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