ecological assessment report

Ecological Assessment Report Phase 1 Habitat Survey and Protected Species Assessment

Site: Buckingham Hotel, Burlington Road, Buxton, Derbyshire

Client: A. Barar

Report published: 13/08/13

updated : 22/07/14

Prepared by: Megan Cox BSc (Hons) PGDip MIEAM

2

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTON ................................................................................................................................ 4

1.1 Background ............................................................................................................................. 4

1.2 Landscape and Site Description .............................................................................................. 4

1.3 Development Proposals .......................................................................................................... 7

2 SURVEY METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 9

2.1 Desk Study ............................................................................................................................... 9

2.2 Phase One Habitat Survey ....................................................................................................... 9

2.3 Protected Species Survey ...................................................................................................... 10

3 BASELINE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................. 13

3.1 Aerial Photography ............................................................................................................... 13

3.2 Statutory Designated Sites .................................................................................................... 13

3.3 Non-statutory designated sites ............................................................................................. 13

3.4 Notable Habitats ................................................................................................................... 13

3.5 Biodiversity Action Plan Habitats .......................................................................................... 14

4 HABITAT EVALUATION .................................................................................................................. 15

4.1 Habitats ................................................................................................................................. 15

5 PROTECTED SPECIES EVALUATION ............................................................................................... 17

5.1 Badger (Meles meles) ............................................................................................................ 17

5.2 Bats (Chiroptera sp.) ............................................................................................................. 17

5.3 Dormice (Muscardinus avellanarius) .................................................................................... 18

5.4 Reptiles.................................................................................................................................. 18

5.5 Birds ...................................................................................................................................... 18

5.6 Great crested newt (Triturus cristatus) ................................................................................. 18

5.7 Survey Constraints ................................................................................................................ 19

6 CONCLUSIONS AND NECESSARY PROCEDURAL GUIDANCE .......................................................... 20

6.1 Summary ............................................................................................................................... 20

6.2 Bats........................................................................................................................................ 20

6.3 Bird Welfare .......................................................................................................................... 22

6.4 Bird Nesting Provision ........................................................................................................... 22

7 FURTHER ECOLOGICAL ENHANCEMENTS ..................................................................................... 23

7.1 Creation and Enhancement of Green Infrastructure: Planning Policy Support .................... 23

7.2 Types of Green Roofs and Living Walls ................................................................................. 24

7.3 Environmental Benefits of Green Roofs and Living Walls..................................................... 25

7.3.3 Storm water and flood mitigation................................................................................. 26

3

7.3.4 Reduced urban heat island effect ................................................................................. 27

7.3.5 Enhanced carbon sequestration ................................................................................... 27

7.3.6 Air purification & dust suppression .............................................................................. 28

7.3.7 Enhanced noise reduction ............................................................................................ 29

7.3.8 Increased Biodiversity ................................................................................................... 29

7.4 Biodiverse Roof Proposal ...................................................................................................... 30

7.5 Living Wall Proposal .............................................................................................................. 30

8 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................. 32

APPENDICES .......................................................................................................................................... 35

APPENDIX 1………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….36

APPENDIX 2 ....................................................................................................................................... 56

4

1 INTRODUCTON

1.1 BACKGROUND

1.1.1 Megan Cox, BSc (Hons) PGDip MIEAM, was commissioned by Mr. Ajeet Barar to

undertake a Phase One Habitat Survey and protected species assessment of

Buckingham Hotel, Burlington Road, Buxton, Derbyshire (53.257412N, -1.921591E).

1.1.2 The purpose of the Phase 1 survey is to:

Identify the presence or likely presence of any protected or notable species

or habitats on or adjacent to the site;

Assess the potential impact of any proposed works on existing protected or

notable species and/or habitats present on or adjacent to the site, and make

recommendations for mitigation of said impacts;

Identify any further necessary specialist reports relating to protected species

or habitats and suggest the extent of such reports.

1.1.3 The Phase 1 Habitat Survey included a desktop review and a site visit. An assessment

of the conservation importance of habitats in the surrounding area and habitats

located within the perimeter of the site, was made. Additionally, the potential of each

habitat to support protected species was noted.

1.1.4 It should be noted that a Phase 1 Habitat Survey does not constitute a full protected

species survey but is a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal used as a tool to recommend

whether more detailed surveys are required for protected, Biodiversity Action Plan, or

other notable species of significant conservation interest.

1.1.5 Recommendations for further ecological surveys may also be made.

1.2 LANDSCAPE AND SITE DESCRIPTION

1.2.1 Buxton is located in the north-west of Derbyshire, five kilometres from the County

boundary with Cheshire and three kilometres from the boundary with Staffordshire.

1.2.2 Generally acknowledged as the highest town in England, at 300m above sea level

the historic spa town of Buxton is located at the heart of the Peak District and is

almost entirely encircled by the Peak District National Park, within three kilometres

in most directions.

5

1.2.3 Buxton sits on the divide between the White Peak and the Dark Peak – two

characteristic landforms of the Peak District. Overlooking the River Wye, the

southern area of the town lies on a plateau of carboniferous limestone, whilst the

north and west of the town fall on Millstone Grit, distinguishing the upland

landscape to the north of the town (High Peak Borough Council, 2013).

1.2.4 For thousands of years, water has percolated through the limestone to the south of

the town. Naturally flowing northwards, until it reaches the harder, more

impermeable grit stone, the water is forced to the surface to form the many

mineral-rich springs for which Buxton is famous (High Peak Borough Council,

2013).

1.2.5 The northern, Dark Peak landscape comprises open moorland, enclosed acid

grassland and settled, pastoral landscapes on valley slopes (Derbyshire County

Council, 2013a).

1.2.6 The uplands are characterised by gently rolling heather moorland habitats formed

over Millstone Grit sandstones. Raw peat soils tend to support common heather

(Calluna vulgaris), cross-leaved heath (Erica tetralix), and bilberry (Vaccinium

myrtillus), whilst in the wetter areas of blanket bog, heather is replaced by cotton-

grass (Eriophorum angustifolium) and sphagnum moss species (Sphagnum

sp.)(Derbyshire County Council, 2013a). The uplands are important habitats for

ground-nesting birds. The landscape is extensively managed for sheep grazing and

grouse shooting (Derbyshire County Council, 2013a).

1.2.7 On the lower slopes of the upland valleys of the Dark Peak, a more wooded, pastoral

landscape predominates: small, irregular fields of hedgerow-enclosed improved

pasture; wooded corridors extend along river and stream valleys; networks of

winding lanes connect small settlements and scattered stone farmsteads. Some

remnant, species-rich hay meadows occur and where, at higher altitudes, pasture is

less-intensively grazed, the ecological importance increases (Derbyshire County

Council, 2013a).

1.2.8 The White Peak landscape comprises areas of upland limestone plateau and

deep limestone dales (Derbyshire County Council, 2013b).

1.2.9 Extensive areas of pasture exist on the limestone plateau to the north-east, east and

southeast of Buxton. The topography is gently rolling, with limestone outcrops on

the summits of hills and on steeper slopes. Medium to large fields of improved

pasture for stock rearing are enclosed by dry stone walls (Derbyshire County Council,

2013b). Straight roads connect compact limestone villages and isolated farmsteads

with characteristic slate roofs (Derbyshire County Council, 2013b).

1.2.10 Much of the floristic diversity of the landscape has been lost to agricultural

improvement. However, where outcrops of veins of minerals such as lead, have

occurred and subsequently been exploited by small-scale quarrying, the resultant

disturbed land and spoil has formed an important refuge for rare plants and animals

(Derbyshire County Council, 2013b).

6

1.2.11 The dales to the east of Buxton comprise narrow, deeply incised valleys formed by

rivers and streams flowing away from the limestone plateau. The steep slopes and

extensive areas of exposed rock and scree make them inaccessible for anything

other than for rough grazing by sheep. The thin soils and relatively low grazing

pressure has protected areas of ancient woodland and species-rich calcareous

grassland, supporting species of national importance (Derbyshire County Council,

2013b).

1.2.12 The White Peak is significant as the junction between southern and northern

species of animals and plants (Derbyshire County Council, 2013b).

1.2.13 Buckingham Hotel itself is located at 1-2 Burlington Road, Buxton, Derbyshire,

SK17 9AS (Figure 1). The site comprises a thirty-seven bedroom Victorian

hotel with car park.

Figure 1 Location of Buckingham Hotel

1.2.14 Located at the junction between St. John's Road and Burlington Road, the local area

comprises mature, tree-lined avenues within the main streets. To the south and

south-east of Buckingham hotel are a series of public parks such as Pavilion Gardens,

and the Serpentine Walks, winding through the Wye valley, where the course of the

river has been adapted to create lakes, ponds and waterfalls amongst dense

7

concentrations of mature trees. The immediate area is characterised by large

Victorian residential gardens with mixes of exotic conifers and evergreen shrubs.

1.2.15 The curtilage of the Buckingham Hotel building currently comprises an area

approximately 0.16 ha. With the total land under development comprising

approximately 0.21 ha. (Figure 2). The post development building footprint will

increase, thereby reducing by 0.36 ha. the area of land outside the building’s

current footprint.

Figure 2 Hotel curtilage

1.2.16 The north, east and south boundaries of the site comprise hedgerows with trees,

with car parking to the east and west of the building for thirty-two cars. To the north

and south of the building there are two small areas of amenity grassland with

horticultural planting.

1.3 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS

1.3.1 The footprint of the new building will be enlarged; 60% of the proposed increase

formed plans which were granted Full Planning Permission by High Peak Borough

Council in 2002 (HPK/2002/0072), subsequently renewed in 2006 (HPK/2006/0802).

1.3.2 The building will also be extended above ground by an additional single storey and

below ground by two new basement levels, making three new storeys in total.

8

1.3.3 As is presently the case, the newly developed site will comprise hotel visitor

bedrooms including bar and restaurant areas. Basement areas will be largely be

given over to parking.

1.3.4 All heating and cooling demands will be met on-site by renewable means.

1.3.5 As viewed from Burlington and St John’s Roads, the proposed building will present a

visual and architectural resemblance to the current building, by incorporating the

existing external stonework in the dual frontages.

1.3.6 The developer is determined that the redevelopment, in so far as is possible, sets an

environmental benchmark for sustainable development, especially through natural

habitat creation and exploitation of its subterranean footprint, and is seeking

BREEAM “Very Good/Excellent” accreditations.

1.3.7 Within this overall aspiration, the developer is seeking to go beyond mere habitat

creation and maximisation of biodiversity to explore opportunities for research on

sustainable urban development where feasible.

1.3.8 Further recommendations for ecological enhancement of the site are outlined in

section 7 and Supplementary Materials.

9

2 SURVEY METHODOLOGY

2.1 DESK STUDY

2.1.1 Statutory and non-statutory designated sites, legally protected species and features of

interest within, immediately surrounding, and including a 2km radius of the site, are

conducted through database searches:

The National Biodiversity Network Gateway website National

Biodiversity Network (National Biodiversity Network, 2013)

(Appendix 1);

MAGIC (Multi-Agency Geographical Information for the Countryside)

website (Defra 2013) (Appendix 2);

And reference to:

Ordnance survey mapping (to identify potentially noteworthy

habitats;

Aerial photography

2.1.2 In addition, a search was conducted for invasive plant species such as Japanese

knotweed (Fallopia japonica). Hedgerows were surveyed to determine if any met the

requirements of ‘important hedgerows’ under the 1997 Hedgerows Regulations.

2.1.3 The grid reference of the site, SK053733, was used as the central point of all searches.

2.2 PHASE ONE HABITAT SURVEY

2.2.1 A Phase 1 Habitat survey and protected species scoping survey was undertaken by

Megan Cox, BSc (Hons) PGDip MIEAM on the 20th June 2013.

2.2.2 Survey methodology followed JNCC (Joint Nature Conservation Committee) guidelines

(JNCC, 2010) and included mapping habitat types. Additionally, the site was assessed

for signs and evidence of protected, Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) and rare species in

accordance with Natural England Guidelines Survey (Natural England Guidance, 2011).

2.2.3 Field surveying comprised a walkover inspection of the land and habitats present and

classification of the habitats to Phase 1 standard.

10

2.2.4 A Phase 1 Habitat Survey provides information on the habitats in a survey area and

identifies the actual or potential presence of legally protected or otherwise notable

species/habitats on or immediately adjacent to the site. The main habitats within and

surrounding the site were mapped and are shown (Figure 3).

2.2.5 Target notes, i.e. more detailed descriptions of a particular area in terms of habitat

and species composition or means of highlighting a particular feature of ecological or

other interest are given where appropriate.

2.2.6 Plant names follow ‘New Flora of the British Isles’ Stace (1997). When first mentioned,

the common and scientific name of each botanical species is provided, but only the

common name is stated thereafter.

2.2.7 In addition to establishing the baseline ecological interest within the area, the survey

is intended to identify areas where further surveys may be required. Potential

habitats for legally protected or national/local BAP priority species, including but not

limited to bats, breeding birds, plants and amphibians were noted.

2.2.8 Ecological surveys are limited by factors that affect presence of plants and animals

such as time of year, migration patterns and behaviour. The survey was undertaken in

June an optimal time to undertake a Phase 1 Habitat Survey (Natural England

Guidance, 2011).

2.3 PROTECTED SPECIES SURVEY

2.3.1 Bats

2.3.1.1 Legislation: All UK bats and their roosts are protected by law under the

Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) through their inclusion on

Schedule 5. Bats are also included on Annex IV of Council Directive

92/43/EEC of 21st May 1992 on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of

Wild Fauna and Flora (known as the Habitats Directive). The following is a

summary of their legal protection:

Deliberately capture, injure or kill a bat;

Intentionally or recklessly disturb a bat in its roost or

deliberately disturb a group of bats;

Damage or destroy a bat roosting place (even if bats are not

occupying the roost at the time);

Possess or advertise/sell/exchange a bat (dead or alive) or any

part of a bat;

Intentionally or recklessly obstruct access to a bat roost.

2.3.1.2 An unaided visual ground level survey for potential bat habitats in trees on

site and on the site boundary was undertaken and included a check for signs

11

and evidence of bat activity, as well as potential suitability for roosting and

access.

2.3.1.3 Survey methodology was based on Bat Conservation Trust (BCT) (Bat

Conservation Trust, 2007) and Natural England guidelines (English Nature,

2004), which included assessing potential habitats for:

Potentially suitable roosting sites were based on large enough

cracks, crevices, hollows, loose bark providing cavities and

significant ivy (Hedera helix) growth on trees;

Landscape-scale features: potential foraging area, linear

features, woodland structure

2.3.2 Great Crested Newt

2.3.2.1 Legislation: Great Crested Newts are UK and European protected species

under Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) through their

inclusion on Schedule 5. Great Crested Newts are also included on Annex IV

of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21st May 1992 on the Conservation of

Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora (known as the Habitats

Directive). The following is a summary of the legislation as it applies to

developments:

Intentionally kill, injure, or capture Great Crested newts or their

young;

Disturb the eggs of Great Crested Newts;

Intentionally or recklessly damage, destroy or obstruct access to

areas used by great crested newts for shelter or protection

(which is taken to include water bodies used by Great Crested

Newts);

Intentionally or recklessly disturb Great Crested Newts while

they are occupying a structure or place which is used by them

for shelter or protection.

2.3.2.2 Great Crested Newt Assessment: Ponds on a site are assessed for suitability

for Great Crested Newts (Triturus cristatus) by undertaking Habitat

Suitability Index (HSI) scores, as developed by Oldham et al. (2000) which

assesses factors such as presence of fish, water quality, shading, and

macrophyte (aquatic plants growing in or near water, either emerging from

the water, beneath the surface, or as floating cover.

2.3.3 Breeding Birds

2.3.3.1 Legislation: Under Section 1 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as

amended), wild birds are protected from being killed, injured or captured,

12

while their nests and eggs are protected from being damaged, destroyed or

taken. In addition, certain species such as the barn owl are included in

Schedule 1 of the Act and are protected against disturbance while nesting

and when they have dependent young.

2.3.3.2 Breeding Bird Assessment: Birds were observed and birdsong noted on the

site during the survey and vegetation was summarily checked for the

presence of nests.

13

3 BASELINE CONDITIONS

3.1 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY

3.1.1 Study of aerial photography and Ordnance survey maps revealed no standing water

bodies on the site.

3.1.2 Large standing water bodies are found within 500m of the site to the southeast, with

the River Wye, approximately 90m to the south.

3.1.3 Intensively managed amenity grassland, and busy roads however, reduce connectivity

between ponds and the site.

3.2 STATUTORY DESIGNATED SITES

3.2.1 Statutory Designated Sites of nature conservation interest within 2km of the site

boundary include:

National Park (England): Peak District (1438 sq.km.);

Special Area of Conservation (England): South Pennine Moors (65025.5

ha.);

Sites of Special Scientific Interest (England): Poole's Cavern and Grin Low

Wood (41.54 ha.); and Goyt Valley (26.12 ha.);

Local Nature Reserve (England): Ferneydale grassland (5.24ha.);

3.2.2 A full list of results preformed via MAGIC (2013) can be found in Appendix 1.

3.3 NON-STATUTORY DESIGNATED SITES

3.3.1 No non-statutory designated site for nature conservation is located within 2km of the

site boundary.

3.4 NOTABLE HABITATS

3.4.1 The majority of the woodlands within the 2km area of the site boundary are included

in the National Inventory of Woodland and Trees (MAGIC, 2013).

14

3.5 BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN HABITATS

3.5.1 Peak District Biodiversity Actions Plans reflect the UK targets for habitats of

conservation concern, and translates them to a local level.

3.5.2 A number of priority BAP habitats were found within 2km of the Buckingham Hotel

site boundary including:

Areas of Lowland Calcareous Grassland, Lowland Dry Acid Grassland BAP

Priority Habitat and Lowland Meadows BAP Priority Habitat;

Seven areas of Blanket Bog BAP Priority Habitat and single areas of Fen

BAP Priority Habitat and Purple Moor Grass and Rush Pasture;

Five Traditional Orchards and one possible area of Wood-pasture and

Parkland

Three areas of Ancient & Semi-Natural Woodland:

o Corbar Woods (7.46 ha.);

o Ashwood Dale South (1) (2.61 ha.);

o Ashwood Dale South (2) (4.59 ha.) (MAGIC, 2013).

15

4 HABITAT EVALUATION

4.1 HABITATS

4.1.1 The habitats at the site are very limited and comprise low ecological value (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Phase 1 Habitat survey map

4.1.1.1 Hard-standing The vast majority of the area comprised car park

with no ecological value.

4.1.1.2 Amenity Grassland Two areas of amenity grassland were surveyed. The

habitats are species poor and dominated by

perennial rye grass (Lolium perenne), Yorkshire fog

(Holcus lanantus), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus

repens), dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), nettle

(Urtica dioica), flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) and

common dock (Rumex obtusifolius).

4.1.1.3 Introduced shrub Areas of introduced shrub in the north patch of

amenity planting include Leylandii sp.

16

4.1.1.4 Hedgerow with trees The property is bordered by species poor hedge and

trees with beech (Fagus sylvatica), bird cherry

(Prunus padus), hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna),

lilac (Syringa vulgaris) and elder (Sambucus nigra)

being dominated by six mature small-leaved lime

trees (Tilia cordata).

4.1.2 All trees were subject to a professional survey which found (with one exception) all

on-site trees to be individually of only low or adequate amenity value as per BS: 5837

2012.

4.1.3 No invasive plant species were noted on site.

17

5 PROTECTED SPECIES EVALUATION

N.B. The National Biodiversity Network (NBN) provides an online source of species distribution data,

however, there is a likelihood that not all records exist on such databases and not all parts of the UK

have been effectively surveyed. Therefore species data coverage may be incomplete and patchy. The

absence of a record for a species in an area does not necessarily mean that the species is not present.

5.1 BADGER (MELES MELES)

5.1.1 The National Biodiversity Network had no confirmed records of the presence of

Badger within 2km of the site.

5.1.2 During the course of the survey no evidence of badger presence or setts were

observed.

5.2 BATS (CHIROPTERA SP.)

5.2.1 A search of National Biodiversity Network found one record indicating the presence of

a bat species within 2km of Buckingham Hotel. Natterer's Bat (Myotis nattereri) was

found during a Hibernation Survey by the Bat Conservation Trust in the area of Poole's

Cavern and Grin Low Wood to the south.

5.2.2 Natterer's Bat has numerous records from the White Peak and Magnesian Limestone

areas of the north-east of Derbyshire, with known roosts in the Peak District. It

hibernates in caves (Derbyshire Mammal Group (2013). Furthermore, of the eighteen

species of bat resident in the UK, all have been recorded in Derbyshire, including:

Brown Long-eared, Natterer’s, Whiskered, Bechstein’s, Brandt’s (Derbyshire Mammal

Group (2013).

5.2.3 A number of habitat features at a variety of scales both on and surrounding the

Buckingham Hotel site are indicative of the potential for the presence of protected bat

species, including:

Mature street trees with features of veterancy, such as flaking bark,

cracks, and rot holes, of potential importance to roosting bats;

Presence of older buildings for roosting sites, which are within 500m of

woodland and water;

Linear habitat features such as hedgerows, lines of street trees, often

used as foraging corridors;

Open water: potentially important foraging areas for invertebrate prey.

18

5.2.4 During the survey the building was assessed as having medium potential for providing

roosting, foraging or commuting habitat for bats. The building is not in a favourable

state of repair, with the south and west fascia boards being in poor condition giving

possible access to the roof space for bats.

5.2.5 At the landscape scale the site is within 100m of a riparian corridor through park land

which includes linear features that could be of navigational importance to bats. As

such, a full building assessment, desktop study and bat survey have been

commissioned (Supplementary Material: Bat Habitat Assessment)

5.3 DORMICE (MUSCARDINUS AVELLANARIUS)

5.3.1 There are no records of dormice within the 10km grid square containing the survey

site and dormice are known only to have a scattered remnant population in

Derbyshire. The site is too fragmented, within a landscape context, in relation to this

highly fastidious easily disturbed species.

5.3.2 No signs of dormice were noted during the survey.

5.4 REPTILES

5.4.1 There are records of grass snake (Natrix natrix) and slow worm (Anguis fragilus)

within the 10km grid square containing the survey site.

5.4.2 No signs of reptiles were noted during the survey.

5.5 BIRDS

5.5.1 A swallow (Hirundo rustica) nest was observed on the south side of the building.

Jackdaws (Corvus monedula) were noted on the roof of this section of building too

and access was possible to the roof space of this section of building via gaps.

5.5.2 The proprietor had reported previous nesting jackdaws in the roof space. However a

sonic bird scaring device was installed at the beginning of this year and the jackdaws

appear not to have returned. The linear features of the site offer suitable habitat for a

range of nesting birds.

5.6 GREAT CRESTED NEWT (TRITURUS CRISTATUS)

5.6.1 The site offered no suitable terrestrial habitat for great crested newts. No suitable

aquatic habitat was located on site and as the site was bordered by main roads which

act as barriers for great crested newts it is very unlikely that they would be using the

site.

19

5.7 SURVEY CONSTRAINTS

5.7.1 There were no constraints to the survey (Natural England Guidance, 2011).

20

6 CONCLUSIONS AND NECESSARY PROCEDURAL

GUIDANCE

6.1 SUMMARY

6.1.1 Please note that all conclusions and recommendations are based upon the current

survey findings and on the proposal outlined. If the site management changes then

the potential for protected species to use the site may change accordingly. Many

protected species are also highly mobile and re-survey of the site may be necessary in

the future.

6.1.2 There are no statutory designated nature conservation sites that will be impacted by

the development.

6.1.3 The site offers low ecological value and was assessed as offering no suitable habitat

for any protected species due to the lack of suitable habitat and the isolation of the

site within an urban matrix which dramatically reduces the favourability for species of

low mobility. The two possible exceptions to this are bats and breeding birds.

6.2 BATS

6.2.1 The south and west sides of the building were identified as having possible entrances

to the roof for bats. Given the age of the building, surrounding habitat that could be

utilised by motile species such as bats and linear features of the site, it was

recommended a full bat habitat assessment (including desk study) be undertaken.

6.2.2 This was conducted between the dates of June-September 2013 and included internal

roof space inspection, external building inspection, tree assessment, emergence

surveys and a swarming survey.

6.2.3 The survey concluded that no bats were present at the site or using the site as habitat

for any purposes including commuting and foraging. The survey did identify a

particular lime tree as offering limited potential for bat roosts and recommended it is

soft felled (Cox, 2013).

21

Figure 4. Structural bat box

6.2.4 It is recommended that structural bat boxes (Figure 4) be implemented into the

design of the building - in and/or housed within the roof voids - if suitable access can

be facilitated.

6.2.5 It is impractical to be prescriptive as to the optimum number of boxes or their siting,

but the developer is keen to use Ecosurv’s range of 'Habibat' bat boxes, developed in

partnership with The Bat Conservation Trust, who aim to establish monitoring

schemes where the boxes are installed to determine the factors for successful uptake

and inform future designs. Ecosurv have expressed a willingness to act in a post

planning advisory capacity during detailed design stage.

6.2.6 Post-completion the developer is willing to install full spectrum monitoring for the

benefit of any collaborative research partner(s).

6.2.7 To encourage use of the newly created on-site roosts, maintain optimum foraging

availability and improve the connectivity of the site, bat sensitive lighting is

recommended as set out in Bats and lighting in the UK (Bat Conservation Trust, 2007).

22

6.3 BIRD WELFARE

6.3.1 Hedgerows, trees, crevices in fascia boards and scrub habitats have potential to be

used by a variety of bird species for nesting. Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act

1981 it is illegal to take, damage or destroy the nests of wild birds whilst being built or

in use (with exceptions). However, it is not an offence to carry out work in areas that

they use, outside of the nesting period. Therefore it is recommended that works,

particularly clearance of vegetation, are carried out during the period between 1st

October and end of February to avoid the breeding season.

6.3.2 If works to clear potential nesting habitat need to be carried out during the nesting

period (1st March to 30th September) a check should be made by an ecologist for

nesting birds, the day before the works are due to commence. Any birds nesting

should be left to complete their breeding (i.e. until the young have fully fledged)

before any works that will disturb the birds can take place.

6.4 BIRD NESTING PROVISION

6.4.1 It is recommended that nesting provision be made for a variety of species through

structurally integrated bird boxes and external nests where these are favoured by

certain species. Roof voids may again prove suitable.

6.4.2 Ecosurv, who work closely with the RSPB in connection with monitoring installed

boxes, produce a range of bird boxes/nests and will advise on the best combination of

boxes/nests during detailed design stage.

23

7 FURTHER ECOLOGICAL ENHANCEMENTS

7.1 CREATION AND ENHANCEMENT OF GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE: PLANNING

POLICY SUPPORT

7.1.1 Green infrastructure can be defined as the network of green spaces important for

biodiversity, recreation and cultural heritage within, around and between urban

areas. The concept takes into account the quality and well as the quantity of green

spaces, their multifunctional role, and the importance of the connectivity between

habitats.

7.1.2 Green infrastructure exists as a coherent planning entity in the National Planning

Policy Framework (Department for Communities and Local Government, 2012), with

the potential to guide urban development and offer many opportunities for the

integration between development, nature conservation and promotion of public and

environmental health.

7.1.3 The creation, enhancement and protection of the green infrastructure network is a

core principle of the High Peak Local Plan - Submission (High Peak Borough Council,

2014). Enhancement of green infrastructure through habitat creation, restoration and

the reconnection of isolated habitats, aims at making the built environment

permeable to wildlife from the surrounding countryside (High Peak Borough Council,

2014).

7.1.4 Green roofs and living walls are considered important design features to improve

permeability for wildlife (English Nature, 2003). The integration of green roofs in

urban spatial planning strategies has been shown to have great potential to enable

higher connectivity among green spaces for pollinating insects, for example (Braaker

et al., 2014; Supplementary Buckingham Hotel: Wild Bee Green Roof Meadow).

7.1.5 Furthermore, as well as providing habitat for biodiversity, green roofs and living walls

provide additional environmental and public health benefits such as better regulation

of building temperatures, reduction of urban heat-island effects, storm-water and

flood risk management and the control and prevention of pollution (Obendorfer et al.,

2007). Thus, the incorporation of green roofs and living walls into developments can

contribute to meeting the sustainability aims of both national (Department for

Communities and Local Government, 2012) and local (High Peak Borough Council,

2014) planning strategies.

7.1.6 Such design features are encouraged by some local authorities, for example, The

London Plan requires major developments to incorporate living. For example,

Hackney council expects major development, where feasible, to incorporate a living

roof on 80% of appropriate flat or gently sloping roof space and additionally provides

guidance for living walls (Hackney Council 2011). Likewise since 2011 in Sheffield, a

24

developer will need to include 80% vegetative cover on any new building over

1,000m² (Groundwork Sheffield, 2011).

7.2 TYPES OF GREEN ROOFS AND LIVING WALLS

7.2.1 The client wishes to significantly increase the (pre to post development) area of on-

site natural habitat. Given the constraints imposed by the limited footprint, such

ambitions can only be met by integration of habitat with the new building as part of

its external fabric (roof and walls).

7.2.2 Whilst green roofs (Figure 5.) come in many different forms and types, a distinction is

made between extensive, intensive and bio-diverse (wildlife) roofs. The latter are

similar in composition to an extensive roof, but designed specifically to recreate a

particular priority habitat or vegetation type that may be threatened in the local

region and/or support a particular target species or group of species - the chosen

development option.

Figure 5. Green Roof: Moorgate Crofts Business Centre, Rotherham

7.2.3 Green walls (Figure 6) originated simply as climbing plants such as ivy, growing on

buildings. Today the climbing plants no longer grow directly on the buildings but are

rooted in ground-based or intermediate containers which are trained to cover

specially designed supporting structures attached to existing walls or as freestanding

units (green façades). Alternatively the plants can be hydroponically grown directly

on a suitable medium attached to these structures which themselves are attached to

the walls (living walls) - the chosen development option.

25

Figure 6. Living Wall: Quai Branly Museum

7.3 ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF GREEN ROOFS AND LIVING WALLS

7.3.1 Sustainable development is a core strategy of the High Peak Local Plan (2014) helping

to:

deliver energy efficiency and minimise the amount of energy

needed for cooling and heating of buildings;

minimise surface water run-off and reduce flooding from intense

rainfall events;

protect the local environment through the conservation and

improvement of habitats;

mitigate the impacts of climate change by seeking reductions in

greenhouse gas emissions.

7.3.2 Improved water quality

7.3.2.1 Impervious surfaces such as asphalt, concrete, brick, and stone on

pavements, roads, driveways, car parks and roofs collect pollutants such as

oil, heavy metals, salts, pesticides, and nitrogen deposition. During runoff

events, these contaminants can wash into waterways. Research has been

shown to support the link between runoff from impervious surfaces and the

reduction of water quality in rivers, streams, lakes, ponds and groundwater

(Getter and Rowe, 2006).

26

7.3.2.2 Poor quality surface water run-off can therefore have a negative impact on

the ecological status of water bodies. In the UK, the Water Framework

Directive (WFD) requires all water-bodies to achieve “good ecological

potential or status” by 2027 and Local Planning Authorities are required to

ensure the ecological status of water bodies do not deteriorate as a result of

new development (High Peak Borough, 2014).

7.3.2.3 Green roofs have shown favourable results in reducing the concentrations of

nitrogen and phosphorus compounds and heavy metals in runoff

(Berndtsson et al., 2009). Nitrate nitrogen, a pollutant that contributes to

the eutrophication of water bodies, can be removed from rainwater by

vegetated roofs, however, for green roofs in general, the benefit of

rainwater treatment of other pollutants may be dependent on substrate

composition and depth, vegetation composition and management

(Berndtsson et al., 2009). However, green roofs also have the added

significant benefit of reducing the volume of run-off.

7.3.3 Storm water and flood mitigation

7.3.3.1 Reducing the high runoff during intense rainfall events has become an

imperative in urban environments where the high proportion of areas of

impervious surfaces can result in high volumes of run-off overwhelming

drainage systems and producing flash flooding of homes and businesses.

7.3.3.2 Historical development and high land prices in urban areas, make the

creation of storage reservoirs such as ponds and lakes, where water can be

temporary stored, and green areas, where water can naturally infiltrate and

evaporate, difficult, if not impossible (Mentens, et al., 2006). Thus, green

roofs may present an alternative solution to addressing flood risk mitigation

required of new developments (High Peak Borough, 2014).

7.3.3.3 The water storing capacity of green roofs means they can significantly

reduce the runoff peak of most rainfall events (Mentens, et al., 2006). The

reduction is achieved by:

delaying the initial time of runoff due to the absorption of water

in the green roof system;

reducing the total runoff by retaining part of the rainfall;

distributing the runoff over a longer time period through a

relative slow release of the excess water that is temporary

stored in the substrate.

7.3.3.4 Retention and slow-release of excess water is especially important in older

urban areas, such as in Buxton, where excess storm water enters the

wastewater system, which, when the capacity is exceeded, can dump raw

27

waste into homes, businesses and eventually rivers (Getter and Rowe,

2006).

7.3.4 Reduced urban heat island effect

7.3.4.1 The urban heat island effect refers to the phenomenon that temperatures

are often a few degrees higher in towns than they are in their surrounding

rural areas (Susca et al., 2011).

7.3.4.2 A large portion of this heat comes from the multitude of (dark) hard

surfaces, including exposed walls, which absorb the sunlight and radiation

and emit it as heat. Increasing urban vegetation has been shown to reduce

reflected heat and also cool the trapped air through evaporative cooling – in

effect green roofs and walls not only prevent a building's exterior from

absorbing heat, but cool the immediate surrounding air too (Susca et al.,

2011). Tests have shown green façades cool the exterior of buildings by as

much as 17⁰C.

7.3.4.3 Green roofs and living walls can both contribute to mitigating high

temperature in urban areas and the associated increases in energy use from

air conditioning demand, enhanced air pollution and heat-stress related

mortality and illness.

7.3.5 Enhanced carbon sequestration

7.3.5.1 Trees and plants act as natural carbon sinks, lessening the effects of global

warming. Carbon sinks are reservoirs that accumulate and store carbon for

an indefinite period. The process by which carbon sinks remove carbon

dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere is known as carbon sequestration and

their value is recognised by the Kyoto Protocol which promotes their use as

a form of carbon offset. The Peak District has high levels of per capita

carbon emissions and national targets are seeking an 80% reduction on 1990

levels by 2050 (High Peak Borough Council, 2014).

7.3.5.2 As plants grow, they absorb greenhouse gases (mainly CO2) from the

atmosphere and store it indefinitely in their tissues.

7.3.5.3 The present Buckingham Hotel site features six European limes within the

height range 13-16m, all of which will be removed (without replacement) to

enable the development. These trees were professionally assessed; three of

the six were found as having grown beyond the stage at which they are net

absorbers of CO2 from the atmosphere – leaving only three trees that are

actively reducing atmospheric CO2.

28

7.3.5.4 A 20 m2 area of extensive roof sequestrates (absorbs and stores) about the

same amount of carbon dioxide as a small (8m) tree whereas the density of

plants in living wall systems means the carbon sequestered from, 20 m2

living wall is about the same as a medium sized tree (10-20m). A 100 m2

area of extensive roof or 60 m2 of living wall will therefore provide the same

level of present onsite carbon sequestration (Capital Regional District,

2014).

7.3.5.5 Development proposals envisage 360 m2 of extensive green roof and over

1,000 m2 of living walls which equates to the carbon sequestration

achievable by nearly 70 trees (18 small sized & 50 medium trees) (Green

Over Grey, 2009).

7.3.6 Air purification & dust suppression

7.3.6.1 One of the biggest environmental issues currently facing the UK is the level

of pollution (Environmental Audit Committee, 2010).

7.3.6.2 Researchers from Birmingham and Lancaster universities investigated the

potential health improvements where vegetation was strategically

positioned close to busy roads (Pugh et al., 2012). The research found the

targeted positioning of green walls can reduce levels of two of the most

detrimental air pollutants by eight times more than previously believed

(Pugh et al., 2012).

7.3.6.3 Urban plants clean the air by absorbing and trapping nitrogen dioxide (NO2)

and microscopic particulate matter (PM), both of which are harmful to

human health and exceed safe levels on the streets of many cities. The UK

Government Environmental Audit Committee (2010) estimates that outdoor

air pollution causes 35,000-50,000 premature deaths per year in the UK.

7.3.6.4 Street canyons refer to the effect created by high buildings lining a street,

preventing much of the pollution escaping.

7.3.6.5 The study sought a better understanding of the effects of green plants in

dealing with the sometimes stagnant air of city streets in "urban street

canyons”. The research concluded that plants in urban canyons can reduce

the concentration at street level of NO2 by as much as 40 percent and PM by

60 percent, much more than the 5% previous studies suggested (Pugh et al.,

2012).

7.3.6.6 The research team could distinguish the effects of green walls in street

canyons from those of plants in parks or on roofs - green walls emerged as

clear winners in terms of pollutant removal (Pugh et al., 2012). For the first

time, the study predicts that a significant effect on pollution could be

achieved on a street-by-street basis.

29

7.3.6.7 High Peak Borough Council (2014) “gives high priority to the control and

prevention of pollution due to the negative impact it can have on human

health, quality of life and the natural environment”.

7.3.7 Enhanced noise reduction

7.3.7.1 Planted surfaces have low noise reflectivity and high absorption properties.

Green walls built on the exteriors of buildings will do the same. They

insulate against noise, vibrations and reduce sound penetration. In addition

they help to absorb the echo bouncing off buildings and dampen the noise

pollution of modern cities, improving conditions for occupants and

pedestrians (Getter and Rowe, 2006).

7.3.8 Increased Biodiversity

7.3.8.1 Sustained economic growth, prospering communities and personal well-

being requires the foundation of a healthy, functioning natural

environment. Surrounding the High Peak Borough's towns and villages and

bordering the Peak District National Park, the countryside comprises a

mosaic of internationally, nationally, regionally and locally designated sites

important for their nature conservation value (High Peak Borough Council,

2014).

7.3.8.2 Habitat creation, restoration and the reconnection of isolated habitats are

aims at ensuring continued sustainable development and functioning green

infrastructure (High Peak Borough Council, 2014).

7.3.8.3 Green roofs have been shown to provide an important opportunity to

increase or enhance habitat for wildlife, with a number of notable studies in

the UK (Gedge & Kadas, 2005; Kadas, 2006), Europe (Brenneisen, 2006) and

the US (Tonietto et al., 2011); Ksiazek et al., 2012) and Canada (Colla et al.,

2009) demonstrating that green roofs in urban areas can have high potential

as habitat for threatened species.

7.3.8.4 For example, in Basel, Switzerland, surveys of birds, spiders and beetles on

green roofs found high diversity levels for all groups, including many species

considered rare or threatened (Brenneisen, 2006). Furthermore, a study in

London, on invertebrate populations on green roofs, discovered a higher

diversity of spiders, beetles, bees and other aculeates (wasps, sawflies etc.,)

compared to brownfield sites (Kadas, 2006).

7.3.8.5 Integrating green roofs into urban spatial planning strategies can also

present an opportunity to extend biodiversity into urban areas (High Peak

Borough Council, 2014). Recent research has shown that not only do green

30

roofs provide valuable habitat that harbours a large diversity and abundance

of species, but they also have the potential to act as stepping-stones and

increase the permeability of urban areas, particularly to highly mobile

species such as bees and other pollinating insects (Braaker et al., 2014).

7.3.8.6 It is recommended that green roofs be integrated into the connectivity

concepts of urban planning and management strategies (Braaker et al.,

2014).

7.4 BIODIVERSE ROOF PROPOSAL

7.4.1 Good ecological justification exists for creating an analogue of a local habitat which

combines visual appeal with enhanced provision and support for fauna and supports

future research.

7.4.2 The proposed roof will be designed as a functioning ecosystem targeted specifically at

enhancing populations of pollinators, that is also visually attractive and therefore

more inclined to influence and encourage the general public to do the same.

7.4.3 The new building will feature a 500 m2 biodiverse green roof. Planting will incorporate a range of species that will flower throughout the season and offer attractive pollinators for bees and other insects as well as night time attraction for bats. A more detailed explanation and proposed list of suitable plants can be found in the accompanying Supplementary Buckingham Hotel: Wild Bee Green Roof Meadow.

7.5 LIVING WALL PROPOSAL

7.5.1 Living walls provide all the environmental benefits exhibited by green roofs such as storm water & flood mitigation (7.3.3), reduced urban heat island effect (7.3.4), enhanced carbon sequestration (7.3.5), air purification & dust suppression (7.3.6), enhanced noise reduction (7.3.7), and increased biodiversity (7.3.8). In addition, living walls provide an opportunity to increase connectivity between the ground and upper storey levels.

7.5.2 While it has been common practice to grow climbing plants on the outside walls of buildings for many centuries, they rarely reached more than a couple of storeys high and were limited to a small number of self-clinging species such as ivy, and Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus tricuspidata). However, the application of modern technologies in contemporary ‘vertical gardening’ supports a much wider number of species and to greater heights.

7.5.3 A modern exemplar of the practice is the acclaimed botanist Patrick Blanc, whose vertical garden designs grace many of the world’s cities. Sustainable development is a core principle of Blanc’s Vertical Garden system. The technology is composed of three parts: a metal frame, a PVC layer and felt which provides an air layer acting as a very efficient thermal and noise isolation system. With low maintenance, watering and fertilisation requirements the system provides a long-lasting, sustainable and effective

NOW WITHDRAWN FOLLOWING PRE APPLICATION RESPONSES FROM HIGH PEAK BC

31

means of introducing wildlife habitat, sometimes up to 300 species of plant, to urban areas of low diversity.

7.5.1 Furthermore, the aesthetic benefits of greening urban areas with living walls can

make living in those areas more tolerable for people. Two recent studies in the UK

have shown that people moving to greener urban areas (Alcock et al., 2014) and those

already living in areas with more green space (White et al., 2014) have, not just, lower

mental distress and higher well-being but also sustained mental health

improvements. The potential cumulative benefit of mental health improvements at

the community level highlights the importance of policies to protect and promote

urban green spaces for well-being (High Peak Borough Council, 2014; White et al.,

2014)

7.5.2 The proposed development will feature over 1,000 m2 of living walls, predominantly

covering the western and southern elevations - identified as of non-heritage

importance. Patrick Blanc has indicated his willingness to design and fit his system of

living walls to the new development.

Figure 7 Pont Max Juvenal, France - Vertical Garden on a Bridge before and after

32

8 REFERENCES

Alcock, I., White, M. P., Wheeler, B. W., Fleming, L. E., & Depledge, M. H. (2014).

Longitudinal effects on mental health of moving to greener and less green urban areas.

Environmental science & technology, 48(2), 1247-1255.

Bat Conservation Trust (2007). Bat Survey - Good Practice Guidelines. Bat Conservation

Trust: London

Berndtsson, J.C., Bengtsson, L. and Jinno, K. (2009). Runoff water quality from intensive and

extensive vegetated roofs. Ecological Engineering, 35, 369-380

Braaker, S., Ghazoul, J., Obrist, M.K. and Moretti, M. (2014) Habitat connectivity shapes

urban arthropod communities: the key role of green roofs. Ecology, 95(4), 1010-1021

Brenneisen S. (2006) Space for urban wildlife: Designing green roofs as habitats in

Switzerland. Urban Habitats, 4, 27-36

Capital Regional District (2014). CRD Green Roof & Living Wall - Cleaner air and decreased

carbon dioxide (CO2) emission. [www document: https://www.crd.bc.ca/education/at-

home/low-impact-development/green-roofs/crd-green-roof-living-wall] Accessed June 2014

Colla, S., Willis, E. & Packer, L., (2009). Can green roofs provide habitat for urban bees

(Hymenoptera: Apidae)? Cities and the Environment, 2(1), 1-12

Cox, M (2013) Bat Habitat Assessment, Buxton, 4.2

Department for Communities and Local Government (2012). National Planning Policy

Framework. [www document:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/211

6950.pdf] Accessed June 2014

Derbyshire County Council (2013a). Dark Peak. Landscape Character Area 51. Part 1. [www

document: http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/images/Part%201.1%20Dark%20Peak_tcm44-

245608.pdf ] Accessed 01/08/13

Derbyshire County Council (2013b). White Peak. Landscape Character Area 52. Part 2. [www

document: http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/images/Part%201.2%20White%20Peak_tcm44-

245609.pdf] Accessed 01/08/13

Derbyshire Mammal Group (2013). Species Status: Natterer's bat (Myotis nattereri). [www

document: http://www.derbyshiremammalgroup.com/species_status/natterers_bat.html]

Accessed 01/08/13

33

English Nature (2003). Green roofs: their existing status and potential for conserving

biodiversity in urban areas. English Nature Research Reports, Report 498. English Nature:

Peterborough: UK

English Nature (2004). Bat Mitigation Guidelines. English Nature: Peterborough: UK

Gedge, D. & Kadas, G. (2005). Green roofs and biodiversity. Biologist, 52(3), 161–169

Getter, K.L. and Rowe, D.B. (2006) The Role of Extensive Green Roofs in Sustainable

Development. Horticultural Science, 41(5), 1276-1285

Green Over Grey (2009). Sustainability – Living walls and design. [www document:

http://greenovergrey.com/green-wall-benefits/sustainability.php] Accessed June 2014

Groundwork Sheffield (2011). The GRO Green Roof Code: Green Roof Code of Best Practice

for the UK. [www document:

http://www.thegreenroofcentre.co.uk/Library/Default/Documents/GRO%20ONLINE.pdf]

Accessed June 2014

Hackney Council (2011) Hackney Advice Note: Biodiversity and the Built Environment. [www

document: http://www.hackney.gov.uk/Assets/Documents/1-3208993-

Hackney_Advice_Note_-_Biodiversity_and_the_Built_Environment.pdf] Accessed 3/7/2014

High Peak Borough Council (2013). Buxton Conservation Areas Character Appraisal. Location,

Context and Development of Buxton. [www document:

http://www.highpeak.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/pages/Buxton%20Part%20One.

pdf] Accessed 01/08/13

High Peak Borough Council (2014). High Peak Local Plan – Submission April, 2014. [www

document: http://highpeak-

consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/high_peak/localplansubmission?pointId=2893514] Accessed

June 2014

Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2010) Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey – A

technique for environmental audit. Joint Nature Conservation Committee: Peterborough.

Kadas G. (2006) Rare invertebrates colonizing green roofs in London. Urban Habitats, 4, 66-

86

Ksiazek, K., Fant, J. & Skogen, K., (2012). An assessment of pollen limitation on Chicago green

roofs. Landscape and Urban Planning, 107(4), 401-408

Mentens, J., Raes, D. and Hermy, M. (2006). Green roofs as a tool for solving the rainwater

runoff problem in the urbanized 21st century. Landscape and Urban Planning, 77, 217-226

Multi Agency Geographical Information for the Countryside (MAGIC) (2013). Map Search.

[www document: http://magic.defra.gov.uk/MagicMap.aspx] Accessed on 01/08/13.

34

National Biodiversity Network (NBN) (2013). National Biodiversity Network Gateway. [www

document: http://data.nbn.org.uk/] Accessed 01/08/13

Natural England Guidance (2011). When during the year can a survey take place? [www

document: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/WhentosurveyFINAL_tcm6-

21620.pdf] Accessed 01/08/13

Obendorfer, E., Lundholm, J., Bass, B., Coffman, R.R., Doshi, H., Dunnett, N., Gaffin, S.,

Kohler, M., Liu, K.K.Y, and Rowe, D.B. (2007). Green roofs as urban ecosystems: ecological

structures, functions and services. Bioscience, 57, 823-833

Oldham, et al. (2000). Great Crested Newt Habitat Suitability Index. Herpetological Journal,

10:143-155

Pugh, T. A. M., A. R. MacKenzie, J. D. Whyatt, and C. N. Hewitt (2012). The effectiveness of

green infrastructure for improvement of air quality in urban street canyons. Environmental

Science & Technology, 46 (14), 7692-7699

Stace (1997). New Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge University Press: UK

Susca, T., Gaffin, S.R. and Dell’Osso, G.R. (2011). Positive effects of vegetation: Urban heat

island and green roofs. Environmental Pollution, 159, 2119-2126

Tonietto, R., Fant, J., Ascher, J., Ellis, K. And Larkin, D. (2011). A comparison of bee

communities of Chicago green roofs, parks and prairies. Landscape and Urban Planning,

103(1), 102–108

UK Environmental Audit Committee (2010). Fifth Report of Session 2009-10, Air Quality, HC

229. HMSO: UK

White, M.P., Alcock, I., Wheeler, B.W. and Depledge, M.H. (2014). Would You Be Happier

Living in a Greener Urban Area? A Fixed-Effects Analysis of Panel Data. Psychological Science,

24(6), 920-928

35

APPENDICES

Appendix 1

Biodiversity Network Data Search Results

Great crested newt records

Site name Gridref Date

Recorde

d

Date

Accurac

y

Sensitiv

e

Recorder Determin

er

SPECIE

S

VICECOUNT

Y

Buxton,Fairfie

ld Golf

Course

SK0774 1976 Year N Patrick,

S.J.

Unknown 9400

101

Derbyshire

BUXTON SK0774 1976 Year N Leicester

Polytechni

c Great

Crested

Newt

Survey

Unknown 9400

101

Derbyshire

No site name

available

SK08774

6

1976 Year N Leicester

Polytechni

c Great

Crested

Newt

Survey

Unknown 9400

101

Derbyshire

BUXTON SK08774

6

1976 Year N Leicester

Polytechni

c Great

Crested

Newt

Survey

Unknown 9400

101

Derbyshire

Buxton,Fairfie

ld Golf

Course

SK0774 1976 Year N Howe, G.,

Buxton

Field Club

Unknown 9400

101

Derbyshire

Buxton,Green

Lane

SK08774

6

16/5/197

6

Day N Whiteley,

D.

Unknown 9400

101

Derbyshire

Buxton,Green

Lane

SK0874 4/4/1976 Day N Whiteley,

D.

Unknown 9400

101

Derbyshire

BUXTON SK08774

6

1976 Year N Mary

Swan's

Unknown 9400

101

Derbyshire

amphibian

records

BUXTON SK0774 1976 Year N Mary

Swan's

amphibian

records

Unknown 9400

101

Derbyshire

37

Bat Records

Records from the dataset Derbyshire & Peak District Protected Species Database (Summary of

available records 1970- 2008)

Summary of your access to the dataset Derbyshire & Peak District Protected Species

Database (Summary of available records 1970- 2008), provided by Derbyshire Biological

Records Centre

Dataset

Resolution

Your

Resolution

Sensitive

access

Download raw

data

View

Attributes

View

Recorder

100m 2km

Site name Gridref Date Recorded Date Accuracy Sensitive

Site name protected SK07Y 1996 Year N

Site name protected SK07S 1976 Year N

Site name protected SK07X 1976 Year N

Site name protected SK07W 2007 Year N





Records Centre

Dataset

Resolution

Your

Resolution

Sensitive

access

Download raw

data

View

Attributes

View

Recorder

100m 2km


Site name protected SK07Y 1996 Year N

38

http://data.nbn.org.uk/datasetInfo/taxonDataset.jsp?dsKey=GA000622




http://data.nbn.org.uk/organisation/organisation.jsp?orgKey=10628









Site name protected SK07X 1976 Year N


Occurrence of Chiroptera (terrestrial mammal), in the 10km grid square SK07

Records from the dataset Daubenton's Bat Waterway Survey

Summary of your access to the dataset Daubenton's Bat Waterway Survey, provided

by The Bat Conservation Trust

Dataset

Resolution

Your

Resolution

Sensitive

access

Download raw

data

View

Attributes

View

Recorder

100m 1km


Site name protected SK0178 7/8/2003 Day N









Records Centre

Dataset

Resolution

Your

Resolution

Sensitive

access

Download raw

data

View

Attributes

View

Recorder

100m 2km

39











Site name protected SK07Q No date available No date N

Site name protected SK07R 1998 Year N

Site name protected SK07R 1983 Year N

Site name protected SK07K 1985 Year N

Site name protected SK07L 1988 Year N





40

Otter Records

Occurrence of Lutra lutra (terrestrial mammal), in the 10km grid square SK07

Map of records

Legend

© Crown copyright and database rights 2011 Ordnance Survey [100017955]

Records for Lutra lutra (terrestrial mammal), in the 10km grid square SK07





Records Centre

Dataset

Resolution

Your

Resolution

Sensitive

access

Download raw

data

View

Attributes

View

Recorder

100m 2km



41

http://data.nbn.org.uk/gridSquares/10kmSquareSpeciesData.jsp?parentSq=SK07&allDs=1&desig=0&spGrpKey=96&engOrd=0&src=1&homePageX=184&homePageY=254&spKey=23926&map=1&mapService=tenKmSelectorGBv4







Badger Records

Occurrence of Meles meles (terrestrial mammal), in the 10km grid square SK07

Show me Meles meles records for the 10km grid square SK07

Map of records

Legend


Records for Meles meles (terrestrial mammal), in the 10km grid square SK07

Records from the dataset Mammal records from Britain from the Atlas of Mammals (1993), with some

subsequent records

Summary of your access to the dataset Mammal records from Britain from the Atlas of

Mammals (1993), with some subsequent records, provided by Biological Records Centre

Dataset

Resolution

Your

Resolution

Sensitive

access

Download raw

data

View

Attributes

View

Recorder

100m Full

42







Site name Gridr

ef

Date

Reco

rded

Date

Accu

racy

Sens

itive

Recor

der

Deter

miner

VICEC

OUNTY

STA

TUS

SOU

RCE

NBN_CO

MMENT

RECOR

DTYPE

Ashwood

Dale

SK08

7726

23/6/

1969

Day N Pendl

ebury,

J.B.

Unkn

own

Derbysh

ire

Unkn

own

Unkn

own

50

Deepdale,C

helmorton

SK09

8717

14/7/

1969

Day N Pendl

ebury,

J.B.

Unkn

own

Derbysh

ire

Unkn

own

Unkn

own

50

No site

name

available

SK07 1965 Year N Varty,

J.

Unkn

own

Derbysh

ire

Unkn

own

Field 7

No site

name

available

SK07 Reco

rded

befor

e

1970

Befo

re

Year

N Badge

r

Surve

y

Mamm

al

Societ

y

Unkn

own

Derbysh

ire

Unkn

own

Liter

ature

circa date 7

43

Water Vole

Occurrence of Arvicola amphibius (terrestrial mammal), in the 10km grid square SK07

Show me Arvicola amphibius records for the 10km grid square SK07

Show me records recorded after 0

and before 2013

refresh report data

Map of records

Legend


Records for Arvicola amphibius (terrestrial mammal), in the 10km grid square SK07

Records from the dataset Mammal records from Britain from the Atlas of Mammals (1993), with some

subsequent records

Summary of your access to the dataset Mammal records from Britain from the Atlas of

Mammals (1993), with some subsequent records, provided by Biological Records Centre

Dataset

Resolution

Your

Resolution

Sensitive

access

Download raw

data

View

Attributes

View

Recorder

100m Full

44







Site

name

Gridr

ef

Date

Record

ed

Date

Accura

cy

Sensiti

ve

Recor

der

Determi

ner

VICECOU

NTY

STAT

US

SOUR

CE

RECORDT

YPE

Errwoo

d

Reserv

oir

SK01

74

7/8/197

9

Day N Patrick

, S.J.

Unknow

n

Derbyshire Unkno

wn

Unkno

wn

0

Errwoo

d

Reserv

oir

SK01

74

7/8/197

9

Day N Derby

Recor

ds

Centre

Unknow

n

Derbyshire Unkno

wn

Unkno

wn

0

Combs

Reserv

oir

SK03

79

April,

1975

Month N Derby

Recor

ds

Centre

Unknow

n

Derbyshire Unkno

wn

Unkno

wn

0





Records Centre

Dataset

Resolution

Your

Resolution

Sensitive

access

Download raw

data

View

Attributes

View

Recorder

100m 2km


Site name protected SK07C 1979 Year N

Site name protected SK07J 1990 Year N






45














Site name protected SK07K 1990 Year N






Site name protected SK07P 1996 Year N










Site name protected SK07A 2005 Year N

46

Slow worm records

Occurrence of Anguis fragilis (reptile), in the 10km grid square SK07

Map of records

Legend


Records for Anguis fragilis (reptile), in the 10km grid square SK07

Records from the dataset Derbyshire REPTILE Records 1950-2007

Summary of your access to the dataset Derbyshire REPTILE Records 1950-2007, provided

by Derbyshire Biological Records Centre

Dataset

Resolution

Your

Resolution

Sensitive

access

Download raw

data

View

Attributes

View

Recorder

100m 1km


Recorded

Date

Accuracy

Sensitive

Topley Pike, Topley Pike and Deep Dale SK0971 17/8/1996 Day N

47




SSSI

48

Grass snake records

Occurrence of Natrix natrix (reptile), in the 10km grid square SK07

Map of records

Legend


Records for Natrix natrix (reptile), in the 10km grid square SK07


Summary of your access to the dataset Derbyshire REPTILE Records 1950-2007,

provided by Derbyshire Biological Records Centre

Dataset

Resolution

Your

Resolution

Sensitive

access

Download raw

data

View

Attributes

View

Recorder

100m 1km



49




Records of Adder

Occurrence of Vipera berus (reptile), in the 10km grid square SK07

Map of records

Legend


50

Records for Vipera berus (reptile), in the 10km grid square SK07




Dataset

Resolution

Your

Resolution

Sensitive

access

Download raw

data

View

Attributes

View

Recorder

100m 1km



51




Records of common lizard

Occurrence of Zootoca vivipara (reptile), in the 10km grid square SK07

Map of records

Legend


52

Records for Zootoca vivipara (reptile), in the 10km grid square SK07

Records from the dataset Reptiles and Amphibians Dataset

Summary of your access to the dataset Reptiles and Amphibians Dataset, provided

by Biological Records Centre

Dataset

Resolution

Your

Resolution

Sensitive

access

Download raw

data

View

Attributes

View

Recorder

100m Full

Site name Gridr

ef

Date

Record

ed

Date

Accura

cy

Sensiti

ve

Record

er

Determi

ner

SPECI

ES

NBN_COMM

ENT

VICECOU

NTY

'Cat+Fiddle' SK00

71

Record

ed

before

1910

Before

Year

N Unkno

wn

Unknow

n

9503

304

publication

date

Cheshire

Lightwood

Buxton

SK05

75

1976 Year N Patrick

, S.J.

Unknow

n

9503

304

Derbyshire

Goyt Valley SK01

75

5/6/197

7

Day N Howe,

G.,

Buxton

Field

Club

Unknow

n

9503

304

Derbyshire

Fernilee

Reservoir

SK01

77

16/6/19

84

Day N Yalden

, Dr

D.W.

Unknow

n

9503

304

Derbyshire

Goyt Valley SK01

77

5/6/197

7

Day N Howe,

G.,

Buxton

Field

Club

Unknow

n

9503

304

Derbyshire

Wild Moor,N

of Buxton

SK07 Betwee

n 1833

and

1966

Year

Range

N West,

T.J.

Unknow

n

9503

304

Derbyshire

53




Buxton,Light

wood

SK05

75

1976 Year N Howe,

G.,

Buxton

Field

Club

Unknow

n

9503

304

Derbyshire

AXE EDGE SK02

70

18/5/19

75

Day N Yalden

, Dr

D.W.

Unknow

n

9503

304

Derbyshire

Fernilee

Reservoir

SK01

77

16/6/19

84

Day N Mary

Swan's

reptile

record

s

Unknow

n

9503

304

Derbyshire

AXE EDGE SK02

70

18/5/19

75

Day N Mary

Swan's

reptile

record

s

Unknow

n

9503

304

Derbyshire




Dataset

Resolution

Your

Resolution

Sensitive

access

Download raw

data

View

Attributes

View

Recorder

100m 1km


Recorded

Date

Accuracy

Sensitive

Lightwood, Buxton SK0575 1976 Year N

Goyt Valley, Goyt Valley SSSI SK0175 5/6/1977 Day N

Goyt Valley, Goyt Valley SSSI SK0177 5/6/1977 Day N

Fernilee Reservoir SK0177 16/6/1984 Day N



54





Site name protected SK0072 April, 1989 Month N



Goytsclough, Goyt Valley SK0173 29/9/1979 Day N

Axe Edge SK0171 10/3/1985 Day N

Derbyshire Bridge, Goyt SK0171 22/4/1985 Day N

Goytsclough Quarry, Goyt. SK0173 22/4/1990 Day N

Goytsclough, nr. SK0173 17/6/1990 Day N

Long Edge Plantation (Planting Side) SK0278 11/8/1996 Day N

Axe Edge SK0270 18/5/1975 Day N

Berry Clough, Goyt Valley SSSI SK0272 8/6/1997 Day N

Old Macclesfield Rd, Goyt, Goyt Valley

SSSI

SK0271 12/8/1997 Day N




Site name protected SK0473 July, 2001 Month N

Longedge Plantation SK0178 11/8/1996 Day N

55

Appendix 2

Results of the MAGIC Site Check Report from a 2km radius of the site

Site Check Report

Report Generated on Wed Aug 07 2013 10:47:49 GMT+0100 (GMT Daylight Time)

Local Nature Reserves (England) - points

Reference

1452124

Name

FERNEYDALE GRASSLAND

Hectares

5.24

Hyperlink

http://www.lnr.naturalengland.org.uk/special/lnr/lnr_details.asp?themeid=1452124

Local Nature Reserves (England)

Reference

1452124

Name

FERNEYDALE GRASSLAND

Hectares

5.24

Hyperlink


Moorland Line (England)

Name

MS

Hectares

4302.7981

Name

MS

Hectares

9.5031

National Parks (England)

Name

PEAK DISTRICT

Reference

8

Date of Confirmation Order

19510401

Statutory Area in Sq.km.

1438

56



Hyperlink

HTTP://WWW.NATURALENGLAND.ORG.UK/OURWORK/CONSERVATION/DESIGNATEDAREAS/

NATIONALPARKS/PEAKDISTRICT/DEFAULT.ASPX

Sites of Special Scientific Interest Units (England) - points

Name

POOLE'S CAVERN & GRIN LOW WOOD

Reference

1043096

Site Unit Condition

FAVOURABLE

Citation

1011309

Hectares

41.54

Hyperlink

http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/special/sssi/unit_details.cfm?situnt_id=1011309

Sites of Special Scientific Interest Units (England)

Name

POOLE'S CAVERN & GRIN LOW WOOD

Reference

1043096

Site Unit Condition

FAVOURABLE

Citation

1011309

Hectares

41.54

Hyperlink


Name

GOYT VALLEY

Reference

1042635

Site Unit Condition

UNFAVOURABLE RECOVERING

Citation

1019254

Hectares

26.12

Hyperlink

57

http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/OURWORK/CONSERVATION/DESIGNATEDAREAS/NATIONALPARKS/PEAKDISTRICT/DEFAULT.ASPX

http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/OURWORK/CONSERVATION/DESIGNATEDAREAS/NATIONALPARKS/PEAKDISTRICT/DEFAULT.ASPX




Name

GOYT VALLEY

Reference

1042623

Site Unit Condition


Citation

1011440

Hectares

73.98

Hyperlink


Name

GOYT VALLEY

Reference

1042624

Site Unit Condition


Citation

1011423

Hectares

14.07

Hyperlink


Sites of Special Scientific Interest (England) - points

Name

POOLE'S CAVERN AND GRIN LOW WOOD

Reference

1002434

Natural England Contact

DAN ABRAHAMS

Natural England Phone Number

0845 600 3078

Hectares

41.54

Citation

1001269

Hyperlink

http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/special/sssi/sssi_details.cfm?sssi_id=1001269

58





Sites of Special Scientific Interest (England)

Name

GOYT VALLEY

Reference

1002369


SARA BARRETT


0845 600 3078

Hectares

1332.58

Citation

1002841

Hyperlink


Name

POOLE'S CAVERN AND GRIN LOW WOOD

Reference

1002434


DAN ABRAHAMS


0845 600 3078

Hectares

41.54

Citation

1001269

Hyperlink


Special Areas of Conservation (England)

Name

SOUTH PENNINE MOORS

Reference

UK0030280

Hectares

65025.5

Hyperlink

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/protectedsites/sacselection/sac.asp?eucode=UK0030280

Special Protection Areas (England)

Name

59



http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/protectedsites/sacselection/sac.asp?eucode=UK0030280

PEAK DISTRICT MOORS (SOUTH PENNINE MOORS PHASE 1)

Reference

UK9007021

Hectares

45300.57

60