The Doncaster Green Infrastructure Strategy 2014 - 2028€¦ · 1.3 Doncaster Council’s Environment Strategy, adopted December 2012, amongst other things, commits the Council to

1

The Doncaster Green Infrastructure Strategy

2014 - 2028 Consultation Summary Report – February 2014 1. Background 1.1 Green infrastructure (GI) is a network of multi-purpose spaces and includes parks and

other open spaces, footpaths, countryside and wildlife areas. Having an extensive and fit-for-purpose green infrastructure network provides the setting for investment, healthy lifestyles, community interaction and civic pride. It can help mitigate the impact of climate change, such as providing flood storage and urban cooling, and ensure that we protect and enhance our built and natural heritage. The strategy will inform partnership working (including related funding bids), area based plans and operational decisions. It will also provide evidence base for the Local Development Framework.

1.2 The preparation of a GI Strategy is considered a model of good practice and is becoming

increasingly common at the city region, sub-regional and local level. A good GI Strategy sets out the overall approach for delivering an integrated network of high quality green spaces, habitats and landscapes across an area. It highlights the issues, opportunities, threats and priorities relating to different types of green infrastructure, including where there are gaps and areas of need. A Doncaster GI Strategy provides the opportunity to integrate and combine several other strategies (e.g. Green Space Strategy; Tree Strategy; and, Playing Pitch Strategy) into one single strategy that covers all green aspects of the environment into one overarching framework. An integrated approach to GI will also help improve collaboration, coordination and joint working between internal and external partners.

1.3 Doncaster Council’s Environment Strategy, adopted December 2012, amongst other things, commits the Council to having a Green Infrastructure Strategy adopted by Cabinet by May 2014.

2. Consultation Stages Initial Stakeholder Questionnaire & O&S Workshop (Summer 2013)

In order to inform the consultation draft of the Green Infrastructure Strategy, in August 2013 an initial questionnaire was distributed to over 300 stakeholders, including Elected Members, Town/Parish Councils, strategic stakeholders (Environment Agency, Yorkshire Wildlife Trust etc) as well as community organisations and groups (Friends of… etc). In total, 48 responses were received and the key headlines and findings are set out at Appendix 1.

In addition, a workshop was held with the Regeneration & Environment Overview & Scrutiny Working Group on 16th September 2013 to discuss the GI Strategy in more detail with Elected Members. In particular, Members were given the opportunity to consider the following discussion points:

o A working draft of the GI Strategy Vision and Aims were provided. Members were asked whether or not these were appropriate?

o Discussions with the Woodland Trust have suggested that areas of amenity grassland could be planted with trees, which would both improve the amount of tree cover and reduce maintenance costs. Members were asked what are the pros and cons of this?

2

o A Parish Councillor has commented that a number of local authorities have encouraged local communities to grow vegetables in unused green spaces. In fact some local authorities have handed over public flower beds for the cultivation of vegetables to encourage an interest in growing food. Members were asked whether the GI Strategy should contain a policy in relation to this, and if so what should it be?

o There have been recent reports in the national press about the decline in bee populations and the impacts of this on food production. Members were asked what can the Council do about this? (e.g. wildflower verges).

o Whilst swimming is the most popular form of exercise in the borough, the second most popular form is cycling. Members were asked what can be done, both in terms of infrastructure and information/promotion to support more people in cycling?

o Are there any particular key issues which the strategy should address?

Draft GI Strategy for Public Consultation (November 2013 - January 2014)

2.3 The draft Green Infrastructure Strategy was published for full public consultation for a 6 week1 period from 18th November 2013 – 3rd January 2014. Again the key stakeholders identified above were notified of the consultation and the draft document was published on the Council’s website with a response form that asked several questions about the draft Strategy. By the close of the consultation period, a total of 10 response forms were received2. One individual consultee provided comments, but they related to issues outside of the Local Authority area, or were not relevant to the subject of GI, so have not been included in this consultation summary. A summary of the main consultation comments can be found at Appendix 2.

Elected Member Workshops (January 2014)

2.4 In addition to the full public consultation, workshops were held with Elected Members to

continue their involvement in the GI Strategy and build on the feedback from the initial questionnaires received over the summer 2013. Invitations were sent out to all 66 Elected Members inviting them to the workshops which were split into 2 geographical areas to allow for discussions at an appropriate level. Workshop 1 was for Members whose Wards were covered by the North and East Neighbourhood Management Areas and Workshop 2 was for Members within the Wards that make up the Central and South-West Management Areas.

2.5 In particular, Members were asked to consider and provide comments around the

following key questions:

Have we identified the right sites so far?

If not, then which sites have been omitted & why?

What are the potential future projects/priorities for these sites? and,

How might these be implemented/delivered?

1 n.b. the actual consultation period lasted slightly longer than 6 weeks to allow for Christmas and New Year bank

holidays. 2 n.b. Although consultation comments were welcomed as part of the 6 week public consultation, Elected Members

were asked to attend the Member workshops in January 2014 to provide further input into the draft GI Strategy, as opposed to completing the standard response form.

3

Appendix 1: Initial Stakeholder Questionnaire A1.1 The questionnaire was distributed to the following for a 4 week consultation during August 2013:

63 Ward Members were invited to complete the questionnaire via monthly meetings with the Area Managers;

42 Town/Parish Councils;

21 Strategic Stakeholders (such as the Environment Agency, Woodlands Trust, Natural England and IDBs etc);

A1.2 In addition, the plethora of active community groups across the borough were targeted via each of the Area Team’s contacts lists:

North Area – 66 community groups (sports groups, friends of…, uniformed organisations, TARAs etc);

South West Area - 65 community groups;

Central Area – 29 community groups (note – a number of the central groups were contacted via the south-west distribution list given recent change in areas, but hence the low number);

East Area – 38 community groups. A1.3 In total therefore, the questionnaire was distributed to a total of 324 potentially interested stakeholders. A1.4 There was a total of 43 completed (or part completed) questionnaires returned following the initial consultation period which equated to a response rate of just over 13%. In addition to this, 5 stakeholders submitted general comments, but did not complete the questionnaire as they felt it was not suitable for the comments they wished to make/representative for their organisation. A1.5 The questionnaires have been analysed and a number of the questions have the results presented as a ‘word cloud’. The responses from the questionnaire are input into computer software which generates an output known as a ‘word cloud’. This simple analysis technique shows an instant picture of frequency of responses by showing the responses given as text with the size of the font governed by the frequency of the consultee choosing that response. The larger the text/font, the higher number of respondents choose that option, with the smaller the text/font indicating low levels of response.

4

Question 1: What is you main area of interest/concern regarding your green infrastructure assets?

5

Question 2: Which sites in your area have the best potential to deliver most benefits for the above?

6

Q3. What is your relationship to the site(s) chosen above?

7

Q4. What do you really like about the site(s) you have chosen?

8

Q5. What do you really dislike about the site(s) you have chosen?

9

Question 6: What are the future project priorities and opportunities for the sites identified above?

10

Appendix 2: Draft GI Strategy Consultation Summary Document Ref Consultation Question Summary of Consultation Response

Chapter 2 – our overall approach to

green infrastructure

Question 1: Which of the strategic partnerships that operate within the borough are the most relevant and appropriate to reference in this section of the document?

Environment Agency – helpful to make reference to where GI can be used to support investments supported by the LEP. Natural England - The South Yorkshire GI Strategy (led by South Yorkshire Forest). The Doncaster GI Strategy could help to deliver the strategic aims of the South Yorkshire strategy at a more local level. LNP & LEP Growth Fund are the biggest opportunities to access significant funding, but the strategy needs to be presented in a different light to leave a stronger impression with economic decision makers (see general comments regarding environmental focus). Humberhead Levels and Dearne Valley NIA partnerships, as identified in section 2.7. Yorkshire Wildlife Trust - Agree that the key strategic partnerships which operate in the borough are identified. The two River Catchment Partnerships and Magnesian Limestone Corridor Partnership should also be included.

Question 2: Are there any specific priorities or projects which you think should be identified in this strategy as a focus for spending existing or future developer contributions?

Environment Agency - worth emphasising the important role that high quality GI can play in helping to retain businesses and attract businesses in the knowledge rich industries. Investing in GI can play an important role in helping to increase the resilience of businesses and communities to unusual weather conditions such as prolonged droughts, heat waves, floods etc. Great opportunities to deliver GI as part of major infrastructure schemes, such as flood defences, particularly where match funding from other bodies can be sought. The strategy should seek to encourage greater alignment between the investment programmes of major investors in the area, to help deliver increasing amounts of high quality green infrastructure. We would be keen to see improvements in the Water Framework Directive (WFD) status of failing waterbodies given priority and identified in the strategy as a focus for spending developer contributions e.g. River Torne. Natural England - The Living Don Rotherham Rivers project could be considered here. The project is being delivered by Sheffield Wildlife Trust, funded in part by Natural England. Work to create, strengthen, enhance and maintain the corridors identified in the Natural England Yorkshire and the Humber Green Infrastructure Mapping Project and, to a lesser degree, the Buglife B-Lines initiative. Yorkshire Wildlife Trust - Funding should be directed towards projects within the key strategic areas of the Dearne Valley, the Magnesian Limestone Corridor, the Humberhead Levels, the River Don Corridor and the River Torne Corridor. Continued funding in these areas to work with landowners to improve their land for biodiversity, improve flood storage and increase accessibility should be a priority. Improvements at key sites in the area such as Sprotborough Flash and Denaby Ings (potential enhancement and extension to increase connectivity in the area), Potteric Carr (including training and education) and Thorpe Marsh (potential enhancement and extension) should also be

http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/regions/yorkshire_and_the_humber/ourwork/yandhgreeninfrastructuremappingproject.aspx

http://www.buglife.org.uk/campaigns-and-our-work/habitat-projects/b-lines

http://www.buglife.org.uk/campaigns-and-our-work/habitat-projects/b-lines

11

prioritised. The management and extension of Local Wildlife Sites should also be included.

Question 3: Are the headline monitoring indicators above the most appropriate ones for this Strategy? If no, what would be better alternative(s)?

Environment Agency - monitoring indicators should be thought of as benefits and monitored in the following ways: Actual achieved benefits; cumulative benefits; future potential benefits; and , the persistence of the benefits. Rather than concentrating on the number of GI projects delivered by biodiversity offsetting, we would recommend concentrating on monitoring the areas (in hectares) as well as whether extension to existing, creation of new, or enhancement of GI project . Natural England - The identified monitoring indicators are appropriate. Additional suggestions to consider would include;

A breakdown of gains or losses in biodiversity sites, open spaces or sports facilities

Amount of GI incorporated in planning applications

Uptake of Higher Level Stewardship (HLS) and English Woodland Grant Scheme (EWGS)

Contribution to Biodiversity 2020 (restoration and creation of priority habitat)

Socio-economic indicators The Woodlands Trust - no loss of irreplaceable semi-natural habitats could be an additional indicator. Another could also be derived from the access to woodland and nature conservation areas access standard. Yorkshire Wildlife Trust - Some of the indicators may also be influenced by other factors e.g. house prices and visitor numbers. Compliance with DMBC’s Greenspace Standard could be used as an indicator. The number of biodiversity offsetting schemes within GI coridors could also be used as an indicator for improving the resilience to the impacts of climate change.

Chapter 3 - Doncaster’s Five

Green Infrastructure

Themes.

Theme 1: Biodiversity & Geodiversity

(including river & water

management)

Question 4: Should this Theme include signposts/links to other relevant supporting documents or strategies here? If so, which are the most important ones?

Environment Agency - The WFD is a key driver for improvements in the water environment, both in terms of its biology and hydromorphology. Natural England - We would recommend highlighting here that from April 2014 under Schedule 3 of the Flood and Water Management Act (2010) there will be a requirement for new and redeveloped sites in England to incorporate sustainable drainage systems (SuDS). The Woodlands Trust - The WT has produced a report which outlines the benefits which trees and woodland can provide in improving water quality and helping to alleviated flooding. Link provided. Yorkshire Wildlife Trust - YWT’s Living Landscapes, TCPA and The WT’s GI Guide, RSPB’s and WWT’s Sustainable Drainage Systems, and DMBC’s Biodiversity Offsetting Guidelines. Sheffield Area Geology Trust - Need to recognise that effective planning and land management includes integrated land management to include geodiversity and historic environment interests, as well as biodiversity interests. This is required at a local place scale, as well as at the wider ‘landscape-scale’. In this way the multiple benefits of GI can be realised. Note that geodiversity

12

assets, including exposed bedrock and geomorphological features should be considered as separate GI functions to biodiversity functions, which is not clarified within the YH GI mapping project. There is a need to add a section on how geodiversity will contribute to the Doncaster GI Strategy, and identify how the Doncaster GI Strategy can help deliver the UKGAP and Doncaster GAP priorities within the principles outlined within the Geodiversity Charter for England.



Themes.

Theme 2: Trees & Woodlands


Environment Agency - recommend reference is made to the local provenance of new trees and hence their appropriateness. Greater priority should be given to the planting of native trees. Trees are also extremely important along rivers to provide shade and cover to the water and species therein, protecting them from the potential effects of climate change. They also provide key foraging

habitat for the Daubenton’s bat. Natural England - No additional suggestions Woodlands Trust - Support the content under Theme 2, which represents a very comprehensive policy on trees and woodland. We particularly like the policy on replacement planting where the number of trees to be planted is related to the size of tree being lost. We are told that 30% of the woodland in Doncaster is ancient. Therefore the policy could be strengthened by stating that there should be no loss of ancient woodland. Yorkshire Wildlife Trust - The Woodland Trust’s Space for People Guide and The Forestry Commission’s Guide to Managing Ancient & Native Woodland



Themes.

Theme 3: Green Spaces


Natural England - No additional suggestions Woodlands Trust – Support use of greenspace standards and in particular the standard on woodland and nature conservation areas. We hope that you will further develop these standards to produce woodland creation targets for particular areas of Doncaster, particularly where there is new development and seek funding for this woodland creation from developers through CIL or Section 106. Yorkshire Wildlife Trust - Useful information on green spaces at Our Green Space (link provided).



Themes.

Theme 4: Green Routes


Natural England - No additional suggestions Yorkshire Wildlife Trust – YWT’s Living Landscapes and TCPA and The WT’s GI Guide


Question 8: Should this Theme include signposts/links to other

Natural England - No additional suggestions

13


Themes.

Theme 5: Historic Environment

relevant supporting documents or strategies here? If so, which are the most important ones?

Woodlands Trust - We would like to see a more specific reference to the importance of ancient, veteran and notable trees in this section. The WT carried out a project over three years to map and record over 100,000 ancient trees across the country. Link provided to data from this project.

Chapter 4 - Green Infrastructure

Corridors & Project Areas

Question 9: Does the above identify the most appropriate key strategic project areas/projects? If not, then which ones have been omitted?

Environment Agency - The River Torne corridor masterplan includes the River Torne floodplain. We would have concerns regarding future developments that encroach onto the floodplain and into the riparian zone of the river. We would recommend that any such developments engage with the Environment Agency at the earliest opportunity to ensure proposed developments are suitable. Natural England - Natural England would agree that the identified Strategic Project Areas are all appropriate. The most significant projects for our remit would be Dearne Valley Green Heart and Thorne and Hatfield Moors, and also the Don Rival in association with the Living Don project. Yorkshire Wildlife Trust - Magnesian Limestone Corridor should also be included. We are currently running a Loving Your Local Limestone Project which runs until September 2014 but we are looking to continue with a similar project after this. Sheffield Area Geology Trust - Need to add a reference to the Magnesian Limestone Landscapes Partnership here, that aims to promote GI projects to include the Magnesian Limestone (Doncaster) and Magnesian Limestone (Rotherham) areas as well as including other parts of the Magnesian Limestone within the Sheffield City Region.

Chapter 5 - Findings &

Recommendations (by Neighbourhood

Area)

Central Area

Question 10: Does the above identify the most appropriate priorities, opportunities, and projects for the area? If not, then what has been omitted?

Environment Agency - The Idle and Torne river catchment is being hosted by The Wildlife Trust to bring about improvements in the WFD status of these watercourses. Although many of these areas do not lie within the DMBC area, the Torne does and may be worth including here. Natural England – yes, to our knowledge. Yorkshire Wildlife Trust - This area should also include the River Torne Catchment Partnership in paragraph 5.9. The opportunity relating to woodlands and a healthier lifestyle could be applicable for other greenspaces and should therefore be altered accordingly. The council should attempt to influence the management of privately owned woodlands so that they are managed positively for wildlife and people. We support the inclusion of creating flower rich areas but this would need to include appropriate management. It may be possible to get the community involved in this as we did with our Yorkshire Dales Road Verges Project. The ‘greening of the built environment’ opportunity could include the use of wildlife friendly SuDs schemes and green walls/roofs within developments. Useful links provided. Sheffield Area Geology Trust - There is a need to note for all of the areas in Doncaster MB that

14

there are opportunities to protect and manage the geodiversity assets, including geological and geomorphological features, within both designated and non-designated sites. As at end March 2013, none of the designated geological sites (geological SSSI and LGS including RIGS) had a management plan, though there may be management plans for other interests including LWS and woodlands that include these areas.]



Area)

North Area


Environment Agency - The Idle and Torne river catchment is being hosted by The Wildlife Trust to bring about improvements in the WFD status of these watercourses. Although many of these areas do not lie within the DMBC area, the Torne does and may be worth including here. Natural England – yes, to our knowledge. Yorkshire Wildlife Trust - This area should also include the River Torne Catchment Partnership in paragraph 5.17. The opportunity relating to woodlands and a healthier lifestyle could be applicable for other greenspaces and should therefore be altered accordingly. The council should attempt to influence the management of privately owned woodlands so that they are managed positively for wildlife and people. We support the inclusion of creating flower rich areas but this would need to include appropriate management. It may be possible to get the community involved in this as we did with our Yorkshire Dales Road Verges Project. The ‘greening of the built environment’ opportunity could include the use of wildlife friendly SuDs schemes and green walls/roofs within developments. Useful links provided.



Area)

East Area


Natural England – yes, to our knowledge. Thorne & Moorends Town Council – particular issue for Thorne Moors is its access and visitor facilities which mean that its potential for both residents and visitors is not fully exploited. Needs to say more on protection and improvement of formal and informal green spaces. Thorne Memorial park should be highlighted as a historic park that contributes to the conservation area. Buntings Wood is now a Local Nature Reserve. Yorkshire Wildlife Trust - The opportunity relating to woodlands and a healthier lifestyle could be applicable for other greenspaces and should therefore be altered accordingly. The council should attempt to influence the management of privately owned woodlands so that they are managed positively for wildlife and people. We support the inclusion of creating flower rich areas but this would need to include appropriate management. It may be possible to get the community involved in this as we did with our Yorkshire Dales Road Verges Project. The ‘greening of the built environment’ opportunity could include the use of wildlife friendly SuDs schemes and green walls/roofs within developments. Useful links provided.



Question 13: Does the above identify the most appropriate priorities, opportunities, and projects for the area? If not, then what has been

Environment Agency - The Idle and Torne river catchment is being hosted by The Wildlife Trust to bring about improvements in the WFD status of these watercourses. Although many of these areas do not lie within the DMBC area, the Torne does and may be worth including here.

15

Area)

South-west Area

omitted? Natural England – yes, to our knowledge. Yorkshire Wildlife Trust - This area should also include the River Torne Catchment Partnership in paragraph 5.34. The opportunity relating to woodlands and a healthier lifestyle could be applicable for other greenspaces and should therefore be altered accordingly. The council should attempt to influence the management of privately owned woodlands so that they are managed positively for wildlife and people. We support the inclusion of creating flower rich areas but this would need to include appropriate management. It may be possible to get the community involved in this as we did with our Yorkshire Dales Road Verges Project. The ‘greening of the built environment’ opportunity could include the use of wildlife friendly SuDs schemes and green walls/roofs within developments. Useful links provided.

General comments on GI Strategy

Question 14: Any general comments not covered by questions above?

Environment Agency – Overall we consider the draft document is comprehensive and gives good detail on various facets of GI. The draft document is factually correct and locally specific and as such, we are happy to support it.

Economic benefits: It is worth highlighting the fact that investing in GI can generate cost savings for the public purse; for example, in some instances investing in GI measures upstream within a river catchment can reduce the need to implement more expensive flood defence measures lower down the catchment. Any savings that result from investing in such GI schemes are then available to be spent on other activities which could include measures aimed at providing an economic stimulus. The section titled: why invest in green infrastructure? (page 6) would benefit from being expanded as it currently fails to cover some of the key benefits of investing in GI – increased efficiency of businesses as cooling and heating costs can be reduced through GI investments; opportunities for major savings to the public purse by reducing the need for conventional infrastructure; opportunities for providing skills training. It would be helpful to include specific examples of where investing in GI can help to deliver multiple benefits. For example, the construction of a fish pass can help to deliver environmental and economic benefits (increased length of river available for fishing, help to publicise that an area has a clean environment).

Biodiversity offsetting: The basic principles of offsetting are outlined within the document, as is the fact that Doncaster has been identified as an authority involved in the offsetting trial. However, no detail is given as to how this could be used to deliver GI objectives for the borough. The final document should give greater clarity over the role of offsetting to deliver these objectives.

Summary of actions and delivery targets: The document very helpfully sets out broad objectives at an area level. However, to increase the effectiveness of the strategy, clear and deliverable objectives should be set, with defined mechanisms for implementation and monitoring. It would be helpful if a summary table was also included which set out all of the

16

area objectives in one place for simplicity. Natural England - Overall our opinion is that this is a well-structured document. Chapter 1 includes a good definition of green infrastructure (GI) and thorough analysis of strategic context and local policies, setting out the basis to the strategy. We welcome highlighting the benefits of GI at the start of the Executive Summary. The commitment to have the strategy adopted by Cabinet by 2014 will help ensure statutory weight and increase the likelihood of implementation. A balanced consideration of environment and socio-economic outcomes is important. This strategy is strong on natural environment and biodiversity and the five themes presented are very environment orientated. Demonstrating the socio-economic benefits of GI implementation (we recognise this touched upon in Section 1.7) is also important however to help ensure buy-in from a greater range of stakeholders, particularly decision makers and those who may be sceptical of green infrastructure. We would recommend adding multiple ‘socio-economic benefits’ to the Executive Summary and throughout document, including Section 1.3. It would also be useful to demonstrate how the five themes relate to the aims set out in Section 2.2. The Natural England Microeconomic Evidence for the Benefits of Investment in the Environment (MEBIE) Research Report provides a good evidence base to reference. General comments also include:

Section 1.2 – We would recommend increasing the timescale of the strategy to align with the

Local Plan timescale of 2028 if possible, with a comment on the need to review the strategy over this period.

Section 1.6 – The word ‘Function’ may be a new concept to the reader at this stage. It may be better to reword these points and list under ‘Benefits’ starting with positive active words and putting more emphasis on socio-economics.

Section 1.7 – Strengthen the ‘GI is a solution to a problem’ approach

Section 1.15 – The South Yorkshire Green Infrastructure Strategy Delivery Programme is available online. The projects outlined for the Doncaster area should be referred to in more detail and build upon in this document.

Section 2.2 – It may be beneficial to link to the overall policy objectives from the Local Plan here, and highlight how GI can address these.

Section 2.4 – The link to the planning system could be strengthened (it is more explicit in 2.8).

Section 2.8 – Natural England funding is currently available (budget determined annually) to support green infrastructure delivery projects.

Chapter 3 – We welcome the methodical approach in Chapter 3 considering five themes. The section on Theme 2 Trees and Woodlands is quite lengthy at 9 pages and could be more concise. The ‘functionality and needs’ style assessment undertaken for Theme 3 Open Spaces is good, and this approach could be extended to the other themes where possible to assess assets against the current needs and issues that they could address. Theme 4 Green Routes should make stronger reference to work undertaken as part of the Yorkshire and the Humber Green Infrastructure Mapping Project (Section 3.71).

17

Chapter 4 – We recommend ensuring that a focus on creating a network of projects is maintained. Chapter 4 outlines previous work that has been done to identify GI corridors across the area, and we welcome presentation of the corridors identified as part of the Yorkshire and the Humber Green Infrastructure Mapping Project in Figure 4.1. However there is no explanation at this stage of how this information will be used moving forwards (we note corridors are referenced later for each neighbourhood area in Chapter 5). This strategy can help deliver a coordinated approach to GI delivery and it is important the benefits of creating, enhancing and maintaining a multifunctional GI network are clearly stated throughout the document.

Chapter 5 – We welcome the approach taken in Chapter 5 to identify strengths, challenges and opportunities by neighbourhood area. This presents a good framework for identification and prioritisation of future projects and the early stages of action plans at a neighbourhood level. It would be useful to set out some key principles for implementation, criteria for investment and prioritisation at the start of Chapter 5.

Further evidence on funding streams, and also signposting to guidance or documents that you may consider referencing for the various themes in Chapter 3, is collated in the Natural England GI Signposting document. Link provided.

Yorkshire Wildlife Trust - Overall we are very happy with the draft GI Strategy. We are pleased to see that biodiversity has been included as an important theme throughout the document. A minor point is that it would be useful to include a more detailed map showing the areas and the GI corridors. Sheffield Area Geology Trust – A number of suggestions and points of detail to add and enhance references to geodiversity throughout the strategy put forward. Further suggestions to correction and enhancement of general text throughout the Strategy. South Yorkshire GI Strategy Masterplan needs to include small parts of western and southern Doncaster which have been omitted. Further work on GI methodologies required, including work with neighbouring LPA’s. Thorne & Moorends Town Council – Welcome this strategy and is supportive of its broad principles. It supports the approach of protecting and enhancing the strategic green space within Thorne-Moorends area and welcomes the priority given to the strategic corridors in the Thorne area. Finningley Parish Council - The parish council fully supports the preservation of green spaces, especially those in and surrounding the village, which provide for the mitigation of industrial noise pollution, the reduction of traffic noise and exhaust pollution; provides opportunities for sport & recreation and protecting and enhancing our historic and natural environment. Individual #1 - I am very pleased to be given the opportunity to comment on the draft GI document for Doncaster, the role that different actors can play at all levels to deploy nature-based solutions across Doncaster, and how we can work together to make it happen. There is strong inter-

18

organisational and individual support for Doncaster’s GI Strategy and this is very encouraging. Purpose & Aims - many of the key stakeholders have been working on GI for many years before LAs were encouraged through e.g. the NPPF to develop GI. The document should recognise that a true partnership is needed and not one merely led by the LA. The benefits of GI - go beyond the immediate protection of wildlife and their habitats and include economic, social, environmental, and health and wellbeing factors. Often these benefits can interact with one another resulting in improved social conditions:

Environmental - An example of this is the Borough’s special visual character and appearance, which is a pleasant mix of leafy urban townscape, countryside, woodland and moor land. This special character and appearance has made the Borough a highly desirable place for people to live. Biodiversity is a core element of green infrastructure across Britain and Europe and can benefit greatly from green infrastructure developments beyond the GI network itself. However, there is still a lot of biodiversity outside of Natura 2000 areas which should not and cannot be neglected if Doncaster is to meet the EU biodiversity headline target by 2020.

Economic - What we are seeing more and more across Britain and Europe is that Green Infrastructure solutions are often more cost-effective, more resilient and bring more long-term benefits than artificial, heavy infrastructure. If we can manage to scale up green infrastructure investments, then we can boost innovation and drive market opportunities, unlocking more sustainable growth and creating both high and low-skilled jobs. The Local Environment and Economic Development (LEED) Toolkit is designed to help LEPs and LAs meet their economic growth targets by fully realising the roles the environment can play.

Social - Green spaces can improve mental and physical health and reduce heat-wave effects in towns. Green infrastructure has also played an important part in some highly successful urban rehabilitation projects, including in some of the poorest neighbourhoods. There is substantial evidence that people feel more responsible for their neighbourhood if it is green.

Connectivity - GI operates at a number of scales. From the site scale (green roofs, bio-swales, rain gardens, protected natural areas) to a community scale (greenways, parks, biodiversity policies) to a landscape scale (biodiversity sites/habitats, watershed management). While improvements at each of these scales contribute, it is critical to recognise that it is the connections between scales that allow green infrastructure to function as a complete system. Figure 4.1 of the GI Strategy could be developed further. One suggestion is to break the borough up into one of five concepts of Green Infrastructure as detailed below:

Green Infrastructure Action Areas (GIAAs) - These are priority areas for new or enhanced green infrastructure in relation to proposed/allocated development as well as a means of addressing a perceived deficit or lack of opportunity in relation to existing development

Countryside Access Gateways (CAGs) - These are gateways from urban areas and villages

19

to the wider countryside. These gateways are likely to contain a range of visitor facilities, as appropriate e.g. Cusworth Country Park

Green Infrastructure Opportunity Areas - These are landscape scale multi-functional opportunities for enhancement. These would be of two types; firstly areas of recognised landscape, historic and biodiversity value and secondly areas for longer term multi-functional opportunities

Strategic Access Links - These are links that enable movement between green space, villages and urban fringe. They build upon the existing Rights of Way and cycleway networks, plugging gaps and upgrading routes that are currently inaccessible at some times or to some user groups. They also offer the opportunity to provide wildlife and biodiversity corridors in conjunction with both existing and proposed access links.

Strategic Corridors - These are existing major links through and beyond the Authority, focused less on access and more on biodiversity. They play an important role in linking into the Plans and Strategies of surrounding Authorities.

Implementation - A first step in the implementation of the Strategy should be to incorporate its principles and spatial priorities into the statutory planning system through policies and site allocations in the Local Development Framework via the Core Strategy and reflected through appropriate site allocations as the local authority prepares its relevant Development Plan Documents, reflecting the priorities of the specific area and the priorities and needs of the local communities. If the Planning process does not fully embrace GI then the resources put into the GI Strategy will be wasted. Aims – these are not overly clear Prioritising GI - The Council should be putting environmental sustainability and green infrastructure at the heart of its business through its priorities. The green infrastructure strategy work stream should build on this and engage with partners and infrastructure providers to understand shared priorities for green infrastructure and the mechanisms that you can all use to put it into place.