Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW
ECOLOGICAL SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT
February 2017
[ERAP Ltd ref: 2016-348]
ERAP Ltd (Consultant Ecologists) 49a Manor Lane Penwortham Preston Lancashire PR1 0TA
Tel: 01772 750502 [email protected] www.erap.co.uk
CONTENTS Summary ...... 3 1.0 Introduction ...... 4 1.1 Background and Rationale ...... 4 1.2 Scope of Works ...... 4 2.0 Method of Survey ...... 4 2.1 Desktop Study ...... 4 2.2 Vegetation and Habitats ...... 4 2.3 Animal Life ...... 5 2.4 Survey Limitations ...... 8 2.5 Evaluation Methodology ...... 8 3.0 Survey Results ...... 9 3.1 Desktop Study ...... 9 3.2 Vegetation and Habitats ...... 11 3.3 Animal Life ...... 12 4.0 Evaluation and Assessment ...... 14 4.1 Introduction and Description of Proposals ...... 14 4.2 Designated Sites ...... 14 4.3 Vegetation and Habitats ...... 15 4.4 Protected Species and Other Wildlife ...... 15 5.0 Recommendations and Ecological Enhancement ...... 16 5.1 Introduction ...... 16 5.2 Protection of Habitat ...... 17 5.3 Invasive Species ...... 17 5.4 Bats ...... 17 5.5 Birds ...... 18 5.6 Additional Enhancement for Biodiversity ...... 19 6.0 Conclusion ...... 20 7.0 References ...... 21 8.0 Appendix 1: Tables and Figures ...... 23
List of Tables Table 2.1: Consideration of Suitability of Foraging and Commuting Habitat for Bats ...... 6 Table 2.2: Ponds within 500 metres of the Site ...... 7 Table 2.3: Pond Habitat Suitability Index Categories ...... 7 Table 2.4: Important Habitat Characteristics for Reptiles ...... 8 Table 3.1: Details of the Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) and Potential Local Wildlife Sites (PLWS) within a One Kilometre Radius of the Site ...... 10 Table 3.2: Protected and Notable Species Recorded within a One Kilometre Radius of the Site ...... 10 Table 3.3: Habitat Suitability Index Assessment for Ponds 1 to 5 ...... 13 Table 4.1: Rapid Risk Assessment Result ...... 16 Table 5.1: Suitable Native Species for Tree and Shrub Planting ...... 20 Table 8.1: Plant Species List for the Improved Grassland ...... 23 Table 8.2: Plant Species List for the Unmanaged Vegetation at the Field Boundaries ...... 23 Table 8.3: Habitat Suitability Index Assessment for Ponds 1 to 5 ...... 25 Table 8.4: Table of Photographs ...... 26
List of Figures Figure 8.1: Phase 1 Habitat Map ...... 28 Figure 8.2: Pond Location Map ...... 29 Figure 8.3: Non-statutory Designated Sites in the Wider Area ...... 30
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 1
Document Control Survey Type: Surveyors Survey Date(s) Phase 1 Habitat Carol Flaxman B.Sc. (Hons) GradCIEEM 20th January 2017 Graduate Ecologist Water Vole surveys Carol Flaxman B.Sc. (Hons) GradCIEEM 20th January 2017 Reporting Personnel Date Author Carol Flaxman B.Sc. (Hons) GradCIEEM 1st February 2017 Graduate Ecologist Signature(s)
Checked by Brian Robinson B.Sc. (Hons) MCIEEM 6th February 2017 Senior Ecologist Revised and issued by Carol Flaxman B.Sc. (Hons) GradCIEEM 10th February 2017 Report issued to Wainhomes (North West) Ltd Copy Number 1
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 2
SUMMARY
Introduction and Scope i. This Ecological Appraisal presents the ecological, biodiversity and nature conservation status of land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak. The appraisal was requested in connection with proposals to develop the site to housing. ii. The appraisal presents the results of a desktop study and extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey carried out in January 2017. The scope of survey undertaken is appropriate to identify potential ecological constraints, the remit of mitigation required and opportunities for biodiversity associated with the development proposals.
Results of Survey and Assessment iii. The approximately five hectare site comprises a field of improved grassland with occasional trees and shrubs at the site boundaries. iv. Sett Valley Trail Local Wildlife Site (LWS) lies adjacent to the north-western site boundary and comprises a habitat mosaic. The habitats within the site are not complementary to the designated site adjacent to the site or to those in the wider area. Provided the measures for the protection of the LWS presented at Section 5.2 are implemented during construction, no direct or indirect impacts are predicted upon the LWS. v. No habitats within the site are Priority Habitat and the site supports no habitats which are species rich, semi- natural or of particular interest in terms of their plant species composition. vi. The ditches and boundary trees and shrubs are of site value and it is recommended that these features are retained and protected in accordance with the proposals. vii. Wall Cotoneaster, an invasive species listed on Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) is present within the site. It is an offence to cause the spread of this species in the wild; guidance on the control and management of this species is described in the report (Section 0). viii. The trees and shrubs are suitable for use by nesting birds. All wild birds are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) while they are breeding. Recommendations in relation to the protection of nesting birds are presented at Section 5.5. ix. The presence of other protected species, such as badger, great crested newt, reptile species or water vole is reasonably discounted.
Recommendations x. The recommendations in Section 5.0 address all the mandatory measures and ecological recommendations to be applied to ensure compliance with wildlife legislation, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and best practice. xi. The proposals will secure an opportunity to implement beneficial measures such as habitat creation that will safeguard habitats for wildlife such as birds and bats, with the aim of providing a net gain in biodiversity in accordance with the principles of the NPPF.
Conclusion xii. It is concluded that the proposals are feasible and acceptable in accordance with ecological considerations and relevant planning policy. Development at the site will provide an opportunity to secure ecological enhancement for wildlife associated with residential development.
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background and Rationale
1.1 ERAP Ltd (Consultant Ecologists) was commissioned by Wainhomes North West Ltd to carry out an ecological appraisal of Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak (hereafter referred to as the ‘site’). The Ordnance Survey (OS) grid reference at the centre of the site is SK 0109 8651.
1.2 The appraisal was requested in connection with a planning application to develop the site to housing.
1.2 Scope of Works
1.3 The scope of ecological surveys undertaken in January 2017 comprised:
a. A desktop study for known ecological information at the site and the local area; b. An extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey and assessment; c. Assessment of the ecological value of the habitats within the site with the use of the National Vegetation Classification (NVC) and the Ratcliffe criteria, as presented in A Nature Conservation Review (Ratcliffe, 1977); d. Survey and assessment of all habitats for statutorily protected species and other wildlife including badger (Meles meles), bats, great crested newt (Triturus cristatus), water vole (Arvicola amphibius), bird species and reptiles; e. The identification of any potential ecological constraints on the proposals and the specification of the scope of mitigation and ecological enhancement required in accordance with wildlife legislation, planning policy guidance and other relevant guidance; and f. The identification of any further surveys or precautionary actions that may be required prior to the commencement of any development activities.
2.0 METHOD OF SURVEY
2.1 Desktop Study
2.1.1 The following sources of information and ecological records were consulted:
a. MAgiC: A web-based interactive map which brings together geographic information on key environmental schemes and designations, including details of statutory nature conservation sites; b. Derbyshire Biological Records Centre; and c. Peak District Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP).
2.2 Vegetation and Habitats
2.2.1 An Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey of the site was carried out by Carol Flaxman B.Sc. (Hons) GradCIEEM on the 19th January 2017. The weather was dry and overcast, calm (Beaufort Scale 0) and 6oC at 10am. The conditions were suitable for the ecological survey.
2.2.2 A vegetation and habitat map was produced for the site and the immediate surrounding area at a scale of 1:2,250 (refer to Figure 8.1). The mapping is based on the Joint Nature Conservation Committee Phase 1 Habitat Survey methodology (JNCC, 2010) with minor adjustments to illustrate and examine the habitats with greater precision.
2.2.3 The plant species within the site boundary were determined with estimates of the distribution, ground cover, abundance and constancy of individual species. The estimation of abundance was based on the DAFOR
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 4
system, where D = Dominant, A = Abundant, F = Frequent, O = Occasional and R = Rare, this being a widely used and accepted system employed by ecological surveyors. The terms L = Locally and V = Very were additionally used to describe the plant species distributions with greater precision.
2.2.4 Stands of vegetation and habitats were described and evaluated using the National Vegetation Classification (NVC). The NVC provides a systematic and comprehensive analysis of British vegetation and is a reliable framework for nature conservation and land-use planning.
2.2.5 Searches were made for uncommon, rare and statutorily protected plant species, those species listed as protected in the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and species which are indicators of important and uncommon plant communities. Plant nomenclature follows New Flora of the British Isles 3rd Edition (Stace, 2010).
2.2.6 Searches were carried out for the presence of invasive species, including those listed on Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), including Japanese Knotweed (Fallopia japonica), Indian Balsam (Impatiens glandulifera) and Giant Hogweed (Heracleum mantegazzianum).
2.3 Animal Life
Badger
2.3.1 A thorough search for badger activity was carried out. The survey area covered the site (as annotated on Figure 8.1) and extended to accessible land within a radius of 50 metres from the site boundary. Private gardens were excluded from the survey.
2.3.2 Surveys were conducted in accordance with guidance presented with Badgers and Development (Natural England, 2007) and Badgers: surveys and mitigation for development projects (Natural England, 2015).
2.3.3 The following signs of badger activity were searched for:
a. Sett entrances, e.g. entrances that are normally 25 to 35cm in diameter and shaped like a ‘D’ on its side; b. Large spoil heaps outside sett entrances; c. Bedding outside sett entrances; d. Badger footprints; e. Badger paths; f. Latrines; g. Badger hairs on fences or bushes; h. Scratching posts; and i. Signs of digging for food.
2.3.4 Habitats within and surrounding the site were assessed in terms of their suitability for use by foraging and sheltering badger in accordance with their known habitat preferences as detailed in current guidance and Badger (Roper, 2010).
Bat Species
Trees
2.3.5 A preliminary assessment of the trees within the site was conducted to assess their suitability for use by roosting bats, and to inform whether further surveys or precautionary measures were required.
2.3.6 Trees were assessed from the ground using binoculars and a high-powered torch. Each tree was searched for the presence of any of the following features:
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 5
Woodpecker holes, rot holes, hazard beams, other vertical or horizontal cracks or splits in stems and branches, partially decayed platey bark, knot holes, man-made holes, tear-outs, cankers in which cavities have developed, other hollows or cavities, including butt-rots, double-leaders forming compression forks with included bark, gaps between overlapping stems or branches, partially detached Ivy (Hedera helix) with stem diameters in excess of 50mm and bat, bird or dormouse (Muscardinus avellanarius) boxes.
2.3.7 Terms used to describe any features present follow (where possible) those outlined and described in Bat Tree Habitat Key, 2nd Edition (Andrews, H (ed), 2013).
Habitat Assessment for Commuting / Foraging Bats
2.3.8 Habitats within and adjacent to the site were assessed for their value and suitability for commuting and foraging bats in accordance with Table 4.1 of Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists: Good Practice Guidelines (3rd edn), (Collins, J. (ed), 2016). Reference has been made using the following categories and descriptions / examples, presented at Table 2.1, below.
Table 2.1: Consideration of Suitability of Foraging and Commuting Habitat for Bats Suitability Commuting Habitat Foraging Habitat Negligible Negligible habitat features on site likely to be used by commuting or foraging bats. Low Habitat that could be used by small numbers of Suitable, but isolated habitat that could be commuting bats such as a gappy hedgerow or used by small numbers of foraging bats such unvegetated stream, but isolated i.e. not very well as a lone tree or patch of scrub. connected to the surrounding landscape by other habitat. Moderate Continuous habitat connected to the wider Habitat that is linked to the wider landscape landscape that could be used by bats for that could be used by bats for foraging such commuting such as lines of trees and scrub or as trees, scrub, grassland or water. linked back gardens. High Continuous, high-quality habitat that is well High-quality habitat that is well-connected to connected to the wider landscape and is likely to be the wider landscape and is likely to be used used regularly by commuting bats such as river regularly by foraging bats such as valleys, streams, hedgerows, lines of trees and broadleaved woodland, tree-lined woodland edge. watercourses and grazed parkland. Habitats close to and connected to known roosts. Habitats close to and connected to known roosts.
Bird Species
2.3.9 Bird species observed and heard during the survey were recorded.
2.3.10 Habitats throughout the site and in the immediate surrounding area were assessed for their value to roosting, feeding and nesting birds, as indicated by the amount of shelter, feeding value, woody vegetation structure and species diversity of tree and shrub species in the site.
Great Crested Newt
Desktop Search for Ponds
2.3.11 In accordance with current Natural England guidance (English Nature, 2001) all ponds within an unobstructed 500 metres of a site should be considered for their suitability to support breeding great crested newts. The potential of the proposed development to impact upon any great crested newt population(s) whose breeding ponds are within 500 metres must be considered.
2.3.12 The search of habitats in the wider area up to a distance of 500 metres from the site boundary revealed the presence of five ponds, as detailed in Table 2.2, below.
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 6
Table 2.2: Ponds within 500 metres of the Site Pond OS Grid Distance from Location (refer to Figure 8.2) Reference Reference Site Boundary Pond 1 SK 0057 8646 280 metres West of the site and north of the River Sett Pond 2 SK 0049 8643 365 metres West of the site and north of the River Sett Pond 3 SK 0133 8683 295 metres North-east of the site and south of the River Sett Pond 4 SK 0150 8691 465 metres Concrete lined mill pond north-east of the site and north of the River Sett Pond 5 SK 0156 8691 490 metres North-east of the site and north of the River Sett
Consideration of Requirement for Further Survey
2.3.13 The requirement for further survey at each pond was then assessed using the following criteria:
a. Presence of dispersal barriers to great crested newt movements between ponds and the site, as detected during the walkover survey; b. Distance of ponds from the site; c. Potential influence of the proposed development of the site on any populations of great crested newt (if present at ponds), using the Natural England rapid risk assessment tool; and d. Presence of other ponds which may form metapopulations and/or alter the influence of the site on ponds at greater distances.
Habitat Suitability Index Assessment
2.3.14 All ponds were assessed using the Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) (Oldham, et al., 2000). The ponds were examined with reference to the ten HSI scoring criteria, which are: SI1: Geographical location; SI2: Pond area; SI3: Pond drying; SI4: Water quality (as indicated by the diversity of aquatic plants and invertebrates); SI5: Shade; SI6: Waterfowl; SI7: Fish; SI8: Abundance of other ponds within a one kilometre radius; SI9: Quality of terrestrial habitat; and SI10: Macrophyte cover (i.e. aquatic and emergent plants). The survey was conducted in accordance with ARG UK Advice Note 5: Great Crested Newt Habitat Suitability Index. Amphibian and Reptile Groups of the United Kingdom (ARG UK, 2010).
2.3.15 The assessment followed guidance in relation to interpreting HSI scores, following the categorical scale shown at Table 2.3, below.
Table 2.3: Pond Habitat Suitability Index Categories HSI Score Pond Suitability for Great Crested Newt <0.5 Poor 0.5 – 0.59 Below average 0.6 – 0.69 Average 0.7 – 0.79 Good >0.8 Excellent
Assessment of Terrestrial Habitat
2.3.16 An assessment of the terrestrial habitat within the site for great crested newts was conducted, as informed by the Great Crested Newt Mitigation Guidelines (English Nature, 2001) and the Great Crested Newt Conservation Handbook (Langton, 2001).
2.3.17 Habitats present within the site were assessed for their value to support foraging, sheltering and hibernating great crested newt. Favourable habitats can comprise rough grassland, scrubland, woodland and sites with underground crevices or cracks, such as mammal holes, voids in tree stumps or banks, and refugia such as rock piles or dead wood.
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 7
Reptile Species
2.3.18 The site and its surroundings were assessed in terms of their suitability for use by reptile species using the important characteristics for reptiles outlined in the draft document ‘Reptile Mitigation Guidelines’ (Natural England, 2011), and the Reptile Habitat Management Handbook (Edgar, et al., 2010). These habitat characteristics are outlined in Table 2.4, below.
Table 2.4: Important Habitat Characteristics for Reptiles 1. Location (in relation to species range) 7. Connectivity to nearby good quality habitat 2. Vegetation Structure 8. Prey abundance 3. Insolation 9. Refuge opportunity 4. Aspect 10. Hibernation habitat potential 5. Topography 11. Disturbance regime 6. Surface geology 12. Egg-laying site potential
Water Vole and Otter
2.3.19 The ditches within the site were examined for evidence of use by water vole. The survey methodology detailed in The Water Vole Mitigation Handbook (The Mammal Society Mitigation Guidance Series) Eds. Fiona Mathews and Paul Chanin (Dean, et al., 2016), was applied and the ditches and associated banks were searched for burrows, latrines, feeding remains, runs, feeding lawns, nests and footprints.
2.3.20 An assessment of the suitability of each ditch was undertaken to assess their suitability for use by otter (Lutra lutra) in accordance with the habitat requirements and preferences detailed in Ecology of the European Otter. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers, Ecology Series 10 (Chanin, 2003). Searches were made for signs of otter in accordance with Monitoring the Otter Lutra lutra. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Monitoring Series No 10 (Chanin, 2003) and current Natural England guidance (Natural England, 2014).
2.3.21 Each ditch was searched for dung (spraints), tracks (footprints), feeding remains, otter slides (into water), holts (underground dens) and couches (above ground sites where otters rest during the day).
2.4 Survey Limitations
2.4.1 The survey was conducted during January when many plants are in a state of senescence. The Ecologist is experienced in identifying plant species by their vegetative characteristics, however, and the limited number of species-poor habitats within the site is such that the vegetation and habitats within the site could be easily identified at this time of year.
2.4.2 Water vole surveys are best conducted between April and October, when they are most active. It is considered, in this instance, that adequate assessment of the ditches was possible to reliably determine the presence or absence of water vole at the site.
2.4.3 All areas within the site boundary were fully accessible; no significant survey limitations were experienced.
2.5 Evaluation Methodology
2.5.1 The habitats, vegetation and animal life were evaluated with reference to standard nature conservation criteria as described in A Nature Conservation Review (Ratcliffe, 1977) and Guidelines for the Selection of Biological SSSIs (Bainbridge, et al., 2013). These are size (extent), diversity, naturalness, rarity, fragility, typicality, recorded history, position in an ecological or geographical unit, potential value and intrinsic appeal.
2.5.2 Habitats have been assessed to determine whether they meet those described in UK Biodiversity Action Plan: Priority Habitat Descriptions (Maddock, A (ed), 2008); these lists are used to help draw up the statutory lists of Priority Habitats, as required under Section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006. Where suitable, the ecological value of the habitats present have been assessed using
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 8
the terms outlined in Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland: Terrestrial, Freshwater and Coastal, 2nd Edition (CIEEM, 2016).
2.5.3 Government advice on wildlife, as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (Great Britain Department for Communities and Local Government, 2012) and associated government circulars has been taken into consideration. Legislation relating to protected species, such as those listed under Schedule 1 and Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended), is referenced where applicable, and any impacts to protected species are evaluated in accordance with current guidance.
2.5.4 The presence of any Priority Species, as listed under Section 41 of the NERC Act 2006 is noted, and habitats are assessed in terms of their suitability and value for these species. The presence of habitats and/or species listed by the Peak District Biodiversity Action Plan has been taken into account in the evaluation of the site.
3.0 SURVEY RESULTS
3.1 Desktop Study
Site Designations
3.1.1 The site has no statutory or non-statutory designation for nature conservation.
3.1.2 The site lies within a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Impact Risk Zone for Matley Moor Meadows SSSI and Dark Peak SSSI, South Pennine Moors Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Peak District Moors (South Pennine Moors Phase 1) Special Protection Area (SPA).
3.1.3 Matley Moor Meadows SSSI is located 3.28 kilometres north east of the site and is designated as a nationally important site for its lowland unimproved neutral grassland, comprising the nationally scarce MG5 Crested Dog’s-tail – Common Knapweed NVC grassland community.
3.1.4 Dark Peak SSSI, South Pennine Moors SAC and Peak District Moors (South Pennine Moors Phase 1) SPA are located at least three kilometres to the east of the site. These sites are designated for their semi-natural upland and moorland vegetation comprising blanket mires, wet and dry heaths, acid grassland and flushes and mires on moorland slopes and these habitats support a range of breeding birds.
3.1.5 The Impact Risk Zone for the site states that the Local Planning Authority should consult Natural England on the likely effects of aviation proposals, solar schemes and wind turbines, planning applications for quarries, industrial and agricultural development which may cause air pollution, general combustion processes and landfill operations (Ordnance Survey, 2017). The proposed construction of residential dwellings at the site does not meet any of the criteria for which the Local Planning Authority is required to consult Natural England.
3.1.6 One Local Nature Reserve (LNR) is present within a one kilometre radius of the site. Watford Lodge LNR is located 270 metres to the west of the site and is described as a valuable wetland area which provides habitats for amphibians and bird species. Watford Lodge LNR is also designated as a Derbyshire Wildlife Trust nature reserve and is part of Watford Lodge Local Wildlife Site (LWS).
3.1.7 The data search revealed the presence of six non-statutory designated sites within a one kilometre radius of the site. Details of the four LWS and two Potential Local Wildlife Sites (PLWS) are presented in Table 3.1, below.
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 9
Table 3.1: Details of the Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) and Potential Local Wildlife Sites (PLWS) within a One Kilometre Radius of the Site Site Name and OS Grid Reference Distance from Site Ecological Feature Sett Valley Trail LWS Adjacent to the north- Habitat mosaic SK 0100 8667 western site boundary Watford Lodge LWS 140 metres west Standing open water – pond (include SK 0068 8651 ERAP Ltd pond ref Pond 1) Thornsett Wood and Pond, Birch Vale PLWS 210 metres north east Wet woodland SK 0157 8681 of the site Thornsett Mill Pond #1 LWS 295 metres north east Standing open water (ERAP Ltd pond SK 0133 8682 of the site ref Pond 3) Birch Vale Mill Ponds LWS 650 metres east Standing open water SK 0179 8684 Holly Farm Pastures 2 PLWS 750 metres west of Unimproved neutral grassland SK 0012 8625 the site PLWS = Potential Local Wildlife Site are sites that have been identified as having nature conservation interest, but where that interest has not been fully assessed against the Wildlife Site Selection Guidelines.
3.1.8 A map to show the site in relation to the statutory and non-statutory designated sites is presented at Figure 8.3. The presence of designated sites in the wider area is considered further at Section 4.2.
Protected and Notable Species
3.1.9 There are no known records of protected or notable species within the site boundary. Records held by Derbyshire Biological Records Centre of protected and notable species within a one kilometre radius of the site are presented at Table 3.2, below.
Table 3.2: Protected and Notable Species Recorded within a One Kilometre Radius of the Site Taxon Group Species Name and Designation 1 Notes (all measurements are approximate) Amphibians Common toad (Bufo bufo) Two records dated 1976 and 1996, at least 590 S41 metres from the site Terrestrial Common pipistrelle (Pipistrellus pipistrellus) One record of a roost dated 2006, 790 metres from Mammals EPS and WCAs5 the site Soprano pipistrelle (Pipistrellus pygmaeus) One record of a sighting dated 2012, 790 metres from EPS, S41 and WCAs5 the site Water vole (Arvicola amphibius) Two records dated 1972 and 1996 at least 310 metres WCAs5, S41 and LBAP from the site Badger (Meles meles) Two records dated 1995 and 2011 at least 175 metres PBA from the site Brown hare (Lepus europaeus) Four records dated between 2001 and 2005, at least S41 1.2 kilometres from the site Reptiles Grass snake (Natrix natrix) One record dated 2007, 360 metres from the site WCAs5 and S41 (recorded at Pond 2) Flowering Derbyshire Red Data Book Species Plants Bogbean (Menyanthes trifoliata), Chamomile (Chamaemelum nobile), Jacob’s-ladder (Polemonium caeruleum), Sheep’s-bit (Jasione montana) and Stinking Chamomile (Anthemis cotula). Birds S41 Bullfinch (Pyrrhula pyrrhula), cuckoo (Cuculus canorus), dunnock (Prunella modularis), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), lesser spotted woodpecker (Dendrocopos minor), linnet (Carduelis cannabina), reed bunting (Emberiza schoeniclus), skylark (Alauda arvensis), spotted flycatcher (Muscicapa striata), starling (Sturnus vulgaris) and willow tit (Parus montanus). 1Key to designation codes EPS = European Protected Species under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) WCAs5 = Listed on Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) S41 = Priority Species listed under Section 41 of the NERC Act (2006) PBA = Protection of Badgers Act 1992 LBAP = Peak District Local Biodiversity Action Plan Derbyshire Red Data Book Species taken from Derbyshire Red Data Book Plant Species (N.J. Moyes and A. Willmot, 2009)
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 10
3.1.10 The presence of these protected and notable species within the wider area has been taken into account throughout this report.
3.2 Vegetation and Habitats
General Description
3.2.1 The approximately five hectare site is located on the eastern edge of New Mills and comprises a field of mown improved grassland, with stone walls, fences and occasional trees and shrubs present at the site boundaries.
3.2.2 The north-western site boundary is defined by a timber post and wire fence beyond which lies High Hill Road and a public footpath. Fields of grassland, residential dwellings and the River Sett lie in the wider area to the north and west of the site.
3.2.3 The north-eastern and south-eastern boundaries are defined by one metre high stone walls with occasional young trees and shrubs. The eastern site boundary is defined by a timber post and wire fence. A field of horse grazed pasture lies adjacent. Hayfield Road lies adjacent to the south-eastern boundary and residential dwellings and fields of improved grassland occupy land in the wider area to the east of the site. The south-western boundary is defined by a timber post and wire fence and stone wall, beyond which lie residential dwellings.
3.2.4 For all habitat descriptions refer to the Phase 1 Habitat Survey map appended at Figure 8.1. Photographs are appended at Table 8.4.
Improved Grassland
3.2.5 The improved grassland field is frequently mown for hay or silage (Photo 1). The mown grassland is characterised by constant and abundant Perennial Rye-grass (Lolium perenne), constant and frequent Creeping Buttercup (Ranunculus repens) and frequent and locally abundant Yorkshire-fog (Holcus lanatus). A plant species list for the mown grassland is appended at Table 8.1.
3.2.6 The improved grassland is characteristic of an MG7 Perennial Rye-grass ley grassland community of the NVC (Rodwell, 1992).
Unmanaged Field Boundary Vegetation
3.2.7 Unmanaged grassland vegetation is present at each site boundary. The unmanaged grassland is 0.5 to one metre wide at the north-eastern, north-western and south-western site boundaries, and 15 metres wide at the south-eastern site boundary, where it is located on an approximately 45° sloping bank (Photo 2).
3.2.8 The unmanaged field boundary vegetation is characterised by frequent and locally abundant Yorkshire-fog and locally frequent Creeping Bent (Agrostis stolonifera), Cock’s-foot (Dactylis glomerata), False Oat-grass (Arrhenatherum elatius), Meadow Foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis), Tufted Hair-grass (Deschampsia cespitosa) and Timothy (Phleum pratense).
3.2.9 The unmanaged field boundary vegetation is characteristic of a grass dominated mosaic of the MG9 Yorkshire-fog – Tufted Hair-grass and MG1 False Oat-grass grassland communities of the NVC (Rodwell, 1992).
3.2.10 A plant species list is appended at Table 8.2.
3.2.11 A row of unmanaged trees and shrubs are present at the north-western corner of the site (Photo 3). The woody vegetation comprises constant and abundant Blackthorn (Prunus spinosa), locally frequent Alder (Alnus glutinosa), Hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna), occasional Holly (Ilex aquifolium) and rare Beech (Fagus sylvatica). The largely bare understorey is characterised by constant and frequent Cleavers (Galium
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 11
aparine) and locally frequent Common Nettle (Urtica dioica), Creeping Buttercup and Bramble (Rubus fruticosus agg.).
3.2.12 The shrub vegetation is characteristic of a W22 Blackthorn – Bramble scrub community of the NVC (Rodwell, 1991).
Ditches
3.2.13 An approximately 65 metre section of ditch is located at the south-western site boundary (Ditch 1), and a further 20 metre section of ditch is present at the south eastern end of the site (Ditch 2). A section of ditch less than one metre in length is also present at the south-eastern end of the site under a pile of rocks; this small section of ditch is culverted at both ends.
3.2.14 At the time of the survey (January 2017), Ditch 1 (Photo 4) supported a slow north-westerly flow of water, which was approximately 0.05 metres deep. Ditch 2 (Photo 5) supported stagnant water, again approximately 0.05 metres deep. The channel of both ditches is narrow (0.1 to 0.15 metres wide) with 0.3 to 0.4 metre deep brown earth soil banks set at 90°. Both ditches culvert underground at each end through 0.3 metre diameter pipes. Neither of the ditches support any aquatic or emergent vegetation and they are both covered and heavily shaded by the unmanaged grassland vegetation present at the site boundaries.
3.2.15 An section of ditch at the south-eastern end of the site is open for less than one metre in length and is partially hidden under a pile of rocks. The 0.2 metre wide channel supported a westerly flow of water at the time of the survey approximately 0.1 metres deep. The ditch supports no aquatic or emergent vegetation.
Invasive Species
3.2.16 As illustrated on Figure 8.1, a single plant of Wall Cotoneaster was detected at the western end of the south-western boundary. This species is listed on Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and, as such, it is an offence to spread or cause it to spread in the wild. This is considered further at Section 4.3, below.
3.3 Animal Life
Badger
3.3.1 There are no known records of badger for the site, however the desktop study returned records of badger in the wider area at least 175 metres from the site.
3.3.2 The grassland habitats within the site are suitable for use by foraging badger. The woodland habitats in the wider area to the north and west of the site provide favourable habitat for use by both foraging and sheltering badger. No evidence of badger, including setts, paths or latrines, was detected within the site or the area of search, however. The presence of badger at the site is reasonably discounted.
Bat Species
Trees
3.3.3 No features suitable for use by roosting bats were detected at any of the trees within the site or at the site boundaries. The presence of roosting bats at trees within the site is reasonably discounted.
Commuting and Foraging Bats
3.3.4 The improved grassland within the site is of negligible suitability for use by foraging and commuting bats, as it is unlikely to provide an abundance or diversity invertebrate prey. The occasional trees and shrubs at the site boundaries provide features of ‘low’ suitability for use by foraging bats (in accordance with Table 2.1), as, whilst they provide some ‘edge’ habitat, they are relatively isolated within the wider landscape and are therefore unlikely to form part of any regular commuting route between roosting or foraging habitats in
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 12
the wider area. The trees, shrubs and river corridor habitats to the north and north-west of the site are favourable foraging and commuting habitat for a diversity of bat species and a larger number of foraging and commuting bats.
Bird Species
3.3.5 Wood pigeon (Columba palumbus) and carrion crow (Corvus corone) were detected within the site in January 2017 and a single robin (Erithacus rubecula) was detected at the trees and shrubs in the north- western corner of the site.
3.3.6 The trees and shrubs at the site boundaries are suitable for use by feeding and nesting passerine (perching) birds. Recommendations for the protection of nesting birds are described at Section 5.5.
3.3.7 It is considered that the site is unsuitable for ground nesting birds and wintering bird species due to the relatively small field size, the proximity to existing housing and the currently intensively managed habitats present.
Great Crested Newt and other Amphibians
Habitat Suitability Index Assessment
3.3.8 A HSI Assessment for Ponds 1 to 5 are presented at Table 8.3 and a summary of the results are presented in Table 3.3, below. Refer to Photos 6 to 10 appended at Table 8.4 for photographs of the ponds.
Table 3.3: Habitat Suitability Index Assessment for Ponds 1 to 5 Pond Reference Distance from Site Boundary HSI Assessment Result Pond 1 280 metres Poor Pond 2 365 metres Poor Pond 3 295 metres Average Pond 4 465 metres Good Pond 5 490 metres Good
3.3.9 The assessment of Ponds 1 and 2 is ‘poor’ owing to the major presence of fish and/or fowl.
Assessment of Terrestrial Habitat
3.3.10 The site chiefly comprises improved grassland which is intensively managed; this habitat is considered unfavourable for foraging and does not provide any suitable refugia for sheltering great crested newt. The sections of unmanaged, tussocky grassland at the site boundaries provide more suitable habitat for foraging and sheltering amphibians.
3.3.11 The findings of the assessment conducted are considered further at Section 4.4, with an assessment of the impacts of the proposed development on any breeding population of amphibian associated with Ponds 1 to 5.
Reptiles
3.3.12 Debris suitable for sheltering and basking reptiles was examined during the survey; no reptile species were detected.
3.3.13 A single record of grass snake is reported 360 metres from the site (dated 2007), recorded at Pond 2. The wetland habitats associated with Ponds 1 and 2 are favourable habitat for use by grass snake and the areas of grassland and woodland habitats in close proximity to the ponds provide structural diversity preferred by this species. There are no wetland habitats suitable for use by grass snake within the site.
3.3.14 The regularly disturbed and heavily managed habitats within the site provide poor quality habitat for sheltering, basking and hibernating reptiles and the homogenous vegetation supports little variation in its physiognomy. There are no piles of garden waste or other suitable debris for use by sheltering or
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 13
hibernating reptiles, and the site supports no decomposing material suitable for egg-laying grass snake. There is no favourable habitat for basking reptiles within the site. The species-poor habitats within the site are reasonably unlikely to support a large population or a variety of invertebrate prey.
3.3.15 It is considered that the presence of grass snake (and other reptile species) within the site is reasonably discounted and no further survey is necessary to inform the planning decision.
Water Vole and Otter
3.3.16 Two records of water vole, dated 1972 and 1996, are reported at least 310 metres from the site.
3.3.17 No signs of water vole or otter were detected within the ditches within the site. The shallow short sections of narrow channel present within the site are considered unsuitable for use by water vole and riparian fauna such as otter, and the ditches are not connected to a network or suitable ditches in the area. The presence of riparian fauna is reasonably discounted.
4.0 EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT
4.1 Introduction and Description of Proposals
4.1.1 It is proposed to develop 3.2 hectares of the site to housing, associated roads and hard standing. The remaining 1.8 hectares under the pylons in the south west of the site will be public open space; recommended ecological enhancements for the open space are presented at Section 5.6.
4.2 Designated Sites
4.2.1 The improved grassland habitats within the site are not complementary to the habitats associated with Matley Moor Meadows SSSI or Dark Peak SSSI, South Pennine Moors SAC and Peak District Moors (South Pennine Moors Phase 1) SPA which are located at least three kilometres from the site. Existing housing lies in close proximity to the site and agricultural farmland and existing developments, including housing and roads, lie between the site and the statutory designated sites.
4.2.2 It is considered that the site is sufficiently distant from the designated sites above that any adverse impacts as a consequence of the proposed development are reasonably discounted.
4.2.3 The site lies adjacent to the Sett Valley Trail LWS, which will be retained in accordance with the proposals, and five further LWS and PLWS lie within a one kilometre radius of the site. The intensively managed improved grassland habitats within the site are not complimentary to the habitat mosaic of the Sett Valley Trail LWS or to the woodland, open water or neutral grassland habitats for which the other non-statutory sites are designated.
4.2.4 Protection of the adjacent LWS during construction is essential and will be achieved, refer to Section 5.2. No direct impacts associated with habitat loss or damage as a result of the development proposals on the LWS will occur.
4.2.5 The Sett Valley Trail LWS is a 2.5 mile recreational trail for walkers, cyclists and horse riding and is managed to ensure it remains suitable for this purpose and is attractive to wildlife. It is recognised that the presence of additional residential dwellings will increase the local population and result in increased recreational pressures e.g. dog walking and tourism. However, the Sett Valley Trail is already frequently used and it is considered that its additional use as a result of this small scale development will not have a significant impact on the non-statutory designated sites or their features of special interest.
4.2.6 It is concluded, provided the recommendations at Section 5.2 are adhered to, no adverse impacts will occur on the designated sites as a consequence of the proposed development.
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 14
4.2.7 The ecological recommendations presented at Section 5.6 for the area of open space have been designed to be complementary to the Sett Valley Trail LWS and the habitats in the local area.
4.3 Vegetation and Habitats
4.3.1 None of the habitats within the site are examples of Priority Habitat. None of the habitats within the site are of significant interest in terms of their plant species composition and the habitats present are representative of semi-natural habitat. The NVC communities present are typical of the geographical area and conditions present. The site contains only common and widespread plant species.
4.3.2 The trees and shrubs at the site boundaries are of site value as they add structural diversity and are suitable to support foraging and breeding bids. The ditches are also of value at the site level as they contribute to the diversity of habitats at the site.
4.3.3 Wall Cotoneaster, an invasive species listed on Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) was detected at the site. Recommendations for the removal of this species are presented at Section 5.3.
4.4 Protected Species and Other Wildlife
4.4.1 Appropriate survey effort and assessment in accordance with standard guidance has been carried out to reasonably discount adverse effects on badger, roosting bats, reptile species, water vole and otter.
4.4.2 Habitats at the site boundaries are of low suitability for foraging and commuting bats; recommendations of features to enhance habitats for roosting, foraging and commuting bats at the site are presented at Section 04.
4.4.3 The trees and shrubs provide suitable foraging and nesting habitat for the species of birds detected within the site and the wider area via the records search. Consideration of birds (including protection of breeding birds and recommended enhancements for Priority Species) are presented at Section 5.5 of this report.
4.4.4 The potential impact of the proposed development on amphibians is assessed further below.
Great Crested Newt
4.4.5 Five ponds are located within a 500 metre radius of the site, all of which are at least 280 metres from the site.
4.4.6 Table 4.1, below provides the results of the Natural England rapid risk assessment tool applied to Ponds 1 to 5 from Template for Method Statement to support application for licence under Regulation 53(2)(e) in respect of great crested newts Triturus cristatus. Form WML-A14-2 (Natural England, 2015).
4.4.7 The tool has been completed based on the distances of Ponds 1 to 5 (greater than 250 metres), and the size of the proposed development area (3.2 hectares). The rapid risk assessment tool assumes that great crested newt are present.
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 15
Table 4.1: Rapid Risk Assessment Result Component Likely Effect Notional Offence Probability Score Great crested newt breeding pond(s) No effect 0 Land within 100m of any breeding pond(s) No effect 0 Land 100-250m from any breeding pond(s) No effect 0 Land >250m from any breeding pond(s) 1 – 5 ha lost or damaged 0.04 Individual great crested newts No effect 0 Maximum: 0.04 Rapid risk assessment result: GREEN: OFFENCE HIGHLY UNLIKELY
4.4.8 A site-specific assessment has been conducted at the site as part of the survey and subsequent evaluation. This assessment has concluded that the presence of great crested newt within the site is reasonably unlikely, and any proposed impacts to great crested newt as a consequence of the proposals can be reasonably discounted for the following reasons:
a. There are no ponds or other suitable water bodies within the site and the short sections of narrow and shallow ditch are considered unsuitable for use by great crested newt; b. There are no known records of great crested newt within a one kilometre radius of the site; c. The results of the Natural England rapid risk assessment indicate that the development area is sufficiently small and distant from ponds at least 250 metres from the site that any proposed development is highly unlikely to impact upon great crested newt populations (if present); d. The site lies outside the core/immediate terrestrial habitat (i.e. land within 50 metres of a breeding pond) and intermediate terrestrial habitat (i.e. land within 250 metres of a breeding pond) zones, typically used by breeding great crested newt; e. The improved grassland habitats within the site are unfavourable for use by terrestrial great crested newt; and f. The woodland and scrub habitats in close proximity to the ponds provide favourable habitats for use by amphibians associated with the ponds.
4.4.9 As such, it is considered that there is no requirement for further surveys at the site or ponds in the wider area to inform the planning application and the presence of great crested newt within the site is reasonably discounted.
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS AND ECOLOGICAL ENHANCEMENT
5.1 Introduction
5.1.1 These recommendations aim to ensure that the development is implemented in accordance with all wildlife legislation, Natural England guidance, the principles of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), local planning policy and best practice.
5.1.2 Where possible, opportunities to enhance the ecological interest and habitat connectivity and seek biodiversity gain through appropriate landscape planting and habitat creation have been identified, as required by the NPPF and other relevant planning documents.
5.1.3 All recommendations are appropriate to the geographical area, the habitats in the wider area, the wildlife present in the local area (and likely to use the site post-construction) and take into consideration the end use of the site as a residential development.
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 16
5.2 Protection of Habitat
Protection of Existing Vegetation
5.2.1 It is recommended and entirely feasible to retain the trees and shrubs at the site boundaries. During the construction phase, temporary protective demarcation fencing will be used to protect the trees and shrubs to be retained. The fencing must extend outside the canopy of the retained trees and must remain in position until all area have been developed to ensure protection is provided throughout the construction phase.
5.2.2 The fencing will be in accordance with BS5837:2012 Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction: Recommendations (BSI, 2012).
Protection of Ditches
5.2.3 The sections of ditch within the site should be retained and protected during the construction and operational phase through implementation of best practice. In particular, the following Pollution Prevention Guidelines (PPG) will be adhered to:
a. PPG1: Basic good environmental practices (Environment Agency, 2013); b. PPG5: Works in, near or over watercourses (Environment Agency, 2014); c. PPG6: Construction and demolition sites (Environment Agency, 2012); and d. PPG7: Operating refuelling sites (Environment Agency, 2011).
Protection of Sett Valley Trail LWS
5.2.4 It is recommended that the trees and shrubs in the north-western corner of the site are retained and protected.
5.2.5 Long-term protection of the LWS from the risk of adverse effects such as garden extensions and fly-tipping can be achieved by the installation of a tall boundary fence (i.e. taller than the typical 1.8 metre high plot boundary fencing) at the boundary of the dwellings adjacent to the LWS.
5.3 Invasive Species
5.3.1 It is an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) to cause the spread of Wall Cotoneaster in the wild. It is concluded that the preparation of an Invasive Species Management Plan is not necessary in this case and best practice should be carried out during constructions works to avoid the spread of these species in the wild.
5.3.2 It is recommended that the single plant is grubbed out by the roots during site clearance and disposed of appropriately.
5.4 Bats
Lighting
5.4.1 Paragraph 125 in Chapter 11 (conserving and enhancing the natural environment) of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states:
“By encouraging good design, planning policies and decisions should limit the impact of light pollution from artificial light on local amenity, intrinsically dark landscapes and nature conservation”.
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 17
Construction Phase
5.4.2 Any lighting to be used at the site during construction should be directional and screened where possible, this specification should be included within a Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP), or similar.
Development Lighting Design
5.4.3 The lighting scheme to be implemented at the developed site must involve the use of appropriate products and screening, where necessary, to ensure no excessive artificial lighting shines over Sett Valley Trail LWS adjacent to the north-western site boundary, areas of ecological enhancement and any landscape planting, as lighting overspill may deter use by wildlife such as foraging bats.
5.4.4 The lighting scheme will be designed with reference to current guidance, namely:
a. Artificial lighting and wildlife. Interim Guidance: Recommendations to help minimise the impact of artificial lighting. (Bat Conservation Trust, 2014); and b. Bats and lighting: Overview of current evidence and mitigation guidance (Stone, 2014).
Enhancing Habitats for Roosting Bats
5.4.5 The habitats in the wider area are suitable for use by foraging and commuting bats. To enhance opportunities for roosting bats at the site, it is recommended that the development incorporates the installation of four commercially available bat access panels at the new buildings.
5.4.6 The bat access panels should be sited at least four metres above ground level, ideally facing or close to areas of landscape planting or existing linear features. The access panels should not be positioned over windows or doorways where bat droppings may become a nuisance. Once the development layout has been finalised, an Ecologist should advise on appropriate positions for the bat access panels. Suitable bat access panels are available from NHBS Ecology (www.nhbs.com) or Wild Care Shop (www.wildcareshop.com) and are presented at Insert 1:
Insert 1: Examples of commercially available bat access panels.
5.5 Birds
Protection
5.5.1 All wild birds are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) while they are breeding. It is mandatory that the trees and shrubs or other suitable breeding bird habitat which are to be removed as part of the proposals are only removed outside the bird breeding season. The bird breeding season typically extends between March to August inclusive.
5.5.2 If any vegetation is scheduled for removal in the bird breeding season it is advised that advice from an Ecologist is sought. It may be necessary to carry out a walkover survey to demonstrate satisfactorily that no breeding birds, active nests, eggs or fledglings are present in the area to be cleared.
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 18
5.5.3 If breeding birds are detected the Ecologist will issue guidance in relation to the protection of the nesting birds in conjunction with the scheduled works. This may involve cordoning off an area of the site until the young birds have fledged.
Enhancing Habitats for Nesting Birds
5.5.4 The existing boundary trees and shrubs are suitable for the continued attraction of foraging birds at the site. To create additional opportunities for nesting birds at the site in the long-term it is recommended that eight nest boxes are installed at the new residential dwellings. Varying designs of nest boxes suitable for a range of species associated with residential development in close proximity to grassland, such as tree and house sparrow (Priority Species) and blue tits, are recommended and are presented in Insert 2, below.
5.5.5 The boxes should be positioned avoiding areas such as directly above any windows or doors. RSPB advice states that boxes should ideally be sited facing north to east, to avoid exposure to direct sunlight, which may cause overheating of chicks in the nest.
Insert 2: 1SP House Sparrow Nesting Terrace (left) and 1MR Schwegler Avianex (right)
5.5.6 Such bird boxes are available from the NHBS (www.nhbs.com) or Wild Care Shop (www.wildcareshop.com). ERAP Ltd will advise on the siting of bird boxes.
5.6 Additional Enhancement for Biodiversity
Creation of Wildlife Areas within the Site
5.6.1 The 1.8 hectares area of the site under the pylons which is undevelopable provides an opportunity to provide opportunities for the enhancement of biodiversity at the site. During the detailed design of the area of open space, the following recommendations should be considered to maximise opportunities for wildlife:
a. Retention and protection of the sections of ditch; b. Planting of native species rich hedgerow to enhance habitat connectivity across the site. Any hedgerows should be managed to maximise their benefit to wildlife. Suitable species to incorporate into the planting are presented at Table 5.1, below; c. Establishing new wildlife ponds should be explored. Wildlife ponds would provide considerable enhancement in terms of the biodiversity of any proposed development; d. Any Sustainable Drainage System (SuDS) proposed should also be investigated to maximise its potential benefit for ecological enhancement; and e. Planting of a wildflower grassland seed mix will enhance opportunities for animal life and minimise the maintenance regime. The objectives of the grassland seeding will be to provide a habitat for wildlife such as invertebrates, small mammals and amphibians. A suitable wildflower seed mix is WF1 Flowering Meadow available from Germinal Seeds Amenity (www.germinalamenity.com).
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 19
Landscape Planting
5.6.2 It is recommended that the landscape planting within the residential site is composed from native species and species known to be of value for the attraction of wildlife
5.6.3 It is recommended that trees which support blossom and fruit which will attract insects are incorporated into the landscape planting. Suitable species are presented at Table 5.1.
Table 5.1: Suitable Native Species for Tree and Shrub Planting Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name Common Name Acer campestre Field Maple Prunus spinosa Blackthorn Corylus avellana Hazel Rosa arvensis Field Rose Crataegus monogyna Hawthorn Rosa canina Dog-rose Ilex aquifolium Holly Sambucus nigra Elder Malus sylvestris Crab Apple Sorbus aucuparia Rowan Prunus avium Wild Cherry Ulmus glabra Wych Elm Prunus padus Bird Cherry Viburnum opulus Guelder Rose
5.6.4 The understorey and ground cover planting design should be prepared to optimise the attraction of invertebrates such as feeding bumblebees and butterflies. Where possible the use of native species should be maximised but where necessary non-native species known to be attractive to invertebrates should be used.
5.6.5 Planting schemes that include flowering species such as Calluna, Ceanothus, Hebe, Lavendula, Lonicera, Potentilla, Rosmarinus and Vinca can maximise opportunities for feeding invertebrates and for the attraction of foraging bats and birds.
5.6.6 For further plants suitable for the attraction of pollinators, refer to the Perfect for Pollinators Plant List (Royal Horticultural Society, 2012). It is recommended that the selection of plant species at the site ensures that a variety of flowering species are available throughout the year.
Landscape and Habitat Management Plan
5.6.7 To secure the successful establishment and aftercare of the new landscaping planting and habitat creation, it is recommended there is a commitment to a Landscape and Habitat Management Plan.
5.6.8 Appropriate management prescriptions in accordance with conservation objectives will be described for each of the habitat types with a schedule/programme of works. The Plan will also provide a mechanism for remedial actions to be implemented if required (such as repair of fencing, signs etc.).
5.6.9 The preparation and implementation of a Landscape and Habitat Management Plan could form the subject of a suitably worded planning condition.
6.0 CONCLUSION
6.1 This ecological appraisal has demonstrated that a residential development at the site in New Mills is feasible and acceptable in accordance with ecological considerations and the National Planning Policy Framework.
6.2 It is possible to implement reasonable actions for the protection and long-term conservation of fauna such nesting birds and roosting bats.
6.1.2 Development at the site will provide an opportunity to secure ecological enhancement for fauna typically associated with residential areas. Measures to achieve a net gain for biodiversity in accordance with the development proposals are specified in Section 5.0 and are entirely feasible to achieve compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and best practice.
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 20
7.0 REFERENCES
Andrews, H (ed), 2013. Bat Tree Habitat Key, 3rd Edition. Bridgewater: AEcol Ltd. ARG UK, 2010. ARG Advice Note 5: Great Crested Newt Habitat Suitability Index. [Online] Available at: http://www.arguk.org/advice-and-guidance/view-category Bainbridge, I. et al., 2013. Guidelines for the Selection of Biological SSSIs. Peterborough: Joint Nature Conservancy Council. Bat Conservation Trust, 2014. Artificial Lighting and Wildlife: Interim Guidance: Recommendations to help minimise the impact of artificial lighting. [Online] Available at: http://www.bats.org.uk/pages/bats_and_lighting.html BSI, 2012. Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction. Recommendations. London: BSI Standards Limited. Chanin, P., 2003. Ecology of the European Otter. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers, Ecology Series 10. Peterborough: English Nature. Chanin, P., 2003. Monitoring the Otter Lutra lutra. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Monitoring Series No 10, Peterborough: English Nature. CIEEM, 2016. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland: Terrestrial, Freshwater and Coastal, 2nd Edition. Winchester: Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Managament. Collins, J. (ed), 2016. Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists: Good Practice Guidelines (3rd edn). London: The Bat Conservation Trust. Dean, M., Strachan, R., Gow, D. & Andrews, R., 2016. The Water Vole Mitigation Handbook (The Mammal Society Mitigation Guidance Series) Eds. Fiona Mathews and Paul Chanin, London: The Mammal Society. Edgar, P., Foster, P & Baker, J., 2010. Reptile Habitat Management Handbook. Bournemouth: Amphibian and Reptile Conservation. English Nature, 2001. Great Crested Newt Mitigation Guidelines. Peterborough: English Nature. Environment Agency, 2011. Operating Refuelling Sites, PPG7: Prevent Pollution. [Online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/operating-refuelling-sites-ppg7-prevent-pollution Environment Agency, 2012. Construction and Demolition Sites, PPG6: Prevent Pollution. [Online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/construction-and-demolition-sites-ppg6-prevent-pollution Environment Agency, 2013. Basic Good Environmental Practices, PPG1: Prevent Pollution. [Online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/basic-good-environmental-practices-ppg1-prevent-pollution Environment Agency, 2014. Works in, near or over watercourses, PPG5: Prevent Pollution. [Online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/works-in-near-or-over-watercourses-ppg5-prevent-pollution Great Britain Department for Communities and Local Government, 2012. National Planning Policy Framework. London: H.M.S.O. Great Britain, 1981. Wildlife and Countryside Act. London: H.M.S.O. Great Britain, 2006. Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act. London: H.M.S.O. Great Britain, 2010. The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations. London: H.M.S.O. JNCC, 1995. The UK Biodiversity Steeting Group Report, Volume 2, Action Plans. London: H.M.S.O. JNCC, 2010. Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey: A technique for Environmental Audit. Peterborough: NCC. Langton, T. B. C. a. F. J., 2001. Great Crested Newt Conservation Handbook. Halesworth: Froglife. Maddock, A (ed), 2008. UK Biodiversity Action Plan: Priority Habitat Descriptions. [Online] Available at: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-5718 N.J. Moyes and A. Willmot, 2009. Red Data List of Derbyshire's Vascular Plants, Derby: Derby Museum and Art Gallery. Natural England, 2007. Badgers and Development, Peterborough: Natural England. Natural England, 2011. The Reptile Mitigation Guidelines. Peterborough: Natural England.
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 21
Natural England, 2014. Otters: surveys and mitigation for development projects. [Online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/otters-protection-surveys-and-licences [Accessed 03 November 2016]. Natural England, 2015. Badgers: Surveys and mitigation for development projects. [Online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/badgers-surveys-and-mitigation-for-development-projects [Accessed 3 December 2015]. Oldham, R. S., Keeble, J., Swan, M. J. S. & Jeffcote, M., 2000. Evaluating the Suitability of Habitat for the Great Crested Newt (Triturus cristatus). Herpetological Journal, Volume 10(4), pp. 143-155. Ordnance Survey, 2017. Site Check Report Centroid Grid Ref: SK010865. [Online] Available at: http://magic.defra.gov.uk/magicmap.aspx [Accessed 01 February 2017]. Ratcliffe, D. A., 1977. A Nature Conservation Review. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rodwell, J. S., 1991. British Plant Communities: Volume 1, Woodlands and Scrub. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rodwell, J. S., 1992. British Plant Communities: Volume 3, Grasslands and Montane Communities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Roper, T., 2010. Badger (Collins New Naturalist Library, Book 114). Glasgow: Harper Collins. Royal Horticultural Society, 2012. Perfect for Pollinators, Garden Plants. [Online] Available at: https://www.rhs.org.uk/science/conservation-biodiversity/wildlife/encourage-wildlife-to-your- garden/plants-for-pollinators Stace, C. A., 2010. New Flora of the British Isles 3rd Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Stone, E. L., 2014. Bats and Lighting: Overview of current evidence and mitigation guidance. Bristol: University of Bristol.
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 22
8.0 APPENDIX 1: TABLES AND FIGURES
Table 8.1: Plant Species List for the Improved Grassland Scientific Name Common Name DAFOR1 Cover Cardamine flexuosa Wavy Bitter-cress VLF <1% Cerastium fontanum Common Mouse-ear O/VLF <1% Dactylis glomerata Cock’s-foot LF 2% Festuca rubra Red Fescue VLF <1% Holcus lanatus Yorkshire-fog F/LA 10% Lolium perenne Perennial Rye-grass A* 80% Plantago lanceolata Ribwort Plantain O/VLF <1% Ranunculus repens Creeping Buttercup F* 10% Rumex acetosa Common Sorrel VLF <1% Rumex obtusifolius Broad-leaved Dock VLF <1% Taraxacum officinale agg. Dandelion VLF <1% Trifolium repens White Clover VLF <1% 1Key to DAFOR: D=Dominant, A=Abundant, F=Frequent, O=Occasional, R=Rare, V=Very, L=Local and *denotes a constant species
Table 8.2: Plant Species List for the Unmanaged Vegetation at the Field Boundaries Scientific Name Common Name DAFOR1 Cover Ornamental species R <1% Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore R <1% Agrostis stolonifera Creeping Bent LF 5% Alopecurus pratensis Meadow Foxtail LF 15% Arrhenatherum elatius False Oat-grass LF 20% Cardamine flexuosa Wavy Bitter-cress VFL <1% Carex hirta Hairy Sedge LVF 2% Centaurea nigra Common Knapweed VLF <1% Chamerion angustifolium Rosebay Willowherb LF 2% Cirsium arvense Creeping Thistle VLF <1% Cotoneaster horizontalis Wall Cotoneaster R <1% Crataegus monogyna Hawthorn O/VLF <1% Dactylis glomerata Cock's-foot LF 15% Deschampsia cespitosa Tufted Hair-grass LF 5% Elytrigia repens Common Couch VLF <1% Epilobium hirsutum Great Willowherb VLA <1% Festuca rubra Red Fescue LF 2% Fraxinus excelsior Ash O/VLF <1% Galium aparine Cleavers VLF <1% Heracleum sphondylium Hogweed LF 2% Holcus lanatus Yorkshire-fog F/LA 40% Juncus effusus Soft-rush VLF <1% Phalaris arundinacea Reed Canary-grass O/VLF <1% Phleum pratense Timothy LF 5% Plantago lanceolata Ribwort Plantain VLF <1% Poa pratensis Smooth Meadow-grass LF 3% Pteridium aquilinum Bracken VLF <1% Ranunculus acris Meadow Buttercup VLF <1% Ranunculus repens Creeping Buttercup LF 1% Rosa canina Dog-rose O/VLF <1% Rubus fruticosus agg. Bramble O/VLF <1% Rumex acetosa Common Sorrel VLF <1% Rumex obtusifolius Broad-leaved Dock VLF <1% Sambucus nigra Elder R <1% Continued overleaf
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 23
Scientific Name Common Name DAFOR1 Cover Table 8.2 continued Taraxacum officinale agg. Dandelion VLF <1% Urtica dioica Common Nettle LF 3% Veronica sp. Speedwell species O/VLF <1% Vicia sp. Vetch species VLF <1% 1Key to DAFOR: D=Dominant, A=Abundant, F=Frequent, O=Occasional, R=Rare, V=Very, L=Local and *denotes a constant species
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 24
Table 8.3: Habitat Suitability Index Assessment for Ponds 1 to 5 Suitability Index Pond 1 Pond 2 Pond 3 Pond 4 Pond 5 Criteria Description Score1 Description Score1 Description Score2 Description Score2 Description Score2 SI1 Geographical Location Marginal 0.5 Marginal 0.5 Marginal 0.5 Marginal 0.5 Marginal 0.5
SI2 Pond Area 2400 0.8 4200 0.8 2000 0.8 750 1 1800 0.86 SI3 Pond Drying Never dries 0.9 Never dries 0.9 Never dries 0.9 Never dries 0.9 Never dries 0.9 SI4 Water Quality Moderate 0.67 Moderate 0.67 Moderate 0.67 Poor 0.33 Moderate 0.67 SI5 Shade 80% 0.6 40% 1 90% 0.4 70% 0.8 80% 0.6 SI6 Waterfowl Major 0.01 Absent 1 Absent 1 Absent 1 Absent 1 SI7 Fish Possible 0.67 Major 0.01 Possible 0.67 Absent 1 Possible 0.67 SI8 Abundance of other Ponds2 1 0.68 1 0.68 4 1 3 0.95 3 0.95 SI9 Quality of Terrestrial Habitat Good 1 Moderate 0.67 Good 1 Good 1 Good 1 SI10 Macrophyte Cover 2% 0.3 1% 0.3 0% 0.3 0% 0.3 5% 0.35 Assessment result: Poor 0.40 Poor 0.42 Average 0.67 Good 0.71 Good 0.71 1 1/9 Calculated by (SI1 x SI3 x SI4 x SI5 x SI6 x SI7 x SI8 s SI9 x SI10) (Criteria SI2 omitted from the calculation as there are no data for ponds of these sizes) 2 1/10 Calculated by (SI1 x SI2 x SI3 x SI4 x SI5 x SI6 x SI7 x SI8 s SI9 x SI10) 2 Ponds within an unobstructed one kilometre radius divided by 3.14
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 25
Table 8.4: Table of Photographs
Photo 1: Mown improved grassland Photo 2: Unmanaged grassland at the south eastern boundary
Photo 3: Trees and shrubs at the north western Photo 4: Ditch 1 overgrown with unmanaged corner of the site grassland
Photo 5: Ditch 2 Photo 6: Pond 1
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 26
Photo 7: Pond 2 Photo 8: Pond 3
Photo 9: Pond 4 Photo 10: Pond 5
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 27
Figure 8.1: Phase 1 Habitat Map
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 28
Figure 8.2: Pond Location Map
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 29
Figure 8.3: Non-statutory Designated Sites in the Wider Area
ERAP Ltd. 2016-348 Land off Derby Road, New Mills, High Peak, SK22 4HW: Ecological Survey and Assessment February 2017 30