Winshill Primary School Burton-on-Trent,

Preliminary Roost Assessment

Report No. P120.T22.19 Date: 30 September 2019

Josh Bowler BSc (hons)

Trust Ecology

Flat 3 Maws Craft Centre, Jackfield, Shropshire TF8 7LR Tel: 01952 877861 Email: [email protected] Website: http://trustecology.co.uk

Project

Winshill Primary School Burton-on-Trent Staffordshire Preliminary Roost Assessment

Date: 30.09.2019

Description: Preliminary Roost Assessment to consider potential impacts to bats in relation to a proposed classroom extension

Client Details Sally Platt, Principal Architect (Feasibility and Development) Property Services Entrust

Author Josh Bowler BSc (Hons)

Checked by Holly Bowler BSc (Hons)

This report must not be reproduced other than in full and should be read in its entirety. This report remains copyright of Trust Ecology.

While the surveyor makes every reasonable effort, Trust Ecology cannot guarantee that all protected species have been identified and survey results are definitive.

Preliminary Roost Assessment 2 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

Table of Contents

Page Non-technical Summary 4 i. Introduction 5 ii. About This Report 5 iii. Methodologies 5 iv. Desk Study 6 v. Results of Preliminary Roost Assessment 7 vi. Roost Suitability & Potential Impacts 7 vii. Recommendations 8 viii. Bibliography 9

Annex 1: Plates 11 Annex 2: Existing vs. Proposed Plans 14 Annex 3: Desk Study Data 16 Annex 2: Relevant Wildlife Legislation Summary 19 Annex 3: Bat Friendly Planting 20

Figures Figure 1: Existing site plan 14 Figure 2: Proposed site plan 14 Figure 3: Existing vs proposed east elevation 15

Tables Table 1: Surveyor Experience and Bat Licenses 5 Table 2: Summary of Survey Methodologies 5 Table 3: Potential Impacts 8 Table 4: Further Survey & Licensing 8 Table 5: Mitigation Hierarchy 8

Plates Plate 1: Views of east elevation where extension is proposed 11 Plate 2: Views of the tree (T3) proposed for removal 12 Plate 3: Views of west elevation where shade canopy to be re-located 12 Plate 4: Internal view of school hall with no loft void 13

Preliminary Roost Assessment 3 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

Non-technical Summary

• On the 19th September 2019, Trust Ecology undertook a Preliminary Roost Assessment (PRA) at Winshill Primary School, Burton-on-Trent as commissioned by Sally Platt, Principal Architect (Feasibility and Development) for Entrust Property Services. • The survey was requested to inform pre-application planning advice on a proposal for construction of a single-story classroom extension on the eastern aspect of the existing building. The proposal requires the removal of a single leylandii tree (T3) and the relocation of a shade canopy to an area on the west of the existing building. • Winshill Primary School is located in Winshill, a suburb to the northeast of Burton- on-Trent in the borough of near the border with South ; the school is surrounded by residential areas, but pasture, arable with scattered trees, woodland and hedgerow lie within 275m of the school to the north and east. The is 1.25km to the west. • There are no records of bats using the site, but there are records of six bat species within 2km of the site. • All potential bat roost and/or bat access habitats that would be impacted by the proposal (where accessible) were subject to survey; this included roofing felt, soffit boxes, brickwork, door/window frames and adjacent trees. An internal inspection of the pitched-roofed school hall where the extension would tie in was conducted, but no loft was present and other affected sections of building were flat-roofed. • The thorough inspection found no bats or evidence of their presence, either recent or historic, in any gaps in the impacted sections of the building’s structure at the time of the survey. Nevertheless, there remains a very low risk that an opportunistic bat could seek shelter between the time of the survey and the start of works. • Bat roost potential of affected features/structures was found to be negligible. Given the small-scale nature of the proposal and of affected features, and taking into account the suitability of buildings throughout the wider area, the risk of bat presence is negligible to very low. • The leylandii proposed for removal offers potential bird nesting habitat. • The proposal should result in a negligible impact on bats as long as a precautionary approach is taken; based on these findings, no EPS mitigation licence is required. • The proposal could potentially impact nesting birds; this can be mitigated through appropriate timing of works or a pre-works breeding bird check. • To reduce the likelihood of negative impacts to bats and nesting birds, recommended reasonable avoidance measures and working methods should be followed (Section vii). • No further survey is considered necessary or proportional given the findings and small-scale nature of the proposal. • Suggested enhancements for bats such as bat-friendly planting and the installation of bat boxes and bird boxes are provided in Section vii.

Preliminary Roost Assessment 4 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

i. Introduction:

On the 19th September 2019, Trust Ecology undertook a Preliminary Roost Assessment (PRA) at Winshill Primary School, Burton-on-Trent as commissioned by Sally Platt, Principal Architect (Feasibility and Development) for Entrust Property Services.

The survey was requested to inform pre-application planning advice on a proposal for construction of a single-story classroom extension on the eastern aspect of the existing building. The proposal requires the removal of a single leylandii tree (T3) and the relocation of a shade canopy to an area on the west of the existing building. Annex 2 illustrates the existing versus the proposed plans.

Winshill Primary School is located in Winshill, a suburb to the northeast of Burton-on-Trent in the borough of East Staffordshire approximately 275m from the border with ; the school is surrounded by residential areas, but pasture, arable with scattered trees, woodland and hedgerow lie within 275m of the school to the north and east. The River Trent is 1.25km to the west.

ii. About this Report:

This report outlines the methodologies and results of the Preliminary Roost Assessment (PRA) carried out in order to assess impacts from the proposal, where it is possible to do so at this stage, and make relevant recommendations for any actions needed such as additional survey, mitigation, etc., if applicable. iii. Methodologies:

The survey was carried out by an experienced, licensed ecologist as detailed in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Surveyor Experience and Bat License Ecologist Bat Survey Licence Held Relevant Experience Josh Bowler BSc Bat (Level 1) 2015-12371-CLS-CLS 19 Years

Survey methodologies are summarised in Table 2 below.

Table 2: Summary of Survey Methodologies Survey Appropriateness of Methods Geographical extent details Timing: Suitable (Anytime) Areas to be affected by the In accordance with established proposed development. guidance [(BCT, 2016), (Mitchell-Jones Preliminary et al, 2004)] Roost Date: 19.09.19 Assessment Methods: Detailed external/internal daytime inspection of affected areas of the building for evidence of bats; overall assessment of roost potential and likelihood that the proposal would result in offences to bats.

Average weather conditions (PRA): 19oC; partly cloudy; wind Beaufort 2;

Preliminary Roost Assessment 5 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

Survey Equipment: Binoculars, ladder, endoscope, mirrors, Clulite torch, camera, GPS, head-torch, notepad, PPE

Survey Limitations

There were no significant survey limitations.

No significant precipitation had occurred in the weeks leading up to the survey, and cobwebs and detritus were still present on the walls and features; thus, if any signs such as droppings or urine staining were present, these would have been evident.

The impacted areas of the existing school building were single-storey and predominantly flat and felted. However, there is a taller elevation with a shallowly pitched roof above the school hall which has no loft void. A small void may exist between the interior timber ceiling and the roof but was no way to examine this. Nonetheless, no discernible exterior entry or exit points were noted and thus no further investigation was necessary. All external areas of the roof could be seen using lighted extension mirrors, torch, and close- focus binoculars, and sufficient information was obtained to form a robust assessment.

The site lies within 275m of the East Staffordshire / South Derbyshire border. As this is a small-scale development, detailed bat records from Staffordshire Ecological Record (SER) were considered sufficient for this desk study.

The survey was carried out at or near the end of the bird nesting season and thus determination of previous nesting activity could only be deduced from habitats present and any remnant nesting material that might be found.

Evaluation and Impact Assessment Criteria

When ascribing nature conservation value and potential impacts to species populations, the geographical frame of reference, examples of selection criteria and impact references used are in accordance with Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the (CIEEM, 2016). iv. Desk Study:

There are no statutory nature conservation sites, ancient woodlands or geological/geomorphological sites within 1km of the application site (within the Staffordshire border).

The only non-statutory wildlife site within 1km of the school (within the Staffordshire border) is Dale Brook, a retained Biodiversity Alert Site that is 800m to the northwest and is defined as a mosaic of dense scrub, grassland, and scattered scrub in the steep-sided valley of Dale Brook.

Bat records within 2km of the site include common pipistrelle, soprano pipistrelle, brown long-eared, noctule, whiskered bat, Natterer’s and ‘bat species.’ All but four of the records are over 1km distant from the school and these are at least 14 years or older. The closest record is for common pipistrelle (roost type and no. unspecified) 190m to the northeast.

The raw desk study data has been provided in Annex 4.

v. Results of Preliminary Roost Assessment:

Preliminary Roost Assessment 6 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

All potential bat roost and/or bat access habitat that could be impacted by the proposal was subject to survey; this included:

• Roofing felt, soffit boxes, brickwork, door/window frames, flashing and affected tree (T3).

All external aspects of the roof in the area of the proposed extension and where the shade canopy will be relocated to were thoroughly inspected at height with a torch, lighted mirrors and endoscope, including the roof felt edging, flashing, timbers, soffit boxes, attachments to wall, etc. The roof is tightly sealed. Any gaps noted in generally were too narrow for bat entry; these were inspected but did not harbour bats or lead to any cavity or crevice and were fully visible. Several wasps were noted entering and exiting one small hole. Flashing was tight, where present.

Soffit boxes were tight, and small gaps noted between the soffit box and external wall or roof were covered by dense cobwebs.

There were no gaps or potential bat access points around any other windows frames/sills. The leylandii tree (T3) within the area proposed for the new extension is up to 8m in height; its dense branches and leaf cover are not often favoured by bats which prefer a more open canopy for tree roosts. The area of trunk that could be seen did not contain any cavities or crevice’s that may be used by bats. Although not favourable for bats, the tree does offer suitable habitat for birds and therefore a precautionary approach to its removal is required. There are a further two trees within 10m of the area proposed for the relocation of the shade canopy; these should not be affected by the works but care should be taken not to compact their roots (see recommendations vii).

The proposed extension would replace approximately 100m2 of improved amenity grassland. This is not considered a significant loss given the habitat type and amount of similar adjacent habitat.

Photographs are provided in Annex 1. vi. Roost Suitability & Potential Impacts:

A thorough inspection confirmed that the area of the school building to be affected by the proposal showed no evidence of bats, either recent or historic, and the overall tight construction makes these areas unlikely to be used by roosting bats. Given the small scale of affected features and the suitability of buildings throughout the wider area, the likelihood of their presence is negligible to low. Nevertheless, there remains a low risk that an opportunistic bat could seek shelter between the time of the survey and the start of works.

Based on these findings and the description of suitability for roosting bats found in the Bat Conservation Trust’s Bat Survey Guidelines (2016) the areas of the building affected by the proposal would be classed as ‘Negligible’ suitability.

The table below provides an indication of the ecological value of, and potential impacts to bats and nesting birds based on the Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment (CIEEM, 2016). A summary of bat and nesting bird legislation is provided in the Annex 4.

Table 3: Potential impacts

Preliminary Roost Assessment 7 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

Ecological Potential Impacts at the Construction and Operational Stages Feature Bats Evaluation: Negligible (as unlikely to be roosting); there remains a very low risk that an opportunistic bat could shelter between the time of the survey and the start of works, a risk which can be managed with the reasonable avoidance measures recommended. Bats may commute and foraging through and around the school at low levels, but it is expected that the majority of bat activity locally will be concentrated around the brook, river and in the more extensive woodlands east of Winshill.

Impacts: Potential for risk to bats from the proposal should be negligible at all stages as long as recommended precautionary measures in section vii are followed. Nesting Birds Evaluation: No evidence of birds using the building was noted, however the leylandii tree (T3) within the development area is likely to be used by nesting birds.

The two trees within 10m of the proposed relocated shade area should not be affected by the proposal. Impacts: there is a risk of impact to nesting birds, but this should be negated through appropriate mitigation. There will only be a minor loss of nesting habitat.

There is some potential for root compaction of two trees within 10m of the proposed relocated shade area unless the recommended precautionary measures in section vii are followed. vii. Recommendations

It should be noted that all recommendations are provided as information only and specialist legal advice may be required. The conclusions of this report are based on current information; if works are significantly delayed, reassessment may be required.

Table 4: Further Survey & Licensing Additional Survey or Licensing Required In the opinion of the surveyor, the level of survey is sufficient to conclude that the risk to bats from the proposal is negligible due to the limited suitable roosting habitat and lack of any evidence of roosting. The requirement for further surveys has to be proportional to the level of risk. As such, there is no justification for further bat surveys at this site. Based on these findings, no EPS mitigation licence is required.

Table 5: Mitigation Hierarchy Avoidance/Mitigation/Compensation/Enhancement Measures All Protected Species • All staff and workers on site, including sub-contractors, should be made aware of bat and other species protection issues at site induction talks. Work must stop immediately and Natural (0345 1300 228) contacted if any protected species are found onsite. A summary of bat and nesting bird legislation is provided in Annex 4.

Preliminary Roost Assessment 8 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

Bats • Care should be taken when removing external features such as fascia, soffit boxes, flashing and roofing felt, lifting with an upward/outward motion and checking for bats/birds or evidence of their presence (e.g. droppings, staining, etc.) continually. • Avoid worksite-lighting at night. • Avoid any increase in lighting levels or focusing lighting toward potential bat roosts in adjacent buildings and habitats, tree-lines and other possible foraging lines such as walls, fences and other linear features. This can be achieved through use of cowls, hoods, etc. to direct the light, avoiding tall lighting columns, using motion-sensor security lighting, and timing the lighting to avoid the 1hr after dusk and 1hr before dawn when bats are most active. If in doubt, the advice of an ecologist should be sought. • It is advised that any landscaping scheme incorporate some of the plants listed in the Bat Friendly Planting List (see Annex 5). Bat boxes are an opportunity for positive enhancement for bats and are always welcomed. These could be sited in suitable locations on trees or buildings. A bat box information pack on bat box types, siting, locations, etc. can be downloaded from BCT at: http://www.bats.org.uk/publications_download.php/1318/Bat_Box_Information_Pa ck.pdf Birds • It is recommended that removal of the leylandii within the development area takes place outside of the bird breeding season. The nesting season generally runs from March to August, but is species-dependent and may start early or extend late if conditions are suitable. If this is not possible, further advice from a suitably qualified ecologist should be sought, as a pre-works nesting bird check may be required. If nests were found, no works disturbing nests or blocking of access points could take place until the young have fledged. • To compensate for potential loss of nesting habitat It is recommended that at least 2 bird boxes suitable for small species are mounted in suitable locations within the general proximity of the building or grounds. Trees • The trees to be retained within 10m of the proposed relocated shade area should have root protection zones in place as per BS 5837 (2012). This also applies to any tree which may be affected from works traffic or heavy plant.

viii. Bibliography

Bat Conservation Trust (2016) Bat Surveys: Good Practice Guidelines. Bat Conservation Trust, London.

CIEEM (2016) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the UK and Ireland: Terrestrial, Freshwater and Coastal, 2nd edition. Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management, Winchester

CIEEM (2017) Guidelines for Preliminary Ecological Appraisal, London.

H.M.S.O. (2006) The Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act

H.M.S.O. (2017) The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations. London.

Preliminary Roost Assessment 9 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

H.M.S.O. (1981) The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). London.

Mitchell-Jones A.J. and McLeish A.P. (2004) The Bat Workers’ Manual. 3rd Edition. JNCC, Peterborough.

Staffordshire Ecological Record: http://www.staffs-ecology.org.uk

Preliminary Roost Assessment 10 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

Annex 1: Plates

Plate 1: Views of east elevation where extension is proposed

Preliminary Roost Assessment 11 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

Plate 2: Views of the tree (T3) proposed for removal

Plate 3: Views of the west elevation where shade canopy to be re-located

Preliminary Roost Assessment 12 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

Plate 4: Internal view of school hall with no loft void

Preliminary Roost Assessment 13 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

Annex 2: Existing Vs. Proposed Plans

Figure 1: Existing site plan (orange circles denote areas of proposed works)

Existing shade canopy to be relocated

Area for Leylandii proposed (T3) proposed extension for removal

Figure 2: Proposed site plan showing location of extension (red hatching)

Preliminary Roost Assessment 14 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

Figure 3: Existing versus proposed east elevation (extension outlined in red)

Preliminary Roost Assessment 15 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

Annex 3: Desk study Data

List of records for bat species: 2Km of Winshill Village Primary School Burton-on-Trent. (SK 2730 2346) produced 24/9/2019 Common Location Scientific Name Name Detail Year Abundance Chiroptera Bats 2017 Chiroptera Bats 2008 Grafton Road, Burton upon Chiroptera Bats Trent 2015 2 Count of Commuting Chiroptera Bats Winshill 1991 1 Count of Adult Whiskered Myotis mystacinus Bat High Street* 1995 1 Count of Male Myotis nattereri Natterer's Bat Tower Road 2016 1 Count of Foraging Pass Nyctalus noctula Noctule Bat Tower Road 2016 2 Count of Commuting Pipistrelle Pipistrellus Bat species Newton Leys* 1995 44 Count of Alive Pipistrelle Pipistrellus Bat species Sales Lane* 2004 2 Count of Adult Pipistrellus Windsor Drive, pipistrellus sensu lato Pipistrelle * 1990 1 Count of Nursery Colony Pipistrellus Newton Road, pipistrellus sensu lato Pipistrelle Burton-on-Trent 1995 1 Count of Female Pipistrellus garden, pipistrellus sensu Common Stapenhill, stricto Pipistrelle Staffs 2001 Pipistrellus Grafton Road, pipistrellus sensu Common Burton upon 1 Count of Foraging Activity; 1 stricto Pipistrelle Trent 2015 Count of Commuting Pipistrellus Grafton Road, pipistrellus sensu Common Burton upon stricto Pipistrelle Trent 2015 2 Count Pipistrellus Grafton Road, pipistrellus sensu Common Burton upon stricto Pipistrelle Trent 2015 2 Count Pipistrellus pipistrellus sensu Common stricto Pipistrelle Tower Road 2016 3 Count of Commuting Pipistrellus pipistrellus sensu Common stricto Pipistrelle Tower Road 2016 5 Count of Commuting Pipistrellus pipistrellus sensu Common stricto Pipistrelle Winshill, Staffs 2001 Grafton Road, Pipistrellus Soprano Burton upon pygmaeus Pipistrelle Trent 2015 1 Count of Commuting Pipistrellus Soprano pygmaeus Pipistrelle Tower Road 2016 1 Count of Commuting Brown Long- Plecotus auritus eared Bat Tower Road 2016 1 Count of Commuting

Preliminary Roost Assessment 17 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

List of non-statutory biological/ecological sites: 1Km of Winshill Village Primary School Burton-on-Trent. (SK 2730 2346) produced 25/9/2019 Grid Site SiteID Ref. Name Status Year Abstract A mosaic of dense scrub, grassland, and 22/64/ SK269 Dale Retained scattered scrub in the steep-sided valley of Dale 90 240 Brook BAS 1997 Brook.

Preliminary Roost Assessment 18 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

Annex 4: Relevant Wildlife Legislation Summary

1 Bats All British bat species are listed on Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and Schedule 2 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (the Habitats Regulations 2017), which, in summary, makes it an offence to:

• Intentionally or recklessly disturb a bat while it is occupying a structure or place which it uses for shelter or protection • Intentionally or recklessly obstruct access to any structure or place which it uses for shelter or protection • Sell, offer for sale or possess for the purpose of sale any bat or part of a bat or advertise sales or purchases of bats • Deliberately capture or kill a bat • Deliberately disturb a bat • Damage or destroy a breeding site or resting place of a bat • Keep, transport, sell or exchange, or offer for sale or exchange a live or dead bat or any part of a bat

2 Nesting Birds All birds, their nests and eggs are protected by law and it is thus an offence, with certain exceptions, to:

• Intentionally kill, injure or take any wild bird • Intentionally take, damage or destroy the nest of any wild bird whilst it is in use or being built • Intentionally take or destroy the egg of any wild bird • Have in one's possession or control any wild bird, dead or alive, or any part of a wild bird, which has been taken in contravention of the Act or the Protection of Birds Act 1954 • Have in one's possession or control any egg or part of an egg which has been taken in contravention of the Act or the Protection of Birds Act 1954 • Use traps or similar items to kill, injure or take wild birds • Have in one's possession or control any bird of a species occurring on Schedule 4 of the Act unless registered, and in most cases ringed, in accordance with the Secretary of State's regulations (see Schedules) • Intentionally or recklessly disturb any wild bird listed on Schedule 1 (such as Barn Owl) while it is nest building, or at a nest containing eggs or young, or disturb the dependent young of such a bird.

Preliminary Roost Assessment 19 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)

Annex 5 - Bat Friendly Planting

List of species taken from the Bat Conservation Trust Leaflet: “Encouraging Bats. A Guide for Bat Friendly Gardening and Living” (BCT, Unknown)

Plants marked * are hybrids or exotics that may be useful in the garden

Flowers For Borders

*Aubretia (spring to early summer) *Michaelmas daisy (summer to autumn) Bluebell (spring) *Night-scented stock (summer) *Candytuft (summer to autumn) Ox-eye daisy (summer) *Cherry pie (summer to autumn) *Phacelia (summer to autumn) Corncockle *Poached egg plant (summer) Cornflower Primrose (spring) Corn marigold Red campion (spring) Corn poppy *Red valerian (summer to autumn) *Echinacea Scabious (summer) *Evening primrose (summer to autumn) St John’s wort (spring) Field poppies (summer) *Sweet William (summer) *Honesty (spring) *Tobacco plant *Ice plant ‘Pink lady’ (early autumn) *Verbena (summer to autumn) Knapweed (summer to autumn) *Wallflowers (spring to early summer) Mallow (summer to autumn) Wood forget-me-not (spring) *Mexican aster (summer to autumn) Yarrow (early summer)

Herbs

Angelica Hyssop (summer to early autumn) Bergamot (summer to early autumn) Lavenders Borage (spring to early autumn) Lemon balm Coriander (summer) Marjoram (summer) Fennel (summer to early autumn) Rosemary (spring) Feverfew (summer to autumn) Sweet Cicely (spring to early summer) English marigolds Thyme (summer)

Trees, shrubs and climbers

*Bramble (climber) Hazel (suitable for coppicing) Buddleia (shrub Honeysuckle (native honeysuckle) Common alder (suitable for coppicing) Hornbeam Dog rose (climber) Ivy (climber) Elder (small) *Jasmine (night-scented) English oak (large gardens only) Pussy willow (suitable for coppicing) Gorse (shrub) Rowan Guelder rose (shrub) Silver birch Hawthorn (suitable for coppicing)

Wild flowers for pond edges and marshy areas

Bog bean Marsh marigold (spring) Bugle Marsh woundwort Creeping Jenny (spring to summer) Meadowsweet (summer to early autumn) Flag iris Purple loosestrife (summer) Hemp agrimony (summer) Water avens Lady’s smock (spring to summer) Water forget-me-not (summer to autumn) Marsh mallow Water mint (summer to autumn)

Preliminary Roost Assessment 20 Winshill Primary School (Report P120.T22.19 rev 01)