As NCC have refused to release the results of their bat surveys in the affected woods, the Wensum Woodlanders have carried out their own surveys, with the help of the British Trust for Ornithology and the UEA. These show that these woodlands are home to many species of bats including the protected Barbastelle.
August Bat Survey results have just been analysed, the results are here....
August Bat Survey results have just been analysed, the results are here....
Here is the latest NCC statement..... (or rather what they meant to say ! )
Late last year, the County Council published a shortlist of four potential road options for the Norwich Western Link and carried out a public consultation on these options. The public wanted Option D but we have recommended Option C, a new 3.9 mile dual carriageway road, as the best overall solution and preferred route for the Norwich Western Link. We have taken NO ACCOUNT of the very expensive surveys and route recommendations that we paid Kier/Mouchel and WSP for, when Route 'C' did not exist. The Council’s Cabinet met on Monday 15 July to discuss the contents of the report, and despite all the evidence and protests, decided to go ahead with this environmental disaster.
Option C would not link directly from the roundabout at the western end of Broadland Northway instead it will start around 350 metres further along the A1067 Fakenham Road before turning in a south-westerly direction via yet another new roundabout. The road will cross the River Wensum on a huge 4 lane viaduct before swerving to the West and destroying some privately owned woodlands and wildlife habitats. It will then swerve southwards through more woodland and continue at or near ground level for the remainder of its length. It would link to the A47 via a new junction at Wood Lane (B1535), the other side of Honingham! Please see the attached maps which shows the route.
We have recommended Option C as the preferred route despite the protests and other route options that have been suggested, as it has a 'high cost-to-benefit ratio', (whatever that means....its certainly high cost!) , but that has devastating environmental impacts, and received less support through our recent public consultation.
We should be committed to creating this road in an environmentally responsible way and are aiming to achieve ‘biodiversity net gain’ (another ludicrous and meaningless NCC statement) by, for example, creating new habitats and including features such as green bridges, these unfortunately will do little for the displaced or dead wildlife, the decimated trees or the health of our planet. One of the Norwich Western Link’s project objectives is to encourage people to shift the way they travel to use more sustainable forms of transport, such as walking, cycling and public transport, though We are not quite sure how creating a four lane highway helps with this.
It’s important to say that at this stage the preferred route is only a recommendation by 9 Conservative Norfolk County Councillors in the Cabinet.
please let them have your views by emailing Chris Fernandez, Norwichwesternlink@norfolk.gov.uk
Late last year, the County Council published a shortlist of four potential road options for the Norwich Western Link and carried out a public consultation on these options. The public wanted Option D but we have recommended Option C, a new 3.9 mile dual carriageway road, as the best overall solution and preferred route for the Norwich Western Link. We have taken NO ACCOUNT of the very expensive surveys and route recommendations that we paid Kier/Mouchel and WSP for, when Route 'C' did not exist. The Council’s Cabinet met on Monday 15 July to discuss the contents of the report, and despite all the evidence and protests, decided to go ahead with this environmental disaster.
Option C would not link directly from the roundabout at the western end of Broadland Northway instead it will start around 350 metres further along the A1067 Fakenham Road before turning in a south-westerly direction via yet another new roundabout. The road will cross the River Wensum on a huge 4 lane viaduct before swerving to the West and destroying some privately owned woodlands and wildlife habitats. It will then swerve southwards through more woodland and continue at or near ground level for the remainder of its length. It would link to the A47 via a new junction at Wood Lane (B1535), the other side of Honingham! Please see the attached maps which shows the route.
We have recommended Option C as the preferred route despite the protests and other route options that have been suggested, as it has a 'high cost-to-benefit ratio', (whatever that means....its certainly high cost!) , but that has devastating environmental impacts, and received less support through our recent public consultation.
We should be committed to creating this road in an environmentally responsible way and are aiming to achieve ‘biodiversity net gain’ (another ludicrous and meaningless NCC statement) by, for example, creating new habitats and including features such as green bridges, these unfortunately will do little for the displaced or dead wildlife, the decimated trees or the health of our planet. One of the Norwich Western Link’s project objectives is to encourage people to shift the way they travel to use more sustainable forms of transport, such as walking, cycling and public transport, though We are not quite sure how creating a four lane highway helps with this.
It’s important to say that at this stage the preferred route is only a recommendation by 9 Conservative Norfolk County Councillors in the Cabinet.
please let them have your views by emailing Chris Fernandez, Norwichwesternlink@norfolk.gov.uk
Unfortunately Ringland Parish Council promoted Route 'C' , despite the destruction of their nearby woodlands, with a FOUR LANE 70MPH ROAD AND VIADUCT.
This scheme is being promoted as a LINK road (not a NDR extension or bypass) IF this flawed project goes ahead, does it HAVE to be with a dual carriageway road and viaduct, with the enormous increases in cost, ongoing maintenance, noise and pollution that this will bring?
