Planning Applications - Frequently Asked Questions

Members of the public frequently request DWT to object to planning applications & other development proposals arising in Devon.

We regret that, whilst many cases might have wildlife impact, we do not have the resources, or the local knowledge, to be able to fulfil these requests. In exceptional cases where, in the context of the county, biodiversity losses would be very great or where a particularly controversial issue is involved, we might examine a development proposal. This will, however, depend on staff time being available.

Instead, we have provided help for the public so that they can make their own, well grounded, objections. This help is in the form of –

• an OBJECTION CHECKLIST: for Planning Applications affecting biodiversity
• answers to Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

The OBJECTION CHECKLIST for Planning Applications affecting biodiversity is a tick-box form which you can use to indicate your grounds for objecting to a development proposal. It -

• cites the national policy and law which should be complied with when development proposals affecting biodiversity/wildlife are being considered by a local planning authority (LPA).
• acts as a reminder to the planning case officer dealing with the development proposal of the importance of biodiversity/wildlife
• gives authority and weight to your objections

Local Planning Authorities must take into account the policies and laws referred to within the checklist when making planning decisions.

1. Download it here.
2. Tick a box in the right hand column which reflects the reason why you wish to object to the development proposal.
3. Note that the left hand column shows you (and the planning case officer) how your objection is backed up by policy in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), or the law. The planning case officer will therefore need to consider it carefully.
4.  In the area at the end of the OBJECTION CHECKLIST, you can type any information you wish to provide to reinforce, justify and evidence your objections. It is important that you explain the details of how these policies or laws are not being complied with in this specific case.
5. Save your completed OBJECTION CHECKLIST for your own records and then send a copy to the planning case officer at the LPA. Alternatively, if you wish to object in letter form, you can copy parts of the OBJECTION CHECKLIST to incorporate in your own letter of objection.

We have anticipated some (but not all) of the questions you might ask, below.

We have also produced separate Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) here which might help on associated topics.

National planning policy, in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), is, generally speaking, only concerned about habitats and species which have conservation importance (because their population levels are threatened).

National planning policy will not give you grounds for objecting to adverse impact on common habitats or common species (e.g. grey squirrels, rabbits, mice, foxes, and most types of garden bird). Fields used for arable crops or grass pasture might look green and attractive, but ecologists consider that they are usually of little ecological value because the grass is mainly ryegrass, and the arable fields are regularly ploughed and chemically treated. It is often only the hedgerows bordering the fields that might be of ecological value (and again, only those that are species-rich, comprising several hedgerow plant species).

Certain common species have a degree of legal protection (e.g. birds and badgers) and local planning authorities must have regard to this, but, strictly speaking, planning law and wildlife law are separate matters. (see FAQ below).

In circumstances where only the common species and habitats are likely to be affected by a planning proposal, you might consider that an objection to the impact on the character of the countryside, (under NPPF paragraph 174b), is more suitable for your case and would carry more weight. The Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) has experience in these matters and might be worth contacting.

There is recognition, in the planning system, that there are sites of international/national/local importance. For example:

• Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) & Special Protection Areas (SPA) – sites of international importance
• Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) – sites of national importance
• Local Wildlife Sites (known in Devon as County Wildlife Sites (CWS)) – sites of local importance

To confuse the picture, some SSSIs are also SACs and SPAs, and habitats in some County Wildlife Sites are as valuable as those in SSSIs.

• Devon Biodiversity Records Centre can provide a report on what designations are present and what species records are held for a given area. This service is usually subject to a charge.
• Devon County Council’s Environment Viewer provides mapped information on topics such as flood risk, ecology, landscape designations and planning.
• Magic provides an interactive map showing data from various government departments such as the Environment Agency, Natural England and Forestry Commission.

The designation process can take many months or years, so is only an option for long‐term strategic site protection.

• Tree Preservation Orders (TPO) - write to the planning authority with your reasons, include a map identifying the tree.
• County Wildlife Sites (CWS) - search for The Devon Local Sites Manual (May 2009) on the DBRC website.
• Hedgerow – see hedgerows FAQ sheet
• Local Green Space – see local green space FAQ sheet

In exceptional circumstances, TPO and CWS designations can be applied rapidly. Please get in touch with DBRC to initiate a survey of a potential CWS for consideration for designation.

The difference in the value of biodiversity before and after the development is carried out. This may result in a net gain or a net loss.

Defra has produced the Biodiversity Metric 3.0, a method of measuring the wildlife value of an area based on habitat features.

The Environment Act 2021 requires a Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) of at least 10%, but DWT strongly advocates a minimum BNG of 20%.

DWT consider that ecological reports produced as part of planning applications should contain clearly presented information to enable a judgement to be made on biodiversity net gain or loss, whether this is the latest draft of the Defra Biodiversity Metric methodology or otherwise.

Mitigation measures are those which seek to reduce biodiversity harm to a level where it is not significant. They may be integral to the layout & design process or an afterthought.
Compensation is only to be contemplated after all mitigation possibilities have been exhausted but where significant harm would still occur. Compensation is usually provided off-site.

Development should follow this hierarchy:

• A development should avoid harm to biodiversity in the first instance.
• If harm cannot be avoided, mitigation should be put in place on site.
• If mitigation is not possible, compensation should be provided.

Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) is still expected from an application, regardless of whether mitigation or compensation is required. If none of this is possible – the planning application should be refused.

A network of ecologically valuable habitats of variable connectivity, allowing movement and interaction of wildlife populations. Devon’s pattern of hedgerows is one of the most visible components of this network. The network also includes woodlands, wildflower grasslands, streams etc.

Ecological networks are commonly fragmented and in need of connectivity through habitat restoration and creation.

DWT is presently carrying out research, with others, on the location of wildlife habitats in Devon with view to producing an ecological network map for the county (the Devon Nature Recovery Network Map). It is envisaged that, subject to discussions, local authorities will incorporate this map into the next review of their Local Plans.

‘Weight’ is the amount of emphasis given to various planning considerations in the making of decisions by local authorities and Planning Inspectors. They weigh the pros and cons of the development proposal in the context of the economic, social and environmental policies in the NPPF. Local Plan policies usually reflect these national policies.

The ecological consultant for the applicant will make a judgement on whether significant harm is likely to arise from the development proposal and will recommend measures for mitigation and/or compensation in the ecological report. Judgements will be influenced by the ecological value of a habitat or species and its status in policy or legal terms.

The ecological report accompanying planning applications (apart from most householder, and change of use, applications) is produced by an ecological consultant who is employed by the planning applicant. The report will outline the ecologically valuable habitats and species likely to be affected by the development and recommend mitigation measures to prevent significant harm to them.

If you are sceptical about the report, particularly if it involves marginal judgements, bear in mind that the ecologist is usually a professional member of the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM) and is subject to its Code of Professional Conduct which requires its members to exercise sound professional judgement and integrity. CIEEM has produced guidelines for its members on the required procedures and contents of various types of ecological report.

This does not mean that you have to agree with everything in the ecological report. You may, for instance, have local information which was not apparent to the ecologist and which challenges the facts in the report or the judgements about the mitigation or compensation measures proposed.

Local members of the public are able to witness the application site and its wildlife throughout the year and may have knowledge that the Ecological Consultant (whose surveys are only a snapshot in time) may not have.

You might therefore take a view on whether the mitigation and compensation measures, recommended by the ecologist –

• cover all aspects that you are concerned about
• are really likely to prevent significant harm to species & habitats
• have actually been incorporated in the proposed development layout & landscape design
• are capable of actually being effectively implemented
• are likely to be maintained, and their effectiveness monitored, after implementation

Your conclusions will help to determine whether you wish to pursue one or more of the potential grounds for objection in the OBJECTION CHECKLIST.

Some, but not all, local authorities in Devon have their own ecologists to provide professional advice on planning application biodiversity impact and recommendations.

Natural England is the government’s advisor on the natural environment. They are responsible for overseeing the conservation of designated sites (Special Areas of Conservation, Special Protection Areas, Sites of Special Scientific Interest) and legally protected species.

Their opinions on these matters are given great weight by Planning Inspectors and Judicial Review Judges.

Yes, but Local Planning Authorities are nevertheless required to have regard to the law.
When development proposals are likely to affect Special Areas of Conservation (SAC), Special Protection Areas (SPA), Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), a LPA will usually seek the advice of Natural England.

When development proposals are likely to affect a legally protected species, a LPA will either seek the advice of Natural England, or consult Natural England’s online guidance. Search online for –
Protected species and development: advice for local planning authorities.

A LPA needs to be confident that that there are effective mitigation measures to safeguard legally protected species, before granting planning permission.

If a LPA wants to give planning permission but thinks that the works required to implement the development might cause legal offences to protected species, it must be confident that Natural England will issue a licence for such (otherwise illegal) works before issuing planning permission. If it thinks that Natural England would not issue a licence, then it should not give planning permission.

The situation is subject to a degree of uncertainty, because Natural England licences can only be issued after a planning permission has been granted.

For further information, see the Natural England online guidance, above.

No, DWT is not a statutory consultee on planning applications. Local planning authorities are not required to consult us. However, DWT is usually consulted regarding applications affecting County Wildlife Sites or DWT nature reserves.

DWT has no legal authority to stop development.

Carry out an online search, using the words – planning portal decision making process.
Aspects of the process you might find relevant include -

• When making decisions on planning applications, a LPA must have regard to the following –

          - Local Plan policies (including allocated sites)

          - National planning policies in the NPPF

          - the law

• The LPA is required to determine a planning application in accordance with the policies (including site allocations) of an adopted Local Plan. If the planning application is for a site that is allocated for development site in the Local Plan, the LPA cannot consider ‘in-principle’ objections to the development but it can consider objections to the way the development is being put forward in the planning application (e.g. the layout, design, mitigation measures).

• The LPA must weigh all the positive and negative aspects of a proposed development, as they relate to policy and law, before making its decision to permit or refuse the planning application.

• The NPPF requires decisions to take account of economic and social objectives as well as environmental ones. This means that the environmental case will usually need to be very strong if it is to outweigh the economic and social benefits of, for instance, a housing development.

• The LPA can impose planning conditions on a permission to prevent some negative aspects arising.

• If the LPA refuses the planning application, the applicant has the right of appeal against the decision.

• If the LPA approves the planning application, third parties (eg. local residents) have no right of appeal against the decision.

• The planning system has its critics. The introduction to the Government’s White Paper (Planning for the Future, MHCLG Aug. 2020) sums it up – “The challenge we face – an inefficient, opaque process and poor outcomes”

Very important, because -

• Planning Application decisions must be in accordance with an up-to-date Local Plan (unless there are serious planning issues which indicate the Plan should not be followed) -
  • if they comply with the Local Plan they should be approved
  • if they conflict with the Local Plan they should not usually be granted

• Where the Local Plan is out-of-date (e.g. where it shows an inadequate supply (less than 5 years) of housing sites), permission should be granted unless –
  • areas of particular importance will be significantly affected (SAC, SPA, SSSI, AONB, National Parks, ancient woodland, veteran trees, and others listed in NPPF)
  • adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, taking the NPPF policies as a whole.

• Where Local Plans are in the process of being revised, their policies will carry varying weight according to –
  • the stage the Local Plan revision has reached
  • the extent of unresolved objections
  • the degree of consistency with the policies in the NPPF

Material considerations include all the concerns covered by the NPPF, i.e. -

• a sufficient supply of homes
• building a strong, competitive economy
• ensuring the vitality of town centres
• promoting healthy & safe communities
• promoting sustainable transport
• supporting high quality communications
• achieving well-designed places
• protecting Green Belt land
• meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding & coastal change
• conserving & enhancing the natural environment
• conserving & enhancing the historic environment
• facilitating the sustainable use of minerals

Issues which are not material considerations, include –

• loss of view
• negative effect on the value of properties
• rapaciousness of developer
• neighbourhood feuds