LAWNSIDE, NAILSWORTH PRELIMINARY ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

LAWNSIDE, NAILSWORTH

PRELIMINARY ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

A Report to: Aster Homes

Report No: RT-MME-118997-02

Date: September 2015

Triumph House, Birmingham Road, Allesley, Coventry CV5 9AZ Tel: 01676 525880 Fax: 01676 521400

E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.middlemarch-environmental.com

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.middlemarch-environmental.com/

Lawnside, Nailsworth RT-MME-118997-02 Preliminary Ecological Assessment

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. Page 1

REPORT VERIFICATION AND DECLARATION OF COMPLIANCE

This study has been undertaken in accordance with British Standard 42020:2013 “Biodiversity, Code of practice for planning and development”.

Report Version

Date Completed by: Checked by: Approved by:

Final 11/09/2015

Sarah Hickman BSc (Hons) (Ecological

Consultant) Ella Robinson BSc (Hons) (Ecological Project Assistant)

Dr Philip Fermor MCIEEM CEnv

(Managing Director)

David Smith MCIEEM (Ecology and

Landscapes Director)

The information which we have prepared is true, and has been prepared and provided in accordance with the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management’s Code of Professional Conduct. We confirm that the opinions expressed are our true and professional bona fide opinions.

DISCLAIMER

The contents of this report are the responsibility of Middlemarch Environmental Ltd. It should be noted that, whilst every effort is made to meet the client’s brief, no site investigation can ensure complete assessment or prediction of the natural environment. Middlemarch Environmental Ltd accepts no responsibility or liability for any use that is made of this document other than by the client for the purposes for which it was originally commissioned and prepared.

VALIDITY OF DATA

The findings of this study are valid for a period of 24 months from the date of survey. If works have not commenced by this date, an updated site visit should be carried out by a suitably qualified ecologist to assess any changes in the habitats present on site, and to inform a review of the conclusions and recommendations made.



NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY

Middlemarch Environmental Ltd was commissioned by Aster Homes to carry out a Preliminary Ecological Assessment at the site of a proposed residential development in Lawnside, Nailsworth. To fulfil this brief an ecological desk study and a walkover survey (in accordance with Phase 1 Habitat Survey methodology) were undertaken. The desk study exercise identified one European statutory site within 5 km of the survey area, two UK statutory sites and nine ancient woodland sites within 2 km and three non-statutory sites within 1 km. The site is located within 10 km of a statutory site designated for bats. The closest statutory site is Woodchester Park SSSI located 915 m north and the closest non-statutory site is Bunting Hill KWS located 115 m south from the development site. The desk study also provided records of protected and notable species including bats, badger, otter, water vole, reptiles, amphibians, white-clawed crayfish, stag beetle and birds. The walkover survey was undertaken on 21st August 2015 by Sarah Hickman, Ecological Consultant. The site formerly housed a number of garages which, with the exception of two blocks in the north-western corner of the site, have now been demolished. It is dominated by extensive areas of hardstanding that previously formed the bases of the demolished garages and the associated parking courts. The key ecological features on site in relation to the works proposed are scattered trees, badgers, birds, reptiles and bats. In order to ensure compliance with wildlife legislation and relevant planning policy, the following recommendations are made: R1 Habitat Loss and Enhancement: In accordance with the provision of Chapter 11 of the National

Planning Policy Framework (Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment) and Local Planning Policy, biodiversity enhancement measures should be incorporated into the landscaping scheme of any proposed works to maximise the ecological value of the site.

R2 Trees: Any trees on site, or overhanging the site, which are to be retained as a part of any proposed

works should be protected in accordance with British Standard 5837: 2012 "Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - recommendations". Protection should be installed on site prior to the commencement of any works on site.

R3 Badger: Given the suitable habitat present within the survey area and connectivity to adjacent

habitat that is suitable for badgers, it is recommended that a badger survey is undertaken to determine whether any setts are located within 30 m of the proposed development area.

R4 Nesting Birds: Vegetation and building clearance should be undertaken outside the nesting bird

season. The nesting bird season is weather dependent but generally extends between March and September inclusive.

R5 Reptiles: A reptile survey should be undertaken of suitable habitats within the proposed

development site. Reptile surveys can be completed in suitable weather conditions between April and September (inclusive).

R6 Terrestrial Mammals including Badger: Any excavations that need to be left overnight should be

covered or fitted with mammal ramps to ensure that any animals that enter can safely escape. Any open pipework with an outside diameter of greater than 120 mm must be covered at the end of each work day to prevent animals entering/becoming trapped.

R7 Foraging Bats: In line with paragraph 125 of the National Planning Policy Framework, the

development should aim to limit the impact of light pollution on bats through the careful use of lighting in critical areas only and at a low level with minimum spillage. No lighting should impact on the site boundaries.



CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 4

1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................ 4 1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION AND CONTEXT .......................................................................................................... 4

2. METHODOLOGIES.................................................................................................................................... 5

2.1 DESK STUDY ......................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 PHASE 1 HABITAT SURVEY ..................................................................................................................... 5

3. DESK STUDY RESULTS .......................................................................................................................... 6

3.1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 6 3.2 NATURE CONSERVATION SITES .............................................................................................................. 6 3.3 PROTECTED / NOTABLE SPECIES ............................................................................................................ 7 3.4 INVASIVE SPECIES ................................................................................................................................ 10

4. PHASE 1 HABITAT SURVEY ................................................................................................................. 11

4.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 11 4.2 SURVEY CONSTRAINTS AND LIMITATIONS .............................................................................................. 11 4.3 HABITATS ............................................................................................................................................ 11 4.4 FAUNA ................................................................................................................................................ 12 4.5 INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES .................................................................................................................... 12

5. DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................... 13

5.1 SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS ................................................................................................................... 13 5.2 NATURE CONSERVATION SITES ............................................................................................................ 13 5.3 HABITATS ............................................................................................................................................ 13 5.4 PROTECTED/NOTABLE SPECIES ........................................................................................................... 14 5.5 INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES .................................................................................................................... 16

6. RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................ 17

6.1 NATURE CONSERVATION SITES ............................................................................................................ 17 6.2 HABITATS ............................................................................................................................................ 17 6.3 PROTECTED / NOTABLE SPECIES .......................................................................................................... 17 6.4 INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES .................................................................................................................... 18

7. DRAWINGS .............................................................................................................................................. 19 8. PHOTOGRAPHS ..................................................................................................................................... 21 REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................... 23 APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................................. 24

APPENDIX 1 ................................................................................................................................................... 25 APPENDIX 2 ................................................................................................................................................... 31



1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND

In February 2015 Aster Homes commissioned Middlemarch Environmental Ltd to undertake an initial ecological appraisal of the site of a proposed development at Lawnside, Nailsworth. This assessment is required to inform a planning application associated with a proposed residential development. However, at the time of writing full details of the proposed development were not known. To assess the existing ecological interest of the site an ecological desk study was carried out, and a walkover survey was undertaken on 21st August 2015. In addition, Middlemarch Environmental Ltd has been commissioned to undertake a Pre-Development Arboricultural Survey, as detailed in report number RT-MME-118997-02.

1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION AND CONTEXT

The site under consideration is situated at the junction of Lawnside and Fieldways within a housing estate located to the west of Nailsworth town centre. The site extends to approximately 0.18 ha in size and it is centred on Ordnance Survey Grid Reference ST 8415 9982. The site formerly housed a number of garages which, with the exception of two blocks in the north-western corner of the site, have now been demolished. It is dominated by extensive areas of hardstanding that previously formed the bases of the demolished garages and the associated parking courts. The public highway of Lawnside, which runs into Fieldways, bisects the site and a public footpath, which connects the site to Seven Acres Road to the east, runs adjacent to this. The surrounding landscape is dominated by residential development and to the north and east this continues to dominate the wider landscape. To the south and west the wider landscape is dominated by agricultural land interspersed with pockets of woodland. The topography of the site is varied with numerous areas of sloping land present and an overall fall in levels of approximately 3.5 m from the north-western corner to the south-eastern. A number of retaining walls are present throughout the site with the most significant being located in the southern section of the site adjacent to an area of amenity grassland and the concrete base of a demolished garage block.



2. METHODOLOGIES

2.1 DESK STUDY

An ecological desk study was undertaken to determine the presence of any designated nature conservation sites and protected species in proximity to the site. This involved contacting appropriate statutory and non-statutory organisations which hold ecological data relating to the survey area. Middlemarch Environmental Ltd then assimilated and reviewed the desk study data provided by these organisations. The consultees for the desk study were:

Natural England - MAGIC website for statutory conservation sites; and,

Gloucestershire Centre for Environmental Records. The desk study included a search for European statutory nature conservation sites within a 5 km radius of the site (extended to 10 km for any statutory site designated for bats), UK statutory sites within a 2 km radius and non-statutory sites and protected/notable species records within a 1 km radius. The data collected from the consultees is discussed in Chapter 3. Selected raw data are provided in Appendix 1. In compliance with the terms and conditions relating to its commercial use, the full desk study data is not provided within this report. The desk study also included a review of relevant local planning policy with regard to biodiversity and nature conservation (see Appendix 2).

2.2 PHASE 1 HABITAT SURVEY

The walkover survey was conducted following the Phase 1 Habitat Survey methodology of the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC, 2010) and the Institute of Environmental Assessment (IEA, 1995). Phase 1 Habitat Survey is a standard technique for classifying and mapping British habitats. The aim is to provide a record of habitats that are present on site. During the survey, the presence, or potential presence, of protected species was noted. Whilst every effort is made to notify the client of any plant species listed on Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981, as amended) present on site, it should be noted that this is not a specific survey for these species. Data recorded during the field survey are discussed in Chapter 4.



3. DESK STUDY RESULTS

3.1 INTRODUCTION

All relevant ecological data provided by the consultees was reviewed and the results from these investigations are summarised in Sections 3.2 and 3.3. Selected data are provided in Appendix 1.

3.2 NATURE CONSERVATION SITES

Statutory and non-statutory nature conservation sites located in proximity to the survey area are summarised in Table 3.1.

Site Name Designation Proximity to Survey Area

Description

European Statutory Sites

Rodborough Common SAC 2,800 m north

east

Rodborough Common is the most extensive area of semi-natural dry grasslands surviving in the Cotswolds of central southern England, and represents CG5 Bromus erectus – Brachypodium pinnatum grassland, which is more or less

confined to the Cotswolds. The site contains a wide range of structural types, ranging from short turf through to scrub margins, although short-turf vegetation is mainly confined to areas of shallower soils.

UK Statutory Sites

Woodchester Park SSSI 915 m north

west

The site occupies a secluded and sheltered valley running roughly east/west in the dip slope of the Cotswold escarpment near Nailsworth. It overlies Jurassic limestone and clays and supports a diverse fauna and flora associated with the grassland, woodland and wetland habitats that lie within the valley. The seclusion, shelter and range of habitats provide an unrivalled environment which is exploited by a nationally important breeding colony of greater horseshoe bats Rhinolophus ferrumequinum centred on the

Mansion near the western end of the site. The valley is also of outstanding invertebrate interest.

Minchinhampton Common SSSI 1,050 m east

This is one of the largest grassland Commons on the Cotswolds. It lies on Jurassic Limestone immediately south of Rodborough Common SSSI and like it, consists of a central plateau area which drops away steeply to the Nailsworth valley on the west and the Frome valley to the north. The outlying areas of Iron Mills and Littleworth Commons are included in the site. The site is important for its unimproved, herb-rich limestone grassland. Disused quarry workings near the centre of the Common are of geological importance for their fossils.

Non-statutory Sites

Bunting Hill KWS 115 m south Semi-natural grassland

Nailsworth Brook KWS 590 m north

east Watercourse with mammal interest

Lower Lutheredge Farm Banks

pKWS 770 m south

west Mainly rank calcareous grassland with invertebrate interest.

Table 3.1: Summary of Nature Conservation Sites (Continues)



Site Name Designation Proximity to Survey Area

Description

Ancient Woodland Sites

High/Bowlas Woods ASNW 460 m west No information available

Colliers Wood ARW 915 m north

west No information available

Woodchester Park Woods ARW 1,280 m north

west This wood is part of the SSSI above, Woodchester Park.

Hazel Wood ASNW 1,340 m south

east No information available

Unnamed Wood ASNW 1,680 m north

west No information available

Hartley Bridge Wood ASNW 1,680 m south No information available

Lutheredge Farm Wood ASNW 1,860 m west No information available

Unnamed Wood ASNW 1,900 m east No information available

Sandgrove ASNW 1,970 m south This wood is adjacent to the SSSI Kingscote and Horsley Woods.

Key:

SAC: Special Area of Conservation SSSI: Site of Special Scientific Interest KWS: Key Wildlife Site pKWS: Potential Key Wildlife Site ASNW: Ancient Semi-Natural Woodland ARW: Ancient Replanted Woodland

Table 3.1 (Continued): Summary of Nature Conservation Sites

The survey area was found to be within the SSSI impact risk zone of the above listed SSSI, Woodchester Park.

3.3 PROTECTED / NOTABLE SPECIES

Table 3.2 and the following text provide a summary of protected and notable species records within a 1 km radius of the study area. It should be noted that the absence of records should not be taken as confirmation that a species is absent from the search area. Gloucestershire is now moving towards a more integrated landscape-scale approach to biodiversity conservation with the aim of recovering habitats and species as well as the ecosystems and services that they underpin. Therefore, there are no specific habitat or species action plans.

Species No. of

Records

Most Recent Record

Proximity of Nearest Record to Study Area

Species of Principal

Importance?

Local BAP?

Legislation / Conservation

Status

Amphibians

Common frog Rana temporaria

8 2010 490 m south - n/a WCA 5 S9(5)

Common toad Bufo bufo

3 2010 490 m south n/a WCA 5 S9(5)

Palmate newt Lissotriton helveticus

1 2005 550 m north - n/a WCA 5 S9(5)

Smooth newt Lissotriton vulgaris

2 2010 550 m north - n/a WCA 5 S9(5)

Table 3.2: Summary of Protected/Notable Species Records Within 1 km of Survey Area (Continues)



Species No. of

Records

Most Recent Record



Importance?

Local BAP?


Status

Birds

Fieldfare Turdus pilaris

3 2010 680 m west - n/a WCA1i

Brambling Fringilla montifringilla

1 2002 Potentially within

1 km* - n/a WCA1i

Kingfisher Alcedo atthis


1 km* - n/a WCA1i

Eurasian hobby Falco subbuteo


1 km* - n/a WCA1i

Mediterranean gull Larus melanocephalus


1 km* - n/a WCA1i

Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis


1 km* - n/a WCA1i

Osprey Pandion haliaetus


1 km* - n/a WCA1i

Peregrine Falco peregrinus


1 km* - n/a WCA1i

Red kite Milvus milvus


1 km* - n/a WCA1i

Redwing Turdus iliacus


1 km* - n/a WCA1i

Aquatic invertebrates

White-clawed crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes

1 2014 820 m south east n/a ECH 2,

WCA 5 S9(1) WCA 5 S9(5)

Terrestrial invertebrates

Stag beetle Lucanus cervus


WCA 5 S9(5)

Reptiles

Slow worm Anguis fragilis

11 2014 Potentially on site+ n/a WCA 5 S9(1) WCA 5 S9(5)

Common lizard Zootoca vivipara

1 2009 140 m west n/a WCA 5 S9(1) WCA 5 S9(5)

Grass snake Natrix natrix

4 2008 260 m west n/a WCA 5 S9(1) WCA 5 S9(5)

Mammals – bats

Unidentified bat Chiroptera sp.

7 2014 290 m north west # n/a #

Pipistrelle Pipistrellus sp.

2 1991 300 m south east # n/a ECH 4,

WCA 5, WCA 6

Greater horseshoe bat Rhinolophus ferrumequinum

3 2014 460 m south east n/a ECH 2, ECH 4, WCA 5, WCA 6

Brown long-eared bat Plecotus auritus

2 2014 520 m south-east n/a ECH 4,

WCA 5, WCA 6

Lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros


Table 3.2 (Continued): Summary of Protected/Notable Species Records Within 1 km of Survey Area (Continues)

http://www.ukbap.org.uk/PrioritySpeciesdetail.aspx?id=2039



Species No. of

Records

Most Recent Record



Importance?

Local BAP?


Status

Mammals – bats (continued)

Serotine bat Eptesicus serotinus

1 2014 520 m south east - n/a ECH 4,

WCA 5, WCA 6

Soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus


WCA 5, WCA 6

Barbastelle bat Barbastella barbastellus


Noctule Nyctalus noctula

2 2010 650 m north n/a ECH 4,

WCA 5, WCA 6

Common pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus

3 2014 820 m south east - n/a ECH 4,

WCA 5, WCA 6

Long-eared bat species Plecotus

2 2006 830 m south n/a ECH 4,

WCA 5, WCA 6

Mammals – others

Badger Meles meles

2 2014 † - n/a WCA 6, PBA

Otter Lutra lutra

1 2009 180 m south west n/a ECH 2, ECH 4, WCA 5, WCA 6

Water vole Arvicola amphibius

1 1997 630 m east n/a WCA 5

Key:

#: Dependent on species +: Grid reference provided was six figures and as such, the record may be located within 100 m of the study site. *: Grid reference provided was four figures only. † Badger records are confidential and therefore proximity is not provided within the report. ECH 2: Annex II of the European Communities Council Directive on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and Wild Fauna and Flora. Animal and plant species of community interest whose conservation requires the designation of Special Areas of Conservation. ECH 4: Annex IV of the European Communities Council Directive on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and Wild Fauna and Flora. Animal and plant species of community interest in need of strict protection. PBA: Protection of Badgers Act 1992. WCA 1i: Schedule 1 Part 1 of Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Birds protected by special penalties at all times. WCA 5: Schedule 5 of Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Protected animals (other than birds). WCA 5 S9(1): Schedule 5 Section 9(1) of Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Protected animals (other than birds). Protection limited to intentional killing, injury or taking. WCA 5 S9(5): Schedule 5 Section 9(5) of Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Protected animals (other than birds). Protection limited to selling, offering for sale, processing or transporting for purpose of sale, or advertising for sale, any live or dead animal, or any part of, or anything derived from, such animal. WCA 6: Schedule 6 of Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Animals which may not be killed or taken by certain methods.

Species of Principal Importance: Species of Principal Importance for Nature Conservation in England.

Note. This table does not include reference to the Berne Convention (Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats), the Bonn Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals or the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).

Table 3.2 (Continued): Summary of Protected/Notable Species Records Within 1 km of Survey Area

In addition to the species listed in Table 3.2, the desk study provided records of the following (located within 1 km of the site):



Birds The desk study revealed records of five species of bird listed as Species of Principal Importance, comprising common cuckoo Cuculus canorus, European turtle dove Streptopelia turtur, house sparrow Passer domesticus, lesser redpoll Carduelis carbaret and yellow wagtail Motacilla flava subsp. flavissima. Invertebrates The desk study revealed records of two species of butterfly listed as Species of Principal Importance, comprising dingy skipper Erynnis tages and small heath Coenonympha pamphilus and twenty-three species of moth listed as Species of Principal Importance, comprising Beaded Chestnut Agrochola lychnidis, buff ermine Spilosoma luteum, centre-barred sallow Atethmia centrago, cinnabar Tyria jacobaeae, dark-barred twin-spot carpet Xanthorhoe ferrugata, dot moth Melanchra persicariae, drab looper Minoa murinata, dusky brocade Apamea remissa, dusky thorn Ennomos fuscantaria, feathered gothic Tholera decimalis, garden tiger Arctia caja, ghost moth Hepialus humuli, grey dagger Acronicta psi, knotgrass Acronicta rumicis, lackey Malacosoma Neustria, minor shoulder-knot Brachylomia viminalis, mouse moth Amphipyra tragopoginis, rustic Hoplodrina blanda, shaded broad-bar Scotopteryx chenopodiata, small emerald Hemistola chrysoprasaria, small phoenix Ecliptopera silaceata, small square-spot Diarsia rubi and white ermine Spilosoma lubricipeda.

3.4 INVASIVE SPECIES

No records of invasive species within a 1 km radius of the study area were provided in the desk study. It should be noted that the absence of records should not be taken as confirmation that a species is absent from the search area.



4. PHASE 1 HABITAT SURVEY

4.1 INTRODUCTION

The results of the Phase 1 Habitat Survey are presented in the following sections. An annotated Phase 1 Habitat Survey Drawing (Drawing C118997-02-01) is provided in Chapter 7. This drawing illustrates the location and extent of all habitat types recorded on site. Any notable features or features too small to map are detailed using target notes. Photographs taken during the field survey are presented in Chapter 8. The survey was carried out on 21st August 2015 by Sarah Hickman, Ecological Consultant. Table 4.1 details the weather conditions at the time of the survey.

Parameter Condition

Temperature (ºC) 17

Cloud (%) 100

Wind (Beaufort) F0-1

Precipitation Dry

Table 4.1: Weather Conditions During Field Survey

4.2 SURVEY CONSTRAINTS AND LIMITATIONS

No significant constraints were experienced at the time of survey.

4.3 HABITATS

The following habitat types were recorded on site during the field survey:

Amenity grassland;

Building;

Fence;

Hardstanding;

Scattered scrub;

Scattered trees; and,

Wall. These habitats are described below. They are ordered alphabetically, not in order of ecological importance. Amenity grassland There were several large areas of amenity grassland present around the site (Plate 1). A large area in the south of the site and an area on the western boundary were well managed with a sward of approximately 1 – 2 cm; the remaining areas were unmanaged, with a sward of 20 – 100 cm. Species comprised yarrow Achillea millefolium, dandelion Taraxacum officinale agg., daisy Bellis perennis, ribwort plantain Plantago lanceolata and cock’s-foot Dactylis glomerata. Building Two blocks of garages were present in the north of the survey area (Plate 2). They were of concrete construction, with corrugated asbestos roofs and plastic sliding doors. Fence Various types of fencing was present throughout the survey area, including heras fencing (Plate 3), post and rail, chain link and panel fencing. They were all approximately 1 m high and generally devoid of any vegetation, except for the dense ivy Hedera helix on the panel fencing on the southern boundary. Hardstanding Areas of tarmac car parking and access roads were present, which were generally in good condition (Plate 4). However, vegetation was growing the cracks and around the edges of the southern area of hardstanding, with species comprising butterfly-bush Buddleia davidii, dock Rumex sp., yarrow, nettle Urtica dioica and bramble Rubus fruticosus agg.



Scattered scrub Scattered scrub was present around areas of hardstanding and buildings (Plate 5). Species comprising bramble, bindweed Calystegia sp., nettle, ivy and dandelion. Scattered trees Several scattered trees were present, predominately in the north of the site. They ranged in age from young to mature and in height from 2 m to 7 m. Species comprised ash Fraxinus excelsior, elder Sambucus nigra, sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus and elm Ulmus sp. For more information about the trees on site, please refer to the Pre-development Arboricultural Survey as detailed in RT-MME-118997-01. Wall A retaining wall was present in the centre of the survey area, around an area of hardstanding (Plate 6). This comprises concrete blocks, which are approximately 1 m high. Scattered scrub was present on top of the wall, with species comprising ash, sycamore and nettle.

4.4 FAUNA

During the survey field signs of faunal species were recorded. The time of year at which the survey is undertaken will affect species or field signs directly recorded during the survey. Birds

A woodpigeon Columba palumbus was observed on site during the field survey. Mammals A mammal pathway (Plate 7), latrine (Target note 1, Plate 8) and push-through were noted on site at the time of survey.

4.5 INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES

No invasive plant species were found on site during the survey.



5. DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

5.1 SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS

It is understood that the proposals comprise the development of approximately eight or nine houses; however, full details are currently unknown. Therefore, a precautionary approach has been adopted when discussing the potential for impact nature conservation sites and which habitats and species are notable considerations. The discussions and recommendations should be reviewed and amended, where appropriate, once the proposals are finalised.


The desk study exercise identified one European statutory site within 5 km of the survey area, two UK statutory sites and nine ancient woodland sites within 2 km and three non-statutory sites within 1 km. The site is located within 10 km of a statutory site designated for bats. The significance of these sites to the proposed development is discussed below. European Statutory Sites ‘Rodborough Common’ SAC is the only European statutory site and is located 2,800 m north east of the survey area. Due to the small-scale nature of the development, the built-up nature of the intervening habitats, and the distance between the European statutory sites and the survey area, it is unlikely that these sites will be directly or indirectly impacted by the proposed development. Therefore, European statutory sites are not a notable consideration in relation to the proposed development. UK Statutory Sites ‘Woodchester Park’ SSSI is the closest UK statutory site and is located 915 m north west of the survey area. This site is partially designated for the presence of a greater horseshoe bat roost centred on the mansion near the western end of the site. There is limited connectivity between the survey area and the conservation site, as there are predominately houses and roads between the two areas. The survey area is well lit by streetlight, meaning it is unlikely for greater horseshoe bats to be present. For more information about how bats may use the site, please refer to Section 6.3. The survey area was also found to be within the SSSI impact risk zone of this SSSI. However, the proposed development does not fall into the risk categories of this SSSI (please refer to Appendix 1 for more information). The remaining conservation site is located 1050 m from the survey area. Due to the small-scale nature of the development, the built-up nature of the intervening habitats, and the distance between the statutory conservation sites and the survey area, it is unlikely that these sites will be directly or indirectly impacted by the proposed development. Therefore, UK statutory sites are not a notable consideration in relation to the proposed development. Non-Statutory Sites and Ancient Woodland Sites ‘Bunting Hill’ KWS is the closest non-statutory site and is located 115 m south of the survey area. The remaining conservation sites are located 590 m or more from the survey area. Due to the small-scale nature of the development, the built-up nature of the intervening habitats, and the distance between the non-statutory conservation sites and the survey area, it is unlikely that these sites will be directly or indirectly impacted by the proposed development. Therefore, non-statutory sites are not a notable consideration in relation to the proposed development.

5.3 HABITATS

The ecological importance of the habitats present on site is determined by their presence on the list of Habitats of Principal Importance in England and on the Local BAP. It also takes into account the intrinsic value of the habitat. Those habitats which are considered to be of intrinsic importance and have the potential to be impacted by the site proposals are highlighted as notable considerations. A discussion of the implications of the site proposals with regard to the habitats present on site is provided in the text below. A separate discussion of the value of the habitats on site to protected or notable species is provided in Section 5.4.



Scattered trees The mature and semi-mature trees on site are of intrinsic value as they cannot be easily replaced in the short to medium term. As it is unknown if the trees are to be affected by the proposed development, a recommendation for their retention and protection has been given in Section 6.3. Amenity grassland, building, fence, hardstanding, scattered scrub and wall The remaining habitats on site are well represented locally, have low-species diversity or can easily be replaced within the new development. Therefore, they are not a notable consideration for the proposed development. Habitats considered to be of relevance to the proposed development are summarised in Table 5.1.

Habitat Type Habitat

of Principal Importance?

Local BAP Habitat?

Summary of Potential Impacts

Scattered trees - - Habitat loss

Table 5.1: Summary of Potential Impacts on Notable Habitats

5.4 PROTECTED/NOTABLE SPECIES

The following paragraphs consider the likely impact of the site proposals on protected or notable species. This is based on those species highlighted in the desk study exercise (Chapter 3) and other species for which potentially suitable habitat occurs within or adjacent to the survey area. Mammals Bats The desk study provided records of eleven species of bat within a 1 km radius of the survey area, with the closest record being located 290 m north-west. The trees on site do not have features suitable for roosting bats, such as woodpecker holes or split limbs. The buildings were deemed to be unsuitable for roosting bats, as although there were features such as gaps around the doors and lifted roof edging, there was no cavity or other suitable roosting features for bats found when the buildings were fully inspected. The buildings were also damp, making it unlikely for a roosting bat to be present. Therefore, roosting bats are not a notable consideration for the proposed development. The trees and scrub provide suitable foraging habitat for bats. They may also form part of a commuting route into the wider landscape. Therefore, foraging bats are a notable consideration for the proposed development and a recommendation has been given within Section 6.3. Badger The desk study provided a record of a badger within a 1 km radius of the survey area. Evidence of badgers using the site for foraging was noted at the time of survey, such as a push-through in the southern fence, mammal pathways and a latrine. Although no setts were identified at the time of survey, the amenity grassland and scrub provides potential sett-building habitat and therefore setts may be established before work begins. Therefore, badgers are a notable consideration for the proposed development and a recommendation has been given within Section 6.3. Otter The desk study provided a record of an otter within a 1 km radius of the survey area, which was located 180 m south-west. There are no water courses on site or in the immediate vicinity of the survey area. Therefore, otters are not a notable consideration for the proposed development. Water vole The desk study provided a record of a water vole within a 1 km radius of the survey area, which was located 630 m east. There are no water courses on site or in the immediate vicinity of the survey area. Therefore, water vole are not a notable consideration for the proposed development. Reptiles The desk study provided records of slow-worm, lizard and grass snake within a 1 km radius of the survey area, with the closest record being located potentially on site. The majority of the site is unsuitable for



reptiles, as it is predominately hardstanding and buildings. However, the longer areas of amenity grassland may provide suitable foraging and refuge habitat. The survey area is also connected to potentially suitable foraging and refuge habitat in the wider landscape. Therefore, reptiles are a notable consideration for the proposed development and a recommendation has been given within Section 6.3. Amphibians The desk study provided records of common frog, common toad, palmate newt and smooth newt within a 1 km radius of the survey area. The majority of the site is unsuitable for terrestrial habitat, as it is predominately hardstanding and buildings. The longer areas of amenity grassland may provide suitable habitat; however, reference to Ordnance Map Survey data and aerial imagery indicates that there are no water bodies within a 500 m radius that could provide suitable breeding habitat. Therefore, amphibians are not a notable consideration for the proposed development. Birds The desk study provided records of ten species listed as Schedule 1 on the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 as amended. The specific breeding ranges and habitat requirements of these species mean that they are unlikely to nest within the survey area. Numerous other more common bird species were also identified within the desk study, as well as various bird species being observed on site at the time of survey. If the proposed works are undertaken in the bird nesting season then there is potential for impact upon nesting birds and as such, a recommendation has been made in Section 6.3. Due to the limited extent of potential nesting and foraging habitat to be removed and the presence of alternative features within the local vicinity, it is considered that the works should not adversely impact upon birds in the long-term. Nevertheless, as some losses will occur, enhancement recommendations are provided within Section 6.2. Aquatic invertebrates The desk study provided a record of a white-clawed crayfish within a 1 km radius of the survey area, which was located 820 m south-east. There are no water bodies on site or in the immediate vicinity. Therefore, white-clawed crayfish is not a notable consideration for the proposed development. Terrestrial invertebrates The desk study provided a record of a stag beetle within a 1 km radius of the survey area, which was located 860 m south-east. There were no piles of wood or standing dead wood identified on site at the time of survey. The survey area is not well connected to suitable habitat in the wider landscape. Therefore, stag beetles are not a notable consideration for the proposed development. The desk study revealed records of numerous invertebrate species within a 1 km radius of the survey area. The foodplants of the majority of these species were not present on site at the time of survey; however, the foodplant of the centre-barred sallow moth, ash, was present. Given the commonality of ash and the presence of similar habitat within the wider landscape, it is considered the loss of this habitat will not affect this moth in the long term. However, as some losses will occur, enhancement recommendations have been given within Section 6.2. Other Species The following protected species are not considered to be material considerations due to the lack of desk study records and absence of suitable habitats within the development site: dormouse, red squirrel and polecat. Summary Species considered to be of relevance to the proposed development are summarised in Table 5.2.



Species / Species Group

Species of Principal Importance?

Local BAP Species?

Summary of Potential Impacts

Bats # n/a Loss of suitable habitat, lighting

Badger - n/a Loss of suitable habitat, direct harm/injury

Reptiles # n/a Loss of suitable habitat, direct harm/injury

Birds # n/a Loss of suitable habitat, direct harm/injury

#: Species dependent

Table 5.2: Summary of Potential Impacts on Notable Species


There were no invasive plant species identified within a 1 km radius of the survey area or noted on site at the time of survey. Therefore, invasive plant species are not a notable consideration for the proposed development.

A summary of legislation and policy relevant to the ecology of the site is included in Appendix 2.



6. RECOMMENDATIONS

All recommendations provided in this section are based on Middlemarch Environmental Ltd’s current understanding of the site proposals, correct at the time the report was compiled. Should the proposals alter, the conclusions and recommendations made in the report should be reviewed to ensure that they remain appropriate.


There are no recommendations to be made in regard to nature conservation sites.

6.2 HABITATS

The following recommendations are made regarding the habitats present on site: R1 Habitat Loss and Enhancement: In accordance with the provision of Chapter 11 of the National

Planning Policy Framework (Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment) and Local Planning Policy, biodiversity enhancement measures should be incorporated into the landscaping scheme of any proposed works to maximise the ecological value of the site:

Planting of habitats which will be of value to wildlife, such as: native seed/fruit bearing species to provide foraging habitat for mammals and birds; nectar-rich species to attract bees, butterflies and moths; wildflower grassland margins to provide larval food for caterpillars and to attract

butterfly and moth species such as wall and small heath; and, species which attract night flying insects which will be of value to foraging bats, for

example: evening primrose Oenothera biennis, goldenrod Solidago virgaurea, honeysuckle Lonicera periclymenum and fleabane Pulicaria dysenterica.

Inclusion of hedgehog passes under any fence lines to allow connectivity between the site and the wider area.

Provision of nesting/roosting habitat, such as installation of nest boxes for species such as house sparrow, dense scrub for species such as song thrush, and bat boxes for species such as pipistrelle.

R2 Trees: Any trees on site, or overhanging the site, which are to be retained as a part of any proposed

works should be protected in accordance with British Standard 5837: 2012 "Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - recommendations". Protection should be installed on site prior to the commencement of any works on site. Any trees that are removed should be mitigated within the landscaping design, through the inclusion of appropriate native or wildlife attracting species of adequate size.

6.3 PROTECTED / NOTABLE SPECIES

To ensure compliance with wildlife legislation and relevant planning policy, the following recommendations are made:

R3 Badger: Given the suitable habitat present within the survey area and connectivity to adjacent habitat that is suitable for badgers, it is recommended that a badger survey is undertaken to determine whether any setts are located within 30 m of the proposed development area. Should badger setts be identified a badger activity survey may be required. Badger surveys can be completed at any time of the year. Should a badger sett be identified that will be required to be disturbed or closed, works to the badger sett will require a licence from Natural England. Badger setts can be closed between July and November inclusive.

R4 Nesting Birds: Vegetation and building clearance should be undertaken outside the nesting bird

season. The nesting bird season is weather dependent but generally extends between March and September inclusive. If this is not possible then any vegetation and buildings to be removed or disturbed should be checked by an experienced ecologist for nesting birds immediately prior to works commencing. If birds are found to be nesting any works which may affect them would have to be delayed until the young have fledged and the nest has been abandoned naturally.



R5 Reptiles: A reptile survey should be undertaken of suitable habitats within the proposed

development site. Reptile surveys can be completed in suitable weather conditions between April and September (inclusive).

R6 Terrestrial Mammals including Badger: Any excavations that need to be left overnight should be

covered or fitted with mammal ramps to ensure that any animals that enter can safely escape. Any open pipework with an outside diameter of greater than 120 mm must be covered at the end of each work day to prevent animals entering/becoming trapped.

R7 Foraging Bats: In line with paragraph 125 of the National Planning Policy Framework, the

development should aim to limit the impact of light pollution on bats through the careful use of lighting in critical areas only and at a low level with minimum spillage. No lighting should impact on the site boundaries.


There are no recommendations to be given in regard to invasive plant species.



7. DRAWINGS

Drawing C118997-02 – Phase 1 Habitat Map

||||||||||||

||||||||||||||||| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

||||||||| || |

| || |

| | || | |

| | || | |

| | || | |

| | || | |

| | || | |

| | || | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

|||| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

|||||||

|||||||

||||||

DDDDD

DDDDDDDDDDDD

DD

&§&§

&§

&§

&§ &§

!H

FIELDWAYS

A

A

AA

A

A

1

384150

384150

384200

384200

1998

00

1998

00

1998

50

1998

50

0 2010 m

Triumph House, Birmingham Road, Allesley, Coventry CV5 9AZT:01676 525880 F:01676 521400

E:[email protected]$

C118997-02

Project

Drawing

Client

Drawing Number

Scale @ A4

Approved By Drawn By

Date

RevisionC118997-02

1:400SH CD

August 201500

Aster HomesPreliminary Ecological Assessment

Lawnside, NailsworthLegendSite boundary

&§ Scattered tree| | | | | | | FenceD D D Line of scattered scrub

WallMammal pathAmenity grasslandBuildingHardstanding

D D

D D

D D

D D

D D

D D

D D

D D Scattered scrub

!H Target note

This drawing is based on topographical survey "7979-1.dwg",supplied by the client.

A

1. Badger latrine



8. PHOTOGRAPHS

Plate 1: Amenity grassland Plate 2: Building

Plate 3: Heras fencing Plate 4: Hardstanding

Plate 5: Scattered scrub Plate 6: Wall



Plate 7: Mammal pathway Plate 8: Badger latrine



REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

British Standards Institution (2013). British Standard 42020: 2013. Biodiversity – Code of practice for planning and development. British Standards Institution, London.

British Standards Institution. (2012). British Standard 5837:2012, Trees in relation to design, demolition and

construction – recommendations. British Standards Institution, London. Department for Communities and Local Government (2012). National Planning Policy Framework. Available:

http://www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/planningsystem/planningpolicy/planningpolicyframework/

Institute of Environmental Assessment. (1995). Guidelines for Baseline Ecological Assessment, Institute of

Environmental Assessment. E&FN Spon, An Imprint of Chapman and Hall. London. Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2010). Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey: A technique for

environmental audit (reprint). Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2012). UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework. Available:

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/UK_Post2010_Bio-Fwork.pdf Middlemarch Environmental Ltd (2015) Pre-development Arboricultural Survey. Lawnside, Nailsworth. RT-

MME-118997-01.



http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/UK_Post2010_Bio-Fwork.pdf



APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1: Summary of Statutory Nature Conservation Sites APPENDIX 2: Overview of Relevant Legislation and Policy



APPENDIX 1

Summary of Statutory Nature Conservation Sites



Site Check Report Report generated on Mon Aug 24 2015 You selected the location: Centroid Grid Ref: ST841998 The following features have been found in your search area: Ancient Woodland (England) Wood Name Theme Name

Ancient & Semi-Natural Woodland Theme ID 1416105 Area (Ha) 3.12 Wood Name Theme Name Ancient & Semi-Natural Woodland Theme ID 1416110 Area (Ha) 3.42

Wood Name COLLIERS WOOD Theme Name Ancient Replanted Woodland Theme ID 1106887 Area (Ha) 35.19 Wood Name HAZEL WOOD Theme Name Ancient & Semi-Natural Woodland

Theme ID 1110330 Area (Ha) 41.72 Wood Name HARTLEY BRIDGE WOOD Theme Name Ancient & Semi-Natural Woodland Theme ID 1110325 Area (Ha)

6.81 Wood Name HIGH/BOWLAS WOODS Theme Name Ancient & Semi-Natural Woodland Theme ID 1110321 Area (Ha) 26.92 Wood Name LUTHEREDGE FARM WOOD Theme Name

Ancient & Semi-Natural Woodland Theme ID 1110319 Area (Ha) 4.04 Wood Name SANDGROVE Theme Name Ancient & Semi-Natural Woodland Theme ID 1110323

Area (Ha) 44.59



Wood Name WOODCHESTER PARK WOODS Theme Name Ancient Replanted Woodland Theme ID 1106884

Area (Ha) 42.2 Sites of Special Scientific Interest (England) Name MINCHINHAMPTON COMMON Reference 1002601 Natural England Contact PAUL HACKMAN Natural England Phone Number 0845 600 3078 Hectares

193.98 Citation 1002432 Hyperlink http://designatedsites.naturalengland.org.uk/SiteDetail.aspx?SiteCode=s1002432 Name WOODCHESTER PARK Reference 1002631 Natural England Contact PAUL HACKMAN Natural England Phone Number

0845 600 3078 Hectares 228.27 Citation 1003561 Hyperlink http://designatedsites.naturalengland.org.uk/SiteDetail.aspx?SiteCode=s1003561 Local Nature Reserves (England) No Features found National Nature Reserves (England) No Features found

SSSI Impact Risk Zones – to assess planning applications for likely impacts on SSSIs/SACs/SPAs & Ramsar sites (England) 1. DOES PLANNING PROPOSAL FALL INTO ONE OR MORE OF THE CATEGORIES BELOW? 2. IF YES, CHECK THE CORRESPONDING DESCRIPTION(S) BELOW. LPA SHOULD CONSULT NATURAL ENGLAND ON LIKELY RISKS FROM THE FOLLOWING: All Planning Applications All planning applications outside/extending outside existing settlements/urban areas affecting greenspace, farmland, semi natural habitats or features such as trees, hedges, streams, rural buildings/structures EXCEPT HOUSEHOLDER APPLICATIONS. Infrastructure Pipelines, pylons and overhead cables. Any transport proposal including road, rail and by water (excluding routine maintenance). Airports, helipads and other aviation proposals.

Wind & Solar Energy Quarry Planning applications for quarries, including: new proposals, Review of Minerals Permissions (ROMP), extensions, variations to conditions etc. Rural Non Residential Residential Residential development of 100 units or more. Rural Residential Any residential development of 50 or more houses outside existing settlements/urban areas. Air Pollution Pig & Poultry Units. Any other development/ industrial or commercial process that could cause AIR POLLUTION.

Combustion

http://designatedsites.naturalengland.org.uk/SiteDetail.aspx?SiteCode=s1002432

http://designatedsites.naturalengland.org.uk/SiteDetail.aspx?SiteCode=s1003561



General combustion processes >20MW energy input. Incl: energy from waste incineration, other incineration, landfill gas generation plant, pyrolysis/gasification, anaerobic digestion, sewage treatment works, other incineration/ combustion. Waste Landfill. Incl: inert landfill, non-hazardous landfill, hazardous landfill. Composting

Any composting proposal with more than 500 tonnes maximum annual operational throughput. Incl: open windrow composting, in-vessel composting, anaerobic digestion, other waste management. Discharges Water Supply Large infrastructure such as warehousing / industry where net additional gross internal floorspace is > 1,000m² or any development needing its own water supply. Guidance /Metadata_for_magic/SSSI IRZ User Guidance v2.2 MAGIC 05May2015.pdf Special Areas of Conservation (England) Name RODBOROUGH COMMON Reference

UK0012826 Hectares 109.27 Hyperlink http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/protectedsites/sacselection/sac.asp?eucode=UK0012826 Ramsar Sites (England) No Features found Special Protection Areas (England) No Features found

http://www.magic.gov.uk/Metadata_for_magic/SSSI%20IRZ%20User%20Guidance%20v2.2%20MAGIC%2005May2015.pdf

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/protectedsites/sacselection/sac.asp?eucode=UK0012826







APPENDIX 2

Overview of Relevant Legislation and Policy



This section provides an overview of the framework of legislation and policy which underpins nature conservation and is a material consideration in the planning process in England. GENERAL BIODIVERSITY LEGISLATION AND POLICY Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, as amended (Habitats Regulations 2010, as amended) The Habitats Regulations 2010 consolidate and update the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 and all its various amendments. The Habitats Regulations 2010 are the principal means by which the EEC Council Directive 92/43 (The Habitats Directive) as amended is transposed into English and Welsh law. The Habitats Regulations 2010 place duty upon the relevant authority of government to identify sites which are of importance to the habitats and species listed in Annexes I and II of the Habitats Directive. Those sites which meet the criteria are, in conjunction with the European Commission, designated as Sites of Community Importance, which are subsequently identified as Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) by the European Union member states. The regulations also place a duty upon the government to maintain a register of European protected sites designated as a result of EC Directive 79/409/EEC on the Conservation of Wild Birds (The Birds Directive). These sites are termed Special Protection Areas (SPA) and, in conjunction with SACs, form a network of sites known as Natura 2000. The Habitats Directive introduces for the first time for protected areas, the precautionary principle; that is that projects can only be permitted having ascertained no adverse effect on the integrity of the site. Projects may still be permitted if there are no alternatives, and there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest. The Habitats Regulations 2010 also provide for the protection of individual species of fauna and flora of European conservation concern listed in Schedules 2 and 5 respectively. Schedule 2 includes species such as otter and great crested newt for which the UK population represents a significant proportion of the total European population. It is an offence to deliberately kill, injure, disturb or trade these species. Schedule 5 plant species are protected from unlawful destruction, uprooting or trade under the regulations. The Habitats Regulations 2010 were amended in August 2012 to ensure clearer transposition of the provisions of Articles 2, 3, 4(4) (second sentence) and Article 10 of the Wild Birds Directive, by giving additional and specific duties to relevant bodies. A number of amendments were also made to transpose more clearly certain elements of the Habitats Directive. The Wildlife and Countryside Act (WCA) 1981 (as amended) The WCA, as amended, consolidates and amends pre-existing national wildlife legislation in order to implement the Bern Convention and the Birds Directive. It complements the Habitat Regulations 2010 (as amended), offering protection to a wider range of species. The Act also provides for the designation and protection of national conservation sites of value for their floral, faunal or geological features, termed Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs). Schedules of the act provide lists of protected species, both flora and fauna, and detail the possible offences that apply to these species. All relevant species specific legislation is detailed later in this Appendix. The Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act 2000 The CROW Act, introduced in England and Wales in 2000, amends and strengthens existing wildlife legislation detailed in the WCA. It places a duty on government departments and the National Assembly for Wales to have regard for biodiversity, and provides increased powers for the protection and maintenance of SSSIs. The Act also contains lists of habitats and species (Section 74) for which conservation measures should be promoted, in accordance with the recommendations of the Convention on Biological Diversity (Rio Earth Summit) 1992. The Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 Section 40 of the NERC Act places a duty upon all local authorities and public bodies in England and Wales to promote and enhance biodiversity in all of their functions. Sections 41 (England) and 42 (Wales) list habitats and species of principal importance to the conservation of biodiversity. These lists superseded Section 74 of the CRoW Act 2000.



The Hedgerow Regulations 1997 The Hedgerow Regulations make provision for the identification of important hedgerows which may not be removed without permission from the Local Planning Authority. UK Biodiversity Action Plan The United Kingdom Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP), first published in 1994 and updated in 2007, was a government initiative designed to implement the requirements of the Convention of Biological Diversity to conserve and enhance species and habitats. The UK BAP contained a list of priority habitats and species of conservation concern in the UK, and outlined biodiversity initiatives designed to enhance their conservation status. Lists of Broad and Local habitats were also included. The priority habitats and species correlated with those listed on Section 41 and 42 of the NERC Act. The UK BAP required that conservation of biodiversity was addressed at a County level through the production of Local BAPs. These were complementary to the UK BAP, however were targeted towards species of conservation concern characteristic of each area. In addition, a number of local authorities and large organisations have produced their own BAPs. Species and Habitats of Material Consideration for Planning in England In 2011, the government published the ‘Biodiversity 2020: A strategy for England’s wildlife and ecosystem services’ to replace the previous England Biodiversity Strategy. In 2012 the UK BAP was replaced by the UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework. Previous planning policy (and some supporting guidance which is still current, e.g. ODPM Circular 06/2005, now under revision), refers to UK BAP habitats and species as being a material consideration in the planning process. Equally many local plans refer to BAP priority habitats and species. Both remain as material considerations in the planning process but such habitats and species are now described as Species and Habitats of Principal Importance for Conservation in England, or simply priority habitats and priority species under the UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework. The list of habitats and species remains unchanged and is still derived from Section 41 list of the Natural Environmental and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006. As was previously the case when it was a BAP priority species hen harrier continues to be regarded as a priority species although it does not appear on the Section 41 list. NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK AND PRACTICE GUIDANCE In early 2012, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) replaced much previous planning policy guidance, including Planning Policy Statement 9: Biological and Geological Conservation. The government circular 06/05: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation - Statutory Obligations and Their Impact within the Planning System, which accompanied PPS9, still remains valid. A presumption towards sustainable development is at the heart of the NPPF. This presumption does not apply however where developments require appropriate assessment under the Birds or Habitats Directives. Chapter 11, on conserving and enhancing the natural environment, sets out how the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by minimising impacts on biodiversity and, where possible, provide net gains in biodiversity. Opportunities to incorporate biodiversity gains into a development should be encouraged. If a proposed development would result in significant harm to the natural environment which cannot be avoided (through the use of an alternative site with less harmful impacts), mitigated or compensated for (as a last resort) then planning permission should be refused. In March 2014 the Department for Communities and Local Government released guidance to support the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), known as the National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG). This has been produced to provide guidance for planners and communities which will help deliver high quality development and sustainable growth in England. The guidance includes a section entitled ‘Natural Environment: Biodiversity, ecosystems and green infrastructure’ which sets out information with respect to the following:

the statutory basis for minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains where possible;

the local planning authority’s requirements for planning for biodiversity;

what local ecological networks are and how to identify and map them;



the sources of ecological evidence;

the legal obligations on local planning authorities and developers regarding statutory designated sites and protected species;

the considerations for local (non-statutory) designated sites;

definition of green infrastructure;

where biodiversity should be taken into account in preparing a planning application;

how development can enhance biodiversity;

how policy is applied to avoid, mitigate or compensate for significant harm to biodiversity and how mitigation and compensation measures can be ensured; and,

the consideration of ancient woodlands and veteran trees in planning decisions. LOCAL PLANNING POLICY http://www.stroud.gov.uk/docs/planning/planning_strategy.asp The Stroud District Local Plan (2005) The Stroud District Local Plan was adopted on the 10th November 2005. Its policies expired on the 10th November 2008 unless they were ‘saved’ by a Direction made by the Secretary of State under the provisions of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. The ‘saved’ policies of relevance to ecology are detailed below. This remains the key policy document for making development control decisions until all policies are replaced through the adoption of a new District Local Plan, which is currently under preparation. POLICY NE3 Protection of Key Wildlife Sites, RIGs and LNRs. Development proposals that would adversely affect a Key Wildlife Site, Local Nature Reserve or Regionally Important Geological or Geomorphological Site will not be permitted unless the benefits of the development outweigh the nature conservation interest or scientific interest of the site. Where development is permitted, the effects of the development should be minimised and conditions or planning obligations used to secure compensatory measures that reflect the importance of the site and relevant Gloucestershire Biodiversity Action Plan targets. POLICY NE4 Control of development affecting legally protected and BAP species. Development proposals that would adversely affect, either directly or indirectly, a site supporting any legally protected species or its habitat, or priority species or habitats as defined in the Gloucestershire Biodiversity Action Plan, will not be permitted unless safeguarding measures can be provided through conditions or planning obligations to secure their protection. Where appropriate, development proposals should contribute to Gloucestershire Biodiversity Action Plan targets. POLICY NE5 Wildlife corridor protection In considering proposals for development, the protection or enhancement of wildlife corridors will be sought. It is important that the function of any corridor should not be harmed. The creation of new wildlife corridors will be supported in appropriate locations. The details of any necessary enhancing, mitigating or compensatory measures should accompany the development proposal. POLICY NE6 Retention of important natural features In development proposals, important landscape features such as trees, hedges, shrubs, vegetation, green lanes, walls, woodland and unimproved pasture should be retained and managed to conserve and enhance biodiversity. The impact of development on such features should be minimised and will be controlled through the use of conditions and planning obligations. POLICY NE7 Protection of water based habitats Development proposals that would adversely affect the nature conservation interest of natural watercourses, canals, ponds and other water features will not be permitted unless either: 1. the benefits of the development outweigh the nature conservation interest of the water feature; or 2. the effects of the development on the nature conservation interest of the water feature can be compensated by conditions or planning obligations. POLICY NE11 Protection of trees and woodlands

http://www.stroud.gov.uk/docs/planning/planning_strategy.asp



Development will not be permitted if it would damage or destroy trees protected by a Tree Preservation Order, or identified as Ancient Woodland, or in a Conservation Area unless either: 1. the removal of one or more trees would be in the interests of good arboricultural practice; or, 2. the benefits of the proposed development outweighs the amenity or landscape value of the protected trees. POLICY NE12 Protection of hedgerows Development that would destroy or significantly damage an ‘important’ hedgerow will not be permitted unless the benefits of the development outweigh the ‘importance’ of the hedgerow in terms of its contribution to landscape character or appearance, or its nature conservation, historical or archaeological interest. The Emerging Stroud District Local Plan 2014 There is a requirement to plan for current and future development needs over at least a 15 year time horizon. The District Council are currently preparing a new plan which is due to be adopted during the Autumn/Winter period 2015. SPECIES SPECIFIC LEGISLATION This section contains a summary of legislation with relation to the species present or potentially present in the survey area. The reader should refer to the original legislation for definitive interpretation. Badgers Badgers and their setts are protected under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992. The Protection of Badgers Act 1992 is based primarily on the need to protect badgers from baiting and deliberate harm or injury, badgers are not protected for conservation reasons. The following are criminal offences:

To intentionally or recklessly interfere with a sett. Sett interference includes disturbing badgers whilst they are occupying a sett, as well as damaging or destroying a sett or obstructing access to it.

To wilfully kill, injure, take, possess or cruelly ill-treat a badger, or to attempt to do so.

A badger sett is defined in the legislation as:

‘Any structure or place that displays signs indicating current use by a badger’. ‘Current use’ is not synonymous with current occupation and a sett is defined as such (and thus protected) as long as signs of current usage are present. Therefore, a sett is protected until such a time as the field signs deteriorate to such an extent that they no longer indicate ‘current usage’. Badger sett interference can result from a multitude of operations including excavation and coring, even if there is no direct damage to the sett, such as through the disturbance of badgers whilst occupying the sett. Any intentional or reckless work that results in the interference of badger setts is illegal without a licence from Natural England30. In England a licence must be obtained from Natural England before any interference with a badger sett occurs. The reader should refer to the original legislation for the definitive interpretation. Bats Bats and the places they use for shelter or protection (i.e. roosts) receive European protection under The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, as amended (Habitats Regulations 2010, as amended). They receive further legal protection under the Wildlife and Countryside Act (WCA) 1981, as amended. This protection means that bats, and the places they use for shelter or protection, are capable of being a material consideration in the planning process. Regulation 41 of the Habitats Regulations 2010 (as amended), states that a person commits an offence if they:

deliberately capture, injure or kill a bat;

deliberately disturb bats; or



damage or destroy a bat roost (breeding site or resting place). Disturbance of animals includes in particular any disturbance which is likely to impair their ability to survive, to breed or reproduce, or to rear or nurture their young, or in the case of animals of a hibernating or migratory species, to hibernate or migrate; or to affect significantly the local distribution or abundance of the species to which they belong. It is an offence under the Habitats Regulations 2010 (as amended) for any person to have in his possession or control, to transport, to sell or exchange or to offer for sale, any live or dead bats, part of a bat or anything derived from bats, which has been unlawfully taken from the wild. Whilst broadly similar to the above legislation, the WCA 1981 (as amended) differs in the following ways:

Section 9(1) of the WCA makes it an offence to intentionally (rather than deliberately) kill, injure or take any protected species.

Section 9(4)(a) of the WCA makes it an offence to intentionally or recklessly* damage or destroy, or obstruct access to, any structure or place which a protected species uses for shelter or protection.

Section 9(4)(b) of the WCA makes it an offence to intentionally or recklessly* disturb any protected species while it is occupying a structure or place which it uses for shelter or protection.

*Reckless offences were added by the Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act 2000. As bats re-use the same roosts (breeding site or resting place) after periods of vacancy, legal opinion is that roosts are protected whether or not bats are present. Bats The following bat species are Species of Principal Importance for Nature Conservation in England: Barbastelle Bat Barbastella barbastellus, Bechstein’s Bat Myotis bechsteinii, Noctule Bat Nyctalus noctula, Soprano Pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus, Brown Long-eared Bat Plecotus auritus, Greater Horseshoe Bat Rhinolophus ferrumequinum and Lesser Horseshoe Bat Rhinolophus hipposideros. The reader should refer to the original legislation for the definitive interpretation. The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) places a duty on public bodies to take measures to preserve, maintain and re-establish habitat for wild birds. Nesting and nest building birds are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act WCA 1981 (as amended). Subject to the provisions of the act, if any person intentionally:

kills, injures or takes any wild bird;

takes, damages or destroys the nest of any wild bird while that nest is in use or being built; or

takes or destroys an egg of any wild bird, he shall be guilty of an offence. Some species (listed in Schedule 1 of the WCA) are protected by special penalties. Subject to the provisions of the act, if any person intentionally or recklessly:

disturbs any wild bird included in Schedule 1 while it is building a nest or is in, on or near a nest containing eggs or young; or

disturbs dependent young of such a bird, he shall be guilty of an offence. Several bird species are Species of Principal Importance for Nature Conservation in England, making them capable of being material considerations in the planning process. Reptiles All of the UK’s native reptiles are protected by law. The two rarest species – sand lizard (Lacerta agilis) and smooth snake (Coronella austriaca) – benefit from the greatest protection; however these two species are not known to occur within Gloucestershire. Common lizard (Zootoca vivipara), slow-worm (Anguis fragilis), adder (Vipera berus) and grass snake (Natrix natrix) are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 as amended from intentional killing or injuring.



In England and Wales, this Act has been amended by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CRoW), which adds an extra offence, makes species offences arrestable, increases the time limits for some prosecutions and increases penalties. The Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 places a duty on Government Departments to have regard for the conservation of biodiversity and maintains lists of species and habitats which are of principal importance for the purposes of conserving biodiversity in England and Wales. All native reptile species are included on these lists. This is a simplified description of the legislation. In particular, the offences mentioned here may be absolute, intentional, deliberate or reckless. Note that where it is predictable that reptiles are likely to be killed or injured by activities such as site clearance, this could legally constitute intentional killing or injuring.

Documents

LAWNSIDE, NAILSWORTH PRELIMINARY ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT