CALA Homes (Midlands) Ltd.

Kidderminster Road, Hagley, Worcestershire Ecological Appraisal July 2012

FPCR Environment and Design Ltd Registered Office: Lockington Hall, Lockington, Derby DE74 2RH Company No. 07128076. [T] 01509 672772 [F] 01509 674565 [E] [email protected] [W] www.fpcr.co.uk This report is the property of FPCR Environment and Design Ltd and is issued on the condition it is not reproduced, retained or disclosed to any unauthorised person, either wholly or in part without the written consent of FPCR Environment and Design Ltd. Ordnance Survey material is used with permission of The Controller of HMSO, Crown copyright 100018896.

Rev

Issue Status

Prepared / Date

Approved/Date

-

Draft 1

HS/ 14.09.2011

KG / 18.10.11

Draft 2

KG / 10.07.12

Ecological Appraisal

fpcr

CONTENTS 1.0

INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 2

2.0

METHODOLOGY............................................................................................................. 3

3.0

RESULTS ........................................................................................................................ 7

4.0

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................13

TABLES Table 1: Hedgerow Species Composition and HEGS Grades

FIGURES Figure 1: Location Plan Figure 2: Phase 1 Habitat Plan Figure 3: Badger Location Pan

APPENDICES Appendix 1: Botanical Species List Appendix 2: Hedgerow Survey Data

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

1

Ecological Appraisal

fpcr

1.0

INTRODUCTION

1.1

The following report has been prepared by FPCR Environment & Design Ltd on behalf of CALA Homes (Midlands) Ltd.. This report details the results of an Ecological Appraisal undertaken on a site adjacent to Kidderminster Road, Hagley, Worcestershire and updates the previously submitted ecological assessment against the revised development proposals for the site. The th survey was undertaken on 12 August 2011 and comprised an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey including initial observations of any suitable habitats for or evidence of protected species. The survey work completed by FPCR in August 2011 updated survey work completed by the Worcestershire Wildlife Consultancy in May 2011. Site Location and Context

1.2

The site is approximately 35ha in area and is located on the eastern edge of West Hagley, centred on grid reference SO 909 802. The surrounding land use is composed mainly of residential development to the north, west and south-west, with agricultural land to the south and east. The site is bounded to the north by Kidderminster Road, A456 and to the east by Stourbridge Road, A491 (Figure 1).

1.3

The site comprises a variety of habitats, bounded by plantation woodland, hedgerows and the Gallows Brook to the south east of the site. The dominant habitat was species poor semiimproved grassland which is cut for silage or hay and has been grazed. Other habitat identified in the site included plantation woodland, tall ruderal vegetation, scrub and mature trees on the site boundary. The Gallows Brook is situated adjacent to the south western boundary of the site. The land slopes gently to the south and to the west and a fairly steep bank is present separating the southern most field. No water bodies are present within the site and no known ponds are located within 500m of the site. Development Proposals

1.4

The survey was commissioned to identify potential ecological constraints to the development of 175 residential houses / apartments and an area of B1 office units with associated infrastructure. Recommendations for habitat enhancements and compensation to ensure compliance with local and national planning policy are also provided in the following report.

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

2

Ecological Appraisal

2.0

fpcr

METHODOLOGY Desk Study

2.1

As part of the initial ecological appraisal completed by the Worcestershire Wildlife Consultancy in May 2011 a consultation exercise was completed with the Worcestershire Biological Records Centre for records of protected and notable species within 2Km of the proposed development area. The information provided by the Worcestershire Biological Records Centre is reviewed in the following document.

2.2

Further inspection of colour 1:25000 OS base maps (www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk) and aerial photographs from Google Earth (www.maps.google.co.uk) was also completed as part of this assessment in order to provide additional context and identify any features of potential importance for nature conservation in the wider countryside.

2.3

The Multi Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) website was also searched for the location of statutory of importance for nature conservation. The potential zone of zones of influence searches are as follows:  5km around the application area for sites of International Importance (e.g. Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), Special Protection Areas (SPAs), Ramsar sites).  2km around the application area for sites of National or Regional Importance (e.g. Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and species records (e.g.: protected, UK BAP or notable species).  1km around the application site for sites of County Importance (e.g. Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) / Local Wildlife Sites (LWS). Flora

2.4

The survey was undertaken in May 2011 (by Worcestershire Wildlife Consultancy) and then updated in August 2011 using the standard Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Methodology (JNCC, 2006), as recommended by Natural England, to identify specific habitats and features of ecological interest. Habitats were marked on a base plan and where appropriate, target notes were made. An inspection of the site for the presence of any invasive weed species was also carried out. Features such as trees were considered with regard to their ecological value and potential to provide suitable habitats for protected species. The survey was undertaken within the optimal survey period (May to September), and sufficient information was gathered to enable classification of habitats and identify any features of interest for the purposes of this assessment. Whilst the plant species lists obtained should not be regarded as exhaustive, sufficient information was obtained to determine broad habitat types.

2.5

Hedgerows were surveyed individually using the Hedgerow Evaluation and Grading System (HEGS) after Clements and Toft (1993) to enable identification and evaluation of hedgerows of nature conservation importance within the site. Hedgerows were graded on a scale of 1-4, within which grades 1 and 2 are generally considered to be of nature conservation priority: 1= high to very high value 2 = moderately high to high value

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

3

Ecological Appraisal

fpcr

3 = moderate value 4 = low value. 2.6

Hedgerows were also considered against the Hedgerow Regulations 1997 Wildlife and Landscape criteria, to identify any hedgerows, which would be classified as “important” for nature conservation under this part of the act. Under this methodology, hedgerows are considered according to the average number of woody species per 100m of hedgerow. Additional features which enhance hedgerows, when found in association with the hedge, such as mature trees, ditches and hedge banks are also considered.

2.7

It should be noted that hedgerows may also qualify as Important under the Archaeological criteria of this Act, which is beyond the scope of this assessment. Mature Trees

2.8

An independent arboricultural assessment of mature trees within the site was completed by the Ruskins Group Consultancy, the results of this survey are reported separately in the report entitled ‘Arboricultural Impacts Assessment and Tree Condition Survey for the Land at Kidderminster Road, Hagley. Ruskins Group Consultancy. October 2011’. This appraisal also assessed mature trees to confirm the presence / absence of Veteran trees within the site against the standard assessment methodology supported by Natural England. Fauna

2.9

During the survey of the site, observations, signs of or suitable habitat for any species protected under Part I of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), the Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2010 and the Protection of Badgers Act 1992. Consideration was also given to the existence and use of the site by other notable fauna such as UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP), Local BAP (Worcestershire Biodiversity Action Plan) or Red Data Book (RDB) species. Badger

2.10

During walkover survey, all hedgerows, other suitable habitats within the development boundary and accessible land within 30m were searched for evidence of badger activity. Methodology employed followed that outlined by Harris, Creswell and Jefferies (1991). Bats Buildings

2.11

A licensed bat worker from FPCR completed internal / external surveys of all of the buildings situated within the site (Licence Reference Number: 20110265). External aspects of the buildings were examined to identify potential access points and roost sites. Structural features were recorded and suitable access points such as small gaps under eaves/soffit boards, raised or missing ridge tiles, gaps through degraded mortar and gaps at gable ends were sought. Where potential access points or roost sites were identified evidence of current or previous usage was sought. Such evidence includes staining within the features and the presence of urine staining or bat droppings. Confirmation that access points had not recently been used by bats includes

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

4

Ecological Appraisal

fpcr

presence of heavy cob-webbing and general detritus within features. Binoculars were used to aid the surveys. 2.12

Internal inspections of all building and any present roof voids were carried out to identify any evidence of previous or present occupation by bats. Such evidence includes the presence of live or dead bats, droppings, urine staining, the conspicuous absence of cobwebs and grease /scratch marks on timbers.

2.13

These surveys were completed in August 2011 following a period of suitable weather to maximise the recording of evidence of occupation. Mature Trees

2.14

An assessment was made of trees potentially affected by the development within the site by a licensed bat worker from FPCR to assess their potential to support roosting bats to enable recommendations with respect to the proposed works. Trees were examined in August 2011 from ground level, with the aid of binoculars for features that could provide suitable roosting opportunities including cracks, cavities, woodpecker/rot holes, fissures or missing limbs, and for evidence of use by roosting bats such as staining or the presence of bat droppings. Dense ivy cover was also noted when present as this can obscure the aforementioned features. Dormice

2.15

Habitats within the proposed development site were assessed for the suitability to support dormice. The assessment included recording suitable features such as area of dense scrub / woodland with suitable food resources throughout the year. Such food resource including fruit bearing vegetation including bramble and area of hazel. Where suitable habitat was identified the overall area of the habitat was assessed as to the viability of the area to support dormice and connectivity to the wider environment. Great crested newts

2.16

Terrestrial habitats within the site were assessed for their suitability to provide suitable areas of shelter or rest for terrestrial great crested newts. Such areas were considered to comprise areas of tussock grassland and areas of dumped material include vegetation and other waste items. Connectivity to the wider environment and the location of traditional field pond within 500m of the proposed development was also assessed through analysis of colour 1:25000 OS base maps (www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk) and aerial photographs from Google Earth (www.maps.google.co.uk). Reptiles

2.17

Habitats present were considered for their potential suitability for reptiles. Potentially suitable habitats include features which provide opportunities for reptiles to bask, forage and/or hibernate and include areas of varied vegetation structure, in sheltered locations with sunny aspects and good connectivity to other suitable reptile habitats.

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

5

Ecological Appraisal

fpcr

Water vole and Otter 2.18

The Gallow Brook adjacent to the southern site boundary was assessed for evidence of occupation by water vole and otter. Such evidence includes:  Prints,  Latrines or spraints,  Holes visible in the banks typical of the species,  Grazed ‘lawns’ along aquatic margins,  Feeding stations,  Holts. Other

2.19

Any sightings, evidence of or suitable habitats for other protected fauna, local BAP or otherwise notable species including breeding birds were recorded during the site visit.

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

6

Ecological Appraisal

3.0

fpcr

RESULTS Desk Study Statutory Designations

3.1

No international sites of conservation importance were identified within a 5 km radius of the site.

3.2

The only statutory site of Nature Conservation interest identified within 2Km of the proposed development site was the Worcester Lane, Pedmore (Local Nature Reserve). This site is situated approximately 1.3Km to the north of the site and is isolated from the site by significant infrastructure roads and existing areas of the built environment. Non-statutory Designations

3.3

No non-statutory local wildlife sites (LWS) lie within 1km of the site. Protected/Notable Species

3.4

The NBN gateway confirmed post-1990 records of great crested newt Triturus cristatus, grass snake Natrix natrix, slow-worm Anguis fragilis, brown hare Lepus europaeus, common pipstrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus, and European water-vole Arvicola amphibius within 10km of the site. European badger Meles meles has been recorded within 2km of the site, between 1997 and 2010. No other recent records of protected species were identified on the NBN gateway.

3.5

The biological data search from Worcestershire Biological Records Centre yielded several records of protected and notable species within a 2km radius of the site. These consist of badger, brown hare, common toad Bufo bufo, common pipistrelle and two unidentified species of bat. None of these records are specific to this site. Site Description

3.6

Habitats on site comprised plantation woodland, species poor semi-improved grassland, tall ruderal vegetation, scattered scrub and trees bounded partially by hedgerows and associated tree standards. The Gallows Brook flows to the south of the site, however there are no water bodies within the site, or within 500m of the site.

3.7

No non-native, invasive weeds such as Japanese knotweed or giant hogweed were recorded within the site. Habitats/Flora

3.8

The locations of the habitats described below are illustrated in Figure 2 - Phase 1 Habitat Plan. Comprehensive species lists are detailed in Appendix 1. Plantation Woodland Conifer Plantation

3.9

The habitat running along the northern and eastern boundaries of the site comprised a conifer plantation consisting of Corsican pine Pinus nigra. There is no understorey, which is fairly usual

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

7

Ecological Appraisal

fpcr

under dense conifer plantations due to shade and the build up of fallen needles. Along the northern boundary, the pines are interspersed with yews Taxus baccata. Broad-leaved Plantation 3.10

Towards the eastern end of the site, the conifer plantation gives way to broad-leaved plantation with cherry Prunus avium and sweet chestnut Castanea sativa.

3.11

Within the centre of the site, another strip of broad-leaved woodland stands. This is approximately 15-20 years old, consisting of pedunculate oak Quercus robur, red oak Quercus rubra, cherry, ash Fraxinus excelsior, rowan Sorbus aucuparia and a single Swedish whitebeam Sorbus hybrida. The understorey is sparse and consists of the remains from the improved grassland in which the trees have been planted. There are a large number of cherry saplings growing from suckers. Scattered Scrub

3.12

Numerous stands of scrub are present within the unmanaged small field to the south of the site. Large stands of bramble Rubus fruticosus are apparent along the steep slope between the northern and southern fields. Scattered scrub was also recorded along the Brook and included hawthorn Crataegous monogyna, ash and elder Sambucus nigra. Species-poor semi-improved Grassland

3.13

The largest fields, to the west and east of the site comprise species-poor semi-improved grassland. This is dominated by perennial rye-grass Lolium perenne, rough meadow-grass Poa trivialis and meadow brome Bromus commutatus with occasional cock’s-foot Dactylis glomerata. There is a low diversity of flowering herbs with frequent creeping thistle Cirsium arvense, creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens, meadow buttercup Ranunculus acris and occasional cow parsley Anthriscus sylvestris and curled dock Rumex crispus recorded. Single specimens of common sorrel Rumex acetosa and pignut Conopodium majus were observed. There was clear evidence that these fields had been cut for hay or silage and has been grazed in the recent past.

3.14

To the south west of the site a further area of species poor semi-improved grassland with a slightly richer composition was identified. Meadow foxtail Alopecurus pratensis, Yorkshire fog Holcus lanatus, creeping bent Agrostis stolonifera and white clover Trifolium repens occur along with occasional sheep’s sorrel Rumex acetosella and dove’s-foot crane’s-bill Geranium molle and abundant dandelions Taraxacum agg. The south-western corner of this field is low-lying and slightly wetter and consequently frequent soft rush Juncus effusus is found.

3.15

A further field in the south eastern aspect of the site also comprised species poor semi-improved grassland previously grazed by horses. The sward was similar to that of the northern fields albeit with a slightly richer composition. Meadow foxtail Alopecurus pratensis, Yorkshire fog Holcus lanatus, creeping bent Agrostis stolonifera and white clover Trifolium repens occur along with occasional sheep’s sorrel Rumex acetosella and dove’s-foot crane’s-bill Geranium molle and abundant dandelions Taraxacum agg..

3.16

The south-western corner of this field is low-lying and slightly wetter and consequently frequent soft rush Juncus effusus is found. Patches of taller ruderal vegetation dominate the western area of the field. Further grass species included occasional soft-brome Bromus hordeaceus and red fescue Festuca rubra. Areas of disturbance are apparent with species such as shepherd’s-purse

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

8

fpcr

Ecological Appraisal

Capsella bursa-pastoris, pineappleweed Matricaria discoidea and knotgrass Polygonum sp. present. Ruderal vegetation 3.17

The southern boundary of the western field consists of a mixture of post and wire fencing surrounded by tall herb, dominated by common nettle Urtica dioica and bramble.

3.18

Patches of tall herb were present with the southern-most field. These were dominated by common nettle, common ragwort Senecio jacobaea and creeping thistle. A small patch of deadly nightshade Atropa belladonna was also present beneath a large mature oak tree to the north of the field. A steep bank was present within the northern aspect of this field which was dominated by bracken Pteridium aquilinum and bramble. Running Water

3.19

Gallows Brook runs along the southern boundary of the site. At the time of survey, this brook was very shallow and barely flowing. The cross section of the brook suggests the Brook is shallow through all seasons. Hedgerows

3.20

Mixed species mature hedgerows border the west, north and east boundaries of the site (hedgerows H1-H2, Figure 2). Species present and HEGS grades are provided in Table 1 below. Field data used to determine important hedgerows (Hedgerow Regulations 1997) are provided in Appendix 2. Table 1– Hedgerow Species Composition and HEGS Grades Hedge

3.21

Length Species (m)

HEGS Grade

Woody Important Contains Species Under >80% /100m Habitat Native Regs Species

H1

200

Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, elder Sambucus nigra, hazel Corylus avellana, crack-willow Salix fragilis, goat willow Salix caprea, garden privet Ligustrum ovalifolium., ash Fraxinus excelsior, Scots pine Pinus sylvestris

2+

4-5

N

Y

H2

850

Holly Ilex aquifolium, hawthorn, ash, sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus, pedunculate oak Quercus robur.

-2

4

N

Y

Hedgerows H1 and H2 have HEGS grades of 2 or more, indicating moderate-high (H2) and high (H1) nature conservation value. These hedgerows contain more than 80% native woody species and are therefore UK BAP priority habitats for conservation. Trees

3.22

One mature oak (T1) located to the east of the eastern shelter belt was identified with characteristics feature of a Veteran Tree. No further Veteran trees were identified during the arboricultural assessment.

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

9

Ecological Appraisal

fpcr

Fauna Badger 3.23

At the time of survey six badger setts were identified. The main sett (S1) was located to the south east of the central area of broadleaf plantation on the steep embankment to the south of the site. This sett comprised 13 active holes with evidence of activity including fresh bedding at sett entrance, fresh digging, fresh latrines and well worn pathways. Sett (S2) is situated outside the western site boundary. This sett was identified as a single hole outlier with fresh evidence of occupation which comprised the presence of fresh bedding at the entrance to the sett.

3.24

The setts referenced S3 – S6 were all identified on the western boundary of the central area of broadleaf plantation. At the time of survey no evidence of recent occupation including fresh bedding, fresh digging or prints was identified. Consequently, at the time of survey these setts were identified as disused.

3.25

Over the survey fresh latrine sites and pathways were identified on the southern and west boundaries of the site. Snuffle holes were also identified adjacent to these boundaries and pathways to the woodland adjacent to the south west boundary was confirmed. No significant evidence of foraging was identified centrally within the large area of species poor semi-improved grassland affected by the proposed development. Bats Buildings

3.26

The buildings identified within the site were all temporary single storey structures located to the south east of the site. The buildings were constructed all constructed from single skinned wooden panels or corrugated metal sheets and as such do not provide suitable roosting habitat for bats. Over the survey no evidence of internal or external evidence of occupation was identified. Mature Trees

3.27

Mature trees potentially affected by the proposed development are restricted to the area of the coniferous plantation to the north east of the site and the area of broadleaved woodland which is situated centrally within the site. The mature trees in these area of the site were of a uniformed age is initial inspection did not identified any significant features which would provide suitable roost sites for bats.

3.28

Some limited suitability for bat roosts was identified associated with the mature trees on the northern boundary of the proposed development area. These trees are retained with the final development design. Foraging

3.29

The dominant habitat across the proposed development area was species poor semi-improved grassland. This open habitat will not provide a significant foraging resource for the local bat population.

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

10

Ecological Appraisal

3.30

fpcr

The boundary habitat and the edge of the broadleaved woodland situated centrally within the site will provide suitable foraging for the local population. Birds

3.31

The publication Birds of Conservation Concern (BoCC) (Eaton et al 2009) lists the status of birds in the UK. The list is divided into three sections:  Red list species are those that are Globally Threatened according to IUCN criteria; those whose population has declined rapidly (50% or more) in recent years; and those that have declined historically and not shown a substantial recent recovery.  Amber list species are those with an unfavourable conservation status in Europe; those with a population or range that has declined moderately (between 25% and 49%) in recent years; those whose population has declined historically but made a substantial recent recovery; rare breeders; and those with internationally important or localised populations.  Green list species fulfil none of the above criteria.

3.32

Habitats within the site are typical of the wider area. Hedgerows and trees provide potential nesting and feeding opportunities for a range of farmland and urban edge birds including species of conservation concern such as yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella, starling Sturnus vulgaris, dunnock Prunella modularis and house sparrow Passer domesticus. Dormice

3.33

Habitats within the site do not provide suitable foraging area for dormice and there is no suitable connectivity to other suitable habitats for dormice within the wider environment. Great Crested Newts

3.34

Field perimeter hedgerows and areas of plantation within the site provide some suitable cover for great crested newts during their terrestrial phase. The remainder of the site generally provides sub-optimal habitat for this species in the form of intensively grassland. There are no water bodies within the site and no known ponds within a 500m radius of the site. Reptiles

3.35

The grassland habitat within the site is cut for hay or silage and is grazed. Consequently, the majority of the grassland habitat affected by the proposed development did not provide a suitable mosaic structure to be by common species of reptiles. The tall ruderal habitats on the south facing embankments were dense and provided heavy shading of the ground layer. Therefore, the habitats on these embankment did on the southern boundary of the site did not provide suitable habitats for common species of reptiles. Water vole & Otter

3.36

No evidence of occupation by water vole or otter was identified along the section of the Gallow Brook which is adjacent to the south eastern boundary of the site.

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

11

Ecological Appraisal

fpcr

Survey Limitations 3.37

The quality of field data will be affected by the season of the survey, with some plant species only being evident or identifiable at certain seasons. The initial site assessment was completed during the ideal habitat survey period, i.e. during the plant growing season (April-September inclusive), therefore there were no survey timing limitations to the quality of the Phase 1 survey data.

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

12

Ecological Appraisal

4.0

fpcr

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Proposals

4.1

The survey was commissioned to identify potential ecological constraints to the development of 175 residential houses / apartments and an area of B1 office units with associated infrastructure. To facilitate re-development of the site an area of the coniferous plantation to the north east of the site will be lost to construction of the access road and an area of the central broadleaved plantation will be loss for construction of new residential units. Desk study Statutory designations

4.2

The only statutory designated site identified within 2Km of the site was the Local Nature Reserve (Worcester Road, Pedmore). This site is approximately 1.3Km to the north and is isolated by significant infrastructure roads and existing areas of the building environment. Therefore, development of the assessment site is unlikely to result in negative impacts to the conservation value of this area. Non-statutory designations

4.3

The site is not covered by any non-statutory designation for nature conservation and no local wildlife site have been identified within 2Km of the site. Therefore, the presence of local wildlife sites has not been identified as a statutory ecological constraint to the proposed development. Habitats

4.4

The degree to which habitats receive consideration within the planning system relies on a number of mechanisms, including:  Inclusion within specific policy (e.g. veteran trees, ancient woodland and linear habitats in Planning Policy Statement 9 (PPS9), or non-statutory site designation),  Identification as a habitat of principal importance for biodiversity under Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (NERC) 2006 and consequently identification as a Priority Habitat within the UK or local Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP).

4.5

The site was dominated by species semi-improved grassland of low ecological value and plantation woodland, bounded by mature, native mixed hedgerows. The coarse grassland and ruderal vegetation present was considered to be of some limited value to wildife within the local area. Tree and hedgerow habitats provided a number of commuting routes and nesting and foraging opportunities for wildlife.

4.6

Hedgerows qualify as UK BAP priority habitats for conservation and hedgerows H1 and H2 are considered to be of moderate-high and high nature conservation value according to their HEGS grades. The majority of these hedgerows have been retained in the overall development design. There will be the loss of small section of these hedgerows through the construction of access roads into the site. The loss of these small lengths of hedgerows has not been identified as a statutory ecological constraint to the development and the provision of appropriate native species planting in the overall landscaping scheme will compensate for any such losses.

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

13

Ecological Appraisal

4.7

fpcr

To maintain the conservation value of retained hedgerows suitable management techniques should be employed following development and the hedgerows should be gapped up where necessary using native species planting. Management techniques employed should comprise:  Top out hedgerow to a height of between 1.5 and 2m to suit circumstances, and a width of at least 3m, retaining hedgerow trees.  Prune any diseased or rotten wood (including the removal of main stems and limbs) back to sound wood.  Remove all stems and limbs which are unsafe or are in danger of falling or breaking during gales.  Remove all cut material from the site. Do not site burn.  Prune annually in late November (after the leaves have started to drop). Part cut on rotation basis – divide into 3 sections and cut each section every 3 years on rotation.  Trees such as silver birch and pedunculate oak within the hedgerow will be allowed to mature into standard trees to provide nesting and foraging opportunities for local wildlife and a varied habitat structure.  At all times, care will be taken to minimise disturbance to habitats in the vicinity of the badger sett, and to encourage dense ground cover in this area.

4.8

The majority of the individual mature trees identified were present on the site boundary. The majority of these, including the mature oaks were in good condition but did provided potential habitats for invertebrates, nesting birds and other wildlife. The development proposals have retained the majority of these mature specimens no significant impacts to local biodiversity are expected from re-development of the site. At the detailed designed stage removal of a small number of the mature trees situated on the site boundaries maybe required. If such removal is necessary this should be minimised and compensation for loss of the trees should be provided in the landscape scheme. All retained mature trees will be managed in a sympathetic manner to retain the ecological value and arboricultural safety.

4.9

The coniferous plantation on the northern and western boundaries of the site was dominated by Corsican pine and no notable ground flora was identified over the survey. Consequently, this habitat was identified as being of low nature conservation value. The proposed development will affect an area of this woodland through construction of the new access road but impacts from the loss of this species poor habitat are likely to be negligible.

4.10

The current development proposals show loss of a significant area of the broadleaved plantation situated centrally within the site. This plantation was identified as been relatively recently planted and no notable ground flora was identified. Consequently, this habitat was also identified as being of low conservation value and potential impacts from the loss of an area of this plantation are also likely to be negligible.

4.11

Within the development design compensation for loss of the coniferous plantation and the broadleaf plantation will be provide through the creation of significant areas of native species woodland planting using species mixes which are of local provenance. Once established these areas will be managed to maximise ecological benefits through the introduction of glades and the creation of a varied woodland edge. The provision of such woodland and future management

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

14

Ecological Appraisal

fpcr

would provide significant gains to local bio-diversity and would be in accordance to both national and local planning policies. 4.12

The mature oak identified with characteristics features of a Veteran Tree is retained in the overall development design and is buffered from the proposed development by the retained shelter belt. This will be managed to increase the longevity of the specimen in ecological and arboricultural terms. Such management may include some crown reduction to reduce potential future failure.

4.13

The development proposals have retained a significant buffer zone of 25 – 30m along the southern site boundary and a central connective corridor has been provided through the site. The creation of native species woodland planting with mosaic areas of wetland and species rich grassland in the southern and west buffer strips will provide significant enhancements for local biodiversity and compensate for the loss of the species poor broadleaf woodland located centrally within the proposed development site. At the detailed design stage the wetlands in the southern buffer zone and along the central corridor should be designed to provide marginal shelves and areas of open water with native species planting.

4.14

On establishment these habitats should be managed in a sympathetic manner to enhance the conservation value of the habitats provided. Sympathetic management of aquatic habitat in the balancing facilities could included periodic cutting, strimming, raking, pulling or dredging may be required in order to maintain suitable aquatic habitats over time. The aim of the management should be to maintain at least 50% of the pond surfaces as open water free from emergent/marginal vegetation. If clearance is required no more than 30% of such areas should be cleared annually on a rotational basis during autumn.

4.15

Bank-side vegetation in the balancing facility should be subject to cutting or removal on an annual basis during the late autumn/winter as necessary to create open conditions suitable for use by basking invertebrates and reptiles. Handheld strimmers rather than flail mowers will be used to avoid damage to the banks and cut vegetation will be removed from the waters edge.

4.16

The stream to the south east of the proposed development area is retained during and on completion of the proposed development. As part of the detailed development proposals wetland enhancements adjacent to the watercourse will be provided. Such enhancements should include the removal of dense areas of scrub during later autumn/winter to allow the creation of an open water course.

Fauna 4.17

Principal pieces of legislation protecting wild species are Part 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (as amended) 1981 (WCA) and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. Some species, for example badgers, also have their own protective legislation (Protection of Badger Act 1992). The impact that this legislation has on the Planning system is outlined in ODPM 06/2005 Government Circular: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – Statutory obligations and their Impact within the Planning System.

4.18

This guidance states that as the presence of protected species is a material consideration in any planning decision, it is essential that the presence or otherwise of protected species, and the extent to which they are affected by proposals is established prior to planning permission being

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

15

Ecological Appraisal

fpcr

granted. Furthermore, where protected species are present and proposals may result in harm to the species or its habitat, steps should be taken to ensure the long-term protection of the species, such as through attaching appropriate planning conditions for example. 4.19

In addition to protected species, there are those that are otherwise of conservation merit, such as those included as priority species in the UK BAP which are also listed as species of principal importance for the purpose of conserving biodiversity under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006.

4.20

The implications that various identified species or those that are thought reasonably likely to occur may have for developmental design and programming considerations are outlined below: Badger

4.21

The development has been designed to retain the main sett (S1) and a 30m stand off zone has been provided around this sett. Therefore, the presence of this sett is not a statutory constraint to the proposed development. To ensure disturbance of the sett is minimised following development of the site thick native scrub planting should also be planted around the sett.

4.22

A 30m buffer zone has also been provided around the outlier S2 identified on the western boundary of the proposed development. Therefore, the presence of this sett is also not a statutory constraint to the proposals. As with the main sett S1 thick native species scrub planting should be provided around the sett to ensure disturbance is minimised following development.

4.23

No evidence of recent activity was identified associated with the outlier setts S3 – S6 on the western boundary of the central area of broadleaved plantation. As no recent evidence of activity was identified associated with these setts a licence from Natural England for closure is not currently required and the presence of the setts has not been identified as a statutory constraint to development. Activity of these setts will be monitored prior to development and if badger activity is identified closure of these setts will be completed in accordance to a licence granted by Natural England over the period of July to November (inclusive).

4.24

Foraging identified over the completed survey was predominately confirmed at the edges of the species poor semi-improved grassland which is not lost to the proposed development. Therefore, loss of the grassland to development is unlikely to result in significant impacts to the foraging behaviour of the local clan.

4.25

The provision of enhanced habitats in the 30 – 25m buffer zones on the southern and western boundaries of the proposed development will retain the majority of the identified foraging area and provide compensation for the loss of foraging within the site. To ensure impacts to foraging are minimised low level lighting should be used on these boundaries of the proposed development and native species scrub / woodland planting will provide cover for the local population to minimise potential impacts.

4.26

To minimise potential conflict between badgers and garden habitats dwellings on the southern and western boundaries have been design to front onto the buffer zones. This design will maximise the area between the usable residential space and badger foraging area to minimise overall disturbance of the clan.

4.27

All roads within the development will be low speed residential service road. Therefore, the potential for increased road traffic accidents will be minimised.

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

16

Ecological Appraisal

4.28

fpcr

Prior to commencement of site works a further walkover survey will be completed to ensure compliance with relevant wildlife legislation. During development best working practises will be implemented to minimise potential animal welfare issues. This will include back filling deep excavations at the end of daily works. Where this is not feasible shallow escape ramps will be provided or deep excavations will be covered. Bats

4.29

The buildings within the site were unsuitable to be used a bat roost. Consequently, the presence of a bat roost in these buildings has not been identified as a statutory constraint to the proposed development.

4.30

The mature trees lost in the area of the coniferous plantation and the central broadleaf plantation were all semi-mature specimens and as such no suitable features to be used as a bat roost were identified. Therefore, the presence of a bat roost in mature trees lost in these areas of the site has not been identified as a statutory constraint to the proposed development.

4.31

Other mature trees on the boundary of the site do provide features which are suitable to be used a roost sites. The current development proposals show the majority of these trees are retained in the proposal development and as such the presence of a bat roost in these trees would not be a statutory constraint to the proposed development. If any of the mature boundary trees are to be lost following submission of the detailed design further detailed inspections will be necessary to confirm the presence or absence of bat roosts.

4.32

The majority of the habitats affected by the proposed development will provide limited foraging for the local bat population. Habitats which are likely to be used by the local population for foraging will be the mature boundary habitats and the edge of the central broadleaf plantation. Although the proposed development will remove an area of the coniferous plantation and a significant area of the central broadleaf plantation, compensation for the loss of such foraging will be provided on the southern and western boundaries. This mitigation will included the creation of wetland habitats, woodland habitats and areas of species rich grassland. Following the implementation of this mitigation, potential impacts on the local population are likely to be negligible. To ensure potential impacts on the local bat population are minimised low level light should be used adjacent to the retained boundary habitats to the north / east and the habitats created on the southern / western boundaries.

4.33

Further enhancements for the local bat population should be provided across the proposed development through the implementation of Ibstock Bat Bricks (Model B). The implementation of such features would increase the number of potential roost sites locally and result in positive impacts to the local population. Birds

4.34

Hedgerows, scrub and trees within the site provide potential nesting habitat for a range of bird species potentially present in the local area, including a range of UK BAP and BoCC amber and red list species such as song thrush Turdus philomelos, house sparrow, bullfinch Pyrrhula pyrrhula, dunnock, starling and yellowhammer. Due to the maturity and good condition of a lot of these trees there are nesting opportunities present for hole-nesting species such as house sparrow. The open grassland habitats do not provide suitable habitat to support significant numbers of ground nesting birds.

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

17

Ecological Appraisal

fpcr

4.35

Loss of the area of coniferous plantation and the broadleaf plantation will result in the loss of suitable nest site for avifauna but impacts from the loss of such habitats to the local population are likely to be negligible. Through the creation of the southern and western buffer areas and the provision of scrub / woodland areas any initial losses will be mitigated. Further enhancements including the implementation of nest boxes in area of retained vegetation and the installation of bird boxes on buildings will provide additional mitigation for the loss of nest sites in existing habitats. The provision of such mitigation and additional enhancement will be in accordance to local and national planning policy.

4.36

All nesting birds and their nests are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as amended). Any removal of woody vegetation including hedgerow sections and trees should therefore occur outside of the bird breeding season (March to August inclusive) to minimise the risk of disturbance to breeding birds. If this is not possible, such vegetation should be checked prior to removal by a suitably experienced ecologist. If active nests are found, vegetation should be left untouched and suitably buffered from works until all birds have fledged. Specific advice should be sought prior to undertaking the clearance. Dormice

4.37

Habitats within the site were identified as being unsuitable to support dormice and connectivity to suitable habitats in the wider environment were poor. Consequently, the presence of dormice has not been identified as a statutory constraint to the proposed development. Great crested newts

4.38

No water bodies are present within the site. No water bodies are shown on OS plans with suitable connectivity to the site within 500m. Terrestrial habitats situated within the site are also sub-optimal for use by great crested newts with few suitable areas of shelter or rest being identified. From this assessment the presence of great crested newts has not been identified as a statutory constraint to the proposed development. Reptiles

4.39

Habitats within the site were identified are providing sub-optimal habitat for common species of reptiles being largely dominated by grassland which is cut for hay or silage and grazed. Therefore, the presence of reptiles within the site has been identified as unlikely and the presence of such species has not been identified as a statutory constraint to re-development of the site. Water & Otter

4.40

The presence of these species was not confirmed over the survey. Therefore, these species have also not been identified as a statutory constraint to the proposed development.

JD:\Adlib Express\Input\707e9692-c889-4962-9935-6650d0e5683d.DOC

18