The Council has decided to secure local Habitat Banks through legal agreements with private landowners and another local authority.

URL: https://committeeadmin.lancaster.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=1574

Decision Maker:

Outcome:

Is Key Decision?: No

Is Callable In?: Yes

Purpose:

Content: (Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Tyldesley)   Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer Planning and Climate Change to agree to the approach to securing local Habitat Banks within the district by entering into legal agreements with offsite biodiversity unit providers and approve progression of a Council-owned Habitat Bank delegating specific designation of Council-owned land for habitat banks to the Chief Officer – Planning and Climate Change, following case-by-case consultation with the other relevant Chief Officers comprising the Council’s Senior Leadership Team.   The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:   Given that there are 2 proposals, both proposals are separately analysed in this section.   Proposal 1: S106 agreements to secure private land with a Habitat Management and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) for Offsite Biodiversity Net Gain     Option 1: S106 agreement with private landowners to secure offsite biodiversity gains Option 2: direct landowners to Responsible Bodies for conservation covenants Advantages Provides revenue to oversee compliance with the S106 agreement.   Council can work with landowners so proposals contribute to local nature recovery and potentially align with other policy, e.g. Green and Blue Infrastructure/LNRS/ flood risk reduction.   Example templates for legal agreements are available (Planning Advisory Service). No responsibilities for Council, just ensure biodiversity units are registered and correctly allocated to in-district developments post[1]decision Disadvantages Requires input from multiple services to determine acceptability of proposal and minimise risk of need for future enforcement. May be more expensive for landowner, depending on Responsible Body criteria may only take large projects.   Habitat bank may be set up out of district.   No revenue to Council.   Risks May only get small scale proposals from developers for their own developments, rather than habitat banks at large scale. Habitat bank business might fail during the 30-year period. Could require a bond to insure against this, but it may affect viability in early stage.   Unforeseen events (e.g. catastrophic storm, fire or new disease – but landowner would not be penalised in such cases). Entry into S106 is discretionary, but Council could be seen as unreasonable in refusing a viable option, especially if challenged in an appeal on a developer-led proposal).   Proposal 2: Development of a habitat bank on Council-owned land     Option 1: Enter into a S106 agreement with Chorley Council for habitat bank at Burrow Beck solar array Option 2: To not enter into a S106 Agreement with Chorley Council, and to further explore alternatives Advantages S106 is a legal agreement type known to both Councils.   Low cost for S106 monitoring role payable to Chorley Council (c. £8000 plus legal costs) as Chorley has assessed the site as small and low risk.   A simple stand-alone agreement, with no need for a reciprocal arrangement.   Cost of maintenance of habitat at this site will be met by the revenue from the solar farm, whether or not the site becomes a habitat bank.   Revenue from sale or allocation of biodiversity units can be used to help set up habitat banks on other Council land for when None Disadvantages Council has 30+ year commitment. Would limit any other development on the site during the period.   Small cost to set up agreement and carry out future monitoring and report, but minor compared to potential income from sale/allocation of units. Not entering into a S106 to deliver the habitat bank would result in the Council having to search the open market for suitable units to buy in the future (for its own developments).   There would be a loss of opportunity for potential income generation. Risks Possible risk that units delivered could be less than forecast, but metric and HMMP has been deliberately conservative.   Uncertainty about future monetary value of biodiversity units – depends on demand.   Low financial risk as site management is funded by solar farm income, not dependent on sale of biodiversity units. Alternative Habitat Banks may be located outside the district and could result in the exporting of biodiversity provision outside the district.   In respect of Proposal 1, the preferred option is Option 1 (i.e. to enter into S106 agreements with private landowners to secure off-site biodiversity gains).   Private landowners providing off-site biodiversity gain locally will help development viability locally and so contribute to delivery of housing targets.   If private habitat banks are set up at scale locally this has potential to contribute to nature recovery and other local policy aims.   Off-site provision of biodiversity gain must be legally secured by S106 (or conservation covenant). Developers that need to make significant biodiversity gains can also use this method to secure net gain for individual developments, although scrutiny will be needed at application and post-application stages to assess viability and risks.   In respect of Proposal 2, the preferred option is Option 1 (i.e. to enter into a S106 Agreement with Chorley Council for a habitat bank at Burrow Beck Solar Array.   A S106 agreement with Chorley Council is the only opportunity currently available with another local authority. Chorley Council is further ahead in preparation of S106 agreements for habitat banks including agreement with another Council which means that there is a process ready to adopt for this proposed S106 agreement.   The Burrow Beck solar array at Bailrigg offers a low-risk opportunity for Lancaster City Council to start its first habitat bank. With Chorley Council willing to enter a hosting agreement to legally secure the habitat bank, this gives an opportunity to make a start, fitting with the timescale for the solar farm delivery. It is expected that if this option is adopted the habitat bank can be registered this year and start to make allocations of units.   This report set out the preferred way forward for (i) securing habitat banks throughout the district and (ii) utilising the timely delivery of the Burrow Beck solar array to deliver the Council’s first habitat bank.   It is intended that the approach adopted by Chorley Council (Appendix 1 to the report) will continue to be used until such time as guidance is reviewed and amended. Separate to this report, future consideration will need to be made about the priorities for the allocation or sale of units in future, and the price at which any units should be offered for sale (if they were to be made available to private developers, rather than being solely allocated to the council’s own future developments). It is anticipated that any strategic decisions regarding this will be a matter for Cabinet, at the appropriate time.   Councillor Tyldesley proposed, seconded by Councillor Bottoms:-   “That the recommendations, as set out in the report, be approved.”   Councillors then voted:-   (1)             That approval be given to Lancaster City Council entering into standalone legal agreements (Section 106 Agreements) with private landowners to secure offsite Biodiversity Gain Sites (‘Habitat Banks’) which will:   (a)        Allow Officers to engage with landowners who wish to create a ‘Biodiversity Gain Site’ of ‘Habitat Bank’; (b)        Use Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) habitat banking criteria to inform the assessment of proposed habitat banks; (c)        Enable officers, upon receipt of information from landowners to enter negotiations with landowners with a view to (i) checking proposals are suitable and acceptable for offsite Biodiversity Net Gain; and (ii) agreeing a Section 106 (or ‘S106’) to secure the site and a Habitat Management and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) for a minimum of 30 years, as appropriate; (d)        Permit the Chief Officer - Planning and Climate Change, or officers authorised by the Chief Officer, to negotiate S106 agreements on this matter and amend the guidance in light of experience and/or updated guidance or legislation from government; and, (e)        Allow for sign-off of the legal agreements.   (2)                    That the development of habitat banks on Council-owned land be progressed as follows:   (a)        To support Council officers in work to put Council assets forward for off-site BNG, the decision to create habitat banks on individual sites will be delegated to the Chief Officer of Planning and Climate Change, informed by an approved business case on a site-by-site basis as appropriate; (b)        To agree to the negotiation of a S106 agreement with Chorley Council for a habitat bank on Council-owned land at Bailrigg (Burrow Beck) solar array.   Officer responsible for effecting the decision:   Chief Officer Planning & Climate Change   Reasons for making the decision:   The decision is in accordance with key objective of increasing biodiversity in the Council Plan, particularly Action 1.4 on Ecology & Biodiversity and consistent with the Local Plan; particularly Policy DM44 on the protection and enhancement of biodiversity.   The proposals also support specific actions in the Biodiversity Action Plan approved by Cabinet in 2024, particularly (a) Action 1.3 on developing an internal monitoring system to support the delivery of BNG across the district, ensuring delivery and condition can be monitored over 30 years; (b) Actions 6.1 & 9.4 on exploring the preparation of a local off-site BNG register at either a local or county level; and (c) Action 6.2 on investigating opportunities for BNG delivery on Council owned land. Given that the proposals described in this report are aligned to both formal Policy Frameworks documents previously approved by full Council and the Biodiversity Action Plan previously approved by Cabinet then Cabinet is the appropriate body for decision making body for proposals that would create working arrangements with another local planning authority and establishing the necessary biodiversity net gain implementation management arrangements to enable BNG to be appropriately and objectively managed on Council-owned assets.

Date of Decision: July 8, 2025