Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate Assessment in Support of Residential Allocation Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate Assessment in Support of Residential Allocation
October 2015
Indigo Planning
Indigo Planning Limited Toronto Square Leeds LS1 2HJ
Tel: 0113 380 0270 Fax: 0113 380 0271
[email protected] indigoplanning.com
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate Assessment in Support of Residential Allocation
Contents Page
1. Introduction 1 Context 1 Site characteristics 1 Programme 1 Report structure 1
2. Site context 3 General location 3 Statutory or non-statutory designations 3
3. Supporting Evidence 5 Transport assessment 5 Ecology 5 Trees and landscaping 5
4. Current Planning Policy 7 National planning policy 7 Local planning policy 7
5. Site Assessment 11 Proposed site – land off Colber Lane 11
6. Conclusions 14
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate Assessment in Support of Residential Allocation
Appendices
Appendix 1 Site Location Plan
Appendix 2 Transport Assessment, Curtins (August 2015)
Appendix 3 Proposed Site Allocation Boundaries
Appendix 4 Ecological Survey, Smeedon Foreman (August 2015)
Appendix 5 Arboricultural Survey, Smeedon Foreman (August 2015)
Appendix 6 Bishop Thornton Sites - Harrogate SHLAA (May 2013 Update)
Appendix 7 Local Services within a 10 Minute Drive Time of Bishop Thornton (August 2015)
Page 1
1. Introduction
Context
1.1. This report has been commissioned by the Diocese of Leeds to assess the sustainability and suitability of land at Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, in support of the allocation of the site for future residential development.
1.2. The site is within the ownership of the Diocese of Leeds. This report supplements representations submitted to Harrogate Borough Council in relation to the Harrogate Strategic Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment (SHELAA) Call for Sites consultation in October 2014.
Site characteristics
1.3. The site in its entirety covers approximately 1.2 hectares of grazed agricultural land, with existing site access obtained from Colber Lane. The site can be divided into two specific parcels. The first site (site 1) fronts onto Colber Lane, is circa 0.4ha in size and has the capacity to accommodate circa 12 dwellings (at a gross density of 30 dwellings per hectare). The second site (site 2) is a larger parcel of land located to the north of site 1, of circa 0.8ha in size, which has capacity to accommodate circa 24 dwellings, (at a gross density of 30 dwellings per hectare). Site 2 is more divorced from the existing settlement sitting further north than the current development limits but has the potential to be developed for housing in conjunction with site 1.
Programme
1.4. The Council is currently reviewing all sites put forward at the Call for Sites consultation stage in October 2014. This report has been prepared, and is submitted to supplement the initial representations made by Indigo Planning in October 2014, and subsequent representations submitted in August 2015 prior to the final document being published in late 2015.
Report structure
1.5. In assessing the site a review has been undertaken of the relevant Harrogate District Core Strategy (2009) and Local Plan (2001), the sites; location, historical context, proximity to retail and leisure services, transport credentials (including appropriate site access), ecological arboricultural value. The transport assessment has been undertaken by Curtins Consulting. The ecological assessment and arboricultural reports have been prepared by Smeedon Foreman. These reports are appended to this report for reference, and feed into the overall assessment undertaken by Indigo Planning.
1.6. The research confirms that the site has the potential to be developed to provide residential development and is suitable and available for housing, as explored further in the Site Assessment in Section 4.
1.7. The report is structured as follows:
• Section 2 outlines the context of the site;
• Section 3 outlines collated evidence in support of allocation;
• Section 4 provides a brief commentary on the current relevant local and national planning policies;
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate rpt.005...21560003 Indigo Planning on behalf of Diocese of Leeds Page 2
• Section 4 provides a site assessment considering land use planning policy, highways, trees and ecology; and
• Section 5 sets out the overall conclusions of the assessment.
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate rpt.005...21560003 Indigo Planning on behalf of Diocese of Leeds Page 3
2. Site context
General location
2.1. The site is located within the village of Bishop Thornton, to the north west of Ripley village centre, with Ripon to the north and Harrogate to the south. The site is bounded to the south by agricultural outbuildings, to the south west and west by residential dwellings and to the north and east by agricultural land.
2.2. The site in its entirety covers approximately 1.2 hectares of grazed agricultural land, with existing site access obtained from Colber Lane located to the south and east of the site boundary.
2.3. The site can be divided into two distinct areas of land site1 (outlined in red) and site 2 (outlined in blue) as identified in the Site Location Plan below. Agricultural land across the entire of Bishop Thornton is classified as grade 4 (poor) by Natural England.
Figure 2.1 Site location plan
Site 1
Site 1
2.4. Site 1 (indicated in red) covers approximately 0.4 hectares of land, in an elongated rectangular form, directly behind the existing properties on Colber Lane. Existing access to the site is gained via site 2 and the existing entrance off Colber Lane.
2.5. Site 2 (indicated in blue) covers approximately 0.8 hectares and forms the large square area of land directly to the north of site 1. Access to the site is gained off Colber Lane on the eastern corner of this site (site 2). Site locations plans are provided at Appendix 1.
Planning history
2.6. An online search of the relevant planning history from Harrogate Borough Council concludes that the site has no relevant planning history. Historical Ordinance Survey maps also indicate that the site has never been developed.
Statutory or non-statutory designations
2.7. The site does not contain any environmental constraints (i.e. Tree Preservation Orders (TPO) or ecological designations). There are no heritage designations within or adjacent to the site that would preclude its potential for development.
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate rpt.005...21560003 Indigo Planning on behalf of Diocese of Leeds Page 4
2.8. The site is located within Flood Zone 1 of the Environment Agency’s Flood Zone Map and therefore is the lowest possible risk for flooding.
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate rpt.005...21560003 Indigo Planning on behalf of Diocese of Leeds Page 5
3. Supporting Evidence
Transport assessment
3.1. Curtins Consulting has undertaken an appraisal of the site. This assessment considered highway safety, vehicle trips generated by the proposed development, and an assessment of access by sustainable modes of transport. This is attached at Appendix 2, but the key conclusions are summarised below.
3.2. The site is located within 60m of a bus stop and is approximately 2 miles from the nearest local convenience shops at Markington and Ripley. The nearest bus stops provide access to both Ripon town centre and Pateley Bridge, with a regular timetable running throughout the week. If further residential development was to be brought forward in Bishop Thornton there is potential for these services to be enhanced.
3.3. Access into both sites 1 and 2 is best taken through Site 2 due to visibility constraints posed by the positioning of Site 1 onto Colber Lane. This does not preclude the allocation of site 1 in isolation from site 2. Any allocation of site 1 in isolation can include land sufficient to provide vehicular access along the eastern boundary of the site utilising the existing access point from Colber Lane. This access is entirely deliverable given its singular ownership, location and physical characteristics. The proposed allocation boundaries to sites 1 and 2 are shown on Appendix 3.
3.4. It is anticipated that developing Site 1 for circa 12 dwellings and Site 2 for circa 20 dwellings (maximum figures) would generate an additional 10 vehicles on the local highway network in the morning peak and an additional 13 in the evening peak. This equates to a vehicle every 5 minutes accessing or egressing from the site which is considered low.
Ecology
3.5. Smeedon Foreman has undertaken a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal of the site. This is attached at Appendix 4.
3.6. There are no statutorily designated sites within the site boundary or within 2km of the site. The site is within a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Impact Risk Zone (IRZ). However data provided by the relevant Natural England GIS dataset indicates the proposed development is unlikely to pose a threat to this SSSI.
3.7. The ecological appraisal has focused on species such as great crested newts, bats, badgers, frogs, breeding birds and other species such as foxes.
3.8. Any development of the site is unlikely to have any impact upon great crested newts, badgers or breeding birds, albeit if any hedgerows are to be removed these will have to be undertaken outside of nesting periods.
3.9. There are four trees on site with potential for roosting bats. If these trees are to be affected by the proposals i.e. any tree surgery or felling works, further assessment through a climb and inspect survey is recommended. The installation of bat boxes upon new buildings and/or trees to be retained would aim to provide roosting opportunities for the local bat population.
Trees and landscaping
3.10. Smeedon Foreman has undertaken an arboricultural survey to assess the existing trees on site and there current state of health. This report is attached at Appendix 5.
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate rpt.005...21560003 Indigo Planning on behalf of Diocese of Leeds Page 6
3.11. The survey demonstrates that there are 17 trees currently on the site. The assessment has identified that of these 10 are in a poor state.
3.12. Whilst these trees offer some local habitat, should they be required to be removed as part of any future development, their loss would not be of detrimental impact and replacement landscaping would be of a greater benefit.
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate rpt.005...21560003 Indigo Planning on behalf of Diocese of Leeds Page 7
4. Current Planning Policy
National planning policy
4.1. The National Planning Policy Framework 2012 (the Framework) outlines a presumption in favour of sustainable development. It states (paragraph 14):
“At the heart of the planning system is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan making and decision taking.”
4.2. The Framework defines the three mutually dependant dimensions of sustainable development as the economic, social, and environmental roles.
4.3. Presumption in favour of sustainable development is a clear driver in the planning system through both plan making and decision taking and for decision taking (paragraph 14) this means:
“Approving development proposals that accord with the Development Plan without delay…where the Development Plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, granting permission unless any adverse impact of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits…’
4.4. Paragraphs 214 and 215 of the Framework state that the weight afforded to relevant policies and existing plans should reflect their degree of consistency with the overall Framework.
Key planning principles
4.5. Paragraph 17 of the Framework sets the overarching role of the planning system. This includes, planning not simply being about scrutiny, finding ways to improve the places where people live, supporting economic development to deliver new homes, encouraging the effective use of land and actively managing patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public transport whilst securing high quality design and amenity.
Housing
4.6. Paragraph 49 outlines how housing applications should be considered in presumption of sustainable development, where demonstrable benefits outweigh adverse impact. Policies for the supply of housing are not considered up-to date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites.
4.7. The National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG) (2014) provides guidance to support the Framework and in respect of housing paragraph 13 of the housing standards section states ‘this includes planning to provide the high quality housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations while, helping to use natural resources prudently’.
Local planning policy
4.8. The Development Plan for Harrogate District consists of the Harrogate District Core Strategy (2009) and saved policies from the Harrogate District Local Plan (2001), Selected Alterations (2004)(2007) and its associated Policies Map (2001).
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate rpt.005...21560003 Indigo Planning on behalf of Diocese of Leeds Page 8
Harrogate District Core Strategy
4.9. The following policies from the Core Strategy (2009) are relevant in the consideration of any future proposal that may come forward on the site for residential development.
4.10. Policy SG1: Settlement Growth Housing Distribution indicates that:
4.11. ‘…the majority of new housing built in villages and the countryside will be accommodated in those villages with the best access to jobs, shops and services…with the scale of housing land release required by the Regional Spatial Strategy will necessitate the development of greenfield land involving…smaller scale land releases focussed around other settlements with the best access to jobs, shops and services that are well related to the form, function and character of the settlement concerned.’
4.12. Policy SG2: Settlement Growth: Hierarchy and Limits designates Bishop Thornton as a Group C settlement. This specifies that such settlements:
“will accommodate very limited growth in the form of sustainable development within the existing built up area”.
4.13. With the exception of very small scale ‘rounding off’:
“the only expansion of the built up areas of these settlements will be for the small scale 100% affordable housing schemes for local people”.
4.14. Policy SG2: Settlement Growth (page 17) discusses further how settlements are classified as Group C Villages if they are within a well-defined built up area, on a key bus/rail route and feature at least three community facilities including; a post office, foodstore, doctor, primary school, pub, village hall, place of worship or sports hall.
4.15. It is of note that since the most recent Annual Survey of Services and Facilities (November 2006), Bishop Thornton has lost one of its four classified community facilities (the pub) and is classified due to the villages two primary schools, place of worship and ability to provide employment to at least 10 people to live and work within the village.
4.16. The Core Strategy key performance indicators (page 58) clearly state that 21.5% of all additional housing provision (as policy SG2 states) should be accommodated across the District’s villages including Category C settlements, including the village within which the site is located, Bishop Thornton.
4.17. Policy SG3: Settlement Growth: Conservation of the Countryside, including Green Belt, identifies that outside the development and infill limits of settlements (including Bishop Thornton):
“land will be classified as countryside and there will be strict control over new development in accordance with national policy protecting the countryside and Green Belt…to promote a sustainable pattern of rural development in those areas of the Countryside outside of the Green Belt (including Bishop Thornton) the following forms of development will be encouraged…affordable homes for local people, rural building conversions, small scale community facilities and employment adjacent to development limits and sustainable rural enterprises.”
Harrogate Local Plan Policies Map
4.18. As identified in the Harrogate District Local Plan Policies Map (2001), the site is unallocated and lies directly to the north of the Bishop Thornton development limit boundary. The boundary for development limit was set as part of the Local Plan (2001) policy C15:Conservation of Rural Areas, superseded by the Core Strategy (2009) policy SG3:
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate rpt.005...21560003 Indigo Planning on behalf of Diocese of Leeds Page 9
Settlement Growth: Conservation of the Countryside.
Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA)
4.19. The District’s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) Update Report was published in May 2013. Within Bishop Thornton two sites are identified as suitable for the provision of housing, due to their adjacent location to existing settlement identified for settlement growth in policy SG2 of the Core Strategy (2009).
4.20. The SHLAA Plan below shows the location of all previously assessed and suitable sites (in blue) and our site (not previously assessed but deemed highly suitable) (in red)).
Figure 4.1 SHLAA plan
4.21. Site A (ref: RL1147), lies to the west of the settlement boundary, on land at West Farm Lane. It is a small greenfield site, in agricultural use, covering approximately 0.18 hectares. The site lies adjacent to the settlement identified for growth in the Core Strategy SG2, located within open countryside and restricted development as specified in policy SG3 of the Core Strategy. Issues also exist questioning required site access via Colber Lane and the necessity to meet highway standards.
4.22. Site B (ref:RL4025) to the south of the settlement boundary, on land south of West Grove. Is a site that although flat, has no defined southern boundary, due to it being part of a larger agricultural field. The northern boundary abuts the highway of West Grove and resident6ial cul-de-sac with semi-detached properties. Again, the site lies adjacent to the settlement identified for growth in the Core Strategy SG2, but is mostly within open countryside and restricted development as specified in policy SG3 of the Core Strategy. Issues again exist in relation to the suitability of site access onto West Grove. The sites ownership and availability is also unknown.
4.23. The identified sites are located to the south and east of the Diocese’s site and are located within a comparative area and location, adjacent to existing residential properties. Both sites were selected as suitable for housing due to their low grade agricultural land value, no restrictive development ground/pollution/demolition or flood zone restrictions, adjacent location to an existing cycle route and acceptable site access with no adverse impact on the capacity of the existing network. It is of note that neither of these sites has come forward for development.
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate rpt.005...21560003 Indigo Planning on behalf of Diocese of Leeds Page 10
4.24. The Council provides quarterly updates on their housing land supply, with the latest update published in June 2015 indicating that the District only has a borderline deliverable supply of 5.1 years (including a 20% buffer).
Emerging Strategic Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment (SHELAA)
4.25. The Strategic Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (SHELAA) Call for Sites consultation process ended in October 2014. The two sites, the subject of this suitability appraisal, were put forward as part of this consultation process. The Council is currently considering all representations received and the final document will be published towards the end of 2015. The content of this assessment should be utilised by the local planning authority to inform the final content of this document.
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate rpt.005...21560003 Indigo Planning on behalf of Diocese of Leeds Page 11
5. Site Assessment
5.1. An assessment of the site at Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton was made against the same criteria used for sites included in the SHLAA 2013 update. Our assessment indicates that this site is available and suitable for housing as existing poor grade agricultural land, with appropriate access, causing no adverse impact on the capacity of the existing network, adjacent to the settlement limit with no development ground or flood zone restrictions.
Proposed site – land off Colber Lane
Core Facts
Land Type: Greenfield Existing Use: Agricultural Settlement: Bishop Thornton Grouping: Settlement C Proposed Use: Residential
5.2. Located on the eastern development boundary of Bishop Thornton, the proposed site (above) in its entirety covers approximately 1.2 hectares of flat, grade 4 (poor) grazed agricultural land. The site is bounded to the south by agricultural outbuildings, to the south west and west by residential dwellings and to the north and east by agricultural land.
5.3. The site can be divided into two distinct areas of land Site1 (outlined in red) and Site 2 (outlined in blue) as identified above.
Characteristics
5.4. Site 1 (in red) covers a gross area of 0.4 hectares and abuts existing properties on Colber Lane. The site is adjacent to the development limits of Bishop Thornton, with site access gained off Colber Lane, via the existing entrance on the eastrn corner of Site 2. This site has capacity to accommodate circa 8 dwellings.
5.5. Site 2 (in blue) covers a gross area of 0.8 hectares and is adjacent to Site 1, with access to both sites is gained via this site as described above. This site has capacity to accommodate circa 20 dwellings.
5.6. As a whole the site is well related to the wider settlement of Bishop Thornton, located within the area of land sandwiched between the road and residential properties to the south and east, and wider estate buildings and access roads to the north and west. This is in direct
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate rpt.005...21560003 Indigo Planning on behalf of Diocese of Leeds Page 12
contrast to the sites considered in the SHLAA which extend exclusively into the open countryside to the south and west.
Relevant history
5.7. No relevant site history has been identified.
Designations and issues
5.8. There are also no known problems with; ground conditions, hazardous installations on or near the site, no pollution or contamination issues, no known remediation issues or buildings on site requiring demolition.
5.9. The site does not contain any environmental constraints (i.e. Tree Preservation Orders (TPO) or ecological designations). There are no heritage designations within or adjacent to the site that would preclude its potential for development.
5.10. The site is located within Flood Zone 1 of the Environment Agency’s Flood Zone Map and therefore is the lowest possible risk for flooding.
Suitability
5.11. The site lies adjacent to a settlement identified for growth in the Core Strategy SG2.
5.12. It is anticipated that developing site 1 for circa 12 dwellings and site 2 for circa 20 dwellings (maximum figures) would generate an additional 10 vehicles on the local highway network in the morning peak and an additional 13 in the evening peak. This equates to a vehicle every 5 minutes accessing or egressing from the site which is considered low.
5.13. Any development of the site is unlikely to have any impact upon great crested newts, badgers or breeding birds, albeit if any hedgerows are to be removed these will have to be undertaken outside of nesting periods.
5.14. There are four trees on site with potential for roosting bats. If these trees are to be affected by the proposals i.e. any tree surgery or felling works, further assessment is recommended. The installation of bat boxes upon new buildings and/or trees to be retained would aim to provide roosting opportunities for the local bat population
5.15. An arboricultural survey to assess the existing trees on site demonstrates that there are 17 trees currently on the site, of which 10 are in a poor state.
5.16. Whilst these trees offer some local habitat, should they be required to be removed, their loss would not be of detrimental impact and replacement landscaping would be of a greater benefit.
Key constraint policies
5.17. Key constraint policies include the following Core Strategy policies:
• HLP3 - Affordable Housing Provision: Rural Exception Sites; and
• SG3 - Settlement Growth: Conservation of the Countryside, including Green Belt.
5.18. While such policies restrict the development of the proposed site for housing, the proposed sites 1 and 2, in addition to the sites previously designated for inclusion at Bishop Thornton all fall adjacent to the existing settlement limit, just within the green belt.
5.19. As further assessment of the sites suitability, a site visit and assessment was undertaken by Indigo on 12 August 2015. As part of this 16 surrounding villages within a drive time of 10
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate rpt.005...21560003 Indigo Planning on behalf of Diocese of Leeds Page 13
minutes from the site were visited and their range of services assessed. A copy of the full assessment is included in Appendix 7.
5.20. The range of local services accessible within a 10 minute drive time includes access to 10 local shops/post office stores. Bishop Thornton has no local store but two primary schools and a place of worship. The settlement is considered a major employer, providing at least 10 jobs for people to live and work within the same village.
5.21. The site is located within 60m of a bus stop and is approximately 2 miles from the nearest local convenience shops at Markington and Ripley. The nearest bus stops provide access to both Ripon town centre and Pateley Bridge, with a regular timetable running throughout the week.
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate rpt.005...21560003 Indigo Planning on behalf of Diocese of Leeds Page 14
6. Conclusions
6.1. Our assessment indicates that this site is available and suitable for housing as:
• It constitutes existing poor grade agricultural land;
• Can be provided with appropriate access;
• Causes no adverse impact on the capacity of the existing highway network;
• Is adjacent to the settlement limit where limited rounding off is permitted by policy SG2; and
• Has no physical characteristics (such as ground stability of flooding) which preclude its development.
6.2. The proposed site has access to a range of local stores, health, education and leisure services within a 10 minute drive time, in addition to the existing bus routes from Bishop Thornton to Ripley and Pateley Bridge thereby reinforcing the sites sustainability credentials.
6.3. There is no heritage or environmental restriction placed on the site which could hinder future development.
6.4. The development of the site(s) for residential development will not have an adverse impact upon existing trees. Development of the site will allow for diseased and damaged trees to be removed and new trees planted.
6.5. Safe access into the site(s) can be gained via site 2 which would ensure visibility for vehicles users/ development of a maximum of 32 dwellings would generate on average one vehicle movement every 5 minutes which is not considered to be excessive. Colber Lane is a lightly trafficked road and poses a low risk to pedestrians and cyclists. This does not preclude the allocation of site 1 in isolation from site 2. Any allocation of site 1 in isolation can include land sufficient to provide vehicular access along the eastern boundary of the site utilising the existing access point from Colber Lane. This access is entirely deliverable given its singular ownership, location and physical characteristics.
6.6. The two sites identified as part of the Harrogate SHLAA (2013) within Bishop Thornton are similar to our site in area and location with both adjacent to existing residential properties. The two sites proposed by the Diocese of Leeds are deliverable and no constraints have been identified.
6.7. On this basis the land promoted by the Diocese of Leeds better meet the planning policy tests outlined in the report, and is better placed to deliver the housing strategy required by the Council than the two sites previously identified. Accordingly, the site should be allocated in advance of the two sites previously assessed in the SHLAA.
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate rpt.005...21560003 Indigo Planning on behalf of Diocese of Leeds
1 APPENDIX
Key Site boundary Project LPA Harrogate Borough Indigo Planning Limited Land on Ripley Road Toronto Square Council Leeds Title LS1 2HJ Site location plan Date: 23.10.14 Scale: As shown Project No: 21560003 T 0113 380 0270 Client Drawing No: 21560003/1 F 0113 380 0271 Diocese of Leeds Drawn By: TH [email protected]
Key Site boundary Project LPA Harrogate Borough Indigo Planning Limited Land on Ripley Road Toronto Square Council Leeds Title LS1 2HJ Site location plan Date: 23.10.14 Scale: As shown Project No: 21560003 T 0113 380 0270 Client Drawing No: 21560003/2 F 0113 380 0271 Diocese of Leeds Drawn By: TH [email protected]
2 APPENDIX
Imperial West
Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Site Appraisal Report
Curtins Ref: TPLE 1239
Revision: Draft
Issue Date: 24 August 2015
Sophos International
Client Name: The Diocese of Leeds
Curtins Rose Wharf, Ground Floor 78-80 East Street Leeds L29 8EE Tel: 0113 234 8509 www.curtins.com
STRUCTURES • TRANSPORT PLANNING • ENVIRONMENTAL • CIVILS & INFRASTRUCTURE • EXPERT ADVICE • SUSTAINABILITY • STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT Birmingham • Bristol • Cardiff • Douglas • Edinburgh • Kendal • Leeds • Liverpool • London • Manchester • Nottingham
TPLE 1239 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Site Appraisal Report
Rev Description Issued by Checked Date
00 Draft TAP MDR 24/08/2015
This report has been prepared for the sole benefit, use, and information for the client. The liability of Curtins Consulting Limited with respect to the information contained in the report will not extend to any third party.
Author Signature Date
Tom Pridmore Dip EP 24 August 2015 Senior Transport Planner
Reviewed Signature Date
Matt Rudman BEng MCIHT 24 August 2015 Associate
Rev Draft | Copyright © 2015 Curtins Consulting Ltd Page i
TPLE 1239 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Site Appraisal Report
Table of contents 1.0 Site Appraisal - Transport ...... 1
1.1 Introduction ...... 1
1.2 Existing Use and Access ...... 1
1.3 Proposed Use ...... 3
1.4 Proposed Access ...... 3
1.5 Trip Generation ...... 4
1.6 Sustainable Travel ...... 5
1.7 Transport Policy Review ...... 7
1.8 Conclusions and Recommendation ...... 7
2.0 Appendices ...... 8
Figures
Figure 1.1 – Location Plan ...... 1 Figure 1.2 – Existing Site Access from Colber Lane ...... 2 Figure 1.3 – Cycle Route Signage……………………………………………………………………………………….6
Tables
Table 1.1 – Proposed Development Trip Generation ...... 5 Table 1.2 – Local Bus Journey Summary ...... 6
Rev Draft | Copyright © 2015 Curtins Consulting Ltd Page ii
TPLE 1239 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Site Appraisal Report
1.0 Site Appraisal - Transport
1.1 Introduction
This Transport Site Appraisal Note has been prepared by Curtins to support the promotion of two sections of land to the north of Colber Lane in the village of Bishop Thornton, North Yorkshire. The local planning authority is Harrogate Borough Council and the local highway authority is North Yorkshire County Council. Section 1 is shown in blue and Section 2 in red on the site photo below.
A detailed site visit was undertaken by Curtins staff on Tuesday 11th August 2015 and the observations and measurements taken have been used to inform this note.
The entire site (Sections 1 and 2) is bounded by Colber Lane to the south and east, residential properties to the west and agricultural land to the north. The site is shown encircled in Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1 – Location Plan
1.2 Existing Use and Access
Both sites are owned by the Diocese of Leeds and are presently used as arable farmland. The only vehicle access to the site is for use by the farmer and is located on Colber Lane to the east of the second section. The access is presently gated and wide enough for a tractor to enter the site. A culvert
Rev Draft | Copyright © 2015 Curtins Consulting Ltd Page 1
TPLE 1239 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Site Appraisal Report
has been provided for the access point so that it can be located over the highway drainage ditch that runs alongside Colber Lane. This access point is shown in Figure 1.2.
Figure 1.2 – Existing Site Access from Colber Lane
Colber Lane is the main road through the village and through various name changes forms a link from the village of Clint to Wormald Green, where it meets the A61, Ripon Road. This road routes through the villages of Burnt Yates, Shaw Mills, Bishop Thornton and Markington and is rural in nature throughout.
Site observations showed Colber Lane to be very lightly trafficked and with sparse street lighting, the only evidence of lighting, being a streetlight adjacent to the existing site access point.
In keeping with the rural nature of the village and its surroundings, Colber Lane has no footways along its length until the approaches to the priority junction at the centre of the village and St Joseph’s Catholic Primary School. The footways in the centre of the village were measured to be between 1.7m and 1.8m wide. The carriageway was measured to be between 5.45m and 6.1m in width depending on location.
The speed limit on Colber Lane is 30mph through the village centre although this is lowered to 20mph past the entrances to the two primary schools. Colber Lane is on National Cycle Network route 67 and by its designation as part of this route, there is an inference that the route is lightly trafficked and seen as safe for vulnerable road users.
Rev Draft | Copyright © 2015 Curtins Consulting Ltd Page 2
TPLE 1239 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Site Appraisal Report
A check of the accident history of the surrounding highway network has been undertaken as part of this study.
The Crashmap website (www.crashmap.co.uk) was used to provide baseline data to assess existing conditions. Crashmap uses validated Department for Transport data for collisions where a Personal Injury Accident has occurred (where Police attended). Data outlined below is from the period covering the last three years available (2012, 2013 and 2014).
Analysis of the Crashmap website shows that there has been no accidents within the village of Bishop Thornton in the last three years. This includes all areas of the village including the site boundary and potential access points.
1.3 Proposed Use
It is proposed that the site will be allocated for housing development. As stated previously, the site is split into two sections with the smaller section being adjacent to Colber Lane. We would expect 12 dwellings to be able to be developed on the first section of land with 20 dwellings being developed on the second. This would be the maximum potential quantum of development.
Pedestrian and cycle access to the site will have to be taken from Colber Lane, as this is the only existing highway adjacent to the site.
The parking standards set out by North Yorkshire County Council in their 2007 publication “Transport and Development – A Guide” suggest that a maximum parking provision of: • One space for a one bedroom dwelling; • Two spaces for two and three bedroom dwellings; and • Three spaces for four or more bedroom dwellings.
Visitor parking is to be provided at one space per five dwellings. Any parking associated with the development will need to be kept within the site boundary. Cycle parking is not specified, although it is likely that a cycle space per dwelling will be required, located in either a cycle shed or garage.
Servicing of the dwellings will have to take place from the internal road network and access road and will require a vehicle tracking exercise to inform the highway design.
1.4 Proposed Access
As previously discussed, the site is split into two sections. Section 1 is close to the village and has the longest site frontage. There is a defining factor with this frontage which is the bend in the road which restricts visibility, along with two trees that look to be very well established and may potentially be covered by a TPO. There is also a drainage ditch that would need to be culverted and a grass verge that is up to 1.9m in width and would need to be crossed.
Rev Draft | Copyright © 2015 Curtins Consulting Ltd Page 3
TPLE 1239 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Site Appraisal Report
Investigations undertaken during the site visit established a number of issues with establishing an acceptable vehicle access into Section 1. If the access is located close to the existing houses in the village, from the required 2.4m distance back, there would be an issue with achieving sufficient visibility sighting distance without crossing third party land, which would be unacceptable to the local highway authority.
Even with the access point located as far to the west as possible, during site measurements, the available left visibility was less than the 43m required for a 30mph road. As we move along the site boundary of Section 1 and Colber Lane, the available left visibility envelope becomes less, due to the bend in the road and overhanging trees. If the site entrance to Section 1 is positioned at the easterly most point, the left visibility is acceptable but the right visibility can only be measured at less than 27m, which would not be acceptable.
We can therefore conclude that due to the winding nature of Colber Lane and the overhanging trees, access to Section 1 cannot realistically be achieved directly from the main highway.
Section 2 has a shorter site boundary with Colber Lane, however the boundary is straight and therefore as long as the right visibility splay (to the bend) is 43m or more, access can be taken from this point. The left visibility splay is satisfactory from any point on the site frontage.
It should be noted that the drainage ditch will have to be culverted with any proposed access into the development site. The present field access shown in Figure 1.2 could be improved and used as a new access point as it would have acceptable visibility splays, although some further culverting would be required to gain the required entry width for a residential access road.
To conclude, access to Section 1 can only be achieved through Section 2. This would therefore require using part of Section 2 to access Section 1 or submitting a proposal for both sections to be allocated for residential development.
1.5 Trip Generation
To determine the trip generation associated with the proposed development, the TRICS database has been used. This is an industry-standard software tool which comprises a vast database of traffic surveys of existing developments, across the UK and Ireland, sub categorised into particular land uses such as foodstore, residential, leisure, retail and office developments.
The proposed development is for 12 private dwellings on the first section of land with 20 on the larger, second section of land. If access for the first section of land is taken through the second section, then the quantum of development will reduce to accommodate the access road.
Rev Draft | Copyright © 2015 Curtins Consulting Ltd Page 4
TPLE 1239 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Site Appraisal Report
85th percentile trip rates have been used from TRICS due to the rural nature of the site. These are likely to be requested by NYCC. Table 1 shows the calculated trip rates and trip generation for the proposed development by showing the trip generation for both sections.
The full TRICS outputs are presented in Appendix B.
Traffic Generation AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) Land Use Arr Dep Total Arr Dep Total
Houses (Privately Owned) 0.235 0.588 0.823 0.500 0.600 1.100 Trip Rate (Per dwelling)
Houses (Privately Owned) 3 7 10 6 7 13 Vehicle Trips for Section 1
Houses (Privately Owned) 5 12 17 10 12 22 Vehicle Trips for Section 2
Table 1.1 – Proposed Development Trip Generation
As the table above shows, if the first section of land was developed, there would be an additional 10 vehicle on the local highway network in the morning peak and an additional 13 in the evening peak. This equates to a vehicle every 5 minutes accessing or egressing from the site.
Even if both sites were developed, this would only drop to a vehicle every two minutes accessing or egressing from the site in the peak hours.
1.6 Sustainable Travel
It is always advantageous to site residential development close to sustainable transport options. These could include both proximity to public transport and connections to pedestrian and cycle links. Additional residential development within Bishop Thornton is only likely to make bus services more viable and potentially increase patronage.
There are bus stops on Colber Lane located less than 100m from the site. There is a limited bus service from these stops although for a village of this size, not located on a main road, any bus service is to be welcomed given the rural location. Table 1.2 summarises services from these stops.
Rev Draft | Copyright © 2015 Curtins Consulting Ltd Page 5
TPLE 1239 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Site Appraisal Report
Frequency Bus Route Service Weekday Sat. Sun.
Pateley Bridge – Bishop One service JKM Thornton – Markington - on a - - Ripon Thursday
One service Demand Response service to DR14 on a - - Harrogate Wednesday
Table 1.2 – Local Bus Journey Summary
In addition to the services shown in Table 1.2, there is a further service 139 that runs from the former Drovers Pub site to Ripon. This runs once a day on Monday, Thursday and Saturday.
As previously discussed, National Cycle Route 67 runs along Colber Lane, through the village and is clearly signed at the signpost in the village centre, as shown in Figure 1.3 below.
Figure 1.3 – Cycle Route Signage
Rev Draft | Copyright © 2015 Curtins Consulting Ltd Page 6
TPLE 1239 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Site Appraisal Report
The pedestrian links and footways in the village are based around the two primary schools and the bus stops in the centre of the village. It is likely that NYCC would request a footway from the site to link into the current footway network in the village. This request could be considered as reasonable and is likely to be justified on the grounds of highway safety. It is likely to need to be a requirement of any planning permission.
1.7 Transport and Planning Policy Review
The North Yorkshire Local Transport Plan (LTP3), states that the main aim of the highway authority is to help sustainable travel to essential services which the proposed development site accords to by having two primary schools in close walking distance of the site. The nearby national cycle route also aligns itself with the site and the aims of the LTP by providing an alternative sustainable transport infrastructure for residents to access local services.
1.8 Conclusions and Recommendation
As discussed above, access to the smaller section 1 can only be achieved through section 2. This will therefore require the boundaries of the sections to be altered to achieve a deliverable scheme. It can also be argued that the smaller section of land is the most likely to be delivered in policy terms.
The village does not have a regular bus service but this is more a legacy of location rather than any flaw in the local transport network. The location of the site on the national cycle network is of benefit and the availability of two primary schools within the village helps to show that despite the rural location, the site is in a sustainable location, for the size of village.
Rev Draft | Copyright © 2015 Curtins Consulting Ltd Page 7
TPLE 1239 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Site Appraisal Report
2.0 Appendices
Appendix A Crashmap Plan
Appendix B TRICS Output
Rev Draft | Copyright © 2015 Curtins Consulting Ltd Page 8
TPLE 1239 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Site Appraisal Report
Appendix A Crashmap Plan
Rev Draft | Copyright © 2015 Curtins Consulting Ltd
TPLE 1239 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Site Appraisal Report
Appendix B TRICS Output
Rev Draft | Copyright © 2015 Curtins Consulting Ltd
Our Locations
Birmingham Leeds 2 The Wharf Rose Wharf Bridge Street 78-80 East Street Birmingham B1 2JS Leeds LS9 8EE T. 0121 643 4694 T. 0113 274 8509 [email protected] [email protected]
Bristol Liverpool Quayside Curtin House 40-58 Hotwell Road Columbus Quay Bristol BS8 4UQ Riverside Drive T. 0117 302 7560 Liverpool L3 4DB [email protected] T. 0151 726 2000 [email protected]
Cardiff London 3 Cwrt-y-Parc 40 Compton Street Earlswood Road London EC1V 0BD Cardiff T. 020 7324 2240 CF14 5GH [email protected] T. 029 2068 0900 [email protected]
Douglas Manchester Varley House Merchant Exchange 29-31 Duke Street 17-19 Whitworth Street West Douglas Manchester M1 5WG Isle of Man IM1 2AZ T. 0161 236 2394 T. 01624 624 585 [email protected] [email protected]
Edinburgh Nottingham 1a Belford Road 56 The Ropewalk Edinburgh Nottingham EH4 3BL NG1 5DW T. 0131 225 2175 T. 0115 941 5551 [email protected] [email protected]
Kendal 28 Lowther Street Kendal Cumbria LA9 4DH T. 01539 724 823 [email protected]
Registered in England and Wales number: 2054159 Registered office: Curtin House, Columbus Quay, Riverside Drive, Liverpool L3 4DB
3 APPENDIX
Site 2
Site 1
Key Site boundary Project LPA Harrogate Borough Indigo Planning Limited Land on Colber Lane Toronto Square Council Leeds Title LS1 2HJ Proposed allocation boundaries Date: 23.10.15 Scale: As shown Project No: 21560003 T 0113 380 0270 Client Drawing No: 21560003/3 F 0113 380 0271 Diocese of Leeds Drawn By: TH [email protected]
4 APPENDIX
SF 2444 August 2015
Preliminary Ecological Appraisal Land off Colber Lane, North Yorkshire
Landscape Architects Urban Designers Ecologists Horticulturists Somerset House, Low Moor Lane, Scotton, HG5 9JB Tel: 01423 863369 Fax: 01423 313107 Email: [email protected] www.smeedenforeman.co.uk Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 3 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 3 3.0 BASELINE INFORMATION 3.1 Methodology 4 3.2 Nature Conservation Designated Sites 4 3.3 Existing Species Records 5 3.4 Site Habitat Survey 6 3.5 Local Biodiversity Action Plan 9 4.0 IMPLICATIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Nature Conservation Designated Sites 10 4.2 Habitats 10 4.3 Protected Species 11 5.0 SUMMARY 13
FIGURES 01: Aerial photograph (included within the report) 02: Phase 1 Habitat Plan
APPENDICES 01: Designated Sites 02: Species Records – NEYEDC & NYBG 03: Legal Status of Protected Species
Report Verification: Report compiled by: Maria Gill BSc (Hons) Position: Ecologist Signature:
Report checked by: Catherine White BSc MA (LD) CMLI MCIEEM Position: Associate Ecologist Signature:
Page 2 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Smeeden Foreman Limited has been commissioned by Diocese of Leeds to undertake a preliminary ecological appraisal of land off Colber Lane in Bishop Thornton, North Yorkshire (central grid reference SE 26237 63450).
This report will include the following information gathered by desk study and a phase 1 habitat survey: • Proximity to statutory and non-statutory designated sites; • Proximity to existing records for protected species; and, • Site habitat appraisal and potential to support protected species.
A review of the above information will be made to identify any features or sites of ecological interest which may be affected by the development proposals. Where potential impacts or protected species are identified the need for mitigation measures and specific species surveys will be discussed and recommendations for potential environmental enhancements will be made.
The proposed development is for the creation of residential housing with associated gardens.
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
Figure 01: Aerial photograph showing the site boundary and the surrounding area.
Page 3 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
The proposed development site comprises two improved pasture fields within the village of Bishop Thornton. Field 1 lies immediately adjacent to the north of Field 2 but for the purposes of this report the site survey boundary is the entire area of both fields, hereafter referred to as “the site”.
The site is approximately 10km to the north-west of Harrogate town centre and lies to the eastern edge of Bishop Thornton village. Habitats within the vicinity of the site include more agricultural pasture to the north with residential properties bordering the site to the south and east. Colber Lane runs adjacent to south of the site beyond which lies more residential properties and agricultural farm buildings.
The site itself comprises two improved grazed pasture fields with areas of marshy grassland and tall ruderal vegetation. The site is bounded by a mixture of mature hedgerows and fencing, with several trees in association with the hedgerows. A defunct hedgerow bounds the site to the north, likely to have formed a former field boundary.
3.0 BASELINE INFORMATION
3.1 Methodology
The ecological interest of the site has been investigated by a combination of desk study, consultation and field survey.
Information was requested from the following organisations:- • North and East Yorkshire Ecological Data Centre (NEYEDC) • North Yorkshire Bat Group (NYBG)
The following sources of information were consulted:- • www.magic.gov.uk (government web sites for nature conservation and environmental information) • Harrogate Biodiversity Action Plan • Aerial photographs
3.2 Nature Conservation Designated Sites
Statutory Designations
There are no statutorily designated sites such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), Special Areas of Conservation (SAC), Special Protection Areas (SPA), Ramsar sites, Local Nature Reserves (LNR) or National Nature Reserves (NNR) within the site boundary or within 2km of the proposals site. The application site is within an SSSI Impact Risk Zone (IRZ); however data provided by the relevant Natural England GIS dataset indicates the proposed development is unlikely to pose a threat to this SSSI.
Non-statutory Designations
Local authorities for any given area may designate certain areas as being of local conservation interest. The criteria for inclusion, and the level of protection provided, if any, may vary between areas. Most individual counties have a similar scheme, although they do vary.
Page 4 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
These sites, which are given various titles such as ‘Listed Wildlife Sites’ (LWS), ‘Local Nature Conservation Sites’ (LNCS), ‘Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation’ (SINCs), or ‘Sites of Nature Conservation Importance’ (SNCIs), together with statutory designations, are defined in local and structure plans under the Town and Country Planning system and are a material consideration when planning applications are being determined.
Consultation with the NEYEDC provided information on one Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) within 2km of the proposed development site. These are detailed in the table below:
Site Name Location Description Site Code Shaw Mill High Dam Approximately 1.3km to the Open water SE26-13 west of the site (SE 246 627)
Due to the nature and size of the proposed development, the difference between the habitat types and the intervening land uses, it is anticipated that there will be no adverse effects on this SINC. Refer to Appendix 01 for a map showing the locations of these sites was provided by North and East Yorkshire Ecological Data Centre.
3.3 Existing Species Records
Protected species information including UK and European Protected Species was provided by NEYEDC and the NYBG. The records within 2km are detailed in the tables below, with approximate distances from the site. Records included within the table are those within closest proximity to the site for each species provided. With records spanning multiple years the most recent has been identified. The full list of records provided by NEYEDC and NYBG is included within Appendix 02.
Species Grid Notes Reference Great crested newt SE267645 Records from 1984 & 1992. Closest from 1992 approx. 1.1km north-east from the site. Otter SE262650 Record from 2007. Closest approx. 1.6km north-west from the site. White-clawed crayfish SE2662 Record from 03/02/2001 approx. 1.4km north of the site.
Consultation with North Yorkshire Bat Group provided multiple bat records within 2km of the site with those records in closest proximity to site and most recently recorded detailed below:
Species Grid Notes Reference Brown long-eared bat SE264636 03/07/86 –Bishop Thornton Church Approximately 200m north-east of the site recorded perch feeding.
Page 5 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
SE250622 Most recent record 30/06/14. Approximately 1.7km south-west. Roost record. Common pipistrelle SE252630 17/07/14 – High Mill Farm, bat approximately1.1km south-west of site. Recorded roost in barn. Myotis bat species SE252630 17/07/14 – High Mill Farm, approximately1.1km south-west of site. Recorded roost. Natterer's Bat SE26816248 20/09/11 – High Kettlespring Farm. Approximately 1.1km south-east of the site. Recorded in flight. SE250622 29/07/14 Approximately 1.7km south west. Roost record. Noctule bat SE252630 11/06/14 – High Mill Farm. Approximately 1.1km south-west. Recorded in flight. Pipistrelle bat species SE255625 06/08/2001 – 1 High Shaw Mills. Approximately 1.1 km south-west of site. Summer roost. Soprano pipistrelle SE252630 09/07/11 – High Mill Farm. Approximately 1.1km south west. Recorded commuting & foraging.
Unidentified SE264636 1992 – Bishop Thornton Church. bat species Approximately 200m north east. Roost record.
No records of priority UKBAP species were provided within the site boundary. Species within 2km of the proposals include common toad, curlew and northern lapwing.
3.4 Site Survey – Phase 1 habitat survey
A walk over survey was undertaken on the 10th August 2015. Habitat types and key species were noted and are presented in the Phase 1 Habitat format proposed by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2010). Refer to Figure 02. The site largely comprises improved grassland habitat with areas of marshy grassland also present. Hedgerows mark the northern, southern and western boundaries with broadleaved trees to all boundaries in association with the hedgerows. Other habitats on site comprise small areas of tall ruderal vegetation and dry ditches adjacent to some hedgerows.
Improved grassland Improved grassland is the dominant habitat on site (Target note 1, refer to Figure 02). The two fields on site are currently managed through the grazing of cattle. The sward is close- cropped and dominated by perennial ryegrass Lolium perenne with other grasses present including Yorkshire fog Holcus lanatus, common bent Agrostis capillaris, meadow foxtail Alopecurus pratensis, annual meadow-grass Poa annua and cock's foot grass Dactylis glomerata. Stands of creeping thistle Cirsium arvense and common nettle Urtica dioica are present across site due to the enrichment of soil from grazing animals. Other forb species occurring frequently to rarely in the sward include meadow buttercup Ranunculus acris, white clover Trifolium repens, common sorrel Rumex acetosa, spear thistle Cirsium vulgare, common cat'sear
Page 6 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
Hypochaeris radicata, redshank Persicaria maculosa, soft rush Juncus effusus, dandelion Taraxacum agg., groundsel Senecio vulgaris, pineapple mayweed Chamomilla suaveolens, broad- leaved dock Rumex obtusifolius, chickweed Stellaria media, common mouse-ear Cerastium fontanum, lesser stitchwort Stellaria graminea, common vetch Vicia sativa, rapeseed Brassica napus, creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens, a speedwell species Veronica sp. and a goosefoot species Chenopodium sp.
The section of site immediately adjacent to Colber Lane comprises a road verge of improved grassland (Target note 2). This grassland is mostly managed resulting in a sward dominated by perennial rye-grass and Yorkshire fog with other species occurring frequently to occasionally including broadleaved dock, dandelion, creeping buttercup, cleavers, ragwort Senecio jacobaea, greater plantain Plantago major, oxeye daisy Leucanthemum vulgare, pineapple mayweed, common catsear and upright hedge parsley Torilis japonica.
A log pile was also noted to the east of site which could provide potential foraging opportunities for invertebrates, sheltering and hibernation opportunities for amphibians, reptiles and small mammals (Target note 3). This habitat has been colonised by stands of creeping thistle, common nettle and spear thistle.
Marshy grassland Areas of marshy grassland can be found across site, particularly to the north-eastern and south-eastern corners boundaries (Target note 4). These areas are dominated by soft rush with other species found to be typical of this habitat such as marsh cudweed Gnaphalium uliginosum, marsh ragwort Senecio aquaticus, marsh thistle Cirsium palustre, bog stitchwort Stellaria alsine, marsh foxtail Alopecurus geniculatus, redshank and a forget-me-not species Myosotis sp. Tufted hair-grass Deschampsia cespitosa, curled dock Rumex crispus, creeping buttercup, broad-leaved dock, common sorrel, common catsear, lesser stitchwort and spear thistle were also recorded occurring rarely to occasionally in the sward.
Hedgerows with associated trees The hedgerow which lies to the south-east boundary is approximately 165m long, up to 3m high in places and 2-3m wide (Target note 5). This hedgerow is mostly intact with very few gaps, partly managed with a dry ditch present adjacent to most of its length which is likely to be periodically wet due to a drainage pipe which runs into it. The canopy is dominated by hawthorn Crataegus monogyna and blackthorn Prunus spinosa with other species recorded occurring occasionally including hazel Corylus avellana, dog rose Rosa canina, holly Ilex aquifolium, goat willow Salix caprea and bramble Rubus fruticosa. Species occurring rarely to occasionally within the ground flora at the base of this hedge and within the ditch include creeping thistle, common nettle, broadleaved dock, spear thistle, common sorrel, cleavers Gallium aparine, smooth sow-thistle Sonchus oleraceus, common foxglove Digitalis purpurea, great willowherb Epilobium hirsutum, bristly ox-tongue Helminthotheca echioides, yarrow Achillea millefolium, hedge woundwort, meadowsweet Filipendula ulmaria, , rosebay willowherb Chamerion angustifolium, marsh thistle and soft rush. Ivy Hedera helix and honeysuckle Lonicera periclymenum was also recorded as an abundant climber within this hedge, particularly the western end. Four mature ash Fraxinus excelsior, sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus and oak Quercus robur trees are associated with this hedgerow, three of which are considered to have the potential to support bat roosts. Oak, sycamore and hazel saplings also occur within the hedge.
To the north of the site lies an unmanaged defunct hedgerow which is likely to have been a former field boundary (Target note 6). This hedge is approximately 130m with large gaps, measuring 2-4m high in places and 2 m wide. A dry ditch runs partially along the base. The canopy is dominated by hawthorn and blackthorn, with bramble, dog rose and young ash
Page 7 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
saplings also present. The understorey includes species such as cleavers, common nettle, upright hedge parsley, broad-leaved willowherb Epilobium montanum, creeping thistle, soft rush, common sorrel, greater bird's foot trefoil Lotus pedunculatus.
A defunct hedgerow dissects the site and measures approximately 100m in length, 2-3m high and 1m wide, up to 2m in places (Target note 7). This hedgerow is unmanaged with a messy appearance with a canopy which is hawthorn dominant. Species also recorded include bramble, holly, honeysuckle, hazel and sycamore saplings. The understorey comprises common sorrel, field rose Rosa arvensis, broadleaved willowherb, broadleaved dock, creeping buttercup, soft rush, common nettle and common foxglove. A mature oak is located to the western end of the hedgerow which is considered to have potential to support roosting bats. An owl nestbox has also been mounted on this tree. Five ash trees are also spread out along this hedge, one dead and another found to contain nest material within a deep crevice.
The hedgerow to the western boundary measures approximately 30m long, 3-4m high and 2m wide (Target note 8). The canopy is blackthorn dominant, with honeysuckle, holly, hawthorn and young ash trees also present. Species recorded within the ground flora of this hedgerow include common sorrel, broadleaved dock, chickweed, meadowsweet, Himalayan balsam (HB), greater bird's foot trefoil, marsh thistle and soft rush.
Tall ruderal vegetation Small areas of tall ruderal herbs were recorded to the south-western corner of the site (Target note 9). Species recorded include great willowherb, broadleaved dock, common nettle and the invasive species Himalayan balsam Impatiens glandulifera (HB).
Target note 1 – Improved grassland, field Target note 2 – Road verge off Colber Target note 3 – Log pile to east of site to south of site Lane to the south of site, improved grassland
Target note 4 – Marshy grassland to Target note 4 – Marshy grassland to Target note 5 – Hedgerow adjacent to south-west corner of site west of site southern boundary
Page 8 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
Target note 6 – Defunct hedge to Target note 7 – Defunct hedge dissecting Target note 8 – Hedge to western northern boundary the site boundary
Target note 9 – Tall ruderal herb to Oak tree with owl nest box to right, south-western corner, including invasive ash tree with nest material in Himalayan balsam deep crevice to left (Target note 8)
3.5 Local Biodiversity Action Plan
Habitat types for which action plans have been prepared for the Harrogate Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) include: • Blanket bog • Upland heathland • Moorland edge • Woodland • Wood pasture and parkland • Upland calcareous and calaminarian (metaliferous) grasslands • Magnesian limestone grassland • Lowland meadows and floodplains grasslands • Fens • Reedbeds • Standing water • Flowing water • Arable farmland • Hedgerows • Gardens and urban wild space
Habitats within the proposals site which are listed within the local BAP include hedgerows.
Species for which action plans have been prepared for the Harrogate Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) include:
Page 9 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
• Otter • Water vole • Hen harrier • Great crested newt • Common frog • Thistle broomrape • Chestnut click beetle • Bats
Species listed within the local BAP which may utilise habitats within the site include bat species, with hedgerows and trees providing potential bat foraging and commuting habitat. Common frogs were noted at the time of survey within marshy grassland on site.
4.0 IMPLICATIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 Nature Conservation Designated Sites
There are no statutory sites within 2km of the proposed development site, however, the application site does lie within an Impact Risk Zone (IRZ) of an SSSI occurring beyond the 2km search area; the development type does not fall within the categories listed which are considered to have a potential impact on the SSSIs within the local area as a result of the proposed development.
Non-statutory sites located within 2km are located at such a distance, with intervening land uses, such as roads and development, that the proposed development is not considered to have an adverse impact upon these designated sites.
4.2 Habitats
Habitats within the site are predominantly considered to be of low conservation value comprising improved grazing pasture, grassland road verge and tall ruderal vegetation. Habitats of some interest include areas of marshy grassland and hedgerows with associated trees. The plant communities at the site are of widespread occurrence and are characteristic of the habitats present in the wider area and common nationally.
Hedgerows across site are considered to be of some conservation value comprising a range of native species. All of the hedgerows on site have potential to support nesting and foraging birds and may provide foraging habitat for bats as well as providing potential invertebrate habitat. Trees associated with hedgerows are also of a size and age which indicate the hedgerows are relatively mature. To maintain biodiversity trees and hedgerows should be retained wherever possible and losses mitigated for by replacement planting. To enhance the development site it is recommended that hedge planting is proposed to gap up the defunct hedgerows in association with the existing hedges to increase their length and maintain connectivity to the network of hedgerows across site. Gaps within existing hedgerows can be filled with shrub species to be planted would be those currently recorded within the site such as blackthorn, hawthorn and dog rose, with the addition of species such as guelder rose Viburnum opulus and dogwood Cornus sanguinea. Oak and rowan Sorbus aucuparia could be planted as standard trees within hedges where applicable. Hedgerow planting could also be proposed to the parts of the boundary which are currently fenced which would aim to increase connectivity within the site and the wider area for wildlife species such as bats.
Page 10 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
The hedgerow to the southern boundary of the site contains a diverse range of native species and consequently may meet the criteria for importance under the Hedgerow Regulations (1997), however, a full assessment has not undertaken at the time of survey. Further survey may be required if any hedgerows or sections of this hedgerow are to be removed as a result of the proposed development.
The grassland is generally of low conservation value however, areas of marshy habitat is likely to provide attractive habitat for amphibians. To mitigate the loss of these areas consideration should be given to the inclusion of marshy/wildflower grassland within any proposed open green space and associated with existing or new hedgerow planting.
Protective fencing, such as Heras fencing, should be installed prior to the commencement of construction works along all boundaries to protect existing trees, hedgerows and any new planting during works.
Stands of Himalayan balsam, target noted “HB” on Figure 02 (appended), were also recorded growing to the south-western corner and north-western corners of the site. This species is a non-native invasive included under Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) which should not be planted or otherwise caused to grow in the wild. This plant should therefore be treated/removed from site as part of the proposed development work. Consideration could be given to undertaking control treatment prior to the commencement of work to avoid any potential delays/minimise costs.
4.3 Protected Species
Refer to Appendix 03 for relevant species legislation.
Great crested newts There are no areas of standing water able to support breeding amphibians, however, habitats within the site are considered to offer potential foraging, cover and hibernation opportunities during their terrestrial phases, with areas of marshy grassland across site and a log pile located to the east of site which may act as a potential refuge for hibernating amphibians or reptiles. Consultation undertaken with the local record centre provided two records for great crested newt, the closest of which was 1.1km to the north-east of the site. When consulting an OS base map of the surrounding area, one pond was located within 500m of the site to the south. The development site is severed from this pond by Colber Lane and the surrounding residential buildings which are likely to act as a dispersal barrier to newts if present within this pond. No adverse impact upon great crested newts is therefore anticipated as a result of the development and no further survey for this species is considered necessary.
Two common frogs were recorded within marshy grassland on site at the time of survey. Although not a protected species, common frogs have been afforded a biodiversity action plan by Harrogate Borough Council. Consideration could be made for the inclusion of sustainable drainage systems and/or pond creation within the development proposals where possible to aim at providing alternative foraging/sheltering opportunities for amphibians.
Bats There are existing records for brown long-eared, common pipistrelle, soprano pipistrelle, noctule bat, Natterer’s bat, a Myotis sp., a pipistrelle species and an unknown bat species within the vicinity of the site, with the closest record being a brown long-eared bat recorded perch-feeding approximately 0.2km to the north-east and a known bat roost 200m to the north-east.
Page 11 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
There are no buildings on site, however, there are a number of trees associated with the network of hedgerows across the site which were assessed as having potential to support roosting bats. The trees with potential are target noted as ”BP” on Figure 02 (appended) and include a mature oak and a mature sycamore along the southern boundary, and two mature ash trees to the north-western corner of Field 1. If these trees are to be affected by the proposals i.e. any tree surgery or felling works, further assessment through a climb and inspect survey is recommended. This would assess the presence/absence of roosting bats and the requirement for mitigation, etc. prior to any tree works commencing. This survey can be undertaken at any time throughout the year.
Features, such as hedgerows with associated trees to the boundaries and across site, have the potential to be utilised by foraging and commuting bats. Recommendations for hedgerow retention and planting made within section 4.2 of the report would aim to enhance the site for foraging and commuting bats. If any hedgerows or sections of hedgerows within the site boundary are to be removed as a result of the development, it is recommended bat activity transect surveys are undertaken within the appropriate survey season (May – September) to record the use of the site by bats and assess the potential impact of the proposed development.
Proposed lighting would be sympathetic to bat species, where possible the lighting scheme should be designed to be of low level illuminance and directed away from any existing and new areas of planting. Further reference should be made to the Bat Conservation Trust publication Bats and Lighting in the UK.
Breeding birds Bird species recorded during the survey include house martin, buzzard, starling, house sparrow, house sparrow, dunnock, swallow, bullfinch and jackdaw. It is considered likely that house sparrow, starling, bullfinch, jackdaw and dunnock would utilise habitats within the site to nest including hedgerows and trees. An owl box with jackdaw or woodpigeon nest material was noted on a mature oak to the west of site and an ash tree with similar nest material was also recorded. As recommended in section 4.2 of the report, hedgerows and mature trees would ideally be retained within any proposed development and new areas of native tree and shrub planting would also be adopted. This would aim to maintain and enhance suitable breeding habitat for bird species currently using the site.
Any proposed vegetation clearance works would be undertaken outwith the nesting bird period (March – August inclusive) or subsequent to a checking survey by an appropriately qualified ecologist. If occupied nests are found on site, measures such as applying a set boundary around the nest may be necessary until the young birds have fledged.
To enhance the site in regards to cavity nesting bird species such as house sparrow and swallow, it is recommended that a range of nest boxes are installed across the site on proposed new buildings and trees to be retained.
Badger No signs of badger were detected within the site during the survey. Consultation undertaken with the local record centre provided no records of badger within the vicinity of the site, however due to suitable habitat being within close proximity it is considered that badger may access the site for foraging and commuting purposes. It is therefore recommended that precautionary working methods are adopted during works to avoid accidental harm to badgers. This would include covering or providing a means of escape to any open trenches and capping any open pipework at the end of each working day.
Page 12 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
Other species There is considered to be no suitable habitat within or adjacent to the site for protected species such as otter, water vole and white-clawed crayfish. No adverse impact upon these species is therefore anticipated from any proposed development.
Page 13 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
5.0 SUMMARY
Smeeden Foreman Limited has been commissioned by Diocese of Leeds to undertake a preliminary ecological appraisal of two fields off Colber Lane in Bishop Thornton, North Yorkshire. The proposed development will involve the construction of residential housing with associated gardens.
Designated Sites There are no statutorily designated sites within the site boundary or within 2km of the proposals site. The application site is within an SSSI Impact Risk Zone (IRZ); however data provided by the relevant Natural England GIS dataset indicates the proposed development is unlikely to pose a threat to this SSSI. There is one non-statutory site within 2km of the proposals site, Shaw Mill High Dam, which lies approximately 1.3km to the west. Due to the nature and size of the proposed development, the difference between the habitat types and the intervening land uses, it is anticipated that there will be no adverse effects on this SINC.
Habitats Habitats within the site are predominantly considered to be of low conservation value comprising improved grazing pasture, grassland road verge and tall ruderal vegetation, with areas of some interest being areas of marshy grassland, hedgerows with associated trees. The following recommendations have been made to minimise potential impacts on the site’s biodiversity: • Retain hedgerows with associated trees wherever possible; • Installation of Heras protection fencing along all boundary hedgerows and trees to be retained as well as new planting whilst construction works are taking place. • The gapping up of existing hedgerows across site using appropriate native species, refer to section 4.2; • Planting of native hedgerows to the boundaries of the site where these are absent. New hedgerows would comprise a range of appropriate native species, including standard trees planted at irregular intervals to prevent an avenue affect; • Inclusion of marshy/wildflower grassland within any proposed open green space and in association with new and retained hedgerows; • A control programme for Himalayan balsam.
Protected and notable species • Great crested newts – No adverse impact upon great crested newts anticipated and no further survey for this species is considered necessary. • Bats – Four trees on site are considered to have potential to house roosting bats. If these trees are to be affected by the proposals i.e. any tree surgery or felling works, further assessment through a climb and inspect survey is recommended. The installation of bat boxes upon new buildings and/or trees to be retained would aim to provide roosting opportunities for the local bat population. The retention and planting of new hedgerows would aim to maintain potential flight corridors and foraging habitat. If hedgerow or sections of hedgerows are to be removed, bat activity surveys are recommended to assess the use of the site by bats and potential impact of the proposed development. • Breeding birds – Hedgerows and trees on site provide foraging and nesting opportunities for breeding birds. Recommendations to enhance the site for birds include the gapping up of existing hedgerows, the planting of hedgerows where absent and installation of nest boxes upon new buildings/trees. Any vegetation removal will be undertaken outwith the breeding bird season (March – August inclusive) unless
Page 14 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
checks by an appropriately qualified ecologist finds no active nests immediately prior to clearance works commencing. • Badger – Precautionary working methods during on-site construction works.
Refer to section 4.3 for further information on the protected species assessment.
Page 15 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
FIGURE 02: PHASE 1 HABITAT SURVEY
Page 16 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
APPENDICES: 01 – Designated Sites 02 – Species records – NEYEDC & NYBG 03 - Legislation Notes: Protected Species.
Page 17 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
APPENDIX 01 – DESIGNATED SITES
Page 18 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
APPENDIX 02 – SPECIES RECORDS – NEYEDC & NYBG
NEYEDC
Page 19 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
NYBG
Page 20 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
APPENDIX 03 - LEGISLATION NOTES: PROTECTED SPECIES
Bats All British bats are afforded full protection under both UK and European legislation.
The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 2007 transpose the Habitats Directive into UK law, making it an offence to- - deliberately disturb a bat or - deliberately kill or capture a bat - damage, destroy or obstruct access to a breeding site or resting place (note this applies to both deliberate and reckless actions).
The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) (Schedule 5) made it an offence to - intentionally kill, injure or take a bat - damage, destroy or obstruct a resting place *, - disturb the species in a resting place * - possess or control a bat or any part thereof - sell, offer for sale, possess or transport for sale any bat or part thereof - set traps for catching, killing or injuring bats - possess articles for the purposes of committing offences against bats [*= intentional and reckless offences covered]
Legal protection under the Habitats Directive applies to both the animals and their breeding sites and resting places. This means that bat roosts are fully protected, whether they are in use at the time or not. Where roosts are identified, any works which may contravene the protection afforded to them require derogation from the provisions of the legislation in the form of a licence from Natural England.
Breeding birds The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 gives protection to all bird’s nests (whilst being built or in use) and eggs from intentional damage or destruction. Additional protection against disturbance on the nest or of dependant young is provided for birds included on Schedule 1.
Great Crested Newt The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) transposes into UK law and the Convention on the Conservation of European and Wildlife and Natural Habitats (commonly referred to as the ‘Bern Convention’). The 1981 Act was amended by the Countryside and Rights of Way [‘CRoW’] Act 2000. The great crested newt is listed on Schedule 5 of the 1981 Act, and is therefore subject to the provisions of Section 9, which make it an offence to: • Intentionally kill, injure of take a great crested newt [Section 9 (1)] • Possess or control any live or dead specimen or anything derived from a great crested newt [Section 9 (2)] • Intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct access to any structure or place used for shelter or protection by a great crested newt [Section 9 (4)(a)] • Intentionally or recklessly disturb a great crested newt while it is occupying a structure or place which it uses for that purpose [Section 9(4)(b)]
The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 (the Habitats Regulations) transpose into the UK law Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21st May 1992 on the conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora (often referred to as the ‘Habitats [and Species] Directive’). The great crested newt is listed on Annex II and Annex IV of the Directive. The
Page 21 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
former Annex relates to the designation of Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) for this species; even where great crested newts occur outside SACs, the inclusion on Annex II serves to underline their conservation significance. Inclusion of the Annex IV (‘European Protected Species’) means that member states are required to put in place a system of strict protection as outlined in Article 12, and this is done through inclusion on Schedule 2 of the Regulations. Regulation 39 makes it an offence to: • Deliberately capture or kill a great crested newt [Regulation 39 (1)(a)] • Deliberately disturb a great crested newt [Regulation 39(1)(b)] • Deliberately take or destroy the eggs of a great crested newt [Regulation 39 (1)(c)] • Damage or destroy a breeding site or resting place of a great crested newt [Regulation 39(1)(d)]
The legislation applies to all life stages of great crested newts.
Badger Badgers and their setts are protected by the Protection of Badgers Act 1992. Under this act it is illegal to: (1) wilfully kill, injure, take a badger or attempt to do so, (2) cruelly ill-treat a badger or (3) interfere with a sett, including disturbing a badger while occupying a sett.
Page 22 of 23
SF2444
Client: Diocese of Leeds Report: PEA Site: Land off Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Date: August 2015
Page 23 of 23
SF2444
APPENDIX 5
20 APPENDIX
SF2444 Colber Lane August 2015
Colber Lane Bishop Thornton Arboricultural Survey
Landscape Architects Urban Designers Ecologists Horticulturists Somerset House, Low Moor Lane, Scotton, Knaresborough, North Yorkshire, HG5 9JB Tel: 01423 863369 Fax: 01423 313107 Email: [email protected] www.smeedenforeman.co.uk Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
Document Check Sheet Job Title: Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton Job Number: SF2444 Document Title: Arboricultural Survey Revision: Date: Prepared by: Checked by: Approved by: - 14.08.2015 LW FH FH Revision: Date: Rev Note:
Prepared by: Checked by: Approved by:
Revision: Date: Rev Note:
Prepared by: Checked by: Approved by:
Revision: Date: Rev Note:
Prepared by: Checked by: Approved by:
Revision: Date: Rev Note:
Prepared by: Checked by: Approved by:
Laura Welborn LW BA (Hons) DipLA MA
Frances Horne FH BA (Hons) DipLA DipUED CMLI
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 2 Smeeden Foreman Ltd Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction Page 4 1.1 Site Description Page 4 1.2 Legal Status of Trees Page 5 2.0 Aims and Methodology Page 6 2.1 Aims Page 6 2.2 Survey Methodology - Trees Page 7 2.3 Key to Survey Schedules Page 7 3.0 Tree Survey Schedules Page 8 3.1 Individual Trees Page 8 3.4 Summary Page 11 3.5 Tree Surgery Page 11 4.0 Above Ground Constraints Page 14 5.0 Below Ground Constraints Page 14 6.0 Building near trees and hedgerows on shrinkable soils Page 14 7.0 Ash Die-Back Page 15
Appendix A SF2444 TC01 Page 16 Appendix B Survey Notes Page 17
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 3 Smeeden Foreman Ltd Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
1.0 Introduction
Smeeden Foreman Ltd has been appointed to undertake an arboricultural survey of trees at Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton. The survey was undertaken on 11th August 2015 and was based upon drawing no. 21560003/1 produced by Indigo Planning Limited. No topographical information was available at the time of survey. The trees have been surveyed in accordance with BS 5837: 2012. The limitations of survey techniques and analysis are included in Appendix B.
1.1 Site Description The site is located approximately 10.4km to the north west of Harrogate, to the eastern edge of Bishop Thornton village. The overall site is approximately 0.9 hectares and is currently grazed agricultural fields. The site is currently bordered by trees along the main road to the village which runs along the southern site boundary. There are open fields to the north and north west. Residential properties are located to the west and south west and there are a number of large scale farm buildings directly south of the site. Directly adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site, there is a converted barn with associated garden space. The church is also located approximately 0.06km north east of the site boundary. Trees and vegetation are mainly concentrated along field boundaries and within hedgerows.
Figure 1 – Site location
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 4 Smeeden Foreman Ltd Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
1.2 Legal status of trees
The trees are not protected by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) and the site itself is not situated within a Conservation Area (A check of on-line mapping provided by Harrogate Borough Council on 11/08/15). Trees may be subject to legal protection under a range of other legislation, much of which is aimed at wildlife and habitat protection, particularly nesting birds and bats. No work should be done to any trees until either suitable permission has been granted or it has been verified that the intended work does not require permission.
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 5 Smeeden Foreman Ltd Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
2.0 Aims and Methodology
2.1 Aims The aims of the survey are to undertake a non-invasive survey of the identified trees and any trees which have the potential to be affected by future works within the vicinity. The Tree Constraints Plan shows the location and category of the surveyed trees.
2.2 Survey Methodology The survey was carried out to British Standard 5837:2012 using the categories explained below:
2.2.1 The trees were assessed visually from ground level. Where potential problems were identified, further inspection by tree climbing is recommended. No digging or drilling methods were employed during this survey
2.2.2 The tree numbers or group numbers within the schedules refer to the order in which the trees were recorded and shown on the tree survey plan
2.2.3 The approximate height of each tree is measured from ground level to top of canopy using a clinometer;
2.2.4 The diameter of each tree is measured at 1.5m above ground level. Where a tree stem divides below 1.5m each stem is measured at 1.5m above ground level in accordance with Annex C of the British standard. The diameter of trees where the trunk was inaccessible have been estimated and marked as such within the survey schedules.
2.2.5 The age of each tree is based upon our experience and is divided into young, semi-mature, early-mature, mature, over mature and veteran.
2.2.6 The physiological condition of the trees is based upon our experience and is an assessment of the health and vigour of the tree.
2.2.7 The structural condition and description is also based on our experience.
2.2.8 Both the approximate expected lifespan remaining and category / rating of each tree is based on our experience;
2.2.9 The retention category of each tree or group of trees is based upon the information detailed above using the following categories: A Trees of high quality and estimated life expectancy of at least 40 years (Light green on plan) B Trees of moderate quality and estimated remaining life expectancy of at least 20 years (Mid blue on plan) C Trees of low quality and estimated remaining life expectancy of at least 10 years or young trees with a stem diameter below 150mm (Grey on plan) U Trees cannot realistically be retained as living trees in context of current land use for longer than 10 years (Dark red on plan)
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 6 Smeeden Foreman Ltd Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
2.2.10 The following subcategories have been used in rating tree value: 1 Mainly arboricultural value 2 Mainly landscape value 3 Mainly cultural values, including conservation
2.3 Key to Survey Schedules Tree no. Tree number as recorded on the plan: T1, T2 etc and for tree groups: G1, G2 etc. Hedges: H1, H2 etc.
Species Common name
Height Overall estimated height of the tree in metres (rounded up to the nearest metre for trees over 10m high).
Stem Dia Stem diameter measured in millimetres at 1.5m above ground (on sloping ground measured on the upslope of the stem) in accordance with Annex C of BS5837:2012.
Branch spread Measured in metres (rounded up to the nearest half metre) along the four cardinal points: north, east, south and west to derive an accurate representation of the crown.
Ht crown clearance The existing height, measured in metres, above ground level of: the first significant branch and direction of growth and the canopy.
Age class Young (Y), semi-mature (SM), early mature (EM), mature (M), over-mature (OM), veteran (V).
Physiological condition Good (G), moderate (M), poor (P), dead (D).
Structural condition Overall form of tree, presence of any decay, any physical defects and observations
Preliminary Management Recommendations Including any further investigations required, wildlife habitat potential, management or pruning works.
ERC The estimated remaining contribution measured in years: <10, 10+, 20+, 20-30+, 40+)
Cat Category U or A to C grading as defined in Table 1 BS 5837: 2012
RPA Root protection area measured in square metres and calculated according to BS 5837:2012
Other abbreviations used: OSB Outside site boundary T Tree G Group H Hedge AFP Access facilitation pruning (one-off pruning to allow access for construction) GL Ground-level MS Multi-stem Est Estimate
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 7 Smeeden Foreman Ltd Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
3.0 Tree Survey Schedules
3.1 Individual Trees
Tree Tag Species Height (m) Stem Branch Ht crown Age Physiological Structural condition and observations Preliminary management ERC Cat RPA No. No. Dia Spread clearance (m) Class condition recommendations (years) (m²) (mm) (m) T1 0993 Ash 13 800 N 9.5 2m S OM Poor Large over mature tree to field boundary Fell <10 U 290 adjacent to telegraph pole. Fungal growths E 3.5 4m N on trunk and very large cavity through S 6.0 6m W heart of tree (see photo 3).. Previous W 3.0 significant links lost to west side. T2 0817 Sycamore 11.5 500 N 3 2.5m W M Poor Slight lean to east. Upper canopy has Monitor. 10+ C2/ 113 hight proportion of dead wood/die-back. E 2.5 Bat potential. U Damage by barbed wire. High proportion S 3.5 of bark flaking on lower trunk. Several W 3 small cavities in upper trunk. T3 0814 Sycamore 9.5 640 N 5.5 2.7m W M Moderate Some snags in upper canopy to S/SE side. Remove dead wood. <10 U 191 E 5.5 Cavity at base extends approximately 350mm into heartwood. S 4 W 2.5 T4 1165 Oak 17 920 N 10 2.5m W M Good Significant tree with relatively minor snags None 40+ A2 387 E 9 considering age. Engulfed barbed wire at 1.2m. Moderate level of ivy in the canopy. S 9 W 7 T5 0128 Oak 15.5 900 N 5.5 2.5m NW M Moderate to Adjacent to water trough. Some crown Crown clean. 20+ B2 366 E 8.5 good. retrenchment to south east over highway. Consider removal Ivy in canopy. of limb over road. S 6 W 6
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 8 Smeeden Foreman Ltd Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
Tree Tag Species Height (m) Stem Branch Ht crown Age Physiological Structural condition and observations Preliminary management ERC Cat RPA No. No. Dia Spread clearance (m) Class condition recommendations (years) (m²) (mm) (m) T6 0128 Ash 18.5 420 N 3.5 3m NE SM Poor Significant amount of crown die back. Very Fell <10 U 81 E 3.5 thin canopy. In decline. S 2.5 W 2 T7 1193 Ash 15.5 480 N 1.5 3m N SM Poor Moribund. Full canopy retrenchment with Fell <10 U 102 E 2 some epicormic growth occurring at 3-6m. S 3.5 W 1.5 T8 1147 Ash 9.5 590 N 4 2.5m SM Poor Previous loss of significant limb has Fell <10 U 150 E 3 resulted in decay in heartwood and split extending for 2m. Resulting pocket shows S 5.5 past use for nest (see photo 8). W 6.5 T9 No Ash 11 500 N 0 2.5m SM Poor Multi-stem from 2.5m. In severe decline Fell <10 U 113 tag and much dead wood. est. E 2 S 1.5 W 2.5 T10 0995 Oak 15.5 970 N 7 2m M Good Owl nest box on trunk at 3m. Good None 40+ A2 430 E 9 specimen with very minor dead wood. S 10 W 9.5 T11 0955 Ash 19.5 850 N 6 2.5m E M Moderate - Loss of vigor and canopy contains a high Monitor. 10+ C2 327 Poor proportion of dead wood. Moderate bat E 7.5 Remove limb to East. potential. Evidence of crampballs fungus S 8 visible in upper limbs. W 7
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 9 Smeeden Foreman Ltd Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
Tree Tag Species Height (m) Stem Branch Ht crown Age Physiological Structural condition and observations Preliminary management ERC Cat RPA No. No. Dia Spread clearance (m) Class condition recommendations (years) (m²) (mm) (m) T12 1035 Ash 17.5 760 N 6.5 6m E M Poor Bat potential due to several small cavities Monitor 10+ C2/ 255 in upper limbs. Bracket fungus visible in E 5 U upper limbs. Approximately 40% dead S 4.5 wood. Several lost limbs. W 7 T13 0953 Ash 15.5 540 N 4 2.5m S SM Poor Fungus on ground 1.5m from tree (see Fell <10 C2/ 137 photo 2). In decline. Stag branches and E 5 U dead wood throughout. Poor form. S 3.5 W 2.5 T14 1198 Oak 8.5 490 N 2 2.2m S SM Moderate Suffered wind blow of upper portion, Crown clean 20+ B2/ 113 however remaining tree appears of good E 3 C2 vigour. S 2.5 W 2 T15 0976 Ash 10.5 460 N 4.5 1.5m S SM Poor Of poor vigour with think canopy and Fell <10 C2/ 102 losses of branches leaving scars where E 4 U decay is occurring, particularly to the S 3 north east at approximately 4m. W 3.5 T16 0958 Ash 10.5 390 N 4 3m S SM Moderate Existing branch wound at 1m on east side Monitor 10+ C2 64 E 4 with decay as a result. Some dead wood throughout canopy. S 4 W 3 T17 0907 Ash 12.0 MS N 4 2.1m SY - SM Good Two stems from base. Some included bark None 40+ A2 43 at union may pose structural weakness as 250 + E 4 tree matures. 180 S 3.5 W 3.5
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 10 Smeeden Foreman Ltd Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
3.4 Summary The majority of trees are located along the field boundaries, within hedgerows.
T1 (see photo 3) is an over mature Ash tree that has a large cavity through the heart of the tree. The tree also has fungal growths on the trunk and has lost significant limbs to the west side. T3 is a sycamore with a significant basal cavity (see photo 4). We would recommend that these trees are felled due to their condition, limited remaining contribution and location adjacent to the road.
Further to T1, trees T6, T7, T8, T9, T13, T15 are Ash trees that have been graded as category U (fell). These trees may, however be retained in their current context where they pose little nuisance and provide local habitat benefits but should not be considered a constraint to potential changes of land use as they are identified as being in poor condition with limited future contribution. T8 has a large split on the trunk which extends approximately 2m up the tree (see photo 5). It currently has the remnants of a nest in the cavity.
T2 (Sycamore) and T12 (Ash) are in poor condition and should be considered for removal, however due to the small cavities identified in the upper limbs, they have been assessed as having potential to support bats. In these instances we would recommend the trees be the subject of a detailed examination which would assess if there are any bat roosts present. If these trees are require removal, this inspection should be carried out before any work is undertaken.
T4 and T10 are large mature oak trees, located to the southern and western boundaries of the site. These trees are in good condition and are graded as category A trees, there are no preliminary management recommendations made and the trees form an important part of the landscape in this location.
3.5 Tree Surgery/Removal Where suggested as ‘Preliminary Management Recommendations’ within the Tree Survey Report, tree surgery/removal shall be carried out to existing trees on site and shall be in accordance with BS 3998 Recommendations for Tree Work, industry best practice and in line with any works already agreed with the Local Authority. The Tree Surgeon shall be chosen from The Arboricultural Association’s Approved Contractor list and all work shall be undertaken at the appropriate time and with the consent and approval of the Site Agent who shall approve a programme of work. Operations shall be carefully carried out to avoid damage to the trees being treated or neighbouring trees. No trees to be retained shall be used for anchorage or winching purposes. If appropriate, it is suggested that the arisings from felled trees are placed within these areas to benefit and encourage habitat diversity.
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 11 Smeeden Foreman Ltd Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
T1
T3 T17 T2 T16 T4 T12 T7 T10 T13 T14 T15 T6 T8 T11 T5 T9
Photo 1 - Panoramic view of the site from the gateway, showing trees T1-T17.
Photo 2 - Fungus on ground 1.5m from T13 Photo 3 - Large cavity and fungus on T1 (Ash)
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 12 Smeeden Foreman Ltd Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
Photo 4 - Cavity at base of T3 (Sycamore) Photo 5 - Cavity in the trunk of T8 (Ash) with nest material evident
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 13 Smeeden Foreman Ltd Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
4.0 Above Ground Constraints The potential for retaining trees on a development site includes the extent of the influence of the tree at the time of survey. Consideration is also given to the effects of future growth within the context of the proposed development. In addition the potential nuisance caused by shading to new buildings both after construction and also once trees reach their ultimate size is also considered. The extent to which a tree may represent a constraint to development will depend both upon the location of the trunk and size and nature of the canopy and also the extent of the roots below ground. The tree constraints drawing (SF2444 TC01) plots the location and extent of the tree above ground.
5.0 Below Ground Constraints
The Root Protection Area (RPA) represents a potential constraint to development which may be modified in pattern, although not overall area, by existing site conditions such as structures and surfaces, soil types and drainage, and an appreciation of the nature of particular tree species and root morphology.
Within the tree root protection area there should be a presumption against excavation, excess pedestrian movement, storage of materials, construction, or changes in ground level unless consideration is given to the potential effects on the tree to be retained and the efficacy of any construction techniques designed to reduce adverse effects on the tree. The tree constraints drawing (SF2444 TC01) plots the location and extent of the tree below ground through application of the calculation provided in section 4.6 of the BS5837:2012 Trees in relation to design demolition and construction – Recommendations.
6.0 Building near trees and hedgerows on shrinkable soils (NHBC standard - chapter 4.2) Shrinkable soils are subject to changes in volume as their moisture content is altered. Soil moisture contents vary seasonally and are influenced by a number of factors including the action of tree roots. The resulting shrinkage or swelling of the soil can cause subsidence or heave damage to foundations, the structures they support or services. Engineers should consider the soil condition and the potential impact of the species of the trees/hedges on and adjacent to the site when preparing building/structure design. The following high water demand species (As listed in table 12, appendix 4.2 – A, NHBC standard chapter 4.2) were noted on or adjacent to the site: Broad leafed trees: Ash (Moderate) - T1, T6, T7, T8, T9, T11, T12, T13, T15, T16, T17 Oak (High) - T4, T5, T10, T14 Sycamore (Moderate) - T2, T3 Hedgerows: Hawthorn (High) - Field boundaries. Holly (Low) - Field boundaries.
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 14 Smeeden Foreman Ltd Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
7.0 Ash Die-Back Chalara fraxinea, commonly known as ash die-back, is a fungus which causes leaf loss and crown die-back and usually death of ash trees. First confirmed within the UK in 2012, the fungus has been confirmed widely and poses a devastating effect upon the British landscape. Existing ash should be monitored for symptoms and reported accordingly (www.forestry.gov.uk). If new planting is proposed as part of the development, this should aim to provide a variety of alternative woodland scale tree species such as sycamore, hornbeam, oak, beech and lime.
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 15 Smeeden Foreman Ltd Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
APPENDIX A
SF2444 TC01 Tree Constraints Plan
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 16 Smeeden Foreman Ltd Diocese of Leeds Arboricultural Survey
APPENDIX B
Tree survey to BS 5837:2012 -Trees in relation to design demolition and construction limitation notes
This survey to BS 5837:2012 is a visual assessment undertaken from ground level without The health, (condition) and resulting safety of trees for a risk assessment should be checked any physical investigation and should be regarded as a preliminary overview of the trees on on a cyclical basis, alternating between early and late seasons to ensure a full picture of the site. ‘This term [visual] describes a general approach to tree surveying using visual observation trees current health is established. Therefore the assessment of risk that trees present on a and recording, combined with experience and knowledge of tree biology and structure to draw particular site would be additional to the scope of this BS 5837:2012 tree survey. conclusions about tree condition’p8[1] Arboricultural Impact Assessments, Tree Protection Plans, Method Statements, Tree Observations on structural condition, preliminary management recommendations, (e.g. Management Plans pruning ) and the estimated remaining contribution are based on visual indicators present at These items are additional services identified relating to design demolition and construction the time of inspection (i.e. a single point in time). in BS5837:2012 which may form part of a strategy to manage risks.
It should be noted that numerous potential defects may not be detectable dependent upon NHBC Guidelines timing of inspection, in particular wood decay fungi which may only occasionally produce The technical requirements of the National House Building Council Chapter 4.2 Building external fructifications or may not provide external symptoms until an advanced state of near trees are not fully met under the requirements of BS BS5837:2012 in relation to invasion is achieved. shrinkable soils and ‘vegetation surveys’ (which include hedgerows and shrubs.). p4 [5]
Trees are long lived organisms with a significant proportion of growth below ground, (in addition to what is evident above ground) that naturally loose branches and may potentially fail in many ways. References/ Further reading Risk Assessments [1] The Arboricultural Association Guidance Note 7 Tree Surveys: A Guide to good Practice. Whilst hazards may be identified in this document e.g. a defect ‘that may cause harm’. The risk, (i.e. ‘the chance high or low) that somebody could be harmed by these and other hazards, together [2] Health and Safety Executive Guidance http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/risk-assessment.htm with an indication of how serious the harm could be’ is not assessed. [2] [3] HSE guidance on Tree Management SIM01/2007/05 Management of the risk from falling Requirements for ongoing inspections (to monitor observed defects) and risk assessments trees or branches. will be suggested as necessary in the body of the report. The level and frequency of assessment required (in line with HSE advice) will depend on a range of factors for example [4] National Tree Safety Group Guidance – Common Sense Risk Management of Trees. ‘the frequency of public access to the tree’ p4 [3]. A balanced and proportionate approach to tree safety management is advocated in the National Tree Safety Group publication [5] National House Building Council Chapter 4.2 Building near trees (Part 4 Foundations). ‘Common sense risk management of trees’. [4]
H:\J2400-2499\2444 Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton\Arboriculture\SF2444 Arboricultural Survey.indd 17 Smeeden Foreman Ltd
6 APPENDIX
7 APPENDIX Page 1
Local Services within a 10 Minute Drive Time of Bishop Thornton (August 2015)
Village
Store Distance from Site (Miles) Primary School Post Office Pub Convenienc e Doctors Church Take Away Service Bus Hargate 0.4
Shaw Mills 0.7
Markington 2.0 1 1 2 1 1
Burnt Yates 2.3 1 1
Clint 2.6 1
Ingerthorpe 2.8
Bedlam 2.8
Warsill 2.8
Ripley 2.8 1 2 2 1
Wormald 3.5 Yes Green
Birstwith 3.6 1 1 1 1 Yes
Hamsthwaite 3.8 1 1 1 1 Yes
South 3.9 1 1 Yes Stanley
Sawley 3.9 1 1 Yes
Fountains 3.9
Killinghall 4.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Yes
Total within 5 4 8 6 2 6 2 10 minute drive time from site
Land on Colber Lane, Bishop Thornton, Harrogate rpt.005..21560003 Indigo Planning on behalf of Diocese of Leeds