Coldra Woods Hotel by Celtic Manor and Starbucks Drive Thru Restaurant. Ecological Assessment

Transcription

1 Coldra Woods Hotel by Celtic Manor and Starbucks Drive Thru Restaurant Broadhall (Coldra Woods) Ltd; Coldra Manor Resort and Idris Davies Ltd. Tel: St. John Hughes MSc MCIEEM Date: 04/04/17 Report ref: EVG EA

2 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION GENERAL LOCATION AND CONTEXT METHODOLOGY...4 Definitions... 4 Scoping... 5 Desk study... 5 Phase I Survey... 6 Protected Species... 6 Evaluation of Ecological Features and Impact Assessment LEGISLATIVE AND CONSERVATION CONTEXTS...9 Legislative Context... 9 Biodiversity Conservation Initiatives RESULTS...11 Designated Sites Non-Statutory Designations Site Habitats Neighbouring Habitats Protected Species Dormouse EVALUATION OF ECOLOGICAL FEATURES...15 Designated Sites Habitats & Species IMPACT ASSESSMENT...16 Proposed Development Doc Ref : EVG EA

3 Summary Assessment CONCLUSIONS...22 TABLES Table 4.1 Relevant nature conservation designation context. Table 4.2 Protected species legislation. Table 5.1 Non-statutory nature conservation designations within 1km. Table 5.2 Grassland flora. Table 6.1 Ecological importance of habitats and species. Table 7.1. Summary Assessment Ecological Priority Matrix APPENDIX I Figure 1. Location map Figure 2. Non-statutory nature conservation sites (SINC) within 1km. Figure 3. Phase I Habitat Map Figure 4. Proposed layout Photographs 1-8 of the project site APPENDIX II Bat Surveys - Methodology Doc Ref : EVG EA

4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY was commissioned by Broadhall (Coldra Woods) Ltd; Coldra Manor Resort and Idris Davies Ltd; to carry out an extended Phase I Habitat survey and protected species surveys of the proposed development site near Coldra Wood, just north of Junction 24 of the M4 Motorway, Newport National Grid ref: ST The site has been identified for development of a hotel, drive-thru restaurant and associated infrastructure. The objectives of the surveys were to identify: a) potential / actual ecological constraints which are material to planning, and if any, b) appropriate avoidance or mitigation measures by design to overcome constraints, and c) to assess the impacts of the project on any ecological resources of value at at least a Local level. This report therefore identifies the ecological status and context of the study site and wider area in relation to designated sites, habitats, and protected/notable species. It provides an evaluation of the main ecological features that are present, or likely to occur. The study involved desk study and an extended Phase I survey of the site and immediate neighbouring ground, and a range of protected species surveys (badgers, otter and water vole, dormice; and reptiles). A separate invertebrate survey was undertaken 1. This work, which was all undertaken during appropriate seasons in 2016 enabled the ecological baseline conditions to be determined, and where appropriate, impact avoidance and mitigation to be incorporated into the project as appropriate. The study site is does not form part of, or lie adjacent to any designated nature conservation site. It is dominated by semi-improved grassland; plantation; hedgerows; scrub; and woodland. The project will result in the removal of approximately 0.7ha of semi-improved grassland; ~100m of species-poor hedgerow; and relatively small extents of scrub and plantation / trees. The potential exists for impact on neighbouring retained mature trees, by damage to root systems if extending into the construction zone. A tree survey has been undertaken and root protection areas (RPAs) identified. Neighbouring retained trees will be suitably protected from potentially damaging activities. Impact on the water quality of a minor drainage line which extends through the north eastern region of the site may arise if pollution (physical/chemical) enters the drainage line via rain water runoff from the construction zone. Best practice pollution prevent measures will be adopted during the construction phase to this risk, and set out the protocol to follow should such event arise. This applies equally to creation of the proposed water body (pond) on the drainage line. Protected species surveys confirmed the potential for bird nesting activity (associated with structured habitats), and the presence of dormice. These species may potentially be impacted by the project, however impact avoidance / reduction by design is possible, and has been defined, together with additional mitigation measures in Table 7.1 (Ecological Priority Matrix). Works affecting dormice will be carried out under appropriate licences, and mitigation implemented as agreed with Newport City Council (NCC) and Natural Resources Wales (NRW) a Dormouse Method Statement (Ref: EVG DMS) has been prepared. 1 Falk, S., (2016). An invertebrate survey of land North-east of Coldra Roundabout, Newport, Wales. Doc Ref : EVG EA [1]

5 Additionally a Dormouse Management & Monitoring Scheme (Ref: EVG DMMS) has been prepared and relates primarily to the woodland in the western part of the site. The proposed woodland management is likely to benefit dormice, and have a positive impact on the woodland biodiversity in general. Doc Ref : EVG EA [2]

6 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 was commissioned by Broadhall (Coldra Woods) Ltd; Coldra Manor Resort and Idris Davies Ltd; to carry out an extended Phase I Habitat survey and protected species surveys of the proposed development site near Coldra Wood, just north of Junction 24 of the M4 Motorway, Newport National Grid ref: ST The objectives of the surveys were to identify: a) potential / actual ecological constraints which are material to planning, and if any, b) appropriate avoidance or mitigation measures to overcome constraints, and c) to assess the impacts of the project on any ecological resources of value at least at a Local level. Doc Ref : EVG EA [3]

7 2 GENERAL LOCATION AND CONTEXT 2.1 The study site is located to the north east of Newport, just north of Junction 24 on the M4 Motorway Figure 1. It is largely bound by highway infrastructure - to the north by the A449 corridor; to the south by the A48 corridor; with these highways join the roundabout to Junction 24, west of the site. To the east lies the Coldra Court (formally the Hilton Newport) and associated parking. The site is access off the A48 via a derelict entrance. The western region of the site is comprised of broadleaved woodland (part of Coldra Wood) and is the subject of suitable management as part of the overall project. 2.2 The wider area features woodland (Coldra Wood) and Celtic Manor Report golf course to the north and west; urban development to the east and south west; and agricultural land to the south east, all separated from the site by highway infrastructure. 3 METHODOLOGY 3.1 This section identifies the area as referred to in this study, and describes the approach taken in terms of scoping of ecology surveys, the methods used to gather baseline information; evaluate the importance of ecological features; and carry out a preliminary assessment. Definitions Project Site 3.2 At the time of undertaking the baseline investigations the boundary of the project site had not been defined definitively, although the area potentially affected was known. Study Site 3.3 For the purposes of this study a site (the study site) was defined including where necessary a suitable buffer to the anticipated construction zone. The study site boundary did not necessarily correspond with any specific planning application boundary however it was expected to at least contain the direct impact zone of the project (this is the case). Doc Ref : EVG EA [4]

8 3.4 The approach taken in terms of scoping of ecology surveys, and methods used to gather baseline information; evaluate the importance of ecological features; and assess potential impacts of the project is described below. Scoping 3.5 The scope of assessment work was informed by a combination of desk and field based investigations in the first instance, an extended Phase I Habitat survey. The overall approach towards scoping followed that described within the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM 2006) guidelines for Ecology Impact Assessment (EcIA) 2. In broad terms, this involves consideration of existing information / evidence, combined with field investigation, which may itself be an iterative process. The Phase I survey and desk study, and consultation (March 2016) with Newport City Council Ecologist, Katie Godfrey lead to the implementation of certain protected species surveys, identified below. Further to this, an invertebrate survey was undertaken, and is reported on separately 3. Desk study 3.6 The following sources of information were consulted for biological records (specifically protected and locally notable species) and designated nature conservation sites: South East Wales Biodiversity Records Centre (SEWBReC) for protected/notable species records Newport City Council for data on locally designated sites within 1km of the centre of the study site CCW s (now part of NRW) Protected Sites Map and MAGIC 4 for Nationally and Internationally designated nature conservation sites within 2km of the site. 3.7 Further to this, a review of aerial photography; OS mapping; and the Local BAP (Newport) was carried out. 2 Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2006) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom (version 7 July 2006). 3 Falk, S., (2016). An invertebrate survey of land North-east of Coldra Roundabout, Newport, Wales. 4 MAGIC Multi Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside. Doc Ref : EVG EA [5]

9 Phase I Survey 3.8 The Phase I survey, which was undertaken on the 15 th of January, 2016, was based upon modification of the Phase I Habitat Survey methodology developed by the former Nature Conservancy Council. Although this method primarily allows for the main habitats of a site and neighbouring land to be mapped and described, an extension of the methodology includes determining the presence of protected species / notable species, or potential suitability of existing habitats which may be affected (directly or indirectly) by a project, to support species material to planning. Further to the January survey, additional observations of flora, particularly of the grassland within the site, were made and noted through the spring / summer of the 2016 when undertaking site visits for the dormouse survey, and later, the reptile survey. Protected Species 3.9 Through the process of scoping, species for which signs of activity were noted and / or potentially suitable habitat considered, or if there was known association with habitats in the area and therefore accounted for in the assessment, include: breeding birds, badger, bats, dormice, otter, water vole and reptiles Consideration was given to the potential for or actual occurrence of such species (or sheltering / resting places of such species) within the site and adjacent land, and likely sensitivity to the proposed development; thus informing whether or not such species are material considerations in terms of planning for the project. Breeding Birds 3.11 No specific breeding bird survey was undertaken, nor considered necessary. More appropriate for this site/setting was to note the potential for existing habitats to support nesting birds. Existing habitats were therefore assessed accordingly as part of the extended Phase I survey. Nevertheless, observations of birds at the site were noted through the spring / summer of the 2016 when undertaking site visits for the dormouse survey. Badgers 3.12 The site and immediate neighbouring land was searched for signs of badger activity, and / or badger setts. Doc Ref : EVG EA [6]

10 3.13 No evidence of badgers was observed, and this species is therefore not considered further in this assessment. Bats 3.14 A comprehensive set of bat surveys were carried out in accordance with guidelines published by the Bat Conservation Trust (BCT) 5. This included tree inspection for potential bat roost features; tree dusk/dawn surveys; transect surveys and automated (static) surveys. The adopted methodologies are described in detail is Appendix II. Dormouse 3.15 Given the presence of plantation, scrub, hedgerows and woodland within and adjacent to the site, a dormouse survey was carried out. The survey was undertaken between April and September in accordance with guidelines and pertaining to nest tube surveys published by English Nature 6. A total of 50 nest tubes were installed within in areas of structured habitat. Otter & Water Vole 3.16 The drainage line bounding the north eastern of the site was searched for signs of otter and / or water vole. Signs of otters include prints, spraints, feeding remains, holts. Signs of water vole activity include print marks, latrines, lawns, and burrows No signed or evidence of either of these species was recorded, and therefore they are not considered further in this assessment. Reptiles 3.18 The site supports habitat potentially suitable (although relatively isolated) habitat for common species of reptiles including slow worm, common lizard, and grass snake. Accordingly, to determine presence or likely absence of such species, artificial refugia consisting of ½ m² roofing felt mats were placed across this part of the site in locations predetermined to be potentially suitable (areas receiving early sun light in which reptiles may bask) for attracting reptiles if present. The refugia were given a week to settle and for reptiles to be attracted, 5 Hundt L. (2012). Bat Surveys: Good Practice Guidelines, 2 nd Ed. Bat Conservation Trust. 6 English Nature Research Report 524. Surveying Dormice using nest tubes. Doc Ref : EVG EA [7]

11 following which seven visits were made inspect the refugia for the presence of individuals during weather conditions suitable for reptiles to bask The installed artificial refugia were inspected on the 7 th, 10 th, 14 th, 21 st, 24 th, 26 th and 30 th of September. Weather conditions during the monitoring were mild, dry, partly cloudy/sunny and calm The survey did not produce any records of reptiles. Based upon this result, reptiles are unlikely to occur within the study site, and are therefore not considered further in this assessment. Evaluation of Ecological Features and Impact Assessment 3.21 Determining the value of ecological features and assessing potential impacts has been carried out in accordance with the methodology for Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) as defined by the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM 2006) Ecological features are evaluated in a geographical context, with the value falling into one (or more) of the following seven categories of importance: International (in this case within the EU) National (within the UK or Wales, depending on legislative scope) Regional (South Wales ) County (Gwent) District (Newport) Local (Newport City) Immediate Zone of Influence, or Negligible 3.23 It should be noted that Local as referring to Local Priority Habitats and Species (see Section 5) relates to District (Newport) level, and differs in this respect from the above geographic extent inferred by Local. 7 Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (2006) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom (version 7 July 2006). Doc Ref : EVG EA [8]

12 4 LEGISLATIVE AND CONSERVATION CONTEXTS Legislative Context 4.1 Nature conservation policy in the UK is implemented through the designation of certain areas, habitats and species under legislation from local to international level. The legislative framework of relevance / potential relevance to the proposed project and study area is outlined below in Table 4.1 (designations) and Table 4.2 (protected species). Table 4.1 Relevant nature conservation designation context. Designation Description Statutory Designations There are no statutory designations within 1km of the project site. Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) Non-statutory Designations This designation is applied to the most important non-statutory nature conservation sites in Wales. While SINCs do not receive statutory protection they are normally offered protection though development plans. Planning Policy Wales PPW (2012) and Technical Advice Note (TAN) 5: Nature Conservation and Planning (2009) formally recognize the role that the non-statutory designations can have in the protection of locally important nature conservation sites. Local Planning Authorities therefore consider likely impacts to the nature conservation objectives of such sites as a material consideration in the planning process. Table 4.2 Protected species legislation. Protected Legislation Species Breeding Birds All wild birds within the UK are afforded legal protection under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as amended). The amount of protection afforded to wild birds varies depending on whether the species are listed on various Schedules or Licences. Part from protection from intentional or reckless harm (exceptions relating to open seasons for certain species), protection is similarly afforded to birds eggs, whilst active nests are protected from damage or destruction. Certain species (Schedule I) are protected from disturbance at breeding sites. Bats The UK supports eighteen species of bat with different habitat, feeding and roosting requirements. As a group of species which are protected under the Habitats Directive and inclusion in the Conservation (Natural Habitats, & c.) Regulations 2010 (as amended), they receive the highest protection with individuals, their young (if breeding in the UK) and roost sites being fully protected against disturbance or obstruction. Existing legislation does not provide protection to foraging areas and commuting routes of bats, although such features are important for the survival of bat populations. Dormouse The dormouse is protected under the Habitats Directive; Conservation (Natural Habitats, & c.) Regulations 2010 (as amended), and Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 (as amended). The Regulations and Act make it offence to harm or disturb dormice, whether intentionally or recklessly, or damage or destroy dormouse breeding sites or places of shelter/protection. Doc Ref : EVG EA [9]

13 Biodiversity Conservation Initiatives 4.2 The UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP) system was initiated (1994) in response to the UK government signing the Convention of Biological Diversity at the Earth Summit, Rio de Janeiro, in The UK BAP sets priorities for nationally and locally important wildlife and habitats. It is based upon a system of three types of action plans including species action plans; habitat action plans; and local action plans (LBAP s). In addition to identifying key species/habitats of conservation priority, the system allows for an overview of the status of such species/habitats and the broad policies which affect their conservation, to be developed. 4.4 The Newport LBAP guides local conservation work to contribute to UK BAP targets. It lists a range of priority natural / semi-natural habitats and species which are the focus of local conservation efforts. 4.5 Further to this, Newport City Council has produced Supplementary Planning Guidance (Wildlife and Development, March 2010), which sets out how biodiversity should be conserved and enhanced throughout the development control process. The Guidance states that biodiversity must be actively considered by all development proposals. Doc Ref : EVG EA [10]

14 5 RESULTS Designated Sites Statutory Designations 5.1 As indicated, there are no statutory designations within 1km of the project site. Non-Statutory Designations 5.2 Table 5.1 list non-statutory designations (SINCs) occurring within 1km of the project site (the measurements provided refer to the closest part of the designation and direction of it relative to the project site) Figure 2. Appendix I. Coldra Wood SINC Coed Rhedyn/Scotch Wood SINC Table 5.1 Non-statutory nature conservation designations within 1km. Site / Map ref* Site Ref Number Habitat Species Guidelines Reason Distance (km)** / Direction Flat Wood SINC R13 H1-Woodlands Remnants of ancient semi- >200m SW natural woodland C14 H1-Woodlands Ancient semi-natural woodland on base-rich soils with rich ground flora LL2 H1-Woodlands Ancient semi-natural woodland >50m W >200m SE Site Habitats 5.3 The main habitats of the project site are illustrated in the Figure 3 - Phase I Habitat Map, and photographs 1-8 Appendix I. The following paragraphs describe these habitats as relating to the site, and thereafter, habitats of the immediate neighbouring land. Semi-improved Grassland 5.4 The central and eastern region of the site is dominated by semi-improved grassland, divided into two fields, from which an annual hay cut is taken (late summer). Species of flora recorded are listed in Table 5.2. Doc Ref : EVG EA [11]

15 Table 5.2 Grassland flora. Common name Grassland Species Varied Grass Sp. Unspecified Ragwort Buttercup Sp. Cinquefoil sp. Yarrow Thisle Spc. Ribwort Plantain Dandelion Red Clover Nettle Selfheal Latin name Poaceae Jacobe vulgaris Ranunculus Potentilla Achillea millefolium Cirsum Plantago lanceolatus taraxacum agg. Trifolium pratense Urtica Dioica pruella Grassland Boarders Meadow Sweet Birdsfoot Trefoil Mouse Ear Willow Herb Sp. Common Bramble Horsetail Dogs Mercury Hemlock Spec Hogweed Filipendula ulmaria lotus corniculatus cerastium epilobium sp. Rubus fruticosus Equisetaceae Mercurialis perennis Conium maculatum Heracleum Plantation 5.5 A belt of semi-mature plantation, dominated by ash (Fraxinus excelsior), and including elements of field maple (Acer campestre), hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna), hazel (Corylus avellana) and blackthorn (Prunus spinosa), runs along the southern boundary, between the grassland areas within the site, and the A38 to the south. Hedgerows 5.6 There are two hedgerows at the site; one separating the two fields, and the second, along the eastern edge of the southern field. Both are dominated by hazel, and largely unmanaged, with bramble (Rubus fruticosus) developing along the edges. Doc Ref : EVG EA [12]

16 Scrub 5.7 Belts of bramble dominated scrub have developed along the field boundaries and are encroaching into the fields. 5.8 Salix and ash dominated scrub is established in the north eastern region part of which lies beneath high voltage power lines and is consequently periodically coppiced. Drainage Line 5.9 A minor drainage line extends through the north eastern region of the site, originating off site to the north, and leading into the adjacent Coldra Court Hotel land. Flows are very dependent upon rainfall runoff of land to the north. Broadleaved Woodland 5.10 Broadleaved woodland characterises the western region of the site, and is part of the wider Coldra Wood - regarded as ancient woodland. The woodland in the study site is covered by a woodland TPO The main canopy species are ash (Fraxinus excelsior), oak (Quercus robur), which are progressively shading the shrub layer out The shrub layer, where present, is characterised by hazel, with elements of holly (Ilex aquifolium) and towards the edges, Salix. The predominant ground cover species is ivy (Hedera helix). Neighbouring Habitats 5.13 The immediate neighbouring land is dominated by: highway to the south (A38) and west (roundabout / A449); a broad verge of predominantly rough grassland to the A449 to the north; and managed / semi-managed landscaping and buildings /car parking of Coldra Court to the east. Protected Species Breeding Birds 5.14 Only common species of birds were observed at the site, including wood pigeon, blackbird, robin, blue tit, great tit, and dunnock. The areas of grassland are considered too small to support ground nesting birds such as skylark. Doc Ref : EVG EA [13]

17 5.15 Given the type and extent of existing habitats of the site and immediate area, it is considered likely that only a small range and number of common garden/hedgerow species occur locally, and potentially nest within existing habitats, especially the scrub. Bats 5.16 The surveys produced evidence of small numbers of three species common pipistrelle; a Myotis species; and Noctule see Table2. and Table 3 in Appendix II. The pipistrelle activity was mainly along the southern boundary region, involving foraging, whilst Noctule were observed commuting across the western region of the site, high above it. Dormouse 5.1 The installed nest tubes were inspected on the: 17 th May; 29 th June; 21 st July; 19 th Aug; 7 th Sep; and 30 Sep. Weather conditions during the monitoring were mild, dry, and calm. 5.2 The survey confirmed the presence of dormice at the site two recordings of dormouse nests (both on the 30 th of September); one situated within the hedgerow separating the two fields; and the other in scrub in the far south eastern region of the site. 5.3 Based on the results, it is assumed that all areas of scrub, plantation and woodland within and immediately adjacent to the study site potentially support dormice. Other Species - Invertebrates 5.4 The invertebrate survey recorded 184 species, indicating a site of moderate but not exceptional interest. The number of scare and unusual species recorded was low with only three noteworthy species found. These were the Essex Skipper Thymelicus lineolus (appears to be rare in Wales); the Picture-winged fly Campiglossa malaris, which is currently graded as RDB1, but has shown a massive recent expansion in southern Britain, and the Cinnabar Moth Tyria jacobaeae, which is listed in Section 42 of the 2006 NERC Act, though it is not rare. Doc Ref : EVG EA [14]

18 6 EVALUATION OF ECOLOGICAL FEATURES Designated Sites 6.1 SINCs are of District (Newport) level ecological importance. Habitats & Species 6.2 Table 6.1 summarises the importance of ecological features. Table 6.1 Evaluation of ecological features. Feature Site/Neighbouring land Extent on site / use of site Designations SINC (multiple) Habitats Semiimproved Grassland In surrounding landscape Site n/a Dominates the central and eastern regions, although small acreage (less than 1ha, and comprised of common occurring flora) Plantation Site Linear belt along the southern boundary (beside A38) Hedgerows Site Three central and eastern region; unmanaged and species poor (less than 5 native species / 30m) Scrub Site Minor elements associated with the hedges and plantation; mixed-species block in the north eastern region Drainage line Broadleaved Woodland Protected Species Breeding Birds (woodland / garden species) Bats Site and neighbouring land (east); culverted to the north Site, and blocks in the general area Potentially neighbouring land and site Site and Neighbouring land Short section extending through the north eastern part of the site Occupies the western region of the site Potentially nesting (within hedges/plantation/scr ub/trees) Small numbers of relatively common species, foraging at the Nature Conservation status Non-statutory designation Declining LBAP Habitat Common & widespread Declining LBAP Habitat Common & widespread Stable Declining LBAP Habitat Ancient woodland / LBAP Habitat Likely wide spread common species LBAP Species Value District importance Local importance Less than Local importance Local importance Less than Local importance Local importance District importance Predicted to be of less than Local importance Local importance Doc Ref : EVG EA [15]

19 Feature Dormouse Invertebrate s Site/Neighbouring land Site and Neighbouring land to the east. Also recorded in Coldra Wood north of the A449 Extent on site / use of site site, or commuting high above it Small numbers occupying structured habitats Site Likely small numbers / populations Nature Conservation status LBAP species Essex Skipper Thymelicus lineolus (appears to be rare in Wales) Value District importance Local importance Picture-winged fly Campiglossa malaris, which is currently graded as RDB1, but has shown a massive recent expansion in southern Britain Cinnabar Moth Tyria jacobaeae, listed in Section 42 of the 2006 NERC Act, though it is not rare. 7 IMPACT ASSESSMENT Proposed Development 7.1 The proposal for the site is to develop the central and eastern regions for a new hotel and drive-thru restaurant, and include associated car parking and landscaping Figure 4 Appendix I. Site preparation will involve certain vegetation clearance and ground works to accommodate the proposed development. Summary Assessment 7.2 It is during the construction phase of the project that the potential for ecological impact is greatest, with this reducing to a low level impact thereafter. The main Doc Ref : EVG EA [16]

20 aspect of project which will, or may result in impact is therefore the process of site clearance and earthworks in particular. The main potential postconstruction impact is increased lighting of neighbouring habitats, which can and will be minimised, in addition to the positive impact of suitable habitat management. 7.3 Table 7.1 summarises the potential impacts of the project. It outlines mitigation (including avoidance and compensation) where appropriate, and identifies the likely residual impact once this mitigation is in place. It includes proposed habitat management and creation of habitat features where the opportunity exists to compensate for the loss of habitat, including habitats used/potentially used by protected fauna. The compensation measures, particularly the reintroduction of suitable woodland management, are likely to result in positive biodiversity impact in the medium to long term. Doc Ref : EVG EA [17]

21 Table 7.1. Summary Assessment Ecology Priority Matrix Feature Status / Legal Protection* Potential for impacts Further Survey Effort Mitigation Measures & Enhancements Designated Sites SINC No n/a n/a - Semi-improved Grassland LBAP Habitat Yes loss of ~0.65ha n/a Plant species-rich amenity grassland (i.e., BSH Amenity Species Rich Eco Mix ) Likely Residual Impact Moderate negative at Local Plantation n/a Yes loss of <01ha n/a n/a Minor negative at site and immediate area level Hedgerow LBAP Habitat Yes loss of ~100m (speciespoor) n/a Plant locally occurring native shrub species see Landscape Plan Figure 4, Appendix I. Scrub n/a Yes loss of <0.15ha n/a Plant locally occurring native shrub species see Landscape Plan Figure 4, Appendix I. Drainage Line (minor) n/a Yes - decreased water quality - as a result of : - incidental pollution (physical/chemical) in runoff entering the stream from the construction zone in general -increased silts/sediment load in rain water runoff entering the stream from the construction zone in general, including during creation of an in-course water body (pond) n/a Adopt best practice pollution prevention controls during site preparation and the construction phase, especially when constructing the in-course water body Minor negative at Local level Minor negative at site and immediate area level Negligible to Minor ve at Local level Doc Ref : EVG EA [18]

22 Feature Status / Legal Protection* Potential for impacts Broadleaved Woodland LBAP Habitat Yes damage as a result of access during construction Yes damage to root zones of retained trees along eastern edge of woodland Birds (small numbers of common woodland / garden species potentially associated with structured habitats) WCA 1981 Yes - potential to cause damage to /destruction of active nests/eggs, or harm to young - legal offence (dependent upon when site preparation works, i.e., vegetation removal commence) Minor to Moderate Further Survey Effort Tree survey completed, Pre-vegetation clearance (trees and scrub) works survey for active nests if these works are conducted during the bird nesting season (March Aug inclusive) Mitigation Measures & Enhancements RPAs defined + protection fencing specified - see Tree Impact & Protection Plan Restore woodland management - see Dormouse Management & Monitoring Scheme (Ref: EVG DMMS) Remove trees and scrub that will not be retained, outside of the main nesting season (March Aug) (and only once the dormouse related constraints have been overcome see Dormouse below), or if this is not possible, then once it has been confirmed by an Ecologist that no active nests are present [Notes: if active nests are present, works in that area will have to be postponed until young are fully fledged] Likely Residual Impact Minor negative at site level Neutral Bats (confirmed small numbers of foraging/commuting bats) WCA 1981, Habitat Regs Yes - loss of potential nesting habitat Minor Yes - increased levels of exterior lighting (associated with the hotel and associated infrastructure) Minor Moderate [Notes: None of the trees dentified for removal support features of bat roost potential] Detailed surveys completed Habitat creation (scrub) and compensation (restore hazel coppicing) is likely to create new potential nesting sites Minimise the use of exterior lighting, and where such lighting is necessary, use directional (avoiding neighbouring woodland), lowintensity lighting Lighting to be designed in accordance with Institute of Lighting Professionals Guidance Notes for the Reduction of Obtrusive Light (GN01:2011) giving consideration to properties adjacent to the site and the need to create "dark corridors" at the site boundary for wildlife habitats. Minor ve Doc Ref : EVG EA [19]

23 Feature Status / Legal Protection* Potential for impacts Further Survey Effort Mitigation Measures & Enhancements Likely Residual Impact Dormouse (confirmed presence within plantation and scrub, and likely presence within woodland) WCA 1981, Habitat Regs Yes -Loss of suitable habitat (scrub and hedgerow) (construction zone in general) - Moderate Disturbance during construction phase (construction zone in general) - Minor Moderate Detailed survey completed Enhancement: Install ten (5) bat boxes (Schwegler F2) within woodland to the west Dormouse Method Statement (Ref: EVG DMS) Suitable timing and method of vegetation removal (i.e., late April / May or mid Sep / Oct) under licence from NRW when dormice are active but not breeding and can redistribute themselves. Works to be supervised by a an experience and appropriately licensed Ecologist [Notes: the appropriate licence from NRW will need to be applied for well in advance of any works commencing on site. Granting of a licence is dependent on: - no satisfactory alternative - imperative reason of overriding public interest - maintenance of the favourable local conservation status of the species Moderate +ve Short term: Moderate ve Medium to Long term: Neutral A licence allows activities that would otherwise be prohibited, without committing an offence.] Habitat creation and management - see Hedgerows, Scrub, Broadleaved Woodland above. Implement suitable woodland enhancement measures - Dormouse Management & Doc Ref : EVG EA [20]

24 Feature Status / Legal Protection* Invertebrates (see Table 6.1 above) * WCA 1981 = Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Potential for impacts Further Survey Effort Mitigation Measures & Enhancements Monitoring Scheme (Ref: EVG DMMS) Yes Loss of suitable habitat n/a See Invertebrate report for recommended mitigation 8 SINC = Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Likely Residual Impact Minor ve 8 Falk, S., (2016). An invertebrate survey of land North-east of Coldra Roundabout, Newport, Wales. Doc Ref : EVG EA [21]

25 8 CONCLUSIONS 8.1 The proposed development will occupy an area of land currently supporting a combination of ~0.7ha of semi-improved grassland, ~100m of hedgerow habitat, and relatively small areas of scrub and plantation. 8.2 A species rich replacement grassland (e.g., BSH Amenity Species Rich Eco Mix ) is recommended and will be planted in areas of proposed amenity grassland. Species-rich native scrub planting is proposed in belts / blocks around the development to compensate for loss of scrub and hedgerow habitat. 8.3 Enhancements include a new water body (associated with the drainage line through the north eastern region of the site, and restoration of woodland management (incremental coppicing in the western region of the site) with the combined purpose of encouraging development of the shrub layer and provide a range of conditions / opportunities for woodland ground flora, and improve conditions for dormice. 8.4 The project has potential to additionally impact on breeding birds; and dormice, however appropriate measures will be adopted so as to avoid / minimise the risk and significance of impact on these species. In both instances, impact avoidance / reduction is possible. Measures to achieve this and compensate for habitat losses are outlined in Table 7.1 (Ecological Priority Matrix). 8.5 Particular attention has been given to the presence of dormouse at the site, and mitigation and compensation measures implemented through design. A Dormouse Method Statement (Ref: EVG DMS), and a Dormouse Management & Monitoring Scheme (Ref: EVG DMMS) have consequently been prepared to inform both the planning application and European Protected Species licence application stages. Doc Ref : EVG EA [22]

26 APPENDIX I Figure 1. Location Map Doc Ref : EVG EA [23]

27 Figure 2. Non-statutory nature conservation sites (SINC) within 1km. Doc Ref : EVG EA [24]

28 Figure 3. Phase I Habitat Map Doc Ref : EVG EA [25]

29 Figure 4. Proposed layout Doc Ref : EVG EA [26]

30 Photographs 1 8 of the project site Photo 1. View north across the southern field. Photo 2. View west along eastern part of southern boundary. Photo 3. View north east towards south eastern boundary region hedgerow. Photo 4. View east along hedgerow separating the two fields. Photo 5. View north east across the northern field. Photo 6. View north towards the northern boundary. Doc Ref : EVG EA [27]

31 Photo 7. View north at existing access point into the site. Photo 8. View south along track leading into the site. Doc Ref : EVG EA [28]

32 APPENDIX II Bat Surveys - Methodology The approach to surveying the site followed that advised in the Bat Conservation Trust Survey Guidelines (BCT) 9. This is in terms of bat activity surveys (Chapter 7. of the guidelines); tree dusk/dawn surveys (Chapter 8. of the guidelines); and interpretation of the results (Chapter 11. of the guidelines). The evaluation has been informed by available information on the distribution and commonness or otherwise of species of bats in the UK published by the Joint Nature Conservancy Council and the Tracking Mammals Partnership in , and current knowledge of the local status of bats 11. It is based upon a geographical frame of reference, and the distribution and rarity of the species concerned 12. Survey Objectives The key objectives of the site activity survey were to identify: The assemblage of bat species using the study site The relative frequency with which the study site is used by the different species The temporal and spatial distribution of activity for the different species, and bat in general The nature of the activity for the different bat species All trees within the study site and bordering onto it and which may potentially be affected by the development were inspected for features of bat roost potential as part of the extended Phase I Habitat survey. This includes features such as natural holes/hollows; woodpecker holes; significant splits/cracks and lifted bark. This work was aided by close focussing binoculars. No such trees were recorded. 9 Hundt L. (2012). Bat Surveys: Good Practice Guidelines, 2 nd Ed. Bat Conservation Trust. 10 Battersby, J. (Ed) & Tracking Mammals Partnership UK Mammals: Species Status and Population Trends. First Report by the Tracking Mammals Partnership. JNCC/Tracking Mammals Partnership, Peterborough. 11 Wray A., Wells D., Long E. & Mitchell-Jones T. (2010). Valuing bats in ecological impact assessment. In Practice Vol. 70, pg Wray A., Wells D., Long E. & Mitchell-Jones T. (2010). Valuing bats in ecological impact assessment. In Practice Vol. 70, pg Doc Ref : EVG EA [29]

33 Survey Design Activity Surveys The survey design was informed by: surveyor experience and familiarity with the study site, and consideration of OS mapping and aerial photography to identify habitat connectivity in the general location. A transect survey route was identified to include habitats of potential as bat foraging areas and flight lines such as along corridors/edges of structured habitats, in addition to open areas. A location for automated survey sampling was selected centrally within the site to gather data of activity (foraging and/or commuting) of species. Timing The activity survey work was carried our between June and October inclusive, with both survey methods repeated on a monthly basis, and in accordance with the timing specified in Table 1. Table 1. Timing of three bat survey methods. Survey technique Timing Transect surveys Dusk from approximately 15min before sunset, and extending for up to 3hrs Static surveys Minimum of 20min before sunset, through to minimum of 20min after sunrise, over a minimum of 3 consecutive nights Survey Area The survey area corresponds with the likely construction zone and areas which could potentially be influence by increased lighting from the proposed development. Survey Effort Survey effort was related to study site in terms of: southern geographic location size of site habitat complexity type of proposed development and risk it presents to species potentially present In terms of survey visit frequency and timing, it was considered that Mediumsized sites and Medium habitat quality as defined in Table 7.2 of the BCT Doc Ref : EVG EA [30]

34 guidelines applied, and this served as a guide to the surveys which were carried out. Whilst not extending across the full possible season for bat activity, the surveys were spread across optimal survey months (July to September), and therefore considered robust in terms of temporal spread. Survey Methods A) Transects As indicated above, the transect route took into account habitats of potential for bat activity, and examples of those habitats potentially less likely to attract activity (i.e., open areas). The transects consisted of recording observations of bat and bat calls whilst walking sectors interspersed by stationary points. The sectors took a minimum of 2 minutes to walk/record, whilst the points consisted of 5min recordings. In order to reduce time associated bias, the starting points for monthly transects was evenly spaced along the transect route. Weather conditions were recorded at the start and end of the transect, as were any significant weather changes during the surveys. Survey days which were mild, calm, and dry were selected in so far as was possible. B) Automated Surveys Automated (static) surveys were carried out along the hedgerow separating the two fields. Weather forecasts were monitored, and periods of settled mild weather were selected in so far as was possible. Recording: Observations Observational recordings were made during the Transect surveys whilst ambient light level allowed i.e., mainly within the first hour after sunset, and during the hour before sunrise. Recordings were made of: Doc Ref : EVG EA [31]

35 the numbers of bats and bat passes species in so far as was possible at the time of recording (calls being simultaneously recorded digitally for later analysis) activity (foraging/commuting/swarming etc.) directions/paths of flight Bat Calls Bat calls were recorded using the following equipment: An EM3+ for the Transect surveys A Song Meter SM2+ unit operating in mono recording mode, with external micro phones positioned at 2m above ground level and attached to the units via cables, for the Automated surveys All equipment was checked immediately pre-use / deployment. Data Processing: Bat Pass In this study, a bat pass is defined as two or more bat calls in continuous sequence up to a maximum of 10sec. Call Analysis Data management and analysis was assisted by the use of BatNAV software, Wildlife Acoustics proprietary software Kaleidoscope (for converting WAC format recordings made by EM3+ and SM2+ equipment, to ZCA files); and AnalookW. Personnel The surveys were conducted by St.John Hughes (Licensed surveyor), and Ria Walters (experienced assistant surveyor). Survey Limitations Detection rates of varies between species, and accordingly, caution needs to be exercised when interpreting acoustic recordings. Furthermore, bat activity surveys amount to a sample of actual events, and in this respect cannot be (nor are they intended to be) definitive, but rather a representation of events which needs to be interpreted in light of other factors including: location, landscape/habitat context, resource availability Doc Ref : EVG EA [32]

36 (opportunities for roosting, foraging etc.), weather conditions, species distributions and habitat associations etc.. Considering this context, and the conditions during which the survey work was carried out, there were no significant limitations associated with the survey, which provides a robust representation of the baseline activity. Results Table 2. Monthly frequency of bats recorded along the transect. Species Total bat pass/transect* June (24 th ) July (22 nd ) Aug (23 rd Sep (22 nd ) Oct (11 th ) Common pipistrelle Serotine Noctule Myotis All species * transect = dusk survey from approximately 15min before sunset, and extending for up to 3hrs. Observed mainly foraging along the southern region of the site. Observed commuting across the western region of the site, high above it. Table 3. Average nightly frequency of bats recorded per month static survey. Species Average bat pass/night/survey at A1* June (24-30) July (23-25) Aug (23-26) Sep (22-26) Oct (11-15) Common pipistrelle Noctule Myotis All species * survey = minimum of 20min before sunset, through to minimum of 20min after sunrise, over a minimum of 3 consecutive nights per month. Doc Ref : EVG EA [33]