Ecological Technical Note Longsdon Way, ,

September 2019

1.0 Introduction

1.1 This Technical Note has been prepared by CSA Environmental on behalf of Croudace Homes Ltd in relation to land at Longsdon Way, Caterham, Surrey (hereafter referred to as, ‘the Site’), centred around Ordnance Survey grid reference TQ 348 551).

1.2 The Site (c.3.96 ha) is being promoted for allocation for residential housing (originally for up to c.60 units). Representations have been made to Council (TDC) for inclusion of a site allocation within the Tandridge ‘Our Local Plan 2033’, however the Site was excluded from further consideration as a result of Regulation 19 consultation. Whilst the evidence base previously provided by TDC confirmed that the Site is not performing Green Belt purposes and as such could be considered for release from the Green Belt, concerns were subsequently raised following publication of their ecology evidence base which identified the Site as ‘ecologically unsuitable’ due to the potential for the Site to be restored to calcareous grassland as S41 (NERC Act, 2006) habitat. The validity of this decision is explored and evaluated within this Technical Note, in light of revised proposals for development of a reduced scale (up to c.40 units), see Development Plan (Ref DES/929/600) provided in Appendix E.

1.3 A review of the Local Plan evidence base documents has been undertaken, and an assessment of the conclusions drawn against site based survey and biological records data commissioned by the applicant, has been made. Information presented within the following documents has been considered:

Tandridge District Council – Evidence Base Tandridge Local Plan site Based Ecology Assessment Volumes 1 & 2 – Blindley Heath, Bletchingly and Caterham 2016 (ECO 14) Tandrigde Local Plan Site Based Ecology Assessment (2017 & 2018) (ECO 4 & ECO 2) (as a contextual comparison on approach as CATT0016 is not included within this study) Tandridge Local Plan 2016 Site Based Ecological Assessment Rebuttals and Reponses to Promotor Representations 2018 (ECO 1).

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 1 Applicant Representations and Evidence Base Longsdon Way, Caterham - Ecological Assessment (April 2015). Derek Finnie Associates (Consultant Ecologists) Response to Tandridge District Council’s Local Plan: Sites Consultation (November 2016). Shrimplin Brown Planning & Development. Representations to Tandridge District Council – Local Plan Issues and Approaches Consultation (February 2016). ECE Planning.

1.4 In addition to the above CSA Environmental undertook an update Phase 1 Habitat survey, National Vegetation Classification (NVC) survey and biological records search in July 2019, to provide an up to date assessment of ecological constraints to development in the context of the proposed allocation. Results of these update studies are summarised below.

2.0 Methods

2.1 Prior to the site visit, a desktop data search was completed in order to obtain records of designated wildlife sites and protected/notable species on-site or within the local area. The Surrey Biodiversity Information Centre was contacted to obtain records and details of non- statutory wildlife site designations from a 2km radius from the Site’s central grid reference (TQ 345551), while details of statutory designated wildlife sites were retrieved from the Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) online database. The MAGIC data search for statutory designations comprised those within a 10km radius for sites of International importance, 3km for sites of National importance and 2km for sites of Local importance.

2.2 A review of existing survey data from the Phase 1 habitats survey (Derek Finnie Associates, April 2015) and NVC survey (TEC, September 2016), was undertaken and a summary of findings present. These findings were compared with the results of an extended Phase 1 Habitat1 and NVC2 survey undertaken on 09 July 2019, in order to confirm the type, value and extent of on-site habitats and their potential to support notable and protected species. Habitats mapped during the 2019 survey are shown on the Habitats Plan (CSA/4416/01) provided in Appendix A. A copy of the full NVC Report provided in Appendix C.

1 Joint Nature Conservation Committee, 1990. Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey – a technique for environmental audit. Revised reprint 2010. Peterborough: JNCC. 2 Assessed in line with Rodwell, JS, ed (1992) British communities Volume 3: Grasslands and montane communities. Cambridge University Press, and using MAVIS software - Hill (2016), available at https://www.ceh.ac.uk/services/modular-analysis-vegetation-information-system-mavis

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 2 3.0 Consideration of Designated Sites

3.1 No statutory or non-statutory wildlife designations, Ancient Woodland or a Biodiversity Opportunity Area (as identified within the emerging TDC Local Plan 2033) cover the Site or immediately adjacent land. The Site was not identified as a potential Site of Nature Conservation Interest (pSNCI) during the Tandrige SNCI project.

3.2 A number of designated sites were identified within the defined search area. These are summarised below, and include a number of sites designated for calcareous grassland. This highlights both the value of this area for calcareous grassland habitats, and illustrates the relative abundance of this habitat type within the local area. Natural England Condition Assessments for SSSI compartments indicate that these sites are mainly in ‘favourable’ or ‘unfavourable recovering’ condition.

Statutory Designations Mole Gap to Reigate Escarpment Special Area of Conservation (SAC) – located c. 8.87km west of the Site. This site is designated for its Annex I habitats including the only area of stable box scrub Buxus sempervirens in the UK, as well as semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland faces on calcareous substrates (Festuco-brometalia) and Yew woodlands Taxus baccata. The Natural England Condition Assessment for SSSI units within the SAC concludes habitats are 52.79% favourable, 46.71% unfavourable recovering and 0.51% unfavourable- no change (total 1016.42 ha).

Woldingham and Oxted Downs Site of Special Scientific Importance (SSSI) – located c. 1.66km east of the Site. This SSSI is designated for its rich chalk grassland, scrub and mature and secondary woodland supporting many species, including a number that are rare. The Natural England Condition Assessment for this SSSI is 51.15% favourable and 48.85% unfavourable recovering (total 128.9 ha).

Quarry Hangers SSSI - located c.2.2km south-west of the Site at its closest point. This SSSI is designated for the mixture of species-rich chalk grassland, scrub and woodland, and a number of which are rare or local in Surrey, as well as locally important invertebrates which it supports. The Natural England Condition Assessment for this SSSI is 49.07% favourable, 42.01% unfavourable recovering and 8.91% unfavourable declining (total 33.5 ha).

Blanchmans Farm Local Nature Reserve (LNR) – located c.2.7km north-east. Comprising two summer meadows, a pond, a central wooded area, hazel coppice, a newly planted orchard and horse grazing (total 9.4ha).

Non-Statutory Designations Eight Sites of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI) were identified within a 2km radius of the Site. Three of these sites (all located along

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 3 the west facing ridge along the A2 corridor north and south of the Longsdon Way site) have been designated for the grassland habitats which they support, as summarised below. A fourth SNCI, Foxburrow Fields, is located further to the south-west; no habitat information on this site has been provided by SBRC, but it is anticipated that this will have been designated for grassland habitats given its name / aerial photography. Full details and mapping provided by SBRC is provided within Appendix C.

Manor Park SNCI – located c.1.5km north. Unimproved calcareous and mesotrophic grassland communities, both of which are rare and declining (total 19.3 ha).

Chalet Field SNCI – located c.0.59km south. Species-rich unimproved and semi-improved mesotrophic and calcareous grassland (total 10.2ha).

Stoney Hill West SNCI – located c.0.92km north. The site supports pockets of species-rich calcareous grassland, including 19 species typically of grassland of conservation interest in Surrey (as recorded in 2015), (total 7.3ha).

Six potential SNCI have also been identified within a 2km radius of the Site. SBRC have not provided any information about the nature of these sites, as pSNCIs are sites which are thought likely to contain flora or fauna of County or regional importance, but that have not been surveyed to confirm this. However, pSNCI are incorporated into the TDC Local Plan 2001 in policy NE4, and in the TDC Local Plan 2033 in policy TLP35. From aerial photography and mapping of the local area it appears likely that the following have been identified as potential grassland pSNCI:

Whitehill pSNCI (grassland and woodland areas) – located c.1.58km south-west (total 29.95 ha)

Godstone Road Field pSNCI (grassland and woodland areas) – located c.0.44km south (total 3.83ha)

4.0 Previous Habitat Survey Data

Ecological Assessment (DFA) 4.1 An extended Phase 1 habitats survey was undertaken on 05 March 2015, following the JNCC (2010) methods. Habitats identified comprised broad-leaved woodland (linear belts along the western, northern and eastern borders), scrub (dense patch in the south-west corner) and species poor semi-improved grassland (occupying c.90% of the site). Grassland was classified as semi-improved, species poor due to the abundance of perennial rye grass Lolium pernne and cock’s foot Dactylis glomerata, although the presence of glaucous sedge Carex flacca (indicative of calcareous grassland) was recorded. The

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 4 assessment concluded that the grassland was of ‘negligible ecology value’ due to its limited diversity in terms of species and sward structure. Ho wever, it should be noted that this survey was undertaken outside of the optimal period for botanical survey, and as such many herb species may not have been evident / flowering.

4.2 DFA undertook an update survey visit in November 2016, which concluded that there was no major ecological constraint to development of the Site. Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna scrub was noted to be near dominant in some areas, suggesting that the grassland was undergoing natural succession in the absence of management.

TDC Site –Based Ecology Assessments 4.3 A detailed grassland survey was undertaken by TEP on 12 August 2016; within a suitable period for botanical survey, but perhaps not optimal for calcareous grassland (optional period typically June / July). Area C (which comprises c.3.3ha of grassland; as shown on the Ecological Assessment Plan – CAT0016, TEP Ref G5636.007B.14) and covers all but the south-west extent of the Site was assessed as comprising calcareous grassland, with a varied sward structure, under low / no management allowing a tussocky sward to develop and scattered scrub to colonise. The sward was less diverse across the lower, south-west slope; the northern slope (towards the woodland) was noted to have a good diversity of grasses, sedges and occasional woodland flora.

4.4 A total of 14 species from the Surrey SNCI criteria list were reported to have been recorded, although examination of the species list provided within the CAT016 Grassland Survey and Evaluation only yields 11 species which appear on the current Guidance for the Selection of SNCIs in Surrey (, May 2008). This included species such as burnet saxifrage Pimpinella saxifraga and glaucous sedge (species indicative of old meadows which have suffered little disturbance), although as an infrequent component of the sward. None of the species listed in bold (species which are on the Draft list of Vascular Plants that are rare, scarce or of conservation interest in VC17, Surrey) within the SNCI selection guidance for calcareous grassland were recorded. However, it was considered that further surveys undertaken earlier in the summer season may have increased the number of species recorded to at least the 15 required by the SNCI criteria, although not perhaps including those species listed in bold (and therefore still not meeting the criteria for SNCI selection of calcareous grassland sites).

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 5 4.5 The report notes that good examples of certain NVC grassland communities would be considered as S41 habitats, including certain types of neutral and calcareous grasslands, and that seven positive indicator species of these habitat types were recorded (a reasonable but not notable number). Preliminary NVC analysis assign habitats to scrub (W24) and/or mesotrophic grassland categories (MG1).

4.6 TEP concluded that whilst Area C comprised a reasonable example of calcareous grassland (despite NVC analysis not supporting this grassland classification), capable of restoration to S41 status, it was currently falling short of S41 status / ‘County’ level value due to lack of management, nutrient enrichment and scrub colonisation. ‘Local’ level value was assigned (also taking account the size and position of the grassland within local ecological networks) and it was concluded that it was unsuitable for any significant development. It was noted that development could be delivered with an extension from Ashwick Close utilizing areas D, E and the southern part of Area C with no net loss to biodiversity, if it could be linked to a grassland enhancement and management plan for the rest of Area C that restores it to calcareous grassland. No details on the unit area suitable for development was provided.

5.0 2019 Baseline Site Conditions

Biological Records (June 2019) 5.1 SBRC have returned records of several notable flora, of which those which occur within chalk grassland habitats may be of relevance to the Site. Those recorded within the same 1km OS grid square include white helleborine damasonium and stinking Helleborus foetidus (although these species are typical of woodland on chalk) and slender bedstraw Galium pumilum. Other notable chalk grassland / woodland edges species recorded within a 2km radius include greater yellow rattle Rhinanthus angustifolius, basil thyme Acinos arvensis, man orchid Orchis anthropophora, sainfoin Onobrychis viciifolia, field fleawort Tephroseris integrifolia, hound’s-tongue Cynoglossum officinale, greater butterfly orchid Platanthera chlorantha, fly orchid , white mullein Verbascum lychnitis, dwarf spurge Euphorbia exigua, frog orchid Dactylorhiza viridis, eyebright Euphrasia officinalis, pale St. John’s-Wort Hypericum montanum and wall bedstraw Galium parisiense.

5.2 None of the above mentioned species were recorded on Site within the 2019 survey, or the previous surveys undertaken by TEP (September, 2016) and DFA (April, 2015).

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 6 Phase 1 habitats and NVC Survey (July 2019) Grassland 5.3 Neutral Grassland: This area was characterised by a species-poor grass- dominated sward. False oat-grass was the dominant component of the vegetation throughout most of the area, although in places it became co-dominant with red fescue Festuca rubra. Very few forbs were recorded in this area with field bindweed Convolvulus arvensis the most visual component, alongside the large areas of regenerating hawthorn and bramble Rubus fruticosus agg. scrub. High nutrient demanding species (e.g. perennial ryegrass, nettle Urtica dioica and creeping thistle Cirsium arvense) were absent. NVC analysis define this grassland as MG1e Arrhenatherum elatius grassland, Centaurea nigra sub- community, a species rich version of MG1 with a lower dominance of coarse grasses, and the presence of a more species-rich flora. It is usually recorded when meadows are in the transition between species- rich and species-poor, reflecting changes in management.

5.4 Transitional Grassland: This area (denoted on the NVC survey map with a blue line) formed the buffer zone between the poor neutral grassland and the more rich calcareous grassland. The sward largely comprised the same grasses and cover values as the poor neutral grassland, but contained a small range of calcareous indicator species including wild marjoram Origanum vulgare, common bird’s-foot trefoil Lotus corniculatus and glaucous sedge.

5.5 Calcareous grassland: The central part of the northern half of the Site was considered to comprise relatively species rich calcareous grassland. The dominant grass here was upright brome Bromus erectus, which occur alongside high amounts of glaucous sedge. Other good calcareous indicator species included fairy flax Linum catharticum, field scabious Knautia arvensis, meadow oat-grass Helictochola pratensis and downy oat-grass Avenula pubescens. NVC analysis define this grassland as CG2c Festuca ovina-Avenula pratensis grassland, Holcus lanatus-Trifolium repens sub-community. This is a slightly degraded sub- type of this CG2 Festuca ovina-Avenula pratensis grassland, and although most of the community constants are still represented, many of the smaller forbs such as rock rose Helianthemum nummularium, squinancywort Asperula cynanchica and fairy flax are not found (N.B. fairy flax was in fact found at extremely low levels within the survey Site).

5.6 A total of 11 species which appear on the current Guidance for the Selection of SNCIs in Surrey (Surrey Wildlife Trust, May 2008) were recorded on the Site. This included, five species from the list which were recorded during the TEP 2016 survey. A total of 17 species from the list recorded between 2016 and 2019 surveys; exceeding the criteria of 15 species for SNCI selection. However, no species from the rare, scare or of conservation interest list were recorded in either year. As such whilst the Site clearly supports a fairly good example of calcareous grassland, it does not meet the criteria for selection as an SNCI for this habitat and

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 7 is considered to be of below Country level importance. The Site is considered to be important at the Local level, as part of a network of calcareous grassland sites found locally, designated as SNCI, SSSI and SACs which are of much higher value.

Semi-Natural Broadleaved Woodland 5.7 A small area of semi-natural broadleaved woodland is present in the southwestern corner of the Site. The woodland appeared to have undergone some recent management as there were numerous patches of chippings on the ground where trees had been felled.

5.8 Dominant species present included hazel Corylus avellana, wild privet Ligustrum vulgare, sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus, elder Sambucus nigra, hawthorn and horse chestnut Aesculus hippocastanum. The ground flora was very sparse with occasional ivy Helix hedera, common hogweed Heracleum sphondylium, cleavers Galium aparine, wood false brome Brachypodium sylvaticum, wood avens Geum urbanum, enchanters nightshade Circaea lutetiana and herb-Robert Geranium robertianum.

5.9 A large strip of broadleaved woodland borders the northern boundary of the Site and separates it from the A22. Dominant species include hazel, ash Fraxinus excelsior, wild privet, elder, hawthorn, blackthorn Prunus spinosa, sycamore and dogwood Cornus sanguinea. Other species present included cherry Prunus avium, ivy, rose Rosa sp., and black bryony Tamus communis.

Tall Ruderal Vegetation 5.10 Scattered patches of tall ruderal vegetation are present across the Site, predominantly along the northern and southern boundaries and bordering the on-Site woodland. Common nettle, cleavers, dogwood saplings and hogweed are dominant species, with frequently occurring red dead nettle Lamium purpureum, red clover Trifolium pratense, field bindweed, common couch Elytrigia repens and hairy brome Bromus ramosus.

Dense Scrub 5.11 Occasional patches of dense scrub have developed around the corners and boundaries of the Site and around the dilapidated building in the south-eastern corner of the Site. Species include bramble, field rose Rosa arvensis, spear thistle Cirsium vulgare, ivy, honeysuckle Lonicera periclymenum, cleavers and hawthorn.

Native Hedgerows 5.12 Three native species-poor hedgerows are present along the boundaries of the Site, two of which are connected to further hedgerows with trees. Species include sycamore, hazel, hawthorn, ash, honeysuckle, blackthorn, dog rose Rosa canina and wayfaring tree Viburnum lantana.

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 8 Native Hedgerows with Trees 5.13 Two native hedgerows with trees are present on Site and situated along the northern and south-eastern boundaries. The species composition is similar to the above described hedgerows with the addition of cherry and common dogwood.

Buildings 5.14 One dilapidated building is present on-Site, situated in the south-eastern corner of the Site. The building’s roof had previously collapsed, with a wooden frame and corrugated asbestos cement sheeting of the old roof on the ground around the building, leaving the building largely open. Species such as hazel saplings and ivy, have started to colonise the ground within the building.

Hardstanding 5.15 A small area of hardstanding comprising bitumen tiles is situated just north of the entrance gate to the site. This area has largely been colonised by perennial weeds and encroaching scrub.

5.16 A full species list is provided in Appendix B at the end of this report.

6.0 Development Proposals

Proposed Development and Ecological Enhancement 6.1 Taking account of data provided the TEP report to inform the TDC Site- Based Ecology Assessment, and update survey data from site assessment in July 2019 (an optimum period for botanical survey of calcareous grassland sites) a revised Development Plan (REF: DES/929/600) has been produced which would deliver the following: Up to c. 40 units over 1.31ha of land Focus development on the southern and western parts of the site; retaining the most valuable areas of calcareous grassland to the north and east; Scope to secure management of 2.51ha of grassland, to include 0.73ha of existing calcareous grassland and improvement of 1.81ha of neutral and transitional grassland, through implementation of a long term Grassland Management Plan; Provision of 0.14ha of additional Public Open Space.

6.2 The above would be consistent with the advice provided by TEP, with development being largely restricted to the south and west of the site, and more valuable calcareous grassland being retained to the north and east. Allocation, subject to the implementation of a long term Grassland Management Plan (which could incorporate measures such as traditional hay meadow cut an collect, and enhancement of the seedbank through green hay strewing from retained areas of high value

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 9 calcareous grassland), would ensure that a significant area of calcareous grassland (2.15ha; comprising 0.73ha of existing calcareous grassland and 1.81ha of neutral and transitional grassland) would be have the potential to be restored and maintained in perpetuity. In the absence of such management grassland at the Site remains vulnerable to changes in management (e.g. commercial farming regime which could lead to enrichment / ploughing) or in the face of no management scrubbing over under natural succession. A detailed Grassland Management Plan could be agreed alongside any future planning consent, and secured by way of condition.

7.0 Assessment Against TEP Methodology

Evaluation of TDC Assessment 7.1 An initial review of the TDC Site-Based Ecology Assessment was undertaken by DFA in December 2016. It was concluded that the TEP report presented an inaccurate assessment of the Site, concluding that it was ‘ecologically unsuitable’ for development without robust justification. DFA evaluated the TEP data against the methodology presented, and reached the conclusion that the Site is either ‘ecologically suitable’ or ‘majority ecological suitable’, due to the absence of habitats of high value, or extensive areas of S41 habitats.

7.2 Given these conflicting assessments, the TEP Decision Framework for Assessment of Development Suitability has been applied again, in light of updated survey information and revised scheme design.

7.3 The TEP ecological assessment methodology defines areas which are ecologically suitable, sensitive and unsuitable for development, using the following categories described in Table 1, below.

Table 1. TEP Assessment of Ecological Suitability for Development Categories

Site Definition Categorisation Ecologically The site has few habitats of value, and any habitats of value Suitable appear capable of being avoided by development.

Majority Although most of the site has few habitats of value, there are Ecologically discrete areas of high value, but it appears they can be avoided Suitable and protected during development.

Sensitive -Minority More than 50% of the site has habitats of high value, but the Ecologically remainder of the site does not have habitats of value, and Suitable development in this area appears capable of avoiding adverse effects on the retained high-value habitats.

Sensitive -Special The site or surrounds have features of ecological value which are Design and distributed in such a way as to require special measures to ensure Mitigation their conservation. These special measures include bespoke adjustments to development density, building design or

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 10 Measures needed protection that go beyond the scope of "embedded mitigation". Subject to these measures, the site is ecologically suitable for development.

Sensitive -Point of The core of the site is ecologically suitable but access for roads or Access Issues services would appear to require loss of moderately high-value habitats (see also "Unsuitable -Point of Access Issues" below).

Ecologically The majority of the site has habitats of high value which appear Unsuitable impossible to avoid for any significant development of the type proposed.

Ecologically The core of the site is ecologically suitable for development (or Unsuitable -Point capable of sensitive development), but it appears that access for of Access Issues roads and services would inevitably require the loss of irreplaceable habitats, such as ancient woodland.

7.4 Using the TEP method of Ecological Valuation the Site, TDC concluded that the site was of Local Level Value. Application of this valuation is not consistent with the methodology as the Site has not been found to meet the criteria for S41 habitat. However, it is accepted that with some restoration the Site has good potential to meet the S41 / Surrey SNCI Section Criteria for calcareous grassland and as such a level of ‘Local Value’ has been carried through the following appraisal methodology.

7.5 The TEP methodology also incorporates consideration of a sites value as a an ecological network and the provision of ‘embedded mitigation’ which could be delivered through application of the ‘mitigation hierarchy’ as required in line with the NPPF and local planning policy. TEP provide examples of what embedded mitigation may constitute, including the following which are of relevance to the Site:

Avoidance of S41 priority habitats

Ensuring that retained habitats and protected features are incorporated into a long-term management plan

7.6 The ‘Decision Framework for Assessment of Development Suitability’ is guided by the potential impacts for the development on protected sites, S41 habitats, significant ‘supporting habitats’ and there information is available, protected species concentrations. The Framework has been applied to the proposed development at CAT0016, using a precautionary approach in terms of classification of the value of the habitats present, as follows:

7.7 Q1: Does the Site, or it boundary contain S41 habitat, a protected site or significant areas of supporting habitat?

Yes (habitat has the potential to achieve S41 status) - go to Q2

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 11 7.8 Q2: Can habitats and sites or value be retained and enhanced using embedded mitigation? Yes - the site has a discrete area of high-value habitat which development can avoid, so it may be appropriate to continue with the decision frame work by considering the site as ‘Majority Ecologically Suitable’. However, using a precautionary approach we have carried the assessment through to the nest stage (Q3), acknowledging that there may be some minor impacts to areas of higher value habitats.

7.9 Q3: What is the value and replaceability of habitats that could not be protected by embedded mitigation? The on-Site high-value habitat is considered to be of Local level importance, with the majority of habitat to be lost considered be of less than local value – go to Q4.

7.10 Q4: Is it feasible that special design and mitigation measures could overcome the adverse effect, while maintaining and enhancing biodiversity on site and in the local area? Yes, as discussed above, only a discrete area of the Site contains high- value habitat which, as a result of development of the Site would be largely retained, restored and enhanced along with other areas of habitat which are currently of lower value due to lack of management. There is scope for enhancement / biodiversity net gains to be achieved as part of the scheme, with valuable habitats / other ecological important features being protected through mitigation by design. As such, using a precautionary approach, it would be appropriate to consider the site as ‘Sensitive, special design and mitigation measures required’.

7.11 Q5; Can the site be accessed from the existing road network or urban area with no effect on s41 habitats and designated sites? Yes - access is possible from Longsdon Way with no impact to S41 habitat / areas of high value - go to Q6.

7.12 Q6: Consider designated sites and protected species in the surrounding area. Even if they are not directly affected (Q1) consider whether adverse indirect effects arising from development can be mitigated using design and mitigation measures such as construction management plans, greenspace provision.

Yes - further surveys would be required in respect to reptiles, bats, dormice and Roman snail (as detailed below), however appropriate mitigation could be delivered and detailed as part of an outline planning application in order to avoid any adverse effects as a result of the development.

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 12 7.13 In respect of the above, it may be appropriate to considering the Site as ‘Majority Ecologically Suitable’ or ‘Sensitive -Special Design and Mitigation Measures needed’ with areas of high-value habitat being protected during development and enhanced subject to a suitable Grassland Management Plan being implemented.

Fauna / Protected Species Bats 7.14 SThe BIC provided records of at least ten bat species from within the search area, including: brown long-eared Plecotus auritus, lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros, myotis species Myotis sp. including whiskered/Brandt’s M. mystacinus/brandtii, Bechstein’s M. bechsteninii, Daubenton’s M. daubentonii, natterer’s M. nattereri and Alcathoe M. alcathoe, as well as serotine Eptesicus serotinus, noctule bat Nyctalus noctula, soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus and common pipistrelle P. pipistrellus. The closest record is of a common pipistrelle and noctule bat, recorded c. 1.75m north-west of the Site in 2014.

7.15 One dilapidated building is present within the Site and considered to provide negligible suitability for roosting bats, however mature trees at the site boundaries could support roosting features. The grassland which dominates the Site, along with boundary hedgerows, woodland and trees are likely to support foraging and commuting bats, although the TEP assessment notes that connectivity for bats would be low given the surrounding residential area. Development proposals should be informed by a preliminary roost impaction of the building and bat activity surveys / static monitoring across the site to define any roosting sites / key foraging or commuting routes, with development and external lighting proposals being designed with due consideration to avoid any impacts in line with policy and legislation requirements.

Badgers 7.16 SBIC did not return any records for badger Meles meles due to the sensitivity of these records. No evidence of badger was recorded during the walkover survey, however the woodland, scrub and hedgerow habitats present provide suitable opportunities for sett creation and it is considered likely that badger will use the Site for foraging and commuting, as such an update badger survey would be required to inform any future planning application.

Dormice 7.17 SBIC returned records for dormouse Muscardinus avellanarius from within the search area dating between 2000 and 2016. The closest record is from c. 1.6km north-east of the Site from 2016. The majority of hedgerows present on-Site are narrow and disconnected from other suitable dormouse habitat, however the western hedgerow (H2) and off-Site woodland immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the Site provide some suitable opportunities for dormice with

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 13 connectivity to further off-site habitat. Although it is not anticipated that any of these habitats will be lost, impacts to local dormouse population as a result of disturbance and cat predation should be considered and further surveys undertaken to informa any furture planning application.

Birds 7.18 SBIC returned records of 17 species of bird from within the search area. Species of relevance to the Site include bullfinch Pyrrhula pyrrhula, whitethroat Sylvia communis, starling Sturnus vulgaris, green woodpecker Picus viridis, dunnock Prunella modularis, yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella and song thrush Turdus philomelos. The hedgerows, trees and adjacent woodland provide suitable nesting habitat for birds, with species of open habitats potentially using the Site for foraging / nesting. Given the habitats present, it is considered that the Site provides opportunities for a common and widespread assemblage of grassland and woodland bird species and further assessment will be required to inform an EcIA for submission alongside any planning application.

Reptiles 7.19 Records of slow worm Angis fragilis and common lizard Zootoca vivipara were from within the search area. The margins of the Site, including the area of ruderal vegetation, scrub and hedgerow bases provide suitable sheltering and foraging habitat for reptiles. During the habitat survey and incidental sighting of a common lizard around a rubble pile along the western boundary was recorded. Additionally, a dead slow worm was recorded within the area of calcareous grassland. Further surveys to assess the use of the Site by reptiles will be required to inform a Reptile Mitigation Strategy in due course, however given the proposed level of habitat retention and enhancement it is considered that there is good scope to achieve positive mitigation for reptiles on-site.

Amphibians 7.20 SBIC returned records for smooth newt Lissotriton vulgaris, palmate newt Lissotriton helveticus, common frog Rana temporaria and common toad Bufo bufo from within the search area. The closest record was of smooth newt and common frog from c. 480m west. No records of great crested newt were returned by the records centre. Although the grassland, scrub and tall ruderal vegetation on the Site provides suitable foraging and sheltering habitat, no waterbodies are present on-Site or within 500m of the Site according to OS and aerial mapping. It is therefore considered unlikely that amphibians would utilise the habitats on Site.

Invertebrates 7.21 SBIC returned records of six species of invertebrate including eight records of Roman snail Helix pomatia. The closest record for Roman snail is from c. 815m north-east of the Site from 2010. Other records of species of potential relevance to the Site include chalk hill blue Polyommatus

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 14 coridon, small blue Cupido minimus, stag beetle Lucanus cervus and silver spotted-skipper Hesperia comma. Due to the presence of calcareous grassland on-Site there is potential Roman snail to be present and it is recommended that further investigations in relation to this species are undertaken. Appropriate mitigation can be delivered through the scheme design and detailed as part of an outline planning application.

8.0 Compliance with Planning Policy and Legislation

National Planning Policy Framework (2019) (NPPF) 8.1 The NPPF sets out the government planning policies for England and how they should be applied. With regards to ecology and biodiversity, Chapter 15: Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment, paragraph 170, states that the planning system and planning policies should minimise impacts on and provide net gains for biodiversity, including by establishing coherent ecological networks that are more resilient to current and future pressures.

8.2 Paragraph 175 sets out the principles that local planning authorities should apply when determining planning applications:

If significant harm to biodiversity resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts).

Development on land within or outside a Site of Special Scientific Interest, and which is likely to have an adverse effect on it (either individually or in combination with other developments), should not normally be permitted. The only exception is where the benefits of the development in the location proposed clearly outweigh both its likely impact on the features of the site that make it of special scientific interest, and any broader impacts on the national network of Sites of Special Scientific Interest.

Development resulting in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats (such as ancient woodland and ancient or veteran trees) should be refused, unless there are wholly exceptional reasons and a suitable compensation strategy exists.

Development whose primary objective is to conserve or enhance biodiversity should be supported; while opportunities to incorporate biodiversity improvements in and around developments should be encouraged, especially where this can secure measurable net gains for biodiversity.

TDC Local Plan 2033 8.3 Policy TLP35 of the TDC Local Plan 2033, which covers Biodiversity, Ecology and Habitats, states that ‘proposed developments should protect biodiversity, geodiversity and natural habitats and contribute to the wider Green and Blue Infrastructure network. Proposals should also

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 15 ensure there is a net gain in biodiversity and provide maintenance, enhancement, restoration and, if possible, expansion of important assets, by aiming to restore or create appropriate priority wildlife habitats and ecological networks to sustain and recover biodiversity. Schemes should also ensure that Priority Habitats and natural features are protected by incorporation within the Green and Blue Infrastructure network, including sufficient buffering’.

8.4 Policy TP35 also states that ‘the Council will conserve and enhance biodiversity and seek opportunities for Priority Habitat creation and restoration particularly within and adjacent to Biodiversity Opportunity Areas (BOAs)’.

8.5 Policy TP37 of the Local Plan 2033 states that the Council will resist the loss of trees, woodlands, hedgerows and vegetation of significant ecological value and require existing trees, hedgerows and vegetation to be positively integrated into the site layout and protected in accordance with BS5837:2012. The Council also expects new developments to integrate additional trees, hedgerows and vegetation, and seek opportunities to enhance green corridors.

NERC Act 8.6 Section 40(1) of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 states that each public authority, “must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity.” This legislation makes it clear that planning authorities should consider impacts to biodiversity when determining planning applications, with particular regard to the Section 41 (S41) lists of 56 habitats and 943 species of principal importance. The UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) has been superseded by the Biodiversity 2020 Strategy, which continues to prioritise the S41 lists, however Local BAPs continue to influence biodiversity management and conservation effort, including through the spatial planning system, at the local scale.

8.7 Annexe A of the Biodiversity Strategy 2020 identifies the priorities and key actions of the strategy in relation to planning and development as outlined below:

Priority Action 3.4: Through reforms of the planning system, take a strategic approach to planning for nature within and across local areas. This approach will guide development to the best locations, encourage greener design and enable development to enhance natural networks. We will retain the protection and improvement of the natural environment as core objectives of the planning system Priority Action 3.5: Establish a new, voluntary approach to biodiversity offsets

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 16 Scheme Compliance 8.8 No designations, including SSSI’s, SNCI, pSNCI or habitats considered to meet the criteria for such designation / S41 (currently), are present at the Site and the proposed development is not anticipated to have any significant adverse effects on any nearby SSSI’s.

8.9 Given the limited extent of higher value habitat (calcareous grassland areas) within this Site it is not anticipated that development would result in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitat, with development proposals allowing for the retention of existing key areas of calcareous grassland and introduction of appropriate management (though implementation of a Grassland Management Plan) over a wider area (over 60% of the Site) with the aim of achieving enhancement / restoration of calcareous grassland.

8.10 The proposed scheme also seeks to retain features of ecological value such as boundary trees and hedgerows where possible, as well as incorporate areas of new planting in order to strengthen and enhance existing green infrastructure. The scheme is considered to offer good scope for protected species mitigation to be achieved, as required and informed by further surveys to inform any future planning application.

8.11 As such, development in this location could secure biodiversity improvements which would contribute to the local network of calcareous grassland sites and offering resources for local wildlife / protected species. As such, overall it is considered that the proposed scheme would be compliant with requirements of the NPPF and Local Plan policy and allow the TDC to discharge their obligations under the NERC Act.

9.0 Conclusions

Ecological Assessment 9.1 Despite DFA’s assessment of the Site (April, 2015) concluding that the Site was of ‘negligible ecological value’, assessments by TEP (September, 2017) concluded that Area C comprised a reasonable example of calcareous grassland, capable of restoration to S41 status and was considered to be of ‘Local’ level value, given the lack of management, nutrient enrichment and scrub colonisation. TEP concluded that it was unsuitable for any significant development, although it was noted that development could be delivered with an extension from Ashwick Close utilizing areas D, E and the southern part of Area C with no net loss to biodiversity, provided that a grassland enhancement and management plan is produced for the rest of Area C.

9.2 The NVC survey completed in July 2019 accords with the results of the TEP grassland survey and concluded that the central part of the northern half of the Site (Area C) comprises relatively species rich calcareous grassland, surrounded by a buffer zone of transitional

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 17 grassland containing some calcareous species, although these areas do not meet the criteria for Surrey SNCI designation / S41 status. The remaining areas of habitat within the Site are not considered to be of high-level value.

Development Suitability 9.3 TEP determined that the Site was ‘ecological unsuitable’ for development, which according to the development category definitions would define the Site as having majority habitats of ‘high value which appear impossible to avoid for any significant development of the type proposed’. However, this contradicts the TEP Site Assessment which concluded that the site was of Local Level Value and that some development could be delivered within areas D, E and the southern part of Area C with no net loss to biodiversity.

9.4 The TEP methodology also incorporates consideration of a site’s value as a an ecological network and the provision of ‘embedded mitigation’ which could be delivered through application of the ‘mitigation hierarchy’ as required in line with the NPPF and local planning policy. Examples of embedded mitigation include the avoidance of S41 priority habitats and incorporating the retention and protection of habitat features into a long-term management plan.

9.5 W hen applying the ‘Decision Framework for Assessment of Development Suitability’ it is our conclusion that, given that most of the site has few habitats of value and only a small area of calcareous grassland is present (0.73ha of 3.96ha of the total Site area) can be avoided and protected during development, the Site can be classed as ‘Majority Ecologically Suitable’ or using a precautionary approach, ‘Sensitive -Special Design and Mitigation Measures needed’.

Conclusion 9.6 The proposed scheme will provide up to c. 40 units over 1.31ha of land. The development proposals have been specifically designed to focus development on the southern and western parts of the site in order to retain and enhance the existing area of calcareous grassland (0.73ha) and to improve other areas of on-Site grassland to a calcareous state (1.81ha) through implementation of a long term Grassland Management Plan, in line with TP35 of the Local Plan 2033.

9.7 Given the limited extent of high-value habitat within this Site it is not anticipated that development would result in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitat. As a result of the proposed development, the existing calcareous grassland would be retained and appropriately managed in line with a Grassland Management Plan, to restore and enhance the quality and extent of the habitat. It is therefore considered that the above proposed scheme would meet the criteria for development set out within the NPPF / local planning policy and that the site is suitable for development subject to appropriate mitigation and enhancement / restoration measures being secured.

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 18

Appendix A

Habitats Plan (CSA/4416/100)

44146 Longsdon Way, Caterham 19 Site Boundary

SI Semi-Improved Neutral Grassland

Calcareous Grassland

Transitional Grassland

W2 Wn Woodland and Number

Tall Ruderal Vegetation SI

H3 Dense Scrub

Hedgerow and Number

Hedgerow with Trees SI H4

SI Scatered Trees (approx. locations)

H2 Buildings

Hardstanding 4 1

Gate SI W1 H5 Target Notes 2 Tn H1 1- Dead slow worm 2- Log Pile 3- Lizard spotted around brick rubble 3 4- Rubble Pile

0 30 60metres

Offce 20, Citibase, 95 Ditchling Road, Project Longsdon Way, Caterham Date Sept 2019 Drawing No. CSA/4416/100 Brighton BN1 4ST Drawing Title Habitats Plan Scale See Bar Rev - t 01273 573871 e [email protected] w csaenvironmental.co.uk Client Croudace Homes Ltd Drawn TF Checked CC

© CSA Landscapes Ltd. Do not scale from this drawing. Refer to fgured dimensions only.

Appendix B

Species List

Habitat Phase 1 S41/Annex Flora Reference I status Common name Latin name Codes

Field Bindweed Convolvulus arvensis Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna Hedge Bedstraw Galium album Cleavers Galium aparine Lady's Bedstraw Galium verum Meadow Geranium pratense Crane's-bill Dove's-foot Geranium molle Crane's-bill Hogweed Heracleum sphondylium Common Bird's- Lotus corniculatus foot-trefoil Creeping Potentilla reptans Cinquefoil Bramble Rubus fruticosus Curled Dock Rumex crispus Creeping Bent Agrostis stolonifera Neutral B2 - False Oat-grass Arrhenatherum elatius Grassland False Brome Brachypodium sylvaticum Pendulous Sedge Carex pendula Cock's-foot Dactylis glomerata Common Couch Elytrigia repens Red Fescue Festuca rubra Yorkshire-fog Holcus lanatus Smaller Cat's-tail Phleum bertolonii Smooth Poa pratensis Meadow-grass Tall Fescue Schedonorus arundinaceus Meadow Fescue Schedonorus pratensis Yellow Oat-grass Trisetum flavescens Rough-stalked Brachythecium Feather-moss rutabulum Neat Feather- Scleropodium purum moss Agrimony Agrimonia eupatoria Scarlet Pimpernel Anagallis arvensis Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna Wild Strawberry Fragaria vesca Hedge Bedstraw Galium album

Calcareous Perforate St Hypericum perforatum B3 - grassland John's-wort Field Scabious Knautia arvensis Meadow Lathyrus pratensis Vetchling Fairy Flax Linum catharticum Red Bartsia Odontites vernus Marjoram Origanum vulgare

Creeping Potentilla reptans Cinquefoil Selfheal Prunella vulgaris Rose Rosa sp. Salad Burnet Sanguisorba minor Bladder Silene vulgaris Campion Red Clover Trifolium pratense Germander Veronica chamaedrys Speedwell Creeping Bent Agrostis stolonifera False Oat-grass Arrhenatherum elatius Meadow Oat- Avenula pratense grass Downy Oat-grass Avenula pubescens False Brome Brachypodium sylvaticum Upright Brome Bromopsis erecta Glaucous Sedge Carex flacca Cock's-foot Dactylis glomerata Sheep's-fescue Festuca ovina Red Fescue Festuca rubra Yorkshire-fog Holcus lanatus Smaller Cat's-tail Phleum bertolonii Tall Fescue Schedonorus arundinaceus Meadow Fescue Schedonorus pratensis Yellow Oat-grass Trisetum flavescens Neat Feather- Scleropodium purum moss Agrimony sp. Agrimonia sp. Hairy brome Bromus ramosus Field bindweed Convolvulus arvensis Common Cornus sanguinea dogwood Common couch Elytrigia repens Cleavers Galium aparine Hedge bedstraw Galium mollugo Tall ruderal C3.1 - Herb robert Geranium robertianum Common Heracleum hogweed sphondylium Red dead-nettle Lamium purpureum Creeping Potentilla reptans cinquefoil Bladder campion Silene vulgaris Red clover Trifolium pratense Germander Veronica chamaedrys speedwell Sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus Semi- Natural Aesculus Horse chestnut Woodland hippocastanum Wood false Brachypodium brome sylvaticum

Enchanter’s Circaea lutetiana nightshade Common Cornus sanguinea dogwood Hazel Corylus avellana Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna Ash Fraxinus excelsior Cleavers Galium aparine Wood avens Geum urbanum Herb robert Geranium robertianum Ivy Helix hedera

St John’s wort sp. Hypericum sp. Holly Ilex aquifolium Wild privet Ligustrum vulgare Cherry Prunus avium Blackthorn Prunus spinosa Elder Sambucus nigra Wayfaring tree Viburnum lantana Sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus Hazel Corylus avellana Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna Ash Fraxinus excelsior Hedgerows J2.1.1 S41 Honeysuckle Lonicera periclymenum Blackthorn Prunus spinosa Dog rose Rosa canina Black bryony Tamus communis Wayfaring tree Viburnum lantana Sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus Common Cornus sanguinea dogwood Hedgerows with Trees Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna Cherry Prunus avium Blackthorn Prunus spinosa Sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus Hazel Corylus avellana Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna Ash Fraxinus excelsior Scattered Trees A3.1 - Holly Ilex aquifolium Blackthorn Prunus spinosa Dog rose Rosa canina Elder Sambucus nigra Rosebay Chamerion willowherb angustifolium Creeping thistle Cirsium arvense Dense Scrub A2.2 - Spear thistle Cirsium vulgare Midland Crataegus laevigata hawthorn Fox glove Digitalis purpurea

Great Willowherb Epilobium hirsutum Cleavers Gallium aparine Ivy Hedera helix Wild privet Ligustrum vulgare Honeysuckle Lonicera periclymenum Field rose Rosa arvensis Bramble Rubus fruticosus agg.

Appendix C

NVC Botanical Baseline Survey Report (Ilex Ecology, July 2019)

NVC Botanical Baseline Survey

Longsdon Way, Caterham

Ilex Ecology July 2019 1 of 12

Summary

Ilex Ecology were commissioned by CSA Environmental to carry out a Phase II botanical survey of an area of grassland at Longsdon Way, Caterham, referred to herein as the ‘Site’.

The initial survey was carried out on July 9th 2019.

Using a standard NVC (National Vegetation Classification) methodology, the vegetation was mapped and 10 quadrats of vegetation were sampled, as well as a wider species list compiled from a walkover of the grassland.

The survey was hampered by a recent cut and flail that had been carried out across the whole Site; this presented a significant limitation to the survey in terms of being able to gather a comprehensive species list and accurately map the boundaries of the vegetation communities.

However, it was possible to identify two relatively discreet homogenous vegetation types. The southern and outer areas of the field were characterised by species-poor neutral grassland (MG1e Arrhenatherum elatius grassland, Centaurea nigra sub-community), and a small area to the north supported a relatively species-rich calcareous grassland (CG2c Festuca ovina- Avenula pratensis grassland, Holcus lanatus-Trifolium repens sub-community). Between the two grassland types was a large buffer zone which contained several indicator species of calcareous soils but not in sufficient quantities to be classified as calcareous grassland.

CG2 vegetation is an unimproved calcareous grassland type which has recorded dramatic losses over the last century, and is considered to be of high conservation value.

The absence of negative indicator species in the entire unit, such as nettle, docks and thistles and relatively low cover of perennial ryegrass means the grassland has a high potential for effective conservation management, and eventual conversion to a more species-rich habitat.

Ilex Ecology July 2019 2 of 12

Methodology

The area was subject to a National Vegetation Class (NVC) survey on 9th July 2019 by experienced botanist Dominic Price MCIEEM (Ilex Ecology), accompanied by Tilly Fitzwebster ACIEEM (CSA Environmental).

The entire Site was subjected to a walkover survey, which resulted in the mapping of two vegetation types and one transition zone. Once the boundaries of these stands were delimited, five 2x2m quadrats were surveyed in each area.

The quadrats were spread out fairly evenly across each area, but ultimately located randomly by throwing an object from a distance.

Within each quadrat, every species was recorded and then given a cover reading using percentage values. Once the quadrats were recorded, each area was then walked over to record any additional species not found in the plots.

This data was then analysed using MATCH software (Hill, 2016) which assigns a best fit for community type to each plot.

Caveat

The entire area of grass and had been cut a short period before the survey took place. This made it difficult to map out the community boundaries as several of the key species could only be found with a fingertip search of the sward. In addition, it is likely that several key species which tend to only possess floristic features high above the ground will not have been recorded during the surveys. In addition the overall lower list of species makes the dataset less likelyto create an accurate analysis using the match software.

Ilex Ecology July 2019 3 of 12

Results

Fig 1 Map of vegetation stands.

Red circle = calcareous grassland, blue circle = calcareous transitional grassland.

The majority of the Site contained neutral semi-improved and relatively species-poor grassland, characterised by high covers of graminoids such as false oat-grass and red fescue. To the north of the site this changed in character to more calcareous grassland supporting a greater range of species. A large transitional zone was recorded between the two grassland types and to the north which contained many calcareous indicator species but at insufficient cover values to be defined as calcareous grassland. Despite the recent haycut to the field, the overall character was one of abandonment, with large patches of the remnants of hawthorn and bramble scrub.

Ilex Ecology July 2019 4 of 12

Neutral Grass

This area was characterised by a species-poor grass-dominated sward. False oat-grass was the dominant component of the vegetation throughout most of the area, although in places it became co-dominant with Red Fescue. Very few forbs were recorded in this area with field bindweed the most visual component, alongside the large areas of regenerating hawthorn and bramble scrub.

High cover levels of the bryophyte Brachythecium rutabulum were found throughout this sward, which tends to be an indication of periods of neglect, where a thick thatch and dense sward has allowed the development of more damp-loving mosses.

Prior to the haycut it is likely that more forbs and a better diversity of grasses may have been observed, although a detailed inspection within the quadrants revealed a generally low diversity.

One significant factor of note was the total absence of high nutrient demanding species, such as perennial ryegrass, nettle and creeping thistle. This implies that although overall diversity was low, the field would have a good potential to support a higher range of species with the correct management.

Transition Zone

This area (denoted on the map with a blue line) formed the buffer zone between the poor neutral grassland and the more rich calcareous grassland. The sward largely comprised the same grasses and cover values as the poor neutral grassland, but contained a small range of calcareous indicator species including wild marjoram, common bird’s-foot trefoil and glaucous sedge.

Calcareous grassland

This smaller area of the site denoted by a red line contained an area of relatively species-rich calcareous grassland. The dominant grass here was upright brome, which occurred alongside high amounts of glaucous sedge. Other good calcareous indicator species included fairy flax, field scabious, meadow oat-grass and downy oat-grass.

As with the previous grassland, most of this area still showed high signs of neglect over time, with large areas of regenerating hawthorn scrub and a build-up of thatch from the arisings not being diligently collected.

The recent cut also meant it is highly likely that key species, including forbs such as orchids, will not have been found during the survey. As such the accuracy of the affiliation to the calcareous grassland community is not as robust as would be possible in more optimal conditions.

Ilex Ecology July 2019 5 of 12

NVC analysis Each cohort of quadrats were analysed separately to test their affinity with the existing NVC sub- communities. The match coefficients for each area were as follows;

Calcareous Neutral Grassland Grassland Community Percentage Match Community Percentage Match

CG2c 37.22 MG1e 37.40

CG3c 36.73 MG1a 36.81

CG6 36.48 MG1 34.47

CG6a 35.88 MG1b 33.71

CG3 34.81 MG1c 32.63

CG6b 34.69 SD9a 32.05

CG3a 34.36 MG12a 31.88

MG1e 34.14 W24b 31.76

CG2 33.85 MG9b 30.05

CG3b 33.15 SD9 29.76

Key to communities in table: CG2c Festuca ovina-Avenula pratensis grassland, Holcus lanatus-Trifolium repens sub-community CG3c Bromus erectus grassland, Knautia arvensis-Bellis perennis sub-community CG6 Avenula pubescens grassland CG6a Avenula pubescens grassland, Dactylis glomerata-Briza media sub-community CG3 Bromus erectus grassland CG6b Avenula pubescens grassland, Potentilla reptans-Tragopogon pratensis sub-community CG3a Bromus erectus grassland, typical sub-community MG1e Arrhenatherum elatius grassland, Centaurea nigra sub-community CG2 Festuca ovina-Avenula pratensis grassland CG3b Bromus erectus grassland, Centaurea nigra sub-community MG1a Arrhenatherum elatius grassland, Festuca rubra sub-community MG1 Arrhenatherum elatius grassland MG1b Arrhenatherum elatius grassland, Urtica dioica sub-community MG1c Arrhenatherum elatius grassland, Filipendula ulmaria sub-community SD9a Ammophila arenaria-Arrhenatherum elatius dune grassland, typical sub-community MG12a Festuca arundinacea grassland, Lolium perenne-Holcus lanatus sub-community W24b Rubus fruticosus-Holcus lanatus underscrub, Arrhenatherum elatius-Heracleum sphondylium sub-community MG9b Holcus lanatus-Deschampsia cespitosa grassland, Arrhenatherum elatius sub-community SD9 Ammophila arenaria-Arrhenatherum elatius dune grassland Ilex Ecology July 2019 6 of 12

CG2c Festuca ovina-Avenula pratensis grasslands are a declining vegetation type found on free- drawing calcareous lithomorphic soils in warm and dry lowland climates. The communities are reliant on a mixture of grazing and haycutting, and are now much reduced due to abandonment of land, and increase in nutrient leaves leading to more species-poor swards dominated by fewer larger plants.

The communities typically comprises a species-rich mixture of grasses and forbs, without any single species gaining overall dominance, and thus developing an intimate mosaic of many smaller, more delicate plants. Many rare species including a large range of orchids can be found in this community.

CG2c Festuca ovina-Avenula pratensis grassland, Holcus lanatus-Trifolium repens sub-community is a slightly degraded sub-type of this vegetation type, and although most of the community constants are still represented, many of the smaller forbs such as rock-rose, squinancywort and fairy flax are not found (N.B. fairy flax was in fact found at extremely low levels within the survey Site). This habitat also differs from the main community in that there is a rise in the amount of bulkier grasses, such as false brome and Yorkshire fog, which can give the grassland a much more tussocky appearance than the typical CG2 community. This change tends to occur due to a loss of management, and especially the removal of grazing, linked to a raise in nutrient levels on the soils which prevents the smaller forbs from competing. MG1 Arrhenatherum elatius grassland is a relatively common type of grassland that occurs on ungrazed or lightly grazed grasslands on neutral soils. The key factor in its development is the lack of a grazing or cutting regime, which gives dominance to taller grasses and results in a poorer diversity than its grazed counterparts.

The MG1e Arrhenatherum elatius grassland, Centaurea nigra sub-community is defined as a species rich version of MG1 with a lower dominance of coarse grasses, and the presence of a more species- rich flora. It is usually recorded when meadows are in the transition between species-rich and species-poor, reflecting changes in management. Although the surveys did not identify this area as the transition zone, this means the entire site has at least some affinity to calcareous grassland, and the potential for this habitat to expand with the correct management.

Ilex Ecology July 2019 7 of 12

Assessment As outlined earlier in this report due to the site being cut prior to the survey, accuracy of the survey was significantly limited. It is likely that a significant component of the vegetation had been removed, and therefore mapping of the habitat boundaries was extremely difficult.

The percentage value matches produced by the software are also low. However, considering the lack of vegetation recorded and the fact that a clear correlation emerged, demonstrates the quality of the habitat. To be definitive, the survey would need to be repeated before a cut was carried out, but it is likely this would lead to a stronger correlation with unimproved calcareous grassland rather than downgrade the classification.

CG2 grassland is an exceptionally rare grassland, covered under the Section 41 and Biodiversity Action Plan ‘Lowland Calcareous Grassland’ habitat type. Due to the rarity and high conservation value of this grassland there should be a strong presumption against the destruction of any remaining stands of this vegetation.

Earlier surveys of the Site had suggested that calcareous grassland was confined to the upper slopes, but in fact as the 2019 survey mapping shows the picture is more complicated, with a circular area of grassland found in the northern central part of the site, with a wider transition zone covering much of this northern area. The smaller southern section of the site is more defined by species-poor MG1e grassland, and there may be the possibility of limited development here if attached to a mitigation plan which radically improved the current management of the rest of the site.

Encouragingly, the small number of calcareous specialists found in extremely low numbers on the entire site afford a huge potential to the site, and with improved management this could be converted to a much more valuable area of grassland, giving both value as a biological as well as an amenity resource, both in terms of the visual appeal of the meadow and the additional presence of groups such as butterflies, moths and crickets which could thrive in such an area.

References

Hill (2016) MAVIS Software. https://www.ceh.ac.uk/services/modular-analysis-vegetation-information-system-mavis

Rodwell, JS, ed (1992) British plant communities Volume 3: Grasslands and montane communities. Cambridge University Press

Ilex Ecology July 2019 8 of 12

Appendix 1

Table 1: Survey Data 09 July 2019, Neutral Grassland

Quadrat M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 Overall DAFOR* Convolvulus arvensis Field Bindweed 5 5 O-LA Crataegus monogyna Hawthorn 1 15 5 5 F-LA Galium album Hedge Bedstraw 1 4 2 F Galium aparine Cleavers Galium verum Lady's Bedstraw Geranium pratense Meadow Crane's-bill Geranium molle Dove's-foot Crane's-bill 1 1 R Heracleum sphondylium Hogweed 2 R Lotus corniculatus Common Bird's-foot-trefoil 5 O Potentilla reptans Creeping Cinquefoil 3 3 5 F Rubus fruticosus Bramble 8 15 20 3 5 A Rumex crispus Curled Dock 1 1 R Agrostis stolonifera Creeping Bent O Arrhenatherum elatius False Oat-grass 60 35 65 35 30 A-LD Brachypodium sylvaticum False Brome 5 10 O Carex pendula Pendulous Sedge R-LA Dactylis glomerata Cock's-foot 5 5 5 F Elytrigia repens Common Couch R Festuca rubra Red Fescue 20 60 20 40 30 A-LD Holcus lanatus Yorkshire-fog 10 5 5 O Phleum bertolonii Smaller Cat's-tail R Poa pratensis Smooth Meadow-grass 5 5 O Schedonorus arundinaceus Tall Fescue R Schedonorus pratensis Meadow Fescue 15 10 F Trisetum flavescens Yellow Oat-grass 10 2 F Brachythecium rutabulum Rough-stalked Feather-moss 5 40 15 A Scleropodium purum Neat Feather-moss 20 R *DAFOR Scale: D = Dominant, A = Abundant, F = Frequent, O = Occasional, R = Rare, L - Locally

Ilex Ecology July 2019 9 of 12

Table 2: Survey Data 09 July 2019, Calcareous Grassland

Quadrat C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 Overall DAFOR* Agrimonia eupatoria Agrimony 3 1 R Anagallis arvensis Scarlet Pimpernel 1 1 R Crataegus monogyna Hawthorn 5 3 3 F Fragaria vesca Wild Strawberry 1 R Galium album Hedge Bedstraw 5 4 4 4 5 A Hypericum perforatum Perforate St John's-wort 2 2 R Knautia arvensis Field Scabious 3 8 3 O Lathyrus pratensis Meadow Vetchling 2 Linum catharticum Fairy Flax 1 R Odontites vernus Red Bartsia 1 R Origanum vulgare Marjoram 10 4 5 6 4 A Potentilla reptans Creeping Cinquefoil 3 1 1 R Prunella vulgaris Selfheal 1 1 R Rosa sp. Rose 1 1 2 O Sanguisorba minor Salad Burnet R Silene vulgaris Bladder Campion 1 1 1 O Trifolium pratense Red Clover R Veronica chamaedrys Germander Speedwell 2 R Agrostis stolonifera Creeping Bent R Arrhenatherum elatius False Oat-grass 10 O-LA Avenula pratense Meadow Oat-grass 5 5 R Avenula pubescens Downy Oat-grass 2 3 2 R Brachypodium sylvaticum False Brome 2 5 3 7 A Bromopsis erecta Upright Brome 20 30 35 25 35 A-LD Carex flacca Glaucous Sedge 20 25 20 15 25 A Dactylis glomerata Cock's-foot 1 1 1 R Festuca ovina Sheep's-fescue 2 2 R Festuca rubra Red Fescue 15 10 15 10 12 A Holcus lanatus Yorkshire-fog 5 1 1 O Phleum bertolonii Smaller Cat's-tail 2 2 R Schedonorus arundinaceus Tall Fescue 1 R Schedonorus pratensis Meadow Fescue 20 4 15 O-LA Trisetum flavescens Yellow Oat-grass 5 2 5 2 O Scleropodium purum Neat Feather-moss 5 5 10 10 10 A THATCH 25 10 BARE GROUND 20 *DAFOR Scale: D = Dominant, A = Abundant, F = Frequent, O = Occasional, R = Rare, L - Locally

Ilex Ecology July 2019 10 of 12

Appendix 2 Images

Neutral grassland

Calcareous grassland

Ilex Ecology July 2019 11 of 12

Areas of recent scrub clearance

Site from southerly aspect

Ilex Ecology July 2019 12 of 12

Appendix D

Ecological Assessment Plan – CAT0016 (TEP Ref G5636.007B.14, September 2016)

KEY HELAA Site Habitat Area Development Suitability (Ecological Matters Only)

DEERSWOOD Ecologically U nsuitable(3.96ha) !(A CLOSE

Note

GODSTONE ROAD 1.e T h terms “Suitable”, “Unsuita ble”and “Sen sitive” are defined

BY-PASS

ONLY in respect of ecological factors. Many other factors will CHURCHVIEW CLOSE TILL INGDOWN LANE inform Tandridge Counc il’s overall assessment of whether a site . is suitable for development For example, a site that is termed “ec ologic ally suitable” may be not suitable for development on landscape grounds. Conversely, Tandridge Council, taking

CATERHAM account of all the evidenc efrom other studies, may conclude

that a site termed “ecologicallyo unsuitab le”isappropriate t alloc ate for development, given the constraintsn applyi g to other sites. !(F 2. For an explanation of how Ecological Assessment maps are gener ated, refer to Chapt . ers 5 a nd6 of T EP Report 5636 003.

3. All linnes andn marki gs are i dicative only, and further surveys may alter judgemen tsa nd. boundaries

This map has been produced from the following sources:

r -Tandridge Dist ict Council -Surrey Wildlife Trust Schedule (January 1997) -Natural England -Reproduced by permission ofOrdnance s Survey on b ehalfofHerMajesty' Stationery Office. ©Crown Copyrightanddatabaseright 2016.A ll rights reserved. LONGSDON WAY !(C Site Map !(F ASPREY GROVE

OD LANE

1:30,000

!(D B HELAASites Removed (CAT 053, CAT 062, LIN023, LIN030 and OXT051) MK FH 14/09/2016 A ENASites Added MK FH 16/08/2016 !(B Rev Description Drawn Approved Date ASHWICK CLOSE

COLLIERS

Genesis Centre, Birchwood Science Park, Warrington WA37BH Tel 01 92 5 84 400 4 e- m ail t ep @ te p.uk . com w w w .tep.uk.com !(D Project !(E Tandridge DC Site Based Ecology Assessments

Ti tle Ecological Assessment - CAT 016 GODSTONE ROAD

Drawing Number G5636.007B.14 Sheet 14 of 135

Metres Drawn Checked Approved Scale Date GREENWOODGARDENS 0 37.5 75 MK SS FH 1:1,700 @ A3 15/09/2016

Appendix E

Development Plan (DES/929/600, September 2019)