Bat Scoping Report and Preliminary Ecological Appraisal
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Unit 4, Langham Stables, Langham Lane, Lodsworth, Petworth, West Sussex GU28 9BU Tel: 01798 861 800 - E-Mail: [email protected] - Web: www.ecologyco-op.co.uk Bat Scoping Report and Preliminary Ecological Appraisal Mill House, Mill Lane, Cocking Author: Paul Whitby BSc, MCIEEM, CEcol Reviewed by: Dr Ryan Walker MCIEEM, CEnv 22th April 2021 Project No: 4146 The Ecology Co-operation Ltd Registered Office: Greens Court, West Street, Midhurst, West Sussex, GU29 9NQ Company number: 8905527 Mill House – BAT SCOPING REPORT AND PEA Document Control Issue No Author Reviewer Issue Date Additions/alterations Notes Original PW RW 22/04/21 Small changes to text This report has been prepared by The Ecology Co-operation Ltd, with all reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of the Contract with the client. This report only becomes the property of the client once payment for it has been received in full. We disclaim responsibility to the client and others in respect of any matters outside the scope of the above. This report is confidential to the client and we accept no responsibility of whatsoever nature to third parties to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known. Any such party relies on the report at their own risk. 2 Mill House – BAT SCOPING REPORT AND PEA Report Summary 1. The Ecology Co-op was commissioned by Mr and Mrs Dixon to undertake a Bat Scoping Assessment and Preliminary Ecological Appraisal at Mill House, Mill Lane, Cocking. The purpose of this report is to present the findings of the appraisal and identify potential ecological constraints and opportunities in relation to a proposal to add an extension to the rear of the property, and to demolish the existing garage, which will be re-built in a new location. 2. An assessment of the site was undertaken by Paul Whitby BSc, MCIEEM, CEcol and Natural England Level 2 bat survey class licence holder on the 10th March 2021. This included a ground-based external inspection of the buildings, an internal inspection of potential roost features, such as enclosed loft spaces (subject to access), and an appraisal of the surrounding habitats, to evaluate the site for its potential to support bats. All bat species are European Protected Species (Annex IV, ‘Habitats Directive’). 3. This site is situated in the rural village of Cocking, West Sussex. It comprises a large residential building and a small garage on a tarmac driveway with a small managed garden. Within a wider context, it is surrounded by agricultural fields, small patches of woodland, and there is the presence of Costers brook to the east of the site. 4. The area of the property that will be impacted by the proposals for a new extension was found to support a solitary bat, visibly roosting behind a hanging tile, whilst at the norther end of the property where new French doors are proposed, the hanging tile in this location were deemed to have ‘moderate’ roosting suitability. The garage building to be demolished has a negligible suitability for roosting bats. Habitats within the zone of influence of the proposals was considered to be of value to bats for foraging, commuting, and wider dispersal purposes. 5. Therefore, in accordance with current guidelines, two emergence/re-entry surveys are recommended to complete a roost characterisation assessment of the property, focussing on the two zones of impact. These must be spaced approximately three weeks apart, between May and September (although September is considered a sub-optimal survey month and surveys cannot be undertaken in September for low potential buildings). 6. A chalk stream called Costers Brook is present adjacent to the garage and supports high biodiversity value. It is important that strict measures are in place to ensure that impact risks to this feature are minimised. The production of a Construction Environment Management Plan will help to ensure that impact risks to this watercourse are minimised. 7. A European Protected Species (EPS) licence will be required for works which will destroy the identified bat roost. The EPS licence would detail full mitigation measures during the development likely to include careful timing of the works to avoid adverse impacts on bats, the precautionary sensitive removal of roost features, supervised by a bat license holder, and provision of permanent bat roosting features. 3 Mill House – BAT SCOPING REPORT AND PEA CONTENTS PAGE 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Purpose of the Report .................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Background .................................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Policy and Legislation ..................................................................................................... 7 2 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................. 7 2.1 Desk Study ..................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Field Survey ................................................................................................................... 7 2.2.1 Roosting Potential .................................................................................................... 7 2.2.2 Hibernation Potential ............................................................................................... 8 2.2.3 Foraging and Commuting Potential ......................................................................... 9 2.3 Other Protected and/or Notable Species ........................................................................ 9 3 RESULTS/OBSERVATIONS ................................................................................ 9 3.1 Desk Study and Granted EPS Licences ......................................................................... 9 3.2 Site Context and Surrounding Habitats ........................................................................ 12 3.3 Inspection for Bats ........................................................................................................ 13 3.3.1 Roost Potential ...................................................................................................... 13 3.3.2 Hibernation Potential ............................................................................................. 14 3.4 Foraging and Commuting Potential .............................................................................. 15 3.5 Other Protected and/or Notable Species ...................................................................... 15 3.6 Survey Limitations ........................................................................................................ 15 3.7 Photographs ................................................................................................................. 16 4 ECOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES ................................... 20 4.1 Designated Sites .......................................................................................................... 20 4.2 Bats .............................................................................................................................. 20 4.2.1 Roost Potential ...................................................................................................... 20 4.2.2 Hibernation Potential ............................................................................................. 21 4.2.3 Foraging and Commuting Suitability ...................................................................... 21 4.3 Other Protected and/or Notable Species ...................................................................... 21 4.4 Biodiversity Enhancement Opportunities ..................................................................... 22 APPENDIX 1 – WilDlife LeGislation anD National PlanninG Policy ...................... 23 APPENDIX 2 – ReDucinG Impacts of ARtificial LiGht ............................................. 25 4 Mill House – BAT SCOPING REPORT AND PEA 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose of the Report The Ecology Co-op has been commissioned to undertake a bat scoping assessment and Preliminary Ecological Appraisal of Mill House by Mr and Mrs Dixon. This report presents the findings of a walkover survey and building/tree inspection for occupation by bats, undertaken by Paul Whitby BSc, MCIEEM, CEcol and Natural England Level 2 bat survey class licence holder on the 10th March 2021. Whilst this report has maintained a focus on assessing potential impacts upon roosting bats and bat activity within the proposal’s zone of influence, it has also considered the potential for any other protected/notable species and/or habitats to be adversely affected. The proposal for the site comprises rear extensions to the ground and first floor of the property and the demolition of the existing garage with a relocated new garage that will include new accommodation. Recommendations for further surveys that are likely to be required to inform a planning application and Ecological Impact Assessment are provided, if necessary. Where appropriate, measures to avoid, mitigate and/or compensate for significant adverse effects are outlined. This report is intended to inform the client and the appropriate planning authority of the potential impacts that this development proposal may have upon roosting bats as well as identifying potential impacts