Ecological Appraisal

Land at Rackheath, Norwich

May 2020

Quality Management Client: Halsbury Homes Ltd Project: Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report Title: Ecological Appraisal Project Number: ECO-5674 File Reference: 5674 EcoAp vf4/SK/LB/DM Date: 15/05/2020

Copyright The copyright of this document remains with Aspect Ecology. All rights reserved. The contents of this document therefore must not be copied or reproduced in whole or in part for any purpose without the written consent of Aspect Ecology.

Confidentiality This report may contain sensitive information relating to protected species. All records of Badger setts must remain confidential. Where this report is circulated publicly or uploaded to online planning portals, reference to Badger setts must be redacted and any maps pertaining to the locations of Badger setts removed from the document.

Legal Guidance The information set out within this report in no way constitutes a legal opinion on the relevant legislation (refer to the relevant Appendix for the main provisions of the legislation). The opinion of a legal professional should be sought if further advice is required.

Liability This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the commissioning client and unless otherwise agreed in writing by Aspect Ecology no other party may use, or rely on the contents of the report. No liability is accepted by Aspect Ecology for any use of this report, other than for the purposes for which it was originally prepared and provided. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the advice in this report. The content of this report is partly based on information provided by third parties; Aspect accepts no liability for any reliance placed on such information. This report is subject to the restrictions and limitations referenced in Aspect Ecology’s standard Terms of Business.

Contact Details Aspect Ecology Ltd Hardwick Business Park I Noral Way I Banbury I Oxfordshire OX16 2AF t 01295 279721 e [email protected] w www.aspect-ecology.com

Contents

Text:

Executive Summary ...... 1

1 Introduction ...... 2

2 Methodology ...... 3

3 Ecological Designations...... 9

4 Habitats and Ecological Features ...... 11

5 Faunal Use of the Site ...... 14

6 Mitigation Measures and Ecological Enhancements ...... 20

7 Conclusions ...... 25

Plans:

Plan 5674/ECO1 Site Location

Plan 5674/ECO2 Ecological Designations

Plan 5674/ECO3 Habitats and Ecological Features

Plan 5674/ECO4 Pond Plan

Appendices:

Appendix 5674/1 Desktop Study Data

Appendix 5674/2 Evaluation Methodology

Appendix 5674/3 Report to Inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

Appendix 5674/4 Legislation Summary

Appendix 5674/5 Great Crested Newt Mitigation Strategy

Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

Executive Summary i) Introduction. Aspect Ecology was commissioned by Halsbury Homes Ltd in June 2019 to undertake an Ecological Appraisal in respect of proposed development of land at Rackheath, Norwich. ii) Proposals. The proposals are for development of the site to provide 165 residential dwellings and 16 supported living bungalows. iii) Survey. The site was surveyed in June 2019 based on standard extended Phase 1 methodology. In addition, a general appraisal of faunal species was undertaken to record the potential presence of any protected, rare or notable species, with specific surveys conducted in respect of bats, Badger and Great Crested Newt. i) Ecological Designations. The site itself is not subject to any statutory or non-statutory ecological designations. The nearest statutory designation is Mousehold Heath Local Nature Reserve (LNR) located approximately 3.9km to the south west of the site. The nearest European designation of ecological importance is The Broads Special Area of Conservation (SAC) which is also a Special Protection Area (SPA) and Ramsar site, located approximately 4.4km to the south east of the site. All of the ecological designations in the surrounding area are physically well separated from the site and are therefore unlikely to be adversely affected by the proposals. ii) Habitats. The site comprises an arable field surrounded by a thin strip of grass and tall ruderal vegetation with a small number of young to semi-mature trees and scrub in the north eastern corner. The habitats within the site are not considered to form important ecological features and their loss to the proposals is of negligible significance. iii) Protected Species. The site generally offers limited opportunities for protected species and no evidence of any such species was recorded during the survey work. However, it is likely that birds nest within suitable habitat at the site and could therefore potentially be adversely affected by the proposals, in addition to small mammals and reptiles. Appropriate mitigation measures, centred on the careful timing of works and sensitive clearance of suitable habitat, will therefore be implemented to safeguard nesting birds, small mammals and reptiles during relevant site clearance works. iv) Enhancements. The proposals present the opportunity to secure a number of biodiversity benefits, including additional native tree planting and new grassland and wetland habitat creation. v) Summary. In summary, the proposals have sought to minimise impacts on biodiversity and subject to the implementation of appropriate avoidance, mitigation and compensation measures, it is considered unlikely that the proposals will result in significant harm.

May 2020 Page|1 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

1 Introduction

1.1 Background and Proposals

1.1.1 Aspect Ecology was commissioned by Halsbury Homes Ltd in June 2019 to undertake an Ecological Appraisal in respect of proposed development of land at Rackheath, Norwich, centred at grid reference TG 2863 1195 (see Plan 5674/ECO1).

1.1.2 The proposals are for development of the site to provide 165 residential dwellings and 16 supported living bungalows.

1.2 Site Overview

1.2.1 The site is located to the north east of Norwich, Norfolk. The site is bound to the north east by Broad Lane, to the south east by a railway line and to the south west by the newly built A1270 and associated roadside verge, whilst agricultural land lies to the north west.

1.2.2 The site itself comprises an arable field with associated trees and scrub.

1.3 Purpose of the Report

1.3.1 This report documents the methods and findings of the baseline ecology surveys and desktop study carried out in order to establish the existing ecological interest of the site, and subsequently provides an appraisal of the likely ecological effects of the proposals. The importance of the habitats and species present is evaluated. Where necessary, avoidance, mitigation and compensation measures are proposed so as to safeguard any significant existing ecological interest within the site and where appropriate, opportunities for ecological enhancement are identified with reference to national conservation priorities and local Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs).

May 2020 Page|2 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

2 Methodology

2.1 Desktop Study

2.1.1 In order to compile background information on the site and its immediate surroundings the Norfolk Biodiversity Information Service (NBIS) were contacted, with data requested on the basis of a search radius of 2km.

2.1.2 Where information has been received from the above organisation(s) this is reproduced at Appendix 5674/1 and on Plan 5674/ECO2, where appropriate.

2.1.3 Information on statutory designations was obtained from the online Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) database, which utilises data provided by Natural England, with an extended search radius (25km). In addition, the MAGIC database was searched to identify the known presence of any Priority Habitats within or adjacent the site. Relevant information is reproduced at Appendix 5674/1 and on Plan 5674/ECO2, where appropriate.

2.1.4 In addition, the Woodland Trust database was searched for any records of ancient, veteran or notable trees within or adjacent to the site.

2.1.5 Application documents relating to the Norwich Northern Distributor Road1 which passes immediately to the west of the site were also reviewed to provide further background on faunal species.

2.2 Habitat Survey

2.2.1 The site was surveyed in June 2019 in order to ascertain the general ecological value of the land contained within the boundaries of the site and to identify the main habitats and ecological features present.

2.2.2 The site was surveyed based on standard Phase 1 Habitat Survey methodology2, whereby the habitat types present are identified and mapped, together with an assessment of the species composition of each habitat. This technique provides an inventory of the basic habitat types present and allows identification of areas of greater potential which require further survey. Any such areas identified can then be examined in more detail through Phase 2 surveys. This method was extended, in line with the Guidelines for Preliminary Ecological Appraisal3 to record details on the actual or potential presence of any notable or protected species or habitats.

2.2.3 Using the above method, the site was classified into areas of similar botanical community types, with a representative species list compiled for each habitat identified. The nomenclature used for plant species is based on the Botanical Society for the British Isles (BSBI) Checklist.

2.3 Faunal Surveys

2.3.1 General faunal activity, such as mammals or birds observed visually or by call during the course of the surveys was recorded. Specific attention was also paid to the potential

1 Accessed at: https://www.norfolk.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/major-projects-and-improvement-plans/norwich/northern- distributor-road/planning-and-approval-process/development-consent-order/dco-documents 2 Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2010, as amended) ‘Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey: A technique for environmental audit.’ 3 Chartered Institute for Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM) (2013) ‘Guidelines for Preliminary Ecological Appraisal.’

May 2020 Page|3 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

presence of any protected, rare or notable species, and specific consideration was given to bats, Great Crested Newt and Badger, as described below.

Bats4

Visual Inspection Surveys

2.3.2 Trees were assessed for their suitability to support roosting bats based on the presence of features such as holes, cracks, splits or loose bark. Suitability for roosting bats was rated based on relevant guidance5 as:

 Negligible;  Low;  Moderate; or  High.

2.3.3 Any potential roost features identified were also inspected for any signs indicating possible use by bats, e.g. staining, scratch marks, bat droppings, etc.

Badger (Meles meles)6

2.3.4 A detailed Badger survey was carried out in June 2019. The survey comprised two main elements. The first element involved searching for evidence of Badger setts. For any setts that were encountered, each sett entrance was noted and mapped. The following information was recorded:

 Number and location of well used / active entrances; these are clear from any debris or vegetation and are obviously in regular use and may, or may not, have been excavated recently;  Number and location of inactive entrances; these are not in regular use and have debris such as leaves and twigs in the entrance or have plants growing in or around the edge of the entrance; and  Number of disused entrances; these have not been in use for some time, are partly or completely blocked and cannot be used without considerable clearance. If the entrance has been disused for some time all that may be visible is a depression in the ground where the hole used to be and the remains of the spoil heap.

2.3.5 The second element involved searching for signs of Badger activity such as well-worn paths and push-throughs, snagged hair, footprints, latrines and foraging signs, so as to build up a picture of any use of the site by Badger.

Great Crested Newt (Triturus cristatus)

Habitat Suitability Index (HSI)

2.3.6 As a first step in identifying the potential presence of Great Crested Newt at the site, a Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) study was undertaken of all relevant water bodies within

4 Surveys based on: English Nature (2004) ‘Bat Mitigation Guidelines’ and Collins, J. (ed.) (2016) ‘Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists: Good Practice Guidelines (3rd edn).’ Bat Conservation Trust 5 Collins, J. (ed.) (2016) ‘Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists: Good Practice Guidelines (3rd edn).’ Bat Conservation Trust 6 Based on: Mammal Society (1989) ‘Occasional Publication No. 9 – Surveying Badgers’

May 2020 Page|4 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

250m7 of the site boundary (based on a review of Ordnance Survey mapping and satellite imagery). Guidance set out within Natural England’s Method Statement template, to be used when applying for a Great Crested Newt development licence, states that surveys of ponds within 500m of the site boundary are only required when ‘(a) data indicates that the pond(s) has potential to support a large Great Crested Newt population, (b) the footprint contains particularly favourable habitat, (c) the development would have a substantial negative effect on that habitat and (d) there is an absence of dispersal barriers.’ Given that in this instance, none of the four points listed above are applicable to the site, it is considered that survey of ponds within 500m of the site boundary is not required, and that survey of ponds within 250m represents adequate survey effort.

2.3.7 An HSI study is used to assess the potential of water bodies to support Great Crested Newt. It is undertaken by attributing a score to a number of factors that can affect the presence or absence of this species. Ten factors are utilised in an HSI assessment, as described below:

 SI1 Location. The location of the water body within Great Britain;  SI2 Pond area. The size of the water body;  SI3 Permanence. How often the water body dries out;  SI4 Water Quality. The water quality, based primarily on invertebrate diversity;  SI5 Shade. The percentage of the perimeter of the water body that is shaded;  SI6 Fowl. The presence or absence of water fowl;  SI7 Fish. The presence or absence of fish;  SI8 Pond Count. The number of water bodies within 1km of the surveyed water body (not counting those on the far side of major barriers such as roads);  SI9 Terrestrial. The quality of terrestrial habitat surrounding the water body; and  SI10 Macrophytes. The percentage cover of the surface area of the water body covered by macrophytes (aquatic plants).

2.3.8 The overall suitability of the water body is then determined by entering these figures into an equation devised by Oldham et al. (2000)8. The suitability of water bodies is classed into one of five categories, either ‘poor’, ‘below average’, ‘average’, ‘good’ or ‘excellent’.

2.3.9 This HSI study was undertaken in line with the guidelines developed by Oldham et al. and subsequently adapted by ARG UK (2010)9. A suitably experienced ecologist undertook the assessment in line with these guidelines, with the study also supplemented by desktop research where appropriate.

2.4 Survey Constraints and Limitations

2.4.1 All of the species that occur in each habitat would not necessarily be detectable during survey work carried out at any given time of the year, since different species are apparent during different seasons. The Phase 1 habitat survey was undertaken within the optimal season therefore allowing a robust assessment of habitats and botanical interest across the site.

7 250m is the typical maximum migratory range of this species, see English Nature (2004) ‘An assessment of the efficiency of capture techniques and the value of different habitats for the great crested newt Triturus cristatus’. English Nature Research Report 576 8 Oldham RS, Keeble J, Swan MJS & Jeffcote M (2000) ‘Evaluating the suitability of habitat for the Great Crested Newt (Triturus cristatus)’. Herpetological Journal 10 (4), 143-155 9 Amphibian & Reptile Groups of the UK (2010) ‘ARG UK Advice Note 5: Great Crested Newt Habitat Suitability Index’

May 2020 Page|5 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

2.4.2 Attention was paid to the presence of any invasive species listed under Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). However, the detectability of such species varies due to a number of factors, e.g. time of year, site management, etc., and hence the absence of invasive species should not be assumed even if no such species were detected during the Phase 1 survey.

2.4.3 Densely vegetated habitats within the site have the potential to reduce the detectability of field signs for faunal species such as Badger. A detailed survey was able to be completed and, whilst dense scrub vegetation is present within the site, it is considered that the survey results do provide an accurate baseline to assess the potential for impacts on Badger under the development proposals.

2.5 Ecological Evaluation Methodology

2.5.1 The evaluation of ecological features and resources is based on professional judgement whilst also drawing on the latest available industry guidance and research. The approach taken in this report is based on that described by the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM, 2018)10, which involves identifying ‘important ecological features’ within a defined geographical context (i.e. international, national, regional, county, district, local or site importance). For full details refer to Appendix 5674/2.

2.6 National Policy Approach to Biodiversity in the Planning System

2.6.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)11 describes the Government’s national policies on ‘conserving and enhancing the natural environment’ (Chapter 15). NPPF is accompanied by Planning Practice Guidance on ‘Biodiversity, ecosystems and green infrastructure’ and ODPM Circular 06/200512.

2.6.2 NPPF takes forward the Government’s strategic objective to halt overall biodiversity loss13, as set out at Paragraph 170, which states that planning policies and decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by:

‘minimising impacts on and providing net gains for biodiversity, including by establishing coherent ecological networks that are more resilient to current and future pressures’

2.6.3 The approach to dealing with biodiversity in the context of planning applications is set out at Paragraph 175:

‘When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should apply the following principles:

a) if significant harm to biodiversity resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for, then planning permission should be refused;

b) development on land within or outside a Site of Special Scientific Interest, and which is likely to have an adverse effect on it (either individually or in

10 CIEEM (2018) ‘Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland: Terrestrial, Freshwater, Coastal and Marine’, Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management, Winchester 11 Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government (2019) ‘National Planning Policy Framework’ 12 ODPM (2006) ‘Circular 06/2005: Planning for Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – A Guide to Good Practice’ 13 DEFRA (2011) ‘Biodiversity 2020: A strategy for England’s wildlife and ecosystem services’

May 2020 Page|6 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

combination with other developments), should not normally be permitted. The only exception is where the benefits of the development in the location proposed clearly outweigh both its likely impact on the features of the site that make it of special scientific interest, and any broader impacts on the national network of Sites of Special Scientific Interest;

c) development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats (such as ancient woodland and ancient or veteran trees) should be refused, unless there are wholly exceptional reasons and a suitable compensation strategy exists; and

d) development whose primary objective is to conserve or enhance biodiversity should be supported; while opportunities to incorporate biodiversity improvements in and around developments should be encouraged, especially where this can secure measurable net gains for biodiversity.

2.6.4 The above approach encapsulates the ‘mitigation hierarchy’ described in British Standard BS 42020:201914, which involves the following step-wise process:

 Avoidance – avoiding adverse effects through good design;  Mitigation – where it is unavoidable, mitigation measures should be employed to minimise adverse effects;  Compensation – where residual effects remain after mitigation it may be necessary to provide compensation to offset any harm; and  Enhancement – planning decisions often present the opportunity to deliver benefits for biodiversity, which can also be explored alongside the above measures to resolve potential adverse effects.

2.6.5 The measures for avoidance, mitigation, compensation and enhancement should be proportionate to the predicted degree of risk to biodiversity and to the nature and scale of the proposed development (BS 42020:2019, section 5.5).

2.7 Local Policy

Joint Core Strategy 201415

2.7.1 Under the adopted Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk, Policy 1 (Addressing climate change and protecting environmental assets) relates to biodiversity and the natural environment, setting out that adverse effects on European sites will be avoided, whilst development impacting on nationally designated sites and species will be assessed in accordance with national policy and legislation. The policy also sets out that habitats and environmental assets of regional or local importance should be conserved and enhanced whilst green infrastructure is promoted.

2.7.2 Policy 2 (Promoting good design) also requires that development is designed to avoid harmful impacts on key environmental assets.

14 British Standards Institution (2013) ‘Biodiversity – Code of practice for planning and development’, BS 42020:2019 15 Greater Norwich Development Partnership (January 2014) ‘Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk’

May 2020 Page|7 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

Development Management DPD 201516

2.7.3 The Development Management DPD for Broadland District Council contains a number of policies relating to biodiversity and the natural environment, as summarised below:

 Policy EN1 (Biodiversity and Habitats) promotes the protection and enhancement of biodiversity, that fragmentation of habitats is avoided, and the development of a co-ordinated green infrastructure network;

 Policy EN3 (Green Infrastructure) sets out that development is expected to maximise opportunities for the creation of a well-managed network of wildlife habitats.

16 Broadland District Council (August 2015) ‘Development Management Development Plan Document’

May 2020 Page|8 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

3 Ecological Designations

3.1 Statutory Designations

Description

3.1.1 The statutory designations of ecological importance that occur within the local area are shown on Plan 5674/ECO2. The nearest statutory designation is Mousehold Heath Local Nature Reserve (LNR), located approximately 3.9km to the south west of the site. This LNR is designated on the basis of its broad leaved semi-natural woodland and areas heathland.

3.1.2 The nearest European designation of ecological importance is The Broads Special Area of Conservation (SAC), which is also designated as Broadland Special Protection Area (SPA) and Ramsar, located approximately 4.4km to the south east of the site. The SAC is designated for its wetland habitats including, fens, forests, lakes, bogs and meadows. It is also designated for a number of Annex II species, including, Desmoulin’s Whorl-snail Vertigo moulinsiana, Ramhorn Snail Anisus vorticulus, Fen Orchid Liparis loeselii and Otter Lutra lutra. The SPA is designated for a number of bird species, namely Bittern Botaurus stellaris, Bewick’s Swan Cygnus Columbianus bewickii, Gadwall Anas strepera, Whooper Swan Cygnus Cygnus, Marsh Harrier Circus aeruginosus, Hen Harrier Circus cyaneus, Shoveler Anas clypeata, Wigeon Anas penelope and Ruff Philomachus pugnax. The Ramsar is also designated on the basis of its assemblage of breeding and wintering birds, along with large numbers of rare plants and invertebrates.

Evaluation

3.1.3 The site itself is not subject to any statutory nature conservation designations. All such designations are well separated from the site and therefore unlikely to be subject to adverse effects during the construction phase of development, although there is some potential for adverse effects during the operational phase of development, principally as a result of recreation.

3.1.4 In regard to recreational pressure, the proposals are for a relatively small-scale development, which is well separated from the designations and therefore is unlikely to result in any significant increase in recreational usage. Nevertheless, given the presence of European designations within the surrounding area, a report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) has been prepared, provided at Appendix 5674/3. As this details, the majority of designations are not considered to be affected, whilst following mitigation to be implemented in relation to the Broads SAC and Broadlands SPA and Ramsar (including open space included within the site itself, connections to proposed pedestrian and cycle links to the north of the site and the provision of information packs to new residents, promoting the use of alternative greenspace areas), it is considered that European designations would not be subject to any adverse effects as a result of the proposed development in-combination with any other plans and projects.

3.1.5 The nearest statutory designation, Mousehold Heath LNR, is well separated from the site, such that direct effects from the development are unlikely to significantly impact upon this designation. This LNR is designated in part for its recreational value and, as such, is set up to accommodate visitor use such that any minor increase in recreational activity is unlikely to result in any significant adverse effects on the LNR in the long term. Therefore no adverse effects are expected at this, or other more distant statutory designations.

May 2020 Page|9 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

3.2 Non-statutory Designations

Description

3.2.1 The non-statutory designations of nature conservation interest that occur within the local area are shown on Plan 5674/ECO2. The nearest non-statutory designation is Paine’s Yard Wood, The Owlery and March Covert County Wildlife Site (CWS), located approximately 0.5km to the north west of the site. The CWS is designated on the basis of its varied woodlands of largely native species. The next nearest non-statutory designation is Racecourse Plantation CWS located approximately 1.5km to the south west of the site.

Evaluation

3.2.2 The site itself is not subject to any non-statutory nature conservation designations. All non- statutory designations in the surrounding area are well separated from the site by existing development and given the nature and scale of the proposals, these designations are unlikely to be affected.

3.3 Priority Habitats, Ancient Woodland and Notable Trees

3.3.1 There are no records of any Ancient Woodland, notable or veteran trees within or adjacent to the site. All Ancient Woodland and notable trees in the surrounding area are well separated from the site by existing development and given the nature and scale of the proposals, these features are unlikely to be affected.

3.4 Summary

3.4.1 In summary, the site itself is not subject to any statutory or non-statutory ecological designations and it is unlikely that any such designations in the surrounding area will be significantly affected by the proposals.

May 2020 Page|10 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

4 Habitats and Ecological Features

4.1 Background Records

4.1.1 No specific records of any protected, rare or notable plant species from within or immediately adjacent to the site are included within the information returned from the Records Centre. A number of records of Priority Species were returned from NBIS including Marsh Stitchwort Stellaria palustris, Greater Water-parsnip Sium latifolium, Tubular Water- dropwort Oenanthe fistulosa all recorded in 2011, none of which were recorded within or adjacent to the site. No evidence for the presence of any of these species within the site was recorded during the survey work undertaken.

4.2 Overview

4.2.1 The habitats and ecological features present within the site are described below and evaluated in terms of whether they constitute an important ecological feature and their level of importance, taking into account the status of habitat types and the presence of rare plant communities or individual plant species of elevated interest. The likely effects of the proposals on the habitats and ecological features are then assessed. The value of habitats for the fauna they may support is considered separately in Chapter 5 below.

4.2.2 The following habitats/ecological features were identified within/adjacent to the site:

 Arable and Bare / Recolonising Vegetation;  Grass and Tall Ruderal Vegetation;  Trees and Scrub; and  Offsite Woodland

4.2.3 The locations of these habitat types and features are illustrated on Plan 5674/ECO3 and described in detail below.

4.3 Priority Habitats

4.3.1 Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 places duties on public bodies to have regard to the conservation of biodiversity in the exercise of their normal functions. In particular, Section 41 of the NERC Act requires the Secretary of State to publish a list of habitats which are of principal importance for conservation in England. This list is largely derived from the ‘Priority Habitats’ listed under the former UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), which continue to be regarded as priority habitats under the subsequent country-level biodiversity strategies.

4.4 Arable and Bare / Recolonising Vegetation

Description

4.4.1 The site is dominated by a single arable field (see Plan 5674/ECO3), which was recorded to be in current cultivation at the time of survey. A small number of colonising species were noted within the areable, including, Groundsel Senecio vulgaris and Speedwell Veronica sp..

4.4.2 A small area of bare and recolonising ground within the northern part of the site, forming the farm access track into the site. This area was largely devoid of vegetation, save for colonising grass and tall ruderal vegetation (see paragraph 4.5 below)

May 2020 Page|11 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

Evaluation

4.4.3 The arable is in current cultivation with a very small number of colonising species present in spaces between crops and along the access track into the field. As such, the arable and bare /recolonising ground do not constitute important ecological features. The loss of these habitats to the proposals is therefore of minor ecological significance.

4.5 Grass and Tall Ruderal Vegetation

Description

4.5.1 A narrow field margin is present around the arable which measures approximately 0.5- 1m in width and comprises a mixture of grasses and tall ruderal vegetation (see Plan 5674/ECO3). Grass species present include False Oat-grass Arrhenatherum elatius, Cock’s- Foot Dactylis glomerata, Barren Brome Anisantha sterilis, Yorkshire Fog Holcus lanatus, Soft Brome Bromus hordeaceus and Annual Meadow-grass Poa annua, with herb and ruderal species recorded including Spear Thistle Cirsium vulgare, Common Nettle Urtica dioica, Hogweed Heracleum sphondylium, Cow Parsley Anthriscus sylvestris, Curled Dock Rumex crispus, Cleavers Galium aparine, Creeping Thistle Cirsium arvense, Willowherb Epilobium sp., Dandelion Taraxacum officinale agg., Scarlet Pimpernel Anagallis arvensis subsp. arvensis, Ragwort Senecio jacobaea, Poppy Papaver rhoeas, Mayweed Tripleurospermum inodorum, Green Alkanet Pentaglottis sempervirens, Hemlock Conium maculatum, Common Fumitory Fumaria officinalis, Hawksbit, Weld Reseda luteola, Garlic Mustard Alliaria petiolata, White Campion Silene latifolia, Red Campion Silene dioica, and Sow-thistle Sonchus arvensis. Small patches of Bracken Pteridium and Bramble Rubus fruticosus agg. scrub are also present along the field margin in places.

Evaluation

4.5.2 The areas of grassland and tall ruderal vegetation are dominated by common and widespread species and are small in extent, and as such, are not considered to form an important ecological feature. Accordingly, the loss of small areas to the proposals is not considered to be of significance.

4.6 Trees and Scrub

Description

4.6.1 A small strip of young trees and dense scrub is present in the north eastern corner of the site, which measures approximately 2m wide. Tree species present include Wild Cherry Prunus avium, Silver Birch Betula pendula, Ash Fraxinus excelsior and Field Maple Acer campestre, whilst scrub species include Bramble, Guelder-rose Viburnum opulus, Dogwood Cornus sanguinea, Blackthorn Prunus spinosa, Hazel Corylus avellana and Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna

Evaluation

4.6.2 The areas of trees and scrub are dominated by common and widespread species and are small in extent, and as such, are not considered to form an important ecological feature. Accordingly, the loss of small areas to the proposals is not considered to be of significance.

May 2020 Page|12 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

4.7 Offsite Woodland

Description

4.7.1 A wooded belt is present adjacent to the northern site boundary, as shown on Plan 5674/ECO3. This wooded belt was recorded to measure approximately 10m wide, dominated by young to semi-mature trees with a limited understorey. Trees present within the canopy include Sweet Chestnut Castanea sativa, Wild Cherry, Ash, Lime Tilia sp., Silver Birch, Turkey Oak Quercus cerris, Holm Oak Q.ilex, English Oak Q. robur and Scot’s-pine Pinus sylvestris, with an understorey comprising Holly and Hawthorn.

Evaluation

4.7.2 The woodland is considered to qualify as the priority habitat type ‘Lowland Mixed deciduous Woodland’, which covers most types of deciduous woodland, and is therefore an important ecological feature in the context of the local area. However, given its location adjacent to the site, it will be fully retained under the scheme, although consideration should be given to its protection during construction works, as set out in Chapter 6. Subject to the implementation of these recommendations, the offsite woodland is unlikely to be adversely affected as a result of the scheme.

4.8 Habitat Evaluation Summary

4.8.1 On the basis of the above, it considered that none of the habitats present within the site constitute important ecological features and their loss to the proposals will be of negligible ecological importance, with similar habitats common and widespread in the surrounding area. The offsite woodland is considered to be of local importance, although this will be fully retained under the scheme.

May 2020 Page|13 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

5 Faunal Use of the Site

5.1 Overview

5.1.1 During the survey work, general observations were made of any faunal use of the site with specific attention paid to the potential presence of protected or notable species. Specific survey work was undertaken in respect of bats, Badger and Great Crested Newt, with the results described below.

5.2 Priority Species

5.2.1 Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 places duties on public bodies to have regard to the conservation of biodiversity in the exercise of their normal functions. In particular, Section 41 of the NERC Act requires the Secretary of State to publish a list of species which are of principal importance for conservation in England. This list is largely derived from the ‘Priority Species’ listed under the former UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP), which continue to be regarded as priority species under the subsequent country-level biodiversity strategies.

5.2.2 During the survey work undertaken, the Priority Species Skylark Alauda arvensis was recorded within the site. This is discussed further below.

5.3 Bats

5.3.1 Legislation. All British bats are classed as European Protected Species under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2019 (as amended) and are also listed under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). As such, both bats and their roosts (breeding sites and resting places) receive full protection under the legislation (see Appendix 5674/4 for detailed provisions). If proposed development work is likely to result in an offence a licence may need to be obtained from Natural England which would be subject to appropriate measures to safeguard bats. Given all bats are protected species, they are considered to represent important ecological features. A number of bat species are also considered S41 Priority Species.

5.3.2 Background Records. No specific records of bats from within or adjacent to the site were returned from the desktop study. Information received from the LRC returned records of Barbastelle Barbastella barbastellus, Serotine Eptesicus serotinus, Myotis Myotis sp., Daubenton’s Bat Myotis daubentonii, Natterer’s Bat Myotis nattereri, Noctule Nyctalus noctula, Nathusius’ Pipistrelle Pipistrellus nathusii, Soprano Pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus, Brown Long-eared Plecotus auritus, and Pipistrelle bat species Pipistrelle sp. within 2km of the site. The closest record is for a Brown Long-eared, recorded in 2012, recorded approximately 150m south of the site boundary.

5.3.3 Surveys conducted for the Norwich Northern Distributor Road application included bat activity transects within land to the north and south of the site, although did not include the site itself. These surveys recorded activity to be dominated by Common Pipistrellus pipistrellus and Soprano Pipistrelle, with very occasional passes by Barbastelle, Noctule and Leisler’s Nyctalus leisleri.

May 2020 Page|14 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

5.3.4 Evaluation and Assessment of Likely Effects

Roosting

Trees

5.3.5 A small number of trees are present in the north eastern corner of the site, whilst the site is bordered by a strip of woodland. However, these trees are not considered to exhibit any features with bat roosting potential and, in any event, appear to be retained in the proposals.

Foraging / Commuting

5.3.6 The site is unlikely to be of any particular value to foraging and commuting bats due to the arable nature of the field with no particular boundary features. The majority of the trees and scrub within the site, in addition to the offsite woodland, will be retained under the proposals, whilst new tree, hedgerow and shrub planting will improve connectivity through the site and increase the foraging potential of the site.

5.3.7 Accordingly, subject to the implementation of the recommendations outlined at Chapter 6 below, along with other ecological enhancements, it is considered that the conservation status of local bat populations will be fully safeguarded under the scheme.

5.4 Badger

5.4.1 Legislation. Badger receive legislative protection under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 (see Appendix 5674/4 for detailed provisions), and as such should be assessed as an important ecological feature. The legislation aims to protect the species from persecution, rather than being a response to an unfavourable conservation status, as the species is in fact common over most of Britain. It is the duty of planning authorities to consider the conservation and welfare impacts of development upon Badger and issue permissions accordingly.

5.4.2 Licences can be obtained from Natural England for development activities that would otherwise be unlawful under the legislation. Guidance on the types of activity that should be licensed is laid out in the relevant best practice guidance. 17, 18

5.4.3 Background Records. No specific records of Badger from within or adjacent to the site were returned from the desktop study. Two records of Badger were returned with the closest record approximately 650m north-west of the site boundary, recorded in 2014.

5.4.4 Survey Results and Evaluation. No evidence of Badger was found within or immediately adjacent to the site, and as such Badger is considered unlikely to form an ecological constraint to the proposals. It is possible that Badgers make some use of the site for foraging, but given the abundance of suitable habitat surrounding the site, the proposed development is unlikely to result in any substantial loss of Badger habitat.

5.5 Other Mammals

5.5.1 Legislation. A number of other UK mammal species do not receive direct legislative protection relevant to development activities but may receive protection against acts of cruelty (e.g. under the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996). In addition, a number of these

17 English Nature (2002) ‘Badgers and Development’ 18 Natural England (2011) ‘Badgers and Development: A Guide to Best Practice and Licensing’, Interim Guidance Document

May 2020 Page|15 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

mammal species are S41 Priority Species and should be assessed as important ecological features.

5.5.2 Background Records. No specific records of other mammals from within or adjacent to the site were returned from the desktop study. A number of records of the Priority Species Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus, Brown Hare Lepus europaeus and Eurasian Red Squirrel Sciurus vulgaris were returned from within the search area around the site. The closest record is for a Hedgehog, recorded in 2008, recorded approximately 240m north of the site boundary.

5.5.3 Survey Results and Evaluation. No evidence of any other protected, rare or notable mammal species was recorded within the site. Other mammal species likely to utilise the site, such as Fox Vulpes vulpes, remain common in both a local and national context, and as mentioned above do not receive specific legislative protection in a development context. As such, these species are not a material planning consideration and the loss of potential opportunities for these species to the proposals is of negligible significance.

5.5.4 The desktop study returned background records of Hedgehog, Brown Hare and Red Squirrel within the surrounding area, which are all Priority Species. The site offers some minor opportunities for Brown Hare and Hedgehog, although the habitats present are common and widespread in the surrounding areas. However, it is recommended that precautionary safeguards are put in place to minimise the risk of harm to Hedgehog and Brown Hare, in the event that these species are present, as detailed in Chapter 6 below.

5.6 Amphibians

5.6.1 Legislation. All British amphibian species receive a degree of protection under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Great Crested Newt is protected under the Act and is also classed as a European Protected Species under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2019 (as amended). As such, both Great Crested Newt and habitats utilised by this species are afforded protection (see Appendix 5674/4 for detailed provisions). Great Crested Newt is also a S41 Priority Species, as are Common Toad Bufo bufo, Natterjack Toad Epidalea calamita, and Pool Frog Pelophylax lessonae. As such, these species should be assessed as important ecological features.

5.6.2 Background Records. No specific records of Great Crested Newt from within or adjacent to the site were returned from the desktop study. A number of records of Great Crested Newt were returned from the search area surrounding the site, with the closest record located approximately 1.1km to the north west of the site.

5.6.3 Surveys conducted for the Norwich Northern Distributor Road application included amphibian surveys of the pond P2 adjacent to the north of the site (see Plan 5674/ECO4), conducted in 2012. This survey recorded no amphibians at the pond. Pond P4 was considered unsuitable for survey, whilst P3 is not shown. Pond P1 has been created since construction of the road. The closest Great Crested Newt populations were recorded at ponds to the north-west of the site, likely corresponding with the record detailed above.

5.6.4 Information has also been sourced in relation to an application for land to the north of the site (application ref: 20160395). To inform this application, an environmental DNA (eDNA) survey was undertaken at pond P2 in 2015 which returned a negative result for Great Crested Newt. Pond P3 was not identified by this survey. A subsequent update habitat survey was undertaken in April 2019 to inform a reserved matters application and Biodiversity Management Plan (ref: 20191032). A specific update Great Crested Newt

May 2020 Page|16 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

survey was not undertaken although the Biodiversity Management Plan has been agreed by the Norfolk County Council Natural Environment Team.

5.6.5 Survey Results. Four ponds have been identified within close proximity to the site, as shown on Plan 5674/ECO4. An initial appraisal of ponds P2-P4 was made using the HSI system to identify potential suitability to support Great Crested Newt, see Table 5.1, below. Pond P1 was found to be dry at the time of survey and therefore not subject to analysis.

Table 5.1. HSI survey results. Suitability Indices

Pond HSI Score Suitability

SI 1 SI 2 SI 3 SI 4 SI 5 SI 6 SI 7 SI 8 SI 9 SI

Fish

SI 10 SI

Shade Ponds

Location

Pond Area Pond

Water Fowl Water

Pond Drying Pond

Macrophytes

Water Quality Water

Terrestrial Habitat Terrestrial

Offsite Ponds

P1 Dry at time of survey

P2 1 0.2 0.5 1 0.2 1 1 0.8 0.67 0.35 0.57 Below Average

P3 1 0.1 1 1 1 1 1 0.1 0.33 0.9 0.56 Below Average

P4 1 0.2 0.9 0.67 1 1 1 0.1 0.67 0.6 0.59 Below Average

5.6.6 Evaluation and Assessment of Likely Effects. In summary, all of the ponds surveyed were found to be of ‘Below Average’ potential to support Great Crested Newts. Due to the unsuitable HSI scores, lack of any nearby background records for this species and presence of suboptimal habitat within the site, it is considered highly unlikely that Great Crested Newt would be present and affected by the proposals. However, it is noted that the previous survey work is several years old and there is a low risk of colonization of adjacent ponds by a small newt population based on the suitability outlined during the HSI assessment.

5.6.7 It is therefore recommended that update surveys are undertaken at an appropriate stage prior to commencement of development to confirm mitigation and licensing requirements. It is considered that this could be conditioned, in accordance with the exceptional circumstances set out under Section 9.2.4 of BS4202019, namely “to confirm the continued absence of a protected species”. However, to satisfy the Council in regard to the current application that Great Crested Newt, if present, could be fully safeguarded under the proposals, and the three ‘licensing tests’ could be met, a precautionary mitigation strategy is set out at Appendix 5674/5, to be implemented in the event that Great Crested Newt is identified during update surveys. If required, this would be detailed as part of a European Protected Species (EPS) development licence.

5.7 Reptiles

5.7.1 Legislation. All six species of British reptile are listed under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), which protects individuals against intentional killing or injury. Sand Lizard Lacerta agilis and Smooth Snake Coronella austriaca receive additional protection under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2019 (as amended);

19 British Standards Institution (2013) ‘Biodiversity – Code of practice for planning and development’, BS 42020:2013

May 2020 Page|17 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

refer to Appendix 5674/4 for detailed provisions. All six reptile species are also S41 Priority Species. As such, all reptile species should be assessed as important ecological features.

5.7.2 Background Records. No specific records of any reptile species from within or adjacent to the site were returned from the desktop study. Information returned from NBIS returned records for Grass Snake Natrix natrix, with the closest located approximately 1km to the south-west of the site.

5.7.3 Surveys conducted for the Norwich Northern Distributor Road application included a reptile survey along the northern and eastern margins of the woodland to the north of the site. No reptiles were recorded in this location.

5.7.4 Evaluation and Assessment of Likely Effects. The site provides limited opportunities for reptiles, being dominated by arable with habitats of potential value being limited to boundary field margins. Given the size of the site and lack of connectivity to any habitats of elevated value to reptiles, the site is not considered likely to support any significant reptile interest. As such, reptiles are not considered likely to form an important ecological feature, although recommendations for the safe clearance of suitable habitat for Hedgehog will also safeguard any individual reptiles, in the unlikely event any are present at the time of the site clearance works.

5.8 Birds

5.8.1 Legislation. All wild birds and their nests receive protection under Section 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) in respect of killing and injury, and their nests, whilst being built or in use, cannot be taken, damaged or destroyed. Species included on Schedule 1 of the Act receive greater protection and are subject to special penalties (see Appendix 5674/4 for detailed provisions).

5.8.2 Conservation Status. The conservation importance of British bird species is categorised based on a number of criteria including the level of threat to a species’ population status20. Species are listed as Green, Amber or Red. Red Listed species are considered to be of the highest conservation concern being either globally threatened and or experiencing a high/rapid level of population decline (>50% over the past 25 years). A number of birds are also S41 Priority Species. Red and Amber listed species and priority species should be assessed as important ecological features.

5.8.3 Background Records. Information from the data search included records for several bird species in the vicinity of the site, including the Red Listed species Skylark Alauda arvensis, House Sparrow Passer domesticus, Grey Wagtail Motacilla cinerea, Nightingale Luscinia megarhynchos, Redwing Turdus iliacus, Spotted Flycatcher Muscicapa striata, Woodcock Scolopax rusticola, and Song Thrush Turdus philomelos. None of the records originate from within the site itself.

5.8.4 Surveys conducted for the Norwich Northern Distributor Road application indicated a ‘low’ estimated utilisation of the field forming the site by breeding birds. Whilst a general species list for the full survey area is provided, no further specific details for the site are available.

5.8.5 Survey Results. Several species of bird were observed within the site during the Phase 1 survey including Blackbird Turdus merula and Skylark.

20 Eaton MA, Aebischer NJ, Brown AF, Hearn RD, Lock L, Musgrove AJ, Noble DG, Stroud DA and Gregory RD (2015) ‘Birds of Conservation Concern 4: the population status of birds in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and the Isle of Man’ British Birds 108, pp.708-746

May 2020 Page|18 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

5.8.6 Evaluation. Most of the birds recorded at the site are not listed as having any special conservation status, although Skylark is included on the Red list as a result of declines in UK breeding populations and is also a Priority Species. However, the habitats present are common in the surrounding area and there is no evidence to suggest the site is of elevated value at a local level for this species, which in any case, is common in Great Britain21. The proposals could in the loss of young trees/scrub and this could potentially affect any nesting birds that may be present at the time of works. Accordingly, a number of safeguards in respect of nesting birds are proposed, as detailed in Chapter 6 below. In the long-term, new nesting opportunities will be available for birds as described in Chapter 6 below.

5.9 Invertebrates

5.9.1 Legislation. A number of invertebrate species are listed under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). In addition, Large Blue Butterfly Maculinea arion, Fisher’s Estuarine Moth Gortyna borelii lunata and Lesser Whirlpool Ram’s-horn Snail Anisus vorticulus receive protection under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2019 (as amended); refer to Appendix 5674/4 for detailed provisions. A number of invertebrates are also S41 Priority Species. Where such species are present, they should be assessed as important ecological features.

5.9.2 Background Records. No specific records of invertebrates were returned from within or adjacent to the site. Records of the Priority Species Red-shanked Carder-bee Bombus ruderarius, Cinnabar Tyria jacobaeae and Oak Hook-tip Watsonalla binaria were returned from NBIS, with the closest records for both and Cinnabar and Oak Hook-tip located approximately 0.7km north-west of the site, recorded in 2010.

5.9.3 Survey Results and Evaluation. No evidence for the presence of any protected, rare or notable invertebrate species was recorded within the site. The site is dominated by arable land, which is likely to support only a limited diversity of invertebrates. The site has several areas of bare ground and occasional patches of scrub but otherwise contains relatively few micro-habitats that would typically indicate elevated potential for invertebrates22, such as a variable topography with areas of vertical exposed soil, areas of species-rich semi-natural vegetation; variable vegetation structure with frequent patches of tussocks combined with short turf; free-draining light soils; walls with friable mortar or fibrous dung. Accordingly, given the habitat composition of the site and lack of adjacent sites designated for significant invertebrate interest, it is considered unlikely that the proposals will result in significant harm to any protected, rare or notable invertebrate populations, and the site is not considered to support an important invertebrate assemblage.

5.10 Summary

5.11 On the basis of the above, it considered that the site is unlikely to be of any elevated value to faunal species, although the habitats present in the site could support foraging/commuting bats, Brown Hare, Hedgehog, reptiles and nesting birds.

21 Population estimates of birds in Great Britain and the United Kingdom. Musgrove et al., British Birds, 2013 22 Natural England (2010) ‘Higher Level Stewardship – Farm Environment Plan (FEP) Manual’, 3rd Edition

May 2020 Page|19 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

6 Mitigation Measures and Ecological Enhancements

6.1 Mitigation

6.1.1 Based on the habitats, ecological features and associated fauna identified within / adjacent to the site, it is proposed that the following mitigation measures (MM1 – 9) are implemented under the proposals. Further, detailed mitigation strategies or method statements can be secured via suitably-worded planning conditions, as recommended by relevant best practice guidance (BS 42020:2019).

European Designations

6.1.2 MM1 – Recreational Activity. As set out in the Report to Inform a HRA at Appendix 5674/3, a number of measures are identified to be implemented by the proposed development to help promote use of alternative spaces and routes for recreation and reduce pressure at the Broads SAC and Broadlands SPA and Ramsar, namely:

6.1.3 MM2 –Tree Protection. All trees to be retained within the proposed development shall be protected during construction in line with standard arboriculturalist best practice (BS5837:2012) or as otherwise directed by a suitably competent arboriculturalist. This will involve the use of protective fencing or other methods appropriate to safeguard the root protection areas of retained trees.

Bats

6.1.4 MM3 – Sensitive Lighting. Light-spill onto retained and newly created habitat, in particular the retained offsite woodland, will be minimised in accordance with good practice guidance23 to reduce potential impacts on light-sensitive bats (and other nocturnal fauna). This may be achieved through the implementation of a sensitively designed lighting strategy, with consideration given to the following key factors:

 Light exclusion zones – ideally no lighting should be used in areas likely to be used by bats. Light exclusion zones or ‘dark buffers’ may be used to provide interconnected areas free of artificial illumination to allow bats to move around the site;

23 Bat Conservation Trust and Institute of Lighting Professionals (2018) ‘Guidance Note 08/18: Bats and artificial lighting in the UK’; Stone, E.L. (2013) ‘Bats and lighting: Overview of current evidence and mitigation guidance.’; ILP (2011) ‘Guidance notes for the reduction of obtrusive light’ Institution of Lighting Professionals, GN01:2011.

May 2020 Page|20 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

 Appropriate luminaire specifications – consideration should be given to the type of luminaires used, in particular luminaries should lack UV elements and metal halide and fluorescent sources should be avoided in preference for LED luminaries. A warm white spectrum (ideally <2,700K) should be adopted to reduce the blue light component;  Light barriers / screening – new planting (e.g. hedgerows and trees) or fences, walls and buildings can be strategically positioned to reduce light spill;  Spacing and height of lighting units – increasing spacing between lighting units will minimise the area illuminated and allow bats to fly in the dark refuges between lights. Reducing the height of lighting will also help decrease the volume of illuminated space and give bats a chance to fly over lighting units (providing the light does not spill above the vertical plane). Low level lighting options should be considered for any parking areas and pedestrian / cycle routes, e.g. bollard lighting, handrail lighting or LED footpath lighting;  Light intensity – light intensity (i.e. lux levels) should be kept as low as possible to reduce the overall amount and spread of illumination;  Directionality – to avoid light spill lighting should be directed only to where it is needed. Particular attention should be paid to avoid the upward spread of light so as to minimise trespass and sky glow;

 Dimming and part-night lighting – lighting control management systems can be used, which involves switching off/dimming lights for periods during the night, for example when human activity is generally low (e.g. 12.30 – 5.30am). The use of such control systems may be particularly beneficial during the active bat season (April to October). Motion sensors can also be used to limit the time lighting is operational. Badger

6.1.5 MM4 – Badger Construction Safeguards. In order to safeguard Badger should they enter the site during construction works, the following measures will be implemented:

 Any trenches or deep pits within the site that are to be left open overnight will be provided with a means of escape should a Badger enter. This could simply be in the form of a roughened plank of wood placed in the trench as a ramp to the surface. This is particularly important if the trench fills with water;  Any temporarily exposed open pipes (>150mm outside diameter) should be blanked off at the end of each working day so as to prevent Badgers gaining access as may happen when contractors are off-site;  Any trenches/pits will be inspected each morning to ensure no Badgers have become trapped overnight. Should a Badger become trapped in a trench it will likely attempt to dig itself into the side of the trench, forming a temporary sett. Should a trapped Badger be encountered a suitably qualified ecologist will be contacted immediately for further advice;  The storage of topsoil or other ‘soft’ building materials in the site will be given careful consideration. Badgers will readily adopt such mounds as setts. So as to avoid the adoption of any mounds, these will be kept to a minimum and any essential mounds subject to daily inspections with consideration given to temporarily fencing any such mounds to exclude Badgers;

May 2020 Page|21 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

 The storage of any chemicals at the site will be contained in such a way that they cannot be accessed or knocked over by any roaming Badgers;  Fires will only be lit in secure compounds away from areas of Badger activity and not allowed to remain lit during the night; and  Unsecured food and litter will not be left within the working area overnight.

6.1.6 MM5 – Badger Update Survey. Given that no evidence of Badgers has been recorded within or adjacent to the site it is considered that Badgers do not currently pose a constraint to development. Nonetheless, Badgers are dynamic animals and levels of Badger activity can rapidly change at a site, with new setts being created at any time. It is therefore recommended that an update survey is carried out prior to commencement of site works in order to confirm the current status of Badgers at the site.

Hedgehogs/reptiles

6.1.1 MM6 – Hedgehog/reptile Safeguards. In order to safeguard Hedgehogs, reptiles and other small mammals should they enter the site during construction works, the following measures will be implemented:

 A watching brief should be maintained for Hedgehog, reptiles and other small mammals throughout any clearance works;  Any piles of material already present on site, particularly vegetation/leaves, etc. and any areas of dense scrub or hedgerows, shall be dismantled/removed by hand and checked for animals prior to the use of any machinery/disposal;  Any material to be disposed of by burning, particularly waste from vegetation clearance and tree works, should not be left piled on site for more than 24 hours in order to minimise the risk of animals occupying the pile. If this cannot be avoided, material should be stored within a container such as a skip to prevent animals from gaining access. Any material which has been stored on the ground overnight should be moved prior to burning to allow a thorough check for any animals which may have been occupying the pile;  In the event that an injured Hedgehog or animal is found, the animal should be wrapped carefully in a towel and taken to a local vet immediately;

 To maintain connectivity throughout the site for Hedgehog and other small mammals and to allow access to suitable foraging habitat contained within residential gardens, small holes (13cmx13cm) should be created within garden fences or under gates.

Brown Hare

6.1.2 MM7 – Timing of Works. The general construction safeguards detailed previously in relation to Badger will also help to mitigate against adverse effects on Brown Hare. Further, to minimise the potential risk of injury and death to Brown Hare, habitats will be maintained at a short sward length prior to the commencement of works to reduce the likelihood of Brown Hare, particularly young leverets, using the vegetation on site for cover. In addition, where possible, site clearance will be avoided during the main breeding period for Brown Hare, specifically February to September/October. Should this not be feasible, a search of habitats within the site will be undertaken by a suitably qualified ecologist prior to the start of works.

May 2020 Page|22 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

Great Crested Newt

6.1.3 MM8 – Update Surveys. Great Crested Newt are considered unlikely to be present at the site, albeit the survey data for the surrounding ponds is several years old. As such, update surveys are proposed at an appropriate stage prior to commencement of development to confirm the continued absence of the species. In the unlikely event that Great Crested Newt are recorded, in accordance with best practice guidelines, and to ensure compliance with relevant legislation, a mitigation strategy would be put in place to take reasonable steps to minimise any potential impact on Great Crested Newts. This is set out at Appendix 5674/5. This provides the necessary information to satisfy the Council in regard to the current application that Great Crested Newt, if present, could be fully safeguarded under the proposals, and the three ‘licensing tests’ could be met. If required, the mitigation strategy set out below would be further detailed as part of an EPS development licence.

Nesting Birds

6.1.4 MM9 – Timing of Works. To avoid a potential offence under the relevant legislation, no clearance of suitable vegetation should be undertaken during the bird-nesting season (1st March to 31st August inclusive). If this is not practicable, any potential nesting habitat to be removed should first be checked by a competent ecologist in order to determine the location of any active nests. Any active nests identified would then need to be cordoned off (minimum 5m buffer) and protected until the end of the nesting season or until the birds have fledged. These checking surveys would need to be carried out no more than three days in advance of vegetation clearance.

6.2 Ecological Enhancements

6.2.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) encourages new developments to maximise the opportunities for biodiversity through incorporation of enhancement measures. The proposals present the opportunity to deliver ecological enhancements at the site for the benefit of local biodiversity, thereby making a positive contribution towards the broad objectives of national conservation priorities and the local Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP). The recommendations and enhancements summarised below are considered appropriate given the context of the site and the scale and nature of the proposals. Through implementation of the following ecological enhancements (EE1 – EE3), the opportunity exists for the proposals to deliver a number of biodiversity benefits at the site.

Habitat Creation

6.2.2 EE1 – New Planting. It is recommended that where practicable, new planting within the site be comprised of native species of local provenance, including trees and shrubs appropriate to the local area. Suitable species for inclusion within the planting could include native trees such as Oak, Ash, Birch Betula pendula and Field Maple, whilst native shrub species of particular benefit would likely include fruit and nut bearing species which would provide additional food for wildlife, such as Blackthorn, Hawthorn, Crab Apple Malus sylvestris, Hazel Corylus avellana and Elder. Where non-native species are proposed, these should include species of value to wildlife, such as varieties listed on the RHS’ ‘Plants for Pollinators’ database, providing a nectar source for bees and other pollinating insects.

6.2.3 EE2 – Wildflower Grassland. It is recommended that areas of wildflower grassland are created within the site such that, in combination with new native landscape planting, opportunities for biodiversity will be maximised under the proposals. This would make a positive contribution towards the local BAP, which lists ‘lowland meadows’ as a priority. Consideration should be given to the laying of wildflower turfs, comprising locally

May 2020 Page|23 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

appropriate native species, to establish wildflower grassland. This would ensure rapid establishment of these habitats, and reduce the timeframe for delivering the range of ecological benefits that are proposed.

EE3 – Wetland Features. The opportunity exists under the proposals to create new wetland habitats that will provide a range of opportunities for wildlife. It is recommended that the potential to create ponds or other wetland habitats such as Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) under the proposals be given due consideration. Creation of such habitats would provide opportunities for a range of wildlife (if guided by ecological principles) while also helping to attenuate surface water run-off.

May 2020 Page|24 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Ecological Appraisal

7 Conclusions

7.1 Aspect Ecology has carried out an Ecological Appraisal of the proposed development, based on the results of a desktop study, Phase 1 habitat survey and a number of detailed protected species surveys.

7.2 The available information confirms that no statutory or non-statutory nature conservation designations are present within or adjacent to the site, and none of the designations within the surrounding area are likely to be adversely affected by the proposals.

7.3 The Phase 1 habitat survey has established that the site is dominated by habitats not considered to be of ecological importance, whilst the proposals have sought to retain those features identified to be of value. Where it has not been practicable to avoid loss of habitats, new habitat creation has been proposed to offset losses, in conjunction with the landscape proposals.

7.4 The habitats within the site support several protected species, including species protected under both national and European legislation. Accordingly, a number of mitigation measures have been proposed to minimise the risk of harm to protected species, with compensatory measures proposed, where appropriate, in order to maintain the conservation status of local populations.

7.5 In conclusion, the proposals have sought to minimise impacts and subject to the implementation of appropriate avoidance, mitigation and compensation measures, it is considered unlikely that the proposals will result in significant harm to biodiversity. On the contrary, the opportunity exists to provide a number of biodiversity benefits as part of the proposals.

May 2020 Page|25

Plans

Plan 5674/ECO1:

Site Location

Plan 5674/ECO2:

Ecological Designations

Plan 5674/ECO3:

Habitats & Ecological Features

Plan 5674/ECO4:

Pond Plan

Appendices

Appendix 5674/1:

Desktop Study Data

5km Statutory Designations

Legend Local Nature Reserves (England)

National Nature Reserves (England)

Ramsar Sites (England) Sites of Special Scientific Interest (England)

Special Areas of Conservation (England) Special Protection Areas (England)

Projection = OSGB36 Map produced by MAGIC on 15 July, 2019. xmin = 615700 Copyright resides with the data suppliers and the map ymin = 306700 must not be reproduced without their permission. Some information xmax = 639200 in MAGIC is a snapshot of the information that is being maintained or (c) Crown Copyright and database rights 2019. Ordnance Survey 100022861. ymax = 318700 continually updated by the originating organisation. Please 0 1 2 refer to the metadata for details as information may be illustrative or representative rather than definitive at this stage.

km 2km Priority Habitats

Legend Ancient Woodland (England) Ancient and Semi-Natural Woodland Ancient Replanted Woodland Priority Habitat Inventory - Deciduous Woodland (England) Priority Habitat Inventory - Traditional Orchards (England) Priority Habitat Inventory - No main habitat but additional habitat exists (England)

Projection = OSGB36 Map produced by MAGIC on 15 July, 2019. xmin = 624000 Copyright resides with the data suppliers and the map ymin = 309600 must not be reproduced without their permission. Some information xmax = 633400 in MAGIC is a snapshot of the information that is being maintained or (c) Crown Copyright and database rights 2019. Ordnance Survey 100022861. ymax = 314700 continually updated by the originating organisation. Please 0 0.45 0.9 refer to the metadata for details as information may be illustrative or representative rather than definitive at this stage.

Appendix 5674/2:

Evaluation Methodology

1. The evaluation of ecological features and resources is based on professional judgement whilst also drawing on the latest available industry guidance and research. The approach taken in this report is based on that described by the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM) ‘Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland’ (2018)1.

Importance of Ecological Features

2. Ecological features within the site/study area have been evaluated in terms of whether they qualify as ‘important ecological features’. In this regard, CIEEM guidance states that “it is not necessary to carry out detailed assessment of features that are sufficiently widespread, unthreatened and resilient to project impacts and will remain viable and sustainable”.

3. Various characteristics contribute to the importance of ecological features, including:

• Naturalness; • Animal or plant species, sub-species or varieties that are rare or uncommon, either internationally, nationally or more locally, including those that may be seasonally transient; • Ecosystems and their component parts, which provide the habitats required by important species, populations and/or assemblages; • Endemic species or locally distinct sub-populations of a species; • Habitat diversity; • Habitat connectivity and/or synergistic associations; • Habitats and species in decline; • Rich assemblages of plants and animals; • Large populations of species or concentrations of species considered uncommon or threatened in a wider context; • Plant communities (and their associated animals) that are considered to be typical of valued natural/semi-natural vegetation types, including examples of naturally species- poor communities; and • Species on the edge of their range, particularly where their distribution is changing as a result of global trends and climate change.

4. As an objective starting point for identifying important ecological features, European, national and local governments have identified sites, habitats and species which form a key focus for biodiversity conservation in the UK, supported by policy and legislation. These are summarised by CIEEM guidance as follows:

Designated Sites

• Statutory sites designated or classified under international conventions or European legislation, for example World Heritage Sites, Biosphere Reserves, Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar sites), Special Areas of Conservation (SAC), Special Protection Areas (SPA);

1 CIEEM (2018) ‘Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland: Terrestrial, Freshwater, Coastal and Marine’, Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management, Winchester Page 1 of 3

• Statutory sites designated under national legislation, for example Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), National Nature Reserves (NNR) and Local Nature Reserves (LNR); • Locally designated wildlife sites, e.g. Local Wildlife Sites (LWS). Biodiversity Lists

• Habitats and species of principal importance for the conservation of biodiversity in England and Wales (largely drawn from UK BAP priority habitats and priority species), often referred to simply as Priority Habitats / Species; • Local BAP priority species and habitats.

Red Listed, Rare, Legally Protected Species

• Species of conservation concern, Red Data Book (RDB) species; • Birds of Conservation Concern; • Nationally rare and nationally scarce species; • Legally protected species.

5. In addition to this list, other features may be considered to be of importance on the basis of local rarity, where they enable effective conservation of other important features, or play a key functional role in the landscape.

Assigning Level of Importance

6. The importance of an ecological feature should then be considered within a defined geographical context. Based on CIEEM guidance, the following frame of reference is used:

• International (European); • National; • Regional; • County; • District; • Local (e.g. Parish or Neighbourhood); • Site (not of importance beyond the immediate context of the site).

7. Features of ‘local’ importance are those considered to be below a district level of importance, but are considered to appreciably enrich the nature conservation resource or are of elevated importance beyond the context of the site.

8. Where features are identified as ‘important’ based on the list of key sites, habitats and species set out above, but are very limited in extent or quality (in terms of habitat resource or species population) and do not appreciably contribute to the biodiversity interest beyond the context of the site, they are considered to be of ‘site’ importance.

9. In terms of assigning the level of importance, the following considerations are relevant:

Page 2 of 3

Designated Sites

10. For designated sites, importance should reflect the geographical context of the designation (e.g. SAC/SPA/Ramsar sites are designated at the international level whereas SSSIs are designated at the national level). Consideration should be given to multiple designations as appropriate (where an area is subject to differing levels of nature conservation designations).

Habitats

11. In certain cases, the value of a habitat can be measured against known selection criteria, e.g. SAC selection criteria, ‘Guidelines for the selection of biological SSSIs’ and the Hedgerows Regulations 1997. However, for the majority of commonly encountered sites, the most relevant habitat evaluation will be at a more localised level and based on relevant factors such as antiquity, size, species-diversity, potential, naturalness, rarity, fragility and typicalness (Ratcliffe, 1977). The ability to restore or re-create the habitat is also an important consideration, for example in the case of ancient woodland.

12. Whether habitats are listed as priorities for conservation at a national level in accordance with Sections 41 and 42 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (NERC) 2006, so called ‘Habitats of Principal Importance’ or ‘Priority Habitats’, or within regional or local Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs) is also relevant, albeit the listing of a particular habitat under a BAP does not in itself imply any specific level of importance.

13. Habitat inventories (such as habitat mapping on the MAGIC database) or information relating to the status of particular habitats within a district, county or region can also assist in determining the appropriate scale at which a habitat is of importance.

Species

14. Deciding the importance of species populations should make use of existing criteria where available. For example, there are established criteria for defining nationally and internationally important populations of waterfowl. The scale within which importance is determined could also relate to a particular population, e.g. the breeding population of common toads within a suite of ponds or an otter population within a catchment.

15. When determining the importance of a species population, contextual information about distribution and abundance is fundamental, including trends based on historical records. For example, a species could be considered particularly important if it is rare and its population is in decline. With respect to rarity, this can apply across the geographic frame of reference and particular regard is given to populations where the UK holds a large or significant proportion of the international population of a species.

16. Whether species are listed as priorities for conservation at a national level in accordance with Sections 41 and 42 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (NERC) 2006, so called ‘Species of Principal Importance’ or ‘Priority Species’, or within regional or local Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs) is also relevant, albeit the listing of a particular species under a BAP does not in itself imply any specific level of importance.

17. Species populations should also be considered in terms of the potential zone of influence of the proposals, i.e. if the entire species population within the site and surrounding area were to be affected by the proposed development, would this be of significance at a local, district, county or wider scale? This should also consider the foraging and territory ranges of individual species (e.g. bats roosting some distance from site may forage within site whereas other species such as invertebrates may be more sedentary).

Page 3 of 3

Appendix 5674/3:

Report to Inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including

Appropriate Assessment)

Land at Rackheath, Norwich

Report to Inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

May 2020

Quality Management Client: Halsbury Homes Ltd Project: Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report Title: Report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment) Project Number: 1005674 File Reference: 1005674 HRA vf4/MD/DM Date: 15/05/2020

Contact Details Aspect Ecology Ltd Hardwick Business Park I Noral Way I Banbury I Oxfordshire OX16 2AF t 01295 276066 e [email protected] w www.aspect-ecology.com

Contents

Text:

1 Introduction ...... 1

2 Description of Plan/Project ...... 4

3 Stage 1 - Screening of Likely Significant Effects ...... 5

4 Stage 2 – Appropriate Assessment: Broads SAC and Broadland SPA and Ramsar ...... 7

5 Summary and Conclusion ...... 14

Plans:

Plan 5674/HRA1 Site Location

Appendices:

Annex 5674/1 European Designations within the surrounds of the site - taken from Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) database

Annex 5674/2 Designated site citations

Annex 5674/3 Travel distances to potential recreational destinations

Annex 5674/4 Proposals plan

Annex 5674/5 Annotated NENGT AAP Policy Map illustrating proposed green infrastructure connectivity

Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

1 Introduction

1.1 Background and Proposals

1.1.1 Aspect Ecology has been commissioned by Halsbury Homes Ltd to provide a report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) in respect of land at Rackheath, Norwich (see Plan 5674/HRA1).

1.1.2 The proposals at the site are for 165 residential dwellings and 16 supported living bungalows.

1.1.3 The site is located approximately 4.4km to the north east of The Broads Special Area of Conservation (SAC), which is also designated as Broadland Special Protection Area (SPA) and Ramsar. A number of other European designations are also located within the wider vicinity of the site. As such, the proposals will need to be subject to a HRA under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended), setting out an assessment of effects on nearby European designations.

1.1.4 On this basis, the following report sets out information to inform a HRA (including Appropriate Assessment).

1.2 Legislation

1.2.1 All areas in England classified as Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) or SPAs, collectively known as European sites, receive statutory protection under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (the ‘Habitats Regulations’). These Regulations transpose into UK legislation the ‘Habitats Directive’ 1992 (92/43/EEC) and the ‘Birds Directive’ 2009 (2009/147/EC).

1.2.2 The Regulations impart a duty on Local Planning Authorities (competent authorities) to carefully consider whether any proposals may have a significant effect on a European site, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects. In most circumstances, permission may only be given for a plan or project to proceed if it has been ascertained that it will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of any such designation.

1.3 Assessment Methodology

1.3.1 The procedure for assessment of projects that are not directly connected with, or necessary to, the management of the designation for conservation is an ordered process following a number of key stages, as set out within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)1 and accompanying ODPM circular 06/20052, whilst further detail is provided by EC guidance relating to the Habitats Directive3,4.

Stage 1 – Screening

1.3.2 Under the first stage, it is necessary to examine if the proposals will result in any ‘likely significant effect’ on the internationally important features of the European site, either

1 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (February 2019) National Planning Policy Framework 2 ODPM Circular 06/2005: Government Circular: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – Statutory Obligations and their impact within the Planning System (16 August 2005) 3 European Commission (November 2001) Assessment of plans and projects significantly affecting Natura 2000 sites: Methodological guidance on the provisions of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC 4 European Commission (April 2000) Managing Natura 2000 sites: The provisions of Article 6 of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC

May 2020 Page|1 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

alone or in combination with other plans or projects. EC guidance recommends that key indicators should be used to determine the significance of effects.

1.3.3 If it can be objectively concluded that there are not likely to be significant effects on the European site, no further assessment is necessary and permission should not be refused under the assessment.

1.3.4 If any ‘likely significant effects’ are identified or where it remains unclear whether effects will be significant the assessment procedure should follow on to Stage 2.

1.3.5 Contrary to previous case law in England and Wales, following the recent Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruling (People over Wind, Peter Sweetman v Coillte Teoranta, Case C-323/17, dated 12 April 2018), measures intended to avoid or reduce the harmful effects of a plan or project on a European site should not be taken into account at this screening stage, and instead these must be considered as part of an Appropriate Assessment (Stage 2).

Stage 2 – Appropriate Assessment

1.3.6 Should it be determined that (in the absence of mitigation/avoidance measures) a plan or project will result in ‘likely significant effects’ on a European site (or that such effects cannot be ruled out), the competent authority should proceed to the next stage, where further assessment is required.

1.3.7 Under the second stage, it is necessary to determine whether the proposals, either alone or in combination with other projects or plans, will result in any adverse effects on the integrity of the site as defined by the conservation objectives and status of the site. The precautionary principle should be applied, and the focus should be on objectively demonstrating, with supporting evidence, that there will be no adverse effects on the integrity of the European site. Where this is not the case, adverse effects must be assumed.

1.3.8 If it is considered that the proposal will not adversely affect the integrity of the site, permission can be granted. If this cannot be ascertained, or there is uncertainty, the assessment procedure should follow on to Stage 3.

Stage 3 onwards

1.3.9 Under Stages 3 and 4, it is necessary to assess if there are alternative solutions and whether there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest. If these tests are passed, authorisation may be granted subject to compensation measures being secured.

1.4 Scoping and Consultation

1.4.1 A consultation response was received in relation to the withdrawn September 2019 application at the site from the Natural Environment Team at Norfolk County Council (NCC), dated 1 October 2019. The Natural Environment Team note in their response that the site is located on land outside the Residential Allocation under the North East Norwich Growth Triangle (NENGT) Area Action Plan (AAP), and accordingly is not including as part of the HRA for this plan. A HRA is recommended to be undertaken as part of this application, both as a standalone application and in-combination with other development within the growth triangle.

1.4.2 Following this response, a report to inform a HRA was produced to accompany the now withdrawn application, following which a further response was received from the Natural Environment Team dated 16 December 2019. This raises a number of points in relation to

May 2020 Page|2 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

the HRA report, including that the average household size in Plumstead in 2011 was 2.5 people per house, whilst further detail should be provided regarding travel distances, potential effects on Salhouse Broad (forming functionally linked habitat) and additional mitigation options. Consideration of these matters is provided in this report.

May 2020 Page|3 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

2 Description of Plan/Project

2.1 Site Location

2.1.1 The site is located to the north east of Norwich, Norfolk. The site is bound to the north east by Broad Lane, to the south east by a railway line and to the south west by the newly built A1270 and associated roadside verge, whilst agricultural land lies to the north west.

2.1.2 The site itself measures approximately 8ha and comprises an arable field with associated trees and scrub.

2.2 Development Proposals

2.2.1 The site is proposed for development of 165 residential dwellings and 16 supported living bungalows.

2.3 Cumulative Effects

2.3.1 As part of the assessment, consideration has been given to the potential for cumulative effects arising in-combination with other plans or projects. This includes specific consideration of development allocated under the North East Norwich Growth Triangle AAP, taking account of the HRA of this plan5, including the delivery of 7,000 homes by 2026, rising to 10,000 thereafter.

2.3.2 Consideration of in-combination effects is included where relevant within the following sections.

5 Norfolk County Council Natural Environment Team (May 2014) Habitats Regulations Assessment of the North East Norwich Growth Triangle Area Action Plan. Undertaken for Broadland District Council

May 2020 Page|4 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

3 Stage 1 - Screening of Likely Significant Effects

3.1 European Designations within the Surrounds of the Site

3.1.1 A number of European designations are located within the surrounds of the site, as listed below, with the distances and direction relating to the nearest point of the designation to the site:

 The Broads SAC, located 4.4 km to the south east;

 Broadland SPA and Ramsar, located 4.4 km to the south east;

 River Wensum SAC, located 8.7km to the west;

 Norfolk Valley Fens SAC, located 14.3km to the north west;

 Breydon Water SPA and Ramsar, located 16.4km to the east; and

 Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC, located 21.4km to the east.

3.1.2 A plan of European designations within the surrounds of the site is provided at Annex 5674/1.

3.2 European designations to be considered as part of this assessment

3.2.1 The HRA of the North-East Norwich Growth Triangle (NENGT) Area Action Plan6 has been reviewed. This document assesses developments within the NENGT, an area which contains the site (albeit the site itself is not allocated under this plan).

3.2.2 As detailed within the NENGT HRA, a number of the designations assessed were not considered likely to be significantly affected by development within the NENGT, largely on the basis of the distance between the designations and the boundary of the NENGT, whilst other factors such as existing visitor facilities were also taken into account. On this basis, Norfolk Valley Fens SAC and Breydon Water SPA and Ramsar were scoped out of the HRA.

3.2.3 The River Wensum SAC was considered further within the NENGT HRA, given the distance of approximately 6km between this designation and the NENGT, however it was considered that on the basis of this distance from the River catchment, effects from hydrology were considered unlikely, whilst given the restrictions of public access and low visitor numbers, effects from recreational activity were also considered unlikely. As such, this site was screened out in terms of further assessment.

3.2.4 Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC was subject to Appropriate Assessment within the NENGT HRA, however this report found no impact on the integrity of the designated features of this SAC from proposed development within the NENGT.

3.2.5 The NENGT HRA identifies a likely significant effect in relation to recreational disturbance at the Broads SAC and Broadland SPA and Ramsar, and indicates some small potential for an impact to be addressed by mitigation.

6 Norfolk County Council (May 2014) Habitats Regulation Assessment of the North-East Norwich Growth Triangle Area Action Plan – For Broadland District Council, May 2014, Proposed Submission Stage

May 2020 Page|5 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

3.2.6 On the basis of the above, given that the site is located within the NENGT area and would not result in a substantial increase in housing numbers above that set out under the plan, it is considered that the more distant designations can be screened out in terms of a likely significant effect, drawing on the conclusions of the NENGT HRA. As such, this assessment focuses on potential effects in relation to the Broads SAC and Broadland SPA and Ramsar.

3.3 Potential Effects in Relation to the Proposed Development

3.3.1 On the basis of the above, potential for an adverse effect has been identified in relation to the Broads SAC and Broadland SPA and Ramsar as a result of recreational pressure/disturbance from in-combination development. An Appropriate Assessment is therefore required in relation to the above. Information to inform such an assessment is set out in the following section.

May 2020 Page|6 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

4 Stage 2 – Appropriate Assessment: Broads SAC and Broadland SPA and Ramsar

4.1 Geographical Context

4.1.1 The Broads/Broadland comprises an extensive area of wetland habitat within eastern Norfolk, including inland waterbodies, bogs, fens, grassland and woodland. The area is subject to designation as SAC (covering 5,889ha) and SPA/Ramsar (covering 5,462ha).

4.1.2 Both the SAC and SPA/Ramsar designations lie approximately 4.4km to the south east of the site at its nearest point, separated by existing development, roads and agricultural land. The areas subject to SAC and SPA/Ramsar designation are also subject to designation under a number of Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), the nearest being Yare Broads and Marshes SSSI. The Broads/Broadland is also subject to designation as a number of National Nature Reserves (NNRs), the nearest of which being Mid-Yare NNR, managed by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and supported by Natural England. The other NNRs are managed by a combination of Natural England, Norfolk Wildlife Trust (NWT), Butterfly Conservation, The Broads Authority and Higher Level Stewardship Schemes.

4.2 Qualifying Features

The Broads SAC

4.2.1 The Broads SAC qualifies under Article 3 of the Habitats Directive by supporting the following Annex I habitats:

 Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp.

 Natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition - type vegetation

 Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae)

 Transition mires and quaking bogs

 Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae

 Alkaline fens

 Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior (Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae)

4.2.2 The Broads SAC also qualifies under Article 4(4) of the Habitats Directive by supporting the following Annex II species:

 Desmoulin's Whorl Snail Vertigo moulinsiana

 Fen Orchid Liparis loeselii

 Ramshorn Snail Anisus vorticulus

 Lutra lutra: Otter

May 2020 Page|7 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

Broadland SPA

4.2.3 Broadland SPA qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Birds Directive by supporting nationally important breeding populations of the following Annex I species:

 Bittern Botarus stellaris  Marsh Harrier Circus aeruginosus

4.2.4 Broadland SPA qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Birds Directive by supporting nationally important wintering populations of the following Annex I species:

 Bewick's Swan Cygnus columbianus bewickii  Bittern Botaurus stellaris*  Ruff Philomachus pugnax  Whooper Swan Cygnus Cygnus  Hen Harrier Circus cyaneus#

4.2.5 The SPA also qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Birds Directive by supporting internationally important wintering populations of the following migratory species:

 Wigeon Anas penelope#  Gadwall Anas strepera  Pink-footed Goose Anser brachyrhynchus*  Shoveler Anas clypeata

4.2.6 The SPA also qualifies under Article 4.2 of the Birds Directive by regularly supporting at least 20,000 waterfowl*.

Notes: * Species not listed under the citation documents, but included as part of the JNCC 2001 review # Species listed under the citation documents, but not included as part of the JNCC 2001 review

Broadland Ramsar

4.2.7 Broadland Ramsar qualifies under the following Ramsar criteria:

 Ramsar criterion 2: The site supports a number of rare species and habitats within the biogeographical zone context, including the habitats listed under the Broads SAC qualifying features.  Ramsar criterion 6: The site support qualifying species/populations including Bewick's Swan, Eurasian Wigeon Anas Penelope, Gadwall and Shoveler.

4.2.8 Citation forms for The Broads SAC and Broadland SPA and Ramsar are included at Annex 5674/2.

4.3 Conservation Objectives

4.3.1 The European Site Conservation Objectives for The Broads SAC are stated as:

May 2020 Page|8 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

Ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the Favourable Conservation Status of its Qualifying Features, by maintaining or restoring:

 The extent and distribution of qualifying natural habitats and habitats of qualifying species;

 The structure and function (including typical species) of qualifying natural habitats;

 The structure and function of the habitats of qualifying species;

 The supporting processes on which qualifying natural habitats and the habitats of qualifying species rely;

 The populations of qualifying species; and

 The distribution of qualifying species within the site.

4.3.2 The European Site Conservation Objectives for Broadland SPA are stated as:

Ensure that the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and ensure that the site contributes to achieving the aims of the Wild Birds Directive, by maintaining or restoring:

 The extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features;  The structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features;  The supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely;  The population of each of the qualifying features, and;  The distribution of the qualifying features within the site.

4.4 Consideration of Potential Effects

4.4.1 The NENGT HRA identifies a likely significant effect in regard to The Broads SAC and Broadland SPA and Ramsar, from recreational disturbance. An assessment of this effect, based on the proposed development alone and in-combination is set out below.

Disturbance

4.4.2 The NENGT HRA highlights potential effects on The Broads SAC and Broadland SPA and Ramsar as a result of recreational disturbance arising from new residential development, resulting in disturbance of bird populations. Potential vulnerabilities are specifically highlighted in regard to disturbance to breeding Marsh Harrier, roosting overwintering Hen Harrier, overwintering Wigeon, Gadwall and Shoveler, along with potential effects to the assemblage of wildfowl and waterbirds. The HRA also concludes that the remainder of the habitats and species of interest are unlikely to be affected by disturbance, largely due to being located in areas less likely to be impacted by recreation given the wet and inaccessible nature of the habitats.

4.4.3 Furthermore the NENGT HRA states that the NENGT is not located in close proximity to the component units of these designations, and as such, residents are unlikely to use this designation for day-to-day recreational activities such as dog walking. In addition, the HRA highlights ‘honey pot’ locations which are present within these designations (managed by organisations such as Natural England, NWT and the RSPB) and will likely absorb the

May 2020 Page|9 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

majority of visitors, and the existing management mechanisms will continue to be able to absorb such visitor pressures and address any likely impacts. Moreover, it is highlighted that the number of visitors from new development in the area will likely represent a comparatively small proportion of the total number of visitors arising from the existing population and tourists, who are being encouraged to visit by the Tourism Strategies which have been created by organisations such as the Broads Authority. Nevertheless, it is highlighted that some minor potential for impacts resulting from disturbance remains from in-combination development under the NENGT AAP, which should be addressed through mitigation measures. The proposed development could make a small additional contribution to this.

4.4.4 The December 2019 consultation response from NCC Natural Environment Team also highlights potential for disturbance to areas outside the SAC/SPA/Ramsar but which form functionally linked habitat. This issue is not specifically considered within the NENGT HRA, although a number of sites outside the designated area are noted as important sites for wildfowl (at Table 6). The Natural Environment Team response also notes Salhouse Broad as being functionally linked to the SAC/SPA/Ramsar, although this site is not referenced within the NENGT HRA.

Visitor survey information

4.4.5 Information is available regarding current visitor activity at The Broads SAC and Broadlands SPA and Ramsar within the Footprint Ecology report covering the various international designations within Norfolk7. This report contained the following findings:

 52% of visitors to all the Norfolk sites subject to assessment visited from home;  Holiday makers accounted for nearly half of interviewed visitors to the Broads;  77% of visitors arrived by car;  16% of visitors to the Broads stated the site being close to home as a reason for visiting;  32% of visitors to the Broads lived within 5km, beyond which visitor rates sharply fall off;  The median distance travelled to visit the Broads was 73.1km;  Dog walking accounted for a relatively small proportion of visits to the Broads, at 17%;  A 14% increase in visits to the Boards is anticipated in line with development set out in local planning policy, in the absence of mitigation.

4.4.6 Given the wide catchment of the Broads and the national interest in the site, it was noted that it is difficult to assess changes in recreational pressure resulting from new development in the vicinity of the designations.

4.4.7 On this basis, it appears that a significant proportion of existing visitors to the Broads are tourists from a wide catchment, which is not unexpected given the national interest in the site, and the policies promoting tourism in the area. This is also facilitated by the nature of access at the designation, with access and facilities managed by a network of conservation organisations including Natural England, NWT and the RSPB across the network of NNRs.

7 Pinter, C., Liley, D. and Lowen, S. (2017) Visitor Surveys at European Protected Sites Across Norfolk During 2015 and 2016. Footprint Ecology

May 2020 Page|10 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

4.4.8 It is therefore considered that whilst new development will increase visitor numbers to the designations, new residents are not the primary source of visits, whilst there is clearly capacity at the NNRs which are being managed for this purpose by a number of conservation organisations. Nevertheless, mitigation is detailed below in any event.

Proposed development and accessibility

4.4.9 The site is proposed for development of 165 new dwellings. Based on an average occupancy of 2.5 people8, this would result in a total population of approximately 412.5 people. As such, the increase in visitor numbers arising from the proposed development is likely to be negligible (accounting for less than a 3% increase relative to housing proposed under the NENGT AAP by 2026).

4.4.10 The closest route by road to a suitable parking area and access point at this designation is approximately 8.5km from the site, at the Cockshoot Broad (see Annex 5674/3). Other access points to the SAC/SPA/Ramsar are located further from the site. As such, all access points are a moderate distance from the site, such that residents are unlikely to regularly visit the designations, although a small number may make some use of this area for recreation.

4.4.11 A review of other sites noted to support important waterfowl populations (as identified at Table 6 of the NENGT HRA) has been undertaken to identify if any of these functionally linked sites are likely to be subject to increased recreational pressure. The majority lie further from the site than the nearest access point to the SAC/SPA/Ramsar (Cockshoot Broad as set out above), although Wroxham Broad and Thorpe Marshes are marginally closer, at 7.1km and 7.4km by road from the site respectively (see Annex 5674/3). Both of these sites are noted to support Gadwall, specifically listed as an interest feature of the SPA, with other wildfowl assemblage species including Bean Goose, Mallard, Pochard and Tufted Duck. There does not appear to be parking available at Thorpe Marshes, and whilst a car park is present at Wroxham Broad, there does not appear to be public access along the shore of the lake beyond the immediate surrounds of the car park. Accordingly, bird interest species are unlikely to be affected by recreational disturbance at these locations.

4.4.12 Salhouse Broad identified by the NCC Natural Environment Team response lies 5.1km by road from the site (see Annex 5674/3), whilst a car park is present a short distance to the south of the lake. A circular walk ‘Bittern to Salthouse’ also leads to this area, whilst the Broad is promoted as a tourist destination. Accordingly this area is relatively accessible from the proposed development and may be subject to some increase in recreational activity. However, Salhouse Broad is not referenced within the NENGT HRA as an important wildfowl site, whilst interest species known to occur at the Broad9 are limited to Marsh Harrier. This would not comprise breeding activity (Marsh Harrier breeding in reedbeds and other tall fen vegetation which appears to be absent from Salhouse Broad) and foraging birds are unlikely to be sensitive to recreational disturbance. As such, increased recreational activity at this location is unlikely to affect the integrity of Broadlands SPA and Ramsar.

Summary

4.4.13 On the basis of the above, it is considered unlikely that the proposed development would make a significant contribution to recreational pressure at the Broads SAC or Broadland SPA

8 Based on average household size in Plumstead in 2011 from Norfolk Insight (2019): http://www.norfolkinsight.org.uk/housing/report/view/d1cfcb22a23446f7a8e49bd75b8ae734/E05005774/ 9 https://www.salhousebroad.org.uk/flora--fauna.html

May 2020 Page|11 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

and Ramsar, whilst bird species within areas of functionally linked habitat are unlikely to be subject to recreational disturbance associated with the development.

4.4.14 However, a small number of residents could make occasional use of the SAC/SPA/Ramsar for recreation, which in-combination with existing recreational use, could result in disturbance to some bird species at vulnerable times of year. As such, this is addressed by mitigation as set out below.

4.5 Mitigation/Avoidance Measures

Open space and habitat provision

4.5.1 Given a very small potential impact has been identified within the NENGT HRA on The Broads SAC and Broadlands SPA and Ramsar as a result of recreational pressure, which the proposed development could contribute to (albeit any usage would be limited at most), consideration is given to mitigation and avoidance measures.

4.5.2 The strategy set out within the NENGT HRA is based on provision of alternative greenspace, providing an attractive destination for visitors to use for recreation rather than the Broads SAC and Broadlands SPA and Ramsar. This includes greenspace within development sites, together with more substantial areas being delivered as part of consented sites and new allocations. Schemes are also proposed to improve connectivity for non-vehicular users.

4.5.3 Approximately 85ha of greenspace is to be provided under three considered schemes, namely Brook Farm (ref: 20090886) located 1km to the south west, White House Farm (ref: 20080367), located 1.8km to the west, and North Sprowston and Old Catton (ref: 20121516), located 2.7km to the north west. A further 40ha or more is to be provided under proposed allocations including a proposed 30ha site between the NENGT and the designation, which is required to comprise acid grassland or woodland/parkland. It is also noted that smaller scale applications, particularly in the south also contain open space within their boundaries, which will be located in close proximity to the site, given its location in the southern half of the NENGT.

4.5.4 Accordingly, substantial greenspace will be available in much closer proximity to the site, providing an attractive alternative recreational resource. Furthermore, approximately 2.4ha of open space is to be provided under the scheme itself (see Annex 5674/4), providing a sizeable area for day to day recreation (e.g. dog walking). Consideration will be given to fencing and other measures at the detailed stage to ensure that safe areas are available within the site for dogs to be let off the lead.

4.5.5 It is noted that areas immediately north of the site are allocated for development under the NENGT AAP (GT 18: Land South of Green Lane West and GT 19: Land South of Green Lane East). Under the AAP, these sites are required to provide pedestrian and cycle links across the frontage of the site adjacent to Green Lane West/East and landscaping along the western edge adjacent to the Northern Distributor Road. This will provide connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists to the north, linking to the proposed green infrastructure corridor to the north of Rackheath under the AAP (GT 2: Primary Green Infrastructure Corridor). Accordingly, it is proposed that the detailed proposals for the site at the reserved matters stage allow for pedestrian and cycle access to these links, either via the road or to an agreed point at the site boundary, promoting connectivity to the wider green infrastructure network. This is illustrated at Annex 5674/5, whilst the proposed links are shown at Annex 5674/4. As these plans indicate, the open space provision within the site together with the offsite linkages will provide a readily available resource for day to day recreation by the residents of the scheme.

May 2020 Page|12 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

4.5.6 To further promote these alternative greenspaces and encourage sensitive behaviour if residents do visit the Broads SAC and Broadlands SPA and Ramsar, it is proposed that information packs are provided to new residents setting out what open spaces are available and how impacts on vulnerable wildlife can be avoided.

4.5.7 As such, it is considered that these alternative areas of publicly accessible green space would be more likely to be used for activities such as dog walking by the majority of residents, and accordingly visits to the Broads SAC and Broadlands SPA and Ramsar would be reduced to negligible levels. In any event, these visits would be likely to be located in areas already subject to existing management regimes, with capacity to absorb recreational visits with minimal impact. As such, it is considered that following mitigation, any contribution to recreational activity associated with the proposed development would be negligible, and an adverse effect on integrity would be avoided.

4.6 Conclusion

4.6.1 Following implementation of the measures set out above, it is concluded that any potential effects on the Broads SAC and Broadlands SPA and Ramsar as a result of the proposed development in-combination with other plans and proposals will be avoided.

May 2020 Page|13 Land at Rackheath, Norwich Report to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (including Appropriate Assessment)

5 Summary and Conclusion

5.1 Aspect Ecology is advising Halsbury Homes Ltd in respect of ecological issues relating to land at Rackheath, Norwich. An outline planning application has been submitted for 165 residential dwellings and 16 supported living bungalows.

5.2 The site is located approximately 4.4km from The Broads Special Area of Conservation (SAC), which is also designated as Broadland Special Protection Area (SPA) and Ramsar, which is located to the south east of the site at its nearest point. This report therefore provides an assessment of potential effects on European designations arising from the proposed development so as to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment.

5.3 Based on the nature of the development and separation from surrounding designations, these can largely be screened out in terms of likely significant effects. However, potential effects as a result of recreation are identified in relation to the Broads SAC and Broadlands SPA and Ramsar. Accordingly, information to inform an Appropriate Assessment in relation to these designations is provided. This identifies a number of measures to be implemented by the proposed development to help promote use of alternative spaces and routes for recreation and reduce pressure at the SAC/SPA/Ramsar, namely:

 Approximately 2.4ha of open space is to be provided under the scheme itself, providing a sizeable area for day to day recreation (e.g. dog walking);  The detailed proposals for the site at the reserved matters stage will allow for pedestrian and cycle access to links to be provided by adjacent developments to the north of the site, either via the road or to an agreed point at the site boundary, promoting connectivity to the wider green infrastructure network; and  To further promote these alternative greenspaces and encourage sensitive behaviour if residents do visit the Broads SAC and Broadlands SPA and Ramsar, information packs will be provided to new residents setting out what open spaces are available and how impacts on vulnerable wildlife can be avoided. 5.4 In conclusion, given the nature of the proposals and taking into account the existing, newly created and proposed publicly accessible greenspace in the surrounds of the site, along with new open space provision and other measures to promote such areas under the proposals for the site, it is considered that the project will have no adverse effect on the integrity of the European sites, either alone or in-combination with other plans and projects.

May 2020 Page|14 Plan 5674/HRA1

Site Location

Annex 5674/1

European Designations within the surrounds of the site - taken from Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) database

25km European Designations

Legend Ramsar Sites (England) Special Areas of Conservation (England)

Special Protection Areas (England) Special Areas of Conservation (Marine Components GB) Candidate Designated Possible Special Protection Areas (Marine Components GB) Classified Potential

Projection = OSGB36 Map produced by MAGIC on 15 July, 2019. xmin = 571300 Copyright resides with the data suppliers and the map ymin = 285300 must not be reproduced without their permission. Some information xmax = 680200 in MAGIC is a snapshot of the information that is being maintained or (c) Crown Copyright and database rights 2019. Ordnance Survey 100022861. ymax = 344100 continually updated by the originating organisation. Please 0 5 10 refer to the metadata for details as information may be illustrative or representative rather than definitive at this stage.

km Annex 5674/2

Designated site citations

NATURA 2000 – STANDARD DATA FORM

Special Areas of Conservation under the EC Habitats Directive (includes candidate SACs, Sites of Community Importance and designated SACs).

Each Natura 2000 site in the United Kingdom has its own Standard Data Form containing site-specific information. The data form for this site has been generated from the Natura 2000 Database submitted to the European Commission on the following date:

22/12/2015

The information provided here, follows the officially agreed site information format for Natura 2000 sites, as set out in the Official Journal of the European Union recording the Commission Implementing Decision of 11 July 2011 (2011/484/EU).

The Standard Data Forms are generated automatically for all of the UK’s Natura 2000 sites using the European Environment Agency’s Natura 2000 software. The structure and format of these forms is exactly as produced by the EEA’s Natura 2000 software (except for the addition of this coversheet and the end notes). The content matches exactly the data submitted to the European Commission.

Please note that these forms contain a number of codes, all of which are explained either within the data forms themselves or in the end notes.

Further technical documentation may be found here http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Natura_2000/reference_portal

As part of the December 2015 submission, several sections of the UK’s previously published Standard Data Forms have been updated. For details of the approach taken by the UK in this submission please refer to the following document: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/Natura2000_StandardDataForm_UKApproach_Dec2015.pdf

More general information on Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) in the United Kingdom is available from the SAC home page on the JNCC website. This webpage also provides links to Standard Data Forms for all SACs in the UK.

Date form generated by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee 25 January 2016.

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/

NATURA 2000 - STANDARD DATA FORM For Special Protection Areas (SPA), Proposed Sites for Community Importance (pSCI), Sites of Community Importance (SCI) and for Special Areas of Conservation (SAC)

SITE UK0013577

SITENAME The Broads

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. SITE IDENTIFICATION 2. SITE LOCATION 3. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION 4. SITE DESCRIPTION 5. SITE PROTECTION STATUS AND RELATION WITH CORINE BIOTOPES 6. SITE MANAGEMENT

1. SITE IDENTIFICATION

1.1 Type 1.2 Site code Back to top B UK0013577

1.3 Site name

The Broads

1.4 First Compilation date 1.5 Update date 1996-01 2015-12

1.6 Respondent:

Name/Organisation: Joint Nature Conservation Committee Joint Nature Conservation Committee Monkstone House City Road Peterborough Address: PE1 1JY Email:

Date site proposed as SCI: 1996-01

Date site confirmed as SCI: 2004-12

Date site designated as SAC: 2005-04

Regulations 11 and 13-15 of the Conservation of Habitats National legal reference of SAC and Species Regulations 2010 designation: (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/490/contents/made).

2. SITE LOCATION

Longitude Latitude 1.603611111 52.73527778

2.2 Area [ha]: 2.3 Marine area [%] 5889.43 0.0

2.4 Sitelength [km]: 0.0

2.5 Administrative region code and name

NUTS level 2 code Region Name

UKH1 East Anglia

2.6 Biogeographical Region(s)

(100.0 Atlantic %)

3. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Annex I Habitat types Site assessment

Cover Cave Data Code PF NP A|B|C|D A|B|C [ha] [number] quality

Relative Representativity Conservation Global Surface

3140 175.51 G A A A A

3150 292.12 G A B A B

6410 58.31 G B C A C

7140 5.89 G B C A B

7210 X 209.07 G A A A A

7230 5.89 G A C A B

91E0 X 763.27 G A B A A

PF: for the habitat types that can have a non-priority as well as a priority form (6210, 7130, 9430) enter "X" in the column PF to indicate the priority form. NP: in case that a habitat type no longer exists in the site enter: x (optional) Cover: decimal values can be entered Caves: for habitat types 8310, 8330 (caves) enter the number of caves if estimated surface is not available. Data quality: G = 'Good' (e.g. based on surveys); M = 'Moderate' (e.g. based on partial data with some extrapolation); P = 'Poor' (e.g. rough estimation)

3.2 Species referred to in Article 4 of Directive 2009/147/EC and listed in Annex II of Directive 92/43/EEC and site evaluation for them

Species Population in the site Site assessment

Scientific G Code S NP T Size Unit Cat. D.qual. A|B|C|D A|B|C Name

Min Max Pop. Con. Iso. Glo.

Anisus I 4056 p P DD B B C B vorticulus

Liparis P 1903 p 251 500 i M C B A B loeselii

M 1355 Lutra lutra p 23 23 i G C A C C

Triturus A 1166 p P DD D cristatus

Vertigo I 1016 p P DD C A C A moulinsiana

Group: A = Amphibians, B = Birds, F = Fish, I = Invertebrates, M = Mammals, P = Plants, R = Reptiles S: in case that the data on species are sensitive and therefore have to be blocked for any public access enter: yes NP: in case that a species is no longer present in the site enter: x (optional) Type: p = permanent, r = reproducing, c = concentration, w = wintering (for plant and non-migratory species use permanent) Unit: i = individuals, p = pairs or other units according to the Standard list of population units and codes in accordance with Article 12 and 17 reporting (see reference portal) Abundance categories (Cat.): C = common, R = rare, V = very rare, P = present - to fill if data are deficient (DD) or in addition to population size information Data quality: G = 'Good' (e.g. based on surveys); M = 'Moderate' (e.g. based on partial data with some extrapolation); P = 'Poor' (e.g. rough estimation); VP = 'Very poor' (use this category only, if not even a rough estimation of the population size can be made, in this case the fields for population size can remain empty, but the field "Abundance categories" has to be filled in)

4. SITE DESCRIPTION

Habitat class % Cover

N09 1.0 N10 39.0 N06 16.0 N08 1.0 N07 19.0 N16 24.0

Total Habitat Cover 100

Other Site Characteristics 1 Terrestrial: Soil & Geology:nutrient-poor,alluvium,basic,nutrient-rich,clay,peat2 Terrestrial: Geomorphology and landscape:floodplain,lowland,valley

4.2 Quality and importance Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp.for which this is considered to be one of the best areas in the United Kingdom.Natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition-type vegetationfor which this is considered to be one of the best areas in the United Kingdom.Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae)for which the area is considered to support a significant presence.Transition mires and quaking bogsfor which this is considered to be one of the best areas in the United Kingdom.Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianaefor which this is considered to be one of the best areas in the United Kingdom.which is considered to be rare as its total extent in the United Kingdom is estimated to be less than 1000 hectares.Alkaline fensfor which this is considered to be one of the best areas in the United Kingdom.Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior (Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae)for which this is considered to be one of the best areas in the United Kingdom.Liparis loeseliifor which this is one of only three known outstanding localities in the United Kingdom.which is known from 15 or fewer 10 x 10 km squares in the United Kingdom.Lutra lutrafor which the area is considered to support a significant presence.Vertigo moulinsianafor which this is considered to be one of the best areas in the United Kingdom.Anisus vorticulusfor which this is considered to be one of the best areas in the United Kingdom.

4.3 Threats, pressures and activities with impacts on the site

The most important impacts and activities with high effect on the site

Negative Impacts Positive Impacts Threats Activities, Pollution Pollution inside/outside and inside/outside Rank management (optional) Rank (optional) [i|o|b] pressures [i|o|b] [code] [code] [code] [code] H D05 I H M01 B H B02 I H H02 B H A04 I H I01 B H A02 I H D05 I H A06 I Rank: H = high, M = medium, L = low Pollution: N = Nitrogen input, P = Phosphor/Phosphate input, A = Acid input/acidification, T = toxic inorganic chemicals, O = toxic organic chemicals, X = Mixed pollutions i = inside, o = outside, b = both

4.5 Documentation Conservation Objectives - the Natural England links below provide access to the Conservation Objectives (and other site-related information) for its terrestrial and inshore Natura 2000 sites, including conservation advice packages and supporting documents for European Marine Sites within English waters and for cross-border sites. See also the 'UK Approach' document for more information (link via the JNCC website).

Link(s): http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/category/6490068894089216

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/Natura2000_StandardDataForm_UKApproach_Dec2015.pdf

http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/category/3212324

5. SITE PROTECTION STATUS (optional)

Code Cover [%] Code Cover [%] Code Cover [%]

UK01 35.7 UK04 100.0 6. SITE MANAGEMENT

Organisation: Natural England Address: Email:

6.2 Management Plan(s): An actual management plan does exist:

Yes

No, but in preparation

X No

6.3 Conservation measures (optional) For available information, including on Conservation Objectives, see Section 4.5. EXPLANATION OF CODES USED IN THE NATURA 2000 STANDARD DATA FORMS

The codes in the table below are also explained in the official European Union guidelines for the Standard Data Form. The relevant page is shown in the table below.

1.1 Site type CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO A Designated Special Protection Area 53 SAC (includes candidates Special Areas of Conservation, Sites of Community Importance and B 53 designated SAC) C SAC area the same as SPA. Note in the UK Natura 2000 submission this is only used for Gibraltar 53

3.1 Habitat representativity CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO A Excellent 57 B Good 57 C Significant 57 D Non-significant presence 57

3.1 Habitat code CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO 1110 Sandbanks which are slightly covered by sea water all the time 57 1130 Estuaries 57 1140 Mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide 57 1150 Coastal lagoons 57 1160 Large shallow inlets and bays 57 1170 Reefs 57 1180 Submarine structures made by leaking gases 57 1210 Annual vegetation of drift lines 57 1220 Perennial vegetation of stony banks 57 1230 Vegetated sea cliffs of the Atlantic and Baltic Coasts 57 1310 Salicornia and other annuals colonizing mud and sand 57 1320 Spartina swards (Spartinion maritimae) 57 1330 Atlantic salt meadows (Glauco-Puccinellietalia maritimae) 57 1340 Inland salt meadows 57 1420 Mediterranean and thermo-Atlantic halophilous scrubs (Sarcocornetea fruticosi) 57 2110 Embryonic shifting dunes 57 2120 Shifting dunes along the shoreline with Ammophila arenaria ("white dunes") 57 2130 Fixed coastal dunes with herbaceous vegetation ("grey dunes") 57 2140 Decalcified fixed dunes with Empetrum nigrum 57 2150 Atlantic decalcified fixed dunes (Calluno-Ulicetea) 57 2160 Dunes with Hippopha• rhamnoides 57 2170 Dunes with Salix repens ssp. argentea (Salicion arenariae) 57 2190 Humid dune slacks 57 21A0 Machairs (* in Ireland) 57 2250 Coastal dunes with Juniperus spp. 57 2330 Inland dunes with open Corynephorus and Agrostis grasslands 57 3110 Oligotrophic waters containing very few minerals of sandy plains (Littorelletalia uniflorae) 57 Oligotrophic to mesotrophic standing waters with vegetation of the Littorelletea uniflorae and/or of 3130 57 the Isoëto-Nanojuncetea 3140 Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp. 57 3150 Natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition - type vegetation 57 CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO 3160 Natural dystrophic lakes and ponds 57 3170 Mediterranean temporary ponds 57 3180 Turloughs 57 Water courses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho-Batrachion 3260 57 vegetation 4010 Northern Atlantic wet heaths with Erica tetralix 57 4020 Temperate Atlantic wet heaths with Erica ciliaris and Erica tetralix 57 4030 European dry heaths 57 4040 Dry Atlantic coastal heaths with Erica vagans 57 4060 Alpine and Boreal heaths 57 4080 Sub-Arctic Salix spp. scrub 57 5110 Stable xerothermophilous formations with Buxus sempervirens on rock slopes (Berberidion p.p.) 57 5130 Juniperus communis formations on heaths or calcareous grasslands 57 6130 Calaminarian grasslands of the Violetalia calaminariae 57 6150 Siliceous alpine and boreal grasslands 57 6170 Alpine and subalpine calcareous grasslands 57 Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia) (* 6210 57 important orchid sites) Species-rich Nardus grasslands, on silicious substrates in mountain areas (and submountain areas in 6230 57 Continental Europe) 6410 Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae) 57 6430 Hydrophilous tall herb fringe communities of plains and of the montane to alpine levels 57 6510 Lowland hay meadows (Alopecurus pratensis, Sanguisorba officinalis) 57 6520 Mountain hay meadows 57 7110 Active raised bogs 57 7120 Degraded raised bogs still capable of natural regeneration 57 7130 Blanket bogs (* if active bog) 57 7140 Transition mires and quaking bogs 57 7150 Depressions on peat substrates of the Rhynchosporion 57 7210 Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae 57 7220 Petrifying springs with tufa formation (Cratoneurion) 57 7230 Alkaline fens 57 7240 Alpine pioneer formations of the Caricion bicoloris-atrofuscae 57 8110 Siliceous scree of the montane to snow levels (Androsacetalia alpinae and Galeopsietalia ladani) 57 8120 Calcareous and calcshist screes of the montane to alpine levels (Thlaspietea rotundifolii) 57 8210 Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation 57 8220 Siliceous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation 57 8240 Limestone pavements 57 8310 Caves not open to the public 57 8330 Submerged or partially submerged sea caves 57 Atlantic acidophilous beech forests with Ilex and sometimes also Taxus in the shrublayer (Quercion 9120 57 robori-petraeae or Ilici-Fagenion) 9130 Asperulo-Fagetum beech forests 57 9160 Sub-Atlantic and medio-European oak or oak-hornbeam forests of the Carpinion betuli 57 9180 Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines 57 9190 Old acidophilous oak woods with Quercus robur on sandy plains 57 91A0 Old sessile oak woods with Ilex and Blechnum in the British Isles 57 91C0 Caledonian forest 57 91D0 Bog woodland 57 Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior (Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion 91E0 57 albae) 91J0 Taxus baccata woods of the British Isles 57

3.1 Relative surface CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO A 15%-100% 58 B 2%-15% 58 C < 2% 58

3.1 Conservation status habitat CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO A Excellent conservation 59 B Good conservation 59 C Average or reduced conservation 59

3.1 Global grade habitat CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO A Excellent value 59 B Good value 59 C Significant value 59

3.2 Population (abbreviated to ‘Pop.’ in data form) CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO A 15%-100% 62 B 2%-15% 62 C < 2% 62 D Non-significant population 62

3.2 Conservation status species (abbreviated to ‘Con.’ in data form) CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO A Excellent conservation 63 B Good conservation 63 C Average or reduced conservation 63

3.2 Isolation (abbreviated to ‘Iso.’ in data form) CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO A Population (almost) Isolated 63 B Population not-isolated, but on margins of area of distribution 63 C Population not-isolated within extended distribution range 63

3.2 Global Grade (abbreviated to ‘Glo.’ Or ‘G.’ in data form) CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO A Excellent value 63 B Good value 63 C Significant value 63

3.3 Assemblages types CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO WATR Non breeding waterfowl assemblage UK specific code SBA Breeding seabird assemblage UK specific code BBA Breeding bird assemblage (applies only to sites classified pre 2000) UK specific code

4.1 Habitat class code CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO N01 Marine areas, Sea inlets 65 N02 Tidal rivers, Estuaries, Mud flats, Sand flats, Lagoons (including saltwork basins) 65 N03 Salt marshes, Salt pastures, Salt steppes 65 N04 Coastal sand dunes, Sand beaches, Machair 65 N05 Shingle, Sea cliffs, Islets 65 N06 Inland water bodies (Standing water, Running water) 65 N07 Bogs, Marshes, Water fringed vegetation, Fens 65 N08 Heath, Scrub, Maquis and Garrigue, Phygrana 65 N09 Dry grassland, Steppes 65 N10 Humid grassland, Mesophile grassland 65 N11 Alpine and sub-Alpine grassland 65 N14 Improved grassland 65 N15 Other arable land 65 N16 Broad-leaved deciduous woodland 65 N17 Coniferous woodland 65 N19 Mixed woodland 65 N21 Non-forest areas cultivated with woody plants (including Orchards, groves, Vineyards, Dehesas) 65 N22 Inland rocks, Screes, Sands, Permanent Snow and ice 65 N23 Other land (including Towns, Villages, Roads, Waste places, Mines, Industrial sites) 65 N25 Grassland and scrub habitats (general) 65 N26 Woodland habitats (general) 65

4.3 Threats code CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO A01 Cultivation 65 A02 Modification of cultivation practices 65 A03 Mowing / cutting of grassland 65 A04 Grazing 65 A05 Livestock farming and animal breeding (without grazing) 65 A06 Annual and perennial non-timber crops 65 A07 Use of biocides, hormones and chemicals 65 A08 Fertilisation 65 A10 Restructuring agricultural land holding 65 A11 Agriculture activities not referred to above 65 B01 Forest planting on open ground 65 B02 Forest and Plantation management & use 65 B03 Forest exploitation without replanting or natural regrowth 65 B04 Use of biocides, hormones and chemicals (forestry) 65 B06 Grazing in forests/ woodland 65 B07 Forestry activities not referred to above 65 C01 Mining and quarrying 65 C02 Exploration and extraction of oil or gas 65 C03 Renewable abiotic energy use 65 D01 Roads, paths and railroads 65 D02 Utility and service lines 65 D03 Shipping lanes, ports, marine constructions 65 D04 Airports, flightpaths 65 D05 Improved access to site 65 E01 Urbanised areas, human habitation 65 E02 Industrial or commercial areas 65 CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO E03 Discharges 65 E04 Structures, buildings in the landscape 65 E06 Other urbanisation, industrial and similar activities 65 F01 Marine and Freshwater Aquaculture 65 F02 Fishing and harvesting aquatic ressources 65 Hunting and collection of wild animals (terrestrial), including damage caused by game (excessive density), and taking/removal of terrestrial animals (including collection of insects, reptiles, F03 65 amphibians, birds of prey, etc., trapping, poisoning, poaching, predator control, accidental capture (e.g. due to fishing gear), etc.) F04 Taking / Removal of terrestrial plants, general 65 F05 Illegal taking/ removal of marine fauna 65 F06 Hunting, fishing or collecting activities not referred to above 65 G01 Outdoor sports and leisure activities, recreational activities 65 G02 Sport and leisure structures 65 G03 Interpretative centres 65 G04 Military use and civil unrest 65 G05 Other human intrusions and disturbances 65 H01 Pollution to surface waters (limnic & terrestrial, marine & brackish) 65 H02 Pollution to groundwater (point sources and diffuse sources) 65 H03 Marine water pollution 65 H04 Air pollution, air-borne pollutants 65 H05 Soil pollution and solid waste (excluding discharges) 65 H06 Excess energy 65 H07 Other forms of pollution 65 I01 Invasive non-native species 65 I02 Problematic native species 65 I03 Introduced genetic material, GMO 65 J01 Fire and fire suppression 65 J02 Human induced changes in hydraulic conditions 65 J03 Other ecosystem modifications 65 K01 Abiotic (slow) natural processes 65 K02 Biocenotic evolution, succession 65 K03 Interspecific faunal relations 65 K04 Interspecific floral relations 65 K05 Reduced fecundity/ genetic depression 65 L05 Collapse of terrain, landslide 65 L07 Storm, cyclone 65 L08 Inundation (natural processes) 65 L10 Other natural catastrophes 65 M01 Changes in abiotic conditions 65 M02 Changes in biotic conditions 65 U Unknown threat or pressure 65 XO Threats and pressures from outside the Member State 65

5.1 Designation type codes CODE DESCRIPTION PAGE NO UK00 No Protection Status 67 UK01 National Nature Reserve 67 UK02 Marine Nature Reserve 67 UK04 Site of Special Scientific Interest (UK) 67

NATURA 2000 – STANDARD DATA FORM

Special Protection Areas under the EC Birds Directive.

22/12/2015

Please note that these forms contain a number of codes, all of which are explained either within the data forms themselves or in the end notes.

Further technical documentation may be found here http://bd.eionet.europa.eu/activities/Natura_2000/reference_portal

More general information on Special Protection Areas (SPAs) in the United Kingdom is available from the SPA home page on the JNCC website. This webpage also provides links to Standard Data Forms for all SPAs in the UK.

Date form generated by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee 25 January 2016.

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/

NATURA 2000 - STANDARD DATA FORM For Special Protection Areas (SPA), Proposed Sites for Community Importance (pSCI), Sites of Community Importance (SCI) and for Special Areas of Conservation (SAC)

SITE UK9009253

SITENAME Broadland

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. SITE IDENTIFICATION 2. SITE LOCATION 3. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION 4. SITE DESCRIPTION 5. SITE PROTECTION STATUS AND RELATION WITH CORINE BIOTOPES 6. SITE MANAGEMENT

1. SITE IDENTIFICATION

1.1 Type 1.2 Site code Back to top A UK9009253

1.3 Site name

Broadland

1.4 First Compilation date 1.5 Update date 1994-09 2015-12

1.6 Respondent:

Name/Organisation: Joint Nature Conservation Committee Joint Nature Conservation Committee Monkstone House City Road Peterborough Address: PE1 1JY Email:

1.7 Site indication and designation / classification dates

Date site classified as SPA: 1994-09

Regulations 12A and 13-15 of the Conservation Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, National legal reference of SPA (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/490/contents/made) designation as amended by The Conservation of Habitats and Species (Amendment) Regulations 2011 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2011/625/contents/made).

2. SITE LOCATION

Longitude Latitude 1.6 52.73222222

2.2 Area [ha]: 2.3 Marine area [%] 5508.88 0.0

2.4 Sitelength [km]: 0.0

2.5 Administrative region code and name

NUTS level 2 code Region Name

UKH1 East Anglia

2.6 Biogeographical Region(s)

(100.0 Atlantic %)

3. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Back to top 3.2 Species referred to in Article 4 of Directive 2009/147/EC and listed in Annex II of Directive 92/43/EEC and site evaluation for them

Species Population in the site Site assessment

Scientific G Code S NP T Size Unit Cat. D.qual. A|B|C|D A|B|C Name

Min Max Pop. Con. Iso. Glo.

Anas B A056 w 231 231 i G B C clypeata

Anas B A050 w 10071 10071 i G C C penelope

Anas B A051 w 240 240 i G B C strepera

Botaurus B A021 r 2 2 i G B B stellaris

Circus B A081 r 16 16 p G B B aeruginosus

Circus B A082 w 22 22 i G B C cyaneus

Cygnus B A037 columbianus w 600 600 i G B B bewickii

Cygnus B A038 w 100 100 i G C C cygnus B A151 Philomachus w 96 96 i G B C pugnax

4. SITE DESCRIPTION

Habitat class % Cover

N10 41.0 N16 8.5 N08 13.0 N07 25.0 N06 10.0 N02 2.5

Total Habitat Cover 100

Other Site Characteristics 1 Terrestrial: Soil & Geology:sedimentary,peat,basic,clay,nutrient-rich2 Terrestrial: Geomorphology and landscape:valley,lowland,floodplain

4.2 Quality and importance ARTICLE 4.1 QUALIFICATION (79/409/EEC)During the breeding season the area regularly supports:Botaurus stellaris (Europe - breeding)at least 10% of the GB breeding populationThree year mean 1996-1998Circus aeruginosus10.2% of the GB breeding population5 year mean, 1987/8-1991/2Over winter the area regularly supports:Circus cyaneus2.9% of the GB population5 year peak mean 1987/8-1991/2Cygnus columbianus bewickii (Western Siberia/North-eastern & North-western Europe)at least 8.2% of the GB populationCount, as at 1996/7Cygnus cygnus (Iceland/UK/Ireland)1.8% of the GB populationCount, as at 1996/7ARTICLE 4.2 QUALIFICATION (79/409/EEC)Over winter the area regularly supports:Anas strepera (North-western Europe)0.8% of the population5 year peak mean, 1991/2-1995/6

4.3 Threats, pressures and activities with impacts on the site

The most important impacts and activities with high effect on the site

Negative Impacts Positive Impacts Threats Activities, Pollution Pollution inside/outside and inside/outside Rank management (optional) Rank (optional) [i|o|b] pressures [i|o|b] [code] [code] [code] [code] H A04 I H I01 B H D05 I H H02 B H A06 I H M01 B H D05 I H A02 I H B02 I Rank: H = high, M = medium, L = low Pollution: N = Nitrogen input, P = Phosphor/Phosphate input, A = Acid input/acidification, T = toxic inorganic chemicals, O = toxic organic chemicals, X = Mixed pollutions i = inside, o = outside, b = both

Link(s): http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/Natura2000_StandardDataForm_UKApproach_Dec2015.pdf

http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/category/3212324 http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/category/6490068894089216

5. SITE PROTECTION STATUS (optional)

Code Cover [%] Code Cover [%] Code Cover [%]

UK01 39.8 UK04 100.0

6. SITE MANAGEMENT