SHP2016 - Environmental Statement Non-technical Summary

8/15/2019 SHP2016 - Environmental Statement Non-technical Summary

1/39

STONE HILLPARK LIVE WORK PLAY

A brighter future for

Thanet and East Kent

SHP1-15

EnvironmentalStatement (Volume 3):Non-TechnicalSummary


2/39

REPORT NO 70009799

STONE HILL PARKENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT

VOLUME 3:

NON-TECHNICALSUMMARY OF THEENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT

PUBLIC MAY 2016


3/39


4/39

iii

Stone Hill ParkLtd WSP | Parsons BrinckerhoffFormer Manston Airport Project No 70009799 April 2016 Public

Q U A L I T Y M A N A G E M E N T

ISSUE/REVISION FIRST ISSUE REVISION 1 REVISION 2 REVISION 3Remarks V1

Date May 2016

Prepared by Tony Selwyn

Signature

Checked by Karen McAllister

Signature

Authorised by Karen McAllister

Signature

Project number 70009799

Report number V1

File reference W:\Environmental Planning London\03. Projects\02. EIA Projects\70009799 - FormerManston Airport EIA\5. Reporting\3. ES\NTS


5/39

iv

Stone Hill ParkLtd WSP | Parsons BrinckerhoffNon-Technical Summary of the Environmental Statement Project No 70009799Public April 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................1

2 WHAT IS PROPOSED FOR THE SITE? ......................................6

3 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS .................................................... 16

4 WHAT MEASURES ARE PROPOSED TO MITIGATE THEEFFECTS?.................................................................................. 26

5 WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? .......................................................... 32

6 REFERENCES ............................................................................ 33


6/39

1

Stone Hill ParkLtd WSP | Parsons BrinckerhoffNon-Technical Summary of the Environmental Statement 70009799Public April 2016

1 INTRODUCTION Stone Hill Park Ltd. are applying for planning permission for a mixed use development (the1.1.1‘Proposed Development’) on the circa 303 hectare (ha) Former Manston Airport Site (the ‘Site’),located within the District of Thanet, Kent. The planning application is submitted in ‘hybrid’ form(part detailed and part outline) and the details are confirmed in Section 2.

This document is a Non-Technical Summary (NTS) of the Environmental Statement (ES)1.1.2submitted with the hybrid planning application. The purpose of this NTS is to present a summaryof the findings of the ES in non-technical language compliant with The Town and CountryPlanning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Amendment) Regulations 2015 (the ‘EIARegulations’) which require that before planning permission is granted, for certain types ofdevelopment, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) must be undertaken that identifies thelikely significant environmental effects of a development and suggests ways in which anysignificant negative effects on the environment can be prevented, reduced and/or offset.

Given the nature and size of the Proposed Development, an EIA was undertaken of the likely1.1.3significant environmental effects of the development on the environment, including demolition andconstruction works and the completed development. The ES (including baseline information,survey information and technical assessments) submitted with the planning application presentsthe findings of the EIA process, the scope of which was agreed with TDC as part of a scopingexercise, in direct consultation with a number of consultees.

The ES is based on the total extent of the Proposed Development, as defined by the application1.1.4plans and parameter plans, as well as other documents submitted for approval with theapplication.

This NTS is presented as a series of key questions and answers to identify the likely significant1.1.5 environmental effects of the development and describe how any significant negative effects areproposed to be mitigated, prevented and/or offset during the construction and future operation ofthe completed development.

Both the ES and the NTS are publicly available for anyone to review to understand the nature and1.1.6form of the Proposed Development.

Table 1 below confirms the Project Team who have prepared the planning application and the1.1.7Planning Application Documentation including the ES.

Table 1- The Project Team

TEAM MEMBERS ROLE

Stone Hill Park Ltd Applicant

http://www.stonehillpark.co.uk/


7/39

2


TEAM MEMBERS ROLE

Planit ie Masterplanners and Landscape and Visual Assessment

GVA Bilfinger Planning Consultant

Aecom Transport Consultant

Pillory Barn Communications Consultant

WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff (WSP | PB) EIA Project Management and Co-ordination; Ecology& Biodiversity; Noise; Ground Conditions andContamination; Air Quality; Water Resources; Socio-economics; Archaeology and Cultural Heritage; FloodRisk and Drainage; Energy & Sustainability; WasteManagement and Utilities and Infrastructure.

1.2 WHO HAS BEEN CONSULTED ABOUT THE EIA?

Consultation has been undertaken with both statutory and non-statutory consultees and members1.2.1of the public as part of the EIA Scoping exercise and technical studies reported within the ES. TheScoping exercise was undertaken to identify any sensitivities or concerns which may have beenneeded to be considered during the design process and assessed as part of the ES.

Thanet District Council (TDC) provided their EIA Scoping Opinion and agreement on the1.2.2approach to the ES methodologies and subsequent surveys. The following organisations wereconsulted during the preparation of the ES:

Thanet District Council;

http://www.pillorybarn.co.uk/http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjQyIeM9aTLAhUCaRQKHQfrDrYQjRwIBw&url=http://a-pvm.com/third-speaker-a-pvm-architects-workshop-aecom/&psig=AFQjCNH7Hg9kKXcnF8s2kh4fN0v801ejFA&ust=1457108141598239http://www.gva.co.uk/http://www.planit-ie.com/


8/39

3


Kent County Council;

Natural England;

Historic England;

Environment Agency; and

Southern Water.

1.3 THE SITE

The Site extends to approximately 303 hectares and is wholly located within the administrative1.3.1area of TDC as shown in Figure 1 below. Until 2014, the Site was used as a commercial airport(alongside ancillary employment type uses); although some low level employment-type activitiesremain as a legacy of the former airport.

The Site accommodates a number of existing buildings and features associated with its previous1.3.2aviation use, including a concrete runway, taxiways, aprons, aircraft dispersals, car parks,grassland and a variety of airfield buildings, including the passenger terminal, control towers andhangars. The extent of existing hardstanding on Site is approximately 100 ha.

The Site is located to the west of Ramsgate, Margate and Broadstairs and is bound by the A2991.3.3Hengist Way to the south, B2190 Spitfire Way to the west, arable farmland, business operationsand residential properties to the north and Manston Court Road and further farmland to the east.

The northern part of the Site is bisected by the B2050 Manston Road which connects1.3.4Spitfire Way and Birchington in the west with the A256 and Ramsgate in the east.

Flood mapping supplied by the Environment Agency shows the Site is wholly located in Flood1.3.5Zone 1, and therefore is considered to be at low risk of flooding. The TDC Strategic Flood Risk

Assessment indicates that there are no recorded flooding events at the Site.

The majority of the Site is directly underlain by the Margate Chalk Member which is a Principal1.3.6 Aquifer. No superficial deposits have been mapped at the Site however there is a high likelihoodthat Made Ground overlies the chalk across the majority of the Site.

The Site is within a Source Protection Zone (SPZ) I, II and III relating to a groundwater abstraction1.3.7for potable water supply from the Margate Chalk Aquifer which is licenced to abstract up to 2.5million cubic metres of water a year and operated by Southern Water. The SPZ I is mappedacross the majority of the runway and is understood to relate to the inferred route of an historicalchalk mine adit.

There are no designated built heritage assets within the Site boundary. The Site does not lie1.3.8within or adjacent to any Conservation Area.

TDC is responsible for Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) in the vicinity of the Site and the1.3.9 ‘Thanet Urban’ Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) was declared by TDC in 2011, and an Action Plan was developed with measures to effect improvements.

There are no ecological designations which apply to the Site.1.3.10


9/39

4


Figure 1 - Site Location Plan and Boundary

HISTORIC LAND USE

Previous aviation use at the Site was established in 1915, when biplanes from the British Royal1.3.11Flying Corps (renamed the RAF in 1918) began to use farmland at Manston as a site foremergency landings.

By the end of 1916, a training school and the Operational War Flight Command had been set-up1.3.12on the site of the current passenger terminal building. At the outset of World War Two (WWII) theSite was in full use, and during the Battle of Britain acted as a forward operating base for anumber of aircraft during the Battle of Britain.

Post-WWII, the Site was still under the control of the RAF and was used predominantly by the US1.3.13 Air Force (USAF) during the 1950’s and the Cold War. The USAF vacated the Site in the 1960s,and it became a joint RAF and civilian airfield, later being renamed as the Kent International

Airport/ Manston Airport. In 2014 it was announced that the airport would be closed.

CURRENT LAND USE

There are a number of existing buildings / structures across the Site, almost all of them1.3.14associated in some way with the former airport. Some low level employment-type activities remainon Site as a legacy of the former airport.

The existing buildings / structures include the following:1.3.15

Numerous hangars and workshops huts;

Cargo Centre;

Fire Station;


10/39

5


Old Control Tower;

RAF Museum;

Spitfire and Hurricane Museum;

Radar Dish;

Modern Control Tower;

Terminal Building; and

A number of electrical sub-stations.

1.4 THE SURROUNDING AREA

Employment and residential properties are located to the north, east and south-east of the Site.1.4.1Immediately to the north of the Site (across the Manston Road) is the Ministry of Defence (MOD)Fire Training and Development School (FTDS).

There is one Conservation Area within 1km of the Site, Acol Conservation Area located to the1.4.2north-west of the Site. There are no World Heritage Sites or Registered Parks and Gardens within

1km or 2km of the Site. There are however 6 Scheduled Monuments within the 2km of the Siteranging from Bronze Age enclosures, Medieval Monastic Sites and Anglo-Saxon Cemeteries.

There are 21 listed buildings located within a 1km radius of the Site, 3 of which are Grade II* and1.4.318 Grade II Listed.

A number of sites of national importance (within 2km of the Site) and European and international1.4.4importance (within 10km of the Site) are present, including:

Sandwich and Pegwell Bay National Nature Reserve (National Nature Reserve);

Sandwich Bay to Hacklinge Marshes Site of Special Scientific Interest (Site of SpecialScientific Interest); and

Thanet Coast and Sandwich Bay Wetland of International Importance (Ramsar site).


11/39

6


2 WHAT IS PROPOSED FOR THE SITE? 2.1 THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The planning application is submitted in hybrid form, meaning it will be submitted in part detailed2.1.1and part outline. The specific details of each element proposed as part of the hybrid applicationare as follows:

The outline element of the planning application (with all matters except Access reserved forfuture determination) for the provision of:

Buildings/floorspace for the following uses:

Employment (Use Classes B1a-c/B2/B8).

Residential (Use Classes C3/C2).

Retail (Use Classes A1-A5).

Education and other non-residential institutions (Use Class D1).

Sport and recreation (Use Class D2).

Hotel (Use Class C1).

Open space/landscaping (including outdoor sport/recreation facilities).

Car parking.

Infrastructure (including roads and utilities).

Site preparation and other associated works.

The detailed element of the application comprises:

Change of Use of retained existing buildings.

Development of Phase 1 comprising four industrial units (Use Class B1c/B2/B8) withancillary car parking and associated infrastructure.

Means of Access to the Site.

The total maximum quantum for the Proposed Development is outlined in Table 2 below. The2.1.2proposed quantum mix, total units and non-residential space for the Proposed Developmentspecific to each element of the application are outlined in Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5 below.

Table 2 - Maximum Quantum of the Proposed Development

USE CLASS MAXIMUM QUANTUM

A1 – A5

3,100 m2 (Gross Internal Area (GIA)), of which:

Maximum 1,100 m2 (net) Use Class A1 convenience sales area; and

Maximum 563 m2 (net) Use Class A1 comparison sales area.

B1 (a-c) / B2/B8

85,000 m2 (GIA), of which:

Maximum 1,700 m2 (GIA) for use as office (B1a/b)

[See notes]


12/39

7


USE CLASS MAXIMUM QUANTUM

C1 120 bedrooms

C3/C2

2,500 residential units, to comprise:

Maximum 2,500 dwellings (use Class C3)

Maximum 250 units to be age-restricted for elderly persons (unit to comprisebed spaces (use class C2) or dwellings (use class C3))

D1/D2

■ 2 primary schools, with combined capacity of up to 4 forms of entry; and

■ Up to 11,500 m2 (GIA) of other D1/D2 uses.

[See notes]

Notes: Combined total B1(a-c)/B2/B8/D1/D2 floorspace to not exceed 85,000 sqm (GIA) (excluding primary schools) Class D2 usesrestricted to sport and recreation only.

Table 3 - Detailed Elements: Change of Use of Retained Buildings

BUILDINGREFERENCE

EXISTING USE PROPOSED USE FLOORSPACE (GIA)SQM

B14 & B14a (ControlTower)

Sui Generis D1/D2 846

B18 (Hangar)Sui Generis B1 (c)/B2/B8 551

B34 (Workshop)Sui Generis B1 (c)/B2/B8 50



B2 (Hangar)Sui Generis B1 (c)/B2/B8 3,530

B3 (Airport) Sui Generis B1 (c)/B2/B8 1,765

B9 (Modern ControlTower)

Sui Generis D1/D2 233

B8 (Fire Station)Sui Generis D1/D2 750

Sub-total B1 (c)/B2/B8 6,488

D1/D2 1,829


13/39

8


BUILDINGREFERENCE

EXISTING USE PROPOSED USE FLOORSPACE (GIA)SQM

Total 8,317

Notes: Class D2 uses restricted to sport and recreation only. Table 3 above only includes buildings/structures for which planning permissionfor change of use is sought.

Table 4 - Detailed Element: Phase 1

USE CLASS FLOORSPACE (GIA) SQM

B1 (c)/B2/B8 10,224

Table 5 - Outline Element of the Proposed Development

USE CLASS FLOORSPACE (GIA) SQM

A1 – A5 3,100 m2 (GIA), of which:

Maximum 1,100 m2 (net) Use Class A1 convenience sales area; and

Maximum 563 m2 (net) Use Class A1 comparison sales area.

B1 (a-c) / B2/B8 68,288 m2 (GIA), of which:

Maximum 1,700 m2 (GIA) for use as office (B1a/b)

C1 120 bedrooms

C3/C2 2,500 residential units, to comprise:

Maximum 2,500 dwellings (use Class C3); and

Maximum 250 units to be age-restricted for elderly persons (unit to comprisebed spaces (use class C2) or dwellings (use class C3))

D1/D2*

■ 2 primary schools, with combined capacity of up to 4 forms of entry; and

■ 9,671 m2 (GIA)

Notes: Combined total B1(a-c)/B2/B8/D1/D2 floorspace to not exceed 66,459 sqm (GIA) (excluding primary schools). Class D2 usesrestricted to sport and recreation only.

RESIDENTIAL

The Proposed Development seeks to deliver a total of up-to 2,500 homes as part of the outline2.1.3element of the application, ranging in size and tenure of 1 – 5 bedrooms and including a mix ofhouses and apartments.

The residential provision will provide a proportion of affordable housing, accessible units and up2.1.4to 250 age-restricted units, that could include retirement housing, extra-care / assisted homes,residential care and residential nursing.

The indicative housing mix for the Proposed Development is detailed below.2.1.5


14/39

9


Table 6 - Indicative Unit Size Mix

NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PROPOSED

One Bed10 -20%

Two Bed30 – 40%

Three Bed30 – 40%

Four + Bed15 – 20%

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE

In addition to the residential and non-residential elements, the Proposed Development will include2.1.6a mix of publicly accessible open space including parkland and outdoor sports and recreationfacilities. The open space will be delivered in a number of parcels / zones and will comprise:

Structure Planting – comprising a linear belt of native woodland;

Heritage Park Open Space and Infrastructure Zone – area of open parkland managed asinformal grassland which allows occasional use as a heritage grass runway when required;

Field Open Space Zone – Area of existing fields where agricultural uses will be maintained.

Habitat Open Space Zone – Area of land to be managed to promote a range of new habitatsand ecological areas;

An area of no development to the north of Site, where the land will be retained in its existinguse;

Special Outdoor Water-Based Recreational Zone – As per structural Open Space andInfrastructure Zone – but also where recreational surface water body and associated builtfacilities allowed (’Wave Garden’).

2.2 TRANSPORTATION AND ACCESS

VEHICULAR

Vehicular access to the Proposed Development will be achieved from six main points of access2.2.1as follows.

The development will include the provision of a new north-south link between the A299 Hengist2.2.2Way in the south and Manston Road in the north to facilitate the first phase of a potential linktowards Westwood Cross as identified in the Thanet Transport Strategy (2005-2011).

In order to control access to Manston Road to the north of the Site, bus gates will be introduced2.2.3within the development to restrict access. The placement of these bus gates will be agreed withKent Country Council (KCC) as part of reserved matters applications for the relevant phase of thedevelopment.

PUBLIC TRANSPORT

Bus access to the Site will be phased and secured through a comprehensive Public Transport2.2.4

Strategy that has been proposed by the Applicant and that has been agreed in principle with the


15/39


16/39

11


Green infrastructure taking the form of a number of different parks (Heritage, pocket andecological) for use by walkers and dog walkers.

VISUAL

A ‘Zone of No Development’ included to the south of the runway, to locate significantdevelopment away from the most sensitive ridge line / runway locations to the south of theSite;

Domestic scale development that respects the character of the site and surrounds; and

Boundary edges of the Site treated to match the character of the surrounding landscape.

MOVEMENT AND ACCESS

Opportunities to open up this site for public access given its restricted operations over manyyears as an airfield site during the war and subsequent commercial activity;

Retention of the existing means of access to the Site, with the creation of new access pointsto the north, south and west; and

Inclusion of primary, secondary and tertiary link roads for all modes throughout the Site, along

with new key pedestrian cross links.

HERITAGE

Conversion of the existing runway for use as part of a large public parkland to connect thedevelopment from east to west;

Retention of a number of existing buildings across the Site to form part of a new HeritageHub; and

Incorporation of a new museum hub, providing space and opportunity for the two existing onsite museums to expand.

LAND USES

Inclusion of education, health, leisure and retail facilities to provide a commercial hub andcentre for the new settlement; and

Employment, commercial and residential mix to provide a balanced and sustainablecommunity which respects the character of the site location in the defined countryside.

INFRASTRUCTURE

Wave Garden to be positioned outside Source protection Zone (SPZ) 1 of the Thanet Aquifer;

Incorporation of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) / wetland areas across the Site tomanage the surface water runoff;

Retention of the sub-station to the north-east of the Site; and

Sustainable approach to energy and waste.

The evolution of the layout, scale and appearance of the built form, together the environmental2.4.5considerations is outlined below and in the Design and Access Statement submitted with thehybrid planning application.

The sequence of the design evolution is set out below.2.4.6

JULY 2015 (PUBLIC CONSULTATION 1: THE EMERGING CONCEPT MASTERPLAN)

KEY COMPONENTS

Employment (the principal use): to include a range of accommodation types focussed on

the requirements of the advanced manufacturing and technology sectors.


17/39

12


Housing: to support the viability of the development and to complement the employment

uses.

Sport / recreation: large scale indoor facilities of national significance to complement theemployment uses.

Heritage: aviation-related cultural facilities including a ‘heritage’ grass runway.

Green infrastructure: sports pitches, parks, open green space.

KEY ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS AT THIS STAGE

Retention of existing runway, access points, existing museums and creation of a heritage hubto the north of the Site;

Conversion of runway into large public parkland;

Inclusion of a significant amount of green infrastructure across the Site;

Consideration of existing site levels and height considerations, particularly to the south of therunway which is the highest point of the site; and

A ‘Zone of No Development’ included to the south of the runway, to locate significantdevelopment away from the most sensitive ridge line / runway locations to the south of theSite.

DECEMBER 2015 (PUBLIC CONSULTATION)

KEY COMPONENTS

Option 1 – Development Heart

A heart / central hub located at the centre of the development.

The linear park runs through the middle of development and connects to the countryside northand south of the site.

Figure 2 - Developing Masterplan


18/39

13


The Site can connect to the adjacent commercial uses at Manston Business Park andpotential redevelopment of the Ministry of Defence (MOD) site.

Figure 3 - Development Heart

OPTION 2 – CENTRAL PARKLAND

Large linear parkland through the middle of the Site creates a more meaningful green

connection.

The Site connects to adjacent commercial uses at Manston Business Park and potentialredevelopment of the MOD site.

Potential to incorporate a heritage runway.


19/39

14


Figure 4 - Central Parkland

OPTION 3 – PARKLAND EDGE

Eastern linear parkland creates a large buffer to Manston Village and helps to the Site as aseparate community.

The layout creates a compact development.

The Site connects to adjacent commercial uses at Manston Business Park and potentialredevelopment of the MOD site.

The parkland creates an open edge to the eastern park boundary.

Figure 5 - Parkland Edge


20/39


21/39

16


3 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 3.1 WHEN WILL THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BE BUILT?

Subject to the granting of planning permission, demolition and construction would be targeted to3.1.1commence in 2017 and is likely to be completed in around 2032. Demolition and constructionwould be undertaken on a phased basis following the approval of the required reserved mattersapplications for the detailed design.

The sections below summarise the assessment of the likely significant effects of the construction3.1.2phase and the operational phase of the completed proposed development in relation to eachtechnical discipline as reported in the ES.

3.2 WILL I BE ABLE TO SEE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT?

The form and layout of the proposed development has been formulated through a lengthy iterative3.2.1

process involving environmental assessment and consultation. This process has allowed siteconstraints and opportunities to directly influence the evolution of the masterplan and thelandscape proposals. As a result, mitigation measures form part of the design of the landscapeand surrounding built form.

The parameter plans and illustrative masterplan have been developed in accordance with good3.2.2landscape and urban design principles, which avoids, reduces or offsets potential impacts on thelandscape and views.

The assessment predicts that the proposed development will result in major positive landscape3.2.3effects and positive visual effects as a result of the proposed development. The positive effectshave the potential to be optimised further through the detailed design that will emerge through thereserved matters planning application process. Where negative effects have been predicted,there is substantial potential to reduce such effects through the process of reserved matters, asdemonstrated by the illustrative masterplan which is compliant with the parameter plans.

3.3 WILL THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BENEFIT THE LOCAL ECONOMY?

A review of the baseline data found that Thanet and Kent both have an expanding population with3.3.1relatively large proportions of working age people within the community, with both Thanet andKent well represented by individuals working within public admin, education and health sectors.

In 2015, the Indices of Multiple Deprivation ranked Kent 100th out of the 152 counties and unitary3.3.2authorities within England, placing it in the 50% least deprived counties within England. Thanethowever remains the most deprived district within Kent, ranking 21st out of the 326 local

authorities within England, placing it within the top 10% most deprived local authorities withinEngland.

During construction works, it is anticipated that the Proposed Development will provide up to 5883.3.3Full Time Equivalent (FTE) jobs and an estimated 392 FTE construction jobs per year ofconstruction. Additional jobs are also expected to be created through indirect inducedemployment, providing an estimated further 984 indirect jobs. In addition, there is anticipated tobe a further 1,095 indirect FTE roles generated in the wider Kent area as a result of the ProposedDevelopment.


22/39

17


The Proposed Development is likely to have a positive effect on the socio-economics of the area3.3.4once it is completed. Depending on the final mix of employment uses developed across the Site,the number of FTE jobs created will be approximately 2,127 direct FTE jobs with additional jobscreated through the inclusion of on-site schools, healthcare and leisure facilities. Furthermore,additional employment opportunities will be generated through indirect / induced employment.

The Proposed Development will provide a range of housing (including approximately 30%3.3.5affordable, intermediate and accessible homes) that will help to meet the housing demands inThanet, as outlined within the Thanet Local Plan and the Strategic Housing Market Assessment.In addition the new residents of the Proposed Development will increase the spending in the localarea, providing a positive economic uplift for Thanet.

Once operational, the Proposed Development will help to alleviate the increased demand on3.3.6community facilities with the provision of two primary schools on Site that will increase the overallcapacity of places within Thanet and help to accommodate the new child population. In addition,the Proposed Development will have a positive effect on secondary school provision andcommunity learning facilities through financial contributions to help accommodate the secondaryschool aged children of the Proposed Development and the increased demand for servicesincluding and community library facilities.

At present, there is insufficient capacity within existing healthcare facilities (GP’s) to3.3.7accommodate the anticipated 5,950 new residents. However the development includes aproportion of D1 space that will include healthcare facilities to provide for the new residents.

The proposed development includes an extensive network of recreational/open space including3.3.8structure planting, Heritage Park Open Space and Infrastructure Zone, Field Open Space Zoneand a special Outdoor Water-Based Recreational Zone (Wave Garden'). These areas ofrecreational and Public Open Space will incorporate footpaths and cycling paths which will beconnected to the wider green infrastructure network. The level of the proposed provision will besufficient for the new population of the generated by the development will help in alleviatingexisting demand for green space in the wider area.

3.4 WILL THE DEVELOPMENT GENERATE MORE TRAFFIC ON THE LOCALROAD NETWORKS?

The assessment indicates that the proposed development is predicted to have a negative effect in3.4.1terms of Driver Delay at a number of junctions located within the defined study area.

Each of the junctions identified currently operate over capacity, as such the model used is not3.4.2expected to accurately reflect the delay experienced by each driver. In reality, the driver delay ateach of the relevant junctions is expected to be considerably less.

A number of mitigation measures have been considered and these are outlined in the Transport3.4.3 Assessment Report submitted with the planning application. These measures will aid in providing

additional capacity to accommodate traffic associated with the development. Several junctionsshow a minor or moderate negative effect in terms of driver delay following mitigation. However,in junction delay terms these effects are minor and are unlikely to be material on a day to daybasis. The only junction that shows a major negative effect following mitigation is the A256/A257

Ash Road. We will continue to discuss the effects at this junction with KCC as the highwayauthority following the submission of the application with the intention of reducing the effectsdown to within an acceptable level.


23/39

18


The Proposed Development is predicted to have a negative effect in terms of driver fear and3.4.4Intimidation on a number of links within the study area. However, a number of these links are notexpected to carry pedestrians and cyclists and improvements are proposed where appropriate tomitigate the effects of the development. Overall it is not considered that there are any residualeffects as a result of the proposed development.

The Proposed Development is expected to have a negative effect upon accidents and safety at a3.4.5number of junctions located on the local highway network in the vicinity of the site. It is notconsidered that there are any significant existing safety issues at any of these junctions, whichcould be exacerbated by the traffic resulting from the development and therefore nosupplementary mitigation measures have been considered.

3.5 WHAT WILL BE THE EFFECT LOCAL AIR QUALITY?

The residual effect in relation to PM10 and PM2.5 due to activities in the construction phase3.5.1following the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures is likely to not be significant.

The residual effect at existing receptors is likely to be significant in relation annual mean3.5.2concentrations of NO2 with a moderate negative to negligible effect. However such effects duringthe construction phase will be temporary.

The residual effect on the existing population and designated sites for all pollutants as a result of3.5.3the completed operational development is not likely to be significant.

3.6 WILL THE DEVELOPMENT CAUSE A LOT OF NOISE?

Best practice measures have been set out in the ES that are proposed to be adopted to mitigate3.6.1any negative effects. Prior to the implementation of any development, a more detailedassessment is likely to be required when a contractor has been appointed and the constructionmethods and equipment are confirmed. Depending on the receptor location, the constructionactivity to be undertaken based on the proposed construction plant locations, construction noise is

likely to result in direct, temporary, short to short-term negligible to moderate negative effect inthe immediate surroundings.

Industrial/commercial noise limits have been derived in accordance with British Standard 41423.6.2and the requirements of TDC. All proposed industrial/commercial noise that is subject to therequirements of BS 4142 will need to be designed (collectively) to achieve these noise limits. It isassumed that if all plant are designed cumulatively to achieve the specified noise limits, there willbe a permanent, long-term negligible residual effect.

The road traffic associated with the completed proposed development will lead to a direct,3.6.3permanent, long-term negligible effect on most roads. The exceptions are Spitfire Way (east ofColumbus Avenue) and Manston Road (east of Shottendane Road) there will be a direct,permanent, long-term minor negative (insignificant) effect.

The assessment of the suitability of the site for noise-sensitive development is based on the3.6.4results of the baseline noise survey and noise levels derived from traffic flow data. Theassessment of the site for residential use has shown that acceptable internal noise levels will beachieved with appropriate glazing and passive ventilation. External noise levels in the gardens ofthe proposed development will achieve the 55 dB criterion with the possible exception of anygardens immediately adjacent to the northern and southern boundaries of the residential area.The standard garden fences for these plots may need to be replaced with acoustic fences,depending on the orientation and location of the gardens.

An assessment of the suitability of the site for the proposed primary schools and hotel will need to3.6.5be undertaken when traffic flow data for the internal roads is made available. However, on thebasis of the measured noise levels, the site is considered acceptable for these uses.


24/39

19


To conclude, the site is considered acceptable for development from a noise perspective.3.6.6

3.7 WILL THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AFFECT ON-SITE ECOLOGY?

During the construction phase, on-site habitat of ecological importance will be lost to and3.7.1fragmented by the Proposed Development resulting in a direct permanent (long term) effect of

negative significance at the District scale for the duration of the construction phase. Retention andsensitive management of approximately 100ha of grassland on the Site through the constructionphase will mitigate for some of this loss, resulting in a residual effect of direct temporary (mediumterm) negative significance at the local scale.

The wintering bird community will also be impacted by the loss and fragmentation of grassland3.7.2habitat at the Site. Taking into consideration the Local value of the wintering bird community andthe District value of the short eared owl, this impact is assessed as being of direct permanent(long term) negative significance at the District scale. Through the retention and enhancement ofwintering bird habitat the residual effect upon wintering birds on the Site during the constructionphase is of direct permanent (long term) positive significance at the site scale.

Disturbance of wintering birds during the construction phase is likely to result in a temporary3.7.3(medium term) direct effect of negative significance at the local scale; a residual effect of thesame magnitude, duration and extent is likely to persist despite the implementation of mitigation.

Degradation of supporting wintering bird habitat during the construction phase as a result of3.7.4changes in hydrology could result in an indirect temporary (short term) effect of negativesignificance at the local scale. Following implementation of standard mitigation measures andgood environmental site practices effects arising from hydrological changes are likely to benegligible.

The direct loss of barn owl arising from traffic collision during the construction phase would result3.7.5in a direct permanent (long term) effect of negative significance at the district scale. Goodenvironmental site practices, such as limiting working hours to times when barn owls are less

likely to be foraging may reduce the likelihood of barn owl fatality, however, the risk cannot beeliminated. For this reason, the residual effect on barn owls as a result of increased traffic on theSite remains of the same magnitude, duration and extent.

The effect of loss of the barn owl roost in combination with the loss and fragmentation of barn owl3.7.6foraging habitat is likely to result in a direct permanent (long term) effect of negative significanceat the district scale. Provision of a replacement roost will result in a residual effect of temporarydirect (medium term) negative significance at the local scale. Retention and sensitivemanagement of parcels of foraging habitat will result in a residual effect of direct permanent (longterm) negative significance at the local scale.

Disturbance of barn owl associated with the construction phase will constitute a temporary (long3.7.7term) direct effect of negative significance at the local scale. Following the implementation of a

Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) outlining good environmental practicemeasures the residual effect upon barn owls at the Site during the construction phase will be atemporary direct (medium term) effect of negative significance at the local scale.


25/39

20


Direct mortality of brown hare resulting from traffic collision during the construction phase is likely3.7.8to result in a direct permanent (medium term) effect of negative significance at the site scale.Following the implementation of standard mitigation measures and good environmental sitepractices, the residual effect upon brown hare as a consequence of increase vehicular movementand construction related activities is likely to be negligible.

The loss and fragmentation of brown hare habitat during the construction phase is likely to result3.7.9in a direct permanent (long term) effect of negative significance at the local scale. Despite theretention and sensitive management of grassland habitat during this phase, loss andfragmentation is likely result in a residual effect that remains of the same magnitude, duration andextent.

Disturbance of brown hare through increased site activity associated with the construction phase3.7.10could constitute a direct temporary (medium term) effect of negative significance at the localscale. Through the implementation of a CEMP outlining good environmental practice measures, itis probable that the residual effect on brown hare will be negligible.

Once completed, the hydrological changes associated with the development could have a3.7.11significant effect on the semi-improved grassland habitat on the Site. It is possible but uncertain

that a direct permanent (long term) effect of negative significance at the local scale may occur.The implementation of SuDs on the Site will likely result in a negligible residual effect.

Effects on wintering birds (particularly ground nesting birds and passerines) through predation by3.7.12cats during the operational phase could constitute a direct permanent (long term) effect ofnegative significance at the local scale. Mitigation for this issue at large scale developments isimpractical, therefore a residual effect of the same magnitude, duration and extent is probable.

The presence of cats is also likely to indirectly impact short eared owl during the operational3.7.13phase through the reduction of prey availability. This in combination with increased trafficmovement on the Site (and therefore the increased risk of traffic collision) constitutes an effect ofdirect permanent (long term) negative significance at the district scale on short eared owl. Whilstcat predation is impractical to mitigate for, measures to reduce the likelihood of traffic collision

events for short eared owl will be implemented. As the risk of fatalities cannot be removed and theimpact of the loss significant on the short eared owl population in the area, the residual effect onshort eared owl of the same magnitude, duration and extent would remain.

Dog walking within areas used by wintering birds is likely to have a disturbance effect of direct3.7.14permanent (long term) negative significance at the local scale during the operational phase of theProposed Development. A dog management strategy will discourage dog walkers from usingsensitive areas and encourage use of amenity ‘dog-friendly’ areas; despite this, a residual effecton wintering birds of the same magnitude, duration and extent is likely.

Degradation of grassland habitat on the Site through changes in hydrology is possible. This in3.7.15turn can alter the botanical and invertebrate composition of foraging habitat for wintering birds; itis possible but uncertain that an indirect permanent (long term) effect of negative significance atthe local scale could result. The implementation of SuDS on the Site will likely result in anegligible residual effect on the wintering bird community as a result of changes in thehydrological regime.

It is possible that increased traffic levels associated with the operational phase of the Proposed3.7.16Development could result in barn owl fatalities at the Site, resulting in a direct permanent (longterm) effect of negative significance at the district scale on the barn owl population. Mitigation mayreduce the likelihood of a barn owl fatality, but the impact of a fatality would remain of significanceat the district scale.


26/39

21


Habitat fragmentation through use of an insensitive light regime during the operational phase3.7.17could result in a direct permanent (long term) effect of negative significance at the district scale.Sensitive lighting directly around the barn owl roost and across foraging habitat will reduce thiseffect to negligible significance.

Disturbance to barn owl during the operational phase is likely to have a direct temporary (medium3.7.18

term) effect of negative significance at the local scale. The prevention of excessive disturbance bythe occupiers of the building containing the barn owl roost will result in a negligible residual effect.

Increased traffic movements with the Site and on roads surrounding the Site are likely to result in3.7.19increased brown hare mortality. This could constitute a direct permanent (long term) effect ofnegative significance on brown hare at the local scale. Mitigation for this impact is impractical at alarge scale development and therefore a residual effect of the same magnitude, duration andextent is likely.

Disturbance of brown hare by dog walking on the Site could have a significant effect on the3.7.20population during the operational phase. A likely direct permanent (long term) effect of negativesignificance at the local scale could occur. Implementation of a dog management strategy is likelyto reduce dog presence in sensitive areas; however, it is likely that a residual effect of the same

magnitude, duration and extent will result.

The retention and continued sensitive management of approximately 100ha of semi-natural3.7.21grassland on the Site during the operational phase will likely result in a direct permanent (longterm) effect of positive significance at the local scale for semi-improved grassland, wintering birds,barn owl and brown hare. During the operational phase, the new landscaping will also becomefunctional, compensating for construction fragmentation effects on protected species andproviding additional foraging opportunities.

3.8 WILL THE DEVELOPMENT HAVE HIGH LEVELS OF ARTIFICIAL LIGHT?

An assessment of the external artificial lighting environment was undertaken to ascertain the3.8.1

baseline lighting conditions on Site and in the immediate surrounding area. Day-time and night-time lighting surveys have been carried out at the Site and surrounding area which includedtaking readings of illuminance (light spill) and detailed observations at measurement locations.

The existing lighting conditions within the Site are heterogeneous, with areas adjacent to existing3.8.2buildings illuminated and indicative of an E2/E3 Environmental Zone (‘low to medium districtbrightness’), with the remainder of the Site being generally unlit and more indicative of an E2Environmental Zone (‘low district brightness’). In some locations of the Site, an element of lightspill is apparent as a result of lighting installations located adjacent to the Site. The surroundingenvironment is a mix of agricultural land, small villages, commercial parks and small individual orassemblages of residential properties.

Given the varied nature of the surrounding land use, there is a mix of Environmental Zones,3.8.3

ranging from E1/E2 (‘intrinsically dark/low district brightness’) to the south of the Site u p to E3Environmental Zone (‘medium district brightness’) within commercial areas and the settlements ofManston and Minister.

During the construction phase, the principal lighting effects expected to arise from the Proposed3.8.4Development are likely to be from temporary lighting associated with the illumination ofcontractors’ activities and compounds, construction activities and work tasks for safety andsecurity reasons. A number of sensitive receptors have been identified that are considered to besusceptible to light spill and glare, including residential properties, local roads and PRoW. In orderto mitigate temporary lighting effects, it is assumed that the lighting requirements at Site will bemanaged as part of a CEMP.


27/39

22


Overall the residual effects for all receptors range from negligible up to minor to moderate3.8.5negative significance. Although there are residual effects of negative significance associated withthe construction phase of the Proposed Development the effects are only considered to betemporary in nature.

Once completed, there will be a range of lighting installations associated with the operation3.8.6

Proposed Development including street and highways lighting, architectural/security lighting,illuminated signs, low level bollard lighting and artificial lighting, installations (includingfloodlighting) in the recreational/sports facilities/areas. It has been assumed that lighting wouldbe designed in accordance with BS, best practice and to KCC specifications. Mitigation has beenproposed to minimise effects of light spill and glare at sensitive receptors, including carefulinstallation and layout of sports/recreational lighting and maintenance/monitoring of new lightinginstallations by suitably qualified lighting contractors. As such, the residual effects range fromnegligible up to negligible to minor negative significance, with the exception for residentialreceptors on Manston Road and Spitfire Way, who will experience a minor to moderate negativeresidual effect.

Temporary and permanent changes to the night-time scene have also been considered. There3.8.7are a number of observers of the night-time scene within the Site (future residential properties),

immediately adjacent to the Site (Spitfire Way, Manston Road, Manston Court Road and withinCliffs End and Manston) or within close proximity to the Site (Vincent Road, Preston Road withinMinster and individual properties to the south of the Site). All of the receptors identified wereconsidered to experience temporary and permanent changes to the night-time scene as a resultof the lighting associated with the Proposed Development.

Following the implementation of mitigation, the receptors were considered to experience a3.8.8residual effect of minor negative residual significance.


28/39

23


ARE THERE ANY CONCERNS RELATING TO CONTAMINATED LAND ORGROUND CONDITIONS WITHIN THE SITE?

The ground conditions across the Site are likely to comprise superficial geology likely to consist of3.8.9

potentially large and sporadic areas of Made Ground, with possible areas of Brickearth mostly inthe north, east and west of the Site. The entire Site is underlain by the Upper Chalk which is aPrincipal Aquifer and SPZ I, II and II and is a major groundwater source of regional importance.Groundwater within the Upper Chalk is unconfined and is anticipated to be present at a minimumdepth of approximately 4m above ordnance datum (AOD) equivalent to 35m bgl to 50m bgl(based upon maximum and minimum Site levels). Groundwater flow is anticipated to be towardssoutheast towards Pegwell Bay.

Sensitive receptors comprise construction workers and adjacent site users. Sensitive Controlled3.8.10Water receptors include the underlying Principal Aquifer, (including the SPZ I, II and III and thechalk adit present beneath the Site which relate to the Lord of the Manor groundwater abstractionwell), and Groundwater Dependant Terrestrial Ecosystem (GWDTE): Pegwell Bay.

Potential sources of contamination have been identified across the Site associated with its former3.8.11use as an airfield although no ground investigation has been completed on the Site. Based on theavailable baseline data, it is considered that the following significant risks may be associated withthe Proposed Development during the demolition and construction phase prior to theimplementation of mitigation measures:

Potential effect on construction workers and adjacent site users from pre-existingcontamination;

Potential for effect on Controlled Waters from pre-existing contamination;

Potential presence of unstable ground conditions; and

Potential for effect on Controlled Waters.

Mitigation measures include ground investigation works to fully characterise the shallow ground3.8.12and groundwater conditions (including ground gas and radon), and development of appropriateremedial / mitigation measures which would be implemented through the CEMP to ensure theadoption of safe working systems and good environmental practices during this phase.

Following incorporation of mitigation measures in accordance with current best practice and3.8.13relevant guidance, it is considered that residual effects associated with demolition andconstruction and operational phase of the Proposed Development would be of negligiblesignificance.

The mitigation measures are proposed to provide compliance with the Construction (Design &3.8.14Management) Regulations 2015. The process of ground investigation, risk assessment, and

obtaining regulatory approval will ensure that the Site is in a condition that is suitable for theproposed use and that the Site does not fall under the definition of ‘Contaminated Land’ asdefined by the Contaminated Land Regulations 2012.

This process would also provide enhanced protection for controlled waters in compliance with the3.8.15Environmental Permitting Regulations, 2010 and the Water Environment (WFD) Regulations,2003 and National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), to prevent degradation of the identifiedcontrolled water bodies’ WFD quality statuses.


29/39

24


3.9 WILL THE DEVELOPMENT INCREASE THE RISK OF FLOODING?

The only potential flooding risk considered to affect the development is from surface water3.9.1flooding; this however, is not deemed significant due to the drainage strategy and mitigationmeasures which will be put in place.

The effect on water supply capacity is not deemed to be significant given that Southern Water3.9.2have confirmed they will provide supply subject to off-site reinforcement works being undertaken.

The effect on foul water drainage capacity is not deemed to be significant given that Southern3.9.3Water have confirmed that discharge to their network is acceptable subject to improvementworks.

The effect on surface water quantity and quality to Pegwell Bay is not deemed to be significant3.9.4given the proposed drainage strategy and the pre-treatment devices such as attenuation basins,swales and permeable pavements which will be included.

The proposed development will meet the requirements of relevant legislation (e.g. in terms of3.9.5protection of the environment), policy and guidance on drainage and flood risk relating todevelopment.

Following the implementation of the drainage strategy and recommended mitigation measures, no3.9.6significant residual effects in terms of Water Resources and Flood Risk are anticipated duringconstruction or operation.

3.10 WILL THE DEVELOPMENT AFFECT THE HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT IN THELOCAL AREA?

3.10.1.1 In terms of archaeological baseline, there is evidence for Prehistoric activity (particularly duringthe Neolithic, Bronze Age and Iron Age periods within the Site and wider Study Area. There isalso significant evidence to suggest activity within the Site and Study Area during the Roman andSaxon/Early Medieval periods, and evidence of continued occupation of the wider area is widelyknown (Appendix 10.1).The 20

th century also a significant asset.

3.10.1.2 No designated assets will be significantly affected by the Proposed Development. There are noWorld Heritage Sites or Registered Battlefields or Registered Historic Parks and Gardens withinthe Site or the 1km Study Area. There is one Conservation Areas within the 1km Study Area,which is Acol CA. This Conservation Area is located to the 350m north west of the Site. There are

no Listed Buildings within the Site curtilage; and one Listed Building affected through setting bythe Proposed Development, the Former Prospect Inn a Grade II Listed Building. There arehowever 19 Grade II listed buildings within the Study Area; There are two Grade II* ListedBuildings within the 1km Study Area. There are six Scheduled Monuments within the 2km Study

Area and one Scheduled Monument within the 5km Study Area to cover that asset. Only that oneasset, SM Richborough Castle has been brought forward for settings assessment within thischapter.

3.10.1.3 There are no designated heritage landscapes within the Site or within the 1km study area aroundthe Site. There are no Areas of Archaeological Potential within the wider Study Area.

3.10.1.4 During the construction phase, the assessment considered that the residual effects on anypotential buried/surface archaeological deposits are likely to be of moderate negative significance

for the Prehistoric and Early Medieval periods, and minor negative for all other periods following


30/39

25


the implementation of mitigation measures. Such mitigation measures include geophysical surveyrecently undertaken by AOC Archaeology across the Site which has revealed widespreadpotential for archaeological sites and features within the Proposed Development areas. Thissurvey will target areas for evaluative trial trenching within the Site, to be agreed with KCC.

3.10.1.5 During the construction phase, the assessment has determined that there are a number of non-designated heritage assets that would be affected by the Proposed Development, mainly thehistoric buildings located within the Site boundary. Whilst mitigation measures are proposed toreduce the effects on the non-designated heritage assets within the Site, in the form of historicbuilding assessment and survey including sympathetic historic restoration and renovation.Therefore, the residual effects are considered to be negligible negative significance.

3.10.1.6 During the construction and operational phases, the assessment has determined that the settingof two designated heritage assets and one non-designated heritage asset would be directlyaffected by the Proposed Development, including the Richborough Castle Scheduled Monument,the former Prospect Inn, a Grade II Listed Building and the former Manston military airfield and itsassociated historic buildings. No measures are proposed to reduce the negative effects on these

heritage assets. Therefore, the residual effects are considered to range from negligible to minornegative significance depending on the asset affected.

3.10.1.7 Proposed features of the development including the Heritage Runway Park, other greeninfrastructure and retained former properties within the development help to conceptualise theformer presence of Manston Airport and are likely to have a beneficial effect on the setting ofassets that have clear associations with the former Airport.

3.10.1.8 An assessment of the historic landscape character was undertaken during the constructionphase. The assessment concluded that a residual effect ranging from negligible to minor negativesignificance for the partial loss of the complete open landscape of the former military airfield siteand character units.

3.11 WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN COMBINATION WITHOTHER COMMITTED DEVELOPMENT?

The likely effects of the development together with the committed developments, has been3.11.1assessed. The construction works may result in negative effects should the committeddevelopments be constructed at the same time as the development, resulting in an increase indisturbance from construction activities, an increase in noise and dust as a result of constructionactivities and a change in the landscape character of the area.

During site preparation and construction of the Proposed Development, the majority of likely effect3.11.2interactions relate to nearby residents where temporary effects are expected in terms of noise andvibration, dust generation, landscape views and changes in the visual character of the Site.

These effects will be temporary and intermittent during the construction works. The proposed3.11.3CEMP will reduce and control any negative effects on the existing environment, including effectson existing residential properties near the Site.

Once the proposed development is complete, long-term positive in-combination effects on3.11.4existing and future residents (within the Site) are expected to arise from changes in road traffic,changes in views, an increase in housing numbers, job creation, education and other learningfacilities and the creation of accessible open space and new local amenity and leisure facilities.


31/39

26


4 WHAT MEASURES ARE PROPOSED TOMITIGATE THE EFFECTS?

A summary of the proposed measures to be employed to mitigate any adverse environmental4.1.1effects and enhance environmental benefit associated with the Proposed Development aresummarised in Table 7 below.

Such measures are outlined in the Environmental Statement and the intention is that if planning4.1.2permission is improved, such measures would be secured by appropriate and relevant planningconditions imposed on the planning permission and delivered through the detailed design andreserved matters applications.

Table 7 - Summary of Mitigation Measures

Topic Area Measures to avoid or offset potential negative environmental effects /enhancement measures

Construction Phase Operation Phase

Air Quality Implementation of a CEMP;

Implementing good sitepractice, including dampeningof exposed road surfaces andstock piles of materials. Allvehicles carrying looseaggregates should be

sheeted;

Ensure all motorisedequipment on-site is kept ingood working order;

Restrict on-site vehiclemovements where possible;

Use of best practice inmaterials storage andtransportations, plantmaintenance and sitemanagement; and

Restrict HGV movements to

non-peak hour deliveries.

No Mitigation Required

Noise & Vibration Implementation of a CEMP;

Application of the principle ofBest Practicable Means.

Mitigation to be considered atthe detailed design stage toensure all relevant noisesources meet therecommended noise limits.

Ecology and NatureConservation

Retention of significant areasof existing grassland; sensitivemanagement to improvesward diversity and quality.

Landscaping strategy to retain

connections between retained

Implementation of SuDS.

Continued implementation ofsensitive grasslandmanagement regime.

Cat predation on large scale


32/39

27



Construction Phase Operation Phasegrassland and newlandscaping with inter-connecting grassed bordersand verges.

Implementation of standardmitigation measures includinga variety of goodenvironmental sites practices(CEMP).

Cessation of use of fertilisersand limited (targeted) use ofherbicides and sensitive timing

of grass cuts.

Retention of significant areasof existing grassland, inclusionof broad grassland marginsand management regime toincrease prey biomass.

Inclusion of berry-bearingnative shrubs to provide foodsource.

Replacement roost creation inexisting building, retention andenhancement of parcels of

grassland habitat, creation oflinking semi-natural corridors,sensitive work timing and lightmanagement.

Retention of significant areasof existing grassland; sensitivemanagement.

Creation of new scrub,hedgerow and woodlandmosaic habitat.

impractical to mitigate.

High hedgerow planting as abuffer alongside primary roadsintersecting or adjacent toshort eared owl foraginghabitat.

Implementation of dogmanagement scheme,encourage use of amenityareas by public (discourageaccess to ‘nature areas’) andsensitive light management.

Sensitive lighting and habitatmanagement.

Prevent access toreplacement roost by buildingusers and discouragedisturbance.

Encourage use of amenityareas by public (discourageaccess to ‘nature areas’) andsensitive light management.

Continued implementation ofsensitive grassland

management regime.

Landscape and Visual Effects Implementation of a CEMP;

Phased approach to

development to minimiseimpacts;

Management of landscapewithin developed areas topromote positive contributionto landscape character;

Protection of any landscapefeatures and heritage featuresof value that contribute todefining the site’s character.Phased approach todevelopment to minimiseimpacts;

Ongoing management of newlandscape;

Ongoing maintenance oflandscape buffer to easternedge of site to ensureseparation from ManstonVillage; and

Ongoing management oflandscape to promote positivecontribution to landscapecharacter.


33/39

28



Construction Phase Operation Phase Visual screening of

construction works with sitehoarding;

High quality new settlementareas developed inaccordance with principles ofgood design;

High quality associated greeninfrastructure;

Work with existing groundlevels to minimise cut and fill;

and Protection of any landscape to

be retained.

Traffic and Transport A CEMP will be secured by

condition and implemented tominimise the impacts ofconstruction on thesurrounding transport networkfor all users.

A number of junction capacityimprovements are proposedas part of the developmentthat will provide nil detrimentand in some cases a minorpositive impact. At the A256/A257 Ash Road we willdiscuss the impacts of thedevelopment at this junctionwith KCC post-application.

A number of improvements tothe pedestrian and cyclenetwork both within the siteand surrounding it areproposed that will improveamenity for existing users ofthe area.

Archaeology and CulturalHeritage

Historic Buildings Assessmentand Survey and renovation;and

Archaeological evaluationincluding recent geophysical

survey and so to start targetedtrial trenching. Furthermigration in archaeologicalexcavation and furtherarchaeological works.Preservation by record and insitu where possible.

Retention of built heritagefeatures as part of the designaspects of the development.

Water Resources and Flood Risk Offsite reinforcement works of

the existing public watersupply network will beundertaken prior toconstruction;

Improvements of the existing

No Mitigation Required


34/39

29



Construction Phase Operation Phasefoul drainage network will beundertaken prior toconstruction; and

Risks to the quality of theexisting water supply will bemanaged through theimplementation of a CEMP.

Socio-Economics andPopulation

No Mitigation Required. The applicant will enter intonegotiations with the Councilas it is expected that theapplicant will make a financial

contribution, via a Section 106agreement, for off-sitesecondary school places,community and adult learningand library facilities.

Ground Conditions A targeted ground

investigation will beundertaken with anynecessary remediation ormitigation also completedduring the construction phase;

Working areas clearly definedto ensure minimal disturbance

of soils. The contractor shallappraise the suitability ofworking areas in this respectas part of working methodstatements;

Construction vehicles wouldbe regularly maintained toreduce the risk of hydrocarboncontamination associated withleaks and spillage and will onlybe active when required;

Designated areas for thestorage of hazardous

materials, fuels, oils andchemicals. All designatedareas will be of hard-standingwithin bunds (110% thevolume of the vessel) and allfilling points / valves will belocated within the extent ofsaid bund or appropriate driptrays will be provided;

Provision of temporary welfarefacilities which are to bemaintained and undergoregular checks sufficient forthe number of construction

workers. These units should

A targeted groundinvestigation will beundertaken prior to design andconstruction of the SuDSfeatures with any necessaryremediation or mitigation alsocompleted during theconstruction phase; and

The ground investigation mustinclude soil leachate testing atthe specific location of theplanned SuDS features toallow assessment of potentialrisks to Controlled Waters.


35/39

30



Construction Phase Operation Phasebe regularly emptied under amanagement contract;

Controlled and covered wastestorage areas;

Provision of fuel emergencyspill kits, located at strategicpoints; and

Provision of environmentalawareness training forconstruction workers.

Generic safe working practicesshould be adhered to and include:

Use of appropriately qualifiedpersons for the intended task;

Use of Personal ProtectiveEquipment (PPE);

Provision of on-site washingfacilities;

Washing of hands at the endof every work period (includingforearms, face etc. if theybecome dirty);

No eating rule on-site andconfining of smoking areasaway from the work site, andonly after decontamination;

Reporting of any ill health; and

The damping down of exposedsurfaces during periods of dry/ windy weather.

In addition, a UXO Threat Assessment has been undertakenfor the Site which has indicated

there is a high risk of unexplodedordnance being present at the Site.Therefore the following mitigationmeasure may be required:

Explosive Ordnance Safetyand Awareness Briefings toany personnel conductingintrusive works and theprovision of UnexplodedOrdnance Site SafetyInstructions;

An UXO survey be completedby a competent party of all


36/39


37/39

32


5 WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? The Environmental Statement has been submitted to Thanet District Council together with the5.1.1other Planning Application Reports and Plans for the Planning Officers to consider in consultationwith various stakeholders such as Kent County Council, Environment Agency, and NaturalEngland and other government bodies and agencies.

Members of the general public are also invited to make comments on the planning applications5.1.2and will be consulted by TDC alongside the statutory consultees. The feedback from theconsultation will be taken into account by Officers before making a recommendation to the ThanetDistrict Council Planning Committee on the Planning Application in the context of planning policy.

5.2 WHO CAN I CONTACT IF I WANT SOME MORE INFORMATION?

Further Information, including a copy of the planning application documents, the ES and this Non-5.2.1 Technical Summary, are available at the following website:

https://www.thanet.gov.uk/your-services/planning/view-planning-applications/view-planning-applications/

Any comments can be sent to:5.2.2

Planning and RegenerationThanet District CouncilPO Box 9Cecil StreetMargate

KentCT9 1XZ

You can also comment via the live planning application form or sent an email to the following5.2.3address:

[email protected]

Paper copies of the ES documents can be provided at a cost, via WSP | PB.5.2.4

https://www.thanet.gov.uk/your-services/planning/view-planning-applications/view-planning-applications/https://www.thanet.gov.uk/your-services/planning/view-planning-applications/view-planning-applications/https://www.thanet.gov.uk/your-services/planning/view-planning-applications/view-planning-applications/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.thanet.gov.uk/your-services/planning/view-planning-applications/view-planning-applications/https://www.thanet.gov.uk/your-services/planning/view-planning-applications/view-planning-applications/


38/39

33


6 REFERENCES Ref. 2.1 – Thanet District Transport Strategy (2005 – 2011): Accessed Online [19.04.2016].


39/39

Documents

SHP2016 - Environmental Statement Non-technical Summary