Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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 Poor
~ 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
- Hedge: Species Poor
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:
~ Native Spedes Rich
- Hedge: Species Poor
\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:
~ Native Spedes Rich
- Hedge: Species Poor
\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
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1,0 I 2 June 2014 18
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 20
. 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
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 21
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 22
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 23
10. Access Agreement Documentationfor Burnell Land
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 24
'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...,.. ...... ... ...... ......
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1,0 I 2 June 2014 25
1o
o ~
~ ., ~ii. !iilUbi h
--L~-
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 26
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....... ............... ...
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 27
~\
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
SOUTH BRISTOL LINKLAND ENTRY FOR SURVEY WORKREF37
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:,: ~ ':,; :'...,.,
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 29
¡;¡
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
SOUTH BRISTOL LINKLAND ENTRY FOR SURVEY WORKREF40
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 ... ... ......... ... ,.. .........
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1,0 I 2 June 2014 31
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 34
11. Extracts from Defra Biodiversity
Offsetting Paper
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 35
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:
PB 13745
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 37
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 38
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1,0 I 2 June 2014 39
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 40
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 42
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 43
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 44
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 45
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 46
12. Extracts from Translocation Practice
Guidance
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 47
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~
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 48
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 49
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 50
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1,0 I 2 June 2014 51
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 52
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1,0 1 2 June 2014 53
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 54
13. Extracts from The Works on CommonLand (Exemptions) (England) Order2007
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 55
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 56
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.
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 57
14. Extracts from Standing Advice for
Ancient Woodland and Veteran Trees
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 1 2 June 2014 58
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1,0 I 2 June 2014 59
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1,0 1 2 June 2014 60
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
Atkins NSC/6/2 I Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 61
15. Figure 7: Yanley Quarry Site:
Proposed Restoration Masterplan
Atkins NSC/6/2 1 Version 1.0 I 2 June 2014 62
-'--~----~-_....- 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