steepfield, abersychan surveys for bats and nesting …€¦ · steepfield, abersychan surveys for...

STEEPFIELD, ABERSYCHAN

SURVEYS FOR BATS AND NESTING BIRDS

October 2015

David Clements Ecology Ltd Carlton House, 5 Herbert Terrace, Penarth, Glamorgan, CF64 2AH

Tel: 029 20 350120 Fax: 029 20 711997 [email protected]

Author: Aislinn Harris BSc (Hons) ACIEEM

09.10.15

Checked by: Neil Price BSc (Hons) MSc PhD MCIEEM

09/10/15

Version No./Stage

V 1.0

DCE 345:Steepfield, Abersychan: Survey for Bats: v1.0: Oct 2015

SUMMARY This report has been prepared by David Clements Ecology Ltd (DCE) for P & P Builders Ltd and refers to an area of land adjacent to Steepfield House, Abersychan (SO 26655 03674) in Torfaen. The site location and context is shown at Plan 1. The site measures approximately 0.29ha in extent and lies within the town of Abersychan. Tree stumps, brash and bare ground make up the majority of the site footprint with some ruderal vegetation and scrub along the site boundaries. There is also a small area of grassland in the north east corner but this is not covered by the proposed development site boundary. The site slopes downwards from west to east. A large double storey building is present in the south east corner of the site, adjacent to Manor Way. The proposed development site is part of a larger parcel of undeveloped land. A large field of semi-improved acid grassland is present to the north of the site. A small rectangular section of land is present to the north west of the proposed development site, attached to the west of the larger undeveloped field. This area is in separate ownership and currently has planning permission for a housing development. Ecological surveys of the wider undeveloped land have been completed by DCE in previous years. In September 2007 a bat survey, including an internal and external survey of the building and a single dusk emergence survey, was completed (DCE 2007). No bats were found to be roosting within the buildings. An update to a previous Extended phase 1 survey, also undertaken by DCE was completed in February 2015 which highlighted the potential of the buildings within the site footprint to support bats. The building had not significantly changed since the original bat surveys in 2007. The present survey confirmed a single common pipistrelle bat to be roosting within building 3 as shown on plan 3a. A derogation licence from Natural Resources Wales (NRW) will be required to demolish building 3 and will require suitable mitigation measures to be put in place during and after the development works. Obtaining a NRW licence prior to works commencing on site is a statutory requirement. Hibernatory use of all four buildings by bats is thought to be extremely unlikely. The building walls are constructed with breeze block, brick, wooden and metal sheeting which does not tend to offer the cool and stable conditions required by bats for hibernation purposes. Also the wider landscape around Torfaen offers more attractive hibernation sites such as caves, old mine shafts and quarries.


1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This report has been prepared by David Clements Ecology Ltd (DCE) for P & P

Builders Ltd and refers to an area of land adjacent to Steepfield House, Abersychan (SO 26655 03674) in Torfaen. The site location and context is shown at Plan 1.

1.2 The site measures approximately 0.29ha in extent and lies within the town of

Abersychan. Tree stumps, brash and bare ground make up the majority of the site footprint with some ruderal vegetation and scrub along the site boundaries. There is also a small area of grassland in the north east corner but this is not covered by the proposed development site boundary. The site slopes downwards from west to east. A large double storey building is present in the south east corner of the site, adjacent to Manor Way.

1.3 The proposed development site is part of a larger parcel of undeveloped land. A large

field of semi-improved acid grassland is present to the north of the site. A small rectangular section of land is present to the north west of the proposed development site, attached to the west of the larger undeveloped field. This area is in separate ownership and currently has planning permission for a housing development.

1.4 In the immediate surroundings of the site, housing is present in to the east, south and

west. As stated above a field of semi improved grassland sits immediately adjacent to the north of the site but further afield lies a small amount of woodland and less dense housing..

1.5 Ecological surveys of the wider undeveloped land have been completed by DCE in

previous years. In September 2007 a bat survey, including an internal and external survey of the building and a single dusk emergence survey, was completed (DCE 2007). No bats were found to be roosting within the buildings.

1.6 An update to a previous Extended phase 1 survey, also undertaken by DCE was completed

in February 2015 which highlighted the potential of the buildings within the site footprint to support bats. The building had not significantly changed since the original bat surveys in 2007.

1.7 The buildings that sit within the site are currently used a garage and workshop. The site is

proposed for a small housing development and as such the buildings will be demolished. 1.6 Statutory Position and Background Information 1.6.1 Bats are flying insectivorous mammals. There are about 17 species resident in Britain

which vary from comparatively common and widespread species (eg the pipistrelles1 , brown long-eared bat) to internationally rare and endangered species (eg the horseshoe bats). Bats do not make nests but have ‘roosts’, which may be solitary or gregarious.

1 Pipistrelle bat (Pipistrellus pipistrellus) is now known to comprise an aggregate of two distinct species distinguished primarily by their echolocation calls, which are grouped at 45kH and 55kH respectively. The second species is now identified as the ‘soprano pipistrelle’ (P. pygmaeus). Both species are comparatively common and widespread in the UK.


Individual bats require a range of different roosting sites for differing purposes: in the summer, for example, daytime roosts in buildings and trees may be used, whilst for winter hibernation roosts in locations such as humid caves, basements or deep within the fabric of stonebuilt structures are preferred. Other roosts may be used at various times for the rearing of young, mating and as temporary feeding perches etc.

1.6.2 All bats and their roosts require strict protection under the EU Directive on the

Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Flora and Fauna (92/43/EEC; the ‘Habitats Directive’), which is implemented in the UK via the Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2010 (the ‘Habitats Regulations’). Some additional protection against disturbance is also conferred under the amended Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981. Bats are listed under the Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats and also under the Agreement on the Conservation of European Bats 1992 (the ‘Eurobats Agreement’), signed within the framework of the Bonn Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals 1979.

1.6.3 All bats are listed in Annex IV of the EC Habitats Directive, and the British species are

listed on Schedule 2 of the Habitats Regulations 1994, and are therefore designated ‘European Protected Species’ by the latter. Such species are subject to enhanced protection and more stringent licensing provisions than those which are protected under the Wildlife & Countryside Act alone.

1.6.4 Both the animals themselves and any structures or places used for breeding or shelter

are fully protected against both intentional or unintended but ‘reckless’ disturbance or harm, the latter irrespective of whether or not bats are present in them at the time. Where works are allowed to affect such places there is a legal requirement to obtain a licence (or ‘derogation’) in advance and to ensure that the works do not result in any avoidable harm to bats. The bats should also enjoy continued ‘favourable conservation status’ once the works are completed, through the incorporation of suitable mitigation and enhancement measures.

1.6.5 The issuing of licences which allow the disturbance of European Protected Species by

development, or for any other reason, is now the direct responsibility of Natural Resources Wales (NRW) as of 1 April 2013. The licensing restrictions are considerably more onerous than those of the Wildlife & Countryside Act and could potentially have significant impact on the viability of a given development proposal, irrespective of whether or not a valid planning consent has been obtained. Further details on the procedures are set out in TAN 5 (WAG 2009).

1.6.6 All species of bat in Britain are believed to be declining in range and numbers, with

about half of the resident species classed as ‘rare’, three classed as ‘endangered’ and one ‘extinct’ (but recently rediscovered in Britain) (Morris 1993; Richardson 2000). Several bats are listed as ‘Priority Species’ in the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP: BRIG 2007) and its Welsh equivalent (WBP 2007).

1.6.7 Some of the rarest bat species in Europe, including the horseshoe bats, barbastelle,

Bechstein’s bat and greater mouse-eared bat, are additionally listed on Annex II of the Habitats Directive. This requires the EU nation states to designate key areas of habitat used by these species as Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), and to implement policies to conserve and enhance their populations through appropriate management


etc. These species are accorded enhanced conservation significance in the UK, although they are not subject to any additional protection measures.

Derogations 1.6.8 Amongst other things, the Habitats Regulations make it an offence to:

− capture or kill; − disturb; − take or destroy eggs or young, or; − damage or destroy a breeding site or resting place of;

a European Protected Species, except under certain narrowly defined circumstances. New developments which would contravene the protection afforded to such species require derogation, in the form of a licence, from the Habitats Directive which must be issued by NRW.

1.6.9 Before such a licence can be issued, NRW must be satisfied that:

− the derogation would not be detrimental to the ‘favourable conservation status’ of populations of the species concerned within its natural range.

− the derogation is in the interests of public health and public safety, or for other imperative reasons of over-riding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature, or will have beneficial consequences of primary importance to the environment.

− there is no satisfactory alternative to the derogation which would allow the development to proceed but which would avoid, or reduce, the need for adverse impact to the species.

1.6.10 Failure to obtain a derogation would render any actions which cause harm or

disturbance to bats illegal, including any activities which might be undertaken under a valid planning consent. The possession of planning consent in no way alleviates or over-rides the requirements of the Habitats Regulations, and neither does it automatically ensure that a derogation may be obtained.

1.6.11 Current planning guidance in Wales requires that local planning authorities are in

possession of all of the survey information which is necessary in order to determine the probability of impact to European Protected Species, and the likely viability and success of any required mitigation measures, before determining any given planning application. As of 1 October 2008, planning authorities cannot register a new planning application until all of the necessary survey information has been made available. NRW will not consider any application for licences in relation to a proposed development until after it has received notice of the planning consent.

Nesting Birds 1.6.12 Almost all species of birds native to the British Isles are afforded at least some level of

statutory protection under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981, the only exceptions being a handful of pest and game species which may be killed under certain specified


and licensed conditions. In the great majority of cases, birds are protected against injury or killing, and this protection extends to their nests, eggs and young. Certain rare species, which include barn owl, are subject to enhanced protection against disturbance whilst nesting, by virtue of their listing on Schedule 1 of the Act.

1.613 The protection of common nesting birds (ie those not listed on Schedule 1) typically

applies only to the animals themselves and to the site of their nests whilst they are in use. The nesting site per se is not protected once nesting has ceased and the nest is no longer occupied by the adults, eggs or young. More stringent regulations may apply to the nesting sites of Schedule 1 species, however.


2.0 APPROACH & METHODS 2.1 A site inspection for bats was carried out in accordance with the guidance given by BCT

(2012). The building was inspected in dry weather conditions during daylight hours on 15th July 2015 by appropriately licenced and experienced surveyors. The weather was warm and sunny during the survey. Aislinn Harris (NRW:61009:OTH:CSAB:2014) and Claire Pooley (NRW:62408:OTH:CSAB:2015) undertook the internal inspection. The accessible interior voids were all entered and searched using high-powered lanterns (Clulite FAN1) and torches (Clulite ML7). Other equipment was available as required including a digital endoscope (A68KF) for the examination of voids in the fill of stone walls etc, various inspection mirrors and ladders to inspect high areas. Searches were made especially for evidence such as bat droppings and feeding remains, as well as for sightings of actual bats (in cracks and crevices etc) and secondary signs such as fur-oil and urine stains, scratch-marks etc.

2.2 The layout and construction of the building was recorded and the internal voids were

briefly described and characterised, with an estimate being made of their potential attractiveness and suitability for bats with reference to a range of factors including human disturbance, light levels, air movement, exposure, thermal stability and cobwebbing of access points etc.

2.3 The building was also subject to two dusk emergence surveys, carried out on the 15th July

aand 10th September 2015 respectively (see Plans 3a & 3b). For the first dusk emergence survey, three observers were stationed around the building from approximately 30 minutes before dusk until it was too dark to see any potentially emerging bats. For the second survey two observers were stationed around the building from approximately 30 minutes before dusk until it was too dark to see any potentially emerging bats. Each observer was equipped with an Anabat SD1 or SD2 bat detector, with bat calls recording to CF card for subsequent analysis using the AnaLookW call analysis software (Corben 2006).

2.4 Existing Records 2.4.1 In addition to the original survey, an enquiry was sent to the South-East Wales Biological

Records Centre (SEWBReC) in order to obtain access to any existing records of bats and roof-nesting birds from the site or its immediate vicinity. SEWBReC is the main depository for ecological data, including bat records, in the south-east Wales region.


3.0 SURVEY RESULTS 3.1 Data Search 3.1.1 There are no existing bat records from the site itself. The closest roost record is for a

common pipistrelle roost approximately 160m away from site. There are a few records of commuting and foraging lesser horseshoe, brown long-eared, Brandt’s, myotid and common pipistrelle bats within 1km of the site (SEWBReC 2015).

3.1.2 There are no records of birds from the site itself and no records of birds were returned

with the data search. The lack of records is thought to show a lack of recording in the area rather than a lack of such species.

Designated Sites of Biodiversity Interest Statutory Sites 3.1.3 The site does not contain or lie adjacent to any statutory sites of nature conservation

interest, such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), National Nature Reserves (NNRs) or Local Nature Reserves (LNRs).

Non-Statutory Sites 3.1.4 The site is within Bewdley Reptile Sites SINC boundary, a no non-statutory sites of

nature conservation interest. Bewdley Reptile Site SINC has been designated for its large populations of reptiles and consists of a good habitat mosaic of grassland and heathland.

3.1.5 There are numerous other SINC sites within the 1km buffer zone which include

Steepfield SINC, Ancient Semi Natural Woodland SINC and Lasgarn Wood SINC. The Cycle Path from Blaenavon to the Viaduct Local Nature Reserve (LNR) is approximately 700m to the north of site.

3.1.6 SINCs are one of a class of non-statutory nature conservation designations which are

recognised throughout the UK under a wide range of titles, and which are collectively referred to as ‘Wildlife Sites’. Wildlife Sites are so-called ‘third tier’ sites, generally ranked below sites which are of international or national biodiversity significance, but which are considered to have substantive nature conservation value in the sub-national (ie regional or district) context. They are usually designated at the county or county borough level by the relevant local planning authority, and are recognised as a planning constraint in the relevant statutory development plan. The framework for the identification and designation of ‘Wildlife Sites’ is set out in various Government documents, and is referred to in Planning Policy Wales (2002) and Technical Advice Note (Wales) 5: Nature Conservation & Planning (2009).


3.2 Description of the Site 3.2.1 The layout of the building is shown at Plan 2, and representative photographs are given

at the end of this report. The building is described and its potential for roosting bats is assessed below.

Building 1 and 2 3.2.2 A group of buildings are present to the south east of the site surrounded by hardstanding

and fencing. The buildings are of various designs and are currently used by two separate tenants. Building 1 is a brick built double storey hipped asbestos sheet roof building. A single storey corrugated metal mono pitch roof building is attached to the south west elevation of building 1. This building is labelled as building 2 and the doors are open to the courtyard. Both building 1 and 2 are built into a bank along their west elevation which forms part of the wider site. Internal access into building 1 could not be gained. Building 2 had no attic voids or separate rooms within it.

Building 3 3.2.3 The main building on site, building 3, is a brick built rectangular shaped structure with a

pitched slate roof. The building sits on a slight north east to south west axis with a single storey extension built on the south elevation. The single storey section of the building has double pitched slate roof and large double doors on the east elevation. The first floor section of the building is covered in a pebble dash render. Gaps between the soffit boards and walls, a missing ridge tile and missing mortar fillets were noted around the exterior of the building. However the majority of the roof seemed to be in good condition.

3.2.4 Internally, the single storey section of the building is open to the rafters and unlined. It

is currently used as a working garage. It would appear that the first floor of the building had previously been used as offices and a bar but the majority of the ceiling has been removed and the first floor is now used as storage. Approximately a third of the ceiling is still intact. Due to concerns about the safety of the ceiling, surveyors could not closely inspect the floor of the remaining void for evidence of the presence of bats. All the windows on the first floor are boarded up but one small lourved window is present at the north gable apex. The interior of the combined first floor and attic void is uncluttered and dark.

Building 4 3.2.5 Building 4 is a small single storey building with a double pitched slate roof. The walls

are covered in a cement render with one large garage door on the south elevation. Potential access points were noted around the building such as a few slipped tiles along the verge and missing mortar fillets. An attic void is likely to be present but no hatch was visible meaning access to the void could not be gained. The building is currently used for storage.


3.3 Site Inspection Results 3.3.1 During the present survey all four buildings were visually inspected for the presence of

bats. Internal access could be gained to building 1 and the attic void of building 4 could not be inspected due to health and safety issues. No evidence of bats was found in any of the buildings. However, numerous features suitable for use by bats were noted in building 3 and 4. Features such as gaps between soffit boards and walls, a missing ridge tile and missing mortar fillets were noted on buildings 3 and 4. Buildings 1 and 2 are assessed as having low potential, whilst buildings 3 and 4 are assessed as having medium to low potential for bats.

3.4 Flight Survey Results 3.4.1 Two flight surveys were undertaken at the optimum time of year for bat activity in

suitable weather conditions. Three experienced surveyors were present on the 15th July 2015 and two surveyors on the 10th September 2015; a minimum of one bat licenced ecologist was present at each survey. The surveyors had a good view of all aspects of the building. The surveyor position and flight survey results are shown at Plan 3a and 3b.

Dusk emergence survey 3.4.2 A dusk emergence survey was completed on the 15th July 2015. The weather conditions

were dry and warm. Cloud cover was minimal. Temperatures were approximately 20°C for the survey period. Sunset was at approximately 21:23.

3.4.3 A single common pipistrelle bat was seen to emerge from beneath the missing ridge tile

of building 3 as shown on plan 3a. No bats were observed emerging from any of the other buildings. The first bat call was recorded at 21:46 which was a common pipistrelle bat. Brown long-eared and a species of mytoid bat were also recorded during the survey. Foraging activity was noted over the adjacent fields.

Dusk emergence survey 3.4.4 A dusk emergence survey was completed on the 10th September 2015. The weather

conditions were dry and warm. Cloud cover was 80%. Temperatures were approximately 18°C for the survey period. Sunset was at approximately 19:37.

3.4.5 No bats were seen to emerge from any building. The earliest call recorded during the

survey is of a common pipistrelle bat at 19:52. Small numbers of pipistrelle bats were noted foraging over the buildings and adjacent fields during the survey. Brown long eared, noctule and a myotid species of bat were also recorded during the survey.

3.5 Constraints 3.5.1 Access into the courtyard at the rear of building 1 was not possible during the first

activity survey. As such, the view of buildings 1, 2 and 3 was obscured. As bat activity was noted around the building very early during this survey, it was thought possible that the emergence of other bats could potentially have been missed. Therfore, another


activity survey was undertaken to overcome this constraint. The overall assessment of the site for bat activity is therefore considered satisfactory.


4.0 ASSESSMENT & CONCLUSIONS 4.1 The present survey confirmed a single common pipistrelle bat to be roosting within

building 3 as shown on plan 3a. A derogation licence from Natural Resources Wales (NRW) will be required to demolish building 3 and will require suitable mitigation measures to be put in place during and after the development works. Obtaining a NRW licence prior to works commencing on site is a statutory requirement.

4.2 The activity surveys were conducted during the bat active period and it is thought likely

that building 3 is used by a small number of male and or non-breeding females as a summer roosting location. No bat droppings were found during the surveys and the low numbers of bats do not indicate the presence of a maternity roost.

4.3 No evidence of bats was found in buildings 1, 2 and 4. It is thought unlikely that these

buildings are used as a roosting location given the sub-optimal construction materials and the lack of activity associated with the buildings during the activity surveys.

4.4 Hibernatory use of all four buildings by bats is thought to be extremely unlikely. The

building walls are constructed with breeze block, brick, wooden and metal sheeting which does not tend to offer the cool and stable conditions required by bats for hibernation purposes. Also the wider landscape around Torfaen offers more attractive hibernation sites such as caves, old mine shafts and quarries.

Nesting Birds 4.5 The present survey found no evidence that the building is currently used by nesting birds.

It is, however, highly likely that common synanthropic species such as house sparrow may nest, at least on occasion, where suitable opportunities occur. The dense scrub and immature trees within the site provide excellent nesting opportunities for birds.


5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 All bats and their roosting places are protected by law. As bats have been found to be

roosting at building 3 of the proposed development site at Steepfield, a derogation licence from NRW, which will included a detailed method statement, will be required for the site prior to any development works commencing. The method statement agreed as part of the licence must be followed during any site works. Subject to the approval of NRW at licence stage, a brief description of the measures likely to be required within the method statement are given below:

5.2 Current best-practice mitigation would require that any significant structural works

affecting known or potential roosting places (ie any works affecting walls, roofs or exterior structures such as fascias, barge-boards etc) will be undertaken during the winter months, ie from approximately November to February inclusive, when bats are considered least likely to be present in the buildings.

5.3 Contractors should remove all exterior fascias, barge-boards, soffits and ridge tiles etc,

by hand, checking carefully for any evidence of bats. 5.4 Contractors will be informed of the protected status of bats, and the restrictions imposed

by any NRW licence, by means of a ‘toolbox talk’ ahead of the works. 5.5 Contractors will not touch or handle bats except where there is an imminent danger of

their being killed or harmed (for example, due to collapsing masonry or unstable structures etc) in which case they will be carefully picked up using gloved hands and removed to a cool, dark, safe and undisturbed location nearby to await the arrival of the bat ecologist.

5.6 The services of an appropriately qualified and licensed bat ecologist will be retained in

respect of the above, and will be available on an ‘on-call’ basis, throughout the demolition and construction period in order to deal promptly with ay bat presences (or other protected species) which may be encountered during the works.

5.7 Mitigation for the loss of bat roosting space in building 3 is required. This will be

achieved through the provision of two integral bat boxes, provided in two separate buildings, within the proposed site footprint. Appendix 1 provides some suggested styles of bat boxes which could be used

5.8 Any security lighting on this extension will be at ground level only. It will be

directional and/or hooded to ensure there is no light spill upwards. Dark corridors leading away from roost access points must be maintained.

5.9 The use of mitigation features will be monitored by means of one flight survey carried

out between May and August in year 1 commencing in the first season after the completion of the development works. Survey results will be provided to the planning authority ecologist and NRW.

5.10 Building works should also have regard to the possible presence of nesting birds. Works

in the winter months i.e. November to February, would also avoid any conflict with


nesting birds and is therefore preferred. Building works at other times of the year would be possible however, but should be immediately preceded by a survey to ensure that no nesting birds are present. In the event that nesting birds are found to be present, demolition may need to be delayed until the current nesting cycle has been completed and the nests abandoned. This would be a statutory requirement.


6.0 REFERENCES Bat Conservation Trust (BCT 2012) Bat Surveys – Good Practice Guidelines, 2nd

Edition. Bat Conservation Trust, London. Corben, C (2006) AnalookW for Bat Call Analysis Using ZCA. Version 3.3q, Oct 2006.

Titley Electronics Ltd.

DCE Ltd (2006) Site At Steepfield, Abersychan, Torfaen, South Wales: Ecological Assessment DCE Ltd (2007) Site At Steepfield, Abersychan, Torfaen, South Wales: Ecological Assessment DCE Ltd (2010) Site At Steepfield, Abersychan, Torfaen, South Wales: Reptile Mitigation Strategy DCE Ltd (2015) Site At Steepfield, Abersychan, Torfaen, South Wales: Ecological Assessment

Mitchell-Jones, A J & McLeish, A (2004) The Bat Worker’s Manual (3rd Edition). Joint

Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. Morris, P A (1993) A Red Data Book for British Mammals. Mammal Society, London. Richardson, P (2000) Distribution Atlas of Bats in Britain & Ireland, 1980-1999. Bat

Conservation Trust, London. Stebbings, R E, Yalden, D W & Herman, J S (2007) Which Bat Is It? A Guide to Bat

Identification in Great Britain & Ireland (3rd Edition). Mammal Society, London.


APPENDIX 1: BAT & BIRD BOXES EXAMPLES Examples of Suitable Integrated Wall-boxes

Schwegler 1FR ACO wall-box BirdBrickHouse 1

Habibat custom-faced Ibstock Type C Vivara Pro Built-in (customisable facings)

Schwegler 1FE Wildex cavity-box (large) Wildex cavity-box (narrow)

All of these bat-boxes can be rendered over leaving just the entrance showing.


PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SITE, February 2015 Roofline of building 1 – 4 Example of gap between soffit and walls building 3 North gable of building 3 Example of missing mortar fillet on gable 3 View of building 3 View of single storey extension of building 3


View of building 4 View of building 2 Example of damaged soffit box on building 3 View of unlined roof of single storey section of building 3 Internal view of building 2 Attic void of building 3

Land at Steepfield, AbersychanBat survey

Plan 1: Site Context

DCE 345 NTS Oct 2015

1

2

3

4

Land at Steepfield, AbersychanEcological Assessment

Plan 2: Building Layout


1

1S

1S

1S

1S

Buidling Number

Single storey section

Buidling outline

Ridge line

N

1

2

3

4


Plan 3a: July Dusk Survey


1 Buidling Number

Building outline

NCommon Pipistrelle emergence point

Common Pipistrelle Flight Path

Bat Flight Path

Surveyor Location

1

2

3

4


Plan 3b: September Dusk Survey


1 Buidling Number

Building outline

NCommon pipistrelle Bat Flight Path

Surveyor Location

steepfield, abersychan surveys for bats and nesting …€¦ · steepfield, abersychan surveys for...

Documents