REPORT BATS & BARN OWLS CANDLE STORE BANK CLOSE CHRISTCHURCH DORSET BH23 1AB

Transcription

1 REPORT ON BATS & BARN OWLS AT CANDLE STORE BANK CLOSE CHRISTCHURCH DORSET BH23 1AB Job Ref: Candle Store_ Prepared by: Philip Smith Conservation Consultant 45 Normanhurst Avenue Queens Park Bournemouth Dorset BH8 9NN Signed Phil Smith... Page 1 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

2 INSTRUCTIONS Instructions were received from Christchurch Borough Council to inspect and advise on the presence or absence of bats and barn owls at Candle Store, Bank Close, Christchurch, Dorset BH23 1AB. Grid Reference SZ INSPECTION The inspection of the site took place on 5 th January THE CONTRACTOR I am a licensed bat warden and have been conducting surveys for Natural England for some 11 years. I have been assisting a PhD student from Bristol University as a volunteer helper conduct research into Bats in the Landscape on the Isle of Purbecks. I have recently managed a project to study some of Britain s rarest bats just north of Bournemouth. I have undertaken surveys for two local council authorities and carried out surveys in Spain. I hold Natural England licences 15, 17 and 18 to survey for bats and licences to survey for Barn owl, Great crested newts, Sand Lizards, Smooth Snakes and White-clawed crayfish. I have been the named ecologist on a number of European Protected Species Licences which I have prepared and successfully submitted to natural England. LIMITATIONS OF INSPECTION A visual inspection of the dwelling was conducted to identify potential bat roosting features that are considered suitable for any bat roosting activity. Where necessary binoculars (8x magnification) was used to see areas where it was too dangerous to get close to, such as the roof and eaves. A visual inspection of the roof void was carried out. Where necessary an endoscope was used to examine any holes. This survey is a snap shot at the time of the visit. It cannot be guaranteed that any bats will be found due to nature of their life style. If planning is successful and should the builders find one or more bats, work must stop immediately and Natural England contacted for advice. The penalties for disturbing or destroying bats or their roosts or places of shelter are severe. EXISTING USE OF BUILDINGS The site consisting of two separate buildings of differing ages thought to date back approximately 50 and 100 years are brick built detached building with asbestos corrugated roofs. Both buildings are single storey are used for the storage. The cavity walls have a mix of openings in the form of air bricks. It is believed that the property does not benefit from cavity wall insulation. The roof of the Candle store (Building1 former candle store) has an overall length of approximately 10 metres long with a maximum width of 8 metres wide with no loft space. The single storey storage rooms (Building 2 - former toilet block) has an overall length of approximately 7 metres long with a maximum width of 4 metres wide. It is not known if a loft space exists as the keys provided did not fit the locks. The front east of the site is hardstanding and the site occupies approximately 0.02 hectares. Page 2 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

3 PROPOSED USE OF BUILDINGS It is proposed that the buildings are demolished and erect 2 small cottage-styled 2 bedroom houses. Page 3 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

4 OBSERVATIONS REGARDING BATS The BERN Convention (The Convention on the conservation of European Wildlife and natural Habitats) was adopted in 1979 and came into force in As a result the European Community adopted the EC Habitats Directive. All British bats are listed under Appendix III of the Bern Convention, and Annex IV of the EC Habitats Directive. Bats and their habitat are listed under Appendix II of the Bonn Convention obligating the UK to protect their habitat. All bat species are specially protected under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and as a result it is illegal to: Intentionally kill, injure or take bats; Deliberately disturb bats; Damage, destroy or obstruct access to bat roosts. Additionally, the Conservation (and Habitats and c.) Regulations, 1994 (as amended in 2007) protects bats under Schedule 2. In 2000 the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 was enacted to increase the legislative powers so that reckless acts were included. Planning Policy Statements (PPS) set out the Government s national policies on different aspects of planning in England. PPS9 sets out planning policies on protection of biodiversity and geological conservation through the planning system. The Government s objectives for planning are: to promote sustainable development by ensuring that biological and geological diversity are conserved and enhanced as an integral part of social, environmental and economic development, so that policies and decisions about the development and use of land integrate biodiversity and geological diversity with other considerations. to conserve, enhance and restore the diversity of England s wildlife and geology by sustaining, and where possible improving, the quality and extent of natural habitat and geological and geomorphological sites; the natural physical processes on which they depend; and the populations of naturally occurring species which they support. to contribute to rural renewal and urban renaissance by: enhancing biodiversity in green spaces and among developments so that they are used by wildlife and valued by people, recognising that healthy functional ecosystems can contribute to a better quality of life and to people s sense of well-being; and ensuring that developments take account of the role and value of biodiversity in supporting economic diversification and contributing to a high quality environment. The planning system has a significant part to play in meeting the Government s international commitments and domestic policies for habitats, species and ecosystems. Planning Policy Statements (PPS) set out the Government s national policies on different aspects of planning in England. PPS9 sets out planning policies on protection of biodiversity and geological conservation through the planning system. This has now been replaced by the National Planning Policy Framework, issued in March Page 4 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

5 The Government s objectives for planning with regard to bio-diversity and conservation are set out in Section 11 and extracts are shown below. We can only show extracts relevant to Conservation and Bio-diversity. Please see for the full framework. Conserving and enhancing the natural environment. The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by: Protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation interests and soils; Recognising the wider benefits of ecosystem services; Minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, contributing to the Government s commitment to halt the overall decline in biodiversity, including by establishing coherent ecological networks that are more resilient to current and future pressures; In preparing plans to meet development needs, the aim should be to minimise pollution and other adverse effects on the local and natural environment. Plans should allocate land with the least environmental or amenity value, where consistent with other policies in this Framework. 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. Set out a strategic approach in their Local Plans, planning positively for the creation, protection, enhancement and management of networks of biodiversity and green infrastructure To minimise impacts on biodiversity and geodiversity, planning policies should: plan for biodiversity at a landscape-scale across local authority boundaries; identify and map components of the local ecological networks, including the hierarchy of international, national and locally designated sites of importance for biodiversity, wildlife corridors and stepping stones that connect them and areas identified by local partnerships for habitat restoration or creation; promote the preservation, restoration and re-creation of priority habitats, ecological networks and the protection and recovery of priority species populations, linked to national and local targets, and identify suitable indicators for monitoring biodiversity in the plan; Page 5 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

6 METHODOLOGY Standard methods of identifying if bats use a building include observation of staining by urine or faeces on walls, observation of faeces on ledges or flat surfaces, direct observation of bats perching or roosting, observation of prey items and emergence observations. The Bat Conservation Trust has issued Good Practice Guidelines which require that if there is a likelihood that bats could use the property, emergence surveys are conducted proportionate to the likelihood that bats may be or have used the property. Potential access points, droppings around the building or droppings inside the roof all contribute to the likelihood that bats are using or have used the property. It is deemed suitable to survey buildings throughout the year for signs of bats or the likelihood that they may have or are using the property. Emergence and dawn swarm surveys are considered suitable subject to warm weather from the start of May to mid- October. Should it be found that there are potential access holes, droppings around the outside of the property or in the roof space, one or more emergence surveys may have to be undertaken. Additionally, the surrounding habitat may be conducive to bats being in the area and therefore using properties in the area. It should be noted that absence is near impossible to prove, as there is always a chance of finding a bat. Their high mobility means that it is virtually impossible to rule out bats using any type of structure for roosting or habitat for foraging or as a flight path. When there is no conclusive evidence of bats, a potential for bat presence could still be presumed. It should therefore be noted that whilst a negative report implies bats are not using the property, this would be at the time of the inspection. There is always the chance that a single bat is using the property and this would be extremely difficult to locate. Bats could always start to use the property after the inspection. Therefore if while the works are in progress bats or evidence are noted work should stop immediately and Natural England or ourselves be contacted for advice. OBSERVATIONS MADE ON THE PLANNING PROCESS The report is produced to assist in the planning process and changes to the dwelling/property as advised by the client. It advises only on the biodiversity at the site. In this particular case it is regarding bats. It is assumed that the land/building owner will be submitting this report through the correct planning procedure and has sought or will seek professional planning advice. It is the landowner s responsibility to ensure all aspects of law are complied with. This includes matters regarding, but not exclusively, tree preservation orders, heritage matters and any other matter requiring planning approval before any works are undertaken. Any advice given does not infer a legal right to carry out any actions that may be subject to, but have not been processed and approved by, any local planning authority and conditions or constraints that they would impose. This report does not override any legal process that is required to be obtained to carry out the proposed works. Page 6 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

7 OBSERVATIONS MADE ON THE PROPERTY REGARDING BATS Building 1 the Candle Store 1. Staining by urine or faeces of walls, eaves, doors and windows A visual inspection was made of the extension external walls, eaves, doors and windows around the building. The brick wall surfaces were examined and showed no evidence of bat faeces or staining. Several air bricks are present and although no evidence of bat droppings was noted wind and rain could easily remove these tell-tale signs. The fit between the walls and the eaves on the building was not tight and did not allow bats to access the property if they so choose. Wooden doors and metal windows are present and well-sealed. No evidence was noted anywhere. 2. Faeces on ledges or flat surfaces A visual inspection of flat surfaces of the dwelling was conducted. This included window ledges and ground areas around the base of the walls. All areas of the roof area were examined with binoculars and no evidence noted of bat activity. 3. Direct observation of bats perching or roosting in the roof void A visual inspection was made of all internal areas of the building and a high powered torch which gave good views. No loft space is present and the ceiling appears to be a vaulted ceiling sloping south west to north east. The building is currently used by Christchurch Borough Council to store a variety of materials. 4. Prey items Certain species of bats likely to use this type of roof structure for perching while feeding at night leave the remains of their prey. This generally relates to Long-eared bats and the wing remains of moths or butterflies are discarded and can be found below their feed perches. No evidence of insect remains was found. 5. External Roof The roof of the dwelling is constructed with sloping corrugated asbestos sheets with plastic corrugated sheets for lighting consistent with the age of the property heavily covered in grass and moss. A number of gaps around the gutters of the building on the eastern front side exist and a clean gap was noted on the northern edge of the property. The roof was examined closely with binoculars and no staining or faeces noted around any areas. See Appendix I for examples. 6. Barn owls No opportunities exist in this property for barn owls to use it. No evidence was visible in the form of white faecal staining or pellets were present. 7. Emergence observations We would categorise the building as having moderate potential for bats due to the clean gaps found in several places and the excellent local wooded habitat which is ideal for foraging. It is therefore deemed necessary to conduct an appropriate number of emergence surveys. 7. Nesting birds The land immediately adjacent to the building consists of tarmac and hardstanding. Nesting birds could be present within the ivy at the rear of the building or on trees. Page 7 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

8 8. Reptiles The land immediately adjacent to the building is hard standing in the form of tarmac and not considered likely to accommodate reptiles. 9. Trees We believe two trees (Sycamore) are affected by the works at the rear (west side) of the building either by removal or due to the proximity of the demolition and building works. These trees have negligible value to bats. Building 2 the Storage units (former toilet block) 1. Staining by urine or faeces of walls, eaves, doors and windows A visual inspection was made of the extension external walls, eaves, doors and windows around the building. The brick wall surfaces were examined and showed no evidence of bat faeces or staining. Several air bricks are present and although no evidence of bat droppings was noted wind and rain could easily remove these tell-tale signs. The fit between the walls and the wooden eaves on the building was tight and did not allow bats to access the property if they so choose. Wooden doors windows are present and well-sealed. No evidence was noted anywhere. 2. Faeces on ledges or flat surfaces A visual inspection of flat surfaces of the dwelling was conducted. This included window ledges and ground areas around the base of the walls. All areas of the roof area were examined with binoculars and no evidence noted of bat activity. 3. Direct observation of bats perching or roosting in the roof void Internal access was available as the keys provided did not either fit the locks or the locks were corroded. 4. Prey items Internal access was available as the keys provided did not either fit the locks or the locks were corroded. 5. External Roof The roof of the dwelling is constructed with sloping corrugated asbestos sheets consistent with the age of the property heavily covered in moss. A number of gaps around the eaves of the building on the north eastern front side exist and a clean gap was noted on the northern edge of the property. The roof was examined closely with binoculars and no staining or faeces noted around any areas. See Appendix I for examples. 6. Barn owls No opportunities exist in this property for barn owls to use it. No evidence was visible in the form of white faecal staining or pellets were present. 7. Emergence observations We would categorise the building as having moderate potential for bats due to the clean gaps found in several places and the excellent local wooded habitat which is ideal for foraging. It is therefore deemed necessary to conduct an appropriate number of emergence surveys. Page 8 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

9 7. Nesting birds The land immediately adjacent to the building consists of tarmac and hardstanding. Nesting birds could be present within the clean gaps of the building. 8. Reptiles The land immediately adjacent to the building is hard standing in the form of tarmac and not considered likely to accommodate reptiles. Page 9 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

10 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions The building was assessed as holding moderate potential to support roosting bats, predominantly crevices dwelling bats possibly using gaps in the external walls of both buildings. The surrounding habitat is ideal for foraging and commuting within Druitt woods and the wider area. Barn owls are not considered likely to be using the buildings. There is potential for nesting birds in the clean gaps or in the ivy at the rear of the Building 1. Recommendations Bats If the plans change we must be afforded the opportunity to update this report. Further surveys As the building holds moderate potential to support roosting bats a suite of three dusk emergence and dawn re-entry surveys must be undertaken in line with the Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists Good Practice Guidelines (Bat Conservation Trust). These surveys must be undertaken between May and August to identify whether a breeding roost could be present within the site. The dusk emergence and dawn re-entry surveys comprise a number of ecologists positioned around the external features of the building watching just before dusk until two hours after dusk and for two hours before dawn for bats entering or leaving the building. These surveys must be spaced at least two weeks apart to allow for the movement of bats between roosts. Mitigation will be based on the findings of the emergence surveys. Mitigation A worst case scenario has been devised to mitigate for the disturbance to a maternity roost within the stone walls of crevice dwelling bats and a hibernation roost due to the cool steady temperatures that will exist within the walls. As such the following mitigation plan will provide suitable protection for the bats: European Protected Species Licence A European Protected Species Licence (EPSL) will be applied for (should bats be present). This licence application will be granted by Natural England who will take into consideration the following three tests to ensure the favourable conservation status of the species. Licenses will only be granted where there is no satisfactory alternative to the development, the development will be detrimental to the maintenance of the bat population and that the development is in the interests of the Page 10 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

11 public health and safety or is required for other imperative reasons overriding public interest. Pre-works check and supervision of works A check must be made by the licenced bat ecologist prior to any works commencing to ensure no bats are present in the area or will be harmed; The named ecologist or named assistant must be on site for works as detailed in the EPSL to assist or give advice and deal with any bats found; All work staff on site will be briefed on the importance of the site, not to handle any bats found, how any tiles are to be removed and replaced, how any wooden boarding is to be removed and how any mitigation is to be installed. Any roof coverings will be removed by hand under the supervision of the bat ecologist and the stone works will be subject to an endoscopic survey once the roof coverings have been removed. Any bats within the wall will be protected and all access points retained. As asbestos is present this work will be dependent on appropriate health and safety guidelines issued by the demolition team at the time. Replacement of roosting provisions Loss of potential roosting provisions within the gaps between the walls and eaves could result in the loss of day roosts for a maternity roost of crevice dwelling bats as the buildings will be demolished. The two properties must have one feature each built into the fabric of the wall of the property to replace the loss of the existing features. Two Schwegler 1WI bat tubes ( ) must be built into the walls as high as possible on the side facing Druitt Gardens (south west) on the north east elevation. See Appendix III & IV for locations and description of bat tube. 1 bat access tile (either slate or concrete) must installed on each new build. 1 square metre of bitumen felt must be used in this location on the roofs laid on top of the breathable felt. Battening will be included to secure the area under the tiles. See Appendix III & IV for locations and descriptions. Temporary roosting provisions 3 Schwegler 2FN bat boxes will be installed within a nearby mature tree in Druitt Gardens by the ecologist writing this report which is under the clients land ownership and will provide alternative temporary bat roosting habitat. This will be installed at a minimum height of 3.5m on the southern elevation of trees. As this is open public access parkland, trees will be decided. It is the client s responsibility to ensure permission from the parks department is obtained for this action. Timings This will be timed for when bats are least likely to be using the building. The building is considered suitable to support hibernating bats and the worst case scenario will assume a breeding roost is present on site which means the works must take place between October / November and March / April (when temperatures are above 8c for four consecutive nights). Page 11 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

12 Lighting It is assumed that bats are foraging within the woodland at the rear of the buildings (west side) and commuting up and down the side of the site. Existing street lighting is predominant in the area and bats will be well used to the street lights. There will be no restrictions on lighting. Nesting birds The open gaps on the buildings could provide suitable nesting habitat for birds such as robin, wrens and titmice. The scrub at the rear (west) of the site and the demolition should be cleared and secured outside of the breeding season (which is considered to run between March and September) to ensure no nests are destroyed as part of the works. Where this is not feasible a suitably qualified ecologist will undertake a pre-works check and supervise the vegetation removal. Where nests, chicks or eggs are found no works will be undertaken which would disrupt the breeding cycle until the chicks have fledged. A Schwegler 1SP Sparrow Terrace will be installed into the wall as high as possible on the southern side of the building. See Appendix III & IV for location and description. Two Schwegler 11 House Martin Nest ( ) and associated Schwegler Dropping Board For No. 11 House Martin Terrace ( html ). See Appendix III & IV for location and description. Page 12 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

13 References Collins, J (ed.) 3 rd edition (2016). Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists: Good Practice Guidelines. Bat Conservation Trust, London. Mitchell-Jones A. J. (2004). Bat Mitigation Guidelines. English Nature, Peterborough. Mitchell-Jones A.J. & McLeish A.P. (2004) The Bat Workers Manual (3 rd Edition) Joint Nature Conservation Committee Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2005). Circular 06/2005: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation Statutory Obligations and their Impact within the Planning System. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2012). National Planning Policy Framework Drawings provided by Aspire Architects Page 13 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

14 Appendix I Photos Building 1 the Candle store Photo 3. Example of front of Property. Photo 4. Example of rear of property Ivy, scrub and trees Photo 5. Example of internal ceiling Photo 6. Example of clean gaps in eaves Page 14 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

15 Building 2 the Storage units (former toilet block) Photo 7. Example of front of Property. Photo 8. Example of rear of property. Photo 6. Example of clean gaps in eaves. Photo 6. Example of clean gaps in eaves. Page 15 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

16 Appendix II Location of site at Bank Close, Christchurch surrounded in red Page 16 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

17 Appendix III New site layout with mitigation features Page 17 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

18 Appendix IV Mitigation features Bats Schwegler 1WI Summer And Winter Bat Box ( ). The Schwegler 1WI Summer and Winter Bat Box has been designed for the safe hibernation of bats in winter as well as for summer roosting. The 1WI is a very good example of just how easy it is to assist bats in urban areas. With this Brickbox it is possible to offer new quarters or provide replacement for destroyed bat roosts. The combination of several, effective insulating materials in a layer structure ensures that the box maintains a good habitat, but still guaranties sufficient air-convection and permeability. The extremely durable material will last many decades, providing shelter for the bats. See diagram below for bat tiles in the scheme. Bat tiles Bat tile in situ Page 18 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

19 Birds House martin boxes Schwegler 11 House Martin Nest ( ). House martins nest on the external walls of buildings, but usually require the protection of overhanging eaves. The Schwegler 11 House Martin Nest has its own integrated roof, allowing martins to nest on any external facade, regardless of whether there are eaves or not. Schwegler Dropping Board For No. 11 House Martin Terrace ( ). The droppings Board prevents the nuisance caused by droppings accumulating around windows and doors. it is made from traditional Schwegler Woodcrete material, painted with light-coloured paint and is designed for use with the No. 11 House Martin Nest. Schwegler 1SP Sparrow Terrace ( html ). The Schwegler 1SP Sparrow terrace has three separate nesting chambers, each with two entrances, and will be used by both the House Sparrow Page 19 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017

20 (Passer domesticus) and the Tree Sparrow (Passer montanus). The unit can be completely integrated within a brick or concrete wall, or can be mounted externally. Page 20 of 20 Prepared by Phil Smith 06/01/2017