Farringdon Station Redevelopment Integrated Ticket Hall Building an Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Lo

NETWORK RAIL

29 October 2010

Farringdon Station Redevelopment Integrated Ticket Hall Building

An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03

Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

Contents

1.0 General Details ...... 1 1.1 Identification of Structure and Reference to Project/Scheme ...... 1 1.2 Background ...... 2 1.3 Policy background ...... 2 1.4 A Living Roof for the ITHB ...... 3

2.0 Living roofs ...... 4 2.1 Benefits of living roofs ...... 4 2.2 Benefits of living roofs to wildlife in urban environments ...... 4 2.3 Types of living roof ...... 5 2.4 Black redstarts and brownfield invertebrates ...... 6

3.0 Living roof design for Farringdon Integrated Ticket Hall Building ...... 8 3.1 Development of the design ...... 8 3.2 Providing a roof landscape for invertebrates: substrate, plants and topography...... 9

4.0 Assessment of the Scheme’s Benefits ...... 11 4.1 Contribution to Local Biodiversity Action Plans ...... 11 4.2 Benefits to local wildlife ...... 11 4.3 Assessment against Planning Policy ...... 13 4.4 Assessment against requirements of Planning Condition 5 ...... 13

5.0 Recommendations for Monitoring and Maintenance ...... 15 5.1 During construction ...... 15 5.2 Post construction monitoring ...... 15 5.3 Post construction maintenance ...... 16 5.4 Emergency maintenance procedure ...... 16 5.5 Protecting the roof during building works adjacent to the ITHB ...... 16

6.0 Conclusions ...... 18

7.0 References ...... 19

Appendices

A Drawings B Planning Condition 5 C Maintenance procedure, Bauder biodiversity green roof systems D Baseline Ecology Reports

Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

1.0 General Details

Planning permission with conditions was granted for the Farringdon Station Integrated Ticket Hall Building (ITHB) by the London Borough of Islington (LBI) in September 2009. This ticket hall will provide an access to Network Rail and London Underground services, and in the future will provide a link to the London Crossrail services. The proposed ITHB has been designed to include a living roof.

The Atkins Station Design Team were asked to provide specialist ecological comments on the design of the living roof in order to show that the roof design meets the London Borough of Islington’s aspirations for genuine biodiversity enhancement in the context of redevelopment. The report is also designed to provide evidence for credits within the Civil Engineering Environmental Quality Assessment & Awards Scheme (CEEQUAL).

This report provides a summary of information relating to living roofs and their values/benefits to wildlife particularly in urban environments like Greater London, describes the different types of living roof and the choice of roof design and illustrates how the living roof designed for the ITHB will benefit wildlife locally and help to meet local Biodiversity Action Plan targets.

This report has been produced by Miss J Brinkley BSc (hons) MSc AIEEM, an ecologist at Atkins with four years experience in ecology in the UK. She is an associate member of the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management and is experienced in ecological work relating to developments. This report has been reviewed by Mrs C Wansbury MA MSc MIEEM CMLI CEnv, a Principal Ecologist at Atkins with in excess of 17 years experience in ecology within the UK and has advised on living roof schemes across southern England. Mrs Wansbury has previously sat on the Green Building Council’s working group that produced the report ‘Biodiversity and the Built Environment’. Any assessment in this report is purely focussed on the potential benefits of the Scheme to local biodiversity and does not comment on the engineering aspects of the design such as structural safety.

1.1 Identification of Structure and Reference to Project/Scheme

The Network Rail Location Code for Farringdon Station is N222; the London Underground Location Code is M123. The station serves the London Underground Metropolitan, Hammersmith & City and Circle Lines and National Rail Thameslink services. The station is located within postcode EC1M 6BY at the junction of Turnmill and Cowcross Streets, adjacent to Farringdon Road.

For location, refer to the following drawing: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101200 STATION SITE AND LOCATION PLAN

Page 1 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

1.2 Background

Ecological surveys were carried out at the Farringdon Station site during 2007 and 2008 (Temple Group 2007 & 2008). The reports relating to this survey work are provided for reference in Appendix D of this report. At the time of those surveys, the existing Farringdon site was described as of ‘low ecological value’ but provided potential roosting opportunities for bats and potential habitat for black redstarts. Detailed bat surveys found no evidence of bats roosting in or around Farringdon Station. Surveys carried out specifically to search for black redstarts found a single male to be holding territory in the area around Farringdon station in 2007. It was not thought that this male was paired as no female was recorded, and the male did not make alarm calls when recognised predators (such as magpie, carrion crow and kestrel) were nearby as it would do if a nesting female was present.

Both survey reports recommended the inclusion of a living roof in the design of the new station building because this would increase foraging opportunities for these species. The black redstart survey report was more specific, and recommended a roof ‘designed specifically for black redstarts and brownfield invertebrates’. More information about these surveys can be found in the bat survey and black redstart survey reports (Temple Group 2007 & 2008).

Living roofs are called a variety of things; the most well used term is ‘green roof’. Other descriptions used include nature roofs, brown roofs, roof gardens, eco roofs, ‘extensive’ and ‘intensive’ roofs. The description ‘living roof’ is chosen for this report as this seems the most appropriate word to encompass all these terms, is used in policy documents including the London Plan (GLA February 2008). Types of living roof are described in more detail in Section 2.0.

1.3 Policy background

The importance of living roofs is recognised in UK policy and legislation, particularly that relating to planning. Planning Policy Statement 9 (PPS9) and the accompanying Government Circular: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation - Statutory Obligations and their Impact within the Planning System (ODPM 06/2005, Defra 01/2005) set out the Government’s national policies on protection of biodiversity and geological conservation through the planning system. PPS9 sets out the need to balance the adequate provision of development and economic growth whilst ensuring effective conservation of wildlife and natural features. With careful planning and control, conservation and development can be compatible and opportunities for enhancement to local biodiversity such as the inclusion of living roofs are, where possible, encouraged.

National policy is reflected locally in the London Borough of Islington’s ‘Good Practice Guides’ a series of guidance notes providing information on sustainable design within developments in the borough. Good Practice Guide 1: Green Roofs and Walls, sets outs the Borough’s aspirations for the inclusion of living roofs on new developments. The London Plan also includes a policy requiring major developments to incorporate ‘living roofs’ where feasible (GLA February 2008).

Page 2 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

The Islington Local Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) promotes local priorities for nature conservation in the Borough. This is developed in parallel with the UK BAP which was initiated to comply with the obligations placed on the UK by the Convention on Biological Diversity 1992. The Convention commits the UK to produce detailed actions plans to conserve its biological resources. The UK BAP prioritises its important habitats and species of conservation concern in Habitat Action Plans and Species Action Plans. Local authorities promote habitat and species conservation at regional level through development of Local BAPs. These local plans can include species and habitat more relevant to the local area that might not be included in the national BAP allowing a more targeted approach to conservation.

1.4 A Living Roof for the ITHB

Following local and national planning policy the ITHB has been designed to include a living roof. The roof design incorporates the recommendations of the ecological reports relating to ITHB and the LBI Good Practice Guides. The LBI preferred specification for living roofs is a ‘biodiversity-based extensive substrate’ roof. This has been reflected in a planning condition relating to the roof design (Planning Condition 5 Application P091441, Appendix B).

This report provides a description and assessment of the ITHB living roof design in the following sections:

• Section 2.0 provides a review of the literature relating to living roofs, describing the benefits of living roofs, the different options of living roof design and the reason for the choice of living roof design for the ITHB;

• Section 3.0 provides a description of the development of the specific design for the ITHB living roof;

• Section 4.0 provides an assessment of how the living roof designed for the ITHB will benefit wildlife locally and help to meet local Biodiversity Action Plan targets; and

• Section 5.0 provides recommendations for monitoring and maintenance of the ITHB living roof.

Page 3 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

2.0 Living roofs

2.1 Benefits of living roofs

The broad environmental benefits of living roofs are well known and accepted. The list of benefits continues to grow as greater emphasis is placed on sustainability within the built environment. Such benefits include:

• Extending roof life by protecting the roof from extremes in weather and UV light damage,

• Reducing heat & cooling costs and can potentially reduce water/sewer charges by insulating the building producing a more stable temperature inside,

• ‘Cleaning’ the air around the building as vegetation can absorb dust and pollutants,

• Reducing in the ‘urban heat island’ effect by reflecting rather than absorbing light and cooling the air through water evaporation,

• Moderating storm water run off by retaining rain water,

• Insulating the building from noise,

• Improving the view from adjacent buildings,

• Providing a design opportunity that can boost the environmental credentials of a business

• Providing a benefit to wildlife – this can depend on the type of living roof, but all systems provide some habitat for feeding and shelter for a range of species, and providing valuable habitat and green ‘links’ through built up areas, and

• Assisting in meeting the targets of Biodiversity Action Plans.

All living roofs will have benefits locally. However, the greater the size of the roof, or the more living roofs there are in one area, the more significant the environmental benefits become. The benefits to wildlife are discussed in more detail below.

2.2 Benefits of living roofs to wildlife in urban environments

Living roofs can provide a habitat which creates foraging and sheltering opportunities where there is currently nothing more than the built environment. They can create ‘green’ links to other existing habitat within the local area by acting as island which mobile species can feed, rest, and even become established. The more living roof and open spaces there are through a predominantly built environment, the more opportunities there are for species to move through the area. They can also provide additional habitat for species which are rare or protected.

Page 4 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

2.3 Types of living roof

Living roof systems are commonly divided into three broad categories which are described below (adapted from Livingroofs.org, 2010).

‘Intensive’ roofs Typically designed as roof gardens, the purpose of these roofs is recreational, providing an open space for people. There may be areas of planting mixed in with hard landscaping such as pathways. Often a deep layer of soil is required to support a variety of plants which can include shrubs and trees. Intensive roofs require regular maintenance, much like any amenity garden.

Tower of London, London (Photograph supplied by Bauder)

‘Extensive’ roofs These roofs are lightweight with shallow growing material. They require little maintenance. These roofs are sometimes known as brown roofs, consisting of drought resistant plants such as Sedum which is a succulent plant with fleshy leaves which are usually grown on ‘mats’ and fixed to the roof. They can be designed to reflect the buildings natural surrounding by selecting different growing substrates.

Ethelred Estate, London (Photograph supplied by Bauder)

‘Biodiverse’ living roofs These include a wide variety of green and brown roofs and are also referred to as eco roofs and biodiversity roofs. The overall design aim is to provide habitat specifically for wildlife. They can be designed to replace habitat lost to the development itself, or provide habitat enhancement designed with a particular species in mind. They have a much greater benefit for wildlife than other roof systems.

Grays Inn Road, London (Photograph supplied by Bauder)

Page 5 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

The overall benefits described in Section 2.1 relate to all types of living roof. As described in Section 1.4, the living roof for the ITBH has been developed following the LBI Good Practice Guides and follows the recommendations of the baseline ecology surveys in 2007 and 2008 (Temple Group, Appendix D) to create a biodiverse roof which would provide habitat for black redstarts and brownfield invertebrates.

2.4 Black redstarts and brownfield invertebrates

The interest in biodiverse living roofs in Islington and across London has been driven largely by the conservation of the rare black redstart, a species of bird rare in the UK and listed as a species of conservation concern within the UK and London BAPs. Black redstarts are of similar size to a robin and are known to feed on invertebrates found on sparsely vegetated wasteland areas and coastal sites. They seem to favour sites with complex structures such as buildings or cliff faces, rather than large open areas. Their core habitat in the Mediterranean includes harsh habitats such as sparsely vegetated lava fields on extinct volcanoes. For this reason a large proportion of the breeding population in the UK can be found in urban areas where it is particularly associated with brownfield sites (English Nature 2003).

Black redstart – Male Black redstart - Female

Page 6 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

Historically, Greater London contained large areas of brownfield habitat. Many of these were bomb sites from the Second World War, but additional brownfield areas developed if, for example, industrial sites were abandoned and left unused. There is continued pressure to build on these sites within urban areas. However, many of these brownfield sites which have been left derelict and undisturbed have gained a large amount of conservation interest. They have been found to be home to a wide range of nationally scarce and rare invertebrates due to the mosaic of habitats created by interesting plant communities and topographical variation across the site (Buglife 2010). These sites are also known to support a range of bird species. As brownfield sites are lost to redevelopment, living roofs have been seen as one way to replace these important habitats. These living roofs can increase the opportunities for black redstarts to forage and shelter. This, alongside a growing interest in sustainability and promotion of the benefits which building projects can have to local wildlife has helped the living roof movement to grow.

The black redstart survey carried out in 2008 recommended the inclusion of a roof designed specifically for black redstarts into the ITHB design. To create a roof which could be used by black redstarts, the ITHB roof has been designed to mimic brownfield land that provides habitat suitable for a wide range of invertebrate species. A long term study into invertebrate colonisation of living roofs in London found that 10% of the invertebrate species collected at the study sites were designated nationally rare or scarce, indicating that living roofs can be important tools for invertebrate conservation (Kudas 2006). Invertebrate communities on biodiverse roofs tend to be much more diverse than those found on Sedum based extensive roof roofs. Biodiverse living roofs develop a diverse plant community as a result of their low nutrient well-drained substrate base. Extensive Sedum based roofs have a much lower plant and topographical diversity. A long term study into invertebrate colonisation on different types of living indicates that biodiverse roofs are the most valuable to invertebrate conservation as they can provide ‘an excellent habitat for many invertebrates’ as ‘most invertebrates respond not only to the plant species but also to architectural diversity of plants’ (Kudos & Gedge 2009). The study suggests that providing the created habitat is good quality, invertebrates will colonise living roofs from existing brownfield/living roof sites which are a considerable distance away. Providing even small patches of good quality habitat is key to the conservation of invertebrates within London. Overall, the success of design for foraging black redstarts relies on design to support a variety of invertebrates.

Page 7 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

3.0 Living roof design for Farringdon Integrated Ticket Hall

Building

3.1 Development of the design

Bauder is the roofing specialist developing the technical specifications of the roof design for the Farringdon ITHB. Bauder has established a successful professional relationship with Islington Borough Ecologist via liaison during numerous projects regarding roof designs, and is highly experienced in creating successful living roof schemes within the Islington area. Atkins Ecology is providing an assessment of how this specific design could benefit local wildlife and demonstrate that the design meets the requirements of the planning condition. Refer to N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101823 in Appendix A for general layout of the roof landscape.

The design has been developed in accordance with the overall aim of London Borough of Islington’s planning condition placed on the development, which is to create a biodiverse living roof. Approximately 680m2 of living roof is proposed for the Farringdon ITHB. The living roof is in two sections as shown on N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101823 in Appendix A. Collectively, these two areas create a large area of living roof and allows a variety of habitats to be created to provide foraging opportunities for the rare black redstart. The diagram below shows how the roof at the ITHB will be constructed.

Proposed Bauder Biodiversity Roof System Wildflower planting species selected which can tolerate the difficult growing conditions on the roof and are beneficial to invertebrates

Bauder extensive substrate is a lightweight growing material that is manufactured for use in roof systems which is nutrient poor and well drained, vital for the development of diverse vegetation.

Bauder filter fleece is a filtration layer that prevents the fine elements of the substrate from washing into the drainage layer.

Bauder DSE20 drainage board is a water drainage layer manufactured from lightweight recycled material.

Bauder FSM 600 is a fibre protection matting layer Bauder PE Foil is a polyethylene foil separation and slip layer.

Bauder Plant E capping sheet is a chemically treated, root resistant layer.

Bauder KSA DUO underlayer

Page 8 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

3.2 Providing a roof landscape for invertebrates: substrate, plants and

topography.

As described in Section 2.4 the key to creating a biodiverse roof is providing suitable habitat for invertebrate species. Individual invertebrate species favour particular ‘mircohabitats’. To provide good quality habitat on the ITHB living roof, the overall diversity of the roof will be maximised by varying the depth of the substrate across the roof. The Bauder extensive substrate provides a nutrient-poor, well- drained growing medium for vegetation to develop. Nutrient-poor soil promotes plant diversity as it slows the growing rate of plants and therefore reduces the dominance of certain species which are able to grown very quickly in nutrient rich conditions such as some species of grass.

The substrate depth will be varied across the roof and will create the base for sparse vegetation cover with plenty of bare ground. This will provide a mixture of microhabitats and places for invertebrates to shelter and hunt for food. Sandy areas will also be provided for those rare burrowing invertebrates and those species which use bare ground to hunt for prey.

Scattered rocks, piles of rubble and dead wood will be used to create topographical diversity creating cooler and damper microhabitats where they shade. Dead wood also provides habitat for invertebrates which rely on it for food and reproduction.

Plant Species Flowering plants that provide nectar and pollen are important and in many cases specific plants species support specific invertebrates (English Nature 2003). Following seeding the plant community would be left to develop naturally. Vegetation which is left unmanaged provides a large resource of dead stems, fruit heads and seed heads. A minimum level of management also means that invertebrates sheltering within living or dead plants are protected.

A mixture of seed and plant plugs will be used on the ITHB roof design. The use of plant plugs is primarily for the vegetation to establish at a quicker rate to show progression on the roof surface. All of the plants chosen for the scheme are those which can tolerate growing in shallow, nutrient poor substrates. Typically these species are naturally found in shingle, rock and chalk environments. The species mix selected is the Emorsgate ERF1 Living roof wildflower mixture. This plant mix is shown overleaf.

Page 9 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

% Wildflower species 6 Agrimonia eupatoria 6 Anthyllis vulneraria 4 Centaurea nigra 3 Clinopodium vulgare 3 Echium vulgare 6 Galium verum 2 Hypericum perforatum 6 Knautia arvensis 5 Leontodon hispidus 4 Leucanthemum vulgare 1 Linaria vulgaris 6 Lotus corniculatus 4 Malva moschata 4 Origanum vulgare 3 Plantago media 6 Primula veris 6 Prunella vulgaris 5 Ranunculus acris 5 Ranunculus bulbosus 4 Reseda lutea 6 Sanguisorba minor 5 Silene vulgaris

A cornfield mix will also be used to provide an initial splash of colour and flowering plants to the roof during the growing season following the completion of the roof construction. This will help to encourage those mobile invertebrates who are attracted to flowering plants such as bees and flies.

It has been noted during design that future proposals for the site include a Crossrail Over Site Development (OSD) building directly abutting the proposed ITHB along gridline KN. This will cause some shading to the living roof through the latter part of the day. Bauder’s experience has been that vegetation can become a little denser in areas where shading occurs. Water does not evaporate so quickly which favours some of the plant species over others and therefore this can lower plant diversity in these areas. All living roofs are individual and this will be the natural progression of that part of the roof and will add to the structural diversity of the roof as a whole. This should not result in a requirement for additional maintenance. The design of the living roof has taken account of the potential future shading. Open, sandy areas will be placed where there will be less future shading (refer to N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101823 in Appendix A for general layout of the roof landscape). Bare ground is more important to invertebrates if the ground can warm up quickly in direct sunlight.

Page 10 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

4.0 Assessment of the Scheme’s Benefits

4.1 Contribution to Local Biodiversity Action Plans

The Greater London, London Borough of Islington and London Underground BAPs all include a Habitat Action Plan for built environments which recognise that built structures can be important to wildlife in urban environments. The Islington and London Underground BAP have actions and objectives relating to the inclusion of living roofs on new developments as shown in Table 4.1. The Islington BAP aims to provide one acre of living roof habitat each year. One acre is approximately 4,000m2. The 680m2 of roof being designed for the ITHB will make a significant contribution to meeting this target, providing 19% of Islington’s habitat creation target for the year in which the roof is built.

Table 4.1 Relevant information from Biodiversity Action Plans

Islington Habitat Action Plan 1. Built Environment Aims To encourage the establishment of suitable practices for biodiversity in the built environment.

Objective Promote awareness and understanding of green roofs

Target Establish one acre of green roof space on new developments per year.

London Underground Action Plan 3. Built Environment Objective To conserve and enhance biodiversity of London Underground’s buildings through design and development. Target To maintain and develop the wildlife potential on built London Underground Property (in this case maintaining the living roof)

4.2 Benefits to local wildlife

Islington is one of the smallest and densely populated Boroughs in London. Approximately 87% of the Borough is built environment (Islington BAP). In such a built up environment, the addition of any space specifically designed for wildlife will have a benefit. Living roofs have been included in new developments, and retrofitted to existing developments within the Borough including the Borough Council’s Municipal Office. The proposed biodiverse living roof will add to these existing features to provide a real enhancement for wildlife within the local area.

The roof is designed in principal to provide foraging and sheltering habitat for black redstarts. The structural aspects of the roof including the ventilation, concrete and the buildings context near to other structures will provide the large scale diversity which black redstarts are known to favour in brownfield land. Black redstarts are a UK and Greater London BAP species and providing new habitat for them helps to meets the targets of these action plans. Page 11 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

Although designed for black redstarts, the ITHB living roof could be used by a number of the species which are subject to action plans at national and local level such as bird species (including black redstarts, house sparrows and starlings), bats and a wide range of invertebrates which can reach the rooftop. Many of these species have also been described as nationally rare or scarce, or in the case of birds been placed on the Red or Amber list of species of conservation concern. Table 4.2 provides a summary of BAP species which may benefit from the biodiverse roof in Islington.

Table 4.2 A list of Biodiversity Action Plan species which might benefit from the ITHB roof

Species How living roofs UK BAP London Islington LU BAP could help BAP BAP

Bats (Pipistrelle Improved foraging * * * * and other species) habitat

Kestrel Foraging habitat *

Black redstart Foraging habitat * *

Song thrush Foraging habitat *

House martin Foraging habitat * *

House sparrow Foraging habitat * * *

Pied wagtail Foraging habitat *

Swallow Foraging habitat *

Brown-banded Foraging (and possibly * * carder bee nesting) habitat

A mining bee Foraging and nesting * Andrena florae on sandy substrate (requires white bryony)

Bombardier beetle Foraging and breeding * habitat

Bloody nosed Foraging and breeding * beetle habitat

Stripe-winged Foraging and breeding * grasshopper habitat

A spider Zelotes Foraging and breeding * latreillei habitat Adapted from ENRR 498 (English Nature 2003)

Page 12 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

4.3 Assessment against Planning Policy

Farringdon ITHB will be built on land previously occupied by rail tracks and station buildings assessed prior to site clearance. This land was found to be of low value for biodiversity. Therefore, the living roof at Farrington ITHB does not form compensation for the loss of an existing feature. Instead it will provide genuine enhancement of local biodiversity by creating a new area of habitat for species in Islington where there were limited opportunities existing.

4.4 Assessment against requirements of Planning Condition 5

The London Borough of Islington planning conditions placed on the living roof is very detailed (see Appendix B). However, the Borough Ecologist has confirmed to Bauder that the overall aim is to create a biodiverse roof which could potentially support a diverse range of invertebrates and therefore encourage black redstarts to use it to forage and shelter. There have been some necessary variations from the exact specifications in the planning condition which are described below.

- Planning Condition 5a: Substrate and topography Due to weight restrictions on the roof design the depth of substrate may vary from that specified in the planning condition. It will be possible to achieve a maximum depth of 150mm in some areas. However, this will mean lowering the minimum depth in other places to achieve an average weight loading over the roof as a whole. The depth of substrate will be sufficient for the vegetation to establish on the roof. Variation in the depth of substrate will provide greater habitat diversity. Material can not be sourced from the site as it is unsuitable for use within the roof design.

- Planning Condition 5b: Drainage layer The drainage layer and filter sheet combined are 22mm thick and not 25mm as specified in the planning condition. 3mm difference is thickness is not deemed significant; the drainage system being used has been proven to be successful by Bauder.

- Planning Condition 5c: Layout/size of roof Since the planning application was submitted and approved, it has been necessary to make some changes to the roof design to incorporate additional smoke ventilation as part of the station fire strategy. This has resulted in the original living roof area available to been reduced by approximately 50% as shown on drawing N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101818. Despite the introduction of ventilation, the combined size of living roof is approximately 680m2 which is a large area and makes a significant contribution to the London Borough of Islington’s Built Environment BAP target. The introduction of ventilation on the roof design adds to the larger scale structural diversity which black redstarts favour in their habitats.

Page 13 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

- Planning Condition 5d: Seed/plant mix This condition states the use of grass species on the roof shall be avoided. Some grasses can quickly out complete other plant species reducing the plant diversity within the habitat. The plant mix used will match the species listed within the planning condition with the exception of the grasses listed (Briza media, Koeleria macrantha, Festuca ovina). The planning condition also requires seeds to be used all over the roof. However, some areas will deliberately not be sown, because bare ground is a valuable resource for some invertebrate species of conservation concern, therefore promoting opportunities for greater diversity of species on the roof.

All other requirements of Planning Condition 5 have been met. Despite the minor deviations from the specifications of the planning condition described above, the proposed living roof will successfully meet the overall aim of creating a ‘biodiversity-based’ roof by providing habitat for local wildlife including brownfield invertebrates and black redstarts.

Page 14 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

5.0 Recommendations for Monitoring and Maintenance

5.1 During construction

An initial site meeting will be required between design team (including client), contractor and ecologist to discuss the proposed landscape design for the roof. This will ensure the design intentions are fully understood and that the requirements to protect the system during all site operations is established.

Installation of the roof will be monitored throughout construction by Bauder following their stringent guidelines and policy.

During the final stages ecological input will be required to supervise the final details of the design such as the placement of stone and log piles across the roof.

5.2 Post construction monitoring

Aim: The overall aim of the scheme is to create additional habitat which could potentially be used by invertebrates and black redstarts. Ongoing monitoring should reflect this aim.

Establishment of plant community: Establishing a sparse landscape of vegetation is important to the variation of microhabitats available to invertebrates. The development of the plant community should be monitored annually for 5 years. Monitoring surveys should take place in July when most of the plant species included in the seed mix would be in flower and is not too late in the growing season that many of the plants will have died back in the arid conditions found on the rooftop. Monitoring will note additional species which have colonised the roof, including potentially invasive species which will require removal. Photographs should be taken each year.

Establishment of invertebrate community: An invertebrate survey should be carried out 1, 3 and 5 years after completion of the roof to monitor the establishment of an invertebrate community. Surveys should be carried out by an invertebrate specialist and are likely to involve one or two visits each year.

Use of the roof by black redstarts: Black redstart surveys should be carried out to the same methodology as the surveys undertaken prior to development. This will involve surveys on four occasions between late May and July. A black redstart survey should be carried out 1, 3 and 5 years after completion of the roof.

All survey visits will note any other bird activity on the roof structure.

Page 15 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

Monitoring results and future years: The information gathered from these monitoring visits will assist in refining future living roof designs and therefore the monitoring results will be made available to London Borough of Islington, the client (Network Rail, London Underground) and Bauder. This scheme provides an opportunity to gain valuable insight into the development of living roof design and consideration should be given to continuing monitoring past the initial five years, particularly as there is likely to be a large change in the environment surrounding the roof with the addition of a new building.

5.3 Post construction maintenance

Bauder provides thorough guidelines for maintenance of their living roof systems which must be followed. Current guidelines are attached as Appendix C. Annual vegetation monitoring results will highlight whether specific measures need to be taken with regards to maintaining plant diversity for the first five years.

5.4 Emergency maintenance procedure

Bauder must be contacted in the first instance to provide advice about any works which would disrupt the roof system.

The living roof could provide potential habitat for nesting birds such as black redstart. Works disrupting the structure of the roof could disturb nesting birds if they take place within the core bird nesting season (March to September). Work outside this period runs less risk of destroying occupied nests although care is needed at all times to avoid committing an offence since birds have been recorded nesting in every month of the year. All birds, their nests and eggs have full legal protection. Damaging or destroying the nest of any wild bird (whilst being built or in use) is an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. A check for nesting birds should be carried out as soon as possible prior to works. If an ecologist is not available at short notice, staff involved will be briefed on the possibility of finding nesting birds. If a nest is found advice must be sought from Natural England with regards to the emergency works.

5.5 Protecting the roof during building works adjacent to the ITHB

As part of the Crossrail project, a building is proposed directly adjacent to the west side of the ITBH. Bauder should be contacted with regards to any building works directly adjacent to the roof for their advise with regards to protecting the roof system from potential damage from chemicals and oils.

A system to protect the roof from dust and pollutions during future construction activities must be developed prior to the start of such construction works.

Page 16 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

Black redstart surveys should be carried out throughout the nesting season (taken to be April to August) prior to construction to establish whether they are nesting or using the ITBH roof. Black redstarts are listed in Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and are protected from disturbance while nesting. Ecological advice should be followed at all times with regards to working near to black redstart nests.

Page 17 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

6.0 Conclusions

Based on examples and knowledge from existing living roof projects, the biodiverse living roof proposed for the Farringdon Integrated Ticket Hall Building is expected to provide many environmental benefits, particularly a benefit to local biodiversity. Existing information indicates that a wide range of invertebrates, plants and birds occur on roofs designed specifically to enhance local biodiversity. In addition, the inclusion of a living roof contributes to Local BAP habitat targets and potentially benefits a number of species of conservation concern in the UK that might use the roof, notably the black redstart and rare invertebrate species.

The living roof at Farringdon will contribute to the ‘greening’ of the built environment in the Islington Borough and help to promote the inclusion of living roofs in design projects and new builds in the local area. The more living roofs are built or retrofitted, the more significant the benefits will be to local wildlife. This individual scheme will provide almost a fifth of London Borough of Islington’s Biodiversity Action Plan target for living roof creation during the year the roof is installed. It is designed to ensure that a genuine, long term benefit is provided to local biodiversity.

The design incorporates the requirements of the planning condition with a few minor deviations and includes key elements and recommendations that will provide the best potential for a successful biodiverse living roof as a habitat for invertebrates and black redstarts.

Page 18 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

7.0 References

Buglife, 2010. Brownfields [online], Available: http://www.buglife.org.uk/conservation/currentprojects/Habitats+Action/Brownfields [February 2010].

Early, P., Gedge, D., Newton, J., & Wilson, S., 2007. Building Greener. Guidance on the use of green roofs, green walls and complementary features on buildings, CIRIA publication (C644)

Emorsgate, 2010. ERF1: Wildflowers for green roofs [online], Available: http://wildseed.co.uk/mixtures/view/57 [February 2010].

English Nature, 2003. Green roofs: their existing status and potential for conserving biodiversity in urban areas, English Nature Research Report 498, English Nature, Peterborough.

Islington Biodiversity Partnership, 2004. Islington’s Biodiversity Action Plan [online]. Available: http://www.islington.gov.uk/Environment/sustainability/sus_nature/biodiversity_islington/biodiversity.asp, [February 2010].

Gaston, K. J., & Spicer, J. I., 2003. Biodiversity: an introduction. WileyBlackwell, Hoboken.

Greater London Authority (GLA), February 2008. The London Plan: Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London, Consolidated with Alterations since 2004, Greater London Authority, London.

Kudas, G., 2006. Rare Invertebrates Colonizing Green Roofs in London, Urban Habitats [online journal], Volume 4 (www.urbanhabitat.org).

Kudas, G., & Gedge, D. 2009 Can Green Roofs Provide Habitat For Invertebrates In An Urban Environment? [online], Available: http://www.livingroofs.org/NewFiles/laymansguide2.pdf [February 2010]

London Biodiversity Partnership, 2007. London’s Action Plan [online], Available: http://www.lbp.org.uk/londonap.html [February 2010].

London Borough of Islington, Green Roofs and Walls Good Practice Guide [online] Available: http://www.islington.gov.uk/DownloadableDocuments/Environment/Pdf/Green_roofs_gd_prac.pdf [February 2010]

London Underground, 2007. London Underground’s Biodiversity Action Plan [online], Available: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/LU-Biodiversity-Action-Plan-final.pdf, [February 2010].

UK Biodiversity Partnership, 2008. UK list of priority habitats and species for download v1.3 20081022 [online], Available: http://www.ukbap.org.uk/library/NewPriorityList/UK_list_of_Priority_habitats_and_species_for_download_ v1.3%2020081022.xls [February 2010].

RSPB, 2010 Illustrations [online], Available: http://www.rspb.org.uk/wildlife/birdguide/name/b/blackredstart/index.aspx

Page 19 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

Appendix A Schematic layout of the roof landscape

The drawings identified in the following table are contained within Appendix A:

Drawing Title Drawing Number

FARRINGDON STATION – ARCHITECTURAL N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101200 STATION SITE AND LOCATION PLAN

BIO DIVERSE ROOF GENERAL ARRANGEMENT N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101823

Page 20 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 DO NOT SCALE

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Map with permission of the controller of Her Majestys

N Stationery Office. Crown Copyright. Licence No: 0100040692. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings.

LOCATION PLAN

GENERAL NOTES:

GENERAL NOTES: AREA 8 - INTEGRATED TICKET HALL BUILDING FOR SCOPE OF WORKS REFER TO: N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000017DOCUMENT REFERENCES: FOR DESIGN RISK ASSESSMENT REFER TO: N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000001SCOPE OF WORKS: N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000004 DESIGN RISK ASSESSMENT: N222-52152-ATL-REP-EG-000007 FOR KEY TO SYMBOLS REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101210 FOR LOCATION OF SECTION/ELEVATION REFERENCES REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-1012041. TURNMIL STREET CONCOURSE & 101206 AND SWITCH ROOMS FOR CMS AXONOMETRIC REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101201

2. LU BUILDING FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS PLANS AT PLATFORM LEVEL REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101027 & 101028 3. 43 COWCROSS STREET FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS PLANS AT PLATFORM4. EXISTING REFLECTED TRAINSHED CEILING ROOF LEVEL REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101035 & 101036

5. NEW NORTH TRAINSHED ROOF FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS PLANS AT TICKET HALL LEVEL REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101218 6. PLATFORM 4 FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS PLANS AT TICKET HALL REFLECTED CEILING LEVEL REFER TO: 7. PLATFORM 3 N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101228 LOCATION PLAN FOR8. ARCHITECTURALPOWERLINK SUBSTATION GENERAL AREAARRANGEMENTS AND STAIR S1 PLANS (SHOWN AT ON 1:1250 FIRST FLOORMAIN WORKS LEVEL DRAWING REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101001) N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101519

FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS PLANS AT 9. NORTH ESCAPE STAIR S2 (SHOWN ON MAIN WORKS TICKET HALL REFLECTED CEILING LEVEL REFER TO: DRAWING N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101001) N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101836

FOR10. ARCHITECTURALNORTH ESCAPE GENERAL STAIR S3 ARRANGEMENTS PLANS AT CROWCROSS STREET ROOF LEVEL REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101818

11. COWCROSS STREET BRIDGE FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS SECTIONS REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-103901 TO 103907 12. INTEGRATED TICKET HALL FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS ELEVATIONS REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-102000 TO 102003

ITHB: INTEGRATED TICKET HALL BUILDING

BOUNDRY OF LAND OWNERSHIP BOUNDRY OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

SHE BOX AFC SIGNIFICANT RESIDUAL RISK IN ADDITION TO THE HAZARDS/RISKS NORMALY ASSOCIATED WITH THE TYPES OF WORK DETAILED ON THIS DRAWING, 1 NOTE THE FOLLOWING:

DRA REF. HAZARD

10 TURNMILL STREET 16

13 12a

- - 18 11a

- - 09 20a

10 39 38 37

20b

20c

20d

19 05

21a 40

02 36 04 01 03

22a 21b 41 22b 35 42 34 43 33 44 32 45

SPACE FOR LIFT ENGINEERS GATE

SSL 120.215

EQ C EQ EQ C EQ

C C EQ EQ

SSL 120.210 IT IS ASSUMED THAT ALL WORKS WILL BE CARRIED OUT BY A COMPETENT PERSON WORKING, WHERE APPROPRIATE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN APPROVED METHOD STATEMENT.

Cable Gantry

850/565

1050/1050

AC111

880/560 845/560 C02 29/10/10 AY PS CM 880/560 ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION

560/550 2 1050/570 1050/570 1050/570 1050/570 1050/570 1050/570 1050/570 1050/570

750/600

9988.00 (WH1047) 12 Rev. Date Description of Revisions Drawn Ck'd App

9945.00 (WH1044) DRAFT Status FOR CONSTRUCTION

CROWCROSS STREET This drawing is the property of Network Rail. It shall not be reproduced in whole or in part, nor disclosed to a third party, without the written permission of the Programme Director, Thameslink 6 7 Programme, James Forbes House, 27 Great Suffolk Street, London, SE1 0NS. 11 Copyright 2007 Network Rail.

Contractor 5 4

SMITH NEW COURT HOUSE 3

Client

Thameslink Programme James Forbes House 27 Great Suffolk Street London SE1 0NS Tel: 0207 023 3559 \\wsatkins.com\Project\GBLOW\Rail_RMU\RI0016\NR_5060147_0809_ Farringdon\002. Design Eng\011 CAD\13 CAD Data\01 WIP\AR - ITH\N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101200-001-C02.dgn Project Title THAMESLINK PROGRAMME Filename: N222 - FARRINGDON INTEGRATED TICKET HALL BUILDING

FARRINGDON ROAD Drawing Title 09:33:43 FARRINGDON STATION - ARCHITECTURAL STATION SITE AND LOCATION PLAN

27/10/2010

Date: Drawn By Name Sig. Date A YATES NO 05/12/2009

Checked By Name Sig. Date P SEAWARD NO 05/12/2008

Approved By Name Sig. Date C MINTIKKIS NO 05/12/2008

Scale Sheet of 1:1250, 1:500 1 1 PUGH2630 Map Grid ELR UOM From To LUL mm

Network Rail Rev

GREVILLE STREET Drawing Number

Username: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101200 C02

All changes to this CAD generated drawing MUST be made via the master CAD file. Size: A1 DO NOT SCALE

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Map with permission of the controller of Her Majestys Stationery Office. Crown Copyright. Licence No: 0100040692. 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings.

N LOCATION PLAN

5967 3945 3200 6000 3000 3000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2845

S4 S3

S2 S5

GENERAL NOTES: LEGEND: AREA 8 - INTEGRATED TICKET HALL BUILDING C02 103008 S9 FOR SCOPE OF WORKS REFER TO: S10 BAUDER EXTENSIVE SUBSTRATE AT VARIED N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000017 S11 DEPTHS & WILD FLOWER SEEING/PLUGS FOR DESIGN RISK ASSESSMENT REFER TO: N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000001

39 38 37 BAUDER EXTENSIVE SUBSTRATE BARE FOR KEY TO SYMBOLS REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101210 GROUND (NO PLANTING) FOR LOCATION OF SECTION/ELEVATION REFERENCES REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101204 & 101206 40 FOR CMS AXONOMETRIC REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101201 STORE 36 41 STAIR S41 42 35 SANDY SUBSTRATE FOR BURROWING ATS B/342 43 ATS A/151 34 44 INVERTEBRATES AT VARIED DEPTHS FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS PLANS AT 33 45 32 PLATFORM LEVEL REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101027 & 101028 46

SPACE FOR LIFT LOG PILES SCATTERED (EQUAL FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS PLANS AT ENGINEERS GATE TO 1 LOG PER 20m/sq) PLATFORM REFLECTED CEILING LEVEL REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101035 & 101036 SSL 120.215 STONES PILES OR BOULDERS FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS PLANS AT TICKET HALL LEVEL REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101218 BAUDER BIO DIVERSE ROOF - TYPICAL CUT SECTION LIVING ROOF: 680m/sq SHOWING VARIABLE VEGETATION & SUBSTRATE LAYER FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS PLANS AT TICKET HALL REFLECTED CEILING LEVEL REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101228

S8 S8 LEER ROOM STAIR S40 FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS PLANS AT ATS B/339 ATS 1/150 FIRST FLOOR LEVEL REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101519

FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS PLANS AT TICKET HALL REFLECTED CEILING LEVEL REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101836

FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS PLANS AT PLANT AREA U ROOF LEVEL REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101818 ATS B/340 FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS SECTIONS

1800 REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-103901 TO 103907

T FOR ARCHITECTURAL GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS ELEVATIONS REFER TO: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-102000 TO 102003

SSL 120.210 ITHB: INTEGRATED TICKET HALL BUILDING

2970 S7

103016 S

ROOF EAST S7 ATS B/335 ROOF EAST ATS B/335 SHE BOX AFC SIGNIFICANT RESIDUAL RISK 4070 IN ADDITION TO THE HAZARDS/RISKS NORMALY ASSOCIATED WITH THE TYPES OF WORK DETAILED ON THIS DRAWING, NOTE THE FOLLOWING: LR DRA REF. HAZARD

S1 7500 S1 IT IS ASSUMED THAT ALL WORKS WILL BE CARRIED OUT BY A

CON'T N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101815 COMPETENT PERSON WORKING, WHERE APPROPRIATE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN APPROVED METHOD STATEMENT.

C02 C02 C02 29/10/10 ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION AY PS CM Q Rev. DateDRAFTDescription of Revisions Drawn Ck'd App Status FOR CONSTRUCTION

This drawing is the property of Network Rail. It shall not be reproduced in whole or in part, nor disclosed to a third party, without the written permission of the Programme Director, Thameslink Programme, James Forbes House, 27 Great Suffolk Street, London, SE1 0NS. Copyright 2007 Network Rail.

Contractor

ROOF CENTRAL ATS B/336 8000

Client

Thameslink Programme James Forbes House 27 Great Suffolk Street London SE1 0NS Tel: 0207 023 3559 P \\wsatkins.com\project\gblow\rail_rmu\ri0016\nr_5060147_0809_ farringdon\002. design eng\011 cad\13 cad data\01 wip\ar - ith\N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101823-001-C02.dgn Project Title C02 THAMESLINK PROGRAMME Filename: N222 - FARRINGDON INTEGRATED TICKET HALL BUILDING S12 Drawing Title 18:21:33 8000 FARRINGDON STATION - ARCHITECTURAL

ROOF WEST BIO-DIVERSE ROOF ATS B/337 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT 103013 103011 25/10/2010 S6 S6 Date: Drawn By Name Sig. Date A YATES NO 17/03/2010 KN Checked By Name Sig. Date P SEAWARD NO 17/03/2010 S4 Approved By Name Sig. Date C MINTIKKIS NO 17/03/2010

Scale Sheet of 1:100 1 1 103007

reve1176 S3 S2 S5 Map Grid ELR UOM From To S12 C02 LUL mm

Network Rail Rev Drawing Number

Username: N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101823 C02

All changes to this CAD generated drawing MUST be made via the master CAD file. Size: A1 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

Appendix B Planning Condition 5 (Application P091441)

Planning Condition 5: (Application P091441) “The hereby approved brown roof shall: a) be biodiversity based with an extensive green roof substrate known to support the wildflower species specified below, of varied contoured depth of between 80-150mm comprising predominantly crushed brick and crushed concrete graded from 25mm to dust, sourced from the site where possible. Areas of stones, boulders and natural logs (including at least 1 natural log of minimum 100mm diameter a 1m length per 20sqm of roof) shall be added to the roof surface to create additional micro habitats; b) include a 25mm drainage layer/filter sheet below the substrate layer of the roof; c) be laid out in accordance with drawing N222-WSR-DRG-AR-101818/A01 hereby approved; and d) be planted with 0.5gms of special cornfield mix and 16 plugs of mixed wildflower species per sqm, or seeded with 0.5gms of special cornfield mix and a mix of wildflower species at 2gms per sqm over all areas within the first planting season following the practical completion of the building works. Use of grasses shall be avoided as these are likely to reduce the biodiversity value of the roof. The wildflower plugs and/or seeds shall comprise a mix of all of the following species: Agrimonia eupatoria, Anthyllis vuleraria, Briza media, Centaurea nigra, Echium vulgare, Galium verum, Festuca ovina, Hypericum perforatum, Knautia arvensis, Koeleria macrantha, Leontodon autumnalis, Origanum vulgare, Plantago media, Primula veris, Prunella vulgaris, Ranunculus acris, Ranunculus bulbosus, Reseda lutea, Sanguisorba minor, Silene vulgaris.

The brown roof shall be installed strictly in accordance with the above and maintained as such thereafter and no change therefrom shall take place without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Evidence that the roof has been installed in accordance with sub-points a) to d) above shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved.”

Page 21 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

Appendix C Maintenance procedure, Bauder Biodiversity Green Roof Systems

Page 22 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010

MAINTENANCE PROCEDURE BAUDER BIODIVERSITY GREEN ROOF SYSTEMS

General Maintenance

General maintenance is for this type of roof landscaping is normally related to only the waterproofing and drainage related elements, rather than the landscaping, although some biodiverse landscape schemes include deliberate planting that may require localized attention to removed weeds etc.

Maintenance is best carried out annually during springtime and additionally in late autumn should the particular roof location be affected by local trees that produce surface leaf litter. Some deposited leaf litter may be considered as contributory to the bio-diverse environment and this is fine so long as provision is made for ensuring that this has no negative effect on the drainage performance.

The following procedures should be carried out as indicated below, in order to ensure the roof is maintained in good condition and to protect the validity of the guarantee.

Designated Biodiversity areas should be disturbed as little as possible during maintenance so as not to upset any micro-habitats that may have colonised.

Basic roof related maintenance procedures

1. Ensure safe access can be gained to the roof and that relevant Health and Safety Procedures are followed when working at roof level. Safety harness attachment points or man safe systems should always be used where provided.

2. Remove all debris and leaves from rainwater outlets, chutes, gutters etc. All debris must be removed from the roof and not simply flushed down rainwater pipes. Roofs in the vicinity of taller trees will need more frequent maintenance. We recommend removing leaf litter during the spring and again in late autumn, to ensure that fallen leaves to not cover any growth.

3. Open the lid of the Inspection chambers and ensure that all rainwater outlets (including down pipes) are free from blockages and that water can flow freely.

4. Ensure that any protective metal flashings or termination bars remain securely fixed and in place.

5. Examine all mastic sealant and mortar pointing for signs of degradation, and repair or renew as necessary.

6. Where promenade tiles or paving slab walkways exist, ensure that they are securely fixed in position and remain in good condition.

7. Please ensure that any items of plant/equipment that may have been introduced to the roof are sited on a suitable isolated slab and that any fixings that may have been used to secure them do not penetrate the waterproofing. Please contact Bauder for advice regarding suitability of isolating slabs.

8. Please report any signs of waterproofing damage or degradation to Bauder immediately. We can then provide the necessary recommendations or in the case of warranty related issues, make arrangements for remedial work to be carried out if necessary. It is recommended that a roof plan marked with co-ordinates be used to record the findings of the inspection. This will avoid

confusion and provide an on-going record of roof performance, which can be compared year on year.

9. Works to adjoining areas - When carrying out maintenance to adjoining areas, care must be taken not to damage the system. For example, any solvent-based product allowed to wash down into the system will seriously destabilize the molecular structure of the bitumen causing it to fail. Similarly with oils associated with machine plant maintenance or fats from extractors over cooking areas. If this risk is considered likely, then Bauder should be contacted so that we may advise. Chemical damage will invalidate the guarantee.

10. Alterations - Any alterations to the waterproofing system that may affect its integrity will invalidate the guarantee. If such a situation should arise, then Bauder should be contacted immediately so that we may advise on the alteration and how it should be incorporated without affecting the guarantee.

Plant related maintenance tasks required

Plant encroachment Any planting, which has encroached into drainage outlets, walkways and the vegetation barriers (pebbles), should be removed. If movement/settlement of the pebble vegetation barrier has occurred, then additional washed stone pebbles (similar to the existing) should be added.

Plant Maintenance Advice should be obtained from the landscape designer and any maintenance carried out according to their specific recommendations.

Fertilizer and Irrigation Biodiversity roofs generally do not normally require any fertilisation or artificial watering. However if planting other than that found naturally colonizing is deliberately incorporated into the roof, then this may be required. Again, guidance should be obtained from the landscape designer in this instance.

Support Biodiversity roofs usually require only minimal maintenance and we are happy to offer advice on issues concerning your roof and how to maintain it in good order. We believe our products and systems are of the highest standard and we are happy to talk through any queries or concerns. It is always useful to provide photographs to accompany queries where possible.

Please note: In the event of any query arising which it is thought may affect the condition of the system, then Bauder should be contacted at the address below. We cannot accept responsibility for any problem or failure due to use outside those parameters for which the system was designed or ‘acts of god’ beyond our control e.g. extreme weather conditions or damage through pests.

Bauder Ltd

United Kingdom Broughton House, Broughton Road, Ipswich, Suffolk IP1 3QR England

Ireland O'Duffy Centre, Cross lane, Carrickmacross, Co.Monaghan.

T: +44 (0)1473 257671 F: +44 (0)1473 230761 E: [email protected] www.bauder.co.uk Thameslink Programme – Farringdon Station Redevelopment ITHB - An Assessment of the Benefits of the Proposed Living Roof to Local Biodiversity

Appendix D Baseline Ecology Reports

Page 23 of 25 NR Ref. N222-52152-ATL-REP-AR-000051-03 Atkins Ref. R10017-WA8A-PRM-REP-00427-03 29 October 2010 REPORT for Network Rail

Thameslink Programme Bat Survey

Network Rail Thameslink Programme Bat Survey Status: Final

Network Rail Bat Survey

Status: Final Date: 31.10.2007

Author: Main Contributors: Huma Pearce Andrew Bryant John Newton Report for: Peter Bragg Approved by: Thameslink Programme James Forbes House 27 Great Suffolk Street London SE1 0NS

Mark Southwood

Copy to: Project Director

This report has been prepared by Temple Group Ltd with all reasonable care and diligence within the terms of the contract with the client. We disclaim any responsibility to the client and others in respect of any matters outside the scope of the above. We accept no responsibility to third parties to whom this report, or any part, thereof is made available. Any such party relies upon the report at their own risk.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 2 of 37 31.10.2007

CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION...... 5 1.1. The Brief...... 5 1.2. Site Context & Status...... 5 2. RELEVANT LEGISLATION AND POLICY...... 7 2.1. Bat Legislation ...... 7 2.2. National Planning Policy ...... 7 2.3. Biodiversity Action Plans...... 7 3. METHOD ...... 8 3.1. Walkover Survey...... 8 3.2. Bat Emergence and Activity Survey...... 8 4. RESULTS ...... 9 4.1. Walkover Surveys...... 9 4.2. Emergence and Activity Survey ...... 12 5. CONCLUSION ...... 14 6. RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 15 6.1. Bat Foraging Habitat...... 15 6.2. Bats and Lighting...... 15 REFERENCES ...... 16

APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 Plans...... 17 APPENDIX 2 Transect Surveys and Target Notes...... 22 APPENDIX 3 Photographs...... 27

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 3 of 37 31.10.2007

Executive Summary A bat survey of four Thameslink stations was undertaken in July 2007 to determine the value of these sites for bats. There are proposals to redevelop the sites that will include the demolition of some structures and the construction of replacement buildings and platforms. No bats were observed during the surveys. However, several structures in and around the stations offer some potential bat roosting and foraging habitat. The high level of lighting and poor vegetation cover in and around the sites is likely to be the main contributing factor to the absence of bats. Any buildings to be demolished or refurbished as part of the development proposals should be resurveyed prior to the commencement of works. If bats are found a licence application will have to be submitted to and approved by Natural England prior to the commencement of works. Recommended enhancement measures to improve the site for the benefit of bats are discussed.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 4 of 37 31.10.2007

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. The Brief Ecology Consultancy Ltd (ECL) was commissioned by Temple Group/Network Rail to undertake a survey for bats at five stations due to be re-developed as part of the Thameslink Project. These included Blackfriars Station, London Bridge Station, Farringdon Station, and Borough Viaduct. This report comprises the initial assessment of these sites for bats and it will inform the Environmental Statement.

1.2. Site Context & Status

1.2.1. Blackfriars Station Blackfriars Station is situated on the north bank of the River Thames. It is bordered by Queen Victoria Street to the south, Victoria Embankment/Upper Thames Street (A3211) to the north, New Bridge Street/Blackfriars Bridge to the west and Puddle Dock to the east, see Appendix 1, Map 1. The railway bridge crosses the River Thames to the east of Blackfriars Bridge. The survey area extends from Apothecary Street in the north, across the River Thames, to Burnell Street in the south. The station is situated in a heavily built environment and is surrounded by buildings of both modern and old character. These are used as offices, commercial premises, warehouses and residential units. The grid reference for the station is TQ317809.

1.2.2. London Bridge Station London Bridge Station is situated on the south bank of the River Thames. It is bordered by St. Thomas Street to the south, Duke Street/Tooley Street to the north and Borough High Street to the west, see Appendix 1, Map 2. To the east, the railway lines, which run from east to west, are supported by a viaduct. A series of roads pass under the arches of the viaduct up to Tower Bridge. The survey area extends from Borough High Street to the west, up until Druid Street to the east. The station is situated in a heavily built environment and is surrounded by buildings of both modern and old character. These include offices, commercial premises, warehouses and residential units. The grid reference for the station is TQ330803.

1.2.3. Farringdon Farringdon Station is situated to the north of the River Thames. It is bordered by Greville Street/Cowcross Street to the south, Clerkenwell Road (A5201) to the north, Farringdon Road (A201) to the west and Turnmill Street to the east, see Appendix 1, Map 3. The survey area extends from Clerkenwell Road to the north down to Charterhouse Street to the south. The station is situated in a heavily built environment and is surrounded by buildings of both modern and old character which are used as offices, commercial premises, and warehouses, as well as residential units. The grid reference for the station is TQ316819.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 5 of 37 31.10.2007

1.2.4. Borough Viaduct Borough Viaduct is situated to the south of the River Thames. It is bordered by Southwark Street to the south, Bankside and the River Thames to the north, Park Street to the west and Borough High Street to the east, see Appendix 1, Map 4. The survey area extends from Bankside down to Redcross Way, and east towards Southwark Cathedral and Borough High Street. Borough Market is at the centre of the site area. The grid reference for the centre of the site is TQ326803.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 6 of 37 31.10.2007

2. RELEVANT LEGISLATION AND POLICY

2.1. Bat Legislation All species of bat are fully protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) through their inclusion in Schedule 5. All bats are also included in Schedule 2 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats, & c.) Regulations 1994. The Act and Regulations make it illegal to:

intentionally or deliberately kill, injure or capture (take) bats;

deliberately disturb bats (whether in a roost or not);

damage, destroy or obstruct access to bat roosts;

possess or transport a bat or any other part of a bat, unless acquired legally; or

sell, barter or exchange bats or parts of bats. A license will need to be obtained from Natural England if any bat roost is to be affected by development activities.

2.2. National Planning Policy Guidance on nature conservation is issued by the Government in the form of Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (PPS 9) and circular 06/2005 on biodiversity and the planning system. The key principles in this guidance include the aim that all planning decisions should prevent harm to biodiversity. PPS 9 offers the following guidance on Species and Habitats of Principal Importance for Biodiversity designated under section 74 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (which generally comprise UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority habitats species): “Planning authorities should ensure that these species and habitats are protected from the adverse effects of development, where appropriate, by using planning conditions and obligations. Planning authorities should refuse permission where harm to the species or their habitats would result unless the need for and benefits of the development clearly outweigh that harm.”

2.3. Biodiversity Action Plans The UK BAP was initiated to comply with obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity 1992. It describes the UK’s biological resources and commits to developing detailed plans to conserve these resources. The UK BAP comprises Habitat Action Plans (HAPs) and Species Action Plans (SAPs). In addition, local authorities promote habitat and species conservation at a regional level through development of Local BAPs (LBAPs). The UK BAP includes a species action plan for pipistrelle bats amongst others and all bats are included in the Biodiversity Action Plan for London.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 7 of 37 31.10.2007

3. METHOD

3.1. Walkover Survey An external inspection of all buildings and viaducts associated with Blackfriars Station, London Bridge Station, Farringdon Station and Borough Viaduct was carried out on the 26th, 27th 28th June and 5th July 2007 respectively, to evaluate the potential for roosting bats. All accessible areas were surveyed for bats and bat field signs (bat dropping, feeding remains such as moth wings and urine and fur oil stains) and potential bat access points into any structures associated with the station premises and viaducts were identified. An assessment of the site and its surrounds was undertaken to identify potential bat foraging areas and commuting routes. This assessment informed the location of observation stations for the emergence and activity survey.

3.2. Bat Emergence and Activity Survey One bat emergence and activity survey was undertaken at Blackfriars Station, London Bridge Station, Farringdon Station and Borough Viaduct on the evening of 26th, 27th 28th June and 5th July 2007 respectively. The emergence and activity surveys commenced 20 minutes before sun-set and lasted for at least 1 hour after sunset. Two surveyors were equipped with BatBox Duet Frequency Division detectors for all surveys. Due to extent of the site areas, at least one surveyor walked a transect area during the emergence period, to ensure that all sites with bat potential were included, for transects see Appendix 2, Maps 1 to 4.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 8 of 37 31.10.2007

4. RESULTS

4.1. Walkover Surveys During the site walkover, habitats within the site plan which offered potential for bat roosting, foraging and commuting were identified and mapped. The descriptions below are cross referenced to these locations and should be read in conjunction with the individual site maps in Appendix 2.

4.1.1. Blackfriars Station The main station building, see Appendix 2, Map 5: T1, comprises a mixture of stone brick, breeze-block and metal construction. Metal and concrete cladding is present along parts of the exterior walls, see Appendix 3, Photograph 1. All brick and stonework appeared to be well mortared and did not offer opportunities for crevice roosting bats such as pipistrelles. The presence of metal cladding reduces the likelihood of bats roosting behind these structures due to unstable temperatures associated with metal. Furthermore, this section of the station is likely to be of low suitability to bats due to its close proximity to Queen Victoria Street which is well lit and carries high levels of traffic. Vegetation cover in this area was minimal and offered only limited bat foraging opportunities. The railway bridge joins the main station building at the southern end and extends south over Queen Victoria Street and the River Thames, see Appendix 2, Map 5: T2. The railway bridge has a metal frame which is enclosed by wooden boarding and a series of windows to the east, and metal sheeting to the west, see Appendix 3, Photograph 2. Although several potential access points were associated with the wooden cladding along this section, this area is lit by natural light during the day and artificial light during the evening, and is therefore of low suitability to roosting bats. North of the main station towards Apothecary Street, see Appendix 2, Map 5: T3, the railway line is supported by a bridge with a concrete frame, see Appendix 3, Photograph 3. This is a well sealed structure and offered no suitable roost sites for crevice roosting species. The surrounding area is dominated by hardstanding with only limited stands of buddleia along the eastern side, providing poor bat foraging potential, see Appendix 3, Photograph 4. South of Queen Victoria Road, the railway bridge crossing the River Thames is of metal construction, supported by stone buttresses. No signs of crevices or cavities were apparent and the bridge was considered to offer only low bat roosting potential, see Appendix 3, Photograph 5. There is planted shrubbery along the riverside walk, see Appendix 3, Photograph 6, and good insect activity was observed along the river. This section of the survey area provides some potential for foraging bats, see Appendix 2, Map 5: T4. South of the river, the railway is supported by a brick built viaduct with a series of arches. The brickwork associated with the viaduct offered opportunities for crevice roosting bats. However, several arches, particularly along Invicta Plaza, see Appendix 2, Map 5: T5, are used for car parking. These are well lit with fluorescent lighting which reduces their suitability for roosting bats, see Appendix 3, Photograph 7. Several arches along Burrell Street and to the north of Burrell Street have been bricked up, see Appendix 3, Photograph 8, and these sections of the viaduct are likely to provide the greatest potential www.templegroup.co.uk Page 9 of 37 31.10.2007

for bat roosting within the survey area. Gaps within the brick work were inspected but no bat field signs were found on the exterior walls, see Appendix 2, Map 5: T6. Overall the site and its surrounds were extensively lit and most parts of the site were also well exposed. There was only limited vegetation, mostly buddleia, along the viaduct providing poor quality habitat for bat foraging. The River Thames is likely to offer some feeding opportunities for bats, but this is also well lit and has limited vegetation cover.

4.1.2. London Bridge Station The main station building is of brick construction with a ridged roof which has a series of skylights, see Appendix 2, Map 6: T1. The station concourse and platforms are brightly lit and offer unsuitable conditions for bat roosting. The bus station to the west, see Appendix 2, Map 6: T2, consist of a metal framed with roof lighting throughout. The adjacent railway bridge is of metal construction and supported by concrete buttresses. Neither of these structures offered roosting opportunities for bats, see Appendix 3, Photograph 9. The eastern section of the site has the greatest potential for bats, see Appendix 2, Map 6: T3. The railway is supported by a viaduct of brick construction with a series of arches through which one-way roads pass. Along these roads are a series of additional arches which run perpendicular to the road arch, see Appendix 3, Photograph 10. These lead into the main structure of the viaduct and are mostly associated with commercial properties along the Tooley Street and Crucifix Lane. Numerous access points for bats to enter these arches were identified, see Appendix 3, Photograph 11, and these offer darkened and mostly undisturbed conditions suitable for roosting bats. However, lighting associated with the adjoining road may reduce the value of these areas for roosting bats. The viaduct provides numerous potential bat access points that are suitable for crevice dwelling bats such as pipistrelle species, see Appendix 3, Photograph 12. However, no bat signs were found on any of the exterior walls. The extent of light spill within all areas of the site, together with limited vegetation cover and poor foraging opportunities are likely to reduce the potential for bats.

4.1.3. Farringdon Station Farringdon Station, see Appendix 2, Map 7:T1, is a brick building with a metal framed roof that supports sky-lights. The station concourse and platforms are well lit by natural light throughout the day, and fluorescent lighting illuminates these areas during the evening. The interior of this building is therefore unsuitable for bats. To the west of the station along Farringdon Road are a series of office blocks, see Appendix 2, Map 7: T2. These are well maintained modern buildings of metal and glass construction with flat roofs, see Appendix 3, Photograph 13. Based on their design and structure, these buildings were considered to unsuitable for bats. To the east of the station, along Turnmill Street are a series of flat roofed single storey offices/workshops, see Appendix 2, Map 7: T3. Some of these are unoccupied and in a state of disrepair, see Appendix 3, Photograph 14. There are access points leading into these premises which may offer low potential for bats. The tree line along Turnmill Street provides some foraging potential for bats. However, its value is likely to be diminished because of the street lighting along the road. www.templegroup.co.uk Page 10 of 37 31.10.2007

To the south of the station entrance are a series of brick built commercial outlets with flats above, see Appendix 2, Map 7: T4. The railway line passes through a series of brick arches below these properties and then extends a short distance before diverging into 3 separate tracks which pass through tunnels, see Appendix 3, Photograph 15. The tunnels and arches could not be accessed, but crevices associated with disrepair of the brickwork may be present due to the age of the structures. The tunnels were therefore considered to have some potential to support crevice dwelling bats. Additionally fissures associated with the brick wall that borders the railway line may also provide roosting opportunities. The habitat surrounding Farringdon Station was largely devoid of vegetation, with only occasional stands of ruderal vegetation and buddleia. However, there are a number of courtyards off Cowcross Street that have planted shrubbery, see Appendix 3, Photograph 16, and these may provide sheltered areas for bats to feed close to the railway. Bats could also use the railway line as a flight-line and insects, which were seen flying above the railway lines, may provide some opportunities for bats to forage.

4.1.4. Borough Viaduct This consists of 3 railway lines that converge at 3 points where they cross Southwark Street, Borough High Street and Park Street. These are supported by metal frame braces and brick built viaducts, see Appendix 3, Photograph 17. Some of the arches of the viaduct support retail outlets, whereas others are used as well lit pedestrian walkways or for car parking. Numerous fissures were identified within the arches of the viaducts and these offer some potential for crevice roosting bat species. However, the value of these arches for bat roosting is likely to be diminished by the high level of associated street lighting. Ruderal species and buddleia which have colonized parts of the roof of the viaduct and offers low foraging potential to bats, see Appendix 3, Photograph 18. The railway line to the east of Stoney Street, see Appendix 2, Map 8: T1, crosses over Borough Market. The market is situated within an open metal framed structure with metal roofing and skylights along several sections. This structure is unsuitable for roosting bats. Opposite Borough Market, to the south-east of the railway line is a derelict building, see Appendix 2, Map 8: T2. This building shows signs of subsidence and is supported by scaffolding. Gaps in the brickwork, where the scaffolding poles extend into the property, provide potential access points for bats, see Appendix 3, Photograph 19. The viaduct and its immediate surrounds have limited vegetation cover. There are high levels of disturbance associated with traffic along Southwark Street and Borough High Street, and noise and light disturbance associated with the bars and restaurants along the southern end of Stoney Street and the northern end of Park Street, Overall the area was considered to be unsuitable for bats. However, notable refuges which may have value to bats include Southwark Cathedral, see Appendix 2, Map 8, T3, and the graveyard at Redcross Way, see Appendix 2, Map 8, T4. There is also an area of new residential properties to the west of Park Street which may provide some opportunities for bat roosting and foraging, see Appendix 2, Map 8, T5. Southwark Cathedral is situated to the northeast of Borough Market. The cathedral and its well vegetated ground offer potential roosting and foraging sites for bats immediately adjacent to the viaduct, see Appendix 3, Photograph 20.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 11 of 37 31.10.2007

A graveyard is situated to the south-west of the viaduct, along Redcross Way. This has become colonized by ruderal species and buddleia, and insect activity in this area was good. This graveyard is enclosed by a brick wall and provides a potential sheltered and undisturbed foraging area for bats, see Appendix 3, Photograph 21.

4.2. Emergence and Activity Survey

4.2.1. Blackfriars Station Both the north and south side of Blackfriars Station was assessed during the survey on the 26th June 2007. Surveyor 1 was positioned along the north bank of the River Thames, see Appendix 2, Map 5, to assess the value of the river as a bat commuting and foraging route. Furthermore the southern section of the station building could be observed for emerging bats. Surveyor 2 was positioned on the north bank of the River Thames, see Appendix 2, Map 5. The surveyor walked a transect from the river to Burrell Street. This section of the survey area was considered to offer the highest potential for bats due to the presence of several arches, some of which were bricked up but had potential bat access points. Sunset was at 21:20, and the survey commenced at 21:03. The weather conditions at the start of the survey were dry with 60% cloud cover and a light breeze. The temperature was 13.5ºC. No bats were detected by either surveyor during the survey.

4.2.2. London Bridge The eastern section of the survey area was offered the greatest potential for bats due to the presence to several undisturbed arches. This area was also less well lit than the western section. Both surveyors followed a transect which passed under the viaduct at Stainer Street, Weston Street, Bermondsey Street, Shand Street and Barnham Street, see Appendix 2, Map 6. At the start of the survey on the 27th June 2007 the temperature was 13.9ºC and the weather conditions were dry with 80% cloud cover. Sunset was recorded at 21:20, and the survey commenced at 21:15. There were light rain showers prior to the start of survey. No bats were detected by either surveyor during the survey.

4.2.3. Farringdon Station Surveyor 1 was positioned close to a courtyard along GreenHill’s Rent, at the southeast corner of the survey area. From this point the surveyor was able to assess the value of a planted courtyard for foraging bats as well as observe any bats commuting along the railway line. Surveyor 2 walked a transect between Clerkenwell Road and the carpark to the south of Grenville Street, see Appendix 2, Map 7. The surveyor was able to assess bat activity along the railway both to the north and south of Grenville Road, and observe any emergence and/or foraging activity associated with the offices and treeline along Turnmill Street. www.templegroup.co.uk Page 12 of 37 31.10.2007

Sunset on the 28th June 2007 was recorded at 21:19, and the survey commenced at 21:03. At the start of the survey the temperature was 17.5ºC and the weather conditions were dry with 90% cloud cover and a light breeze. No bats were detected by either surveyor during the survey.

4.2.4. Borough Viaduct One surveyor walked a transect between Southwark Cathedral and the northern end of Stoney Street. The second surveyor walked from Clink Street, along Park Street and towards Redcross Way to the south of Southwark Road, see Appendix 2, Map 8. These transects ensured that the majority of the viaduct was included within the survey as well as notable areas with bat foraging potential namely Southwark Cathedral and the graveyard at Redcross Way. Sunset on the 5th July 2007 was recorded at 21:19, and the survey commenced at 21:10. There was drizzle at the start of the survey until 21:25, following this the conditions were dry with a light breeze and the temperature at the start of the survey was 15.8ºC. No bats were detected by either surveyor during the survey.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 13 of 37 31.10.2007

5. CONCLUSION

The surveys formed a preliminary investigation of the suitability of the station sites for bats. Although no bat activity was seen by either surveyors at Blackfriars Station, London Bridge Station, Farringdon Station or Borough Viaduct, this is not a guarantee that bats are not roosting in or around the stations surrounds. Several areas were identified as having potential for bat roosting and foraging, Features with potential to support roosting bats include the arches of the viaduct north and south of Blackfriars Station, the arches to the east of London Bridge, buildings to the south of Farringdon Station and the disused premises opposite Borough Market and the arches along Stoney Street and Park Street at Borough Viaduct. Features with bat foraging potential included ruderal vegetation and buddleia along the railway lines, the River Thames and the Cathedral grounds and the Graveyard at Redcross Way close to Borough Viaduct. The railway lines of all stations may also provide suitable flight-lines for bats at certain times of the year. Since the majority of the site areas were assessed from the adjacent roads, and a thorough inspection of the premises was not possible, it is recommended that all buildings and structures proposed for demolition or refurbishment are reassessed prior to any works. If bats are found, a licence application will need to be submitted to and approved by Natural England prior to the commencement of works. Lighting and limited foraging habitat associated with these stations are likely to be the contributing factors to the absence of bat activity observed. It is therefore recommended that these factors are considered within the development proposals.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 14 of 37 31.10.2007

6. RECOMMENDATIONS

Although no bats were reported to use the station sites in London, where possible any new development proposals should seek to enhance these sites for the benefit of bats.

6.1. Bat Foraging Habitat The provision of ‘intensive’ and/or ‘extensive’ green roofs and ‘living walls’ on any new or refurbished buildings would enhance the suitability of the station sites for bat foraging. Similarly, any planting associated with landscaping proposals should ideally include the use of native plant species that will attract insects and thus provide a potential food source for bats throughout the bat activity period (spring to autumn) e.g. honeysuckle Lonicera periclymenum, dog rose Rosa canina, guelder-rose Viburnum opulus, hawthorn Crataegus monogyna, elder Sambucus nigra and hazel Corylus avellana.

6.2. Bats and Lighting Potential impacts of the development on bats are associated with lighting. Research has found that bats are sensitive to artificial lighting and that excessive lighting can delay bats from emerging, thus shortening the time available for foraging, as well as causing bats to move away from suitable foraging grounds or roost sites to alternative dark areas (Jones 2000). At present, the station sites and their surrounds are extensively lit by floodlighting along the station platforms and street-lighting and light spill from commercial properties. This may be a contributing factor to the absence of bat activity recorded and it is recommended that, where possible, the proposed development should seek to minimize the extent of additional light spill. Artificial lighting should be kept to a minimum. In particular, floodlighting should not be used. Low pressure sodium lights are a preferred option to high pressure sodium or mercury lamps, and light should be directed downwards with minimal light spillage. This can be achieved by limiting the height of lighting columns and fitting hoods that direct the light below the horizontal plane. Ideally, some dark periods should also be provided, preferably at bat emergence and during peak activity periods. The linear feature of the railways offers potential as bat flight-lines. At present these are all well lit in and around the stations and it is recommended that a darkened area at least along the surrounding walls and at the edge of the viaducts is achieved in order to enhance these areas as bat commuting routes.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 15 of 37 31.10.2007

REFERENCES

Jones J 2000 Impact of Lighting on Bats Bat Conservation Trust http://www.bats.org.uk/downloads/Helpline/lighting.pdf

BCT (2007). Bat Survey Guidelines (Consultation Draft).

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 16 of 37 31.10.2007

APPENDIX 1 Plans

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 17 of 37 31.10.2007

Map 1 - Blackfriars Station – Site Plan

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 18 of 37 31.10.2007

Map 2 - London Bridge Station – Site Plan

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 19 of 37 31.10.2007

Map 3 - Farringdon Station – Site Plan

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 20 of 37 31.10.2007

Map 4 - Borough Viaduct – Site Plan

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 21 of 37 31.10.2007

APPENDIX 2 Transect Surveys and Target Notes

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 22 of 37 31.10.2007

Map 5 - Blackfriars Station – Transect Survey and Target Notes

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 23 of 37 31.10.2007

Map 6 - London Bridge Station – Transect Survey and Target Notes

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 24 of 37 31.10.2007

Map 7 - Farringdon Station – Transect Survey and Target Notes

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 25 of 37 31.10.2007

Map 8 - Borough Viaduct – Transect Survey and Target Notes

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 26 of 37 31.10.2007

APPENDIX 3 Photographs

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 27 of 37 31.10.2007

Photo 1 - Western elevation of the main Blackfriars Station Building

Photo 2 – Railway Bridge extending over Queen Victoria Street

Photo 3 – Railway Bridge to the north of Blackfriars Station

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 28 of 37 31.10.2007

Photo 4 – North of the Blackfriars Station: Area supports mostly hard standing with only small stands of vegetation

Photo 5 – Railway bridge crossing the River Thames constructed of a metal frame and supported by stone buttresses

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 29 of 37 31.10.2007

Photo 6 – London Bridge Station: Riverside walk along the northern bank of the River Thames offers some potential for bat foraging. (Location of emergency activity survey)

Photo 7 – London Bridge Station: Arches of the viaduct used for parking and well lit with fluorescent lighting

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 30 of 37 31.10.2007

Photo 8 – London Bridge Station: Arches to the north of Burrell Street. These have been bricked up and provide potential roosting opportunities for bats

Photo 9 – London Bridge Station: Railway bridge adjacent to London Bridge Bus Station is likely to be unsuitable for roosting bats

Photo 10 – Lighting with London Bridge Station and metal ceiling provides poor suitability for roosting bats

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 31 of 37 31.10.2007

Photo 11 – London Bridge Station: One of a series of arches, which pass under the railway viaduct, offers some potential for roosting bats

Photo 12 – London Bridge Station: Potential access points for bats to enter chambers beneath the viaduct

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 32 of 37 31.10.2007

Photo 13 – Farringdon Station: Offices along Farringdon Road situated adjacent to the railway line

Photo 14 – Office/Workshops to the east of Farringdon Station. These are in a state of disrepair and have low potential for roosting bats.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 33 of 37 31.10.2007

Photo 15 – Railway line and surrounding properties south of Farringdon Station

Photo 16 – Courtyard situated along Greenhill’s Rents just off Cowcross Street, to the south-east of Farringdon Station.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 34 of 37 31.10.2007

Photo 17 – Borough Viaduct: The viaducts consist of a railway line supported by metal braces and brick built arches

Photo 18 – Borough Viaduct – Vegetation which has colonised the roof of the viaduct may have some value for bat foraging.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 35 of 37 31.10.2007

Photo 19 – Borough Viaduct: Building along Stoney Road which shows a sign of subsidence and which is supported by scaffolding offers some potential for roosting bats.

Photo 20 – Borough Viaduct: Southwark Cathedral, situated to the north east of the viaduct may offer suitable roosting and foraging opportunities for bats.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 36 of 37 31.10.2007

Head Office: Barnards, Station Road, Horsted Keynes, West Sussex RH17 7ED T:01825 790964 F:01825 791066 London Office: Tempus Wharf, 33A Bermondsey Wall West, London SE16 4TQ T: 0207 394 3700 F: 0207 394 7871 E: [email protected] Head Office: Barnards, Station Road, Horsted Keynes, West Sussex RH17 7ED T 01825 790964 F 01825 791066 [email protected] www.templegroup.co.uk London Office: Tempus Wharf 33A Bermondsey Wall West London SE16 4TQ T: 0207 394 3700 F: 0207 394 7871 REPORT for Network Rail

Thameslink Programme Black Redstart Survey at Blackfriars, London Bridge, Farringdon and Borough Viaduct

Network Rail Thameslink Programme Black Redstart Survey at Blackfriars, London Bridge, Farringdon and Borough Viaduct Status: Final

Network Rail Black Redstart Survey at Blackfriars, London Bridge, Farringdon and Borough Viaduct

Status: Final Date: 13.11.2007

Author: Main Contributors: Dusty Gedge John Newton Andrew Bryant Report for: Liz Howarth Approved by: Thameslink Programme Network Rail 27 Great Suffolk Street London SE1 0NS

Mark Southwood Copy to: Project Director

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 2 of 15 13.11.2007

Head Office: Barnards, Station Road, Horsted Keynes, West Sussex RH17 7ED T:01825 790964 F:01825 791066 London Office: Tempus Wharf, 33A Bermondsey Wall West, London SE16 4TQ T: 0207 394 3700 F: 0207 394 7871 E: [email protected] Network Rail Thameslink Programme Black Redstart Survey at Blackfriars, London Bridge, Farringdon and Borough Viaduct Status: Final

CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION...... 4 1.1. The Brief...... 4 1.2. Site Context and Status ...... 4 1.3. Black Redstart Ecology...... 5 2. LEGISLATION AND PLANNING GUIDANCE...... 6 2.1. Legislation ...... 6 2.2. National Planning Policy ...... 6 2.3. Biodiversity Action Plans...... 6 3. METHOD ...... 7 3.1. Walkover Survey...... 7 4. RESULTS ...... 9 4.1. Overview...... 9 4.2. Commentaries on Routes ...... 10 5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 11 5.1. Conclusion...... 11 5.2. Recommendations...... 11

TABLES Table 3.1 - Survey Routes ...... 7 Table 3.2 - Dates and Times of Black Redstart Surveys ...... 8 Table 4.1 - Summary of Survey Visit Findings...... 9

APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 Plans...... 12

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 3 of 15 13.11.2007

Head Office: Barnards, Station Road, Horsted Keynes, West Sussex RH17 7ED T:01825 790964 F:01825 791066 London Office: Tempus Wharf, 33A Bermondsey Wall West, London SE16 4TQ T: 0207 394 3700 F: 0207 394 7871 E: [email protected] Network Rail Thameslink Programme Black Redstart Survey at Blackfriars, London Bridge, Farringdon and Borough Viaduct Status: Final

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. The Brief Temple Group was commissioned by Network Rail to undertake a survey for black redstarts Phoenicurus ochruros at five stations due to be re-developed as part of the Thameslink Project. These included Blackfriars Station, London Bridge Station, Farringdon Station, and Borough Viaduct. This report comprises the initial assessment of these sites for black redstart and it will inform the Environmental Statement.

1.2. Site Context and Status

1.2.1. Blackfriars Station Blackfriars Station is situated on the north bank of the River Thames. It is bordered by Queen Victoria Street to the south, Victoria Embankment/Upper Thames Street (A3211) to the north, New Bridge Street/Blackfriars Bridge to the west and Puddle Dock to the east, see Appendix 1, Plan 1. The railway bridge crosses the River Thames to the east of Blackfriars Bridge. The survey area extends from Apothecary Street in the north, across the River Thames, to Burnell Street in the south. The station is situated in a heavily built environment and is surrounded by buildings of both modern and old character. These are used as offices, commercial premises, warehouses and residential units. The grid reference for the station is TQ317809.

1.2.2. London Bridge Station London Bridge Station is situated on the south bank of the River Thames. It is bordered by St. Thomas Street to the south, Duke Street/Tooley Street to the north and Borough High Street to the west, see Appendix 1, Plan 1. To the east, the railway lines, which run from east to west, are supported by a viaduct. A series of roads pass under the arches of the viaduct up to Tower Bridge. The survey area extends from Borough High Street to the west, up until Druid Street to the east. The station is situated in a heavily built environment and is surrounded by buildings of both modern and old character. These include offices, commercial premises, warehouses and residential units. The grid reference for the station is TQ330803.

1.2.3. Farringdon Farringdon Station is situated to the north of the River Thames. It is bordered by Greville Street/Cowcross Street to the south, Clerkenwell Road (A5201) to the north, Farringdon Road (A201) to the west and Turnmill Street to the east, see Appendix 1, Plan 1. The survey area extends from Clerkenwell Road to the north down to Charterhouse Street to the south. The station is situated in a heavily built environment and is surrounded by buildings of both modern and old character which are used as offices, commercial premises, and warehouses, as well as residential units. The grid reference for the station is TQ316819.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 4 of 15 13.11.2007

Head Office: Barnards, Station Road, Horsted Keynes, West Sussex RH17 7ED T:01825 790964 F:01825 791066 London Office: Tempus Wharf, 33A Bermondsey Wall West, London SE16 4TQ T: 0207 394 3700 F: 0207 394 7871 E: [email protected] Network Rail Thameslink Programme Black Redstart Survey at Blackfriars, London Bridge, Farringdon and Borough Viaduct Status: Final

1.2.4. Borough Viaduct Borough Viaduct is situated to the south of the River Thames. It is bordered by Southwark Street to the south, Bankside and the River Thames to the north, Park Street to the west and Borough High Street to the east, see Appendix 1, Plan 1. The survey area extends from Bankside down to Redcross Way, and east towards Southwark Cathedral and Borough High Street. Borough Market is at the centre of the site area. The grid reference for the centre of the site is TQ326803.

1.3. Black Redstart Ecology Black redstarts are partial migrants that breed in the UK during the period May to August, predominantly in urban areas. Areas of sparse ‘wasteland’ vegetation and stony ground provide important foraging habitat and many brownfield sites within London provide this habitat requirement. The birds typically nest on a variety of ledges or holes, preferably situated within structures. (See http://www.blackredstarts.org.uk/ for further information).

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 5 of 15 13.11.2007

Head Office: Barnards, Station Road, Horsted Keynes, West Sussex RH17 7ED T:01825 790964 F:01825 791066 London Office: Tempus Wharf, 33A Bermondsey Wall West, London SE16 4TQ T: 0207 394 3700 F: 0207 394 7871 E: [email protected] Network Rail Thameslink Programme Black Redstart Survey at Blackfriars, London Bridge, Farringdon and Borough Viaduct Status: Final

2. LEGISLATION AND PLANNING GUIDANCE

2.1. Legislation It is an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), to:

kill, injure or take any wild bird, or to take or destroy their eggs; or

take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird while it is in use or being built. Certain species, including the black redstart, receive additional special protection under Schedule 1 of the Act and under Annex 1 of the European Community Directive on the conservation of Wild Birds (79/409/EEC), making it an offence to recklessly or intentionally disturb the bird whilst nesting.

2.2. National Planning Policy Guidance on nature conservation is issued by the Government in the form of Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (PPS 9) and circular 06/2005 on biodiversity and the planning system. A key principle of this guidance is that all planning decisions should prevent harm to biodiversity. PPS 9 offers the following guidance on Species and Habitats of Principal Importance for Biodiversity designated under section 74 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (which generally comprise UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority habitats species): “Planning authorities should ensure that these species and habitats are protected from the adverse effects of development, where appropriate, by using planning conditions and obligations. Planning authorities should refuse permission where harm to the species or their habitats would result unless the need for and benefits of the development clearly outweigh that harm.”

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 6 of 15 13.11.2007

Head Office: Barnards, Station Road, Horsted Keynes, West Sussex RH17 7ED T:01825 790964 F:01825 791066 London Office: Tempus Wharf, 33A Bermondsey Wall West, London SE16 4TQ T: 0207 394 3700 F: 0207 394 7871 E: [email protected] Network Rail Thameslink Programme Black Redstart Survey at Blackfriars, London Bridge, Farringdon and Borough Viaduct Status: Final

3. METHOD

3.1. Walkover Survey The standard black redstart survey method as outlined on www.blackredstarts.org.uk was used and involved visual surveys of the Site and its immediate surrounds at dawn and dusk from late May until the end of July in order to note the sighting, songs and calls of any black redstarts that may be present. The survey area was split into four distinct areas, each of which was designated to be surveyed four times during the survey period of late May to late July. The routes are described in Table 3.1 and illustrated in Appendix 1, Plan 1. It was decided to combine Routes B and C and to undertake six visits to these areas and to extend the London Bridge area to include parts of the Borough Viaduct and to undertake six visits to this area. Each visit was two hours in length. The railway lines were observed where possible, all records of black redstarts were noted and any relevant activity associated with breeding pairs was also recorded (such as singing, carrying of nest material/food, agitation and alarm calling). Table 3.1 - Survey Routes

Route Description A Farringdon Station bound by Charterhouse St to the south, Ray St to the North, Farringdon road to the West, and Farringdon Lane/Turnmill Street the east. Viewing/vantage points over the railway lines were possible to the south of Farringdon Station itself and from Ray Street. B Blackfriars Station essentially bound by White Lion Hill to the south, Ludgate Hill to the North, Farringdon New Lane to the West and Blackfriars Lane to the east. However the route taken also included viewing from both Blackfriars Bridge and the eastern end of Platform 1 at Blackfriars Station. C Blackfriars South/Borough Viaduct was more complicated route focussing at ground level on walking Union St, Dolben St, Bear Lane, Chancel St, Blackfriars Road and Hopton Street. Fortunately there is a good view point from an old railway access road to the south of Union St on the west side of the tracks. It was possible to view in both directions with both binoculars and telescope. D London Bridge Station and Borough Viaduct followed a route from Platform 1 and 2 at London Bridge Station, Tooley Street, Southwark Cathedral, Redcross Street, Union Street and back to London Bridge Station along Southwark Street. Viewing in a south-easterly direction was possible from Platforms 1 and 2 at London Bridge.

Table 3.2 provides details of the dates and times of the visits.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 7 of 15 13.11.2007

Head Office: Barnards, Station Road, Horsted Keynes, West Sussex RH17 7ED T:01825 790964 F:01825 791066 London Office: Tempus Wharf, 33A Bermondsey Wall West, London SE16 4TQ T: 0207 394 3700 F: 0207 394 7871 E: [email protected] Network Rail Thameslink Programme Black Redstart Survey at Blackfriars, London Bridge, Farringdon and Borough Viaduct Status: Final

Table 3.2 - Dates and Times of Black Redstart Surveys

Route Date Time of Survey Route A Survey 1 27/05/07 2000 -2200 Survey 2 16/06/07 0500 -0700 Survey 3 24/06/07 0500 -0700 Survey 4 14/07/07 1900 -2100 Route B/C Survey 1 25/05/07 0600 -0800 Survey 2 1/06/07 0600 -0800 Survey 3 11/06/07 0500 -0700 Survey 4 24/06/07 1900 -2100 Survey 5 15/07/07 0600 -0800 Survey 6 22/07/07 1900 -2100 Route D Survey 1 24/05/07 0500 -0700 Survey 2 26/05/07 1800 -2000 Survey 3 5/06/07 0500 -0700 Survey 4 23/06/07 2000 -2200 Survey 5 14/07/07 0500 -0700 Survey 6 22/07/07 0600 -0800

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 8 of 15 13.11.2007

Head Office: Barnards, Station Road, Horsted Keynes, West Sussex RH17 7ED T:01825 790964 F:01825 791066 London Office: Tempus Wharf, 33A Bermondsey Wall West, London SE16 4TQ T: 0207 394 3700 F: 0207 394 7871 E: [email protected] Network Rail Thameslink Programme Black Redstart Survey at Blackfriars, London Bridge, Farringdon and Borough Viaduct Status: Final

4. RESULTS

4.1. Overview The results of the survey visits are summarised in Table 4.1. Table 4.1 - Summary of Survey Visit Findings

Route Survey Results A 1 No record 2 1 Male singing between Cowcross and Charterhouse St 3 1 Male active on railway land south of Farringdon station 4 1 Male singing Ray St B/C 1 1 Male singing on piers in Thames 2 1 Male Singing in Garden area besides viaduct by Thames [South Bank] 3 1 Male alarm calling between R. Thames and Southwark St 4 No records 5 1 Male 1 Female on viaduct around Southwark St 6 1 Male 1 Female and possibly 1 Juvenile between Thames and Southwark St D 1 1 Male Singing Southwark Cathedral 2 1 Male Singing on Cannon St Viaduct and Borough Market 3 No records 4 1 Male 1 Female seen flying towards Cannon St Viaduct 5 No records 6 1 Male Borough Viaduct/Redcross St, 1 Female seen flying toward Cannon St Viaduct

The above results suggest that black redstarts are holding territory in all areas surveyed, see Appendix 1, Plan 2.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 9 of 15 13.11.2007

Head Office: Barnards, Station Road, Horsted Keynes, West Sussex RH17 7ED T:01825 790964 F:01825 791066 London Office: Tempus Wharf, 33A Bermondsey Wall West, London SE16 4TQ T: 0207 394 3700 F: 0207 394 7871 E: [email protected] Network Rail Thameslink Programme Black Redstart Survey at Blackfriars, London Bridge, Farringdon and Borough Viaduct Status: Final

4.2. Commentaries on Routes

4.2.1. Route A In the Farringdon area a male black redstart was holding territory, though the absence of sightings of females and the lack of alarm calling when recognised predators, such as magpies (Pica pica), kestrel (Falco tinnuculus) and carrion crow (Corvus corone), were nearby suggests that this male was not paired. However, the presence of a territorial male was not unexpected in this area as Farringdon Station was a noted territory between 1995 and the early 2000’s due to the observations of a commuter, who annually submitted breeding records to the London Natural History Bird Report.

4.2.2. Route B/C The presence of a female between the River Thames in the area of Route C and a singing male signifies an active breeding territory. Furthermore the observation of a very active male alarming calling vigorously at a pair of magpies (Pica pica) suggests that breeding occurred. This is supported by the possible presence of a juvenile briefly seen from the access road south of Southwark Street with adults on the rail-side between Southwark Street and the Thames.

4.2.3. Route D The presence of a male and female in and around the Borough Market area suggests that this pair was holding an active territory. It was difficult with limited view of the viaducts from ground level to assess whether they attempted nesting or had been successful. The loci of activity appeared to be the Cannon Street rail spurs from the main viaduct. This is supported by casual observations of a male from the train into Cannon Street on three dates outside of the surveys [13/05/07, 01/06/07 and 05/07/07] and a female [05/07/07].

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 10 of 15 13.11.2007

Head Office: Barnards, Station Road, Horsted Keynes, West Sussex RH17 7ED T:01825 790964 F:01825 791066 London Office: Tempus Wharf, 33A Bermondsey Wall West, London SE16 4TQ T: 0207 394 3700 F: 0207 394 7871 E: [email protected] Network Rail Thameslink Programme Black Redstart Survey at Blackfriars, London Bridge, Farringdon and Borough Viaduct Status: Final

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. Conclusion During the breeding season of 2007 on the section of the proposed Thameslink railway line between Farringdon Station and London Bridge Station there were three active territories. One of these territories comprised an unpaired male in the Farringdon Station area. A pair appears to have breed successfully with at least one young observed, between Southwark Street and the River Thames. A further pair was holding territory in the Southwark Cathedral/Borough Viaduct/ Cannon St rail spurs area. No young or other evidence of breeding was observed regarding this pair of birds although it is considered highly likely that this occurred.

5.2. Recommendations The following recommendations are proposed in order to ensure that black redstarts are provided with suitable nesting and foraging habitat as part of the Thameslink works.

Provision of suitable foraging habitat on any new buildings in the form of green roofs designed specifically for black redstarts and brownfield invertebrate mitigation.

Black redstarts are known to breed and nest on construction sites and, therefore, as a fully protected bird species under Schedule 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) it is a criminal offence to intentional or recklessly disturb or harm breeding adults, their nests and dependent young. If works take place during the nesting season (May to August inclusive) then the Site should be surveyed to ensure that no nesting black redstarts are present. If a nest is found, Natural England should be consulted as to the measures to be taken to safeguard the nest.

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 11 of 15 13.11.2007

Head Office: Barnards, Station Road, Horsted Keynes, West Sussex RH17 7ED T:01825 790964 F:01825 791066 London Office: Tempus Wharf, 33A Bermondsey Wall West, London SE16 4TQ T: 0207 394 3700 F: 0207 394 7871 E: [email protected] Network Rail Thameslink Programme Black Redstart Survey at Blackfriars, London Bridge, Farringdon and Borough Viaduct Status: Final

APPENDIX 1 Plans

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 12 of 15 13.11.2007

Head Office: Barnards, Station Road, Horsted Keynes, West Sussex RH17 7ED T:01825 790964 F:01825 791066 London Office: Tempus Wharf, 33A Bermondsey Wall West, London SE16 4TQ T: 0207 394 3700 F: 0207 394 7871 E: [email protected] Network Rail Thameslink Programme Black Redstart Survey at Blackfriars, London Bridge, Farringdon and Borough Viaduct Status: Final

Plan 1 - Black Redstart Survey Transect Routes

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 13 of 15 13.11.2007

Head Office: Barnards, Station Road, Horsted Keynes, West Sussex RH17 7ED T:01825 790964 F:01825 791066 London Office: Tempus Wharf, 33A Bermondsey Wall West, London SE16 4TQ T: 0207 394 3700 F: 0207 394 7871 E: [email protected] Network Rail Thameslink Programme Black Redstart Survey at Blackfriars, London Bridge, Farringdon and Borough Viaduct Status: Final

Plan 2 - Black Redstart Territories Summer 2007

www.templegroup.co.uk Page 14 of 15 13.11.2007

This page is purposely left blank

Document number: N222-63110-CJV-PRO-EN-000003 Date of Issue: April 2009 Page 2 of 8

Document Revision History: Revision Amendment Date 00 Initial Submission for review / approval June 08 01 Updated for 1B and Crossrail requirements April 09

SITE ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL PLAN

IMPACT – ECOLOGY AND BIODIVERSITY

1.0 ASPECT/ACTIVITIES ...... 4 2.0 RESPONSIBILITIES ...... 4 3.0 CONSENT REQUIREMENTS...... 4 4.0 CLIENT REQUIREMENTS...... 5 5.0 GENERAL CONTROL MEASURES ...... 5 6.0 SPECIFIC CONTROL MEASURES ...... 5 7.0 MONITORING AND MEASUREMENT ...... 6 8.0 IN THE EVENT OF AN EMERGENCY...... 6 9.0 RELATED DOCUMENTS...... 6 10 APPENDIX A. ECO TIMELINE ...... 7

Document number: N222-63110-CJV-PRO-EN-000003 Date of Issue: April 2009 Page 3 of 8

1.0 ASPECT/ACTIVITIES

Although the Farringdon Station worksite is not classed as an ecologically valuable or sensitive area there are several aspects of the development that need to be examined to minimise any negative impact. The purpose of this control plan is to describe the measures to be taken to minimise the risk of damage upon the ecology on the site, and explain measures that will be taken to minimise risks and mitigate any damage caused.

The main ecological risks identified in the aspects register are: • Vegetation clearance and vegetation remaining- Leading to environmental damage; • Demolition of existing structure, drainage systems- Leading to Disruption of ecology and natural habitats i.e. bats; • Landscape creation and restoration

2.0 RESPONSIBILITIES

• Project Manager responsible for the duration of the construction phase with any requirements communicated on to contractors as applicable and for the effective management of the works in line with the Employers requirements and in line with additional agreements between the project and the London Borough of Islington (LBI).

• SHE Manager/ Environmental Advisor responsible for advising the Project Team and monitoring compliance, for obtaining and managing consents, the provision of training, and for managing communications with Islington Council

• Agents and Engineers responsible for ensuring all aspects associated with ecology and biodiversity are adequately covered in Work Package Plans and Best Practice is followed.

• Community Relations Manager responsible for receiving comments or complaints from our neighbours.

• Site Supervisors responsible for the day-to-day implementation of the mitigation measures required to minimise the impact arising from the works.

• Network Rail Ecologist responsible for advising the Project Team during the construction phase.

• All Employees are responsible for complying with the plan in relation to the work they are undertaking and for reporting and responding to ANY incident.

3.0 CONSENT REQUIREMENTS

Permission is required from LBI for the removal of any trees.

Document number: N222-63110-CJV-PRO-EN-000003 Date of Issue: April 2009 Page 4 of 8

4.0 CLIENT REQUIREMENTS Farringdon, Environmental Mitigation Schedule. (Appendix B)

Crossrail, Environmental Minimum Requirements.

5.0 GENERAL CONTROL MEASURES

The Environmental Aspects Register within the HASEMP includes activities which may impact the sites ecology. Controls from this plan will be applied to mitigate the impact of the projects activities as far as is reasonably practicable.

6.0 SPECIFIC CONTROL MEASURES

CoLOR and subcontractors shall ensure that near sensitive receptor locations the following guidelines will be applied and followed:

Trees A number of trees have been removed from Turnmill Street. In mitigation, arrangements have been put in place for a replacement scheme that will be agreed with LBI. If trees are not to be removed, they will be protected if working in close proximity, works will be undertaken as specified in BS5837, ‘Guide for Trees in Relation to Construction’.

Protective fencing will be erected around trees that are to remain. Fencing will be located at the edge of the canopy of the tree if excavations are occurring in the area, or if no excavations are being completed in the area, the tree trunk and branches will be protected.

Bats Bat surveys was undertaken in July 2007 to determine the value of all Thameslink sites for bats. Bat surveys have been carried out on all buildings affected by phase 1 of the development. A follow up survey was carried out during August 2008. No bats were found during these surveys.

The surveys formed a preliminary investigation of the suitability of the station sites for bats. Although no bat activity was seen by surveyors at Farringdon Station, this is not a guarantee that bats are not roosting in or around the stations surrounds.

Further surveys for bat roost potential were carried out during September- October on Cowcross St Properties, The Terminal Building, Caxton House Carpark, Cardinal Tower, Lincoln Place and a number of areas seen as having reasonably high potential around the station. No bats were located during these surveys and the area in general was seen as a poor habitat for bats.

If during the works bats are discovered in any of the buildings, work shall immediately be stopped until mitigation measures can be taken, after consultation with an expert.

Birds Prior to vegetation clearance CoLOR will undertake a site inspection to ensure there are no nesting birds within the area. If a nest is discovered, work should cease immediately and it must be reported to a member of the SHE staff and the Network Rail specialist ecologist will be engaged. No work should begin in or near this area until the ecologist has been consulted.

N.B all nesting birds are protected by law.

Document number: N222-63110-CJV-PRO-EN-000003 Date of Issue: April 2009 Page 5 of 8

Black redstarts (protected species) are partial migrants that breed in the UK during the period May to August, predominantly in urban areas. Areas of sparse ‘wasteland’ vegetation and stony ground provide important foraging habitat and many brownfield sites within London provide this habitat requirement.

The standard black redstart survey method was used and involved visual surveys of the site and its immediate surrounds at dawn and dusk from late May until the end of July in order to note the sighting, songs and calls of any black redstarts that may be present. In the Farringdon area a male black redstart was holding territory, though the absence of sightings of females and the lack of alarm calling when recognised predators, such as magpies (Pica pica), kestrel (Falco tinnuculus) and carrion crow (Corvus corone), when nearby suggested that this male was not paired.

Black Restarts are known to breed and nest on construction sites. When works take place during the nesting season (May to August inclusive) then the site will be surveyed to ensure that no nesting black redstarts are present. If a nest is found, Natural England will be consulted as to the measures to be taken to safeguard the nest.

Invasive Plants - Japanese Knotweed No invasive plants have been identified in previous studies. If Japanese Knotweed or any other invasive plant is found on the site then the incident will be reported to the SHE Manager/ Environmental Advisor to confirm the best way to deal with it. The area will be fenced off and then managed using Networks Rails procedure for guidance (Environmental Guidance Note, JK02).

Unexpected Ecological Findings No other protected species have been identified in previous studies. If a protected species, suspected protected species or an invasive plant is discovered after works have begun the Project Manager will stop the work, cordon off the area and restrict access. The SHE or Environmental Advisor will then be contacted and a decision made over the most appropriate way forward. An ecologist will be consulted prior to works recommencing.

7.0 MONITORING AND MEASUREMENT Bat surveys have previously been completed and there will be continual monitoring of other ecological factors carried out during regular weekly inspections of the site by members of the SHE team, and actions undertaken to ensure best practice is being followed.

8.0 IN THE EVENT OF AN EMERGENCY In the event of an emergency/ incident the event will be reported as an environmental incident.

9.0 RELATED DOCUMENTS • Environmental Mitigation Register • RSK Carter Ecological Ltd, Bat survey Report

Document number: N222-63110-CJV-PRO-EN-000003 Date of Issue: April 2009 Page 6 of 8

10 APPENDIX A. ECO TIMELINE

EcoTimeline SURVEY SPECIALIST SURVEY & KEY NO WORK MITIGATION WORK GENERAL TIMES ADVICE

Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

NO WORK - NESTING SEASON Vegetation Vegetation clearance clearance Birds Optimum time for survey of breeding birds

Optimum time for survey of wintering birds Optimum time for survey of wintering birds

SPECIALIST SURVEY REQUIRED TO DETERMINE SUMMER AND WINTER ROOSTS SPECIALIST ADVICE REQUIRED AND LICENCE PRIOR TO ANY WORKS ON/NEAR BAT ROOST

Optimum time for habitat surveys - roosts and flight plans Bats NO WORK ON Relatively safe to work on hibernation roosts (unlikely to be occupied) NO WORK ON HIBERNATION OR NOTE: swarming may occur in September ALL WORK MUST STOP HIBERNATION OR POTENTIAL ROOSTS IF BATS ARE PRESENT POTENTIAL ROOSTS Relatively safe to work on Relatively safe to work on maternity roosts NO WORK ON MATERNITY OR maternity roosts unlikely to (unlikely to be occupied) POTENTIAL ROOSTS be occupied)

Document number: N222-63110-CJV-PRO-EN-000003 Date of Issue: April 2009 Page 7 of 8

APPENDIX B. FARRINGDON EXTRACT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION SCHEDULE Topic Phasing Location Description Incorporated Source ref Mitigation Ecology Pre- General Where Japanese knotweed is known to occur, pre construction surveys to Yes Ecology and construction be carried out and method statement to detail its control and/or elimination Biodiversity during construction. Specialist Report 2004. Pg 22

Ecology Construction General Provide clear demarcation and fencing of wildlife site boundary, contractor Yes Appendix F to briefing, new areas of wildlife interest and habitat re-creation. ES2004 S&M report Ecology Construction General If any protected species are found during works, work should cease Yes Ecology and immediately and an ecologist consulted for advice. Biodiversity Specialist Report 2004. Pg 22

Ecology Construction General Where space allows, cut logs will be stacked up to provide microhabitats No Ecology and for invertebrates, such as the London BAP species, the Stag beetle. Biodiversity Specialist Report 2004. Pg 22

Ecology Pre- General General - In so far as is reasonably practicable, avoid undertaking Yes ES2004 SMR construction clearance of habitats during the relevant species’ nesting, hibernation or F7.1 rearing seasons, or in a manner so as to discourage recolonisation. The list of named species, the sites and the appropriate seasons for such clearance will be taken from information contained in the ES or its supporting documentation and from subsequent baseline studies and survey reports.

Document number: N222-63110-CJV-PRO-EN-000003 Date of Issue: April 2009 Page 8 of 8

Rail Metro Unit Station Design Team

Atkins 25th Floor Euston Tower 286 Euston Road London NW1 3AT

Phone: 0207 121 2000 Email:[email protected]