The Westwood School – ‘A Technology College’
ECOLOGICAL APPRAISAL
A Report for Coventry City Council
August 2008
Produced by
Warwickshire Museum Ecology Unit
The Butts
Warwick
CV34 4SS
(01926) 418060
Please note that this report contains information in relation to protected species which
should remain confidential. The natural environment cannot be fully predicted, but the
findings of this report are based on the best available knowledge.
Written by: Neil Beamsley, Ecologist
Checked by: David Lowe, Principal Ecologist
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1
2 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................ 1
2.1
2.2
DESK STUDY.............................................................................................................................1
FIELD SURVEY......................................................................................................................... 1
3 RESULTS ............................................................................................................. 1
3.1 DESK STUDY.............................................................................................................................1
3.1.1
Statutory Sites……………………………………………………………………………….2
3.1.2
Non-statutory sites ................................................................................................................ 2
3.1.3
Protected species ................................................................................................................... 2
3.1.4
Phase 1 habitat data............................................................................................................... 2
3.2 FIELD SURVEY......................................................................................................................... 3
3.2.1
Habitats ................................................................................................................................. 3
3.2.2
Fauna..................................................................................................................................... 5
4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................. 6
4.1
4.2
CONCLUSIONS.........................................................................................................................6
RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................................................................7
5 REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 9
6 APPENDICES........................................................................................................................10
1
INTRODUCTION
Warwickshire County Council Ecology Unit was commissioned by Coventry City
Council to undertake an Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey of the Westwood School, in
relation to the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme.
The scope of the survey was as follows:
- Desk Study
- Site Visit
o To determine the habitats present within the site, and to assess their
nature conservation value.
o To assess the potential for protected species to use the habitats within
the site
- Report
o To highlight any potential ecological constraints or opportunities at the
site in relation to future development.
The site is located off Mitchell Avenue in Coventry at National Grid Reference
SP 291 770.
2
2.1
METHODOLOGY
Desk Study
A search of the records held by the Warwickshire Biological Records Centre was
undertaken for the area up to 1km around the site. This included statutory and nonstatutory nature conservation designations and records of protected species.
A search was also made of the Habitat Biodiversity Audit (HBA) data for existing
Phase 1 Habitat information for the site and surrounding area up to 1km.
2.2
Field survey
An Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey of the school site was undertaken on 8th May
2008, in accordance with the standard methodology (NCC, 1990 updated JNCC,
2003). This involved the classification of habitats according to the species present and
target noting features worthy of further investigation. An assessment was also made
of the potential of the habitats to support protected species. Any evidence of protected
or notable species was recorded during the site visit. Other incidental observations of
fauna were also noted.
3
3.1
RESULTS
Desk Study
The full results of the data search are presented in Appendix 1 and are summarised
below:
1
3.1.1. Statutory Sites
There is one statutory site that falls within 1km of the school boundary. This is Ten
Shilling Wood Local Nature Reserve (LNR) which is immediately to the north of the
school site.
3.1.2 Non-statutory sites
The school grounds are not currently subject to any non-statutory designations. The
northern boundary of the school is adjacent to a Site of Importance for Nature
Conservation (SINC), known as ‘Ten Shilling Wood’. The wood is also an LNR (see
above). This site supports mostly broad-leaved woodland and a diverse ground flora
dominated by native bluebells. There are several other non-statutory ‘Ecosites’ within
a 1km radius of the school site, see Appendix 1 for further details.
3.1.3
Protected species
There are records of great crested newt Triturus cristatus and common pipistrelle bat
Pipistrellus pipistrellus close to the school site. Both are European Protected Species.
These species are also fully protected in the UK under the 1981 Wildlife and
Countryside Act (WCA) (as amended), the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c..)
Regulations 1994, (as amended 2007) and the Countryside and Rights of Way
(CROW) Act 2000. Great crested newts are a Priority UK and local Biodiversity
Action Plan (BAP) species, and bats are included in the local BAP.
Other protected species from the surrounding area include water vole to the north of
the site, along Canley Brook. Water voles are now (as amended April 2008) subject to
full protection under the WCA act (1981). This protection extends to the disturbance,
harm or killing of the individual and disturbance and destruction of its burrow.
There are also records of other species with limited protection in the immediate area,
these being common frog Rana temporaria and smooth newt Triturus vulgaris. Both
species are afforded protection from sale only under the 1981 WCA (as amended).
3.1.4
Phase 1 habitat data
Existing information held by the Habitat Biodiversity Audit (HBA) indicates that the
site itself supports amenity grassland, buildings, areas of bare ground, areas of
amenity shrub planting and hedgerows. Much of the remaining search area (i.e. 1km
buffer around the site) is either built up or comprises amenity grassland and improved
pasture bounded with hedgerows, with small areas of scrub, woodland, amenity
grassland and semi-improved grassland.
2
3.2
Field Survey
3.2.1 Habitats
The Extended Phase 1 Habitat survey was undertaken on 8th May 2008 by Neil
Beamsley, Becky May and Agni-Louiza Arampoglou of the WCC Ecology Unit. The
site contains the following habitats:
 Amenity grassland
 Buildings
 Hedgerows and mature trees
 Scrub
 Semi improved grassland
 Standing water
 Tall ruderal
Each habitat is described below, with features of ecological interest and detailed
species lists given in Appendix 2. Plates showing ecological features recorded on site
are presented in Appendix 3.
Amenity Grassland
The majority of the grounds surrounding the school were considered to be amenity
type grasslands of varying quality but low overall ecological value.
Nearly all areas of the amenity grasslands consisted of short cropped grasses. These
were either mown or subject to regular footfall and therefore stressed and patchy in
places. Species such as perennial rye grass, Yorkshire fog, creeping buttercup and
cock’s-foot were dominant in most areas of the grounds.
In the less disturbed areas species such as wavy bittercress, doves-foot crane’s bill and
cuckooflower were present in small numbers. However these patches were isolated
and likely to be diminishing.
Buildings
The buildings were mostly brick-built structures with flat or shallow pitched roof
spaces, lined with steel sheeting or felt. Some buildings were of a more raised pitch
with roofing tiles.
Hedgerows and mature trees
A number of mature and semi-mature trees were observed on-site, along with a
number of mature hedgerows.
Within the school grounds were several small stands of mature and semi-mature trees.
These consisted of up to 15 standard trees, mostly of cherry, maple, sycamore and
poplar species.
3
Around the outer boundary of the school grounds were mostly well established
hedgerows. These were predominately hawthorn, populated with individual examples
of elder, dog rose, field maple and blackthorn. These hedges were tall and managed to
presumably provide a visual screen to the school.
Within the ground were a number of mature hedgerows that were used to mark the
boundaries between the main school grounds and outer playing fields. These hedges
were mature and well populated, with very few large gaps. Hawthorn, blackthorn,
field rose, field maple and elder were the dominant species.
Scrub
A small patch of scrub was noted to the rear of the buildings in the south-eastern
corner of the site. The scrub was dominated by suckering blackthorn but there was
also a diverse ground flora present including field speedwell, lesser stitchwort,
common cat’s-ear, wood sage, common bird’s foot trefoil, lesser trefoil, bluebell,
common sorrel, slender speedwell, lords and ladies, ground ivy, slender thistle and
field woodrush.
Semi improved grassland
Consultation with the aerial photography provided appeared to show that the area to
the far south west of the school site had recently been re-seeded. This was evident on
the ground, with the mainly amenity species mix being patchy and poorly established
in some places.
Within this area was a small patch of species rich vegetation. This was a small
(roughly 10x2m) patch of significant plant species not found anywhere else on-site.
Species such as fodder burnet, cowslip, oxeye daisy and cut-leaved crane’s bill were
all recorded.
As these species were not found growing anywhere else on-site it was felt that this
area, although attractive and ecologically valuable, was the result of a deliberate
habitat creation project using a species-rich flower seed mix. It is not therefore
indicative of the value of the overall site.
Standing water
There was a remnant pond near to the south eastern boundary with marsh marigold
and meadowsweet.
Tall Ruderal
Many of the boundary margins within the grounds were considered to be tall ruderal
vegetation. This was mainly a consequence of the areas that were not accessible to the
regular grass cutting activities on-site. Such areas were considered to offer a
reasonably valuable refuge to ground dwelling species on-site.
The northern boundary of the site was a continual bank of ruderal vegetation. This
area was dominated by species such as bramble, elder, rosebay willowherb and
4
grasses such as red fescue and Yorkshire fog. A single female common frog was
found in this margin.
3.2.2 Fauna
Badgers
Possible evidence of badger activity was recorded on-site. This was in the form of a
‘push-through’ under the security fence that borders the north of the site and a clear
run along the southern boundary fence. One small dung-pit and several snuffle holes
were also recorded along the northern boundary. These areas are marked on the site
map in Appendix 2.
Bats
The majority of the buildings within the site were considered to have limited potential
for roosting bats, lacking most of the features usually associated with roosting. Nearly
all of the buildings had flat or shallow pitched roof spaces, lined with steel sheeting or
felt. Much of the weatherboarding around the flat roof areas appeared to be tightly
fitted and offered limited potential bat access. Few other access points were observed
around areas of lead flashing. Some areas were of a more raised pitch with roofing
tiles, and were considered to offer more roosting potential.
Two large oak trees, situated in Ten Shilling Wood, but largely overhanging the
school grounds, were considered to have medium to high bat potential. These trees
exhibited a number of features that could potentially be of use to bats. It should be
noted that Ten Shilling Wood is likely to support a significant population of roosting
bats of various species.
Other mammals
No evidence of other protected or notable mammals was recorded. The habitats within
the site were not considered suitable for dormice, otter or water vole.
Herpetofauna
The remnant pond near to the southern boundary had very little surface water and was
not considered to be suitable for breeding amphibians.
Some areas of the playing fields, especially close to the western boundary of the site
appeared to be retaining water, but this was not pooling. A single common frog was
found along the northern boundary of the site, however no further amphibians or
reptiles were encountered.
A small area of rocky bare ground was observed along the western boundary of the
site. This was considered to offer some basking potential for any reptiles within the
area, although no evidence of reptiles was recorded.
5
Nesting birds
Several common bird species were noted during the site visit. These included carrion
crow, swift, magpie, blue tit, wren, green woodpecker and chiffchaff. Bird nesting
opportunities were present in all the trees, shrubs and hedgerows within the site.
Invertebrates
The majority of habitats within the site were intensively managed and were not
considered to be of significant value for invertebrates. Areas of unmanaged grassland,
scrub and hedgerows, along with limited areas of tall ruderal vegetation, would be of
higher value to invertebrates.
Several speckled wood butterflies were noted during the site visit. This species is not
currently subject to any species action plan, as it is considered to be a locally common
species.
4
4.1
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions
This site is considered to offer a limited resource for wildlife. The majority of the site
is dominated by habitats of relatively low ecological value, such as amenity grassland,
buildings and hardstanding. Some areas, mostly at the periphery of the site, including
the areas of unmanaged semi-improved grassland, scrub and hedgerows are of higher
ecological value and the area to the immediate north of the site (Ten Shilling Wood)
is considered to be of considerable value to wildlife. These will mostly be unaffected
by the proposals for the redevelopment of the site (as shown on IID Architects
Drawing Nos 987-WW-PL-02 and -03), although there will some tree removal
elsewhere within the site. Proposals for landscaping will need to include native tree
species to compensate for these losses.
The buildings were considered to have some, albeit limited, potential to support
roosting bats. Conclusively ruling out the potential presence of bats can be difficult.
Further survey work would be required to determine if bats are roosting within the
buildings scheduled for demolition as shown on IID Architects Drawing Nos. 987WW-PL-02 and -03. If bats were present, then the proposed works would require a
derogation licence from Natural England, to include a scheme of mitigation designed
to avoid adverse impacts on individuals and on the conservation status of the local
population. The mature oak trees identified as having bat potential would not be
impacted by the proposals as shown on the above drawings.
Peripheral areas of the site, especially the damp area along the north western corner of
the site, are considered to be suitable for commuting amphibians and reptiles. As
there are several local records, this could potentially include the European protected
great crested newt and other protected species such as grass snake and slow worm.
The proposed works as shown on the above drawings would not impact on these
areas. Remaining habitats within the site are considered to be largely unsuitable for
6
herpetofauna. If newts or reptiles are found during any development works, then
works would have to cease and Natural England be informed.
It is considered likely that badgers use this site for foraging overnight. Individuals are
probably accessing the site via Ten Shilling Wood, as a mammal ‘push-through’ was
recorded under the boundary fence. Foraging activity and territorial behaviour was
also recorded in this area. No badger setts were recorded within the site boundary and
very few locations suitable for badgers to establish setts were identified. It is not
considered likely that any development at the site would significantly adversely affect
any local population.
The trees and shrubs within the site provide good nesting opportunities for birds and if
any would be removed as part of any development at the site, then there would be
potential for an offence under the Wildlife and Countryside Act.
The site may also support a number of invertebrate and small mammal species, in the
peripheral habitats, although any impacts from development of the site are unlikely to
be significant. It is not considered likely that the site supports any other protected or
notable species. Overall the site is considered to be of low ecological value, but with
the potential to be greatly improved.
4.2
Recommendations
The site is currently considered to be of limited ecological value. However, in light of
the proposed works to be carried out, further specialist ecological survey work will be
required.
We would therefore make the following recommendations in regards to safeguarding
and enhancing provisions on-site for protected species and habitats:
 Retained trees and hedgerows should be protected during the development in
accordance with British Standard BS5837: 1991, ‘A Guide for Trees in Relation
to Construction’. The proposed new areas of planting or habitat creation will
compensate for the loss of several trees to the development works, in accordance
with PPS9. All planting should be native and sourced locally.
 As the existing music department and CLASP buildings are proposed for
demolition, a pre-determinative bat survey of these buildings should be undertaken
at an appropriate time of year by a suitably experienced ecologist. The survey
should include a daytime inspection of cavities and other suitable features, together
with at least two dusk surveys to record bat activity (and a dawn survey if deemed
appropriate). The results of this survey together with any proposed mitigation
should be submitted with the planning application.
 The proposals do not appear to impact on any areas that have the potential to
support protected amphibians or reptiles. If the peripheral areas of unmanaged
grassland, scrub and hedgerows are to be impacted by future proposals, then a
reptile and invertebrate survey should be carried out. If such species are present,
then a scheme of mitigation should be designed to avoid impacts on the species
present.
7
 If any great crested newts are found during any development works, then all work
must cease whilst Natural England is contacted for advice.
 Breeding birds have been noted on-site. The proposal involves removing several
mature trees. These must be checked by a suitably qualified ecologist, prior to any
work going ahead. Birds can nest in many places including buildings, trees, shrubs
dense ivy, and bramble/rose scrub. Birds can nest at any time, and the site should
ideally be checked for their presence by an experienced ecologist immediately
before work starts.
 All works should be carried out in a sensitive manner and all personnel on-site
should be briefed on how to identify grass snakes, newts, badger signs and nesting
birds and what to do should they encounter any such species.
8
5
REFERENCES
CIRIA C587 Guidance on the optimal timing for carrying out specialist ecological
surveys and mitigation. www.ciria.org/pdf/calendar.pdf
English Nature (2001) Great Crested Newt Mitigation Guidelines, English Nature,
Peterborough.
English Nature (2004) Reptiles: guidelines for developers, English Nature,
Peterborough.
JNCC, (2003). Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey: A technique for environmental
audit (reprint). Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.
Langton T.E.S., Beckett, C.L. and Foster, J.P. (2001), Great Crested Newt Conservation
Handbook, Froglife, Halesworth.
Natural England, (2004) Bat mitigation guidelines:, English Nature Publication
Warwickshire BAP website http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/biodiversity
UK BAP website http://www.ukbap.org.uk/default.aspx
9
APPENDIX 1
Desk Study
APPENDIX 2
Site Report and Species List
APPENDIX 3
Plates