Skip to main content

Unfortunately, you can't participate in this project anymore because it has been archived

What should the SLP do for climate and nature?

It is important that the growth required to support our increasing population does not harm the climate or the natural environment.

There are many areas where plan making can take action - these can be summarised as Built Environment, Natural Environment, Movement and Renewable Energy

Phases

Phases overview

Phase 1: Collecting your responses, comments and ideas.

Collecting your responses, comments and ideas.

Phase 2: Reviewing your responses, comments and ideas.

Reviewing your responses, comments and ideas.

Phase 3: Feeding back.

Feeding back.

Collecting your responses, comments and ideas.

15 January 2024 00:00 - 14 March 2024 00:00

Tell us your ideas about how the SLP could ensure that growth does not harm the climate or nature, what it can do to help, and how we can adapt and recover.

19 ideas

Michael Katesmark2 years ago Extend tree planting between existing areas of woodland in the Winchcombe - Prestbury corridor to provide wildlife connectivity.Replace the recent extensive cull of ash trees along the local roads with resilient UK species.Consider reversion to formal water meadows, or even wetlands, in areas likely to be prone to flooding, particularly in the Tewkesbury area as a relatively cheap downstream flood-mitigation option and to encourage biodiversity.

john jones2 years ago

Camilla Barlow2 years ago The Built Environment is a habitat in its own right. There are various species who are building dependent or can adapt to a built environment. Therefore the word ‘habitat’ should be included in the list under this heading or the built environment included under the heading Natural Environment.It is well document that closeness to nature is good for well-being and so all new development (houses, public buildings, industrial buildings, home extensions etc.) should provide nesting cavities for building dependent species. Universal bricks, based on the design of a swift brick, are used by 4 red listed species (swift, house sparrow, starling and house martin), as well as much-loved blue tits and great tits and overwintering birds and insects. They are an invaluable boost to biodiversity in a built environment.BS 42021: 2022 provides full detail and should be referenced in the Local Plan (https://knowledge.bsigroup.com/products/integral-nest-boxes-selection-and-installation-for-new-developments-specification-1?version=standard). BS42021 has been endorsed by the NHBC in NF89 Biodiversity in new housing developments https://www.nhbc.co.uk/binaries/content/assets/nhbc/foundation/biodiversity-in-new-housing-developments.pdf page 42. “Fitting at a ratio of 1 nest brick per house across the development will ensure sufficient nest sites for colonial species. 3-5 can be located in one house, so helping locate them in suitable locations for access to foraging habitat. The British Standard BS42021 sets out details on nest box installation for the above species into domestic and commercial properties.”

Jon Ellis2 years ago We always think of our needs and the needs of the other animals that share this world us always seem to be secondary. This needs to change and the SLP should ensure we shift from allowing developers to get away with minimum standards on everything to having to deliver excellence and the highest standards on all aspects of their developments. The highest standards should be for nature where all existing trees and hedgerows baring exceptional circumstances have to be incorporated into developments. Green corridors to link up the green spaces left by developments should be mandatory and relocation of all species effected by developments should be done prior to any ground being broken. Excellence should also be delivered on climate change and all properties should conform to the highest possible environmentally friendly standards. Developers should also be made to deliver a higher percentage of affordable housing. Currently the emphasis seems to be on maximising profits rather than truly delivering much needed housing. Necessary infrastructure changes need to be in place prior to any homes being built. This will ensure the impact on existing communities is kept to a minimum which is something that currently doesn't happen. If we truly need new homes they need to be built in the highest possible ethical ways and they impact every aspect of every development thoroughly thought through before planning is granted. The needs of prospective home owner's cant be allowed to outweigh everything else. The system we currently have seems to brush aside communities concerns about developments. It ignores concerns on flooding, it ignores the concerns of nature, it limits as much as possible peoples chances to have their say. This needs to change!

Jo Furley2 years ago

Southam Clerk2 years ago

James Nicholson-Smith2 years ago

john jones2 years ago

James Nicholson-Smith2 years ago There is no excuse. We can build housing that is not only energy efficient and practical but can also incorporate extensive green rooves, rainwater harvesting greywater systems, centralised heating systems, wildlife highways and natural flood measures. New developments should genuinely conserve and enhance the biodiversity and landscape of the areas outside towns and cities.The planning system should not be based on meeting minimum standards because that is all the developers will ever deliver. The planning system and policy must drive a higher standard by setting a design code. This has to be stipulated as must have requirements and not desirable.

Peter Long2 years ago Developments and Biodiversity: Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) will now legally be required to apply to most new developments. However, the development (or part of) that harms the existing land and nature within it needs to be restored to a commensurate level to that which is lost. Too often developers plans to restore nature as a result of a development that are submitted to TBC fall way short of actually compensating for the biodiversity loss. The removal of hedgerows and/or established trees that are a habitat for rapidly declining species, for example, cannot be replaced by the addition of a few saplings within a new housing development and the placement of a few bird/bat boxes at random locations. If there cannot be commensurate compensation for biodiversity loss at a particular site then there are facilities that TBC or developers can use to ensure BNG - for example, approach bodies such as the RSPB who have worked in conjunction with the Construction Industry Research and Information Association to produce guidelines on this and the RSPB have 'biodiversity units' that TBC can buy to help offset net biodiversity loss.The ecological reports submitted by environmental consultants on behalf of developers locally (and paid for by the very same developers - a clear conflict of interest!) in my opinion generally fail to adequately record the biodiversity that exists at a particular site. The consultancy firm by their very nature will concentrate their efforts on trying to ascertain the presence or absence of certain key species that are protected by law (badgers, bats, great crested newts etc) and therefore could impact whether the development can proceed in it's proposed form. There is far less emphasis on the remaining biodiversity which could be substantial and locally very important - ecologists for example will invariably make a couple of short visits to a particular site to take a general overview of what they see/hear during that visit. These visits are often at the wrong time of year to adequately pick up on the breeding presence of Amber or Red Listed "Birds of Conservation Concern". An example of this is the recently approved expanded housing development near Rudgeway Farm, adjacent to the Wheatpieces estate and the new Bloor Homes HQ. This site has a significant population of breeding Skylarks and Yellowhammers - both Red listed species that are in very rapid UK wide population decline. The ecological report for the development completely fails to pick up on this despite the singing Skylarks being obvious to even the most casual observer on any given day in the Spring/Summer. In addition. numerous records spread over several years of breeding activity of these birds has been lodged with the Gloucestershire Centre for Environmental Records (GERC), the very same body that ecological consultants tend to consult locally for the presence of such data. I suspect that ecological consultants are requesting a narrow range of data that would not reveal general wider biodiversity of a particular area and therefore their subsequent report to the developer does not tend to adequately reflect the full extent of the biodiversity that is present. Public feedback on the presence of Red or Amber listed species at a particular site (that is not picked up the ecological consultant that works for the developer) needs to be acknowledged by TBC and more effort made to engage directly with the person or body that raises this via for example your planning portal. Consideration should be given to notifying local residents of significant proposed land developments within a certain radius of their address and options provided for feedback. There is not enough awareness of such developments and therefore limited engagement or feedback on them on the TBC Planning Portal. In my opinion, attaching the odd random planning notice on lamp posts close to affected area is not enough. Ideas and comments tend to be posted on local website noticeboards which can be a waste of potential valuable feedback for TBC.Linkage of fragmented habitats: Biodiverse sites within the Borough can end up being isolated in pockets of land, with the wildlife within each site becoming restricted and unable to move to a similar habitat. TBC could plan 'nature corridors' that link such sites and allow wildlife to move more freely. In effect it then becomes one larger biodiverse site. For example, hedgerow corridors linking with woodland sites.More sensitive management of hedgerows for which TBC has a responsibility to maintain:This includes hedges on residential estates. For example, there are several stretches of hedge on the Wheatpieces estate that are communal roosts for House Sparrows. These provide vital overnight cover for roosting birds in the winter but every year when they are flail mowed, the evergreen sections are ripped away and the height dramatically reduced. The flocks are then noticeable by their absence the following evening! Several stretches of hedge have been reduced to gappy stumps where once they were thriving. The management of these hedges should be less draconian with better communication with the the appointed contractors to achieve a more sensitive result that benefits wildlife and keeps routeways clear.Flood alleviation - working with (not against) nature: Move away from short term knee-jerk environmental responses to supposedly try and address flooding to longer term planning that takes a more holistic, wider and cost effective approach and that benefits nature into the bargain. Too often the response is to dredge and straighten a particular stream/river channel and remove or severely reduce the bankside tree cover and vegetation. An example of this is the stream that runs alongside a "Restricted Byeway" close to Walton Cardiff village. It did have a really impressive biodiversity that included several species of dragonfly and birds such as Grey Wagtail used to visit. After severe dredging it is now a shell of what it used to be (a sterile, straight channel devoid of micro-habitat) and I detect no improvement in local flood alleviation. We should be restoring ecosystems not obliterating them! I would like TBC to take an approach to land management that seeks to work with nature to restore ecosystems and alleviate flooding - lets create and restore wetlands; approve tree planting and natural regeneration. There is substantial evidence now that tree planting and natural regeneration of trees and scrub can significantly reduce flooding, soil erosion and water erosion - see studies at the Pontbren Project (mid Wales) for example. Alternative environmental solutions may be needed dependent on the actual area concerned.

Sharon Beattie2 years ago

Catherine Marfell2 years ago

Dan Etchells2 years ago For me, the trite answer is 'do everything in that table, and it'll all be grand!!'.But, looking at it - we should have a strategy, which we should communicate, clearly, to all stakeholders. That should include how people can help, how they can change things, etc.Built - We should show people where we are, where we intend to go. We should signpost resources available to them to change their built environment - grants, guides, etc. We should make clear statements, supporting and aligned to Net Zero - 'gas boilers are going, this is how you make the transition', etc.Natural - Should make clear where we're going, and ask people to help - volunteers, etc.Movement - Make clear what's happening. I'd like us to make a yes / no decision on e-scooters, and - if yes - look at opening up travel on them between Gloucester, Cheltenham, Bishops Cleeve - maybe Tewkesbury.I'd like to see major footpaths - Wyvern Way / Severn Way invested in and improved. Renewable -We should signpost opportunities for people to 'make a change'. Grants, loans etc.Maybe pilot activity - select a small area, install alternate energy sources, publicise??Commit to x% of public buildings using rain water, solar power etc.

Nicola Hillary2 years ago Buglife have developed B Lines, https://www.buglife.org.uk/our-work/b-lines/, ideal insect pathways running through our countryside and towns, that should be enhanced with plants that are pollen and nectar sources.One of these B Lines runs across the Tredington / Stoke Orchard to Bishop's Cleeve area. It would be good if any new development proposed along this broad B Line area could incorporate measures to create effective and broad East - West wildlife corridors in the development design.

David Kiln2 years ago

Beth Sweet2 years ago There are plenty of grassed areas around Gloucester which are mowed frequently, resulting in very low biodiversity. Where there are no safety issues i.e. visibility for traffic, these could be mowed far less frequently to encourage a greater variety of plant species and hence insects. These could help to provide connection between the small isolated protected areas. Ideally, cut and collect would be used to reduce the nutrient levels in the soil so that the proportion of stronger grasses would be reduced. As well as helping wildlife, this would reduce air and noise pollution from the mowers.

WILLIAM BRENTNALL2 years ago Low carbon technology has been stop start for the past 25 years as various government schemes come and go. Firm clear policies that are carried through can bring a degree of certainty for the low carbon sector and allow it to thrive. For too long we have allowed developers to cut costs and put gas fired heating into poorly insulated homes. These will all have to be retrofitted as we move towards a low carbon future. The ambition is clearly there it is following it through with development control decisions.

Beth Sweet2 years ago Declaring a wildlife emergency would mean that nature would have to be considered in all council decisions. The State of Nature report in 2023 (from Natural England and others) highlighted the fact that the UK, one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world, is still losing biodiversity. Nearly 1 in 6 species are at risk of extinction. Whether we consider ecosystem services/ natural capital, or just the enjoyment and mental health benefits people get from spending time in nature, it is vital to conserve what we have and work to improve it. Declaring a wildlife emergency would allow a joined-up plan to ensure we can all continue to enjoy our local wildlife.

James Howe2 years ago

Filters

Total posts: 19

There are 19 projects available.

Selected zero tag filters.

Selected zero tag filters.