13th February 2015 The University of Reading c/o Mr Paul McAteer Assistant Project Manager Parsons Brinckerhoff Management Services - Sustainable Building Solutions South URS Building, Whiteknights Campus The University of Reading Shinfield Road Reading RG6 6AX Dear Paul, URS Building, The University of Reading Whiteknights Campus – Ecological Appraisal and Bat Building Inspection Thank you for commissioning EPR to carry out an ecological survey to inform the proposed redevelopment of the University of Reading URS building. Redevelopment proposals currently comprise renovation works to include cosmetic alterations to the building, such as replacement of cladding. There is also potential for a further floor to be added to the structure and the existing undercroft to be enclosed, creating a useable studio space. The full extent of redevelopment plans has not yet been finalised. I therefore decided to complete an Ecological Appraisal of the URS building and its surroundings with the aim of identifying potential ecological constraints and opportunities associated with any future works to the building as fully as possible, to inform development of the proposals. The URS building lies within a complex of teaching blocks and office buildings, interspersed with amenity gardens and ornamental planting, at the centre of the University of Reading Whiteknights Campus (National Grid Reference: SU 7332 7172) (Map 1). The campus is located to the south- west of Reading City centre within a largely residential urban setting. This letter provides a summary of survey methods, results and arising recommendations following a site visit, during which an initial Ecological Appraisal and Bat Inspection of the URS building and the predicted potential Zone of Influence of redevelopment works (hereafter “the Site”) (Map 1) was conducted. At the time of this visit, a similar survey of the nearby Library building was also completed, the results of which are provided in a separate letter report. Zone of Influence In order to identify the full extent of potential ecological issues associated with future redevelopment proposals at the Site, I have considered their likely Zone of Influence (ZOI) (IEEM, 2006; refer to Appendix 1). Taking into account the type and scale of those renovation works currently proposed, I consider that the potential Zone of Influence of the scheme, for the majority of biophysical changes, is likely to extend only to the URS building itself and immediately adjacent land. This area will be the focus of any proposed renovation works. The exception to this could be where extension to/demolition within the current building footprint is proposed, as part of finalised redevelopment plans. To allow for this eventuality, during the site survey, habitats in the area surrounding the URS building were also included in the Zone of Influence and assessed for potential ecological considerations. It should, however, be noted, that any future large-scale structural redevelopment and landscaping plans may necessitate further updating habitat assessment. Relevant Guidance, Legislation and Policy Legislation and policy relevant to ecological assessment works at the URS building is set out under Appendix 1 and summarised below. In undertaking this assessment, I have had regard to best practice guidance, including that detailed within the Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) in the United Kingdom (IEEM, 2006) and the Bat Conservation Trust (BCT) Bat Surveys, Good Practice Guidelines (BCT, 2012). In preparing my recommendations, due consideration has been given to biodiversity conservation legislation, planning policy and nature conservation priorities, both national and international, including: The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Legislation providing protection for sites and species, including the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (the ‘Habitats Regulations’) and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended); Biodiversity conservation priorities under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006, and Reading Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP). Nature conservation policy under the local planning system, namely that detailed within the existing Reading Borough Council Core Strategy (2008) (in place ahead of an emerging Local Plan document). Methodology Methods employed for completion of the Ecological Appraisal and Bat Building Inspection are set out under Appendix 2 to this document and described in further detail, where necessary, below. The Ecological Appraisal comprised of a desktop study, followed by a site visit to complete a walkover survey and Bat Inspection of the URS building and its surrounding area. I visited the site with my colleagues John Atkinson (a licensed bat ecologist: Class Licence: CLS01806) and Philip Brown on the 27th of January 2015. Desktop Study As part of the desktop study, submissions were made to the Thames Valley Environmental Records Centre (TVERC) and local Bat Group for a records search to identify sites designated for their conservation value as well as existing European Protected Species records within 5km, and notable species records within 2km of the Site. Designated Sites The locations of designated sites identified during the search are shown on Map 1. Statutory There are no statutory designated sites located within 5km of the Site. Non-Statutory 14 non-statutory designated sites, comprising Local Wildlife Sites (LWSs) and Local Nature Reserves (LNRs) lie within 5km of the Site. The closest of these is Whiteknights Park LWS, which occupies the eastern part of the Whiteknights Campus, approximately 200m from the Site. Recommendations with regards to designated sites Due to the low-impact nature of current proposals and the isolation of the majority of designated areas from the Site, by development and urban infrastructure, I do not consider that any designated conservation interests will be affected by renovation works as they currently stand. Should future plan development lead to proposals for significant structural demolition or construction and/or landscaping works, potential impacts on the nearby LWS and any necessary mitigation measures should be considered via consultation with a suitably-qualified ecologist. Protected Species Relevant protected species records are shown on Map 3 and discussed further in the below text, as appropriate. Habitats and Botany Map 1 shows habitats recorded within the potential Zone of Influence of renovation works at the URS building during the Ecological Appraisal survey. Target notes are given as Appendix 3. The URS building is located towards the south of the Site (Target Note (TN) 1) and is considered further in the protected species section below. The building is immediately surrounded by areas of paved hard-standing and tarmacked paths. To the north is an open area of amenity grassland (TN 2). This space is intensively managed and occupied by sparse ornamental shrub planting and scattered mature and semi-mature trees, comprising both coniferous and deciduous, mostly non-native varieties. A short ornamental hedge runs along the southern and part of the eastern and western edges of this open area. In the west this hedge comprises Beech but becomes a Holly cultivar at approximately the mid-point of the building. Tarmacked paths intersect the grassed area. Ornamental borders are present in some areas alongside pathways as well as immediately adjacent to the URS building on its western and southern aspects. Species in these areas comprise non-native ornamental shrub varieties and immature trees. A similar open space is present extending from the eastern aspect of the building (TN 3). The Chancellors Way road runs alongside the western and southern aspects of the building. To the south of this feature are further smaller open amenity grassland and garden areas, beyond which lie two building blocks containing the Admissions Office (TN 4), Allen Laboratory and Human and Environmental Sciences and Archaeology departments (TN 5). A small ornamental pond is present under the undercroft overhang on the western aspect of the building (TN 6). This feature is discussed further in the protected species section below. No botanical species or habitats of conservation importance were noted during the survey. In general, the amenity spaces within and immediately surrounding the Site are not considered to support features of ecological interest and therefore I do not consider that they present any ecological constraints to renovation plans. However some mature tree specimens and shrubs in the vicinity of the building may offer potential to support breeding birds, as discussed further in the protected species section below. Recommendations with regards to habitats and botany Existing mature trees and shrubs should be retained as part of any future renovation scheme for the building and any potential impacts on these features should be minimised via the introduction of suitable root protection zones and sensitive management techniques, as appropriate. Should any future large-scale structural/landscaping redevelopment be planned for the site and/or its surroundings, the need for further updating habitat assessment should be considered via consultation with a suitably-qualified ecologist. Protected Species As part of the Ecological Appraisal, the potential for onsite habitats with the Zone of Influence to support protected species was also assessed. Results and recommendations in relation to relevant protected species considerations