Reasoned risk assessment for bats: Buildings at Kirkby House Farm, Hill Road, Kirkbyin-Cleveland. April 2010 Amended January 2011

Transcription

1 Reasoned risk assessment for bats: Gale Cottage, Wolsingham, Bishop Auckland, County Durham, DL13 3LT Tel: Fax: website: Buildings at Kirkby House Farm, Hill Road, Kirkbyin-Cleveland April 2010 Amended January 2011 Company registered in England No

2 Contents A Executive summary 2 B Introduction 2 C Survey and site assessment 10 D Impact assessment 24 E Mitigation 24 F References 25 Kirkby House Farm January

3 A Executive summary Barrett Environmental Ltd was commissioned by David Stovell and Millwater, Middlesbrough, on behalf of their client, Waring Estates, to carry out a reasoned risk assessment for the presence of roosting bats in the agricultural buildings of Kirby House Farm, Hill Road, Kirkby-in-Cleveland. Waring Estates proposes to demolish the outbuildings and develop the site with the construction of six, twobedroom holiday homes. A daylight survey of the buildings and site was carried out on the 29 th March Evidence of the use of one of the large barns by foraging bats was found, although there was no indication that bats roost at the site. The proposed demolition is considered to have a neutral/minor negative impact on the conservation status of the local bat population. However, an area of corrugated asbestos roofing sheet could not be accessed on Building C, a wooden building, and mitigation in respect of this structure only is required. The roof of the building will be dismantled carefully by hand, in the presence of a licensed batworker, who will be on hand to take any bats that are found into care. In addition, the site will be enhanced for bats by the installation of a Schwegler 1WQ bat roost unit on the south gable of the eastern most new property. If bats are found, the dismantling work will stop and Natural England will be contacted to agree a way forward. B Introduction B1 Background to development Barrett Environmental Ltd was commissioned by David Stovell and Millwater, Middlesbrough on behalf of their client, Waring Estates, to carry out a reasoned risk assessment for the presence of roosting bats in farm outbuildings at Kirby House Farm, Hill Road, Kirkby-in-Cleveland. It is understood that Waring Estates proposes to demolish the outbuildings and re-develop the site with the construction of 6 x two-bedroom holiday homes. The site is situated at grid reference NZ and lies at an altitude of approximately 95m AOD. The location of the site is indicated on Figure 1. Kirkby House Farm January

4 Figure 1: Site location plan (adapted from MAGIC) B2 Full details of proposed works All existing outbuildings at Kirby House Farm except two stable/storage blocks will be demolished, and 6 x two-bedroom, two-storey, semi-detached holiday homes constructed at the site. Figures 2 and 3 show the existing and proposed site layouts, with the floor plans and elevational drawings shown in Figures 4 to 6. Kirkby House Farm January

5 Figure 2: Existing site layout (David Stovell & Millwater drawing HN/10/017/002) Kirkby House Farm January

6 Figure 3: Proposed site layout. (David Stovell & Millwater drawing HN/10/017/003) Kirkby House Farm January

7 Figure 4: Proposed floor plans (extract from David Stovell & Millwater drawing HN/10/017/004) Kirkby House Farm January

8 Figure 5: Proposed south elevation Cottages 1 & 2 (extract from David Stovell & Millwater drawing HN/10/017/005) Figure 6: Proposed north elevation Cottages 1 & 2 (extract from David Stovell & Millwater drawing HN/10/017/005) Kirkby House Farm January

9 Figure 7: Proposed west (left) & east (right) elevations (extract from David Stovell & Millwater drawing HN/10/017/005) Kirkby House Farm January

10 Figure 8: Proposed landscaping plan Kirkby House Farm January

11 C Survey and site assessment C1 Pre-existing information on protected species at survey site North Yorkshire Bat Group is the repository for bat records in the county. Data were provided for the site and surrounding area and are presented in Table 1. Species Site Grid ref. Date Comment Pipistrelle species Soprano Pipistrelle Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown The Wainstones, Stokesley Road, Kirkby, Stokesley Kilmorie, Busby Lane, Kirkby in Cleveland The Old Vicarage, Kirkby in Cleveland 4 Hallgarth, Great Broughton 10 Town Green Drive, Great Broughton 113 High Street, Great Broughton NZ NZ NZ NZ NZ NZ Pipistrelle Great Broughton NZ5505 species Table 1: North Yorkshire Bat Group records 30 Jul Apr Jul Aug 2003 May Aug Sep 1993 Roost Roost Large roost Summer roost Roost Bat found near house on patio. The data shows 3 records of bat roosts in the proximity of the site, although none from the site itself. The 2006 records may represent a single colony of bats that utilises several roost locations. C.2 Status of species All bat species and their roost sites are fully protected under The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). The Act makes it an offence to: intentionally kill, injure, take, possess or trade in any bat species (as listed in schedule 5); interfere with places used for shelter or protection or intentionally disturb animals occupying such places. All bat species are listed on Annex IVa of the European Habitats Directive 1992 (EC Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and Wild Fauna and Flora). In the UK the Directive has been transposed into national laws by means of the Conservation (Natural Habitats, & c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended 2007). These are known as 'the Habitats Regulations'. Under this legislation a person commits an offence if they: Kirkby House Farm January

12 deliberately capture, injure or kill any bat; deliberately disturb any species in such a way as to be likely significantly to affecti) the ability of any significant group of animals of that species to survive, breed or rear or nurture their young ii) the local distribution or abundance of that species; damage or destroy a breeding site or resting place. All UK bat species are also listed on Appendix III of the Bern Convention (Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, 1982) and, except the pipistrelle, are listed in Appendix II. All UK bat species are protected under the Agreement on the Conservation of Bats in Europe (under the Bonn convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals). The UK Biodiversity Action Plan includes seven bat species on the priority species list and has plans for five, including soprano pipistrelle (UK BAP, 2007). 17 species of bat are native to the UK, with an estimated population of 1.28 million, the common pipistrelle (Pipistrellus pipistrellus) is the most common, the only other species with the status "common" are soprano pipistrelle (Pipistrellus pygmaeus) and brown long-eared bats (Plecotus auritus). Four species, Daubenton's (Myotis daubentoni), Natterer's (Myotis nattereri) bat, Whiskered (Myotis mystacinus) and Brandt s bat (Myotis brandti), with populations between 150,000-30,000, are locally common. In 2010 Alcathoes bat (Myotis alcathoe) was added to the list of resident species (URL1). Five of the remaining species are vulnerable and four, including the grey long-eared bat (Plecotus austriacus), with an estimated population of only 1,000, are rare (URL2). The Hambleton Biodiversity Action Plan (2002) cites nine species of bat that have been recorded in North Yorkshire. These are listed below, together with their estimated UK populations. Lesser horseshoe 14,000 Whiskered/Brandt s combined 70,000 Daubenton s 150,000 Natterer s 100,000 Common pipistrelle/soprano pipistrelle combined 2,000,000 Noctule 50,000 Brown long-eared 200,000 Eight of these species are found in Hambleton District. The ninth species, the lesser horseshoe bat, is thought to be extinct in the county, but was last recorded from the western edge of the North York Moors National Park, immediately adjacent to the Hambleton District boundary, in the 1980s. Hambleton District Wide Local Plan (1999) policies that are relevant to bats Kirkby House Farm January

13 include NC1, NC4, NC5, NC6 and NC7. C3 Objective of survey To determine the risk level of the likely use by roosting bats of the out-buildings at Kirby House Farm, in order to predict the impact of the proposed development on the conservation status of the local bat population. C4 Plan/map of survey area Figure 2 in section B2. C5 Site/Habitat description Cross referenced photographs of the site are presented in section C5.6, and the building locations are labelled in Figure 8. Kirby House Farm lies on the outskirts of the rural hamlet of Kirkby-in- Cleveland, situated in the valley of the River Leven. Open farmland lies to the south and east of the site. The north and west boundaries are limited by the residential properties of Kirkby village. The bat foraging habitat in the vicinity is considered to be of medium/high quality. The outbuildings of the Kirby House Farm site comprise 6 structures; a large barn complex, a small open-fronted horse shelter, a wooden calving shed, an open-fronted hay barn and 2 single-storey brick stable blocks, which will be retained and are not included in the demolition proposal. The outbuildings create an enclosure around a concreted yard. All the buildings were erected between 1960 and Kirkby House Farm January

14 Figure 8: Building layout (adapted from David Stovell & Millwater Drawing HN/08/036/21) C5.1 Building A This large barn (Images 1-5) is formed from two conjoined structures. The north compartment is of steel-framed construction, with concrete construction block lower walls, and corrugated sheeting or wooden slats to the roofline. The pitched roof is corrugated sheeting, open at the ridge for ventilation. A large roller shutter door is fitted into the west wall. This area is currently used for vehicle and caravan storage. The north unit is the smaller of the two and has a small brick-built single-storey extension attached to the west wall. The extension has double wooden doors, and a single-throw corrugated sheet roof. There are no enclosed voids inside the extension. The south compartment of the large barn is a reinforced concrete-framed structure, with concrete block lower walls topped with either corrugated sheets or open wooden slats to the roofline. The roof is clad in corrugated sheet and is open at the ridge. There are no enclosed internal voids. A double wooden door is fitted into the west wall. The large internal floor area is divided into three Kirkby House Farm January

15 sections by concrete block walls. The central area is used as a covered exercise yard and the side aisles are used for vehicle storage. C5.2 Building B To the south of the large barn there are 2 timber, single-storey buildings (Buildings B and C). The smaller of the two is an open-fronted horse shelter (Image 6) which is wooden framed building, clad with wood weatherboarding, and topped with a single throw steel sheet roof. The building has been used by nesting swallows. C5.3 Building C The second wooden building (Images 7 and 8), originally used as a calving shed, is of timber-framed construction with weatherboard walls, and a gabled, corrugated sheet roof. Internally the walls and ceiling are lined. There are no internal voids but there are gaps at the roofline beneath the corrugated sheeting which could be use by bats to access the cavities between the roof sheets and the liner. Swallows have nested in the apex of the roof. C5.4 Building D This building (Images 9-12) is an open-sided hay barn of steel-framed construction with concrete block lower walls topped with corrugated sheeting and open wood slats, and a corrugated sheet pitched roof. Internally the building is divided into two aisles by a block wall. The south aisle is used for vehicle and boat storage. There are no internal enclosed voids. Inside the apex of the west gable of the main aisle of the barn there was a large climbing shrub which was being used by birds for roosting and nesting. C5.5 Buildings E The two single-storey brick-built stable blocks (Image 13) each house six stalls and the south stall of the west block is used as an office. The single-storey structures have asbestos roofs and well pointed single-skin walls with no apparent gaps. The corrugated sheet roofs are fitted with translucent roof lights. The buildings lie within the site boundary but are to be retained. Kirkby House Farm January

16 C5.6 Images Image 1: West exterior gable of north compartment of Building A showing the door and single-storey out building Image 2: Interior of north compartment of Building A Kirkby House Farm January

17 Image 3: Interior of the southern compartment of Building A, showing the indoor exercise area Image 4: West and south aspects of the south compartment of Building A Kirkby House Farm January

18 Image 5: East aspect of Building A Image 6: East aspect of Building B. Kirkby House Farm January

19 Image 7: South aspect of Building C Image 8: Internal view of Building C, showing lined walls & ceiling Kirkby House Farm January

20 Image 9: East aspect of Building D Image 10: The climbing shrub in the west apex of Building D used by roosting/nesting birds Kirkby House Farm January

21 Image 11: North aspect of Building D Image 12: Bat droppings on deck of boat in the south aisle of Building D Kirkby House Farm January

22 Image 13: The brick stable block structures of Building E that are to be retained Image 14: View north from site showing the adjacent houses of Kirby village. Kirkby House Farm January

23 Image 15: View east from site showing woodland & open farmland Image 16: View south from site showing open farmland & North York Moors in the distance Kirkby House Farm January

24 C6 Field survey C6.1 Methods Survey methodologies were those recommended in The Bat Workers Manual (2004), the Bat Mitigation Guidelines (2004) and Bat Surveys Good Practice Guidelines (2007). A daylight survey was carried out in two parts; an external survey of the buildings looking for indications of bat occupation and suitable bat roost access points, and an internal examination including internal floors, walls and roof spaces looking for field signs of bats and potential roost locations. Field signs searched for included live bats, dead bats, droppings, urine stains, grease marks and feeding remains such as butterfly and moth wings. All areas of the buildings were inspected. Ladders were used as required. And internal illumination was provided by powerful hand-held torches. An endoscope was used to examine cracks and crevices that had potential to be used by roosting bats. The surrounding area was assessed to determine the habitat quality for commuting and foraging bats and identify likely flight lines from the site to access such areas. C6.2 Personnel The daylight survey was carried out by Dave Thew, an experienced and licensed bat surveyor, (Licence No: ), assisted by Steve Thompson. C7 Results Bat field signs were found in the south aisle of the open-fronted hay barn (Building D). Several scattered bat droppings (identified as pipistrelle sp.) were found on car and boat covers. No bat field signs were found in any of the other buildings surveyed. C8 Interpretation and evaluation C8.1 Presence/absence There are no records of bats at the site, but there are known roosts approximately 300m away. Several scattered bat droppings were found on surfaces in Building D, which is an open-sided barn. No potential roost sites were found in the building, and the droppings did not correspond with possible perch sites (eg roof beams). It is therefore concluded that the droppings indicate bat foraging activity within the barn, rather than a night roost. No other indications of bat presence/activity were found at the site. C8.2 Site status The site is considered to be a low risk for the presence of roosting bats, but is used by foraging bats. The buildings lie on the edge of Kirby-in-Cleveland, in Kirkby House Farm January

25 an area of open farmland. Trees and hedgerows bordering the site will provide feeding habitat and flight corridors for bats. The location was classified as medium/high quality habitat for foraging and commuting bats. C 8.3 Constraints The risk assessment was implemented outside the period of bat activity. The roof of Building C is corrugated asbestos sheeting that is underdrawn with hardboard. It was not possible to inspect the void in each corrugation, although no evidence of bat occupation was found along the eaves, at the ends of the sheets. D Impact assessment No evidence of roosting bats was found in any of the buildings at the site and the demolition of Buildings A, B, D and E is considered to have a neutral impact on roosting bats. The survey of Building C was constrained by the inaccessibility of the underside of the corrugated asbestos sheets, some of which might be accessed by bats, which could be disturbed, injured or killed during the demolition. This would be a major negative impact upon the individual animal, but the lack of bat field sign reduces the likelihood of there being significant numbers of bats in the building and the impact upon the conservation status of the local population is considered to be neutral/minor negative. The demolition of the buildings, particularly the open barn, will reduce opportunities for bats to forage under cover which could be regarded as a minor negative impact on the local population. E Mitigation and compensation The roof of Building C is corrugated asbestos sheeting, which will be dismantled carefully by hand prior to disposal. There is a low risk that roosting bats may be present, but to mitigate that eventuality, a licensed bat worker will be present during the roofing sheet removal in case bats are found. If bats are found, the bat worker will place the animals in a secure container out of harms way until conditions are appropriate for its/their release at the site at dusk. Natural England will be contacted to agree a way forward. In addition, and to enhance the area for bats, a Schwegler 1WQ bat roost unit will be installed on the south gable of the eastern most new property, which lies closest to boundary features likely to be used by foraging and commuting bats. Kirkby House Farm January

26 F References Bat Conservation Trust (2007). Bat Surveys Good Practice Guidelines. Bat Conservation Trust, London. Hambleton District Council (2001) Hambleton Biodiversity Action Plan. Hambleton District Council. Northallerton. Mitchell-Jones, A. J (2004), Bat Mitigation Guidelines, English Nature. Mitchell-Jones, A. J & McLeish, A. P (Eds) (2004), Bat Workers Manual, Joint Nature Conservation Committee. URL2 me_in_uk URL2 p.aspx?id=19 Kirkby House Farm January