Site Reference Client Name
Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey
Roydon Marina Phase II, Roydon for: Roydon Mill Lodges LLP SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Contact Details:
Enzygo Ltd. tel: +44 [0]114 231 5151 Samuel House mob: +44 [0]7545 206 122 5 Fox Valley Way email: [email protected] Stocksbridge www.enzygo.com Sheffield. S36 2AA
Roydon Marina Phase II, Roydon
Project: Roydon Marina Phase II: Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey
For: Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Status: FINAL
Date: July 2015
Author: Diane Wood – Senior Ecologist MCIEEM
Reviewer: Paul Beswick – Technical Director
Disclaimer: This report has been produced by Enzygo Limited within the terms of the contract with the client and taking account of the resources devoted to it by agreement with the client. We disclaim any responsibility to the client and others in respect of any matters outside the scope of the above. This report is confidential to the client and we accept no responsibility of whatsoever nature to third parties to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known. Any such party relies on the report at their own risk.
Enzygo Limited Registered in England No. 6525159 Registered Office Stag House Chipping Wotton‐Under‐Edge Gloucestershire GL12 7AD
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | ii March 2016
Contents
Contents ...... 2
Executive Summary ...... 3
1.0 Introduction ...... 4
2.0 Methodology ...... 6
3.0 Results ...... 10
Desk Study ...... 10
Survey Results ...... 16
4.0 Ecological Impacts and Recommendations ...... 21
5.0 Summary and Conclusions ...... 27
6.0 References ...... 29
7.0 Appendix A – Extended Phase 1 Habitat Map ...... 31
8.0 Appendix B – Biodiversity Legislation ...... 32
9.0 Appendix C ‐ Target Notes and Photographs ...... 38
10.0 Appendix D ‐ Bat Roost Assessment Criteria [Hundt, L. 2012] ...... 43
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Executive Summary i. A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal [PEA] which comprised of an Extended Phase 1 habitat survey was carried out for the proposed extension of the existing Roydon Marina at Roydon, Essex. ii. A desk study and an extended Phase 1 habitat field survey were carried out to identify habitats and the potential for the site to support protected/notable species. iii. The desk study found that the internationally designated Lee Valley Ramsar, Special Protection Area [SPA] and Site of Special Scientific Interest [SSSI] site is ~160m to the west of the site. There are three Local Wildlife Sites [LWS] within ~60m‐640m of the site. iv. The field survey was carried out on the 12th May 2015 [updated in March 2016] and found within the site boundary were ten [10] different habitats. v. Recommendations are made in Chapters 4 and 5 of this report and include the following receptors:
Statutory Sites; Non‐statutory Sites; Breeding Birds; Wintering Birds; Bats; Water Voles; Site clearance; and Invasive Species.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 3 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Background
1.1.1 Enzygo Ltd was commissioned by Roydon Mill Lodges LLP, to conduct an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey of the proposed extension of Roydon Marina. The marina is located at Roydon Marina Village, Roydon, Essex, CM19 5EJ [hereafter referred to as ‘the site’]. The boundaries of the site are shown in Appendix A: Figure 1. The approximate central Ordnance Survey national grid reference for the site is 539625, 209914. The purpose of this report is to support a planning application for an extension to the existing marina at the site.
1.2 Site Location and Description
1.2.1 The site is situated in the town of Roydon, Essex approximately 3km to the west of Harlow. There are three main rivers within the immediate vicinity of the site; the River Stort is located approximately 60m to the north of the site, the River Stort [Navigation] located approximately 30m to the south of the site and Mill Stream located 20m to the south of the site. An ordinary watercourse flows along the western boundary of the site in a northerly direction and connects into the marina in the North West corner. The London Liverpool Street to Cambridge rail line is adjacent to the northern boundary of the site with a sewage works to the north of it. Surrounding the western and southern boundaries of the site is agricultural land. To the east is Roydon Marina Village
1.2.2 The site is approximately 5.6ha in size.
1.3 Development Proposals
1.3.1 It is understood the proposal is for the extension of the existing Roydon Marina, with the additional of 240 berth with the capacity for both narrow boats and wide berth boats and associated; ‘Elsan’ [chemical toilet] points, refuse collection facilities, and an extension to the facilities building to provide additional shower facilities. The proposal would also include associated car parking for approximately 100+ cars and a new bound gravel access road.
1.4 Survey and Reporting Aims and Objectives
1.4.1 The ecological investigations undertaken by Enzygo included the following:
A desk study to obtain existing information on statutory and non‐statutory sites of nature conservation interest, and records of protected/notable species within the site and its environs;
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 4 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
An extended Phase 1 habitat survey involving a walkover of the site to record habitat types and dominant vegetation, including any invasive species, and a reconnaissance survey for evidence of protected fauna or habitats capable of supporting such species; An investigation of any buildings or built structures and trees for their potential to support bats; and An assessment of the potential ecological constraints to the proposed works at the site and recommendations for further survey, avoidance, mitigation, and enhancement where appropriate.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 5 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
2.0 Methodology
2.1 Desk Study
2.1.1 Information was obtained from Essex Ecology Services Ltd. [EECOS], the ecological records centre for Essex, Hertfordshire Environmental Records Centre [HERC] regarding the presence of nature conservation designations and protected and notable species within 2km of the proposed development site. In addition, a search for designations was made of the web‐based MAGIC [Multi Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside] database.
2.1.2 The data search covers:
Statutory nature conservation designations, such as National Nature Reserves and Sites of Special Scientific Interest; Non‐statutory nature conservation designations, such as Wildlife Sites; Protected species, such as badgers Meles meles, great crested newts Triturus cristatus and bat species; and Notable species, such as those listed in the UK and local Biodiversity Action Plan.
2.1.3 Please note that Tree Preservation Orders [TPOs] and Conservation Area designations have not been checked as part of the desk study or extended Phase 1 habitat survey and are not considered further in this report.
2.2 Surveyor Details
2.2.1. The desk study, report and the site survey were conducted by Diane Wood MCIEEM [Enzygo Senior Ecologist].
2.3 Survey Methodology
2.3.1 An extended Phase 1 habitat survey was conducted within the site boundary [See Appendix A] on the 12th May 2015. In addition, the habitats around the edges of the lake that were outside of the site boundary were surveyed, to give a wider picture of the lake as a whole and to evaluate the habitats in this area should they need to be included in any mitigation that may be required. All areas of the site were investigated and as recommended by English Nature’s Badgers and Development [2002] guidance document, a 30m buffer around the site was investigated for evidence of badger activity where access was possible.
2.4 Habitats
2.4.1 The vegetation and habitat types within the site were noted during the walkover survey in accordance with the categories specified for a Phase 1 Vegetation and Habitat Survey [Joint
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 6 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Nature Conservation Committee, 2010]. Dominant plant species were recorded for each habitat present.
2.5 Protected and Notable Species
2.5.1 The site was inspected for evidence of and its potential to support protected or notable species, especially those listed under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 [as amended], the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 [as amended], including those given extra protection under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities [NERC] Act 2006 and Countryside & Rights of Way [CRoW] Act 2000, and listed on the UK and Local Biodiversity Action Plans.
2.5.2 The following species were considered:
Great Crested Newts
2.5.3 The site was appraised for its suitability to support great‐crested newts. The assessment was based on guidance outlined in the Joint Nature Conservation Committees’ published Herpetofauna Workers’ Manual [Gent, T. & Gibson, S., 2003] and the Great Crested Newt Conservation Handbook [Langton et al, 2001].
2.5.4 The Oldham et al. [2000] Habitat Suitability Index [HSI] was applied to ponds on site and any within 500m of the site where accessible, that were identified using Ordnance Survey maps and aerial images.
Reptiles
2.5.5 The site was appraised for its suitability to support reptiles. The assessment was based on guidance outlined in the Joint Nature Conservation Committees’ published Herpetofauna Workers’ Manual [Gent, T. & Gibson, S., 2003].
Bats
2.5.6 The buildings/trees within the boundary were appraised by an experienced ecologist from Enzygo for their suitability to support breeding, resting and hibernating bats using survey methods based on those outlined in the Bat Conservation Trust’s Bat Surveys: Good Practice Guidelines [Hundt, L., 2012] and English Nature’s Bat Mitigation Guidelines [Mitchell‐Jones, A.J., 2004].
Badgers
2.5.7 The site was surveyed for evidence of badger setts or other badger activity such as paths, latrines or signs of foraging. Methodologies used and any setts recorded were classified according to published criteria [Harris et al., 1989]. A 30m buffer zone around the expected
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 7 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
zone of influence was surveyed as recommended in English Nature’s Badgers and Development [2002].
Otters
2.5.8 Water courses on site were assessed for their suitability to support otters. This assessment was based on guidance outlined in Monitoring the Otter [Chanin, P., 2003].
Water Voles
2.5.9 Following methods set out in the Water Vole Conservation Handbook 3rd Ed. [Strachan, Moorhouse & Gelling, 2011], an assessment of water bodies and water courses within the site was undertaken to determine their suitability to support water voles and a search for evidence of activity, including droppings, latrines, burrows, footprints and feeding lawns, was undertaken of any areas considered suitable.
Other Species
2.5.10 The site was also appraised for its suitability to support other protected or notable fauna including mammals, birds and invertebrates in accordance with the Institute for Ecology and Environmental Management’s Guidelines for Preliminary Ecological Appraisal [2012]. Evidence of any current or historical presence of such species was recorded.
Invasive Species
2.5.11 The site was searched for evidence of invasive plant species, such as Japanese knotweed Fallopia japonica, Himalayan balsam Impatiens glandulifera, giant hogweed Heracleum mantegazzianum, New Zealand pygmyweed Crassula helmssii, wall cotoneaster Cotoneaster horizontalis, rhododendron Rhododendron ponticum [and hybrids] and floating pennywort Hydrocotyle ranunculoides [see Appendix B Table B2 for full list].
2.6 Survey Limitations
2.6.1 To determine presence or likely absence of protected species usually requires multiple visits at suitable times of the year. As a result, the survey undertaken focussed on assessing the potential of the site to support species of note, which are considered to be of principal importance for the conservation of biodiversity with reference to the National Planning Policy Framework [Department for Communities and Local Government, 2012], especially those given protection under UK or European wildlife legislation.
2.6.2 The survey was undertaken in May which is during the recommended Phase 1 habitat survey season of April‐September.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 8 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
2.6.3 The details of this report will remain valid for a period of two years. Beyond this period it is recommended that a new review of the ecological conditions is undertaken.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 9 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
3.0 Results
3.1 Desk Study
3.1.1 Please refer to Chapter 8: Appendix B for key environmental legislation with regards to habitats and species.
3.2 Statutory Sites
3.2.1 The nearest international and national statutory designated site is the Lee Valley Ramsar and Special Protection Area [SPA] that is located ~160m to the west of the site. The same site is also a nationally designated Site of Special Scientific Interest [SSSI], Rye Meads SSSI. The site is also an RSPB reserve.
3.2.2 The Ramsar designation was for the nationally scarce plant species whorled water‐milfoil Myriophyllum verticillatum and the rare or vulnerable invertebrate Micronecta minutissima and the populations of shoveler Anas clypeata and gadwall Anas strepera strepera.
3.2.3 The SPA designation is for overwintering bittern Botaurus stellaris and migrating shoveler and gadwall.
3.2.4 The SSSI designation was for the tall fen vegetation which provides a valuable habitat for locally uncommon plants and for birds, namely bittern, gadwall, shoveler, snipe Gallinago gallinago, water rail Rallus aquaticus, bearded tit Panarus biamicus and common tern Sterna hirundo.
3.2.5 Hunsdon Mead SSSI is located approximately 1.7km to the north east of the site. It was designated as the grassland habitats within it support the day‐flying moth, small yellow underwing Panemeria tenebrata. The SSSI also supports large feeding flocks of overwintering fieldfare Turdus pilaris and redwing Turdus iliacus.
3.3 Non‐statutory Sites
3.3.1 There are eleven non‐statutory designated sites lying within or partly within 2km of the site, none are within the site itself. The sites are Local Wildlife Sites [LWS] which are sites of local or district wide importance for the enjoyment, study or conservation of wildlife, geological features and landforms.
Rye Meads Gravel Pit [LWS] – located approximately 60m to the north of the site, designated for a mosaic of habitats, standing water, fen and swamp indicators. Lee Valley North [LWS] – located approximately 240m to the south of the site, designated for a complex of lakes and wildfowl and wetland birds.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 10 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Stanstead Abbots Gravel Pit [LWS] ‐ located approximately 640m to the north of the site, designated for mosaic of habitats, standing water, fen and swamp indicators. Rye House Power Station [LWS] ‐ located approximately 1.1km to the south west of the site, designated for grassland indicators, fen and swamp indicators, species. Senior’s Lake [LWS] ‐ located approximately 1.5km to the north of the site, designated for fen and swamp indicators. Stanstead Bury Wood [LWS] – located approximately 1.6km to the north east of the site, designated for ancient woodland. World’s End [LWS] – located approximately 1.6km to the south east of the site, designated for woodland, hedgerows and green lanes. Lake South of the Maltings [LWS] – located approximately 1.8km to the north of the site, designated for mosaic of habitats, fen and swamp indicators. Totwellhill Bushes [LWS] ‐ located approximately 1.8km to the south of the site, designated for ancient and deciduous woodland. Roydon Brickfields North [LWS] – located approximately 1.9km to the south of the site, designated for lowland meadows. Roydon Mead [LWS] – located approximately 1.9km to the north east of the site, designated for river floodplain habitat.
3.3.2 The MAGIC website revealed that there are:
95 parcels of UKBAP Priority habitat ‘Deciduous Woodland’ within 2km of the site, the nearest is ~20m from the northern boundary of the site. 15 areas of ‘Good Quality Semi‐improved Grassland’ UKBAP Priority habitat, the nearest is ~250m to the west of the site in Lee Valley Ramsar/SPA. 1 area of the UKBAP Priority habitat ‘Lowland Fens’ occurs ~2km to the south west of the site. 1 area of UKBAP Priority habitat ‘Reedbeds’ ~900m to the north west of the site. 12 areas of ‘National Inventory of Woodland and Trees’ UKBAP Priority Habitat occur, the nearest is ~340m to the south of the site. 11 parcels of UKBAP Priority Habitat ‘Coastal and Floodplain Grazing Marsh’ occur, the nearest is ~160m to the south west of the site. 4 areas of UKBAP Priority habitat ‘Traditional Orchards’ the nearest ~1.2km to the north of the site. 2 areas of ‘Ancient and Semi‐natural Woodland’ UKBAP Priority habitat, the nearest ~1.6km to the north of the site.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 11 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
1 area of ‘Ancient Replanted Woodland’ UKBAP Priority Habitat ~1.5km to the north of the site. 1 area of ‘Lowland Meadows’ UKBAP Priority Habitat ~1.7km to the north east of the site. 1 area of ‘Woodland and Parkland’ UKBAP Priority Habitat ~966m to the north of the site.
3.4 Protected and Notable Species
3.4.1 Please refer to Chapter 8: Appendix B for explanation of the legislation and protection covering the species. The records were checked against species included in the UK BAP [JNCC, 2010] and Essex Local Biodiversity Action Plan [LBAP] [Essex Biodiversity Project, 2011]. The local biodiversity records centres only holds records which have been supplied to them and hence may not provide an accurate reflection of the fauna/flora present on the site. Recent records refers to data received in or after the year 2000.
Flora
3.4.2 No records were received from EECOS.
3.4.3 HERC supplied:
Bluebell Hyacinthoides non‐scripta [Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 [as amended] Schedule 8, LBAP] two records dating from 1999 ~1.7km to the north east of the site; River water‐dropwort Oenanthe fluviatilis [LBAP] twenty records between 1999 and 2008, the nearest ~970m to the west of the site.
Invertebrates [includes White‐clawed Crayfish [Austropotamobius pallipes]
3.4.4 No records were received from EECOS.
3.4.5 HERC returned records of 52 species of invertebrates all of which were UKBAP species. The majority of recent records were from ~160m to the west of the site at Rye Meads SSSI, with some from Hunsdon Mead SSSI ~1.7km to the north east of the site.
3.4.6 Dated records of white‐clawed crayfish in the River Stort which were last recorded in 1981.
Amphibians
3.4.7 No records were received from EECOS.
3.4.8 Records received from HERC included:
Three records of great crested newt dated 2003 and 2004 was received from Rye Meads Power Station ~1km to the south west of the site; and
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 12 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Dated records of common toad Bufo bufo between 1988‐1997, the nearest at Rye Meads nature reserve.
Reptiles
3.4.9 No records were received from EECOS.
3.4.10 Ten records of grass snake Natrix natrix [WCA, UKBAP] between 1985 and 2001 were received from HERC, the closest being in Rye Meads SSSI, ~160m to the north west of the site. Two dated records of common lizard Zootoca vivipara were also received.
Birds
3.4.11 No records were received from EECOS who also advised that Essex Field Club had no bird records available at the time of the request.
3.4.12 Recent records of 51 bird species from HERC are summarised in Table 1 below:
Table 1: HERC Records of Protected [WCA Sch 1 part 1], UKBAP and LBAP Birds within 2km of the Site
Date No. of Scientific name Common name Designation Location recorded records Rye Meads ~160m to Acanthis cabaret Lesser redpoll UKBAP 2012‐2013 85 the west of the site Northern Rye Meads ~160m to Accipiter gentilis WCA Sch1 part1 2013 1 Goshawk the west of the site Common Rye Meads ~160m to Alcedo atthis WCA Sch1 part1 1994‐2013 338 Kingfisher the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Alauda arvensis Skylark UKBAP, LBAP 1995‐2013 62 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Anas querquedula Garganey WCA Sch 1 part 1 1995‐2013 75 the west of the site WCA Sch 1 part 1 Rye Meads ~160m to Botaurus stellaris Bittern 1996‐2013 43 UKBAP, LBAP the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Calidris pugnax Ruff WCA Sch 1 part 1 2002‐2003 3 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Carduelis cannabina Common Linnet UKBAP 1995‐2013 37 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Cettia cetti Cetti’s warbler WCA Sch 1 part 1 2008‐2013 289 the west of the site Little ringed Rye Meads ~160m to Charadrius dubius WCA Sch 1 part 1 1996‐2013 96 plover the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Circus aeruginosus Marsh harrier WCA Sch 1 part 1 1995‐2013 69 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Circus cyaneus Hen harrier WCA Sch 1 part 1 2013 1 the west of the site Montagu’s Rye Meads ~160m to Circus pygargus WCA Sch 1 part 1 2013 2 harrier the west of the site Coccothraustes Rye Meads ~160m to Hawfinch UKBAP 2012 1 coccothraustes the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Cuculus cuculus Cuckoo UKBAP 1994‐2013 86 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Cygnus cygnus Whooper swan WCA Sch 1 part 1 2013 4 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Emberiza schoeniclus Reed Bunting UKBAP 1994‐2013 205 the west of the site
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 13 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Date No. of Scientific name Common name Designation Location recorded records Rye Meads ~160m to Emberiza calandra Corn bunting UKBAP 1994‐2013 5 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Emberiza citrinella Yellowhammer UKBAP 1994‐2013 41 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Falco subbuteo Hobby WCA Sch 1 part1 1995‐2013 136 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Falco peregrinus Peregrine WCA Sch 1 part1 2003‐2013 69 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Fringilla montifringilla Brambling WCA Sch 1 part 1 1995‐2013 12 the west of the site White‐tailed Rye Meads ~160m to Haliaeetus albicilla WCA Sch 1 part 1 2012 3 eagle the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Hydrocoloeus minutus Little gull WCA Sch 1 part 1 1996‐2012 4 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Larus argentatus Herring gull UKBAP 2012‐2013 221 the west of the site Mediterranean Rye Meads ~160m to Larus melanocephalus WCA Sch 1 part 1 2012‐2013 3 gull the west of the site Grasshopper Rye Meads ~160m to Locustella naevia UKBAP 1994‐2013 55 warbler the west of the site Black‐tailed WCA Sch 1 part 1, Rye Meads ~160m to Limosa limosa 2012‐2013 28 godwit UKBAP the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Milvus milvus Red kite WCA Sch 1 part 1 2011‐2013 46 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Motocilla flava Yellow wagtail UKBAP 1995‐2013 30 the west of the site Spotted Rye Meads ~160m to Muscicapa striata UKBAP 1995‐2013 4 flycatcher the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Numenius arquata Curlew UKBAP 195‐2013 8 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Numenius phaeopus Whimbrel WCA Sch 1 part 1 2012 1 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Panarus biarmicus Bearded tit WCA Sch 1 part 1 2003‐2013 10 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Pandion haliaetus Osprey WCA Sch 1 part1 1995‐2013 8 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Passer domesticus House sparrow UKBAP 1995‐2013 24 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Perdix perdix Grey partridge UKBAP, LBAP 2013 1 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Podiceps auritus Slavonian grabe WCA Sch 1 part 1 2003 23 the west of the site Black‐necked Rye Meads ~160m to Podiceps nigricollis WCA Sch 1 part 1 2013 1 grebe the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Prunella modularis Hedge Accentor UKBAP 1995‐2013 125 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Pyrrhula pyrrhula Bullfinch UKBAP 1995‐2013 171 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Regulus ignicapilla Firecrest WCA Sch 1 part 1 2003 2 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Streptopelia turtur Turtle dove UKBAP 1995‐2013 21 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Sturnus vulgaris Common starling UKBAP 1995‐2013 349 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Tringa nebularia Greenshank WCA Sch 1 part 1 1996‐2013 33 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Tringa ochropus Green sandpiper WCA Sch 1 part 1 1995‐2013 474 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Turdus iliacus Redwing WCA Sch 1 part 1 1995‐2013 203 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Turdus philomelos Song Thrush UKBAP, LBAP 1995‐2013 141 the west of the site
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 14 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Date No. of Scientific name Common name Designation Location recorded records Rye Meads ~160m to Turdus pilaris Fieldfare WCA Sch 1 part 1 1996‐2013 148 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Tyto alba Barn Owl WCA Sch1 part1 2012‐2013 47 the west of the site Rye Meads ~160m to Vanellus vanellus Lapwing UKBAP 1995‐2013 456 the west of the site Bats
3.4.13 No records were received from EECOS.
3.4.14 HERC provided the following records of bats. None of these records relate to the site itself.
Table 2: HERC Bat Records within 2km of the Site
Date No. of Scientific name Common name Designation Location recorded Records EPS Plecotus auritus Brown long‐eared bat WCA Sch 5 1985‐2003 5 None received UKBAP EPS Stanstead Abbots Pipistrellus pygmaeus Soprano pipistrelle WCA Sch 5 2002‐2004 6 ~640m to the UKBAP north of the site EPS Nyctalus noctula Noctule WCA Sch 5 1977‐1993 9 None received UKBAP EPS Nyctalus leisleri Leisler’s bat 1977‐1996 10 None received WCA EPS Unidentified WCA Sch 5 Pipistrellus sp 1976‐2005 1 None received Pipistrelle sp[p] WYBAP LBAP EPS Rye Meads SSSI WCA Sch 5 Pipistrellus pipistrellus Common pipistrelle 2009‐2010 56 ~160m to the WYBAP west of the site LBAP EPS Myotis brandtii Brandt’s bat 1999 1 None received WCA Sch 5 EPS Myotis daubentonii Daubenton’s bat 1983‐1992 10 None received WCA Sch 5 EPS Eptesicus serotinus Serotine bat 1975‐1996 17 None received WCA Sch 5 Unidentified bat EPS Chiroptera 1994‐2001 13 None received species WCA Sch 5 Key: EPS: European Protected Species: Species listed under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 as amended. WCA: Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 [as amended] UKBAP: UK Biodiversity Action Plan LBAP: Wakefield Biodiversity Action Plan WYBAP: West Yorkshire Biodiversity Action Plan Badgers 3.4.15 No records of badger Meles meles [Protection of Badgers Act 1992] were received from EECOS.
3.4.16 Nine records of badger were received from HERC between 1985 and 2014 with no locations provided.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 15 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Otter 3.4.17 The following otter Lutra lutra [EPS, WCA Sch 5, LBAP] records were received from EECOS:
Nineteen between 2004 and 2009, the nearest ~560m to the north of the site in Toll House Stream. 3.4.18 HERC holds 33 records of otter between 1920 and 2011, the nearest in Rye Meads SSSI ~160m to the west of the site. Water Voles
3.4.19 No water vole Arvicola amphibius records were received from EECOS.
3.4.20 263 water vole records were received from HERC between 1976 and 2013, the nearest in Rye Meads SSSI.
Other Species
3.4.21 HERC returned five records of Harvest Mouse Micromys minutus [UKBAP] dated between 1988 and 2006 occurring at Rye Meads SSSI ~160m to the west of the site.
Invasive Species
3.4.22 No records of species from Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 [as amended] were received from EECOS or HERC.
3.5 Survey Results
3.5.1 Please refer to Chapter 7: Appendix A for Extended Phase 1 Habitat Map and locations of Target Notes and Chapter 9: Appendix C for Target Note descriptions and photographs. The habitats are listed in the order found in JNCC, [2010] and the protected species are listed in evolutionary order.
Habitats
Semi‐natural Broad‐leaved Woodland
3.5.2 This habitat occurred to the south of the site and around the island in the lake. There were two stand of woodland on the south western bank outside of the site boundary. The trees were mature and dominant tree species were silver birch Betula pendula, willow Salix sp[p] and sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus. The understorey contained hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, holly Ilex aquifolium, common nettle Urtica dioica, greater burdock Arctium lappa and ivy Hedera helix. [Appendix C: Target Note 1].
Dense Scrub 3.5.3 Dense scrub occurred along boundary with the rail line, along the north western bank of the lake and to the south of the site boundary near the lock. The species present were predominantly willow with bramble Rubus fruticosus agg, hazel Corylus avellana, dog rose
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 16 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Rosa canina, hawthorn, common nettle, American willowherb Epilobium ciliatum, hogweed Heracleum sphondylium and greater burdock. [Appendix C: Target Note 2]. Scattered Scrub 3.5.4 The dense scrub was scattered along the south eastern boundary of the lake and contained young willow, hawthorn and bramble. Scattered Broad‐leaved Trees 3.5.5 Along the rail line boundary were scattered mature ash, sycamore and silver birch trees. Semi‐improved Neutral Grassland 3.5.6 Along both edges of the path on the north western boundary were strips of semi‐improved neutral grassland. The dominant species present were cocksfoot Dactylis glomerata, false oat‐ grass Arrhenatherum elatius, perennial ryegrass Lolium perenne, ribwort plantain Plantago lanceolata, hogweed Heracleum sphondylium, broad‐leaved dock Rumex obtusifolius, creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens, common nettle, white dead‐nettle Lamium album. Cleavers Galium aparine, oilseed rape Brassica napus, cow parsley Anthriscus sylvestris and creeping cinquefoil Potentilla reptans. [Appendix C: Target Note 3]. Poor Semi‐improved Grassland
3.5.7 There was one area of this habitat at the northern point of the site, adjacent to the lake [Appendix C: Target Note 4]. The area appeared to be un‐managed amenity grassland that was in the process of succession to semi‐improved grassland. Dominant species present were common, rank species daisy Bellis perennis, broad‐leaved dock, creeping buttercup, ribwort plantain Plantago lanceolata and spear thistle Cirsium vulgare.
Tall Ruderal
3.5.8 There was one area of tall ruderal within the site at the western tip where the River Stort passes under the rail line. Another area occurred outside the site boundary around the lock. The tall ruderal species consisted of common nettle, comfrey Symphytum officinale, cleavers and field bindweed Convolvulus arvensis [Appendix C: Target Note 5].
Standing Water
3.5.9 The lake within the site boundary had a narrow shelf around the edges and then fell steeply to ~6m deep in the centre. There was some lesser pond sedge Carex acutiformis on the edges of the lake, but no submerged vegetation in the lake itself [Appendix C: Target Note 6].
Running Water
3.5.10 There was an ordinary watercourse running from south east to north west adjacent to the lake and running into the lake. This was outside of the site boundary.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 17 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Amenity Grassland
3.5.11 This habitat was outside of the site boundary between the south eastern edge of the lake and the River Stort [Navigation]. The area was managed intensively and the grassland had been mown short. Forbs that could be seen in the grass were daisy, yarrow Achillea millefolium, creeping buttercup and some ragwort Senicio jacobaea [Appendix C: Target Note 7].
Dry Ditch
3.5.12 A ditch that was dry at the time of the survey was located on the southern part of the boundary of the site with the rail line. It may have been wet at some time as there was evidence of a small area of dead common reed Phragmites australis which grows in freshwater habitats. Otherwise, the species present in the ditch were scrub species that favour dry habitats namely common nettle, field bindweed, oilseed rape and bramble [Appendix C: Target Note 8].
Bare Ground
3.5.13 There was a bare ground path all around the lake sides with occasional openings to the lake side to enable anglers to access the lake. There was no vegetation growing on the compacted bare ground [Appendix C: Target Note 9].
Hard Standing
3.5.14 An area in the south western tip of the site had been thickly gravelled over for car parking. There was no vegetation in this area.
3.6 Protected and Notable Species
Invertebrates
3.6.1 The habitats and flora on site are common and widespread and likely to support common species of invertebrates only. The lake did not have a diverse flora. It is known that the lake has a high population of the invasive American signal crayfish Pacifastacus leniusculus which have eradicated the native white‐clawed crayfish.
Great Crested Newts
3.6.2 The lake on site is unsuitable for great crested newts due to its large size and depth and the populations of fish species that inhabit the lake. No records of great crested newts within 500m of the site were received from EECOS or HERC. The site is separated from other waterbodies within 500m of it by the rail line and the River Stort and River Stort [Navigation]. These will act as barriers to prevent the dispersal of any great crested newts into the site from outside. It is considered that the site is unlikely to support great crested newts in either their aquatic or terrestrial phases of their life‐cycles.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 18 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Reptiles
3.6.3 The habitats on site that are suitable for basking and foraging reptiles and provide shelter are the semi‐improved grasslands and tall ruderal. These habitats occur in patches or thin strips with connectivity to larger areas of reptile habitat being along the thin strip adjacent to the rail line.
Birds
3.6.4 The woodland and scrub on site have the potential to support a range of nesting birds during the breeding season and provide roosting and feeding habitat during the rest of the year. The lake has the potential to support nesting waterfowl. A breeding bird survey has been carried out at the site in 2015 and full results are provided in Roydon Marina Phase II: Breeding Bird Survey Report. [Enzygo, 2015a].
Bats
Bat Roosts
3.6.5 The trees on and adjacent to the site were assessed for their potential to support roosting bats [See Appendix D for assessment criteria in accordance with Hundt, L., 2012]. The trees within the site boundary were not considered suitable for roosting bats as they were immature with no holes, cracks in bark or features that bats could roost in.
3.6.6 There were mature trees and a dead tree [Appendix C: Target Note 10] with bat roost potential in the wooded area to the south, outside of the site boundary.
Foraging and Commuting Bats
3.6.7 The habitats on site that are suitable as bat foraging areas and commuting routes are the woodland, scrub, grasslands and standing water which would provide insect food for bats. The site has been assessed as having medium quality foraging and commuting habitat for bats [Hundt, L., 2012].
3.6.8 Bat activity surveys are been carried out at the site during 2015 and full results will be provided in Roydon Marina Phase II: Bat Survey Report. [Enzygo, 2015].
Badgers
3.6.9 No signs of badgers or their setts were observed during the survey. The terrestrial part of the site was small and any signs of badgers would have been recorded.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 19 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Otters and Water Voles
3.6.10 The lake and the rivers and watercourses connecting to it outside of the site have the potential to support otters and/or water voles. Otters may use the lake on site as part of their foraging range and not solely reliant on it as a resource.
Other Species
3.6.11 The woodland, scrub, grassland and tall ruderal habitats on site have the potential to support European hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus [UKBAP]. The site also has the potential to support common toad [UKBAP].
3.7 Invasive Species
3.7.1 There was an area of Himalayan balsam Impatiens glandulifera recorded during the survey. It was on the north western boundary adjacent to the rail line and dry ditch [Appendix C: Target Note 11,]. The area measured ~ 25m x 2m at the time of the survey.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 20 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
4.0 Ecological Impacts and Recommendations
The Epping Forest District Council Countryside Manager Abigail Oldham and Essex Wildlife Trust [at Abigail Oldham’s recommendation] were consulted by telephone in April 2015 with regard to the scoping for the surveys and mitigation recommended in this report.
4.1. Designated Sites
Statutory Sites
4.1.1 The internationally designated Lee Valley SPA, Ramsar and SSSI lies ~160m to the west of the site and is designated for waterfowl populations. The lake on site has the potential to support waterfowl that could potentially be from the same populations as use the designated site. The Epping Forest District Council Case Officer, Jill Shingler received a pre‐application scoping opinion from Natural England on the 6th May 2015. Natural England have recommended that a Habitats Regulations Assessment [HRA] is undertaken to evaluate any potential adverse effects the scheme would have on the Lee Valley SPA and Ramsar. This would commence with an Assessment of Likely Significant Effects [ALSE] [which is also known as a Habitats Regulations Assessment screening] which should be prepared by the competent authority. Should likely effects be found, an Appropriate Assessment would be required. 4.1.2 The other nationally designated site within 2km of the site is Hunsdon Mead SSSI ~1.7km to the north east of the site. It was designated as the grassland habitats within it support the day‐flying moth, small yellow underwing Panemeria tenebrata. The SSSI also supports large feeding flocks of overwintering fieldfare Turdus pilaris and redwing Turdus iliacus. Although the site is connected to the SSSI via the River Stort and River Stort [Navigation], the site is downstream of the river and does not contain habitats that the SSSI has been designated for. It is considered unlikely that the scheme will have any adverse effects on the SSSI. 4.1.3 It is recommended that mitigation measures following the procedures in the Environment Agency’s PPG5 [works in, near or liable to affect watercourses] and PPG21 [pollution incident response planning] are implemented during construction to avoid pollution incidents. During operation of the site, any new discharges from surface run‐off and draining should also be considered and not be discharged where they would reach the Lee Valley SPA, Ramsar and SSSI site.
Non‐Statutory Sites
4.1.4 Eight of the eleven non‐statutory designated sites that are located within a 2km radius of the proposed site lie over 1km away from the site. The LWS status of these sites is considered unlikely to be directly or indirectly impacted by the proposed works because of the distances between the proposed site and the LWS sites and the lack of connectivity between them.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 21 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
4.1.5 The three other LWS sites Rye Meads Gravel Pit [LWS] ~60m to the north of the site, designated for a mosaic of habitats, standing water, fen and swamp indicators.; Lee Valley North [LWS] ~240m to the south of the site, designated for a complex of lakes and wildfowl and wetland birds and Stanstead Abbots Gravel Pit [LWS] ~640m to the north of the site, designated for mosaic of habitats, standing water, fen and swamp indicators are connected to the site via watercourses and are all closer to the site. It is recommended that Epping Forest District Council are informed of the potential for indirect impacts to the LWA’s and mitigation should follow procedures in the Environment Agency’s PPG’s 5 and 21 as mentioned in 4.1.1 above.
4.1.6 The nearest UKBAP Priority habitat is a parcel of ‘Deciduous Woodland’ ~20m north of the site. This is unlikely to be directly impacted by the scheme as the rail line lies between them. Indirect impacts would be mitigated by the use of the same Environment Agency PPG’s.
4.2 Habitats
4.2.1 The flora recorded at the site is considered to be locally common and widespread. The habitats on site are immature and do not fall into any of the UK or Local BAP Priority Habitat descriptions. There are no recommendations for further surveys of these habitats.
4.2.2 The scheme should incorporate appropriate enhancement measures and aim for no loss of biodiversity. In order to achieve this, ecological input into the design and layout should be sought and the final landscape design should incorporate appropriate native species planting.
4.2.3 However, it should be noted that if the habitats on site are found to be supporting protected species as a result of additional surveys [See 4.3.4, 4.3.6, 4.3.7 and 4.3.12], the restoration scheme may need to be adapted accordingly.
4.3 Protected and Notable Species
4.3.1 Please refer to Chapter 8: Appendix B for explanation of the legislation and protection covering the species.
Invertebrates
4.3.2 As the habitats on site are considered to be likely to support only common and widespread species of invertebrates, no specific invertebrate surveys are recommended. The enhancement measures recommended above will increase biodiversity and consequently the invertebrate population.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 22 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Great Crested Newts
4.3.3 The great crested newt and its habitat are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 [as amended] and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 as amended.
4.3.4 No evidence of great crested newt was found during the survey and they are considered unlikely to be present within the site. As such there are no further recommendations with regard to this species.
Reptiles
4.3.5 All species of native reptiles are afforded varying degrees of legal protection under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 [as amended].
4.3.6 Given the small footprint of works affecting areas suitable for reptiles and the remainder of the habitat within the scheme footprint is sub‐optimal [i.e. dense shaded scrub and woodland], it is not considered necessary to carry out a full reptile survey in support of the planning application. However, the presence of very low numbers of reptiles within the footprint of the works, particularly along the rail line cannot be entirely discounted. Phase I of the scheme undertaken in 2010, found no reptiles present on site. It is recommended that the following measures which are the same as undertaken in 2010 are repeated to comply with legislation and to prevent unlawful killing and injuring of reptiles as a result of the development:
Immediately prior to development, the vegetation cover within the development area should be progressively removed. This will be done in stages using hand held tools, successively lowering the height and reducing the area of vegetation to displace any reptiles present into adjacent areas of retained habitat. Vegetation removal should commence with the careful removal of naturally occurring refugia such as brash piles, followed by the removal of scrub, and then successive lowering of herbaceous vegetation to a height of 100mm. The vegetation clearance described above should be carried out under the supervision of a suitably qualified ecologist. Any reptiles exposed during the phased habitat removal will be collected and removed to the nearest adjacent area of suitable reptile habitat not subject to construction works. Once vegetation is removed to approximately 50mm, this height will be maintained for the duration of the construction works to keep the habitat unsuitable for reptiles.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 23 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Birds
4.3.7 All nesting birds are protected from disturbance whilst nesting by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 [as amended].
4.3.8 Breeding bird surveys and wintering bird surveys were recommended in the scoping discussion and will be necessary to inform the HRA screening that is required by Natural England. Breeding bird surveys are being carried out at the site in spring/summer 2015. The results and any mitigation will be provided in Roydon Marina Phase II: Breeding Bird Survey Report. [Enzygo, 2015a]. Wintering bird surveys involve four visits to site between October and March.
4.3.9 Standard mitigation recommendations for breeding birds include that if any vegetation clearance is to be carried out, it should be undertaken outside the main breeding season [typically March to September inclusive]. If this is not possible, works affecting bird nesting habitat during this period should be undertaken under the supervision of an ecologist who should check vegetation for active nests prior to clearance works commencing and identify any areas that should be avoided. Any active nests found must remain in situ, with a buffer of undisturbed vegetation, until all the young have fledged. Further mitigation may be required once the full survey results are known.
Bats
4.3.10 All species of British bats and their roosts are fully protected under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 [as amended] and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 [as amended].
Bat Roost Surveys
4.3.11 There were trees with bat roost potential observed outside the site boundary. Although they would not be directly impacted by the scheme, any bats roosting in them may be disturbed during construction. It is recommended that to prevent any bats potentially abandoning their roosts due to disturbance, works and the associated lighting should not be undertaken during the night.
Bat Activity Surveys
4.3.12 It was recommended that bat activity surveys should be undertaken at the site as part of the scoping. These are being undertaken between May and October 2015 in accordance with the guidelines in Hundt, L. [2015]. The results of the bat surveys and any mitigation will be provided in Roydon Marina Phase II: Bat Survey Report. [Enzygo, 2015].
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 24 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Badgers
4.3.13 Badger and their setts are protected under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992.
4.3.14 No evidence of badgers was found during the survey and they are considered unlikely to be present within the site. As such, there are no further recommendations with regard to this species.
Water Voles and Otters
4.3.15 The otter and its habitat are protected under Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 [as amended] and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 [as amended]. The European sub‐species is listed as globally threatened in the IUCN Red List. Water voles and their habitat are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 [as amended].
4.3.16 It was recommended that water vole surveys should be undertaken at the site as part of the scoping. Signs of otter can also be observed simultaneously whilst carrying out these surveys. They are being undertaken during summer 2015 in accordance with the guidelines in Chanin [2003] and Strachan et al. [2011]. The results of the surveys and any mitigation will be provided in Roydon Marina Phase II: Water Vole Survey Report. [Enzygo, 2015c].
Other Species
4.3.17 Prior to any vegetation clearance taking place at the site, site clearance workers should be made aware of the risk of finding hedgehogs or common toads during site clearance, and, if any are found, they should be placed in an area of safety, away from the works area. This would be likely to be undertaken simultaneously with the reptile mitigation recommended in 4.3.5 above.
4.4 Invasive Species
4.4.1 It would be an offence under Schedule 9, Part II of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 [as amended] to cause invasive species to spread. Any material containing these species is also identified as ‘controlled waste’ under the Environment Protection Act 1990 and must be disposed of properly at permitted landfill sites.
4.4.2 One stand of Himalayan balsam was found [Appendix C: Target Note 11] within the site of ~25m x 2m in area.
4.4.3 Invasive non‐native plants can cause problems for native UK species and reduce biodiversity. It is recommended that the invasive plants are removed.
4.4.4 To eradicate/prevent the Himalayan balsam spreading, it is recommended that removal of the plant is undertaken by hand pulling before June when it flowers, as the plant is spread by seed
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 25 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
and is capable of projecting its seeds several metres upon disturbance. The plant can also be strimmed down in early spring and kept at a low height to prevent flowering occurring. Chemical control near water can be carried out with herbicides containing glyphosate or 2,4‐ D amine. Glyphosate will also kill grasses, but 2,4‐D amine will kill only broadleaved weeds; for best effect, use when the plant is small and actively growing, particularly in springtime. Further details can be found in Harmful weeds and invasive, non‐native plants: prevent them spreading. Environment Agency [2014].
4.5 Enhancement
4.5.1 It is recommended that ecological input into the design and layout of the development and restoration proposal is sought at an early stage in the design process. This allows the ecological impacts of the development to be minimized where possible and appropriate compensation, mitigation, and/or enhancement to be incorporated in the design.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 26 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
5.0 Summary and Conclusions i. Statutory Sites: The Lee Valley Ramsar and SPA is ~160m to the west of the site. Natural England require that an Assessment of Likely Significant Effects [ALSE] [which is also known as a Habitats Regulations Assessment screening] should be undertaken to evaluate any potential adverse effects the scheme would have on the designated site. It is recommended that procedures in the Environment Agency’s PPG5 and PPG21 are implemented during construction to avoid pollution incidents. ii. Non‐statutory Sites: Rye Meads Gravel Pit [LWS], Lee Valley North [LWS] and Stanstead Abbots Gravel Pit [LWS] are between ~60m and 640m from the site boundary and are connected to the site via watercourses. It is recommended that Epping Forest District Council is informed of the potential to indirectly impact the LWS’s and procedures in the Environment Agency’s PPG5 and PPG21 should be implemented to prevent impacts. iii. Reptiles: It is recommended that prior to commencement of works, the vegetation cover within the development area should be progressively removed under the supervision of an ecologist. Any reptiles found should be removed to the nearest adjacent area of suitable reptile habitat not subject to construction works. Vegetation should then be maintained at a height of 50mm throughout the duration of the works. iv. Breeding and Wintering Birds: Breeding bird surveys are being carried out at the site in spring/summer 2015. The results will be provided in Roydon Marina Phase II: Breeding Bird Survey Report. [Enzygo, 2015a]. Wintering bird surveys are recommended to inform the ALSE recommended above. The surveys involve four visits to site between October and March. Standard mitigation requires that vegetation clearance should be carried out outside the main breeding season [typically March to September inclusive]. If this is not possible, works affecting bird nesting habitat during this period should be undertaken under the supervision of an ecologist. Further mitigation may be required once the full survey results are known. v. Bats: It is recommended that to prevent any roosting bats potentially being disturbed outside of the site boundary, works and the associated lighting should not be undertaken during the night. Bat activity surveys of the whole site are being undertaken in 2015. The results of the surveys and any mitigation required will be provided in Park Balk Quarry: Bat Survey Report. [Enzygo, 2015]. vi. Water Voles and Otters: Water vole surveys including otter checks are being undertaken in 2015. The results of the surveys and any mitigation required will be provided in Park Balk Quarry: Water Vole Survey Report. [Enzygo, 2015c].
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 27 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP vii. Site clearance: It is recommended that site workers are made aware of the low risk of encountering notable species [such as hedgehogs and common toads] during works, and appropriate actions to take should they be found. viii. Invasive Species: It is recommended that the stand of Himalayan balsam is removed by either hand pulling, strimming or spraying off. ix. Facilities Building Extension: The extension to the current building is within the existing building envelope, in that it replaces an existing store area, and makes a relatively minor change to a new structure. As such the proposal will not impact on any designated habitat or protected species.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 28 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
6.0 References
Chanin, P. [2003]. Monitoring the otter. Conserving Natura 2000, Rivers Monitoring Series No. 10, English Nature, Peterborough.
English Nature [2002]. Badgers and Development. English Nature, Peterborough, UK.
Environment Agency. Pollution Prevention Advice and Guidance [PPG]. Available online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/pollution‐prevention‐guidance‐ppg#pollution‐ prevention‐guidance‐series‐ppgs [Accessed July 2015].
Environment Agency. [2014]. Harmful weeds and invasive, non‐native plants: prevent them spreading. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/prevent‐the‐spread‐of‐harmful‐invasive‐and‐non‐ native‐plants [Accessed June 2015].
Enzygo. [2015]. Roydon Marina Phase II: Bat Survey Report
Enzygo. [2015a]. Roydon Marina Phase II: Breeding Bird Survey Report
Enzygo. [2015c]. Roydon Marina Phase II: Water Vole Survey Report
Froglife [1999]. Reptile Survey: an introduction to planning, conducting and interpreting surveys for snake and lizard conservation. Advice Sheet 10. Froglife, Halesworth.
Gent, T. & Gibson, S. [2003]. Herpetofauna Workers' Manual. JNCC, Peterborough.
Harris, S., Cresswell, P. & Jeffries, D. [1989]. Surveying Badgers. An occasional publication of the mammal society – No. 9. Mammal Society, London.
Hundt, L. [2012]. Bat Surveys – Good Practice Guidelines. Bat Conservation Trust, London.
Institute for Ecology and Environmental Management [2012]. Guidelines for Preliminary Ecological Appraisal. Available online at: http://www.cieem.net/guidance‐on‐preliminary‐ecological‐appraisal‐ gpea‐ [Accessed June 2015].
Joint Nature Conservation Committee [2010]. Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey: A technique for environmental audit. JNCC, Peterborough.
Langton, T.E.S., Beckett, C.L. and Foster, J.P. [2001]. Great Crested Newt Conservation Handbook. Froglife, Halesworth.
Multi‐Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside [MAGIC]. Available online at: http://magic.defra.gov.uk/ [Accessed June 2015].
Mitchell‐Jones, A.J. [2004]. Bat Mitigation Guidelines. English Nature, Peterborough.
Oldham, R.S., Keeble, J., Swan, M.J.S. & Jeffcote, M. [2000]. Evaluating the suitability of habitat for the great crested newt Triturus cristatus. Herpetological Journal, 10[4], 143‐155.
Strachan, R., Moorhouse, T.& Gelling, M. [2011]. Water Vole Conservation Handbook [3rd Edn]. Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Oxford.
Essex Biodiversity Project. [2011] Essex Biodiversity Action Plan. Available online at:
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 29 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP http://www.essexbiodiversity.org.uk/biodiversity‐action‐plan [Accessed July 2015].
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 30 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
7.0 Appendix A – Extended Phase 1 Habitat Map
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 31 March 2016 Key
Site Boundary
Semi-natural Broad-levaed Woodland
Scrub Dense
Scrub Scattered
Scattered Broad-leaved Trees
SI Semi-improved Neutral Grassland 9 Standing Water SI 4 Running Water
Tall Ruderal SI
A Amenity Grassland SI
Bare Ground SI
Hard Standing 2 SI Poor Semi-improved Grassland
3 SI Dry Ditch SI A Target Note A
SI SI A
8 A
11 SI
A
SI A
7 5 1 A
10 6 A STEP Business Centre, Wortley Rd, Sheffield, S36 2UH
CLIENT: Darinian Ltd
SCALE: PROJECT REF: 1:2,500@A3 SHF.202.004
DRAWN: CHECKED: DATE: SI MG DW July 2015
PROJECT: Roydon Marina Phase II
TITLE: Phase 1 Habitat Map
DRAWING NO: SHF.202.004.E.D.001
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
8.0 Appendix B – Biodiversity Legislation
Bern Convention [1982]
The Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats [the Bern Convention] was adopted in Bern, Switzerland in 1979, and was ratified in 1982. Its aims are to protect wild plants and animals and their habitats listed in Appendices 1 and 2 of the Convention, and regulate the exploitation of species listed in Appendix 3. The regulation imposes legal obligations on participating countries to protect over 500 plant species and more than 1000 animals.
To meet its obligations imposed by the Convention, the European Community adopted the EC Birds Directive [1979] and the EC Habitats Directive [1992 – see below]. Since the Lisbon Treaty, in force since 1st December 2009, European legislation has been adopted by the European Union.
Biodiversity Action Plan [BAP]
The UK Biodiversity Action Plan [UKBAP – UK Steering Group, 1995; UK Biodiversity Group, 1998 ‐ 2000] lists and prioritises habitats and species and sets national targets to be achieved. The intent of the UKBAP, however, is much broader than the protection and enhancement of less common species, and is meant to embrace the wider countryside as a whole [Biodiversity 2020: A Strategy for England’s Wildlife and Ecosystem Services, Defra, 2011].
The UKBAP has recently undergone a review [Biodiversity Reporting and Information Group, June 2007] resulting in the identification of 1,150 ‘Priority’ Species Action Plans [SAPs], 65 ‘Priority’ Habitat Action Plans. The UK Post‐2010 Biodiversity Framework was published in July 2012 and succeeds the UK BAP.
Local Biodiversity Action Plans [LBAP] identify habitat and species conservation priorities at a local level [typically at the County level], and are usually drawn up by a consortium of local Government organisations and conservation charities.
Birds Directive
The EC Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds [791409/EEC] or ‘Birds Directive’ was introduced to achieve favourable conservation status of all wild bird species across their distribution range. In this context, the most important provision is the identification and classification of Special Protection Areas [SPAs] for rare or vulnerable species listed in Annex 1 of the Directive, as well as for all regularly occurring migratory species, paying particular attention to the protection of wetlands of international importance.
Bonn Convention
The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals or ‘Bonn Convention’ was adopted in Bonn, Germany in 1979 and came into force in 1985. Participating states agree to work together to preserve migratory species and their habitats by providing strict protection to species listed in Appendix I of the Convention. It also establishes agreements for the conservation and management of migratory species listed in Appendix II.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 32 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
In the UK, the requirements of the convention are implemented via the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 [as amended], Wildlife [Northern Ireland] Order 1985, Nature Conservation and Amenity Lands [Northern Ireland] Order 1985 and the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 [CRoW].
Habitats Directive
The Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora, or the ‘Habitats Directive’, is a European Union directive adopted in 1992 in response to the Bern Convention. Its aims are to protect approximately 220 habitats and 1,000 species listed in its several Annexes.
In the UK, the Habitats Directive is transposed into national law via the Conservation of Habitats and Species [Amendment] Regulations 2012 in England, Scotland and Wales, and via the Conservation [Natural Habitats, &c] Regulations [Northern Ireland] 1995 [as amended] in Northern Ireland.
Protection of Badgers Act 1992
The main legislation protecting badgers in England and Wales is the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 [the 1992 Act]. Under the 1992 Act it is an offence to: wilfully kill, injure, take or attempt to kill, injure or take a badger; dig for a badger; interfere with a badger sett by, damaging a sett or any part thereof, destroying a sett, obstructing access to a sett, causing a dog to enter a sett or disturbing a badger while occupying a sett.
The 1992 Act defines a badger sett as: “any structure or place which displays signs indicating current use by a badger”.
National Planning Policy Framework [2012]
Following the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework [NPPF] in March 2012, Planning Policy Statement 9 [PPS9]: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation [2005] has been withdrawn. However, ODPM 06/2005: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – Statutory Obligations and their impact within the Planning System [the guidance document that accompanied PPS9] has not been withdrawn and, where more detailed guidance is required than is given within the NPPF, local planning authorities will continue to rely on ODPM 06/2005.
This guidance requires local planning authorities to take account of the conservation of protected species when determining planning applications and makes the presence of a protected species a material consideration when assessing a development proposal that, if carried out, would be likely to result in harm to the species or its habitat.
In the case of European Protected Species such as bats, planning policy emphasises that strict statutory provisions apply [including the Conservation of Habitats and Species [Amendment] Regulations 2012], to which a planning authority must have due regard.
Where developments requiring planning permission are likely to impact upon protected species it is necessary that protected species surveys are undertaken and submitted to meet the requirements of paragraph 98 of ODPM Circular 06/2005 which states that:
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 33 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
‘The presence of a protected species is a material consideration when a planning authority is considering a development proposal that, if carried out, would be likely to result in harm to the species or its habitat.’
General guidance within the body of the NPPF which are also potentially relevant to the possible presence of bats at the site includes the following statements:
"The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by:
protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation interests and soils; recognising the wider benefits of ecosystem services; minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, contributing to the Government’s commitment to halt the overall decline in biodiversity, including by establishing coherent ecological networks that are more resilient to current and future pressures"
"Local planning authorities should set criteria based policies against which proposals for any development on or affecting protected wildlife or geodiversity sites or landscape areas will be judged."
“To minimise impacts on biodiversity and geodiversity, planning policies should:
plan for biodiversity at a landscape‐scale across local authority boundaries; identify and map components of the local ecological networks, including the hierarchy of international, national and locally designated sites of importance for biodiversity, wildlife corridors and stepping stones that connect them and areas identified by local partnerships for habitat restoration or creation; promote the preservation, restoration and re‐creation of priority habitats, ecological networks and the protection and recovery of priority species populations, linked to national and local targets, and identify suitable indicators for monitoring biodiversity in the plan; aim to prevent harm to geological conservation interests; and where Nature Improvement Areas are identified in Local Plans, consider specifying the types of development that may be appropriate in these Areas”.
"When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by applying the following principles:
if significant harm resulting from a development cannot be avoided [through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts], adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for, then planning permission should be refused;"
Species of Principal Importance in England
Section 41 [S41] of this Act requires the Secretary of State to publish a list [in consultation with Natural England] of habitats and species which are of principal importance for the conservation of biodiversity in England. The S41 list is used to guide decision‐makers such as public bodies including local and regional authorities, in implementing their duty under Section 40 of the Natural Environment and rural Communities [NERC] Act 2006, to have regard to the conservation of biodiversity in England, when carrying out their normal [e.g. planning] functions. The S41 list includes 65 habitats of principal importance and 1,150 species of principal importance. SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 34 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
The Conservation of Habitats and Species [Amendment] Regulations 2012
The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2012 [as amended] came into force on 16th August 2012 and amend the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 to ensure the various provisions of Directive 92/43/EC [‘the Habitats Directive’] are transposed in a clear manner.
Regulations place a duty on the Secretary of State to propose a list of sites which are important for either habitats or species [listed in Annexes I or II of the Habitats Directive respectively] to the European Commission. These sites, if ratified by the European Commission, are then designated as Special Protection Areas [SPAs] within six years. The 2012 amendments include that public bodies help preserve, maintain and re‐establish habitats for wild birds.
The Regulations also make it an offence to deliberately capture, kill, disturb or trade in the animals listed in Schedule 2, or pick, uproot, destroy, or trade in the plants listed in Schedule 5 [see Table B1].
Table B1: Schedules of the Conservation of Habitats and Species [Amendment] Regulations 2012
Schedule 2 – European Protected Species of Animals Schedule 5 – European Protected Species of Plant Common name Scientific name Common name Scientific name Horseshoe bats Rhinolophidae ‐ all species Shore dock Rumex rupestris Common bats Vespertilionidae ‐ all species Killarney Fern Trichomanes speciosum Wild Cat Felis silvestris Early Gentian Gentianella anglica Dolphins, porpoises and Cetacea – all species Lady’s‐slipper Cypripedium calceolus whales Dormouse Muscardinus avellanarius Creeping Marshwort Apium repens Pool Frog Rana lessonae Slender Naiad Najas flexilis Sand Lizard Lacerta agilis Fen Orchid Liparis loeselii Plantain, Floating‐leaved Fisher’s Estuarine Moth Gortyna borelii lunata Luronium natans water Newt, Great Crested Triturus cristatus Yellow Marsh Saxifrage Saxifraga hirculus Otter Lutra lutra Lesser Whirlpool Ram’s‐ Anisus vorticulus horn Snail Smooth Snake Coronella austriaca Sturgeon Acipenser sturio Natterjack Toad Bufo calamita Caretta caretta, Chelonia mydas, Lepidochelys Marine Turtles kempii, Eretmochelys imbricata, Dermochelys coriacea
The Hedgerow Regulations 1997
The Hedgerow Regulations 1997 were made under Section 97 of the Environment Act 1995 and came into force in 1997. They introduced new arrangements for local planning authorities in England and Wales to protect important hedgerows in the countryside, by controlling their removal through a system of notification. Important hedgerows are defined by complex assessment criteria, which draw on biodiversity features, historical context and the landscape value of the hedgerow.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 35 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 [as amended]
This is the principal mechanism for the legislative protection of wildlife in the UK. This legislation is the chief means by which the ‘Bern Convention’ and the Birds Directive are implemented in the UK. Since it was first introduced, the Act has been amended several times.
The Act makes it an offence to [with exception to species listed in Schedule 2] intentionally:
kill, injure, or take any wild bird, take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while that nest is in use, or take or destroy an egg of any wild bird.
In addition, the Act makes it an offence [subject to exceptions] to:
intentionally or recklessly kill, injure or take any wild animal listed on Schedule 5, interfere with places used for shelter or protection, or intentionally disturbing animals occupying such places. The Act also prohibits certain methods of killing, injuring, or taking wild animals
Finally, the Act also makes it an offence [subject to exceptions] to:
intentionally pick, uproot or destroy any wild plant listed in Schedule 8, or any seed or spore attached to any such wild plant, unless an authorised person, intentionally uproot any wild plant not included in Schedule 8, sell, offer or expose for sale, or possess [for the purposes of trade], any live or dead wild plant included in Schedule 8, or any part of, or anything derived from, such a plant.
Following all amendments to the Act, Schedule 5 ‘Animals which are protected’ contains a total of 154 species of animal, including several mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish and invertebrates. Schedule 8 ‘Plants which are Protected’ of the Act, contains 185 species, including higher plants, bryophytes and fungi and lichens. A comprehensive and up‐to‐date list of these species can be obtained from the JNCC website.
Part 14 of the Act makes unlawful to plant or otherwise case to grow in the wild any plant which is listed in Part II of Schedule 9.
Table B2 provides a comprehensive list of plant species listed in this schedule. It is recommended that plant material of these species is disposed of as bio‐hazardous waste, and these plants should not be used in planting schemes.
Table B2: Invasive plant species listed in Schedule 9 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 [as amended] Common Name Scientific Name Perfoliate alexanders Smyrnium perfoliatum Red algae Grateloupia luxurians Variagated yellow archangel Lamiastrum galeobdolon subsp. argentatum Yellow azalea Rhododendron luteum Himalayan balsam Impatiens glandulifera Cotoneaster Cotoneaster horizontalis Entire‐leaved cotoneaster Cotoneaster integrifolius
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 36 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Common Name Scientific Name Himalayan cotoneaster Cotoneaster simonsii Hollyberry cotoneaster Cotoneaster bullatus Small‐leaved cotoneaster Cotoneaster microphyllus False Virginia creeper Parthenocissus inserta Virginia creeper Parthenocissus quinquefolia Purple dewplant Disphyma crassifolium Fanwort or Carolina water‐shield Cabomba caroliniana Water fern Azolla filiculoides Hottentot fig Carpobrotus edulis Three‐cornered garlic Allium triquetrum Giant hogweed Heracleum mantegazzianum Water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes Giant kelp Macrocystis spp. Giant knotweed Fallopia sachalinensis Hybrid knotweed Fallopia japonica × Fallopia sachalinensis Japanese knotweed Fallopia japonica Few‐flowered garlic Allium paradoxum Water lettuce Pistia stratiotes Parrot’s‐feather Myriophyllum aquaticum Floating pennywort Hydrocotyle ranunculoides Duck potato Sagittaria latifolia Floating water primrose Ludwigia peploides Water primrose Ludwigia grandiflora Water primrose Ludwigia uruguayensis Rhododendron Rhododendron ponticum Rhododendron Rhododendron ponticum × Rhododendron maximum Giant rhubarb Gunnera tinctoria Japanese rose Rosa rugosa Giant salvinia Salvinia molesta Green seafingers Codium fragile Californian red seaweed Pikea californica Hooked asparagus seaweed Asparagopsis armata Japanese seaweed Sargassum muticum Laver seaweeds [except native species] Porphyra spp Australian swamp stonecrop or New Zealand pygmyweed Crassula helmsii Wakame Undaria pinnatifida Curly waterweed Lagarosiphon major Waterweeds Elodea spp.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 37 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
9.0 Appendix C ‐ Target Notes and Photographs
Photo/Target Notes Photo Note No.
Semi‐natural Broad‐leaved 1 Woodland on southern boundary taken 12.05.2015.
Dense scrub along north western 2 bank of the lake, taken12.05.2015.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 38 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Photo/Target Notes Photo Note No.
Semi‐improved neutral grassland, photograph taken on the 3 12.05.2015 from the path facing south west.
Poor semi‐improved neutral 4 grassland taken on 12.05.2015.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 39 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Photo/Target Notes Photo Note No.
5 Tall ruderal. Taken 12.05.2015.
Standing water – Roydon Lake. 6 Taken on the 12.05.2015.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 40 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Photo/Target Notes Photo Note No.
7 Amenity grassland. 12.05.2015.
8 Dry ditch, taken on 12.05.2015.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 41 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
Photo/Target Notes Photo Note No.
9 Bare ground, taken 12.05.2015.
Ivy‐covered dead tree outside of 10 the site boundary with bat roost potential. Taken 12.05.2015.
Area on Extended Phase 1 Habitat 11 Survey Map where Himalayan balsam occurred.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 42 March 2016
Roydon Mill Marina Phase II Roydon Mill Lodges LLP
10.0 Appendix D ‐ Bat Roost Assessment Criteria [Hundt, L. 2012]
Table D1: Features of Trees Commonly Used by Bats for Roosting and Shelter [Taken from Hundt, L. 2012].
Features of Trees Used as Bat Roosts Signs Indicating Possible Use by Bats Natural holes Tiny scratches around entry point Woodpecker holes Staining around entry point Cracks/splits in major limbs Bat droppings in, around or below entrance Loose bark Audible squeaking at dusk or in warm weather Hollows/cavities Flies around entry point Dense epicormic growth [bats may roost within it] Distinctive smell of bats Bird and bat boxes Smoothing of surfaces around cavity Table D2: Categories of Bat Roost Potential in Trees. Taken from Hundt. L [2012].
Tree Category Description Category 1* Trees with multiple highly suitable features capable of supporting larger roosts. Trees with definite bat potential, supporting fewer suitable features that category 1* trees Category 1 or with potential for use by single bats. Trees with no obvious potential, although the tree is of a size and age that elevated surveys Category 2 may result in cracks or crevices being found; or the tree supports some features which may have limited potential to support bats. Category 3 Trees with no potential to support bats. Table D3: Features of Buildings and Built Structures Potentially Used by Bats in Summer. [Taken from Hundt, L. 2012]
Likelihood of bats Feature of the building/built structure being present Pre 20th century or early 20th century construction Agricultural buildings of traditional brick, stone or timber construction Large and complicated roof void with unobstructed flying spaces Large [>20cm] roof timbers with mortise joints, cracks and holes Entrances for bats to fly through Poorly maintained fabric providing ready access points for bats into roofs, walls, bridges, but at the same time not being too draughty and cool. Roof warmed by the sun, in particular south facing roofs Higher Weatherboarding and/or hanging tiles with gaps Low level of disturbance by humans Bridge structures, follies, aqueducts and viaducts over water and/or wet ground For rarer species building or built structure is located in the core area of the distribution Buildings and built structures in proximity to each other providing a variety of roosting opportunities throughout the year Buildings or built structures close to good foraging habitat, in particular mature trees, parkland, woodland or wetland, especially in rural setting
Modern, well maintained buildings or built structures that provide few opportunities for access by bats Small cluttered roof space Buildings and built structures comprised primarily of pre‐fabricated steel and sheet materials Lower Cool, shaded, light or draughty roof voids Roof voids with a dense over of cobwebs and no sections of clean ridge board High levels of regular disturbance Highly urbanised location with few or no mature trees, parkland, woodland or wetland High levels of external lighting.
SHF.202.004.EC.R.001.A Page | 43 March 2016