Linglongs Road, Whaley Bridge, Derbyshire ECOLOGICAL
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Gladman Developments Ltd Linglongs Road, Whaley Bridge, Derbyshire ECOLOGICAL APPRAISAL March 2014 Ecological Appraisal fpcr FPCR Environment and Design Ltd Registered Office: Lockington Hall, Lockington, Derby DE74 2RH Company No. 07128076. [T] 01509 672772 [F] 01509 674565 [E] [email protected] [W] www.fpcr.co.uk This report is the property of FPCR Environment and Design Ltd and is issued on the condition it is not reproduced, retained or disclosed to any unauthorised person, either wholly or in part without the written consent of FPCR Environment and Design Ltd. Ordnance Survey material is used with permission of The Controller of HMSO, Crown copyright 100018896. Rev Issue Status Prepared / Date Reviewed / Date Approved/Date - Draft 1 ED / 21.11.2013 NJL / 27.11.2013 KEH / 16.12.13 Rev A ED / 19.02.2014 NJL / 14.02.2014 KEH / 19.02.14 Final ED / 06.03.2014 ED / 06.03.2014 J:\5600\5660\ECO\Eco App\5660 Eco App 06.03.14.doc 1 Ecological Appraisal fpcr CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 3 2.0 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................. 4 3.0 RESULTS .......................................................................................................................10 4.0 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................23 FIGURES Figure 1: Site Location and Designated Sites Figure 2: Protected and Notable Species Records Figure 3: Internationally and Statutorily Designated Sites Figure 4: Phase 1 Habitat Plan Figure 5: Bat Transect Survey Results: Dusk 26.05.2013 Figure 6: Bat Transect Survey Results: Dusk 24.07.2013 Figure 7: Bat Transect Survey Results: Dusk 26.09.2013 Figure 8: Ecological Management Plan TABLES Table 1: Conservation Value of Hedgerows in Relation to HEGS Grades Table 2: Bat Survey Protocol for Trees Table 3: HSI Score Suitability Measure Table 4: Local Wildlife Site Information Table 5: Potential Local Wildlife Site and ‘Other Sites’ Information Table 6: Protected and Notable Species Records Table 7: Static Bat Detector Results Table 8: Reptile Survey Results Table 9: Recorded Number of LWS Grassland Indicator Species APPENDICES Appendix A: Botanical Species Lists Appendix B: Confidential Badger Survey Report J:\5600\5660\ECO\Eco App\5660 Eco App 06.03.14.doc 2 Ecological Appraisal fpcr 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 The following report has been produced by FPCR Environment and Design Ltd on behalf of Gladman Developments Ltd and provides details of Extended Phase 1 Habitat survey and protected species surveys for badger Meles meles, bats and reptiles, undertaken on land to the east of Linglongs Road, Whaley Bridge (hereafter referred to as the site). 1.2 The site comprises four fields, two of which contain predominantly species-poor semi-improved grassland and two containing predominantly rush Juncus sp. dominated marshy grassland. The boundaries of the site are formed by dry stone walls. The internal boundaries separating the individual fields are separated by lines of mature trees and post and wire fences. A mature hedgerow and stream are located within the east of the site. 1.3 Off-site habitats include broadleaved woodland to the south and south east and further grassland and arable fields to the west beyond Linglongs Road. An abandoned school is located adjacent to the southern site boundary. Existing residential and light industry developments are present to the north west, north and east of the site. Development Proposals 1.4 The survey was commissioned in order to identify any potential ecological constraints relating to the development of residential properties and associated public open space within the site boundary. Please refer to the Development Framework Plan (FPCR February 2014) for the details of the proposed development. J:\5600\5660\ECO\Eco App\5660 Eco App 06.03.14.doc 3 Ecological Appraisal fpcr 2.0 METHODOLOGY Desk Study 2.1 Existing baseline information regarding the presence of ecological sites of interest and protected or notable species was requested from Derbyshire Wildlife Trust, High Peak Badger Group, Derbyshire Bat Conservation Group, Derbyshire Amphibian and Reptile Group and the Multi- Agency Geographical Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) website1. 2.2 The search area for this information was related to the significance of the site, the species, or potential zones of influence, as follows: • 5 km around the survey area for sites of International Importance (e.g. Special Areas of Conservation (SAC), Special Protection Areas (SPA), or Ramsar Sites); • 2 km around the survey area for sites of National or Regional Importance (e.g. Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) or Local Nature Reserves (LNR); • 1 km around the survey area for sites of County or Local Importance (e.g. Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC), Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) or Local Nature Reserves (LNR)) and species records (e.g. Statutory Protected, those listed as species of principal importance under Section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 20062, Local Biodiversity Action Plan Species (LBAP) or notable species). 2.3 Further inspection, using colour 1:25,000 OS Base Maps, and aerial photographs from Google Maps3 and Bing Maps4 was undertaken in order to provide additional context and identify any features of potential importance for nature conservation in the wider countryside. Field Surveys All field surveys were undertaken by suitably experienced, and where required, licenced5, ecologists from FPCR. Extended Phase 1 Survey 2.4 The site was surveyed during May and July 2013. Surveys followed standard extended Phase 1 Habitat Assessment Methodology, as recommended by Natural England6 and involved a systematic walkover of the site classifying the habitat types present and marking them on a base map. Target notes were made to record features or habitats of particular interest, as well as any sightings or evidence of protected or notable species. Plant species lists were compiled during the walkover survey, which although not exhaustive, were considered to be sufficient to be able to determine broad habitat types and their ecological value. 1 www.magic.gov.uk 2 The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006. [Online]. Available from: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/16/contents [Accessed 11/11/2013] 3 www.maps.google.co.uk 4 www.bing.com/maps 5 Natural England Bat Licence Number: CLSO 1276 6 JNCC. (1990). Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey – a technique for environmental audit. Peterborough: JNCC J:\5600\5660\ECO\Eco App\5660 Eco App 06.03.14.doc 4 Ecological Appraisal fpcr Hedgerows 2.5 Hedgerows were surveyed individually using the Hedgerow Evaluation and Grading System (HEGS)7 to enable identification and evaluation of their nature conservation value and significance for wildlife. Each hedgerow was assigned a grade based on the results, as indicated below. Grades above 2 are classed as being of nature conservation priority. Table 1: Conservation Value of Hedgerows in Relation to HEGS Grades Grade Value of Hedgerow -1, 1, 1+ High to Very High -2, 2, 2+ Moderately High to High -3, 3, 3+ Moderate -4, 4, 4+ Low 2.6 Hedgerows were also assessed against the Wildlife and Landscape criteria of the Hedgerow Regulations 19978. Results are assessed against the set criteria laid out in the regulations to ascertain whether a hedgerow is classed as ‘Important’. Hedgerows may also qualify as ‘Important’ under the Archaeology and History criteria of this Act, but assessment against this aspect of the Act was outside the remit of this study. 2.7 Hedgerows were also assessed to determine if they met the habitat descriptions for Hedgerow Habitat of Principal Importance as listed within Section 41 of the NERC Act, (i.e. whether they consisted of 80% or more native species). Badger Surveys 2.8 Please refer to Appendix B: Badger Survey Report for the methodology and results of the badger survey undertaken within the site. The Badger Survey Report is confidential and is separate from this document. A copy can be obtained from FPCR on request. Bat Surveys Tree Assessment 2.9 Tree assessments were undertaken from ground level, with the aid of a torch and binoculars where required, on all trees on site in May. During the survey features considered to provide suitable roost sites for bats such as the following were sought: • Trunk cavity – Large hole in trunk caused by rot or injury. • Branch cavity - Large hole in branch caused by rot or injury. • Trunk split – Large split / fissure in trunk caused by rot or injury. • Branch spilt – Large split / fissure in branch caused by rot or injury. • Branch socket cavity – Where a branch has fallen from the tree and resulted in formation of an access point in to a cavity. 7 Clements, D. & Toft, R. (1992). Hedgerow Evaluation and Grading System (HEGS) – a methodology for the ecological survey, evaluation and grading of hedgerows. Countryside Planning and Management 8 The Hedgerow Regulations 1997 – Statutory Instrument 1997 No. 1160. [Online]. London: HMSO. Available from: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/1160/contents/made [Accessed 11/11/2013]. J:\5600\5660\ECO\Eco App\5660 Eco App 06.03.14.doc 5 Ecological Appraisal fpcr • Woodpecker hole – Hole created by nesting birds suitable for use by roosting bats. • Lifted bark – Areas of bark which has rotted / lifted to form suitable access point/roost site for bats. • Hollow trunk – Decay in heartwood leading to internal cavity in trunk. • Hazard beam failure – Where a section of the tree stem/branch has failed causing collapse and leading to longitudinal fractures / splits / cracks along its length. • Ivy cover – Dense / mature ivy cover where the woody stems could create small cavities / crevices. 2.10 The trees were classified into general bat roost potential groups based on the presence of features listed above. Table 2 below describes these categories and provides information regarding the requirements for additional survey work and mitigation measures. This is based upon Table 8.4 in Bat Surveys- Good Practice Guidelines9.