DOCSLIB.ORG

Preliminary Ecological Appraisal 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Preliminary Ecological Appraisal 2019 Site: Land South-east of NNUH off Colney Lane, Norfolk Work Preliminary Ecological Item: Appraisal (2019) Client: Priscilla Bacon Norfolk Hospice Care Ltd Author: Dr GW Hopkins CEnv MCIEEM Date: 22 September 2019 Hopkins Ecology Ltd, St George’s Works, 51 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1DD T. 01603 435598 M: 07481 477103 E: [email protected] W: www.hopkinsecology.co.uk CONTENTS SUMMARY 1 1. INTRODUCTION 2 2. METHODS 3 3. DESIGNATED SITES 5 4. SITE DESCRIPTION 7 5. SCOPING FOR SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN 9 6. DISCUSSION 12 7. APPENDIX 1: PHOTOGRAPHS 16 8. APPENDIX 2: LEGISLATION SUMMARY 18 SUMMARY Hopkins Ecology Ltd was appointed by Code DP on behalf of Priscilla Bacon Norfolk Hospice Care Limited to prepare an ecological appraisal of a plot of Land South-east of Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital (NNUH), off Colney Lane, for a proposed 24 bed end of life hospice with associated offices and car parking. The Site lies south of the internal boundary road of the NNUH, with an access route off this and through a young plantation, then cutting into an adjacent field where the main development Site extends to ~2.8ha. This report covers the proposed re-located site for the hospice, the boundaries of which are roughly 170m north-east of the location surveyed and assessed by Hopkins Ecology Ltd in 2018. As well as a Phase 1 habitat survey and species scoping, the assessment is further informed by a data search and survey work for the adjacent ‘Newfound Farm’ residential scheme, where an extensive suite of surveys were undertaken in 2010. The on-Site habitats comprise a deciduous plantation dating from the 1990s, with access proposed through this. The main area is arable cropland, with a verge of improved grass sward separating this form the plantation. A defunct hedgerow runs along the north boundary. No habitats of principal importance are present, with the hedgerow considered to have too little woody vegetation to qualify. Great crested newts are scoped out on the basis that there are no ponds within 250m. There is a record of a small badger sett from the west of the Site, but no evidence of current presence of this species was found in the plantation or other nearby areas. None of the trees have roost potential, but the plantation edge may be used by commuting bats. Other species of conservation concern potentially present include nesting birds, hedgehogs and widespread but declining invertebrates. These are likely to be present as components of larger local populations and are of value at the local scale only. No additional surveys are currently recommended. However, if lighting and development impacts on the woodland and plantation edges cannot be avoided then bat surveys are recommended to assess the importance of these areas for bats. Scheme design should consequently aim to minimise impacts on the woodland and plantation edges. The site is within a sub-regional green infrastructure corridor and this provides a strategic context for enhancement measures, such as soft landscaping and other measures including bird boxes, retention of felled timber on-Site and ensuring that hedgehogs have access through the completed scheme. Clearance of vegetation should be outside of the nesting bird season. Page | 1 Land South-east of NNUH of Colney Lane, Norfolk: Preliminary Ecological Appraisal 2019 1. INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND 1.1 Hopkins Ecology Ltd was appointed by Code DP on behalf of Priscilla Bacon Norfolk Hospice Care Limited to prepare an ecological appraisal of a plot of Land south-east of Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital (NNUH), off Colney Lane, for a proposed 24 bed end of life hospice with associated offices and car parking. The Site lies south of the internal boundary road of the NNUH, with an access route off this and through a young plantation, then cutting into an adjacent field where the main development Site extends to ~2.8ha. 1.2 This report covers the proposed re-located site for the hospice, the boundaries of which are roughly 170m north-east of the location surveyed and assessed by Hopkins Ecology Ltd in 2018. SITE CONTEXT 1.3 The Site is within the Mid Norfolk Natural Character Area1, which is characterised as an: “ancient countryside with a long settled agricultural character, where arable land is enclosed by winding lanes and hedgerows, interspersed by woodland and heath and dissected by lush pastoral river valleys”. LEGISLATION AND PLANNING POLICY 1.4 The following key pieces of nature conservation legislation are relevant to legally protected species (with a more detailed description in Appendix 2): • The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (the Habitats Regulations); and • The Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as amended). 1.5 Also, the National Planning Policy Framework (MHCLG, 20192) requires local authorities to avoid and minimise impacts on biodiversity and, where possible, to provide net gains in biodiversity when making planning decisions. A substantial number of habitats and species are of conservation concern in the UK. A small number of these species are fully protected under the legislation listed above, but others in England are recognised as Habitats / Species of Principal Importance under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 and reinforced by the National Planning Policy Framework. For these habitats / species local planning authorities are required to promote the “protection and recovery” via planning and development control. Examples include hedgerows, and species such as the widespread reptiles, house sparrows and soprano pipistrelle and noctule bats. 1.6 Although the NPPF has an overarching aim of minimising impacts to biodiversity, the majority of species of conservation concern are not specifically recognised by legislation or planning policy. The level of protection afforded to these is undefined and should be considered within the overall aim of minimising impacts on biodiversity. 1 Natural England (2014) NCA Profile 84: Mid Norfolk. Available from: http://www.greaternorwichgrowth.org.uk/dmsdocument/1590 2 MHCLG (2019) National Planning Policy Framework for England. Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government, London. Page | 2 Land South-east of NNUH of Colney Lane, Norfolk: Preliminary Ecological Appraisal 2019 2. METHODS PERSONNEL 2.1 This ecological assessment was prepared by Dr Graham Hopkins CEnv MCIEEM FRES, who holds full survey licences for great crested newts and bats. He has over 15 years of consultancy experience in East Anglia. DATA SEARCH 2.2 At the desk study comprised a formal data search from the local records centre commissioned in 2015 and a review of relevant data from and information from other sources (Table 1). The location of designated sites and other relevant features was verified with reference to the survey reports accompanying unrelated schemes. Table 1. Overview of desk study data sources. Source Information Norfolk Biodiversity Information Designated sites, species of conservation concern; 2km Service search radius MAGIC (www.magic.gov.uk) Additional information on statutory sites, habitats of principal importance and wider countryside information South Norfolk DC and GNDP Information regarding local green infrastructure proposals planning policy documents Local Planning Applications, Recent survey data for protected species locally, including manual searching of the Broadland negative data DC website Various literature and web-based Information on local projects and initiatives of potential searches relevance as well as some species-level data, including the Norfolk Wildlife Trust Living Landscape3 and Buglife B-Line4 (bee-line) initiatives Historic maps of Norfolk Aerial photographs from 1988 and 1946 (with Google Earth (http://www.historic- for later images); OS maps from 1880s and earlier maps.norfolk.gov.uk/) 2.3 Reference is also made to survey information from two nearby schemes: • Land Adjacent the NNUH5 (located to the north-east of the Site, separated by the hospital complex); • Land South-west of Newfound Farm6 (located on the farmland to the south and east of the Site, within 30m of the Site boundary); and • Land to The South of NNUH Colney Lane7 (a hospice application immediately west of the Site and with the access route very similar to the current Site). 3 http://www.wildlifetrusts.org/living-landscape 4 https://www.buglife.org.uk/b-lines-hub/map 5 2012/1880 | Proposed offices, etc | Land Adj Norfolk And Norwich University Hospital Colney Lane Colney Norfolk NR4 7UY 6 2013/1793 | Outline planning permission for a development for up to 650 dwellings etc | Land South- west Of Newfound Farm Colney Lane Cringleford Norfolk 7 2015/2924 | 25 bed end of life, not for profit hospice with associated offices and car parking | Land To The South Of Norfolk And Norwich Hospital Colney Lane Colney Norfolk Page | 3 Land South-east of NNUH of Colney Lane, Norfolk: Preliminary Ecological Appraisal 2019 FIELD SURVEY 2.4 The walkover survey was undertaken on 07 September 2019. The description of habitats was based on the methods of JNCC (2010)8 and trees were surveyed from ground level for their potential suitability for roosting bats, looking for gaps, cracks and other voids9; searches were also made for signs of badgers. 2.5 Hedgerows were surveyed according to the guidance of DEFRA (2007)10, recording woody species within a 30m section and associated features such as banks, ditches and ground flora (see constraints). These are used to determine Important Hedgerows according to the Hedgerow Regulations as described in the text (‘Evaluation’), but also see ‘Constraints’ below. 2.6 The local presence of ponds (to a radius of 250m) was determined from OS maps and Google Earth and previous survey reports. GUIDANCE 2.7 The ecological assessment has been prepared with reference to best practice guidance published by the Chartered Institute for Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM) and as detailed in British Standard 42020:2013 Biodiversity - Code of Practice for Biodiversity and Development.
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]
  • Nortblk Bird &
    NorTblk Bird & Mammal Report 1998 Volume 32 part 2 1 Norfolk Bird Report - 1998 Editorial 1 29 Obituary: Michael Seago 1 32 Review of the Year 1 34 Wetland Bird Surveys 1 40 Systematic List 1 43 Introductions, Escapes, Ferals and Hybrids 272 Earliest and Latest Dates of Summer Migrants 276 Latest and Earliest Dates of Winter Migrants 277 Non-accepted Records and Non-submitted Records 278 Contributors 279 Ringing Report 28 Breeding Woodland Birds of Holkham Park between 1995 and 1997 293 Titchwell - a day to remember 299 The Classic Robin fall of early October 1998 300 Pied Wagtails in Central Norwich 304 Ringing in Norfolk 307 The Birds of The Wash - corrections 3 1 Norfolk Mammal Report - 1998 Editorial Classified List 313 Contributors 325 The Broadland Bat Survey 326 Harbour Porpoises at Sheringham 1993-1998 329 A Survey of Mammals Flattened on Norfolk’s Roads ( 1996-1999) 331 Published by NORFOLK AND NORWICH NATURALISTS’ SOCIETY, Castle Museum, Norwich, NRl 3JU [Transactions Volume 32 part 2 October 1999) ISSN 0375 7226 Keepsake back numbers are available from Mrs M J Dorling, 6 New Road, Hethersett, NR9 3HH Front cover photograph: Barn Owl (C R Knights) Back cover photograph: Harvest Mouse (M R Perrow) HjiTOHY -3 OEC 1999 Norfolk Bird Report - 1998 eXCKAMXO QENERAL Editorial The Council ot the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists Society presents the annual report on the birds ot Norfolk. An introduction to those involved in the current report is given below. The close liaison with the Norfolk Bird Club and Birdline East Anglia has continued. Many readers will be aware that the 1997 Norfolk Bird Report was again successful in the prestigious ‘British Birds’ Bird Report of the Year competition having been awarded second place, after being joint winners in 1994 and 1995.
    [Show full text]
  • Norwich Open Space Needs Assessment
    NORWICH OPEN SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT PART 2 AREA PROFILES SUB AREA 1 WEST Norwich Open Space Needs Assessment Final report December 2007 CONTENTS Page (s) Introduction Map of Sub Area Description of Sub Area Quantity of open space Access to open space Quality of open space Strategic Priorities 6 3 Database 7 8 10 12 13 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________14 Leisure and the Environment 2 Norwich Open Space Needs Assessment Final report December 2007 INTRODUCTION Area profiles These area profiles form part of a larger study of open space and recreation facilities in Norwich City, using guidance provided under ‘PPG 17’, and should be read in context with the overall findings of the study (see Part 1). The profiles give detail at a local level in relation to the provision of open space and recreational facilities by sub area. Four sub areas have been identified across the City. Each sub area has been analysed using the proposed Norwich standards for open space, outlined in Part 1 of the report. The profiles include the following information: • Relevant census data and other information about the area. This is important when considering the current and future needs of the population for open space provision • Location and types of open space • Quantity of open space • Access to open space • Quality of open space • Strategic priorities for open space. Typology Part 1 of the report identifies the range of typologies for open space and sport and recreation
    [Show full text]
  • Site: Land North and West of Hethersett Work Item
    Site: Land North and West of Hethersett Work Strategic Ecological Item: Assessment Client: Pigeon Land 2 Ltd and Hethersett Consortium Author: Dr GW Hopkins CEnv MCIEEM Date: 29 October 2018 Hopkins Ecology Ltd, St George’s Works, 51 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1DD T. 01603 435598 M: 07481 477103 E: [email protected] W: www.hopkinsecology.co.uk Contents Summary 1 1. Introduction 2 Background 2 Site Context and Status 2 Legislation and Planning Policy 2 2. Methods 3 Desk Study 3 Field Survey 3 Guidance 3 3. Designated Sites 4 Overview 4 Statutory (International and National) Sites 4 Non-Statutory Sites 4 4. Green Infrastructure 6 Overview 6 Green Infrastructure Around Hethersett 6 5. Habitats and Botany 7 Overview 7 Phase 1 Habitats 7 6. Scoping for Species of Conservation Concern 8 Plants 8 Bats 9 Great Crested Newts 9 Birds 10 Reptiles 11 Small Mammals 11 Invertebrates 11 7. Evaluation 12 Strategic Green Infrastructure 12 Habitats of Principal Importance 12 Scoping for Species of Conservation Concern 12 Recommendations for Additional Surveys 13 8. Impacts, Mitigation and Enhancements 13 Impacts 13 Mitigation 13 Enhancements 14 9. Conclusion 16 10. Appendix 1: Photographs 17 11. Appendix 2: Additional Data 18 Summary Hopkins Ecology Ltd was appointed by Pigeon Land 2 Ltd (‘Pigeon’) and the Hethersett Consortium (‘the Landowners’) to prepare a strategic ecological assessment of Land North and West of Hethersett, with a view to identifying constraints and opportunities in the context of the proposed allocation of the Site within the Greater Norwich Local Plan. The Site is on the western and northern fringes of Hethersett and comprises a series of arable fields and associated habitats, with a total area of ~111ha.
    [Show full text]
  • The Norfolk Natterjack of the NNNS
    , BRITISH MUSElJMi (NATURAL \\\VW) - 8 MAR 1991 exchan U6 Y • • GENSRAL V- -:• •4iV / <-. ». » * i . <* > y=»* j »• 'i *1 / 'O' i - .. ; • THE 'S' , NORFOLK NATTERJACK The Quarterly bulletin of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists' Society No. 31 *************November 1990 BARROW COMMON, BRANCASTER Recording Field meeting, 12 August 1990 Barrow Common ocupies an area of glaciated sand and gravel just inland from Brancaster Staithe, around 150' above sea level (hence giving some fine views of the coast), falling away abruptly to Valley Farm to the east, and more gradually to woodland to the south. There are a few gravel-pits, abandoned and overgrown apart from one just to the east of the north/south bisecting road. The common was grazed until the early 70's (G. Beckett), but is now dominated by Gorse and Bracken, with incipient scrub, including some healthy- looking young Oaks. Along the border with Gas Plantation to the south there is not surprisingly an intermediate sparsely timbered zone. The Society’s visit co-incided with one of the driest periods in recent years, so that many of the smaller plants especially were very dried up, if not dead. However, there had been no recent fires. Fortunately, the vascular plants and bryophytes had been surveyed within the last three years by other individuals and organisations, who have kindly made their records available. Invertebrate animals were well represented and there were some dozen species of birds seen or heard. A total of 12 spider sp. were recorded by Rex Haney, and 3 others by Reg and Lil Evans, who were principally concerned with Fungi.
    [Show full text]
  • GREATER NORWICH DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP TECHNICAL CONSULTATION FULL REPORT (Final Draft)
    GREATER NORWICH DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP TECHNICAL CONSULTATION FULL REPORT (Final draft) Prepared for Greater Norwich Development Partnership Thorpe Lodge, Yarmouth Road Thorpe St Andrew Norwich NR7 0DU Prepared by: Michael Mackman BA (Hons), MMRS, FCIM, Chartered Marketer 14 November 2008 Greater Norwich Development Partnership – Joint Core Strategy Consultation P08872 14 November 2008 Page 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Obviously, the evaluation of the comments on the GNDP Regulation 25 consultation is a matter for the Partnership. However, it may be helpful to draw out some common and recurring themes. There are many expressions of concern about the effects of further development on key local infrastructure. These include (but are not exclusively) water and sewerage, health services, transportation/ roads, community facilities and infrastructure, education, policing and the environment (including impacts on SSSIs, nature reserves and green spaces). Many respondents express views to the effect that local resources are at capacity or above, and that further development must bring with it benefits to support new populations, wherever housed. There are particular concerns in some rural communities, although some also welcome controlled development as a means of assuring or enhancing local services, and request a higher development “status” or the development of specific sites. Others are concerned about “knock on” effects on local infrastructure, including roads, local schools and so on. This is coupled with concerns about sustainability, the desirability of “green infrastructure” and about ensuring that new development has the minimum carbon footprint. There are also suggestions about measures to improve the carbon footprint of existing developments, for example, through renewables technology. Unsurprisingly, these concerns are balanced by suggestions from agents, landowners, developers and businesses suggesting the desirability of additional development, or the development of specific sites.
    [Show full text]
  • The Norfolk Natterjack of the NNNS
    A $. 2U- BRITISH MUSEUM (NATURAL HISTORY) 2 1 MAY 1991 EXCHANGED RAL LIBRARY NORFOLK Number 33 May 1991 NATTERJACK The quarterly bulletin of the Norfolk & Norwich Naturalists’ Society CHANCE MEETING IN RHODES This year I visited Rhodes in the second half of March to look at the flowers. The date may sound early to many people but this is the eastern end of the Mediterranean and flowering is a week or two in advance of places not much further west, such as Crete. For example, the pyramidal orchid, Anacamptos pyramidalis, was in full bloom, whereas in Crete, in my experience, it would not reach that stage until about the second week in April, while in Majorca flowering would not occur before the end of that month. What can be said of Rhodes as a place to seek flowers ? Certainly in the vicinity of Rhodes town the effects of tourism are all too apparent. Nevertheless, a few miles to the south, and the island is over sixty miles in length, there is an appreciable amount of country worthy of exploration and, unlike many other places, organised parties were not in evidence. During my first week 1 never saw anyone who looked remotely interested in flowers. In the second week I made two contacts with enthusiasts. The first encounter was near the summit of the mountain, Profitis Elias. It is tree-covered and as I approached the top I noted a parked car and, not far away, a couple who were obviously interested in the flowers. I walked across to meet them.
    [Show full text]
  • Display PDF in Separate
    rsTPsA W A T o c L S r RELOCATION OF SUFFOLK WATER COMPANY BOREHOLE D SECCOMBE HYDROGEOLOGIST NATIONAL RIVERS AUTHORITY 13 August 1992 Table of Contents 1. Introduction .......................................................... 1 2. Description of problem ............................................... 1 3. Licence requirements of new s i t e ..................................... 2 4. Proposed locations ................................................... 3 Dairy Farm, North Lopham ......................................... 3 Lovers Lane, Garboldisham ......................................... 5 Yaxley Crag borehole 3 A 2 ......................................... 7 Cranley borehole 10A ................... .......... ..... 8 5. Catchment water balances ............................................. 9 R. Lt O u s e ........................................................ 9 R. D o v e ............................................................ H 6. Areas of Environmental interest .................................... 12 7. Conclusion............................................................ 14 8. Recommendations..................................................... 15 This book is due for return on or before the last date shown below. Don G>*(1 W*II L»d.. London. N.21 C»l. No. 1208 DG 02342/71 List of Figures Figure 1 - Monthly abstraction data for two boreholes adjacent to Redgrave F e n ........................................................16 Figure 2 - Location for cross-section of R. Lt. O u s e ................. 17 Figure 3 - Geological
    [Show full text]
  • Norfolk Rivers Drainage Board
    Water Management Alliance (Eastern) Norfolk Rivers Drainage Board BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN April 2018 NORFOLK RIVERS IDB – BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN Front cover images (L-R) ; Himalayan Basalm; Barn Owl; White Clawed Crayfish; Otter; River Nar; IDB Digger 2 FOREWORD This Biodiversity Action Plan (Second Edition) has been prepared by the Norfolk Rivers Internal Drainage Board, in accordance with the commitment to the Implementation Plan of the DEFRA Internal Drainage Board Review, requiring IDBs 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 Norfolk Rivers 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]
  • City of Norwich Replacement Local Plan 2014
    City of Norwich Replacement Local Plan Adopted Version, November 2004 FOREWORD The City of Norwich prides itself on its environment and character as well as its continuing economic growth and importance as the capital of the Eastern Region. This Plan has been developed in a period of rapid upheaval and economic change, which is having significant effects across the City and on the context in which the Plan must be developed. Norwich has emerged from this period of change with better prospects for its future development and this Plan is part of our approach to achieving that and continuing to gain maximum benefit from the changes proposed. This Local Plan replaces the one adopted in 1995 and provides a full update to reflect the current needs of the City. The plan was amended to take account of the recommendations of the Inspector who conducted a public inquiry in May/June 2003. In particular, this Plan recognises the importance of identifying sites, which have previously been developed, for regeneration and redevelopment in the future. This should have a significant effect on reducing the need for more greenfield development sites around the City of Norwich in the next ten years. It will also help to sustain the vigorous and attractive character of Norwich. We hope that this plan, adopted in November 2004, will create the right mixture of certainty and flexibility to respond to the changes we face. IAN COUZENS Leader of the City Council November 2004 City of Norwich Adopted Version Replacement Local Plan November 2004 City of Norwich Adopted Version Replacement Local Plan November 2004 CONTENTS CHAPTER Page no.
    [Show full text]
  • County Wildlife Sites – Breckland 2018
    County Wildlife Sites – Breckland 2018 Site Site Name Last Survey Transboundary Grid reference Number Date (T) or registered common (C) 169 Coston Meadow 85 T (SN) 170 River Yare Corridor 85 T (SN) 177 Bickerston Meadow 9/95 T (SN) 178 The Carrs 6/95 T (SN) 541 West and Pentney Commons 9/95 & 6/97 T (WN) 542 Sovereign Meadow 10/95 T (WN) 593 Little Ouse Meadow 85 TM 003800 594 Little Fen 7/96 TM 035792 595 The Lows 7/09 TM 032789 596 Adj. Little Fen 85 TM 046799 597 Old Fen 9/95 TM 000807 598 Broomscott Common 7/16 C TM 004806 599 Oak Plantation 85 TM 006803 600 Wood near Garboldisham 5/96 TM 016846 601 Lang Fen (South) 4/96 TM 063800 602 Holland’s Wood 5/96 TM 050822 603 Lopham Grove 85 TM 062838 604 Broom Covert and Downhill Plantation 09/07 TM 020863 605 East Harling Fen 8/96 TM 000874 607 The Lows 8/96 TM 014880 608 West of Quidenham 6/96 TM 020877 611 Arnold’s Belt 85 TM 043880 614 Adj. to River Wittle 8/96 TM 009880 615 East Harling Common 8/96 TM 005882 616 Adj. River Wittle 8/96 TM 008881 618 Common Plantation 8/96 TM 035885 619 Copince’s Fen 85 TM 049883 620 Eccles Wood (North) 8/96 TM 013895 621 Eccles Wood (Middle) 8/96 TM 013893 622 Eccles Wood (South) 8/96 TM 017890 623 The Carr 5/96 TM 024890 624 Jubilee Plantation 5/96 TM 064896 625 Warren and Nuttery Plantation 5/96 TM 062898 626 Stacksford Wood 8/13 TM 052903 627 Lower Plantation 5/96 TM 060905 630 New Buckenham Common (north) 85 C TM 095910 632 East of Old Buckenham Fen 5/96 TM 052921 633 Abbey Farm Meadow 5/96 TM 073926 634 West Moor 85 TM 067946 635 Hargham Estate 5/96
    [Show full text]
  • NCC Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report
    Norfolk County Council SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL SCOPING REPORT Norfolk Local Transport Plan Draft Strategy, Transport for Norwich, Kings Lynn and Great Yarmouth Transport Strategies JULY 2020 PUBLIC Norfolk County Council SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL SCOPING REPORT Norfolk Local Transport Plan Draft Strategy, Transport for Norwich, Kings Lynn and Great Yarmouth Transport Strategies TYPE OF DOCUMENT (VERSION) PUBLIC PROJECT NO. 70072839 DATE: JULY 2020 PUBLIC Norfolk County Council SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL SCOPING REPORT Norfolk Local Transport Plan Draft Strategy, Transport for Norwich, Kings Lynn and Great Yarmouth Transport Strategies WSP Kings Orchard 1 Queen Street Bristol BS2 0HQ Phone: +44 117 930 6200 WSP.com PUBLIC QUALITY CONTROL Issue/revision First issue Final Draft Final Final Update Final Post- for Review Consultation Remarks Draft Final Draft Final for Final Update Final Post- Consultation Consultation Date 22/01/2019 May 2019 October 2019 June 2020 July 2020 Prepared by Safia Bibi Safia Bibi Safia Bibi Mabel Munoz- Mabel Munoz- Devesa Devesa Signature Checked by Fiona Symes Fiona Symes Mabel Munoz- Ursula Ursula Devesa Stevenson Stevenson Signature Authorised by Ursula Ursula Ursula Ursula Ursula Stevenson Stevenson Stevenson Stevenson Stevenson Signature Project number 70050207 70050207 70050207 70072839 70072839 File reference \\uk.wspgrou \\uk.wspgroup.c \\uk.wspgroup.c TBC p.com\centra om\central om\central l data\Projects\70 data\Projects\70 data\Projects 0502XX\700502 0502XX\700502 \700502XX\7 07 - Transport 07 - Transport
    [Show full text]