HOBBLEDOWN FARM Preliminary Ecological Appraisal ECO01598 Hobbledown Farm Final April 2021 rpsgroup.com REPORT Document status Version Purpose of document Authored by Reviewed by Approved by Review date Draft Planning application SB KS KS 22/12/20 Final Planning application SB KS KS 19/03/21 Final Planning application SB KS KS 14/03/21 Approval for issue Isaac Phillips [Signature] 14 April 2021 The report has been prepared for the exclusive use and benefit of our client and solely for the purpose for which it is provided. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by RPS Group Plc, any of its subsidiaries, or a related entity (collectively 'RPS') no part of this report should be reproduced, distributed or communicated to any third party. RPS does not accept any liability if this report is used for an alternative purpose from which it is intended, nor to any third party in respect of this report. The report does not account for any changes relating to the subject matter of the report, or any legislative or regulatory changes that have occurred since the report was produced and that may affect the report. The report has been prepared using the information provided to RPS by its client, or others on behalf of its client. To the fullest extent permitted by law, RPS shall not be liable for any loss or damage suffered by the client arising from fraud, misrepresentation, withholding of information material relevant to the report or required by RPS, or other default relating to such information, whether on the client’s part or that of the other information sources, unless such fraud, misrepresentation, withholding or such other default is evident to RPS without further enquiry. It is expressly stated that no independent verification of any documents or information supplied by the client or others on behalf of the client has been made. The report shall be used for general information only. Prepared for: Hobbledown Farm Prepared by: RPS Sam Barker Ecologist 20 Western Avenue Milton Park Abingdon, Oxfordshire OX14 4SH T +44 1235 821 888 E [email protected] ECO01598 | Hobbledown Farm | Final | April 2021 rpsgroup.com Page i REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive summary should include: • RPS were commissioned by Hobbledown Farm to undertake a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal of an area of land within Hobbledown Farm, Epsom, Surrey. This comprised a desk study, Phase 1 Habitat Survey and an ecological scoping survey which assessed the potential of the site to support species of conservation concern or other species which could present a constraint to the development of the site. • The development proposals involve the creation of a new water play area comprising formation of shallow water features and erection of play equipment and associated structures within an existing farm park. • The site is approximately 0.3 ha in size and comprises grassland, a hedgerow, an existing zipwire and some juvenile trees. The surrounding land contains a small woodland copse, hedgerows, childrens play park, livestock pens and enclosures, areas of recreation grassland and footpaths. • The Preliminary Ecological Appraisal desk study identified 20 statutory designated sites within 5 km of the site and four non-statutory designated sites within 2 km of the site. The closest designated site was Horton Country Park Site of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCI) approximately 0.09 km from site. • The Phase 1 Habitat Survey identified that the site was predominantly an amenity grassland field. A native species-rich hedgerow was present along the northern boundary, wuth juvenile trees along the south of the site. A bark based zipwire and bare ground footpath were present in the east of the site. • The habitats on site provide some potential to support protected and notable species including birds, foraging and commuting bats, badgers and suitable terrestrial amphibian habitat. • A total of eight ponds were identified within 250 m of the site boundary. A Great Crested Newt (GCN) Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) survey of the four ponds on site identified that one pond provided Average suitability for GCN. The other three ponds were all assessed as providing Poor suitability for GCN. • A badger survey was also conducted at the same time as the Phase 1 Habitat Survey. No evidence of badgers or their setts were recorded within the site or 30 m from application boundary. • It is recommended that a GCN eDNA survey is undertaken on the pond that was identified as being of Average potential to support GCN (Pond 1). • No other protected species surveys are recommended but mitigation and enhancement measures have been provided. • Mitigation measures include, timing of vegetation removal to avoid the nesting bird season, retaining as many of the trees as possible. • Enhancement measures could include providing bird boxes within the site. ECO01598 | Hobbledown Farm | Final | April 2021 rpsgroup.com Page i REPORT Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................... I Executive summary should include: .......................................................................................................... i 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose and scope of this report ................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Study area ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Development proposals ................................................................................................................. 1 1.4 Legislation and policy ..................................................................................................................... 2 2 METHODS ................................................................................................................................................ 4 2.1 Desk Study ..................................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Ecological Appraisal ....................................................................................................................... 4 2.3 GCN Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) Assessment .......................................................................... 4 2.4 Badger Survey................................................................................................................................ 5 2.5 Impact Appraisal ............................................................................................................................ 6 2.6 Limitations ...................................................................................................................................... 7 3 RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................. 8 3.1 Designated Sites ............................................................................................................................ 8 3.2 Species .........................................................................................................................................11 3.3 Phase 1 Habitat Survey ...............................................................................................................13 3.4 GCN Habitat Suitability ................................................................................................................15 3.5 Badger Survey..............................................................................................................................15 3.6 Ecological Scoping Survey ...........................................................................................................17 4 EVALUATION AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS ........................................................................................18 4.1 Designated sites ...........................................................................................................................18 4.2 Habitats ........................................................................................................................................18 4.3 Species .........................................................................................................................................18 5 MITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENT ....................................................................................................20 5.1 Habitats ........................................................................................................................................20 5.2 Species .........................................................................................................................................20 5.3 Enhancement opportunities .........................................................................................................20 6 CONCLUSIONS .....................................................................................................................................21 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................22 Tables Table 3.1: Statutory designated sites within 5 km and non-statutory designated sites within 2