Habitats Regulation Assessment Report

Page contents

Print Page

Executive Summary

This report presents the Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) of the draft East Sussex Local Transport Plan 4 in relation to relevant Habitat Sites (e.g. Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and Ramsar wetland sites). Natural England was written to on 15 June 2023 requesting confirmation of relevant Habitat Sites to consider in the HRA. The sites were confirmed as the following in a response dated 21 July 2023: 

• Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA; 
• Castle Hill SAC; 
• Lewes Downs SAC; 
• Pevensey Levels SAC and Ramsar; 
• Hasting Cliffs SAC; 
• Dungeness SAC & Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay Ramsar; 
• Wye & Crundale Downs SAC; 
• Mole Gap to Reigate Escarpment SAC; and  
• Folkstone to Etchinghill Escarpment SAC. 

Natural England also suggested that the following sites are also considered within the HRA: 

• The Mens SAC;  
• Duncton to Bignor Escarpment SAC;  
• Ebernoe Common SAC;  
• North Downs Woodland SAC;  
• Lydden and Temple Ewell Downs SAC; and 
• Dover to Kingsdown Cliffs SAC. 

The draft East Sussex LTP4 strategy and interventions have been screened to determine whether a Likely Significant Effect (LSE) on relevant Habitat Sites could exist. The HRA screening identified LSEs for Ashdown Forest SAC & SPA, Lewes Downs SAC, Pevensey Levels SAC & Ramsar, Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar in relation to the following policies and schemes. 

• Policy B2- Active Travel; 
• Policy C3- Rail;
• Policy D1- Strategic Connectivity; 
• Newhaven-Lewes-Uckfield-East Grinstead-London (Avenue Vert) Active Travel Enhancements;
• A22 Corridor Package (north of Maresfield to East Grinstead); 
• Hailsham/Polegate-Lewes-Falmer-Brighton (A27/NCN90) Active Travel Enhancements; 
• Lewes Area Local Active Travel Enhancements; 
• South Downs Area Local Active Travel Enhancements; 
• North Wealden and North Lewes (Uckfield, Heathfield, Crowborough) Area Local Active Travel Enhancements; 
• Eastbourne-Pevensey-Bexhill-Hastings (A259/NCN2) Active Travel Enhancements; 
• High Speed 1 to Hastings, Bexhill and Eastbourne; 
• Ashford – Rye - Hastings (New NCN) Active Travel Enhancements; and 
• A259 Level Crossing Removals (east of Rye). 

As a result, an appropriate assessment (AA) was carried out. This stage of the HRA evaluates the potential for the ‘screened in’ East Sussex Local Transport Plan 4 policies and interventions to result in adverse effects on the integrity of the Habitat Sites as listed above. The AA has assessed public access/disturbance, hydrological impact and water pollution, air pollution, changes in species distribution and land take. 

Mitigation measures have been put forward, including carrying out project level HRAs for all identified interventions at Ashdown Forest SAC & SPA, Pevensey Levels SAC & Ramsar, Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar that may have an impact on public access, hydrological impact and water pollution, air pollution, changes in species distribution and land take. Additionally, it is suggested that any scheme which lies within 200m of Ashdown Forest SAC & SPA, Dungeness SAC, and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar should ensure that best practice pollution prevention guidelines are followed during construction, in order to minimise hydrological impact, water pollution, and air pollution.  

The HRA concludes that there will be no adverse effects on the Lewes Downs SAC. 

Some potential adverse effects identified at Ashdown Forest SAC & SPA, Pevensey Levels SAC & Ramsar, Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar- in relation to recreation/disturbance, hydrology and water pollution, air pollution, and changes to species distribution- will need to be concluded via project level HRA and mitigation.  

Back to top

---

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

Steer are currently working in partnership with East Sussex County Council to develop the East Sussex Local Transport Plan 4 (LTP4). The LTP4, when adopted, will replace the East Sussex LTP3 2011-2026. SLR have been commissioned on behalf of East Sussex County Council (ESCC) to undertake the HRA of the LTP4. 

1.2 This Document 

This document presents the findings of the HRA of the draft East Sussex LTP4. It accompanies the draft LTP4 whilst it is consulted on.  

1.3 Habitat Regulations Assessment 

In the UK, the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) has been transposed into domestic legislation as the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended) (updated by the Conservation of Habitats and Species (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019) which requires an assessment of any plans which are likely to have a significant effect on any protected Habitats Sites (formerly European sites), i.e. Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and Ramsar wetland sites. This assessment is commonly referred to as a HRA and applies to strategic plans with an impact on land use. 

The purpose of a HRA is to assess the significance of potential impacts of a plan on relevant Habitats Sites. The assessment should determine whether the plan would adversely affect the integrity of the site in terms of its nature conservation objectives. Where potential negative effects are identified, other options should be examined to avoid any potential for damaging effects.  

HRA findings feed into the parallel Integrated Sustainability Appraisal (ISA) which incorporates SEA, an integral part of the plan preparation process. 

1.4 The East Sussex Local Transport Plan 4 

This LTP4 sets out a strategy for a well-connected and sustainable East Sussex, which meets the needs of all those who live, work, or visit the county.  

Local Transport Plans are a requirement of the Transport Act 2000. The Act states that plans must set out both overall strategy and plans for their implementation. The government has asked that all Local Transport Plans be updated by Summer 2024.  LTP4 covers the period from 2024 to 2050. The plan replaces and builds on East Sussex’s third Local Transport Plan (LTP3), which covered the period from 2011-2026 and was adopted in 2011. 

The LTP4 needs to reflect this changing policy context. It has been created through in-depth engagement with members, officers, local stakeholders and an early consultation with the general public. It has been written in line with current LTP guidance. 

The LTP4 Vision 

The vision for transport in East Sussex is: 

“An inclusive transport system that connects people and places, is decarbonised, safer, resilient and enhances our natural environments supporting our communities and businesses to be healthy, thrive and prosper.” 

Objectives 

Six objectives have been identified to support the LTP4 vision. There is no priority allocated to the objectives as they all have a role to play in achieving the vision for the East Sussex. The objectives are: 

• Deliver safter and accessible journeys; 
• Support healthier lifestyles and communities; 
• Decarbonise transport; 
• Conserve and enhance our local environment; 
• Support sustainable economic growth; and 
• Strengthen the resilience of our transport networks. 

Outcomes 

For each of the objectives, a number of outcomes have been identified. These outcomes are presented below and they demonstrate what ESCC are seeking to achieve through the delivery of each objective. Each outcome has been nested under a single objective, but many of these outcomes support delivery of other objectives.  

Objective 1: Deliver safer and accessible journeys 

• Outcome 1.1: Create enhanced and inclusive transport networks for all users 
• Outcome 1.2: Contribute to reducing the number of casualties and collisions on our transport networks 
• Outcome 1.3: Contribute to improving personal safety for all journeys 
• Outcome 1.4: Improve interchange between travel modes 
• Outcome 1.5: Improve access to key local services by all modes 

Objective 2: Support healthier lifestyles and communities  

• Outcome 2.1: Increase the proportion of walking, wheeling, and cycling journeys 
• Outcome 2.2: Increase active travel and public transport journeys through education, training, travel behaviour change initiatives and information 
• Outcome 2.3: Re-design road space to balance the needs of different road users, including encouraging people to walk, wheel, cycle and use the bus 
• Outcome 2.4: Support reduction of emissions to improve air quality 
• Outcome 2.5: Mitigate noise pollution through technology and design 
• Outcome 2.6: Improve access to green spaces, public rights of way and leisure and health facilities 

Objective 3: Decarbonise transport and travel 

• Outcome 3.1: Increase the proportion of people travelling by walking, wheeling, cycling, public and shared transport 
• Outcome 3.2: Facilitate the uptake of ultra-low and zero-emission vehicles for journeys, through the delivery of supporting infrastructure 
• Outcome 3.3: Work with partners to decarbonise transport and tackle climate change 
• Outcome 3.4: Support clean technologies and fuels that contribute towards the decarbonisation of transport 

Objective 4: Conserve and enhance our local environment  

• Outcome 4.1: Conserve and enhance our local and natural environment by mitigating negative impacts of transport design and delivery 
• Outcome 4.2: Enhance and create attractive connected communities and public spaces 
• Outcome 4.3: Support habitat connectivity and increase in biodiversity through the delivery of enhanced and new transport infrastructure and public spaces 

Objective 5: Support sustainable economic growth  

• Outcome 5.1: Facilitate the efficient movement of goods and people 
• Outcome 5.2: Contribute to reducing deprivation and inequality through improved accessibility for all to employment, education, and training 
• Outcome 5.3: Attract and retain businesses and a skilled workforce in the county 
• Outcome 5.4: Enhance sustainable access to key visitor and cultural destinations 
• Outcome 5.5: As a Local Highway Authority engage with our Local Planning Authorities to deliver sustainable and well-connected housing and employment growth identified in their Local Plans 

Objective 6: Strengthen the resilience of our transport networks 

• Outcome 6.1: Improve journey time reliability for people and businesses 
• Outcome 6.2: Enable transport journeys to be resilient, flexible, and adaptable and recover quickly from emergencies and events 
• Outcome 6.3: Improve the condition of highway and other transport infrastructure and assets 

1.5 How to Comment on this Document 

This report has been published for consultation from 27 November 2023 and comments are welcome by 25 February 2024.2023. Details on how to respond are set out below.

Please provide responses by either:

• visiting ESCC Consultation Hub
• e-mailing LocalTransportPlan@eastsussex.gov.uk 
• telephone Switchboard 0345 608 0190

Back to top

---

2. Approach to the HRA

2.1 The HRA Process 

HRA is a staged process as shown in Figure 2.1 which sets out the overall HRA process in accordance with Communities and Local Government draft guidance (English Nature (2006) draft Guidance – The Assessment of Regional Spatial Strategies and Sub-regional strategies under the provisions of the Habitats Regulations). Current best practice demonstrates that a blurring of the tasks in an iterative manner is the most effective method of assessing a plan as it develops. 

Figure 2.1: The HRA process

The HRA process requires close working with Natural England in order to agree the process and outcomes and, if necessary, obtain information and agree mitigation proposals. 

During screening, the ‘Precautionary Principle’ needs to be applied: if an effect cannot be ruled out based on objective information, it has been reported as “likely” or not possible to rule out. Furthermore, a judgement by the Court of Justice of the European Union (People Over Wind) ruled that Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora) must be interpreted as meaning that mitigation measures (referred to in the judgment as measures which are intended to avoid or reduce effects on Habitats Sites) should be assessed within the framework of an AA and that it is not permissible to take account of measures intended to avoid or reduce the harmful effects of the plan or project on a Habitats Site at the screening stage. The screening exercise must therefore consider elements of the plan without any proposed mitigation. Measures that reduce impacts on Habitats Sites but form an integral part of the Local Transport Plan and would have been provided even if there were no LSE on Habitats Sites, can still be included at the screening stage (Simpson, P. (2018) People Over Wind. Habitats Regulations Assessment Handbook Journal. Issue 10. Page 25.).  

The following guidance has been referred to in undertaking the HRA to date: 

• English Nature (2006) draft Guidance – The Assessment of Regional Spatial Strategies and Sub-regional strategies under the provisions of the Habitats Regulations;  
• Scottish Natural Heritage (January 2015) Habitats Regulations Appraisal of Plans Guidance For Plan-Making Bodies In Scotland Version 3.0 originally prepared by David Tyldesley and Associates;  
• Department for Communities and Local Government (August 2006) Planning for the Protection of European Sites: Appropriate Assessment. Guidance for Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents. Draft; 
• European Commission (September 2021). Assessment of plans and projects in relation to Natura 2000 sites – Methodological guidance on Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC; 
• Government Guidance (July 2019) – Appropriate Assessment: Guidance on the use of Habitats Regulations (www.gov.uk/guidance/appropriate-assessment); and 
• Natural England (April, 2019). Habitats Regulations Assessment. Natural England Standard. 

Evidence Gathering 

The first task in undertaking HRA is to confirm the Habitats Sites to be considered and to collate information about those sites. Current guidance (Scottish Natural Heritage (January 2015) Habitats Regulations Appraisal of Plans Guidance for Plan-Making Bodies in Scotland Version 3.0 – in the absence of a similar Government publication for HRA of plans in England, this guidance document provides useful and relevant guidance) suggests that the following Habitats Sites be included in the scope of assessment:  

• All sites within the LTP4 boundary; and  
• Other sites beyond the LTP4 boundary shown to be linked to development within the Borough through a known ‘pathway’ (pathways are routes by which a change in activity within the Local Plan Area can lead to an effect upon a European site). 

Pathways are routes by which a change in activity within the East Sussex LTP4 can lead to an effect upon a Habitats site.   

The LTP4 boundary is the same as the East Sussex County Council boundary. There are 9 European sites which lie wholly or partly (within a 25km radius) within the County Council boundary which will be included in the scope of the assessment. These are: 

• Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA; 
• Castle Hill SAC; 
• Lewes Downs SAC; 
• Pevensey Levels SAC and Ramsar; 
• Hasting Cliffs SAC; 
• Dungeness SAC & Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay Ramsar; 
• Wye & Crundale Downs SAC; 
• Mole Gap to Reigate Escarpment SAC; and  
• Folkstone to Etchinghill Escarpment SAC. 

Natural England was written to in June 2023 requesting confirmation that the above listed Habitats sites should be considered in the HRA. A response was received from Natural England on 21 July 2023. The response from Natural England can be found in Appendix B. In their response, Natural England agreed with the list of sites proposed and also suggested that the following additional sites should be considered in relation to traffic-generated air pollution at the early stages of assessment: 

• The Mens SAC  
• Duncton to Bignor Escarpment SAC  
• Ebernoe Common SAC  
• North Downs Woodland SAC  
• Lydden and Temple Ewell Downs SAC  
• Dover to Kingsdown Cliffs SAC 

These sites have therefore also been considered within the scope of the HRA, particularly in relation to the potential for the sites to be affected by changes in road traffic and air pollution resulting from the draft East Sussex LTP. 

The Habitats Site vulnerabilities and factors affecting their integrity are presented within the tables of information for each Habitats Site in Appendix A.  

HRA Task 1: Screening 

HRA screening should consider the potential effects both of the plan itself and the plan in combination with other plans or projects. The Competent Authority (ESCC) is required to undertake a screening exercise to determine whether a plan covered by the Regulations is likely to have significant effects on a Habitats site or species, and therefore whether a full HRA is required. The HRA screening exercise within Section 3 of this HRA Report provides a screening determination on behalf of ESCC.   

Screening has considered whether the key factors affecting the integrity and objectives to ensure favourable condition status of each Habitats Site are likely to be significantly affected by the new East Sussex draft LTP4, either alone, or in combination with other plans and strategies.  

In accordance with latest available guidance (Scottish Natural Heritage (January 2015) Habitats Regulations Appraisal of Plans Guidance For Plan-Making Bodies In Scotland Version 3.0 originally prepared by David Tyldesley and Associates), a set of screening criteria was developed which are presented in Table 2.1. These criteria were used to screen the policies within the draft LTP4.  

Table 2.1: Local Plan Screening Criteria

Screening Rationale	Details
LSE	A likely effect is one that cannot be ruled out on the basis of objective information. The test is a ‘likelihood’ of effects rather than a ‘certainty’ of effects. Although some dictionary definitions define ‘likely’ as ‘probable’ or ‘well might happen’, in the Waddenzee case (European Court of Justice C-127/02) the European Court of Justice ruled that a project should be subject to appropriate assessment “if it cannot be excluded, on the basis of objective information, that it will have a significant effect on the site, either individually or in combination with other plans and projects”.
No LSE - A general policy statement	A general statement of policy sets out a strategic aspiration for the plan-making body for a certain issue.   A general ‘criteria based’ policy expresses the tests or expectations of the plan-making body when it comes to consider particular proposals.  Does not necessarily include more site-specific criteria based policies which may require AA.
No LSE - Not proposals generated by this plan	Aspects excluded from the appraisal because they are not proposals generated by this plan.
No LSE – A protection policy	Aspects which protect the natural environment, including biodiversity, or conserve or enhance the natural, built or historic environment.
No LSE – No development or change	Aspects which will not lead to development or other change.
No LSE – Makes provision for change but no impact pathway	Aspects which make provision for change, but which could have no conceivable effect on a European site, because there is no link or pathway between them and the qualifying interests, or any effect would be a positive effect, or would not otherwise undermine the conservation objectives for the site.
No LSE - Policy is too general	Aspects which are too general so that it is not known where, when or how the aspect of the plan may be implemented, or where any potential effects may occur, or which European sites, if any, may be affected.

Where the potential for LSEs cannot be excluded, an AA of the implications of the plan is required. The potential for adverse effects and how they can be mitigated need to be considered within the AA stage.  

Following consultation on the East Sussex Local LTP4, modifications made by ESCC will be screened and a further update to the HRA Report will be prepared if necessary. 

Task 2: Appropriate Assessment 

The methodologies used in order to carry out the AA for each potential effect are described within Section 4. 

Potential in combination effects with other plans has been considered as necessary within Section 4.  Where the AA has found that the LTP4 would have no effect at all on the Habitat Sites as a result of an impact pathway then an adverse effect in combination is ruled out and no further assessment is required. This approach is in accordance with established case law (Foster and Langton (R (Foster and Langton) v Forest of Dean DC and Homes and Communities Agency [2015] EWHC 2648 (Admin) Cranston J)). 

The other plans considered for potential in combination effects with the new East Sussex LTP4 are as follows: 

• Eastbourne Core Strategy (2013) and emerging New Eastbourne Local Plan (2019-2039); 
• Hastings Planning Strategy (2014) and draft new Local Plan (2019-2039); 
• Lewes Core Strategy (2016) and emerging Lewes District Local Plan (to 2040); 
• Rother Core Strategy (2014) and emerging Rother District Local Plan (2019-2039); 
• South Downs Local Plan (2014-2033); 
• Wealden Core Strategy (2013) and emerging Wealden District Local Plan ;
• Transport Strategy for the South East (2020); 
• Kent Local Transport Plan 4 (2016-2031); 
• West Sussex Local Transport Plan (2022-2036); and
• Surrey Local Transport Plan 4 (2022-2032). 

Descriptions of the plans outlined can be found in Appendix A. 

Back to top

---

3. Screening of Local Transport Plan 4 Policies

3.1 Introduction 

The LTP4 strategy and interventions have been screened for LSEs on the relevant Habitat Sites. The LTP strategy consists of 22 policies and 67 schemes.  

Screening considered the potential ways in which the draft East Sussex LTP4 could have an effect on Habitats Sites, which is informed by the site vulnerabilities and factors potentially affecting their integrity (see Appendix A for further details).  

The policies within the LTP strategy have been screened and potential impact pathways considered. Where a potential impact pathway and LSE could exist, or where there is uncertainty, the policy has been screened in for further consideration. 

Following policy screening, the interventions set out within the draft LTP Implementation Plan were screened. The available information about each intervention, including any locationally specific information, timing and progress (whether it will be studied, designed or delivered during the plan period) and the nature of any construction development required to implement it, has been considered in the screening process. Where locationally specific details are available, it has been assumed that Habitats Sites more than 5km away would not be negatively affected by construction activities. Where little information is available about an intervention is available assumptions have been made and agreed with the LTP plan authors. 

As LSEs and uncertainty have been identified within the screening stage, it has been necessary to advance to the AA stage, which is discussed in Section 4. 

Table 3.1 presents the findings of the screening of LTP strategy policies for the nine main habitat sites. 

3.2 Policy and Intervention Screening

Table 3.1: Findings of the LTP strategy policies screening

Note: for an accessible version of Table 3.1 please contact LocalTransportPlan@eastsussex.gov.uk

Table 3.2 presents screening findings for the LTP4 policies against the additional Habitats Sites suggested by Natural England. A GIS exercise identified that all of the Habitats Sites are within 200m of an A road outside of the LTP4 plan area.  

The policies were considered for their potential to result in a change to traffic-generated air pollution. Screening of the policies found that in most cases the policies where general policy statements. They would not lead to a change in traffic generated pollution and no LSE was identified. The exception was the Integrating Transport policy where no LSE was identified because although the policy makes provision for change, no impact pathway is identified. 

The interventions were also screened against the additional sites identified by Natural England. None of the interventions are within close proximity to the Habitats Sites listed in Table 3.2, however, some interventions relate to routes which connect to roads which are within 200m of the Habitats Sites. In these cases, such as ‘Cuckfield - Haywards Heath - Newick - Uckfield Rural bus service enhancements (A272)’ and ‘Hastings - Rye - Ashford/Dover rural bus service enhancements’, the interventions are unlikely to increase traffic on the A272 or A20 as bus enhancements are more likely to reduce private vehicle traffic levels and associated air pollution.  

No LSEs have been identified for any of the additional sites identified by Natural England. 

Table 3.2: Findings of the LTP strategy policies screening - additional sites

Table 3.3 presents the schemes screened in.

Table 3.3: Schemes Screened in

The conclusions of the screening stage are that the following Habitats Sites can be screened out from any further consideration because no likely significant effects have been identified resulting from the draft East Sussex LTP: 

• Castle Hill SAC; 
• Hastings Cliffs SAC; 
• Wye and Crundale Downs SAC;  
• Mole Gap to Reigate Escarpment SAC; 
• Folkstone to Etchinghill Escarpment SAC; 
• The Mens SAC; 
• Duncton to Bignor Escarpment SAC; 
• Ebernoe Common SAC; 
• North Downs Woodland SAC; 
• Lydden and Temple Ewell Downs SAC; and 
• Dover to Kingsdown Cliffs SAC. 

The screening exercise identifies either LSEs or uncertainty in relation to the following, which means that the next stage of the HRA, AA needs to be undertaken: 

Table 3.4: Summary of LSEs identified in relation to Policies and Interventions

For fully accessible versions of Tables 3.1 to 3.4 please contact LocalTransportPlan@eastsussex.gov.uk 

Back to top

---

4. Appropriate Assessment

4.1 Public Access/Disturbance 

Active travel enhancements and new walking, wheeling and  cycling infrastructure could potentially increase access to Habitats Sites if they improve connectivity to the sites. Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA, Lewes Downs SAC, Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar could be negatively affected by increased recreation through disturbance of species and damage to habitats.  

Elements of the LTP4 which could potentially result in this effect are:   

• Policy B2 (Active Travel) – policy measures will focus on, for example, planning, designing, delivering and maintaining new and enhanced infrastructure, which could result in improving access to the Habitat Site, if infrastructure connects to routes which pass through the Habitat Site.  
• Specific interventions identified within the Implementation Plan which support the implementation of Policy B2: 

• • Newhaven- Lewes- Uckfield- East Grinstead- London (Avenue Verte) Active Travel Enhancements; 
  • Hailsham/Polegate- Lewes- Falmer- Brighton (A27/NCN90) Active Travel Enhancements; 
  • Lewes and South Downs Area Local Active Travel Enhancements; 
  • North Wealden and North Lewes (Uckfield, Heathfield, Crowborough) Area Local Active Travel Enhancements; and 
  • Hastings – Rye - Ashford (New NCN) Active Travel enhancements. 

Each of the interventions are considered in turn below by Habitats Site. 

4.1.1 Ashdown Forest SAC & SPA 

Potential effect alone 

The intervention “Newhaven- Lewes- Uckfield- East Grinstead- London (Avenue Verte) Active Travel Enhancements” is in the study stage and has been screened in because the route between these settlements passes through Ashdown Forest SAC. What the active travel enhancements will entail has not yet been defined but it is assumed that it could involve new cycle paths along the A22 which passes through parts of Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA between Uckfield and East Grinstead. 

These routes could potentially improve access to the SAC and SPA. This could therefore mean that more people access the SAC/SPA through active travel interventions such as cycling routes. Without any more details of what would be included within the intervention the potential for increased access within the SAC and SPA is uncertain.  

Once proposals are being developed for the active travel enhancements between Uckfield and East Grinstead, a project level HRA of the scheme should be undertaken which should examine current rights of way which connect into the SAC / SPA from the A22 (if that is the route of the interventions), the level of current use and risk that the scheme could increase recreational use of the SAC and SPA such as mountain biking which could result in disturbance and trampling of the species for which the SAC and SPA are designated. 

However, it is possible that encouraging active travel between Uckfield and East Grinstead could reduce air pollution which could result in a beneficial effect on the SAC. Air pollution is considered under Section 4.3.  

Potential in combination effect 

Residential development within Uckfield and East Grinstead could potentially combine with the active travel enhancements to increase the risk of increased recreational pressure on Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA. However, as the exact nature of the active travel enhancements are not yet known, the in combination effect is also uncertain. Again, it is possible that encouraging active travel between Uckfield and East Grinstead could help to minimise air pollution which could be generated by new development. 

Mitigation 

Suggested mitigation is for a project level HRA to be carried out of the scheme once detailed proposals are available. The project level HRA should examine current rights of way which connect into the SAC / SPA from the A22 (if that is the route of the interventions), the level of current use and risk that the scheme could increase recreational use of the SAC and SPA such as mountain biking. Management of the access points should be examined and, if deemed appropriate, then necessary measures to control access is implemented to reduce the impact of recreational users. Measures could include path maintenance, signs to encourage users to stay on paths, information boards etc.  

Conclusion 

It is difficult to assess the potential effect of the intervention “Newhaven- Lewes- Uckfield- East Grinstead- London (Avenue Verte) Active Travel Enhancements” on Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA with regards to increasing recreational pressure without any clearer indication of the active travel enhancements the intervention will include in this area and the exact route.  

However, if a project-level HRA is undertaken and any avoidance measures put in place prior to any construction, it should be possible to avoid an adverse effect on the Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA with regards recreation pressure from the intervention, both alone and in combination 

4.1.2 Lewes Downs SAC 

Potential effect alone 

The interventions “Newhaven- Lewes- Uckfield- East Grinstead- London (Avenue Verte) Active Travel Enhancements”, “Hailsham/Polegate- Lewes- Falmer- Brighton (A27/NCN90) Active Travel Enhancements”, “Lewes and South Downs Area Local Active Travel Enhancements” and “North Wealden and North Lewes (Uckfield, Heathfield, Crowborough) Area Local Active Travel Enhancements” have been screened in as they could involve new paths or active travel routes in the area of Lewes Downs SAC. None of the routes of the interventions pass through the Lewes Downs SAC apart from Hailsham/Polegate- Lewes- Falmer- Brighton (A27/NCN90) Active Travel Enhancements. 

These routes and the improvement of active travel infrastructure such as cycle routes could potentially improve access to the SAC. However, the Lewes SAC is situated in an elevated position above the town of Lewes and only a small section of the SAC lies adjacent to and potentially accessible from the A26 within Lewes. It is therefore concluded that the potential for the active travel enhancements which may be proposed within the interventions listed above are very unlikely to increase recreational access or pressure on the Lewes Downs SAC.   

Potential in combination effect 

The interventions alone are not predicted to lead to any residual adverse effect on the Lewes Downs SAC. It is therefore concluded that the interventions could not therefore lead to an in combination effect on the Lewes Downs in combination with any other plans or projects.  

Mitigation 

None required. 

Conclusion 

It is concluded that the interventions “Newhaven- Lewes- Uckfield- East Grinstead- London (Avenue Verte) Active Travel Enhancements”, “Hailsham/Polegate- Lewes- Falmer- Brighton (A27/NCN90) Active Travel Enhancements”, “Lewes and South Downs Area Local Active Travel Enhancements” and “North Wealden and North Lewes (Uckfield, Heathfield, Crowborough) Area Local Active Travel Enhancements” will not result in an adverse effect on the Lewes SAC from recreational pressure, both alone and in combination.  

4.1.3 Dungeness SAC & Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar 

Potential effect alone 

The intervention “Hastings – Rye - Ashford (New NCN) Active Travel enhancements” is in the study stage and could involve new active travel infrastructure, such as cycle paths along the A259 in the Rye area. This could pass through and/or close to parts of the Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar. Facilitating active travel along this route, presumably for cyclists, could potentially improve access to the SAC, SPA & Ramsar site. Without exact details of what would be proposed within the intervention, the potential for increased access within the SAC, SPA and Ramsar to occur is difficult to assess. However, the Habitats Sites adjacent the A259 primarily comprises wet ground which is inaccessible due to the lack of recreation access points off this road at present. It is therefore not considered that providing a cycle lane on the A259 in this area is likely to increase recreation by cycle on the Habitats Sites.  

Potential in combination effect 

Given that it is determined above that facilitating cycling along the A259 is not likely to increase cycling recreation on the SAC, SPA and Ramsar site alone, it is therefore concluded that the intervention could not therefore lead to an in combination effect on the Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar in combination with any other plans or projects. 

Mitigation 

None required. 

Conclusion 

It is concluded that the intervention “Hastings – Rye - Ashford (New NCN) Active Travel enhancements” will not result in an adverse effect on the Lewes SAC from recreational pressure, both alone and in combination.  

Recommendation 

Under the title “Conserve and enhance our local environment” within the LTP4, emphasis should be put on protecting sensitive habitats and species and directing recreation to ecologically robust areas, such as by amending text as follows: 

“support the connectivity of ecologically robust habitat trails and pathways” (Draft LTP4, p22).

4.2 Hydrological Impact and Water Pollution 

Proposed interventions within the East Sussex LTP4 could potentially create hydrological changes and water pollution within Habitat Sites, particularly if the intervention is located within, close to them or in locations which could affect tributaries flowing into Habitats Sites. Interventions which involve construction could, in theory, cause physical changes to riverbanks, increase surface runoff, decrease infiltration and decrease evapotranspiration (due to vegetation removal) within their localised area. 

Elements of the LTP4 which could potentially result in this effect are:   

• Policy B2 (Active Travel) and Policy D1 (Strategic Connectivity)  – policy measures will focus on, for example, planning, designing, delivering and maintaining new and enhanced infrastructure, which could result in hydrological impacts on Habitat Sites through construction.  
• Specific interventions identified within the Implementation Plan which support the implementation of policies B2 and D1 (Newhaven- Lewes- Uckfield- East Grinstead- London (Avenue Verte) Active Travel Enhancements, A22 Corridor Package (north of Maresfield to East Grinstead), Eastbourne- Pevensey- Bexhill- Hastings (A259/NCN2) Active Travel Enhancements, Hastings – Rye - Ashford (New NCN) Active Travel enhancements and A259 Level Crossing Removals (east of Rye). 

Each of the interventions are considered in turn below by Habitats Site. 

4.2.1 Ashdown Forest SAC & SPA 

Potential effect alone 

The interventions “Newhaven- Lewes- Uckfield- East Grinstead- London (Avenue Verte) Active Travel Enhancements” and “A22 Corridor Package (north of Maresfield to East Grinstead)” are within the study and develop stages respectively. The activities involved in each intervention have not yet been defined, however, it has been assumed that the A22, which passes through parts of the Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA, could be subject to some localised but not significant junction improvements and active travel infrastructure. There is therefore a risk of hydrological impact through construction activities, depending on where are construction activity may take place.  Without any more details of what would be included within the intervention, the potential for hydrological impacts within the SAC to occur is uncertain. Due to uncertainty regarding what would be involved in delivering these two interventions, the nature of and location of any construction, the potential for an adverse effect to occur on the SAC and SPA is uncertain. 

Potential in combination effect 

Other construction and development within the area of Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA may have the potential to combine with potential construction effects in this area, unless they are controlled. However, as the exact nature of the active travel enhancements and A22 corridor junction enhancements are not yet known, the in combination effect is also uncertain.  

Mitigation 

There is a risk of an adverse effect on the Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA due to water pollution during scheme construction. It is therefore recommended that the LTP states that any scheme which has the potential to have an adverse impact on the water quality of the Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA during construction should ensure that best practice pollution prevention guidelines are followed, including adherence with the following CIRIA guidance documents to manage construction run-off: 

• CIRIA C532 (2001). Control of water pollution from construction sites. Guidance for consultants and contractors; 
• CIRIA C648 (2006) – Control of Water Pollution from Linear Construction Projects; and 
• CIRIA C741 (2015) – Environmental Good Practice on site. 4th Edition.  

Where a risk of an adverse effect on the integrity of the SAC and SPA has been identified due to water pollution, this could be mitigated by incorporating interceptors into the scheme design to trap the silt, oil and other possible contaminants in run-off to prevent pollution and degradation of the downstream habitats. This should be designed in accordance with current best practice, including adherence to the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11 Section 3 Part 10 HD 45/09 Road Drainage and the Water Environment.  

Project level HRA of the “Newhaven- Lewes- Uckfield- East Grinstead- London (Avenue Verte) Active Travel Enhancements” and “A22 Corridor Package (north of Maresfield to East Grinstead)” interventions should be undertaken to ensure that the potential effects of the projects are fully considered in relation to Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA, both alone and in combination with other projects, and necessary avoidance and mitigation measures put in place. 

Conclusion 

It is difficult to assess the potential effect of the interventions “Newhaven- Lewes- Uckfield- East Grinstead- London (Avenue Verte) Active Travel Enhancements” and “A22 Corridor Package (north of Maresfield to East Grinstead)” on Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA with regards to hydrological impacts and water pollution without any clearer indication of the construction activities involved and where it would take place.  

However, through the employment of standard construction techniques and if project-level HRA is undertaken and avoidance measures put in place during construction and in operation, it should be possible to avoid an adverse effect on the Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA with regards hydrological impact and water pollution from the interventions, both alone and in combination.   

4.2.2 Pevensey Levels SAC & Ramsar 

Potential effect alone 

The intervention “Eastbourne- Pevensey- Bexhill- Hastings (A259/NCN2) Active Travel Enhancements” is in the study stage so the exact nature of the proposals is not yet clear. It is assumed that the intervention will involve the introduction of new or improved cycle paths either on or near to the existing carriageway of the A259. The route of the intervention (i.e. the A259) passes through the Pevensey Levels SAC and Ramsar site. The construction of these new routes could potentially result in hydrological impacts and water pollution. Without any more details of what would be included within the intervention, the potential for hydrological impacts and water pollution within the SAC and Ramsar to occur is uncertain.  

Potential in combination effect 

Other construction and development within this area e.g. around Pevensey and Hailsham may have the potential to combine with potential construction effects, unless they are controlled. However, as the exact nature of the active travel enhancements are not yet known, the in-combination effect is also uncertain.  

Mitigation 

There is a risk of an adverse effect on the Pevensey Levels SAC and Ramsar due to water pollution during scheme construction. It is therefore recommended that the LTP states that any scheme which has the potential to have an adverse impact on the water quality of the Pevensey Levels SAC and SPA during construction should ensure that best practice pollution prevention guidelines are followed, including adherence with the following CIRIA guidance documents to manage construction run-off: 

• CIRIA C532 (2001). Control of water pollution from construction sites. Guidance for consultants and contractors; 
• CIRIA C648 (2006) – Control of Water Pollution from Linear Construction Projects; and 
• CIRIA C741 (2015) – Environmental Good Practice on site. 4th Edition.  

Where a risk of an adverse effect on the integrity of the SAC and SPA has been identified due to water pollution during scheme, this could be mitigated by incorporating interceptors into the scheme design to trap the silt, oil and other possible contaminants in run-off to prevent pollution and degradation of the downstream habitats. This should be designed in accordance with current best practice, including adherence to the DMRB Volume 11 Section 3 Part 10 HD 45/09 Road Drainage and the Water Environment. 

Project level HRA of the “Eastbourne- Pevensey- Bexhill- Hastings (A259/NCN2) Active Travel Enhancements” intervention should be undertaken to ensure that the potential effects of the project is fully considered in relation to Pevensey Levels SAC and Ramsar site, both alone and in combination with other projects.  

Conclusion  

It is difficult to assess the potential effect of the interventions “Eastbourne- Pevensey- Bexhill- Hastings (A259/NCN2) Active Travel Enhancements” on Pevensey Levels SAC and Ramsar site with regards to hydrological impacts and water pollution without any clearer indication of the construction activities involved and where it would take place. 

However, through the employment of standard construction techniques and if a project-level HRA is undertaken and any required avoidance measures put in place during construction and in operation, it should be possible to avoid an adverse effect on the Pevensey Levels SAC and Ramsar site with regards hydrological impact and water pollution from the intervention, both alone and in combination.   

4.2.3 Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar 

Potential effect alone 

The intervention “Hastings – Rye - Ashford (New NCN) Active Travel enhancements” is in the study stage and could involve new active travel infrastructure, such as cycle paths along the A259 in the Rye area. This could pass through and/or close to parts of the Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar. The exact proposals have not yet been developed but any construction involved could potentially result in hydrological impacts and water pollution. Without any more details of what would be included within the intervention, the potential for hydrological impacts within the SAC, SPA & Ramsar to occur is uncertain.  

The intervention “A259 Level Crossing Removals (east of Rye)” is in the study stage and may not be delivered within the LTP4 plan period. Nevertheless, it is included within the implementation plan. This project will include significant construction of a new section of road south of an existing railway line in order to remove two level crossings (Star and Guldeford) in the area around the settlement of East Guldeford. The construction works and the diversion of approximately 1.6km of the A259 within the Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar as well as the introduction of cycle paths on the A259 in the shorter term, could result in hydrological impacts and water pollution within the Habitats Sites unless carefully controlled. This could potentially result in a negative effect on these Habitats Sites.  

Following construction, there could be impacts may still be present due to changes in land permeability.  

Potential in combination effect 

Both interventions could result in hydrological impacts and water pollution in this area, with the “Hastings – Rye - Ashford (New NCN) Active Travel enhancements” (assumed to be a cycle route, possibly within the carriageway) being undertaken in the shorter term and the “A259 Level Crossing Removals (east of Rye)” being brought forward after the LTP4 plan period. Both interventions could have a negative effect on hydrology and cause water pollution unless carefully controlled. Further negative effects could potentially occur from any other development planned within the LTP4 plan period in this area or beyond the plan period, if development is not carefully controlled. 

Mitigation 

There is a risk of an adverse effect on the Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar due to hydrological changes and water pollution during scheme construction. It is therefore recommended that the LTP states that any scheme which has the potential to have an adverse impact on the water quality of the Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar during construction should ensure that best practice pollution prevention guidelines are followed, including adherence with the following CIRIA guidance documents to manage construction run-off: 

• CIRIA C532 (2001). Control of water pollution from construction sites. Guidance for consultants and contractors; 
• CIRIA C648 (2006) – Control of Water Pollution from Linear Construction Projects;

Back to top

---

5. Summary and Conclusions

5.1 Screening Results 

HRA screening of the East Sussex LTP4 policies identified a number of LSEs in relation to the following: 

• Potential LSE on Ashdown Forest SAC & SPA due to public access/disturbance, hydrological impact and air pollution; 

• Potential LSE on Lewes Downs SAC due to public access/disturbance and air pollution; 
• Potential LSE on Pevensey Levels SAC & Ramsar due to water pollution and hydrological impact; 
• Potential LSE on Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar due to public access/disturbance, changes in species distribution, water pollution and hydrological impact, air pollution and land take. 

5.2 Appropriate Assessment

The AA stage of the HRA has been undertaken to evaluate the potential for the ‘screened in’ East Sussex Local Transport Plan 4 policies and interventions to result in adverse effects on the integrity of the Habitat Sites as listed above. The AA has assessed public access/disturbance, hydrological impact and water pollution, air pollution, changes in species distribution and land take. 

5.3 Mitigation 

Mitigation measures have been put forward as follows: 

Public Access/Disturbance  

Project level HRA should be carried out on the intervention “Newhaven- Lewes- Uckfield- East Grinstead- London (Avenue Verte) Active Travel Enhancements” in relation to Ashdown Forest SAC & SPA once detailed proposals are available. This should examine current rights of way which connect into the SAC / SPA from the A22 (if that is the route of the interventions), the level of current use and risk that the scheme could increase recreational use of the SAC and SPA such as mountain biking. Management of the access points should be examined and, if deemed appropriate, then necessary measures to control access is implemented to reduce the impact of recreational users. Measures could include path maintenance, signs to encourage users to stay on paths, information boards etc. 

Hydrological Impact and Water Pollution 

Identified interventions which have the potential to result in an adverse impact on water quality in the Ashdown Forest SAC & SPA, Pevensey Levels SAC & Ramsar, and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA and Ramsar during construction should ensure that best practice pollution prevention guidelines are followed, including adherence with the following CIRIA guidance documents to manage construction run-off: 

• CIRIA C532 (2001). Control of water pollution from construction sites. Guidance for consultants and contractors; 
• CIRIA C648 (2006) – Control of Water Pollution from Linear Construction Projects; and 
• CIRIA C741 (2015) – Environmental Good Practice on site. 4th Edition.  

Where a risk of an adverse effect on the integrity of the Habitat Sites has been identified due to water pollution, this could be mitigated by incorporating interceptors into the scheme design to trap the silt, oil and other possible contaminants in run-off to prevent pollution and degradation of the downstream habitats. This should be designed in accordance with current best practice, including adherence to the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) Volume 11 Section 3 Part 10 HD 45/09 Road Drainage and the Water Environment.  

Project level HRAs of the “Newhaven- Lewes- Uckfield- East Grinstead- London (Avenue Verte) Active Travel Enhancements”, “A22 Corridor Package (north of Maresfield to East Grinstead)”, “Eastbourne- Pevensey- Bexhill- Hastings (A259/NCN2) Active Travel Enhancements” and “A259 Level Crossing Removals (east of Rye)” interventions should be undertaken to ensure that the potential effects of the projects are fully considered in relation to the relevant Habitat Sites. 

Air Pollution 

Identified interventions which lie within 200m of Ashdown Forest SAC & SPA, Dungeness SAC, and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar should ensure that best practice pollution prevention guidelines are followed during construction, including adherence with the standards outlined in the following: 

• Highways England (2019), DMRB LA 105 Air Quality Rev 0; and 
• Institute of Air Quality Management (2014), Guidance on the assessment of dust from demolition and construction  

This will include the development of a dust management plan with measures to monitor effectiveness of mitigation, daily on-site and off-site inspections and recording of complaints/exceptional dust events. 

Project level HRA of the “the A259 Level Crossing Removals (east of Rye)” intervention should be undertaken to ensure that the potential effects of the project are fully considered in relation Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA and Ramsar and necessary avoidance and mitigation measures put in place. 

Changes in Species Distribution 

Project level HRAs of the “the A259 Level Crossing Removals (east of Rye)” and “High Speed 1 to Hastings, Bexhill and Eastbourne“ interventions should be undertaken.  This will ensure that the potential effects of the projects are fully considered in relation to Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA and Ramsar and necessary avoidance and mitigation measures put in place. 

Land Take 

Project level HRAs of the “the A259 Level Crossing Removals (east of Rye)” intervention. If the intervention would result in permanent land take within Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA and Ramsar then a full evaluation of the alternatives to the route would be required to identity any feasible alternatives. If no alternatives are feasible then it would be necessary for this intervention to advance to the ‘IROPI’ test (imperative reasons of overriding public interest) which would need to be assessed by the Secretary of State. Compensatory measures are likely to be required if the project proceeds to the IROPI stage.   

5.4 Recommendation 

In relation to the assessment of public access/disturbance, it is recommended that under the title “Conserve and enhance our local environment” within the LTP4, emphasis should be put on protecting sensitive habitats and species and directing recreation to ecologically robust areas, such as by amending text as follows: 

“support the connectivity of ecologically robust habitat trails and pathways” (Draft LTP4, p22) 

5.5 Conclusions  

Recreation 

There will be no adverse effects on the Lewes Downs SAC or the Dungeness SAC & Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar from recreational pressure, both alone and in combination. 

If a project-level HRA is undertaken and any avoidance measures put in place prior to any construction, it should be possible to avoid an adverse effect on the Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA with regards recreation pressure from the intervention “Newhaven- Lewes- Uckfield- East Grinstead- London (Avenue Verte) Active Travel Enhancements”, both alone and in combination.   

Hydrological Impact and Water Pollution 

Through the employment of standard construction techniques and if project-level HRA is undertaken and avoidance measures put in place during construction and in operation, it should be possible to avoid an adverse effect on the Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA, Pevensey Levels SAC and Ramsar and Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA and Ramsar with regards hydrological impact and water pollution from the interventions “Newhaven- Lewes- Uckfield- East Grinstead- London (Avenue Verte) Active Travel Enhancements”, “A22 Corridor Package (north of Maresfield to East Grinstead)”, Eastbourne- Pevensey- Bexhill- Hastings (A259/NCN2) Active Travel Enhancements” and “Hastings – Rye - Ashford (New NCN) Active Travel enhancements”, both alone and in combination.   

With regards to the “A259 Level Crossing Removals (east of Rye)”, there is a potential for an adverse effect to occur on hydrology and water pollution on the Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA and Ramsar from the construction and operation of the intervention. The potential for an in combination effect is uncertain as the intervention is likely to be delivered beyond the LTP4 plan period. Project level HRA of the proposal should be undertaken once it has been suitably progressed. Alternative route consideration and mitigation may be required in order to avoid adverse effects and conclude a project level HRA. 

Air pollution 

It is concluded that the intervention “Newhaven- Lewes- Uckfield- East Grinstead- London (Avenue Verte) Active Travel Enhancements” will not result in an adverse effect on the Lewes Downs SAC from air pollution alone. 

With the use of standard construction techniques and in line with the requirements of local planning policy, it is concluded that the intervention “Newhaven- Lewes- Uckfield- East Grinstead- London (Avenue Verte) Active Travel Enhancements”, “A22 Corridor Package (north of Maresfield to East Grinstead)” and “A259 Level Crossing Removals (east of Rye)” will not result in an adverse effect on the Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA and Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar from air pollution resulting from construction, both alone and in combination.  

With regards to the “A259 Level Crossing Removals (east of Rye)”, there is a potential for an adverse effect to occur on the Dungeness SAC and Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA and Ramsar from the operation of the intervention. The potential for an in combination effect is uncertain as the intervention is likely to be delivered beyond the LTP4 plan period. Project level HRA of the proposal should be undertaken once it has been suitably progressed. Alternative routes and air quality assessment informed by traffic data may be required in order to provide the necessary information to avoid adverse effects and conclude a project level HRA. 

Changes in Species Distribution 

With regards to the interventions “A259 Level Crossing Removals (east of Rye)” and “High Speed 1 to Hastings, Bexhill and Eastbourne”, there is a potential for an adverse effect to occur on species distribution on the Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA and Ramsar from the construction and operation of the interventions. The potential for an in combination effect is considered unlikely. Project level HRA will be needed for the proposals once they have been suitably progressed. Similarly, the “High Speed 1 to Hastings, Bexhill and Eastbourne” will require project level HRA and avoidance measures put in place to avoid changes to species distribution.  

Land take 

With regards to the “A259 Level Crossing Removals (east of Rye)”, there is a potential for an adverse effect to occur from land take on the Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA and Ramsar from the construction and operation of the intervention. The potential for an in combination effect is considered unlikely. A project level HRA will be needed for the proposal once it has been suitably progressed. A comprehensive package of mitigation and compensatory measures is likely to be required for the scheme to go ahead and be signed off by Natural England.

Back to top

---

6. Next Steps

The LTP4 will be subject to consultation commencing on 27 November 2023 until 25 February 2024.  Natural England will be consulted on this HRA Report at the same time.  

Following consultation, comments will be reviewed and any necessary changes required to the LTP4 and HRA will be considered. If changes are made to the LTP4 these will be screened for LSEs and the HRA Report updated as necessary.  

Back to top

---

Appendix A: Plans and Projects considered for Potential In Combination Effects

Table A.1: Plans and Projects considered for Potential In Combination Effects

Plan Name	Plan Description
Eastbourne Core Strategy (2013) and emerging New Eastbourne Local Plan (2019-2039)	The Eastbourne Core Strategy Local Plan (2013) sets out the key direction and planning framework for Eastbourne. The new Plan will look ahead to 2039 and will be the key planning document that will shape, plan and manage growth, regeneration and development across the Borough. The LTP and IIA will need to reflect planned growth as well as emerging policy, including environmental policies.
Hastings Planning Strategy (2014) and draft new Local Plan (2019-2039)	The Hastings Planning Strategy (2014) is the key strategic document prepared as part of the Hastings Local Plan. It provides a long-term plan to deliver regeneration and sustainable growth in the Borough up to 2028. The draft new Local Plan was consulted on in 2021 and contains strategic policies, focus area policies and development policies. The LTP and IIA will need to reflect planned growth as well as emerging policy, including environmental policies.
Lewes Core Strategy (2016) and emerging Lewes District Local Plan (to 2040)	The Core Strategy is Lewes District Council's central planning policy document for the Lewes district. It sets out the long-term spatial vision for the district and will guide development and change up to 2030.   To date, Issues and Opportunities cover tackling climate change; protecting and enhancing the quality of the environment; accommodating and delivering growth; improving access to housing; promoting a prosperous economy and building community wealth; creating healthy, sustainable communities with infrastructure. The LTP and IIA will need to reflect planned growth as well as emerging policy, including environmental policies.
Rother Core Strategy (2014) and emerging Rother District Local Plan (2019-2039)	The adopted Strategy sets the overall vision for future land use and provides the framework for the scale and distribution of development up to 2028. The delivery of a new Plan set out policy response to the climate emergency and biodiversity crisis as well as plan for sustainable development up to 2039. The LTP and IIA will need to reflect planned growth as well as emerging policy, including environmental policies.
South Downs Local Plan (2014-2033)	The Local Plan has been informed by a range of factors relating to the special qualities of the National Park, including landscape character, biodiversity and cultural heritage of the National Park, Neighbourhood Plans, local housing and economic needs and the impact of climate change. The IIA will need to reflect special qualities of the Park, in particular landscape, biodiversity and heritage value.
Wealden Core Strategy (2013) and emerging Wealden District Local Plan	The Core Strategy Local Plan comprises a long-term spatial vision and strategic objectives for the Wealden District area for the period 2013 to 2027. The new Local Plan will provide policies to shape our places, plan and manage growth in the district and guide development over a 15-20 year period. The LTP and IIA will need to reflect planned growth as well as emerging policy, including environmental policies.
Transport Strategy and Strategic Investment Plan for the South East (2020)	The Strategy and Strategic Investment Pla covers 16 constituent local transport Authorities, 5 local enterprise partnerships, and 46 district and borough councils.  The Strategy sets out a 30-year vision for region and the strategic economic, social and environmental goals and priorities that underpin it. These include net-zero, improved productivity, health and wellbeing, quality of life, accessibility and protection of the south-east unique natural and historic environment. An IIA was undertaken for the Strategy and the LTP and IIA for ESCC will sit within this regional framework.
Kent Local Transport Plan 4 (2016-2031)	The Local Transport Plan 4 comprises a long term transport vision for Kent for the period 2016-2031. It comprises transport policies and schemes, based on issues identified at local, county and national levels. The plan has an overarching ambition ‘To deliver safe and effective transport, ensuring that all Kent’s communities and businesses benefit, the environment is enhanced and economic growth is supported.’.
West Sussex Local Transport Plan (2022-2036)	The Local Transport Plan comprises a long term transport vision for West Sussex for the period 2022-2036. It comprises transport policies and schemes, based on issues identified at local, county and national levels. The plan has an overarching vision to address spatial economic challenges of the county, provide employment and services across the county, contribute to aims of net zero carbon by 2050, and improve health and prospects for residents.
Surrey Local Transport Plan 4 (2022-2032)	The Local Transport Plan 4 comprises a long term transport vision for Sussex for the period 2022-2032. It comprises transport policies and schemes, based on issues identified at local, county and national levels. The plan aims to transform he county’s transport network, which a significant focus on reducing carbon emissions from transport. The overarching objectives are: Net zero carbon emissions; Sustainable growth; Well-connected communities and; Clean air and excellent quality of life.

Back to top

---

Appendix B: Information about Habitats Sites

Tables containing more information about Habitat Sites are available for the following sites:

• Ashdown Forest SAC and SPA
• Castle Hill SAC
• Lewes Downs SAC
• Pevensey Levels SAC and Ramsar
• Hastings Cliffs SAC
• Dungeness SAC
• Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay SPA & Ramsar
• Wye and Crundale Downs SAC 
• Mole Gap to Reigate Escarpment SAC  
• Folkstone to Etchinghill Escarpment SAC  
• The Mens SAC
• Duncton to Bignor Escarpment SAC
• Ebernoe Common SAC
• North Downs Woodland SAC 
• Lydden and Temple Elwell Downs SAC
• Dover to Kingsdown Cliffs SAC  

Accessible versions of these documents can be made available on request to LocalTransportPlan@eastsussex.gov.uk 

Document containing tables with information about Habitat Sites listed above [269.0 KB] [pdf]

Back to top

---

Acronyms and Abbreviations

Acronyms and Abbreviations

Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA)	An assessment in accordance with the Habitats Regulations (The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (SI No. 2010/490)) to ascertain the significance of potential impacts of a plan on relevant European sites. The assessment determines whether the plan would adversely affect the integrity of the sites in terms of its nature conservation objectives. Where negative effects are identified, other options should be examined to avoid any potential for damaging effects.
Integrated Sustainability Appraisal (ISA)	A systematic process required by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and incorporating the requirements of the SEA Directive, and other related assessments such as Health Impact Assessment and Equalities Impact Assessment. It is aimed at appraising the social, environmental and economic effects of plans and ensuring that they accord with the objectives of sustainable development.
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)	A process required by EU Directive 2001/42/EC (known as the SEA Directive) and the SEA Regulations (Statutory Instrument No. 1633) for the formal assessment of certain plans and programmes which are likely to have significant effects on the environment.
Local Transport Plan (LTP)	Local Transport Plans set out the transport needs and challenges in an area and highlight policies and interventions in order to alleviate these issues.
In Combination Effects	Where policies, plans or projects effecting the same area might affect European sites in combination with each other.
Special Area of Conservation (SAC)	Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) are protected areas in the UK designated under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 and the Conservation of Offshore Marine Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 in the UK offshore area. Designated sites make a significant contribution to conserving the habitats and species identified in Annexes I and II of EU Directive 92/43/EEC (known as the Habitats Directive).
Special Protection Area (SPA)	Special Protection Areas (SPAs) are protected areas for birds in the UK classified under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 and the Conservation of Offshore Marine Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 in the UK offshore area.
Ramsar Wetland Site	Ramsar Sites are wetlands of international importance designated under the Ramsar Convention. Sites proposed for selection are advised by the relevant statutory nature conservation body (or bodies) within the UK, or the relevant administration within each Overseas Territory or Crown Dependency.

Back to top

---

Print Page