DOCSLIB.ORG

Part Two Noise

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Part Two Noise PART TWO NOISE SECTION 7 – NOISE Please note, this Assessment must be read in conjunction with Part 1 of the Grandcourt Quarry Environmental Statement (ES) which contains: • a detailed description of the Proposed Development; • development Drawings and Figures; and • a summary of other assessments undertaken in relation to the Proposed Development which may be relevant. The following documents and drawings form part of this assessment: Figure 7.1 – Noise and Dust Monitoring Locations Appendix 7.1 – Ambient / Background Noise Level Monitoring Equipment and Procedures Appendix 7.2 – Ambient / Background Noise Monitoring Survey Results Appendix 7.3 – Noise Predictions Appendix 7.4 – Noise Report June 2016 Appendix 7.5 – Noise Report November 2016 Appendix 7.6 – Noise Report May 2017 Appendix 7.7 – Noise Report December 2017 PART TWO NOISE SECTION 7 - NOISE 7.1 INTRODUCTION 7.1.1 Planning consent for extraction of sand at Grandcourt Quarry, East Winch was granted to Sibelco by Norfolk County Council in 2007. Sibelco is now seeking to extend the area of mineral extraction into land to the east of the consented reserves. Transport of the extracted sand from this site to the existing stockpiling and plant feed site at Leziate will continue to be by articulated dumptrucks using the internal dedicated haul route. 7.1.2 An assessment of the potential impact at the closest noise sensitive properties, due to noise arising from proposed quarrying activity has been undertaken and the findings are set out in the following report. 7.2 BASIS OF ASSESSMENT 7.2.1 The proposed quarry extension will entail mobile plant operating closer a number of noise sensitive residential properties. In order to evaluate the impact of the proposals scheme on these noise sensitive properties, a quantitative assessment has been conducted. The basis of this assessment is as follows:- . Identification of significant noise sources and noise generating activities. Assessment of sound pressure levels from main sources and activities to determine sound power levels. Measurement of existing background and ambient noise levels at the noise sensitive properties. Calculation of received noise levels at the properties arising from the proposed site activities. Comparison of predicted noise levels with existing noise levels and with relevant noise criteria. Proposals for mitigation of impacts (if required) 7.3 SITE DESCRIPTION 7.3.1 The Grandcourt Quarry site is situated approximately one mile south east of the mineral processing site at Leziate. The site is located on the northern side of the A47 trunk road with East Winch village to the east. The current quarry is located to the west and north- PART TWO NOISE west. The existing haul route to transport sand between the quarry and processing plant will remain in use with a short additional section at the eastern end to link into the new deposit. 7.3.2 The extension area land varies from an elevation of around 26m above ordnance datum (AOD) in the south west, falling towards the north and east to an elevation of 14m AOD. There are no existing landforms or topographical features within the site that would significantly influence noise propagation towards neighbouring noise sensitive properties. The land is currently used as arable farm land and in acoustic terms, is soft. 7.4 NOISE SENSITIVE PROPERTIES 7.4.1 There are only two occupied residential properties in close proximity on the western side of the application area. Grandcourt Farm is located north-west of the site at 75 metres from the proposed extraction area and another property also known as Grandcourt Farm (here referred to as Carrpit Cottage to avoid confusion) located next to the A47 at a distance of 100 metres from the proposed extraction area. Holland House, situated just off the A47 is the closest property to the south east of the application area at a distance of 100 metres from the proposed extraction area. 7.4.2 Grandcourt Bungalow is situated at the western edge of the application site and it is proposed that this property will, subject to mineral planning consent, be demolished. 7.4.3 A larger number of noise sensitive residential properties are located in East Winch village to the east of the application site. No.63 Town close is situated at 270m from the north eastern edge of the application area. 7.5 ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE CRITERIA Site Specific Noise Criteria 7.5.1 For the ongoing sand extraction operations at Grandcourt Quarry, planning consent was granted by Norfolk County Council in 2007 (Planning Ref No. C/2/2004/2034). Condition 5 of the consent specifies a limit on received noise from site operations as follows: ‘With the exception of noise generated during soil movement and bund/baffle mound construction and removal, noise emitted from the site shall not exceed: 49dB(A) LEQ (1 hour) at Grandcourt Farmhouse PART TWO NOISE 50dB(A) LEQ (1 hour) at Grandcourt Bungalow 46dB(A) LEQ (1 hour) at Carrpit Cottage National Planning Policy Framework and Technical Guidance 7.5.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was issued by the Department for Communities and Local Government in March 2012. The NPPF simplifies and replaces over a thousand pages of planning policy with a single, concise document. 7.5.3 The NPPF is supplemented by a Technical Guidance document which provides additional guidance to planning authorities to ensure effective implementation of the planning policy set out in the NPPF on development in relation to mineral extraction. The Technical Guidance sections relating to assessment and control of noise from proposed mineral developments are outlined below. Noise Emissions 7.5.4 Under the National Planning Policy Framework, planning authorities need to ensure that unavoidable noise emissions are controlled, mitigated or removed at source. Planning authorities should also establish appropriate noise limits for extraction operations taking place in proximity to noise sensitive properties 7.5.5 Those making development proposals should carry out an assessment of noise emissions which should identify all noise sources and consider the proposed locations, procedures and duration of operations. Proposals for the control or mitigation of noise emissions should consider: • the main characteristics of the operations process and its environs, including the location of noise-sensitive properties; • proposals to minimise, mitigate or remove noise emissions at source; • assessing the existing noise climate around the site of the proposed development operations, including background noise levels at nearby noise sensitive properties; • estimating the likely future noise from the development and its impact on the neighbourhood of the proposed operations: • monitoring noise emissions to ensure compliance with appropriate environmental standards PART TWO NOISE Noise Standards 7.5.6 Subject to a maximum of 55dB(A) LEQ 1 Hour (free-field), Mineral Planning Authorities should aim to establish a noise limit at the noise sensitive property that does not exceed background level by more than 10dB(A). It is recognised, however that in many circumstances it will be difficult to not exceed background level by more than 10dB(A) without imposing unreasonable burdens on the mineral operator. In such cases the limit set should be as near that level as practicable during normal working hours (07:00 – 19:00) and should not exceed 55dB(A) LEQ. 7.5.7 Evening (19:00 – 22:00) limits should not exceed background level by more than 10dB(A) and night-time limits should not exceed 42dB(A) LEQ. 7.5.8 Where tonal noise contributes significantly to the total site noise, it may be appropriate to set specific limits for this element. Peak or impulsive noise, which may include some reversing bleepers, may also require separate limits that are independent of background noise and should not be allowed to occur regularly at night. 7.5.9 For noisy, short-term activities such as soil stripping, construction and removal of baffle/soil storage mounds and spoil heaps or construction of new permanent landforms, it may not be possible to meet the noise limits set for normal operations. 7.5.10 Increased daytime noise limits of up to 70dB(A) LEQ for periods of up to eight weeks in a year at specified noise sensitive properties should be considered for essential site preparation and restoration work where it is clear that this will bring longer term environmental benefits to the site or its environs. 7.5.11 Where work is likely to take longer than eight weeks, a lower limit over a longer period should be considered. In some wholly exceptional cases, where there is no viable alternative, a higher limit for a very limited period may be appropriate in order to attain the environmental benefits. However, within this framework the 70dB(A) LEQ limit referred to previously should be regarded as the normal maximum. 7.6 MONITORING OF EXISTING NOISE LEVELS 7.6.1 Measurement of background/ambient noise levels has been undertaken in the vicinity of the closest noise sensitive residential properties on each side of the application site (see Figure PART TWO NOISE 7.1). The monitoring procedure and instrumentation used are set out in Appendix 7.1 and the recorded noise levels are shown in Appendix 7.2. 7.6.2 Noise monitoring was conducted at three locations over periods of twelve hours (during separate visits in May and July 2012 and March 2013) corresponding to the maximum proposed working periods. Readings were obtained over twelve consecutive one-hour periods commencing at 7:00 and ending at 19:00. Monitoring at one location was conducted over a nine hour period, commencing at 10:00 and ending at 19:00. Town Close, East Winch 7.6.3 Town Close in East Winch is situated on the north eastern side of the application area.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A47/A141 Guyhirn Junction Project Update Winter 2020
    A47/A141 Guyhirn junction Project update winter 2020 Investing in the A47 The A47 is an important connection, linking the cities of Norwich and Peterborough, the towns of Wisbech, Kings Lynn, Dereham, Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft and a succession of villages in what is largely a rural area. As part of a multi-billion investment to improve journeys on England’s major A-roads and motorways, the Government is funding a package of six projects on the 115-mile stretch of the A47 between Peterborough and Great Yarmouth. Together the projects will convert almost eight miles of single carriageway into dual carriageway and improve key junctions along the A47 road. The A47 road improvement projects are: n A47/A141 Guyhirn junction n A47 Wansford to Sutton dualling n A47 North Tuddenham to Easton dualling n A47/A11 Thickthorn junction n A47 Blofield to North Burlingham dualling n A47 Great Yarmouth junction About the A47/A141 Guyhirn junction project Project benefits A47 We’ll be making changes to the Guyhirn junction between the A47 (Fen Our improvements to the junction will: Road to South Brink) and the A141 (March Road) which is used by over B1187 GuyhirnGuyhirn 20,000 vehicles a day and experiences high levels of congestion. The n reduce delays and queuing traffic by increasing the size of the Guyhirn South Brink changes to the junction aim to reduce congestion, improve journey times roundabout Gull Road High Road and increase safety. n improve safety by increasing visibility for drivers when they enter the roundabout Following our Preferred Route Announcement (PRA) in 2017, we undertook n improve pedestrian crossings and footpaths, particularly between Proposed traffic light R i v e r N e n e controlled crossing a variety of technical and traffic surveys to help us finalise our design for the March Road, Guyhirn village and local amenities New enlarged roundabout project.
    [Show full text]
  • Skeffington Parish Walks
    Skeffington This leaflet is one of a series produced to promote circular walking throughout the county. You can obtain Skeffington others in the series by visiting your local library, Tourist Information Centre or download them from www.leics.gov.uk/paths. circular 2 walks Bottesford 1 3½kms/2¼ miles Muston Redmile 2 8½kms/5¼ miles Wymeswold Scalford Hathern Burton on the Wolds Thorpe Acre & Prestwold Asfordby Barrow upon Soar Frisby Rearsby Normanton le Heath Barkby Ibstock Twyford Appleby Swepstone Anstey Hungarton Magna Groby Tilton & Lowesby 4 Carlton Ratby Keyham Skeffington, Desford Rolleston & Tugby 4 The path is well Thurnby l Burton Overy Wistow Hallaton marked and soon bears right Narborough through two gates about 100m apart. Medbourne Burbage Kibworth Cross the fields, to a narrow bridge on & Smeeton Westerby Laughton the left. Then follow the waymarkers Ullesthorpe Lubenham uphill to eventually reach Tugby along a surfaced path passing to the right of the three houses ahead. l5 Walk up Main Street into the village, then turn left The routes are clearly marked with bold, yellow It is advisable to wear suitable footwear when walking. into Chapel Lane. Note the Fox and Hounds public topped waymarker posts and waymarker discs Stout shoes or walking boots are recommended. house is just up on the right. Continue up the path with the Parish Walks symbol. Some stretches of the route follow minor country roads. Beware to the right, passing “Meadowcroft” on the right, then of traffic approaching from both directions. If possible stay on the through a small metal gate and onto a narrow path.
    [Show full text]
  • A Short Guide to Providing and Managing Sites for Gypsies and Travellers
    Places we’re proud of A short guide to providing and managing sites for Gypsies and Travellers January 2021 2 / Places we’re proud of About this guide This short guide shares some key lessons and strong examples to prompt more housing associations and local authorities to get involved in providing good- quality sites for Gypsies and Travellers. It’s produced by the National Policy Advisory Panel on Gypsy and Traveller Housing, which is a group of housing providers committed to extending provision and raising standards of this much-needed type of accommodation. The guide is based on research funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, undertaken by De Montfort University in Leicester and published by the Chartered Institute of Housing in 2016.1 This showed how vital it is for existing sites to be well managed, before seeking political and public support for plans to build new sites. The 2016 study identified a list of essential ingredients for effective site delivery and management, which this guide amplifies and illustrates with successful case studies from across the UK. Foreword I am delighted to be able to welcome this guide to providing and managing Gypsy and Traveller sites, produced by the National Policy Advisory Panel on Gypsy and Traveller Housing. It is welcome to see housing providers driving debate on Gypsy and Traveller accommodation. There are excellent examples of housing associations and local authorities working together to provide and manage sites in their areas. Baroness Cathy Bakewell Their message is that housing providers can and should include Vice-Chair of the All Party Gypsy and Traveller sites in their plans for developing new Parliamentary Group on housing.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Flood Risk Assessment
    Greater Norwich Area Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Final Report: Level 1 November 2017 This page has intentionally been left blank 2017s5962 Greater Norwich Area SFRA Final v2.0.docx JBA Project Manager Claire Gardner The Library St Philips Courtyard Church Hill COLESHILL Warwickshire B46 3AD Revision History Revision Ref / Date Issued Amendments Issued to Draft rev 1.0 / June 2017 DRAFT for comment SFRA Steering Group Final Draft rev 2.0 / August 2017 Final DRAFT for comment SFRA Steering Group Final rev 1.0 / October 2017 Final report SFRA Steering Group Final rev 2.0 / November 2017 Final Report – updated with SFRA Steering Group minor text amendments Contract This report describes work commissioned on behalf of a consortium of local planning authorities in Norfolk: • Broadland District Council • Great Yarmouth Borough Council • Borough Council of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk • Norwich City Council • North Norfolk District Council • South Norfolk Council • Broads Authority Each authority was represented as part of a steering group for the SFRA. The steering group’s representative for the contract was North Norfolk’s Policy Team Leader, Iain Withington. Sophie Dusting, Freyja Scarborough and Ffion Wilson of JBA Consulting carried out this work. Prepared by .................................................. Sophie Dusting BSc MEPS Analyst ....................................................................... Ffion Wilson BSc MSc Analyst ....................................................................... Freyja Scarborough BSc MSc Assistant Analyst Reviewed by ................................................. Claire Gardner BSc MSc MCIWEM C.WEM Chartered Senior Analyst ....................................................................... Philip Bennett-Lloyd BSc DipMgmt CMLI MCIEEM MCIWEM C.WEM C.Env Technical Director 2017s5962 Greater Norwich Area SFRA Final v2.0.docx Purpose This document has been prepared as a Final Report for the Greater Norwich Partnership.
    [Show full text]
  • FINAL SA Appendix E Residential Site Proformas
    Appendix E - Housing Site Proformas Summary .............................................................................................................................. 2 Blaby ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Cosby ................................................................................................................................. 24 Countesthorpe .................................................................................................................... 39 Croft .................................................................................................................................... 72 Elmesthorpe ........................................................................................................................ 78 Enderby .............................................................................................................................. 87 Glenfield............................................................................................................................ 102 Glen Parva ........................................................................................................................ 111 Huncote ............................................................................................................................ 117 Kilby .................................................................................................................................. 126 Kirby
    [Show full text]
  • Free Entrance ONE WEEKEND OVER 400 PROPERTIES and EVENTS
    Free Entrance ONE WEEKEND OVER 400 PROPERTIES AND EVENTS SATURDAY 13 & SUNDAY 14 SEPTEMBER www.discovernorthernireland.com/ehod EHOD 2014 Message from the Minister Welcome to European Heritage Open Days (EHOD) 2014 This year European Heritage Open Days will take place on the 13th Finally, I wish to use this opportunity to thank all and 14th September. Over 400 properties and events are opening of the owners and guardians of the properties who open their doors, and to the volunteers during the weekend FREE OF CHARGE. Not all of the events are in who give up their time to lead tours and host the brochure so for the widest choice and updates please visit our FREE events. Without your enthusiasm and website www.discovernorthernireland.com/ehod.aspx generosity this weekend event would not be possible. I am extremely grateful to all of you. In Europe, heritage and in particular cultural Once again EHOD will be merging cultural I hope that you have a great weekend. heritage is receiving new emphasis as a heritage with built heritage, to broaden our ‘strategic resource for a sustainable Europe’ 1. Our understanding of how our intangible heritage Mark H Durkan own local heritage, in all its expressions – built has shaped and influenced our historic Minister of the Environment and cultural – is part of us, and part of both the environment. This year, as well as many Arts appeal and the sustainable future of this part of and Culture events (p21), we have new Ireland and these islands. It is key to our partnerships with Craft NI (p7), and Food NI experience and identity, and key to sharing our (p16 & 17).
    [Show full text]
  • Community Infrastructure Fund Cif 2 Postwick Hub Full
    Community Infrastructure Funding CIF 2 Postwick Hub Full Business Case COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE FUND CIF 2 POSTWICK HUB FULL BUSINESS CASE NORFOLK COUNTY COUNCIL OCTOBER 2008 CONTENTS Project Summary Information 1 Overview 1 Project Plan 2 Promoter Information 3 NATA Appraisal Summary Table 5 1 Scheme Description 1-1 1.1 Background 1-2 1.2 Postwick Hub - Preferred Scheme 1-3 2 Strategic Case 2-1 2.1 Background information 2-1 2.2 Scheme objectives 2-8 2.3 Scheme history and development 2-9 2.4 Strategic Fit 2-12 3 Value for Money Case 3-1 3.1 Introduction 3-1 3.2 Capital Costs 3-1 3.3 Operating Costs 3-3 3.4 Cost Benefit Analysis 3-4 3.5 New Approach to Appraisal Assessment 3-1 3.6 NATA Supporting Analyses 3-30 4 Delivery Case 4-34 4.1 Strategic Project Governance 4-34 4.2 Project Delivery and Staffing 4-37 4.3 Project Programme 4-39 4.4 Park & Ride 4-40 4.5 Risk Management 4-41 4.6 Stakeholder and Community Engagement 4-41 5 Commercial Case 5-1 5.1 Preferred procurement route 5-1 5.2 Risk share 5-5 5.3 Contract monitoring 5-6 i 5.4 Council’s experience 5-6 6 Financial Case 6-1 6.1 Detailed cost breakdowns 6-1 6.2 Independent verification of costs 6-4 6.3 Inflation 6-4 6.4 Quantified Risk Assessment 6-5 6.5 Optimism Bias 6-5 6.6 Funding 6-5 6.7 Summary of Funding Package 6-6 6.8 Revenue Funding 6-6 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1A Figure 1.1 Appendix 2A Figure 2.1 Appendix 3A Modelling Appendix 3B Environment Worksheets Appendix 3C Safety Worksheets Appendix 3D Economy Worksheets Appendix 3E Accessibility Worksheets Appendix 3F Integration
    [Show full text]
  • Road Investment Strategy East Area 6 Scheme Assessment Report A47
    Road Investment Strategy East Area 6 Scheme Assessment Report A47 Guyhirn Junction (A47IMPS2-AMY-GJ-ZZ-DO-L-0006) Date: 23 February 2018 Version: 1.4 [Type here] [Type here] [Type here] Document Control Document Title Scheme Assessment Report – A47 Guyhirn Junction Author Jon Brittain / Dan Hunt / Andrew Warwick / Raymond Logan Owner Aaron Douglas – Highways England Distribution Highways England Document Status Consultee comment Revision History Version Date Description Author 0.1 09/06/17 First Draft for Interim SGAR Jon Brittain 1.0 13/10/17 Draft of Stage 1 info for initial Jon Brittain comment 1.1 01/12/17 Draft of complete product Jon Brittain 1.2 13/12/17 Updated DRAFT for Consultee Jon Brittain comment 1.3 22/01/18 Updated DRAFT following Jon Brittain Consultee comment 1.4 23/02/18 HE Project Management review Lizzie Cooper Reviewer List Name Role Andy Heap A47 Project Director (Amey) Aaron Douglas Highways England Project Manager Paul Carey A47 Programme Manager (Amey) Guy Lewis Senior Responsible Owner (HE) Peter Grant S&P Transport Planning Group (HE) Jose Garvi Serrano SES Environment (HE) Mark Howes SES Safer Roads Group (HE) Raymond Logan Transportation Lead (Amey) Andrew Warwick Environmental Lead (Amey) Dan Hunt Engineering Lead (Amey) Approvals Name Signature Title Date of Version Issue Peter Havlicek P M Havlicek Programme Lead (HE) 18 April 1.4 2019 The original format of this document is copyright to Highways England [Type here] [Type here] [Type here] Table of Contents 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 15 1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................... 15 1.2 Project Control Framework ................................................................................................... 16 1.3 The identified problem ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Swan Inn 3 Dereham Road, Mattishall, Dereham, Norfolk NR20 3QB
    File Ref: E-615561b Swan Inn 3 Dereham Road, Mattishall, Dereham, Norfolk NR20 3QB Tenure Open plan ground floor trade areas Leasehold Lounge bar and dining areas (40) 3 bedroom owner's accom Price Trade division 60% bar, 40% food £38,500 T/O £231,364 ex VAT Y/E 31.3.2018 Simon Jackaman Divisional Director 01223 402600 [email protected] SOLE SELLING RIGHTS Swan Inn 3 Dereham Road, Mattishall, Dereham, Norfolk NR20 3QB File Ref: E-615561b Google © Copyright (2019). All rights reserved. Location The Swan Inn is prominently situated in the centre of Mattishall directly opposite the village Church of All Saints. The village of Mattishall is located in the heart of Norfolk approximately 11 miles west of Norwich and 4 miles east of Dereham. The main A47 road which connects Norwich to King's Lynn via Dereham is close by and provides access to the north Norfolk coast, making the village very accessible. Description A two-storey detached property, pre-war built of brick construction under a pitched tiled roof, with single storey additions to the side and rear, which enhance the public areas. Google © Copyright (2019). All rights reserved. Swan Inn 3 Dereham Road, Mattishall, Dereham, Norfolk NR20 3QB File Ref: E-615561b Trade The business is very much the hub of the local community and regularly holds quiz and bingo evenings. The current owners have operated the business for just over 4 years, during which time they have carried out a number The Swan Inn is ideally suited to an owner operator seeking of refurbishments and improvements to the trading and to build upon the increasing established trade developed by private living accommodation.
    [Show full text]
  • Sessional Diary 2005–06
    HOUSE OF COMMONS SESSIONAL DIARY 2005–06 11 May 2005 to 8 November 2006 Prepared in the Journal Office of the House of Commons INTRODUCTION 1. This diary records the business on which the House spent its time in Session 2005–06, analysed into categories, and similar information for sittings in Westminster Hall. It is intended mainly to provide information in response to statistical inquiries, and in using it the following points should be borne in mind: (a) The diary does not include business which took little or no time, such as presentations of bills, unopposed private business, and motions agreed to without debate or division. (b) Divisions are normally included with the business to which they relate. (c) Timings are taken from the Official Report, using the printed times where available, and otherwise taking a column of debate to last three minutes. Daily prayers are assumed to last a standard five minutes (and are not itemised in the analysis), and the time at which the House rose is taken from the Votes and Proceedings. (d) Periods of suspension are included in the total sitting time, and are listed in section 14h of the analysis (Miscellaneous). However, the 2½-hour suspension from 11.30 to 14.00 in Westminster Hall on most Tuesdays and Wednesdays (introduced on 1 January 2003) is shown in brackets in the “Duration” column and is left out of the totals. Other suspensions in Westminster Hall are included in the totals and in the analysis under section 5. (e) The times in the column headed “After appointed time” refer to business taken after the time appointed as the “moment of interruption”.
    [Show full text]
  • Road Investment Strategy East Area 6 A47 / A11 Thickthorn Junction Improvements PCF Stage 2 Scheme Assessment Report (SAR) HE551
    Road Investment Strategy East Area 6 A47 / A11 Thickthorn Junction Improvements PCF Stage 2 Scheme Assessment Report (SAR) HE551492-ACM-GEN-TJ-RP-ZM-00006 Date: 16 January 2018 Version: 4.0 1 This page is intentionally left blank 2 Document Control Document Title Scheme Assessment Report (SAR) – HE551492-ACM-GEN-TJ-RP-ZM-00006 Author Kevin Mitchell / Oluwatobi Owoiya/Fay Lagan/John Alderman/Constantinos Rontogiannis Owner Romeu Rosa Distribution See Reviewers List Document Status For Stage Approval Revision History Version Date Description Author 1.0 30th June 2017 For Stage Approval Kevin Mitchell 2.0 8th December 2017 For Stage Approval (core growth Oluwatobi Owoiya/Fay only – Traffic) Lagan/John Alderman 3.0 21st December 2017 For Stage Approval (including high- Oluwatobi Owoiya/Fay low growth summary) Lagan/Mark Chadwick 4.0 16th January 2018 For Stage Approval (all final Constantinos comments) Rontogiannis/Brendan Kemp Reviewer List Name Role Romeu Rosa Intergrated Project Team Peter Grant Transport Planning Group (TPG) Jose Garvi Serrano SES Environment Team Mark Howes SES Safer Roads Group Approvals Name Signature Title Date of Version Issue Guy Lewis Programme Lead (PL) 25/01/18 1 The original format of this document is copyright to the Highways England 3 Limitations AECOM Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited (“AECOM”) has prepared this Report for Highways England (“Client”) in accordance with the Agreement under which our services were performed in the Collaborative Delivery Framework (Consultancy) 2016-2017, Roads Investment Strategy Schemes A47/A12 Corridor, Project Control Framework Stage 2 commission. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this Report or any other services provided by AECOM.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Committee Papers
    Planning Committee Agenda 05 March 2021 10.00am This is a remote meeting held under the Broads Authority’s Standing Orders on Procedure Rules for Remote Meetings. Participants: You will be sent a link to join the meeting. The room will open at 9.00am and we request that you log in by 9.30am to allow us to check connections and other technical details. Members of the public: We will publish a live stream link two days before the meeting at Planning Committee - 5 March 2021 (broads-authority.gov.uk). The live stream will be suspended for any exempt items on the agenda. Please email committees@broads- authority.gov.uk with any queries about this meeting. Introduction 1. To receive apologies for absence 2. To receive declarations of interest 3. To receive and confirm the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 5 February 2021 (Pages 3-13) 4. Points of information arising from the minutes 5. To note whether any items have been proposed as matters of urgent business Matters for decision 6. Chairman’s announcements and introduction to public speaking Please note that public speaking is in operation in accordance with the Authority’s Code of Conduct for Planning Committee and the new Government regulations and standing orders agreed by the Authority. 7. Request to defer applications include in this agenda and/or vary the order of the agenda 8. To consider applications for planning permission including matters for consideration of enforcement of planning control: 8.1. BA/2021/0028/FUL – Whitlingham Country Park: construction of toilet block (Pages 14- 20) Planning Committee, 05 March 2021 1 Enforcement 9.
    [Show full text]