Regulation 18 draft Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 7567

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: House Builders Federation

Practice guidance from DLUHC and the Draft DEFRA BNG Guidance has been released during your consultation period.

Currently the BNG PPG has been published in draft form as such some details may change between now and the implementation date.

It should also be noted that the PPG is clear that there is no need for individual Local Plans to repeat national BNG guidance.

The Council should not deviate from the Government’s requirement for 10% biodiversity net gain as set out in the Environment Act. There are significant additional costs associated with biodiversity gain, which should be fully accounted for in the Council’s viability assessment. It is important that BNG does not prevent, delay or reduce housing delivery.

We suggest particular care is needed in terminology to ensure the BNG policy reflects the national policy and guidance. For example, on-site and off-site
biodiversity is referred to as units, and the statutory national credit system of last resort is referred to as credit.

HBF would encourage Rutland to ensure the Local Plan fully considers BNG as part of the site selection process. This should include understanding the BNG
requirement, including undertaking an assessment of the baseline to support the allocation. Understand the BNG costs and viability for the site and considering how
this may impact other policy requirements such as affordable housing, other s106 or CIL contributions.

There is need for the policy wording and/or supporting text to be clearer about the differentiation between
the mitigation hierarchy and the BNG hierarchy.

The requirement of the policy do not reflect
the national 10% BNG legislation requirements, policy or guidance. Similarly wording of the BNG legislation means that a final BNG plan can only be submitted after planning permission is granted.

Comments noted. Amendments made to refer to ‘units’ in the wording of Policy EN3. Extra criteria regarding credits to be added to policy and additional text on credits. Mitigation hierarchy is covered in part a) of the policy.

Change from 15% to 10% as a higher percentage than the statutory objective of biodiversity net gain needs to be evidenced. In order for the Local Plan to be deemed sound this uplift above the mandatory level must be robustly evidenced.

Object

Representation ID: 7568

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: House Builders Federation

This could be clearer are unclear how this relates to the wider BNG and LNRS objectives.

The policy also seeks to require three replacement trees for each tree lost. How and why is there the requirement for three replacement trees for every one lost and what assumptions have been relation to the size
and standard of trees? A three for one replacement policy could impact on the land uptake for any development and may have implications for the density of developments, which in turn has the potential to have an impact on the
viability of developments.

Comments noted. Policy already refers to BNG in relation to mitigating for loss of trees and woodland. Add in reference to ‘LNRS’ after ‘Biodiversity Net Gain’. Targets regarding the amount of tree cover across the County form part of the Local Nature Recovery Strategy.

For replacement trees; Amend policy text to "In such cases the council will require new trees to replace the value of the trees that were removed. In most cases, this will be a higher number of new trees as trees significantly increase in value as their grow and mature. A value of the trees lost should be obtained by using appropriate formats, (e.g. CAVAT, Helliwell or iTree). Replacement trees should be of a similar species and capable of attaining a similar size to that which are being lost and will be required to be planted on-site."

Object

Representation ID: 7569

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: House Builders Federation

HBF suggest this policy needs to be clearer about how it links into BNG policies, specifically the BNG Metric for watercourses.

Noted. This policy should be read in conjunction with Policy EN3 - Biodiversity Net Gain

Object

Representation ID: 7570

Received: 08/01/2024

Respondent: House Builders Federation

The revised IDP will form an essential part of the evidence base in support of this Local Plan. HBF would welcome to the opportunity to review this once it is available.
There is also likely to be a need to revisit the viability assessment once the infrastructure requirements are known.

Comment Noted The revised IDP has been considered in preparation of the Regulation 19 version of the Local Plan and has been taken into consideration in the updated Whole Plan Viability Assessment. The IDP will form part of the updated evidence base for the Regulation 19 consultation.