aluco ECOLOGY

Aluco Ecology Ltd Registered in England No. 5598341

[email protected] www.alucoecology.co.uk

Hampshire 01962 886633 / Berkshire 01488 648321 / South-West 01326 291064

Registered Office: Pencairn, Penmenner Road, The Lizard, Cornwall TR12 7NR

Aluco Ecology Ltd.

43 CHILTERN DRIVE

CHARVIL

PRELIMINARY BAT SURVEY

JANUARY 2020

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.alucoecology.co.uk/

43 Chiltern Drive, Bat Survey January 2020

2

43 CHILTERN DRIVE

PRELIMINARY BAT SURVEY

1.0 BACKGROUND

Aluco Ecology Ltd was commissioned to carry out a Bat Emergence Survey of the property

The 43 Chiltern Drive, Charvil, Berkshire RG10 9QF at SU778758 by the property Owner.

A ‘Preliminary Bat Survey’ is an investigation of a site for Bat use, presence or potential for

Bat roosts and any impacts to use from a proposed development was completed in January

2019.

Legislation and Policy

All native species of bat and their roosts are afforded full legal protection in the UK. The

outcomes of this Ecological Appraisal will be tested against relevant legislation and policy;

namely the Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2017 (as amended) (the Habitat

Regulations) in relation to the protection of European sites (Special Protection Areas SPA,

and Special Areas of Conservation SAC) and European protected species (eg bats, dormouse,

great crested newts) and the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and Countryside

& Rights of Way Act (CRoW) 2000 for protected species and the designation and protection

of SSSIs.

Under the legislation is illegal to:

• intentionally or deliberately kill, injure or capture (take) bats

• deliberately disturb bats (whether in a roost or not)

• damage, destroy or obstruct access to bat roosts

• possess or transport a bat or any parts of bats, unless acquired legally

• sell, barter or exchange bats, or parts of bats

A ‘bat roost’ can be interpreted as any structure or place which any wild animal uses for

shelter or protection. As bats tend to reuse the same roosts, the roost is protected whether or

not the bats are present at the time of survey.

2. OUTLINE OF THE SCHEME AND SITE LOCATION

In summary it is proposed to extend the house on the north and east aspect along with some

internal updates. The main house roof will not be altered but the lower garage roof and car

port will be affected in relation to a planning application (see Figures 1-5, Photos 1-12).


3

Figure 1a Location Plan

© Crown copyright 2018 Ordnance Survey. All rights reserved. Licence number OS 1000047209


4

Figure 1 Location Plan and Existing site plan


5

Figure 2 Existing site elevations


6

Figure 3 Proposed Site Plan


7

Figure 4 Proposed Site Elevations


8

3. SURVEY

Methodology

The aim of this Bat Survey is to evaluate the potential suitability of the proposed development

site in relation to bat use and bat roosts using the Bat survey guidelines (Bat Conservation

Trust, 2016), which provides guidance on assessing and evaluating development sites and

features for bat roost potential. The potential for structures to support roosting or breeding bats

is evaluated under the protocol for the visual internal and external inspection (Negligible,

Low, Moderate or High).

A survey to assess the site for bats and bat roosts was carried out on the 23 January 2020. The

survey was carried out using the methodology described by the Bat Conservation Trust survey

guidelines (BCT, 2016). This involved a survey internally and externally for any roosting bats

or signs which could indicate use of the building by bats and for potential roost sites and roost

access points. Anthony Blunden MCIEEM CEnv (Natural England Licence number 2015-

10884-CLS-CLS), principal ecologist of Aluco Ecology with over fifteen years survey

experience, conducted the survey.

Results

The site is generally sloping to the west and is adjacent to a range of similar residential

houses. See Photos 1 to 15 of the site.

The brick-built house with plain-tiled concrete interlocking roof, faces onto a quiet estate

road. The design and age of the building (built c1970), presents few suitable roosting access

opportunities within the roof tile structure or above the wall plate/soffit. Modern building

techniques present very few gaps and where venting is provided, these are insect meshed to

prevent even small insect access (see Photos 1-10).

Access was possible throughout the roof void. There was a large easy access hatch to access

areas of the roof. The main space of the roof around the hatch was used as storage in a very

typical way. All the surfaces within the voids were carefully inspected for the presence of bats

and droppings (Photos 10-13). The roof voids where generally lightly cobwebbed and small

amounts of dusty and only used periodically for storage. No bat dropping evidence was

recorded in the roof voids although a few older droppings of mice were noted.

The decorative hanging tile panels on all aspects do provide bat roosting opportunity with

known roosts in the area. Droppings and a probable roost location and entrance was recorded

in the hanging tiles on the South elevation (Photo 14-15).


9

Photo 1 Existing building (South aspect). All external surfaces were carefully inspected for

any evidence of bat use, particularly droppings or marks around potential roost sites. Key

locations searched included window sills, windows and hanging tiles.

Photo 2 Building (North aspect) No external evidence recorded. Lower tile section with

interlocking very limited access opportunity for bats. Upper tile sections with potential


10

Photo 3 43 Chiltern Drive , west aspect. Low potential tile section. No external evidence

recorded.

Photo 4 43 Chiltern Drive ,Garage. No external evidence recorded


11

Photo 5/6 43 Chiltern Drive Garage / carport (East aspect). No external evidence recorded.


12

Photo 7/8 43 Chiltern Drive Garage / carport (East aspect). No external evidence recorded.

Limited structure for roosting. Open internal garage roof structure.


13

Photo 9 43 Chiltern Drive soffit detail, modern building techniques with very limited access

opportunity for bats

Photo 10 Loft void- No evidence recorded


14

Photo 11/12 Loft void. All surfaces where inspected in detail for evidence of bat droppings

and use - No evidence recorded


15

Photo 13 Loft void. All flat surfaces where inspected in detail for evidence of bat droppings

and use – No evidence recorded


16

Photo 14/15 Bat evidence of Pipistrelle bat droppings and expected roost entrance on South

elevation. This type of feature and gap and upper tile gaps from slipped tiles are very

regularly used on all such similar tile hanging used and will expect many local buildings

have similar use


17

Figure 5 Existing Site Elevation Survey Plan

Key

PipistrelleRoost locations

Roost Entrance Pipistrelle

Pipistrelle Dropping locations

Potential Roost locations


18

4. SUMMARY INTERPRETATION FOR BATS & CONSTRAINTS TO SURVEY

The building was evaluated using the Potential Suitability of Proposed Development Sites for

Bats (including Buildings & Trees) methodology as per the Bat Survey guidelines (Bat

Conservation Trust, 2016). 43 Chiltern Drive was evaluated as an almost certain roost site for

bats.

Evidence was recorded during the survey of 43 Chiltern Drive in relation to the upper hanging

tile section on the South elevation. No evidence was recorded in relation to the garage /

carport section of the building. No evidence of bat roosts / or bats was recorded within the

loft-spaces, or on other external surfaces of parts of the buildings. No trees are impacted by

the proposals.

Based on the current survey and potential roost impacts from the proposals, information from

further survey is considered very unlikely to provide further useful information in relation to

the element of the scheme in relation to conversion of the garage / carport and construction of

the new extension. The new Extension is well below the house roof height and roost location

in the upper hanging tile section. There are no hanging tiles on the east aspect where the

extension is to be constructed. It is also sufficiently far away from the works area, and for a

temporary period, the extension construction works would not cause any significant

disturbance to the roost in the hanging tiles on the South elevation.

Note: Should the upper hanging tiles sections need to be removed or disturbed at any future

stage, update survey and emergence survey would then be required. Given the evidence, the

Local Authority usually expect a standard current good practice guidance emergence survey.

This is usually 3 emergence surveys which should be reasonably spaced apart in the period

April-Oct. Two of the surveys should be in the peak survey period is May-Aug inclusive. Any

future licence application, A Licence would be required to remove the hanging tiles, and will

also require this further survey information.

The survey was carried out during a window of time in January 2020 and therefore the survey

has provided a window of time of the sites use. Since bats regularly move between different

roost sites, particularly to satisfy their varying requirements at different times of the year and

weather conditions.

External building dropping evidence can be washed and blown away during the late autumn

winter period, but during warm weather in summer can remain for long periods.

Due to these survey limitations an assessment using professional judgement has been used to

interpret the findings with a precautionary approach to the assessment of the bat population

utilising the building and to carrying out the proposed work. Timing a survey to co-inside

with the bats presence in the building is not always possible or practical.

Measures set out that if followed would avoid / minimise impacts provided that a

precautionary method is followed subject to planning permission:


19

Any works should proceed under with care as it is rarely the case that the presence of bats can

be ruled out entirely. If any recent evidence of bats is found prior to or during works, then all

work must stop immediately. It is a legal requirement that Natural England is contacted for

further advice. Should works not occur for more than one year, it is recommended that

update survey is undertaken to ensure no change in status have occurred.

A sensitive lighting strategy during construction and during future building use is

recommended. All lighting is recommended to avoid light egress onto boundary habitats.

Please refer to Institution of Lighting Professionals, Guidance Note 08/18 Bats and artificial

lighting in the UK for further information.

Consideration was also given to the potential for any notable habitats on site, and the site to

support other legally protected species. No other protected species are considered likely

present within the zone of influence which would be impacted by the development proposals.

The site is primarily highly maintained garden with flowerbeds, shrubberies. The garden does

not support any notable vegetation or habitats.

5. MITIGATION AND ENHANCEMENT

Given the local environment, we would recommend building in some bat roosting opportunity

as a scheme enhancement. A Woodstone roosting unit (see Figure 6) high on the west wall

on the property would be appropriate for biodiversity gain for the application.

Figure 6 recommended scheme enhancement Woodstone type roost unit

Cut to show function of the roost unit

Woodstone Box -Designed specifically for the pipistrelle bat . Bats are contained within the bat box

itself . Maintenance free with entrance at the base


20

REFERENCES

Bat Conservation Trust 2016 Bat Surveys Good Practice Guidelines 3rd Edition

Report Author

Anthony Blunden MSc CEnv MCIEEM

Aluco Ecology Ltd

aluco ECOLOGY

Documents

Transcript of aluco ECOLOGY