Urban Ecology and Development

1. Urban Ecology and Development

2. ‘how protected species can obstruct redevelopment of derelict urban sites’ Delays due to seasonal requirements of ecological surveys and licensing. Costs associated with mitigation. a rarer occurrence: Prevention of development due to ecological constraints.

3. Aim of this talk is: To illustrate ways in which ecology interacts with urban development Propose that ecology/protected species must be considered a fundamental element of the whole process from the earliest opportunity in order to alleviate ‘obstructions’

4. The Big Five or common obstructions! Badger terrestrial habitat Otter watercourses/bodies Water vole watercourses, marshy areas Bats buildings, trees Great crested newt ponds + terrestrial habitat in pond locality Places of shelter (e.g. badger setts) and areas used for foraging/commuting important. Don’t have to be ‘on site’ as development may cause disturbance

5. When things go wrong…….or get expensive Nant Glas Trefnant. Two newts. £140,000 Elm Court School. Three bats. £20,000 and four months late London Gateway. Mass great crested newt translocation. £50 million Bat-related crimes Penalties on conviction - the maximum fine is £5,000 per incident or per bat (bear in mind some roosts contain several hundred bats), up to six months in prison, and forfeiture of items used to commit the offence, e.g. vehicles, plant, machinery. £?

6. The ecologist’s role in the urban planning system or obstruction reduction! Development project team The major obstacle to a professional working relationship between the ecologist and the design and engineering professions is the traditional attitude adopted by the ecologist, a kind of motherhood belief, that all development is unacceptable, unnecessary, or "immoral." (Dorney 1973).

7. Example: demolition problem….. The council did not deem an ecological survey of the building necessary for the application; A clear breach of the law has occurred. The matter was referred to the police by SNH; We are now in an unenviable position - we can only report and recommend on baseline conditions i.e. a part demolished building now unsuitable for the ecologically significant bat roost it supported over the summer; Upshot - can we ‘make a useful contribution’ with regards to the bats themselves? Probably not now - far too late. Retrospective mitigation measures can be employed but may never be successful. Will (and should) the council be prosecuted and fined?

8. Adherence to legal requirements, best practice and licence applications Key legislation Best/acceptable practice (where possible) That appropriate licences for the purposes of the development are applied for where necessary. It may be necessary for the ecologist to hold a valid licence for the survey work required on site - e.g. GCN, bats, barn owl.

9. Set scope and levels of surveying requirements • Consultation • SNH • Council • Planning condition? • Initial walkover survey to further define • Second guess level of survey required by statutory authorities – under NCA (Scot) public bodies required to pay attention to Scottish Biodiversity Strategy. In theory this would mean considering over 1,800 terrestrial and freshwater species……

10. Provision of surveying and reporting Different groups/taxa subject to seasonal constraints Surveys may take considerable length of time e.g. over a season Specialist equipment may be required Security may be required (derelict urban sites…!) What is required from report? Impact Assessment etc?

11. Survey seasonal constraints examples

12. Advise on and secure agreement for appropriate mitigation as required Mitigation required if ecological feature to be unduly affected Mitigation can be time-consuming (seasonal constraints possible) Requires consultation and agreement May require licensing – remember not possible for some species (e.g. water vole)

13. Oversee works within ECW role Key element in delivering mitigation Responsible for discharging relevant planning conditions Reactive role Post-development monitoring

14. Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999 The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c) Regulations 1994 (The Habitat Regulations); The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c) Amendments (Scotland) Regulations 2007; The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention); EC Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the Conservation of Wild Birds (The Birds Directive); EC Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora (The Habitats Directive); The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention); Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2000 (NCSA); Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (WCA); The Protection of Badgers Act 1992; Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996; The National Parks (Scotland) Act 2000; National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949; Scottish Executive interim Guidance of European Protected Species, Development Sites and the Planning System, 2001; National Planning Policy Guidance 14: Natural Heritage (NPPG 14). Why consider ecology at all?

15. Schedule 1 Crude oil refineries Construction of motorways Waste water treatment plants Quarries and open cast mining Schedule 2 Urban development projects > 0.5 ha Construction of roads Brewing & malting > 1000 square metres Ferrous metal foundries > 1000 square metres Projects subject to EIA

16. Appropriate Assessment • Ensure for the qualifying species that there is no significant disturbance of the species • Ensure that for the qualifying species that the population is maintained as a viable component of the site • Ensure for the qualifying species that the structure, function and supporting processes of habitats supporting the species are maintained in the long term • Ensure for the qualifying species that the distribution and extent of habitats supporting the species are maintained in the long term • Ensure for the qualifying species that the distribution of the species within the site is maintained in the long term

17. Three tests for EPS • The development must be necessary for the purposes of ‘preserving public health or public safety or other imperative reasons of overriding public interest including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment’. The appropriate authority shall not grant a licence under this regulation unless they are satisfied that: • that there is no satisfactory alternative, and • that the action authorised will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range.

18. R (on the application of Simon Woolley) v Cheshire East Borough Council June 2009 • Issue: the presence of a small bat roost in an existing building on a proposed development site • Planning permission was granted and the existing building and bat roosts were demolished • The key issue was that the local planning authority had provided no evidence that the three tests had been considered • The court determined that this amounted to a breach of European law and that this alone was enough to overturn the planning permission • The key implications of this are careful consideration of EPS and the three tests prior to submitting a planning application.

19. Nationally Protected Species • Schedule 1 – birds protected by special penalties e.g. barn owl • Schedule 5 – protected animals e.g. water vole • Schedule 8 – protected plants To add to that list of species/groups that need to be considered are: • All birds and their nests are protected during breeding • Schedule 9 of the WCA lists those plant species for which it is an offence to ‘plant or otherwise cause to grow in the wild’ e.g. Japanese knotweed NO LICENSING PROCEDURE FOR NATIONALLY PROTECTED SPECIES

20. Schedule 5 Example • Water vole present on a site • The proposed development would have lead to the complete destruction of water vole habitat • Under WCA it is an offence to disturb or damage any water vole resting place or habitat • No licensing procedure • Mitigation options: • Avoidance of water vole habitat • Habitat creation and translocation • Development deemed not viable

21. Other Considerations • NPPG 14 : Natural Heritage • UK Biodiversity Action Plan • 1150 UK BAP Priority Species • 65 UK BAP Priority Habitats • Scottish Biodiversity Strategy • Red data book plants • Annex I Habitat types • Good assemblages of amphibians/reptiles

22. Brownfield Site

23. In summary • Ecology can and often does interact with urban development proposals • Consider ecology at the outset of the project to avoid problems down the line • Presence of protected species will rarely stop development if considered appropriately • Be aware of timing restrictions associated with ecological surveying and mitigation - and build them into the project programme • Sometimes resolving ecological ‘obstructions’ will cost a considerable amount - is the development, as planned, worth it?