Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting
/
Habitats Regulations Assessment
/
Longhurst Group
Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting
Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting
/
Habitats Regulations Assessment Evidence in support of a Habitats Regulations Assessment Report for Bidwells on behalf of Longhurst Group
/
Longhurst Group
Job Number 8782 Author Sam Mardell BSc (Hons) ACIEEM Version Checked by Approved by Date Type Wendy McFarlane Dr Rachel Saunders Draft for 1.0 04/05/2020 MA MSc MCIEEM BSc (Hons) MCIEEM Consultation
The Ecology Consultancy, 60 Thorpe Road, Norwich, Norfolk, NR1 1RY T. 01603 628 408 E. [email protected] W. www.ecologyconsultancy.co.uk
Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting
Contents
Executive Summary 1 1 Introduction 3 2 Relevant Legislation 8 3 Methodology 9 4 Stage 1 HRA (Screening) 20 5 Stage 2 HRA (Appropriate Assessment) 35 6. Conclusions 38 References 39 Appendix 1: Natural England Correspondence 43
/ Habitats Regulations Assessment
/ Longhurst Group
LIABILITY The Ecology Consultancy has prepared this report for the sole use of the commissioning party in accordance with the agreement under which our services were performed. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the advice in this report or any other service provided by us. This report may not be relied upon by any other party without the prior written permission of The Ecology Consultancy. The content of this report is, at least in part, based upon information provided by others and on the assumption that all relevant information has been provided by those parties from whom it has been requested. Information obtained from any third party has not been independently verified by The Ecology Consultancy, unless otherwise stated in the report.
COPYRIGHT © This report is the copyright of The Ecology Consultancy. Any unauthorised reproduction or usage by any person is prohibited. The Ecology Consultancy, part of the Temple Group, is the trading name of Ecology Consultancy Ltd.
Executive Summary
The Ecology Consultancy was commissioned by Bidwells on behalf of Longhurst Group to provide evidence in support of a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) for the proposed residential development at land east of Lynn Road, Weeting, Norfolk. The site was previously granted outline planning permission for 56 dwellings across two phases, though Longhurst Group are now seeking to submit a new full planning application, which would increase the density of the development with a targeted 76 dwellings within the red line boundary. The main findings are as follows:
• The site falls within 1,500m of habitat which supports the Breckland Special Protection Area (SPA) stone curlew population. In order to avoid impacts of built development on stone curlews, local planning policy has defined a buffer zone that extends 1,500m from the edge of those parts of Breckland SPA that support or are capable of supporting stone curlew. Within this area, new development will only be permitted if it can be demonstrated, through an Appropriate Assessment under the Habitats Regulations, that there will be no adverse impact on the qualifying features or integrity of the designated site.
• Using a precautionary calculation, previous HRA work undertaken in support of the initial outline application could not rule out likely significant effect on Breckland stone curlew as a result of the proposed development. Precautionary measures were therefore proposed to reduce any effects on habitat quality, which included the provision of stone curlew nesting habitat away from the vicinity of the site.
• As part of Stage 1 of this current HRA (screening for likely significant effects), the initial scoping radius for Internationally Important Wildlife Sites was a 15km radius from the proposed development site. This is based on distances visitors are known to travel to undertake recreational activities and precedents set in other HRAs of plans and projects.
• Using this radius, the following sites are considered: Breckland SPA, Breckland Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Norfolk Valley Fens SAC.
• Given that the site falls within the 1,500m stone curlew which essentially provides justification for likely significant effect on stone curlew, it was not considered necessary to include this qualifying feature in the screening exercise. Potential for adverse effects on stone curlew resulting from the proposed development is therefore covered in the shadow Appropriate Assessment.
• As a result of the Stage 1 HRA (screening) exercise, it is considered that significant effects on the integrity of any of the Internationally Important Wildlife Sites or their qualifying
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 1
features (excluding stone curlew) are unlikely when considering the project alone and in- combination with other plans or projects. This was primarily due to the distance between the proposed development site and the individual wildlife sites, as well as the proportional increase in residents in the area and, by inference, potential visitors to the sites, against existing background levels.
• In accordance with local planning policy, a shadow Appropriate Assessment assessing adverse impacts on the integrity of the Breckland SPA stone curlew population has been provided in this document to aid the relevant Competent Authority in their assessment.
• Using Natural England’s stone curlew planning tool, the Appropriate Assessment was able to draw the conclusion of no adverse effect on the integrity of Breckland SPA both alone and in-combination with other plans or projects. This negates the need for the precautionary mitigation measures proposed in previous project-level HRA work.
• Formal consultation with Natural England, the RSPB and other stakeholders as to their views on likely significant effects on local Internationally Important Wildlife Sites is recommended as a next step and feedback should be incorporated into the report as required.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 2
1 Introduction
BACKGROUND TO COMMISSION
1.1 The Ecology Consultancy was commissioned by Bidwells, on behalf of Longhurst Group, in July 2019 to provide evidence in support of a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) for the proposed residential development at land east of Lynn Road, Weeting, Norfolk.
1.2 The site was previously granted outline planning permission for 56 dwellings across two phases and is now included within Weeting’s settlement boundary in the emerging Breckland Local Plan. The previous applications (2011/1102/F – Phase 1, 2013/0258/O – Outline Phase 2, and 2016/1412/D – Detailed Phase 2) were supported by an HRA, though Longhurst Group are now seeking to submit a new full planning application, which would increase the density of the development with a targeted 74 dwellings, an increase of 18.
SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT WORK
1.3 Relevant previous HRA work undertaken in relation to the site, which predominantly focussed on stone curlew, a qualifying feature of Breckland Special Protection Area (SPA), includes:
• an ecological appraisal and supporting evidence for Appropriate Assessment relating to Breckland SPA undertaken by Wild Frontier Ecology (Wild Frontier Ecology, 2013a); and
• an addendum to the ecological appraisal and supporting evidence for Appropriate Assessment undertaken by Wild Frontier Ecology (Wild Frontier Ecology, 2013b).
1.4 The main findings of the previous HRA work which are relevant to this assessment are as follows:
• The proposed development site is close to Breckland SPA, which qualifies under Article 4.1 of the Directive (79/409/EEC) by supporting breeding populations of stone curlew, nightjar and woodlark.
• The site also falls within 1,500m from habitat which supports the Breckland SPA stone curlew population. In order to avoid impacts of built development on stone curlews, local planning policy has defined a buffer zone that extends 1,500m from the edge of those parts of Breckland SPA that support or are capable of supporting
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 3
stone curlew. Within this area, new development will only be permitted if it can be demonstrated, through an Appropriate Assessment under the Habitats Regulations, that there will be no adverse impact on the qualifying features or integrity of the designated site.
• Most of the recent nesting attempts of stone curlew were found to have come from within Weeting Heath Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), a nature reserve owned by Norfolk Wildlife Trust, over 1km from the site.
• The Appropriate Assessment considered whether the proposals were likely to result in an adverse effect on the integrity of the SPA via effects on stone curlew. Potential effects were considered to be non-proximity effects, reduction in habitat quality (effects from noise, lighting, traffic, pet predation, fly tipping, increased fire risk and trampling) and in-combination effects with the first phase of development. Effects on nightjar and woodlark were not anticipated due to the distance from areas of the SPA supporting these species.
• Using a precautionary calculation, the effect on the breeding density of stone curlew within the SPA was deemed to be very minor. Precautionary measures were therefore proposed to reduce any effects on habitat quality.
• The potential for effects for stone curlews nesting outside of the SPA were also considered, although this was deemed exclusively a protected species issue. This was based on the conclusion that the population with the SPA was self-sustaining and therefore effects on nesting stone curlew outside of the SPA were unlikely to affect the designated population within the SPA. Mitigation was therefore proposed for these effects, which included the provision of stone curlew nesting habitat away from the vicinity of the site. Providing that this could be secured through an appropriate planning condition, it was concluded that no adverse effects on the integrity of Breckland SPA would result from the proposed development.
1.5 It should be noted that likely significant effects on Breckland Special Area of Conservation (SAC) were not covered in previous HRA work despite the nearest component SSSI (Weeting Heath) being situated within 1km of the proposed development site. Since the previous application, the HRA of the new Breckland Local Plan has identified the potential for urban effects such as increased fire, litter and eutrophication to significantly affect Breckland SAC (Liley & Hoskin, 2019), which is highlighted in Policy ENV 03 of the recently adopted Local Plan (2019). This report therefore assesses the potential for urban effects on Breckland SAC following the findings of the plan-level HRA.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 4
SCOPE OF THIS REPORT
1.6 This report provides evidence in support of an updated HRA to be undertaken by Breckland Council as the competent authority.
1.7 Stage 1 of this HRA assesses whether, unmitigated, significant effects are likely upon local Internationally Important Wildlife Sites as a result of the proposed residential development at land east of Lynn Road, Weeting, Norfolk. This screening exercise takes into account recent case law (People Over Wind and Sweetman v Coillte Teoranta (C- 323/17)) which determined that mitigation specifically aimed at reducing the effects of a plan or project on European sites should only be taken into account at Stage 2 (Appropriate Assessment) and not at Stage 1 (screening).
1.8 Where Stage 1 screening concludes likely significant effects on the integrity of a site as a result of the proposals, progression to Stage 2 (Appropriate Assessment) is required to quantify, where possible, impacts and determine potential mitigation measures to alleviate adverse effects. A shadow Appropriate Assessment is provided to aid the relevant Competent Authority in their Stage 2 assessment.
SITE CONTEXT AND STATUS
1.9 The proposed development site is situated on the northern extent of the village of Weeting, Norfolk. It is approximately 3.41 hectares (ha) in size and consists predominantly of an arable field bound by hedgerows and semi-natural broad-leaved woodland. The wider landscape, meanwhile, predominantly consists of arable land, residential areas and large expanses of woodland. The site is not subject to any nature conservation designations.
1.10 The site is predominantly situated across private farmland, although a public footpath extends along the southern boundary which links Lynn Road to the west of the site with Angerstein Close to the east.
1.11 The Ordnance Survey National Grid reference for the centre of the site is TL 77212 89305.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
1.12 The development proposals, based on current plans provided by the client’s agent are for a residential development, comprising 76 affordable homes complete with associated parking, garages, gardens and infrastructure.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 5
1.13 It is proposed that the site will be accessed via a new road off Lynn Road to the west, most of which has already been constructed. It is understood that the completion of this access road will require the demolition of an existing farm building just beyond the western site boundary.
1.14 The existing boundary hedgerows and woodland will be retained and incorporated into the site’s green infrastructure which will include an area of open green space incorporating an infiltration pond close to the centre of the site, as well as additional tree and shrub planting throughout the site. A permissive path is also proposed through the woodland which will link to the existing footpath and area of open green space.
1.15 For the purposes of the HRA, it has been assumed that maximum capacity for each dwelling will be 2.3 people which is the average household size in Breckland according to most recent demographic analysis (Norfolk Insights, 2019). This equates to a maximum of c.170 people, a figure that will likely be towards the upper range of capacity for the development once operational.
NOMENCLATURE
1.16 All Latin names provided in the text follow the common name and are provided at the first mention. Thereafter, only common names alone are provided.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 6
Figure 1: Proposed site layout
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 7
2 Relevant Legislation
2.1 Development proposals should give consideration to Regulation 63 under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended) to ensure that operations do not cause significant damage alone, or in combination, to the ecological features of Natura 2000 Sites, otherwise known as European Sites or Internationally Important Wildlife Sites (SPAs and SACs and, as a matter of Government policy, Ramsar Sites).
2.2 Article 6, paragraphs (3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC), are transposed into English Law by Regulation 63 the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017, and state:
(3) ‘Any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site but likely to have a significant effect thereon, either individually or in combination with other plans or projects, shall be subject to appropriate assessment of its implications for the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives. In the light of the conclusions of the assessment of the implications for the site and subject to the provisions of paragraph 4, the competent national authorities shall agree to the plan or project only after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site concerned and, if appropriate, after having obtained the opinion of the general public’.
(4) ’If, in spite of a negative assessment of the implications for the site and in the absence of alternative solutions, a plan or project must nevertheless be carried out for imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of social or economic nature, the Member State shall take all compensatory measures necessary to ensure that the overall coherence of Natura 2000 is protected. It shall inform the Commission of the compensatory measures adopted’.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 8
3 Methodology
THE HRA PROCESS
3.1. The Habitats Directive and Regulations do not specify how an assessment should be undertaken. The methodology for this report is therefore based on the approach set out in the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) (2006), Dodd et al., (2007), English Nature’s Habitats Regulations Guidance Notes (HRGN) (English Nature 1997, 1999) and Natural England’s Operational Standard for HRA (Natural England, 2017).
3.2. HRAs are required for all development/strategic plans likely to impact on Internationally Important Wildlife Sites. Such assessments follow the precautionary approach in considering the effects on site integrity in that projects may only proceed if the competent authority has ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of a European Wildlife Site. The Habitats Regulations define ‘European Sites’ as candidate SACs, SACs, Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and Sites of Community Importance (SCI). The Habitats Regulations do not provide statutory protection for potential SPAs (pSPAs), possible/probable SACs (pSACs) or listed or proposed Ramsar Sites. For the purpose of considering development proposals and their likely impacts on such sites, government policy in England is that the aforementioned sites ‘should be given the same protection’ as statutory European sites. Collectively these are referred to as Internationally Important Wildlife Sites.
3.3. Although the HRA process relates specifically and exclusively to the qualifying interests of European Wildlife Sites, given that each designation overlaps to some degree with Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), features of European importance cited for these nationally important sites, and the condition of the SSSI, are also important considerations for the planning process.
3.4. The Habitats Regulations describe a procedure that provides for a systematic set of stages for the transparent consideration of the likely significant effects a plan or project could have on an Internationally Important Site. Guidance states that there are four tasks in producing an assessment as follows:
• Stage One: Screening – the process which identifies whether the plan or project is required for the management of Internationally Important Wildlife Site(s) and, if not, whether there are likely to be any effects upon a site as a result of the plan or The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 9
project, either alone or in combination with other projects or plans, as well as considering whether these effects are likely to be significant.
• Stage Two: Appropriate Assessment - the consideration of the impact of the plan on the integrity of the Internationally Important Wildlife Site, either alone or in combination with other projects or plans, with respect to the site’s structure and function and its conservation objectives. Additionally, where adverse effects on site integrity exist, an assessment of the effectiveness of potential mitigation of those impacts will be made;
• Stage Three: Assessment of alternative solutions - the process which examines alternative ways of achieving the objectives of the plan that avoid likely significant effects on the integrity of the Internationally Important Wildlife site identified at Stage Two; and
• Stage Four: Assessment where no alternative solutions exist and where adverse impacts remain — an assessment of compensatory measures where, in the light of an assessment of imperative reasons of overriding public interest (IROPI), it is deemed that the plan should proceed. Each stage determines whether a further stage in the process is required. If, for example, the conclusions at the end of Stage One are that there are no likely significant effects on the European sites, there is no requirement to proceed further.
STAGE 1 HRA (SCREENING)
3.5. Likely significant effect is not defined in the Habitat Regulations or the Directive. A good working definition is any effect that may reasonably be predicted as a consequence of a plan or project that may affect the achievement of conservation objectives of the features for which the site was designated but excluding trivial and inconsequential effects (de minimis). Likely effect is not only one that is probable but should also be taken to mean an effect that could happen if its occurrence cannot be ruled out, based on the best available impartial information. Effects that are likely to be significant include:
• causing change to the ecological coherence or robustness of the site, or to the wider series of Internationally Important Wildlife sites (for example by presenting a barrier between isolated fragments, or reducing the ability of the site to act as a source of new colonisers);
• causing reduction in the area of a particular habitat within the site or the actual site, or in some way sterilising part of the site from its ecological functioning;
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 10
• causing direct or indirect change to the physical quality of the environment (including the hydrology) or habitat within the site;
• causing ongoing disturbance to species or habitats for which the site is designated or classified;
• altering community structure (species composition);
• causing direct or indirect damage to the size, characteristics or reproductive ability of populations on the site or using supporting habitat outside the site;
• altering the vulnerability of populations to other impacts;
• causing a reduction in the resilience of the feature against external change (for example its ability to respond to extremes of environmental conditions); or
• affecting restoration of a feature where this is a conservation objective.
3.6. Each phase of the proposal (project) has been considered against each of the Internationally Important Wildlife Sites’ qualifying features and an assessment of potential effects made using best available evidence and information. In this case, only the operational phase is considered to hold the potential to affect the Internationally
Important Wildlife Sites; construction and any decommissioning phases have, therefore, been scoped out, given the nature of the proposal and the distance from nearby designated sites.
3.7. The various elements of the proposals have first been considered ‘alone’, that is in isolation of any potential combined effects of the other elements of the proposal. If there are no likely significant effects ‘alone’ upon a qualifying feature, any elements of the proposal deemed to have an effect(s) but which is/are not significant on their own are then considered for their potential to have an effect in combination with other effects of the proposal. A precautionary principle is applied to the process of assessing significant impacts.
3.8. An in-combination assessment is required only where the project may have an effect on an Internationally Important Wildlife Site, but on its own, the effects are not likely to be significant. In these cases, the effects of the proposal are considered alongside other live (within the planning system pending decision or decided but not yet in place) plans or projects to assess whether they may add up to a significant ‘in-combination’ effect.
3.9. This report provides evidence in support of an HRA to be undertaken by Breckland Council as the competent authority. This report should be regarded as a draft for
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 11
consultation with Natural England and other key stakeholders, such as the RPSB, to seek their detailed views on the potential for impacts of the proposed development on local Internationally Important Wildlife Sites and, where necessary, to agree appropriate mitigation measures as part of the Stage 2 (Appropriate Assessment) – see below.
STAGE 2 HRA (APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT)
3.10. The Stage 2 HRA (Appropriate Assessment) must assess the adverse impacts on the features of the Internationally Important Wildlife Site(s), taking full account of the site’s conservation objectives and be based on the potential impacts determined at Stage 1 HRA (screening).
3.11. Judgments as to significance are made in relation to factors for which a given site has been classified or designated, using each site’s Conservation Objectives as the primary focus for the assessment. Consideration must also given to the current condition of the Internationally Important Wildlife Sites, taking into account factors such as the magnitude, extent, reversibility, timing and frequency of each potential impact in line with current guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment (CIEEM, 2018). Impacts may be direct or indirect, permanent or temporary, and positive or negative.
3.12. If Stage 1 finds the project, alone, is likely to result in likely significant effects on site integrity, then the scale and significance of these effects ‘alone’ must then be assessed in Stage 2 and potential mitigation measures proposed and assessed to alleviate these impacts. Where Stage 1 finds the project will not have a significant effect on site integrity on its own but will do so in combination with other plans or projects, the scale and significance of these ‘in-combination’ impacts must be considered in Stage 2 prior to exploring mitigation. In either case, where mitigation measures are proposed, these should be agreed with Natural England.
3.13. It should be noted that integrity is defined by the European Commission (2000) as relating to the reasons for the site’s designation as follows:
‘the integrity of a site is the coherence of the site’s ecological structure and function, across its whole area, or the habitats, complex of habitats and/or populations of species for which the site is or will be classified’
3.14. This report uses the approach provided in Assessment of Plans and Projects Significantly Affecting Natura 2000 Sites (European Commission, 2002) and in accordance with CIEEM (2018). The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 12
LOCAL PLANNING POLICY
3.15. Breckland Council have recently adopted a new Local Plan (2019) which builds on the policies of the previously adopted Core Strategy (2015). Key environmental policies set out in the new Local Plan that are relevant to this assessment are summarised below.
Policy ENV 02 Biodiversity protection and enhancement
3.16. The highest level of protection will be given to European Sites, with development only permitted where the proposal is in accordance with the requirements of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (MM120).
3.17. Where measures to mitigate for potential adverse effects on European sites are required, the proposed mitigation measures must be justified as fit for purpose with appropriate evidence, to inform the Council’s Habitats Regulations Assessment.
3.18. Development likely to have an adverse effect (either directly or indirectly) on a site of national, regional or local biodiversity, or geological interest, as identified on the Policies Map, will not be permitted unless:
• it can be clearly demonstrated that there are reasons for the proposal that outweigh the need to safeguard the special ecological / geological interest of the site;
• it has been demonstrated, where development would result in significant harm, that it cannot be reasonably located on an alternative site that would result in less or no harm, and;
• residual harm, after all measures to prevent and adequately mitigate have been applied, will be adequately compensated for.
3.19. Where the Council considers that a designated site, protected species or any species or habitat, particularly where listed as a Priority Habitat or Species under Section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006), may be adversely affected by a development proposal, an ecological assessment (EcIA) will be required to be submitted with the planning application to assess effects on flora and fauna, commensurate with the scale of the impact and the importance of the species.
3.20. In accordance with the stepwise approach to protecting biodiversity (the mitigation hierarchy), all development with the potential to affect biodiversity should demonstrate how such effects have been considered, by firstly demonstrating how effects have been
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 13
avoided, and then how effects that cannot be avoided have been minimised. Residual harm, after all measures to prevent and adequately mitigate have been applied, must be adequately compensated for.
3.21. All development should demonstrate how net gains for biodiversity are being secured as part of the development, proportionate to the scale of development and potential impacts (if any). Where development is permitted, the authority will consider the need for conditions or planning obligations to ensure the protection and enhancement of the site’s nature conservation and / or geological interest. Wherever a proposed development may have a detrimental impact upon a designated site or protected species, appropriate conditions and/or planning obligations will be used to ensure that the appropriate mitigation measures incorporated within the proposal are fully implemented and monitored where required.
3.22. Policy ENV03 outlines specific requirements that apply to The Breckland Special Protection Area.
Policy ENV 03 The Brecks Protected Habitats & Species
3.23. The Council requires that a Habitats Regulations Assessment is undertaken on all proposals for development that are likely to have a significant effect on The Breckland Special Protection Area (SPA) which is classified for its populations of stone curlew, woodlark and nightjar, and/or Breckland Special Area of Conservation (SAC), which is designated for its heathland habitats. Development will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the proposal will not adversely affect the integrity of the SPA or the SAC.
Stone Curlew
3.24. Plan level Habitats Regulations Assessment has been undertaken to identify where built development is likely to significantly affect the Breckland SPA. Map 5.1 identifies a 1,500m buffer zone from the edge of those parts of the SPA that support, or are capable of supporting, stone curlew, where new built development would be likely to significantly affect the SPA population. The plan level Habitats Regulations Assessment also identifies areas that have a functional link to the SPA, because they support stone curlew outside, but in close proximity to the SPA boundary. These areas also have a 1500m buffer zone, within which new built development would be likely to significantly affect the SPA population.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 14
3.25. A conclusion of no likely significant effect can be met where the proposed building is located further than 1500m away from the SPA boundary (red primary buffer) or the identified (blue secondary buffer) or possible (orange square cells) areas that have a functional link (see Map 5.1).
3.26. Development within the SPA boundary or located less than 1500m away from the SPA boundary or identified areas that have a functional link (see Map 5.1) will not normally be permitted.
3.27. Where a proposed building is outside the SPA but within 1500m of the SPA boundary or identified or possible areas that have a functional link (see Map 5.1), there may be circumstances where a project level Habitats Regulations Assessment is able to demonstrate that the proposal will not adversely affect the integrity of the SPA. For agricultural buildings, applicants must provide evidence to show how their proposal meets the criteria listed in Natural England’s “Agricultural Buildings and the Breckland SPA stone curlew constraint zone” advice note, or successor document. Circumstances where the proposal is able to conclusively demonstrate that it will not result in an adverse effect on Breckland SPA may include where the proposal is:
• More than 1500m away from potential stone curlew inside the SPA;
• A new building that will be completely masked from the SPA by existing built development;
• A proposed re-development of an existing building that would not alter its footprint or increase its potential impact;
• A new agricultural building of less than 120 sqm;
• An extension to existing agricultural building of less than 120 sqm or 100% of the original, whichever is less.
3.28. Large developments adjacent to, or just outside the primary or secondary buffer, particularly where occurring in an isolated area with few other buildings, are likely to also require project level assessment.
Woodlark and Nightjar
3.29. Development within 400m of the SPA that support, or are capable of supporting, woodlark and/or nightjar will not normally be permitted. The Council will consider the need for a Habitats Regulations Assessment to determine the implications of
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 15
development on nightjar and woodlark on a case by case basis, depending on the location and nature of the proposal.
Recreation pressure and urban effects
3.30. Plan level Habitats Regulations Assessment has identified the potential for increased disturbance to nightjar, woodlark and stone curlew as a result of recreation, and the potential for other urban effects such as increased fire, litter and eutrophication to significantly affect Breckland SPA and SAC.
Monitoring and Mitigation Framework
3.31. The Council commits to a framework of measures that will enable it to coordinate the necessary monitoring and mitigation measures required to demonstrate that the increases in visitor pressure arising from new development in the District will be addressed before adverse effects on European sites occurs. These will include as a minimum the following measures to be implemented following adoption of the Plan:
• Creation of an advisory group;
• Production of a monitoring programme;
• Identification of mitigation measures; and
• Defining funding to support the above measures.
3.32. The Council will work with partners to develop a framework for managing and monitoring urban effects. Proposals for development where urban heaths at Thetford (Barnham Cross Common, Thetford Heath, Thetford Golf Club and Marsh), East Wretham or Brettenham are likely to be used as local greenspace will need to demonstrate the inclusion of mitigation measures that contribute to the framework to address the potential impact urban effects on Breckland SPA/SAC.
SCREENING AREA
3.33. Previous research in Dorset and Hampshire (Liley et al., 2008a, Sharp et al., 2008a) has shown that coastal sites or large tracts of semi-natural habitat will attract a proportion of residents from a wide area, up to 20km away from the site. Clearly, therefore, effects of a project associated with increased visitors to a site have the potential to be realised some distance from the development site itself.
3.34. For the purposes of this assessment and given the scale and nature of the proposed development at Weeting, a 15km radius was considered appropriate as an initial
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 16
screening radius around the proposed development site. This is also based on recent (2018) feedback from Natural England on a similar project in the region stating that a search radius of at least 13km is necessary when initially assessing impacts relating to increased recreational pressure.
3.35. However, based on other studies in the region, the typical distance people will travel regularly to access a site for recreation and leisure activities is more likely to be c.5km (Panter et al., 2017). As such, this radius has also been used to guide the assessment, where appropriate, and is in line with the approach taken in other HRAs for significant proposed developments in the Borough, namely Mill Farm, Brandon which only covered Breckland SPA and Breckland SAC (FPCR, 2019a).
3.36. The 15km search radius encompasses all or part of the following Internationally Important Wildlife Sites:
• Breckland SAC;
• Breckland SPA;
• Norfolk Valley Fens SAC; and
• Rex Graham Reserve SAC.
3.37. A map of Internationally Important Wildlife Sites within 15km of the proposed development site is provided in Figure 2 below.
3.38. Although Rex Graham Reserve SAC falls within 15km of the proposed development site, this site is situated within the outer limits of the screening radius (14.9km south west) and has been previously screened out of the Core Strategy and Local Plan HRAs due to its character and location outside of the district (Liley et al., 2008b; Liley & Hoskin, 2019). It is therefore considered unlikely that any significant effects will occur on this SAC, and, as such, this site is no longer referred to in this assessment.
3.39. The Conservation Objectives for each site, together with any Supplementary Advice, provide the necessary context for HRAs and detail on the site’s structure, function and supporting processes. These objectives, provided by Natural England, aim to ensure that the integrity of each site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and that each site contributes to achieving the aims of the Habitats and/or Wild Birds Directive.
3.40. This assessment was also informed by the site-specific Conservation Objectives, citations and any Supplementary Advice for Conservation Objectives (SACO) for the
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 17
Internationally Important Wildlife Sites, as well as citations for individual component SSSI’s, where relevant. Site Improvement Plans and relevant SSSI Views About Management (VAM) documents have also been considered.
3.41. The Conservation Objectives, and supporting information such as Supplementary Advice (where available), are to ensure that, subject to natural change, the integrity of the site is maintained or restored as appropriate, and 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 the qualifying species;
• the structure and function (including typical species) of qualifying natural habitats;
• the structure and function of the habitats of the 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.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 18
Figure 2: Location of the site in relation to Internationally Important Wildlife Sites within a 15km radius
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 19
4 Stage 1 HRA (Screening)
OVERVIEW
4.1. This section provides a summary of each Internationally Important Wildlife Site within a 15km radius of the proposed development site and sets out the potential ways in which the proposals might reasonably be expected to affect the qualifying features of these Internationally Important Wildlife Sites based on a rapid assessment of location, proximity, type, scale, extent, duration, frequency and timing of proposed operations or activities.
EUROPEAN SITE CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES & SUPPLEMENTARY ADVICE
4.2. A brief description of the above sites, taken largely from the Site Improvement Plans is presented below, along with a summary of the qualifying habitats and species.
Breckland SPA and SAC
4.3. The Breckland SPA and SAC is characterised by an extensive area of grass heath (and some heather heath), large arable fields, and the largest coniferous forest in lowland England. Together, these support over 2000 priority species, many of which are confined to the area, or have their core UK distribution there.
4.4. The SPA holds internationally important populations of stone curlew, nightjar and woodlark. stone curlew establishes nests on open ground provided by arable cultivation in the spring, while woodlark and nightjar breed in recently felled areas and open heath areas within the conifer plantations. The heaths include the best preserved systems of inland sand dune vegetation, which is in part characterised by the nationally rare grey hair-grass Corynephorus canescens, and sand sedge Carex arenaria. The CG7 Festuca ovina – Hieracium pilosella – Thymus praecox grassland type is rich in rare species and is more typical of the steppe vegetation associated with central Europe. It can be found in mosaics with heath/acid grassland, giving rise to patterned ground that formed under peri-glacial conditions, and which reflects differences in substrate composition. The dry acidic heath is represented by H1 Calluna vulgaris – Festuca ovina heath. The open Breckland landscape provides ideal conditions for early successional rare/scarce plants and invertebrates and supports internationally important populations of Annex 1 grounding nesting birds, namely stone curlew, woodlark and nightjar. Aquifer-fed fluctuating meres and alluvial forests dominated by Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior are also features of the SAC. The meres are restricted to the Norfolk The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 20
Breckland. They support unusual and highly characteristic plant and animal communities associated with periodic inundation and drying out, as part of the natural cycle. The meres, together with a range of other water bodies, provide breeding habitat for great crested newt Triturus cristatus.
Norfolk Valley Fens SAC
4.5. Norfolk Valley Fens SAC comprises a series of 14 individual and geographically separated valley-head spring-fed fens scattered across 200km2 of central and north Norfolk. Such spring-fed flush fens are very rare in the lowlands.
4.6. It is one of two sites selected in East Anglia, in eastern England, where the main concentration of lowland alkaline fens occurs. This site comprises a series of valley- head spring-fed fens. Such spring-fed flush fens are very rare in the lowlands. Most of the vegetation at this site is of the small sedge fen type, mainly referable to M13 Schoenus nigricans – Juncus subnodulosus mire, but there are transitions to reedswamp and other fen and wet grassland types.
4.7. The individual fens vary in their structure according to intensity of management and provide a wide range of variation. There is a rich flora associated with these fens, including species such as grass-of-Parnassus Parnassia palustris, common butterwort Pinguicula vulgaris, marsh helleborine Epipactis palustris and narrow-leaved marsh- orchid Dactylorhiza traunsteineri. Six other Annex I habitats are present as qualifying features but are not a primary reason for the selection of this site.
4.8. Two Annex II species are present, narrow-mouthed whorl snail and Desmoulin's whorl snail are also a primary reason for the selection of the site.
4.9. It should be noted that not all the qualifying habitats and species summarised above are present across all of the 14 SSSIs that underpin Norfolk Valley Fens SAC. The distribution of the qualifying habitats and species therefore varies across the SAC. Specifically, Foulden Common SSSI which falls within the 15km radius only supports alkaline fens (calcium-rich springwater-fed fens), alluvial forests with alder and ash, calcareous fens with cladium and semi-natural dry grasslands on calcareous substrates. As a result, this screening exercise only considers these aforementioned habitats given that all other qualifying features summarised above are not present at this particular site.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 21
SITES OF SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC INTEREST (SSSI)
4.10. The above European sites are unpinned by a number of component SSSIs and the proposed development site lies within the Impact Risk Zones (IRZ) of several of these. Although impacts on the interest features of these nationally important sites do not form part of the HRA process, Natural England advice is that consultation is required on all planning application types within these areas1 due to the potential risk of impact on site interest features and integrity.
IMPACT PATHWAYS AND LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS TEST
4.11. The qualifying features are presented in Table 4.1 below, together with a screening of potential impact pathways on these features as a result of the proposals ‘alone’ and in- combination with other live plans or projects.
4.12. Given that the site falls within the 1,500m stone curlew buffer zone, an Appropriate Assessment is required in accordance with Policy ENV 03 of Breckland Council’s recently adopted Local Plan to assess adverse impacts on the integrity of Breckland SPA. As Policy ENV 03 essentially provides justification for likely significant effect on stone curlew, it was not considered necessary to include this qualifying feature in the screening exercise. Potential effects on stone curlew resulting from the proposed development is therefore covered in the shadow Appropriate Assessment in Section 5 of this report. Potential effects on the other qualifying features of Breckland SPA (nightjar and woodlark) though are assessed in Table 4.1 below.
1 http://magic.gov.uk/MagicMap.aspx The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 22
Table 4.1. Qualifying features of Internationally Important Wildlife Sites within 15km of proposed development site with potential impact pathways and assessment of likely significant effect on features as a result of proposals.
Breckland SPA (closest point: Breckland Farmland SSSI 177m west of the proposed development site)
Qualifying Feature Potential Impact Pathways Likely Significant Effect (Yes/No/Uncertain)
Article 4.1 breeding: Construction phase: Disturbance to Disturbance: No (alone or in-combination). In Breckland, nightjar and woodlark Nightjar Caprimulgus breeding nightjar and woodlark if typically breed in recently felled areas and open heaths within conifer plantations europaeus (up to 12.2% of works are carried out during the within the Breckland Forest SSSI component of the SPA, which is situated the breeding population in breeding season. Degradation of approximately 819m north of the site at its closest point. The distribution of existing Great Britain) habitat capable of supporting nightjar and woodlark breeding territories within the SPA is therefore likely to reflect nightjar and woodlark through dust forestry management and the distribution of clear-felled areas. Article 4.1 breeding: deposition. Woodlark Lullula arborea (up Using satellite imagery, at least two clear-felled areas, at differing stages of to 28.7% of the breeding development and open grassland, are present in the area of Breckland Forest SSSI population in Great Britain) within proximity to the proposed development site, which would potentially be capable of supporting breeding nightjar and woodlark. These areas, however, are in excess of 1km from the proposed development site across intervening arable land and are further buffered by woodland belts and copses outside of the SPA boundary.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 23
No significant effects on breeding nightjar and woodlark are therefore anticipated as a result of disturbance generated by the construction phase of the development. No in-combination effects with other live plans or projects are also envisaged.
Degradation of habitat capable of supporting nightjar and woodlark: No (alone or in- combination). Degradation of habitat capable of supporting nightjar and woodlark through dust deposition generated by the construction phase of the development is not anticipated due to the distance between the proposed development site and the nearest potential supporting habitat (>1km). No in-combination effects with other live plans or projects envisaged.
Article 4.1 breeding: Operational phase: Recreational Recreational effects: No (alone or in-combination). In Breckland, nightjar and Nightjar Caprimulgus effects on breeding nightjar and woodlark typically breed in recently felled areas and open heaths within conifer europaeus (up to 12.2% of woodlark (disturbance; damage to plantations within the Breckland Forest SSSI competent of the SPA, which is the breeding population in nests and eggs). Predation of situated approximately 819m north of the site at its closest point. The distribution of Great Britain) nightjar and woodlark by domestic existing nightjar and woodlark breeding territories within the SPA is therefore likely cats. to reflect forestry management and the distribution of clear-felled areas. Article 4.1 breeding: Woodlark Lullula arborea (up Using satellite imagery, at least two clear-felled areas, at differing stages of to 28.7% of the breeding development and open grassland, are present in the area of Breckland Forest SSSI population in Great Britain) within proximity to the proposed development site, which would be potentially capable of supporting breeding nightjar and woodlark. Given that no known parking facilitates are available at the access point of the SSSI/SPA at this location, to access these areas from the proposed development site would require in excess of a c.2.4km indirect walk via Cromwell Road, Hereward Way, All Saints and Castle
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 24
Close. This distance is likely to deter new residents from visiting Breckland Forest SSSI on a regular basis, particularly given that studies undertaken in relation to similar habitats at Thames Basin Heaths and Dorset Heathlands have shown that 400m is the typical distance that many people will travel on foot (Liley et al., 2008b). This distance is also referred to in Policy ENV 03 of the newly adopted local plan and discussed within both the Core Strategy and Local Plan HRAs (Liley et al., 2008b; Liley & Hoskin, 2019).
The closest access into Breckland Forest SSSI from the proposed development site, which consists of footpath intersection leading into and along the southern edge of the forest, also does not extend directly through the areas of clear-fell that are capable of supporting nightjar and woodlark. Where the footpath does extend around the southern edge of an area of clear-fell, this is screened by an established hedgerow with trees which extends along its boundary.
Visitor surveys carried out as part of a local recreational study (available on Breckland Council’s planning page) undertaken in support of a planning application (currently undecided) for a large-scale residential development in Brandon (FPCR, 2019b), also found that current levels of use of this footpath (referred to as Location 7) were very low (5%) in comparison to the other seven survey locations across Weeting and Brandon. Visitors recorded using the footpath for dog walking was also low, with only 15% of the total number of visitors recorded at this location walking dogs (FPCR, 2019b). The study therefore concluded that this location appeared to be used by a few locals on a reasonably regular but not frequent basis where paths
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 25
and the opportunity to walk/cycle a reasonable distance are available (FPCR, 2019b).
Breckland Forest SSSI can also be accessed via a footpath which extends north west from Lynn Road approximately 177m south west of the proposed development site. The footpath follows the southern edge of Breckland Farmland SSSI/SPA, before leading directly through Weeting Heath SSSI/SAC and then ultimately to Breckland Forest SSSI. Clear felled areas within this part of the Breckland Forest SSSI/SPA though are a c.3km walk from the proposed development site, a distance which is again likely to deter new residents from visiting on a regular basis. This footpath was also included in the local recreational study which found existing levels of use to be low, being the least popular considered by total overall count, with only 6% of interviews recorded (FPCR, 2019b).
Owing to the proximity of Breckland Forest SSSI to the proposed development site, an increase in numbers of visitors to the SSSI/SPA as a result of the proposed development is likely; however, numbers are likely to be low and infrequent, when taking into account existing visitor levels at this location. Low level, incidental disturbance or other ‘urban effects’ can therefore not be ruled out, particularly where nests are located close to footpaths (although studies have shown that both nightjar and woodlark territories tend to occur where levels of human disturbance are lowest, i.e. away from footpaths (Liley et al., 2006; Mallord, 2005)). However, the predicted low increase in visitor numbers is considered unlikely to have a significant effect on
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 26
both nightjar and woodlark, alone or in-combination with other plans or projects, on what is a relatively dispersed population of birds across the SSSI/SPA.
Predation by domestic cats: No (alone or in-combination). In developing a strategy to avoid the effects of increased cat predation on the qualifying bird species of Breckland SPA, the newly adopted Local Plan specifies that development within 400m of the SPA that support, or are capable of supporting, nightjar and/or woodlark will not normally be permitted. This is based on similar strategies adopted by other local authorities in close proximity to Thames Basin Heaths and Dorset Heathlands as discussed in the Core Strategy HRA (Liley et al., 2008b).
Given that habitat within the SSSI/SPA capable of supporting nightjar and woodlark is situated in excess of 1km from the proposed development site, with abundant alternative hunting habitats including gardens, farmyards and woodland all present within closer proximity, no significant effects on both nightjar and woodlark are anticipated as a result of increased predation by cats, alone or in-combination with other plans or projects.
Breckland SAC (closest point: Weeting Heath SSSI 967m west of the proposed development site)
Article 4(4): Alluvial forests Construction phase: Degradation Construction effects: No (alone or in-combination). There is the potential for with Alnus glutinosa and of qualifying habitats through dust construction effects on the nearest competent SSSI of Breckland SAC (Weeting Fraxinus excelsior (Alno- deposition Heath), which is notified for supporting semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates. Degradation of this qualifying habitat through dust
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 27
Padion, Alnion incanae, deposition generated by the construction phase of the development though is not Salicion albae) anticipated due to the distance between the proposed development site and Weeting Heath (967m). No in-combination effects with other live plans or projects Article 4(4): European dry envisaged. heaths
Article 4(4): Inland dunes with open Corynephorus and Agrostis grasslands
Article 4(4): Natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition-type vegetation.
Article 4(4): Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates (Festuco- Brometalia)
Article 4(4): Alluvial forests Operational phase: Urban effects and trampling: No (alone or in-combination) The proposed with Alnus glutinosa and Urban/recreational effects such as development has the potential to increase the numbers of visitors to the SAC which Fraxinus excelsior (Alno- litter, vandalism, wildfire, nutrient
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 28
Padion, Alnion incanae, enrichment from dog fouling; in turn could lead to effects through trampling of vegetation, increased risk of wildfire Salicion albae) trampling of vegetation; and localised nutrient enrichment through dog fouling.
Article 4(4): European dry Due to its distance, the SAC at Weeting Heath (which is only notified for supporting heaths semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates) is likely to be the most susceptible to potential increased urban/recreational effects resulting Article 4(4): Inland dunes with of the proposed development. This site is publicly accessible and includes a small open Corynephorus and visitor centre and car park which is a c.3.7km drive from the proposed development Agrostis grasslands site. Weeting Heath can also be accessed via a footpath which extends north west from Lynn Road approximately 177m south west of the proposed development site. Article 4(4): Natural eutrophic The footpath follows the southern edge of Breckland Farmland SSSI/SPA, before lakes with Magnopotamion or leading directly through Weeting Heath which is a c.1.2km walk when using this Hydrocharition-type route. This distance though is likely to deter new residents from visiting Weeting vegetation. Heath SSSI on a regular basis, particularly given that studies undertaken in relation to similar habitats at Thames Basin Heaths and Dorset Heathlands have shown that Article 4(4): Semi-natural dry 400m is the typical distance that many people will travel on foot (Liley et al., 2008b). grasslands and scrubland This footpath was also included in the local recreational study which found existing facies: on calcareous levels of use to be low, being the least popular considered by total overall count, substrates (Festuco- with only 6% of interviews recorded (FPCR, 2019b). Brometalia) The local recreational study also indicated that existing visitor numbers at Weeting Heath from the visitor centre/car park were also the joint lowest (5%) in comparison to other survey locations across Weeting and Brandon (FPCR, 2019b). Visitors appeared to be visiting specifically because of the wildlife, notably birds, habitats and peacefulness associated with the SSSI/SAC, with dog walking not of great
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 29
importance (FPCR, 2019b). No visitors from Weeting or Brandon (identified in the report as post code IP27) were also recorded as accessing the SSSI/SAC at this location, with all visitors being from outside the area.
Owing to the proximity of Weeting Heath SSSI to the proposed development site, an increase in numbers of visitors to the SSSI/SPA as a result of the proposed development is likely; however, numbers are likely to be low and infrequent, when taking into account existing visitor levels at the SSSI. As such, effects are highly unlikely to undermine the site’s conservation objectives or affect site integrity when considered alone or in-combination with other plans or projects. This conclusion also applies to other component SSSIs of the SAC that fall within the screening radius, given that these sites are likely to be subject to even less visitation by new residents given that they are situated much further away.
Norfolk Valley Fens SAC (closest point: Foulden Common SSSI 9.9km north of the proposed development site)
Article 4(4): Alkaline fens Operational phase: Urban effects & trampling: No (alone): Uncertain (in-combination). The proposed (Calcium-rich springwater- Urban/recreational effects such as development has the potential to increase the numbers of visitors to Norfolk Valley fed fens) litter, vandalism, wildfire, nutrient Fens SAC at Foulden Common due to its proximity which, in turn, could lead to enrichment from dog fouling; effects through trampling of vegetation, increased risk of wildfire and localised Article 4(4): Alluvial forests trampling of vegetation; Changes nutrient enrichment through dog fouling. Given that the typical distance that people with Alnus glutinosa and to hydrological regime as a result may travel regularly to a site for dog walking and other local access is 5km (Panter Fraxinus excelsior (Alno- of increased water abstraction. et al., 2016) and that the SAC is a c.12km drive from the proposed development site, increased visitor numbers as a result of the proposed development are likely to be very low and infrequent, and as such, effects are highly unlikely to undermine the
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 30
Padion, Alnion incanae, site’s conservation objectives or affect site integrity when considered alone or in- Salicion albae) combination with other plans or projects.
Article 4(4): Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae.
Article 4(4): Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates (Festuco- Brometalia)
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 31
SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT OF LIKELY SIGNFICIANT EFFECTS OF PROPOSALS ‘ALONE’
4.10. The screening exercise (Stage 1 HRA) concluded that the proposed development is not considered to result in likely significant effects on any of the qualifying features (excluding stone curlew) of the Internationally Important Wildlife Sites lying within a 15km radius of the proposed development site. This was primarily due to the distance between the proposed development site and the individual wildlife sites, as well as the proportional increase in residents in the area and, by inference, potential visitors to the sites, against existing background levels.
SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT OF LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF PROPOSALS ‘IN COMBINATION’
4.11. The HRA of the Breckland Local Plan (Liley & Hoskin, 2019), which makes provision for 14,925 dwellings in the area over the plan period 2011-2036, considered the key impacts to be recreational disturbances to Breckland SPA birds and recreational effects on Breckland SAC and SPA habitats. In-combinations effects on these sites are therefore considered further here.
4.12. A recent study (Panter et al., 2016) of visitor patterns across a wide number of European sites in Norfolk, including Breckland, provides useful information on distances travelled by visitors and their primary reasons for visiting. This study also predicts that, as a result of the above new housing during the current plan period, visitor access to sites in Breckland may increase by 30%. This predicted increase for sites within Breckland was much higher than the Norfolk-wide 14% increase and, as such, the HRA for the local plan concluded that development in the Breckland area has particular implications in terms of recreation, due to its proximity and scale (Liley & Hoskin, 2019). These results were reported to be particularly relevant when considering the impacts from the overall quantum of development and the likely scale of change in recreation at sensitive sites, with particular increases predicted from growth within Thetford, Swaffham and Mundford (Liley & Hoskin, 2019).
4.13. A brief examination of live (within the planning system pending decision or decided but not yet in place) plans and projects within Breckland around the proposed development site revealed a large number of private homeowner applications for the construction of extensions and garages which are all highly unlikely to result in any potential cumulative effects. The search also revealed a low number of small-scale (<10 dwellings) residential developments, as well as several larger residential schemes and the HRA of the local
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 32
plans. The more significant plans and projects include the following though this is unlikely to be an exhaustive list:
• Habitats Regulations Assessment of Breckland Local Plan (Liley & Hoskin, 2019). Key impacts considered are recreational disturbances to Breckland SPA birds and recreational effects on Breckland SAC and SPA habitats;
• Mill Farm, Brandon Road, Brandon – 450 dwellings and associated infrastructure (application currently undecided). The shadow HRA prepared by FPCR (2019a) in support of the application concluded likely significant effect on Breckland SPA (at both the Breckland Farmland SSSI and Breckland Forest SSSI) as a result of the proposed development. Mitigation at the Appropriate Assessment stage includes the provision of offsite mitigation areas for stone curlew, nightjar and woodlark, as well as on site green infrastructure and open space proposals.
• East of New Lodge, Lynn Road, Weeting – Construction of two dwellings adjacent to the current proposed development site with planning permission approved in 2019. Based on the plans submitted, Natural England considered that the proposed development would not have significant adverse impacts on statutorily protected sites or landscapes.
• Fengate Drive, Weeting – Construction of eight dwellings and associated infrastructure (application currently undecided). The shadow HRA prepared by Wild Frontier Ecology (2017) in support of the application could not rule out likely significant effect on Breckland SPA stone curlew as a result of the proposed development. Mitigation at the Appropriate Assessment stage includes screening and sensitively conducted construction works, as well as signage along a connecting footpath into the SPA, advising new residents that dogs are to be kept on leads.
4.14. Although the closest access point (Location 7) into Breckland Forest SSSI/SPA from the proposed development site is almost equidistant (c.2.1km and 2.4km walk) to the proposed development at Mill Farm, Brandon, any increase in visitors to this part of the SSSI/SPA in-combination are still likely to be low and infrequent, when considering existing visitor levels at this location, as well as the typical distance that many people will travel on foot (400m). There are also closer access points into Breckland Forest SSSI/SPA from the proposed development at Mill Farm, Brandon which is likely to further deter new residents from accessing the forest at Location 7.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 33
4.15. Likewise, based on existing visitor patterns at Weeting Heath SSSI (FPCR, 2019), it could be assumed that there will be no net increase in visitor numbers to the SSSI/SAC as a result of the proposals in-combination, given that no visitors residing from IP27 were recorded at the site during the visitor surveys. It is acknowledged though that this would be highly unlikely, particularly when considering that the visitor surveys were only carried out over a two-day period, and therefore it would be more reasonable to assume that any increase in visitors to Weeting Heath will also be low and infrequent when considered in-combination.
4.16. It is therefore concluded that in combination effects on the qualifying features of the designated sites within the 15km search radius are unlikely due to the reasons provided above and in Table 4.1.
4.17. The next section provides the information in support of an Appropriate Assessment specifically relating to potential effects on the Breckland SPA stone curlew population to be completed by the relevant Competent Authority.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 34
5 Stage 2 HRA (Appropriate Assessment)
5.1. The site falls within the 1,500m stone curlew buffer zone and the proposed development therefore has the potential to have direct impacts on the Breckland SPA stone curlew population. In accordance with local planning policy therefore, this section provides information in support of an Appropriate Assessment on potential adverse impacts on Breckland stone curlew.
REVIEW OF IMPACTS FROM PROPOSALS
Breckland SPA
Direct impacts of built development on the Breckland SPA stone curlew population
5.2. A study undertaken by Sharp et al., (2008b) found lower densities of stone curlew in areas close to housing or surrounded by high densities of housing. The reasons for this avoidance are difficult to pinpoint and are likely attributed to a range of factors including higher levels of human disturbance, other urban effects such as the occurrence of fires (Haskins, 2000; Liley et al., 2006; Underhill-Day, 2005; Kirby & Tantrum, 1999), as well as increased predation by cats (Sims et al., 2008).
5.3. A study by Taylor (2007) looked at the behavioural response of incubating stone curlews to potential disturbance events in the vicinity of the nest. This found that stone curlews responded to disturbance by becoming alert and then temporarily leaving the nest. By recording the distance between the source of the disturbance and the nest at which these responses occurred, the study found that stone curlews temporarily left nests in response to disturbance at considerable distances, and that the closer a potential source of disturbance, the greater likelihood that birds would respond by leaving the nest. Even at long distances (>300m), the probability of stone curlew running, or flying was increased, relative to that when the disturbance was further away or absent. The probability of response per unit distance also varied with the type of disturbance. For example, after allowing for the effect of distance, birds were more likely to respond by running or flying from a walker with a dog than a walker without a dog, or than a motor vehicle. While these results do not show any population impact of disturbance, the behavioural response shows that the species is particularly sensitive to the presence of people. Repeated flushing has the potential for consequences on the health of the adult in terms of energy use and leaves nestlings vulnerable to predation.
5.4. A study by Kirkby & Tantrum (1999) also found a clear link between the frequency of
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 35
fires and urban areas, with heaths surrounded by more houses being more susceptible to fires. Fires can have a detrimental effect on the integrity of heathlands by destroying large areas of vegetation that supports key ground nesting birds (Underhill-Day, 2005).
5.5. A study has shown that cats account for one third of the mortality occurring in some bird populations (Churcher & Lawton, 1987), while in a five month period it has been estimated that Britain’s c.9 million cats bring home around 92 million prey items (Woods et al., 2003). Analysis across 15 Dorset heathlands also suggests that cats can roam up to 1,500m (particularly at night), which means that many heaths are well within territory ranges of urban cats (Underhill-Day, 2005). The presence of an increased number of cats within Breckland therefore clearly has the potential for negative impacts on stone curlew. Studies have also shown that the proximity of some heaths to urban areas may also result in an increase in the densities of other urban predators, such as foxes (Harris and Rayner, 1986, Taylor, 2002). There is also evidence to suggest that higher densities of avian predators such as crows and magpies exist on heaths with human activity (Marzluff & Neatherlin, 2006; Taylor, 2002).
5.6. As discussed in the Core Strategy HRA (Liley et al., 2008b), the factors highlighted above are all indirect effects that occur as a result of the housing, rather than being a direct effect of the presence of the houses. It is, however, also possible that the reduced densities are directly related to the built environment. The avoidance of housing by stone curlews has been clearly demonstrated using data relating to arable land (Sharp et al., 2008), where there is limited public access. The large distances over which the housing has been shown to have an effect suggests that disturbance, fire occurrence and increased predation would seem unlikely as explanations in their own right. It may therefore be that stone curlew simply show a behavioural response to avoiding the built environment. It may be that housing and other built development has some negative effect are not fully understood and may relate to fragmentation or loss of offsite foraging habitats. It is also possible that birds may simply perceive areas close to housing and other built development as poorer quality.
5.7. In order to avoid impacts of built development on stone curlews, local planning policy has defined a buffer zone that extends 1,500m from the edge of those parts of Breckland SPA that support or are capable of supporting stone curlew. This zone was originally defined as part of plan-level HRA work undertaken around 2008 following the study undertaken by Sharp et al., (2008b). This buffer zone is now well established and understood, and continues to be a key mitigation measure, which has since been refined in light of new stone curlew data obtained by the RSBP (Liley, 2016).
5.8. In order to quantify potential displacement of stone curlew, Natural England have also
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 36
recently (2016) produced a stone curlew planning tool which is available through their discretionary advice service (DAS).
5.9. The tool is based on the most recent work (Clarke & Liley 2013) that predicts stone curlew numbers for a given area based on data on the distance to the nearest trunk road, areas of current housing, amount of new housing and the amount of woodland. Areas of buildings or other data can be manipulated within the tool to generate predictions of changes in stone curlew use.
5.10. Use of the tool therefore provides much greater levels of assurance for local planning authorities, in contrast to other methods which involve a degree of interpretation/expert judgement, which invariably creates a level of uncertainty that the use of the planning tool removes. Previously, any uncertainty surrounding a prediction of impact would have to be mitigated for on a precautionary basis, as was the case in previous project- level HRA work which was undertaken prior to the availability of the planning tool (Wild Frontier Ecology, 2013a; 2013b).
5.11. The stone curlew planning tool was therefore used to inform this shadow Appropriate Assessment which confirmed that the proposed development will not result in adverse effects on the nesting density of Breckland stone curlew (see Natural England correspondence in Appendix 1, Figure 1) and, therefore, on site integrity.
5.12. This assessment is therefore able to draw to the conclusion of no adverse effect on the integrity of Breckland SPA both alone and in-combination with other plans or projects, which negates the need for the precautionary mitigation measures proposed in previous project-level HRA work (Wild Frontier Ecology, 2013a; 2013b).
CONSULTATION
5.13. Natural England and RSPB should be formally consulted for their detailed views on the potential for likely significant effects on local Internationally Important Wildlife Sites with feedback incorporated into the HRA, as required.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 37
6. Conclusions
6.1. This HRA has considered likely significant effects on Breckland SPA, Breckland SAC and Norfolk Valley Fens SAC resulting from the proposed development at land east of Lynn Road, Weeting.
6.2. The screening exercise (Stage 1 HRA) concluded that the proposed development is not considered to result in likely significant effects on any of the qualifying features (excluding stone curlew) of the Internationally Important Wildlife Sites lying within a 15km radius of the proposed development site. This was primarily due to the distance between the proposed development site and the individual wildlife sites, as well as the proportional increase in residents in the area and, by inference, potential visitors to the sites, against existing background levels.
6.3. Given that the site falls within the 1,500m stone curlew buffer zone, a shadow Appropriate Assessment was undertaken in accordance with local planning policy to assess adverse impacts on the integrity of the Breckland SPA stone curlew population.
6.4. Using Natural England’s stone curlew planning tool, the assessment was able to draw the conclusion of no adverse effect on the integrity of Breckland SPA both alone and in-combination with other plans or projects. This negates the need for the precautionary mitigation measures proposed in previous project-level HRA work (Wild Frontier Ecology, 2013a; 2013b).
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 38
References
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.
Churcher, P. B. & Lawton, J. H. (1987) Predation by domestic cats in an English village. Journal of Zoology, 212, 439-455.
Clarke, R.T. & Liley, D. (2013a) Further Assessments of the Relationship between Buildings and Stone Curlew Distribution. unpublished report for Breckland District Council, Footprint Ecology, Wareham, Dorset.
Clarke, R.T, Liley, D. & Panter, C. (2016). Stone Curlew Planning Tool, user notes to accompany excel file.
DCLG (2006) Planning for the Protection of European Sites: Appropriate Assessment. DCLG, London.
Dodd A.M., Cleary B.E., Dawkins J.S., Byron H.J., Palframan L.J. & Williams G.M. (2007) The Appropriate Assessment of Spatial Plans in England: a guide to why, when and how to do it. The RSPB, Sandy.
FPCR (2019a) Information to enable a Habitats Regulation Assessment / Appropriate Assessment of the Impacts on the Breckland SPA and Breckland SAC. Report for Stellar Asset Management Ltd.
FPCR (2019b) Land North of Brandon – Recreational Study Report. Report for Stellar Asset Management Ltd.
Harris, S. & Rayner, J. M. V. (1986) Urban Fox (Vulpes vulpes) Population Estimates and Habitat Requirements in Several British Cities. Journal of Animal Ecology, 55, 575-591.
Haskins, L. E. (2000) Heathlands in an urban setting - effects of urban development on heathlands of south-east Dorset. British Wildlife, 4, 229-237.
Kirby, J. S. & Tantrum, D. A. S. (1999) Monitoring heathland fires in Dorset: Phase 1. Report to DETR. Terra Environmental Consultancy, Northampton.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 39
Liley, D., Clarke, R. T., Mallord, J. W. & Bullock, J. M. (2006a) The effect of urban development and human disturbance on the distribution and abundance of nightjars on the Thames Basin and Dorset Heaths. Natural England / Footprint Ecology.
Liley, D. (2008a) Development and the North Norfolk Coast: Scoping Document on the Issues Relating to Access. Footprint Ecology / RSPB / Norfolk Coast Partnership.
Liley, D., Hoskin, R., Underhill-Day, J. & Tyldesley, D. (2008b). Habitat Regulations Assessment: Breckland Council Submission Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Document. Footprint Ecology, Wareham, Dorset. Report for Breckland District Council.
Liley, D (2016) Stone curlew buffers in the Brecks. Available from: https://www.westsuffolk.gov.uk/planning/Planning_Policies/upload/Stone-Curlew-Buffers- in-the-Brecks-document-210716.pdf
Liley, D. & Hoskin, R. (2019). Habitat Regulations Assessment of the Breckland Local Plan Part 1 Main Modifications Stage. Footprint Ecology, unpublished report for Breckland Council.
Mallord, J. W. (2005) Predicting the consequences of human disturbance, urbanisation and fragmentation for a woodlark Lullula arborea population. School of Biological Sciences. UEA, Norwich.
Marzluff, J. M. & Neatherlin, E. (2006) Corvid responses to human settlements and campgrounds: causes, consequences and challenges for conservation. Biological Conservation, 130, 301-314.
Natural England (2019) Breckland SPA Conservation Objectives Supplementary Advice. Available from: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/5048975426322432.
Natural England (2019) Breckland SAC Conservation Objectives Supplementary Advice. Available from: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/6754976231849984.
Natural England (2019) Norfolk Valley Fens SAC Conservation Objectives Supplementary Advice. Available from: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/5508865827536896.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 40
Natural England (2019) Breckland SPA Conservation Objective. Available from: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/5048975426322432.
Natural England (2018) Breckland SAC Conservation Objective. Available from: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/6441039158312960.
Natural England (2018) Norfolk Valley Fens SAC Conservation Objective. Available from: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/4744233475112960.
Natural England (2015) Breckland Site Improvement Plan (includes both Breckland SPA and Breckland SAC) at: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/5307651355312128.
Natural England (2014) Breckland SPA Citation. Available from: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/5250790146965504.
Natural England (2014) Breckland SAC Citation. Available from: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/6216271045591040.
Natural England (2014) Norfolk Valley Fens Citation. Available from: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/5011049535242240.
Natural England (2014) Norfolk Valley Fens SAC Site Improvement Plan. Available from: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/file/4592297601662976.
Norfolk Insights (2019) Household size and rooms: Breckland. Available from: http://www.norfolkinsight.org.uk/housing/report/view/891751da580444458907259b150af72 5/E01026517/
Panter, C., Liley, D.& Lowen, S. (2016). Visitor surveys at European protected sites across Norfolk during 2015 and 2016.
Underhill-Day, J. C. (2005) A literature review of urban effects on lowland heaths and their wildlife. English Nature Research Report No. 624. English Nature, Peterborough
Sharp, J., Lowen, J. and Liley, D. (2008a) Changing Patterns of Visitor Numbers within the New Forest National Park, with Particular Reference to the New Forest SPA. Footprint Ecology, Dorset.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 41
Sharp, J., Clarke, R. T., Liley, D. & Green, R. E. (2008b) The effect of housing development and roads on the distribution of stone curlews in the Brecks. Footprint Ecology.
Sims, V., Evans, K. L., Newson, S. E., Tratalos, J. A. & J., G. K. (2008) Avian assemblage structure and domestic cat densities in urban environments. Diversity and Distributions, 14, 387-399.
Taylor, E. (2002) Predation risk in woodlark Lullula arborea habitat: the influence of recreational disturbance, predator abundance, nest site characteristics and temporal factors. School of Biological Sciences. University of East Anglia.
Taylor, E. C., Green, R. E. & Perrins, J. (2007) Stone-curlews Burhinus oedicnemus and recreational disturbance: developing a management tool for access. Ibis, 149, 37-44.
Wild Frontier Ecology (2013a) Ecological Appraisal of Proposed Development & Supporting Evidence for Appropriate Assessment relating to Breckland Special Protection Area (SPA). Report for Childerhouse Lodge Estates.
Wild Frontier Ecology (2013b) Addendum to Wild Frontier Ecology’s January 2013 report: Proposed Phase 2 housing development at Cromwell Road, Weeting: Ecological Appraisal of Proposed Development and Supporting Evidence for Appropriate Assessment relating to Breckland Special Protection Area.
Wild Frontier Ecology (2019) Supporting Evidence for Appropriate Assessment relating to Breckland Special Protection Area. Report for Small Fish Ltd.
Woods, M., McDonald, R. A. & Harris, S. (2003) Predation of wildlife by domestic cats Felis catus in Great Britain. Mammal Review, 33, 174-188.
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 42
Appendix 1: Natural England Correspondence
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 43
Figure 1: Correspondence with Natural England RE stone curlew planning tool
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group 44
The Ecology Consultancy Land East of Lynn Road, Weeting / Habitats Regulations Assessment / Report for Longhurst Group