DOCSLIB.ORG

Civil Engineers Structural Engineers Highways & Drainage Engineers Party Wall Surveyors Building Surveyors Expert Witnes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Civil Engineers Structural Engineers Highways & Drainage Engineers Party Wall Surveyors Building Surveyors Expert Witnes Civil Engineers Structural Engineers Highways & Drainage Engineers Party Wall Surveyors Building Surveyors Expert Witness & Litigation Support PLANNING STATEMENT on: PROPOSED AIRCRAFT RECYLING FACILITY, NORWICH AIRPORT, NORWICH. for: KLM UK ENGINEERING LIMITED LIBERATOR ROAD, NORWICH AIRPORT, NORWICH, NORFOLK, NR6 6ER Managing Director: Peter French Bsc(Hons) CEng MICE Consultant: Anthony Canham CEng FICE FCIArb FAE Directors: Chris Dewick Julie Hannant MAAT Rob Panter CEng MIStructE Colin Taylor IEng AMIStructE Mark Bullen BEng (Hons) Vat No. 595 2587 90 Registered in England and Wales Company registration no. 2710417 Registered Office: Canham Consulting Limited, The Old School, School Lane, Thorpe St. Andrew, Norwich NR7 0EP Proposed Aircraft Recycling Facility, Norwich Airport, Norwich Planning Statement 202257 Contents Amendment Record This report has been issued and amended as follows: Rev Description Prepared Checked Approved Date P1 Draft M Hughes B Wilkins B Wilkins 19/06/13 P2 Revised Text M Hughes B Wilkins B Wilkins 20/06/13 P3 Final Submitted M Hughes B Wilkins B Wilkins 21/06/13 P4 Revised Text M Hughes B Wilkins B Wilkins 12/07/13 P5 Final M Hughes B Wilkins B Wilkins 17/07/13 P6 Updated Final Report M Hughes B Wilkins B Wilkins 23/07/13 Canham Consulting Ltd The Old School School Lane Thorpe St. Andrew Norwich NR7 0EP T 01603 430650 F 01603 430672 [email protected] www.canhamconsulting.co.uk Planning Statement – Aircraft Recycling Facility, Norwich Airport, Norwich July 2013 Issue P6 202257 CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 2 1.1 SITE LOCATION .................................................................................................... 4 1.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING SITE .................................................................. 5 2 PROPOSED OPERATIONS ............................................................................................. 6 2.1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DETAILS .................................................................. 7 2.2 CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATION ....................................................................... 10 2.3 GEOGRAPHY, GEOLOGY AND HYDRO-GEOLOGY ............................................. 10 2.4 GROUND CONTAMINATION ................................................................................ 11 2.5 TRAFFIC AND ACCESS CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................ 11 2.6 DRAINAGE AND POLLUTION PREVENTION ........................................................ 12 3 PLANNING POLICY ...................................................................................................... 14 3.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 14 3.2 NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY ........................................................................... 14 3.2.1 NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK (NPPF) ....................................... 14 3.2.2 PLANNING POLICY STATEMENT 10 – WASTE PLANNING POLICY STATEMENT 16 3.2.3 WASTE STRATEGY 2007 ................................................................................... 17 3.3 REGIONAL PLANNING POLICY ........................................................................... 20 3.3.1 CORE STRATEGY AND MINERALS AND WASTE DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT ................................ 20 3.4 LOCAL PLANNING POLICY ................................................................................. 24 3.4.1 JOINT CORE STRATEGY ................................................................................... 24 3.4.2 NORWICH CITY COUNCIL REPLACEMENT LOCAL PLAN (2004) ....................... 27 3.4.3 BROADLAND DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN (REPLACEMENT, 2006) .......................... 29 3.5 SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 30 4 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ..................................................................................... 31 Appendices Appendix A - EIA Screening Opinion www.canhamconsulting.co.uk 1 Planning Statement – Aircraft Recycling Facility, Norwich Airport, Norwich July 2013 Issue P6 202257 1 INTRODUCTION KLM UK Engineering Limited are proposing to provide a facility at Norwich Airport for the storage, maintenance and dismantling of end of life aircraft. Figure 1 shows an aerial photograph of the site. Figure 1: Aerial photograph of the airport site: Bing maps The development proposals are for the recycling of aircraft, including the recovery of components for re-use and recycling, and the destruction of the airframe and metal recovery for recycling. KLM UK Engineering Limited (KLMUKE) have the full support of AF-KLM, one of the world's largest airlines, to develop this facility as soon as possible, and are pleased that this will bring some of KLM’s work to Norwich. As a subsidiary of KLM Royal Dutch Airlines N.V. and a member of the Air France Industries / KLM Engineering & Maintenance Network, KLMUKE’s primary business at Norwich International Airport (NIA) is the repair and maintenance of aircraft in the 3 hangars which KLMUKE currently occupies. In addition KLMUKE runs: A training college located in premises on Hurricane Way. Extensive workshop facilities in the various airport hangars; and Line maintenance at a wide variety of UK airports. An increasingly important part of the KLMUKE business is attracting aircraft to Norwich where the future of the aircraft is uncertain. KLMUKE’s primary goal is to capture extensive refurbishment work which frequently comprises many thousands of hours. However, on occasion, the cost of returning an aircraft to service is uneconomical when balanced against the value of the component parts of the aircraft. This is where KLMUKE’s market position becomes valuable because there are few providers in the market who can refurbish aircraft in fast turnaround times but alternatively can dismantle www.canhamconsulting.co.uk 2 Planning Statement – Aircraft Recycling Facility, Norwich Airport, Norwich July 2013 Issue P6 202257 an aircraft if necessary. So the aircraft owner is not compelled to make an immediate decision when for example a lease to an operator comes to end. However, KLMUKE presently can no longer legitimately dismantle aircraft without having the EA ELV Permit. In turn the EA ELV Permit requires amongst other items: A suitable area to dismantle aircraft Planning Permission (either in the form of Permitted Development or full Planning Permission). In this case we are seeking full Planning Permission. Therefore in order for KLMUKE to maintain and develop this increasingly important strand of business, consent to construct the aircraft dismantling area is vital. An application for an EA Permit is being undertaken and covers the area shown on the General Arrangement Plan (202257/SK100), as well as an existing section of Hangar 6. The planning application is focused on the area outlined in red as shown in Figure 2 below. Hangar 6 will continue to be used for the storage for new and reconditioned aircraft components, as at present. It is worth clarifying that engineering components from aircraft of all ages are taken into stores for re-use and reconditioning on planned schedules based on run time, mileage or air time. Once an aircraft is classified as End of Life Vehicles (ELV) and becomes waste the aircraft will be transported to the proposed site area where it will be dismantled. On dismantling the aircraft, the majority of its components are either recycled, reconditioned or reinstated back into the supply chain for re-use. The reconditioned and reinstated components for re-use will then be stored in Hangar 6 until such time that they are re-used or sold for re-use to a different airline. Whilst Hangar 6 is part of the EA ELV application no change of use is intended, therefore it is not within the planning application area. A drainage management plan and Environmental Risk Assessment will be submitted as part of the Application for the EA permit. Regional and local planning policies support growth of businesses and increased employment at Norwich Airport. Consideration has been given to the need for an Environmental Impact Assessment. A request for a screening opinion has been submitted to Norfolk County Council (NCC) which has been determined: an EIA is not required. Norwich International Airport’s request for a screening opinion dated 14th May 2013 and NCC’s letter of 12th June 2013 are attached at Appendix A. www.canhamconsulting.co.uk 3 Planning Statement – Aircraft Recycling Facility, Norwich Airport, Norwich July 2013 Issue P6 202257 Figure 2: Site Area 1.1 Site Location The proposed development site is located towards the south east corner of Norwich Airport, as shown on the site location plan in Figure 3 below. www.canhamconsulting.co.uk 4 Planning Statement – Aircraft Recycling Facility, Norwich Airport, Norwich July 2013 Issue P6 202257 Figure 3: Site Location Plan 1.2 Description of the Existing Site The site is grassed and forms part of the outfield of Norwich International Airport. It is occupied by the “obstacle clearance zone” associated with the main runway of Norwich Airport, but is beyond the southern edge of the 300m wide “runway strip”, as stipulated by the Civil Aviation Authority. The Norwich Airport Industrial Estate is located to the south of the site. The site is sensibly level at a reduced level above Ordnance datum
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hannah Booth Report Greater Norwich Water Cycle Study 2020-01-23
    Greater Norwich Water Cycle Study Greater Norwich Authorities Draft for consultation Project number: 60593120 February 2020 Greater Norwich Water Cycle Study Draft for consultation Greater Norwich Authorities AECOM Quality information Prepared by Checked by Verified by Approved by Hannah Booth Amy Ruocco Carl Pelling Amy Ruocco Graduate Water Senior Water Consultant Regional Director Senior Water Consultant Consultant Laura Soothill Graduate Engineer Christina Bakopoulou Flood Risk Engineer Revision History Revision Revision date Details Authorized Name Position 01 27/11/2019 Draft for comment CP Carl Pelling Regional Director 02 28/01/2020 Draft for CP Carl Pelling Regional Director consultation 03 05/02/2020 Draft for CP Carl Pelling Regional Director consultation Position statement February 2020 This report represents a working draft of the GNLP Outline Water Cycle Study. Consultation is ongoing with Anglian Water Services, the Environment Agency and Natural England who have not yet signed off the study conclusions and it is therefore subject to change. Further updates are also required to align with some recent changes to housing numbers and extension of the plan period to 2038 agreed in December 2019. These will be incorporated into the final report. Prepared for: Broadland District Council, Norwich City Council and South Norfolk District Council Prepared by: AECOM Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited Midpoint, Alencon Link Basingstoke Hampshire RG21 7PP United Kingdom T: +44(0)1256 310200 aecom.com © 2020 AECOM Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited. All Rights Reserved. This document has been prepared by AECOM Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited (“AECOM”) for sole use of our client (the “Client”) in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees and the terms of reference agreed between AECOM and the Client.
    [Show full text]
  • Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Document No.: PB8164-RHD-ZZ-XX-RP-Z-0010
    Title: Dudgeon and Sheringham Shoal Offshore Wind Farm Extensions Preliminary Environmental Information Report Chapter 28 Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Document no.: PB8164-RHD-ZZ-XX-RP-Z-0010 Date: Classification 29th April 2021 Final Prepared by: LDA Approved by: Date: Jo Rodriguez, Equinor 29th April 2021 Page 2 of 151 Classification: Open Status: Final www.equinor.com Doc. No. PB8164-RHD-ZZ-XX-RP-Z--0010 Rev. no. 4 Table of Contents 28 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ....................................... 12 28.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 12 28.2 Consultation. ....................................................................................................... 12 28.3 Scope .................................................................................................................. 26 28.4 Impact Assessment Methodology ....................................................................... 39 28.5 Existing Environment .......................................................................................... 62 28.6 Potential Impacts ................................................................................................. 85 28.7 Cumulative Impacts ........................................................................................... 116 28.8 Transboundary Impacts .................................................................................... 129 28.9 Inter-relationships .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • City of N O Rwich H Igh S Chool / Ecology S Urvey / Report for N PS
    City of Norwich High School / Ecology Survey / Report for NPS South East Ltd City of Norwich High School City of Norwich High School, Norfolk. Ecology Survey Survey / Ecology / Report for NPS South East Ltd Report for NPS South East Ltd South East Report for NPS Author JI Thacker PhD Job No. 111063 Reviewed by Approved by Date Initial GW Hopkins S Phillips 120112 The Ecology Consultancy 79 Thorpe Road, Norwich, NR1 1UA T. 01603 628408 E. [email protected] W. www.ecologyconsultancy.co.uk CONTENTS Executive Summary .......................................................................................... 4 1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 5 2 Methodology .................................................................................................. 6 3 Results ........................................................................................................... 9 4 Protected Species Assessment ................................................................... 12 5 Discussion .................................................................................................... 13 References ...................................................................................................... 14 Appendix 1: Figures ........................................................................................ 15 Appendix 2: Photographs ............................................................................... 17 Appendix 3: Legislation & Planning
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity Action Plan
    BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN April 2018 BROADS IDB – BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN Front cover images (L-R) Marsh Harrier ©Artur Rydzewski; Norfolk Hawker © Milo Bostock; Water Soldier; Water Vole; Berney Marshes ©Mike Page; BIDB Digger BROADS IDB – BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN FOREWORD This Biodiversity Action Plan (Second Edition) has been prepared by the Broads Internal Drainage Board in accordance with the commitment in the Implementation Plan of the DEFRA Internal Drainage Board Review for IDB’s, to produce their own Biodiversity Action Plans by April 2010. As such, the original version was published in January 2010. This revised version aims to continue to align the Broads IDB with biodiversity policy and more specifically, the Biodiversity document for England, “Biodiversity 2020: A strategy for Englands’ Wildlife and Ecosystem Services” and build on the Government’s 25 Year Environmental Plan; A Green Future. In doing so, the document strives to demonstrate the Board’s commitment to fulfilling its duty as a public body under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 to conserve biodiversity. Many of the Board’s activities have benefits and opportunities for biodiversity, not least its water level management and watercourse maintenance work. It is hoped that this Biodiversity Action Plan will help the Board to maximise the biodiversity benefits from its activities and demonstrate its contribution to the targets as part of the Biodiversity 2020 strategy and achieve wider environmental improvement within its catchments. The Board has adopted the Biodiversity Action Plan as one of its policies and subject to available resources is committed to its implementation. It will review the plan periodically and update it as appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Norwich Fringe Projects Prospectus
    25 years of championing the local environment and our community | the leading promoter of conservation & natural heritage activities in Norwich & nearby localities | working for the health & wellbeing of individuals and places | now launching a new outreach and development programme to recruit more supporters: Natural Heritage Champions www.norwichfringeproject.co.uk Our Story : Our Highlights & Plans The Norwich Fringe Project (NFP) is a local authority funded countryside management partnership that makes natural conservation happen. We are led by a group of passionate environmental defenders, who have been promoting engagement with 25 years of experience in managing local natural the natural heritage and local communities since 1990. heritage in Norwich and a 4 mile radius around the city 38 nature reserves & wildlife sites, ancient meadows, heaths, We aim at protecting the environment and we know that this can be achieved only through woods & marshes such as the 65 acre Marston Marsh at Eaton people’s participation and enthusiasm. What we desire is to make natural heritage sites Earlham Marshes site work funded by High Level accessible to everyone. Stewardship (HLS) Grant volunteer work equal to £130,000 worth of ‘labour’ every year “The areas where Norwich Fringe has been involved are valuable to many people who might support from Norfolk Wildlife Trust, Natural not realise how the area is managed or indeed even that it needs managing at all... Without the England, The Land Trust, Environment Agency Fringe they are in danger of being ignored” an overall performance rated at 10 out of 10 by Survey Respondent 2014 56% of recent survey respondents and an average score of 9.2 out of 10 We believe in the importance of wildlife and biodiversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Transactions of the Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists' Society
    20 NOV 2Q02 I FXCHA^O'-"> 1 Norfolk Bird Report - 2001 Editor: Giles Dunmore Editorial 95 Review of the Year 98 Wetland Bird Surveys for Breydon and The Wash 1 05 Norfolk Bird Atlas 1 07 Systematic List 1 09 Introductions, Escapes, Ferals and Hybrids 248 Earliest and Latest Dates of Summer Migrants 253 Latest and Earliest Dates of Winter Migrants 254 Non-accepted and non-submitted records 255 Contributors 256 Ringing Report 258 Hunstanton Cliffs: a Forgotten Migration Hotspot 268 1 Yellow-legged Gulls in Norfolk: 1 96 -200 1 273 Marmora’s Warbler on Scolt Head - a first for Norfolk 28 Pallas’s Grasshopper Warbler at Blakeney Point - the second for Norfolk 283 Blyth’s Pipit at Happisburgh in September 1 999 - the second for Norfolk 285 Norfolk Mammal Report - 2001 Editor: Ian Keymer Editorial 287 Bats at Paston Great Barn 288 Memories of an ex-editor 298 Harvest Mice: more common than suspected? 299 Are we under-recording the Norfolk mink population? 301 National Key Sites for Water Voles in Norfolk 304 A Guide to identification of Shrews and Rodents 309 Published by NORFOLK AND NORWICH NATURALISTS’ SOCIETY Castle Museum, Norwich, NRl 3JU (Transactions Volume 35 part 2 October 2002) Please note that the page numbering in this report follows on from part 1 of the Transactions pub- lished in July 2002 ISSN 0375 7226 www.nnns.org.uk Keepsake back numbers are available from David & Iris Pauli, 8 Lindford Drive, Eaton, Norwich NR4 6LT Front cover photograph: Tree Sparrow (Richard Brooks) Back cover photograph: Grey Seal (Graeme Cresswell) NORFOLK BIRD REPORT - 2001 Editorial x On behalf of the Society 1 am pleased to present the annual report on the Birds of Norfolk.
    [Show full text]
  • Greater Norwich Infrastructure Investment Plan 2018-19 to 9 Subject 2022-23
    Report to Cabinet Item 07 February 2018 Report of Director of regeneration and development Greater Norwich Infrastructure Investment Plan 2018-19 to 9 Subject 2022-23 Purpose To consider the Greater Norwich Infrastructure Investment Plan 2018-19 to 2022- 23. Recommendations 1. To approve the projects in Norwich to be included in the Greater Norwich Infrastructure Investment Plan 2018-19 to 2022-23 with the first year forming the Annual Growth Programme for 2018-19. 2. To recommend the draft of the Greater Norwich Infrastructure Investment Plan 2018-19 to 2022-23 to the Greater Norwich Growth Board (GNGB) for approval. Corporate and service priorities The report helps to meet the corporate priority a prosperous and vibrant city. Financial implications The total pooled CIL income for greater Norwich (from Broadland, South Norfolk and the city council) is currently projected to be as follows: INCOME To date 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £ Balance 3,396,917 brought forward Actual CIL 3,214,589 receipts Forecast 4,719,530 7,271,195 9,586,646 10,956,189 10,179,162 8,853,709 CIL receipts Cumulative 3,396,917 6,611,506 11,331,035 18,602,230 28,188,876 39,145,265 49,324,427 58,178,136 income The report seeks £1,005,000 from pooled CIL for projects commencing in 2018-19 in Norwich. £55,000 is included in the council’s 5 year capital programme commencing in 2018-19 for the projects to be taken forward by the city council.
    [Show full text]
  • Place Shaping Panel
    Place Shaping Panel Agenda Date Monday 18 January 2021 Members of the Place Shaping Panel Time Cllr P E Bulman Cllr S Lawn (Chairman) (Vice Chairman) 6pm Cllr N J Brennan Cllr G K Nurden Cllr S M Clancy Cllr L A Starling Cllr N J Harpley Cllr D M Thomas Place Cllr L H Hempsall Cllr J M Ward To be hosted remotely at: Thorpe Lodge Conservative Liberal Democrat Substitutes Substitutes 1 Yarmouth Road Cllr A D Crotch Cllr J A Neesam Cllr J F Fisher Cllr S Riley Thorpe St Andrew Cllr R R Foulger Norwich Cllr R M Grattan Cllr D King Cllr G F Peck Labour Substitute Cllr C E Ryman-Tubb Cllr B Cook Contact James Overy tel (01603) 430540 Broadland District Council Thorpe Lodge 1 Yarmouth Road Thorpe St Andrew Norwich NR7 0DU E-mail: [email protected] If any Member wishes to clarify details relating to any matter on the agenda they are requested @BDCDemServices to contact the relevant Director / Assistant Director. Public Attendance This meeting will be live streamed for public viewing via the following link: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZciRgwo84-iPyRImsTCIng. If a member of the public would like to attend to ask a question, or make a statement on an agenda item, please email your request to [email protected] no later than 5.00pm on 13 January 2021. 1 A G E N D A Page No 1 To receive declarations of interest under Procedural Rule no 8 3 2 Apologies for absence 3 Minutes of meeting held on 4 January 2021 5 4 Matters arising therefrom (if any) 5 Greater Norwich Growth Board: Joint Five-Year Investment Plan 9 Trevor Holden Managing Director 2 Agenda Item: 1 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST AT MEETINGS When declaring an interest at a meeting Members are asked to indicate whether their interest in the matter is pecuniary, or if the matter relates to, or affects a pecuniary interest they have, or if it is another type of interest.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX M Policy X: Peat Sites of Peat Will Be Protected, Enhanced
    APPENDIX M Policy x: Peat Sites of peat will be protected, enhanced and preserved. Where it is considered necessary in cases where development coincides with the location of peat an evaluation will be required in relation to palaeoenvironments, archaeology and potential carbon content. There will be a presumption in favour of preservation in-situ for peat and development proposals that will result in unavoidable harm to, or loss of, peat will only be permitted if: i) there is no less harmful viable option; ii) the amount of harm has been reduced to the minimum possible; iii) satisfactory provision is made for the evaluation, recording and interpretation of the peat before commencement of development; iv) the peat is disposed of in a way that will limit carbon loss to the atmosphere. Proposals to enhance peat and protect its qualities will be supported. Reasoned Justification Peat is an abundant soil typology in the Broads and is an important asset as it provides many ecosystem services: Climate change: The soils formed by the Broads wetland vegetation stores 38.8 million tonnes of carbon (NCA Profile 80, Natural England and the Broads Authority’s Carbon Reduction Strategy1). Peat soils release previously stored carbon when they are dry. UK peats represent both a threat and an opportunity with respect to greenhouse gas emissions because correct management and restoration could lead to enhanced storage of carbon and other greenhouse gases in these soils while mismanagement or neglect could lead to sinks becoming net sources of greenhouse gases. Biodiversity: Peat soils support internationally important lake, fen, fen meadow, reed-bed and wet woodland habitats.
    [Show full text]
  • Cambridgeshire & Essex Butterfly Conservation
    Butterfly Conservation Regional Action Plan For Anglia (Cambridgeshire, Essex, Suffolk & Norfolk) This action plan was produced in response to the Action for Butterflies project funded by WWF, EN, SNH and CCW This regional project has been supported by Action for Biodiversity Cambridgeshire and Essex Branch Suffolk branch BC Norfolk branch BC Acknowledgements The Cambridgeshire and Essex branch, Norfolk branch and Suffolk branch constitute Butterfly Conservation’s Anglia region. This regional plan has been compiled from individual branch plans which are initially drawn up from 1997-1999. As the majority of the information included in this action plan has been directly lifted from these original plans, credit for this material should go to the authors of these reports. They were John Dawson (Cambridgeshire & Essex Plan, 1997), James Mann and Tony Prichard (Suffolk Plan, 1998), and Jane Harris (Norfolk Plan, 1999). County butterfly updates have largely been provided by Iris Newbery and Dr Val Perrin (Cambridgeshire and Essex), Roland Rogers and Brian Mcllwrath (Norfolk) and Richard Stewart (Suffolk). Some of the moth information included in the plan has been provided by Dr Paul Waring, David Green and Mark Parsons (BC Moth Conservation Officers) with additional county moth data obtained from John Dawson (Cambridgeshire), Brian Goodey and Robin Field (Essex), Barry Dickerson (Huntingdon Moth and Butterfly Group), Michael Hall and Ken Saul (Norfolk Moth Survey) and Tony Prichard (Suffolk Moth Group). Some of the micro-moth information included in the plan was kindly provided by A. M. Emmet. Other individuals targeted with specific requests include Graham Bailey (BC Cambs. & Essex), Ruth Edwards, Dr Chris Gibson (EN), Dr Andrew Pullin (Birmingham University), Estella Roberts (BC, Assistant Conservation Officer, Wareham), Matthew Shardlow (RSPB) and Ken Ulrich (BC Cambs.
    [Show full text]
  • Norwich State of the Environment Report
    Norwich Policy Area State of the Environment Report Produced by Norfolk Biodiversity Information Service Spring 2013 1 Norfolk Biodiversity Information Service is the Local Environmental Record Centre for Norfolk. It collects, collates, manages and disseminates information on species, habitats, protected sites and geodiversity in the county. For more information go to www.nbis.org.uk Report author: Lizzy Carroll This report is available for download from the NBIS website: www.nbis.org.uk Cover picture credits (from top left): View from St James Hill © Evelyn Simak and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence; Mousehold Heath Credit: Lizzy Carroll; Bowthorpe Marshes Credit: Matt Davies; Ashwellthorpe Lower Wood Credit: Ann Roberts; Catton Park Credit: David Yates; Castle Meadow, Norwich © Katy Walters and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence; Chapelfield Gardens © Graham Hardy and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence; Moth Trapping Credit: Scott Perkin; House Sparrow © Walter Baxter and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence; Wherryman’s Way © Evelyn Simak and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence; River Wensum © David Robertson and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence; Rosary Cemetery Credit: Norwich City Council; Farmland Credit: Richard MacMullen; Himalayan Balsam Credit: Mike Sutton-Croft; Allotments Credit: Lizzy Carroll; UEA Broad ©Nigel Chadwick and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence 2 Acknowledgements The author
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Mineral Extraction Sites
    Proposed Mineral Extraction Sites 104 Breckland Sites Map of proposed sites in Beetley (MIN 08, MIN 12, MIN 13, MIN 51) MIN 12 - land north of Chapel Lane, Beetley Site Characteristics • The 16.38 hectare site is within the parish of Beetley • The estimated sand and gravel resource at the site is 1,175,000 tonnes • The proposer of the site has given a potential start date of 2025 and estimated the extraction rate to be 80,000 tonnes per annum. Based on this information the full mineral resource at the site could be extracted within 15 years, therefore approximately 960,000 tonnes could be extracted within the plan period. • The site is proposed by Middleton Aggregates Ltd as an extension to an existing site. • The site is currently in agricultural use and the Agricultural Land Classification scheme classifies the land as being Grade 3. • The site is 3.7km from Dereham and 12km from Fakenham, which are the nearest towns. • A reduced extraction area has been proposed of 14.9 hectares, which creates standoff areas to the south west of the site nearest to the buildings on Chapel Lane, and to the north west of the site nearest the dwellings on Church Lane. Amenity: The nearest residential property is 11m from the site boundary. There are 21 sensitive receptors within 250m of the site boundary. The settlement of Beetley is 260m away and Old Beetley is 380m away. However, land at the north-west and south-west corners is not proposed to be extracted. Therefore the nearest residential property is 96m from the extraction area and there are 18 sensitive receptors within 250m of the proposed extraction area.
    [Show full text]