Item5Appendix2HRA20230229DETand0221LBC InvercauldArmsHotel

Cairngorms Item 5 Appendix 2 22 Septem­ber 2023 Nation­al Park Author­ity Ügh­dar­ras Pàirc Nàiseanta a’ Mhon­aidh Ruaidh

Agenda item 5

Appendix 2

2023/0229/DET and 2023/0221/LBC

Hab­it­ats reg­u­la­tions appraisal

HAB­IT­ATS REG­U­LA­TIONS APPRAISAL

Plan­ning ref­er­ence and pro­pos­al information	2023/0229/DET Refur­bish­ment of hotel to ser­viced apart­ments with ground floor events space and cinema room, erec­tion of leis­ure facil­it­ies, change of use of dwell­ing­house to offices, con­ver­sion of dairy build­ing to staff accom­mod­a­tion, con­ver­sion of mews to artist stu­dio, replace exist­ing foot­bridge, and erec­tion of asso­ci­ated ancil­lary buildings.
Appraised by	Kar­en Ald­ridge, Plan­ning Eco­lo­gic­al Advice Officer
Date	7 July 2023
Checked by	NatureScot
Date	Date of con­sulta­tion response from NatureScot

INFORM­A­TION

European site details
Name of European site(s) poten­tially affected
1) River Dee SAC
Qual­i­fy­ing interest(s)
1) River Dee SAC
	Atlantic sal­mon
	Fresh­wa­ter pearl mussel
	Otter
Con­ser­va­tion object­ives for qual­i­fy­ing interests
1) River Dee SAC
Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive 2.	To ensure that the integ­rity of River Dee SAC is restored by meet­ing object­ives 2a, 2b and 2c for each qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures (and 2d for fresh­wa­ter pearl mussel)
2b.	Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion of fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel through­out the site
2c.	Restore the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel with­in the site and avail­ab­il­ity of food
2d.	Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel host spe­cies and their sup­port­ing habitats
2a.	Restore the pop­u­la­tion of fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel as a viable com­pon­ent of the site
2b.	Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion of sea lamprey through­out the site
2c.	Main­tain the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing sea lamprey with­in the site and avail­ab­il­ity of food
2a.	Main­tain the pop­u­la­tion of sea lamprey as a viable com­pon­ent of the site
2b.	Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion of Atlantic sal­mon through­out the site
2c.	Restore the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing Atlantic sal­mon with­in the site and avail­ab­il­ity of food
2a.	Restore the pop­u­la­tion of Atlantic sal­mon, includ­ing range of genet­ic types, as a viable com­pon­ent of the site
2b.	Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion of otter through­out the site
2c.	Main­tain the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing otter with­in the site and avail­ab­il­ity of food

2a. Main­tain the pop­u­la­tion of otter as a viable com­pon­ent of the site

Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive I. To ensure that the qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures of the River Dee SAC are in favour­able con­di­tion and make an appro­pri­ate con­tri­bu­tion to achiev­ing favour­able con­ser­va­tion status

APPRAIS­AL

STAGE 1:
What is the plan or project?
Rel­ev­ant sum­mary details of pro­pos­al (includ­ing loc­a­tion, tim­ing, meth­ods, etc)	Refur­bish­ment of hotel and exist­ing build­ings includ­ing the erec­tion of a new build­ing for leis­ure facil­it­ies. The devel­op­ment will also include the replace­ment of the exist­ing foot­bridge over the Clunie Water, which is part of the River Dee SAC.
STAGE 2:
Is the plan or pro­ject dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary for the man­age­ment of the European site for nature conservation?
No
STAGE 3:
Is the plan or pro­ject (either alone or in-com­bin­a­tion with oth­er plans or pro­jects) likely to have a sig­ni­fic­ant effect on the site(s)?
1) River Dee SAC
Atlantic sal­mon & Fresh­wa­ter Pearl Mussel:	YES LSE. The renew­al of the foot­bridge dir­ectly above the Clunie Water has the poten­tial to lead to a pol­lu­tion event e.g. silt or fuels enter­ing the water­course which has the poten­tial to impact on pop­u­la­tions of sal­mon and mus­sels. Poten­tial short term effects could rise from the changes in water qual­ity or longer term impacts from smoth­er­ing of any suit­able breed­ing hab­it­ats down­stream of the works.
Otter:	No LSE. No rest­ing sites were iden­ti­fied with­in 30m from the foot­bridge, there­fore there will likely be no dis­turb­ance to otter. The works to renew the foot­bridge will be short term and con­duc­ted dur­ing the day there­fore unlikely to impact on any otter for­aging or com­mut­ing. Otter are not con­sidered further.
STAGE 4:
Under­take an Appro­pri­ate Assess­ment of the implic­a­tions for the site(s) in view of the(ir) con­ser­va­tion objectives
1. River Dee SAC
2. To ensure that the integ­rity of River Uisge SAC	is restored by meet­ing object­ives 2a, 2b and 2c (and 2d for fresh­wa­ter pearl mussel)
2b. Main­tain the dis­tri­bu­tion of Atlantic sal­mon through­out the site
The cur­rent and poten­tial dis­tri­bu­tion of Atlantic sal­mon with­in the site would not be directly

affected as no devel­op­ment will occur in the water­course. How­ever, pol­lu­tion from sed­i­ment release could indir­ectly cause the dis­tri­bu­tion to change due to changes in water qual­ity (tem­por­ary) and, if sig­ni­fic­ant amounts of sed­i­ment reach the water­course, through smoth­er­ing of hab­it­ats used by sal­mon for spawn­ing and juven­iles (long term).

How­ever, mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures such as a site spe­cif­ic pol­lu­tion pre­ven­tion plan (to be secured by con­di­tion) mean that the risk of pol­lu­tion can be reduced to a min­im­al level, so that the con­ser­va­tion object­ive could still be met. The pol­lu­tion pre­ven­tion plan should include detailed meas­ures to pro­tect the Clunie Water from the release of sed­i­ments or oth­er pol­lut­ants and adhere to good prac­tice guid­ance meas­ures’. If the mit­ig­a­tion is agreed and fully imple­men­ted before con­struc­tion com­mences, this con­ser­va­tion object­ive would be met.

2c. Main­tain the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing Atlantic sal­mon with­in the site and avail­ab­il­ity of food

The cur­rent and poten­tial res­tor­a­tion of the dis­tri­bu­tion of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing Atlantic sal­mon with­in the site would not be dir­ectly affected as no devel­op­ment will occur in the water­course. How­ever, as dis­cussed above, pol­lu­tion from sed­i­ment release would affect sup­port­ing hab­it­ats and if sig­ni­fic­ant amounts of sed­i­ment reach the water­course it could cause smoth­er­ing, redu­cing the dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­at suit­able for spawn­ing and juven­iles (long term)

How­ever, mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures iden­ti­fied for 2b above would reduce the risk of pol­lu­tion reach­ing the water­course to a min­im­al level and so this con­ser­va­tion object­ive would be met.

2a. Main­tain the pop­u­la­tion of Atlantic sal­mon, includ­ing range of genet­ic types, as a viable com­pon­ent of the site

As the oth­er con­ser­va­tion object­ives can be met for Atlantic sal­mon with the mit­ig­a­tion included in the pro­pos­al, the pro­posed devel­op­ment would not hinder or pre­vent the res­tor­a­tion of the pop­u­la­tion of Atlantic sal­mon as a viable com­pon­ent of site. There­fore, this con­ser­va­tion object­ive would be met.

2b. Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion of Fresh­wa­ter Pearl Mus­sel through­out the site

The cur­rent and poten­tial dis­tri­bu­tion FWPM with­in the site would not be dir­ectly affected as no devel­op­ment will occur in the water­course. How­ever, pol­lu­tion from con­struc­tion activ­it­ies (e.g. sed­i­ment, fuels or oils) could indir­ectly cause the dis­tri­bu­tion to change due to changes in water qual­ity (tem­por­ary) and, if sig­ni­fic­ant amounts of sed­i­ment reach the water­course, through smoth­er­ing of hab­it­ats which are used by sal­mon for spawning/​juveniles and hab­it­ats suit­able for sup­port­ing FWPM (long term).

How­ever, mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures iden­ti­fied for 2b above would reduce the risk of pol­lu­tion reach­ing the water­course to a min­im­al level and so this con­ser­va­tion object­ive would be met.

2c. Restore the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing Fresh­wa­ter Pearl Mus­sel with­in the site and avail­ab­il­ity of food

The cur­rent and poten­tial res­tor­a­tion of the dis­tri­bu­tion of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing with­in the site

1 Guid­ance for Pol­lu­tion Pre­ven­tion (GPP) doc­u­ments | Net­Regs | Envir­on­ment­al guid­ance for your busi­ness in North­ern Ire­land & Scotland

would not be dir­ectly affected as no devel­op­ment will occur in the watercourse.

How­ever, pol­lu­tion from con­struc­tion activ­it­ies would affect sup­port­ing hab­it­ats if sig­ni­fic­ant amounts of sed­i­ment reach the water­course and cause smoth­er­ing, redu­cing the dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­at suit­able for spawn­ing and juven­ile sal­mon and hab­it­ats suit­able for sup­port­ing FWPM (long term).

How­ever, mit­ig­a­tion meas­ures for 2b above would reduce the risk of pol­lu­tion reach­ing the water­course to a min­im­al level and so this con­ser­va­tion object­ive would be met.

2^d. Restore the dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel host spe­cies and their sup­port­ing habitats

The dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of FWPM host spe­cies (Atlantic sal­mon & sea trout) would not be dir­ectly affected as no devel­op­ment will occur with­in the watercourse.

How­ever as dis­cussed in 2b & 2c, there is poten­tial for pol­lu­tion from con­struc­tion activ­it­ies to indir­ectly affect the hab­it­ats sup­port­ing these spe­cies which may in turn lead to a change in dis­tri­bu­tion or in change in health of the sup­port­ing spe­cies. With the imple­ment­a­tion of the mit­ig­a­tion men­tioned in 2b the risk of pol­lu­tion events will be reduced there­fore the devel­op­ment would not hinder the dis­tri­bu­tion or vital­ity of the host species.

2a. Restore the pop­u­la­tion of Atlantic sal­mon (includ­ing range of genet­ic types) and Fresh­wa­ter Pearl Mus­sel, as a viable com­pon­ent of the site

As the oth­er con­ser­va­tion object­ives can be met for Atlantic sal­mon and FWPM with mit­ig­a­tion, the pro­posed devel­op­ment would not hinder or pre­vent the res­tor­a­tion of the pop­u­la­tion of Atlantic sal­mon as a viable com­pon­ent of site. There­fore, this con­ser­va­tion object­ive would be met.

Con­ser­va­tion Object­ive I. To ensure that the qual­i­fy­ing fea­tures of the River Dee SAC are in favour­able con­di­tion and make an appro­pri­ate con­tri­bu­tion to achiev­ing favour­able con­ser­va­tion status.

As all the oth­er con­ser­va­tion object­ives would be met, the pro­posed devel­op­ment would not pre­vent or hinder the con­di­tion or con­ser­va­tion status of the qual­i­fy­ing interests of the SAC, and so this con­ser­va­tion object­ive would be met.

STAGE 5:

Can it be ascer­tained that there will not be an adverse effect on site integrity?

1) A Pol­lu­tion Pre­ven­tion Plan (PPP) should be secured by con­di­tion. The PPP should be pro­duced and agreed with the CNPA pri­or to any works com­men­cing on site and then fully imple­men­ted dur­ing con­struc­tion. The con­ser­va­tion object­ives will be met and there­fore there will not be an adverse effect on site integ­rity for the River Dee SAC.

Reas­on — to pro­tect the water envir­on­ment (& River Dee SAC) from pol­lu­tion events caused dur­ing the con­struc­tion of a new foot­bridge over the Clunie Water.