Initial Consultation document

Support

Representation ID: 92109

Received: 10/08/2018

Respondent: Natural England

Agree that there would need to be detailed investigations regarding potential impacts on the River Nar SSSI.

Comment

Representation ID: 92111

Received: 10/08/2018

Respondent: Natural England

In the text it states:"The potential exists for impacts from mineral extraction at MIN 40, if uncontrolled. An assessment of potential hydrogeological impacts from dewatering, together with appropriate mitigation would be required as part of any planning application." Yet in the Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) the site has been screened out (Task 1 Table p30). Please refer to our comments in general about the HRA.

Annex 1: Natural England's comments on the Draft Habitats Regulations Assessment of the M&WLPR, dated May 2018

A recent judgment from the Court of Justice of the European Union (Case C-323/17 People Over Wind v Coillte Teoranta) has provided authoritative interpretation relating to the use of mitigation measures at the screening stage of a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA). The judgment concluded that it is not appropriate, at the screening stage, to take account of measures intended to avoid or reduce the harmful effects of the plan or project on a European site. However, when determining whether the plan or project will have an adverse effect on the integrity of the European site at appropriate assessment, a competent authority may take account of those avoidance and mitigation measures.
The Local Planning Authority, as competent authority for the Minerals and Waste Local Plan, should consider this judgment when undertaking the HRA screening under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 and may wish to take its own legal advice on the implications of the judgment.
This means that for any sites where avoidance and mitigation measures have been identified to protect designated Natura 2000 sites such as Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), Special Areas of Protection (SPAs) or Ramsar sites, the sites should not be screened out for likely significant effect but carried forward to Appropriate Assessment, at which point any mitigation measures, eg not de-watering, conditions to control dust or lighting etc, can be assessed in detail and taken into account.
Our specific comments on various individual allocations included in the initial consultation are intended to reflect this ruling. That is, where measures have been identified specifically to protect a Natura 2000 site, then these allocations should be screened in to Appropriate Assessment. At this stage the effectiveness of any proposed avoidance and mitigation measures and all the evidence should be examined to reach a conclusion of likely significant effect, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, and to ascertain whether an adverse effect on the integrity of the site can be ruled out.
Note that any proposal which may affect a Natura 2000 designated site must go through a project level HRA in addition to this strategic plan-level HRA. This should be identified for each relevant allocation and reflected in the policy wording, including what avoidance and mitigation measures would be necessary. This can be at a 'high' level, e.g. work would take place outside the bird breeding season to avoid disturbance to nesting birds. However, more detail would be expected in the HRA at planning application stage.
The future conclusions and recommendations of the HRA will need to be incorporated into later revisions of the Sustainability Appraisal (SA) report, and be reflected in the allocations and policies of the M&WLPR.

Support

Representation ID: 92113

Received: 13/08/2018

Respondent: Natural England

We welcome the specific policy for this site which seeks to safeguard designated sites.

Comment

Representation ID: 92114

Received: 13/08/2018

Respondent: Natural England

Agree with the conclusions regarding the designated sites.

Support

Representation ID: 92115

Received: 13/08/2018

Respondent: Natural England

Agree.

Comment

Representation ID: 92116

Received: 13/08/2018

Respondent: Natural England

Given the potential for impacts identified on the River Nar, it would be helpful to include a specific requirement for these to be considered at the planning application stage.

Support

Representation ID: 92117

Received: 13/08/2018

Respondent: Natural England

Please also refer to our comments on protected landscapes in our letter of 13 August 2018. We note that this is proposal, although set within the AONB, is an extension to an existing quarry and is well screened. We support the proposal to deliver a high quality restoration scheme that will deliver landscape, biodiversity, geodiversity and amenity benefits. A range of organisations should be consulted and involved when the restoration proposals are drawn up to deliver maximum benefits.

Protected landscapes
Several allocations are either within protected landscapes or lie close to their boundaries or 'settings' which means that the highest sensitivity must be afforded to the landscape. It would be advisable to include a specific policy for protected landscapes within the Plan to reflect their protection as both the Norfolk Coast AONB and The Broads, which has the equivalent status of a national park, mat be impacted by minerals development. Any proposal which may affect a protected landscape or its setting should be subject at application stage to a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) for all stages of the operation.
The LVIA should consider how a proposal may impact the statutory purposes for which a protected landscape is designated, including impacts on landscape character and tranquillity, together with full details of mitigation and restoration. All restoration measures proposed will need to be in keeping with the local landscape character. Consideration should be given to each landscape character's sensitivity and its capacity to accommodate the proposed development. The requirement for a LVIA and mitigation measures should be identified in the Plan for each relevant allocation.
Further information needs to be provided for these allocations which demonstrates that impacts to protected landscape features have been avoided where possible, and mitigation measures put in place for those impacts which cannot be avoided, and a programme of monitoring agreed to ensure the measures are effective. The views of the relevant organisation for each protected landscape need to be taken into account fully on these proposed allocations.

Comment

Representation ID: 92119

Received: 13/08/2018

Respondent: Natural England

The site is in close proximity to North Walsham, a settlement that is likely to increase in size in future years. There is limited accessible greenspace on this side of the town currently. There is an opportunity for the site restoration to include proposals to help address this.

Comment

Representation ID: 92121

Received: 13/08/2018

Respondent: Natural England

Please refer to our comments on protected landscapes in our letter of 13 August 2018.

Protected landscapes
Several allocations are either within protected landscapes or lie close to their boundaries or 'settings' which means that the highest sensitivity must be afforded to the landscape. It would be advisable to include a specific policy for protected landscapes within the Plan to reflect their protection as both the Norfolk Coast AONB and The Broads, which has the equivalent status of a national park, mat be impacted by minerals development. Any proposal which may affect a protected landscape or its setting should be subject at application stage to a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) for all stages of the operation.

The LVIA should consider how a proposal may impact the statutory purposes for which a protected landscape is designated, including impacts on landscape character and tranquillity, together with full details of mitigation and restoration. All restoration measures proposed will need to be in keeping with the local landscape character. Consideration should be given to each landscape character's sensitivity and its capacity to accommodate the proposed development. The requirement for a LVIA and mitigation measures should be identified in the Plan for each relevant allocation.

Further information needs to be provided for these allocations which demonstrates that impacts to protected landscape features have been avoided where possible, and mitigation measures put in place for those impacts which cannot be avoided, and a programme of monitoring agreed to ensure the measures are effective. The views of the relevant organisation for each protected landscape need to be taken into account fully on these proposed allocations.

Object

Representation ID: 92122

Received: 13/08/2018

Respondent: Natural England

Agree due the landscape impacts on the Broads. Potential for adverse impacts on SSSI.

Protected landscapes
Several allocations are either within protected landscapes or lie close to their boundaries or 'settings' which means that the highest sensitivity must be afforded to the landscape. It would be advisable to include a specific policy for protected landscapes within the Plan to reflect their protection as both the Norfolk Coast AONB and The Broads, which has the equivalent status of a national park, mat be impacted by minerals development. Any proposal which may affect a protected landscape or its setting should be subject at application stage to a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) for all stages of the operation.
The LVIA should consider how a proposal may impact the statutory purposes for which a protected landscape is designated, including impacts on landscape character and tranquillity, together with full details of mitigation and restoration. All restoration measures proposed will need to be in keeping with the local landscape character. Consideration should be given to each landscape character's sensitivity and its capacity to accommodate the proposed development. The requirement for a LVIA and mitigation measures should be identified in the Plan for each relevant allocation.
Further information needs to be provided for these allocations which demonstrates that impacts to protected landscape features have been avoided where possible, and mitigation measures put in place for those impacts which cannot be avoided, and a programme of monitoring agreed to ensure the measures are effective. The views of the relevant organisation for each protected landscape need to be taken into account fully on these proposed allocations.

Designated sites
The assessment of a proposal on nearby designated sites, including SSSIs, must include a consideration of likely changes to hydrology and increased disturbance of sensitive species from noise, lighting, vibration etc. Suitable mitigation might include avoidance of the breeding season, provision of screening etc. The impact assessment should provide evidence that there will be no adverse effects on the nationally and internationally designated features from dust blow, changes to hydrology etc. The requirement to include this information at application stage should be made clear in each relevant allocation.