HO31 – East of Kings Park Village – Note on Contamination

Castle Point Borough Council - HO31 – East of Kings Park Village – Note on contamination

1. At the hearing session for matter 5 - Canvey site allocations - held on the 26th May 2021, it was agreed that the Council would prepare a note on whether the site HO31 – Land to the east of Kings Park Village Canvey Island – was part of the old landfill site to the east and whether as a result the site is or likely to be contaminated.

2. This site allocation is for residential development for around 50 new homes. The site is adjacent to the former Canvey Newlands Landfill site, which is no longer operational and is now known as Canvey Heights Country Park. The Inspector asked whether the proximity of this site to the former landfill site would pose a risk to the future occupants of the site. Policy Context 3. The Government’s Planning guidance on Land Affected by Contamination outlines the role of local plans in considering contamination at paragraph 006 (Reference ID: 33-006-20190722).

4. Paragraph 007 (Reference ID: 33-007-20190722) goes on to require a contamination risk assessment be provided as part of a planning application. These requirements are reflected in the proposed modifications outlined in paragraph 21 below.

5. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is clear at paragraph 179 that where a site is affected by contamination it is the responsibility of the developer and/or landowner to secure safe development. Paragraph 178 indicates that post remediation land should no longer be capable of being determined contaminated under Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Site history 6. The site lies between Kings Park Village to the west, and Canvey Heights Country Park to the east, and is in the ownership of Castle Point Borough Council. It is currently fenced off and is not available for public use or access. Canvey Heights Country Park was created from the former Canvey Newlands landfill site, which operated from 1954 to 1989.

7. Prior to Kings Park Village being a park home retirement development, the site was a caravan site for visitors to the area. A photograph showing the caravan site is provided as figure 1.

8. According to Historic Landfill Data available at ArcGIS - My Map published by the government, as shown in figure 2, the HO31 site was within the boundary of the former landfill site. This does not mean that the land was used for landfill.

Figure 1: Newlands Holiday Camp 19661

Figure 2: extent of the former Newlands Landfill site (Source: Environment Agency former Landfill sites map – ArcGIS My Map)

1 Photo by Jacksons Photo Services Ltd - https://www.canveyisland.org/history-2/oldphotos/places- 2/newlands_holiday_camp

9. Evidence that the HO31 site was not part of the area in which landfill took place, includes the aerial photograph provided as figure 3 is dated from 1987 and shows the extent of the former landfill site.

Figure 3: Oblique Aerial Photograph of Canvey Newlands 1987 (HO31 site shown in blue outline)

10. Further evidence is provided by a map from Essex County Council showing the extent of the landfill area dated 1999 as shown in Figure 4.

11. During the operation of the landfill it was important to maintain a buffer between the two uses for amenity purposes, which the HO31 site fulfilled. The allocation site was not therefore formally used for depositing any waste, although it has been the subject to illegal fly tipping on occasions, which was removed at the time.

Figure 4: Newlands Landfill Site (Source: ECC)

Potential Contamination Risk 12. The landfill site was operational between 1954 and 1989 for the receipt of biological waste, although it is likely that it was contaminated with non-biological waste also over the course of time, as less strict waste sorting regimes existed during that period.

13. Furthermore, in its construction, the area used for landfill was not subject to modern legislation laid out in the Environmental Protection Act 1990 or subsequent legislation. It was therefore not clay lined, allowing for sea water ingress at each tide. This allowed for any contaminants to be dispersed by water at each tide. The former landfill area is however capped with a non- engineered clay cap of variable unknown depth as part of the remediation work and creation of the country park.

14. In order to monitor the contamination risks associated with the former landfill, given it was not clay lined, ECC commissioned borehole monitoring in 2002/3, along the western edge of the former landfill area. This coincides with the eastern boundary of the allocation site. These boreholes are 6m to 7m in depth and are in the locations shown in figure 5.

Figure 5: Borehole Monitoring Locations

15. The latest annual monitoring report for these boreholes, dated August 2020, concluded that methane gas levels remained below the Environment Agency guideline values throughout 2019, with only one borehole measuring the presence of methane over the plan period. Carbon dioxide levels meanwhile remained consistent with previous years. Groundwater quality and surface water quality also remained similar to previous review years and is most likely to be affected by saltwater rather than landfill related contaminants. No leachate was monitored in 2019, with the report concluding that this is also likely to have been affected by the sea water ingress at the site. The report is attached for information.

16. As it stands therefore, ongoing contamination levels are low from the former landfill operation. However, there remains two potential risks arising from the development of site HO31 in respect of contamination:

a. Any contaminants already present on the site as a consequence of past leachate; b. Disturbance of the land during development creating new opportunities for leaching or for landfill gas pathways.

17. Consequently, consistent with the NPPF and associated planning practice guidance for land affected by contamination, it is necessary for any application for this site to be accompanied by a Contamination Risk Assessment and undertake any remediation necessary to make the land suitable for residential development. For the purposes of this site, this remediation will need to include the prevention of the creation of new leachate and landfill gas pathways. Any initial investigation by the applicant may be desk based with a site walk over initially but further site investigations on the actual site and neighbouring landfill site may be necessary.

18. In relation to local policy meanwhile, any application for this site would need to comply with Strategic Policy NE8 of the Local Plan, relating to Development on Contaminated Land. Provision of a contamination assessment also forms part of the validation requirements for potentially contaminated sites, contained in the Castle Point Validation Checklist.

19. The Council is of the view that there is enough information to inform the allocation of this site, as the potential risks are identifiable and are capable of mitigation. Policy NE8 of the Local Plan meanwhile provides a clear basis for determining if any proposals for this site deal with contamination appropriately and sufficiently and rejecting any proposals which do not. Proposed modifications 20. It is recognised by the Council that policy HO31 could be made clearer in respect of referencing the contamination risk that needs to be addressed at this site. To ensure clarity and highlight the potential for contamination on the site, the Council is proposing the following modifications to Policy HO31.

21. Insert new paragraph to the Reasoned Justification after Paragraph 10.113 (and renumber the following paragraph accordingly):

The site is adjacent to a historic landfill site. It has also been the subject of fly tipping in the past, which was removed at the time. Any planning application would need to have regard to the potential for ground and/or water contamination and meet the requirements of Strategic Policy NE8, and where necessary, deliver a comprehensive remediation strategy prepared in consultation with ECC, as the Waste Disposal Authority.

Add a new criterion 5 to Policy HO31 as follows, and renumber subsequent criteria:

5. Development will be expected to deliver an appropriate comprehensive remediation strategy, in consultation with ECC, as the Waste Disposal Authority, to address any outstanding historic contamination issues, and to prevent any new contamination pathways arising. Consistent with the NPPF, the responsibility for delivering the remediation including any ongoing measures will fall to the developer.

Implications of Contamination on the Delivery of Site HO31 22. It is anticipated that this allocation will be delivered as an extension to the neighbouring Kings Park Village, although the precise form of the accommodation to be provided on this site is not currently known. The Council is in early discussions with the owner-operator of Kings Park Village regarding the acquisition of the site.

23. It is recognised that dealing with contaminated land is known to impact on development viability due to abnormal development costs. Such costs are unlikely to be typical and may be reflected in a lower land value for a site.

24. The Local Plan and CIL Viability Study 2020 [DV-005] considered two housing typologies which are potentially relevant to the development of site HO31. Typology 37 considered the viability of a scheme comprising 50 houses on a greenfield site on Canvey Island. This showed good viability with a residual value (after all costs including land) of £612 per square metre. Typology 32 meanwhile considered the viability of a scheme comprising 30 houses on a brownfield site on Canvey Island. The brownfield assumptions included £300,000 per hectare for land remediation. This showed reasonable viability with a residual value (after all costs including land) of £69 per square metre.

25. The Council is therefore confident that allocation HO31 is viable despite the likely need to undertake contaminated land remediation. However, as other viability work is required following the hearing sessions in respect of other sites, the Council will carry out an additional assessment in respect of this site also, immediately following the end of the hearing sessions and report to the Inspector accordingly. This will provide additional assurance on this matter.