Overlook environmental factors and risk massive delays

Embarking on a major commercial development scheme involves long-term strategising and significant financial planning; don't sabotage your own project by ignoring environmental science

The current economic climate has thrown numerous construction plans into disarray or halted them completely, but those that remain active are keen to devise schemes and secure planning consents now so they are ready and can gain a competitive edge when the market returns.

When you consider how much media coverage is given to preserving our environment and incorporating energy-efficient initiatives into our buildings and indeed daily lives, it is hard to believe that developers can still overlook one of the most important aspects of preserving our planet – protecting our natural habitat. And yet it happens, and the consequences can be far-reaching and devastating. Leaving aside for a moment the long-term impact this has on the environment and complex natural food chain, overlooking ecological preservation from a financial aspect poses a major risk to the progress of commercial development.

The simple fact is that greater ecological awareness among local authorities, developers, contractors and project managers is needed to prevent significant delays to projects. When the market recovers and development needs to press ahead quickly, many schemes will suffer planning setbacks and costly hold-ups unless ecological impact is ascertained and addressed at the earliest opportunity.

Every new development should have an ecological assessment, which establishes whether any species or habitats might be affected by a given development, and therefore need protection. When you consider the size of regeneration schemes and major retail developments, especially if they are on out of town sites, you can only imagine how many species live on these sites, and what will surprise you still further is the level of responsibility the developer must assume to ensure their future existence.

Let me start with some basics. Schedules of protection exist for a whole host of different habitats and creatures. This means that, by law, they must be safeguarded before any development is allowed to proceed. Some species can only be dealt with if a license from DEFRA is held or specific qualifications. More animal and plant species than you might initially imagine are protected under Schedules five or eight of the Wildlife & Countryside Act, or Annex II of the EU Habitats Directive.

Disturbance or interference with any of these species, even through ignorance or oversight, can carry severe penalties; penalties which are very often directed at the development companies or policy-makers and decision-makers within.

As I’ve mentioned already, there’s quite an array of species which must be protected, and some are more common or can cause greater delays. Badgers, for example, have their own Act of Parliament working in their favour – the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 - which affords protection rights for their habitat and a recognised exclusion zone applies. Badgers are often found in embankments and lightly wooded areas/hedge-lines which are the perfect spot for railway and bridge developments.

If you’re thinking it doesn’t sound quite as tricky as you’d suspected, think again. Timing is everything when it comes to ecological surveys. Some creatures are more easily spotted at certain times of year and sites can only be surveyed when they are visible. Badgers are active all year round, but reptiles are most active and above ground only between mid-spring and mid-summer. If dormice are likely to inhabit a proposed development site, then there are two surveys available: the nut search, and the nest tube survey. Dormice leave distinctive evidence on hazelnuts, a favourite food, but surveys of this kind are generally only possible between September and November. The nest tube search is reliable, but can only be carried out mid-spring, and again from late summer into autumn. What’s more, it can take up to six months to gather evidence.

When presence of a species has been identified, options to move dormice to another habitat must be carried out under licence, and can involve clearing vegetation in phases to encourage the protected species to relocate to a nearby habitat. This is a lengthy process, so developers must plan for this. Also, if a survey season is missed, you must wait for the next opportunity, six or seven months later, which in itself represents a significant delay.

Other examples include slow worms, which may need to be moved, and birds, which have to be protected when on a nest. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 makes it an offence to intentionally kill, injure, or move wild birds, their eggs or nests. There are particularly harsh penalties enforced for birds listed in Schedule one of the Act, when even disturbing the birds is an offence. The legal ramifications are not to be underestimated. Many developments including construction, civil engineering and house building require vegetation clearance prior to site establishment, particularly when the footprint is tight to the site boundary.

In the case of reptiles, articles such as roofing felt are placed on the ground during surveys and when they warm up in the early morning sun, reptiles are attracted to hide underneath. Bats have to be provided with an alternative area to roost or breed, which could mean bat boxes or, in some cases, another building or the redesign of the proposed building to accommodate them and this is at the developer’s cost. Again, delays can be in the region of six months because a licence is needed and planners need to be satisfied that appropriate precautions are factored in.

Another key misconception is that ecological assessments are focused purely on the development site. While construction is focused on perimeter fencing, the fact is that the surroundings and the habitat interaction must be considered too. As already mentioned, a 500 metre perimeter beyond the site is included in assessing the impact on great crested newts and up to 30 metres is required for badgers.

Given the processes that must be followed and the action needed, it’s vital that the impact of protecting species should be considered at due diligence stage, as the surveying periods need to be factored into the programming phase. Discovering newts when you’re on the verge of beginning construction will likely lead to a delay of six months when, had thorough and well planned ecological surveys been undertaken, a far shorter delay would have ensued.

More seriously, failing to undertake a thorough assessment will very often result in refusal of planning permission. Planning has historically been inconsistent but with the modern emphasis on sustainability, and the environment especially, planners are becoming more ecologically aware and more in tune with the regulations that must be followed to protect species and plants.

The consequence of delays is inevitably the apportioning of blame and therefore risk. The contractor may not be involved in the early stages, and yet can face difficulties later if the project is not completed on time. One could argue that the contractor should have checked that all assessments were undertaken, but equally one could take the view that the developer should have carried out the ecological survey before appointing the construction team. At the end of the day, a blame culture benefits no one and every member of a development team should be aware of the issues so they can alert the team.
Without planning consents, we’re nowhere, we’re losing money, we’re damaging stakeholder relations, and we’re only contributing to the slowdown in the market.

With being ahead of the game at stake, it’s crucial that major developers, contractors and clients alike consider every aspect of their development at its earliest possible stage.

By Caroline Oldroyd
Group Environmental Manager at Osborne
Tel: 01737 234300; or email: enquiries@osborne.co.uk