ecology - wordpress.com · 2014. 6. 6. · table of contents chapter 1. figure 1: statutory sites...

NSC/6/2

THE NORTH SOMERSET COUNCIL (SOUTH BRISTOL LINK CLASSIFIEDROAD)

SIDE ROADS ORDER 2013

THE NORTH SOMERSET COUNCIL (SOUTH BRISTOL LINK)

COMPULSORY PURCHASE ORDER 2013

THE NORTH SOMERSET COUNCIL (SOUTH BRISTOL LINK)

COMPULSORY PURCHASE ORDER (No 2) 2014

EXCHANGE LAND CERTIFICATES IN RESPECT OF SPECIALCATEGORY LAND

Appendices of

Matthew Bowell

On behalf of

North Somerset Council

In respect of

Ecology

Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014

Table of contentsChapter1. Figure 1: Statutory Sites in the Vicinity of the Scheme

2. Figure 2: Non-Statutory Sites in the Vicinity of the Scheme

3. Figure 3 (a & b): Scheme Showing Existing Phase 1 Habitats

4. Figure 4 (a & b): Scheme Showing CPO Plots Referred to in this Proof

5. Figure 5: Impacts on Highridge Common and Exchange Land Options 1 and 2

6. Figure 6: Alternatives to CPO Plot 03/26 Proposed by Objector 32

7. Table 1: Principal Ecological Impacts Relevant to CPO and Proposed Avoidance 1Mitigation I Compensation

8. Table 2: Planting Compensation Ratios

9. Natural England Statutory Consultation Response Letter

10. Access Agreement Documentation for Burnell Land

11. Extracts from Defra Biodiversity Offsetting Paper

12. Extracts from Translocation Practice Guidance

13. Extracts from The Works on Common Land (Exemptions) (England) Order 2007

14. Extracts from Standing Advice for Ancient Woodland and Veteran Trees

15. Figure 7: Yanley Quarry Site: Proposed Restoration Masterplan

Pages3

5

7

10

13

15

17

19

20

24

35

47

55

58

62

Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014

1. Figure 1: Statutory Sites in the

Vicinity of the Scheme

Atkins NSC/6/21 Version 1.012 June 2014 3

"?t¿ /,' . ;/ "',,,,!h,,!i,"

.. ""'1 k~~

'.' J1:C. ,; i'

,~.."r.jit-'P"i~"'¡;,'. ,,' 0 250 SOD 1,000 Metres

"'~\ I I I

~ -;. '.q-"iil' c, Naima'i EnglaM copytgre 12014). Corrtalns Cmi1',.,aflce SliN'e-)

dat.i c; cni..n copyrJp. ami ii.tab..e itgiit ¡ii::iU

¡

confaln. OrdA

lnc. Survey d.b C

l crown copyrtght

__., and calabll$& rfghl 2014.

"'d_¥..'.~.'.'.".....'."

~"" .... ..,........ ;.,',!- - '-'.'IQ't.:"

,.,d~'.' .',........

f......t.

~:"":~

, ~,T

',,~ 'A

N 'ïf:

cL!; v, i

~f" ;r-7¡; ,...\'

. ~i 0"

" r

~.'

.:.//~.."""'I' ~

l:ód"'.il' :, ~

JesJQ-n.in..(3Q

faòrio!

M. Is,

,.,

11

¡

,i;:j 11

~ -t

-l~r;--~--H

.lI.'l!i.i.flr.s....~tJrI ~

l:¡ \ t

~

SnÌlyo'Poiik."

~;.i;~; ~",

\~(; X

\'':.~

~~'W

lf

:........D

urdhaniU

O'N

nr;

~o;- ::¡

~-.---+

-- -,1, ~

--- +-"

!~,.- -~

--~

.;,."r...ni

¡~'tlri.At,;.'..

+~l'~E

atiltt

I '1o I

_'!.:~¡......iir

+--

;,:..i

Qrii.,1,.f)'''''''

'0'\I

Leqi Coùn:

r~i..rq C

~l,",r t

9' '( W.rdrn/l

~ ~

-Hilt~

-+ ~

*-+

-,~.~-\0

Atibot$L

elgÍ1.~\

ClO

Par.

bbo''..,

"'1.

i'i~i:-il~.fllrri

f!i

("i;tf'ltrti.....-

"..Q

.::ac'Car...

fio'lt

,"J~I.~'-.l

-Old~'"

HI'

I'f~

¡ ,..

í

"\ ~

if-.-- ----t- ~

r"iiil,":,lnr,.

Mt"'t¥FO

tm....iP"R

..'

fh'I~~¡:'..-.:~'IlIm

iSu'l'Jô1;.;'¥I

~,

lid /,...i',~

LiPO

'l" a"~".'l..,.

ß.qrc".. -!

Orcl!;."

lc.ntc"l :4ltl

r-rO

~H~

ßoildl

. IIII

Roir4

11\11 LdS..~q:ot.,~

Olh.oO

"loiiii........'.D

d1K'

TI'eFe.f'i'i.."..,~

I~~~~,

......n...:......~r

""itn'.I-~Coo..øø

lv.i.i:ieNI 1J;!O)i

'f"""'"

~' "õ.::;;:\. i , \

i ~.....

,...."'''''ri-....o...cr-..~

\ ''',y

J""'''' " "'j, .

~'" ----~~~-l'~..~-

'''''~'''' c,~ ~\

Al!\l

l~m~g'"'.l

Z!IIID

-.t;..,,~,, i

.-.i-~,~~~~ __.. --;'-_~--"' ~.!'4V~_

i ~. ~ll

'f,

.'''i

1i.1ll

.F

.~'l~

'.i ~.

. ~Y

i;..

,., "~

~~.: '

''".., J

........ d

lrr~t..r"Siil.

r,;::".. .....r'I

~"'l

t""~:¡:

",,;...t.~..- ;'~,.

i¡'~~'.;

,.

- F.HN

OO

lj~~..;.":....._;':r :.....:=

.: 'P;;¡*' . ':: ~..'t..~..... ~~.,~ ...

.t.¡Qt't':; 1"8'"

''''),.1-' \,~-

.~......~----~!

",I:\'. t.

./ ::t

) "

""':, .J.:~

..:.;....'" ;.¡.........

..

Öt\.,~

l.ni;t~r l)o.'m

---,.,,",, I~

.-

'~.ha.o~h)ri'

~.Ii:..Ú;""n"d' .

~..)~'\

;if Hrèt30lt!t

," ."1 P....L

.I c....'1 ,,'

gO,c'

!,'1; 'VC

I! ~-; "-.r.//.' ...."'.

i,:¡',

I""'"

Jl~C-

LH

.: i

l!:!J=

-t.~~

.. iIliiI.....~ ~

R,fO

J,-,:Ól

,:,' ""....

Slliro;¡~~

.'ß'~-.;r.

;.\

.....t-Bt~1-'P,t~iri

a".

11H'" ........~

lJ~tr'"

tg

-\:----- --~ : (~r"'

!I. Çl~:rr".n

.."...1"".".~N'?1. Oi.

I

..Ij",-

".1..

Her,grO

've

,.,l,.r.rtilllr. r......

- '"

i

.....~.¡~l

~o"Ó'L

$(~:.....;.l:....:, ...'

\'Ôl,

/e,¡,i

".~::t, ¡r~

, ,. ." \\

".\1 (, .,~~1ih~j

."'"~"':";~.t;.

~= ~.....

,.~..,..

...

\...-J.'

'.:'-:-t:i.~'.

i _r'U~

o..(;....¡...:t

,-,:.~

p'tiltrr~

....

Path: P:lGB

EM

CIG

TG

'oAFO

OI4_021S.!.!B

RlST

Ol. J0B

S\20I00790 South Bristol ünk\6.0 R

e¡xirts_ GT

G oot¡:iuls''¡¡,3 M

~_Fi(¡uÆS\540A

pp.cationProjects\SBiY

"",E._S!aliJiory¡i.,'igna1ions_iol'o&

ll.rrutd

I\TK

INS~

¡22LJ

..~oA

von Gorge

Woodlands S

AC

Avon G

orge SS

SI

Ashton C

ourt SS

SI

Red line Boundary of

Planning Application

~ ;,.7

~~~

~;. \ì,

AJJr.ins L

imited @

CO

n$utr.-;¡;i Et".;ri e~

TtieH

1l1z

~

S"O:3PartA

'l"e,8'lr;fel+

Sa.ith ßl~L.

E-~

rllMid, S

S::!~

.4!IU.

Tet .....u.;al14S4 e:E

~C'Q

¡;:':lIX: ....u-:i:aU

S4 &63-333

.,......1I.it.m~¡i¡t¡~tG

m

a-.l'l

WE

ST

OF

EN

GLA

ND

PA

RT

NE

RS

HIP

~.'.,.......

SO

UT

H B

RIS

TO

l. L

INK

"'~

SlalU

lOry S

,tes in the Vicnily of the S

cliem..

3hl.ei.A

3\H

~"¡

....

OIl

4A

tkins NSC

/6/2 1 Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014

2. Figure 2: Non-Statutory Sites in the

Vicinity of the Scheme

Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 5

u~~

.1,;"'.1... -/" I

n Patil ..".

',~ r' . Bow

er.'. .....~

-::.~-~

. '...... .'....~. S

h, tõ.....'-'n'~.

:,', fr~" \S

'-., . 'J.~;' ' -....'"../..

. '.",." I.Iiiiii. ' ,:,,le';'

J\TK

INS~

.SNC

IS!jlill~ Wildlife Network Sites

-...,

fTß

&-

:1

i'\

\' ~ .'.... i', \. ,

*~\rt~'\ \~ ". \'

¿. ~~ ~.f"-..' ~..

;:.\',

~

1\ \.\'.:"

(r~\" /'1\"' ~ 'l.~

;¡~~i:~~

llf~;

&~

ieyi:or

;,;......'1"Hanging Hill

Wood

+-:;-

125 250I

SOD Metres

I

'0 N3tural E

nglMl:1 copyt;gm

¡2/J14ì. contams crnr.anoi:i SW

'I-eyoa13 e C

ro..n copyt'9tr. an: Gabba.se: tiQ

llt 12014.1

Conblns O

rdnance Survey c:iat¡ 'C

'-Crow

n copyrIght';- nd eats-ti.a.u rlgllt ict1.t.

G,

AlkN

1s Limited @

CoM

er'sB

rook Farm

, ,i .... \-'. ,C

oUiter's

BrocW. Bridge

CO

ti:iufttll E~

fl.,~en

Ttlt-M

ut5:0~ P:2rkA

n...B

1":5tt'i:.3oztl'tGI~

En,,~. ss::r~.L¡:a

~l:: +44i:C

l1AS4 ee~:ico

Far: ..u.~C)t~S4 6-6 :U

U...-._all:U

l"~iI'-ot:~~.Ccm

WE

ST

OF

EN

GLA

ND

PA

RT

NE

RS

HIP

Highridge C

omm

onSN

CI

SO

UT

H B

RIS

TO

L L

INK

The

((-'':'-i"i'l

""

-Wi,

,'- ~.

it .~! .-:.:;:~

//,'-' t.:.:::~ 11 ,.'~;

, ! _. i :ií

"'~'':-:'' \' .J.i

,..-"".:;-\;/; '\ .,¡. -.'/

,~.,-r.:--N

on.St3tulory S

i1es .. the Vicinfty et the S

m.m

e

i/II

()n~f

-..i _ ':~(l

; ~WhHChlJ

l¡ ",,-,~r.r...."'"

~''F~

'I/~ l'

l ,."..,,'

, rí d "

00

'_'1'4.., e,

r: Î . :;.-~"..~

~~

" :¿- (.;.

/~,.", ---

.';J"_....;

A3

"'''''''''

....

Atkins N

SC/6/2 I V

ersion 1.0 I 2 June 20146

3. Figure 3 (a & b): Scheme ShowingExisting Phase 1 Habitats

Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1,0 I 2 June 2014 7

OD

CC

J

-~rzza

-'I).

L=

:J

c:::::::::::J

,- / ''--." ~~~~:t7Yæ ~

'...- SOul' ¡:i.i.ic.i if 't-~~ '!t.. gr:' 1\"- )).Ç:!t~rri7 _....,.,

\ C'8rre~

~r;~

ci'/- ~ (,:~

';';:J:)~,,,t,;j//:;':a;. k!t1::,,'¡,j

\ ,,0-': ,\ \ / '\:0 t¿,e \,)r'-::-\~\Æ~K~

/' ~1 ,,' \/' /)) .Y',/f~",i ..~.""

.",""L , Uti, l J/,// '-.. ,(*:"",-V.../- '..i \-~. .. 11"'10

.... ;.. I '¡",. ~ / r ~

~ ~

I

()r

¡i lílllì-liiTiJ¡¡liillillH

IIIIIII¡III'

, ' tr.u.:J "¿:~ i". ",' i;~ I W&

'~ , ,.. , '" "" ..,,'"- ri /f':'Î fJ'/ .t l /

....::.; ~t.i -'

~~ ¡ . ./

\ \01. Aii.~ ",'

~' fdii§,;i

"~\,\ r""':\,,,.

\~:ij¿/

;Y/// ,,-T~

l. y't $ \ "~'~

', \yt~

/b t .,.-:::~, \ .-' /

,7 \¿---~d;'~ - ____~~'~,~\ \ / ____of

'n \ ,,/7 ~v ~ J:.£-~)GO~ \. ~.~

-" -\---./\ _--1 I?"" l \ '\" '¡Cl/;:/

----' !'Îri. l------- - . l-. \ "' //

~ \\ \ A"/

I ~r~¿J \ \ ~/-5

..... ...~"""- 'f-;J \\\ ,g~~".!11. "-',,,,'; .\ r'

1I \!i\ / -"'"

~....---\ //// I:!yj /"

,;-- \ '/ I , ~~i~///,

. \ I "-. y " ,/p, '\

~- --;;:"'"":Y

t~, .' ¡ 'c 'r-A

~ "\ C

o'''''';''''''P

alii: P:',G

SE

MC

lGT

G"."'F

OO

14.021B\!'8R

IST

OL JO

BS

'.20 100700 South 2ristol üili',8,Q

Reports_ G

TG

outputs\8,3 MaP

5_Figures\54O

Applicalkripro¡ects\S

8lJroot"cv _Phase lH

abitat _20 140501.mxd

(tu

....

¡.,l.J,..l1

\.\\\.,.,

~,

/"\

\Q

uarry

J\TK

INSN

c=:J

Red L

ine Boundary of Planning

Application

Broadleaved T

ree.

Dense

XX

XX

X Scrub

Hedge & Træs:

~ Native Species Rich

- Hedge: Species Poor

vvvvv- Hedge: Species R

ich-StreamIHttttHt Fence

CÐ

¡;::::::;i

-~~~Amenity Grassland

Bare G

round

Broadleaved W

oodland

Calcareous G

rassland

Dense S

crub

Ephem

eral I S

ort Perenniel &

Bareground

Poor S

emi-Im

proved Grassland

Improved Grassland

Marshy Grassland

No A

ccess I Not S

urveyed

Planted B

roadleaved Woodland

Sem

i,lmproved N

eulralG

rassland

Scattered S

crub

Swam

p

Tall Herbs

Track

Unim

proved Neutral G

rassland

Waterbody

let .44(C¡'4~" 66:0-30

~r...:l~

Cltoils.i &

U33).

'NW

W.3tli:~t;iC

)baf.ccm

WEST OF EN-GLArÐ PARTNERSHIP

SO

UT

H B

RIS

TO

L LINK

Scheme Showing Exismg Phase 1 HaMats

....

00

Atkins N

SC/6/2 1 V

ersion 1.0 I 2 June 20148

Dense

XX

XX

X Scrub

Hedge &

Trees:

~ Native Species Rich


~ Hedge: Species Rich

-StreamFence

.---"

rc-f'(~~r-

\.t",tJ'\:fof;t""

c=:J

",'.'"/

'\... ~/

\/'

..--..-....-....... \,!,.ij'f/;

,~l-

CJL

/, W""I

rl/ ~

, \~

, """~~h- i \IV

i. ¡: \

. ;.;;,ri ./J.

¡\.\

ITJ

r;:::::;i

-~~~~CIJ

-~rz.z¿

-c:::i

c=:J

~c::::J

-i::~:;i

\. ç

, ./

;-~ /(

~.t()\~

/ \, /:~:)(i' \

\\'~ß'-ii?~\ \i .j'V".v~/ \ \

.~:u:%.....-., /' \ \ \

~f. ).,:ç0 "/\ Motel \

, \5;1,\. \~

~¿

ß~

;?-)/. I. ... ,/ /,/r~

- (/\ \ \\ \ I

\ \ I.-_

I' 1 ~

i¡it-._-----'\

,/)~-r~i/ "" // "J

i/i _/'

\'-\

",..~

// t........./ j! i

'" CO

ttWil:!1"Q

EniP

le-eMfr,e l+

iJ~S1C

F3,,1 A~e.

6nm" Q

c-am G

lu..E

'lli3l'"oO.. B

S3~ .4RZ

-e:i.!'l

T'''''

\

.""'" ."'r\Y\ ~1,¡;X

',y \P

ati1: P:',G

BE

MC

"GT

G'A

FooI4_0218\!'B

RIS

TO

L JOB

S\20IO

O7ll(j S

outh B.-isIolln~

\6,O R

eports_GT

Gout¡ivls\Jj,3 M

aps_RguresólO

Applicalioopro¡eds'.sB

L_ProoT

~_P

haselHaliitat_io140501 m

m

Atkins N

SC/6/2 I V

ersion 1.0 12 June 2014

J\TK

INSN

.R

ed Line Boundary of P

lanningA

ppricaoon

Broadleaved Tree

Am

enity Grassland

Bare G

round

Broadleaved W

oodland

Calcareous Grassland

Dense S

crub

Ephem

eral I S

ort Perenniel &

Bareground

Poor S

enij,lmproved G

rassland

Improved G

rassland

Marshy Grassland

No A

ccess f Not S

urveyed

Planted B

roadleaved Woodland

Semi-Im

proved Neutral

Grassland

Scattered S

crub

Swam

p

Tall Herbs

Track

Unim

proved Neutral G

rassland

Waterbody

ìet ..w~C

I14S4 1S€2000Far. .44~D

1145.f. uii:u'N

"'./f.3:tt~~;iO~atC

C1!!

~'iEST OF ENGLAND PARTNERSHIP

SO

UT

H B

RIS

TO

L LINK

So!ieme Shomng Existing Phase 1 Habilais

Rgul'e 3b

.fQU

00

9

4. Figure 4 (a & b): Scheme Showing

CPO Plots Referred to in this Proof

Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 10

J\TK

INS&

0_(';9'-~'\

J pin..r,\ (rof! \.J

, ,,-

c=J Red line Boundary of Planning

Application

::::.: t Objectîon Area 04101

,......, Indicative CPO plots discussed in

........ erofogy evidence

. Broadleaved Tree

Dense

XX

XX

Scrub

Hedge &

Trees:

~ Native Spedes Rich


V"iIVVV Hedge: Species Ricti

-StreamftIH

HtH

Fence

~ Amenity Grassland

~ Bare Ground

_ Broadleaved Woodland

~ calcareous Grassland

~ Dense Scrub

~ Ephemeral i Sort Perenniel &

Bareground

ßD Poor 8em

i-lmproved G

rasslandi=r:=:J Improved Grassland

_ Marstiy Grassl:ind

~ No Access' Not Surveyed

~ Planted Broadleaved Woodland

.. 8emHmproved Neutral Grassland

lf

j"._, /,L,J

\ /¿00

(.,) -/ ) ,

,l':7 ' J I

C ~

t-:i¡\ fA" S1iJÍft . "

\,'" Cd,s;' /

~\ I

~~

,.',,,,~

~ i

""~~-'7

~"

.....""

--r.....PLOTS 03/04, 03/14, O~!.43;_d

\ .

\\ -----

\_-- ----i,~'\,

..-,,'1

"

\.........---..

~ie~'i:+_ ____

r ",~~~:, .~fàCl,

."'"-.......:'-....

" "

-hl~-~:i\..:+:..---- ,7 .,.~

¡ ...cJ-.D '\, l;n~.;~

ì ./ ,\\ \ .-:;:1

I i' \, 0 \..._~--;/

,..,,:X 'i \ \ T( I

¡ -r"" \\ 1/:/ ilt-"~"~-"~- \ 1t2.....,,/''11' ~

,~ I

. ./ I \~~ / ;:i.:..

__~., -------;~ . 11 /_/~/r/ ~~):f //

'\ T ' ~ ~

~..- '\ ',/ \ ' _ ~

"~ (~I i / '-, PLOT 03/26

Jr-" ~" .\ "" ¡ I" , /.

--~:ir course\t"., ~j"~,. 11 \ \ _ ~ V" \'( Castle Farm,'

!,\ \. ~'" \\ '. /r"~~

Quarrv//

--..,..~T

ht "4-4~t'U.ii54 5E

20:iOFD

:r.: ........;I!JU;.4 SU

:i33w

ly.w..M

kt)~Q¡otilltC

cm

WEST OF Ef-IGLA,ND PARTI'lERSHIP

SO

UT

H B

RIS

TO

L. LrNK

Schem

e Show

ing CP

O P

lots Roeferreó 10 in this P

rocf

....

00

Pat!i: P

:\GB

EM

CtG

TG

'AfO

O 14_021 S

Il!!lRIS

TO

L .IOB

S'3l 100700 S

outh Bristol Ü

1lc\6,O R

eports_ GT

G oui;:.rts\6,3 M

al'S_R

gures\54OA

ppüeatícinProjecislS

Bl_P

roolEv _P

hase IHabitatC

PO

PtiIsR

E'ferred_2014050 l.m

xd

Atkins N

SC/6/2 1 V

ersion 1.0 1 2 June 201411

\-c;::(" ~"...

I\TK

INS~

""'-'"

c=J Red Une Boundary of Planning

Application

~ :..: It Objection Area 04/01

,....., Indicative CPO plots discussed in

L.-..I erofogy evidence

. Broadleaved Tree

Dense

X'X

XX

Scrub

Hedge &

Trees:



\NV

'N H

edge: Species Rich

~./

,/ffittttf-H

Feflce

r::::LJ Amenity Grassland

~ Bare Ground

_ Broadleaved Woodland

~ Calcareous Grassland

~ Dense Scrub

~E

phemeral ¡ S

ort Perenniel &

Bareground

Poor SemH

mproved G

rassland

I

i

CK

J

o=:J

-ISS.'S1

llZ2l

IiIiI semi-lmproved Neutral Grassland

IX: X

xl Scattered S

crub

c=J Swamp

~ TaU

Herbs

c=J Track

_ Unimproved Neutral Grassland

--"17-;::; C=

:J Waterbody

~7I;j. 0 75 150 300 M..tres

i i ( l ! I l I. ...-'ø' T

hIS map

Is repiodiJe"" from oninar~ SU

ivey maieiial..O

lII~.l ').; , 'i:-4 P

!tmf$$IC

lfl et oniianæ S

urvey on: nenal' fi: ihe: contror¿r or H

erí'/ ? ' M

o,¡eSiy-S

StaU

OI1eiy 0""" C

",,"" cop)rigrit u~a_""

..: ~euon 'n1lt1ges C_" ooptl1gl1lana may lead to "",seeiillOll

t"-;/. or cMI pr=

earigs, \V.,: r:t: Ð

i9liana "",nn_'1lpI uc..iiæ nU'l'becr lCOOiE92e2012

/ ~

Improved Grassland

Marshy Grassland

No Access I Not Surveyed

Planted Broadleaved W

oodland

5~t!F'~AN

r:,ßl151:l¡" 3odJii::.kici..E

n~:i!"~

. ss.!: .tFiZ

let ...w~

Cji4S

4 6620:30~

x::: '"''''41t-J'''454 fE3331

w~"'..Q

Iik~,si:iooalccm

0."

WE

ST

OF

EN

GLA

ND

PA

RT

NE

RS

HIP

SOU

TH

S;'lISTO

l..llNK

Scheme Si.owing CPO Plot. R'eci"""¡ to in thi. Proc!

, ,.

" 'rr- Y ~

~,y.. I .----.'

'\........ ,.

...... .................. '"'. ,,¡'"V -. ~.lj

\'iJ7.# .....,.~..r ' .l -'"'.

...

FiguÆ- 4b

00

5. Figure 5: Impacts on HighridgeCommon and Exchange LandOptions 1 and 2

Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 13

~/---------

~

./\

J\TK

INS~

NÎ\ _ Option 1 Proposed

~ Exchange Land

_Option 2 Not Proposed

Exchange Land

~ Receptor Site

E::J Donor Site

~ Highridge Common SNCI

Perm

anent Habitat Loss

_ within Highridge Common

SNC

I

.--i Red Line Boundary of

L......J Planning Application

,....... Approximate Boundary of

\ . ....... Common Land

\ = Road Footprint

o 25 50 100 Metres

I l l I I I I l I

@N

aturalEngland oop)'right r.i014). C

on:,ajns Ordnance S

un;eydata @

Crow

n copyright and database nght (2QH

)

Contains Ordnance Survey data @ Crown copyright

and d.atabase right 2Ol4~

Te!: +

44(0)1454 66Z000

Far. +

44(0)1454 663333w

mI.atlti:n-sgoba1.eom

WE

ST

OF

EN

GLA

ND

PA

RT

NE

RS

HIP

SO

UT

H B

RIS

TO

L LINK

Impacts o-n H

ighridge Com

mon ¿

Land Options 1 &

2

....

Figure 505

.._.....- ..-......-.-, -_._._.. .._,--_.._-_..

6. Figure 6: Alternatives to CPO Plot

03/26 Proposed by Objector 32

Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 15

J\TK

INS~

r---i Red Une Boundary of Planning

L--J Appfication

c::J lndicative CPO plot 03f26

r:z;¡j Alternative plots proposed by

Objector

32

. Broadleaved Tree

Dense

XX

XX

Scrub

Hedge &

Trees:



\IV'l'N Hedge: Species Rich

-StreamiH

HH

Hl Fence

LÐ

Am

enity Grassland

~ Bare Ground

_ Broad

leaved Woodland

~ Calcareous Grassland

~ Dense Scrub

~ Ephemeral f Sort Perenniel &

Bareground

i:=§.CJ Poor 8emi-lmproved Grassland

c:i=J Improved Grassland

_ Marshy Grassland

~ No Access I Not Surveyed

llZ2J Planted Broadleaved Woodland

lJo _ Semi-Improved Neutral Grassl3f1d

Ix x xl scattered Scrub

c=J Swamp

~ TaU

Herbs

c=J Track

Tet .o£4l,e)-1454 6.e:o:iC

Fn-. .,:..i.'1IH1.:S4 ee'nH

WV

tW.klt~loíilbtN

!l...t:cm

WE

ST

OF

EN

GLA

ND

PA

RT

NE

RS

HIP

SO

UT

H B

RIS

TO

L liN

K

~-~

'\----- ""

'\

'\'11

~~)--'--~' - -:r";~'

GoIr COUIS8 \:t'"

., . ....

/\,

.,.,\

lIDderstan",ng of A

lternatives to CPO

Pl"t 03126Proposed by Objec!", 32

"""

"

...

r\

"00

Patíi: P

:\G8E

MC

'iGT

G'A

FllO

14 _02181!'BR

1ST

Ol JO

BS

".20100700 South e""tol bik\6.0 R

eports _ GT

G outpu1S

ilL3 Maps _R

gures'o54OA

ppticatiooP~

ects\S8l_P

rooIEv _ C

PO

Plc!03 _26 _20140501.m

xd

Atkins N

SC/6/2 1 V

ersion 1.0 1 2 June 201416

7. Table 1: Principal Ecological Impacts

Relevant to CPO and ProposedAvoidance I Mitigation ICompensation......'... ), '.',. .,....'//,/ '/.."'.".'//// ...../ .¡/,./,. .."/ ,;/ /

Ãi'/ / ./,/.'?7'F,;.ii\./' ',.,,',., / /,/// :S-7/ .\;r1/......."./e/,."". /\..".i..,. / !iY/'///.// ", \\./. ",.',.....,. .... .~.....L!"i"',/./',i

Highridge Common Loss of 0.75ha of SNCI Habitat translocation, protection ofSNCI grassland (0.6 ha of which habitats of ecological value

is botanically diverse) outside the construction footprint

Hanging Hill Wood Loss of 0.1 ha of woodland Habitat translocation and creation,WS (part of which (within the WS designation protection of habitats of ecologicalis listed as ancient but not listed as ancient value outside the Schemesemi-natural semi-natural broad leaved Provision of approximately 1 ha ofbroadleaved woodland), degradation, native broad leaved woodlandwoodland) reduced connectivity, contiguous to the south of

increased deposition of Hanging Hill Wood WSnitrates

Collitor's Brook Minor disturbance to Strict protection duringSNCI habitats (including a new construction.

culvert), risk of damageduring construction.

Woodlands (non- Loss of approximately 0.4 Provision of native broadleaveddesignated). ha of broad leaved woodland planting belts

plantation woodland. throughout rural section of theScheme.Provision of 2 ha of nativewoodland planting (net gain ofapproximately 1.5 ha).

Mature and veteran Loss of approximately 161 Provision of approximately:trees trees during the 200 extra heavy standard native

construction phase. trees and200 feathered trees.

Scrub and Loss of approximately 900 Programme of hedgerowhedgerows m of hedgerow, and 1.5 ha translocation, and planting,

of scrub. gapping up remaining hedgerows,protection of retained hedgerowsduring construction.Provision of approximately 3 kmof hedgerow, resulting in a netgain of 2.1 km.

G rasslands and Loss and damage of Provision of species richmarsh (non- approximately 1.5 ha of grassland on road verges,

designated) diverse grassland habitats. protection of habitats of ecologicalvalue outside the Scheme.Provision of approximately 5 ha ofspecies rich grassland, resultingin a net gain of 3.5 ha.

Atkins NSC/6/21 Version 1,0 12June 2014 17

Lesser horseshoe Habitat loss, severance, Strategic habitat planting to linkbats fragmentation, disturbance existing habitats, bat underpasses

and road mortality and sensitive street lightingdesign.

Other fauna using Various impacts resulting Largely provided throughthe Scheme and from loss of habitat and compensation planting plus somesurrounding areas severance. additional species specific

elements such as bat and birdboxes and mammal underpasses


8. Table 2: Planting CompensationRatios

.i L.....,(i .....,.""",,',...""''''''t( ..'......, it I"". ...'... .,...'.'

.., "'..'.'. i(i 7r ;c, ; .,.dd....~d..... ..".'...'.

...'.... "( ti. L' . .r

Scheme total:

Sum total planting; 3 ha Sum total for Scheme; 2 ha 1.5:1

Breakdown:

Approximately 1 ha of 0.1 ha of ancient woodland 1 ha to 0.1 ha = 10:1

native broad leaved

woodland

2 ha of native tree and Two plots of 0.2 ha broad leaved 2 ha to 1.9 ha = 1.05: 1

shrub belt plantation woodland (total 0.4 ha)

1.5 ha of scrub

Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1,0 I 2 June 2014 19

9. Natural England Statutory

Consultation Response Letter

Date: 06 August 2013

Our ref: 92368

Your ret. 131P/1204/F2 1_Development Management Service

Planning Officer

Development ManagementDevelopment and EnvironmentNorth Somerset Council

BY EMAll [email protected],UK

Cus1Dmer SenÁCeS

Hcirriæam House

ere- Business Part

Beàr.iWayCÆwe

Cheshin!CWl6GJ

T 0300 000 iQOO

Dear Sir or Madam

Proposal:

131P/1204JF2

Land between the A370 long Ashton Bypass in North Somersetand the Cater Road Roundabout in Hartcliffe, South Bristol

South Bristol Unk: Proposed highway and bus only ink including

bridges, structures, construction compounds, drainage 300

landscaping; Traffic signs, lighting and bus shelters; Shared

cydeway and footway; Works to existing highways and provision

of replacement Highridge Convnon Land

356285 171354

Application Number:location:

Grid Reference:

Town and Country Planning Act 1990

Thank you for your consultation on the above which was received by Natural England on 16 July

2013.

Natural England is a non-departmentaJ pubfic body, Our statutory purpose is to ensure that the

natural environment is conserved, enhanced, and managed for the benefit of present and future

generations, thereby contnbuting to sustainable development.

This reply comprises our staMoiy consultation response under provisions of Article 20 of the Town

and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2010 Regulation 61(3) of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (The Conservation Regulations)and Section 28(1) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended).

Natura 2000 sites

We note that the following European protected sites have been identified within 25km of the

proposed road scheme:. A"lfXl Gorge and Woodlands Special Area of Conservation (SAC) approximately 2 km north;

. Severn Estuary Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Special Protection Area (SPA) and

Ramsar site approximately 10 km west;. North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC approximately 8 km south;

. Bath and Bradford on A"lfXl Bats SAC approximately 20 km south east;

. Wye VaUey and Forest of Dean Bat SAC approximately 22 km north;

. Wye Valley Woodland SAC approximately 22 km north; and,

Page lol4


. Mells Valley SAC approximately 25 km south east

A Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) has been prepared to assess the potential for likely

significant effects of the Scheme on European sites. The HRA concludes that, with theimplementation of the mitigation measures that have been incorporated into the Scheme design. no

likely significant effects on any European sites are anticipated from the proposed South Bristol linkScheme. Implementation of mitigation measures will be guided by a Construction Environmental

Management Plan for the Scheme.

Natura 2000 site - No objectionNatural England notes the information aimed at assisting your authority to undertake theAppropñate Assessment required under Regulation 61 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species

Regulations 2010 (as amended), On the basis of this information, Natural England advises that yourauthority can conclude that the project is not likely to adversely affect the integrity of the above

European protected sites. Subject to the proposals being carried out in strict accordance with thedetails submitted (including any conditions or legal agreements), we ad\iise you, as CooipetentAuthority, that it can be ascertained that this application will not adversely affect the integrity of anyEuropean protected sites. You cb not therefore need to undertake further stages in the appropriateassessment process. t

Site of Special Scientific Interest - No objection - with conditions

This application is approximately SOOm from Ashton Court SSSI and 1.8 km from Avon Gorge Siteof Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) at its nearest point However, Natural England is satisfied that

there is not likely to be an adverse effect on these sites as a result of the proposed scheme being

carried out in strict accordance with the details of the application as submitted. We therefore ad\'Ïse

~ur authority that these SSSls do not represent a constraint in detemining this application. Should

the details of this appücation change, Natural England draws your attention to Section 28(1) of the~d1ife and Counúyside Act 1981 (as amended), requiring your authority to re-consult NaturalEngland.

Conditions. A Construction EnWonmental Management Plan (CEMP) will be prepared for the Scheme to

capture all elements of required mtigation and present them dearty to the appointed sub-

contractor. Regular visits by an Environmental Clerk of Works will be made during theconstruction phase to ensure ecological mitigation is undertaken accordingly,

. A Post-eonstruction Habitat Management and Monitoring Plan win be prepared for the

Scheme to caplt.l'e all the required post construction activities required to preserve andmonitor biodiversity mitigation, compensation and enhancement measures,

These conditions are required to ensure that the development, as submitted, will not impact upon

the features of special interest for which Ashton Court and Avon Gorge Sites of Special ScientificInterest are notified.

If your Authority is minded to grant consent for this application without the conditions recommended

above, we refer you to Section 281 (6) of the \Wdlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended),specifically the duty placed upon your authority, requiring that your Authority;

. Provide notice to Natwal England of the pennission. and of its tenns, the notice to indude astatement of how (If at all) your authority has taken account of Natural England's advice; and

. Shall not grant a pennission which would aDow the operations to start before the end of a

period of 21 days beginning with the date of that notice.

i This reply comprises our stahitory consultation response under provisions of Article 20 of the Town and

Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2010, Regulation 61 (3) of the

Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended), (The Habltat Regulations) andsection 28(1) of the Wildlife and Countryside Ad 1981 (as amended).

Page2of4


Protected species

Natural England does not object to the proposed development. On the basis of the information

available to us, our advice is that the proposed development may affect bats throlKlh disturbance or

darnar.¡e or destruction of a breeding site or resting place. We are satisfied however that theproposed mitk¡ation wouJd maintain the population identified in the survey report,

AB bats are European Protected Species. A licence is required in order to carry out any works thatinvolve certain activities such as capturing the animals, disturbance, or damaging or destroying their~ or breeding places. Note that damage or destruction of a breeding site or restin!:i place is an

absolute offence and unless the offences can be avoided through avoidance (e.g, by timing the

works appropriatety), it should be licensed. In the first instance it is for the developer to decide...mether a species licence will be needed. The developer may need to engage speciafist advice inmaking this decision, A ficence may be needed to carry out mitigation work as well as for impactsdirectly connected with a development.

Natural Englands view on this application relates to this application only and does not representconfinnation that a species ficence (should one be sought) wiU be issued, It is for the developer todecide, in conjunction with their ecological consultant, whether a species licence is needed, It is for

the local planning authority to consider Yollether the permission would offend against Artide 12( 1) of

the Habitats Directive, and if so, whether the application would be likely to receive a licence. This

should be based on the advice we have provided on likely impacts on favourable conservation

status and Natural England's guidance on how we apply the 3 tests (no alternative solutions,imperative reasons of overriding public interest and maintenance of fa\lOllrable conservation status)...men considering licence apprications.

Other adviceWe would expect the Local Planning Authority (LPA) to assess and consÐer the other possible

impacts resulting from this proposal on the following when determining this application:

. local sites (biodiversity and geodiversity)

. locallandscape character

. local or national biodiversity priority habitats and species.

Natural England does not hold locally specific information relating to the above. These remainmatenal considerations in the determination of this planning application and we recommend that~ seek further information from the appropriate bodies (which may indude the local recordscentre, your local wildlife trust or other recording society and a iocal landscape characterisation

document) in order to ensure the LPA has sufficient information to fully understand the impact of the

proposal before it detennines the application. A more comprehensive list of local groups can be

found at Wildlife and Countryside link.

If the LPA is aware of, or representations from other parties highlight the possible presence of aprotected or Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) species on the site, the authority should request suiveyinformation from the applicant before determining the application. The Government has provided

advice' on BAP and protected species and their consideration in the planning system.

Natural England Standing Advice for Protected Species is available on our website to help local

planning authorities better understand the impact of development on protected or BAP species

should they be identified as an issue at particular developments. This also sets out when, following

receipt of survey information, the authority should undertake further consultation with NaturalEngland.

1 Paragr3pli 99 and 99 of ODPM C4rc:uIai 06l2l105

Page3ot4


Biodiversity enhancementsThe authority should consider securing measures to enhance the biodiversity of the site if it is

minded to grant permission for this application, This is in accordance v.ith Paragraph 118 of theNational Planning Policy Framework. Additionally, we would draw your attention to Section 40 of the

Natur.iJ Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006) which states that 'Every public authority

must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of

those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity', Section 40(3) cl the same Act also states

that 'conserving bìodiversity includes, in relation to a living Otgallism or type of habitat restoring or

enhancing a population or habitaf,

We would be happy to comment further should the need arise but if in the meantime you have any

queries please do not hesitate to contact us.

For any queries relating to the specific advice in this letter only please contact Amanda Grundy on0300 060 1454, Fa any new consultations, a to provide further information on this consultation

please send your correspondences to [email protected],

We really value yourfeedback to help us improve the service we offer, We have attached afeedback form to this letter and welcome any comments you might have about our service.

Yours faithfully

Amanda Grundy

Lead Adviser, Sustainable Land Use

Page4of4


10. Access Agreement Documentationfor Burnell Land


'J

To:Graham GroomPersona Associates2nd Floor (East Suite)Barclays House

51 Blshoprlc

HorshamWes1SussexRH121QJ

IERSONASSOCIATES

"'~'''''''''-'''''''''''--''''''''''''-''I'"'_'''_'lilo__~~..

PERSONA't.V' .,r ...' 7~FCEIVED

fa AUG 2Df1

NO ~\REF 'llic\.ø'"

NAME t:,Dear Sir

SOUTH BRISTOL LINKLAND ENTRY FOR SURVEY WORKREF26

I hereby agree in principal to the Specialist Survey Contractors to enter the landwhich i own, or have an interest in, for the purposes set out in PersonaAssociates letter dated 2nd August 2011 and in accordance with the undertakingsspecified therein.

Yours faithfully

(~~~PRI NT NAME. t :~. ~ ~.il~N.,",.~!-:.. . .,

AODRESS.!~~/...~I.qff.~./~t,. ...~.

~ .'.~.!1. ~J. ~~. ~e; r~,....... ,.. ... ..' .....

~ ~ ~~~.. ßß ..l.l.~.lt.;1t........ .....

"~ßir, '~r'"

SC f\N Nt,U

TelephoneIMoblle No. .~!t~. ~.~!tA( ~ ,......

Email t..~.~t:0..~'l.~,L."l:l'\..tr;j k ....!i.~ I..

Date..l~!l.ilt, ...~.?H...,.. ...... ... ...... ......


1o

o ~

~ ., ~ii. !iilUbi h

--L~-


To:Graham GroomPersona Associates

2nd Floor (East Suite)Barclays House516ishopnc

Horshamwest SussexRH121QJ

CIERSONA-pJsSOCIATES

-.._--~~"""'''''' .,~.., -~~.

PEHSONl,\POST HECEIVEO

Dear Sir

1 0 AUG lUll

NO 47-

REF :24løot

; NAME L..,--SOUTH BRISTOL LINKLAND ENTRY FOR SURVEY WORKREF27

I hereby agree in principal to the Specialist Survey Contractors to enter the landwhich I own. or have an interest in. for the purposes set out in PersonaAssociates letter dated 2nd August 2011 and in accordance with the undertakingsspecified therein.

Yours faithfully

S. d Jf L (;Ig08 ~.PRINT NAME..~;.S,:.~.(\!1î-.~~...

ADDRESS.~~...l:l'~1.~.~~.~¡.~...î~ .

~ L~.lt..~ f. .$, w,l?l1!1. J. ... ... . ,... , ..

~~f.~ '1 ~~t..$ ..s. ..l.~, ..t ~J?. .....

SCPI ~.' irq..cri,',\N, \\;1 ~ ,¡, , \I~l~

Telephone/Mobile No...~ ~.t:~ .. ~ .~. ~JL ~ft...

Email .l?J(i,~().~li ..ti'.J~u...Li.i~..81~.

Date...î;"~. 6.'11''' ~~!.t....... ............... ...


~\

f¡--)-"L~~""==-~

Atkins NSC/6/2 I V .ersion 1.0 I 2 June 2014 28

To:Graham GroomPersona Associates

2nd Floor (East Suite)Barclays House51 BishopricHorshamWest SussexRH121QJ

4___.__.....

Pf:::FlSONAPC~"'" ;':H::CEI\lEO

Dear Sir

1 0 AUG 2011

NO 36REF 2ul,:§~NAME 1,-.\~I


I hereby agree in principal to the Specialist Survey Contractors to enter the landwhich I own, or have an interest in, for the purposes set out in PersonaAssociates letter dated 2nd August 2011 and in accordance with the undertakingsspecified therein.

Yours faithfully

Sg~k¿PRINT NA~'t;,,::~,:

ADDRESS,.~~.~/..~.~~~.~~.~.~~.. 9ParJ¡

S.S ~ & P3'\i.7£ti ~.:((~....,.... .....,..,.....,... .t....... ...........

~.ß. ~.S1P.J..... J..~..~.~..,,~ ..A~. .....

Telephone/Mobile No.. ~.l. CL ~.4.'t..~ l .Cr.'!:...

Email .r..~ ~.('.O. 9. ,~l. ':\l. ,:l:.~.l. ~ .. ~.~.l.k.,: .~f

Date"~~~~'~1...eCl.U.......... ......... ......

'" ri-'"

er'l1 f"i', i.', ¡t i;\. t,'t,\~!: t...~ :

\\ t',:, !: \~.~ \ 'i ':

u\)1"\1:,: ~ ':,; :'...,.,


¡;¡

l~ :¿ Igi5::; 0 l.g¡ai ~ ~ i i~

ä! E ~ B~(0 3:af~l-... a;:s 0.; !l~i l

i ã'" ¡,

t íi ~

".

~~.=--....::':;;,~-\ ~~..A'-

y~ ~çi \t\

~,

t\J

'iI,'IJ¡

~~.ß'""",=-~"",L--:F'-'-

\

Atkins NSC/6/21 Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 30

CltRSONA~SOCIATES

To:Graham GroomPersona Associates2nd Floor (East Suite)Barclays House51 BishopricHorshamWest SussexRH121QJ seA, r~ rr tr......

l,~ \i \-,t. ~. llJ "',~'f\l ~ i ~ '~", "

Dear Sir


I hereby agree in principat to the Specialist Survey Contractors to enter the landwhich i own~ or have an interest in, for the purposes set out in PersonaAssociates letter dated 2nd August 2011 and in accordance with the undertakingsspecified therein.

~---....,..

PË'RSOÑvA' IPO~'T pi::CEIVEO ~, ,~, \f... ,~ _

1 0 AUG ~Ull

NO~'l

REF ~\.L\QqNAME\-"r ._

~ ....... ...",..--

PRINT NAME.....:~.~.ß.~~f.'likk

ADDRESS,,~.I,. Jl'!i- /i.R, raf e¡£~

$.~1.l¥.t (l.e. 8. ~.tl~tr ~ ... . .. ... .... ....

~.K~ S:J:f!Jr: .,. fJ.$.. L~.... ~.. ll.~.

Telephone/Mobile No..~.H.7... 9.~~.U.!t!:t:

Email f.\.hNl:.rI..9.lt .... .t4\tk.tA.lk... f:i..~.t..

Date..~~Af?J...~H ... ... ......... ... ,.. .........


z-i

\ i\~-~)/A/ \¿~' \

\"\

\,,/

/-ç/////

/

\\

\i ~~~ ------~...., ,!,: -~

\ \...--""."-" "" "..... "...,..~.-""'"'ì) "-../ - ._,-~'$

ni;

._---~~..--

Atkins NSC/6/2 . -1 Version 1 0 1 2. June 2014 32

pERSONA~SSOCIATES

2ND FLOOR (EAST SUITE)

BARCLAYS HOUSE

51 BISHOPRIC

HORSHAM

WEST SUSSEX RH 12 1 QJ

TEL: 01403 217799FAX: 01403 217790Direct: 01403219899EMAIL: grahamgroom@personaassociates,co.ukWEBSITE: www,personaassociates.co,uk

STATUTORY PROCESS CONSULTANTS

LAND & PROPERTY RESEARCH

Mr John Burnell

Grove HouseHighridge GreenBristolBS138HU

Our Ref: GMG/JAH/2469

02nd August 2011

Dear Sir

SOUTH BRISTOL LINK

You will have received a letter from Paul Paton at North Somerset Council explaining thatyou would be contacted by us regarding ongoing matters relating to the proposed SouthBristol Link.

We have been appointed by the Council to organise entry onto land so that variousContractors can undertake survey work in connection with the Link, My purpose in writing isto seek your agreement in principal for one or more of the Specialist Survey Contractors toenter your land in the next few weeks,

We are writing to you because we believe you own the land shown on the attached drawings,and referred to as REF26, REF28, REF37 and REF40, To ensure we contact others whomay have an interest in this land (i.e. leaseholder, tenant or occupier) we should be grateful ifyou would complete the short questionnaire enclosed with this letter for each drawing. Astamped addressed envelope is provided. Our referencer's will be in the area on Friday andcan collect the completed forms if you would prefer.

With regard to the surveys, they will involve Ground Investigation, Topographical Survey andEnvironmental Survey and they will be undertaken by specialist Contractors. No entry will betaken on to your land before we receive your agreement. Before each Survey is commencedyou will be approached by a Representative of the Contractor who will explain the precisenature of the survey and will give you an indication of what is involved, will indicate aproposed start and finish date and will answer any further questions you may have. I will

remain the Council's coordinator throughout the survey period so you can direct any generalquestions or concerns to me and I will arrange for them to be dealt with,

i can confirm that, where appropriate, a 'before entry condition' schedule would be prepared,In the unlikely event of any damage occurring as a result of the survey work you would, ofcourse, be entitled to seek compensation.

If you are in agreement to entry being taken by the Survey Contractors I would appreciate ifyou could sign and return the consent form enclosed with this letter, together with the landreferencing questionnaire, in the stamped addressed envelope provided, (Extra copies of theconsent form and questionnaire are enclosed for your records).

Persona Associates Umited Director: G M GroomRegistered Office: 4 Peel House, Barttelot Road, Horsham, West Sussex RH12 lDE Registered in England

. No, 2371248Data Protection Act: Registralion Number Z8636S66

~~Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 33

persona associates

Should you have any general queries concerning the South Bristol Link then you can contactPaul Paton at North Somerset Council on 01934 426809 (email [email protected],uk.

The surveys are due to start very shortly so your urgent attention would be most appreciated,Should you have any queries about the Surveys then do not hesitate to contact me.

In relation to the land at REF26, REF37 and REF40, i have written in similar terms to MrRaymond Burnell

Yours sincerely

~~Gj~Graham Groom

Persona Associates limited Director: G M GroomRegistered Office: 4 Peel House. Baruelot Road, Horsham. West Sussex RH 12 1 DE

No, 2371248 ""'''~,.,~..I !I


11. Extracts from Defra Biodiversity

Offsetting Paper


www.defra,gov.uk

Biodiversity Offsetting Pilots

Technical Paper: the metric for the biodiversity

offsetting pilot in England

March 2012

defr~Oepartrn£ofll fo, Environment

Fnnrl ;""1 RIlI.1 Aff.¡"

Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1,0 1 2 June 2014 36

@ Crown copyright 2012

You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format ormedium. under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visitwww.nationalarchives.gov.ukldoclopen-government-Iicence/ or write to the InformationPolicy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail:[email protected],uk

This document/publication is also available on our web site at:

http://www.defra.gov.uklpublicationst

Any enquiries regarding this document/publication should be sent to us at:

[email protected]

PB 13745


Dealing with Risk45. Offset providers will be required to deliver the number of biodiversity units they have

committed to provide, and will bear the risk of failing to do so. There are two main types ofrisk that offset providers may face:

Delivery risks: The risks associated with the actual delivery of the offset due to, forinstance, uncertainty in the effectiveness of restoration or habitat creation/managementtechniques.

Spatial risks: These reflect ecological risks deriving from the change in location of thehabitat or resource. For example, it may be that recreating a type of habitat in a newlocation may reduce its biodiversity value.

46. Where risks cannot be mitigated, some form of insurance is likely to be needed.This could take the form of an increase in the area of habitat creation/restoration providedfor a given number of units. Or, where an increase in the area of land available for theoffset is not possible, you could reduce the number of units available on a given hectare ofland. Where a change in the number of units/area provided is used to manage risk amultiplier can be used to determine the number of units available from a given area.

Multipliers47. The aim of a multiplier is to correct for a disparity or risk. In practice this is very

difficult to achieve, not least because of uncertainty in the measurement of the parametersand the complexity of gathering the required data. This means that multipliers are acomplex element of offsetting. There are a great number of different views on how andwhen they should be used.

48. The use of multipliers is discussed in a BBOP consultation document (Ekstrom etal.. 2008). The main findings of that document were:

. that multipliers have received very little attention in the ecological literature to date,

(particularly those dealing with spatial risk) although this is now starting to change.Where research has been undertaken it tends to suggest that the multipliers used todate are too low to achieve no net loss.

. that multipliers are widely considered in offsetting systems around the world, and

tend to based on rules of thumb loosely based on some science.

49. As an example of a piece of research that argued that multipliers used are often toolow, a paper by Moilanen et al. (2009) concluded that for some ecological restoration andreconstruction very high ratios were needed. However, the conclusion of the BBOP paperis that where there are real risks around the methods and certainty of restoration orcreation then the Moilanen framework is applicable; but for some other situations, (avertedrisk. habitat banks and where restoration techniques are tried and tested), lower ratios canbe used.

10


Delivery risks and multipliers50. As discussed above, offsets will involve either restoration or expansion of habitats.and both are likely to have risks associated with them. Some habitats are more difficultthan others to restore or expand, and there will therefore be different levels of risk fordifferent habitats, However. for any particular habitat. restoration is likely to be lower riskthan expansion.

51. Development on areas of habitat that fall into the high habitat distinctiveness bandwill often need to be offset with conservation action to expand or restore the same habitat

type (like for like compensation). These habitats are likely to be more difficult to expand orrestore than others, and as a result avoiding development on such habitats can effectivelyreduce the risks associated with habitat creation.

52. There is a developing body of evidence about the likelihood of success or failure ofexpansion or recreation projects for a number of different habitats. including the time thatsuch habitats would take to develop (TEEB 2009, Rey Benayas et ai', 2009, Fagan et aL.,2008, for instance). Once there is an estimate of the failure risk. it is possible to work outthe necessary multiplier to achieve a suitable level of confidence (Butcher pers. corn..Moilanen 2009, Treweek & Butcher. 2010). The work of Moilanean provides a basis fordifferent multipliers of various levels of risk. We have used this work to come up withcategories of difficulty of restoration/expansion. and associated multipliers. as set out inFigure 5 below.

53, At Appendix 1 below we have assigned habitats to these broad categories usingexpert opinion. These assignments have had some input from Natural England specialistsbut it is important to note that this is meant purely as an indicative guide. The startingposition with regard to substrate. nutrient levels, state of existing habitat etc will have animpact on the actual risk factor, which may need to be taken into account.

Figure 5: Multipliers for different categories of delivery risk

i

Difficulty of recreation/restoration Multiplier

Very High 10

High 3

Medium 1.5

Low 1

11


The limits of multipliers in managing delivery risks54. If the worst case nsk is realised (Le. the restoration or expansion fails to deliver), amultiplier will not solve the problem. In terms of the overall outcome it will make littledifference whether the offset is the same, twice or five times the size of the impaCted site,if the offset fails to develop into the target habitat or required condition. A simple multiplieris therefore not going to be appropriate in all cases, and some projects will require a morecomplex approach to ensunng the biodiversity outcomes are delivered.

55. For example, Moilanen et al. (2009) recommend that where the uncertainly is high,to achieve a more reliable outcome a 'hedge betting' solution should be applied where bya number of different restoration or offsetting solutions are used across a number ofdifferent sites.

Spatial risks and multipliers56. Offsets are likely to deliver greatest benefits if they are positioned strategically. Inthe biodiversity offsetting pilot, this means offset projects that are in line with the strategiesfor using offsetting developed by the local planning authorities working with their partners.These will identify the priority habitats for the area, and priority locations for contributing tothe ecological network, as outlined in the Natural Environment White Paper and MakingSpace for Nature. Locating offsets strategically will greatly reduce the nsk of an offsetbeing delivered in a spatially less favourable location than the impacted site.

57. In situations where, for whatever reason, an offset is delivered in a location which

doesn't contribute to the ecological network as indentified in the local offsetting strategy, alocal authonty could choose to require offset providers to apply a multiplier to manage therisk of the compensation failing to deliver the required level of compensation forbiodiversity loss. (They could also decide that the project wasn't acceptable ascompensation). Figure 6 sets out a suggested approach for offset providers to follow ifthey choose to use a multiplier to manage this nsk.

Figure 6: Proposed multipliers to deal with spatial risk

Location parameters Multiplier

Offset is in a location identified in the No multiplier requiredoffsetting strategy

Offset is buffenng, linking, restoring or 2expanding a habitat outside an areaidentified in the offsetting strategy

Offset is not making a contnbution to the 3

offsetting strategy

12


Insurance58. A further approach to managing risks is insurance. An offset provider could takeout insurance against their failure to deliver the right number of units, in addition to, orinstead of, using multipliers,

59. Financial insurance would provide a source of funds for re-attempting the offset

project that had failed, thus still allowing the offset provider to meet their obligation in termsof units of biodiversity. The insurance premiums paid by offset providers would likelyreflect the type of habitat creation/restoration scheme being undertaken, and therefore its

specific risk of failure. In Appendix 1 to this document, habitats have been assigned tobroad risk categories both for expansion (recreation) and restoration.

60. The pilot will help us to learn more about how offset providers choose to managetheir risks.

Multipliers and time61. In delivering offsets there may be a mismatch in the timing of impact and offset. Le.

the difference in time between the negative impact on biodiversity and the offset reachingthe required quality or level of maturity, which results in loss of biodlversity for a period oftime.

62. This issue could be managed by encouraging the creation of offsets ahead of theimpact taking place, either though the setting up of habitat banks or, for projects with along lead in, by starting the offset work well ahead of the development.

63. However, particularly in the early stages of Introducing a new approach to offsetting,many offsets are likely to be developed concurrently with the impact taking place. This will

be the case in the biodiversity offsetting pilots. Even where the offset has been started inadvance, the time taken for habitats to mature means that there will almost inevitably be atime lag. Where a time lag does occur, a multiplier can be applied to take account of it.

64. Discounting over time is an economic technique used to compare costs and

benefits that occur in different time periods based around the principle that. generally,people prefer to receive goods and services now rather than later (more details ondiscounting can be found in the Treasury Green Book Guidance 12). Whilst for individualsthe evidence for a preference to consume today is good, the evidence as to why society

should do this, the ecological basis for it is more complex (for discussion see Annex 5REMEDE 2008, NOAA 2006).

12 http://www.hm-treasurv.gov.ukldatagreenbookíndex.htm

13

Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1,0 1 2 June 2014 41

65. Discussions with stakeholders indicate that they support the use of a multiplier toaccount for the temporal risk in the approach to offsetting we use in England. This isbecause it would:

. incentivise habitat banking: if the habitat is established there is no need to apply

multipliers to manage delivery risks, and to take account of time differences. Somore units will be available from a particular area of land.

. create a disincentive for damaging habitats that take a long time to recreate or

restore (Le. many habitats in the 'high' distinctiveness band), by increasing the areaof offset needed to compensate for the loss.

66. Where time discounting is used in offset or compensation schemes, for instance inthe US and in Defra's Environmental Liability Directive guidance, they tend to use astandard discount rate, for example 7% or 3%. discussed in NOAA 2006 and 3.5%, Defra,2009. In England, the Treasury Green Book recommends a discount rate of 3.5% toreflect the value society attaches to 'consumption' (Le. enjoyment of goods and services)at different points in time. It is therefore recommended that this is the rate (3.5%) thatshould be used for time discounting calculations within an English offsetting scheme.

67. Figure 7 shows the multipliers that derive for a number of time periods using adiscount rate of 3.5 %

Figure 7: Multipliers for different time periods using a 3.5% discount rate

Years to target condition Multiplier

5 1.2

10 1.4

15 1.7

20 2.0

25 2.4

30 2.8

32 3

68, The following are the parameters within which the time discounting should operatefor the biodiversity offsetting pilot.

14


69. The number of years that time discounting should take into consideration is from thepoint of impact to the estimated time that it will take for the habitat to reach the pre-agreedtarget quality (Le. the point at which the agreed number of units is delivered). Forsimplicity and to allow upfront estimates of the offsetting provision this will require someguidelines. TEES 2009 provides a good starting point, and Appendix 2 has a table ofestimated timescales from that publication. The actual figure will need to be calculated ona case by case basis for each offset management plan, taking into account the habitat

type, and the amount of restoration or expansion being undertaken.

70. The calculations around the time discount multiplier should cover the whole periodconcerned. The calculations should assume that there is a quality jump from the baselinecondition to the target condition once the relevant number of years has elapsed. Thecalculations therefore do not need to take into account increasing quality in the habitat,

and do not need to be re-done annually.

71. Offsets should last at least as long as the impact of the development, and ideally in

perpetuity. However, to be practical, there needs to be a limit on application of thediscount rate used for time preference. We therefore propose that the maximum multiplierused to take account of temporal risk is x3.

72. We think that offset providers participating in the pilot should apply a temporalmultiplier to their projects when calculating how many units of biodiversity they are able tooffer.

Hedgerows73. Hedgerows are a feature almost unique to the UK and there is no experience ofdealing with them in offset schemes elsewhere that we can draw on. Hedgerows'contribution to biodiversity in the landscape is far greater per unit of area than even themost biodiversity rich habitats because of their role in provision of nest sites, corridors,feeding sites, shelter belts etc. They cannot simply be treated as other habitats andaccounted for on a hectarage basis. It is therefore necessary to come up with amechanism to account for hedgerows in our approach to offsetting that both recognisestheir unique contribution to biodiversity whilst at the same time meeting our guidingprinciple of simplicity.

74. Although this description is written to describe how we deal with hedgerows theconclusions and approach could equally apply, in theory, to other field boundary featuressuch as hedge banks and rows of trees.

75, There is little if any science to draw on that compares the value of a hedgerow toother habitats. Even if such evidence did exist, it is likely that the exact value would be sodependent on a wide range of factors as to make its use as a generalisation difficult.

Consequently it is recommended that hedgerows are treated as a separate case out withthe main metric system.

15


Appendix 1: Risk factors for restoring orrecreating different habitats~ N,B: These assignments are meant purely as an indicative guide. The starting positionwith regard to substrate. nutrient levels, statè of existing habitat etc will have a majorimpact in the actual risk factor. Final risks should be agreed locally as part of setting up theoffset.

Habitats Technical difficulty of Technical difficulty ofrecreating restoration

Aquifer Fed Naturally Very high/impossible MediumFluctuating Water Bodies

Arable Field Margins Low nla

Blanket Bog Very high/impossible High

Calaminarian Grasslands High Medium

Coastal and Floodplain Low LowGrazing Marsh

Coastal saltmarsh Medium Medium

Coastal Sand Dunes Very high/impossible Medium

Coastal Vegetated Shingle High High

Eutrophic Standing Waters Medium Medium

Hedgerows Low Low

Inland Rock Outcrop and Very high/impossible MediumScree Habitats

Limestone Pavements Very high/impossible High

Lowland Beech and Yew Medium LowWoodland

Lowland Calcareous Grassland Medium Low

20


Lowland Dry Acid Grassland Medium Low

Lowland Fens Medium Low

Lowland Heathland Medium Medium

Lowland Meadows Medium Low

Lowland Mixed Deciduous Medium LowWoodland

Lowland Raised Bog Very highlimpossible Medium

Maritime Cliff and Slopes Very highlimpossible High

Mountain Heaths and Willow High MediumScrub

Oligotrophic and Dystrophic Medium MediumLakes

Open Mosaic Habitats on Low LowPreviously Developed Land

Ponds Low Low

Purple Moor Grass and Rush High MediumPastures

Reedbeds Low Low

Saline lagoons Low Low

Traditional Orchards Low Low

Upland Calcareous Grassland High Medium

Upland Flushes, Fens and High MediumSwamps

Upland Hay Meadows Medium Low

21


Upland Heathland Medium Medium

Upland Mixed Ashwoods Medium Low

Upland Oakwood Medium Low

Wet Woodland Medium Low

Wet Heath High High

Wood-Pasture & Parkland Medium Low

22


12. Extracts from Translocation Practice

Guidance


CIRIA C600 london, 2003

.~-,

if.¡

Habitattranslocation

.,J

~

a best practice guide

Penny Anderson

A good copy of the Mona Lisa is still not the Mona Lisa

Kiotzf~ ¡ 987

:e-II

.J

CIRt'\ 1:1 6 Storelz G;i¡e 1:1 We.:tri1instel'1:I Lonco,., SW!? 3AU i:i T~hone: ~44(01:0 n21 989! 1:1 Fax: -~';jO' 20 ,:22 ¡70SErr'~ü: enauirie~tr~,org 1:1 Web::i:e: WIMN.c:n:i.org

paat_ -..- L

~

Penny ,A.nder;ori ":',=i¡1:e.: l.lc 1:1 ?::iii: le? i:i éu P-..".;, Road i:i CU1ton 1:1 Dero,-;hire 9(~ 7 cSNTee¡;ohcne: -HiO! 12% 27086 1:1 c¡¡i:: .....;(01 12~S :3776 i:i Err.;il' p~.,.,..;;col.de'nOr._coli~


CONTENTS

i. INTRODUCTION .......,....,.....,..........,....................................., 7

1.1 What is habitat translocation? ........,.,....,...,....,...........,.........,....... 1

1.2 The scope of the guide ...".......'.................,....................,........ 7

1.3 How to use this guide ..".................,'...........,..................,'....., 7

lA Finding your way through the guide .............................................. 10

i. HABITAT TRANSLOCATION: A HEALTH WARNING... ...... ... . ... ... .,. . .. ... ,.. .... 13

2.1 Introduction.....,...".....,.................,......."..,...,.................. 132. i. I Habitat translocation corn money and takes time and commitment . . . . . . . . . .. 13

2,2 Dealing with the planning system.... .. , . ...... ... . ... . ... . . .,., . . . . .,. .. .. .. ..... 142.3 Planning the execution of the project , . , . . . , , . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . , , . . .. 15

2.3. i Setting objectives .......................,................................. I 5

2.3.2 Choosing a receptor site ......,.,'...,..,..,.,......,.........,.....,..... I 5

2.3.3 The monitoring scheme ..",...,.,.,....".................,",.....,..... I 5

2.3.4 Contract issues ...............,...,...,.,....,..,......,...,...,...,...,.. 16

2.4 The mechanics of translocation. . . . . . . . . . . , ' . , , . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . , . .. 172.5 The ecological impact of translocation ,......,................"....,.............. 17

2.5.1 The effects on soils ,.,........,...,.,....,..........'..,...........,...... .18

2.5.2 The effects on vegetation.. '. .. ,. .. , . ., , ,. . .... . . . ,. _. . . , .,. . . ., , . .. . . .. ... 182.5.3 Changes in the invertebrates .............,'.....,.............,..,........ 18

2.5A Other translocation impacts ...........,..,...,.....,...............,.,.... 19

2.5.5 The significance of translocation effects . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , , . , . . . , . . . . . 20

3. HABITAT TRANSLOCATION AND THE PLANNING PROCESS .....,.....................213. I Background. . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . , . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , 2 I3.2 The policy and guidance context ,.......'..'....,.,..................,.....,..,... 22

3.2.1 Translocation of SSSls is not acceptable ..................................... 22

3.2.2 Dealing with translocation in EIAs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . , . . . . . . _ . . . . . 233.2.3 Judging the potential efficacy of habitat translocation in the EIA process ...... 25

3.3 Habitat translocation commitments ...... . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . , . . . 25

4. PLANNING THE HABITAT TRANSLOCATION ........,.........,......................294.14.2

4.3

4.4

A checklist of requirements .........,...,........,.............",......,.....,... 29

Timetable. . . . . . . . . . , . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . , . . , , . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . 29Setting aims and objectives ....,.................,..,.......,......"..,..."..... 29

Choosing a receptor site . . . . . , , . . . . , . . . . , . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . ' . . , . , . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . 3 i4.4.1 Soils. . . . .. . .. . . . ... . .. . ,.. ,. , ., .... .. , ... . ... . .. . . . .. . . .. . . .. , .. ... . .....324..4.2 Water relations ... _ . , . . . . . , . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . 324.4.3 Site ownership. . . .. . ..' . . . .. . . . . ... .. . . ... . ... . . .. . . . . . . .. , . .. . . . .. .. ... ..32Long-term ownership and management .,.....,.......,...,.'........."........,. 33

Site management pre- and post-translocation . , . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . , . . . . . . , . . . . 34Planning a monitoring scheme .. . . . . . . . , . . ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . 344.7.1 General issues.. .... . .. . .. .. . . ... . . ... .. . . . .... . .. . .... ... . , . . . . . .. '.. . ...344,7.2 Botanical monitoring. .. . .... ".. . .,. . . . ... . ... ...... .. , .... . .. . . . ... . .. ...364.7.3 Invertebrate monitoring. .. .. . ... .. . ...... . ... . , . .. . ,. , . ... . . . . . ,. . . .. .....364.7.4 Monitoring soils ....,..................'....,.......,.........,........... 36

4.7.5 Hydrological monitoring ..............,.........................,.........36

4.7.6 Monitoring other features .................................,.......,....... 36

4.7.7 Monitoring time frame......................... _,...........,.....,.......37

4.7,8 Marking the translocation site for monitoring .,.,.......,...................37

4.5

4,64.7

5. THE CONTRACTUAL CONTEXT FOR HABITAT TRANSLOCATION. .... .. . .. ,., ... .. . ... . 395, 1 The approach to contract procurement ....,.,....,..............."...."......... 39

5.1.1 Types of contract _....,......,.......,.........................,.......... 39

5. 1 .2 Implications of the types of contract for habitat translocation work . . . . . . . . . . . . 405. i .3 Important factors to consider ..............,........................,...... 40

5.2 Contract documentation . . . . , . . . ' . . . . . . . . , . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . 435.2. i Form of agreement "....".......,.........".....................,...... 43

5.2.2 Specification, . . . . . . . .. . . . . . , . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., . . '. , . . . . . . . . ...44

CIRIA C600

.i

.1

J iI

~.J

~

'J I

~ I

~ I

11

J

5


5.2.3 Bills of quantities . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . , . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . , . . . . . . . . . 445.2.4 Schedules of works ..,..'..............,....,.......................,..... 45

5.2.5 Schedules of rates ..,.......,..............................,.............. 45

5.2.6 Contingency. provisional and prime cost sums ..............,......,....,... 45

5.2_7 Contract drawings .....,.......... . .. . . . . . . .. . . . ...... , . . . . , .. ... . . , . . . . . . 465.3 Selection of contractors and tendering.. .. .. .. . . . .. . . .. . .,. , ,.... . ., .. .. . .... . . . . ..475.4 Quality control and supervision of the works .........,............................. 47

6. THE MECHANICS OF TRANSLOCAnON .. . .. .. . . . . . .. . . . . .. .. . ... .. . .. . , ... .. . .. . .. . . 496. i Introduction ..............,..........,.............................,............. 49

6.2 Timing of translocation ........,........................................,.,....... 49

6.3 Choosing the most appropriate type of translocation . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 506.4 Preparation of the receptor site . . . . . . . . , . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 16.5 Turf translocation ................................,.............................,' 52

6.5.1 Turf depth ....,.........................,.................,.............. 52

6.5.2 Turf size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 536.5.3 Cutting and lifting turves ........'.........,....................,.......... 54

6.5.4 Taking rurves to the receptor site. . . . ,... . . . , .. . . . .. . .... .. . .. . . . .. .. . . .. . . .546.5.5 Taking subsoils ................,...,...........................,......,... 55

6.5.6 laying turves . . , . . . . ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . 55il laying turves effectively. . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . , , . . . . , . . . . . . 55iil Re-establishing panerns , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . ' . . . . , . . , . . . . , . . . . . . . . 57

6.6 Soil transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . 586.6. i Soil transfer depth ........................,..........,...........,........ 58

6.7 Tree and shrub translocation. , . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 i6.8 Transplanting individual plants .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . 636.9 Storage of turves or soils .. . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . , . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . 636.10 Watering ............,.,...,..........,...........,..."..',............."...,..64

6.1 i Translocation specialists, machinery and logistics. . . . . , . . . . . . . . ' . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . 646.12 Method statements. . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . 656.13 The weather . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . , . . . , . . . . . ' , . . , . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . 666.14 Integrating with other interests. . . , . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . 666. i 5 Protesters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . 66

7. AFTERCARE AND MAINTENANCE...........................................,....... 677. i The requirements .......,.,...................'.......,.."., __ . .. . , . . .. . __. . . .. . 677.2 Establishment maintenance....,..,...,..............................,............ 67

7.2. i Control of undesirable and invasive species. . ... . , ,. . , .. . . . ... ..... .. .. . . . . , 677.2.2 Replacing failed specimens or thinning ......",............................67

7.2.3 Controlling increased biomass ,.............."........,......,..........,.68

7.3 long-term management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . ' . , , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . , 687.3.1 The management strategy...................,...,....,.,.......,........,. 68

7.3.2 Managing grassJands ,............,.......,.....,........,................ 68

7.3.3 Managing heaths and moors .................,.........,.,............,... 69

7.3.4 Managing woodlands and hedges. ..............................,.........69

7.3.5 Managing wetlands . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . 697.3.6 Securing long-term management ...........'......................,....... 70

8, THE COSTS OF TRANSLOCA nON ...,...........................,............"..... 718. 1 The scope of costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 i

il Planning stage ...............,...................,.............,............... 7 1

iil implementation phase. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . 7 1

REFERENCES .....,....................................................................,.. 75

APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

1

ii

III

Project checklist . . , ' . . . . . . . . , . , . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77The case studies mentioned in the guidance ........,.........,.....,.............. 82

Scientific names of vascular plant species given in the text .......................... 83

6 CIRIA C600


1 INTRODUCTION

Habitat translocation is defined, and a checklist given of the basic requirements toassist in achieving high standards of work from the planning to the posttransplantation monitoring stage.

1.1 WHAT IS HABITATTRANSLOCATION?

Habitat translocation is the process of movingsoils with their vegetation and any animals thatremain associated with them, in order to rescuehabitats that would otherwise be lost due tosome kind of development or extractionscheme. Such activity is essentially associated wimhabitats of significant nature conservation valuewhere a decision has been made to move themrather man lose them totally to another land use.

such as development of some kind or mineralextraction,

Essentially, only habitats and their translocation areincluded in this guidance document and theReview of Translocations that accompanies it.

Species translocations are not covered

specifically. except occasionally as integral parts ofa wider scheme. Advice on species translocationsis readily available elsewhere (Box 1.11,

SPECIES TRANSLOCAnONS

Species transIocalions, for ~ where great aested

newts. water voles at bats are moved out of an area and iito

another habitat, are not cxivered in this guide; see

~ Oxford 2000 for a list of existing guidefines

~ Mclean 2001 for the poicy context

1.2 THE SCOPE OF THE GUIDE

This best practice guide sets out minimumstandards for habitat translocations. It is not a guideto promote translocations, indeed it is stressedthat such translocation should be regarded for all

sites of high nature conservation value as very

much a last reSOr1 when all other alternativeavenues have been explored and discarded.However, where habitat translocation has beenaccepted, this guide seeks to set high standardsto help avoid some of the failures (from a variety ofcausesl found in past translocation projects. It islikely that habitat translocations will continue totake place in certain circumstances. The objective ofthis guide is to raise the standards of these andreduce the risks that emanate from poor practice.

The guide is based on the results of an extensiveReview (see Box 1.21 of habitat translocation

CIRIAC600

projects. which used published and unpublished

information and involved interviewing keyconsultants and contractors involved intranslocation. The Review is provided on CD toaccompany this guide.

THE ORIGIN OF THE GUIDE

A Review"''lIS i.rideitaken ..nett:

~ evakiated over 30 habitat liansIocation projeds

iiidertaken over the last 20 years

~ consc.ited key persorvieI that had been involved in

transIocations at bolti the design and con1ractOlS'

stages

~ assessed the pi.bIisIied iiformation on habitattransIocalions

~ u1íIised the extensive experience of its au1hor.i and

steeriig group,

The Review is provided on CO ii the back of this book.

The basic principles of habitat translocation

should be equally applicable in other parts ofEurope and elsewhere. but will need to be setwithin the pertinent legal and policy framework.The guide focuses on the situation in England, butseeks to accommodate the variation in approachthrough the legal and policy framework in otherparts of the UK. As these. and me processes thatemanate from them. change wim time. theguidance given in this document will need to be re-

set against them. In general. reference to anEnglish or British policy, procedure or government

depamnent implies the equivalent in othercountries. Table I. r provides a framework of theequivalent relevant legal and policy structures forthe UK.

1.3 HOW TO USE THIS GUIDE

The need for habitat translocation will usually ariseas a product of a planning application, or as acorollary of the applications of specialparliamentary procedures or other enablinglegislation, all usually to allow some kind ofdevelopment (construction or extraction forexamplel. to take place where a site of significant

nature conservation value is affected. However, theguidance is equally applicable to temporary

disturbance of high value nature conservation sitessuch as when pipeline or culvert installations pass

through high value habitats.

c" Ii

1


TABLE 1.1 Relevant planning legislation rhroUghout ttie UK

- ---- --ReJevant planning

1

Relevant EIA ReguIatJons Key Wildiire

legislation &Orwars IegIslatfon-.- --England

Town and County Planning The Town and Country Wildlife and Countryside Act

Act 119901 Planning ¡Environmental (19811

The Planning andAssessmentl (England and

CountrySIde and Rights ofWalesl Regulations 1999

Compensation Act 119911 (SI 1999 No. 2931Way Act ¡20001

Conservation ¡Natural

Habitat &cl Reguiationsil9941 & Amendments

120001

Wales Town and County Planning The Town and Country Wildlife and Countryside Act

I " Aa 1199°1 Planning IEnvironmental (19811i AssessmentJ IEngland and

The Planning and Walesl Regulations 1999 Countryside and Rights ofCompensation Act 1 19911

(SI 1999 No, 2931Way Act 120001

Conservation (NaturalHabitat &cl Regulations119941 & Amendments

120001

Scodand Town and County (SCotlandl The Environmental Impact Wildlife and Countryside Act

Act f19971 Assessment ISCotlandl (19811RegUlations 1999 ¡SCottishSI 1999 No. I1 Conservation ¡Natural

Habitat &cl Regulations( 19941 & Amendments

--Nolthem Ireland Northern Ireland Planning The Planning Wildlife NI Order (19851 &

¡NIl Order f19911 jEnvironmentallmpact Amendment f 19951Assessmentl (Northern

Irelandl Regulations The Conservation ¡Natural¡Northern lrelandl 1999 Habitats erei Regulations

(SR 1999 No, 731 fNI/(19951 & Amendments

(19971-... ...

"

B CIRIA C600


TABLE 1.1 Relevant planning policy and advice throughout the UK

(Nature conservation and biodiversity)

.,,-PlannIng guidance on natiie

conservat1on Issues

..

EnglandPlanning Policy Guidance PPG 9Nature Conservation

Grcular 11/95 Planning Conditions

Grcular 1/97 Planning Obligations

Circular 2/99 Environmental impact Assessment11999)

..-wales Technical Advice Note TAN 5 Nature Conservation

and Planning 11996!

Planning Guidance (Wales! Planning Policy 1stReVision 11999!

Circular 35/95 Planning Conditions

Circular 13199 Planning Obligations

......-.

Scotland National Planning Policy Guidance INPPG! 14Narural Heritage ¡ i 999! The Scottish Office.

Pianning Advice Note (PAN! 60 Planning for

Narural Heritage ¡20001. Scottish ExecutiVe.

Grcular 18/ 1986 The Use of Planning Conditions

Nature Conservation: Implementation in Scotland

of EC Directives on the Conservation of NaruralHabitats and of Wild Flore! and !he Conservation,ReVised Guidance ¡Updating Scottish OlTice CircularNo. 6/ 19951. Scottish Execl1tÎVe ¡20001

Circular 12f 1996 Planning Agreements

Circular 15/1999 Environmental Impact Assessment

(SCotlandl Regulations ¡i 9991

Planning Advice Note 58 Environmental ImpactAssessment ¡19991

Northern IÆlancI Planning Policy Statement No. 2. 1997,Planning and Narure Conservation

Other guidance on b1odiverslt¥'

Worldng WIÚL the Grain of N3nire:A biodiversily strategy for England

IDEFRA 20021 Countryside and

Rights of Way Act 2002. section 74and its lists

Countryside and Rights of way Act

2002, section 74 and its lists

Scottish Biodiversicy Srmtegy ¡draft

pending as of Feb 20031

Northern Ireland Biodiversity

Strategy 120001. Northern Ireland

EnVironment and Heritage service

These tefereoces are spedtic to eadi countiy and are aciditIon:il to the UK &odiVersity Action Plan (1994) and Biodiversity; TIie UK Sleeting Groc.p

Reporl (all VOIwnes; 1995 and oriw:irds).

CIRlA C600

- ~.

I.)

I

~

.~ I

I

~I

.r I

.

Il

9


This guide should be used to cover all aspects ofhabitat translocation through:

. the proposal, planning and design process

. the construction and management stage

. ecological monitoring and reporting stage.

The guidance reflects current best practice. based

on the available experience, observations andresearch findings fsee the Review) but, as new

techniques and research results become available, itwill need to be updated and extended by the userto take account of this new information.

As a general principle, the standards recommended

in this guide are equally applicable to anytranslocation, but the amount of effort, theresources needed and, therefore. the costs ofhabitat translocation relate to the natureconservation value of the site. The higher this is.the greater the effort required to achieve bestpractice standards fsee Fig. 1,1).

SITES OF LOWERNATURE

CONSERVATIONVALUE

lLess

demandingobjectives

lEquai tr¡inslo~tionstôlndards. but less

demanding methodspossible

lMore generalmonitoring

requirements

FIGURE 1.1 Levels of input needed related to habitatquaJìty

The guide focuses on translocating habitats of

sufficient nature conservation value that theirre-establishment to reflect their originalcharacteristics is the principal objective.However, the advice given is equally applicable tosituations where salvage translocation ofindividual plants. clumps or small patches is beingundertaken for use in creating better new semi-

naniral areas, especially of species that cannot be

to

purchased as seed. This should be a normalprocedure where such materials are present. It ispossible that" for low value matenai. translocationcould also be part of an ecological enhancement

scheme, The principles of the translocation processwill be the same for these different objectives,although the exigencies of monitoring andfeedback are likely to be much less for lower valuemateriaL.

Before considering habitat translocation forhabitats of significant nature conservation value,consult the following checklist. If any of the itemscannot be assured, then the translocation could fail

to achieve best practice standards:

. time is needed to plan effectively. including

prior survey and data analysis. adequate resources are essential

. the developer needs to be commined to

achieving a successful translocation. an ecologist, suitably experienced in habitat

translocation, will be needed to work on theproject

. a contractor suitably experienced and

adequately equipped for habitattranslocation should be employed

. a matching receptor site is required thatcan be properly managed for the long-term

. a robust monitoring schedule and an

appropriate investigatory programme, preand post translocation. are essential for all

sites of significant value,

Use Fig. 1.2 fsee page i I) for guidance on thescale and time requirements for a translocationproject. Use the expanded checklist inAppendix i for the scope of the wholetranslocation process. This checklist doubles as areminder of all the stages of a translocation, andthe decisions that will need to be made. andprovides a recording form for registering theoutcome of each stage.

CIRIA C600


13. Extracts from The Works on CommonLand (Exemptions) (England) Order2007


SI 100711587 Page 1

2007 No. 2587

CO~10NS, ENGLAND

The Works on Common Land (Exemptions)

(England) Order 2007

Thomson Reuters (Legal) Limited.

UK Stanitoiy Instri.imcnts Crown Cop)right, Reproduced by pcmiission of the Controner of Her Majesty's Stationery Office,

Afade 3rd September 2007

7th September 2007

1st October 2007

Laid before Parliament

Coming into force

The Secretary of State, m exercise of the powers coiifeiTed by sections 43(1)(b), (7) and (8) and59(1) of die COnitlions Act 2006, and bemg satisfied of the matters specified in section 43(3) ofthat Act, makes die following Order:

Extent

Preamble: England

o Law In Force

1.- Citation, commf'nCf'mf'nt and application

(1) T1ùs Order may be cited as die Works on Conuiion Land (Exemptions) (England) Order 2007and comes into force on 1 st October 2007.

(2) This Order applies m relation to England only.

Commencement

art. 1(1)-(2): October 1, 2007

Extent

art. 1(1)-(2): England


SCHEDULE 1

\VOl'kc; exempt fl'om l'equiring section 38 consent

AI,tide 2

t!J Law In Force

Paragraph Descriptioii o/works Descriptioii o/persoll

corrrillg Oiit works

1. The erection of temporary fencing (which may include electric fencing) for a 1. The owner of the land.period not exceeding six months, to enclose land for the pwpose of restricting 2, Any person entitled tothe movement of gr.¡zing :inimals which are on the land- exercise rights of(a) in the exercise of a right of common to graze aniiiials; or common over the land.

(b) in the interests of nattue conseivation.

The exemption in respect of works specified in this paragr.¡ph only applies 3. Any other person

if- acting with the written

consent of the owner of(a) the area to be enclosed does not, either by itself or cumulatively with any the land.other areas within the same register unit enclosed without section 38 consentby VII1ue of this paragr.¡ph, exceed the lesser of 10 hectares or 10% of the areaof the register unit of which it forms part; and

(b) no part of the land to be enclosed has, during the period of 6 months

immediately before the works are camed out, previously been enclosed withoutsection 38 consent by virtue of this parngr.¡ph.

2. The erection of temporary fencing, for a period not exceeding 3 years if the 1. The owner of the land,fence is wholly on moorland or 1 year in any other case, to enclose land for

the purpose of-

(a) carrying out work which facilitates the growth or restof3tion of vegetation 2. Any person entitled to

for the benefit of the common land; or ~rciserights ofcommon over the land.

(b) protecting the vegetation during a period of such growth or restof3tion, in 3. Any other person

so far as such protection is necessary or expedient to enable the growth oracting with the written

restoratIon to occur. consent of the owner ofThe exemption in respect of works specified in this paragr.¡ph only applies the land.

if-(a) the area to be enclosed does not, either by itself or cumulatively with anyother areas ",'Íthin the same register unit enclosed \\'Íthout section 38 consentby virtue of this paragraph, exceed i % of the are41 of the register unit of whichit forms part; and

(b) no part of the land to be enclosed has, during the period of 1 year

immediately before the works are carried out. pre\'Íously been enclosed withoutsection 38 conscrit by virtue of this paragr.¡ph.

3 The erection of temporary fencing, for a period not exceeding 5 years, to 1. The owner of the land.enclose land in orocr- to restrict access to it in the interests of nature 2. Nattual England.conservation, where that is required under the terms of a written agreementrelating to the management of the land, being-

(a) an agreement between the owner of the land and Naniral England; or 3. Any other person

(b) an agreement between the owner of the land and the Secretary of State,acting with the written

entered into before the commencement of this Order, consent of the owner ofthe land,

The exemption in respect of works specified in this paragraph only applies if

the area to be enclosed does not, either by itself or cuniulatively with any other

areas within the same register unit enclosed without section 38 consent byvirtue of this parngraph, exceed 1 % of the area of the register unit of which it

forms part.


14. Extracts from Standing Advice for

Ancient Woodland and Veteran Trees


I"\Â Forestry Commission

CrJIl England

STANDING ADVICEFOR ANCIENT WOODLAND AND VETERAN TREES

Version: National Ancient Woodland and Veteran Tree Standing Advicecovering England issued by Natural England and the Forestry

Commission in April 2014 (replacing the previous version issuedby Natural England for the south east of England),

Issue Date: 7 April 2014

Next Review Date: 6 April 2016 and then no later than every two years

L.ocal Planning Authoritiesto which this StandingAdvice applies: All Borough, County, District, Unitary and National Park

Authorities (exercising their function as Planning Authorities) inEngland

Advice Reference: StAdv/AWVT/NE/Apr2014


1) Purpose and use of this Standing Advice

1.1 Ancient woodland is an irreplaceable resource of great importance for its wildlife, soils, recreation,cultural value, history and the contribution it makes to our diverse landscapes, It is a scarce resource,covering only 3% of England's land area. Veteran trees can be hundreds of years old, provide habitat formany different species and are a part of our landscape and cultural heritage. Local authorities have a vitalrole in ensuring the protection and conservation of ancient woodland and veteran trees, in particularthrough the planning system.

1.2 This Standing Advice is issued jointly by Natural England and the Forestry Commission, It providesadvice which local planning authorities are advised to use in determining planning applications on oraffecting ancient woodland and veteran trees. When consulted on proposals, Natural England and theForestry Commission will refer planning authorities to this advice, although we may provide a more detailedbespoke response in certain circumstances, as set out below. Standing Advice is a material considerationin the determination of applications in the same way as a letter received from Natural England followingconsultation.

1.3 Natural England is a statutory consultee for development proposals affecting all Sites of SpecialScientific Interest (SSSI) (including those SSSl's that are ancient woodland andl or contain veteran trees).The Forestry Commission is a non-statutory consultee on ancient woodland sites, including proposalswhere any part of the development site is within 500m of an ancient woodland site and where thedevelopment would involve erecting new buildings or extending the footprint of existing buildings,

1.4 This advice is issued in accordance with:

. The National Planning Policv Framework (March 20'12) and National Planning Practice Guidance

(2014);

. Article 16 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England)

Order 2010 SI 20'10/2184 and any subsequent relevant amending Order; and,

. ODPM Circular 06/2005: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation - Statutory Obligations and theirimpact within the Planning System.

1.5 Providing bespoke advice in addition to this standing advice:

1.5.1 Natural England must be consulted as a statutory consultee for proposals in or likely to affectancient woodland or veteran trees that are part of a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), SpecialProtection Area (SPA), Special Area of Conservation (SAC) or Ramsar site. Natural England will

provide bespoke advice in all cases where there is likely to be an impact on the interest features of anSSSI or other designated site.

1.5.2 When consulted on a planning application that may impact on ancient woodland or veterantrees not within a SSSI, SPA, SAC or Ramsar site, Natural England will direct planning authorities tothis Standing Advice. We will only provide bespoke advice in exceptional circumstances.

1.5.3 For any proposal affecting ancient woodland - Local Authorities may also approach the

Forestry Commission for advice as a non-statutory consultee. The Forestry Commission will refer tothis Standing Advice and may provide bespoke advice in certain circumstances.

Return to Contents

3


6,4 Mitigation measures:

Buffer Zones:. Development must be kept as far as possible from ancient woodland, with a buffer area

maintained between the ancient woodland and any development boundary. An appropriate bufferarea will depend on the local circumstances and the type of development.9 In a planning case inWest Sussex the Secretary of State supported the arguments for a i5m buffer around theaffected ancient woodland, 10 but larger buffers may be required.

. The permanent retention of buffer zones must be secured as part of the planning permission.These should be allowed to develop into semi-natural habitat. Developments such as gardens

must not be included within buffer zones as there is limited control over how they may be used, ordeveloped in the future; for example, they might be paved or decked without the need for planningpermission or they may include inappropriate species which could escape into the woodland.

6.5 Compensation measures (to compensate for loss of ancient woodlandl veteran trees):

6.5.1 Ancient woodland and veteran trees are irreplaceable, but if a planning decision has beentaken that results in the loss of ancient woodland or veteran trees, the following measures may, incertain circumstances, contribute to an appropriate compensation package, provided that they aresecured as part of the planning permission via planning conditions or obligations.

6.5.2 New native woodland planting: Creating new woodland cannot provide a directreplacement for ancient woodland - the habitat is irreplaceable. However, if an area of ancientwoodland is lost to development. native woodland habitat creation, at a large scale, could beconsidered as part of a compensation package.

6.5.3 Beneficial management of alternative sites: As well as new native woodland planting,restoration of a PAWS or securing the appropriate management of an area of un managed ancientwoodland nearby may be considered as part of a compensation package, provided that the long term

management of the síte(s) is secured.

6.5.4 Tree planting to replace lost veterans: It is not possible to replace veteran trees with new

planting. However, planting many young trees of similar species to the veterans that have been lostshould be undertaken to help compensate for this loss. The new trees must be located close to thelost trees to provide some ecological connections with other veterans nearby, Also, the intact hulk ofthe veteran tree should be felled and relocated in close proximity to a nearby veteran tree, woodlandor parkland area. This will at least give opportunity for those invertebrates and fungi resident withinthe tree to relocate, provided there is suitable habitat nearby.

9 Comey. P,M.. Smithers. RJ.. Kirby. J.S"Petmen. G.F., Le Due, M.G. & Marrs, RH. (2008) Impacts of nearby development on

the ecology of andent woodland,10 In a planning case concerning an ancient WOOdland in West SUssex, Four Acre Wood, a minimum 15m buffer was

recommended by the Inspector and endorsed by the Secretary of State. Asquith, P. J. (2007) Report 00 Appeals by CrestNietiolson (SOuth) Limited Relating to BoInore Village Phases 4 And 5. Haywards Heath, West SUssex. The Planning

Inspectorate, Bristol, Appeal refs: APPfD383OlA105J1195897-98 & APPI03830/AI06I1198282-83.

Return to Contents

11


15. Figure 7: Yanley Quarry Site:

Proposed Restoration Masterplan


-'--~----~-_....- l

i,~,-=

.="'~:::::-:--:~"-

J~---=-: ~ ==

'i.,lq~

~t.D:ll\.

~-~n- (T

) anct Shrub (3).....

l /~, A

æ;;;;;;j;e"l;;-

OJfl,,~usrooiir

At::#ftpseudopll'liJntJ'

CO

(yli4..wrJønQ

Cr.tla~lI~rnO

llQgftla

Abim

g1lJÚflO

UIIH

aqUlb'illn

......

-Fia!óM;iplio(T

)--'""'-in

S~M~(T

)H

...I(S)H

ii~IIi;)l'IIIS)""~

oioIItCSi

476 I.IN476 UN

3~7 1,111

2S1 t,'"

357 1,1H

z:ia 7'7

70 119 itl

t"ni ¡u:;; --;:;;;-

.lØ:'-Ø

."

Iir~;-;o¡,~

&iu__.

IC

oIolmotllQ

",.J~.i~..il"'"

I...I N

wr;,:.~

"'"

Ar....,.._4 w

u.

~""'''''~Ii,.,..",ii'"tl1Iri-m

.._iwi

i:ii...........i"'iri..,

'"

~~

¡;t P"lll$~

~ (illlld=

e""n..i~....~

¡...C

oft'......"'"o.iiq'l'¡

.,..,1....;1...1

,.,..

..hW

I1.-

I..

..

Proposed schedule for beating up existing w

oodland areas

r,.. m H

lI St\I1lO (SI

%Pantkt1lA

rnm2 JO

'l'.256

Pliiiin~_ün2J 17

¡O'U

43j'O'JoU

U$O

%11ii674(l%

'"40"4$900

.32117

2"2.3l1O

4.'13

"",.00

2.00iJA

),,.

1"

""

'18,..

T"

..,,-

".%

2----;--.....,.,

"3'1

.so

...,-~-

-iï'-.

119"S

,"

".

""...

i , 1i

."

".~

,-1ö--

"u

...11

1.1U

Aw

rii\Jlf p:anl $P-o; ¡random '~~~ì(m

~, 2 DO

,t.c.jr:il:nP'l'tltl~ FteIdM

aPi¡-(Tl 40.60

Q,..",...,.rotl.... Qid,;(l) 40-60

Ace(p~

lJd:Jpl..f;¡'1Il: $i;c¡mom

in 40.00Co?Ull O\o'ltli'.."" H~I (!SI 4tl-60

Ç/U-øIiSr.t4J'lOgJl'lo' H8","omiS) AO.eo

Affl.isQJ.Jfn;iw Aldor 40-ec

~,-;q~1WlJ - -~.- 4"0-63

T';al'lropW

¡l"---,¡¡-".,"io,

iI~

T,..n~pl.inl

TtaM

pI;mT

tf:nl.pIlntnlliu~lT

r.Jl'Il~1l1"

*~r

\~,\

,---

~,-

Atkins N

SC/6/2 1 V

ersion 1,0 1 2 June 2014

(ZJ

1///1D0.'.'.,.:.,. ... ."..,,:

D-C~~~1--"1

1,.,-\1

Ih-Ic.J

oL~

6rz:J

(SJ

~LJ

CÐ

lJJ

IC~=

JI

Key

Planning Application boundary (the Site)

Proposed final restofabon contours

Hanging H

ílJ Wood T

PO B

oundaryN

umber 252W

PrCfJosed im

proved grassland (BSH

RE

9)

EX

ISling rough grassland areas

EX

I5-ting areas managed for agrIculture such as graz1n9 or cut1íng for

h;:i~li:;ilaee

Existing w

oodfand around periphery of site. no proposed changes

EX

iSting NoodIand areas (W

l, W2, W

3A, W

3B, and w

illOw

CO

Ppice)

Proposed wood;i:ind using rnItivc i:ipccics (PW

L to PW

3)

Existing .../O

OdiSnd pianting w

hIch requires beating up (W11A

b. VlllB

a.W

12A. W

12B, W

12C, W

12D)

Eidslìng 'N

I')O(jlarid planting w

hich l1KIuiras thinning w

orks (W9A

. W10B

,W

10A, W

4A)

Exi~ling hedgerow

s (Hl. H

2and H3)

Proposed hedgerows (H

4 and H5)

Existing im

ernaJ Site access tracks (hartJ surface or grass tracks)

Exisling ephom

eral pond and weU

aod

Area unaffected by restf)fiilion proposal' and under agricultural use and

managem

ont

Exîllling deer fence

Proposed deer feflc~

Principal mea of form

er land filling

Ditches and drainage

Roule of pU

blic footpaths

lQcation of gas w

ell heads, manifolds, leachate and other ¡nspec-Jor¡

walls required to be rataìned as per requirem

ents of EA

wasle slte

Ilccnco

EX

iSling kiSSing gate (illustrative symbol riot to scale)

Proposed stile (i1fustratíve symbol not to scale)

Proposed future &toek leriC

Ílig where grazing rneiiagem

aot applie&, w

ithgaled access

Rirvifion

..~o.t.dl"Q

fiwlunl

c_ VirL

g.Qr

,- Yanley Landflll Site

,.., The P

roposed Restoration M

asterplan

YA

940.Dlv5

.~.!r'kiU

~ A

ISc.aIe~ Plan 1:1500

LM

.RB

February 2013

_...,.,..,....."..__ ;iir__.,,,,,___~our.i.....-~!nl4O

C.l'O

o.l__~¡Y.C

lf'o~l-a~"...eII.,....~~O

iol:ro!.M_"'\;oO

~(JI'I.""""',

~., bright & associates

. landscape and environmental consultants

r... t",,,H;i.:$'¡ C

_1'Il\Wfi O

o"......ei.lrf ~'-"' S"~"t:'üPO

'~I66Z 7n""'V

'....iir,gtiI'llu,xJ3t~ooul-.Figure 3

63

ecology - wordpress.com · 2014. 6. 6. · table of contents chapter 1. figure 1: statutory sites...

Documents