Denis Winterbottom

North Warwickshire Borough Council

The Council House
South Street
Atherstone
Warwickshire
CV9 1DE
17th August 2015
Your Ref: PAP/2014/0339
Our Ref: NWBC_2015_0339
Dear Mr Winterbottom,
RE: Redevelopment of the former colliery site for employment purposes within Use Class B2 (General
Industry) and/or as a railway distribution depot for the processing, handling and storage of materials and
the stationing, loading and unloading of trains for the purpose of maintaining railway infrastructure.
Application for Outline planning permission with consideration of Access now, with all other matters
reserved. An illustrative development scheme includes 24,652 sq. metres of built floorspace, associated
car parking, service yards; ancillary open storage areas; additional rail sidings; external gantry crane and
conveyor, related infrastructure and utilities, the retention of the existing rail head and sidings, site
vehicular access, gatehouse, electricity grid connection and sub-station, reconfigured surface water
drainage system retaining existing drainage.
Warwickshire Wildlife Trust is a wildlife conservation charity, and as such our comments relate specifically to
the protection and enhancement of wildlife on and around the proposed development area.
The Trust has reviewed the additional ecological information submitted by the applicant, as well as the Daw
Mill Restoration Plan. The Trust would therefore like to update our earlier response dated 28th July 2014 to
reflect this new information.

The Trust notes that the submission of the additional survey information has alleviated some of our earlier
concerns, namely the impact of the development on reptiles, Great Crested Newt, Barn Owls, Water Voles
and breeding birds.
However, the Trust remains concerned about the impact of this development on the local bat population,
badgers and the overall net loss to biodiversity.
Bats
The bat activity surveys have shown that bats are using the site for foraging and/or commuting. Further
surveys to assess whether any buildings or trees identified for removal contain bat roosts are still required.
In particular, Building 1 and 35.
6 different species of bat were identified during the activity surveys and the site design will need to ensure
that impacts on these bat populations are mitigated. This would include measures to ensure that woody
vegetation and trees are retained and that lighting (both temporary and permanent) does not pollute the
dark corridors used by the bats. The Trust would expect to see specific consideration provided in both the
Landscape and Ecology Management Plan and the Construction and Ecology Management Plan.
I have been unable to locate the Appendices to the Bat & Barn Owl Survey, which include the figures for the
transect survey results. These would help to inform how the bats are using the site and therefore the
mitigation required.
Badgers
There has been no further survey to identify how badgers may be using the site or how the site can be
designed to accommodate them, in particular around the memorial garden. Badgers are protected by law.
Due to their mobile nature it is preferable to complete this survey within 6 months of works beginning so
that up-to-date information can inform the Construction Environment Management Plan. The Trust
therefore recommend that if the council is minded to grant planning permission, a condition is used to
ensure that this survey work is completed in time to inform the CEMP, which should also be included as a
condition.
Net Loss to Biodiversity
The NPPF is clear that sustainable development means moving from a net loss to biodiversity to providing
net gains. The Trust understands that the intention of the applicant and the council was to restore this site
after use as a colliery and therefore restore the biodiversity value of the site. The current application has
delayed this restoration. In this situation, the Trust considers it most appropriate to use the restored state
as the baseline for assessing the current application, as this is the compensation agreed from the colliery
application. Not to do so would result in a large, permanent loss of biodiversity, this is not in keeping with
the NPPF and was not in keeping with past planning guidance and policy.
The Warwickshire, Coventry and Solihull Biodiversity Offsetting metric should be used by the applicant to
assess the net impact of the development on biodiversity, using the restored habitat plan as the baseline.
The Trusts suggestions for on-site mitigation provided in our earlier response are still valid. If it is not
possible for a net gain to be achieved on-site then a suitable biodiversity offsetting scheme needs to be
submitted by the applicant. Paragraph 118 of the NPPF states:

If significant harm resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site
with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for, then planning
permission should be refused.
It is for these reasons that the Trust retains an objection to the development plans as they currently stand.
We believe that there is sufficient legal and policy justification to refuse the application in its current form.
The Trust would be happy to discuss this further with you if required. Please keep me updated with the
progress of this application.
Yours sincerely

Annie English
Annie English
Planning & Biodiversity Officer
Annie.English@wkwt.org.uk