Kelvin Hall School,
Hull
Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
September 2009
SLR Ref: 414.1625.00019
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
Kelvin Hall: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
i
414.1625.00025
September 2009
CONTENTS
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background ....................................................................................................... 1
1.2 BREEAM: Education ......................................................................................... 1
1.3 Scope of the Survey ......................................................................................... 1
METHODS ................................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Desk Study ........................................................................................................ 2
2.2 Site Survey ........................................................................................................ 2
2.3 Surveyor Experience ........................................................................................ 2
2.4 Limitations ........................................................................................................ 2
SURVEY FINDINGS & NATURE CONSERVATION EVALUATION ............................ 4
3.1 Site Context ....................................................................................................... 4
3.2 Site Habitats ...................................................................................................... 4
3.3 Species .............................................................................................................. 5
3.4 Predicted Trends .............................................................................................. 7
3.5 Nature Conservation Evaluation ...................................................................... 7
SITE EVALUATION UNDER BREEAM: EDUCATION CRITERIA............................... 8
4.1 LE3 – Ecological Value of Site & Protection of Ecological Features............. 8
4.2 LE4 – Mitigating Ecological Impacts ............................................................. 11
4.3 LE5 – Enhancing Site Ecology ....................................................................... 14
4.4 LE6 – Long Term Impact on Biodiversity ...................................................... 18
4.5 LE8 – Local Wildlife Partnerships .................................................................. 21
CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................... 23
5.1 Site Summary .................................................................................................. 23
5.2 Credit Summary .............................................................................................. 23
CLOSURE.................................................................................................................. 24
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Targets Notes
Appendix B
Proposed Wildlife Planting Schedules
Appendix C
Background records from NEYEDC
DRAWINGS
Drawing 1a
Phase I Habitat Plan – Main School
Drawing 1b
Phase I Habitat Plan – William Gee
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
1
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
1.0
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
414.1625.00025
September 2009
SLR Consulting Ltd was commissioned in September 2009 by Balfour Beatty to provide an
ecological baseline survey and production of a report to assess the findings against the
BREEAM: Education criteria.
The purpose of this ecological study is to assess the environmental sustainability of the
development proposals against the criteria set out in the Land-use and Ecology sections of
the Buildings Research Establishment’s Assessment Method Education 2008 Assessor
Manual (BES 50.51: Issue 2.0). This report draws on the results of the site survey
undertaken by SLR in September 2009 and background ecological information provided by
North and East Yorkshire Ecological Data Centre to provide a summary of all existing
ecological information pertaining to the site, and goes on to assess potential ecological
impacts plus any mitigation or enhancement measures that may be required.
1.2
BREEAM: Education
The BREEAM: Education scheme is designed to assist developers to create environmentally
sustainable buildings that function at standards higher than those set by the Buildings
Regulations (2000). The achievement of this is recognised and rewarded by the issue of a
grade ranging from “Pass” to “Excellent” and a formal certificate for the development. These
awards can be invaluable, for example by acting as a guarantee for government
organisations when applying for development scheme funding, or as a definitive statement of
the property’s superior standard when advertising for purchasers or tenants.
BREEAM: Education assesses the performance of the proposed development under a
number of criteria, considering the development’s impact on them during both the
construction phase and the building’s occupational life. The overarching criteria assessed
cover: energy efficiency; transport considerations; the prevention of pollution; the use of
appropriate construction materials; the efficiency of water use; the efficient use of the
landscape and the protection and enhancement of features of ecological interest; the health
and well being of the site’s occupants; and site management considerations.
1.3
Scope of the Survey
This report is concerned with only the Land-Use and Ecology section of the BREEAM:
Education scheme. This is composed of eight sections, LE01 to LE08, that address topics
including the selection of development sites of low ecological value, the protection of
features of ecological interest, and ensuring the appropriate management of a site’s
ecological features during its operational life. This report will consider the development
proposals in light of five of the eight sections. Section LE01 relates to the use of previously
developed land, Section LE02 relates to contaminated ground issues and Section LE07
relates to the input of the development’s users into the design of the site’s landscaping.
These three sections are most efficiently addressed by other design team members.
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
2
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
2.0
METHODS
2.1
Desk Study
414.1625.00025
September 2009
Information on designated sites from the area around the site was obtained from the online
Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) database, which utilises
data provided by Natural England, and ‘Nature on the Map’ Natural England’s Interactive
map website.
Information relating to statutory and non-statutory wildlife sites and the presence of
protected, rare or notable species within the vicinity of the site was obtained from North and
East Yorkshire Ecological Data Centre (NEYEDC). A copy of all information received from
these sources is included in Appendix C.
2.2
Site Survey
The site was visited and surveyed on 4th September 2009 by an ecologist from SLR. The
site survey method broadly followed the guidelines for Phase 1 Habitat Assessment, as
detailed by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee1. However, these were modified to
better suit the small scale of the site, the site’s urbanised nature, and to incorporate an
examination of the site’s potential to support fauna (particularly reptiles, badgers, bats and
breeding birds). In accordance with guidelines set by BREEAM, a 3m buffer zone around
the site boundary was also inspected.
In the site description presented in Chapter 3, the DAFOR (Dominant, Abundant, Frequent,
Occasional, Rare) scale is used to describe plant assemblages. This is a tool used to convey
the relative proportion of a plant species within an assemblage and does not relate to the
national or local population status of the plant in any way. Should scarce or notable plant
species be observed, this fact will be clearly and separately noted.
2.3
Surveyor Experience
The surveyor, Ellie Jones, is a project ecologist with two years professional experience. All
work produced is subject to peer review and the surveyor adheres to the Institute of Ecology
and Environmental Management’s (IEEM) code of professional conduct. The surveyor is
experienced at conducting ecological surveys that meet the requirements of BREEAM
assessments.
The report has been verified by Martyn Macefield from SLR, who meets the requirements of
a ‘suitably qualified ecologist’. The reviewer is a full member of the IEEM with over seven
years experience in consultant ecology. The reviewer holds a BSc (hons) degree in
Biological Sciences and a Masters degree in Habitat Creation and Management. The
reviewer is also a qualified assessor on a number of non-domestic BREEAM schemes,
including BREEAM: Bespoke assessments.
2.4
Limitations
Survey was undertaken in September, which is considered to be within the optimal season
for vegetation survey. It is therefore considered that sufficient data was gathered to enable
the assessment of the site to the level required for the purposes of informing a BREEAM:
Nature Conservancy Council (1990). Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey – a Technique for Environmental Audit, 2003
reprint. JNCC, Peterborough.
1
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
3
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
414.1625.00025
September 2009
Education assessment. Whilst it is felt unlikely that significant factors have been overlooked,
due to the nature of the subjects of ecological surveys it is feasible that species that use the
site may not have been recorded by virtue of their seasonality, cryptic behaviour, habit or
random chance.
Please note that where guidance is provided regarding legislation it is given in good faith.
SLR is not a specialised legal practice and in cases of any doubt, the reader should
approach a legal practice specialising in environmental law for advice.
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
4
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
3.0
SURVEY FINDINGS & NATURE CONSERVATION EVALUATION
3.1
Site Context
414.1625.00025
September 2009
The application site (hereafter referred to as ‘the site’) comprises two distinct areas, both of
which are located in the north-west of Hull – the main school area and the William Gee area.
The main school area is located at Kelvin Hall School, Bricknell Avenue (centred on National
Grid Reference TA064309). The main school area is bordered to the north, south and east
by residential development and to the west by Wyke College. The William Gee area is
accessed via Bishop Alcock Road approximately 700m to the north-west of the main school
area. This area is bordered to the east, west and south by boundary treelines and to the
north by amenity grassland and species-poor semi-improved grassland comprising the
remainder of the William Gee landholding.
There are no statutory nature conservation designations within 2km of the development2.
Twenty-seven Sites of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCI) and one Site of Importance
for Nature Conservation (SINC) are present within 2km of the centre of the site3. The
closest of these non-statutorily designated nature conservation sites are Albert Cottage
Allotments SNCI and Land to rear of Cropton Road SNCI, located approximately 200m to
the north-east of the main school area and 100m to the south of the William Gee area
respectively. Albert Cottage Allotments SNCI is designated for supporting Hull Biodiversity
Action Plan (HBAP) habitats of freshwater, grassland, scrub and hedgerow and UK BAP and
HBAP bird species, including starling (Sturnus vulgaris), dunnock (Prunella modularis) and
linnet (Carduelis cannabina), and for having high potential to support breeding birds, small
mammals, bats, amphibians and grass snake (Natrix natrix)4. Land to rear of Cropton Road
SNCI is designated for supporting the UK BAP species, house sparrow (Passer domesticus)
and HBAP habitats comprising freshwater, grassland, parkland and woodland, and for
having the potential to support water vole (Arvicola terrestris), hedgehog (Erinaceus
europaeus), birds and bats.
Whilst no formal environmental impact assessment has been conducted, provided that
standard construction measures are employed, it is considered that the proposed
development will have no significant negative impact on the above-mentioned wildlife sites.
3.2
Site Habitats
A detailed habitat plan is shown on Drawings 1a and 1b, with associated target notes (TNs)
included in Appendix A. A summary is provided below.
The main school area consists of a number of school buildings, playing fields and hardsurface sports pitches with areas of hardstanding for recreation, car parking and access.
Landscaped areas surrounding the school buildings support amenity planting of shrubs and
individual mature and semi-mature trees.
In the north of the main school area, an individual mature grey poplar (Populus x canescens)
with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of approximately 1200mm has been recently felled
2
www.magic.gov.uk. Accessed on 02/09/09.
North and East Yorkshire Ecological Data Centre. Letter ref. 09-239, dated 8th September 2009.
4
Hull City Council (October 2008) Kingston-upon-Hull Open Space Assessment: Sites of Nature Conservation Importance
(SNC)I: Appendix IV Completed Site Quality Assessment Forms and Site Species Lists.
Available at
http://www.hullcc.gov.uk/portal/page?_pageid=221,602692&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL.
3
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
5
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
414.1625.00025
September 2009
and chipped, with the stump retained in situ. The tree has been felled for health and safety
reasons following arboricultural assessment5.
To the south of the main school area is a further field of amenity grassland and two small
areas of species-poor semi-improved neutral grassland supporting frequent seedlings of
dogwood (Cornus sanguinea), hazel (Corylus avellana), whitebeam (Sorbus aria), ash
(Fraxinus excelsior) and Norway maple (Acer platanoides). Adjacent to these areas is a
small block of bare ground, which has been recently cleared and is currently fenced off with
Heras fencing. Aerial photography6 and observations during the Phase I survey suggest that
this area comprised amenity grassland prior to clearance.
The William Gee area supports amenity grassland with small areas of ruderal vegetation and
immature scrub. The east, west and south of the site is bordered by boundary treelines of
individual mature and semi-mature trees, including Lombardy poplar (Populus nigra ‘Italica’),
crack willow (Salix fragilis), cherry and whitebeam. To the north are a further area of
amenity grassland and a broadly rectangular patch of species-poor semi-improved
grassland, comprising the remainder of the William Gee former school site.
3.3
Species
3.3.1 Bats
Fourteen records of pipistrelle (Pipistrellus spp.), four records of common pipistrelle
(Pipistrellus pipistrellus) and one record of an unidentified bat were provided by NEYEDC
within 2km of the site, the closest of which is a record of an unidentified species
approximately 1km to the north of the site. No records of bats were provided within the site.
Internal and external daytime inspection and dusk emergence and dawn re-entry surveys of
all buildings at the site were undertaken by SLR in September 2009. The results of these
surveys are presented in the separate bat survey and assessment report and summarised
below.
No bats or evidence of the presence of bats was recorded from any of the buildings within
the site during internal and external inspections undertaken on the 17th September 2009.
The buildings provide few access points for bats. None of the buildings have enclosed loft
spaces, although the majority have suspended ceilings. The majority of the buildings have
well-sealed, intact roofs of predominantly of concrete, but also of sheet metal or felt, typically
covering an internal wooden or steel truss, and as such these internal sections are of low
suitability for bats.
Generally the buildings have a low suitability to support bats and it is not considered at this
time that bats are resident within the buildings at Kelvin Hall School.
All mature trees at the Main School and William Gee Area were subject to an assessment of
their suitability to support bats. A single willow (Salix sp.) just outside the boundary of the
William Gee Area was assessed to have some potential to support bats in that it supports
two woodpecker holes. The re-development of the William Gee Area will not result in the
loss of this tree.
5
All About Trees (September 2009) Arboricultural Tree Constraints Assessment of Trees at Kelvin Hall School Science College
and Former School Site, Hull. Report for SLR Consulting Ltd.
6
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&tab=wl. Accessed on 1st September 2009.
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
6
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
414.1625.00025
September 2009
No bats were observed emerging from or entering the buildings within the Main School
during the dusk or dawn surveys. A single pipistrelle was recorded foraging during the dusk
survey in and around trees on the astern boundary of Main School. These trees are being
retained as part of the development of the school.
The eastern and southern boundaries of the Main School and the edges of the William Gee
Area all support tree lines which could be used as commuting routes for bats, with limited
foraging potential. Overall, the remainder of habitats within the site are sub optimal for
commuting and foraging bats.
3.3.2 Badgers
No records of badger (Meles meles) were provided by NEYEDC within 2km of the site.
The site was thoroughly examined during survey and no field signs of badger, such as setts,
hairs or latrines, were observed. As such, it is considered that badgers are not present
within the site at the present time. The site does not support habitats typically associated
with badger, and in the absence of such suitable habitat in the vicinity, it is considered
unlikely that the site will be used by badger in the future.
3.3.3 Reptiles
No records of reptiles were provided by NEYEDC within 2km of the site.
The principle habitats present within the site are suboptimal for use by reptile species, being
either heavily maintained amenity grassland and shrubs or frequently disturbed areas of
hardstanding. Rough semi-improved grassland in the south of the site is small in area and
isolated, being surrounded on all sides by residential development and mown amenity
grassland. Reptiles are unlikely to be present at the site at the current time.
3.3.4 Amphibians
Records of common toad (Bufo bufo), common frog (Rana temporaria), smooth newt
(Lissotriton vulgaris) and great crested newt (Triturus cristatus) were provided by LERC
within 2km of the site. The only record of great crested newt is provided at 1km resolution
but is located a minimum of 950m to the north-west of the site.
No field signs of amphibians were observed within the site during survey. The site does not
support any areas of standing open water habitat suitable to support amphibians.
The site supports predominantly heavily managed habitats of negligible potential for
breeding, foraging or hibernating amphibians. Rough grassland in the south of the site
provides suitable terrestrial habitat for amphibians. However, no areas of standing open
water have been identified within 500m of the study area7 and the application site is further
isolated by residential development and roads, which are heavily and regularly disturbed.
The site is therefore considered to have negligible potential to support amphibians.
3.3.5 Breeding Birds
Shrubs, trees and buildings at the site are suitable for use by a range of common bird
species, including UK and local BAP species, during the breeding season.
7
www.streetmap.co.uk; http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&tab=wl
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
7
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
414.1625.00025
September 2009
3.3.6 Other Species
No protected or notable species were observed during the survey. Given the types of
habitat present and the level of survey effort expended, no protected or notable species, with
the possible exception of bats, are considered to be present within the site at the current
time, or likely to use the site in the immediate future.
3.4
Predicted Trends
In the absence of the proposed development, it is considered likely that current land
management would continue for the foreseeable future. During this time, the communities
and habitats present within the application site would be unlikely to change from those
described above
3.5
Nature Conservation Evaluation
3.5.1 Habitats
The vegetated habitats present at both the main school area and William Gee area have low
structural and/or floristic diversity, are unlikely to support any rare or threatened species, and
are common at the local and national scales. The site as a whole is therefore assessed as
being of low ecological value.
3.5.2 Species
Bats
All bat species and their roosts are afforded full protection under the Wildlife and
Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.)
Regulations 1994 (as amended) and it is prohibited to kill, injure or take a bat; to damage or
destroy a roost; or to disturb a bat whilst it is occupying a roost.
No bat roosts were confirmed within buildings or trees at the site during the bat survey work.
The buildings have a low potential to support roosting bats. It is unlikely that buildings within
the study area are important or significant for populations of roosting bats in the local area.
A single tree outside the William Gee Area has some potential to support roosting bats,
although it is unlikely that this tree is important or critical for local populations of bats.
The habitats around the site offer some connectivity to other habitats in the local area,
although the site is not thought to support important foraging grounds or commuting routes.
Breeding Birds
Shrubs, individual trees and buildings within the site are potentially suitable for use by a
variety of bird species8 as a foraging and nesting resource. However, these habitats are
widespread in the local environment and it is considered unlikely that the site would
represent a critical nesting or foraging resource for any populations of bird species of
conservation concern. The site itself is therefore considered of low ornithological value.
8
Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981 and amendments) all wild birds in Britain (except for 11 very common or
derogated pest species) are protected from killing, injuring, or taking, as well as the taking, damaging or destroying of nests in
use or being built, and the taking or destruction of eggs. The eleven derogated and/or common species exempted from this
are: great and lesser black-backed gulls, herring gull, wood pigeon, jay, magpie, carrion crow, rook, jackdaw, feral pigeon, and
collared dove.
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
8
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
4.0
414.1625.00025
September 2009
SITE EVALUATION UNDER BREEAM: EDUCATION CRITERIA
Please be aware that this report does not constitute a formal BREEAM: Education
assessment. Whilst all due care has been taken during the preparation of this report,
following formal assessment by the appointed assessor and BRE’s Quality Assurance
process, the total number of credits achieved may be different to that indicated below.
4.1
LE3 – Ecological Value of Site & Protection of Ecological Features
4.1.1
Credit Criteria
One credit is awarded as follows:
Credits
Where evidence provided demonstrates that the site’s construction
zone is defined as land of low ecological value and all existing
features of ecological value will be fully protected from damage
during site preparation and construction works
1
4.1.2
Compliance requirements
In order to obtain the credit, the following must be considered:

the land within the construction zone must be defined as “land of low ecological
value” using either:
o
o

The BREEAM checklist (A4); or
A suitably qualified ecological consultant who has identified the land
as being of “low ecological value” within an ecological assessment
report, based on a site survey.
All existing features of ecological value on the surrounding site and boundary
area are adequately protected from damage during site clearance, site
preparation and construction, as listed below:
o
o
o
o
trees of over 100 mm trunk diameter, and/or of significant ecological
value, are to be protected by barriers. Barriers must prohibit
construction works in the area between themselves and the tree trunk.
Minimum distance between the tree trunk and barriers must be either
the distance of branch spread or half the tree height, whichever is the
greater;
in all cases trees must be protected from direct impact and from
severance or asphyxiation of the roots;
hedges and natural areas requiring protection must either have
barriers erected and be protected, or, when remote from site works or
storage areas, be protected with a prohibition of construction activity in
their vicinity.
watercourses and wetland areas are to be protected by cut-off ditches
and site drainage to prevent run-off to natural watercourses (as this
may cause pollution, silting or erosion).
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
9
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
4.1.3
414.1625.00025
September 2009

In all cases, the contractor is required to construct ecological protection prior to
any preliminary site construction or preparation works.

The construction zone is defined as the land within a fenced-off area within
which all construction work on the development and its associated
infrastructure is situated. This includes any area used for temporary site
storage and buildings.

Where the construction zone is defined as ‘land of low ecological value’ (refer
to point 1 of design stage compliance requirements above) and where the
surrounding site contains no features of ecological value, this credit can be
awarded by default.

A refurbishment of a building (with no new construction), where all existing
features of ecological value are protected, will achieve this credit by default.
However, where any existing features of ecological value are not protected, this
credit cannot be achieved.

Where the credit is awarded based on the advice of an ecological consultant,
the appointed ecologist must be suitably qualified.

If a suitably qualified ecologist has confirmed a feature has little or no
ecological value, then that feature may be exempt from the protection of
ecological features requirements of this credit.

If features of ecological value have been removed as part of the site clearance
then the development cannot achieve this credit, even if they are to be replaced
as part of a new landscaping strategy.
Site Assessment
The ecologist verifying this report is considered to be a suitably qualified ecologist
under BREEAM: Education criteria.
The habitats present within the construction zone and surrounding site are
anthropogenic in origin and are not considered to be of significant ecological or
nature conservation value. In addition, the site is not considered to be important or
significant for any protected, rare or notable species. As such, the site is currently
considered to be of no significant ecological or nature conservation value.
The individual mature grey poplar in the north of the main school area, which was
felled prior to survey, is exempt from protection as a feature of ecological value, as
the tree was removed for health and safety following arboricultural assessment.
However, the tree is unlikely to have been considered a feature of ecological value
due to its anthropogenic origin, low species and structural diversity, and the
abundance of similar habitat in the local environment.
4.1.4
Credits Awarded
As the construction zone is considered to be land of low ecological value and no
existing features of ecological value have been identified within the surrounding side
or boundary areas, the credit can be awarded.
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
10
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
0
4.1.5
1
Achievement of Extra Credits
All available credits have been awarded.
SLR
414.1625.00025
September 2009
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
11
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
4.2
LE4 – Mitigating Ecological Impacts
4.2.1
Credit Criteria
414.1625.00025
September 2009
Two credits are awarded as follows:
Credits
4.2.2
4.2.3
1
Where evidence provided demonstrates that the change in the site’s
existing ecological value, as a result of development, is between less
than zero and equal to, or greater than, minus nine species per
hectare, i.e. a small negative change.
2
Where evidence is provided to show that there is no negative change
in the ecological value of the site as a result of development. i.e.
equal to, or greater than, zero species.
Compliance requirements

BREEAM measures ecological value using number of plant species. Figures for
the average number of species for different land types are programmed into a
calculation tool available to registered BREEAM assessors.

Where a suitably qualified ecologist has been appointed and can provide more
accurate species count values, these may be substituted for the average
figures.

Garden planting and wildlife garden planting will always record a score of zero
unless a suitably qualified ecologist has been appointed and has distinguished
between “typical” and “wildlife” garden planting in order to determine actual
species numbers.

The ecological value of derelict land is time dependant. BREEAM has devised
a linear scale evaluating the average value of such land from demolition to 30
years abandonment. This presents a worst case figure that should be amended
on the advice of a suitably qualified ecologist wherever possible.
Site Assessment
The table below gives full details of habitat gains/losses as a result of proposals. In spite of
changes to the amounts of each habitat type, the ecological value of the site would be likely
to remain the same as it is neither significantly enhanced nor reduced under the current
development proposals.
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
12
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
414.1625.00025
September 2009
Table 1 Calculation of the change in ecological value of the site before and after
development
Average number of species before development
Area of
Habitat Plot
Habitat Type
(m2)
Buildings, hardstanding and amenity
planting
101393
Total Site Area =
Avg no. of species post-development:
0
=
Total =
Number of
Species x Area
of Plot
0
0
Number of
Species x Area
of Plot
x
No. of
Species
=
100875
x
0
=
219
x
7
=
0
1533
239
x
19
=
4541
60
x
22
=
1320
101393
Total =
7,394
0.07
Change in average number of species
0
No. of species post-development:
0.07
No. of species pre-development:
0.00
Change in number of species:
x
=
0.00
Average number of species after development
Area of
Habitat
Plot
Habitat Type
2
(m )
Total Site Area =
No. of
Species
101393
No. of species pre-development:
Buildings, hardstanding, amenity planting
Wildlife planting - species-rich hedgerow
Wildlife planting - species-rich grassland
(shaded areas)
Wildlife planting - species-rich grassland
(unshaded areas)
x
368.9244
0.07
The proposed wildlife planting schedules for species-rich hedgerow and species-rich
grassland are shown in Appendix B.
Ongoing management of species-rich grassland should comprise a biannual cut to a sward
height of 5-10cm in both April and September. This latter cut must be undertaken following
the end of flowering once wildflowers have set seed. This management regime needs to be
implemented for the grassland to be assessed as wildlife planting.
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
13
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
4.2.4
414.1625.00025
September 2009
Credits Awarded
Assuming that species-rich grassland is managed appropriately as outlined in section 4.2.3
above, there has been a minimal increase in the average number of plant species across the
site (+0.07 species). Two credits can therefore be awarded.
0
4.2.5
1
2
Achievement of Extra Credits
All available credits have been awarded.
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
14
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
4.3
LE5 – Enhancing Site Ecology
4.3.1
Credit Criteria
414.1625.00025
September 2009
Three credits are awarded as follows:
Credits
4.3.2
1
Where the design team (or client) has appointed a suitably qualified
ecologist to advise and report on enhancing and protecting the
ecological value of the site; and implemented the professional’s
recommendations for the general enhancement and protection of the
site’s ecology.
2
Where there is a positive increase in the ecological value of the site
of up to (but not including) six species.
3
Where there is a positive increase in the ecological value of the site
of six species or greater.
Compliance requirements
First credit:

ensure a suitably qualified ecologist has been appointed to report on enhancing
and protecting the ecology of the site;

the suitably qualified ecologist provides an Ecology report with appropriate
recommendations for protection and enhancement of the site’s ecology;

the report is based on a site visit/survey by the suitably qualified ecologist prior
to the commencement of the initial site preparation works; and

where the report has been prepared by a professional who does not comply
with the requirements of a “suitably qualified ecologist” the report has been
verified by a professional who does meet these requirements.

N.B. the client must provide the BREEAM assessor with written confirmation
that the recommendations of the ecology report for the enhancement and
protection of site ecology have been, or will be, implemented.
Second credit:

the first credit must be achieved;

written commitment must be provided to the BREEAM assessor by the client
confirming that the recommendations of the ecology report for the
enhancement and protection of site ecology will be implemented and where the
ecologist confirms that these actions will result in an increase of up to (but not
including) six species; and
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
15
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM

414.1625.00025
September 2009
the increase in the number of species is to be calculated using the BREEAM
assessment tool “Ecology Calculator 2”.
Third credit:
4.3.3

the first credit must be achieved;

written commitment must be provided to the BREEAM assessor by the client
confirming that the recommendations of the ecology report will be implemented
and where the ecologist confirms that these actions will result in an increase of
more than six species; and

the increase in the number of species is to be calculated using the BREEAM
assessment tool “Ecology Calculator 2”.
Site Assessment
Currently there is no formal commitment to any scheme of site enhancement. Therefore no
credits can currently be achieved, despite an appropriately qualified ecologist being
appointed. Please see Section 4.3.5, below, for advice on achieving credits in this section.
4.3.4
Credits Awarded
Provided that the recommendations made below, in Section 4.3.5, are followed, then two
credits may be awarded.
0
4.3.5
1
2
3
Achievement of the Credits
First credit:
A professional ecologist has been appointed to advise on enhancing and protecting the
ecology of the site, and the ecologist is suitably qualified. Therefore, the requirements for
achieving the first credit are partially met. The following recommendations are made for the
enhancement and protection of the site’s ecology and, if a written commitment to implement
them is made, one credit may be awarded:

Specific wording should be introduced into the site induction procedure
instructing all site staff of the importance of maintaining the integrity of the
planted areas outside the development footprint and that these areas should
not be damaged, used for storage etc. Secure fencing such as Heras or
chestnut paling should be used to clearly demark the boundary of the
development footprint and to protect all retained trees in accordance with
BS5387.
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
16
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
414.1625.00025
September 2009

Ten bird boxes should be positioned in appropriate locations around the site,
comprising two each of five kinds (sparrow terrace, house martin, open fronted
robin, small passerine and large passerine), located in appropriate places
specified by an appropriately qualified ecologist. At least two of the passerine
boxes are to be mounted in positions from which they can be seen from a
communal area of the school building. Positioned near to at least one of these
boxes, and also visible from the communal area, will be a bird table and
squirrel-proof bird feeders.

Six bat tubes should be incorporated into the structure of the new buildings on
site. These should be sited on the south facing walls of the new buildings, in
pairs, at at least 3m height. The boxes should be sited close to semi-natural
vegetation, and away from strong sources of light.

A range of terrestrial refugia with the potential to support a range of fauna,
including invertebrates and small mammals such as hedgehogs, would
enhance the biodiversity value of the site and can also be used as an
educational resource. As a minimum, a log pile and a compost heap should be
created within the area of rough grassland in the south of the site. Advice on
the creation of the habitat piles should be sought from an ecologist. Further
biodiversity and educational value can be obtained by creating additional
refuges of varying types in other habitats around the school grounds.

The margins of the sports fields should be sown with a species-rich wildflower
mixture. Once established, the margins are to be mown to a sward height of 510cm in April and September, with all arisings removed to a compost heap.

All landscape planting should be conducted using peat-free composts and
following good horticultural practice. Areas of amenity lawn should not be
sprayed with selective weedkillers during their establishment.

80% of trees to be planted should be native or of known value to wildlife to
provide additional food resources and shelter. Seed-bearing trees and shrubs
and those with nectar-rich flowers should be included, as these are particularly
attractive to birds and invertebrates. Species selection can be guided by the
English Nature publication ‘Plants for Wildlife-Friendly gardens’ (ISBN 1 85716)
catalogue code IN18.7 available from www.naturalengland.org.uk, or similar
publications. The Great British Elm Experiment is currently offering schools the
opportunity to plant a native elm tree. Further details are available at
http://www.conservationfoundation.co.uk/?page_id=53.
Second and third credits:
Award of the second credit can be achieved by planting areas of species-rich hedgerow and
species-rich grassland as prescribed in section LE4. Species-rich grassland should be
managed with a biannual cut to a sward height of 5-10cm in both April and September. This
latter cut must be undertaken following the end of flowering once wildflowers have set seed.
The design team has indicated that these measures will be included in the final design
scheme, and it is therefore assumed that this credit would be awarded.
Achieving the third credit may be impracticable whilst also providing functional sports pitches
and recreational facilities. In order to increase species diversity sufficiently to raise the
overall site average by over six species, it would be necessary to give over an area of
approximately 27350m2 to wildlife planting with 22 plant species of native origin or proven
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
17
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
414.1625.00025
September 2009
benefit to wildlife, such as species-rich grassland, in addition to the wildlife planting specified
in section LE4. Due to the management regime required to enable such grassland to
successfully set seed, i.e. a biannual cut in April and September only, this habitat type will be
unsuitable for forming areas of playing field. An area of 27350m2 is a large portion of the
amenity grassland area on site (which includes the playing fields) and as such is liable to be
impractical.
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
18
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
4.4
LE6 – Long Term Impact on Biodiversity
4.4.1
Credit Criteria
414.1625.00025
September 2009
Two credits are awarded as follows:
Credits
4.4.2
1
Where evidence is provided to demonstrate that the client has
committed to achieving the mandatory requirements listed below and
at least two of the additional requirements.
2
Where evidence is provided to demonstrate that the client has
committed to achieving the mandatory requirements listed below,
and at least four of the additional requirements.
Compliance requirements
Mandatory requirements:
A suitably qualified ecologist, appointed prior to commencement of activities on site, must
confirm in writing that:
1. All relevant UK and EU legislation relating to the protection and enhancement of
ecology has been, or will be, complied with during the construction process.
2. An appropriate management plan is produced covering at least the first five years
after project completion. This is to be handed over to the building occupants and
include:
a. management of any protected features on the site;
b. management of any new, existing or enhanced habitats; and
c. a reference to the current or future site level Biodiversity Action Plan.
3. Where there is a commitment to produce a management plan, information is
provided detailing:
a. the scope of the management plan; and
b. the key responsibilities and with whom these responsibilities lie (e.g. site
landlord, occupier etc.)
Additional requirements:
1. The contractor is required to nominate a “Biodiversity Champion” with the authority to
influence site activities and ensure that detrimental impacts on site biodiversity are
minimized in line with the recommendations of a suitably qualified ecologist.
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
19
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
414.1625.00025
September 2009
2. The contractor is required to train all relevant site staff on how to protect site ecology
during the project. Training should be based on the findings and recommendations of
the ecologist’s report.
3. The contractor is required to record actions taken to protect biodiversity and monitor
their effectiveness throughout key stages of construction. The requirement commits
the contractor to make such records publicly available where requested.
4. The client requires that a new ecologically valuable habitat, appropriate to the local
area, be created. This includes habitat that supports nationally, regionally or locally
important species, and/or which is important itself.
5. The client requires the site contractor to programme site works to minimise
disturbance to wildlife.
6. The client requires actions to be taken to protect/enhance biodiversity, take full
account of the UK Biodiversity Action Plan, and use local biodiversity experts to help
identify ecologically important habitats and species on site.
Note:
The steps taken in the above requirements will depend on the nature of the site and
the surrounding areas. It is likely that either all, or none of the optional items will
apply. Where the optional items and mandatory management plan are deemed not to
be applicable, by an appropriately qualified ecologist and in writing, all credits can be
awarded. However, all other mandatory requirements must be met.
4.4.3
Site Assessment
Mandatory Requirements
Subject to the implementation of the following reasonable avoidance measures, all relevant
EU and UK legislation will be complied with during design and construction, and there would
be no significant adverse impacts anticipated to ecologically valuable habitats or species as
a result of the proposals.
Bats
All species of bat within the UK are protected under the WCA 1981 and the Conservation
(Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended). As such it is an offence to
deliberately kill, injure or take a bat; deliberately disturb a bat in such a way as to be likely
significantly to affect the ability of any significant group of bats to survive, breed, or rear or
nurture their young or the local distribution or abundance of that species; damage or destroy
the breeding or resting place of a bat; intentionally or recklessly obstruct access to a place
that bats use for shelter or protection; and intentionally or recklessly disturb a bat whilst it is
occupying a place which it uses for shelter or protection.
On the basis of current survey information, no significant adverse impacts upon local bat
populations have been identified and no further survey work is considered necessary at this
stage. If development is delayed by 12 months, it is recommended that the bat survey work
is update, and continually updated on an annual basis until development commences.
If in future surveys, bats are confirmed to be roosting within buildings at the site at any point,
an application for a Natural England European Protected Species (EPS) licence would be
required before development works could commence.
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
20
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
414.1625.00025
September 2009
Breeding birds
Section 1, Part I of the WCA 1981 makes it an offence (with certain limited exceptions and in
the absence of a licence) intentionally to kill, injure or take any wild bird, or intentionally to
damage, take or destroy its nest whilst it is being built or is in use, or to take or destroy its
eggs. It is also an offence to possess any live or dead wild bird or egg, or anything derived
from a wild bird or egg. Further, the Act affords additional protection to specific species of
birds listed in Schedule 1 of the Act. These species are also protected from disturbance
whilst breeding.
To avoid destruction of any wild bird nests, all buildings, scrub or trees would need to be
removed outside of the breeding season (1st March to 31st August) where possible. If such
clearance is unavoidable during the bird breeding season, the area to be cleared should first
be inspected by an appropriately qualified ecologist.
If a protected bird nest were to be observed in any habitat scheduled for clearance,
operations within that area should cease immediately and appropriate mitigation be
implemented.
Currently, commitments to the production of an ecological management plan, or any of the
additional requirements have not been made. As a result, no credits can currently be
awarded.
4.4.4
Credits Awarded
0
4.4.5
1
2
Achievement of Extra Credits
If the client confirms that an ecological management plan will be designed and implemented,
all other mandatory requirements will be achieved and at least two of the additional
requirements will be met, it will be possible to award the first credit. The second credit can
be awarded if the client can confirm that in addition to the mandatory requirements, at least
four of the additional requirements will be met.
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
21
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
4.5
LE8 – Local Wildlife Partnerships
4.5.1
Credit Criteria
414.1625.00025
September 2009
One credit is awarded as follows:
Credits
Where evidence provided demonstrates that the design team set up
a partnership with a local group that has wildlife expertise (e.g. the
local wildlife trust).
1
4.5.2
Compliance requirements
A partnership has been set up by the design team with a local group that has wildlife
expertise and the group has:
a. provided advice early in the design process regarding protecting and/or
providing habitat for species of local importance on the site;
b. provided advice to ensure that the design is in-keeping with the local
environment; and
c. provided or will continue to provide ongoing support and advice to the school
to help them manage, maintain and develop the outdoor space in the longer
term.
Written confirmation from the design team or group is required confirming:
a. the scope of the partnership;
b. details and remit of the group;
c. a description of the process for ongoing support by the group; and
d. details of meetings and actions to date.
4.5.3
Site Assessment
Currently there has been no formal commitment to establishing a partnership between the
design team and a local wildlife group. As a result, no credits can be awarded at the present
time.
4.5.4
Credits Awarded
0
1
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
22
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
4.5.5
414.1625.00025
September 2009
Achievement of Extra Credits
If the client can confirm that a partnership between the design team and a local wildlife group
has been set up in compliance with section 4.5.2, it will be possible to award the credit.
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
23
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
5.0
CONCLUSIONS
5.1
Site Summary
414.1625.00025
September 2009
The development site comprises two distinct areas: the mains school area and the William
Gee area. The main school area supports a number of school buildings, playing fields and
hard-surface sports pitches with areas of hardstanding for recreation, car parking and
access. There are also small areas of amenity planting of shrubs, individual mature and
semi-mature trees, and species-poor semi-improved neutral grassland. It is proposed to
demolish the existing school and construct new buildings and sport facilities at the site, with
the development footprint being located primarily upon pre-developed land and amenity
grassland.
A number of site enhancements have been proposed to improve the nature conservation
value of the site and provide appropriate resources for environmental education.
5.2
Credit Summary
Following the comparison of the findings of the site survey against the BREEAM: Education
assessment criteria, it is considered that five credits should be awarded to the development
distributed between the sections in the following manner:
Table 2 Credit summary for Kelvin Hall School, Hull
Credits
awarded
Section
LE3 – Ecological value of the site
1/1
LE4 – Mitigating ecological impact
2/2
LE5 – Enhancing site ecology
2/3
LE6 – Long-term impact on biodiversity
0/2
LE8 – Local Wildlife Partnerships
0/1
Total:
5/9
BREEAM Education is an iterative process and this report has highlighted that a further
three credits may be available under the Ecology section, LE6 and LE8. Additional work
and evidence would be required from the client to confirm the award of these credits.
SLR
Balfour Beatty Construction Northern Ltd.
24
Kelvin Hall School: Ecological Appraisal for BREEAM
6.0
414.1625.00025
September 2009
CLOSURE
This report has been prepared by SLR Consulting Limited with all reasonable skill, care and
diligence, and taking account of the manpower and resources devoted to it by agreement
with the client. Information reported herein is based on the interpretation of data collected
and has been accepted in good faith as being accurate and valid.
This report is for the exclusive use of Balfour Beatty; no warranties or guarantees are
expressed or should be inferred by any third parties. This report may not be relied upon by
other parties without written consent from SLR.
SLR disclaims any responsibility to the client and others in respect of any matters outside
the agreed scope of the work.
SLR
APPENDIX A
Photographs and Habitat Descriptions at Kelvin Hall School
REFERENCE
NO.
PHOTOGRAPH
NAME AND DESCRIPTION
MAIN SCHOOL AREA AND SURROUNDING LAND
HARDSTANDING
TN 1
Areas of hardstanding comprising site access, car
parking and hard surface sports pitches. These areas
are heavily disturbed and support minimal vegetation.
AMENITY GRASSLAND
Mown amenity grassland supporting perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne), Yorkshire fog (Holcus
lanatus), red fescue (Festuca rubra), common bent
(Agrostis capillaris), dandelion (Taraxacum officinale
agg.), white clover (Trifolium repens), creeping
buttercup (Ranunculus repens), greater plantain
(Plantago major), daisy (Bellis perennis), germander
speedwell
(Veronica
chamaedrys),
common
chickweed (Stellaria media) and shepherd’s-purse
(Capsella bursa-pastoris). Suckers of grey poplar
(Populus x canescens) are also locally frequent.
TN 2
Around the margins of the grassland are smaller
patches of ruderal vegetation, including broad-leaved
dock (Rumex obtusifolius), common nettle (Urtica
dioica), groundsel (Senecio vulgaris), cleavers
(Galium aparine), broad-leaved willowherb (Epilobium
montanum), rape (Brassica napus), spear thistle
(Cirsium vulgare) and fat hen (Chenopodium album).
SLR
APPENDIX A
SPECIMEN TREES
Individual mature and semi-mature specimen trees
within amenity grassland at the front of the school and
along the southern and eastern boundaries of the site.
Specimen trees include London plane (Platanus x
hispanica), grey poplar, Lombardy poplar (Populus
nigra ‘Italica’), hornbeam (Carpinus betulus), cherry
(Prunus spp.), Swedish whitebeam (Sorbus
intermedia), Norway maple (Acer platanoides),
whitebeam (Sorbus aria), hawthorn (Crataegus
monogyna), weeping willow (Salix x chrysocoma),
Judas tree (Cercis siliquastrum), ash (Fraxinus
excelsior), elder (Sambucus nigra), apple (Malus
domestica), rowan (Sorbus aucuparia), small-leaved
lime (Tilia cordata), horse chestnut (Aesculus
hippocastanum) and Turkey oak (Quercus cerris).
TN 3
The trees have diameter at breast height (DBH)
measurements of approximately 200-1200mm. The
majority of the mature trees show signs of
management, including removal of limbs.
In the north of the site, an individual mature grey
poplar with a DBH of approximately 1200mm has
been recently felled and chipped, with the stump
retained in situ. The tree has been felled for health
and
safety
reasons
following
arboricultural
assessment.
AMENITY SHRUBS
Small planted areas of amenity shrubs dominated by
exotic species, such as cotoneaster (Cotoneaster
spp.), garden rose (Rosa spp.), barberry (Berberis
spp.), cherry laurel (Prunus laurocerasus) and
Leyland cypress (x Cupressocyparis leylandii).
Immature dogwood (Cornus sanguinea), holly (Ilex
aquifolium), hazel (Corylus avellana), rowan, Norway
maple and whitebeam are occasional.
TN 4
SLR
APPENDIX A
SPECIES-POOR
GRASSLAND
SEMI-IMPROVED
NEUTRAL
Two areas of rough semi-improved grassland to the
south of the site.
TN 5
The grassland is species-poor and supports Yorkshire
fog, common bent, red fescue, perennial rye-grass,
Timothy (Phleum pratense), dandelion, broad-leaved
dock, creeping thistle (Cirsium arvense) and spear
thistle. Seedlings of dogwood, hazel, whitebeam, ash
and Norway maple are frequent.
BARE EARTH
TN 6
A fenced area of bare soil which has been recently
cleared and does not support any vegetation.
BUILDINGS
A number of buildings within the site, including
classrooms, sports facilities and service buildings.
TN 7
The buildings vary in age and comprise single- and
multi-storey structures with brick, resin panel and
breeze-block walls. The buildings have flat or gently
sloping felt, sheet metal or concrete roofs.
SLR
APPENDIX A
BRICKNELL AVENUE
The westbound carriageway of Bricknell Avenue. The
road and pavement are heavily disturbed and support
minimal vegetation.
TN 8
Alongside the road are a number of mature and semimature London plane and Lombardy poplar. The
majority of the trees show signs of regular pruning.
WILLIAM GEE AREA AND SURROUNDING LAND
AMENITY GRASSLAND
An area of mown amenity grassland with small areas
of ruderal vegetation dominated by creeping thistle
and scrub. The scrub supports bramble (Rubus
fruticosus), hawthorn and immature goat willow (Salix
caprea), common alder (Alnus glutinosa) and
pedunculate oak (Quercus robur).
TN 9
INDIVIDUAL SEMI-MATURE AND MATURE TREES
A number of semi-mature and mature trees bordering
the site. These include individuals of Norway maple,
sycamore, Lombardy poplar, whitebeam, apple, crack
willow, hawthorn, Swedish whitebeam, Turkey oak,
London plane, horse chestnut, lime, cherry, silver
birch, grey poplar, ash and pedunculate oak.
TN 10
The majority of individual trees have been used for
boundary planting.
DBH measurements vary
between approximately 100mm and 1100mm.
SPECIES-POOR SEMI-IMPROVED GRASSLAND
A broadly rectangular area of species-poor semiimproved neutral grassland. The sward consists of
Yorkshire fog, red fescue, creeping bent (Agrostis
stolonifera), timothy, cock’s-foot (Dactylis glomerata),
perennial rye-grass, creeping thistle, broad-leaved
dock, broad-leaved willowherb, creeping buttercup,
silverweed (Potentilla anserina), dandelion, ribwort
plantain (Plantago lanceolata), black medick
(Medicago lupulina), spear thistle, red clover
(Trifolium pratense), yarrow (Achillea millefolium) and
smooth tare (Vicia tetrasperma).
Self-seeded
specimens of silver birch, cherry and apple are
occasional.
TN 11
SLR
APPENDIX B
Wildlife Planting Schedule
Species-Rich Hedgerow
Hedgerows of the following species composition should be planted:
Hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna)
Hazel (Corylus avellana)
Holly (Ilex aquifolium)
Wild privet (Ligustrum vulgare)
Blackthorn (Prunus spinosa)
Field maple (Acer campestre)
Field rose (Rosa arvensis)
50%
10%
10%
10%
10%
5%
5%
Species-Rich Grassland
Shaded Areas
A WFG8 Shaded Areas wildflower grassland mix
(http://www.bshamenity.com/) is recommended for this site.
from
British
Seed
Houses
The following species are included within this mix:
Ramsons (Allium ursinum)
Foxglove (Digitalis purpurea)
Meadowsweet (Filipendula ulmaria)
Herb Robert (Geranium robertianum)
Wood avens (Geum urbanum)
Perforate St. John’s-wort
(Hypericum
perforatum)
Self-heal (Prunella vulgaris)
Ragged robin (Lychnis flos-cuculi)
White campion (Silene alba)
Red campion (Silene dioica)
Upright hedge-parsley (Torilis japonica)
Wood sage (Teucrium scorodonia)
Hedge woundwort (Stachys sylvatica)
Greater stitchwort (Stellaria holostea)
Crested dog’s-tail (Cynosurus cristatus)
Slender creeping red fescue (Festuca rubra
ssp. litoralis)
Tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea)
Traveller’s-joy (Clematis vitalba)
Bluebell (Hyacinthoides non-scriptus)
Unshaded Areas
A WFG4 Neutral Soils wildflower grassland mix from
(http://www.bshamenity.com/) is recommended for this site.
British
Seed
Houses
The following species are included within this mix:
Common knapweed (Centaurea nigra)
Pignut (Conopodium majus)
Lady’s bedstraw (Galium verum)
Meadow crane’s-bill (Geranium pratense)
Oxeye daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare)
Common flax (Linum usitatissimum)
Bird’s-foot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus)
Marsh trefoil (Lotus ulignosus)
Ragged robin (Lychnis flos-cuculi)
Sainfoin (Onobrychis viciifolia)
Self-heal (Prunella vulgaris)
Meadow buttercup (Ranunculus acris)
Yellow rattle (Rhinanthus minor)
Salad burnet (Sanguisorba minor)
Small scabious (Scabiosa columbaria)
Betony (Stachys officinalis)
Common vetch (Vicia sativa)
Wild pansy (Viola tricolor)
Crested dog’s-tail (Cynosurus cristatus)
Slender creeping red fescue (Festuca rubra
ssp. litoralis)
SLR
APPENDIX B
Ribwort plantain (Plantago lanceolata)
Tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea)
Species-rich grassland must be planted as an area with a minimum width of 3m and
adjacent to scrub, trees or hedgerow, where possible on the boundaries of the site.
Species-rich grassland should be managed with a biannual cut to a sward height of 5-10cm
in both April and September. This latter cut must be undertaken following the end of
flowering once wildflowers have set seed.
SLR
APPENDIX C
SLR