European site due to distance, lack of links or pathways for effect; air quality effects would be hypothetical rather than real risks to European sites.

No

HA2: Hucknall Economy and Jobs B

All sites, with the exception of the Rolls Royce site in Hucknall, are existing allocations and permissions where there is no evidence to suggest that they have any negative effect on a European site. Therefore, it is unlikely there will be any significant effect on any European site due the limited scale of the new development proposed, the distance, lack of links or pathways to the European sites for effect.

No

HA3: Hucknall Housing Allocations B

This policy identifies housing allocations in Hucknall. This is one of the primary policies within the Local Plan that is likely to have a significant effect on the European sites due to the increase in population within the district which will in turn lead to potentially increased air pollution, recreational pressures and issues with water abstraction and water quality. However, given the effects of other Local Plan Policies, such as: CC2 – Water Resource Management, EV4 – Green Infrastructure, Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, HG4 – Public Green Spaces in New Residential Development, and SD7 – Environmental Protection, it is considered that the risk is negligible, even in combination with other plans and projects.

No

HA4: Green Infrastructure in and around Hucknall

A3

This policy sets out the requirements for green infrastructure in and around Hucknall and will help to relieve pressure on sensitive European sites by improving open space provision closer to urban areas.

No


48

Strategic Area Based Policies – Sutton & Kirkby

SKA1: Sutton-In-Ashfield and Kirkby-In-Ashfield Town Centres

A1 / B


No

SKA2: Economy and Jobs in Sutton and Kirkby

B

All sites, with the exception of the Mowlands site in Kirkby, are existing allocations and permissions where there is no evidence to suggest that they have any negative effect on a European site. Therefore, it is unlikely there will be any significant effect on any European site due the limited scale of the new development proposed, the distance, lack of links or pathways to the European sites for effect.

No

SKA3: Sutton and Kirkby Housing Allocations

B

This policy identifies housing allocations in Sutton and Kirkby. This is one of the primary policies within the Local Plan that is likely to have a significant effect on the European sites due to the increase in population within the district which will in turn lead to potentially increased air pollution, recreational pressures and issues with water abstraction and water quality. However, given the effects of other Local Plan Policies, such as: CC2 – Water Resource Management, EV4 – Green Infrastructure, Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, HG4 – Public Green Spaces in New Residential Development, and SD7 – Environmental Protection, it is considered that the risk is negligible, even in combination with other plans and projects.

No

SKA4: Gypsy and Traveller Site Allocation

B

This policy provides for development over and above that assessed in policy HG1. However, the scale of this type of development and the fact that the site (Park lane, Kirkby) is located within the main urban area means that such development is unlikely to increase the effects of new housing development in Ashfield District on European sites to any significant extent, and is likely to have a negligible effect on European sites.

No

SKA5: Green Infrastructure in and around Sutton-in-Ashfield and Kirkby-In-Ashfield

A3

This policy sets out the requirements for green infrastructure in and around Kirkby and Sutton and will help to relieve pressure on sensitive European sites by improving open space provision closer to urban areas.

No

Strategic Area Based Policies – The Rurals (Selston, Jacksdale and Underwood)

RA1: The Rurals Economy and Jobs A1 / B

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for appropriate uses on business and economic development sites in the Rural’s. B - This policy encourages business development in rural areas, which in theory could affect the European sites, in particular the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC, but given the criteria in the policy that looks to ‘support measures which promote an integrated and flexible approach to sustainable business development’, and given the location of the SAC, its interest features and the conservation objectives, the risk is considered to be negligible, even in combination with the effects of other development in the plan and other plans and projects.

No


49




required?


CC1: Zero and Low Carbon Developments and Decentralised, Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Generation

A1 / A2

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new development. A2 – Intended to protect the natural environment through reductions in air pollution, which would have a potential benefits for European sites.

No

CC2: Water Resource Management

A1 / A2

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new development. A2 – Intended to protect the natural environment through reductions in water consumption and the protection of water quality, which would have a potential benefits for European sites.

No

CC3: Flood Risk and SuDS A1 / A3

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new development. A3 – Intended to conserve and enhance the natural, built or historic environment through reducing flood risk in these areas.

No


EV1: Green Belt A1 / A2 /A3

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new development. A2 – Intended to protect the natural environment. A3 – Intended to conserve and enhance the natural environment, built or historic environment through the protection of land out-side the urban area. (Some areas within the Green Belt are of historic value, such as Bagthorpe Conservation Area).

No

EV2: Countryside A1 / A2 /A3

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new development. A2 – Intended to protect the natural environment. A3 – Intended to conserve and enhance the natural environment, built or historic environment through the protection of land out-side the urban area. (Some areas within the Countryside are of historic value, such as Teversal Conservation Area).

No

RA2: The Rurals Housing Allocations (Selston, Bagthorpe, and Underwood area)

B

This policy identifies housing allocations in the Rural’s. This is one of the primary policies within the Local Plan that is likely to have a significant effect on the European sites due to the increase in population within the district which will in turn lead to potentially increased air pollution, recreational pressures and issues with water abstraction and water quality. However, given the effects of other Local Plan Policies, such as: CC2 – Water Resource Management, EV4 – Green Infrastructure, Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, HG4 – Public Green Spaces in New Residential Development, and SD7 – Environmental Protection, it is considered that the risk is negligible, even in combination with other plans and projects.

No

RA3: Green Infrastructure in the Rurals

A3

This policy is sets out the requirements for green infrastructure in and around Selston, Jacksdale and Underwood and will help to relieve pressure on sensitive European sites by improving open space provision closer to urban areas.

No


50

EV3: Re-use of Buildings in the Green Belt and Countryside

A1 / A3

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new development. A3 – Intended to conserve and enhance the natural, built or historic environment through reducing flood risk in these areas, which would have a potential benefits for European sites.

No

EV4: Green Infrastructure, Biodiversity, and Geodiversity

A2 / A3

Generally the policy will have benefits for biodiversity and will help to relieve pressure on sensitive European sites by improving open space provision closer to urban areas.

No

EV5: Protection of Green Spaces and Recreation Facilities

A2 / A3 / A4

A2 - Generally the policy will have benefits for the natural environment and will help to relieve pressure on sensitive European sites by improving open space provision closer to urban areas. A3 – Intended to conserve and enhance the natural and built environment through the protection of green spaces and recreational facilities. A4 – Intended to protect green spaces and recreation facilities within or close to urban areas and therefore positively steer development and people away from European sites and sensitive areas.

No

EV6: Trees, Woodlands and Hedgerows

A2

This policy is intended to protect the natural environment, including biodiversity, by minimising the loss of trees, woodlands and hedgerows where development is proposed.

No

EV7: Provision and Protection of Allotments

A3 This policy is intended to conserve and enhance the natural and built environment through the provision and protection of allotments.

No

EV8: Equestrian and Other Rural Land Based Activities

A1 This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for new equine development. No

EV9: Agricultural Land Quality A2

This policy is intended to protect the natural environment.

No

EV10: The Historic Environment A3

This policy is intended to conserve and enhance the natural and built environment.

No

EV11: Protection and Enhancement of Landscape Character

A2 / A3

A2 – Intended to protect the natural environment through the protection of land outside the urban area. A3 – Intended to conserve and enhance the natural, and historic environment through the protection of landscape character areas.

No

Providing Jobs

PJ1: Business and Economic Development

A1 This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for new business and economic development.

No

PJ2: Business and Employment Development Sites

A1 / A3 / B

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for appropriate uses on business and economic development sites. A3 – Intended to conserve the natural, built and historic environment by steering business and economic development to sites within the existing urban area. B – All sites, with the exception of the Rolls Royce site in Hucknall and the Mowlands site in Kirkby, are existing allocations and permissions where there is no evidence to suggest that they have any negative effect on a European site. Therefore, it is unlikely there will be any significant effect on any European site due the limited scale of the new development proposed, the distance, lack of links or pathways to the European sites for effect.

No


51

PJ3: Rural Business Development B

This policy encourages business development in rural areas, which in theory could affect the European sites, in particular the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC, but given the criteria in the policy that development must be ‘sustainable’ and an ‘appropriate scale’, and given the location of the SAC, its interest features and the conservation objectives, the risk is considered to be negligible, even in combination with the effects of other development in the plan and other plans and projects.

No

PJ4: Agricultural, Forestry or Horticultural Development and Farm Diversification

A1

This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for new agricultural buildings, farm diversification and commercial equestrian development.

No

PJ5: Education, Skills and Training

B

This policy seeks to support education facilities, allows development of employment sites for educational purposes and plans for the provision of schools for the growing population. Development of this nature is likely to be located within the main urban area and is unlikely to have any significant effect on any European site due to distance, lack of links or pathways for effect.

No

Shopping

SH1: Retail, Leisure and Commercial Town Centre Uses

A1 /A3 / B

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria in which new retail, leisure and commercial development in town centres will be acceptable. A3 – Intended to conserve and enhance the natural, built or historic environment through steering development to town centres and thus away from European sites. B – Development in town centres is unlikely to have any significant effect on any European site due to distance, lack of links or pathways for effect; air quality effects would be hypothetical rather than real risks to European sites.

No

SH2: Local Shopping Centres, Shopping Parades and Single Shops

A1 / A3 / B

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for retail development meeting local need through single out of centre shops. A3 – Intended to conserve and enhance the natural, built or historic environment through steering development to local and minor shopping centres and thus away from European sites. B – Development in local and minor shopping areas and the provision of single shops is unlikely to have any significant effect on any European site due to distance, lack of links or pathways for effect; air quality effects would be hypothetical rather than real risks to European sites.

No

SH3: Food, Drink and the Evening Economy A1 / A3 / B

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new food, drink and entertainment facilities. A3 – Intended to conserve and enhance the natural, built or historic environment through primarily steering development to the primary shopping areas, and thus away from European sites. B – Development of this nature is unlikely to have any significant effect on any European site due to distance, lack of links or pathways for effect; air quality effects would be hypothetical rather than real risks to European sites.

No

SH4: Shopfronts A1 This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for the design of new shopfronts. No


52

Providing Homes

HG1: Provision for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople

A1 / B

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria which will be B – The policy also provide criteria which will be used to guide the process for future site identification. This could therefore lead to new development. However, given the likely scale of this type of development, the criteria that proposals must meet in order to be granted planning permission and the preference that sites should be in the main urban area means that such development is unlikely to increase the effects of new housing development in Ashfield District on European sites to any significant extent, and is likely to have a negligible effect on European sites.

No

HG2: Affordable Housing (Including Starter Homes)

A1

This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the requirements minimum thresholds and requirements for affordable housing relating to new housing development across the district.

No

HG3: Public Open Space in New Residential Developments

A4

This policy is intended to provide green spaces and recreational facilities within or close to urban areas and therefore positively steer development and people away from European sites and sensitive areas.

No

HG4: Housing Mix A1

This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the requirements for new housing development and requirements for the composition of the new housing stock.

No

HG5: Housing Density A1

This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the requirements for housing densities on new sites.

No

HG6: Conversions to Houses in Multiple Occupation, Flats and Bedsits.

A1 This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for conversions to HIMO’s, flats and bedsits.

No

Contributing to Successful Development SD1: Good Design Considerations for Development

A1 This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for design consideration in new development.

No

SD2: Amenity A1 This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for amenity consideration in new development.

No

SD3: Recycling and Refuse Provision in New Development

A1 This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for the provision and location of recycling and refuse provision in new development.

No

SD4: Infrastructure Provision and Developer Contributions

A1

This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria to ensure sufficient physical, social and environmental infrastructure is provided to support new development.

No

SD5: Assessing Viability A1

This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for assessing the viability of a development.

No

SD6: Telecommunications A1

This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for new telecommunication proposals.

No

SD7: Contaminated Land and Unstable Land

A1

This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for new development on sites which are contaminated, unstable or within a coal referral area.

No

SD8: Environmental Protection A1 / A2

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new development in regards to noise, light and air pollution. A2 – Intended to protect the natural environment through reductions in noise levels, light pollution and air pollution, which would have a potential benefits for European sites.

No


53

SD9: Traffic Management and Highway Safety

A1 / A2 / B

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for which new development will be supported with regards to traffic management and highway safety. A2 – Intended to protect the natural environment through reducing the need to travel by car, which would have a potential benefits for European sites. B – Given the hierarchical approach set out in strategic policy SP3 in relation to the location of new development, it seems highly unlikely that major highway capacity enhancements to deal with residual car demand would be likely to have a significant effect on the European sites.

No

SD10: Parking A1 This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for parking standards in new developments.

No

SD11: Advertisements A1

This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for new advertisements.

No

SD12: Provision and protection of Health and Community Facilities

A1 / A2

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new Health and Community Facilities. A2 – Intended to protect the existing health and community facilities.

No

SD13: Designing Out Crime and the Fear of Crime

A1 This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for designing out crime and the fear of crime. No


54



55

South Pennine Moors SAC and SPA



required?

Strategic Policies


A5


No



No

S3: Settlement and Town Centre Hierarchy

A5


No




No

HA2: Hucknall Economy and Jobs A5


No

HA3: Hucknall Housing Allocations A5


No

HA4: Hucknall Green Infrastructure A3

This policy is sets out the requirements for green infrastructure in and around Hucknall and will help to relieve pressure on sensitive European sites by improving open space provision closer to urban areas.

No

Appendix 4: Screening exercise for the South Pennine Moors Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Special Protection Area (SPA)


56



A1 / B


No


B


No

SKA3: Sutton and Kirkby Housing Allocations

B

This policy identifies housing allocations in Sutton and Kirkby. This is one of the primary policies within the Local Plan that is likely to have a significant effect on the European sites due to the increase in population within the district which will in turn lead to potentially increased air pollution, recreational pressures and issues with water abstraction and water quality. However, given the effects of other Local Plan Policies, such as: CC2 – Water Resource Management, EV4 – Green Infrastructure, Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, HG4 – Public Green Spaces in New Residential Development, and SD7 – Environmental Protection, it is considered that the risk is negligible, even in combination with other plans and projects.

No


B


No

SKA5: Green Infrastructure in and around Sutton-In-Ashfield and Kirkby-In-Ashfield

A3


No

Strategic Policies – The Rurals (Selston, Jacksdale an d Underwood)


A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for appropriate uses on business and economic development sites in the Rurals. B - This policy encourages business development in rural areas, which in theory could affect the European sites, in particular the South Pennine Moors SAC and SPA, but given the criteria in the policy that looks to ‘support measures which promote an integrated and flexible approach to sustainable business development’, and given the location of the SAC and SPA, its interest features and the conservation objectives, the risk is considered to be negligible, even in combination with the effects of other development in the plan and other plans and projects.

No

South Pennine Moors Special Area of Conservation


57


B

This policy identifies housing allocations in the Rurals. This is one of the primary policies within the Local Plan that is likely to have a significant effect on the European sites due to the increase in population within the district which will in turn lead to potentially increased air pollution, recreational pressures and issues with water abstraction and water quality. However, given the effects of other Local Plan Policies, such as: CC2 – Water Resource Management, EV4 – Green Infrastructure, Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, HG4 – Public Green Spaces in New Residential Development, and SD7 – Environmental Protection, it is considered that the risk is negligible, even in combination with other plans and projects.

No


A3


No




required?



A1 / A2

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new development. A2 – Intended to protect the natural environment through reductions in air pollution, which would have a potential benefits for European sites.

No


A1 / A2


No

CC3: Flood Risk and SuDS A1 / A3


No



A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new development. A2 – Intended to protect t the natural environment. A3 – Intended to conserve and enhance the natural environment, built or historic environment through the protection of land outside the urban area. (Some areas within the Green Belt are of historic value, such as Bagthorpe Conservation Area).

No


A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new development. A2 – Intended to protect t the natural environment. A3 – Intended to conserve and enhance the natural environment, built or historic environment through the protection of land outside the urban area. (Some areas within the Countryside are of historic value, such as Teversal Conservation Area).

No


58


A1 / A3


No

EV4: Green Infrastructure, Biodiversity and Geodiversity

A2 / A3


No


A2 / A3 / A4


No


A2


No


A3 This policy is intended to conserve and enhance the natural and built environment through the provision and protection of allotments.

No


A1

This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for new equine development.

No



No


This policy is intended to conserve and enhance the natural and built environment. No

EV11: Protection and Enhancement of Landscape Character

A2 / A3


No

Providing Jobs



No


A1 / A3 / B

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for appropriate uses on business and economic development sites. A3 – Intended to conserve the natural, built and historic environment by steering business and economic development to sites within the existing urban area. B – All sites, with the exception of the Rolls Royce site in Hucknall and the Mowlands site in Kirkby, are existing allocations and permissions where there is no evidence to suggest that they have any negative effect on a European site. Therefore, it is unlikely there will be any significant effect on any European site due the limited scale of the new development proposed, the distance, lack of links or pathways to the European sites for effect.

No


59


This policy encourages business development in rural areas, which in theory could affect the European sites, but given the criteria in the policy that development must be ‘sustainable’ and an ‘appropriate scale’, and given the location of the SAC and SPA, its interest features and the conservation objectives, the risk is considered to be negligible, even in combination with the effects of other development in the plan and other plans and projects.

No


A1


No


B


No

Shopping

SH1: Retail, Leisure, Commercial and Town Centre Uses

A1 /A3 / B


No


A1 / A3 / B


No

SH3: Food, Drink and the Evening Economy

A1 / A3 / B

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new food, drink and entertainment facilities. A3 – Intended to conserve and enhance the natural, built or historic environment through primarily steering development to the primary shopping areas, and thus away from European sites. B – Development of this nature is unlikely to have any significant effect on any European site due to distance, lack of links or pathways for effect; air quality effects would be hypothetical rather than real risks to European sites.

No

SH4: Shopfronts A1 This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for the design of new shop fronts. No


60

Providing Homes


A1 / B


No


A1


No

HG3: Public Open Space in New Residential Developments

A4

A4 – Intended to provide open spaces and recreational facilities within or close to urban areas and therefore positively steer development and people away from European sites and sensitive areas.

No

HG4: Housing Mix A1


No



No

HG6: Conversions to Houses in Multiple Occupation, Flats and Bedsits.


No



No


No


A1

This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for the provision and location of recycling and refuse provision in new development.

No


A1


No


This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for assessing the viability of new development.



No


A1


No


A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new development in regards to noise, light and air pollution. A2 – Intended to protect the natural environment through reductions in noise levels, light pollution and air pollution, which would have a potential benefits for European sites.

No


61


A1 / A2 / B


No

SD10: Parking A1 This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for parking standards in new developments.

No



No

SD12: Provision and Protection of Health and Community Facilities

A1 / A2


No




62


63

Appendix 5: In- combination Effects

In-combination Assessment: ‘Other

Plans’ Name of Plan

Description of Plan Likely effect? Screening ‘in-combination’

conclusion

Broxtowe Borough, Gedling

Borough and Nottingham City

Aligned Core Strategies Part 1 Local

Plan (Adopted September 2014)

Broxtowe Borough, Gedling

Borough and Nottingham City

Adopted the Core Strategy in

September 2014. The document

sets out a vision and strategy for

growth and sustainable

development in three local

authority areas up to 2028. It

includes broad locations for

development and strategic policies

for homes, business, retail,

transport and the environment. The

document has strong synergy with

the strategies of Rushcliffe and

Erewash Councils.

A HRA (June 2012) has been

undertaken to accompany the

Aligned Core Strategy. It was

concluded that the overall level of

growth would not be likely to have a

significant effect on any European

site, alone or in-combination with

other plans or projects. For the

Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC, this

assumption relies on the relocation

of the Sherwood Forest visitors

centre and the improved habitat

and access management measures

proposed.

A reasonable assessment can be

undertaken as the Aligned Core

Strategy HRA, carried out in

association with Natural England,

confirmed that no likely significant

effects to identified European sites.

All policies and site allocations

within the Ashfield Local Plan

Publication Document have now

been screened out due to

appropriate mitigation and

avoidance measures included in the

relevant policies in the Local Plan, or

because they did not lead to direct

development.

Therefore, it can be concluded that

as Ashfield has mitigated against

any potential impacts the Local Plan

may have on identified European

Sites, there are no likely ‘in-

combination’ effects with the


64

Ashfield Local Plan and the Aligned

Core Strategy.

Erewash Core Strategy (Adopted

March 2014)

The Core Strategy sets out the

vision and strategy for growth and

development within Erewash up to

2028, and has been prepared in

broad alignment with the Aligned

Core Strategies of Broxtowe

Borough Council, Gedling Borough

and Nottingham City Councils.

Erewash adopted its Core Strategy

in March 2014.

A HRA (June 2012) has been


Aligned Core Strategy (which

Erewash was a part of at the time of

writing the HRA). It was concluded

that the overall level of growth

would not be likely to have a

significant effect on any European

site, alone or in-combination with

other plans or projects. For the

Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC, this

assumption relies on the relocation

of the Sherwood Forest visitors

centre and the improved habitat

and access management measures

proposed.


undertaken as the Erewash Core

Strategy HRA, carried out in

association with Natural England,

confirmed that no likely significant

effects to identified European sites.






avoidance or because they did not

lead to direct development.







Ashfield Local Plan and the Erewash

Core Strategy.


65

Mansfield District Council Local

Plan Consultation Draft (January

2016)

Mansfield District Council is

currently in the process of replacing

the Local Plan (1998).

The New Local Plan will provide a

strategy to deliver new homes,

employment, commercial and

community facilities until 2033. It

will also protect Mansfield’s historic

and natural environment.

A HRA (February 2016) has been


Mansfield Local Plan Consultation

Draft. There are two sites of

concern within the HRA. It is

concluded that no likely significant

effects upon the Birklands &

Bilhaugh SAC will arise alone or in-

combination from the Local Plan. It

is also concluded that, subject to

some proposed changed to policy,

there will be no likely significant

effects upon the Sherwood ppSPA.


undertaken as the Mansfield Local

Plan Consultation Draft HRA, carried

out in association with Natural

England, confirmed that no likely

significant effects to identified

European sites.














Ashfield Local Plan and the

Mansfield Local Plan.

Newark and Sherwood LDF

Allocations & Development

Newark and Sherwood have an

adopted Core Strategy (2011) and

an adopted Allocations and

The Newark and Sherwood

Allocations and Development

Management DPD has been


undertaken as the Newark and

Sherwood HRA confirmed that no


66

Management DPD (Adopted July

2013)

Development Management DPD

(July 2013). The main purpose of the

Allocations and Development

Management DPD is to allocate

sufficient land for housing,

employment and retail, to meet the

needs of Newark and Sherwood to

2026 and beyond.

assessed under the Habitat

Regulations (Sept 2012). The

assessment concluded that there

will be no likely significant effects

(either alone or in combination) as a

result of the Allocations and

Development Management DPD

being implemented.

likely significant effects to identified

European sites.














Ashfield Local Plan and the Newark

and Sherwood LDF.

Local Plan for Bolsover District:

Identified Strategic Options

(October, 2015).

Bolsover District Council is currently

in the process of replacing the Local

Plan (2000). A previously submitted

Local Plan was withdrawn in June

2014.

The New Local Plan will establish

the vision and objectives for

development in Bolsover until 2033,

At present, a HRA: Scope and

Approach Technical Note has been

produced. The Technical Note found

that, although the Local Plan is in

the early stages of development,

any future effects on European sites

are likely to be weak or absent due

to the distances involved;


undertaken as the Bolsover Local

Plan HRA: Scope and Approach

Technical Note has found that any

future effects on identified

European sites are likely to be weak

or absent.


67

including strategic policies and

detailed allocations. The emerging

Local Plan has an adoption target

date of September 2018.

characteristics and features of the

sites; and lack of impact pathways.

Furthermore, whilst ‘in-

combination’ effects may be

possible (e.g. through recreational

pressure), the contribution of the

Bolsover Local Plan to this is likely to

be limited. Bolsover have appointed

AMEC Foster Wheeler to undertake

a more detailed HRA.

The HRA for the previously

submitted Local Plan found no

significant impacts upon European

Sites, either alone or in-

combination.








Therefore, as Ashfield has mitigated

against any potential impacts the

Local Plan may have on identified

European Sites, a reasonable

assessment can conclude that there

are no likely ‘in-combination’ effects

with the Ashfield Local Plan and the

Local Plan for Bolsover District.

Amber Valley Local Plan Part 1 –

The Draft Core Strategy (October

2013)

(Withdrawn from inspection

December 2015; Target adoption

March 2018).

Amber Valley Borough Council is in

the process of replacing the Local

Plan (2006). It had to withdraw the

Submitted Draft Core Strategy

(2013) in December 2015,

concluding that it was unable to

demonstrate a robust five-year

housing supply. The most recent

HRA relates to this document.

The HRA of the Amber Valley draft

Core Strategy (2013) has not

identified pathways of impact other

than recreational pressure and

disturbance and therefore effects

arising from other pathways such as

reduced air quality or changes in

water availability were scoped out

the assessment.


undertaken as the Amber Valley

Core Strategy HRA confirmed that

no likely significant effects to

identified European sites.







68

The Core Strategy will establish the

vision, objectives and proposals for

development until 2028. It will set

out the main locations for new

development and how this will be

managed. The ‘Call for Sites’ process

ended in March 2016. The Draft

Submission Plan is due June 2017,

with a target adoption date of

March 2018.

The draft Core Strategy (2013)

includes policy relating to the

quantum of development to be

delivered within Amber Valley

Borough. However, it was possible

to conclude that the scale of such

development, in parallel with lack

susceptibility and appropriate

management of relevant. European

sites, means that the possibility of

adverse effects from recreational

pressure arising could be screened

out of the HRA. This conclusion

applies both to the Core Strategy

alone and to other plans and

projects that may act in

combination.









Ashfield Local Plan and the Amber

Valley Draft Core Strategy.

North East Derbyshire Local Plan

(2011 – 2031)

North East Derbyshire District

Council is currently in the process of

replacing its 2001-2011 Local Plan. It

had initially been working on a two-

part Local Plan (Part 1: Strategic

Policies & Part 2: Allocations and

Development Management

Policies), but will now be

progressing as a single plan. The

Council aims to consult the public

There is no HRA for the Emerging

Local Plan available at this stage.

Due to the lack of information about

the overall level and distribution of

growth and no accompanying HRA,

the effect of the plan ‘in-

combination’ is uncertain at

present.

However, all policies and site

allocations within the Ashfield Local

Plan Publication have now been


69

on issues and options for this Local

Plan later in 2016, and prepare a

publication version late 2017, with a

target adoption sate of November

2018.

screened out, due to appropriate

mitigation and avoidance measures

included in the relevant policies in

the Local Plan, or because they did

not lead to direct development.

In conclusion, whilst the overall

effect remains uncertain at this

time, Ashfield can only

control/affect the potential impacts

and effects caused either within

their own boundary or through their

own plan and does not have the

ability to influence plans outside

their area.

Chesterfield Borough Council Core

Strategy (July 2013)

Chesterfield Borough Council

adopted the Local Plan: Core

Strategy in July 2013. This sets out

the strategy for development until

2031, identifying broad areas

suitable for development.

A HRA Screening Report was

undertaken for the Core Strategy in

September 2011. The report did not

identify any likely significant

impacts upon Natura 2000 or

Ramsar sites and therefore stage 2

(appropriate assessment) and stage

3 (mitigation and alternative

solutions) of the Habitats

Regulations Appropriate


undertaken as the Core Strategy

HRA Screening Report confirmed

that no likely significant effects to

identified European sites.







70

Assessment process were not

considered necessary.









Ashfield Local Plan and Chesterfield

Borough Council Core Strategy.

71

1. Introduction

1.1 Natural England has confirmed that Sherwood Forest satisfies Stage 1 of the SPA

Selection Guidelines for breeding nightjar and woodlark. Natural England therefore advocates that further consideration of Sherwood Forest against Stage 2 of the SPA Selection Guidelines at the appropriate stage during the UK SPA Review process. However, as the full SPA selection process has yet to be formally implemented and the formal UK Review of the existing suite of sites for nightjar and woodlark is pending, the Review Panel (JNCC) have not yet formed a view on whether a site within the Sherwood Forest region is one of the ‘most suitable territories’ for these species.

1.2 Accordingly, Natural England advocates that a risk-based approach or similar be adopted until such a time that the full SPA Review process has been completed and an announcement has been made by the Secretary of State on the future classification of Sherwood Forest as a SPA. A copy of Natural England’s Advice Note to Local Planning Authorities regarding the consideration of likely effects on the breeding population of nighjar and woodlark in the Sherwood Forest region, can be seen in Appendix A.

2. Context

2.1 This section sets out the context, providing details of the site covered by the ppSPA and background to why it is considered to have potential as a European site. The text in this section draws heavily on Naturals England’s advice to the Inspector for the Rufford Inquiry into a proposed Energy Recovery facility at Rufford (APP/L3055/V/09/ 2102006) 7th October 2009.

Designation European Sites - Overview of the Proces s

2.2 The selection of SPAs in the UK involves two stages and the selection guidelines for SPAs are available on the Joint nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) website (www.jncc.gov.uk/page2643). The first stage of the process is proposed to identify those areas most likely for SPA status, including those areas used regularly by 1% or more of the Great Britain population of a species listed in Annex 1 of the Birds Directive in any season (criterion 1.1). Stage 2 of the selection process then considers and evaluates these areas further using an additional seven criteria, including species, geographic range, population density, number of qualifying species and site naturalness, to select the most suitable areas in number and size for SPA classification.

2.3 There is currently a UK wide SPA review being carried out, led by an Executive Steering Group chaired by DEFRA and comprising representatives of the Government department four country administrations and their statutory conservation agencies

Section 2 Sherwood Forest possible potential

Special Protection Area (ppSPA)


72

across the UK, together with the Joint Nature Conservation Committee. The revised Review Terms of Reference outline that as part of the Review there will be a determination of whether it is necessary to increase the coverage of SPAs for both nightjar and woodlark in light of the most recent national species surveys. Further information by the RSPB, 4th February 2010 (Dodd, A Jennings, K Wilkinson, and C.2010) has confirmed that the population coverage of both nightjar and woodlark within the existing SPA suite has declined between the last national surveys. Considerable changes in population have occurred in individual SPAs during this time. The RSPB have acknowledged a number of possible additions to the SPA series should the UK SPA Review conclude it necessary to increase the coverage of both species. One of these possible additions is in Sherwood Forest.

2.4 The Review will be delivered in three phases. The first phase will consider and develop

further guidance and principles to assist in the ongoing application of the UK SPA guidelines, including the adequacy of the existing suite of SPAs for species such as nightjar and woodlark. The second phase will be undertaken by the four Country Administrations in conjunction with the relevant statutory conservation agencies. It will involve the consideration and application of those principles and further guidance established in phase one, subject to Ministerial approval. This will include whether new SPAs should be considered in the light of recommendations from the first phase of the review , and if so, their location and extent, similarly, whether existing SPAs should be extended either in spatial extent or through the addition of further qualifying species. It will be during the phase when the formal evaluation of individual sites against both Stage 1 and Stage 2 criteria of the SPA Selection Guidelines will be most appropriate. The third phase involves the revision of citations and boundaries (as appropriate and necessary) by individual Country Administrations at those sites where qualifying species and areas have been changed.

Why is Sherwood Forest being considered as a SPA?

2.5 Natural England’s review of the breeding nightjar and woodlark population with data collected during the 2004 and 2006 National Surveys has concluded that numbers of breeding nightjar and woodlark in the Sherwood Forest region represent more than 1% of the total UK breeding populations.

2.6 Natural England’s calculations report Sherwood Forest supported 1.88% of the total UK breeding nightjar population during 2004 and 2.51% of the total UK breeding woodlark population during 2006 (based on the statutory 1% threshold levels from 1992 and 1997 respectively).

2.7 Natural England has shown concern that the Sherwood Forest serves to function as a single ecological site. Analysis undertaken by the RSPB (Dodd, A et al.20120) identified a strong aggregation of nightjar territories in the Sherwood Forest region and likely foraging ranges associated with these territories would suggest considerable overlap and interaction between birds. Many of the component blocks of the Sherwood Forest region are fragmented but sufficiently adjacent or in close proximity to each other to allow movement of birds between the areas, giving the whole area a strong ecological identity.


73

2.8 Natural England is now of the opinion that Sherwood Forest satisfies stage 1 of the SPA Selection Guidelines for breeding nightjar and woodlark. This is supported by the RSPB (Dodd, A. et al, 2010). As a result Natural England would advocate the further consideration of Sherwood Forest against stage 2 of the SPA Selection Guidelines at the appropriate assessment during the UK SPA Review process. As the full SPA selection process has yet to be formally implemented and the formal UK Review of the existing suites of sites for nightjar and woodlark is pending. The Review panel has not yet formed a view on whether a site within the Sherwood Forest region is one of the most suitable territories for these two species and therefore, has not so far provided any recommendation to the Secretary of State on the selection of any SPA in the Sherwood Forest area. It is their view that the possibility of Sherwood Forest being recommended for future classification as a SPA remains at this stage on the basis of the evidence from the national surveys and the interpretation of that data.

2.9 Nevertheless, there is a real possibility that Sherwood Forest could be recommended for future classification as a SPA, and as such Natural England advocates that a risk-based approach should be used prior to the completion of the full SPA Review process (see Appendix A).

What is the extent of the area potentially affected ?

2.10 No assessment of the boundary of the prospective SPA has yet been made, however, two datasets exist which give a good indication of the areas which are likely to be included. Natural England Indicative core area (ICA) boundaries are based on 2004 and 2006 datasets, whilst those of the IBA are based on all records, and can be argued therefore to present a broader picture. In light of the uncertainties in where the final boundaries will lie, and with regard to the review provisions of Regulation 63 (if a block of land was included which had not previously been assessed), for the purposes of this appraisal the boundary is assumed to incorporate all areas within both the IBA and Natural England ICA boundaries. This is considered to be a precautionary approach that should future-proof the appraisal and reduce the likelihood of any review being required should a pSPA be proposed for Sherwood Forest.

2.11 Natural England have emphasised this does not constitute a proposed SPA boundary,

this boundary is purely indicative and there is ongoing consideration of an additional qualifying species in the far north of the Sherwood Forest region which may require the inclusion of additional lands. The outcomes of the UK SPA Review process will be relevant, as is the need for wider consultation with landowners, stakeholders and partners on a proposed SPA site boundary.

2.12 Map A below shows the ppSPA in relation to Ashfield and neighbouring authorities, together with the proposed housing sites in Ashfield.


74


75

3. Existing Designations within the Sherwood Forest Region

3.1 Some such designations already included within the area of the ppSPA, these designations include:

• Foxcovert Plantation, Nottinghamshire Wildlife Trust Nature Reserve;

• Sherwood Heath Local Nature Reserve;

• Sherwood Forest National Nature Reserve

• Birklands and Bilhaugh Special Area of Conservation;

• Clumber Park SSSI

• Thoresby Lake SSSI;

• Strawberry Hill Heath SSSI;

• Welbeck Lake SSSI

• Birklands West and Ollerton Corner SSSI;

• Birklands and Bilhaugh SSSI;

• Rainsworth Water Local Nature Reserve;

• Cockglode and Rotary Wood Local Nature Reserve;

• Rainworth Heath SSSI

4. Methodology

Introduction

4.1 The methodology used to carry out this assessment is the same as the Authority used

for the screening of the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC and the South Pennine Moors SAC/SPA, as detailed in Section 1 (Chapter 4) of this report.

Screening Categories

4.2 Natural England has developed a series of categories that can be used as the basis for screening out policies and proposals. To avoid repetition, these categories are listed on page 19 of the main screening report.

4.3 Appendix B of this Section presents the results of this screening exercise for the Local Plan, the first column identifies the relevant policy within the Local Plan document and the second column identifies the categories that arose from the initial screening exercise, the third column includes recommendations for those policies that fall within category C and D, and finally the last column identifies if an Appropriate Assessment is required for the site.

4.4 It is acknowledged that this exercise is subject to value judgments associated with all

environmental assessments and although guided by criteria is still subjective.


76

5. The Issues

5.1 In line with Natural England’s guidance, policies have been screened against the following issues, in order to identify a significant effect on the prospective European sites either individually or in combination. Appendix B sets out the results.

• Air Quality Water

• Abstraction/Quality

• Pressure from Recreation

• Pet predation

• Habitat loss/ fragmentation

• Lighting

6. Air Quality

Air Quality: Issues

6.1 The Sherwood Forest ppSPA is sensitive to changes in air quality. It is therefore important to establish background concentrations of existing air pollution and whether any critical loads or levels are currently being exceeded. Background concentrations were obtained from the UK Air Pollution Information System (APIS). APIS is a support tool for staff in the UK conservation and regulatory agencies, industry and local authorities for assessing the potential effects of air pollutants on habitats and species.

6.2 The Table below details the background concentrations of the key pollutants which are

relevant to natural ecosystem of the European sites.

Approximate Concentration of Key Air Pollutants

Site Features

Nitrogen Oxide NOx (ug/m3)

Sulpher Dioxide SO2 (ug/m3)

Ammonia NH3 (ug/m3)

Nitrogen Deposition N (Kg/ha/yr)

Acid Deposition Exceedance

Sherwood Forest ppSPA

Polygon A – Thieves Wood

22.71 CLe = 30

4.12 CLe = 20

1.71 Cle = 1-3

35.14 CL = 10-15

Max CL exceeded Due to N

• CL = Critical Loads - The threshold level for the deposition of a pollutant above which harmful indirect effects can be shown on a habitat or species. Additional deposition above the Critical Load is termed Critical Load Exceedance.

• CLe = Critical Levels - The threshold level for the atmospheric concentration of a pollutant above which harmful direct effects can be shown on a habitat or species. Pollutant air concentrations above the Critical Level are termed Critical Level Exceedances


77

• Measurements for the ppSPA have been taken from the 1km grid squares closest to the

proposed housing allocations identified within the Local Plan Preferred Approach. There is only one allocations which falls within 1km of the ppSPA, this is the South of West Notts College site (SKA3p). To assess the impact of this development upon the ppSPA, a measurement was taken from grid reference SK5357.

Air Quality: Implications

6.3 Before considering whether air pollutants are likely to represent a likely significant effect on the ppSPA, it is important to understand the sensitivity of the site to air pollution impacts. It is likely the conservation objectives of the ppSPA will relate to the supporting habitat of the listed bird species, namely nightjar and woodlark, and not the habitats in their own right.

6.4 Negative effects on air quality will be mainly due to increased traffic levels as a result of an

increased population. Increased traffic could have cumulative impacts on air quality which could potentially affect the ppSPA. Certain industrial processes can also have a negative effect on air quality. The Environment Agencies document - Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) H1, indicates that designated sites which are located within 10km of a pollutant source should be considered as a sensitive receptor. The Local Plan does not identify any industrial sites of this nature.

Nitrogen Oxide (NOx)

6.5 Nitrogen Oxide comes from industrial processes; it is formed when certain fuels (oil, gas and coal) are burned at a high temperature, such as combustion. Nitrogen Oxide is also commonly formed from motor vehicles (combustion in the engine).

6.6 An increase in population linked to the additional housings proposed in the Local Plan is likely

to increase the number of motor vehicles using roads close the ppSPA. However, concentrations of Nitrogen Oxide are well within their critical levels at site A – Thieves Wood; therefore the additional contributions from pollutant emissions associated with the Local Plan are not considered to be sufficient to result in any exceedances.

Sulphur Dioxide (SO2)

6.7 Sulphur Dioxide comes from industrial process; it is formed by burning sulphur, which is an impurity in coal and crude oil, with oxygen in the air. Concentrations of Sulphur Dioxide are well within their critical levels at the site; the additional contributions from pollutant emissions associated with the Local Plan are not considered to be sufficient to result in any exceedances.

Ammonia (NH3) emissions

6.8 Concentrations of Ammonia (NH3) are also within their critical levels at the site. Whilst trace emissions of NH3 could hypothetically be associated with some of the policies (from sources of sewage and catalytic converters in motor vehicles), it is considered that on the basis of objective information, there is no likelihood of a significant effect as a result of emissions of NH3, even in light of the in-combination provisions.

Nitrogen (N) deposition

6.9 In considering the implications of the Local Plan for impacts associated with nitrogen deposition, the dispersion properties and impact pathways of pollutants that contribute to


78

Nitrogen deposition need to be fully appreciated. The primary pollutant that can be associated with policies within the Local Plan that could contribute towards Nitrogen deposition at the potential European site is Nitrogen Oxides (NOx). Nitrogen Oxides are produced in combustion processes and are therefore present in vehicle emissions.

6.10 An assessment needs to be made therefore, in light of the scale and locations of policies that

can be associated with increased emissions of Nitrogen Oxide, as to whether the Local Plan is likely to have a significant effect (either alone or in-combination) with respect to Nitrogen deposition.

6.11 With regards to road traffic emissions, the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB),

Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1 (May 2007) looks at the effect of road traffic emissions on local air quality and notes that road traffic emissions quickly reduce as the distance from the road increases. The DMRB states in paragraph 3.13 that “Only properties and Designated Sites within 200m of roads affected by the project need be considered”. Beyond 200m, the contribution of traffic emissions to local pollutant concentrations is considered to be negligible (although this is not to say that local pollutant concentrations will not exceed that statutory air quality objective level). Natural England also recognises that emissions from traffic are not likely to be significant beyond 200m.

6.12 The Local Plan aims to focus development within or adjoining existing urban areas as set out in Strategic Policy SP2: Overall Strategy for Growth, which aims to reduce the need to travel, especially by the private car. Policy SD8: Traffic Management and Highway Safety, also aims to reduce the need to travel by car. However, there is one site which will directly use roads (A60 and A611) which are within 200m of parts of the ppSPA. Site SKA3p – South of West Notts College is allocated for 207 dwellings, and lies approximately 400m north of the Thieves Wood part of the ppSPA (see Map B over the page). Due to the size of the site and the relatively small area of the ppSPA which would be affected by increased Nitrogen deposition, it is reasonable to conclude that there would be no likely significant effect, either alone or in combination with other plans and projects, on the Sherwood Forest ppSPA.

Acid deposition

6.13 Acid deposition is a function of the combined deposition of nitrogen and sulphur containing pollutants. The primary sulphur based pollutant in the UK which contributes to deposition is Sulphur Dioxide with the main sources being industrial processes. However, no industrial developments are proposed in the Local Plan and as a result the impact of the Local Plan can be considered to be negligible (even from an in-combination perspective).


79


80

Air Quality: Conclusions

6.14 In respect of Nitrogen Oxide (NOx), Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) and acid deposition it can be concluded that no likely significant effect, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, can be recorded for the Sherwood Forest ppSPA. This is as a result of no industrial processes being identified within the Local Plan and the limited amount of development proposed in close proximity to the ppSPA.

6.15 On the basis that the implementation of the Local Plan will not result in any further credible

contributions of Ammonia (NH3) within the Sherwood Forest ppSPA, a conclusion of no likely significant effect can be recorded.

6.16 The ppSPA is made up of several discrete blocks of land, not all of which will be affected by

air pollution due to the distances involved, the dispersion properties and travel distances of Nitrogen Oxide emissions outside the immediate locality of the source (for further details see implications for the Birklands and Bihaugh SAC and South Pennine Moors SAC and SPA on pages 22 and 23).

6.17 Whilst site SKA3p will use roads (A60 and A611) which are within 200m of parts of the ppSPA

and there will be some increase in Nitrogen deposition as a result in increased traffic generated, it is not considered significant due to the size of the site and the relatively small part of the ppSPA which would be affected by increased Nitrogen deposition. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that there would be no likely significant effect, either alone or in combination with other plans and projects, on the Sherwood Forest ppSPA as a result of nitrogen deposition.

7. Water Abstraction /Quality

Water Abstraction / Quality: Issues

7.1 In terms of water there is a need to consider whether there are any water related linkages or pathways between the Ashfield Local Plan provisions and the ppSPA at Sherwood Forest.

7.2 Both groundwater and surface water levels can be affected by abstraction for public water

supply, for industrial uses and for agricultural. The water requirements for the East Midlands, including Ashfield, are set out in Severn Trent Water Ltd’s Water Resources Management Plan (WRMP) and the Environment Agency’s Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies (CAMS).

Water Abstraction / Quality: Implications

7.3 Severn Trent Water’s WRMP 2010 sets out the strategy for water resource management

between 2010-2035. Ashfield is located within the East Midlands Water Resource Zone (WRZ6), which serves almost 3 million people. The WRMP assesses the water supply and demand balance throughout the region based on long term projections which include housing and population growth, commercial requirements and climate change. The projections reflect housing growth based largely on the Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS) for the East and West Midlands. The WRMP identifies that in the East Midlands Zone there are eight Natura 2000 sites and that as good practice, the WRMP was taken through the process that would be


81

required for a stage 1 screening Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA). (WRPM 2010, Paragraph 4.4.6). The HRA has identified that based on the current level of detail available for the final WRMP schemes it is unlikely that there will be any significant impact on Natura 2000 or Ramsar sites. The Ashfield Local Plan housing requirements are similar or slightly less than the RSS figures but for a shorter timescale to 2023. Consequently, the projected housing growth used in the WRMP is broadly comparable to projected housing growth in the Local Plan. Therefore, the conclusions reached in the WRMP and associated HRA Screening can be seen to be applicable to Ashfield’s Local Plan.

7.4 The Environment Agency (EA) has been reviewing the effects of water abstractions upon

aquifers and associated watercourse flows through 'Restoring Sustainable Abstraction’ programme (RSA). The purpose is to make sure that the amount of water being taken (or abstracted) from rivers or out of the ground can be sustained without damaging the environment. The Sherwood Forest ppSPA fall within or are impacted by the river catchments of the Don and Rother, The Idle and Torne and the Lower Trent and Erewash. The approach of the Environment Agency to water in these areas is set out in Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies (CAMS) for the:

• Idle and Torne • Lower Trent and Erewash • Don and Rother, as updated

7.5 CAMS undertake an assessment of water availability on a catchment by catchment basis

which influences the approach to water abstraction licences. The RSA programme specifically investigates sites that are designated for protection under European and UK legislation and CAMS assess the effects of existing abstraction licences and any new applications to make sure they are not impacting on internationally important nature conservation sites. In this context the Environment Agency has undertaken the Review of Consents process to identify where abstractions and discharges are impacting on such sites. Changes to abstraction and discharge regimes as a result of new development would not be permitted unless the applicant can demonstrate that there are no likely significant effects upon the designated sites.

7.6 At a local level, part of the evidence base for the Local Plan is sets out in The Greater

Nottingham Scoping Water Cycle Study 2009 and The Greater Nottingham and Ashfield Outline Water Cycle Study 2010. The Outline Water Cycle Study 2010 took into account the housing requirements set out in the East Midlands Regional Plan 2009. This reflected a requirement for the period from 2006 to 2026 of 68,200 dwellings over Greater Nottingham and Ashfield. The Study concluded that:

• Water resource situation in the East Midlands is significantly constrained with

Severn Trent Water forecasting a shortfall of supply against demand if no interventions are made.

• The company plans a programme of measures that will maintain a surplus of supply

over demand. This should not constrain growth at the strategic level, provided that strategic water resources infrastructure is implemented in a timely manner in relation to growth.


82

7.7 The Study recommends that as a result of the constraint in the region on water resources, all new homes are built to the water consumption standards of the Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3/4 as a minimum in order to reduce demand from new households. This is reflected in the Local Plan which includes measures to reduce the demand for water and reduce water consumption in new housing and commercial development. Policy CC2: Water Resource Management identifies the following in relation to water efficiency by:

a. Water Conservation Strategies for development proposals greater than 1,000m2 or 10 dwellings

b. Residential development achieving Level 3 or higher of the Code for

Sustainable Homes in relation to water.

c. For non-residential development the meeting of the BREEAM requirement in Policy CC1 will include reducing water consumption through the use of meters, leak detection, water efficient appliances, or other appropriate measures.

7.8 Water quality can be affected by a number of factors, including toxic chemicals, pesticides

and nutrient enrichment and discharges from sewage treatment works, and over-flowing foul water systems at times of high rainfall and flooding. However, many of the most significant risks to water quality are as a result of agricultural activity, which largely falls outside the remit of the Local Plan. The increase in proposed households may affect water quality by placing extra loads at surface treatment works and potentially increasing run-off. The Outline Water Cycle Study 2010 identifies that potentially the only potential constraint relating to wastewater treatment in Ashfield is at Huthwaite Waste Water Treatment Works (WwTW). There is limited or no existing hydraulic capacity and limited scope to extend the WwTW due to the footprint of the site close proximity of an industrial development. In terms of water quality, the Study concludes there are some issues associated with current performance of some WwTW although Severn Trent Water has indicated that they perceive no quality issues in the future.

7.9 Impacts may arise from flood water management schemes altering flows in rivers and water

courses. However, they may also have a positive impact, for example restoring flood plains. Ashfield is located upstream of the Trent valley with a number of the River Trent’s tributaries rising in Ashfield. The Ashfield Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) concluded that the risk of flooding from watercourse in Ashfield is relatively low, although flood risk is an issue in specific areas. Given the flood risk in the District it is not anticipated that any major flood prevention schemes will be undertaken in Ashfield which will have a pathway to the sites in question.

Water Abstraction / Quality: Conclusions

7.10 It can therefore be concluded, on the basis of objective information, that there would be no

likely significant effect, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, on the Sherwood Forest ppSPA as a result of the provisions of the Local Plan.


83

8. Recreation Pressures

Recreational Pressure: Issues

8.1 The distance people are prepared to travel needs to be taken into consideration when considering the potential recreational pressures on the Sherwood Forest ppSPA, and although there is a gap in visitor survey data, it can be assumed that the most frequent users of the site travel from settlements up to 5km from the ppSPA. There are also areas, such as the Sherwood Forest Visitor Centre which will attract visitors from much further afield and it can be assumed that people will travel from settlements up to 15km from those parts of the ppSPA.

8.2 The effects of recreational pressure on the Sherwood Forest ppSPA is mainly related to

damage to habitats for which the site is designated. This is because Nightjar and woodlark are ground nesting birds and therefore vulnerable to disturbance and predation by animals. Disturbance will usually arise from trampling which, over a period of time, can cause loss of habitat through the establishment of and subsequent widening of paths and tracks. The wearing down of paths and tracks can also cause or accelerate erosion leading to further habitat loss or damage. Access can also increase the likelihood of invasive, non-native species penetrating into the ppSPA.

8.3 Dog walking can cause localised eutrophication (enrichment) of habitats, especially in the first

few hundred metres from access points as a result of dog faeces deposition.

Recreational Pressures: Implications

8.4 The Local Plan proposals will increase the population of Ashfield by approximately 17,670

(based on 7,683 (2016 – 2032) new homes x approximately 2.3 people). A proportion of these new residents will pursue recreational activities on green open spaces. Areas potentially affected could include designated areas such as the Sherwood Forest ppSPA, which contains habitats and species that may be sensitive to disturbance from increases in recreational pressure.

8.5 However, there are many other recreational resources within and adjacent to the district

which provides a recreational resource, some of these are listed below:

• Newstead Abbey - Ravenshead, Nottinghamshire: a former medieval priory, now a historic

house set in magnificent gardens with parkland extending over 300 acres. The Abbey is best known as being the ancestral home of the poet Lord Byron;

• Brierley Forest Park, Skegby Road Huthwaite - Originally a former colliery site, Brierly Forest Park has been transformed into a wildlife haven with nature walks. The park also provides recreation facilities a sculpture trail, areas of local interest as well as a visitor centre;

• Sherwood Pines Forest Park - Off B6030 at Clipstone between Clipstone and Ollerton Sherwood Pines Forest Park: a large area of woodland with way marked walking and cycling trails and other outdoor activities;

• Sherwood Forest Country Park - Edwinstowe Off B6034 just North of Edwinstowe;


84

• Sutton Lawn - The lawn pleasure grounds encompass the grounds of former Sutton Hall;

• Portland Park - A country park with sites of importance for nature conservation (SINC) and a local nature reserve it is significant for its ecological and educational value. The site is unique in Nottinghamshire being located on a band of magnesium limestone. This enables many rare plant species to grow, creating an area, which is abundant with fascinating natural and making it is a site of specific scientific interest (SSSI);

• Vicker Water Country Park - located to the south of Clipstone Village, 5 kilometres from Mansfield: the 80 ha park has been mainly formed on the site of former colliery spoil tips and lies in the shadow of the headstocks of Clipstone Colliery;

• Clumber Park - National Trust location set in a 4000 acre park. Located to the north of Edwinstowe and Ollerton;

• Rufford Abbey and Country Park - Located south of Edwinstowe and Ollerton off the A614 near the B6034. The Abbey remains and gardens surrounded in woodland.

Erosion and Disturbance

8.6 It is considered that most visitors to the sites do stay on paths and therefore the effects of erosion would be likely to be negligible. However there are areas within the ppSPA that attract significant numbers of visitors. The Sherwood Forest Visitor Centre is a main point of interest and it is currently causing unacceptable ecological harm to some areas. This is in the form of car parking as vehicle and pedestrian movement has the potential to compact soil and root zones around veteran trees in the area. As a consequence the visitor centre is to be demolished and removed from the forest together with the associated car parking and play area. This will be reconstructed across the B6034 from its present location, and the previous area will then be restored to oak /headland habitat typical of the area. It is anticipated that the development will increase visitor numbers from the current figure of approximately half a million per year, to one million per year each year and levelling off at 800,000 per year in year. The development will allow visitors into the forest but in a controlled way to help protect the forest.

8.7 There have been areas within the ppSPA, mainly related to the Sherwood Forest Visitors

Centre that have not weathered as well as expected due to several factors. Pooling and rutting has occurred on paths that have been poorly constructed. Paths that exist on a gradient have experienced surface erosion due to water run-off. Due to the poor condition of the footpaths visitors have avoided obstacles and therefore widened the footpaths causing soil compaction over a wider area. As a result water run-off which would otherwise have percolated down through the soil to the benefit of the sites ecology has been lost, adding to the stresses placed on the ecology of the site. The worst affected areas are subject to repair, maintenance and improvement works, limiting the extent of damage.

8.8 Newark and Sherwood District Council are proposing that measures will be taken within the Sherwood Forest Park to ensure that visitor activity is focused around the Major Oak, and is recognised as a high profile cultural and heritage asset and high visitor demand already exist, along with high levels of disturbance. There are proposed access plans to alleviate this, especially to more remote and sensitive areas of the SAC/ppSPA. There are also plans in place to reopen access paths outside of the site, which help to reduce footfall within the SAC/ppSPA.


85

Risk of Fire 8.9 Increased visitor numbers also increases the risk of fire and therefore has the potential to be

a significant effect on the Sherwood Forest ppSPA sites. Impacts of fire on the ppSPA supporting habitats can be significant, long term or even permanent.

Mitigation Measures

8.10 In terms of mitigation measures for the site, in addition to the provision of suitable green infrastructure within new housing developments, there are several other inter-related factors and measures all capable of reducing the likelihood of significant effects. These include but are not limited to:




8.11 Even in light of a potential increase in visitors to the ppSPA, it is considered that the existing

raft of management initiatives referred to above and the relocation of the visitors centre in Sherwood Forest will be sufficient to avoid a significant effect on the ppSPA in the foreseeable future, and in any event within the life of the Local Plan.

8.12 Newark and Sherwood District Council’s proposal to establish a Regional Park in the

Sherwood Area will ensure that visitor activity is focused away from the most sensitive parts of the ppSPA. They intend to develop a brand and promote sustainable tourism based on the important environmental assets of the area. As part of this initiative a number of tourist destinations will be promoted to better manage recreational impacts of visitors to the area. Recreation Pressures: Implications

8.13 Local Plan Strategic Policy SP2: Overall Strategy for Growth, aims to focus development

within or adjoining existing urban areas and reduce the need to travel by private motor vehicles. Policy EV5 aims to protect green spaces, open areas and recreational facilities within the district and Policy HG3 makes provision and sets the criteria for public open space, sport and recreation facilities in new residential development. Together these policies support and encourage the use of ‘local’ open green spaces and recreational facilities. However, the Local Plan cannot control peoples’ recreational and leisure pursuits and as such this issue needs to be considered further in the context of the potential impact on sensitive sites, such as the Sherwood Forest ppSPA.

8.14 Whilst it is acknowledged that certain parts of the ppSPA, such as the Sherwood Forest Visitors Centre, will attract visitors from potentially the whole of Ashfield District, the likely effects on the ppSPA are considered to be limited, mainly due to the proposal to reallocate the visitors centre (as discussed previously) and also the management of these areas. A greater risk is that posed by the allocation of new housing sites close to the ppSPA, as it is considered that residents of these new sites could potentially use areas of the ppSPA for dog walking and general recreational purposes.

8.15 The Local Plan does not identify any sites within 400m of the ppSPA. Site SKA3p lies just

outside the 400m buffer and therefore to ensure all possible risks are assessed, it has been


86

considered as part of this report. Site SKA3p – South of West Notts College, Cauldwell Road is shown on Map C below:

8.16 Site SKA3p for 207 dwellings, is situated to the north of the A617, Sherwood Road South and

the Thieves Wood part of the ppSPA. The A617 separates the site from the ppSPA and it is considered that future residents at the site will most likely use on-site open space or open space to the north, as opposed to traversing the busy A617. Policy HG3 of the Local Plan sets out that a minimum of 10% recreational space for community use will need to be provided on-site, this equates to approximately 0.91ha for site SKA3p. This requirement is set out in Appendix 3 of the Local Plan – ‘Development Briefs for Large Housing Sites’. The site brief acknowledges the importance of on-site open space to help minimise the potential recreational disturbance at Thieves Wood, which forms part of the Sherwood Forest ppSPA.

8.17 In addition to the on-site open space at site SKA3a, the Lindhurst development, which lies

directly east of the site in Mansfield District, will also provide on-site open space. The illustrative masterplan for Lindhurst indicates that a 4 mile network of green links will be provided, together with several pocket parks and a new community park. Future residents of site SKA3p will have access to these areas of green space in addition to their immediate on-site open space. It can therefore be reasonably concluded that sufficient green space will be specifically provided for the future residents to mitigate any potential for recreational disturbance, and to avoid any likely significant effect on the Sherwood ppSPA, either alone or in combination with other elements of the plan, or other plans or projects.

Recreation Pressures: Conclusions

8.16 On the basis of objective information, it can be concluded that there would be no likely

significant effect, alone or in combination with other plans or projects, on the Thieves Wood part of the Sherwood Forest ppSPA, as a result in increased recreational activity.


87

9. Pet Predation

Pet Predation: Issues

9.1 Because woodlark and nightjar are ground nesting birds they are particularly vulnerable to pet predation, primarily from cats in nearby residential areas.

Pet Predation: Implications

9.2 As already discussed under Recreational Pressures, the Local Plan proposes the addition of at least 7,683 new homes. A proportion of the new residents living in these homes will be pet owners. In particular, nightjar and woodlark are vulnerable to cats, therefore any proposed new homes close to the ppSPA must consider their potential impact on the site in respect of pet predation. Map C on the previous page identifies that there are no sites within 400m of the ppSPA. One site (SKA3p) lies just outside the 400m buffer and therefore to ensure all possible risks are assessed, it has been considered as part of this report.

9.3 Site SKA3p is allocated for 207 dwellings and is situated to the north of the A617, Sherwood

Road South and the ppSPA. It is considered that site SKA3p – south of West Notts College, will have little or no impact on the ppSPA because of the A617 physically separates the site and forms a natural boundary which pets are unlikely to cross.

Pet Predation: Conclusions

9.4 Due to distance and physical boundaries, it can be reasonably concluded that there would be no likely significant effect on the Sherwood ppSPA, either alone or in combination with other elements of the plan, or other plans or projects.

10. Habitat Loss and Fragmentation

Habitat loss and fragmentation – Issue

10.1 Loss or fragmentation of habitat for nightjar and woodlark would result in reduced capability of

the area to sustain and support these species. Loss of nesting sites and habitat for insects on which the nightjar and woodlark feed, leads to impacts on the ability of these species to both survive and breed.

Habitat loss and fragmentation – Implications

10.2 The in-combination effect of habitat loss or fragmentation across the Sherwood Forest area

would have a significant detrimental impact on these species. As such the Local Plan, in particular Policy EV4, seeks to avoid loss of key habitats and, indeed, pursue a net increase in green infrastructure and biodiversity, with significant emphasis on the connectivity of habitat. Targeted enhancement areas both within the identified ppSPA and beyond the identified boundary would reduce the extent of loss and fragmentation. Developer contributions may serve as a significant means of achieving this.


88

Habitat loss and fragmentation – Conclusion

10.3 If the above mitigation measures are put into place it should be possible to conclude that there is no likely significant effect as a result of the Local Plan.

11. Lighting

Lighting – Issues

11.1 Nightjars are nocturnal. Prey such as moths are attracted to lights. This creates the potential for collisions with vehicles while birds are feeding on the wing adjacent to the road1. Light spill may also reduce the availability of nesting sites because birds will gravitate to better quality sites.

Lighting – Implications

11.2 The issues related to lighting are capable of being assessed and resolved through the

provision and implementation of design guidance. The guidance could be based on best practice lighting design produced by the Institute of Lighting Engineers and could identify the areas where such issues would need to be considered at the project level.

11.3 Key issues for the design guidance to cover how the effects can be mitigated through design:

• Location and design of lighting;

• Identification of habitats;

• Identification/retention/enhancement of linkages/corridors; and

• Provision of new sites

Lighting – Conclusion

11.4 It is considered that the allocated sites within the Local Plan will not affect the ppSPA in terms

of light pollution due to the distance of the sites from the ppSPA. It can therefore be reasonably concluded that there would be no likely significant effect on the Sherwood ppSPA, either alone or in combination with other elements of the plan, or other plans or projects as a result of lighting.

12. Overall Conclusions: Sherwood Forest ppSPA

12.1 The process has examined each policy within the Local Plan in turn to identify whether there is a potential for it to give rise to significant effects on the ppSPA. For this part of the assessment a screening table has been based on guidance produced by Natural England. Specific issues have been examined in detail and identified. A key element in completing the matrices has been the consideration of the risk of potential effects occurring, in accordance

1 The Sherwood Forest Trust; 1999, Species Action Plan for Nightjar, Available at : http://www.nottsbag.org.uk/pdfs/BAP?sap_nightjar.pdf


89

with the European Communities position statement on Precautionary Principle2. The process has identified certain mitigation measures to be put into place, through the Local Plan.

12.2 The Local Plan will not in itself result in any changes or effect on any European site. Nothing

will happen unless there is a planning permission for individual development sites.

12.3 The process has highlighted the position of the Local Plan, as well as other plans, programmes and projects which is important when assessing the level of risk of significant effects occurring. The need for additional assessments of plans and projects as they progress reduces the risk of significant effects occurring.

12.4 The potential for in combination effects has been assessed through the Appropriate

Assessment (AA) work undertaken for the Regional Spatial Strategy on the overall growth and has been examined and account has been taken of the recommendations contained within the AA report.

12.5 Nightjar and Woodlark are protected species and as such are already a material

consideration. Parts of the prospective SPA are also afforded protection through designation (also a material consideration), e.g. the Birklands and Bilhaugh Special Area of Conservation.

12.6 Through the work undertaken for this Habitat Regulations Assessment it is concluded that an

Appropriate Assessment of the Ashfield Local plan is not required for the Sherwood ppSPA both alone and in combination with other plans or projects.

2 Communication from the Commission on the Precautionary Principle (2000), Commission of the European Communities.


90



91



92



93

Appendix A: Advice Note to Local Planning Authorities regarding the consideration of likely effects on the breeding population of nightjar and woodlark in the Sherwood Forest region

March 2014

This advice note updates and replaces the previous note dated 5 September 2012 to reflect the introduction of the National Planning Policy Framework (‘NPPF’) and amendments to the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (‘the Habitats Regulations’). Summary While no conclusion has yet been reached about the possible future classification of parts of Sherwood Forest as a Special Protection Ar ea (SPA) for its breeding bird (nightjar and woodlark) interest, Natural England a dvise those affected Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) to be mindful of the Se cretary of State’s decision in 2011, following Public Inquiry, to refuse to grant planni ng permission for an Energy Recovery Facility at Rainworth where the potential impacts on these birds and their supporting habitats was given significant weight. In light of this decision we therefore recommend a precautionary approach should be adopted by LPAs which ensures that reasonable and p roportionate steps have been taken in order to avoid or minimise, as far as poss ible, any potential adverse effects from development on the breeding populations of nig htjar and woodlark in the Sherwood Forest area. This will help to ensure that any future need to comply with the provisions of the 2010 Regulations is met with a robust set of measures already in place. This Advice Note provides a brief explanation of th e background to the current situation and suggests a ‘risk-based’ approach that could be followed to help future-proof decision-making on plans and projects. In add ition a summary of the current LPA statutory duties in relation to birds is provid ed for clarity and there are links to further information relating to the legislation and policy that affects SPAs. The document is set out as follows:

• Background – including reference to planning case l aw • Current situation • The recommended ‘risk-based’ approach • Existing statutory duties relevant to birds • Further information • Map highlighting the areas of greatest ornithologic al interest for breeding

nightjar and woodlark Background – the possibility of a protected area (S pecial Protection Area) for nightjar and woodlark in Sherwood and Rufford Energy Recover y Facility planning case law The UK government is required by European law to identify how it can contribute to the conservation of particular bird species across their natural range in Europe through the protection of suitable sites. In doing this exercise it has identified that the populations of nightjar and woodlark in Sherwood may warrant such protection. A final decision has not


94

been made and it remains under consideration as part of a UK-wide SPA Review Programme being led by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee3. The possibility of the area becoming an SPA creates a risk for spatial planning in the Sherwood area. This is because any formalisation of the site as a Special Protection Area (SPA) would place a legal obligation on decision-taking bodies requiring past decisions to be reviewed and potentially modified. In 2011, following a Public Inquiry, the Secretary of State decided to refuse to grant planning permission for an Energy Recovery Facility on land at the former Rufford Colliery site at Rainworth. The likely effect on the breeding populations of woodlark and nightjar was a key consideration in the Secretary of State’s decision4. The Secretary of State agreed that whilst the application site was not within an area currently identified as a Special Protection Area (SPA), there was merit in following the formal approach required for SPAs. He agreed that when considering the impact of the development on the use of the area by the bird species listed on Annex 1 of the European Wild Birds Directive – in this case woodlark and nightjar - an approach similar to that set out in the relevant legislation (Regulation 61 of the Habitats Regulations5) should be adopted. The Secretary of State concluded that he could not be sure that the proposed development would not harm the integrity of the area used by the birds and that the conflict this created with the aims of the Regional Spatial Strategy and the potential harm to the integrity of the habitat used by woodlark and nightjar weighed significantly against the proposal. Current situation Until the SPA Review concludes and provides further guidance as to whether new SPAs for nightjar and/or woodlark should be classified in the UK to meet the obligations of the Wild Birds Directive, there continues to be uncertainty about the future classification of an SPA in the Sherwood Forest area. However it is our view that, based on the evidence from the most recent national nightjar and woodlark surveys in 2004 and 2006 and the interpretation of that data, there remains a possibility of an area of Sherwood Forest being recommended for future classification. We recognise that in the interim this creates difficulty for LPAs in how they should consider land allocations and policies in Development Plans and individual planning applications within the Sherwood Forest area. How local authorities choose to confront this issue is ultimately a matter for them, however Natural England advise that LPAs should adopt a form of ‘risk based approach’ or similar of the kind taken by the Secretary of State in the case referred to above. This should provide decision-making with a degree of future-proofing until such a time that there is greater certainty on whether the Sherwood Forest area is to be afforded pSPA or SPA status and whether the provisions of the 2010 Regulations are to take effect as a matter of policy or law. The recommended ‘risk-based’ approach The ‘risk based’ approach advocated by Natural England was endorsed by the Secretary of State in coming to his decision on the development proposal at the former Rufford Colliery. Natural England suggest that in taking a risk-based approach to development plan making and decision-making, LPAs seek to ensure that plans and proposals are accompanied by

3 See http://archive.defra.gov.uk/rural/documents/protected/spareview-tor.pdf 4 See http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planning- callins/pdf/1914959.pdf 5 See http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/490/made


95

an additional and robust assessment of the likely impacts arising from the proposals on breeding nightjar and woodlark in the Sherwood Forest area. This should ideally cover the potential direct, indirect and cumulative impacts which may include, but may not be limited to, the following;

• disturbance to breeding birds from people, their pets and traffic • loss, fragmentation and/or damage to breeding and/or feeding habitat • bird mortality arising from domestic pets and/or predatory mammals and birds • bird mortality arising from road traffic and/or wind turbines • pollution and/or nutrient enrichment of breeding habitats

No formal assessments of the boundary of any future SPA have been made; therefore it is not possible to definitively identify whether individual application sites would fall inside or outside any possible future designated area. However the enclosed map, which highlights the areas of greatest ornithological interest for breeding nightjar and woodlark, was submitted as evidence to the Rufford ERF Public Inquiry and could be of assistance to your Authority in this regard6. It is worth noting that the Inspector at the Rufford ERF Inquiry decided it appropriate to consider both boundaries to inform his recommendations. We also advise that LPAs should seek to satisfy themselves that planning applications contain sufficient objective information to ensure that all potential impacts on the breeding nightjar and woodlark populations have been adequately avoided or minimised as far as is possible using appropriate measures and safeguards. It may be necessary to obtain ecological advice in relation to the potential impacts of a proposal and any possible avoidance or mitigation measures. Natural England would encourage those LPAs in the Sherwood Forest area to work together, in compliance with the duty to cooperate, to consider the combined effect of their plans and proposals in order to gain a strategic overview and develop a collaborative approach. We are of the view that taking the approach outlined above represents good planning practice which will assist your Authority should the site be classified as SPA in limiting the number of plans and projects which would need to be re-considered as part of the review of consents process required by the 2010 Regulations. Existing biodiversity and wild bird duties In addition to advising that a risk based approach will assist LPAs in future-proofing plans and decisions, Natural England advises that there are other relevant duties in legislation and policy that direct you to consider the protection and enhancement of nightjar and woodlark populations in the Sherwood area. Your Authority must discharge its statutory duty given under Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 to have regard to the purpose of conserving biodiversity. It follows that your authority should have regard to conserving nightjar and woodlark, owing to their inclusion as Species of Principal [conservation] Importance in England7. Your Authority should also have regard to new duties given under regulation 9A of the Habitats Regulations, which requires LPAs to apply all reasonable endeavours to avoid the deterioration of wild bird habitat (including that of nightjar and woodlark) when exercising

6

http://www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/planningsearch/plandisp.aspx?AppNo=ES/1144%20

7 As listed in section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 to guide decision-makers such as public bodies, including local and regional authorities, in implementing their duty under section 40 of that Act


96

their statutory functions. The presence of either or both species and any effects on them is a material consideration when considering planning applications, regardless of whether the Sherwood area is put forward for classification as an SPA in due course. Further information Information on the legislation, policy and classification process affecting Special Protection Areas (SPAs) is available from the following websites:

• JNCC http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-162 • Natural England

http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/conservation/designations/spa/default.aspx

• Defra https://www.gov.uk/protected-or-designated-areas We hope this advice is helpful and provides further assistance. Should Natural England be in a position to update these views and advice, we will do so and notify you accordingly. If you have any queries about this advice, please contact either Liz Newman [email protected] or Ryan Hildred [email protected] Natural England Land Use Operations March 2014


97

Map highlighting the areas of greatest ornithologic al interest for breeding nightjar and woodlark, submitted as evidence to the Rufford ERF Public Inquiry 2010.


98



99

Appendix B: Screening exercise for the Sherwood Forest Possible Potential Special Protection Area (ppSPA)

Sherwood Forest possible potential Special Protecti on Area (ppSPA)



required?

Strategic Policies


A5


No



No

S3: Settlement Hierarchy A5


No




No

HA2: Hucknall Economy and Jobs B


No

HA3: Hucknall Housing Allocations B


No

SPH1: Green Infrastructure in and around Hucknall

A3

This policy is sets out the requirements for green infrastructure in and around Hucknall and will help to relieve pressure on sensitive European sites by improving open space provision closer to urban areas.

No



100


A1 / B


No


B


No

SKA 3: Sutton and Kirkby Housing Allocations

B

This policy identifies housing allocations in Sutton and Kirkby. This is one of the primary policies within the Local Plan that is likely to have a significant effect on the European sites due to the increase in population within the district which will in turn lead to potentially increased air pollution, recreational pressures and issues with water abstraction and water quality. However, given the distance of the allocated sites from the ppSPA and the effects of other Local Plan Policies, such as: CC2 – Water Resource Management, EV4 – Green Infrastructure, Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, HG4 – Public Green Spaces in New Residential Development, SD7 – Environmental Protection, and SD8 – Traffic Management and Highway Safety, it is considered that the risk is negligible, even in combination with other plans and projects.

No


B


No

SKA5: Green Infrastructure in and around Sutton-In-Ashfield and Kirkby-In-Ashfield

A3


No

Strategic Policies – The Rurals (Selston, Jacksdale an d Underwood)


A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for appropriate uses on business and economic development sites in the Rural’s. B - This policy encourages business development in rural areas, which in theory could affect the European sites, in particular the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC, but given the criteria in the policy that looks to ‘support measures which promote an integrated and flexible approach to sustainable business development’, and given the location of the SAC, its interest features and the conservation objectives, the risk is considered to be negligible, even in combination with the effects of other development in the plan and other plans and projects.

No


B

This policy identifies housing allocations in the Rural’s. This is one of the primary policies within the Local Plan that is likely to have a significant effect on the European sites due to the increase in population within the district

No


101




required?



A1 / A2 / B

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new development. A2 – Intended to protect the natural environment through reductions in air pollution, which would have a potential benefits for European sites. B – In part where the policy promotes stand-alone renewable energy schemes, wind turbines could in theory effect birds in the Sherwood Forest ppSPA but given the characteristics of the site, its interest features and the conservation objectives, the risk is considered to be hypothetical and negligible.

No


A1 / A2


No

CC3: Flood Risk A1 / A3


No



A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new development. A2 – Intended to protect t the natural environment. A3 – Intended to conserve and enhance the natural environment, built or historic environment through the protection of land outside the urban area. (Some areas within the Green Belt are of historic value, such as Bagthorpe Conservation Area).

No


A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new development. A2 – Intended to protect t the natural environment. A3 – Intended to conserve and enhance the natural environment, built or historic environment through the protection of land outside the urban area. (Some areas

No

which will in turn lead to potentially increased air pollution, recreational pressures and issues with water abstraction and water quality. However, given the effects of other Local Plan Policies, such as: CC2 – Water Resource Management, EV4 – Green Infrastructure, Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, HG4 – Public Green Spaces in New Residential Development, and SD7 – Environmental Protection, it is considered that the risk is negligible, even in combination with other plans and projects.


A3


No


102

within the Countryside are of historic value, such as Teversal Conservation Area).


A1 / A3


No

EV4: Green Infrastructure, Biodiversity and Geodiversity

A2 / A3


No


A2 / A3 / A4


No


A2


No


A3

This policy is intended to conserve and enhance the natural and built environment through the provision and protection of allotments.

No


A1 This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for new equine development.

No



No


This policy is intended to conserve and enhance the natural and built environment.

No

ENV11: Protection of Landscape Character A2 / A3


No

Providing Jobs



No


A1 / A3 / B A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for appropriate uses on business and economic development sites.

No


103

A3 – Intended to conserve the natural, built and historic environment by steering business and economic development to sites within the existing urban area. B – All sites, with the exception of the Rolls Royce site in Hucknall and the Mowlands site in Kirkby, are existing allocations and permissions where there is no evidence to suggest that they have any negative effect on a European site. Therefore, it is unlikely there will be any significant effect on any European site due the limited scale of the new development proposed, the distance, lack of links or pathways to the European sites for effect.


This policy encourages business development in rural areas, which in theory could affect the European sites, in particular the Birklands and Bilhaugh SAC, but given the criteria in the policy that development must be ‘sustainable’ and an ‘appropriate scale’, and given the location of the SAC, its interest features and the conservation objectives, the risk is considered to be negligible, even in combination with the effects of other development in the plan and other plans and projects.

No


A1


No


B


No

Shopping

SH1: Retail, Leisure, Commercial and Town Centre Uses

A1 /A3 / B


No


A1 / A3 / B


No

SH3: Food, Drink and the Evening Economy A1 / A3 / B

A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new food, drink and entertainment facilities. A3 – Intended to conserve and enhance the natural, built or historic environment through primarily steering

No


104

development to the primary shopping areas, and thus away from European sites. B – Development of this nature is unlikely to have any significant effect on any European site due to distance, lack of links or pathways for effect; air quality effects would be hypothetical rather than real risks to European sites.

SH4: Shopfronts A1 This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for the design of new shopfronts. No

Providing Homes


A1 / B


No


A1


No

HG3: Public Open Space in New Residential Development

A4

A4 – Intended to provide open spaces and recreational facilities within or close to urban areas and therefore positively steer development and people away from European sites and sensitive areas.

No

HG4: Housing Mix A1


No



No

HG6: Conversions to Houses in Multiple Occupation, Flats and Bedsits


No



No


No


A1

This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for the provision and location of recycling and refuse provision in new development.

No


A1


No


This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for assessing the viability of a development.

No



No


105


A1


No


A1 - Partly qualitative; sets out the criteria for new development in regards to noise, light and air pollution. A2 – Intended to protect the natural environment through reductions in noise levels, light pollution and air pollution, which would have a potential benefits for European sites and sensitive areas.

No


A1 / A2 / B


No

SD10: Parking A1 This policy is qualitative, as it sets out the criteria for parking standards in new developments. No



No

SD12: Provision and Protection of Health and Community Facilities

A1 / A2


No




106



107

ANNEX 1

Date: 03 November 2016 Our ref: 199450 Your ref: None Julie Clayton Forward Planning Officer Customer Services Ashfield District Council Hornbeam House [email protected] Crewe Business Park Electra Way BY EMAIL ONLY Crewe Cheshire CW1 6GJ T 0300 060 3900 Dear Julie Ashfield District Council Local Plan – Habitat Regu lations Assessment Screening Report Thank you for your consultation on the above report which was received by Natural England on 02 November 2016. Natural England is a non-departmental public body. Our statutory purpose is to ensure that the natural environment is conserved, enhanced, and managed for the benefit of present and future generations, thereby contributing to sustainable development. Natural England welcomes the opportunity to provide comments on the Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Ashfield Local Plan, as a statutory consultee and specialist adviser on the application of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, the ‘Habitats Regulations.’ We are satisfied that the Screening Report (part1) fully covers our concerns and consider that the emerging draft policies of the Ashfield Local Plan have undergone a full Habitats Regulations Assessment screening, in line with appropriate legislation and guidance. We can therefore confirm that we agree with the Report’s conclusions that the Local Plan policies would not be likely to have a significant effect on a European Site either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, and no further assessment work is required. Furthermore we can confirm that we agree with part 2 of the report’s conclusions in respect of the Sherwood Forest possible potential Special Protection Area (ppSPA) that the Local Plan policies would be unlikely to result in a significant effect and that no further assessment work is required. We would be happy to comment further should the need arise but if in the meantime you have any queries please do not hesitate to contact us. For any queries relating to the specific advice in this letter only please contact Roslyn Deeming on 02080268500. For any new consultations, or to provide further information on this consultation please send your correspondences to [email protected]. Yours sincerely Roslyn Deeming Lead Adviser Sustainable Development Team East Midlands Area


108

This document is available in larger print and where appropriate, other formats may be available upon request. Please contact the Forward Planning Team at Ashfield District Council on 01623 457383.

Ashfield District Council

Forward Planning Team

Urban Road, Kirkby-in-Ashfield, Nottingham, East Midlands, NG17 8DA

Tel: (01623) 457381 / 457382 / 457383 Fax: (01623) 457332