RSK Properties LLP
Rothley Lodge Employment Area Extension
Rothley, Leicestershire
ECOLOGICAL APPRAISAL
October 2012
Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire 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 Approved/Date - Draft 1 PH/ 17.07.12 PH / 17.07.12 Final PH / 10.10.12
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 1 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 3
2.0 METHODOLOGY ...... 3
3.0 RESULTS...... 5
4.0 DISCUSSION ...... 14
TABLES
Table 1: Non-statutory designated sites summaries
Table 2: Table 2. UK BAP, BoCC Red and Amber Listed Bird Species Recorded at Rothley Lodge during Breeding Bird Surveys 2011, and their recent status within Leicestershire.
Table 3: Key Reptile Site Survey Assessment Categories (HGBI 1998)
FIGURES
Figure 1: Site Location and Location of Non-Statutory Sites
Figure 2: Phase 1 Habitat Plan
ADDENDICES
A Badger Survey Report
B Reptile Survey Report
C Bird Survey Report
D Bat Survey Report
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 2 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 The following report has been prepared by FPCR Environment and Design Ltd on behalf of RSK Properties LLP. It provides details of Ecological Surveys completed on a site to the east of Rothley Leicestershire in support of an application to develop the site for employment purposes.
Site Location and Context
1.2 The survey site, identified in Figure 1 – Location Plan, is approximately 24.8ha in area and lies between the A6 Loughborough Road dual carriageway and the River Soar (central OS grid reference SK 593 136) and to the east of the residential centres of Rothley and Mountsorrel.
1.3 Surrounding land use to the north is predominately industrial, with large industrial units forming a paper production and distribution centre, and retail, with a the Wyevale Garden Centre. The A6 Loughborough Road and River Soar forms the western and eastern boundaries respectively and a mixture of amenity grassland and disused sewage farm forms the southern site boundaries.
1.4 Land use in the wider area is a mixture of arable and pastoral farmland and established urban development formed mainly by the villages of Rothley and Mountsorrel. To the east of the River Soar lies Cossington Meadows, a wetland nature reserve managed by the Leicestershire and Rutland Wildlife Trust.
Ongoing works
1.5 Works associated with the infilling of a borrow pit consented under planning ref: 2004/1356/02, which was recently extended (2012), are currently ongoing. The ecological baseline therefore reflects the nature of the site prior to these works, however, where possible the effects of this are outlined in the results where relevant.
Objectives of Study
1.6 The objectives of the study were to:
• review the relative ecological interest of the survey area
• provide recommendations for further survey (if necessary)
• review the broad site proposals and opportunities for mitigation/enhancement
2.0 METHODOLOGY
Desk study
2.1 The Site has been the subject of a number of ecological surveys conducted in support of earlierplanning applications relative to the site and surroundings. The following information from this period has been reviewed for baseline information regarding the Site and its setting and in order to assess the need, if any, for further specialist surveys:
• Summary Report (Cristopher Betts Environmental Biology 2004)
• Land at Rothley Amphibian Surveys (URS 2008)
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 3 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
2.2 In order to compile existing baseline information, relevant ecological information was requested from both statutory and non-statutory nature conservation organisations for the purposes of this Ecological Appraisal, including:
• Multi Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (Magic) website
• Leicestershire Environmental Records Centre (LERC)
• Leicestershire Amphibian & Reptile Network
• Leicestershire Badger Group
• Leicestershire Bat Group
2.3 Further inspection, using colour 1:25,000 OS base maps (www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk) and aerial photographs from Google Earth (www.maps.google.co.uk), was also undertaken in order to provide additional context and identify any features of potential importance for nature conservation in the wider countryside.
2.4 The search area for biodiversity information was related to the significance of sites and species and potential zones of influence, as follows:
• 5km around the application area for sites of International Importance (e.g. Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Special Protection Area (SPA), Ramsar site)
• 2km around the application area for sites of National or Regional Importance (e.g. Sites of Special Scientific Interest)
• 1km around the application site for sites of County/Metropolitan Importance (e.g. Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC)/Wildlife Sites and species records (e.g. protected, UK BAP or notable species).
Extended Phase 1 Survey
2.5 The site was surveyed on 23rd August and 31st August 2010. The survey technique adopted for the initial habitat assessment of the site followed the Extended Phase 1 survey technique1 as recommended by Natural England. This comprised a walkover of the site mapping and broadly describing the principal habitat types and identifying the dominant plant species present within each habitat type.
Fauna
2.6 During the walkover survey of the site, observations, identification and signs of any species protected under Part 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 and the Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994 were noted.
2.7 As a result of the above, further detailed specialist surveys were conducted within the site and wider area. A summary of results is provided here and where necessary in detail, at Appendices A - D.
• Badgers – Surveys completed in March 2011 of the site and wider area following survey protocol outlined in Cresswell, Harris and Jeffries (1992);
1 JNCC, (2007), Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey - a technique for environmental audit, Revised reprint 2003, reprinted 2007
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 4 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
• Reptiles – Part-complete for site and wider area following survey protocol outlined in the Herpetofauna Workers Manual (Gent and Gibson, 1998) and the Froglife Advice Sheet 10 - Reptile Survey (Froglife 1999);
• Bird surveys – including use by breeding, overwintering and passage species
• Bats – surveys were conducted following the Bat Conservation Trust (2007) Bat Surveys- Good Practice Guidelines.
• Otters and water voles - Survey methods followed those outlined in the New River and Wildlife Handbook and Strachan, Moorhouse and Gelling2
Limitations
2.8 It is recognised that the bat surveys were completed following guidance contained within the now updated Bat Surveys – Good Practice Guidelines. The updated guidelines require a higher frequency of activity surveys, although dusk dawn surveys of potential roost features remains broadly the same. Despite this divergence, this is not considered likely to affect the final conclusions.
3.0 RESULTS
Desk Study
Statutory Designated Sites
3.1 The site lies approximately 1.3km from Main Quarry, Mountsorrel SSSI which, as a geological designation, is not discussed further. It is a geological designation notified for its geological interest which includes
“fine examples of granite related, temperature-controlled mineralisation characterised by molybdenite, allanite and topaz, modified by a later introduction of dolomite, sulphides and crystallised chlorites”
and
“probably the most dramatic and well-developed occurrence of asphaltite in Britain”
3.2 As a geological designation it is not considered further within this report. No biological SSSIs occur within 2km of the site, the closest being Buddon and Swithland Reservoir SSSI, which occurs some 2.8km from the site to the east.
Non-Statutory Designated Sites
3.3 A total of seven LWS and two pLWSs occur within the search area. A summary of each of provided in Table 1 below.
2 Strachan, Moorhouse and Gelling (2011) The Water Vole Conservation Handbook. Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Abingdon.
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 5 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
Table 1: Non-statutory designated sites summaries
Ref No Name Area (ha) Location relative to site
Local Wildlife Sites
61675 River Soar within Charnwood Borough 127.1 SK522219 Adjacent to site
48517 Cossington Meadows 17.05 SK597135 50m to east
55140 Rothley Brook in Charnwood Borough 0 SK586125 250m to southwest
25329 Church Meadow 2.56 400m to south east
25501, 25507 & Fields West of Cossington Road 1.098, 500m to east 52948 1.99 & 0.749
33765 Farnham Bridge Marsh 1.423 SK589133 500m to southwest
72483 Linkfield Road Pond 0.831 SK584140 500m to west
80006 Mountsorrel Meadows 9 SK588150 650m to northwest
potential Local Wildlife Sites
00068712 & Lower Soar Floodplain Wetland Soar 0.05 SK599133 00068670 850m to east
00038236 Castle Hill, Scrub in north east section 0.81 SK581149 900m to north
Parish, District and County Sites
LERC000100013207 Plantation 2.33124 Within Site, SK594137
LERC000100013264 Long narrow plantation 1.14083 Within Site, SK594141
LERC000100013212 Drain 0.073063 SK589133
LERC000100013217 Rough, wet grassland with area of marsh 1.25751 SK589133
LERC000100013222 Rothley Brook 0.458287 SK587131
LERC000100013226 Pool 0.07854 SK593127
LERC000100013231 Channel with vegetation 0.144488 SK594127
LERC000100013269 Semi-improved Grassland 1.92344 SK600139
LERC000100013279 Broadleaved woodland 0.275904 SK599133
LERC000100013284 Gravel Pit 2.45507 SK596135
LERC000100013289 Lake 2.73617 SK597128
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 6 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
Ref No Name Area (ha) Location relative to site
LERC000100013310 Cossington Mill Pool 0.690462 SK595128
LERC000100021121 Semi-improved grassland 0.945637 SK600140
LERC000100021186 Drain 0.441237 SK595147
LERC000100021206 Grassland 0.281351 SK600146
Protected species
3.4 Relevant records were provided by the LERC, Leicestershire Badger Group and the Leicestershire Amphibian and Reptile Group. Where relevant, reference is made in the ‘Protected Species’ section below. Due to the confidential and sensitive nature of records spatial information is not given.
Flora
Broad-leaved semi-natural woodland
3.5 An area of native broad leaved woodland is situated adjacent to the River Soar, where the floodplain grades into steep bank supporting dense broad-leaved woodland. The canopy at the base of the slope comprised species typical of wetland habitats with both crack willow Salix fragilis and grey willow Salix cinerea occurring frequently. Further up the slope an ash Fraxinus excelsior dominated woodland occurs with field maple Acer campestre and crab apple Malus sylvatica. Elder Sambucus nigra is also abundant particularly on, and at, the base of the slope.
3.6 The ground flora is generally sparse as a result of the heavy over-shading, although where the canopy is more open and gradient less steep, tall ruderal vegetation dominated by nettle Urtica dioica and brambles occur.
Broad-leaved plantation woodland
3.7 Extensive areas of plantation woodland were recorded across the site and typically comprised canopy species including the broad-leaved species of ash Fraxinus excelsior, silver birch Betula pendula, sycamore Acer pseudoplantanus and field maple Acer campestre, although coniferous species were also present. Ground flora within the plantations was generally poor and often absent.
3.8 A plantation of cricket bat willow Salix alba var. caerulea situated along the flood plain of the River Soar did however support a moderately species rich fen habitat below the canopy (TN 1). Species comprised reed sweet grass Glyceria maxima, meadowsweet Fillipendula ulmaria, water chickweed Myosoton aquaticum, water forget-me-not Myosotis scorpioides, amphibious bistort Persicaria amphibium, marsh woundwort Stachys palustris and reed canary grass Phalaris arundinacea. The presence of areas dominated by nettle, as shown in Photograph 1, is likely to suggests that it is drying out,; probably as a result of natural succession but exacerbated by the willow plantation.
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 7 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
Photograph 1: Cricket bat willow plantation with fen and tall ruderal ground flora
3.9 An immature broad-leaved plantation of around 10yrs growth has been planted on the steep banks of the borrow pit (TN 2). The canopy species comprise a mixture of native species including ash Fraxinus excelsior, alder Alnus glutinosa, hazel Corylus avellana, apple Malus domestica and grey willow Salix cinerea. The tree/shrub spacing is fairly open, which has allowed the development of a dense bramble Rubus fruticosus scrub and tall ruderal herb understory to develop. Although additional species observed included meadow sweet Fillipendula ulmaria, rosebay Chamerion angustifoila and greater willowherb Epilobium hirsutum the community was typically species poor and of low diversity.
3.10 This area is currently being infilled gradually over 18 months under an extant planning consent.
Semi-improved grassland
3.11 Small areas of semi-improved grassland persist around the borrow pit and would be unaffected by infilling works. Coarse grasses including false-oat grass Arrhenatherum elatius and cock’s- foot Dactylus glomerata are locally dominant with a range of herbs characteristic and tolerant of low intensity management such as meadow vetchling Lathyrus pratensis broad-leaved dock Rumex obtusifolius, dead nettles Lamium spp. and hedge woundwort Stachys sylvatica also present.
3.12 An area of semi-improved grassland also occurs adjacent to a second pond used for fly fishing (TN3). Although apparently regularly mown the grassland supports a semi-improved sward with abundant creeping bent Agrostis stolonifera and frequent red fescue Festuca rubra and perennial ryegrass Lolium perenne. A range of herbs tolerant of regular management are present and included abundant white clover Trifolium repens and frequent creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens. Additional species included common cat’s-ear Hypochoeris radicata and autumn hawkbit Leontodon autumnalis and a number of other species indicative of regular disturbance and management.
3.13 A track leading to the borrow pit cuts through an area of semi-improved grassland characterised by a range of species indicative of past disturbance. Yorkshire fog Holcus lanatus dominates with occasional creeping bent, smooth meadow grass Poa pratensis and creeping buttercup.
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 8 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
Common ragwort Senecio jacobaea is frequent. The peripheries of this compartment grade into a tall ruderal herb community.
Tall Herb - ruderal
3.14 Patches of tall ruderal herbs occurs scattered around the site, particularly around the semi- improved grassland, where abundant thistles Cirsium spp and nettle occurs.
Hedgerows
3.15 Hedgerows are infrequent within the site and mainly associated with its boundaries. Two hedgerows are present on the curtilage of existing and former residential dwellings. A single hedgerow dominated by ornamental species occurs centrally within the site and a hornbeam dominated hedgerow is also present on the western boundary. The remaining hedgerows all support a range of native species including hawthorn Crateagues monogyna, holly Ilex aquifolium, elder, crab apple, blackthorn Prunus spinosa and English elm Ulmus procera.
Open water
3.16 The borrow pit TN2 has been drained, is currently being infilled and now lacks open water (Photographs 2 and 3). Marginal and emergent vegetation including, common reed Phragmites australis, bulrush Typha latifolia, reed canary grass Phalaris arundinacea and greater willowherb, persisted around its margins, although is likely to be lost over the coming months.
Photograph 2: View across borrowpit from Photograph 3: Current situation (as of western bank June2012)
3.17 A second pond TN3 occurs to the south and is currently managed as a fishing pond (Photograph 4). It is largely devoid of marginal vegetation although some small areas supporting trifid bur marigold Bidens tripartita, redshank Persicaria maculata, colt’s-foot Tusilago farfara and tufted hair grass Deschampsia cespitosa occur on its banks.
3.18 A third more natural pond exists adjacent to the River Soar (TN 4 & Photograph 5). It is heavily over-shaded in its central and southern extents and contains frequent submerged dead vegetation and branches. Its northern extent, however, grades into tall herb and fen vegetation supporting abundant reed canary grass, nettle and orange balsam Impatiens capensis, with occasional garden Angelica archangelica and wild angelica A. sylvestris.
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 9 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
3.19 No floating or submerged aquatic vegetation was observed.
Photograph 4: View across borrowpit from Photograph 5: Current situation (as of western bank June2012)
Fauna
Badgers
3.20 The presence of badgers was confirmed within the site boundary where an outlier and a main sett were observed in 2010/11. The former comprised an inactive single hole sett with no sign of activity. The latter, however, comprised an active main sett with fourteen active sett entrances. Associated field signs included fresh bedding, dislodged guard hairs, well-worn runs, scratching posts and latrines.
3.21 A third disused sett was also observed during the enabling works for the borrow pit infilling. This sett was closed down during these works.
3.22 Further information can be found in Appendix 1, which should only be provided to bone fida organisations.
Bats
Internal/External survey
3.23 Internal/external, activity and emergence/re-entry surveys were completed during 2011 on a former residential dwelling with associated out buildings.
3.24 The internal inspection highlighted the presence of a small number of brown long-eared bat Plecotus auritus droppings within the roof void of the outbuilding assumed to be associated with a night-time feeding roost.
Emergence/re-entry survey
3.25 During the emergence re-entry surveys a single common pipistrelle was seen to emerge/re-enter the out building on two occasions suggesting that this building is an occasionally used roost.
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 10 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
Activity survey
3.26 During the survey, common Pipistrellus pipistrellus and soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pymaeus bat activity was frequently observed; including commuting and foraging bats adjacent to several suitable features within the site.
3.27 A Myotis species was recorded foraging along the edge of the woodland belt adjacent to pond 2 and Daubenton’s bats Myotis daubentonii were observed foraging and commuting along the River Soar. A single noctule bat was also heard commuting over the site.
3.28 A barbastelle bat Barbastella barbastellus was recorded at 9:25 on the 8th August adjacent to the borrowpit and was commuting through the site.
Birds
3.29 A range of birds were recorded during the breeding and wintering bird surveys of the site. Notable species are indicated in table 2 below:
Table 2. UK BAP, BoCC Red and Amber Listed Bird Species Recorded at Rothley Lodge during Breeding Bird Surveys 2011, and their recent status within Leicestershire.
Species Conservation Status† Recent Status within Leicestershire†† Status
Black-headed Amber list Wintering only Present all year, abundant in winter, Gull uncommon breeder
Bullfinch Amber list Probable and Common resident breeder UK BAP wintering
Common Tern Fairly common passage migrant, uncommon Amber list Non-Breeder breeder
Dunnock Amber list Confirmed and Abundant resident breeder, passage migrant UK BAP wintering
Fieldfare Schedule 1 Wintering only Common winter visitor, rare in summer Red list
Gadwall Common autumn and winter visitor, Amber list Possible uncommon breeder
Gadwall Amber list Wintering only Common autumn and winter visitor, uncommon breeder
Green Possible and Amber list Fairly common resident breeder Woodpecker wintering
Greylag Goose Fairly common to common resident, Amber list Possible uncommon breeder
Kestrel Amber list Wintering only Fairly common resident breeder
Lapwing Red list Wintering only Abundant winter visitor, fairly common UK BAP migrant breeder
Lesser Redpoll Red list Wintering only Fairly common passage and winter visitor, UK BAP rare breeder after recent decline
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 11 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
Species Conservation Status† Recent Status within Leicestershire†† Status
Little Grebe Amber list Wintering only Uncommon to fairly common resident breeder, uncommon winter visitor
Mallard Confirmed and Common autumn and winter visitor, fairly Amber list wintering common breeder
Meadow Pipit Common passage migrant, fairly common Amber list Non-Breeder winter visitor, uncommon breeder
Redwing Schedule 1 Wintering only Common winter visitor Red list
Reed Bunting Amber list Possible and Common resident breeder, recent decline UK BAP wintering
Song thrush Red List Probable and UK BAP Common resident breeder, recent decline wintering LBAP
Starling Red List Possible and Abundant resident breeder, passage migrant UK BAP wintering and winter visitor
Swallow Amber list Possible Common migrant breeder
Swift Amber list Non-Breeder Common migrant breeder
Teal Amber list Wintering only Common autumn and winter visitor, scarce in summer; rare breeder
Tufted Duck Possible and Common autumn and winter visitor, Amber list wintering uncommon to fairly common breeder
Whitethroat Amber list Probable Common migrant breeder
Willow Tit Red list Wintering only Fairly common resident breeder UK BAP
Willow Warbler Amber list Probable Abundant migrant breeder
Yellowhammer Red list Wintering only Common resident breeder, recent decline UK BAP
† Possible breeder - Evidence accumulated during the survey indicates that the bird species could be breeding on site, but the evidence is less conclusive than that obtained for probable breeders. Probable breeder - Evidence accumulated during the survey indicates that the bird species is breeding on site. Confirmed breeder - An active nest was observed or equivalent. Non Breeder – Seen but either flying over and/or no suitable habitats for breeding. †† The terms used to define the species’ abundance in the county are: Scarce - fewer than ten birds occurring or pairs breeding annually Uncommon - 10 to 100 birds occurring or pairs breeding annually Fairly uncommon - 100 to 1,000 birds occurring or pairs breeding annually Common - 1,000 to 10,000 birds occurring or pairs breeding annually Abundant - more than 10,000 birds occurring or pairs breeding annually
3.30 Habitats within the site are also considered to be of potential value to farmland birds due in part to the nature of habitat and its current use. Outgrown unmanaged hedgerows may provide a good source of shelter, forage and nesting opportunities. Similarly, the dominant grassland
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 12 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
habitat within the site, due to the presence of scattered scrub and abundance of ruderal herbs, may provide a foraging resource for a range of granivorous farmland birds particularly during the winter months.
3.31 A range of woodland birds were also noted, which is reflective of the habitat types present in the west of the site and further to the east outside of the application site.
Herpetofauna
Amphibians
3.32 No records of protected amphibians were provided within the local area and previous surveys of the site and surrounding fishing ponds did not highlight the presence of either notable populations of common or protected amphibians.
3.33 Given the well-stocked and fished nature of the site and all water bodies in close proximity to it and its almost complete isolation by the A6 Trunk Road and the River Soar the presence of notable amphibians such as great crested newts was considered to be reasonably and also extremely unlikely.
Reptiles
3.34 As could be expected along most main rivers in the East Midlands records of grass snake exist for the local area and their presence within and adjacent to the site has been confirmed during surveys conducted in 2011 where a maximum count of 6 grass snakes were noted on any one occasion. Most were recorded adjacent to or close to the river and its riparian habitats.
3.35 Habitats within the site are of variable value, although, as a whole, the juxtaposition of areas of cover, potential foraging and basking grass snake is good particularly along scrub edges and in riparian habitats..
Otter and water voles
3.36 No evidence of either otters or water voles was observed within the site. However, evidence of this species presence on the River Soar was noted approximately 500m downstream at the confluence of the Rothley Brook and River Soar where a single old spraint was observed below a foot-bridge.
3.37 Suitable habitat for otters within the site was noted in association with the Borrow Pit now in the process of being in-filled and the fishing pond which could be used for foraging.
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 13 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
4.0 DISCUSSION
Statutory Designations
4.1 No statutory designated sites occur within the search area and any effect on statutorily protected sites is not therefore envisaged.
Non-statutory designations
4.2 Local Wildlife Sites (LWSs) in Leicestershire do not receive statutory protection. However, the National Planning Policy Framework does infer that locally designated sites should receive a level of local policy protection commensurate with their status:
“113. Local planning authorities should set criteria based policies against which proposals for any development on or affecting protected wildlife or geodiversity sites or landscape areas will be judged. Distinctions should be made between the hierarchy of international, national and locally designated sites, so that protection is commensurate with their status and gives appropriate weight to their importance and the contribution that they make to wider ecological networks.”
4.3 The system used to identify LWS in Leicestershire follows that prescribed in the Draft Guidelines for the selection of Local Wildlife Sites (previously known as Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation or SINCs) in Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland. These have been reviewed in order to assess the habitats within the site.
4.4 In assessing the habitats against the guidelines only the River Soar and adjacent wet willow dominated woodland appears to meet the criteria for the designation, the former as a Large rivers (EA stream order >3) and supporting riparian trees over 10m high with exposed roots and overhanging branches and the latter for wet woodland “dominated by willow and/or alder with the water table seasonally near or above the surface” and area greater than 0.25 ha.
4.5 Neither habitat type would be significantly affected by the development proposals
Other Habitats
4.6 Remaining habitats within the site are of variable nature conservation value, although generally unremarkable in a wider context.
4.7 Hedgerows on the periphery of the site are dominated by native species and typically support a reasonable diversity of woody species and, as such, qualify as a priority under the UK BAP. They are likely to be of value for wildlife generally due to their value as commuting routes and for providing shelter, foraging and nesting sites for wildlife, including a number of BAP priority species. All native species hedgerows would be retained within the development.
4.8 Only a single former garden hedgerow would be lost and this could easily be compensated by the provision of structure planting within the detailed design of the site.
4.9 With the exception of the Borrow Pit which is currently being in-filled, all water bodies will be retained, despite their management for angling they do still possess some value due to the likely dependence of a range of fauna on them.
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 14 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
4.10 Grassland habitats are of limited interest, supporting no species of particular interest. Nevertheless, due to its extent and lack of management it is likely to provide a relatively sheltered undisturbed habitat for a range of species and as such is of local value.
4.11 Woodland habitats in the east of the site are also of some local value, particularly where semi- natural such as those on the steep slope down to the River. This habitat will be retained, although some small scale loss of associated plantation woodland of lesser value is proposed. The remaining habitat could be further enhanced through appropriate management and additional planting.
Protected and or notable species
4.12 Consideration was given throughout the survey to the potential presence of protected species. Principle pieces of legislation protecting wild species to be considered are Part 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981(as amended) (WCA) and The Conservation of Habitat and Species Regulations 2010. Some species, for example badgers, also have their own protective legislation (Protection of Badger Act 1992) and are also considered. The impact that this legislation has on the Planning system is outlined in ODPM 06/2005 Government Circular: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – Statutory obligations and their Impact within the Planning System.
4.13 In addition to protected species, there are those that are otherwise of conservation merit, such as UK BAP priority species which are also listed as species of principal importance for the purpose of conserving biodiversity under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006.
Badgers
4.14 The presence of a single main and outlier sett was observed within the site. Both will be retained and buffered within the proposals.
4.15 The value of the site to badgers is likely to be variable. Typically habitat of greatest value are likely to include the semi-natural and plantation woodland habitats scattered around the site and the shorter grassland habitats around the retained ponds, which are likely to provide good foraging habitat. These will all be largely retained within the proposals although some slight losses of scrub could be expected. This loss is unlikely to be significant.
4.16 By virtue of their location outside of the proposed built development area, the setts identified will remain unaffected by the proposals. All would be buffered from the effects of development by either existing or proposed planting. Lower status setts could, however, be affected were they to be present and be concealed within dense scrub, although their loss is unlikely to significantly impact on any local population. Nevertheless, where disturbance (such as the use of heavy machinery) occurs close to retained setts or where setts may be lost as a result of proposals it will still be necessary to ensure that a licence from Natural England is in place prior to works. Licenses are normally only granted following planning consent and covering the period from July to November inclusive.
Bats
4.17 The proposals will lead to the loss of a single occasionally used common pipistrelle roost within a single building. This is unlikely to affect the viability of any local population, although will require
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 15 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
a licence to be in place to allow the loss of a roost. It will be necessary as part of this licence to demonstrate that the ‘favourable conservation status’ of bats is maintained.
4.18 Bats, their habitats in water and on land are protected under Section 41 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 and under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Taken together, these make it an offence to:
• deliberately capture or intentionally take a bat;
• deliberately or intentionally kill or injure a bat
• to be in possession or control of any live or dead bat or any part of, or anything derived from a bat;
• damage or destroy a breeding site or resting place of a bat;
• Intentionally or recklessly obstruct access to any place that a bat uses for shelter or protection;
• intentionally or recklessly disturb a bat while it is occupying a structure or place that it uses for shelter or protection;
• deliberately disturb any bat, in particular any disturbance which is likely to
o impair their ability to survive, breed, reproduce or to rear or nurture their young; or in the case of hibernating or migratory species, to hibernate or migrate; or
o to affect significantly the local distribution or abundance of the species to which they belong.
4.19 Although the law provides strict protection to bats, it also allows derogation from this protection under Section 53 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 through the issuing of EPS licences for development works. These licences in England are currently determined by Natural England (NE).
4.20 Where a lawful operation is required to be carried out, which is likely to result in one of the above offences, an EPS licence may be obtained from NE to allow the operation to proceed.
4.21 As part of the licence application process a number of ‘Tests’ have to be met by the application.
4.22 Natural England Guidance Note: European Protected Species and the Planning Process – Natural England’s Application of the ‘Three Tests’ to Licence Applications (March 2011) states:
“In determining whether or not to grant a licence Natural England must apply the requirements of Regulation 535 of the Regulations and, in particular, the three tests set out in sub-paragraphs (2)(e), (9)(a) and (9)(b)6. (1) Regulation 53(2)(e) states: a licence can be granted for the purposes of “preserving public health or public safety or other imperative reasons of overriding public interest including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment”.
(2) Regulation 53(9)(a) states: the appropriate authority shall not grant a licence unless they are satisfied “that there is no satisfactory alternative”.
(3) Regulation 53(9)(b) states: the appropriate authority shall not grant a licence unless they are satisfied “that the action authorised will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range.”
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 16 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
4.23 Conservation status is defined as “the sum of the influences acting on the species concerned that may affect the long term distribution and abundance of its population within its territory”. It is assessed as favourable when:
• population dynamics data on the species concerned indicate that it is maintaining itself on a long term basis as a viable component of its natural habitats, and
• The natural range of the species is neither being reduced nor is likely to be reduced for the foreseeable future, and
• There is, or will probably continue to be, a sufficiently large habitat to maintain its populations on a long term basis.
4.24 These tests must not only reach agreement with Natural England when assessing a Licence application they must also be assessed by the planning authority when determining a planning application.
4.25 Due to the low status of the roost maintenance of favourable conservation status would require the provision of a range of measures to ensure that bats can continue to roost within the site on an occasional basis. This could be expected to include the provision of a range of bat boxes suitable for the species concerned, the details of which, including their number and location, would be better identified following the detailed design of the site when the location of buildings and associated lighting could be taken into account.
4.26 Throughout developmental design, the proposals have sought to avoid the loss of mature trees and no trees that have the potential to support roosting bats will be lost or isolated from the wider countryside. However, construction activity will lead to the loss of short sections of ornamental hedgerow that could lead to an interruption in regular routes of movement for this group. A range of further measures to prevent significant impact could be expected to include:
• The direct lighting of existing trees and hedgerows or proposed flood attenuation facilities should be prevented,
• The use of existing gaps in hedgerows for site access
• Provision of “Hop-overs” (comprising standard trees whose canopies can be raised and allowed to extend laterally) where minor hedgerow severance has occurred,
• Street- and flood-lighting will use low pressure sodium or high pressure sodium instead of mercury or metal halide lamps, where glass glazing is used due to its UV light filtration,
• Lighting should be directional and light spillage will be avoided,
• Lighting columns would in general be as short as possible, although in some locations taller columns would allow reduced horizontal spill,
• Lighting levels would be as low as guidelines permit and only used where required for public safety reasons.
Birds
4.27 The breeding and wintering bird surveys identified the use of the site by a range of bird species typical of open water, scrub and woodland habitat, some of which are of note, such as dunnock and bullfinch which are listed as Priority Species on the UK BAP.
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 17 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
4.28 With the exception of the borrowpit which is currently being in filled most of the habitats that are used by notable birds are to be retained. The impact on birds arising as a result of the proposals is considered to be only minor and not lead to any significant effect on any local population.
4.29 Nevertheless, all nesting wild birds, their nests, eggs and dependant young are protected from harm under the Wildlife and Countryside Act. To avoid harm to breeding birds, where vegetation is to be removed this should be done prior to the bird-breeding season (March to August/Sept). If this is not possible, vegetation should be checked prior to removal by an experienced ecologist. If active nests are found, vegetation should be left untouched until all birds have fledged.
Herpetofauna
Reptiles
4.30 Grass snakes were found to be present within the site. Suitable habitat for this species exists in association with edge habitats located throughout and in the east of the site where a mosaic of riparian habitats occur and provide the appropriate juxtaposition of areas of cover, basking and hunting. Much of the most important habitat in the east of the site would either be unaffected or will be enhanced for this species.
4.31 In addition to its status as a UK BAP priority species, this species is partially protected under Schedule 5 (Sections 9(1) and 9(5)) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended):
• intentional killing and injury;
• Selling, offering for sale, possessing or transporting for the purpose of the sale or publishing advertisements to buy or sell a protected species.
4.32 Where these animals are confirmed as present on land that is to be affected by development guidance recommends that:
• The animals should be protected from injury or killing during construction operations;
• Mitigation should be provided to maintain the conservation status of the species locally.
4.33 Measures to prevent killing and injuring could be expected to include the adherence to a strict programme and appropriate working methods during site clearance, such as, potentially, the initiation of a trapping and translocation operation prior to soil stripping and the avoidance of sensitive periods when animals could be hibernating or in refuges during poor weather.
4.34 In order to ensure that the conservation status of reptiles is maintained it will be necessary to provide some compensatory habitat creation. The current proposals identify areas in the east, adjacent to the River Soar that would be sympathetically maintained for the benefit of this species among others. Habitat creation proposals would seek to maintain an open mosaic of wet grassland and fen, with scattered pockets of bramble and other scrub species.
Habitat Creation and Enhancement Proposals
4.35 The following section provides broad recommendations for ecological compensation and enhancement that will help achieve a net biodiversity gain from development of the site. The recommendations seek to comply with aspirations of the NPPF. Therefore, wherever possible, any compensation and enhancement measures should focus on complementary Priority Habitats
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 18 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
and Species and be tailored to maximise the contribution that the development makes to BAP targets and local conservation objectives.
Native Planting
4.36 It is recommended that newly created woodland, wetland and grassland habitats form part of the application site’s green infrastructure. The strategic layout of planting should be designed to ensure that any retained habitats are both enhanced and protected. It is recommended that the design and creation of these habitats seek to complement existing habitat of value within the site. This may include:
1. Wet woodland stand types that are typical of those found within the local area and associated with the River Soar flood plain
2. Wet grassland and fen to be focused on areas currently under cricket bat willow plantation, which appear to be drying out
3. Open water and swamp habitats created as a mosaic to compliment the wetland habitats along the river corridor
4.37 The final planting scheme will achieve a balance between biodiversity benefits and landscaping requirements. Where possible all plants will be of local provenance and adhere to the document Creating and Restoring Woodland in Charnwood District: a guide to the trees and shrubs that are most appropriate for inclusion in planting schemes.
Green Corridors
4.38 The retention of boundary features, in combination with a scheme of native planting, will ensure that the proposals would help maintain and enhance connectivity across the site. These measures should be designed to preserve and enhance existing linkages to areas of adjacent habitat, and ensure the site access to the wider countryside is maintained for local faunal populations, including badgers and bats.
Lighting
4.39 High-intensity lighting can have a long-term negative impact upon use of habitats by faunal species. Therefore, the lighting of important habitat features, such as boundary hedgerows, trees, the canal and green corridors, will be designed to minimise impact to wildlife. This can be achieved by a combination of the following steps:
• avoiding unnecessary lighting
• the use of low-intensity lighting
• minimising light spill with the use of directed lighting or designing planting to shield sensitive areas
4.40 Sensitive design of the sites lighting scheme will be of particular benefit to bats, which are likely to use features such as hedgerows and trees for both foraging and commuting, and are Priority Species of the UK BAP.
Bats
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 19 Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire fpcr
4.41 The inclusion of a bat box scheme around the development site will provide new potential roosting sites. The inclusion of these features would be in addition to any mitigation that may be required for the purposes of EPS licensing. It is recommended that this comprises the incorporation of bat boxes and / or bat tubes into fabric of the buildings to be constructed if possible. It is recommended that these boxes should include Schwegler 1FR and 1FQ bat tubes or the Ibstock Enclosed Bat Boxes B and C. These are bat boxes which can be incorporated into the brick walls of buildings and are maintenance free. The small size of the box means they are more suitable for smaller colonies. The tubes will be placed within walls at least 4m from the ground on a suitable aspect i.e. south, east or west and away from lighting to ensure roosting behaviour is not affected. The tubes will be placed on buildings on the site periphery, adjacent tree lines or hedgerows for cover once the bats have emerged These measures are generally suitable for Pipistrelle sp. bats, however, the bat tube is also suitable for a wide range of British bat species
Management Plan
4.42 Implementation of a nature conservation management plan for any retained and newly created habitats will ensure that the optimal benefits for biodiversity are achieved. This conservation plan should span a minimum of 10 years and include details for appropriate management of semi- natural habitats, e.g. hedgerows, wet grassland and woodland, fen and ponds. Nature conservation plans should be designed by an appropriately qualified ecologist.
J:\4400\4405\Ecology\4405 EcoApp.doc 20 This drawing 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 written consent of FPCR Environment and Design Ltd. Ordnance Survey material is used with the permission of The Controller of HMSO, Crown copyright 100018896.
Site Boundary
H4 SI Broad Leaved Woodland
Broad Leaved Plantation Woodland
X X X Scattered Scrub X X X 2 X Tree Standard
Semi-Improved Grassland SI
Tall Herb (Ruderal)
Pond/Borrow Pit (With Reference) P1 4
Water Course
Amenity Grassland
SI X SI X X X X X Ornamental Planting X X X SI X X X
3 H1 Hedgerow (With Reference)
1 Fence SI
H3 Built/Operational Structure H1 SI
Hard Standing/Bare Ground SI X X SI H2
X RSK Properties LLP X X X X X Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire
fpcr Phase 1 Habitat Plan
N NTS @ A3 TJM / PH 11.02.2011 Figure 2 FPCR Environment and Design Ltd, Lockington Hall, Lockington, Derby, DE74 2RH t: 01509 672772 f: 01509 674565 e: [email protected] w: www.fpcr.co.uk masterplanning environmental assessment landscape design urban design ecology architecture arboriculture
SI This drawing 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 written consent of FPCR Environment and Design Ltd. Ordnance Survey material is used with the permission of The Controller of HMSO, Crown copyright 100018896.
Main Quarry SSSI River Soar LWS KEY:
Site Of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Field West of Cossington Road 3 LWS
Field West of Cossington Road 1 LWS Local Nature Reserve (LNR)
Halstead Road Field West of Cossington Road 2 LWS Centenary Pasture LNR Local Wildlife Site (LWS)
Linkfield Road Cossington Meadows LWS Proposed Local Wildlife Site (pLWS) Pond LWS
Application Site Boundary
Church Meadow LWS
Farnham Bridge Marsh LWS
River Soar LWS
Rothley Brook LWS
RSK Properties LLP
Rothley Lodge, Leicestershire
fpcr Site Location Plan and Location of Non-Statutory Sites
N NTS @ A3 TJM / PH 11.02.2011 Figure 1 FPCR Environment and Design Ltd, Lockington Hall, Lockington, Derby, DE74 2RH t: 01509 672772 f: 01509 674565 e: [email protected] w: www.fpcr.co.uk masterplanning environmental assessment landscape design urban design ecology architecture arboriculture