Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport – …bailey.persona-pi.com/Public-Inquiries/M4-Newport...undertaken is contained in Chapter 10 of the March 2016 ES in Appendices 10.7

Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport – Woodland House Proof of Evidence – Bats

M4CaN-DJV-GEN-ZG_GEN-RP-XXX | May 2017 Page1

Adran yr Economi a’r Seilwaith Department for Economy and Infrastructure

APPLICATION FOR LISTED BUILDING CONSENT UNDER SECTION 10 OF THE PLANNING (LISTED BUILDINGS AND CONSERVATION AREAS) ACT 1990 REFERRED TO WELSH MINISTERS BY DIRECTION UNDER SECTION 12

APPLICATION BY: WELSH MINISTERS

SITE: WOODLAND HOUSE (KNOWN LOCALLY AS THE MAGOR VICARAGE), NEWPORT ROAD, MAGOR, MONMOUTHSHIRE, NP26 3BZ Proof of Evidence Richard Green BSc CEnv MCIEEM Welsh Government, Bats Document Reference: WG 1.20.3



Contents

1. Introduction and Scope of Evidence

2. Methodology and Consultation

3. Baseline Conditions

4. Impacts of the Demolition on Bats

5. Residual Effects on Bats

6. Summary and Conclusions

7. Appendices



1. INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF EVIDENCE

1.1 Personal details

1.1.1 My name is Richard Austin Green and I am owner and Director at

Richard Green Ecology Ltd (RGEL). I hold a BSc Honours Degree in

Applied Biology, specialising in Ecology. I am a full member of the

Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management

(CIEEM) and a Chartered Environmentalist with the Society for the

Environment.

1.1.2 I have been a professional ecologist since completing my BSc

Honours Degree in 1993. From 1993 until 2001 I was a

Conservation Officer for the National Rivers Authority and

subsequently Environment Agency.

1.1.3 In 2001, I joined Halcrow Group Ltd (HGL) as an Ecological

Consultant, becoming a Principal Ecologist and having responsibility

for leading a team of environmental scientists from several

disciplines in 2006.

1.1.4 During my time with HGL I worked for the Highways Agency (HA),

both as a seconded assistant environmental advisor for HA Areas 1

& 2 (for 3 years) and as lead ecologist for a research and

development project on bats and highways (for 3 years). This project

resulted in the production of a Design Manual for Roads and Bridges

(DMRB) Interim Advice Note on bats (IAN 116/08). I also undertook

an ecological impact assessment for Welsh Assembly Government

on the A487(T) Porthmadog, Minffordd and Tremadog Bypass

scheme and co-ordinated a Habitats Regulations Assessment of the

Welsh National Transport Plan.



1.1.5 In 2010, I left HGL to set up Richard Green Ecology Ltd (RGEL). In

my current role as Director of RGEL, I continue to undertake

ecological survey and assessment, specialising in bats. In 2010,

RGEL was subcontracted to CH2M Hill (Halcrow) to undertake a

review of bat mitigation in relation to highway severance for the HA,

resulting in a published report in 2011.

1.1.6 Since 2011 I have been working for RPS and Costain undertaking

environmental assessment and mitigation design for bats in relation

to improvements to Section 2 (Gilwern to Brynmawr) of the A465

Heads of the Valleys Road. This is a very challenging scheme, part

of which passes through the Usk Bat Sites Special Area of

Conservation (designated in part for lesser horseshoe bats). Survey

and mitigation for bats on this scheme has been extensive and

innovative.

1.1.7 I am the Welsh Government expert witness for bats on the proposed

M4CaN Scheme (hereinafter “the Scheme”) in relation to bats.

1.1.8 Parts of my evidence are based on surveys carried out by others,

including ecologists employed by RPS and other consultancies,

including Arup. I have undertaken internal surveys at Woodland

House and advised on bat activity surveys undertaken in May and

June 2017. I have confidence in the bat survey methodologies and I

have confidence in and accept survey findings. The evidence I will

give is based on my own conclusions regarding the potential effects

of the demolition of Woodland House on bats and has been

prepared in accordance with CIEEM’s Code of Professional

Conduct. I confirm that the opinions expressed are given in a fair

and impartial manner and are my true and professional bona fide

opinions.



1.2 Scope and Structure of this Evidence

1.2.1 Matthew Jones, in his proof of evidence [WG 1.1.6], provides

background information on the application for Listed Building

Consent for demolition of the Grade II listed Woodland House

(known locally as the ‘vicarage’) and its curtilage buildings at Magor.

1.2.2 My evidence is concerned with the predicted effects on bats

resulting from the demolition of the buildings with proposed

mitigation.

1.2.3 Information on bats and their ecology is provided in my main proof

[WG 1.20.1], so I have not replicated this in my evidence regarding

Woodland House, other than is necessary.

1.2.4 All bat species and their roosts are protected under the Conservation

of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 [DOC 3.1.22] and are

also protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as

amended) [DOC 3.1.7], through inclusion in Schedule 5, and under

the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 [DOC 3.1.12].

1.2.5 Under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 it

is illegal to deliberately disturb bats. In particular, any deliberate

disturbance which is likely (a) to impair their ability to survive, to

breed or reproduce, to rear or nurture their young, or to hibernate or

migrate, or (b) to affect significantly the local distribution or

abundance of the species to which they belong is an offence under

Regulation 41.

1.2.6 Taken together, these acts and regulations make it illegal to:

i. intentionally or deliberately kill, injure or capture bats;

ii. deliberately or recklessly disturb bats;

iii. damage, destroy or obstruct access to places of shelter,

breeding sites or resting places used by bats;



iv. have in one's possession or control, any live or dead bat; and

v. sell, barter or exchange bats, or parts of bats.

1.2.7 As bat roosts in Woodland House and the adjacent coach house will

be destroyed during construction of the Scheme, a derogation

licence will be required from Natural Resources Wales (NRW). As

part of a licence application, a method statement is required that

sets out the details of the roosts to be affected and the proposed

mitigation and monitoring. To grant a licence, NRW must consider

that the following three tests under the Conservation of Habitats and

Species Regulations 2010 will be satisfied.

i. Regulation 53(2)(e) states that licences may be granted to

“preserve public health or public safety or other imperative

reasons of overriding public interest including those of a social

or economic nature and beneficial consequences of primary

importance for the environment.”

ii. Regulation 53(9)(a) states that a licence may not be granted

unless “there is no satisfactory alternative”.

iii. Regulation 53(9)(b) states that a licence cannot be issued

unless the action proposed “will not be detrimental to the

maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a

favourable conservation status in their natural range”.



1.2.8 My evidence is presented in the following structure:

1. Introduction and Scope of Evidence

2. Methodology and Consultation

3. Baseline Conditions

4. Impacts of the Demolition on Bats

5. Residual Effects on Bats

6. Summary and Conclusions

7. Appendices



2. METHODOLOGY AND CONSULTATION

2.1 Methodology

2.1.1 Bat surveys at Woodland House have been undertaken since 2007

as part of a baseline information gathering exercise to inform the

design and assessment of the M4 Scheme. An account of surveys

undertaken is contained in Chapter 10 of the March 2016 ES in

Appendices 10.7 and 10.24 [DOC 2.3.2], and in Appendix SS10.3 of

the December 2016 ES Supplement [DOC 2.4.14]. Further survey,

consisting of an internal inspection of the buildings on the site, was

undertaken in February 2017 (refer to survey report in Appendix A).

Two emergence surveys of Woodland House, the coach house and

the garage are planned in May and June 2017. In addition, a static

bat detector will be left in the coach house between the two surveys

to record bat activity. The surveys undertaken and planned are in

accordance with guidance in Hundt (2012) and Collins (2016).

2.2 Consultation

2.2.1 A meeting with NRW was held on 23 March 2017 to discuss the

survey findings at that date and to agree the details of further survey

required to inform the assessment and derogation licence

application. Kate Stinchcombe, Senior Biodiversity and Ecology

Officer for Monmouthshire County Council was also invited but was

unable to attend the meeting. NRW agreed to the survey method set

out in 2.1.1.

3. BASELINE CONDITIONS

3.1 Bat survey findings

3.1.1 Surveys undertaken by Ove Arup & Partners Ltd in 2007 found a

small common pipistrelle bat Pipistrellus pipistrellus roost in the

outbuilding (coach house) at Woodland House and a possible Myotis

species roost in the garage.



3.1.2 A preliminary bat roost assessment undertaken by RPS on the 11th

August 2015 concluded that Woodland House and the coach house

had medium potential and that the modern garage had no potential

to be used as a bat roost. No internal surveys were undertaken at

this time.

3.1.3 Three bat emergence surveys were undertaken by RPS in August

and September 2015.

3.1.4 Two common pipistrelle bats emerged from Woodland House during

the first survey on 28th August 2015; one at 20:22h from near the

chimney on the western side of the house; and one at 20:28h from

out of the cladding at the top floor window at the front of the house.

Both bats flew southwards away from the house.

3.1.5 No bats were recorded emerging from Woodland House during the

second survey on 2nd September 2015.

3.1.6 Two common pipistrelles emerged from Woodland House during the

final survey on 9th September 2015; one at 19:56h from within the

front door porch; and one at 20:14h, again from out of the cladding

at the top floor window at the front of the house. Both bats flew

southwards away from the house.

3.1.7 No bats emerged from the coach house during any of the three dusk

emergence surveys.

3.1.8 During the internal inspection survey, undertaken by myself on the

20 February 2017, two old pipistrelle droppings were found stuck in

a cobweb and on a timber at the north-east gable in the loft of

Woodland House (refer to Photographs in Annex A of Appendix A).

There was no other evidence of bats in the loft, which was full of

dusty cobwebs, suggesting that there had been no recent bat activity

within the loft. DNA analysis confirmed these droppings to be from

common pipistrelle bat (refer to Annex C of Appendix A).



3.1.9 An accumulation of approximately 200 lesser horseshoe bat

Rhinolophus hipposideros droppings was found in the south west

first floor room of the coach house. The droppings appeared to be of

mixed age, although no fresh droppings were evident.

3.1.10 There was no evidence of bats in the loft of the garage. The only

potential external roosting location in the garage that could not be

fully inspected was a soffit box at the front of the garage (south east

elevation). There were several gaps between the stone facing and

the timber soffit that could potentially be accessed by bats. However,

the gaps were covered in cobwebs and it is unlikely they have been

used recently, if at all.

3.2 Evaluation

Woodland House

3.2.1 Two old common pipistrelle bat droppings were found at the north-

east gable of the loft. The house has clearly been re-roofed relatively

recently and it is possible that these droppings were present before

the house was re-roofed.

3.2.2 Bat emergence surveys from 2015 confirmed a small number (max.

2 bats per survey) of common pipistrelle bats roost under roof

coverings and in the porch. It is possible that bats roost on the wall

top of the north-east gable.

3.2.3 I consider that Woodland House is used as a day roost by a small

number of common pipistrelle bats. It is unlikely that a maternity

roost is present in the house. This evaluation will be reviewed

following the surveys in May and June 2017.



Coach House

3.2.4 Approximately 200 mixed age lesser horseshoe bat droppings were

found on the first floor of the coach house. No bats were seen to

emerge during 2015 surveys.

3.2.5 I consider that the coach house is used as an occasional day and/or

night roost by one or a small number of lesser horseshoe bats. This

evaluation will be reviewed following the surveys in May and June

2017.

Garage

3.2.6 No signs of bats were found in or on the external walls of the garage.

There is a potential roost behind the soffit at the front of the garage,

although it does not look like it has been used recently, if at all, as

there are lots of cobwebs over the gap between the wall and soffit.

Given that there is no evidence of bats in the loft and the number of

cobwebs over the gap, I consider the garage is of low potential to

support roosting bats. This evaluation will be reviewed following the

surveys in May and June 2017.

4. IMPACTS OF THE DEMOLITION ON BATS

4.1 Destruction of bat roosts

4.1.1 A low value common pipistrelle bat day roost (Woodland House) and

a low value lesser horseshoe bat roost (coach house) will be

destroyed.

4.1.2 As set out in section D.2 of the Draft Bat Mitigation Strategy update

(May 2017) [ID 056 (revised)], measures will be undertaken to

prevent injury or death of any bats present at the time of demolition.



4.2 Proposed mitigation for the destruction of bat roosts

4.2.1 A bat house, suitable for use by lesser horseshoe, pipistrelle and

Myotis bats will be provided to the north of the existing M4 as part of

the M4CaN scheme. This is connected to the south side of the M4

by the St Brides Brook and Mill Reen Underpass, which has been

shown to be used by lesser horseshoe, pipistrelle and Myotis

species bats (refer to March 2016 ES [DOC 2.3.2]; section 3.4 in

Appendix 10.7 and paragraphs 4.2.44-48 in Appendix 10.23). A

number of bat boxes (the number and type to be agreed with NRW

in advance with NRW) will also be located on mature trees along

Bareland Street, to the south of Woodland House (refer to Figure 6i

of the Draft Bat Mitigation Strategy update (May 2017) [ID 056

(revised)].

4.2.2 Should surveys in May and June 2017 confirm that the roosts are

more important than that considered at the time of writing, additional

roosting provision could be provided at the proposed replacement

allotments, to be located immediately north of the South Wales

Mainline Railway, between the new M4 and Magor. This could be in

the form of a combined building, part-used as a shed for people

using the allotments and part-used as a bat roost. Bestowing public

‘stewardship’ of the building would reduce the likelihood of

vandalism, given that it would be close to the edge of Magor and

easily accessible. I consider that the building could be designed to

provide a functional bat roost for both lesser horseshoe and

pipistrelle bats, which would not be adversely affected by the

combined-use, i.e., so that bats would not be disturbed by people

using part of the building for storing garden tools, etc.



4.2.3 Bats can currently commute between Woodland House and Mill

Reen Underpass along trees to the west along the back of

residential gardens, or to the east, then north and west along trees

and hedges alongside Newport Road, the A4810 and the existing

M4 (refer to Figure 2 in Appendix A). The latter route would be

severed during construction but the former mentioned trees would

be retained and additional woodland planting provided in this area.

Woodland and linear belts of trees and shrubs would also be planted

to the east side of the proposed M4, providing a connection for bats

to and from the south, including to the proposed bat boxes along

Bareland Street (refer to Figure 3 in Appendix A). Other likely bat

corridors exist through Magor, along Mill Reen and through

woodland from the junction of Grange Road and Dancing Hill/Quarry

Rise and Elm Avenue by the mainline railway. Therefore, bats

currently roosting at Woodland House would still have access to

existing foraging habitats and commuting routes from the proposed

new roosts.

5. RESIDUAL EFFECTS ON BATS

5.1.1 Common pipistrelle bats (up to 2 bats) roosting at Woodland House

will be able to use bat boxes to the south, along Bareland Street,

and bat boxes and the bat house to the north of Magor/Water

Treatment Area (WTA) 11c (refer to Figure 6j of the Draft Bat

Mitigation Strategy update (May 2017) [ID 056 (revised)]. There are

also likely to be other roosts available in buildings in Magor.

5.1.2 Lesser horseshoe bats (considered to be a small number) roosting in

the coach house at Woodland House will also be able to roost at the

bat house, using Mill Reen Underpass to safely cross the M4.



5.1.3 Should further survey confirm that the coach house is a more

important roost for bats than I currently consider, an additional

building could be provided in the proposed replacement allotments

to the south, to provide a replacement bat roost to the south of the

existing M4.

5.1.4 With the proposed mitigation measures, I consider that the

demolition of Woodland House and coach house would not be

contrary to Regulation 53(9)(b) of the Conservation of Habitats and

Species Regulations 2010 [DOC 3.1.22], i.e., it will not be

detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species

concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range.

6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

6.1.1 My evidence concludes that the surveys undertaken and planned for

bats at Woodland House are appropriate and that the assessment of

effects on bats is robust. A Draft Bat Mitigation Strategy update (May

2017) has been produced [ID 056 (revised)] and will be developed in

consultation with NRW at detailed design stage in order to provide

the best available mitigation to reduce effects on bats.

6.1.2 My evidence includes all facts which I regard as being relevant to the

opinions which I have expressed and the Inquiry’s attention has

been drawn to any matter which would affect the validity of that

opinion.

6.1.3 I believe the facts that I have stated in this evidence are true and

that the opinions expressed are correct.

6.1.4 I understand my duty to the Inquiry to assist it with matters within my

expertise and I believe that I have complied with that duty.



7. References

Collins, J. (ed.) (2016) Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists: Good Practice

Guidelines (3rd Edt.). The Bat Conservation Trust, London.

Hundt, L. (2012). Bat Surveys – Good Practice Guidelines. 2nd Edition. Bat

Conservation Trust, London

Appendices

Daytime Bat Survey – Woodland House, Magor, February 2017.

Richard Green Ecology Ltd

Richard Green Ecology Ltd The Natural Selection 9C, Mill Park Industrial Estate, White Cross Road, Woodbury Salterton, Exeter, EX5 1EL 01395 239234 [email protected] www.richardgreenecology.co.uk Reg no. 07287436

Daytime Bat Survey

Woodland House, Magor Produced on behalf of RPS for Welsh Government

Report version

Author/surveyor Checked Authorised Date

Version 1.1

Richard Green BSc (Hons) CEnv MCIEEM

Tom Rickman MSc Grad CIEEM

Richard Green BSc (Hons) CEnv MCIEEM

February 2017

Richard Green Ecology Ltd has prepared this report in accordance with the instructions of their client, RPS, for their and their agent’s sole and specific use. Any other persons who use any information contained herein do so at their own risk.

Contents Executive summary

1 Introduction 1 1.1 Introduction 1

2 Methods 1 2.1 Desk study 1 2.2 Field survey 1

3 Survey Results 2 3.1 Desk study 2 3.2 Field survey 3

4 Assessment, further survey and mitigation 5 4.1 Assessment 5

5 References 7

6 Figures 8

7 Annexes 11 A Photographs B Legislation C DNA analysis results

Executive summary As part of the M4 Corridor around Newport scheme, it is proposed to demolish Woodland House (also known as Magor vicarage) and two outbuildings, consisting of a coach house and a recently constructed double garage. Woodland House is located at NGR ST 4205 8765.

A daytime bat survey of the buildings on the site was undertaken on the 20th February 2017 by Richard Green Ecology Ltd.

This report includes the findings of the survey and proposals for further survey and mitigation.

The site is surrounded by a small patch of deciduous woodland, immediately beyond which is arable land. The M4 is located approximately 200m to the north, the edge of Magor village (residential houses) approximately 100m to the east, the A4180 (a lit road) and an industrial estate approximately 100m to the west and further arable and improved grassland fields with hedgerow boundaries to the south.

Woodland House

Two old common pipistrelle bat droppings (confirmed by DNA analysis) were found at the north-east gable of the loft. The house has clearly been re-roofed relatively recently and it is possible that these droppings were present before the house was re-roofed.

Based on these findings and emergence surveys undertaken in 2015, when two bats were seen to emerge on two occasions, it is considered that Woodland House is used as a day roost by a small number of common pipistrelle bats. Two further emergence surveys are planned in the summer of 2017 to give confidence to this assessment.

Coach house

Approximately 200 mixed age lesser horseshoe bat droppings were found on the first floor of the coach house.

It is considered that the coach house is used as an occasional day and/or night roost by one or a small number of lesser horseshoe bats. Two further emergence surveys are planned in the summer of 2017 to give confidence to this assessment. In addition, a static bat detector will be deployed on the first floor of the coach house during each survey and left to record for 10 days after each survey.

Garage

No signs of bats were found in or on the external walls of the garage. There is a potential roost behind the soffit at the front of the garage, although it does not look like it has been used recently, if at all, as there are lots of cobwebs over the gap between the wall and soffit.

Given that there is no evidence of bats in the loft and the number of cobwebs over the gap, the garage is considered of low potential to support roosting bats. It is recommended that a surveyor observes the front of the garage during the emergence surveys planned for the summer of 2017.

Mitigation

Although further survey is planned to inform a NRW licence application by providing up to date survey information, it is considered that sufficient survey has been undertaken to provide adequate confidence in the assessment of roosting bat use at the site.

A bat house, suitable for use by lesser horseshoe, pipistrelle and Myotis bats will be provided to the north of the existing M4 as part of the M4CaN scheme. This is connected to the south side of the M4 by the St Brides Brook and Mill Reen Underpass, which has been shown to be used by lesser horseshoe, pipistrelle and Myotis bats.

Richard Green Ecology Ltd – Daytime Bat Survey – Woodland House, Magor – RPS for Welsh

Government

February 2017 V 1.1

1

1 Introduction 1.1 Introduction

As part of the M4 Corridor around Newport scheme, it is proposed to demolish Woodland House (also known as Magor vicarage) and two outbuildings, consisting of a coach house and a recently constructed double garage. Woodland House is located at NGR ST 4205 8765.

A daytime bat survey of the buildings on the site was undertaken on the 20th February 2017 by Richard Green Ecology Ltd.

This report includes the findings of the survey and proposals for further survey and mitigation.

2 Methods 2.1 Desk study

2.1.1 Previous survey results Reports of bat surveys undertaken by Ove Arup & Partners Ltd in 2007 (March 2016 Environmental Statement Appendix 10.7) and RPS in 2015 (March 2016 Environmental Statement Appendix 10.24) were reviewed.

2.2 Field survey

2.2.1 Daytime bat inspection The survey involved a thorough visual inspection of the buildings on site for any signs of bats. A search for characteristic signs of bats was made internally and externally, such as droppings, feeding remains, staining, and any bats present. Pipistrelle bat droppings found were analysed for DNA sequence by Warwick University to confirm species.

2.2.2 Timing and weather conditions Date Method Timing Personnel & licence

no. Weather conditions

20/02/2017 Visual inspection

10:00-12:30h

Richard Green (NRW bat survey licence 72358:OTH:CSAB:2016)

8/8 Oktas, light wind, dry, 11°C


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

2

2.2.3 Personnel Richard Green is a consultant ecologist with over 23 years’ professional experience, who holds a Natural Resources Wales survey licence. Richard is also a Chartered Environmentalist with the Society for the Environment and a full member of CIEEM.

2.2.4 Constraints All accessible areas where bats might roost in Woodland House were surveyed, including the main loft, a small loft above an extension and the cellar. Certain areas could not be inspected, such as over wall tops, between slates and roofing membrane, under external lead flashing and behind external soffits. However, the roof of Woodland House was in very good condition having been recently re-reroofed and offered few such areas suitable for bats roosts.

The coach house ground floor was fully inspected but the first floor was only inspected to/from the threshold of the doorway between the two upstairs rooms, as there were concerns about the state of the floor. There was a loft above the first floor that could not be accessed, as there was no hatch. The roof could not be viewed as it was covered in netting. This is also likely to prevent bats from accessing roosts under the roof covering from the outside of the building. However, bats may be able to gain access to the unsurveyed loft space.

The ground floor and loft of the garage were fully inspected. There was a gap between the stone gable wall and the timber soffit at the front of the garage that bats may access. However, this was covered in cobwebs and showed no signs of bat use.

3 Survey Results 3.1 Desk study

3.1.1 Previous survey results (a) Bat Survey Report 2014 by Ove Arup & Partners Ltd (March 2016

Environmental Statement Appendix 10.7) Surveys in 2007 found a small common pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus roost in the outbuilding at Woodland House and a possible Myotis species roost in the garage.

(b) Bat Roost Survey 2015 Report (March 2016 Environmental Statement Appendix 10.24)

A preliminary bat roost assessment undertaken on the 11th August 2015 concluded that Woodland House and the coach house had medium potential and that the modern garage had no potential to be used as a bat roost. No internal surveys were undertaken.


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

3

Three bat emergence surveys were undertaken in August and September 2015.

Two common pipistrelles emerged from Woodland House during the first survey on 28th August 2015; one at 20:22h from near the chimney on the western side of the house; and one at 20:28h from out of the cladding at the top floor window at the front of the house. Both bats flew southwards away from the house.

No bats were recorded emerging from Woodland House during the second survey on 2nd September 2015.

Two common pipistrelles emerged from Woodland House during the final survey on 9th September 2015; one at 19:56h from within the front door porch; and one at 20:14h, again from out of the cladding at the top floor window at the front of the house. Both bats flew southwards away from the house.

No bats emerged from the coach house during any of the three dusk emergence surveys.

3.2 Field survey

Refer to descriptions below, Figure 1 and photographs in Annex A

Buildings on site included Woodland House, a coach house and a garage.

The site was surrounded by a small patch of deciduous woodland, immediately beyond which was arable land. The M4 is located approximately 200m to the north, the edge of Magor village (residential houses) approximately 100m to the east, the A4180 (a lit road) and industrial estate approximately 100m to the west and further arable and improved grassland fields with hedgerow boundaries to the south.


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

4

Aerial photograph showing site and surrounding landscape (from Google Maps)

3.2.1 Buildings and bat evidence Refer to Figure 1 for a plan of buildings referenced below.

(a) Woodland House Woodland House was constructed of stone walls with a natural slate roof over breathable membrane. The U-shaped (in plan) loft space over the main part of the house was very cluttered with two sets of tie beams, one over the other, throughout the loft. The height of the loft was approximately 2 metres to the apex. Each of the three parts of the U-shaped loft were approximately 12 m long by 5 m wide at the base.

Two old pipistrelle droppings were found stuck in a cobweb and on a timber at the north-east gable (refer to Photographs in Annex A). There was no other evidence of bats in the loft, which was full of dusty cobwebs, suggesting that there had been no recent bat activity within the loft. DNA analysis confirmed these droppings to be from common pipistrelle bat (refer to Annex C).

A small loft, approximately 1.2 m high by 2 m wide and 5 m long, above an extension to the north west, was covered with natural slate over breathable membrane. There was no evidence of bats in the loft.


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

5

A small cellar was present below Woodland House. There was no potential bat access and no evidence of bats present.

(b) Coach house The coach house was constructed of stone walls with a natural slate roof that was covered by debris netting (refer to photographs in Annex A). As there was no access to the loft, it was not possible to determine whether the roof was lined. There were two separate rooms on the ground floor and two connected rooms on the first floor. All rooms had various stored items in them. The ground floor rooms were accessed via external wooden doors, one of which was partially open. There were holes in the ceiling enabling bats to fly between floors. The north-east first floor room was accessed via a wooden door, which was relatively tightly shut. There was an open arrow slit window at the south west gable, enabling bats to access the first floor. There was an open doorway between two upstairs rooms.

An accumulation of approximately 200 lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros droppings was found in the south west first floor room. The droppings appeared to be of mixed age, although no fresh droppings were evident. It was difficult to get a very close look at the droppings because of concerns over walking into the room, given the condition of the floor.

(c) Garage The garage was constructed of concrete block, externally rendered and faced with stone. It had a natural slate roof lined with breathable membrane. There was a loft above the ground floor, which contained trussed rafters. Despite this, the loft was large and relatively uncluttered. There was no evidence of bats in the loft.

The only potential external roosting location that could not be fully inspected was a soffit box at the front of the garage (south east elevation). There were several gaps between the stone facing and the timber soffit that could potentially be accessed by bats. However, the gaps were covered in cobwebs and it is unlikely they have been used recently, if at all.

4 Assessment, further survey and mitigation 4.1 Assessment

4.1.1 Woodland House Two old common pipistrelle bat droppings were found at the north-east gable of the loft. The house has clearly been re-roofed relatively recently and it is possible that these droppings were present before the house was re-roofed.


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

6

Bat emergence surveys from 2015 confirmed a small number (max. 2 bats per survey) of common pipistrelle bats roost under roof coverings and in the porch. It is possible that bats roost on the wall top of the north-east gable.

It is considered that Woodland House is used as a day roost by a small number of common pipistrelle bats. It is unlikely that a maternity roost is present in the house. Two further emergence surveys are planned in the summer of 2017 to give confidence to this assessment.

4.1.2 Coach house Approximately 200 mixed-age lesser horseshoe bat droppings were found on the first floor of the coach house. No bats were seen to emerge during 2015 surveys.

It is considered that the coach house is used as an occasional day and/or night roost by one or a small number of lesser horseshoe bats. Two further emergence surveys are planned in the summer of 2017 to give confidence to this assessment. In addition, a static bat detector will be deployed on the first floor of the coach house and left to record between each survey. This will record any lesser horseshoe bat activity in the building during the survey periods.

4.1.3 Garage No signs of bats were found in or on the external walls of the garage. There is some disparity between 2007 and 2015 survey conclusions, where Ove Arup & Partners suggested that there may be a Myotis bat roost in the garage and RPS considered that the garage had no potential for bats to roost. There is potential for bats to roost behind the soffit at the front of the garage, although it does not look like it has been used recently, if at all, as there are lots of cobwebs over the gap between the wall and soffit. Given that there is no evidence of bats in the loft and the number of cobwebs over the gap, the garage is considered of low potential to support roosting bats. It is recommended that a surveyor observes the front of the garage during the emergence surveys planned for the summer of 2017.

4.1.4 Mitigation Although further survey is planned to inform a NRW licence application by providing up to date survey information, it is considered that sufficient survey has been undertaken to provide adequate confidence in the assessment of roosting bat use at the site.

A bat house, suitable for use by lesser horseshoe, pipistrelle and Myotis bats will be provided to the north of the existing M4 as part of the M4CaN scheme. This is connected to the south side of the existing M4 by Mill Reen Underpass, which has been shown to be used by lesser horseshoe, pipistrelle and Myotis bats. Bats can currently commute between Woodland House and Mill Reen Underpass along trees


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

7

to the west along the back of residential gardens, or to the east, then north and west along trees and hedges along Newport Road, the A4810 and the existing M4 (refer to Figure 2). The latter route would be severed during construction but the former mentioned trees would be retained and additional woodland planting provided in this area. Woodland and linear belts of trees and shrubs would also be planted along the east side of the proposed M4, providing a connection for bats from further south (refer to Figure 3). Other likely bat corridors exist through Magor, along Mill Reen and through woodland from the junction of Grange Road and Dancing Hill/Quarry Rise and Elm Avenue by the mainline railway.

For further detail on proposed mitigation, refer to the Draft Bat Mitigation Strategy (Appendix SS10.5 of the December 2016 ES Supplement).

5 References Collins, J. (ed.), (2016) Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists: Good Practice Guidelines (3rd edn). The Bat Conservation Trust, London.

Mitchell-Jones, A.J. (2004). Bat Mitigation Guidelines. English Nature.

Mitchell-Jones, A.J. & McLeish, A.P. (2004). Bat Workers’ Manual – Third Edition. Joint Nature Conservation Committee.


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

8

6 Figures Figure 1 – Building location plan

House

Coach house

Garage

N

Richard Green Ecology Ltd – Daytime Bat Survey – Woodland House, Magor – RPS for Welsh Government

February 2017 V 1.1

9

Figure 2 – Habitat connectivity

Key

Potential existing bat flight lines to/from Woodland House and proposed bat house

Potential future bat flight lines through planted woodland

Woodland House

Proposed Bat House

Mill Reen Underpass

Richard Green Ecology Ltd – Daytime Bat Survey – Woodland House, Magor – RPS for Welsh Government

February 2017 V 1.1

10

Figure 3 – Landscape Environmental Masterplan Sheet 12 of 16 (ES Figure 2.6)


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

11

7 Annexes

A Photographs A.1 Woodland House south west elevation

A.2 Woodland House south east elevation


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

12

A.3 Woodland House south east and north east elevations

A.4 Woodland House north west elevation


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

13

A.5 Inside main loft of Woodland House, showing cluttered tie beam arrangement and cobwebs


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

14

A.6 Individual old pipistrelle bat droppings found in Woodland House loft at north east gable


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

15

A.7 Breathable membrane in Woodland House loft

A.8 Inside Woodland House small extension loft


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

16

A.9 Inside Woodland House cellar

A.10 Coach house south west and south east elevations


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

17

A.11 Coach house ground floor north east room

A.12 Coach house ground floor south west room


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

18

A.13 Coach house first floor north east room

A.14 Coach house first floor south west room – note arrow slit window


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

19

A.15 Mixed age lesser horseshoe bat droppings in coach house first floor south west room

A.16 Close up of lesser horseshoe bat droppings


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

20

A.17 Garage south east elevation

A.18 Inside garage loft


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

21

A.19 Gap at garage soffit covered with cobwebs


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

22

B Legislation

This is a summary of relevant legislation.

B.1 Bats All bat species and their roosts are protected in the UK under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended), which implement the EC Directive 92/43/EEC, also known as the Habitats Regulations.

They are also protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), through inclusion in Schedule 5, and under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.

Taken together, these acts and regulations make it illegal to:

• intentionally or deliberately kill, injure or capture bats;

• deliberately or recklessly disturb bats *;

• damage, destroy or obstruct access to places of shelter, breeding sites or resting places used by bats;

• have in one's possession or control, any live or dead bat; and

• sell, barter or exchange bats, or parts of bats.

* Under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) it is illegal to deliberately disturb bats. In particular, any disturbance which is likely (a) to impair their ability to survive, to breed or reproduce, to rear or nurture their young, or to hibernate or migrate, or (b) to affect significantly the local distribution or abundance of the species to which they belong.

*Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) (Section 9(4)(b)) it is illegal to intentionally or recklessly disturb bats whilst in a place of shelter, although there is a defence under Sections 10(2), 10(3)(c) and 10(5) that allows this otherwise prohibited act. In summary, there is a defence if the disturbance was an incidental result of a lawful operation and could not have reasonably been avoided. The defence applies provided that the appropriate Statutory Nature Conservation Organisation (Natural Resources Wales) has been notified and allowed a reasonable time to advise on whether the proposed action should be carried out and, if so, the method to be used.


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

23

Developments in Wales that compromise the protection afforded to bats under the provisions of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) will almost invariably require a licence to do so lawfully from Natural Resources Wales. Three tests must be satisfied before Natural Resources Wales can issue a licence to permit otherwise prohibited acts:

1. Regulation 53(2)(e) states that licences may be granted to “preserve public health or public safety or other imperative reasons of overriding public interest including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment.”

2. Regulation 53(9)(a) states that a licence may not be granted unless “there is no satisfactory alternative”.

3. Regulation 53(9)(b) states that a licence cannot be issued unless the action proposed “will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range”.


Government

February 2017 V 1.1

24

C DNA analysis results

Documents

Welsh Government M4 Corridor around Newport – …bailey.persona-pi.com/Public-Inquiries/M4-Newport...undertaken is contained in Chapter 10 of the March 2016 ES in Appendices 10.7