DOCUMENT 1 METHOD STATEMENT - BACKGOUND · DOCUMENT 1 METHOD STATEMENT - BACKGOUND ... used farm track leading to Over Hacking Farm and is surrounded by open farmland with extensive

METHOD STATEMENT – WOODFIELD BARN, STONYHURST, CLITHEROE (10 AUGUST 2016)

Page 1 of 16

DOCUMENT 1

METHOD STATEMENT - BACKGOUND A Introduction A planning application for conversion of Woodfield Barn to provide two dwellings requires a detailed method statement as conditioned by Planning App. No. 3/2013/0626 – Ribble Valley Borough Council - 08/07/13. Condition 19 states, Prior to the commencement of any part of the development full details of bat friendly design adaptations and compensation measures for barn owls shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. No demolition or building works shall be carried out during the period of May, June, July and August. In the event that any bats are found or disturbed during any part of the development carried out outside the months of May, June, July and August all work shall cease until further advice has been sought from a licensed ecologist. Reason: To ensure that bats and barn owls will be protected from the damaging activities and [to] reduce or remove the impact of the development. Woodfield Barn is a five-bay stone barn with rubble infill wall construction and duo-pitched slate roof. The barn has a loft area at each end of the building with under-crofts below. At the rear of the barn is a large lean-to shed (formerly a dairy). The barn is in a rural location surrounded by grazing land and open countryside; the site is relatively open and exposed with few sheltering trees nearby, in terms of connectivity to feeding and foraging habitat bats, the site is considered sub-optimal although several bat species are locally present. A number of protected species surveys have been carried out at the property, including evening emergence surveys during 2007 and 2013. Daylight inspections have been undertaken on several occasions and these have provided a consistent result since May 2007. Two bat species are present as solitary bats or low numbers of individuals: these are common pipistrelle and common long-eared bats, both species are relatively widespread and common throughout the recording area. Additionally, evidence of roosting (but not nesting) barn owls was found in 2013 and again in 2016; solitary barn owls are likely to be roosting within the main void of the barn throughout the year. Nesting barn swallows are also present during the summer months. A1 Site: Location: NGR: SD 696 394 The building is situated close to Stonyhurst College at Hurst Green, a rural location within the boundary of the Bowland and Pendle Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). The building is located beside a well-used farm track leading to Over Hacking Farm and is surrounded by open farmland with extensive grazing pasture, well-established field boundaries, hedges and areas of mixed broadleaf /and conifer woodland. Although the barn is not adjacent to any extensive woodland, there is significant wooded habitat 300 metres north of the site at Over Hacking Wood and 400 metres south at Loach Field Wood. The River Hodder is a significant watercourse providing riparian woodland habitat approximately 0.75km north of the site.


Page 2 of 16

The barn is surrounded by grazing pasture and permanent grassland; there are no shelter woodlands nearby although a small group of broadleaf trees is situated close to the north elevation. The location of the barn is considered sub-optimal in terms of connectivity to high-value feeding and foraging habitat for bats (figure 1).

Figure 1: location of Woodfield Barn.

A2 Building: Woodfield Barn, Stonyhurst, Hurst Green, Clitheroe, Lancashire. Woodfield Barn is a five-bay stone barn with rubble infill wall construction and duo-pitched slate roof. Internally there is a loft area at each end of the building with under-crofts below. At the rear of the barn is a large lean-to shippon with animal cubicles. The building has a brick construction with an iron-framed mono-pitched roof clad in blue slate. It is understood this building will be demolished prior to development of the stone barn. The barn is in a rural location and is surrounded by extensive grazing land and open countryside common throughout the Ribble Valley (Figure 2).


Page 3 of 16

Figure 2: Woodfield Barn showing front (west elevation) and side (south) elevation.

Further images of Woodfield Barn

1: Front (west) and side (north) elevation, 2: main wagon door on front elevation, 3. Rear (east) elevation, 4: internal view from northern end of barn, 5: internal view of main void looking to southern end of building, 6: enclosed hayloft at northern end of barn.

A3 Roosting bats: A number of protected species surveys at Woodfield Barn have been carried since 2007:

(1) A scoping survey was undertaken on 31/05/07 (EED Survey job ref: 256/1) (2) A dusk emergence survey undertaken on 05/06/07

3 1

5 6 4

2


Page 4 of 16

Further surveys were undertaken in 2013 (EED Survey job ref: B 1281/3):

(3) A daylight roost assessment on 15/05/13 (4) An evening emergence survey on 15/06/13 (5) Additional site visits on 16/05/13 and 24/05/13.

Bats recorded at the site were common pipistrelle and common long-eared bats. Each of the surveys concluded that only low numbers of bats or solitary pipistrelle bats were likely to be roosting in the building. Feeding and perching signs of long-eared bats were also found in the first floor loft at the northern end of barn in 2007 and 2013. The most recent inspection of the barn was carried out in April 2016 (EED Survey job ref: B1673)

(6) Daylight roost inspection 15/04/16 indicating continuing use of the loft area at the northern end of the building by perching and feeding common long-eared bats.

A3.1 Roosting barn owls and barn swallows Although no barn owls were recorded during the 2007 surveys, evidence of regular roosting by barn owls within the main void of the barn was noted in 2013. The barn continues to attract roosting barn owls in 2016. Nesting barn swallows continue to roost and (probably) nest in the under-crofts and main void of the building. A4 Problem: Two bat species are likely to utilise the roosting opportunities provided by this building; a small number of common pipistrelle bats regularly feed and forage within the main void of the barn and solitary bats may roost within the building. Low numbers or solitary common pipistrelles (Pipistrellus pipistrellus) appear to be roosting within the building. A solitary bat was observed flying within the main void during the 2007 survey in addition to a solitary bat emerging from a rear window in 2013. A dead male pipistrelle was found in the S. undercroft in May 2013. Low numbers or solitary long-eared bats (Plecotus auritus) continue to enter the hayloft at the northern end of the building to perch and feed on insect prey (butterflies and moths) in late summer, autumn and winter. A5 Solution - bats: The preferred option in all cases is the avoidance of disturbance to bats and their roosts. The barn has low to moderate potential for supporting low numbers or solitary common pipistrelles and long-eared bats. There is no evidence to indicate the presence of a significant bat roost within the building and there are no signs of a maternity roost, mating roost or place of hibernation. The conservation significance of the building in its present condition is considered to be relatively low. Current guidance recommends that mitigation and compensation measures should include provision of new roost facilities (not necessarily like-for-like replacements) such as providing new access and roosting opportunities for bats based on the species’ requirements.*


Page 5 of 16

*(Reference: Bat Mitigation Guidelines 2004. Page 39, figure 4).

The presence of low numbers of common species of bats requires provision of new roost facilities within the building after works are completed. It is recommended that a number of ridge access tiles and access slates are incorporated into the final design. A5.1 Solution - barn owls and barn swallows The daylight inspections in 2013 and 2016 found no evidence of nesting activity by barn owls. There is evidence of occasional roosting activity within the main void of the barn by barn owls. It recommended that an owl nesting box is erected close to the barn in advance of the proposed development. Prior to works being carried out, an inspection of the building should be undertaken by a qualified person to ensure there are no nesting owls present or likely to be disturbed by the building operations. Exclusion of barn swallows Barn swallows are likely to roost and nest in the barn each spring and summer. In situations where work is scheduled to begin in the spring or early summer, swallows should be excluded from the building well before the birds return in spring to prevent nesting taking place. The standing advice from the RSPB allows for exclusion of nesting swallows birds from buildings as long as any exclusion takes place during winter before their spring arrival. Exclusion of birds will also affect barn owls from entering the barn, in which case an owl nest box should be in place before any exclusion takes place. B1 Background to activity / development Proposed works Conversion of the barn to two open market dwellings including demolition of lean-to shippon at rear of barn. Planning Permission Application No: 3/2013/0626 (RVBC) Decision date: 02 September 2013. B2 Full details of proposed works covered by the Method Statement Mitigation and compensation measures as shown below (document 2). C Survey and site assessment Pre-existing information on the bat species present at this site. Feeding and foraging activity by common pipistrelle bats around the property; a solitary bat was observed flying within the barn (June 2007); one pipistrelle seen emerging from barn (June 2013) and bat corpse found in under croft (June 2013). Signs of perching and feeding (insect prey) by long-eared bat(s) in first floor loft at the northern end of building in summer 2007, 2013 and spring 2016. There are no signs of a bat maternity roost, mating roost or hibernation roost at this property.


Page 6 of 16

C2 Objectives of the surveys (1) Determine the presence and / or absence of bats, barn owls and other wild birds within the property

and to confirm which species are present including numbers, roost status and roost locations. (2) Provide an impact assessment of the proposed building alterations on all protected species. (3) Determine the appropriate level of mitigation and compensation measures that will be appropriate. C3 Field surveys undertaken at the site (1) Daylight scoping survey - 31/05/2007 (2) Dusk emergence survey - 05/06/2007 (3) Daylight site inspection - 15/05/2013 (4) Dusk emergence survey - 15/05/2013 (5) Daylight site inspection – 15/04/2016 C4 Personnel The inspections were carried out by David Fisher (EED Surveys) - an ecological consultant with more than 25 years of experience in field survey work and development issues relating to protected species. The surveyor has held a licence since 1989 and is a volunteer bat worker with Natural England (via the BCT). Natural England Class Licence WML-A34 - Level 1 (Registration Number: 2015 – 17599-CLS-CLS) Natural England Class Licence WML-A34 – Level 2 (Registration Number: 2015 – 12106-CLS-CLS) C5 Survey results

(1) Daylight scoping survey (31/05/2007) - scattered bat droppings noted on walls and floor and discarded insect wings on floor of first floor hay loft.

(2) Dusk emergence survey (05/06/2007) – common pipistrelles recorded in flight along lane and around building; single bat flying / foraging inside barn at 22.30.

(3) Daylight site inspection - 15/05/2013 – corpse of male pipistrelle in under croft. Discarded insect prey in hay loft at northern end of building. (4) Dusk emergence survey - 15/05/2013 – one common pipistrelle emerges from rear window 21.12 (5) Daylight site inspection – 15/05/2016 – discarded insect prey in hay loft at northern end of building.

(6) Daylight scoping survey (15/05/2013) – 70 castings (pellets) and urine splashes in main barn void.

(7) Daylight scoping survey (15/04/2016) – several fresh and some old castings with urine splashes.

(8) Daylight visits (May 2007, May 2013, April 2016) – nests found in under- crofts and main void.

C6 Interpretation / evaluation of survey results


Page 7 of 16

Two bat species are occasionally active within the barn: Common pipistrelles are most likely to be present during the spring, summer and autumn months. Solitary bats may occasionally enter the building to feed, forage and night roost within the main void of the barn. Common long-eared bats occasionally enter the building to perch and feed on insect prey throughout the year within the loft area, although day roosting within the building is unlikely. Barn owls occasionally roost and feed within the main void of the barn although a nesting pair is unlikely. Barn swallows nest within under crofts and the main void of the barn during the spring and summer months. D Impact assessment Bat Mitigation Guidelines indicate the scale of impact of the proposed works is likely to be low to moderate; the proposed development will require mitigation and compensation measures to remove / reduce the impact of the works on protected species. D1 Short-term impacts: Disturbance to roosting bats can be significantly reduced by appropriate timing of the works; Natural England recommends that works should be undertaken during the spring and autumn periods to avoid the critical periods when bats are hibernating or giving birth to young. Breeding barn owls will not be disturbed. Exclusion of swallows must take place before birds return in spring. D2 Long-term impacts: No measurable impacts.

DOCUMENT 2

METHOD STATEMENT - DELIVERY INFORMATION

A Mitigation and Compensation Bat Mitigation Guidelines recommend ‘provision of new roost facilities where possible; need not be like-for-like, but should be suitable, based on species’ requirements. (Reference: BMG, Figure 4, page 39 – Guidelines for proportionate mitigation). Main recommendations

• Careful timing of the works is required - Avoid disturbance to roof areas during the critical period

May, June, July and August; the recommended times for undertaking roof works is spring / autumn.

• In the unlikely event of any bats being exposed, cover the area to prevent further disturbance to bats and seek advice. Stop work in that part of the building until the work area has been inspected by a qualified person / licensed ecologist. (See Method Statement Summary for contact details)

• Provide 4 No. bat access ridge tiles and 4 no. bat access roof slates during the re-roofing operations.


Page 8 of 16

• Provide 4 No. type 2F (or 2FN) Schwegler bat roosting boxes on the nearby trees on N. side of barn.

• Provide 4 No. artificial swallow nesting platforms (Schwegler type No. 10) under eaves of buildings.

• Provide owl roosting box in large tree adjacent to barn well before the building works are due to begin.

• A qualified person should inspect the site before works begin to ensure nesting owls are not present.

A: Purpose-built barn owl nesting box. B: erection of owl box in mature tree. C: location of owl box facing into open

field.

D: Schwegler type 2F bat box E: Schwegler type 2FN box F: Schwegler swallow nest No. 10

ANNEX 1: METHOD STATEMENT SUMMARY: Woodfield Barn, Stonyhurst, Hurst Green, Clitheroe. 1. Is an EPS Licence required?

In cases where it can be demonstrated that the proposed works are unlikely to result in a breach of the Habitats Regulations, then a development licence (sometimes referred to as a mitigation licence is


Page 9 of 16

not required. However, the local planning authority will require a detailed METHOD STATEMENT to ensure that, the action authorised will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range.”

2. Why is a method statement

required?

The existence of a method statement helps to establish a defence against possible prosecution in the event of bats being disturbed by demonstrating that all reasonable steps have been taken to minimise the impact of the development on protected species.

3. Purpose of a method statement:

The method statement outlines the mitigation measures that are necessary to remove or significantly reduce the impact of the development on protected species by adopting careful working practices and timing of the works to avoid causing disturbance, injury or death to roosting bats and nesting wild birds or by avoiding operations that are likely to result in damage or destruction of a known bat roost or barn owl nesting site. Compensation measures are also required to offset any damage caused by the development. The method statement must be made available on site as a reference document throughout the development; all project managers and contractors should be aware of its existence.

4. Timing of the works

Natural England recommends that the best times for re-roofing operations are spring (March / April) and autumn (September to early November). At these times of year the bats are able to feed on most nights during milder weather and active bats will be able to keep out of the way of any building operations and find alternative places to shelter.

5. Disturbance to roosting bats

In the unlikely event of bats being exposed during the demolition or roofing works, cover the area immediately to prevent bats flying in daylight or place any bats in a small container (using gloves to avoid contact). Place the container in a quiet place away from danger. Stop work in that part of the building and seek advice immediately.

6. EMERGENCY ADVICE:

Please contact: David Fisher (EED) on 07709 225783 (mobile)

7. General advice on bats

The Bat Conservation Trust (BCT) provides a bat helpline: 0345 1300 228; in an emergency, BCT will call the nearest volunteer bat worker to arrange a site visit. www.bats.org.uk email: [email protected]

8. Placement of barn owl box on tree

REQUIRED BEFORE ANY BUILDING WORKS COMMENCE A purpose-built barn owl nest box should be erected well in advance of the start of building operations. The box should be sited in one of the adjacent large trees on the north side of the barn. (Contact surveyor if further advice is required). SEE FURTHER DETAILS ANNEX 3.


Page 10 of 16

9. Placement of bat boxes on tree

REQUIRED BEFORE ANY BUILDING WORKS COMMENCE 3 No. bat boxes should also be erected in one of the nearby trees close to the building. NB. This should be a single cluster of boxes on one of the trees. (Contact surveyor if further advice is required). SEE FURTHER DETAILS ANNEX 3.

10. Artificial barn swallow nests

RECOMMENDED AFTER THE DEVELOPMENT IS COMPLETED 4 No. Schwegler No. 10 swallow nest platforms to be placed under eaves of an out-buildings or garages or beneath eaves of the converted barn. Swallow nesting platforms can be particularly effective when placed inside open-portal buildings. SEE FURTHER DETAILS ANNEX 3.

11. Provide bat access slates in roof

REQUIRED DURING THE RE-ROOFING OPERATIONS Bat-friendly design adaptations to the building will be required to ensure that bats are able to gain access into the roof – 4No. ridge tiles and 4 No. bat access slates should be incorporated into the designs of the new roof. Two recommended designs are shown: (1) Detail 1B - bat access slate. (2) Detail 4A - bat access ridge tiles. SEE FURTHER DETAILS ANNEX 4.

12. Legal responsibilities - compliance

PLEASE NOTE: The onus lies with the applicant to satisfy himself / herself that no offence will be committed if the development goes ahead, regardless of whether planning permission has been granted. Natural England advises that “failure to follow the method statement may result in a breach of the law and leave the developer open to prosecution”.

ANNEX 2

Wildlife legislation – Bats and the law


Page 11 of 16

All bat species in the UK receive full protection under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (amended by the Environment Protection Act 1990). The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 amends the Wildlife and Countryside Act to also make it an offence to intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct a place that bats use for shelter or protection. All species of bats are listed on Schedule 5 of the 1981 Act, which makes it an offence to:

• intentionally kill, injure or take any wild bat.

• intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct access to any place that a wild bat uses for shelter or protection. This is taken to mean all bat roosts whether bats are present or not.

• intentionally or recklessly disturb any wild bat while it is occupying a structure or place which it uses for shelter or protection.

• The protected status afforded to bats means planning authorities may require extra information (in the form of surveys, impact assessments and mitigation proposals) before determining planning applications for sites used by bats. Planning authorities may refuse planning permission solely on grounds of the predicted impact on protected species such as bats. Recent case law has underlined the importance of obtaining survey information prior to the determination of planning consent¹. “It is essential that the presence or otherwise of protected species, and the extent that they may be affected by a development proposal, is established before the planning permission is granted, otherwise all relevant material considerations may not have been addressed in making the decision.” ² All British bat species are included in Schedule 2 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) (Amendment) Regulations 2007, (also known as Habitats Regulations) which defines ‘European Protected Species’ (EPS). ¹ Bat Mitigation Guidelines, AJ Mitchell Jones, Joint Nature Conservation Committee, (2004) ISBN 1 86107 558 8 ² Planning Policy Statement (PPS9) (2005) , Biodiversity and Geological Conservation. ODPM.

Protected species (Bats) and the planning process¹ For development proposals requiring planning permission, the presence of bats, and therefore the need for a bat survey, is an important ‘material planning consideration’. Adequate surveys are therefore required to establish the presence or absence of bats, to enable a prediction of the likely impact of the proposed development on them and their breeding sites or resting places and, if necessary, to design mitigation and compensation. Similarly, adequate survey information must accompany an application for a Habitats Regulations licence (also known as a Mitigation Licence) required to ensure that a proposed development is able to proceed lawfully. The term ‘development’ [used in these guidelines] includes all activities requiring consent under relevant planning legislation and / or demolition operations requiring building control approval under the Building Act 1984. Natural England (Formerly English Nature) states that development in relation to bats “covers a wide range of operations that have the potential to impact negatively on bats and bat populations. Typical examples would be the construction, modification, restoration or conversion of buildings and structures, as well as infrastructure, landfill or mineral extraction projects and demolition operations”. ¹ 2.2.3 - Planning for development, Bat Surveys, Good Practice Guidelines, BCT (2007). (Mitchell-Jones, 2004) Compliance

The existence of a Method Statement helps to establish a defence against prosecution for intentional (WCA), deliberate (Habitat Regulations.) or reckless (WCA) disturbance of bats or damage to roosts. A Method Statements is normally required by the local planning authority to ensure that procedures are in place before the development works are carried out. It is the responsibility of the LPA to ensure that the proposed works do not result in a breach of the Habitat Regulations. Reference: Wildlife and Countryside Act. / (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations (1994) (as amended 2010).

ANNEX 3


Page 12 of 16

Barn owl nest box Barn swallow nesting platform No. 10

This barn owl nest box has been designed with the Barn Owl Trust and constructed from FSC certified exterior grade plywood making it suitable for use both inside buildings, such as barns, or outside. The nest box has a sturdy front platform for owlets to exercise on and a generous front canopy to protect the entrance and platform from bad weather. The nest box is a generous size offering a full 44cm depth from entrance to floor. The double inspection hatch allows full access to the whole floor area for cleaning or inspection and designed to prevent rain coming in with simple, secure fastenings. The specially drilled backplate provides fixings above and below the nest box to ensure it is secure and there are oversized holes to accommodate ropes for hauling the nest box up the tree and locating it. This nest box will be delivered fully assembled with the exception of the platform which can be easily fixed in place without tools, before or after the next box is fixed into position.

Height: 74cm Width: 59cm Depth: 50cm Weight: 8kg approx.

SCHWEGLER No 10 Swallow Nest (for locating inside out-buildings to encourage barn swallows)

It is increasingly difficult for Swallows and House Martins to find suitable nest-building and mud they do find, if any, is often poor quality. In addition, the walls of buildings are nowadays often very smooth, so as a result, nests tend to fall down, sometimes with the nestlings inside. In many places, the vibration caused by heavy vehicles shakes the nests loose. The Swallow Nest should be placed inside outbuildings such as sheds, garages or stables. You should ensure there is always access for the birds through an open window or sky-light. Swallows are sociable birds but multiple nests should not be placed at less than 1m intervals. These Woodcrete nest boxes are famous for their durability - lasting for at least 20-25 years. Woodcrete is a blend of wood, concrete and clay which will not rot, leak, crack or warp. They are backed by leading ornithologists, nature conservation organisations, government agencies and forestry experts. Schwegler boxes have the highest occupation rates of all nest boxes and are carefully designed to mimic natural nest sites and provide a stable environment for chick rearing and winter roosting.

Height 11cm x length 25cm x depth 14cm.


Page 13 of 16

Type 2F and 2FN bat boxes manufactured by Schwegler are suitable for placing on trees; these products are

available from NHBS and other suppliers.

The 2F is the standard and most popular bat box and is ideal as a starter box to see if there are bats in

your area or to provide much needed secure roosting space. It has been designed as a summer

roosting space for bats and has a simple entrance hole at the front. The 2F is manufactured from long-

lasting Woodcrete, which is a blend of wood, concrete and clay which will not rot, leak, crack or warp,

and will last for at least 20 - 25 years, making it suitable for long-term mitigation projects. Woodcrete is

breathable and maintains a stable temperature inside the box and the 2F is painted black to absorb

warmth. It also provides a good rough surface for bats to cling on to and climb.

The 2F bat box can be sited in trees or on buildings and is best positioned at a height of between 3 to 6

metres. Bat boxes should ideally be sited in open sunny positions and in groups of 3 to 5 boxes facing

different directions to provide a variety of micro-habitats. Please note that once bats have inhabited a

roost site they may only be disturbed by licensed bat workers.

Height 33 cm x diameter 16 cm. Weight: 4 kg.

Aluminium tree-friendly nail and hanger included.

The 2FN bat box should be sited in trees and is best positioned at a height of between 3 to 6

metres. Bat boxes should ideally be sited in open sunny positions.

Please note that once bats have inhabited a roost site they may only be disturbed by licensed bat

workers.

ANNEX 4


Page 14 of 16

PROVIDE 4 No. BAT ACCESS SLATES (ie. two slates to be placed on each roof pitch within the second

course of slates below the ridge tiles. The slates should be located towards the northern end of the building.

The bat access slates provide narrow 15 to 25mm gaps under slates enabling crevice-seeking bats to gain access into the roof; pipistrelles and other species are known to use narrow warm cavities provided between the roofing membrane and the slate / tile cladding. Other species including long-eared bats will utilise spaces within a retained roof void where there is a gap

provided in the roofing felt / sarking membrane. Long-eared bats tend roost under the roof timbers, usually

at the junction of rafters and ridge board and prefer to use an uncluttered void in which to fly. Ideally any

retained roof void should be at least 4 metres long and 1.5 metres high from floor to ridge board.

PROVIDE 4 No. RIDGE ACCESS TILES ALONG THE ROOF RIDGE. The ridge tiles can be evenly spaced along the roof ridge. If a roof void is to be included within the final design, at least two of the


Page 15 of 16

access slates should be placed directly above the roof void to allow bats access via the roofing felt / sarking.

Two methods are recommended: (1) either - providing very narrow gaps (20mm – 25mm wide) beneath raised roof tiles. (2) or providing 20mm – 25mm access gaps under tiles to enable bats to enter the space under ridge tiles. Pipistrelles and long-eared bats will enter roofs via narrow gaps under the ridge tiles; additional benefits are

provided when small gaps are provided through the roofing felt or sarking membrane thus enabling bats to

enter any retained roof voids (where this is appropriate to the design of the building).

ANNEX 5


Page 16 of 16

References Altringham, JD., (2011) Bats, From Evolution to Conservation. OUP. BCT, (2016) Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists, Good Practice Guidelines – 3rd Edition BSI, (2013) British Standard for Biodiversity (BS42020) Biodiversity in planning and development. CIEEM, (2016) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland – Second Edition. Dietz, C., Helversen, O., Nill, D. (2009) Bats of Britain, Europe and Northwest Africa. A&C Black. Dietz, C., Kiefer, A., (2016) Bats of Britain and Europe, Bloomsbury. Gunnell K, Murphy B, Williams C, (2013) Designing for Biodiversity, RIBA Publishing / BCT – 2nd Edition. JNCC, (2010), Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey – a Technique for Environmental Survey. Mitchell, AJ and McLeish, AP., (2004), JNCC Bat Workers Manual 3rd Edition. Mitchell, AJ., (2004), English Nature Bat Mitigation Guidelines, version January 2004 Russ, J., (2012), British Bat Calls, A Guide to Species Identification. Pelagic Publishing

RECOMMENDED READING / REFERENCE MATERIAL

Designing for Biodiversity provides detailed information on bat access slates and ridge tiles (pages 30 – 41)

Designing for Biodiversity: A Technical Guide for New and Existing Buildings (2nd edition)

Brian Murphy, Kelly Gunnell and Carol Williams.

• Publisher: RIBA Publishing

• Date Published: Aug 2013

• Available from the RIBA Bookshop £35.00

Documents

DOCUMENT 1 METHOD STATEMENT - BACKGOUND · DOCUMENT 1 METHOD STATEMENT - BACKGOUND ... used farm track leading to Over Hacking Farm and is surrounded by open farmland with extensive