Rob Woolston, director at multi-disciplinary design practice rg+p, discusses the implications of the government’s new biodiversity mandate.
In the Spring statement, the government confirmed it would enforce biodiversity net gain across all developments to ensure new infrastructure and housing is not delivered at the expense of nature and wildlife. This ambitious mandate was officially published as part of the newly launched Environment Bill and consultation is now being undertaken by DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs) to ascertain the parameters for delivery.
In a nutshell, biodiversity net gain requires developers to properly assess a site, consider existing and potential wildlife habitats, how green spaces and nature corridors might be created, and how they can be left in a demonstrably better state than pre-development. Whilst this might not seem anything above the norm in terms of pre-planning considerations, the difference occurs in that there will now be a percentage of the site that must deliver these gains, which is currently being suggested as 10%.
DEFRA is consulting on how this 10% is calculated, using the Biodiversity Metric 2.0 as a beta-test. Developed with input from environmental NGOs, developers, land managers, government agencies, etc, this metric encompasses grasslands, rivers, streams and common green infrastructure.
Within this consultation document, there are some exemptions. For instance, urban brownfield sites that face viability issues or smaller development sites (ten units or fewer), both of which could be offered a more simplified requirement. Following completion of the consultation period (December 2019) and providing parliamentary adoption, it’s likely the agreed calculation percentage will start to be included within planning policy (thus explaining its current absence in all adopted and emerging local plans) and become the responsibility of local authorities to enforce. This is expected to be on a site by site basis directly with developers. It is worth bearing in mind however, that this sits over and above any existing local authority biodiversity requirements and delivery would be expected alongside.
Broadly speaking, the 10% target seems reasonable although it does limit the scope for greater biodiversity gain on larger development sites; a point worthy of further examination by ecological experts and other interested stakeholders such as the RTPI. I think it’s fair to say it’s widely agreed that any development should support environmental conservation or enhancement but this obviously should only be one part of the conversation. New development should be strategic, create communities, natural spaces and we can only achieve this by working collaboratively. As an industry, we should welcome the opportunity to engage with DEFRA and local authorities as this mandate gets rolled out to ensure we continue to build the homes in healthy environments that are beneficial for all.
