Habitat Regulations
Assessment
Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood
Plan
October 2019
DRAFT
AECOM
Quality information
Prepared by
Checked by
Approved by
Hannah Corrigan
Graduate Ecologist
Dr James Riley
Technical Director
Dr Max Wade
Technical Director
Revision History
Revision
Revision date
Details
Authorized
Name
Position
01
09/10/2019
Draft
JR
James Riley
Technical Director
Distribution List
# Hard Copies
PDF Required
Association / Company Name
AECOM
Prepared for:
South Downs National Park Authority
Prepared by:
AECOM Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited
Midpoint, Alencon Link
Basingstoke
Hampshire RG21 7PP
United Kingdom
T: +44(0)1256 310200
aecom.com
© 2019 AECOM Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited. All Rights Reserved.
This document has been prepared by AECOM Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited (“AECOM”) for sole use of
our client (the “Client”) in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees and the
terms of reference agreed between AECOM and the Client. Any information provided by third parties and referred
to herein has not been checked or verified by AECOM, unless otherwise expressly stated in the document. No third
party may rely upon this document without the prior and express written agreement of AECOM.
AECOM
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ...................................................................................................... 6
Scope of Project ...................................................................................................................................................... 6
Legislation ............................................................................................................................................................... 6
2. Methodology .................................................................................................... 8
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 8
Likely Significant Effects (LSE) ............................................................................................................................... 9
HRA Task 2 – Appropriate Assessment (AA) ........................................................................................................... 9
HRA Task 3 – Avoidance and Mitigation................................................................................................................ 10
Confirming Other Plans and Projects that may act ‘In combination’ ...................................................................... 10
3. Internationally Designated Sites .................................................................... 12
East Hampshire Hangers SAC .............................................................................................................................. 12
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 12
Upper Greensand Hangers: Empshott to Hawkley ................................................................................................ 12
Upper Greensand Hangers: Wyck to Wheatley ..................................................................................................... 12
Coombe Wood and The Lythe ............................................................................................................................... 12
Wick Wood and Worldham Hangers ..................................................................................................................... 12
Selborne Common ................................................................................................................................................ 12
Noar Hill ................................................................................................................................................................ 12
Wealden Edge Hangers ........................................................................................................................................ 12
Reasons for Designation ....................................................................................................................................... 13
Historic Trends and Current Pressures ................................................................................................................. 13
Rook Clift SAC ...................................................................................................................................................... 13
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 13
Reasons for Designation ....................................................................................................................................... 13
Historic Trends and Current Pressures ................................................................................................................. 14
Wealden Heaths Phase 2 SPA .............................................................................................................................. 14
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 14
Reasons for Designation ....................................................................................................................................... 14
Historic trends and current pressures ................................................................................................................... 14
4. Likely Significant Effects ................................................................................ 16
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 16
Screening Rogate and Rake NP ........................................................................................................................... 18
5. Consideration of Effect ‘in combination’ ......................................................... 22
6. Appropriate Assessment ................................................................................ 23
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 23
Recreational pressure and disturbance ................................................................................................................. 23
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 23
Mechanical/Abrasive Damage and Nutrient Enrichment ....................................................................................... 24
Disturbance ........................................................................................................................................................... 24
Discussion ............................................................................................................................................................. 24
Air quality .............................................................................................................................................................. 25
Discussion ............................................................................................................................................................. 26
Urbanisation .......................................................................................................................................................... 26
7. Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 28
AECOM
Figures
Figure 1: Four-Stage Approach to Habitats Regulations Assessment (Source: CLG, 2006) ................................... 9
Figure 2: Four-Stage Approach to Habitats Regulations Assessment (Source: CLG, 2006)Error! Bookmark not
defined.
Figure 3. The response of two species, Yorkshire Fog and broad buckler fern to ammonia.Error! Bookmark not
defined.
Tables
Table 1. Other projects and plans that may act 'in-combination' to the development of Rogate and Rake NP. ..... 10
Table 2. Describes how each European Site could be susceptible to the above impact pathways due to increased
urbanisation proposed by Rogate and Rake NP and associated development policies. ....................................... 16
Table 3. Screening outcome of likely significant effects. ....................................................................................... 18
AECOM
6
1. Introduction
Scope of Project
1.1 AECOM was appointed by South Downs National Park Authority to assist in undertaking a Habitats
Regulations Assessment (HRA) for the Rogate and Rake Neighbourhood Plan (NP) Submitted March 2019.
This is for the purpose of informing Rogate and Rake Parish Council and the South Downs National Park
Authority of the potential effects on European sites and how they are being addressed in the Submitted
Neighbourhood Plan, for that Council to take into account in their formal HRA.
1.2 The South Downs Local Plan 2018 was subject to HRA in July 2018 (post Examination and Local Plan policy
modifications). The primary conclusion of the HRA was a need to address air quality, water quality,
recreational pressure and urbanisation issues with regards to the South Downs National Park including its
constituent parishes. The HRA recommended policy mechanisms for this, which were reflected in the
adopted Local Plan.
1.3 At the time of HRA preparation for the South Downs Local Plan; site allocations for residential development
within Rogate Parish were not detailed and were therefore not assessed at a Site level. However, the overall
scale of growth expected within South Downs National Park, including Neighbourhood Plans, was
assessed. The objective of this particular HRA is to identify if any particular site allocations and/or policies
that have the potential to cause an adverse effect on the integrity of Natura 2000 or European designated
sites (Special Areas of Conservation, SACs, Special Protection Areas, SPAs, and Ramsar sites designated
under the Ramsar convention), either in isolation or in combination with other plans and projects, and to
determine whether site-specific mitigation measures are required.
Legislation
1.4 The need for HRA is set out within Article 6 of the EC Habitats Directive 1992 and interpreted into British
law by the Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2017 (as amended). The ultimate aim of the
Habitats Directive is to “maintain or restore, at favourable conservation status, natural habitats and species
of wild fauna and flora of Community interest” (Habitats Directive, Article 2(2)). This aim relates primarily to
habitats and species, and designated sites that have a significant role in delivering favourable conservation
status. European sites (also called Natura 2000 sites) can be defined as actual or proposed/candidate
Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) or Special Protection Areas (SPA). It is also Government policy for
sites designated under the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar sites) to be treated
as having equivalent status to Natura 2000 sites.
1.5 The Habitats Directive applies the precautionary principle to protected areas. Plans and projects can only
be permitted having ascertained that there will be no adverse effect on the integrity of the site(s) in question.
This is in contrast to the SEA Directive which does not prescribe how plan or programme proponents should
respond to the findings of an environmental assessment; merely that the assessment findings (as
documented in the ‘environmental report’) should be ‘taken into account’ during preparation of the plan or
programme. In the case of the Habitats Directive, plans and projects may still be permitted if there are no
alternatives to them and there are Imperative Reasons of Overriding Public Interest (IROPI) as to why they
should go ahead. In such cases, compensation would be necessary to ensure the overall integrity of the
site network.
AECOM
7
Box 1: The legislative basis for HRA
1.6 Over the years, ‘Habitats Regulations Assessment’ (HRA) has come into wide currency to describe the
overall process set out in the Habitats Regulations, from screening through to identification of IROPI. This
has arisen in order to distinguish the overall process from the individual stage of "Appropriate Assessment".
Throughout this Report the term HRA is used for the overall process and restricts the use of Appropriate
Assessment to the specific stage of that name.
Habitats Directive 1992
Article 6 (3) states that:
“Any plan of project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the
site but likely to have a significant effect thereon, either individually or in combination
with other plans or projects, shall be subject to appropriate assessment of its
implications for the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives.”
Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended)
Regulation 105 states that:
“A competent authority, before deciding to … give any consent for a plan or project which
is likely to have a significant effect on a European site … must make an appropriate
assessment of the implications for the plan or project in view of that site’s conservation
objectives… The competent authority may agree to the plan or project only after having
ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the European site.”
AECOM
8
2. Methodology
Introduction
2.1 This section sets out the approach and methodology for undertaking the HRA. HRA itself operates
independently from the Planning Policy system, being a legal requirement of a discrete Statutory Instrument.
Therefore, there is no direct relationship to the ‘Test of Soundness’.
2.2 The HRA is being carried out in the absence of formal Government guidance. The Department for
Communities and Local Government (DCLG, now MHCLG) released a consultation paper on Appropriate
Assessment (AA) of Plans in 2006
1
. As yet, no further formal guidance has emerged specifically regarding
HRA of plans, although government has released general guidance on HRA
2
. Moreover, Court Judgements
can be used to shape the approaches used.
2.3 The draft DCLG guidance
3
makes it clear that when implementing HRA of land-use plans, the AA should be
undertaken at a level of detail that is appropriate and proportional to the level of detail provided within the
plan itself: “The comprehensiveness of the [Appropriate] assessment work undertaken should be
proportionate to the geographical scope of the option and the nature and extent of any effects identified. An
AA need not be done in any more detail, or using more resources, than is useful for its purpose. It would be
inappropriate and impracticable to assess the effects [of a strategic land use plan] in the degree of detail
that would normally be required for the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of a project.” More recently,
the Court of Appeal
4
ruled that providing the Council (competent authority) was duly satisfied that proposed
mitigation could be ‘achieved in practice’ to avoid an adverse effect, then this would suffice. This ruling has
since been applied to a planning permission (rather than a Local Plan)
5
. In this case the High Court ruled
that for ‘a multistage process, so long as there is sufficient information at any particular stage to enable the
authority to be satisfied that the proposed mitigation can be achieved in practice it is not necessary for all
matters concerning mitigation to be fully resolved before a decision maker is able to conclude that a
development will satisfy the requirements of reg. 61 of the Habitats Regulations’.
2.4 In other words, there is a tacit acceptance that HRA can be tiered and that all impacts are not necessarily
appropriate for consideration to the same degree of detail at all tiers.
2.5 Figure 1 below outlines the stages of HRA according to current draft DCLG guidance. The stages are
essentially iterative, being revisited as necessary in response to more detailed information,
recommendations and any relevant changes to the plan until no significant adverse effects remain.
1
DCLG (was CLG) (2006) Planning for the Protection of European Sites, Consultation Paper
2
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/appropriate-assessment
3
Ibid
4
No Adastral New Town Ltd (NANT) v Suffolk Coastal District Council Court of Appeal, 17
th
February 2015
5
High Court case of R (Devon Wildlife Trust) v Teignbridge District Council, 28 July 2015
AECOM
9
Figure 1: Four-Stage Approach to Habitats Regulations Assessment (Source: CLG, 2006)
Likely Significant Effects (LSE)
2.1 The first stage of any Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA Task 1) is a Likely Significant Effect (LSE)
test - essentially a risk assessment to decide whether the full subsequent stage known as Appropriate
Assessment is required. The essential question is:
2.2 “Is the Plan, either alone or in combination with other relevant projects and plans, likely to result in a
significant effect upon European sites?”
2.3 The objective is to ‘screen out’ those plans and projects that can, without any detailed appraisal, be said to
be unlikely to result in significant adverse effects upon European sites, usually because there is no
mechanism for an adverse interaction with European sites.
HRA Task 2 – Appropriate Assessment (AA)
2.4 Where it is determined that a conclusion of ‘no likely significant effect’ cannot be drawn the analysis has
proceeded to the next stage of HRA known as Appropriate Assessment. Case law has clarified that
‘appropriate assessment’ is not a technical term. In other words, there are no particular technical analyses,
or level of technical analysis, that are classified by law as belonging to appropriate assessment rather than
determination of likely significant effects.
2.5 One of the key considerations during appropriate assessment is whether there is available mitigation that
would entirely/ appropriately address the potential effect. This reflects a recent decision by the European
Court of Justice
6
that concludes that measures intended to avoid or reduce the harmful effects of a proposed
project on a European site cannot be taken into account at the Likely Significant Effects or ‘screening’ stage
of HRA. In practice, the appropriate assessment takes any policies or allocations that could not be dismissed
following the determination of Likely Significant Effects with a view to concluding whether there would
actually be an adverse effect on integrity (in other words, disruption of the coherent structure and function
of the European site(s)).
6
People Over Wind and Sweetman v Coillte Teoranta (C-323/17)
HRA Task 1: Likely significant effects (‘screening’) –identifying
whether a plan is ‘likely to have a significant effect’ on a
European site
HRA Task 2: Ascertaining the effect on site integrity – assessing
the effects of the plan on the conservation objectives of any
European sites ‘screened in’ during AA Task 1
HRA Task 3: Mitigation measures and alternative solutions –
where adverse effects are identified at AA Task 2, the plan should
be altered until adverse effects are cancelled out fully
Evidence Gathering – collecting information on relevant
European sites, their conservation objectives and characteristics
and other plans or projects.
AECOM
10
HRA Task 3 – Avoidance and Mitigation
2.6 Where necessary, measures are recommended for incorporation into the Plan in order to avoid or mitigate
adverse effects on European sites. There is considerable precedent concerning the level of detail that a
plan needs to contain regarding mitigation. The implication of this precedent is that it is not necessary for
all measures that will be deployed to be fully developed prior to adoption of the Plan, but the Plan must
provide an adequate policy framework within which these measures can be delivered.
2.7 This fits with the advice of Advocate-General Kokott
7
who commented that: ‘It would …hardly be proper to
require a greater level of detail in preceding plans [rather than planning applications] or the abolition of multi-
stage planning and approval procedures so that the assessment of implications can be concentrated on
one point in the procedure. Rather, adverse effects on areas of conservation must be assessed at every
relevant stage of the procedure to the extent possible on the basis of the precision of the plan. This
assessment is to be updated with increasing specificity in subsequent stages of the procedure’.
2.8 In evaluating significance, AECOM has relied on professional judgement as well as the results of previous
stakeholder consultation regarding development impacts on the European sites considered within this
assessment.
2.9 When discussing ‘mitigation’ for the proposed development sites, one is concerned primarily with the policy
framework to enable the delivery of such mitigation rather than the details of the mitigation measures
themselves since the Neighbourhood Plan document is a high-level policy document.
Confirming Other Plans and Projects that may act ‘In
combination’
2.10 It is a requirement of the Regulations that the impacts and effects of any plan being assessed are not
considered in isolation but in combination with other plans and projects that may also be affecting the
European site(s) in question.
Table 1. Other projects and plans that may act 'in-combination' to the development of Rogate and Rake NP.
Plans
South Downs Local Plan (adopted 2019)
Liss Neighbourhood Development Plan 2011-2028, submitted November 2016
Milland Neighbourhood Development Plan 2016-2030, adopted 2016
West Sussex Joint Minerals Local Plan until 2033, adopted 2018
Chichester District Council, Local Plan Key Policies: 2014-2029 (adopted July 2015), and relevant Neighbourhood
Plans (e.g. Selsey Neighbourhood Plan)
East Hampshire*, The East Hampshire District Local Plan: Joint Core Strategy (adopted 2014), Local Plan Part 2:
Housing and Employment Allocations (adopted April 2017).
Havant Borough Council, 2011. Local Plan (Core Strategy). Adopted March 2011 and Local Plan (Allocations) adopted
2014
Horsham District Local Development Framework (adopted November 2015), the Core Strategy (2007) and replacement
Horsham District Planning Framework and associated Neighbourhood Plans.
Mid-Sussex District Council. Mid-Sussex District Plan, 2018.
Winchester* City Council, 2013. Local Plan – Joint Core Strategy. (Adopted) and Local plan Part 2: Development
Management & Allocations document. (adopted April 2017)
Arun Local Plan 2011-2031 Main Modifications (March 2017); now awaiting adoption
Brighton and Hove Submission City Plan Part One. February 2013, Further Proposed Modifications (2015) and
associated Neighbourhood Plans.
Eastbourne Borough Council, 2013. Core Strategy Local Plan and Employment Land Local Plan (2014).
7
Opinion of Advocate General Kokott, 9th June 2005, Case C-6/04. Commission of the European Communities v United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, paragraph 49.
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=58359&doclang=EN
AECOM
11
Wealden* District Council (Incorporating Part of the South Downs National Park), 2013. Core Strategy Local Plan. New
Local Plan shortly to go to consultation
Transport Plans: West Sussex Transport Plan 3 (2011-2026); East Sussex Local Transport Plan 3 (2011-2026);
Hampshire Local Transport Plan (2011-2031); and Surrey Local Transport Plan LTP3 (2011-2026); South East River
Basin Management Plan 2015 - 2021; Lower Tidal River Arun Strategy Environmental Report (2014).
Minerals and Waste Plans: East Sussex, South Downs and Brighton & Hove Waste and Minerals Plan (adopted 2013);
Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (adopted 2013); West Sussex Waste Plan (adopted 2014); The East Sussex,
South Downs and Brighton & Hove Waste and Minerals Sites Plan (anticipated for adopted early 2018); West Sussex
Joint Minerals Plan (at the time of writing (February 2018) modifications to the Proposed Submission version was
subject to consultation).
AECOM
12
3. Internationally Designated Sites
East Hampshire Hangers SAC
Introduction
3.1 The East Hampshire Hangars describe a series of woodlands (totalling 569.68ha) on the western edge of
the Weald. The SAC is made up of a number of SSSIs.
Upper Greensand Hangers: Empshott to Hawkley
3.2 A series of steep, rocky woodlands on calcareous soils. The dominant tree is ash, often with evidence of
past coppicing. A variety of herb layer plants occurs, including ancient woodland indicators such as early
purple orchid Orchis mascula, herb Paris quadrifolia, butcher’s broom Ruscus aculeatus, sanicle Sanicula
europaea, wild daffodil Narcissus pseudonarcissus and sweet woodruff Galium odoratum. The woodland
supports the nationally scarce Italian lords-and-ladies Arum italicum sub species neglectum. Bryophyte
communities are notable and include nationally scarce species. Molluscs and hoverflies are also
represented by nationally scarce species.
Upper Greensand Hangers: Wyck to Wheatley
3.3 The geology and species supported are similar to those found at Empshott to Hawkley.
Coombe Wood and The Lythe
3.4 The hanger woodlands comprise a range of species including ash, oak Quercus robur, beech Fagus
sylvatica and hazel Corylus avellana. These woods support a relatively rich calcareous ground flora with
substantial populations of green hellebore Helleborus viridis and violet helleborine Epipactis purpurata. The
hanger woods also possess a rich bryophyte flora, mostly epiphytic on the older trees.
Wick Wood and Worldham Hangers
3.5 The species rich ancient woodland associated with varied soils is ecologically distinct and contains a number
of nationally rare woodland types. On the freely draining upper slopes ash and wych elm Ulmus glabra
predominate forming an extremely rare woodland type. Beech, pedunculate oak and whitebeam Sorbus
aria also occur on the upper slopes. A few large coppice stools of small leaved lime Tilia cordata occur in
Wick Hill Hanger. Fifty-seven species of plant which are indicative of ancient woodlands have been found
in the SSSI. Two ponds provide added diversity, which attracts a variety of common and uncommon birds,
butterflies, dragonflies and damselflies.
Selborne Common
3.6 This SSSI is beech-dominated woodland on a steep east-facing chalk slope, grading to mixed plateau
woodland with relict open acid grassland on clay-with-flints. The ground flora is well-developed, with a
number of unusual plant species and rare moss species. On the clay-with-flints plateau, acid grassland
adds variety, together with a small water body. A small area of downland turf also exists. Selborne Common
is one of the most important mollusc sites in Britain, and a number of notable beetles and butterflies also
occur.
Noar Hill
3.7 Noar Hill exhibits a range of chalk vegetation seral stages from open short-sward chalk grassland overlying
ancient quarries, through invasive mixed scrub of hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, blackthorn Prunus
spinosa, juniper Juniperus communis, and sweetbriar and southern downy roses Rosa micrantha and Rosa
tomentosa to mature beech hanger woodland. In addition, hazel coppice is found on the top of the steep
scarp slopes. Eleven species of orchid occur, and the site is of national importance for butterflies and
grasshoppers.
Wealden Edge Hangers
3.8 The Wealden Edge Hangers comprise the mainly wooded easterly facing escarpment of the Hampshire
chalk plateau, at the western extremity of the Weald. It exhibits a wide range of woodland types including
mono-specific yew (in some cases developed over former juniper scrub), yew/beech and beech/ash with
beech/wych elm /field maple Acer campestre/ash, and oak /hazel, on deeper soils, and moist ash/alder
Alnus glutinosa wood by escarpment-foot springs. Ash, beech and elm all occur in coppice forms. A wide
range of calcareous shrubs occur. The bryophyte flora is extremely rich, and the lichen flora is the richest
AECOM
13
for any woodland on chalk in Britain, after Cranborne Chase, with 74 species. The total vascular flora of the
area comprises a known 289 species.
Reasons for Designation
8
3.9 The East Hampshire Hangers qualify as a SAC for both habitats and species. Firstly, the site contains the
Habitats Directive Annex I habitats of:
Dry grasslands and scrublands on chalk or limestone, including important orchid sites: Noar
Hill in particular, has an outstanding assemblage of orchids, including one of the largest UK
populations of the nationally scarce musk orchid.
Beech forests on neutral to rich soils: the site is extremely rich in terms of vascular plants.
Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines. The bryophyte flora is richer than on the
chalk examples and includes several species that are rare in the lowlands
Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates (Festuco-
Brometalia) (* important orchid sites)
Yew woods of the British Isles
3.10 Secondly, the site contains the Habitats Directive Annex II species early gentian.
Historic Trends and Current Pressures
9
3.11 The habitats of the East Hampshire Hangers SAC are dependent upon maintenance of appropriate species
composition and cover. The great majority of the SAC is in favourable condition, and where not, this is due
to factors such as non-native species present, inappropriate vegetation structure (e.g. lack of regeneration,
or too much scrub), and inadequate grazing regimes.
3.12 The key vulnerabilities to the SAC are:
Low nutrient runoff from surrounding land: being steep and narrow, the Hanger woodlands are
vulnerable to nutrient run-off leading to eutrophication.
Disease outbreaks affecting beech trees.
Absence of direct fertilization (agricultural runoff).
Appropriate woodland management.
Rook Clift SAC
Introduction
3.13 At 10.82ha, Rook Clift is the largest known remnant stand of Tilio-Acerion forests dominated by large-leaved
lime Tilia platyphyllos in the south of England. It lies on the deeper soils towards the base of the slope and
valley bottom of a small wooded combe, which gives the site its humid microclimate. The soils are rather
deeper and there is less exposed rock at this site because the chalk is more readily weathered than the
limestones on which many of the other sites lie. Despite this, the vegetation is otherwise typical of the habitat
type, with an abundance of ferns such as hart’s-tongue Phyllitis scolopendrium and shield-fern Polystichum
spp. In addition to species more common in the west of Britain, continental species such as Italian lords-
and-ladies Arum italicum also occur.
Reasons for Designation
10
3.14 Rook Clift qualifies as a SAC for its habitats. The site contains the Habitats Directive Annex I habitats of:
8
https://sac.jncc.gov.uk/site/UK0012723
9
http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/5890345141272576
10
https://sac.jncc.gov.uk/site/UK0030058
AECOM
14
Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines for which this is considered to be one of
the best areas in the United Kingdom
Historic Trends and Current Pressures
11
3.15 Rook Clift is a small wooded coombe on the scarp slope of the South Downs. Large-leaved lime dominates
the canopy together with ash and some beech. The site is in private ownership and is managed under the
Woodland Grant Scheme. As with almost any woodland in southern England, deer could be a problem when
plans are instituted for regeneration. Its small size and unusual composition mean that any planting inside
the wood would need to be tightly controlled. At present 100% of the site is in favourable condition.
3.16 The key vulnerabilities to the SAC are:
Over grazing by deer – deer management
Controlled planting of appropriate species of tree
Wealden Heaths Phase 2 SPA
Introduction
3.17 The Wealden Heaths Phase II SPA is situated on an arc of hilly country on the edge of the Weald. The area
runs parallel to the South Downs and is located on the borders of Hampshire, Surrey and West Sussex.
3.18 The underlying geology is composed of Cretaceous sandstones and ironstone, which give rise to
predominantly acid soils. These are often sandy and free-draining but clay and silt layers produce poorly-
drained areas where streams and wetland habitats can be found. The landscape is largely rural and is
characterised by a prominent escarpment with broad, steep-sided valleys and low, rounded hills with a
mixture of heaths, oak and birch woodland, mature conifer woodlands, pastures and wetlands.
3.19 Large parts of the SPA are used for military training, including live-firing, and so public access is restricted.
However, there are also areas in the SPA which are very popular destinations for a variety of recreational
uses including walking, birdwatching, orienteering and cycling. Some of the land is registered common land
but traditional common land management practices, including grazing, have largely died out in the area.
Nevertheless, there are strong cultural and historical links to the past reflected in the landscape.
Reasons for Designation
12
3.20 The SPA supports three Annex I species:
Dartford warbler Sylvia undata - when classified, the SPA supported 16 pairs (5 year peak
mean 1989-1993) which represented 1.7% of the GB population.
Nightjar Caprimulgus europaeus - when classified, the SPA supported 43 pairs (5 year peak
mean 1989-1993) which represented 1.4% of the GB population.
Woodlark Lullula arborea - when classified, the SPA supported 15 pairs (5 year peak mean
1989-1993) which represented 4.3% of the GB population.
Historic trends and current pressures
3.21 The habitats and features that are supported by Wealden Heaths Phase 2 SPA are sensitive to changes in
air quality. Exceeding critical values for air pollutants may result in changes to the chemical status of a
supporting habitat’s substrate, accelerating or damaging plant growth, altering vegetation structure and
composition and thereby affecting the quality and availability of nesting, feeding or roosting habitats. Some
of the effects that might be attributable to aerial pollution could include accelerated and more vigorous
growth of bramble, birch and coarse grasses and consequent loss of bare ground and/or heather which
offer nest sites. In addition, to air quality pressures the site is also susceptible to disturbance caused by
recreational pressure. The nature, scale, timing and duration of some human activities can result in the
11
http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/6352739575529472
12
https://designatedsites.naturalengland.org.uk/SiteGeneralDetail.aspx?SiteCode=UK9012132&SiteName=DEVIL
AECOM
15
disturbance of birds at a level that may substantially affect their behaviour, and consequently affect the long-
term viability of the population.
AECOM
16
4. Likely Significant Effects
Introduction
4.1 The civil parish of Rogate includes the villages of Rogate and Rake (the majority), and the hamlets of Fyning,
Hillbrow (part), Durford Wood, Durleighmarsh, Terwick Common, Tullecombe, Habin, Langley and Nyewood
(part). In total, there are 1,556 residents in some 639 households. The parish lies within Chichester district
of West Sussex, England.
4.2 Rogate and Rake are located within the South Downs National Park in the centre of the Western Weald.
The parish is approximately 5 miles north to south, 3 miles east to west at its widest, covers approximately
9 square miles or 23 square km, and has a perimeter of about 16 miles. The A272 crosses the parish from
east to west, through the centre of Rogate. Serving the linear settlement of Rake is the B2070 (old A3) that
runs northeast and southwest along the western boundary of the parish, which is also the West Sussex
County and Chichester District border.
4.3 Based upon previous HRA work undertaken for the South Downs Local Plan, there are several pathways of
impact that require analysis regarding increased development within Rogate Parish. These are:
Recreational pressure,
Air quality, and
Urbanization
4.4 Water quality impacts were considered. Internationally designated sites that were assessed for potential
likely significant effects resulting from the SDNPA Local Plan were as follows:
River Itchen SAC – located over 20km to the west of Rogate and Rake Parish Boundary
Arun Valley SAC, SPA and Ramsar site – located over 20km to the east of Rogate and Rake
Parish Boundary.
4.5 However, it is considered that due to the considerable distances listed above that River Itchen SAC and
Arun Valley SAC, SPA and Ramsar are very unlikely to be impacted by increased development at Rogate
and Rake.
4.6 Table 2 identifies the environmental impact pathways to the River Itchen SAC due to increased development
within Rogate and Rake NP.
Table 2. How each European Site could be susceptible to the above impact pathways due to
increased housing proposed by Rogate and Rake NP and associated development policies.
Impact pathway
Discussion
Air quality
Increased residential development within Rogate and Rake will lead to a greater
number of vehicles within the parish. As such, increased air pollution is expected from
vehicles emission. Pollutants realised form vehicles may be carried directly by wind
currents and deposited to at European Sites or pollutants may become soluble and
taken up during evaporation and deposited to European Sites at precipitation.
Recreational pressure
Increased residential development within Rogate and Rake could lead to high numbers
of visitors to European Sites. This is highly likely for Wealden Heaths Phase 2 SPA
(depending on the location of housing within the parish) as this European Site boarders
the Parish boundary. For example, the nature, scale, timing and duration of some
human activities can result in the disturbance of birds at a level that may substantially
affect their behaviour, and consequently affect the long-term viability of the population.
Urbanisation
Increased urbanisation could lead to likely significant effects to European Sites. In
particular, increased residential development within 5km (and particularly 400m) of the
Wealden Heaths Phase 2 SPA could increase cat predation to ground nesting birds
and chicks reducing breeding success of Annex II species.
AECOM
17
4.7 For the Screening assessment (Table 3) green shading in the final column indicates that the proposed
development site or policy has been deemed not to lead to a likely significant effect on any European sites
due to the absence of any mechanism for an adverse effect. Orange shading indicates that a pathway of
impact potentially exists and further discussion is therefore required. For the purposes of this assessment
a 5km zone of influence is used around each European Site. A 5km zone is chosen because a) this is the
zone within which a series of HRAs have identified that all net new housing will have an adverse effect on
the integrity of Wealden Heaths Phase 2 SPA without mitigation and b) the HRA of the SDNP LP records
that Natural England recommended during preparation of their HRA that the Council undertake a project-
level HRA on all developments located within 5km of Wealden Heaths Phase II SPA.
Habitat Regulation Assessment
AECOM
18
Screening Rogate and Rake NP
Table 3. Screening outcome of likely significant effects.
Policy
Designated Site Location
Brief Summary
Screening outcome
Policy NE1: To
Conserve, Protect
and Enhance the
Natural
Environment
Within Rogate Parish.
Policy describes that any new development must
conserve and, wherever possible, enhance the
natural environment and the characterising views
identified in this Plan. This broad principle includes
geology, geo-diversity, wetlands, water systems,
heathland, open spaces, notable trees, landscape
setting, overall tranquillity, dark night skies and
characterising views of the parish.
No likely significant effects. Screened out.
This is a positive policy that requires new development to conserve and, where
possible, enhance the natural environment. The policy also says that development is
expected to contribute to and enhance the natural environment by conserving the
wider benefits of ecosystem services and minimising any adverse impact on
biodiversity. This covers both designated sites and non-designated areas that may
have biodiversity value either through the presence of endangered species or the
diversity of the plants and species present.
Policy BE1:
Locally Distinctive
Design within the
Parish
Within Rogate Parish.
Policy describes that new development must be of
high quality and delivered without permanent
detriment to local environment, the setting of the Plan
area and the Special Qualities of the South Downs
National Park.
No likely significant effects. Screened out.
This policy requires design of development to demonstrate good quality, innovative
and sensitive design, and sets out criteria that Design and Access Statements must
take into account.
Policy BE2:
Conservation
Area
Within Rogate Parish.
Policy describes that permission will only be granted
for development either within, or within the setting of,
Rogate’s Conservation Area, if it can be
demonstrated that it will conserve or enhance the
character of the designation.
No likely significant effects. Screened out.
This policy sets out the circumstances under which development proposals in or
contiguous with Rogate’s Conservation Area, which is within the settlement boundary,
may be permitted and sets out a series of requirements that proposals must
address.The policy does not in and of itself provide for development and therefore not
expected to effect European Sites.
Policy H1:
Settlement
Boundary
Wealden Heaths Phase II
SPA: 5.5km north
East Hampshire Hangers
SAC: 6.4km north-west
Rook Clift SAC: 5.3km south
Policy describes the development boundary within
Rogate’s settlement area.
Likely significant effects. Screened in.
The policy provides for development in principle within the defined Rogate settlement
boundary.
The potential impact pathways are:
- Air quality (in combination)
Policy H2:
Residential
Development in
the Open
Countryside
Wealden Heaths Phase II
SPA: directly adjacent, north
of the Parish boundary
East Hampshire Hangers
SAC: 3.9km west
Rook Clift SAC: 3.8km south
This policy describes that residential development
outside of the settlement boundary will be limited to
replacement dwellings and extensions, except when
one or more of the policy requirements are achieved.
Likely significant effects. Screened in.
This policy facilities development outside of Rogate’s settlement boundary. At the time
of writing, there is no spatial detail outlined within this policy and therefore development
could occur within the wider extent of the Parish boundary. Impacts to European Sites
are expected via the following pathways:
- Recreational pressure of East Hampshire Hangers SAC, Wealden Heaths Phase II
SPA
- Urbanisation of Wealden Heath Phase II SPA
- Air quality (in combination)
Habitat Regulation Assessment
AECOM
19
Policy H3:
Conversion of
Existing
Residential
Properties
Wealden Heaths Phase II
SPA: directly adjacent, north
of the Parish boundary
East Hampshire Hangers
SAC: 3.9km west
Rook Clift SAC: 3.8km south
This policy describes requirements for the
conversion of current residential plots into several
self-contained smaller plots for residential
inhabitation.
Likely significant effects. Screened in.
This policy facilities concentrated development within existing residential plots.
However, at the time of writing there is no spatial detail outlined within this policy and
therefore development could occur within the wider extent of the Parish boundary.
Impacts to European Sites are expected, as above, via the following pathways:
- Recreational pressure of East Hampshire Hangers SAC, Wealden Heaths Phase II
SPA
- Urbanisation of Wealden Heath Phase II SPA
- Air quality (in combination)
Policy H4:
Replacement
Dwellings,
Extensions and
Annexes
Wealden Heaths Phase II
SPA: directly adjacent, north
of the Parish boundary
East Hampshire Hangers
SAC: 3.9km west
Rook Clift SAC: 3.8km south
This policy sets out criteria for replacement
dwellings, extensions and annexes.
Likely significant effects. Screened in.
Again, this policy does not provide spatial detail with regards to development
placement therefore development could occur within the wider extent of the Parish
boundary. Impacts to European Sites are expected, as above, via the following
pathways:
- Recreational pressure of East Hampshire Hangers SAC, Wealden Heaths Phase II
SPA
- Urbanisation of Wealden Heath Phase II SPA
- Air quality (in combination)
Policy H5: Local
Housing Needs
N/A
This policy describes the requirement of affordable
housing and mix of homes on allocated sites in Policy
H6
No likely significant effects. Screened out.
This policy sets out the requirements for housing mix and does not allocated sites for
development. As such, this policy is not expected to impact European Sites.
Policy H6: Renault
Garage and
Bungalow South
of A272, Rogate
Wealden Heaths Phase II
SPA: 5.7km north
East Hampshire Hangers
SAC: 6.7km north-west
Rook Clift SAC: 5.4km south
This policy allocates 9 residential dwellings and
either 2 flats or 2 workshops.
Likely significant effects. Screened in.
The policy allocates 9 residential dwellings and either 2 flats or 2 workshops that are
located within the settlement boundary towards the north east of Rogate. Current site
use is a car garage and bungalow.
The potential impact pathways are:
- Recreational pressure to Wealden heaths Phase II SPA
- Air quality (in combination)
Policy H6: Land on
North side of
B2070 London
Road West of
Flying Bull PH,
Rake
Wealden Heaths Phase II
SPA: 1.7km, north
East Hampshire Hangers
SAC: 5.3km west
Rook Clift SAC: 9.6km south
This policy allocates 4 residential dwellings.
Likely significant effects. Screened in.
The policy allocates 4 residential dwellings towards the centre of Rake Village. Current
site use is a pub garden with associated scrub and trees.
The potential impact pathways are:
- Recreational pressure to Wealden heaths Phase II SPA
- Air quality (in combination)
Policy EW1:
Supporting the
Rural Economy
Within parish boundary.
This policy facilitates development in the open
countryside provided it is restricted to proposals that
Likely significant effects. Screened in.
Habitat Regulation Assessment
AECOM
20
demonstrate positive and demonstrable benefits to
sustaining to the rural economy.
This policy does not provide specifically for development but does provide criteria and
circumstances for potentially suitable rural business development. This could increase
the number of people commuting into the Rogate Parish.
The potential impact pathways are:
- Air quality (in combination)
Policy T1:
Encouraging
Sustainable
Travel
Within parish boundary.
Policy encourages residential and commercial
development to incorporate attractive links to the
nearest point on the public right-of-way network and
local footway networks.
Likely significant effects. Screened in.
This policy relates to encouraging sustainable travel options. This policy requires that,
where practical, new development to connect to the nearest point of the public right of
way network and that opportunities to enhance existing links should be taken wherever
possible.
The potential impact pathways are:
- Recreational disturbance of East Hampshire Hangers SAC, and Wealden Heath
Phase
II SPA
Policy T2: Safety
N/A
Policy describes that proposal should not have a
detrimental impact on the safety of road users
including cyclists, pedestrians and horse riders.
No impact pathways. Screened out.
The policy relates to road safety and is not expected to have likely significant effects
to European Sites.
Policy T3: Parking
Within parish boundary.
Policy describes development that will generate
additional trips by private car should provide
sufficient off-street parking.
Likely significant effects. Screened in.
This policy does not provide specifically for development but does provide criteria and
circumstances for increasing car parking facilities with increased development,
specifically with regards to schools, the village hall and recreational grounds. This
could increase the number of people using cars within the parish and/or commuting
into the Rogate Parish.
The potential impact pathways are:
- Air quality (in combination)
Policy E1:
Renewable
Energy
N/A
Policy describes the councils desires to support the
use of renewable energy projects.
No impact pathways. Screened out.
This policy sets out criteria in which small scale renewable energy projects may be
supported. In particular, support will be given where they can be delivered without
permanent detriment to the local environment and are commensurate with the special
qualities of the National Park (which includes its biodiversity).
Policy CH1:
Community
Facilities
N/A
Policy describes the continuing use of current
community facilities.
No impact pathways. Screened out.
This policy does not allocate new sites for community development and is therefore
not expected to impact European Sites.
Policy CH2:
Development of
community
Facilities
N/A
Policy set out strict requirements for the
redevelopment of community facilities.
No impact pathways. Screened out.
Again, this policy does not allocate new sites for community development rather the
policy aims are to restrict change of use and redevelopment of current community
facilities. Therefore, no likely significant effects are expected to European Sites.
Habitat Regulation Assessment
AECOM
21
Policy CH2:
Development of
Community
Facilities
N/A
Policy describes affords protection from development
to public open spaces.
No impact pathways. Screened out.
This a positive policy that safeguards specific public open spaces and Local Green
Spaces in the parish.
AECOM
22
5. Consideration of Effect ‘in
combination’
5.1 The SDNP LP was subject to HRA in 2017 and updated in 2018. That HRA included a strategic assessment
of air quality, hydrology, recreational pressure and urbanisation ‘in combination’ with growth in other authority
areas (including Rogate and Rake Parish) over the same time period. The ‘in combination’ assessment is
discussed further in the appropriate assessment section of this report.
AECOM
23
6. Appropriate Assessment
Introduction
6.1 The law does not prescribe how an appropriate assessment should be undertaken or presented but the
appropriate assessment must consider all impact pathways that have been screened in, whether they are
due to policies alone or to impact pathways that arise in combination with other projects and plans. That
analysis is the purpose of this section. The law does not require the ‘alone’ and ‘in combination’ effects to
be examined separately provided all effects are discussed. The impact pathways of concern to this HRA
(water quality, water resources and recreational pressure) are inherently ‘in combination’ since the amount
of new development in the Rogate Neighbourhood Plan is too small to result in an adverse effect alone but
only ‘in combination’ with other plans and projects.
6.2 The HRA screening exercise undertaken in Chapter 4, Table 3 indicated a total of 9 policies that were
expected to have likely significant effects to the European Sites due to air quality, recreational pressures
and urbanisation issues. At the screening stage the following policies were screened in, requiring further
assessment:
Policy H1: Settlement Boundary;
Policy H2: Residential Development in the Open Countryside;
Policy H3: Conversion of Existing Residential Properties;
Policy H4: Replacement Dwellings, Extensions and Annexes;
Policy H6: Renault Garage and Bungalow South of A272, Rogate;
Policy H6: Land on North side of B2070 London Road West of Flying Bull PH, Rake;
Policy EW1: Supporting the Rural Economy;
Policy T1: Encouraging Sustainable Travel; and
Policy T3: Parking.
Recreational pressure and disturbance
Introduction
6.3 Recreational use of a European site has the potential to:
Prevent appropriate management or exacerbate existing management difficulties
13
;
Cause damage through erosion and fragmentation;
Trampling of vegetation
14
;
Cause eutrophication as a result of dog fouling; and
Cause disturbance to sensitive species, particularly ground-nesting birds
15
.
6.4 Different types of European sites are subject to different types of recreational pressures and have different
vulnerabilities. Studies across a range of species have shown that the effects from recreation can be
complex. It should be emphasised that recreational use is not inevitably a problem. Many European sites
also contain nature reserves managed for conservation and public appreciation of nature. For example,
Parts of the Wealden Heaths Phase II SPA are managed by the National Trust where access is encouraged
and where resources are available to ensure that recreational use is managed appropriately.
13
JNCC (2019) Threats to UK Lowland Heathland Habitats. Available online from:
http://archive.jncc.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=5942, accessed 30/09/2019.
14
Roovers, P., Verheyen, K., Hermy, M. and Gulinck, H., 2004. Experimental trampling and vegetation recovery in some forest
and heathland communities. Applied Vegetation Science, 7(1), pp.111-118.
15
UNDERHILL‐DAY, J.C. and Liley, D., 2007. Visitor patterns on southern heaths: a review of visitor access patterns to
heathlands in the UK and the relevance to Annex I bird species. Ibis, 149, pp.112-119.
AECOM
24
Mechanical/Abrasive Damage and Nutrient Enrichment
6.5 Most types of terrestrial European site can be affected by soil compaction and erosion, which can arise as
a result of visits by walkers, cyclists, horse-riders and users of off-road vehicles. Dog walkers adversely
impact sites through nutrient enrichment via dog fouling and also have potential to cause greater disturbance
to fauna as dogs are less likely to keep to marked footpaths and move more erratically. Motorcycle
scrambling and off-road vehicle use can cause serious erosion, as well as disturbance to sensitive species.
6.6 The Wealden Heaths Phase II SPA is an internationally designated sites for species that could be adversely
affected by the impacts of excessive trampling and erosion to their supporting habitats. Direct mechanical
trampling and nutrient enrichment are both more subtle and reversible effects than disturbance of nesting
bird populations.
Disturbance
6.7 Concern regarding the effects of disturbance on birds stems from the fact that they are expending energy
unnecessarily and the time they spend responding to disturbance is time that is not spent feeding.
Disturbance therefore risks increasing energetic output while reducing energetic input, which can adversely
affect the ‘condition’ and ultimately survival of the birds. In addition, displacement of birds from one feeding
site to others can increase the pressure on the resources available within the remaining sites, as they must
sustain a greater number of birds.
6.8 Human activity can affect birds either directly (e.g. through causing them to flee) or indirectly (e.g. through
damaging their habitat). The most obvious direct effect is that of immediate mortality such as death by
shooting, but human activity can also lead to behavioural changes (e.g. alterations in feeding behaviour,
nest abandonment, avoidance of certain areas etc.) and physiological changes (e.g. an increase in heart
rate) that, although less noticeable, may ultimately result in major population-level effects by altering the
balance between immigration/birth and emigration/death.
6.9 The factors that influence a species response to a disturbance are numerous, but the three key factors are
species sensitivity, proximity of disturbance sources and timing/duration of the potentially disturbing activity.
Discussion
6.10 The impact pathways assessed at the screening stage regarding increased residential development and by
default more visitors to European Sites is considered in combination with development elsewhere in the
National Park. This is an issue that is most appropriate to tackle at a Local Plan level and it was discussed
extensively in the HRA of the adopted SDNP Local Plan. Within that HRA a total of 11 net new residential
dwellings were assumed at Rogate village in combination with other residential allocations elsewhere within
and beyond the SDNP. It was concluded that the growth in the Local Plan would not result in adverse effects
on the integrity of any European sites. Since the Local Plan HRA was completed, the Rogate and Rake NP
has allocated a total of 4 residential dwellings at Rake village (Policy H6: Land on North side of B2070
London Road West of Flying Bull PH, Rake). The location of this allocated is 1.7km to the south of the
Wealden Heaths Phase II SPA. The extent to which these further four dwellings might change the conclusion
of the Local Plan HRA must therefore be considered.
6.11 The adverse effects of recreational pressure on the Wealden Heaths Phase II SPA and East Hampshire
Hangers SAC were investigated and discussed in detail at the time the East Hampshire/South Downs
National Park Local Plan Joint Core Strategy was prepared and is documented in its various iterations of
HRA and the HRA of the adopted Waverley Local Plan Part 1; the analysis was then updated for the adopted
South Downs Local Plan, with which Natural England concurred. It is therefore not repeated in this
document. The various Core Strategy and Local Plan HRAs concluded that, based on the levels of
development expected within 5km of the SPA over the Strategy period (including that expected within
Waverley district), no strategic mitigation solution was required provided that Whitehill-Bordon (responsible
for the vast majority of new development within the 5km zone) mitigated for its own impacts at the project
level. South Downs Local Plan policy (developed in agreement with Natural England and considered sound
by the planning inspector at Examination) treats other new housing developments within 5km on a case-by-
case basis in determining whether mitigation is required, with the decision as to the need for mitigation being
based upon consideration of the scale of development and its proximity to the SPA.
6.12 Since the issue was already analysed and discussed in detail as part of the Joint Local Plan Examination,
the same conclusions of no adverse effect on integrity can apply to Rogate and Rake NP provided the
housing identified in the Local Plan does not materially alter the quanta on which the South Downs Local
AECOM
25
Plan HRA is based. Since four dwellings at Rake will not materially alter the housing numbers assessed in
the adopted Local Plan, it is considered that the conclusion remains valid
16
. In addition, the mitigating Policy
NE1 mirrors the relevant policy of the adopted South Downs Local Plan and requires that ‘new development
must conserve and, wherever possible, enhance the natural environment… In the north of the parish,
development proposals resulting in a net increase in residential units within 5km of any boundary of the
Wealden Heath Phase II SPA will require a project-specific Habitats Regulations Assessment screening to
determine whether a likely significant effect on the integrity of the site will result and any requirements for
mitigation are identified’.
6.13 Rook Clift SAC is a rural site isolated from any large settlements. The SDNP HRA identified two settlements
within 5km of the SAC. At that time there was expected to be small amounts of new housing at South Harting
(13 dwellings) and Rogate (11 dwellings), amounting to a total of 24 new houses
17
. It was concluded that
such a small number of dwellings would not result in a material change in recreational activity at the site. In
addition, the Natural England Site Improvement Plan for Rook Clift SAC does not identify recreational
pressure as a site vulnerability. As such, no adverse effects would result from increased recreational
pressure as a result of the Rake and Rogate NP. While an additional four dwellings are being delivered in
this Neighbourhood Plan (at Rake) that does not materially change the Local Plan analysis.
6.14 It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the appropriate policy measures are in place to ensure there are
no impacts to European Site integrity due to increased residential development within Rogate and Rake.
Air quality
6.15 Increased residential development within Rogate Parish could decrease air quality through increased
emissions from vehicle exhausts. There are two measures of relevance regarding air quality impacts from
vehicle exhausts. The first is the concentration of oxides of nitrogen (known as NOx) in the atmosphere. In
extreme cases NOx can be directly toxic to vegetation but its main importance is as a source of nitrogen,
which is then deposited on adjacent habitats. The guideline atmospheric concentration advocated by
Government for the protection of vegetation is 30 micrograms per cubic metre (µgm
-3
), known as the Critical
Level, as this concentration relates to the growth effects of nitrogen derived from NOx on vegetation.
6.16 The second important metric is a measure of the rate of the resulting nitrogen deposition. The addition of
nitrogen is a form of fertilization, which can have a negative effect on woodlands and other habitats over
time by encouraging more competitive plant species that can force out the less competitive species that are
more characteristic. Unlike NOx in atmosphere, the nitrogen deposition rate below which we are confident
effects would not arise is different for each habitat. The rate (known as the Critical Load) is provided on the
UK Air Pollution Information System (APIS) website (www.apis.ac.uk) and is expressed as a quantity
(kilograms) of nitrogen over a given area (hectare) per year (kgNha
-1
yr
-1
).
6.17 Emissions of NOx and resulting deposition can have community level impacts to habitats and European
Sites. Habitats that are particularly sensitive to elevated nitrogen levels include woodlands such as those at
East Hampshire Hangers SAC and Rook Clift SAC. Elevated nitrogen deposition in general has driven
strong biogeochemical responses in woodlands with many authors documenting reductions in soil carbon-
nitrogen ratio, acidification and increased nitrate leaching
18
and understory plants can be negatively affected
by nitrogen inputs.
6.18 However, it is important to note that the impact of nitrogen deposition on vegetation composition of
woodlands is poorly understood partly due to the strong confounding influence that tree canopy structure
places on ground flora species richness, cover and other parameters that might illustrate the influence of
nitrogen deposition. The canopy does this through interception of light, rainfall and pollution and the effect
of woodland management upon this structure also has a big influence on groundflora.
6.19 Other protected habitats and species that are supported at East Hampshire Hangers SAC, but not the
primary reason for site selection, includes semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous
substrates (Festuco-Brometalia), (note that this includes the priority feature "important orchid rich sites").
16
Note that East Hampshire District Council are currently considering a new Local Plan to cover the period up to 2033 for the
area within their planning control. The growth outlined in that document will be above and beyond that in the adopted Local Plans
and Core Strategies and thus outwith the scale of development set out in their HRAs. For that reason, East Hampshire Council
intends to expand the mitigation solution for Wealden Heaths Phase 2 SPA to accommodate the large amount of additional
development they intend to deliver. Once again, Bordon settlement will be a focus of this new housing.
17
The previous iteration of the Plan 25 dwellings were provided within 5 km of the SAC.
18
Ibid. Section 7.3, page 65
AECOM
26
These grasslands are found on thin, well-drained, lime-rich soils associated with chalk and limestone. A
large number of rare plants are associated with this habitat, including the Annex II species Early gentian
Gentianella anglica that is also supported by the SAC. By definition this habitat type is unfertilised and is
therefore susceptible to nitrogen deposition. The rare plant species that are supported by this habitat are
therefore adapted to nutrient poor-conditions and impacts such as nitrogen deposition from increased
vehicle emission could have likely significant effects to species richness and composition.
6.20 A second habitat that is also highly impacted by increased soil fertility from nitrates is heathland. The routes
that nitrogen deposition impacts habitats and vegetation described above are through toxicity and the
movement of nitrogen through varying trophic levels. Another route of affect is through nitrogen acidification.
A study undertaken by Maskell et al (2010)
19
observed that with increasing acid deposition from NOx there
was a decrease in species richness within heathland. Acid deposition can have serious impacts to the health
of soil structure and the microbial communities found here. These species carryout a natural decaying
process known as nitrification (converting ammonium to nitrate) that generates acidity. However, when in
combination with acid deposition from NOx pollution the soil pH may become too acidic for specialised plant
communities to survive and therefore result in a net decrease in biodiversity
20
. Acidification tends to be more
of an issue for acid substrates (which have poor buffering capacity (i.e. heathland)) than neutral or
calcareous substrates.
Discussion
6.21 Again, due to the small scale of development within the Rogate and Rake NP increased residential
development and associated air quality impacts to European Sites are assessed in combination. As
describes in Table 2, increased residential development (Policies H1, H2, H3, H4 and H6) and associated
car parking facilities (Policy T3) could increase atmospheric pollutants through the release of chemicals
from vehicle emissions. The issue of air quality is extensively addressed in the SDNP HRA where the nature
of the transport within the South Downs is inherently ‘in combination’ with growth of the surrounding
authorities, including 11 dwellings at Rogate. That HRA concluded that:
At its closest Kingley Vale SAC is 125m from the B2141. Given the distance from the road
and its minor nature, NOx concentrations within the SAC are currently well below the critical
level and are forecast to reduce further up to 2033.
For Wealden Heaths Phase 2 SPA, an increase in nitrogen deposition equivalent to 0.1% of
the critical load is a sufficiently small amount (equivalent to 1 milligram deposited per square
metre, spread over a year
21
) that it is ecologically insignificant, and no retardation of
improvement would occur.
Only minor roads such as the B3006 lie within 200m of the East Hampshire Hangers SAC,
nitrogen deposition rates and NOx concentrations have fallen fairly consistently since 2005
and are expected to continue falling to 2033.
6.22 While an additional four dwellings are being delivered in this Neighbourhood Plan (at Rake) that does not
materially change the Local Plan analysis. As such, it can be concluded that no adverse effect upon the
SPA would result from increased development provided by the NP ‘in combination’ with growth from other
sources. In addition, Policy NE1 prevents ‘any new development from contributing to, or increasing the risk
of, soil, air, water, light or noise pollution or land instability’.
6.23 In addition, Rook Clift SAC is a remote site that does not lie within 200m of any roads that would constitute
journey to work routes for residents of the National Park. The SAC is therefore not expected to be impacted
by direct air quality issues due to increase residential development within Rogate and Rake Parish.
Urbanisation
6.24 Urbanisation impacts result from increased populations within close proximity to sensitive European sites.
The detail of the impacts is distinct from the trampling, disturbance and dog-fouling that results specifically
19
Maskell, L.C., Smart, S.M., Bullock, J.M., Thompson, K.E.N. and Stevens, C.J., (2010). Nitrogen deposition causes
widespread loss of species richness in British habitats. Global Change Biology, 16(2), pp.671-679.
20
Defra (2007) Acid Deposition Processes. Nobel House: London.
21
For comparison, a teaspoon of salt typically weighs 5000-6000 milligrams and a pinch of salt (c. 1/16
th
of a teaspoon) weighs
roughly 300 milligrams
AECOM
27
from recreational activity (considered in the subsequent section relating to Recreational Pressure and
Disturbance). The list of urbanisation impacts can be extensive, but core impacts can be singled out:
Increased fly-tipping,
Cat predation, and
Uncontrolled fires.
6.25 Concerning aspects of urbanisation (particularly predation of the chicks of ground-nesting birds by domestic
cats); the South Down’s HRA analysis for housing delivery allowed for a total of 287 dwellings to be delivered
in the National Park within 5km of the Wealden Heaths Phase 2 SPA. This assessment did not include the
housing allocations at Rake now outlined by the Rogate and Rake NP. However, none of the proposed
dwellings are within 400m of the SPA.
AECOM
28
7. Conclusion
7.1 It is concluded that the appropriate safeguarding policies already exist within the Local Plan and
Neighbourhood Plan. Therefore, no adverse effect would occur on the integrity of European Sites.
aecom.com
AECOM
29