DOCSLIB.ORG

Partnership for Urban South Hampshire: Air Quality Impact Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Partnership for Urban South Hampshire: Air Quality Impact Assessment Partnership for Urban South Hampshire: Air Quality Impact Assessment ___________________________________________________ Report for East Hampshire District Council, Eastleigh Borough Council, Fareham Borough Council, Gosport Borough Council, Havant Borough Council, Portsmouth City Council, Southampton City Council, Test Valley Borough Council, and Winchester City Council ED 10415100 | Issue Number 4 | Date 05/09/2018 Ricardo Energy & Environment Partnership for Urban South Hampshire: Air Quality Impact Assessment | i Customer: Contact: East Hampshire District Council, Eastleigh Jessica Virdo Borough Council, Fareham Borough Council, Ricardo Energy & Environment Gosport Borough Council, Havant Borough Gemini Building, Harwell, Didcot, OX11 0QR, Council, Portsmouth City Council, United Kingdom Southampton City Council, Test Valley Borough Council, and Winchester City t: +44 (0) 1235 75 3489 Council e: [email protected] Ricardo-AEA Ltd is certificated to ISO9001 and ISO14001 Confidentiality, copyright & reproduction: This report is submitted by Ricardo Energy & Environment under contract to the Havant Borough Council. Authors: It may not be used for any other purposes, Thomas Adams, Aayesha Akram, Richard reproduced in whole or in part, nor passed to any Andrews, Robert Benney, Hayley Breen, Mark organisation or person without the specific Broomfield, Thomas Buckland, Charlotte Day, permission in writing of the Commercial Manager, Martin Ferreira, Ken Lipscomb, Nicola Masey, Ricardo Energy & Environment. Victoria Thomson, Keith Vincent, and Jessica Virdo Approved By: Beth Conlan Date: 05 September 2018 Ricardo Energy & Environment reference: Ref: ED10415100- Issue Number 4 Ricardo in Confidence Ref: Ricardo/ED10415100/Issue Number 4 Ricardo Energy & Environment Partnership for Urban South Hampshire: Air Quality Impact Assessment | ii Executive Summary The Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (PUSH) comprises a voluntary partnership of eleven authorities located on the south coast of England. The local authorities included in the study area include Portsmouth City Council, Southampton City Council, Isle of Wight Council, Eastleigh Borough Council, East Hampshire District Council (part), Fareham Borough Council, Gosport Borough Council, Havant Borough Council, New Forest District Council (part), Test Valley Borough Council (part) and Winchester City Council (part). The PUSH Spatial Position Statement 2016 envisages the provision of an additional 104,350 homes by 2034. Local authorities within the PUSH sub-region are currently preparing supporting local plans, with timelines varying by authority and looking to either 2034 or 2036. The greatest population growth is likely to be seen in Portsmouth and Southampton as part of the ‘cities first’ approach. The proposed development may have the potential for significant effects on the environment both within the PUSH region and in surrounding areas. At the same time, the impact of development planned in neighbouring authorities adjoining the PUSH sub-region will potentially have effects on people and the natural environment within the PUSH area. This report considers air quality impacts from increased vehicle emissions associated with proposed development in the PUSH region. Air quality is an ongoing issue of concern for many local authorities within the PUSH region. In the context of human health and the UK’s national air quality objectives, the main pollutant emissions arising from increased road traffic are nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulate matter (both PM10 and PM2.5). The national Air Quality Objective for nitrogen dioxide continues to be exceeded at a number of locations. There are currently 21 Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) in the PUSH area, located within Portsmouth, Fareham, Southampton and Eastleigh. Air quality impacts are also a concern for natural habitats. The area of South Hampshire includes many natural habitat sites and species of international importance. There are many roads in the PUSH region which pass through or nearby designated sites. These sites may be adversely affected by increases in air concentrations of pollutants, particularly oxides of nitrogen and ammonia, and the deposition of these pollutants within the habitats. This report contains the results of an assessment of air quality impacts to support the PUSH local planning authorities in carrying out their reviews of the spatial strategy for the area. A sub-regional air dispersion model (RapidAir) was used to model predicted air quality impacts at all locations within the PUSH study area at a resolution of 3m x 3m. This method of spatially detailed compliance modelling was used to assess air quality impacts in terms of both potential effects on human health and on protected nature conservation sites. Traffic growth within the study area was provided by Solent Transport’s Sub-Regional Transport Model (SRTM). In total, four traffic scenarios were modelled: 2014 Reference Case, 2034 Baseline Scenario, 2034 Do Minimum (2034 DM) Scenario and 2034 Do Something (2034 DS) Scenario. Both 2034 DM and DS scenarios included development and growth within the PUSH region, equating to approximately 100,000 additional dwellings compared to the 2034 Baseline scenario. 2034 DS includes additional transport interventions which are aimed at helping to mitigate the impact of the proposed developments on the transport network. Air quality impacts on human health were assessed based on predicted annual average airborne concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) for all four traffic model scenarios. The air quality impacts were evaluated within existing AQMAs, as well as any other locations within the study area predicted to have pollutant concentrations exceeding the Air Quality Objectives. The air quality modelling study indicates that, because of general improvements in air quality over the period up to 2034, ambient concentrations of NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 within the majority of AQMAs in Ricardo in Confidence Ref: Ricardo/ED10415100/Issue Number 4 Ricardo Energy & Environment Partnership for Urban South Hampshire: Air Quality Impact Assessment | iii the PUSH study area are forecast to improve, and at almost all locations within the AQMAs, concentrations will meet the applicable air quality objectives under the future development scenarios. The modelling indicates that the maximum concentrations are predicted to exceed the objectives in some limited areas under the 2034 development scenarios. However, in all cases, these exceedances are not forecast to occur at locations of relevant exposure (e.g. residences, schools, hospitals etc.). While there is no specific requirement for further mitigation to achieve air quality objectives in 2034, further mitigation measures could be considered to address the higher concentrations within these AQMAs, and are discussed in subsequent chapters of this report. Work is also under way under separate initiatives to ensure that air quality objectives are achieved at all relevant locations as quickly as possible. Air quality impacts on designated sites were assessed based on predicted annual average airborne concentrations of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and ammonia (NH3), as well as annual deposition of nutrient nitrogen and acid. The assessment of impacts on designated was carried out in a stepwise process, designed to comply with Natural England’s emerging requirements and good practice for evaluation of the impacts of air pollution on nature conservation sites. The requirements from Natural England were developed primarily for the assessment of designated sites with European (or equivalent international) designation, namely Ramsar sites, Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and Special Protection Areas (SPAs). We have also included nationally designated Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) that do not form components of European sites in this study. This assessment indicates that the proposed future PUSH development scenarios have the potential to result in air quality impacts for several European-designated sites, for which likely significant effects from air quality impacts cannot be ruled out based on the existing evidence base. In most cases, predicted areas of possible air quality impacts occur in close proximity to existing motorways and A- roads. It is recommended that Councils should consider whether further surveys could be useful to confirm the existence of protected habitats and species within the relevant designated sites. In the event that such surveys confirm that the protected habitats and species are not present in these zones, no further action would be needed to mitigate impacts. Where impacts cannot be ruled out in this way, for European-designated sites, an HRA Stage 2 appropriate assessment will be required to inform the respective local plans, and mitigation of any significant impacts may potentially be needed. This study shows that overall the PUSH region will experience an improvement in air quality over the assessment period, resulting from changes to the road fleet during this time. However, it is also important that the Councils seek further opportunities to avoid or reduce the impacts of vehicle emissions on air quality, through the implementation of well-designed policies and plans that incorporate effective air quality and transport related measures, such as those discussed in this report. The PUSH partnership offers a unique opportunity for the development of a regional strategy that incorporates
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Local Government Boundary Commission for England Report No.201 LOCAL GOVERNMENT
    Local Government Boundary Commission For England Report No.201 LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND REPORT NO. 201. LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND CHAIRMAN • Sir Edmund Compton GCB KBE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN . Mr J M Rankin QC MEMBERS Lady Bowden Mr J T Brockbank Professor Michael Chisholm Mr R R Thornton CB DL Sir Andrew Wheatley CBE To the Rt HOB Merlyn Bees, HP Secretary of State for the Home Department PROPOSALS FOR REVISED ELKTOHAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE BOROUGH 07 GOSPOHT IN THE C00NTY OP HAMPSHIRE 1* Ief the Local Government Boundary Commission for England, having carried out our initial review of the electoral arrangements for the Borough of Gosport in accordance with the requirements of section 63 of, and Schedule 9 to, the Looal Government Aot 1972, present our proposals for the future electoral arrangements for that borough* 2. In accordance with the procedure laid down in section 60(1) and (2) of the 1972 Act, notice was given on 3 June 1974 that we were to undertake this review* This was incorporated in a consultation letter addressed to the Gospcrt Borough Council, copies of which were circulated to the Hampshire County Council, the Member of Parliament for the constituency concerned and the headquarters of the main political parties* Copies were also sent to the editors of local newspapers circulating In the area and of the local government press* Botices inserted in the local press announced the start of the review and invited comments from members of the public and from any Interested bodies* 3. Gosport Borough Council were invited to prepare a draft scheme of representation for our consideration* In doing eo, they were asked to observe the rules laid down in Schedule 11 to the Looal Government Aot 1972 and the guidelines which we set out in our Report Ho* 6 about the proposed site of the Council and the proposed number of councillors for each ward* They were asked also to take into account any views expressed to them following their consultation with local interest*.
    [Show full text]
  • Partnership for South Hampshire – Statement of Common Ground 1
    Partnership for South Hampshire – Statement of Common Ground 1. Introduction 2. Background 3. Content a. a short written description and map showing the location and administrative areas covered by the statement, and a brief justification for these area(s); b. the key strategic matters being addressed by the statement, for example meeting the housing need for the area, air quality etc.; c. the plan-making authorities responsible for joint working detailed in the statement, and list of any additional signatories (including cross-referencing the matters to which each is a signatory); d. governance arrangements for the cooperation process, including how the statement will be maintained and kept up to date; e. if applicable, the housing requirements in any adopted and (if known) emerging strategic policies relevant to housing within the area covered by the statement; f. distribution of needs in the area as agreed through the plan-making process, or the process for agreeing the distribution of need (including unmet need) across the area; g. a record of where agreements have (or have not) been reached on key strategic matters, including the process for reaching agreements on these; and h. any additional strategic matters to be addressed by the statement which have not already been addressed, including a brief description how the statement relates to any other statement of common ground covering all or part of the same area. 4. Signatories 1. Introduction 1.1. The Partnership for South Hampshire (PfSH) – formerly the Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (PUSH) – was originally formed in 2003. It is a partnership of district and unitary authorities, together with a county council and national park authority, working together to support the sustainable economic growth of the South Hampshire sub-region.
    [Show full text]
  • Building Communities in Hampshire Masterplanning for Delivery Peter Frankum – Savills Urban Design Studio
    Building communities in Hampshire Masterplanning for delivery Peter Frankum – Savills Urban Design Studio savills.com Content The Hampshire context . The pressure for growth . Emerging solutions . Historic growth of settlements . Local identity Implementation . Examples Lessons learnt Hampshire context Basingstoke Andover Winchester Southampton Eastleigh Fareham Havant Gosport Portsmouth urban centres The challenge – the pressure for growth Understanding the place and delivering quality The challenge • Pressure for growth • Getting the right design response • Hampshire specific and local identity • Responding to local issues • Understanding constraints • Obtaining local buy in/ ownership • Ensuring quality is a priority • Viable and sustainable change • Quality places – the lasting legacy Typical issues • Setting out clear evidence based advice • Quality of skills/ resources in placemaking • Available, clear and constructive guidance • Ensuring development should respond to site and context • Avoid one solution fits all policies and designs • Poorly designed places (unwelcoming) • Poor access to transport, facilities, jobs • Unviable development areas • Avoiding short-term development and places • Is quality still a priority over other pressures for development? ‘…there is no there there….’ Gertrude Stein The pressure for growth in Hampshire Policy and housing delivery Local Plans •38% of LPAs in Hampshire have a post NPPF plan •Current adopted plans have a total housing requirement of 6,068 •Average housing delivery across Hampshire over
    [Show full text]
  • Peat Database Results Hampshire
    Baker's Rithe, Hampshire Record ID 29 Authors Year Allen, M. and Gardiner, J. 2000 Location description Deposit location SU 6926 1041 Deposit description Deposit stratigraphy Preserved timbers (oak and yew) on peat ledge. One oak stump in situ. Peat layer 0.15-0.26 m deep [thick?]. Associated artefacts Early work Sample method Depth of deposit 14C ages available -1 m OD Yes Notes 14C details ID 12 Laboratory code R-24993/2 Sample location Depth of sample Dated sample description [-1 m OD] Oak stump Age (uncal) Age (cal) Delta 13C 3735 ± 60 BP 2310-1950 cal. BC Notes Stump BB Bibliographic reference Allen, M. and Gardiner, J. 2000 'Our changing coast; a survey of the intertidal archaeology of Langstone Harbour, Hampshire', Hampshire CBA Research Report 12.4 Coastal peat resource database (Hazell, 2008) Page 1 of 86 Bury Farm (Bury Marshes), Hampshire Record ID 641 Authors Year Long, A., Scaife, R. and Edwards, R. 2000 Location description Deposit location SU 3820 1140 Deposit description Deposit stratigraphy Associated artefacts Early work Sample method Depth of deposit 14C ages available Yes Notes 14C details ID 491 Laboratory code Beta-93195 Sample location Depth of sample Dated sample description SU 3820 1140 -0.16 to -0.11 m OD Transgressive contact. Age (uncal) Age (cal) Delta 13C 3080 ± 60 BP 3394-3083 cal. BP Notes Dark brown humified peat with some turfa. Bibliographic reference Long, A., Scaife, R. and Edwards, R. 2000 'Stratigraphic architecture, relative sea-level, and models of estuary development in southern England: new data from Southampton Water' in ' and estuarine environments: sedimentology, geomorphology and geoarchaeology', (ed.s) Pye, K.
    [Show full text]
  • Gazetteer.Doc Revised from 10/03/02
    Save No. 91 Printed 10/03/02 10:33 AM Gazetteer.doc Revised From 10/03/02 Gazetteer compiled by E J Wiseman Abbots Ann SU 3243 Bighton Lane Watercress Beds SU 5933 Abbotstone Down SU 5836 Bishop's Dyke SU 3405 Acres Down SU 2709 Bishopstoke SU 4619 Alice Holt Forest SU 8042 Bishops Sutton Watercress Beds SU 6031 Allbrook SU 4521 Bisterne SU 1400 Allington Lane Gravel Pit SU 4717 Bitterne (Southampton) SU 4413 Alresford Watercress Beds SU 5833 Bitterne Park (Southampton) SU 4414 Alresford Pond SU 5933 Black Bush SU 2515 Amberwood Inclosure SU 2013 Blackbushe Airfield SU 8059 Amery Farm Estate (Alton) SU 7240 Black Dam (Basingstoke) SU 6552 Ampfield SU 4023 Black Gutter Bottom SU 2016 Andover Airfield SU 3245 Blackmoor SU 7733 Anton valley SU 3740 Blackmoor Golf Course SU 7734 Arlebury Lake SU 5732 Black Point (Hayling Island) SZ 7599 Ashlett Creek SU 4603 Blashford Lakes SU 1507 Ashlett Mill Pond SU 4603 Blendworth SU 7113 Ashley Farm (Stockbridge) SU 3730 Bordon SU 8035 Ashley Manor (Stockbridge) SU 3830 Bossington SU 3331 Ashley Walk SU 2014 Botley Wood SU 5410 Ashley Warren SU 4956 Bourley Reservoir SU 8250 Ashmansworth SU 4157 Boveridge SU 0714 Ashurst SU 3310 Braishfield SU 3725 Ash Vale Gravel Pit SU 8853 Brambridge SU 4622 Avington SU 5332 Bramley Camp SU 6559 Avon Castle SU 1303 Bramshaw Wood SU 2516 Avon Causeway SZ 1497 Bramshill (Warren Heath) SU 7759 Avon Tyrrell SZ 1499 Bramshill Common SU 7562 Backley Plain SU 2106 Bramshill Police College Lake SU 7560 Baddesley Common SU 3921 Bramshill Rubbish Tip SU 7561 Badnam Creek (River
    [Show full text]
  • South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment
    K2 D4a H6 J1 E4 L3 D3a C1 A5 N1 H6 O1 D3a O2 E4 D1b K1 D2a L2 L2 M1 N1 L2 E3 N1 D1a D2b D2b H5 M1 M1 D2b L2 J2 L2 D2b K1 H4 D2b B2 L1 D2a P1 F4 I3 D2a I3 P1 B3 E1 H3 B1 E2 A3 G4 G4 Q1 Q1 Landscape Character Areas Q1 Q1 D1a South Winchester Downland Mosaic (Enclosed) B4 D1b South Winchester Downland Mosaic (Open) D2a Hambledon and Clanfield Downland Mosaic (Enclosed) D2b Hambledon and Clanfield Downland Mosaic (Open) D3a Bramdean and Cheriton Downland Mosaic (Enclosed) D4a Newton Valence Downland Mosaic (Enclosed) D: Downland Mosaic K2 H6 J1 E4 D4a L3 D3a C1 A5 N1 H6 O1 D3a O2 E4 D1b K1 D2a L2 L2 M1 N1 L2 E3 N1 D1a D2b D2b H5 M1 M1 D2b L2 J2 L2 D2b K1 H4 D2b B2 L1 D2a P1 F4 I3 D2a I3 P1 B3 E1 H3 E2 B1 A3 G4 G4 Q1 Q1 Q1 Q1 Historic Landscape Character B4 Fieldscapes Woodland Unenclosed Valley Floor Designed Landscapes 0101-Fieldscapes Assarts 0201-Post 1800 Woodland 04-Unenclosed 06-Valley Floor 09-Designed Landscapes 0102-Early Enclosures 0202- Pre1800 Woodland Settlement Industry Military 0103- Recent Enclosures Horticulture 0501- Pre 1800 Settlement 08-Industry 10-Military 0104-Modern Fields 03-Horticulture 0502- Post 1800 Expansion Recreation Settlement 13-Recreation D: Downland Mosaic LANDSCAPE TYPE D: DOWNLAND MOSAIC D.1 The Downland Mosaic landscape type comprises an area of chalk downland at the western end of the South Downs, forming part of a broad area of chalk downland which extends westwards beyond Winchester to the Dorset Downs and Salisbury Plain, and north to Basingstoke.
    [Show full text]
  • Landowner Deposits Register
    Register of Landowner Deposits under Highways Act 1980 and Commons Act 2006 The first part of this register contains entries for all CA16 combined deposits received since 1st October 2013, and these all have scanned copies of the deposits attached. The second part of the register lists entries for deposits made before 1st October 2013, all made under section 31(6) of the Highways Act 1980. There are a large number of these, and the only details given here currently are the name of the land, the parish and the date of the deposit. We will be adding fuller details and scanned documents to these entries over time. List of deposits made - last update 12 January 2017 CA16 Combined Deposits Deposit Reference: 44 - Land at Froyle (The Mrs Bootle-Wilbrahams Will Trust) Link to Documents: http://documents.hants.gov.uk/countryside/Deposit44-Bootle-WilbrahamsTrustLand-Froyle-Scan.pdf Details of Depositor Details of Land Crispin Mahony of Savills on behalf of The Parish: Froyle Mrs Bootle-WilbrahamWill Trust, c/o Savills (UK) Froyle Jewry Chambers,44 Jewry Street, Winchester Alton Hampshire Hampshire SO23 8RW GU34 4DD Date of Statement: 14/11/2016 Grid Reference: 733.416 Deposit Reference: 98 - Tower Hill, Dummer Link to Documents: http://documents.hants.gov.uk/rightsofway/Deposit98-LandatTowerHill-Dummer-Scan.pdf Details of Depositor Details of Land Jamie Adams & Madeline Hutton Parish: Dummer 65 Elm Bank Gardens, Up Street Barnes, Dummer London Basingstoke SW13 0NX RG25 2AL Date of Statement: 27/08/2014 Grid Reference: 583. 458 Deposit Reference:
    [Show full text]
  • Warblington Farm Study
    Havant Borough Council Review of the Warblington Farm Mitigation Option for Nutrient Neutral Development in the Havant Borough ___________________________________________________ Report for Havant Borough Council ED 13715100 | Issue Number 3 | Date 15/06/2020 Ricardo Energy & Environment Havant Borough Council | i Customer: Contact: Havant Borough Council Claire Pitcher Ricardo Energy & Environment Customer reference: 30 Eastbourne Terrace, Paddington, London, W2 6LA, United Kingdom N/A Confidentiality, copyright & reproduction: t: +44 (0) 1235 75 3458 e: [email protected] This report is the Copyright of Havant Borough Council. It has been prepared by Ricardo Energy & Environment, a trading name of Ricardo-AEA Ricardo is certificated to ISO9001, ISO14001 Ltd, under contract to Havant Borough Council. and OHSAS18001 The contents of this report may not be reproduced in whole or in part, nor passed to any Authors: organisation or person without the specific prior Gabriel Streich-Connor, Matthew Edwards, written permission of Havant Borough Council. Claire Pitcher Ricardo Energy & Environment accepts no liability whatsoever to any third party for any loss Approved By: or damage arising from any interpretation or use of the information contained in this report, or Jenny Mant reliance on any views expressed therein. Date: 15 June 2020 Ricardo Energy & Environment reference: Ref: ED13715100- Issue Number 3 Ricardo Confidential Ref: Ricardo/ED13715100/Issue Number 3 Ricardo Energy & Environment Havant Borough Council | ii Table of contents
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Field Trips Programme – Hampshire
    2016 Field Trips Programme – Hampshire The Branch is grateful to the site owners/managers of the nature reserves visited for maintaining public access and safeguarding these very special places of wildlife interest. The grid reference given is for the parking location/meeting point. Sunday 1 MayMay,, mmmeetmeet at 10:30am Catherington Down (SU690143(SU690143),), site: Hampshire County Council Leader: Ashley Whitlock, Tel: 02392 731266; Mobile: 07752 182340 Directions: meet in Lovedean Lane. LLeaveeave the A3(M) at Junction 2, taking the B2149 towards HorndeanHorndean,,,, pass Morrison’s and keep ahead into Catherington LLane.ane. Turn left at Roads Hill and then right into Lovedean LaneLane;; parkpark in Lovedean LLane.ane. A chance to see a lesser known site in the MeoMeonn Valley with good floraflora and faunafauna.... Aiming to see: Brimstone, Orange Tip and other early butterflies and moths Saturday 7 MayMay,, mmmeetmeet at 10:30am Little Butser Hill (SU711200) Leader: Ashley Whitlock, Tel: 02392 731266; Mobile: 07752 182340 Directions: Butser Hill is well signposted from the A3(M) at Clanfield. Meet at Butser Hill car park (Pay & Display)Display).. A chance to visvisitit another area of Butser with a substantisubstantialal Duke of Burgundy colony, to see Skylarks and BuzBuzzards,zards, and take in spectacular views towards Ashford Hill and the MeMeonon Valley. Very steepsteep in places. BBringring Lunch as we will be visiting another part of Butser in the afternoon. Aiming to see: Duke of Burgundy, Dingy and Grizzled Skipper, Small Heath, early moths Saturday 14 MayMay,, mmmeetmeet at 10:30am Stockbridge Down (SU375346), site: National Trust Leader: Ashley Whitlock, Tel: 02392 731266; Mobile: 07752 182340 Directions: Stockbridge Down is 1 mile east of StockbridgeStockbridge and 6 miles west of Winchester on the B3049B3049.
    [Show full text]
  • Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation Sincs Hampshire.Pdf
    Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) within Hampshire © Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre No part of this documentHBIC may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recoding or otherwise without the prior permission of the Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre Central Grid SINC Ref District SINC Name Ref. SINC Criteria Area (ha) BD0001 Basingstoke & Deane Straits Copse, St. Mary Bourne SU38905040 1A 2.14 BD0002 Basingstoke & Deane Lee's Wood SU39005080 1A 1.99 BD0003 Basingstoke & Deane Great Wallop Hill Copse SU39005200 1A/1B 21.07 BD0004 Basingstoke & Deane Hackwood Copse SU39504950 1A 11.74 BD0005 Basingstoke & Deane Stokehill Farm Down SU39605130 2A 4.02 BD0006 Basingstoke & Deane Juniper Rough SU39605289 2D 1.16 BD0007 Basingstoke & Deane Leafy Grove Copse SU39685080 1A 1.83 BD0008 Basingstoke & Deane Trinley Wood SU39804900 1A 6.58 BD0009 Basingstoke & Deane East Woodhay Down SU39806040 2A 29.57 BD0010 Basingstoke & Deane Ten Acre Brow (East) SU39965580 1A 0.55 BD0011 Basingstoke & Deane Berries Copse SU40106240 1A 2.93 BD0012 Basingstoke & Deane Sidley Wood North SU40305590 1A 3.63 BD0013 Basingstoke & Deane The Oaks Grassland SU40405920 2A 1.12 BD0014 Basingstoke & Deane Sidley Wood South SU40505520 1B 1.87 BD0015 Basingstoke & Deane West Of Codley Copse SU40505680 2D/6A 0.68 BD0016 Basingstoke & Deane Hitchen Copse SU40505850 1A 13.91 BD0017 Basingstoke & Deane Pilot Hill: Field To The South-East SU40505900 2A/6A 4.62
    [Show full text]
  • HBIC Annual Monitoring Report 2018
    Monitoring Change in Priority Habitats, Priority Species and Designated Areas For Local Development Framework Annual Monitoring Reports 2018/19 (including breakdown by district) Basingstoke and Deane Eastleigh Fareham Gosport Havant Portsmouth Winchester Produced by Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre December 2019 Sharing information about Hampshire's wildlife The Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre Partnership includes local authorities, government agencies, wildlife charities and biological recording groups. Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre 2 Contents 1 Biodiversity Monitoring in Hampshire ................................................................................... 4 2 Priority habitats ....................................................................................................................... 7 3 Nature Conservation Designations ....................................................................................... 12 4 Priority habitats within Designated Sites .............................................................................. 13 5 Condition of Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs)....................................................... 14 7. SINCs in Positive Management (SD 160) - Not reported on for 2018-19 .......................... 19 8 Changes in Notable Species Status over the period 2009 - 2019 ....................................... 20 09 Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council .......................................................................... 28 10 Eastleigh Borough
    [Show full text]
  • Other Material
    188 HAMPSHIRE FIELD CLUB BOTANICAL EXCURSION TO NOAR HILL N Wednesday, July 4th, a very successful excursion to Noar Hill in search of Orchids took place. This spot is very O little known ; it lies between Newton Valence and Empshott at an elevation of 696 feet, with beautiful views of all the country round. Old chalk diggings, overgrown with turf, form the happy hunting-ground for a large number of wild flowers.' A short local history thus speaks of it : " There was a hamlet or manor of Cures (a clerical error for Oures) lying within the Hundred of Selborne held by the wealthy Benedictine Abbey of Hyde at Winchester. In 1275, and again in 1334, it figures in the Hundred Rolls as the Manor of Ores held of the King ' in chief' by the Abbey ' in perpetual alms ' ; the little Manor remained in the possession of the Abbey till the Dissolution." Gilbert White writes of " Nore Hill, a noble chalk promontory, remarkable for sending forth two streams into two different seas. The one to the south becomes a branch of the Arun, and so falling into the British Channel ; the other to the north, the Selborne stream, makes one branch of the Wey and passes .... thus at the Nore into the German Ocean." According to the local history, " in old days the Lord of the Manor alone might dig chalk from the waste, and seems to have taken full advantage of his privilege if we may judge from the pock-marks on Noar Hill. Anyone else who had a fancy to do the same was liable to a fine of £20 per load." About 50 botanically inclined members turned up, the weather was all that could be desired, orchids were there in plenty, in fact, in places we walked over masses of the Musk Orchis.
    [Show full text]