DOCSLIB.ORG

Wild Frontier Ecology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wild Frontier Ecology WILD FRONTIER ECOLOGY Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Habitats Regulations Assessment of Detailed Policies and Sites Plan: Preferred Options Document July 2013 Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Wild Frontier Ecology Ltd Client details Report produced by: Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West Robert Yaxley CEnv MCIEEM Norfolk Report checked by: Contact: Seth Lambiase MCIEEM John Clements/ Jemma March Unit 2 King’s Court Cold Blow Farm Chapel Street Great Snoring Fakenham King’s Lynn Norfolk PE30 1EX NR21 0HF Tel: 01328 864633 Tel: 01553 616239 [email protected] [email protected] © All rights reserved, Wild Frontier Ecology Ltd 2013. No part of this document to be copied or re-used without the permission of the copyright holder. Wild Frontier Ecology is ISO14001 accredited Company Registered in England and Wales No 4942219. Registered Office - Bank Chambers, Market Place, Reepham Norfolk NR10 4JJ Director Robert Yaxley BSC (Hons) CEnv MIEEM VAT Reg No. 887 4692 54 Site Specific Proposals HRA 1 Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Contents 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................... 4 2 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 5 2.1 REQUIREMENT FOR AN APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT FOR THE DETAILED POLICIES AND SITES PLAN ............ 6 3 THE APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT PROCESS ............................................................ 7 4 CONSULTATION AND PREPARATION .................................................................... 8 5 METHODS .................................................................................................... 9 5.1 TASK 1. POLICY SCREENING - TEST OF LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECT (LSE) ................................. 9 5.2 TASK 2. DETERMINATION, PREVENTATIVE, AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES. ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS ON THE INTEGRITY OF THE SITE(S) – THE ‘APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT’ .................................... 9 5.2.1 Provision of an ‘in combination’ assessment ............................................. 9 5.2.2 Consideration of preventative, avoidance, and mitigation measures ............. 10 5.2.3 Determination of alternative solutions and imperative reasons of overriding public interest ............................................................................................. 10 6 EVIDENCE GATHERING FOR HABS REGS ASSESSMENT ............................................. 12 6.1 POTENTIALLY AFFECTED INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN PROTECTED SITES .............................. 12 6.2 DESCRIPTION, CHARACTERISTICS AND CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES OF SAC SITES ........................ 14 6.2.1 Breckland SAC ................................................................................ 14 6.2.2 Norfolk Valley Fens SAC .................................................................... 16 6.2.3 Ouse Washes SAC ............................................................................. 18 6.2.4 Roydon Common and Dersingham Bog SAC .............................................. 19 6.2.5 River Wensum SAC ........................................................................... 21 6.2.6 The Wash and North Norfolk Coast SAC ................................................. 22 6.3 DESCRIPTION, CHARACTERISTICS AND CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES OF SPA SITES ........................ 25 6.3.1 Breckland SPA ................................................................................ 25 6.3.2 The North Norfolk Coast SPA .............................................................. 26 6.3.3 Ouse Washes SPA ............................................................................. 29 6.3.4 The Wash SPA ................................................................................. 31 6.4 DESCRIPTION, CHARACTERISTICS AND CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES OF RAMSAR SITES ..................... 34 6.4.1 Dersingham Bog Ramsar .................................................................... 34 6.4.2 North Norfolk Coast Ramsar ............................................................... 35 6.4.3 Ouse Washes Ramsar ........................................................................ 37 6.4.4 Roydon Common Ramsar .................................................................... 39 6.4.5 The Wash Ramsar ............................................................................ 40 6.5 OTHER RELEVANT PLANS OR PROJECTS .................................................................. 42 6.5.1 Neighbouring District/Boroughs ........................................................... 43 6.5.2 Increases in Settlement Populations ..................................................... 43 7 APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT AND PLAN ANALYSIS .................................................. 44 7.1 PROCESS ................................................................................................. 44 7.2 CONSIDERED IMPACTS .................................................................................... 44 7.2.1 Loss of Supporting Habitats ................................................................ 45 7.2.2 Habitat Fragmentation Impacts ........................................................... 45 7.2.3 Non-specific Proximity Impacts (stone curlew) ........................................ 45 7.2.4 Hydrological Impacts ........................................................................ 46 7.1.5 Impacts from Increased Recreation and Leisure Pressures ................................. 47 Day Trippers ................................................................................................ 51 Local Users .................................................................................................. 51 RECREATION ALONG THE COAST .................................................................................. 52 RECREATION IN BRECKLAND ....................................................................................... 55 7.2.5 Impacts from Increased Use of Roads .................................................... 55 7.2.6 Cumulative Impacts ......................................................................... 55 8 TASK 1: SCREENING FOR LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS. ......................................... 56 IN CONCLUSION, THE FOLLOWING POLICIES ARE FOUND TO RESULT IN LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECT, AND ARE TAKEN Site Specific Proposals HRA 2 Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk THROUGH TO THE TASK 2 APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT. ............................................................ 80 HUNSTANTON ............................................................................................ 80 BURNHAM MARKET ....................................................................................... 80 FELTWELL AND HOCKWOLD .............................................................................. 80 HEACHAM ................................................................................................ 80 SNETTISHAM ............................................................................................. 80 THORNHAM .............................................................................................. 80 POAW 16 – TOURING AND PERMANENT HOLIDAY SITES ................................................... 80 IN-COMBINATION EFFECTS ON DERSINGHAM BOG SAC/ RAMSAR .......................................... 80 IN-COMBINATION EFFECTS ON ROYDON COMMON SAC/ RAMSAR ......................................... 80 IN-COMBINATION EFFECTS ON NORTH NORFOLK COAST SPA/ RAMSAR ................................... 80 IN-COMBINATION EFFECTS ON WASH SPA/ RAMSAR ...................................................... 80 IN-COMBINATION EFFECTS ON NORTH NORFOLK COAST AND THE WASH SAC ............................. 80 9. POLICY MODIFICATIONS AND AVOIDANCE MEASURES ............................................................ 80 TASK 2: APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT ........................................................................ 82 Site Specific Proposals HRA 3 Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk 1 Executive Summary This document has been produced to inform the Preferred Options stage of the Detailed Policies and Sites Plan (formerly known as the Site Specific Proposals Development Plan Document). This Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) takes into account comments received from Natural England and the RSPB on the previous HRA undertaken for the Issues and Options stage. The Detailed Policies and Sites Plan forms part of a hierarchical process and adds detail to the policies from the Core Strategy (adopted in July 2011) and once adopted will form part of the Local Plan, along with the existing Core Strategy) for the Borough. The Core Strategy was subject to a Habitats Regulations Assessment to ensure no negative effect of the policies on European Sites. The document specifically addresses previous comments on the measures proposed for likely significant effects, which identified the use of monitoring as inappropriate as a form of mitigation. The initial report acknowledged the likelihood of significant alteration to both policies and HRA through the local plan process. The document has considered potential effects on designated sites of European importance of the site-specific preferred options document for the Borough of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk. The potential effects were considered to arise from loss of supporting habitats, habitat fragmentation, non-specific proximity impacts, increased
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Norfolk Local Flood Risk Management Strategy
    Appendix A Norfolk Local Flood Risk Management Strategy Consultation Draft March 2015 1 Blank 2 Part One - Flooding and Flood Risk Management Contents PART ONE – FLOODING AND FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT ..................... 5 1. Introduction ..................................................................................... 5 2 What Is Flooding? ........................................................................... 8 3. What is Flood Risk? ...................................................................... 10 4. What are the sources of flooding? ................................................ 13 5. Sources of Local Flood Risk ......................................................... 14 6. Sources of Strategic Flood Risk .................................................... 17 7. Flood Risk Management ............................................................... 19 8. Flood Risk Management Authorities ............................................. 22 PART TWO – FLOOD RISK IN NORFOLK .................................................. 30 9. Flood Risk in Norfolk ..................................................................... 30 Flood Risk in Your Area ................................................................ 39 10. Broadland District .......................................................................... 39 11. Breckland District .......................................................................... 45 12. Great Yarmouth Borough .............................................................. 51 13. Borough of King’s
    [Show full text]
  • Appropriate Assessment (Submission)
    June 2007 North Norfolk District Council Planning Policy Team Telephone: 01263 516318 E-Mail: [email protected] Write to: Jill Fisher, Planning Policy Manager, North Norfolk District Council, Holt Road, Cromer, NR27 9EN www.northnorfolk.org/ldf All of the LDF Documents can be made available in Braille, large print or in other languages. Please contact 01263 516321 to discuss your requirements. Core Strategy Appropriate Assessment (Submission) Contents 1 Introduction 4 2 The Appropriate Assessment Process 4 3 Consultation and Preparation 5 4 Evidence gathering for the Appropriate Assessment 6 European sites that may be affected 6 Characteristics and conservation objectives of the European sites 8 Other relevant plans or projects 25 5 Appropriate Assessment and Plan analysis 28 Tables Table 4.1 - Broadland SPA/SAC qualifying features 9 Table 4.2 - Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA/SAC 12 Table 4.3 - North Norfolk Coast SPA/SAC qualifying features 15 Table 4.4 - Norfolk Valley Fens SAC qualifying features 19 Table 4.5 - Overstrand Cliffs SAC qualifying features 21 Table 4.6 - Paston Great Barn SAC qualifying features 23 Table 4.7 - River Wensum SAC qualifying features 24 Table 4.8 - Neighbouring districts Core Strategy progress table 27 Table 5.1 - Screening for likely significant effects 29 Table 5.2 - Details of Settlements in policies SS1, SS3, SS5 and SS7 to SS14 and how policy amendments have resulted in no likely significant effects being identified 35 Maps Map 4.1 - Environmental Designations 7 Map 4.2 - Broadland Environmental
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Regulations Assessment: Breckland Council Submission Core Strategy and Development Control Policies
    Habitats Regulation Assessment of the Site Specific Allocations & Policies Document, Wymondham Area Action Plan, Long Stratton Area Action Plan and Cringleford Neighbourhood Development Plan, undertaken for South Norfolk Council October 2013 Natural Environment Team HRA of Site Allocations Document, Wymondham AAP, Long Stratton AAP and Cringleford Neighbourhood Plan for South Norfolk Council October 2013 Habitats Regulation Assessment of the Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document, the Wymondham Area Action Plan, the Long Stratton Area Action Plan and the Cringleford Neighbourhood Development Plan Executive Summary As required by the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, before deciding to give consent or permission for a plan or project which is likely to have a significant effect on a European site, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, the competent authority is required to make an appropriate assessment of the implications for that site in view of that site’s conservation objectives. This document is a record of the Habitats Regulation Assessment of the Sites Allocation Document, undertaken for South Norfolk Council. Additionally, proposed development at Wymondham, as described in the emerging Wymondham Area Action Plan, at Long Stratton, as described in the emerging Long Stratton Area Action Plan and proposed housing in the parish of Cringleford, guided by the emerging Cringleford Draft Neighbourhood Plan, are assessed Three groups of plans are reviewed with respect to their conclusions with respect to potential in-combination effects. These are plans for The Greater Norwich Development Partnership, Great Yarmouth Borough Council, Breckland District Council, and The Broads Authority including local development plans and the Tourism Strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitats Regulations Assessment of the South Norfolk Village Cluster Housing Allocations Plan
    Habitats Regulations Assessment of the South Norfolk Village Cluster Housing Allocations Plan Regulation 18 HRA Report May 2021 Habitats Regulations Assessment of the South Norfolk Village Cluster Housing Allocations Plan Regulation 18 HRA Report LC- 654 Document Control Box Client South Norfolk Council Habitats Regulations Assessment Report Title Regulation 18 – HRA Report Status FINAL Filename LC-654_South Norfolk_Regulation 18_HRA Report_8_140521SC.docx Date May 2021 Author SC Reviewed ND Approved ND Photo: Female broad bodied chaser by Shutterstock Regulation 18 – HRA Report May 2021 LC-654_South Norfolk_Regulation 18_HRA Report_8_140521SC.docx Contents 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose of this report ............................................................................................................................................... 1 2 The South Norfolk Village Cluster Housing Allocations Plan ................................................................... 3 2.1 Greater Norwich Local Plan .................................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 South Norfolk Village Cluster Housing Allocations Plan ................................................................................ 3 2.3 Village Clusters ..........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Norfolk Boreas Offshore Wind Farm Appendix 22.14 Norfolk Vanguard Onshore Ecology Consultation Responses
    Norfolk Boreas Offshore Wind Farm Appendix 22.14 Norfolk Vanguard Onshore Ecology Consultation Responses Preliminary Environmental Information Report Volume 3 Author: Royal HaskoningDHV Applicant: Norfolk Boreas Limited Document Reference: PB5640-005-2214 Date: October 2018 Photo: Ormonde Offshore Wind Farm Date Issue Remarks / Reason for Issue Author Checked Approved No. 20/07/18 01D First draft for Norfolk Boreas Limited review GC CD DT 20/09/18 01F Final for PEIR submission GC CD AD/JL Preliminary Environmental Information Report Norfolk Boreas Offshore Wind Farm PB5640-005-2214 October 2018 Page i Table of Contents 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1 2 Consultation responses Norfolk Vanguard ............................................................... 1 3 References ........................................................................................................... 27 Preliminary Environmental Information Report Norfolk Boreas Offshore Wind Farm PB5640-005-2214 October 2018 Page ii Tables Table 2.1 Norfolk Vanguard Consultation Responses 2 Preliminary Environmental Information Report Norfolk Boreas Offshore Wind Farm PB5640-005-2214 October 2018 Page iii Glossary of Acronyms CoCP Code of Construction Practice DCO Development Consent Order EIA Environmental Impact Assessment ES Environmental Statement ETG Expert Topic Group HVAC High Voltage Alternating Current HVDC High Voltage Direct Current PEIR Preliminary Environmental Information Report SoS Secretary of State Preliminary Environmental Information Report Norfolk Boreas Offshore Wind Farm PB5640-005-2214 October 2018 Page iv This page is intentionally blank. Preliminary Environmental Information Report Norfolk Boreas Offshore Wind Farm PB5640-005-2214 October 2018 Page v 1 Introduction 1. Consultation is a key driver of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process, and throughout the lifecycle of the project, from the initial stages through to consent and post-consent. 2.
    [Show full text]
  • David Tyldesley and Associates Planning, Landscape and Environmental Consultants
    DAVID TYLDESLEY AND ASSOCIATES PLANNING, LANDSCAPE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS Habitat Regulations Assessment: Breckland Council Submission Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Document Durwyn Liley, Rachel Hoskin, John Underhill-Day & David Tyldesley 1 DRAFT Date: 7th November 2008 Version: Draft Recommended Citation: Liley, D., Hoskin, R., Underhill-Day, J. & Tyldesley, D. (2008). Habitat Regulations Assessment: Breckland Council Submission Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Document. Footprint Ecology, Wareham, Dorset. Report for Breckland District Council. 2 Summary This document records the results of a Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) of Breckland District Council’s Core Strategy. The Breckland District lies in an area of considerable importance for nature conservation with a number of European Sites located within and just outside the District. The range of sites, habitats and designations is complex. Taking an area of search of 20km around the District boundary as an initial screening for relevant protected sites the assessment identified five different SPAs, ten different SACs and eight different Ramsar sites. Following on from this initial screening the assessment identifies the following potential adverse effects which are addressed within the appropriate assessment: • Reduction in the density of Breckland SPA Annex I bird species (stone curlew, nightjar, woodlark) near to new housing. • Increased levels of recreational activity resulting in increased disturbance to Breckland SPA Annex I bird species (stone curlew, nightjar, woodlark). • Increased levels of people on and around the heaths, resulting in an increase in urban effects such as increased fire risk, fly-tipping, trampling. • Increased levels of recreation to the Norfolk Coast (including the Wash), potentially resulting in disturbance to interest features and other recreational impacts.
    [Show full text]
  • 233 08 SD50 Environment Permitting Decision Document
    Environment Agency permitting decisions Bespoke permit We have decided to grant the permit for Didlington Farm Poultry Unit operated by Mr Robert Anderson, Mrs Rosamond Anderson and Mr Marcus Anderson. The permit number is EPR/EP3937EP. We consider in reaching that decision we have taken into account all relevant considerations and legal requirements and that the permit will ensure that the appropriate level of environmental protection is provided. Purpose of this document This decision document: • explains how the application has been determined • provides a record of the decision-making process • shows how all relevant factors have been taken into account • justifies the specific conditions in the permit other than those in our generic permit template. Unless the decision document specifies otherwise we have accepted the applicant’s proposals. Structure of this document • Key issues • Annex 1 the decision checklist • Annex 2 the consultation, web publicising responses. EPR/EP3937EP/A001 Page 1 of 12 Key Issues 1) Ammonia Impacts There are two Special Areas for Conservation (SAC) within 3.4km, one Special Protection Area (SPA) within 850m, seven Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) within 4.9km and six Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) within 1.4km of the facility, one of which is within 250m. Assessment of SAC and SPA If the Process Contribution (PC) is below 4% of the relevant critical level (CLe) or critical load (CLo) then the farm can be permitted with no further assessment. Initial screening using Ammonia Screening Tool (AST) v4.4 has indicated that the PC for Breckland SAC, Norfolk Valley Fens SAC and Breckland SPA is predicted to be greater than 4% of the CLe for ammonia.
    [Show full text]
  • Site Improvement Plan Norfolk Valley Fens
    Improvement Programme for England's Natura 2000 Sites (IPENS) Planning for the Future Site Improvement Plan Norfolk Valley Fens Site Improvement Plans (SIPs) have been developed for each Natura 2000 site in England as part of the Improvement Programme for England's Natura 2000 sites (IPENS). Natura 2000 sites is the combined term for sites designated as Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) and Special Protected Areas (SPA). This work has been financially supported by LIFE, a financial instrument of the European Community. The plan provides a high level overview of the issues (both current and predicted) affecting the condition of the Natura 2000 features on the site(s) and outlines the priority measures required to improve the condition of the features. It does not cover issues where remedial actions are already in place or ongoing management activities which are required for maintenance. The SIP consists of three parts: a Summary table, which sets out the priority Issues and Measures; a detailed Actions table, which sets out who needs to do what, when and how much it is estimated to cost; and a set of tables containing contextual information and links. Once this current programme ends, it is anticipated that Natural England and others, working with landowners and managers, will all play a role in delivering the priority measures to improve the condition of the features on these sites. The SIPs are based on Natural England's current evidence and knowledge. The SIPs are not legal documents, they are live documents that will be updated to reflect changes in our evidence/knowledge and as actions get underway.
    [Show full text]
  • The Norfolk & Norwich
    BRITISH MUSEUM (NATURAL HISTORY) TRANSACTIONS 2 7 JUN 1984 exchanged OF GENfcriAL LIBRARY THE NORFOLK & NORWICH NATURALISTS’ SOCIETY Edited by: P. W. Lambley Vol. 26 Part 5 MAY 1984 TRANSACTIONS OF THE NORFOLK AND NORWICH NATURALISTS’ SOCIETY Volume 26 Part 5 (May 1984) Editor P. W. Lambley ISSN 0375 7226 U: ' A M «SEUV OFFICERS OF THE SOCIETY 1984-85 j> URAL isSTORY) 2? JUH1984 President: Dr. R. E. Baker Vice-Presidents: P. R. Banham, A. Bull, K. B. Clarke, E. T. Daniels, K. C. Durrant, E. A. Ellis, R. Jones, M. J. Seago, J. A. Steers, E. L. Swann, F. J. Taylor-Page Chairman: Dr. G. D. Watts, Barn Meadow, Frost’s Lane, Gt. Moulton. Secretary: Dr. R. E. Baker, 25 Southern Reach, Mulbarton, NR 14 8BU. Tel. Mulbarton 70609 Assistant Secretary: R. N. Flowers, Heatherlands, The Street, Brundall. Treasurer: D. A. Dorling, St. Edmundsbury, 6 New Road, Heathersett. Tel. Norwich 810318 Assistant Treasurer: M. Wolner Membership Committee: R. Hancy, Tel. Norwich 860042 Miss J. Wakefield, Post Office Lane, Saxthorpe, NR1 1 7BL. Programme Committee: A. Bull, Tel. Norwich 880278 Mrs. J. Robinson, Tel. Mulbarton 70576 Publications Committee: R. Jones. P. W. Lambley & M. J. Seago (Editors) Research Committee: Dr. A. Davy, School of Biology, U.E.A., Mrs. A. Brewster Hon. Auditor. J. E. Timbers, The Nook, Barford Council: Retiring 1985; D. Fagg, J. Goldsmith, Miss F. Musters, R. Smith. Retiring 1986 Miss R. Carpenter, C. Dack, Mrs. J. Geeson, R. Robinson. Retiring 1987 N. S. Carmichael, R. Evans, Mrs.L. Evans, C. Neale Co-opted members: Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity Action Plan
    BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN April 2018 BROADS IDB – BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN Front cover images (L-R) Marsh Harrier ©Artur Rydzewski; Norfolk Hawker © Milo Bostock; Water Soldier; Water Vole; Berney Marshes ©Mike Page; BIDB Digger BROADS IDB – BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN FOREWORD This Biodiversity Action Plan (Second Edition) has been prepared by the Broads Internal Drainage Board in accordance with the commitment in the Implementation Plan of the DEFRA Internal Drainage Board Review for IDB’s, to produce their own Biodiversity Action Plans by April 2010. As such, the original version was published in January 2010. This revised version aims to continue to align the Broads IDB with biodiversity policy and more specifically, the Biodiversity document for England, “Biodiversity 2020: A strategy for Englands’ Wildlife and Ecosystem Services” and build on the Government’s 25 Year Environmental Plan; A Green Future. In doing so, the document strives to demonstrate the Board’s commitment to fulfilling its duty as a public body under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 to conserve biodiversity. Many of the Board’s activities have benefits and opportunities for biodiversity, not least its water level management and watercourse maintenance work. It is hoped that this Biodiversity Action Plan will help the Board to maximise the biodiversity benefits from its activities and demonstrate its contribution to the targets as part of the Biodiversity 2020 strategy and achieve wider environmental improvement within its catchments. The Board has adopted the Biodiversity Action Plan as one of its policies and subject to available resources is committed to its implementation. It will review the plan periodically and update it as appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitats Regulations Assessment: Draft Scoping Report
    North Norfolk 2016 - 2036 HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT Draft Scoping Report May 2017 North Norfolk District Council Planning Policy Team Telephone: 01263 516318 E-Mail: [email protected] Write to: Planning Policy Manager, North Norfolk District Council, Holt Road, Cromer, NR27 9EN www.north-norfolk.gov.uk/localplan All documents can be made available in Braille, audio, large print or in other languages. Please contact 01263 516318 to discuss your requirements. Draft HRA Scoping - North Norfolk District Council – Emerging Local Plan Executive Summary Habitats Regulations Assessment is required in accordance with the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, (amended 2012); in order to ensure that plans and projects do not have a likely significant effect on any European designated sites for nature conservation. Such plans or projects can only proceed if the competent authority is convinced they will not have an “adverse effect on the integrity of a European site”. Where there is uncertainty over the effects then the competent authority will need to demonstrate how these can be avoided and what mitigation can be put in place. A Local Plan is the subject of Habitats Regulations Assessment, which is the responsibility of the plan-making body (in this case North Norfolk District Council) to produce. This scoping report provides the background and review of evidence to support the commencement of screening and the final Habitats Regulations Assessment of the North Norfolk Core Strategy and Site Allocations documents. This report considers: • The European designated sites within and outside the plan area affected. • The characteristics of these sites and their conservation objectives.
    [Show full text]
  • The Eastern Counties, — ——
    ^^^^^ gh Guides : ——- h^ ==h* - c\J : :ct> r ^c\i ==^JQO - T— ""> h»- [~^co '-_ 7 —^^— :n UOUNTIES /t\u* ton ^¥/ua( vY "IP Grantham ' TaUdngh oihv Mort.ml l y'iii.oco..^i>s ^u , ! v , ^i,,:;;^ , i / v '"'''.v/,,. ;r~ nsiimV *\ ?. ' kXOton /lEICESTERY Monftw /{, r fontf* k ^> h'i .;-"" A0% .-O Krlmarsh\ Blisw.wfli.i2 'oad&J Eelmdon. "VTolvei J''u/<}, upthill r9tc Ami? LoAviibo- 'Widfc *Baldock effbhurn f J Marti}*?' Ihxatingfard eitfktoii 7 " gifzzarcL t^r ' t>un.sti ^OXFORD '/'> Ainershain. finest WytHtrnd^iL Bickuuuis>^ Watliagtnti >^Hi^TV^cHnb£ ^M Shxplake- jfe-wrffa^eR E A PI Nla ^ | J. Bartholomew", E3ix k 4t> fcs J«<00®»»®00 o ocoo iO>l>Ot>l>N0500 o o t-o •0000500^000 OOO o ft ,'rH0D»O0006Q0CMlO>LO H00«3 . o CD Ocp CO COO O O OOCOO ^•OOOOOOOOO o o o o Q 5 m taWOWOOOCO>OiO •io»oo>o CO rHrHrHrHi-HrHrHrHrH . rH rH rH rH ^•COOOOOOOOO _CO O O 3 ojlOrHOrHrHrHGOOO :* :'i>ho 3 rHrH<MrHrHt-lr-l<M<M . • rH rH <M O ft . ocococococoococo CO CO CO CO 3 • t» d- t~ i>- rH (MH^HHHIMiMN • <M <M rH <M •oooomooojohoiooo ^5 rH oJcO<NO<M^<MCOOOOOOCO<MO rHrHCQrHr-1 rHrHrH<MrH(MrHrH<M IrHOCOOOOOCOCOCO 00 O CO 'oo r3 :C5000^ocooooocooo o o Q 525 : oq : : : :§? : : : : : O a OQ r-4 : o • : : :^3 : : : : * a a o 3 O : : : : : : : : : : « : a ^ ft .ft .o • n • o3 • o •J25 o9 S • 0) cS . CO . :oq • :,3 : B :ra : flo -»j cS rQ 2 s.d tJD ? B fcr - 00 O ?+3 J* ^b-3 a p 5 3 8.5 g^ - » * +•+* * * H—H— -r-+-»-+-f-+* * +-+ * * -f--r- Tast.
    [Show full text]