DOCSLIB.ORG

Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) HRA of Purbeck Local Plan Revised Housing Options Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Stroud District Local Plan Review Pre-submission Draft Plan. Authors: Durwyn Liley & Chris Panter FOOTPRINT ECOLOGY, FOREST OFFICE, BERE ROAD, WAREHAM, DORSET BH20 7PA WWW.FOOTPRINT - ECOLOGY.CO.UK 01929 552444 Footprint Contract Reference: 496 Date: 23rd May 2021 Version: Final (Regulation 19 version) Recommended Citation: Liley, D., & Panter, C. (2021). Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Stroud District Local Plan Review Pre-submission Draft Plan. Report for Stroud District Council 2 HRA of Purbeck Local Plan at Main Modifications Summary The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended) require local authorities to assess the impact of their local plan on the internationally important sites for biodiversity in and around their administrative areas. Together, these Special Protection Areas, Special Areas of Conservation and Ramsar sites are known as European sites. The task is achieved by means of a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA). An HRA asks very specific questions of a plan. Firstly, it ‘screens’ the plan to identify if there is a risk that certain policies or allocations may have a ‘likely significant effect’ on a European site, alone or (if necessary) in-combination with other plans and projects. If the risk of likely significant effects can be ruled out, then the plan may be adopted but if they cannot, the plan must be subjected to the greater scrutiny of an ‘appropriate assessment’ to find out if the plan will have an ‘adverse effect on the integrity’ of the European sites. Following an appropriate assessment, a Plan may only be adopted if an adverse effect on the integrity of the site can be ruled out. If necessary, a plan should be amended to avoid or mitigate any likely conflicts. This usually means that some policies or allocations will need to be modified or, more unusually, may have to be removed altogether. This document is the HRA for the Stroud District Local Plan Review Pre-submission Draft Plan (Regulation 19 Consultation), dated May 2021. The HRA found that likely significant effects could be ruled out for the vast majority of policies and allocations. However, the screening assessment was unable to rule out likely significant effects from a number of policies/allocations in terms of: urban effects (Severn Estuary Special Area of Conservation (SAC)/Special Protection Area (SPA)/Ramsar and Rodborough Common SAC), loss of supporting habitat/functionally linked land (Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar), recreation (Cotswolds Beechwoods SAC, Rodborough Common SAC and Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar), water issues (Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar) and air quality (Cotswolds Beechwoods SAC and Rodborough Common SAC). These issues were therefore taken to appropriate assessment. Urban effects Urban effects relate to issues where development is close to the European site boundary and is an umbrella term relating to impacts such as light, noise, cat predation, fly tipping, spread of invasive species (e.g. from gardens and garden waste) and vandalism. Likely significant effects were identified alone for two allocations adjacent to the Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar. These two allocations (PS34 and PS36) are within the Berkeley Cluster, at Sharpness. Mitigation measures have been embedded in the Plan and include a requirement that development is set back from the European site boundary, barriers involving wetland or aquatic habitats between the development site and the European site boundary and the need for site design and construction details to be addressed. Policy wording therefore ensures that urban effects are addressed at the detailed design stage and that measures are possible that can be secured at project level to eliminate adverse effects on integrity. The protective wording ensures adverse effects on integrity to the Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar from 3 HRA of Purbeck Local Plan at Main Modifications urban effects can be eliminated and as the risks are so small (due to development being set back and barriers put in place between the European site and housing), adverse effects on integrity can be ruled out alone or in-combination. Likely significant effects were also identified for Rodborough Common SAC with respect to Delivery Policy EI2, which identifies existing employment sites where mixed use development will be permitted. Two sites were within 400m of Rodborough Common SAC. These are sites that are already developed and checks on aerial imagery indicate that these are sufficiently separated from the SAC that adverse effects on integrity can be ruled out for the sites alone and the risks are so small that adverse effects on integrity can also be ruled out in- combination. Loss of supporting habitat/functionally-linked land The loss, deterioration, or compromise of habitat outside a European site boundary that serves a supporting role for the European site can have impacts for qualifying features of European sites, particularly mobile species such as birds. Screening identified likely significant effects for the following allocations alone in relation to the Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar: PS34 Sharpness Docks and PS36 Sharpness new settlement. For both sites, mitigation measures have been embedded within the plan and address the scale of risk and issues at each location. For PS34 measures include a requirement for survey work and details of mitigation measures such as refuge areas secured within the detailed site design. For PS36, a much larger land area is allocated, spreading across multiple fields, with evidence that some of these are at least occasionally used by qualifying features of the SPA/Ramsar. Recognising that in the long-term such areas could play a more important role (as a result of climate change), there is some uncertainty as to the degree of risk. The Plan therefore requires provision of 35ha of nature reserve, with no public access, outside the Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar. This will secure sufficient habitat as mitigation. Other measures include carefully planned construction to ensure no disturbance to the bird interest of the SPA/Ramsar. These various mitigation measures will need to be resolved through site design and project level HRA, in particular ensuring that the nature reserve is secured and effective in-perpetuity. Subject to the above issues being, adverse effects on integrity from the loss of supporting habitat/functionally-linked land can be ruled out for the two allocations alone. The risks are so small that further assessment considering in-combination effects with other plans and projects would not change the outcome of the assessment and adverse effects on integrity for all sites from loss of supporting habitat can therefore be ruled out alone or in-combination. Recreation Screening identified likely significant effects alone for the Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar as a result of allocations PS34 and PS36 (within the Berkeley Cluster), these are both large allocations adjacent to the European site. Likely significant effects were also identified as a result of the cumulative level of growth within the Plan within 15.4km of the Cotswolds Beechwoods SAC, within 3.9km of Rodborough Common SAC and within 7.7km of the Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar. These distances reflect the distance bands used in existing 4 HRA of Purbeck Local Plan at Main Modifications mitigation schemes (the 7.7km for the Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar) or recent visitor survey data and distance within which 75% of visitors had originated. Existing strategic approaches to address recreation impacts are in place for Rodborough Common SAC and for the Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar and have been running for a number of years. These provide an established means to address the cumulative impacts from recreation and are cross-referenced within the Plan. However, both require updating to ensure they will deliver sufficient mitigation to address the scale of growth in the Local Plan Review. Once updated the mitigation strategies are likely to enable the Council to be confident that adverse effects on integrity, alone or in combination, can be ruled out for Rodborough Common SAC and for the Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar. A strategic mitigation scheme is also in draft for the Cotswolds Beechwoods SAC. Although currently in draft, it is referenced within the Plan and there is a clear commitment in the supporting text for Policy ES6. Once formally in place the strategy will address cumulative, in- combination effects of development across Stroud District and neighbouring authorities and will allow adverse effects on integrity to be ruled out, alone or in-combination. For the two Sharpness allocations PS34 and PS36, mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Plan and these will be secured at project level. They include provision of a SANG associated with PS36 and the diversion of the current Severn Way promoted route. The measures ensure localised impacts resulting from large amounts of new housing in a single location are addressed. Alongside contributions towards an updated Severn Estuary strategic mitigation scheme these measures once implemented will be sufficient to address risks relating to recreation impacts and the Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar and ensure adverse effects alone or in-combination can be ruled out. Water issues Detailed assessment indicates there are no risks in relation to water quantity and the River Severn SAC/SPA/Ramsar. With respect to water quality, details of how wastewater issues will be resolved will need to be checked as part of project level HRA for 7 sites and the details can only be addressed at the detailed masterplan level, which will inform any upgrade requirements or further constraints. The Plan contains relevant wording to ensure these checks are undertaken and development will not proceed without them. As such, it can be ascertained that the Plan will not adversely affect the integrity of the Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar alone with respect to water issues.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Environment Agency Midlands Region Wetland Sites Of
    LA - M icllanAs <? X En v ir o n m e n t A g e n c y ENVIRONMENT AGENCY MIDLANDS REGION WETLAND SITES OF SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC INTEREST REGIONAL MONITORING STRATEGY John Davys Groundwater Resources Olton Court July 1999 E n v i r o n m e n t A g e n c y NATIONAL LIBRARY & INFORMATION SERVICE ANGLIAN REGION Kingfisher House. Goldhay Way. Orton Goldhay, Peterborough PE2 5ZR 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................... 3 1.) The Agency's Role in Wetland Conservation and Management....................................................3 1.2 Wetland SSSIs in the Midlands Region............................................................................................ 4 1.3 The Threat to Wetlands....................................................................................................................... 4 1.4 Monitoring & Management of Wetlands...........................................................................................4 1.5 Scope of the Report..............................................................................................................................4 1.6 Structure of the Report.......................................................................................................................5 2 SELECTION OF SITES....................................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Definition of a Wetland Site................................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on Birds in the Severn and Avon Vales (The “Severn Hams”), Gloucestershire and South Worcestershire April – June 2007
    Notes on birds in the Severn and Avon Vales (the “Severn Hams”), Gloucestershire and south Worcestershire April – June 2007 General introduction The main sites are (from the north): Upton Ham (Worcs): the Upper Ham, a hay meadow south of the town, is an SSSI and is the best conserved of the riverside hams in botanical terms; south of the old railway embankment is the Lower Ham; across the river is Ryall Gravel Pit, still being exploited, and a magnet for many waterbirds, notably waders. Longdon Marsh (Worcs), a nearly enclosed basin north of the M50 motorway, flowing via Bushley Brook to the Severn above Tewkesbury. Avon Meadows (on either side of the Avon north of Tewkesbury), along the border between Gloucestershire and Worcestershire, and including: the restored gravel pits at Bredon’s Hardwick (Worcs); Upham Meadow (sometimes called the “Great Hay Meadow”) and Summer Leasow at Twyning (Glos); Rectory Farm Meadows, a botanical SSSI across the Avon from Upham Meadow (Worcs); Strensham Pits, sludge pools below the waterworks at Strensham (Worcs); further north along the Avon is Gwen Finch Worcestershire Wildlife Trust Reserve near Nafford (Worcs), an area of shallow lakes by the Avon. Just to the east is Kemerton Lake (Worcs), a restored gravel pit in the valley of the Carrant Brook, which flows through Cowfield Marsh into the Avon just above Tewkesbury. The “Severn Hams” proper, between Tewkesbury and Gloucester, in which the main wetland areas are: Ashleworth and Hasfield Hams; Coombe Hill Canal and Meadows (including Cobney Meadows at the western end); and the Leigh Meadows alongside the River Chelt and Leigh Brook above Wainlodes.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning for the Protection of European Sites: Habitat Regulations Assessment/Appraisal (HRA)
    Planning for the Protection of European Sites: Habitat Regulations Assessment/Appraisal (HRA) Evidence Gathering / Baseline Report for the Gloucestershire Minerals Local Plan Update 5 February 2015 HRA Baseline / Evidence Report for Minerals Local Plan Page 1 Contents European Sites in and within 15km of Gloucestershire’s boundary .................................................................. 3 Section 1: Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 4 International / European Sites - An Introduction ........................................................................................ 4 Update 5 for the Minerals Local Plan (MLP) .............................................................................................. 5 Background to Evidence Gathering for HRA .............................................................................................. 5 Updated List of Consultees ........................................................................................................................ 6 Other Plans & Projects ............................................................................................................................... 7 HRA Reporting: Methodology ................................................................................................................... 10 Section 2: European Sites in Gloucestershire & within 15km of its administrative boundary ......................... 11 Rodborough
    [Show full text]
  • Errata to Gloucestershire Bird Report 2014-16
    Errata to Gloucestershire Bird Report 2014-16 Page 2 – Rarities Committee ‘Andrew Jordan’ should be removed. Page 6 – the key to the map of submitted records is as follows. Blank – no records Yellow – 1-49 records Light Green – 50-99 records Dark Green – over 100 records Page 9 – final paragraph, third line, ‘2018 species’ should read ‘218 species’ Page 26 – third line, ‘Country Recorder’ should read ‘County Recorder’ Page 64 – first paragraph, fifth line ‘Kermerton’ should read ‘Kemerton’ Page 66 – first paragraph to be replaced with Nine birds originally ringed at Wibdon Wharf in 2011 and 2013 were recorded abroad thereafter and subsequently re-sighted on the Lower Severn during 2014-16. Six of these were recorded at their nesting sites (four in the Netherlands, one in Germany and one in Sweden); one was seen at a migration site in Germany; and two were found dead in Finland. A further three birds originally ringed abroad (two at nest sites in Finland (May 1997) and Germany (June 2008), and one in August 1997 in the Netherlands) were recorded on the Lower Severn in 2014-16. Many of these birds are recorded frequently while they over-winter on the Severn estuary; one of the birds above was seen 68 times in the three-year period. Page 66 – fifth paragraph, second line ‘Hempstead’ should read ‘Hempsted’ Page 67 – fifth paragraph, final line ‘Hempstead’ should read ‘Hempsted’ Page 107 – the Pale-bellied Brent Goose photograph should be credited to ‘Mike King. Page 121 – last paragraph, second line ‘J Philips’ should read ’N Goatman’ Page
    [Show full text]
  • Integratedlocaldelivery
    INSPIRING AND ENABLING LOCAL COMMUNITIES : An integrated delivery model for Localism and the Environment Final Report By The Countryside and Community Research Institute Inspiring and Enabling Local Communities: an integrated delivery model for Localism and the Environment. Countryside and Community Research Institute Summary of Project Project Title: Inspiring and Enabling Local Communities: an integrated delivery model for Localism and the Environment Client Reference: Research commissioned by the Farming and Wildlife Advisory Group Start Date: 01 February 2010 Finish Date: 31 January 2011 Duration: 12 months Project Manager (Research Team) Christopher Short Research Team: Christopher Short and Rebecca Griffiths (both CCRI), Jenny Phelps (FWAG) Date of Report: 31 January 2011 Dunholme Villa The Park Cheltenham Gloucestershire GL50 2RH www.ccri.ac.uk Suggested citation: Short C, Griffiths R and Phelps J (2010) Inspiring and Enabling Local Communities: an integrated delivery model for Localism and the Environment. Report to Farming and Wildlife Advisory Group and Natural England. CCRI: Cheltenham. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the Farming and Wildlife Advisory Group for commissioning this work and Natural England for providing funding through the Common Land Major Project. The encouragement and support of both Graham Bathe, Common Land Major Project Manager in Natural England and from Andy Ormiston, Managing Director, FWAG have been fundamental to the project. The case study would not have been possible without the support and input of the farmers, members of the local community and agency staff on Walmore so our thanks to them is substantial. Finally thanks are also due to other members of the Gloucestershire FWAG team and colleagues in CCRI for their comments and input.
    [Show full text]
  • Cotswold District Local Plan 2011-2031: Submission Draft Regulation 19 - Focussed Changes
    Cotswold District Local Plan 2011-2031: Submission Draft Regulation 19 - Focussed Changes Habitats Regulations Assessment Report Prepared by LUC April 2017 Project Title: Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Cotswold District Local Plan Client: Cotswold District Council Version Date Version Details Prepared by Checked by Approved by 1 21/10/15 HRA Report for the Kieran Moroney Jeremy Owen Jeremy Owen Cotswold District Local Kate Nicholls Plan Regulation 18 Consultation: Planning Policies 2 04/05/16 HRA Report for the Kieran Moroney Jeremy Owen Jeremy Owen Cotswold District Local Kate Nicholls Plan: Regulation 19 Submission Draft 3 14/06/16 Final updated HRA Kieran Moroney Jeremy Owen Jeremy Owen Report for the Kate Nicholls Cotswold District Local Plan: Regulation 19 Submission Draft 4 05/01/17 Updated HRA Report Katherine Jeremy Owen Jeremy Owen for the Cotswold Sydney District Local Plan: David Green Submission Draft Regulation 19 - Focussed Changes 5 24/04/17 Updated to reflect Katherine Jeremy Owen Jeremy Owen comments from Sydney Natural England and Gloucestershire County Council Cotswold District Local Plan 2011-2031: Submission Draft Regulation 19 - Focussed Changes Habitats Regulations Assessment Report Prepared by LUC April 2017 Planning & EIA LUC BRISTOL Offices also in: Land Use Consultants Ltd Registered in England Design 14 Great George Street London Registered number: 2549296 Landscape Planning Bristol BS1 5RH Glasgow Registered Office: Landscape Management Tel:0117 929 1997 Edinburgh 43 Chalton Street Ecology Fax:0117
    [Show full text]
  • 14 the Natural and Historic Environment
    SECTION 14 14 THE NATURAL AND HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT 14.1 Introduction 14.1.1 The facilitation of sustainable development is a key objective of the Structure Plan Second Review. This refers to social and economic development in the context of safeguarding and improving the whole environment. 14.1.2 The natural environment encompasses soil, air, water, plants and animals. Historic environment can be defined as the inheritance of past human activity. These combine to contribute to our appreciation of the world and our sense of place. It is vital that development and change in the County protect and enhance these resources. 14.1.3 Gloucestershire’s countryside has evolved from the interaction of people with the natural environment over a long period of time. This interaction has created varied and locally distinctive landscapes. The appeal of the County’s countryside is integral to the local economy, leading to investment that may protect and improve the countryside. New development should respect and enhance the environment in its scale, location and design. 14.2 Policies Policy NHE.1 The countryside’s character, appearance and non-renewable and natural resources will be protected from harmful development unless the social and economic needs of the area or wider environmental objectives outweigh such harm. 14.2.1 The Government’s policy is that the countryside should be safeguarded for its own sake and non-renewable and renewable resources should be protected. Post-war policies have focused on designating and protecting those areas of the countryside that are most important for landscape and wildlife. The priority now is to find ways of enriching the quality of the whole countryside.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitats Regulation Assessment Record of Assessment
    Worcestershire County Council Minerals Local Plan Habitats Regulation Assessment Record of Assessment - Consultation Draft November 2016 Contents 1. Executive Summary ......................................................................................... 3 2. Introduction ...................................................................................................... 5 3. Scanning and site selection list ........................................................................ 9 4. Key Potential Impacts .................................................................................... 22 5. Approach to predicting Likely Significant Effects arising from the MLP on European sites .............................................................................................. 29 6. Assessing the Minerals Local Plan Third Stage Consultation Documents ..... 37 7. Assessing Spatial Policy in Relation to Mitigation Recommended Within MLP Screening Assessment ................................................................................ 56 8. The ‘In Combination’ Assessment ................................................................. 60 9. Consideration of potential Likely Significant Effects on European sites ......... 69 10. Summary and Invitation for Comments .......................................................... 82 Appendix 1. Location and boundaries of local Natura2000 sites. ..................... 84 Appendix 2. Showing Strategic Corridors for Mineral Extraction ...................... 93 Appendix 3. Natura2000 sites with
    [Show full text]
  • Topic Assets/Constraints Overview Spatial Variation Within Assessment
    Score: Large Score: Score: Small Extension Medium Extension Spatial variation within assessment area, (3,500+ Extension (500-1,500 Topic Assets/constraints overview development capacity/location dwellings) (1,500- dwellings) implications, potential mitigation 3,500 dwellings) Assets beyond the assessment area that may be susceptible to setting change: Designated • There are listed buildings of all grades in the vicinity of the assessment area. These are typically clustered at Badgeworth, Shurdington and Leckhampton. The church yard cross in Badgeworth Holy Trinity Churchyard is also a Scheduled Monument. Non-designated • There are a number of listed buildings in close proximity to the search area these include: - The Old Lodge, Church Road GL53 0QJ; - 72 Church Road, GLOS,GL53 0PD); - Greenwode Leghe, Cold Wool Lane, GL51 6JA; - Woodbines Cottage, Sunnyfield Lane, GL51 6JB; - West Lodge, Cold Pool Lane, GLOS, GL51 6JF. Score: Large Score: Score: Small Extension Medium Extension Spatial variation within assessment area, (3,500+ Extension (500-1,500 Topic Assets/constraints overview development capacity/location dwellings) (1,500- dwellings) implications, potential mitigation 3,500 dwellings) Assets within the assessment area: Any spatial distribution of development in the assessment area will be required to provide * * * • SSSI (Badgeworth) in the north suitable avoidance/mitigation measures to of the assessment area, part of ensure that there are no adverse impacts on the site is also a GWT nature Badgeworth SSSI. Impacts will need to be reserve with priority semi- mitigated for the nearby Leckhampton Hill and improved grassland habitat. Charlton Kings Common and the Crickley Hill Assets within 250m: and Barrow Wake SSSIs (both designated for calcareous grassland), as the IRZs overlap with • No assets within 250m.
    [Show full text]
  • Topic Paper – Preliminary Habitats Regulations Screening
    Core Strategy Consultation - Background Papers Preliminarywww.stroud.gov.uk/core Habitat Regulations Screening work Core Strategy Topic Paper: Preliminary Habitat Regulations Screening Work February 2010 Stroud District Local Development Framework Core Strategy Consultation - Background Papers Preliminary Habitat Regulations Screening work Background The Council has published a series of background papers to accompany the Core Strategy – Alternative Strategies consultation (February 2010). These cover a range of issues and provide more technical or detailed information than is contained in the consultation document itself. They also provide links to the various published sources of evidence on which the development of the housing and employment options has been based. The background papers are: 1. District Profile: a Portrait of Stroud District 2. Stroud District and Climate change 3. Housing land availability 4. Employment and economic growth in Stroud District 5. Alternative Strategies Consultation: how we developed the seven strategy options 6. Summary guide to our evidence base 7. A summary of townscape analysis and urban design strategies 8. Rural settlement classification 9. Infrastructure position statement 10. Preliminary habitat regulations screening work 11. Summary of responses to the Issues consultation 12. Sustainability Appraisal / Strategic Environmental Assessment for the Alternative Strategies Consultation These background papers can be downloaded from the Council's website or are available from the Council in hard copy at a charge to cover photo copying and postage/packing. Should you wish to make comments on the contents of this document, please write to Planning Strategy Team, Stroud District Council, Council Offices, Ebley Mill, Westward Road, Stroud, GL5 4UB or email [email protected] Stroud District Local Development Framework 2 Core Strategy Consultation - Background Papers Preliminary Habitat Regulations Screening work Table of Contents 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Level 1 Executive Summary September 2008
    Gloucestershire County Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Level 1 Executive Summary September 2008 Halcrow Group Limited Gloucestershire County Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Level 1 Executive Summary September 2008 Halcrow Group Limited Halcrow Group Limited Lyndon House 62 Hagley Road Edgbaston Birmingham B16 8PE Tel +44 (0)121 456 2345 Fax +44 (0)121 456 1569 www.halcrow.com Halcrow Group Limited has prepared this report in accordance with the brief from Gloucestershire County Council, for their sole and specific use. Any other persons who use any information contained herein do so at their own risk. © Halcrow Group Limited 2008 Gloucestershire County Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Level 1 Executive Summary Contents Amendment Record This report has been issued and amended as follows: Issue Revision Description Date Signed 1 0 Executive Summary 12/06/08 RD – Draft 2 0 Executive Summary 23/09/08 RD – Final Level 1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment: Executive Summary Gloucestershire County Council This page is left intentionally blank Level 1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment: Executive Summary Gloucestershire County Council 1 Executive Summary 1.1 Background In December 2007 Gloucestershire County Council, in partnership with its Local Authorities, commissioned Halcrow to produce a Level 1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA). Figure 1: Gloucestershire SFRA Study Area The SFRA has been prepared to support the application of the Sequential Test (by the Councils) outlined in Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk (PPS25), and to provide information and advice in relation to land allocations and development control. The SFRA has assessed all forms of flood risk: fluvial (rivers), tidal (sea), surface water, groundwater, sewers and impounded water bodies (reservoirs and canals), both now and in the future given the likely impacts of climate change.
    [Show full text]
  • Walmore Common SPA Conservation Objectives Supplemenary
    European Site Conservation Objectives: Supplementary Advice on Conserving and Restoring Site Features Walmore Common Special Protection Area (SPA) Site code: UK9007051 Winter flooding of Walmore Common, December 2006 Date of Publication: 1 October 2018 Page 1 of 12 About this document This document provides Natural England’s supplementary advice for the European Site Conservation Objectives relating to Walmore Common SPA. This advice should therefore be read together with the SPA Conservation Objectives available here. You should use the Conservation Objectives, this Supplementary Advice and any case-specific advice given by Natural England, when developing, proposing or assessing an activity, plan or project that may affect this site. Any proposals or operations which may affect the site or its qualifying features should be designed so they do not adversely affect any of the attributes listed in the objectives and supplementary advice. This supplementary advice to the Conservation Objectives describes in more detail the range of ecological attributes on which the qualifying features will depend and which are most likely to contribute to a site’s overall integrity. It sets out minimum targets for each qualifying feature to achieve in order to meet the site’s objectives. The tables provided below bring together the findings of the best available scientific evidence relating to the site’s qualifying features, which may be updated or supplemented in further publications from Natural England and other sources. The local evidence used in preparing this supplementary advice has been cited. The references to the national evidence used are available on request. Where evidence and references have not been indicated, Natural England has applied ecological knowledge and expert judgement.
    [Show full text]