Response from Mr Peter Moreton, Swift Conservation Project - Swifts in the Community
1. Mr Peter Moreton, Swift Conservation Project - Swifts in the Community : 7 Jan 2016 09:51:00
Policy Area and Topic
Quality Environment and Quality Design - Quality Design
Are there any other topics you think we have missed? You may wish to refer to Section 8 of the Discussion Paper 'Other Saved Local Plan Policies'.
The following comments refer to the observation that maintenance of urban biodiversity is not mentioned in the document, specifically to wildlife which is dependent on man and his dwellings. Bats are well protected under current legislation. However certain bird species such as the swift, do not enjoy this level of protection leaving them vulnerable to disturbance and loss of habitat. South Cumbria is fortunate in having a large contingent of properties which are of an age and construction which make them ideal for nesting swifts and also other predominantly house nesting birds such as house sparrows. However inappropriate development can reduce the opportunities for these birds to find places to nest as older buildings get repaired and changed. In the long term making provision in new and substantially altered buildings which provides nesting opportunities for these birds will contribute to the long term viability of these species.
My request therefore is that section 5 (Quality Environment and Design) should be extended to include another sub section specifically to cover the issues of urban diversity. The topic is broader than just specifically focused on one species such as swifts and there is also some justification for including consideration under section 6, Sustainable Communities. The presence of wildlife in urban areas can have a significant and positive impact on the quality of life of those people who live and work in towns and villages.
The swift is one species which I am particularly concerned about. Its numbers have declined significantly in recent years and continue to do so, the loss of nesting sites in urban areas regarded as probably the main reason. Swifts could be protected by ensuring adequate provision is made where building changes are reviewed within the planning framework, to ensure their well being is considered. This is particularly relevant in situations where swifts are known to use a particular building as a nest site. Their long term future could also be addressed by ensuring provision is made in new buildings and substantially altered ones for such features as nest boxes and integral nest bricks.
Do you have any comments to make on the Draft Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report associated with the preparation of the Development Management Policies DPD?
The comments below are made in respect of their relationship with the comments made above re. SASscoping report.
In broad terms in section A1 Policy Theme – Quality Environment and Quality Design the aims/objectives/implications seem to cover the need to consider urban diversity, although the PPPSI’s may not necessarily support the need to specifically consider species such as swifts.
A3 should include mention, in the Quality Environment/Design section, of the vulnerability of urban species due to unsympathetic development and inadequate long term provision for certain species in new developments.
A4 Sustainability Assessment Framework. EN1 could be said to include appropriate provision for Urban Diversity but there is no specific mention of it as part of the scope. EN2 and EN3 should mention urban diversity specific issues explicitly.
