ECOLOGICAL MITIGATION & ENHANCEMENT STRATEGY · 2016. 2. 5. · ecological value will be removed to...

ECOLOGICAL MITIGATION & ENHANCEMENT STRATEGYPrepared by Devon Wildlife Consulting on behalf of Barratt Homes (Exeter)

05 January 2016

LAND AT REDWOOD DRIVE & POPLAR CLOSECHADDLEWOOD - PLYMOUTH

Report 15/2806.02 EMES – Land at Redwood Drive and Poplar Close, Chaddlewood

Revision Checked by Signed Dated

Initial Issue Li-Li Williams MEnvSci

(Hons) MCIEEM

23/12/2015

This report has been prepared for Barratt David Wilson Homes in accordance with the terms

and conditions of appointment supplied with Tender Number T/2734.01 dated 5th

January

2015 and T/2806.01 dated 15th

June 2015. Devon Wildlife Consultants cannot accept any

responsibility for any use of or reliance on the contents of this report by any third party.

Devon Wildlife Consultants is a trading style of Devon Wildlife Enterprises Limited.


Wildlife Checklist (for front of Wildlife Report.)

A.1 Protected and priority species (relates to question 13a in the planning application form).

Location: Chaddlewood,

Plympton Grid reference for

centre of site: SX 558 564

Planning Application

number:

Surveys undertaken pre-

application

Name of surveyors: Matthew Guy and

Laurel Mayne Year that surveys

carried out: 2015

DWC report

number: 15/2806

Species

Terrestrial, intertidal, marine

Walkover

shows that

suitable

habitat

present and

reasonably

likely species

will be

found?

Detailed

survey

needed to

clarify

impacts

and

mitigation

?

Detailed

survey

carried out

and

included?

Species Present or

Assumed to be present on

site Indicate with P or A

and name the species

Impact

on

species?

Detailed

Conservation

Action

Statement

included?

EPS offence

committed?

Three tests

met?

Grid

reference

for specific

location of

species

Breeding birds � × × A. Common song birds � � × N/A

Reptiles � � � P. Slowworm � � × N/A

Species of principal importance � × × A. Hedgehog � � × N/A

A.2 Designations / important habitats / sites of geological importance (relates to questions 13b&c in the planning application form)

Designation

Terrestrial, intertidal, marine

Within site

or potential

impact.

Tick or cross

Name of site / habitat

Conservation

Action Statement

included in

report?

Habitat balance sheet

included (showing area

of habitats lost, gained

and overall net gain)

Relevant organisation

consulted & response

included in the

application?

Statutory designations × × N/A N/A N/A

Non statutory wildlife designations × × N/A N/A N/A

Non statutory geological designations × × N/A N/A N/A


Executive Summary

Devon Wildlife Consultants (DWC) was commissioned by Barratt David Wilson Homes to

undertake an Ecological Appraisal and Mitigation & Enhancement Strategy for a site located

at Chaddlewood, Plympton, Devon, centred at National Grid Reference SX 558 564.

Survey methodology followed the Phase 1 Survey Handbook (JNCC, 2010) with additional

emphasis on searching for protected species and their field signs or identifying habitat which

may support protected species. The survey report also considers ecological records obtained

from Devon Biodiversity Records Centre (DBRC) and Devon Bat Group (DBG) relating to

the site and its surrounding area.

The survey area comprises two species-poor semi-improved grassland fields bound by

species-rich over-mature hedgebanks. Strips of dense scrub and bracken have developed

around the periphery of the grassland habitats, and several patches of bramble scrub are

located within the eastern extent of the site. The fields are currently utilised as public open

space.

It is proposed to develop the larger field to the east of the survey area for residential housing.

The field to the west of the survey area will be retained as public open space. It is understood

that the majority of the hedgebanks will be retained post-development, with the exception of a

number of short sections removed for footpath provision. The hedgebanks present within the

site mark the boundaries of residential properties and therefore are not afforded protection

under the Hedgerow Regulations (1997).

Initial surveys undertaken at the site identified habitat suitable for reptiles and breeding birds,

in addition to foraging wildlife including badgers. A reptile survey was undertaken and

confirmed that the site is utilised by a breeding population of slowworm.

Construction will be undertaken in line with the Construction Ecological Management Plan

outlined within this report and the following requirements are provided:

• Undertake a reptile translocation to remove reptiles from the site prior to

commencement of works.

• The works should ideally be undertaken outside of the main bird nesting season which

extends from March to August (inclusive) or following a nesting bird check.

• As a precautionary measure, a sloping plank should be left in any excavations deeper

than 1m which are to remain open overnight, to avoid trapping any badgers that may

access the excavation. Alternatively excavations should be covered or fenced

overnight.

The proposed works will result in the loss of grassland and scrub habitats which are

considered to be of value to foraging reptiles and nesting birds. Where possible, the majority

of the hedgebank habitats, which are of a high ecological value, will be retained post-

development. This will minimise the impact of the works on any nesting birds present in the


hedgebanks. The species-poor semi-improved grassland which is generally of a low

ecological value will be removed to facilitate construction and the site enabling works.

Habitat creation has been built into the scheme design and will provide commuting/foraging

habitat. Further enhancement measures will provide a net gain in roosting/nesting

opportunities for bats and birds and refugia for reptiles.

Measures to enhance the site post-development are also provided to take into account the

national biodiversity strategy detailed in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) to

protect and restore priority habitats and species.


Contents

1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 5

1.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 5

1.2 Development Proposals ............................................................................................ 5

2 Survey Methodology ........................................................................................................ 6

2.1 Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey........................................................................... 6

2.1.1 Desk Survey ........................................................................................................ 6

2.1.2 Badger Survey .................................................................................................... 6

2.1.3 Tree Roost assessment ....................................................................................... 6

2.2 Reptile Survey ........................................................................................................... 7

2.3 Limitations ................................................................................................................ 7

2.4 Personnel ................................................................................................................... 7

3 Survey Results .................................................................................................................. 8

3.1 Designated Sites ........................................................................................................ 8

3.2 Habitats ..................................................................................................................... 8

3.2.1 Hedgebanks ......................................................................................................... 9

3.3 Species ....................................................................................................................... 9

3.3.1 Badgers ................................................................................................................ 9

3.3.2 Bats ...................................................................................................................... 9

3.3.3 Nesting Birds ..................................................................................................... 10

3.3.4 Dormice ............................................................................................................. 10

3.3.5 Reptiles .............................................................................................................. 10

4 Ecological Impact Assessment ....................................................................................... 11

4.1 Designated Sites ...................................................................................................... 11

4.2 Habitats ................................................................................................................... 11

4.3 Species ..................................................................................................................... 11

4.3.1 Badgers .............................................................................................................. 11

4.3.2 Bats .................................................................................................................... 11

4.3.3 Nesting Birds ..................................................................................................... 12

4.3.4 Dormice ............................................................................................................. 12

4.3.5 Reptiles .............................................................................................................. 12

4.3.6 Hedgehogs ......................................................................................................... 12

5 Landscape and Construction Ecological Management Plan ...................................... 13

5.1 Pre-Construction Phase Mitigation ...................................................................... 13

5.1.1 Vegetation Removal ......................................................................................... 13

5.1.2 Reptiles .............................................................................................................. 13

5.2 Construction Control Measures ............................................................................ 14

5.2.1 Ecological Manager & Ecological Clerk of Works ....................................... 14

5.2.2 Ecological Zones ............................................................................................... 15

5.3 Construction Phase Mitigation ............................................................................. 15

5.3.1 Badger ............................................................................................................... 15

5.3.2 Lighting ............................................................................................................. 15

5.3.3 Protection of Retained Vegetation .................................................................. 16

5.3.4 Pollution Control .............................................................................................. 16

5.4 Post Construction Enhancements ......................................................................... 16


5.4.1 Habitats ............................................................................................................. 16

5.5.2 Species ............................................................................................................... 19

5.6 Summary ............................................................................................................... 19

References ............................................................................................................................... 22

Appendices .............................................................................................................................. 23

Appendix 1 – Desk Study Search Data ................................................................................. 24

Appendix 2 – Legislation ....................................................................................................... 25

Appendix 3 – Raw Survey Data ............................................................................................ 26

Appendix 4 – Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Map ........................................................ 28

Appendix 5 – Landscaping Concepts and Opportunities Plan .......................................... 29

Report 15/2806.02 EMES – Land at Redwood Drive and Poplar Close, Chaddlewood 5

1 Introduction

1.1 Introduction

This report contains the results of an Ecological Appraisal and Mitigation & Enhancement

strategy for a site known as Land at Redwood Drive and Poplar Close located within the suburb of Chaddlewood, Plympton, Devon, centred at National Grid Reference SX 558 564.

This report updates the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (DWC Report No. 14/2734)

undertaken in January 2015 and Ecological Appraisal (DWC Report No. 15/2806) dated

August 2015.

The site was surveyed for signs of legally protected habitats or species and to evaluate the

wildlife value/potential of the site. Further to the initial survey, a reptile survey was

undertaken to confirm presence/absence of reptiles within the site.

1.2 Development Proposals

It is understood that the western field (Field 1) will be retained as public open space and the

eastern field (Field 2) will be developed as residential housing. However it may be necessary

to remove the grassland within both fields to facilitate site enabling works. It is understood

that the majority of the hedgebanks within the Field 1 will be retained post-development, with

only short sections removed for footpath provision. All the scrub within Field 2 and a section

of hedgebank which forms the western boundary of Field 2 will be removed to facilitate

development. The recommendations in this report are based on a Concept Masterplan

provided by the client (Dwg_1000/Rev C dated 23/07/2015) and Landscape Concept and

Opportunities Plan (Tisdall Associates TAS 148 Strat Lndp 1 dated August 2015). Any

changes to the scheme layout or landscaping design will require further assessment.

The scheme includes a number of measures which have been specifically designed to mitigate

and compensate for the ecological impact of the development, in order to provide a net gain in

biodiversity at the site post-development. Mitigation and enhancement measures which have

been in-built into the site layout include creation of a public park of approximately 1.83

hectares on Field 1 in addition to tree planting, orchard creation, rough grassland and

wildflower areas, and wetland associated with attenuation ponds. All new and retained

habitats will be managed in perpetuity for the benefit of biodiversity.


2 Survey Methodology

2.1 Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey

The Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey consisted of a walkover assessment of the site using

Phase 1 Habitat Survey methodology (JNCC, 2010). This is a standard technique for

classifying and mapping British habitats. All areas within the site were surveyed and assessed

for indicators of ecological value, including the presence or signs of any protected or rare

species. A desk based assessment to identify protected species and habitats present within a

1km radius of the site was also undertaken.

2.1.1 Desk Survey

For completion of the ecological desk study, Devon Biodiversity Records Centre (DBRC) and

Devon Bat Group (DBG) were contacted for ecological data.

A standard search area consisting of a 1km radius of the site from a central grid reference was

requested from DBRC. Details of statutory and non-statutory sites designated for nature

conservation or interest, together with records pertaining to protected species and/or species

of conservation concern were obtained.

Information pertaining to bat species was requested from DBG for an extended search area

radius of 4km from the site. This extended area is to account for the mobile nature of bat

species, with particular emphasis on the identification of known roosts for greater horseshoe

bats.

2.1.2 Badger Survey

The survey area and its immediately surrounding habitat was assessed for any indication or

signs of badger Meles meles presence and/or activity through the identification of badger

setts, footprints, hair, tracks and latrines. Any setts identified were classified into the

following sett types:

• Main sett - large number of holes, with signs of recent activity including fresh spoil

and well-worn tracks to and from the sett.

• Annexe sett - several holes which are close to a main sett and are connected by well-

worn paths.

• Subsidiary sett - small number of holes not connected to another sett by paths.

• Outlier sett - one or two holes with signs of sporadic use.

2.1.3 Tree Roost assessment

All trees present within the site were assigned a value based on the Bat Survey Guidelines

(BCT, 2012). Trees are divided into four categories:

• 1* - tree with multiple, highly suitable features capable of supporting larger roosts.

• 1 - tree with definite potential, supporting fewer suitable features than Category 1*

trees or capable of supporting roosts for single/low numbers of bats.


• 2 - tree with no obvious potential for roosting bats although due to its size and

maturity the tree may support some features with limited potential to support bats.

• 3 - tree with no/negligible roosting potential.

2.2 Reptile Survey

An artificial refugia survey was undertaken, introducing refugia throughout the survey areas.

These were subsequently checked for the presence of basking or sheltering reptiles. The

artificial refugia comprised of bitumen (roof felt) sheets and corrugated iron sheets, both

approximately 500mm x 500mm in size, laid at a density of at least 50 per hectare.

Approximately 200 artificial refugia were laid out in locations deemed to have high potential

for basking reptiles on 16th

June 2015. Natural refugia, such as logs or stones, were also

inspected during the survey visits for the presence of reptiles.

The refugia were allowed to bed in for a period of at least seven days prior to the checks

commencing, thus allowing any reptiles within the site to become accustomed to using them.

Following this period seven survey visits were undertaken in June and July 2015 during

suitable weather conditions as detailed by Gent & Gibson (1998).

2.3 Limitations

It is possible that some species may have been overlooked in the field or were not recorded

because they were not evident at the time of surveys. No account can be taken for the

presence or absence of a species on any particular day.

2.4 Personnel

The Preliminary Ecological Appraisal was undertaken by Carly Ireland MSc. MCIEEM

(Senior Consultant) on 14th

January 2015. The Reptile Survey was undertaken in June and

July 2015 by Matthew Guy MSc. ACIEEM (Consultant Ecologist) and Laurel Mayne BSc.

(Hons) (Assistant Ecologist). This report has been undertaken following relevant CIEEM

Guidelines.


3 Survey Results

The full information provided by DBRC and DBG is presented in Appendix 1. All legislation

pertaining to protected habitats and species is provided in Appendix 2. Raw survey data is

presented in Appendix 3.

3.1 Designated Sites

There are six non-statutory designated sites within a 1km radius of the survey area, however

these sites are considered unlikely to be affected by the scale and location of the proposed

development.

3.2 Habitats

The site comprises two species-poor semi-improved grassland fields bound by species-rich

over-mature hedgebanks. Field 1 is rectangular in shape and lies to the west of the site, while

Field 2 is a larger, square shaped field located to the east of the survey area. Strips of dense

scrub and bracken Pteridium aquilinum have developed around the periphery of the grassland

habitats, and several patches of bramble Rubus fruticosus agg. scrub are located within the

eastern extent of the site. The fields are currently utilised as public open space. A full list of

species recorded during the site survey is presented in Appendix 3. An Extended Phase 1

Habitat Survey Map (DWC Drawing Number 14/2734-01) is presented in Appendix 4.

The survey area is dominated by species-poor semi-improved grassland. The sward is

currently unmanaged and has developed a tussocky structure of up to a height of 1.5m. Cock’s

foot Dactylis glomerata dominates the habitat, with additional species occasionally noted

throughout the grassland habitat and in particular around the periphery. Additional species

noted include Yorkshire fog Holcus lanatus, false oat grass Arrhenatherum elatius, ribwort

plantain Plantago lanceolata, meadow buttercup Ranunculus acris, dandelion Taraxacum

officinale agg., broadleaved dock Rumex obtusifolius, hedge bedstraw Galium mollugo and

hogweed Heracleum sphondylium. Paths created by local walkers are present around and

across both of the fields.

A number of scattered immature trees have developed within the western extent of Field 1 and

throughout Field 2. Ash Fraxinus excelsior was frequently noted, with occasional pedunculate

oak Quercus robur. Large patches of bramble scrub have also developed within the eastern

extent of Field 2.

Both of the fields are bound by strips of scrub of varying density. The scrub predominantly

comprises blackthorn Prunus spinosa, with patches of bramble and occasional English elm

Ulmus procera. Stretches of bracken also intersperse the scrub habitat. Rabbit Oryctolagus

cunniculus paths and droppings were frequently noted within the scrub habitats.

The majority of the field boundaries comprise species-rich unmanaged hedgebanks.

Vegetation ranges in height from 3-10m, with occasional semi-mature trees noted. Species

recorded include hazel Corylus avellana, ash, pedunculate oak, English elm, holly Ilex

aquifolium, willow Salix sp., blackthorn and hawthorn Crataegus monogyna. The understorey


was predominantly obscured from view by the strips of dense scrub, but appeared to be

dominated by ivy Hedera helix and navelwort Umbilicus rupestris, with hart’s tongue fern

Asplenium scolopendrium, dog’s mercury Mercurialis perennis and red campion Silene dioica

infrequently noted.

The southern boundary of Field 1 and the eastern boundary of Field 2 are delinated by

fencing, with occasional introduced shrubs which have colonised from adjacent gardens.

Species noted include Wilson’s honeysuckle Lonicera periclymenum, laurel Prunus

laurocerasus and bamboo.

3.2.1 Hedgebanks

The hedgebanks present within the site are mature and support a diversity of species.

However, they mark the boundaries of residential properties and therefore are not afforded

protection under the Hedgerow Regulations (1997).

3.3 Species

3.3.1 Badgers

Due to the nature of the site and the recorded habitats present, the site is considered suitable

for foraging and commuting badger Meles meles; however no signs of badger activity such as

setts, tracks, latrines and/or hair were identified within the survey area. DBRC have identified

records of badgers at a distance of approximately 0.9km from the survey area.

3.3.2 Bats

DBG identified records of up to ten bat species comprising greater horseshoe Rhinolophus

ferrumequinum, lesser horseshoe Rhinolophus hipposideros, barbastelle Barbastella

barbastellus, brown long-eared Plecotus auritus, common pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus,

Nathusius’ pipistrelle Pipistrellus nathusii, unidentified pipistrelle species Pipistrellus sp.,

unidentified Myotis species Myotis sp. Natterer’s Myotis nattereri and whiskered Myotis

mystacinus bats within a 4km radius of the survey area. Records include house, underground

and building roosts including breeding and hibernation roosts, as well as records of

flying/foraging and dead bats. DBRC have also identified six records of unidentified,

pipistrelle sp. and brown long-eared bats from within a 1km radius of the survey area.

3.3.2.1 Roosting Bats

No buildings were recorded within the survey area and the trees identified on site were

categorised as Category 3 i.e. tree with negligible potential to support roosting bats.

3.3.2.2 Bat Activity

The species-rich hedgebanks which bound the survey area provide suitable flight lines and

foraging habitat for species of bat. However the species-poor semi-improved grassland is

likely to represent a low quality foraging habitat for species of bat. Furthermore, the site is

bound to all aspects by residential housing, and is therefore likely to be subject to high levels

of light spill, which reduces its suitability for commuting/foraging bats, with the exception of

commonly encountered light-tolerant species such as pipistrelle species.


3.3.3 Nesting Birds

The hedgebanks, trees and scrub areas present within the site are considered to have high

potential to support nesting birds. The denser grassland has limited potential to support

ground-nesting birds.

3.3.4 Dormice

DBRC did not identify any records of dormice Muscardinus avellanarius within a 1km radius

of the survey area. The hedgebanks on site represent a habitat with potential to support

dormice, particularly as they are dense and species-rich, and would therefore provide shelter

and a supply of food items throughout the year. However, the site is bound to all aspects by

residential housing, and is therefore likely to be isolated and subject to high levels of light

spill and disturbance, which typically deter commuting/foraging dormice. This combined with

the lack of records of this species from within the vicinity of the site, and the residential

location of the survey area, suggest that it is unlikely that a viable population of dormice

could be supported by the habitat available within the site.

3.3.5 Reptiles

The species-poor semi-improved grassland which dominates the survey area was identified as

supporting a breeding population of slowworm Anguis fragilis. Full survey results are

presented in Appendix 3.2; a maximum count of 18 adults was recorded. The reptiles were

recorded throughout the grassland habitats present within the site. The unmanaged sward

provides a range of micro-climates suitable for foraging and basking reptiles, and the scrub

and hedgebanks present within the site provide potential hibernation sites for this species.

DBRC have identified records of slowworm and grass snake Natrix natrix from within a 1km

radius of the site.

3.3.6 Section 41 Species

The combination of informal grassland, scrub and adjacent residential gardens offers suitable

habitat for hedgehogs Erinaceus europaeus.


4 Ecological Impact Assessment

This section details the potential impacts of the proposed development and identifies any

Likely Significant Impacts1 on ecological features associated with the site. The measures

required to mitigate for these effects is outlined in Section 5.

4.1 Designated Sites

Due to the scale and location of the proposed development, it is considered that the

surrounding non-statutory designated sites are unlikely to be directly affected by the works.

4.2 Habitats

The site comprises two species-poor semi-improved grassland fields bound by species-rich

over-mature hedgebanks. The grassland and encroaching scrub are considered to be

commonly-encountered habitats of low ecological value, although provide shelter and

foraging value for wildlife. No protected or invasive plant species were recorded on site, and

the floral diversity of the grassland is generally low. Potential impacts are therefore not

considered to be significant, being limited to the net loss of habitats of low ecological value.

The species-rich unmanaged hedgebanks are likely to be important for a range of wildlife

including nesting birds. It is understood that these hedgebanks are to be retained and enhanced

where possible. Short term impacts would therefore be limited to the loss of limited sections

of hedgebank, with enhancement and buffer planting providing a neutral or positive impact in

the longer term.

4.3 Species

4.3.1 Badgers

It is considered unlikely that badgers will be directly or significantly affected by the proposed

works. Potential impacts are limited to the short-term loss of potential foraging habitat and the

possibility of harm through access to temporary excavations during construction.

Enhancement and buffer planting would provide a neutral impact in the longer term.

4.3.2 Bats

No potential bat roosts have been identified with the site. The majority of the habitat loss

associated with the development will be limited to species-poor semi-improved grassland

habitats which were assessed as being of limited value to bats. The majority of the species-

rich hedgerows will be retained, retaining potential commuting and foraging habitat. In the

longer term, Field 1 will be retained and enhanced as informal public open space, which can

be utilised by foraging bats. It is therefore considered unlikely that the loss of the grassland

habitat present within Field 2 will have any significant impact on commuting/foraging bats,

1 CIEEM (2006) guidance defines a ‘significant’ impact as an impact on the integrity of a defined site or

ecosystem and/or the conservation status of habitats or species within a given geographical area.


with enhancement and buffer planting providing a neutral or positive impact in the longer

term.

4.3.3 Nesting Birds

Scrub and hedge removal during site preparation works will result in the loss of nesting bird

habitat, although the majority of the higher value hedgerow habitats will be retained. In the

absence of mitigation and precautionary timings, there is a risk of directly affecting nesting

birds.

Although the habitat loss is not considered to be a ‘significant’ impact, mitigation will be

required to avoid and minimise this short term impact, with enhancement and buffer planting

providing a neutral or positive impact in the longer term.

4.3.4 Dormice

It is considered unlikely that a viable population of dormice could be supported by the habitat

available within the site and therefore unlikely that dormice will be directly affected by the

works.

4.3.5 Reptiles

Vegetation removal during site preparation works would result in the loss of reptile habitat. In

the absence of mitigation, the proposed development is likely to directly impact upon the

slowworm population found on the site through physical harm during site clearance works

which would therefore contravene the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). This

is not considered to be a ‘significant’ impact; mitigation to avoid and minimise these effects

will need to be implemented.

4.3.6 Hedgehogs

There is likely to be a short term decrease in the area of scrub and grassland habitats, although

green space, garden and allotment habitats associated with the development would be suitable

for hedgehogs. The grassland is currently of low ecological value and there are opportunities

for this habitat to be enhanced.


5 Landscape and Construction Ecological Management Plan

This LEMP/CEMP details design and construction compliance requirements, based on current

UK and EU wildlife legislation and national and local planning policy. These

recommendations must be followed to ensure the legislation is not contravened by the

proposed development.

In addition, the survey results have informed measures which have been specifically designed

to mitigate and compensate for the ecological impacts of the development, in order to provide

a gain in biodiversity at the site post-development. These measures have been incorporated

into the scheme design and all new and retained habitats will be managed in perpetuity for the

benefit of biodiversity.

5.1 Pre-Construction Phase Mitigation

The following sections detail the mitigation strategies for each element of the site ecology to

be affected by the works. Such mitigation will be undertaken prior to construction

commencing on site in order to protect species and habitats that are present and ensure that

the ‘action authorised will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of species

concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range’.

5.1.1 Vegetation Removal

Grassland clearance will be undertaken using precautionary measures in line with the Reptile

Mitigation Strategy (Section 5.1.3).

It is understood that the scrub and sections of hedgebank in Field 2 will be removed. Scrub

and hedgebank removal should be undertaken directionally and under ecological supervision.

The removal of any vegetation suitable for nesting birds will be programmed in at an early

stage in construction in order that it may be undertaken outside of the main bird nesting

season of March to August (inclusive). Nesting may extend outside this period; this is often

dependent on weather conditions and species.

If such works cannot be undertaken outside of the nesting season, a nesting bird check should

be undertaken by an ecologist immediately prior to vegetation removal works. The

construction schedule should allow for potential delays in this case as any active nests must

remain undisturbed until all the young fledge naturally, which may take several months.

5.1.2 Reptiles

A Reptile Mitigation Strategy will be undertaken, comprising a translocation programme to

remove the reptiles from the proposed development area to avoid contravening the Wildlife

and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) during construction. It will be a requirement of the

Reptile Mitigation Strategy that any receptor area utilised during the translocation would need

to be appropriately managed for reptiles. Reptile translocations can be carried out between

April and September and may take several months to be completed. Grassland clearance will

be undertaken under ecological supervision, as part of this strategy.


5.2 Construction Control Measures

To ensure that the works are undertaken in accordance with this document, a series of control

measures will need to be implemented. These measures include the appointment of a member

of the Contractor’s personnel responsible for environmental issues as an Ecological Manager

and appointment of an ecologist as an Ecological Clerk of Works.

This team will ensure that all site personnel are appropriately briefed on the ecological issues

within and surrounding the site. This will be undertaken through inclusion of ecological

briefings within ‘toolbox’ talks given to all staff as part of the site induction process.

5.2.1 Ecological Manager & Ecological Clerk of Works

The Ecological Manager (EM) will be a point of contact during the works and will be

responsible for the following:

• Providing guidance as required for the site team in dealing with environmental matters

• Ensuring the site team and sub-contractors comply with the environmental protocols,

regulations and planning conditions

• Providing information for site induction briefings

• Approving all Method Statements and ensuring that any relevant site environmental

protocols are appended and that these controls are adhered to

• Correct installation and maintenance of physical protection measures.

• Contingency measures in the event of an accident or occurrence of other potentially

damaging incidents

• Support of the Ecological Clerk of Works.

The Ecological Clerk of Works (ECoW) will be a point of contact during the works and will

be responsible for the following:

• Providing guidance regarding ecological protocols and regulations as required

• Carrying out Ecological Watching Briefs and toolbox talks as required

• Carrying out necessary inspections of the habitat protection and mitigation, lighting

restrictions and site management

• Reporting any identified issues to the Site Manager. If insufficient action is taken, the

ECoW shall stop the works and report to the appropriate statutory authority


5.2.2 Ecological Zones

The area will be divided into zones based on a ‘traffic light’ assessment, to indicate the

ecological value of each area:

Red: Habitat of high ecological value supporting several protected species. Work in

these areas will require sensitive timing and ecological supervision.

• These areas primarily comprise the existing hedgebanks and mature trees which

support foraging bats, nesting birds and commuting badgers.

Amber: Habitat of medium ecological value. Ecological mitigation or supervision is

likely to be required prior to development commencing.

• These areas primarily comprise the grassland which supports slowworms.

• Areas of scrub that may support nesting birds are also included.

Green: Habitat of low ecological value. Development can commence in these areas with

no ecological restrictions.

• These areas will comprise areas of grassland and scrub once they have been cleared in

line with the Reptile Mitigation Strategy.

5.3 Construction Phase Mitigation

The following sections detail the mitigation strategies for the species and habitats that may

potentially be affected during the construction phase of the development. Such actions are

considered necessary to minimise negative impacts to species and habitats that are present.

5.3.1 Badger

As a precautionary measure, a sloping plank should be left in any excavations deeper than 1m

which are to remain open overnight, to avoid trapping any badgers and otter that access the

excavation.

5.3.2 Lighting

During the construction phase of the development, site works should be limited to daylight

hours, at least 15 minutes after sunrise and no later than 15 minutes before sunset, thus

ensuring that there will be no requirement for artificial lighting, particularly between April

and October (inclusive). This will eliminate any potential for additional light spillage into

potential bat flight lines or effects on other nocturnal species such as owls. Where use of

construction lighting is unavoidable, this should be tightly shielded and directed away from

retained hedgerow and tree habitats.


5.3.3 Protection of Retained Vegetation

The retained trees and hedgebanks will be designated Biodiversity Protection Zones and will

be protected during and post-development. All trees and hedgebanks scheduled for retention

will be protected using Heras fencing, chestnut paling or similar and all root protection zones

will be demarcated. The contractors will be made aware of the implications and legality of

working with a root protection zone during site induction. All development works, including

storage of materials and plant, will be excluded from the vicinity of trees and hedgebanks.

5.3.4 Pollution Control

Standard construction control measures will be utilised to minimise the risk of dust, noise

disturbance, runoff and accidental pollution, as outlined in Environment Agency Pollution

Prevention Guidelines (PPG6). The Environmental Manager will undertake a risk assessment

for the site to identify required control measures, and all site personnel will be appropriately

briefed on specific pollution control issues within and surrounding the site.

5.4 Post Construction Enhancement and Management

The following sections detail the post-construction enhancement strategies to increase the

value of the retained and created habitats for species present on the site. Such actions are

considered to maximise the net gain in biodiversity across the site. Details are set out in the

RST Strategic Landscape Planting Plan No. TAs 148 POS PP1 provided by the client and

management will be undertaken in line with the Landscape Management Report (Tisdall

Associates, 2015).

5.4.1 Habitats

5.4.1.1 Hedgebanks

Status

The majority of the species-rich hedgebanks are being retained and will be buffered by native

hedge planting in addition to a strip of hedgerow seed mix.

Aims

To maintain the current status of the existing hedges in addition to supplementary planting to

strengthen the hedgebanks along the southern boundary of Field 1 and the eastern boundary of

Field 2.

Weed and grass growth at the base of the hedge will be maintained to a maximum height of

100mm. All hedge cutting will be conducted between November and February to avoid bird

nesting season. Replacement planting will be carried out between November and March.

Areas of new planting will be kept weed free until the canopy closes, with selective weed

control hereafter. These new areas will be allowed to develop naturally for 5 years, only

pruning to prevent encroachment onto pathways and to remove deadwood. Pruning to be

carried out with hand tools. Thinning works will be carried out to allow slower growing

species such as holly and dogwood to develop and maintain a varied canopy structure.


Outcomes

To maintain connectivity of the site to the wider countryside, the species diversity of the

hedgerows and provide a diverse range of foraging, roosting and breeding habitat for wildlife.

5.4.1.2 Meadow and Rough Grassland

Status

Open rough grassland meadow with informal grass paths and access. An informal park will be

created in Field 1 including areas of meadow mix, pollen and nectar mix and tussock

grassland mix.

Aims

Weed growth will be controlled by hand cutting/pulling or digging out of root stock to

develop a heterogeneous sward of open grass and developing vegetation. Grass will be mown

twice per year in March and September/October in order to promote species richness and

suppress encroachment of scrub. Additional grassland seeding/plug planting may be carried

out if needed in March/April or September/October if needed in order to maintain species

diversity.

Amenity grassland will be cut 8-10 times per year with herbicide application to remove thistle

and dock species.

Outcomes

To be maintained as rough grassland with clear routes maintained with controlled public

access. Limited regenerating scrub and trees are to be allowed to develop along the boundary

fence lines to soften boundaries and prove a sense of enclosure. Species planted will include

tussock grasses, species rich in pollen and nectar as well as general meadow and hedge

species.

5.4.1.3 Wetland and Flood Attenuation Areas

Status

There is no wetland habitat presently on site. Attenuation ponds will be created as part of the

Sustainable Urban Drainage Scheme (SUDS) and seeded with wetland edge mix.

Aims

To increase habitat diversity across the site and promote wildlife interest. A seed mix

containing wetland meadow and pond species to be sown around the attenuation ponds.

Wetland plants are to be controlled by hand pulling or cutting, no herbicides are to be used

where possible. Care will also be taken to avoid chemicals accidentally entering the

waterbodies. Dominant and invasive species will be controlled in the interests of species

diversity.

Outcomes

The attenuation ponds and wetland areas will create new habitat for aquatic invertebrates, an

additional foraging habitat for wildlife including amphibians as well as assisting with site

drainage.


5.4.1.4 Retained Trees and Scrub

Status

A small number of trees are being retained across the site in addition to areas of scrub in the

rough grassland.

Aims

To allow the retained trees to grow to maturity and for scrub to be managed as outlined in the

Landscape Management Report. Management will include thinning, restocking and coppicing

to maintain a varied structure.

Areas of retained existing scrub will be assessed every five years and managed on a rotation

basis to maintain a diverse structure ranging from rough grassland through regenerating scrub

to mature scrubland.

Outcomes

An area of regenerating scrub which will be allowed to develop into mature scrubland. This

will be managed to maintain optimal vegetation structure for wildlife, along with open areas

of mature grassland.

5.4.1.5 Parkland Tree, Orchard and Woodland Copse Planting

Status

No orchard or parkland tree habitat currently on site. To be planted as part of the public park.

Aims

To create new areas of native woodland and orchard in addition to individual parkland trees.

Newly planted parkland trees will be supported by a single stake and tie and woodland/scrub

plants by rabbit guards and shelters. Management including weed control, pruning and

thinning will be carried out as outlined in the landscape management report.

Outcomes

To establish an orchard and new individual parkland trees in addition to creating new areas of

native woodland and scrub in order to increase the diversity of habitats and wildlife interest in

the site.


5.5.2 Species

5.5.2.1 Bats

In addition to habitat creation, 20 bat roosting provisions (e.g. Habibat or Schwegler tubes)

will be installed within the walls of the new garages in addition to on mature retained trees

within the north-western extent of Field 1. Bat roost provision will be located at a minimum

height of 3m, either south-east or south-west facing and positioned away from lit areas.

5.5.2.2 Birds

No coppicing, thinning or scrub removal works will be undertaken between the end of

February and late-August, in order to protect nesting birds.

In addition to habitat creation, bird nesting provision suitable for birds that nest in association

with human habitation will be installed on the new garages on a northerly aspect. RSPB

guidelines recommend that an average of one provision per dwelling is installed. The nesting

provision will comprise a mix of general purpose nest bricks (e.g. Habibat) suitable for a

range of birds including blue tit Cyanistes caeruleus and house sparrow Passer domesticus

and located at least 2m high. Any swift Apus apus bricks will be located in groups of 1 to 4 on

a house or 4 to 10 on a block of flats; swift bricks would be located at least 5m high and out

of direct sunlight, with clear flight paths.

5.5.2.3 Reptiles

In addition to habitat creation, any brash, log or grass arisings resulting from vegetation

management will be utilised to create habitat piles, providing potential habitat and over-

wintering sites for invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles and small mammals. These habitat piles

should be approximately 1m3 in size and preferably located within a relatively undisturbed

location within Field 1.

5.5.2.4 Hedgehogs

The residential gardens, rough grassland and habitat piles will provide potential foraging and

shelter for hedgehogs.

5.6 Summary

The proposed works will result in the loss of low quality habitats of limited potential value to

foraging badgers, birds and reptiles. The higher quality species-rich hedgebanks will be

retained and enhanced where possible.

Additional habitat creation associated with the scheme will provide new commuting/foraging

habitat for badgers, bats, birds and reptiles, and enhancement measures will provide new

roosting/nesting opportunities for bats and birds. Precautionary timing and suitable control

measures will be adhered to in order to minimise potential impacts during vegetation removal

and construction. It is therefore considered that there are unlikely to be any significant adverse

ecological impacts from the proposed works.


Ecological

Receptor

Geographical

scale of impact Potential impacts

Mitigation Impact

Avoidance measures Compensation & Enhancement measures Short term Long term

Species poor

semi-

improved

grassland

Site • Loss of 6.39 ha grassland N/A

Creation of 1.83 ha of informal park including planting

of meadow, tussock grassland, pollen and nectar mix.

Habitat enhancement at reptile receptor site off site.

Negative at

Site level

Neutral at Site

level

Hedgebank Site • Loss of sections of hedgebank

within Field 1 and 2

Majority of hedgebanks to be

retained

Planting of native hedgebank shrubs along the southern

boundary of Field 1 and the eastern boundary of Field 2.

Enhance and manage by cutting no more than a third a

year in late winter.

Buffered by a strip of native hedgerow seed mix and

tussock grassland.

Negative

at Site level

Positive at Site

level

Scrub Site • Loss of bramble scrub within

Field 2N/A

Planting of native hedgebank shrubs along the southern


Negative

at Site level

Neutral at Site

level

Native

woodland/

copse

Site • None on site N/A

Introduction of native woodland/copse planting around

Field 1 to buffer and enhance the habitat value for

wildlife.

Positive at Site

level

Positive at Site

level

Orchard Site • None on site N/A

Creation of a community orchard using local fruit

varieties – creates new habitat for foraging wildlife

including birds

Positive at Site

level

Positive at Site

level

Wetland Site • None on site N/A

Creation of attenuation ponds with wetland edge seed

mix– creates new habitat for foraging wildlife including

amphibians.

Positive at Site

level

Positive at Site

level

Badger Site

• Loss of foraging/commuting

habitat

• Low risk of becoming trapped

during excavations

• Reduction in potential grassland

foraging habitat

A sloping plank should be left in

any excavations deeper than 1m /

covered/fenced overnight

Creation of 1.83 ha of informal park including orchard,

attenuation ponds, planting of meadow, tussock

grassland, pollen and nectar mix – enhances foraging

habitat.

Negative at

Site level

Neutral at Site

level

Bats Local

• Loss of low quality grassland and

scrub potential foraging habitat

• Loss of sections of hedgebank

with foraging/commuting

potential

• Additional light spill post

construction

• No roosting opportunities

currently on site

Avoid undertaking the

construction works at night

Use hoods and louvres to reduce

lightspill and avoid lighting

retained hedgebanks


retained

Creation of 1.83 ha of informal park with additional tree,

hedgerow and orchard planting.

Planting of new hedgebank shrubs along the southern


Creation of an attenuation pond will provide additional

foraging for bats.

20 bat roosting provisions incorporated onto the

proposed buildings providing roosting habitat on site.

Negative

at Site and

Local level

Positive at Site

level

Neutral at

Local level


Ecological

Receptor

Geographical

scale of impact Potential impacts

Mitigation Impact

Avoidance measures Compensation & Enhancement measures Short term Long term

Nesting Birds Site

• Risk of damage or destruction of

active nests

• Loss of hedgebank and scrub

nesting habitat

• Loss of potential grassland

nesting habitat

Programme and undertake

vegetation clearance outside of

bird nesting season or following a

nesting bird check


retained

Additional nesting habitat provided through tree and

hedgerow planting.

Creation of an attenuation pond in Field 2 will provide

additional foraging and bathing opportunities.

Bird nesting provisions incorporated (average of 1 per

dwelling) suitable for birds that nest in association with

human habitation.

Negative

at Site level

Positive at Site

level

Reptiles Site • Risk of killing/injury

• Loss of 6.39 ha grassland habitat

The reptiles will be translocated

to an appropriate receptor area

between April - September. The

grassland will then be cut utilising

a methodology which protects any

reptiles still present

Creation of 1.83 ha of informal park managed

appropriately for biodiversity.

Installation of habitat piles within Field 1.

Habitat enhancement at reptile receptor site off site.

Negative at

Site level

Neutral at Site

level

Hedgehogs Site • Loss of grassland and scrub

habitat N/A

Installation of habitat piles within Field 1.

Creation of 1.83 ha of informal park with additional tree,

hedgerow and orchard planting – enhances foraging

habitat and provides shelter

Negative at

Site level

Neutral at Site

level

Table 5.1 Summary of Net Biodiversity Gain


References

Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2013). Guidelines for

Preliminary Ecological Appraisal. CIEEM, Winchester.

Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2015). Guidelines for

Ecological Report Writing. CIEEM, Winchester.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act (2000). HMSO

Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (2010), as amended. HMSO

Devon Biodiversity Action Plan.

http://www.devon.gov.uk/devon_biodiversity_action_plan [accessed July 2015]

Devon County Council (2008) Validation Requirements for Planning Applications to Devon

County Council. Devon County Council, Exeter.

Devon Wildlife Consultants (2015) Preliminary Ecological Appraisal – Phase 1, Redwood

Drive, Chaddlewood, Plympton. Report No. 14/2734. DWC, Exeter.

English Nature. (2004). The Bat Mitigation Guidelines. English Nature, Peterborough.

English Nature (2004). Reptiles: Guidelines for Developers. Belmont Press, English Nature,

Peterborough.

English Nature (2008) Guidelines for the creation of Suitable Accessible Natural Green

Space (SANGS). Natural England, Sheffield.

Hedgerow Regulations (1997). HMSO

JNCC (2010). Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey: A technique for environmental audit

(reprint). Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.

Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006). HMSO

Protection of Badgers Act (1992). HMSO

Tisdall Associates (2015) Land at Redwood Drive and Poplar Close, Chaddlewood

Landscape Management Report. Tisdall Associates, Pershore.


Appendices

Appendix 1: Desk Study Search Data

Appendix 2: Legislation

Appendix 3: Raw Survey Data

Appendix 4: Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Map

Appendix 5: Landscaping Concepts and Opportunities Plan


Appendix 1 – Desk Study Search Data

- 1 -

Statutory & non-statutory sites within 1 kilometre of Redwood Drive, Plymouth (19/01/2015) Enq no. 7259

File Code

Site Name Grid Reference

Area (ha)

Description Status

SX55/010 Lowdamoor SX560575 7.9 Broadleaved woodland, semi-improved neutral grassland & scrub UWS

SX55/007 West Park Hill SX557575 12.8 Semi-improved neutral grassland UWS

SX55/016 Sherwell

SX570571 & SX566567 13.5 Semi-improved neutral grassland UWS

SX55/013 Hemerdon

SX566576 & SX563574 7.7 Semi-improved neutral grassland UWS

SX55/014 Chaddle Wood SX562567 11.3 Ancient semi-natural woodland UWS

SX55/006 Holly Wood SX552575 6.3 Ancient semi-natural woodland partly replanted with conifers & broadleaves OSWI

County Wildlife Sites (CWS): these are sites of county importance for wildlife, designated on the basis of the habitat or the known presence of particular species. This is not a statutory designation like SSSIs, and does not have any legal status. The National Planning Policy framework requires local authorities to identify and map locally designated sites of biodiversity importance (such as County Wildlife Sites) as part of the Local Plan process and to draw up criteria based policies against which proposals for development affecting them will be judged. CWS recognition does not demand any particular actions on the part of the Landowner and does not give the public rights of access. However, it may increase eligibility for land management grants.

Other Sites of Wildlife Interest (OSWI): these are sites of significant wildlife interest within a local context that have been surveyed but do not reach the criteria for County Wildlife Sites. They are not covered by NPPF, but may be included in Local Plans.

- 2 -

Unconfirmed Wildlife Sites (UWS): these are sites identified as having possible interest but not fully surveyed. Some of these sites will be areas of significant wildlife interest. Regionally Important Geological and Geomorphological Sites (RIGS): these are earth science sites that are of regional or local importance. Like CWS, they are included in Local Plans and referred to under NPPF. Ancient Woodland Inventory (AWI): Ancient Woodland is a term applied to woodlands which have existed from at least Medieval times to the present day without ever having been cleared for uses other than wood or timber production. A convenient date used to separate ancient and secondary woodland is about the year 1600. In special circumstances semi-natural woods of post-1600 but pre-1900 origin are also included. The Devon Ancient Woodland Inventory was prepared in 1986 by the Nature Conservancy Council. There are two types of ancient woodland, both of which should be treated equally in terms of the protection afforded to ancient woodland in the National Planning Policy framework (NPPF):

• Ancient semi-natural woodland (ASNW): where the stands are composed predominantly of trees and shrubs native to the site that do not obviously originate from planting. The stands may have been managed by coppicing or pollarding in the past, or the tree and shrub layer may have grown up by natural regeneration.

• Plantations on ancient woodland sites (or PAWS, also known as ancient replanted woodland): areas of ancient woodland where the former native tree cover has been felled and replaced by planted stock, most commonly of a species not native to the site. These will include conifers such as Norway spruce or Corsican pine, but also broadleaves such as sycamore or sweet chestnut.

- 3 -

Plymouth Biodiversity Network Sites:

ID Site name

Grid reference

Area (ha) Description Status Rationale

170 3

Semi-natural broadleaved woodland & amenity grassland

Biodiversity Network Feature

Buffering non-statutory sites (Brockhole & Binicliff Woods CWS)

203 Downfield Drive SX547563 8.8

Broadleaved woodland, scrub and semi-improved grassland


Stepping Stone between two network sites

204 Downfield Drive SX547563 1.3

Broadleaved woodland, scrub and semi-improved grassland



205 The Spinney SX556557 4.6

Semi-natural broadleaved woodland



206 11.6

Poor semi-improved grassland & marshy grassland & allotments



Biodiversity Network: Areas of semi-natural habitat likely to make a significant contribution to the overall movement/dispersal of species within the local landscape as wildlife ‘stepping stones’ or corridors. These include for example, areas of species-rich semi-improved grassland, double hedgerows/hedgebanks, significant belts/areas of scrub, semi-natural or plantation broadleaved woodland and ponds. The best habitats are described a Key Network Features.

- 4 -

Developmental control species records within 1 kilometre of Redwood Drive, Plymouth (19/01/2015) Enq no. 7259

No Common Name

Scientific Name Location Date Grid Reference

UK protection

International protection Status

1 Slow-worm Anguis fragilis Meadowcroft, Downfield Way, Plympton, Plymouth 2004 SX547565

WCA 5 (KIS); NERC 41 Bern III

UKBAP (P)

2 Japanese Knotweed Fallopia japonica Glen Road, amenity grassland 2002 SX547566 WCA 9

3 Japanese Knotweed Fallopia japonica Verge behind Torridge Road, Plymouth 2014 SX550565 WCA 9

4 a Bat Chiroptera Lower Lodge, Newnham Road, Plympton, Plymouth 1989 SX550573 WCA 5, 6 EC IVa; Bonn II

5 Brown Long-eared Bat Plecotus auritus Lower Lodge, Plympton, Plymouth. 1995 SX550573

WCA 5, 6; NERC 41

EC IVa; Bern II; Bonn II

UKBAP (P)

6 a Bat Chiroptera Rear of Kenmare Drive, Plympton, Plymouth (tree roost) 1990 SX552560 WCA 5, 6 EC IVa; Bonn II

7 Grass Snake Natrix natrix Allotments at Newnham, Plympton, Plymouth. 2002 SX552572


UKBAP (P)

8 Slow-worm Anguis fragilis Allotments at Newnham, Plympton, Plymouth. 2002 SX552572


UKBAP (P)

9 Eurasian Badger Meles meles WOOLVERWOOD PLANTATION 1996 SX5555 WCA 6, BA Bern III

10 Eurasian Badger Meles meles BELL CLOSE OPEN SPACE, Bell Close Field 1996 SX5557 WCA 6, BA Bern III

11 a Pipistrelle Bat Pipistrellus Cornwood Road, Plympton, Plymouth 1980 SX557556 WCA 5, 6 EC IVa; Bern III, Bonn II

12 a Bat Chiroptera Dwelling, Plymouth 2014 SX561565 WCA 5, 6 EC IVa; Bonn II

13 Brown Long-eared Bat Plecotus auritus Lowdamoor, Hemerdon, Plymouth. 1996 SX562575

WCA 5, 6; NERC 41

EC IVa; Bern II; Bonn II

UKBAP (P)

14 Japanese Knotweed Fallopia japonica Hemerdon (road verge) 2009 SX5644157351 WCA 9

- 5 -

*Developmental control species

These are species that are considered most important by local authorities in the planning process. They include certain species on the NERC Act (2006) Section 41, those that have European protection and those on the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) 1, 5, 5 (KIS), 8 and Japanese Knotweed.

NERC 41 NERC Act (2006) Section 41: Species listed under Section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006). These are the species found in England which have been identified as requiring action under the UK BAP. All local authorities and other public authorities in England and Wales have a duty to promote and enhance biodiversity in all of their functions.

WCA 5 Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) Schedule 5: species protected against killing, injury, disturbance and handling.

WCA 5 (KIS) Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) Schedule 5: (killing & injury): species protected against killing, injury and sale only.

WCA 6 Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) Schedule 6: animals (other than birds) which may not be killed or taken by certain methods

WCA 9 Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) Schedule 9: animals and plants for which release into the wild is prohibited.

BA Protection of Badgers Act 1992: badgers may not be deliberately killed, persecuted or trapped except under licence. Badger setts may not be damaged, destroyed or obstructed.

Bern II Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern Convention) Appendix II: Special protection for listed animal species and their habitats.

Bern III Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern Convention) Appendix III: Exploitation of listed animal species to be subject to regulation

- 6 -

ECIVa, IVb EC Directive on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora (Habitats & Species

Directive) Annex IVa: Exploitation of listed animals and plants to be subject to management if necessary. Bonn II Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention) Appendix II:

Range states encouraged to conclude international agreements to benefit species listed. UKBAP(P) UK Priority Species (Short and Middle Lists - UK Biodiversity steering Group Report 1995) i.e. species that

are globally threatened and rapidly declining in the UK (by more than 50% in the last 25 years). Has a Species Action Plan.

Red List Bird species of high conservation concern, such as those whose population or range is rapidly declining, recently or

historically, and those of global conservation concern. Amber List Bird species of medium conservation concern, such as those whose population is in moderate decline, rare

breeders, internationally important and localised species and those of unfavourable conservation status in Europe. KeyD (I) Internationally Important Key Dragonfly Species: those which are rare in Great Britain (RDB3 and found in less

than 1% of the 10km squares in Britain) i.e. Southern damselfly (Coenagrion mercuriale). KeyD (N) Nationally Important Key Dragonfly Species: those which have been recorded in less than 10% of 10km squares

in Britain. Those occurring in Devon are White-legged damselfly (Playcnemis pennipes) Scarce blue-tailed damselfly (Ischnura pumilio) Small red damselfly (Ceriagrion tenellum) Hairy dragonfly (Bracytron pratense) Downy emerald (Cordulia aenea) and Keeled skimmer (Orthoetrum coerulescens).

KeyD (R) Regionally Important Key Dragonfly Species: those which have been recorded in 10-20% of the 10km squares in

Britain: Red-eyed damselfly (Erythromma najas) and Ruddy darter (Sympetrum sanguineum).

- 7 -

Greater Horseshoe Bat Consultation Zones: Your site is not within a Strategic Flyway or Sustenance Zone. Strategic Flyways: these make up a key network of flight path zones connecting the component roosts of the South Hams SAC. The strategic flyways have been made 500 metres wide to provide a combination of alternative suitable routes. Flyways subject to a pinch point scenario are particularly susceptible to development pressure. Sustenance Zone: these are key feeding and foraging zones. They consist of a 4km radius circle centred on each of the component roosts of the South Hams SAC (with the exception of Berry Head, on a peninsula which has a sustenance area of a circular sector approximately equal in area to a 4km radius circle). Existing urban non-vegetated areas should not be considered as key foraging areas.

Great Crested Newt Consultation Zones: Your site is not in a Great crested newt consultation zone. These are two kilometre buffers around existing and historical (post 1970) great crested newt records. You may need to carry out great crested newt survey if your site is within one of these zones. For more information please go to: http://www.devon.gov.uk/index/environmentplanning/natural_environment/wildlife.htm.

DEVON BAT GROUP TEL 07971 425 288

EMAIL [email protected] C/o 31 Boobery, Sampford Peverell, Tiverton, Devon, EX16 7BS

Carly Ireland 13th January 2015 Devon Wildlife Consultants 26 Commercial Road Exeter EX2 4AE

BAT RECORD SEARCH RESULTS OF STUDY AREA: Redwood Drive, Plymouth. (Centred SX 558 564)

N.B. Our standard search radius is a 2km radius from the study area. This is within flight distance for all bats entering the study area. The requested search is within a 4km radius from the study area.

Devon Bat Group adhere to Data Protection. Only 4 figure grid references are provided. Data provided is the property of Devon Bat Group and may only be used in connection with this study.

NOTES ON INTERPRETATION; Records coverage: The availability of records is highly influenced by external factors; including the number of bat workers operating within an area, and which specific sites they have visited. Consequently the records returned should only be considered a subset of an area’s true bat activity, and the quality of coverage will vary between regions. Where few or no records exist, this does not indicate the absence of bat species from that area.

Tree roosting species: Bat records are inevitably biased towards species roosting within built structures. Consequently tree roosting species such as Noctules will likely be under-recorded in comparison to other bats.

Age of record: Considering the longevity of some species and the loyalty of colonies to roosts, all records are included. Where a date range is stated, this indicates the range of dates for which we hold records, and does not imply a cessation of occupancy.

Distances and bearings to records: For your guidance an approximate distance and bearing is provided between each record, and the central OS Grid Reference used for the search (with due north being at 0°, and due south being at 180°)

Data quality: Devon Bat Group’s records represent the best opinions of skilled bat workers, and care is taken to record these as accurately as possible. Nevertheless we cannot guaranteed the accuracy of all data and records are provided for guidance only.

Grid Roost Distance Bearing

Ref Species Status Record (kms) (degrees) Year

SX5255 Unknown Unknown Building Roost 3.91 257 1998

SX5255 Brown Long-Eared Hibernation Site House Roost 3.88 258 1987

SX5255 Lesser Horseshoe Hibernation Site House Roost 3.86 260 1989

SX5255 Lesser Horseshoe Hibernation Site House Roost 3.86 260 1989

SX5453 Common Pipistrelle Feeding/Flying Flying Bat 2.91 207 2005

SX5453 Lesser Horseshoe Feeding/Flying Flying Bat 2.91 207 2005

SX5453 Myotis Species Feeding/Flying Flying Bat 2.91 207 2005

SX5453 Barbastelle Feeding/Flying Flying Bat 2.91 207 2005

SX5453 Barbastelle Hibernation Site Underground Roost 2.91 207 2004

SX5453 Natterer's Hibernation Site Underground Roost 2.91 207 2005

SX5457 Common Pipistrelle Breeding Site House Roost 1.61 300 2004

SX5458 Unknown Unknown House Roost 2.83 328 1999

SX5459 Common Pipistrelle Unknown House Roost 3.23 338 2002

SX5552 Brown Long-Eared Unknown House Roost 3.61 185 1998

SX5552 Lesser Horseshoe Unknown House Roost 3.61 185 1998

SX5555 Unknown Unknown House Roost 1.08 214 1998

SX5555 Pipistrelle Species Breeding Site House Roost 1.03 209 1987

SX5555 Pipistrelle Species Unknown House Roost 0.72 214 1987



SX5557 Greater Horseshoe Hibernation Site Underground Roost 1.44 326 1976


SX5558 Brown Long-Eared Unknown Building Roost 1.61 353 2000

SX5658 Greater Horseshoe Hibernation Site Underground Roost 2.38 15 1957

SX5658 Lesser Horseshoe Hibernation Site Underground Roost 2.38 15 1957-1977

SX5658 Lesser Horseshoe Hibernation Site Underground Roost 2.38 15 1977

SX5658 Whiskered Hibernation Site Underground Roost 2.38 15 1965



SX5752 Common Pipistrelle Breeding Site House Roost 3.79 162 1995-2002










SX5854 Nathusius' Pipistrelle Dead Bat Dead Bat 3.09 119 2007

COMMENT

In any ecological appraisal, we would always expect that a ‘best practice’ contemporary bat survey of the site including

buildings, trees, waterways and hedgerow commuting and feeding bats, would be carried out by a qualified bat ecologist at appropriate periods. Alastair Blake

For and on behalf of the Devon Bat Group


Appendix 2 – Legislation

Badgers

Badgers are protected by the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 and the Wildlife and

Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), Schedule 6. Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act it is

illegal to intentionally kill, capture, injure or ill-treat any badger. Under the Protection of

Badgers Act it is an offence to obstruct, destroy or damage a badger sett or disturb badgers

within a sett, with any works which will contravene this legislation requiring prior licensing

from Natural England.

Birds

All wild birds, their nests and eggs are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981

(as amended), including when the nests are being built.

Bat Flight Lines & Foraging Habitat

As a signatory to the Bonn Convention (Agreement on the Conservation of Bats in Europe)

the UK is committed to protecting bat habitats, which necessitates the identification and

protection from damage or disturbance of important feeding areas and commuting routes. In

order to comply with the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006, it is

necessary to demonstrate that foraging bat species have been adequately considered through

the planning process.

Reptiles

Reptiles are protected against intentional killing and injury, sale and transport for sale under

the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Natural England states that activities

such as site clearance and movements of machinery may breach this legislation by causing

death or injury to reptiles (English Nature, 2004). Slowworms are also listed as Priority

species within the UK Biodiversity Action Plan.

Species of Principal Importance

In order to comply with Section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities

(NERC) Act 2006, it is necessary to demonstrate that Species of Principal Importance have

been adequately considered through the planning process.

Local Planning Policy

Plymouth City Council’s Core Strategy includes Policy CS19 Wildlife which sets out how the

Council will promote effective stewardship of the city’s wildlife, through appropriate

consideration of European and nationally protected and important species; retaining,

protecting and enhancing features of biological or geological interest; and seeking to produce

a net gain in biodiversity by designing in wildlife.


Appendix 3 – Raw Survey Data

A3.1 Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey data

English name Scientific name

Ash Fraxinus excelsior

Bamboo

Blackthorn Prunus spinosa

Bracken Pteridium aquilinum

Bramble Rubus fructicosus agg.

Broadleaved dock Rumex obtusifolius

Buddleia Buddleia davidii

Clover Trifolium sp.

Cock’s foot Dactylis glomerata

Crane’s bill Geranium sp.

Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens

Creeping thistle Cirsium arvense

Dandelion Taraxacum officinale agg.

Dogs mercury Mercuralis perenne

Dogwood Cornus sanguinea

English elm Ulmus procera

False oat grass Arrhenatherum elatius

Harts tongue fern Phyllitis scolopendrium

Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna

Hazel Corylus avellana

Hedge bedstraw Galium mollugo

Hogweed Heracleum sphondylium

Holly Ilex aquifolium

Ivy Hedera helix

Laurel Prunus laurocerasus

Meadow buttercup Ranunculus acris

Navelwort Umbilicus rupestris

Nettle Urtica dioica

Pedunculate oak Quercus robur

Ribwort plantain Plantago lanceolata

Willow Salix sp.

Wilson’s honeysuckle Lonicera nitida

Yorkshire fog Holcus lanatus

Botanical Species Recorded During the

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey


English name Scientific name

Blackbird Turdus merula

Carrion crow Corvus corone corone

Comma Polygonia c-album

Field vole Microtus agrestis

House sparrow Passer domesticus

Meadow brown Maniola jurtina

Painted lady Vanessa cardui

Ringlet Aphantopus hyperantus

Robin Erithacus rubecula

Slow worm Anguis fragilis

Small skipper Thymelicus sylvestris

Small white Pieris rapae

Wood mouse Apodemus sylvaticus

Wood pigeon Columba palumbus

Fauna Recorded During the

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey

A3.2 Reptile Survey data

Date Time Temp

(°°°°C) Wind

Cloud

(%)

Slowworm

♀ ♂ SA J

23/06/2015 15:30 18 F1 20 3 2

25/06/2015 10:00 20 F1 10 2 2 3 2

03/07/2015 10:00 17 F1 10 6 4 2 12

10/07/2015 10:00 17 F3 10 8 5 5 25

17/07/2015 13:00 18 F2 70 1

20/07/2015 13:00 17 F2 100 18 5 11 28

22/07/2015 11:30 18 F2 50 17 7 6 23

Reptile Survey Results

Key

♀ Female

♂ Male

SA Sub-adult

J Juvenile


Appendix 4 – Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Map

SI

SI

Field 2

Field 1

Legend

Introduced shrub

Dense scrub

Scattered trees

Species-poor semi-improved grassland

Hedgebank

Fence

Bracken

Additional Notes

- The site is suitable for reptiles - The scrub and hedgerows are suitable for nesting birds

N.B. This map is not definitive.

Title:

Client:

Site:

Drawing No.:

Date:

Drawn By:

Scale:

Checked By:

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey Map

Barratt Homes

Redwood Drive, Chaddlewood, Plympton

14/2734.01-01

January 2015

CI

DNS

KJ

SI


Appendix 5 – Landscaping Concepts and Opportunities Plan

ECOLOGICAL MITIGATION & ENHANCEMENT STRATEGY · 2016. 2. 5. · ecological value will be removed to...

Documents

Transcript of ECOLOGICAL MITIGATION & ENHANCEMENT STRATEGY · 2016. 2. 5. · ecological value will be removed to...