Rev Issue Status Prepared / Date Approved/Date. - Draft 1 LOA / JSE /

Transcription

1 Nancy Hawksworth Barn Conversion: Moor Farm, London Road, Shardlow, Derbyshire Bat Survey Report September 2014

2 FPCR Environment and Design Ltd Registered Office: Lockington Hall, Lockington, Derby DE74 2RH Company No [T] [F] [E] [W] 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 Rev Issue Status Prepared / Date Approved/Date - Draft 1 LOA / JSE /

3 CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION METHODOLOGY RESULTS DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS... 6 TABLES Table 1: Nocturnal survey dates 2014 FIGURES Figure 1: Site Location Figure 2: Nocturnal Survey Plan Figure 3: Nocturnal Survey Plan Figure 4: Nocturnal Survey Plan Figure 5: Nocturnal Survey Plan Figure 6: Bat Mitigation :

4 Bat Survey Report 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 The following report has been prepared by FPCR Environment & Design Ltd on behalf of Nancy Hawksworth. It provides details of an external bat building assessment and four nocturnal bat surveys on the Barn building off London Road, Shardlow, Derbyshire. The surveys were conducted on the 15 th July 2014, 11 th and 12 th August 2014 and 28 th August 2014, to determine the presence/absence of roosting bats within the building which is affected by a proposed development. Site Context 1.2 The site comprises a Barn building used for storage, surrounded by working farm buildings with a domestic residence on the south west end. The site is located in the north west of Shardlow, Derbyshire (Figure 1). Habitats within the survey area include hard-standing, a domestic residence, and active farm buildings. Surrounding the site is a mixture or arable and grazed land and the village of Shardlow extending in a westerly direction. Development Proposals 1.3 This planning application is for the conversion of the barn building in the centre of the farm. This is to become a domestic residence for use by the current owners. The barn itself will remain intact but significant changes are proposed for the interior as well as some repair and alteration to the external features. J:\6400\6414\ECO\Bats\Bat Report 1

5 Bat Survey Report 2.0 METHODOLOGY Assessment of Building 2.1 An external survey of the building present within the site boundary was carried out on 15 th July 2014 by a Natural England licensed bat worker from FPCR (Licence reference number CLS01531). This involved examination of the exterior of the building to determine the potential for bat roost sites. From this, areas of likely / potential value for bats can be broadly identified and a decision made over the selection of locations for more detailed work, if required. Any potential bat access points observed together with any suitable features were noted, in addition to evidence of occupation. These works were undertaken by a Natural England licensed bat worker and this methodology takes into account the statutory guidance from English Nature (now Natural England) 1 and further guidelines introduced by the Bat Conservation Trust 2 and JNCC On the same occasion an internal inspection of the building was carried out to identify any signs of bat activity within the building as well as to assess the potential of the building for habitation by bats. These works were undertaken by a Natural England licensed bat worker and this methodology takes into account the statutory guidance from English Nature (now Natural England) and further guidelines introduced by the Bat Conservation Trust and JNCC. Nocturnal Surveys 2.3 A single dusk nocturnal bat survey was undertaken on the building within the site boundary on 15 th July 2014, followed by a dusk and dawn survey on the 11 th 12 th August 2014 and a final dusk survey on the 28 th August 2014 (Table 1). Surveyors were positioned on all aspects of the buildings from 20 minutes prior to sunset until 115 minutes following sunset for the dusk emergence surveys, and from 90 minutes prior to sunrise until sunrise for the dawn re-entry survey. 2.4 All bat contacts were recorded by number and species, including any bats observed foraging within the vicinity of the buildings. 2.5 Ultrasonic bat detectors were used by surveyors to aid in identification. All of the nocturnal surveys were conducted in appropriate conditions, i.e. ambient temperature exceeding 10 C and little wind and no rain. Table 1 Nocturnal survey dates 2014 Survey ref/date Buildings surveyed Time (sunset/sunrise) Conditions All buildings 21:12 to 23:25 (21:25) 19 C, 0% cloud cover, Still, no rain All buildings 20:25 to 22:39 (20:39) 17 C, 30% cloud cover, medium breeze, no rain. 1 English Nature (2001) Bat Mitigation Guidelines 2 Bat Conservation Trust (2012) Bat Surveys- Good Practice Guidelines 3 JNCC (1999) Bat Workers Manual J:\6400\6414\ECO\Bats\Bat Report 2

6 Bat Survey Report Survey ref/date Buildings surveyed Time (sunset/sunrise) Conditions All Buildings 04:10 to 05:41 (05:41) 15 C, 20% cloud cover, light breeze, no rain All Buildings 19:51 to 22:06 (20:06) 14 C, 0% cloud cover, light breeze, no rain. 3.0 RESULTS Site Survey Assessment of Buildings for Bats (Figures 2 and 3) 3.1 Building 1 (B1) was a single storey, brick built barn with a pitched, clay tiled roof with bitumen felt underlining. Potential bat access points comprised open windows, missing bricks, and occasional gaps under tiles. Some roosting potential was identified on the wooden roof spars and in the gap between the roof tiles and underfelt. In addition to this a small section of the southern end of B1 had a separate roof void with access through gaps in the external lattice brick work. This space was inaccessible to surveyors and so no inspection of its interior was possible. One old bat dropping was identified within B The only area identified as offering potential for hibernation purposes was the ridge of the roof which offered very limited potential for hibernation in the form of a few gaps in the mortar and slate work. J:\6400\6414\ECO\Bats\Bat Report 3

7 Bat Survey Report Building Inspection Photos Internal roof construction; wooden framework, bitumen felt underlining. Gaps in brickwork provide potential access points for bats. Gable end showing potential access points through lattice brickwork. Gable verge was very well sealed Inaccessible roof void at southern end of B1. External view of front face of B1. Open archways provide access to potential internal roosting. Missing tiles on roof provide bats access to void between tiles and underlay felt. J:\6400\6414\ECO\Bats\Bat Report 4

8 Bat Survey Report Nocturnal Surveys Emergence Survey No bats were observed entering or emerging from the building during the survey. The first bat observed was a common pipistrelle foraging along the southern aspect of B1 between B1 and the residential building (Figure 2). Bat activity throughout the survey was evenly distributed for the first hour and foraging / commuting common pipistrelle was the dominant species recorded. Towards the end of the survey the contacts at the southern end of B1 declined but several contacts were recorded foraging around the yard and farm buildings at the northern end of B1. Two passes by a Noctule were recorded, neither of which were visually observed. One pass by a soprano pipistrelle was recorded at 21:47. All other activity comprised common pipistrelles foraging around the farm buildings. Emergence Survey No bats were observed entering or emerging from the building during the survey. Three species / genus of bat were recorded during the survey: common pipistrelle, a Myotis species and Noctule. The first bat recorded was a Myotis species at 21:05 and this was the only contact with this species. Common pipistrelle were the dominant species throughout the survey with multiple passes and foraging consistently until 22:03. Only one pass by a Noctule was recorded at 22:00 but this was faint and was not visually observed by the surveyor. More activity was noted at the northern end of B1, where nearly twice the contacts were recorded as the southern surveyor position. Dawn Survey Common pipistrelle was the only species recorded during this survey, with the first contact at 04:24 foraging at the northern end of B1. Only two contacts were recorded at the southern end of the building; one pass at 04:45 and one bat foraging around the garden and barn from 04:47 until 05:05. The activity at the northern end of B1 was fairly constant with foraging passes from 04:24 until 05:11. At 05:11 one common pipistrelle was observed entering a roost in the roof via a gap left by a missing tile. Emergence Survey No bats were observed entering or emerging from the building during the survey. The first bat contact was a common pipistrelle at 20:25 commuting over the site from east to west. Common pipistrelle was the dominant species though a soprano pipistrelle was recorded at 20:32 foraging around the barn. One pass by a noctule was also noted at 20:45 commuting high over the site from east to west. All the activity for the survey was concentrated between 20:25 and 20:50 and equally spread around B1 and the surrounding area. J:\6400\6414\ECO\Bats\Bat Report 5

9 Bat Survey Report 4.0 DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS Proposal 4.1 This planning application is for the conversion of the barn building in the centre of the farm. This is to become a domestic residence for use by the current owners. The barn itself will remain intact but significant changes are proposed for the interior as well as some repair and alterations to the external features. No alterations are proposed to the areas identified as being currently used by roosting bats. Survey Conclusion 4.2 Throughout the four nocturnal survey occasions only one roost location was recorded. This was a single Common Pipistrelle entering the north western corner of the roof via a gap under a tile. It was concluded that, due to its infrequent use, this roost is only likely to be used as an occasional roost for a single or a very low number of bats at any one time. It was also noted that due to the location of the roost it was unlikely to provide any potential for hibernation and is most likely used only as an occasional roost during the summer. Development Impact 4.3 Given the location of the identified roost it was concluded that the proposed works will not involve the movement or alteration of any materials comprising the roost feature. It is understood that insulation installed outside the proposed living space, and below the newly created roof voids, will help to reduce the impact of increased heat and noise to the current and potential roost habitat. Roost Loss 4.4 It is understood that none of the current roost features will be lost as a result of the development proposal. Roost Disturbance 4.5 In the absence of mitigation, during the construction phase it is possible that operations carried out in close proximity to the identified roost could cause disturbance to single or small numbers of bats present. Though the roost itself with not be altered in any way the excess noise and vibration caused by works has potential for disturbance. Furthermore anthropogenic activity in the long term, could result in disturbance of bats using the current roost feature. Roost Modification 4.6 The development proposal does not involve the removal or alteration of any materials associated with the current roost feature. In the absence of mitigation it is likely that heat loss into the roof void could alter the environmental conditions associated with the current roost feature. Summary of Impacts J:\6400\6414\ECO\Bats\Bat Report 6

10 Bat Survey Report 4.7 Given the evidence it is established that the roost is only likely to support an individual or very small numbers of bats, and it does not constitute a maternity roost. In light of this the impacts described above are likely to amount to a low level impact at most. Mitigation and Compensation 4.8 In order to ensure that the impacts arising from the disturbance of bats are avoided, any works to be carried out in close proximity internally to the identified roost, will be implemented outside the active period for bats (May September). As such all works in the stated areas will be implemented in the period October to April. As the roost feature is unlikely to be suitable for use as a hibernation roost, the likelihood of any bats being present within this period will be negligible. 4.9 It is understood that insulation will be installed above and around the outside walls of the proposed living accommodation to be created within the current roof space. As such this is considered to be sufficient to minimise any long term effects of noise disturbance on any roosting bats once the construction phase is completed. Similarly any impact arising from potential heat loss into the roof void will be minimised by the application of aforementioned insulation In order to enhance the sites potential for bats it is recommended that a small number of additional bat access points be installed in the roof to allow bats access to the proposed roof void and current void between the tiles and bitumen felt. These access points should be in the form of bat tiles (see figure 7) and will be installed on the opposite side of the roof to the current roost to avoid modification of roost habitat With the implementation of the mitigation outlined above there will be no impact of development on any roosting population of bats in the building. In light of this it is not anticipated that proposals will result in any breach of legislation protecting roosting bats therefore it Is not deemed necessary for a license to be obtained in order to carry out the work proposed in the development. However if any work is required outside the period outlined above (October to April) then it is recommended that a license be obtained from Natural England in order to facilitate the work. In this scenario all work must be suspended until such time as a license is obtained. Full planning permission (or outline) along with all relevant conditions/reserved matters discharged must be in place in order to be able to provide the level of detail and certainty required prior to any EPS licence applications. Natural England requires at least 30 working days to process EPS licence applications Given the size and status of the roost, comprising of individual bats of a common species Natural England s Bat Mitigation Guidelines (2004) recommends minimum mitigation and compensation with flexibility over provision of bat boxes, access to new buildings etc. No conditions about timing or monitoring. As such it is anticipated that work under license would be undertaken as described above. However in addition to a license being obtained it is recommended that a pre-dawn survey be carried out prior to any work in order to identify the presence of any roosting bats at that exact time. In the event that the roost (or any other area of B1) is occupied by more than five bats it will be required that work be postponed until such time as the roost is occupied by five or less common pipistrelle If works are not carried out within one year of the last nocturnal assessment the building should be subject to further survey to re-asses the roost size and status The proposed above enhancements contribute to the requirement of biodiversity J:\6400\6414\ECO\Bats\Bat Report 7

11 Bat Survey Report 4.15 The National Planning Policy Framework NPPF NPPF places emphasis on sustainable development, and minimising impacts on biodiversity whilst providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, contributing to the Government s commitment to halt the overall decline in biodiversity. The proposed above biodiversity enhancements will contribute to this requirement. J:\6400\6414\ECO\Bats\Bat Report 8

12 Site Location Nancy Hawksworth Barn Conversion London Road, Shardlow 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. Site Location A4 N Figure 1 Ordnance Survey material is used with the permission of The Controller of HMSO, Crown copyright J:\6400\6414\Bats\Figure1sitelocation.cdr FPCR Environment and Design Ltd, Lockington Hall, Lockington, Derby, DE74 2RH t: masterplanning environmental assessment landscape design urban design f: e: [email protected] w: ecology architecture arboriculture

13

14

15

16

17