Kent Minerals & Waste

Development Framework –

Site Options

Habitat Regulations

Assessment

For consultation

May 2012

Prepared for: Kent County Council

UNITED KINGDOM & IRELAND

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

REVISION SCHEDULE

Rev Date Details Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by

2 01/05/12 For Consultation Dr Graeme Dr James Riley Dr James Riley Down Principal Principal Ecologist Gareth Lavery Ecologist Ecologists

REVISION RECORD

Rev Date Details Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by

2 01/05/12 For Consultation Dr Graeme Dr James Riley Dr James Riley Down Principal Principal Ecologist Gareth Lavery Ecologist Ecologists

URS Scott House Alencon Link Basingstoke Hampshire RG21 7PP

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 2

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Limitations

URS Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited (“URS”) has prepared this Report for the sole use of Kent County Council (“Client”) in accordance with the Agreement under which our services were performed. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this Report or any other services provided by URS. This Report is confidential and may not be disclosed by the Client nor relied upon by any other party without the prior and express written agreement of URS. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report are based upon information provided by others and upon the assumption that all relevant information has been provided by those parties from whom it has been requested and that such information is accurate. Information obtained by URS has not been independently verified by URS, unless otherwise stated in the Report. The methodology adopted and the sources of information used by URS in providing its services are outlined in this Report. The work described in this Report was undertaken between February and April 2012 and is based on the conditions encountered and the information available during the said period of time. The scope of this Report and the services are accordingly factually limited by these circumstances. Where assessments of works or costs identified in this Report are made, such assessments are based upon the information available at the time and where appropriate are subject to further investigations or information which may become available. URS disclaim any undertaking or obligation to advise any person of any change in any matter affecting the Report, which may come or be brought to URS’ attention after the date of the Report. Certain statements made in the Report that are not historical facts may constitute estimates, projections or other forward- looking statements and even though they are based on reasonable assumptions as of the date of the Report, such forward-looking statements by their nature involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from the results predicted. URS specifically does not guarantee or warrant any estimate or projections contained in this Report. Copyright © This Report is the copyright of URS Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited. Any unauthorised reproduction or usage by any person other than the addressee is strictly prohibited

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 3

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 6 1.1 Legislation ...... 6 1.2 Scope and objectives ...... 7 2 METHODOLOGY ...... 9 2.1 Key principles ...... 9 2.2 Process ...... 9 2.3 Likely Significant Effects (LSE)...... 10 2.4 Confirming other plans and projects that may act in combination...... 11 2.5 Physical scope of the assessment ...... 12 3 PATHWAYS OF IMPACT ...... 13 3.1 Introduction ...... 13 3.2 Atmospheric pollution...... 13 3.2.1 Oxides of nitrogen and nitrogen deposition...... 17 3.2.2 Transport exhaust emissions...... 18 3.2.3 Energy from Waste ...... 21 3.2.4 Landfill ...... 22 3.2.5 Other types of waste facility ...... 23 3.2.6 Biopathogens ...... 23 3.2.7 Quarries and minerals sites...... 23 3.2.8 Diffuse air pollution ...... 24 3.3 Water quality and flows...... 24 3.4 Predation ...... 26 3.5 Disturbance ...... 27 3.5.1 Sensitivity of species (birds) ...... 28 3.6 Coastal Squeeze ...... 30 3.7 Direct landtake ...... 31 3.8 Screening distance summary...... 31 4 SCREENING OF PROPOSED MINERAL SITES ...... 33 5 SCREENING OF PROPOSED WASTE SITES ...... 56 6 CUMULATIVE AND ‘IN COMBINATION’...... 69 6.1 Cumulative assessment...... 69 6.2 In Combination Assessment ...... 70 7 CONCLUSIONS OF SCREENING...... 73 7.1 Minerals sites ...... 73 7.1.1 Lydd Quarry...... 77 7.2 Waste sites ...... 78

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 4

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

7.3 Next steps...... 82 APPENDIX 1 - BACKGROUND ON EUROPEAN SITES REFERENCED IN THIS DOCUMENT ...... 83 APPENDIX 2 – MINERALS AND WASTE SITES SUBJECT TO SCREENING BUT WHICH WILL NOT NOW BE TAKEN FORWARD ...... 95

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 5

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Legislation The need for Habitat Regulations Assessment is set out within Article 6 of the EC Habitats Directive 1992, and interpreted into British law by the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. The ultimate aim of HRA is to “maintain or restore, at favourable conservation status, natural habitats and species of wild fauna and flora of Community interest” (Habitats Directive, Article 2(2)). This aim relates to habitats and species, not the European sites themselves, although the sites have a significant role in delivering favourable conservation status. The Habitats Directive applies the precautionary principle to protected areas (Special Areas of Conservation, SACs and Special Protection Areas, SPAs, collectively known as European sites and which comprise the Natura 2000 pan-European network). Plans and projects can only be permitted having ascertained that there will be no adverse effect on the integrity of the site(s) in question. Plans and projects may still be permitted if there are no alternatives to them and there are Imperative Reasons of Overriding Public Interest (IROPI) as to why they should go ahead. In such cases, compensation would be necessary to ensure the overall integrity of the site network. As a matter of Government Policy, contained within paragraph 5 of ODPM Circular 06/2005, Ramsar sites are treated as a European site, even though they are not such sites as a matter of law. In order to ascertain whether or not site integrity will be affected, an HRA should be undertaken of the plan or project in question.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 6

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Box 1. The legislative basis for Appropriate Assessment

Habitats Directive 1992

Article 6 (3) states that:

“Any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site but likely to have a significant effect thereon, either individually or in combination with other plans or projects, shall be subject to appropriate assessment of its implications for the site in view of the site's conservation objectives.”

Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2011, as amended

The Regulations state that:

“A competent authority, before deciding to … give any consent for a

plan or project which is likely to have a significant effect on a European site … shall make an appropriate assessment of the implications for the site in view of that sites conservation objectives… The authority shall agree to the plan or project only after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the European site”.

Over the years the phrase ‘Habitat Regulations Assessment’ (HRA) has come into wide currency to describe the overall process set out in the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations from screening through to IROPI. This has arisen in order to distinguish the process from the individual stage described in the law as an ‘appropriate assessment’. Throughout this report we use the term Habitat Regulations Assessment for the overall process and restrict the use of Appropriate Assessment to the specific stage of that name.

1.2 Scope and objectives The role of the Natura 2000 sites (SACs, SPAs, Ramsar) is to provide statutory protection for terrestrial and coastal sites that are of European and global importance as a result of habitats or species contained within them. Scott Wilson has been appointed by Kent County Council to assist in undertaking a Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) of the potential effects of the Minerals & Waste Development Framework (MWDF), on the Natura 2000 network. The MWDF will supersede the Kent Minerals Local Plan and Kent Waste Local Plan (strategic planning framework for the protection of the environment, sustainable transport priorities, and the scale, pattern and location of waste HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 7

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

and minerals development across Kent). The MWDF includes three development plan documents at various stages of development: the Core Strategy, the Minerals Sites Plan and the Waste Sites Plan. The purpose of this current document is to: • Identify the European sites (Special Areas of Conservation , Special Protection Areas and Ramsar sites) that could potentially be affected by Strategic site allocations within the development document; • Research and set out details of their European interest features and the environmental conditions that are required to maintain the favourable conservation status of those features; • Explore the vulnerability of these European sites to potential impacts arising from the MWDF site allocations and if possible, screen out those European sites that on consideration are unlikely to be affected by the MWDF, based on current knowledge; • Where possible, identify those Strategic site allocations that may conflict with maintaining the favourable conservation of the European sites, based on current knowledge. There are 24 Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), Special Protection Areas (SPAs) or Ramsar sites that lie wholly or partly within Kent: • Medway Estuary and Marshes SPA & Ramsar site; • The Swale SPA & Ramsar site; • Dungeness SAC; • Dungeness to Pett Level SPA; • Thames Estuary and Marshes SPA & Ramsar site; • Thanet Coast and Sandwich Bay SPA & Ramsar site; • Thanet Coast SAC; • Sandwich Bay SAC; • Stodmarsh SAC, SPA & Ramsar site; • Wye and Crundale Downs SAC; • Queendown Warren SAC; • Lydden and Temple Ewell Downs SAC; • Folkestone to Etchinghill Escarpment SAC; • Blean Complex SAC; • North Downs Woodlands SAC; • Peter’s Pit SAC; • Dover to Kingsdown Cliffs SAC; and HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 8

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

• Parkgate Down SAC. There is also the Dungeness, Romney Marsh and Rye Bay pSPA/pRamsar site which requires consideration in this HRA. It is government policy to treat the pSPA as having full protection. The currently designated European sites in Kent are shown on Figure 2.

2 METHODOLOGY

2.1 Key principles This section sets out the basis of the methodology for the HRA. Scott Wilson has adhered to several key principles in developing the methodology – see Table 1. Table 1 - Key principles underpinning the proposed methodology

Principle Rationale Use existing We will use existing information to inform the information assessment. This will include information gathered as part of the SA of the emerging LDF and information held by Natural England, the Environment Agency and others. Consult with Natural We will ensure continued consultation with both Natural England, the England and the Environment Agency for the duration of Environment Agency, the assessment. We will ensure that we utilise Kent Wildlife Trust information held by them and others and take on board and other key their comments on the assessment process and findings. stakeholders Ensure a We will ensure that the level of detail addressed in the proportionate assessment reflects the level of detail in the MWDF (i.e. assessment that the assessment is proportionate). With this in mind, the assessment will focus on information and impacts considered appropriate to the local level. Keep the process We will endeavour to keep the process as simple as simple as possible possible while ensuring an objective and rigorous assessment in compliance with the Habitats Directive and emerging best practice. Ensure a clear audit We will ensure that the AA process and findings are trail clearly documented in order to ensure a clearly discernible audit trail.

2.2 Process The HRA is being carried out in the absence of formal Government guidance. Communities and Local Government released a consultation paper on

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 9

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Appropriate Assessment of Plans in 20061. As yet, no further formal guidance has emerged. The process diagram below outlines the stages of HRA according to current draft CLG guidance. The stages are essentially iterative, being revisited as necessary in response to more detailed information, recommendations and any relevant changes to the plan until no significant adverse effects remain.

Evidence Gathering – collecting information on relevant European sites, their conservation objectives and characteristics and other plans or projects.

HRA Task 1: Likely significant effects (‘screening’) – identifying whether a plan is ‘likely to have a significant effect’ on a European site

HRA Task 2: Ascertaining the effect on site integrity – assessing the effects of the plan on the conservation objectives of any European sites ‘screened in’ during AA Task 1

HRA Task 3: Mitigation measures and alternative solutions – where adverse effects are identified at AA Task 2, the plan should be altered until adverse effects are cancelled out fully

2.3 Likely Significant Effects (LSE) The first stage of any Habitat Regulations Assessment (AA Task 1) is a Likely Significant Effect (LSE) test - essentially a risk assessment to decide whether the full subsequent stage known as Appropriate Assessment is required. The essential question is: “Is the Plan, either alone or in combination with other relevant projects and plans, likely to result in a significant effect upon European sites?” The objective is to ‘screen out’ those plans and projects that can, without any detailed appraisal, be said to be unlikely to result in significant adverse effects upon European sites, usually because there is no mechanism for an adverse interaction with European sites. In this case, the plan documents have been evaluated in detail within the context of existing knowledge of the various ways in which development can impact on European sites, accumulated from carrying out HRAs across the

1 CLG (2006) Planning for the Protection of European Sites, Consultation Paper HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 10

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

country at all geographical scales. If it cannot be concluded with confidence that adverse effects are unlikely, we have deferred to the precautionary principle and assumed that they require investigation in the Appropriate Assessment. URS was supplied with an ‘intermediate list’ of minerals and waste sites in February 2012, which excluded sites that the Council were already aware would not be taken forward, or had been withdrawn by their promoters. In preparing this intermediate list the Council (in discussion with Natural England and Kent Wildlife Trust) had already decided not to take forward three sites on the basis of potential conflicts with European sites: • Site 52 (Weatherlees) – this proposed minerals site was rejected from the intermediate list, in part due to its proximity to Thanet Coast & Sandwich Bay SPA and Ramsar site (within 200m); • Site 26 (Hollowshore, Faversham) – The site forms part of The Swale SPA/Ramsar site. Sand and gravel extraction will damage or destroy the Ramsar features on site and significantly disturb the SPA bird interest; • Site 15 (Burntwick Island, Upchurch, Swale) – Within Medway Estuary & Marshes SPA/Ramsar site, the site would need an HRA and is unlikely to have a positive outcome without mitigation. Other alternatives exist as put forward in the preferred options. Between February 2012 and the production of the final version of this HRA document, a number of further sites were withdrawn or removed from the preferred options list, for a range of reasons. These sites had all been subjected to preliminary HRA screening by URS and (purely for information) the preliminary screening conclusions for those sites are included in Appendix 2. The remaining sites contained in Chapters 4 and 5 are all contained within the minerals and waste Preferred Options.

2.4 Confirming other plans and projects that may act in combination It is neither practical nor necessary to assess the ‘in combination’ effects of the MWDF within the context of all other plans and projects within the South-East of England. For the purposes of this assessment, we have determined that, due to the nature of the identified impacts, the key other plans and projects relate to the additional housing, commercial/industrial allocations, minerals and waste strategies and major infrastructure projects proposed for Kent and surrounding authorities over the lifetime of the Minerals and waste Development Framework policies. The Regional Spatial Strategy for the South East (2009)2 provides a good introduction to proposals for Kent as a whole, and surrounding counties. Although legislation is in place to enable the Regional Spatial Strategies to be revoked, guidance currently indicates that evidence that informed the

2 http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100528142817/http://www.gos.gov.uk/gose/planning/regionalPlanning/815640/ HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 11

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

preparation of Regional Strategies may still be a material consideration in development management decisions and in informing DPD production. Table 2 below outlines the plans and projects that have been identified as relevant to the pathways for effects upon European sites. These include those that are considered likely to influence: • Lydd Airport expansion • Port of Dover expansion • East Sussex Minerals and Waste Development Frameworks • The London Plan • Kent Local Transport Plan • East Sussex Local Transport Plan • Core strategies for Kent and Medway authorities and associated Site Allocations documents (where available) • Shoreline Management Plans relevant to Kent In addition to reviewing plans and projects that may interact with the Kent County Council MWDF, we will also make use of sources of information that provide information (but not plans) regarding European designated sites, including: • Nature on the Map and its links to the JNCC website (www.natureonthemap.org.uk); • The UK Air Pollution Information System (www.apis.ac.uk); and • Habitats Regulation Assessments of LDF DPDs where available

2.5 Physical scope of the assessment There is no pre-defined guidance that dictates the physical scope of a HRA of a Minerals and Waste Development Framework. Therefore, in considering the physical scope of the assessment, we were therefore guided primarily by the identified impact pathways rather than by arbitrary ‘zones’. However, it was considered advisable to ‘scope in’ all European sites in Kent for a first appraisal, plus those that lie close to the borders of the area. Information available from Natural England and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee provides a good introduction to the reasons for the designation of the European sites. This has been supplemented by information gained during consultation with the relevant agencies, notably Natural England and the Environment Agency. This information has informed the site descriptions in Appendix 2.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 12

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

3 PATHWAYS OF IMPACT

3.1 Introduction This section of the report summarises the various impact pathways that can link Waste and Minerals development in Kent with European sites.

3.2 Atmospheric pollution Current levels of understanding of air quality effects on semi-natural habitats are not adequate to allow rigorous assessment of the likelihood of significant effects on the integrity of key European sites. The National Expert Group on Trans-boundary Air Pollution (2001)3 concluded that: • In 1997, critical loads for acidification were exceeded in 71% of UK ecosystems. This was expected to decline to 47% by 2010. • Reductions in SO2 concentrations over the last three decades have virtually eliminated the direct impact of sulphur on vegetation. • By 2010, deposited nitrogen was expected to be the major contributor to acidification, replacing the reductions in SO2. • Current nitrogen deposition is probably already changing species composition in many nutrient-poor habitats, and these changes may not readily be reversed. • The effects of nitrogen deposition are likely to remain significant beyond 2010. • Current ozone concentrations threaten crops and forest production nationally. The effects of ozone deposition are likely to remain significant beyond 2010. • Reduced inputs of acidity and nitrogen from the atmosphere may provide the conditions in which chemical and biological recovery from previous air pollution impacts can begin, but the timescales of these processes are very long relative to the timescales of reductions in emissions. Grice et al4 5 do however suggest that air quality in the UK will improve significantly over the next 15 years due primarily to reduced emissions from road transport and power stations.

3 National Expert Group on Transboundary Air Pollution (2001) Transboundary Air Pollution: Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground-Level Ozone in the UK 4 Grice, S., T. Bush, J. Stedman, K. Vincent, A. Kent, J. Targa and M. Hobson (2006) Baseline Projections of Air Quality in the UK for the 2006 Review of the Air Quality Strategy, report to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Welsh Assembly Government, the Scottish Executive and the Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland. 5 Grice, S., J. Stedman, T. Murrells and M. Hobson (2007) Updated Projections of Air Quality in the UK for Base Case and Additional Measures for the Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland 2007, report to HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 13

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Waste sites (particularly incinerators and landfill sites) can contribute substantially to the atmospheric pollution load through emission of the following pollutants:

• Methane (CH4) - Methane is produced when organic matter is broken down in the absence of oxygen and large quantities are produced by livestock, the spreading of animal manure and landfill sites. Waste treatment, including landfill, released nearly 22% of the UK's methane emissions in 2003, about 2% of all greenhouse gas emissions (in terms of carbon equivalents)6.

• Carbon Dioxide (CO2) - Carbon dioxide is one of the major combustion products from burning fossil fuels. It is also produced in certain non- combustion chemical reactions, for instance in the manufacture of cement. Carbon dioxide is a long-lived pollutant and will remain in the atmosphere for between 50 and 200 years. Carbon dioxide contributes to the greenhouse effect7. • Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) - Oxides of nitrogen are formed during high temperature combustion processes from the oxidation of nitrogen in the air. The principal source of oxides of nitrogen is road traffic, which is responsible for approximately half the emissions in Europe8. NOx concentrations are therefore greatest in urban areas where traffic is heaviest. An increase in the deposition of nitrogen from the atmosphere to soils is generally regarded to lead to an increase in soil fertility, which can have a serious deleterious effect on the quality of semi-natural, nitrogen- limited terrestrial habitats. High NOx levels can also have directly toxic effects on plants.

• Ammonia (NH3) – This is probably the major source of nitrogen deposition to many wildlife sites, and is primarily agricultural in origin9, although it is also produced through some industrial process and by the composting of organic matter on waste sites.

• Sulphur dioxide (SO2) – this is an acidic gas that combines with water vapour in the atmosphere to produce acid rain. Both wet and dry depositions have been implicated in the damage and destruction of vegetation and in the degradation of soils and watercourses. Major SO2 problems now only tend to occur in cities in which coal is still widely used for domestic heating, in heavy industry and in power stations10.

the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Welsh Assembly Government, the Scottish Executive and the Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland. 6 Environment Agency website 7 UK Air Pollution Information System www.apis.ac.uk 8 Dore CJ et al. 2005. UK Emissions of Air Pollutants 1970 – 2003. UK National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory. http://www.airquality.co.uk/archive/index.php 9Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research http://www.iger.bbsrc.ac.uk/Ammonia_Inventory/sources.htm 10 Dore CJ et al. 2005. UK Emissions of Air Pollutants 1970 – 2003. UK National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory. http://www.airquality.co.uk/archive/index.php HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 14

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

• Low-level ozone (O3) – this is unlike the other pollutants mentioned, in that it is not emitted directly into the atmosphere, but is a secondary pollutant produced by a complex reaction between nitrogen dioxide (NO2), hydrocarbons and sunlight11. Unlike the other pollutants, it cannot therefore be directly related to increases in housing, traffic etc. Although peak levels of ozone are generally reducing, annual average levels are generally increasing. • Hydrogen chloride and hydrogen fluoride (HCl and HF) – Both of these chemicals are produced in small amounts as a result of certain energy from waste facilities, principally incineration. HF is the most phytotoxic of all air pollutants. It accumulates in very high concentrations in the margins of leaves. In sensitive species this may lead to distortion of the leaf shape, chlorosis (yellowing), red colouration and, in extreme cases, death of tissues. HCl can also have local, direct, effects on plants, but there is little information available about dose-response relations12. • Dioxins - These are long-lived organic compounds, which form when chlorinated substances in the waste, such as PVC plastic, are burnt and accumulate in the human food chain. Dioxin emissions to air from incinerators are thought to have decreased significantly in recent years. Four sources account for 74% of the total air emissions. These are legal municipal waste incineration (26%), sinter plants (18%), residential wood combustion (boilers, stoves, fireplaces, 16%) and incineration of hospital waste (14%). The incineration of hazardous industrial waste contributes less than 1%.13 • Heavy metals – specifically Cadmium (Cd), which is a normal constituent of soil and water at low concentrations. The main sources of cadmium emissions are from waste incineration, and iron and steel manufacture14. Cadmium and other heavy metals are mainly present in the ash produced by incinerators, but some is released directly to atmosphere via the exhaust stack. Emissions of cadmium have declined substantially over recent years; this is mainly attributable to the decline in coal combustion to generate power. Environmentally, cadmium is dangerous because many plants and some animals absorb it easily and it becomes concentrated in tissues. Migration of landfill gas outside the perimeter of landfill sites taking biodegradable waste can occur, but only where sites have been inadequately engineered. In such circumstances the gas will exclude oxygen from the soil and lead to the exposure and possible death of plants and soil fauna. Such

11 UK Air Pollution Information System www.apis.co.uk 12 ERM. 2007. Appropriate Assessment of the Surrey Waste Development Framework. Surrey County Council 13 Chlorine Online Information Resource website http://www.eurochlor.org/upload/documents/document57.pdf 14 National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory www.aeat.co.uk/netcen/airqual/naei/annreport/annrep96/sect6_3.htm HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 15

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

effects are unlikely beyond a 0.5km radius15 in any case, but since they are a result of poor engineering design, and any current landfill sites will be required to conform to all modern authorisations, they are not considered further in this assessment. For the following reasons, only NOx and ammonia are considered further as specific pollutants in this assessment: • Despite the general association with nitrogen dioxide, ozone levels are not as high in urban areas (where high levels of nitrogen dioxide are emitted) as in rural areas. This is largely due to the long-range nature of this pollutant, which is sufficiently great that the source of emission and location of deposition often cross national boundaries. As such, low-level ozone can only be practically addressed at the national and international level. • Although methane and carbon dioxide are important greenhouse gases, it is not possible to relate quantities of these gases to particular effects on specific European sites. It is therefore not possible to consider these within the scope of this Appropriate Assessment other than by noting that increased emission of these chemicals will contribute at a global scale to accelerating rates of climate change. • Sulphur dioxide concentrations are overwhelmingly influenced (82% of emissions16) by the output of power stations and industrial processes that require the combustion of coal and oil. None of these activities will be associated with developments under the Waste Development Framework and indeed the use of Energy from Waste technology will reduce reliance on conventional power stations and therefore contribute to a reduction in SO2 emissions. • There is an enormous range in sensitivity to hydrogen chloride and hydrogen fluoride between species, and there are no commonly available critical levels for avoidance of visible injury to vegetation. Coupled with the fact that quantities emitted by incinerators will typically result in ground- level concentrations lower than the concentration that will harm vegetation17, these chemicals are not considered further in this assessment. • As with ozone, the distance from emission to deposition of dioxins can be many hundreds of miles, potentially crossing trans-national boundaries, and is dependent upon meteorological conditions. Most importantly, amounts of dioxins formed in incinerators do not depend on chlorine levels,

15 Scottish Environment Protection Agency. 2003. Technical Guidance Note - Habitats Regulations & The Landfill Regulations Guidance http://www.sepa.org.uk/pdf/guidance/landfill_directive/habitats_landfill_regulations_guidance.pdf 16 Dore CJ et al. 2005. UK Emissions of Air Pollutants 1970 – 2003. UK National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory. http://www.airquality.co.uk/archive/index.php 17 ERM. January 2007. Appropriate Assessment of the Surrey Waste Development Framework. Surrey County Council HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 16

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

but primarily on the design and operating temperatures of the facility18. It is therefore not possible to consider dioxin emissions in detail within this assessment. However, it is important to note that dioxins are only emitted by incineration and that incinerators are required by law to control their dioxin emissions below set thresholds. Since ammonia is of relevance to European sites primarily through its effect upon nitrogen deposition, it is not considered independently of nitrogen deposition in this assessment. Since NOx can be directly toxic to plants, it is considered separately from its influence on nitrogen deposition in this assessment. Eutrophication of sensitive habitats through atmospheric deposition is a widely acknowledged phenomenon, although it is extremely difficult to measure as its effects are often hidden by changes in local nutrients (i.e. via direct fertilisation) or changes in grazing pressure. In well-managed sites, the effects of eutrophication may be to some extent counteracted through an increase in grazing pressure. Bobbink et al.19 suggest that sites with low intensity management may have lower critical thresholds than those in higher levels of management. Reintroducing grazing into ungrazed or under-grazed sites can help to counteract changes in vegetation due to nitrogen deposition; however increasing grazing on sites that are already well-grazed may have a direct adverse impact on the plants for which the site was designated. Furthermore, air pollution can act synergistically with insufficient grazing to exacerbate management problems and lead to a coarser species-poor sward. A changing climate (i.e. rising temperatures and reduced summer rainfall) is further exacerbating the situation by putting sensitive habitats and species under increasing stress, in turn reducing their competitive ability and increasing susceptibility to pathogens.

3.2.1 Oxides of nitrogen and nitrogen deposition The most acute impacts of NOx take place close to where they are emitted, but individual sources of pollution will also contribute to an increase in the general background levels of pollutants at a wider scale, as small amounts of NOx and other pollutants from the pollution source are dispersed more widely by the prevailing winds. The main sources of NOx in the UK are20: • Road and other transport (approximately 47%; greater in urban areas);

18 Chlorine Online Information Resource website. http://www.eurochlor.org/upload/documents/document57.pdf 19 Bobbink, Ashmore, Braun, Fluckiger and Vanden Wyngaert. 2002. Work on critical loads for natural and semi-natural systems (“Empirical nitrogen critical loads for natural and semi-natural ecosystems 2002 update”) 20 Dore CJ et al. 2005. UK Emissions of Air Pollutants 1970 – 2003. UK National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory. http://www.airquality.co.uk/archive/index.php HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 17

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

• Public power generation using fossil fuels (22%). 21 • Combustion in industrial processes (14%). • Domestic and commercial sources (4%), e.g. commercial boilers in schools, hospitals etc. Therefore, when considering the ecologically relevant impacts of the Minerals and Waste Development Framework, by far the largest contribution to NOx will generally be made by the associated road traffic. The following air pollution limit value applies for the protection of vegetation and ecosystems from NOx: -3 • World Health Organisation 30 μgm annual average; EU Air Quality Framework Directive 30 μgm-3 annual average away from areas close to main roads, built up areas or major industrial sites; Natural England policy in agreement with the Environment Agency in their Review of Consents process is that the 30 μgm-3 threshold should apply to all designated sites, due to the sensitivity of the habitats within the sites.

3.2.2 Transport exhaust emissions In an appropriate assessment of potential impacts of proposed waste facility sites in Surrey, a dispersion model was used to quantify the effects of emissions from operational vehicles travelling to and from a theoretical incinerator. It was shown that at distances greater than 55 metres from the kerbside, ground level concentrations of NOx represent less than 1% of the critical level22. Inevitably however, the distance to which the pollutants will disperse depends upon the parameters of the model and prevailing meteorological conditions. Moreover, it is clear from other research that there is no such thing as a ‘typical’ waste site. • The actual scale of heavy vehicle movement associated with waste facilities is entirely dependent upon both the type and scale of the facility, neither of which can be prescribed by the Waste Development Framework except at the broadest scale. It is therefore impossible to give meaningful “typical” values for waste sites. A review of a number of waste schemes23 identified that: • A Household Waste Recycling Centre may have very small numbers of heavy vehicle movements (4 per day) but can have a very large number of car movements associated with the general public bringing waste to the site – 150 cars per day at the site considered in the cited example; • Thermal Treatment and Energy from Waste facilities will generally have a much greater number of heavy vehicle movements (perhaps 100 to 200

21 Combustion of coal and oil, some refinery processes and the production of sulphuric acid and other chemicals 22 1% being the level defined in the EU Habitats Directive Handbook at which emissions are not likely to have a significant effect alone or in combination, irrespective of background levels 23 ERM. January 2007. Appropriate Assessment of the Surrey Waste Development Framework. Surrey County Council HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 18

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

per day) due to their generally large size, but will also have a much smaller number of cars travelling to the site, as they do not accept waste from the general public and are heavily automated; • Most other forms of waste treatment (including landfill) fall between these two extremes depending as much upon their size as their type; • The situation can become considerably more complex if various forms of waste treatment facility are co-located on the same site. The ERM (2007) study gathered data from one site that combined a Waste Transfer Station with a Household Waste Recycling Centre, which as a result showed both higher numbers of HGV traffic (66 per day) and public car traffic (up to 1,000 per day at peak times of the year) than either form of waste facility might be expected to attract individually. It is clear from the above that the situation regarding vehicular exhaust emissions associated with waste treatment sites is considerably more complex than it might appear at face value. The only general conclusion that can be safely drawn is that all new waste sites are likely to result in a local increase in vehicle movements and that this increase may be greater where multiple types of waste treatment facility are provided in the same location. It is also true that the distance vehicles travel may be as important as the numbers or type of vehicle in contributing to deteriorating atmospheric deposition of European sites, if the route leads the traffic within close proximity of multiple European sites. According to the Department of Transport’s Transport Analysis Guidance, “Beyond 200m, the contribution of vehicle emissions from the roadside to local pollution levels is not significant” 24.

24 www.webtag.org.uk/archive/feb04/pdf/feb04-333.pdf HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 19

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Figure 1 – Traffic contribution to concentrations of pollutants at different distances from a road (Source: DfT)

Given the difficulties in accurately determining and modelling likely scales of vehicle usage on sites for which all parameters must necessarily at this stage be wholly theoretical, it seems more in line with the precautionary principle to utilise the more cautious 200 m figure, rather than smaller figures that may have been derived from site-specific theoretical models. For the most part, this is therefore the distance that has been used throughout this screening report in order to determine whether European sites are likely to be significantly affected by development under the MWDF. However, following discussion with Natural England and Kent Wildlife Trust, where it is known that individual sites are likely to generate over 200 HGV movements this is highlighted. In addition, it has been identified that there is a particular concentration of sites around the Richborough area, all of which could lead to a cumulative increase in traffic on the A256 (which lies within 200m of the Thanet Coast & Sandwich Bay SPA/Ramsar site and Sandwich Bay SAC) of more than 200 HDV’s per day. Since there is a very high likelihood that vehicles from these sites will all use that road for access, these sites will be considered together with regard to transport impacts. There are eight European sites within the scope of the assessment that lie with 200m of a main road that could serve as a transport route for waste or minerals traffic: • Lydden & Temple Ewell Downs SAC – a portion of which is located within 200m of the A2; • Dover to Kingsdown Cliffs SAC – a portion of which is located within 200m of the M20; • Folkestone to Etchinhill Escarpment SAC – a portion of which is located within 200m of the A20/M20; HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 20

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

• The Swale SPA & Ramsar site – a portion lies within 200m of the A249 and A299; • Medway Estuary & Marshes SPA/Ramsar site – a portion lies within 200m of the A249; • Thanet Coast & Sandwich Bay SPA/Ramsar site and Sandwich Bay SAC – a portion lies within 200m of the A256; • North Downs Wood SAC – a portion lies within 200m of the A249; and • Thames Estuary & Marshes SPA/Ramsar site – a portion lies within 200m of the A228 The issue of cumulative vehicle exhaust emissions is clearly a collective one and no single minerals or waste site can be identified as being ‘responsible’. As such, the approach we have taken is to assume that air quality issues arising from vehicle exhaust emissions are relevant to the MWDF options covering the whole county, and not to individual waste or minerals sites.

3.2.3 Energy from Waste While traffic makes the largest overall contribution to NOx, some individual point sources can also result in substantial increases in the local NOx concentration. Of those point sources associated with waste treatment, thermal treatment / Energy from Waste facilities25 have the potential to emit the greatest amounts, as any form of thermal treatment involves the emission of exhaust gases. For the purposes of this assessment we have not tried to model the emissions of a particular form of thermal treatment in order to estimate possible NOx emissions, for the following reasons: • It is not known at this stage which sites might support a thermal treatment facility; • Incineration (mass burn) is currently the only thermal treatment technology that can be accurately modelled. Use of this technology can emit large quantities of NOx, but the NOx emissions of any form of incinerator, and their distances to deposition, are entirely dependent upon specific parameters of the facility (e.g. stack height). Since any incinerator modelled for this HRA would at this stage be based on entirely hypothetical parameters, the resulting model may in fact bear little relation to actual emissions from an incinerator at a given location; • More importantly, while incineration is currently the most common form of Energy from Waste technology, the international drive to reduce pollutant emissions has resulted in the development of numerous alternative technologies (such as pyrolysis or gasification), which produce relatively

25 Energy from Waste (or Waste to Energy) refers to those types of thermal treatment that incorporate energy recovery technology. HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 21

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

little NOx26 27. At this stage it is unknown which technology will be utilised at the chosen site as this cannot be specified by the Minerals and Waste Development Framework. However, given that the Minerals and Waste Development Framework covers the period until 2026, it is possible that the form of technology adopted for the chosen site will involve gasification, pyrolysis or similar technology, rather than mass burn. Any modelling based upon conventional incineration technology would therefore be potentially unrepresentative. • Therefore, we have concluded that detailed modelling should await greater certainty about the nature of the proposed facility. This may therefore more logically undertaken as part of the project-level Appropriate Assessment for any Energy from Waste Facility as the Minerals and Waste Development Framework will not identify a specific site for EfW but only a range of sites that are of sufficient size to be suitable for larger facilities (which would include EfW). • The Environment Agency guidance on screening point-source pollution emitters for more detailed assessment28 lists the presence of a SSSI or Natura 2000 site within 10km as one of the indicators that detailed assessment (i.e. dispersion-modelling) may be required for a planning application/IPCC consent. The implication of this is that the emissions of a point-source can normally be considered effectively inconsequential on sites located more than 10km distant. While this would not apply to major emitters such as large power stations, refineries and steel works, it would apply to smaller ones such as thermal waste treatment facilities. • For this screening exercise, we have therefore used the 10km figure as a basis on which to screen sites in and out of assessment regarding their possible use as a location for an Energy from Waste facility. If sites that may be suitable for EfW are located within 10km of a European site, they have been screened in for further consideration.

3.2.4 Landfill A landfill gas flare (or utilisation engine) will produce an emission of exhaust gases such as sulphur dioxide, NOx, unburnt hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide and hydrogen chloride. However, the volume of exhaust gases is likely to be small in comparison to other combustion facilities and at a distance of >1km

26 “For a given secondary material, emission levels of SOx, NOx, and particulates from gasification systems are reduced significantly compared to incineration systems… Data for repowering of coal-fired electric utilities with IGCC technology has shown that emissions of SOx, NOx, and particulates are reduced by one to two orders of magnitude” Radian International LLC. 2000 A Comparison of Gasification and Incineration of Hazardous Wastes. Report produced for US Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory. http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/others/techrpts/igcc_wp.pdf 27 Some manufacturers of gasification technology claim the potential to reduce NOx emissions to <10 ppm. “The SOx, NOx, mercury, volatile metals, and particle emissions from a Solena IPGCC plant constitute a small fraction of those emissions from a … incinerator waste-to-energy plant.” Solena Group website www.solenagroup.com/html/images/fuelflexible.pdf 28 Environment Agency. 2003. Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control - Environmental Assessment and Appraisal of BAT. Horizontal Guidance Note IPPC H1 HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 22

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

from the European site may well be inconsequential29. We have therefore used the 1km figure throughout this screening report as a basis on which to screen landfill sites in or out of assessment with regard to air quality issues.

3.2.5 Other types of waste facility Atmospheric emissions of NOx from other types of facility are negligible. For example, anaerobic digestion30 does result in the generation of biogas but not NOx. The emissions to the air are well controlled; some emissions may arise from biogas under positive pressure in the tank, but under normal operating conditions biogas is not released direct to air31. Equally, waste transfer stations32 and mechanical biological treatment33 plant can incorporate a number of different processes in a variety of combinations and can be built for various purposes, but air emissions and health impacts are most likely to be linked to traffic movements. In general therefore, the view has been taken in this screening report that waste sites other than landfill and Energy from Waste facilities are unlikely to have a significant air quality effect on European sites (other than through associated vehicle exhaust emissions).

3.2.6 Biopathogens Some composting sites can result in the production of plant pathogens, which if released into the environment can result in adverse effects on vegetation within European sites located close to the facility. In previous work in Sussex we have agreed with Natural England a screening distance of 1km to be applied to such facilities.

3.2.7 Quarries and minerals sites Atmospheric pollutants generated by minerals sites are more straightforward than with waste sites and generally resolve themselves into dust and traffic exhaust emissions. Vehicle exhaust emissions have already been discussed. Effects of dust will depend on the prevailing wind direction and the transport distance is related to particle size; large particles (>30um) will mostly deposit within 100m of the source, intermediate particles (10-30um) are likely to travel up to 200 - 500m. Smaller particles (<10um) can travel up to 1km from the source34. Dust size and chemical composition is important as smaller particles

29 Scottish Environment Protection Agency. 2003. Technical Guidance Note - Habitats Regulations & The Landfill Regulations Guidance. http://www.sepa.org.uk/pdf/guidance/landfill_directive/habitats_landfill_regulations_guidance.pdf 30 The biological treatment of biodegradable organic waste in the absence of oxygen, utilising microbial activity to break down the waste in a controlled environment 31 Defra. 2004. Review of Environmental and Health Effects of Waste Management: Municipal Solid Waste and Similar Wastes. Defra Publication, London, UK 32 In which waste is transported from waste producers (industry, commerce and the general public) to be treated, recycled and/or disposed 33 A generic term for an integration of several processes commonly found in other waste management technologies, such as Materials Recovery Facilities, sorting and composting plant 34 Scottish Environment Protection Agency. 2003. Technical Guidance Note - Habitats Regulations & The Landfill Regulations Guidance http://www.sepa.org.uk/pdf/guidance/landfill_directive/habitats_landfill_regulations_guidance.pdf HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 23

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

can enter or block stomata and thus interfere with gas exchange, while sufficient coverage may prevent light penetration to the chloroplasts. In prolonged cases, death can result. Dust impacts will be considered further in this assessment, but cannot be quantified beyond the broad potential distances identified above for different particle sizes. For the purposes of screening, those minerals sites that lie more than 1km from a European site have been ‘screened out’ as being unlikely to contribute significant dust impacts even without special mitigation such as ‘wetting’.

3.2.8 Diffuse air pollution In addition to the contribution to local air quality issues, development can also contribute cumulatively to an overall deterioration in background air quality across an entire region. In July 2006, when this issue was raised by Runnymede District Council in the South East, Natural England advised that their Local Development Framework ‘can only be concerned with locally emitted and short range locally acting pollutants’ 35 as this is the only scale which falls within a local authority remit. It is understood that this guidance was not intended to set a precedent, but it inevitably does so since (as far as we are aware) it is the only formal guidance that has been issued to a Local Authority from any Natural England office on this issue. In the light of this and our own knowledge and experience, it is considered reasonable to conclude that diffuse pan-authority air quality impacts are the responsibility of national government, both since they relate to the overall quantum of development within a region or England as a whole (over which individual districts have little control), and since this issue is best addressed at the highest pan-authority level. Diffuse air quality issues will not therefore be considered further within this HRA.

3.3 Water quality and flows The quality of the water that feeds European sites is an important determinant of the nature of their habitats and the species they support. Poor water quality can have a range of environmental impacts: • At high levels, toxic chemicals and metals can result in immediate death of aquatic life, and can have detrimental effects even at lower levels, including increased vulnerability to disease and changes in wildlife behaviour. • Eutrophication, the enrichment of plant nutrients in water, increases plant growth and consequently results in oxygen depletion. Algal blooms, which commonly result from eutrophication, increase turbidity and decrease light penetration. The decomposition of organic wastes that often accompanies

35 English Nature (16 May 2006) letter to Runnymede Borough Council, ‘Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994, Runnymede Borough Council Local Development Framework’. HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 24

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

eutrophication deoxygenates water further, augmenting the oxygen depleting effects of eutrophication. In the marine environment, nitrogen is the limiting plant nutrient and so eutrophication is associated with discharges containing available nitrogen. • Some pesticides, industrial chemicals, and components of sewage effluent are suspected to interfere with the functioning of the endocrine system, possibly having negative effects on the reproduction and development of aquatic life. Water quality may be adversely affected by waste sites through: • Pollution through water runoff from hard surfaces carrying oils, heavy metals and/or de-icing compounds. While these effects can be dispersed throughout the downstream water catchment, they will be most visibly manifested within tens of metres to a few hundred metres of the site36; and • Discharges of leachate from landfill sites can add ammonia, other nutrients and chemical pollutants to surface water bodies. Leachate can also penetrate groundwater. Leachate can escape from landfill sites by leakage through a barrier / containment system, break out through a cap, or overtopping containment. There are several ways in which quarrying / mining can affect water quality/resources: • Quarries and mines that are below the water table will require dewatering on a regular basis. Dewatering37 can lead to a reduction in the water table and “draw down” from hydraulically linked groundwater dependent habitats (including streams and rivers); • The physical presence of a new quarry in the unsaturated zone (i.e. above the water table) can increase the possibility of aquifer contamination and result in a direct reduction in temporary groundwater storage capacity; • If the water that is pumped from a quarry as a result of dewatering has a high proportion of clays and suspended particles, or is contaminated with metals, it can reduce water quality within those watercourses that receive the water; and • Backfilling a dormant quarry with overburden or imported fill may cause changes to groundwater levels, quality and flow paths in adjoining areas. In or near Kent there are eleven European sites that have a particular hydrological sensitivity (this is essentially associated with maintaining high quality flows of freshwater into the estuarine sites):

36 Scottish Environment Protection Agency. 2003. Technical Guidance Note - Habitats Regulations & The Landfill Regulations Guidance. http://www.sepa.org.uk/pdf/guidance/landfill_directive/habitats_landfill_regulations_guidance.pdf 37 Dewatering is most commonly carried out by intermittent pumping from a sump located in the deepest part of the quarry, to keep pace with the inflow of groundwater. HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 25

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

• Medway Estuary and Marshes SPA & Ramsar site; • The Swale SPA & Ramsar site; • Dungeness SAC; • Dungeness to Pett Level SPA; • Dungeness, Romney Marsh & Rye Bay pSPA/pRamsar site • Thames Estuary and Marshes SPA & Ramsar site; • Thanet Coast and Sandwich Bay SPA & Ramsar site; • Thanet Coast SAC; • Stodmarsh SAC, SPA and Ramsar site; and • Peter’s Pit SAC.

3.4 Predation In addition to disturbance due to activities taking place on site, landfill sites can attract large numbers of gulls and corvids (members of the crow family) and rats, which can disturb and prey on the young of bird species for which Special Protection Areas and/or Ramsar sites have been designated. In the case of Kent, this is of relevance to the following sites, which were designated at least in part for their populations of breeding little tern and common tern: • Medway Estuary and Marshes SPA & Ramsar site – as well as its wintering bird interest, the SPA is designated for breeding avocet, common tern and little tern. Common tern and little tern are known to be particularly vulnerable to gull predation; • Dungeness to Pett Level SPA – as well as its wintering bird interest, the SPA is designated for breeding Mediterranean gull, common tern and little tern. Common tern and little tern are known to be particularly vulnerable to gull predations; • Dungeness, Romney Marsh & Rye Bay pSPA/pRamsar site – as well as its wintering bird and vegetation interest, this pSPA/pRamsar site is designated for breeding marsh harrier Circus aeruginosus, avocet Recurvirostra avosetta and sandwich tern Sterna sandvicensis; and • Thanet Coast and Sandwich Bay SPA & Ramsar site – as well as its wintering bird interest, the SPA is designated for breeding little tern. Little tern are known to be particularly vulnerable to gull predation. In addition to those sites designated for terns, two other sites are designated for ground nesting bird species: • The Swale SPA – designated in part for supporting a wide range of breeding birds in large numbers, many of which are ground nesting; and • Stomarsh SPA/Ramsar site – designated in part for breeding hen harrier, bittern and gadwall, all ground nesting species. HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 26

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Environment Agency and Scottish Environmental Protection Agency guidance indicate that 5km is the limit within which gull predation associated with landfill sites may be an issue for designated sites with breeding birds (particularly ground nesting species). As such, for this screening report, landfill site locations have been screened in for further assessment if they lie within 5km of the sites listed above.

3.5 Disturbance Waste sites can share many noise and visual disturbance issues (e.g. heavy vehicle movements and loud machinery) with other industrial operations. Birds are the faunal group that is most often considered in relation to disturbance, largely as this is the group on which disturbance impacts have been most studied. Concern regarding the effects of disturbance on birds stems from the fact that they are expending energy unnecessarily and the time they spend responding to disturbance is time that is not spent feeding38. Disturbance therefore risks increasing energetic output while reducing energetic input, which can adversely affect the ‘condition’ and ultimately survival of the birds In addition, displacement of birds from one feeding site to others can increase the pressure on the resources available within the remaining sites, as they have to sustain a greater number of birds.39 Moreover, the more time a breeding bird spends disturbed from its nest, the more its eggs are likely to cool and the more vulnerable they are to predators. Human activity can affect birds either directly (e.g. through causing them to flee) or indirectly (e.g. through damaging their habitat). The most obvious direct effect is that of immediate mortality such as death by shooting, but human activity can also lead to behavioural changes (e.g. alterations in feeding behaviour, avoidance of certain areas etc.) and physiological changes (e.g. an increase in heart rate) that, although less noticeable, may ultimately result in major population-level effects by altering the balance between immigration/birth and emigration/death.40 The degree of impact that varying levels of noise will have on different species of bird is poorly understood except that a number of studies have found that an increase in traffic levels on roads does lead to a reduction in the bird abundance within adjacent hedgerows - Reijnen et al (1995) examined the distribution of 43 passerine species (i.e. ‘songbirds’), of which 60% had a lower density closer to the roadside than further away. By controlling vehicle

38 Riddington, R. et al. 1996. The impact of disturbance on the behaviour and energy budgets of Brent geese. Bird Study 43:269-279 39 Gill, J.A., Sutherland, W.J. & Norris, K. 1998. The consequences of human disturbance for estuarine birds. RSPB Conservation Review 12: 67-72 40 Riley, J. 2003. Review of Recreational Disturbance Research on Selected Wildlife in Scotland. Scottish Natural Heritage. HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 27

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

usage they also found that the density generally was lower along busier roads than quieter roads41. Activity will often result in a flight response (flying, diving, swimming or running) from the animal that is being disturbed. This carries an energetic cost that requires a greater food intake. Relatively little detailed research has been conducted concerning the energetic cost to wildlife of disturbance, but such evidence as exists indicates a significant negative effect. Quarrying and mining share many noise and visual disturbance issues (e.g. heavy vehicle movements and loud machinery) with other industrial operations; however, quarrying can also result in disturbance through the controlled blasting of rock in order to extract it for processing. This can result in ground vibration that can be perceived a considerable distance from the point of blasting. In addition, the shockwaves will travel through the air (known as overpressure) and, if the blasting takes place near water, the shockwaves can be perceived at even greater distances. Disturbing activities are on a continuum. The most disturbing activities are likely to be those that involve irregular, infrequent, unpredictable loud noise events, movement or vibration of long duration. Birds are least likely to be disturbed by activities that involve regular, frequent, predictable, quiet patterns of sound or movement or minimal vibration. The further any activity is from the birds, the less likely it is to result in disturbance. The factors that influence a species response to a disturbance are numerous, but the three key factors are species sensitivity, proximity of disturbance sources and timing/duration of the potentially disturbing activity.

3.5.1 Sensitivity of species (birds) The distance at which a species takes flight when approached by a disturbing stimulus is known as the ‘tolerance distance’ (also called the ‘escape flight distance’) and differs between species to the same stimulus and within a species to different stimuli. No data could be sourced on the tolerance distances of birds in response to waste site specifically. However, distances for shoveler have been recorded. These are given in Table 3, which compiles ‘tolerance distances’ from across the literature. It is reasonable to assume from this that disturbance is unlikely to be experienced more than a few hundred metres from the birds in question. In addition, the regular mechanized noise that is associated with waste sites is likely to be less disturbing that the presence of visible human activity in areas in which the birds are not used to observing such activity.

41 Reijnen, R. et al. 1995. The effects of car traffic on breeding bird populations in woodland. III. Reduction of density in relation to the proximity of main roads. Journal of Applied Ecology 32: 187-202 HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 28

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Table 3 - Tolerance distances of 21 water bird species to various forms of recreational disturbance, as described in the literature. All distances are in metres. Single figures are mean distances; when means are not published, ranges are given. 1 Tydeman (1978), 2 Keller (1989), 3 Van der Meer (1985), 4 Wolff et al (1982), 5 Blankestijn et al (1986), 6 Cook (1980).42

Type of disturbance Rowing Sailing Species boats/kayak boats Walking Little grebe 60 – 100 1 Great crested grebe 50 – 100 2 20 – 400 1 Mute swan 3 – 30 1 Teal 0 – 400 1 Mallard 10 – 100 1 Shoveler 200 – 400 1 Pochard 60 – 400 1 Tufted duck 60 – 400 1 Goldeneye 100 – 400 1 Smew 0 – 400 1 Moorhen 100 – 400 1 Coot 5 – 50 1 211 3; 339 4; 213 Curlew 5 Shelduck 148 3; 250 4 Grey plover 124 3 Ringed plover 121 3 Bar-tailed godwit 107 3; 219 4 Brent goose 105 3 Oystercatcher 85 3; 136 4; 82 5

42 Tydeman, C.F. 1978. Gravel Pits as conservation areas for breeding bird communities. PhD thesis. Bedford College Keller, V. 1989. Variations in the response of Great Crested Grebes Podiceps cristatus to human disturbance - a sign of adaptation? Biological Conservation 49:31-45 Van der Meer, J. 1985. De verstoring van vogels op de slikken van de Oosterschelde. Report 85.09 Deltadienst Milieu en Inrichting, Middelburg. 37 pp. Wolf, W.J., Reijenders, P.J.H. & Smit, C.J. 1982. The effects of recreation on the Wadden Sea ecosystem: many questions but few answers. In: G. Luck & H. Michaelis (Eds.), Schriftenreihe M.E.L.F., Reihe A: Agnew. Wissensch 275: 85-107 Blankestijn, S. et al. 1986. Seizoensverbreding in de recreatie en verstoring van Wulp en Scholkester op hoogwatervluchplaatsen op Terschelling. Report Projectgroep Wadden, L.H. Wageningen. 261pp. Cooke, A.S. 1980. Observation on how close certain passerine species will tolerate an approaching human in rural and suburban areas. Biological Conservation 18: 85-88 HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 29

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Type of disturbance Rowing Sailing Species boats/kayak boats Walking Dunlin 71 3; 163 2

Six European sites in or near Kent have been designated at least in part for their bird interest: • Medway Estuary and Marshes SPA & Ramsar site; • The Swale SPA & Ramsar site; • Dungeness to Pett Level SPA; • Dungeness, Romney Marsh & Rye Bay pSPA/pRamsar site; • Thames Estuary and Marshes SPA & Ramsar site; • Thanet Coast and Sandwich Bay SPA & Ramsar site; • Stodmarsh SPA & Ramsar site. For the purposes of screening we have used the precautionary distance of 1km as a basis on which to screen waste and minerals sites in or out of consideration with regard to the potential for disturbance (i.e. noise and visual) impacts.

3.6 Coastal Squeeze Rising sea levels can be expected to cause intertidal habitats (principally saltmarsh and mudflats) to migrate landwards. However, in built-up areas, such landward retreat is often rendered impossible due the presence of the sea wall and other flood defences. In addition, development frequently takes place immediately behind the sea wall, so that the flood defences cannot be moved landwards to accommodate managed retreat of threatened habitats. The net result of this is that the quantity of saltmarsh and mudflat adjacent to built-up areas will progressively decrease as sea levels rise. This process is known as ‘coastal squeeze’. In areas where sediment availability is reduced, the 'squeeze' also includes an increasingly steep beach profile and foreshortening of the seaward zones. Minerals and waste sites can contribute to coastal squeeze as much as any other development by restricting opportunities for managing realignment. This impact is relevant to sections of the Kent coastline, which are designated as SAC, SPA and Ramsar sites. Additionally, minerals sites located near habitats where a balance of saline and fresh water is critical have the potential to affect flows through processes such as dewatering, leading to impacts such as reduced freshwater flows to estuaries and saline intrusion.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 30

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

The following sites in Kent are currently suffering from, or potentially threatened by coastal squeeze, saline intrusion or altered coastal process: • Medway Estuary and Marshes SPA & Ramsar site; • The Swale SPA & Ramsar site; • Dungeness SAC; • Dungeness to Pett Level SPA; • Dungeness, Romney Marsh & Rye Bay pSPA/pRamsar site; • Sandwich Bay SAC; and • Thames Estuary and Marshes SPA & Ramsar site; At present there are no minerals or waste sites under consideration in the MWDF that could lead to likely significant effects on the European designated sites listed in 3.6.5 through coastal squeeze, saline intrusion or altered coastal processes. Therefore, these processes are not considered further in this report.

3.7 Direct landtake Issues of direct landtake from terrestrial European sites generally relate to existing permissions (often associated with mineral extraction) that were granted prior to the designation of the site and which have not yet reached completion. In some cases, the process of mineral extraction can be partly responsible for creating the interest of the European site in the first place. This is partly the case with Dungeness SAC and Dungeness to Pett Level SPA and Ramsar site where former mineral workings now form important lagoon habitat. At this stage we have not identified any European sites that may be subject to direct landtake as a result of minerals operations in Kent. In addition to direct landtake from European sites, those sites which are designated for highly mobile species can also be adversely affected by loss of habitat (or in the case of bats disruption of commuting routes).

3.8 Consideration of European sites outside Kent Where appropriate in the tables below, European sites outside Kent (most notably Ashdown Forest SAC/SPA) have been included in the HRA.

3.9 Screening distance summary The table below summarises the screening distances used for each source of impact.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 31

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Table 3 – Screening distances used for each source of impact

Pathway Screening distance Air quality – vehicle exhaust emissions 200m from European site Air quality – Energy from Waste 10km from European site Air quality – landfill gas flares 1km from European site Air quality - dust 1km from European site Air Quality – plant pathogens (composting 1km from European site only) Water quality and flows No standard distance – use Source/Pathway/Receptor approach Disturbance (noise/visual) 1km from European site supporting disturbance sensitive species/populations Gull/corvid predation (non-inert landfill 5km from European site supporting only) sensitive ground-nesting breeding species (e.g. terns) Coastal squeeze No standard distance – evaluate on case by case basis Direct landtake N/A

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 32

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

4 SCREENING OF PROPOSED MINERAL SITES The following table presents the screening assessments for each site that is being considered for inclusion in the Directions consultation document. Several sites were appraised in the first draft of this report but have since been removed from the Directions consultation document for reasons other than European site issues. These are listed for reference in Appendix 2. Green shading in the final column indicates a site option that has been screened out of further consideration due to the absence of any mechanism for an adverse effect on European sites. Orange shading does not necessarily indicate that an adverse effect on a European site will occur, but it does indicate that further investigation will be necessary.

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) 1 East 568000,148962 14km from North Minerals Active Nearest European site is North Peckham Rail Downs Woodlands import/transfer site Downs Woodland SAC Depot SAC approximately 14km to the north-east. There is no scope for likely significant effects from this site and no pathway connecting with any other European sites 6 Land adjacent 562233,157687 7km from North Down Soft Sand New Site, Small Nearest European site is North to Platt Woodlands SAC Downs Woodland SAC Industrial It is confirmed that approximately 7km to the Estate there will be no north-east. There is no scope

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 33

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) change in overall for likely significant effects Heavy Duty from this site and no pathway Vehicle connecting with any other Movements as the European sites new areas will only be worked once the existing areas are worked out 24 Land north of 565334,159614 3.2km from North Down Soft Sand/Silica Proposed Nearest European site is North Addington Woodlands SAC Sand extension to Downs Woodland SAC Lane existing site, approximately 3.2km to north- Medium east. There is no scope for likely significant effects from It is confirmed that this site and no pathway there will be no connecting with any other change in overall European sites Heavy Duty Vehicle Movements as the new areas will only be worked once the existing areas

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 34

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) are worked out 75 Boltons Field, 591918,150204 14.6km from North Soft Sand Proposed Nearest European site is North Lenham Downs Woodlands extension to Downs Woodlands SAC SAC existing site, Small approximately 14.6km to west. There is no scope for likely significant effects from this site and no pathway connecting with any other European sites 76 Chapel Farm, 590416,150623 12.3km from North Soft Sand Proposed Nearest European site is North Lenham Downs Woodlands extension to Downs Woodlands SAC SAC existing site, Large approximately 12.3km to west. There is no scope for likely significant effects from this site and no pathway connecting with any other European sites 77 Burleigh Farm 592904,149894 14.2km from Wye & Soft Sand Proposed Nearest European site is Wye (Brett) Crundale Downs SAC extension to & Crundale Downs SAC existing site, approximately 14.2km to east. Medium There is no scope for likely significant effects from this site and no pathway connecting

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 35

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) with any other European sites 97 Shrine Farm 613964,137863 3km from Folkestone to Soft Sand New Site, Large The site is immediately Etchinghill Escarpment There will be adjacent to the M20. As such it SAC approximately 40- is very likely that traffic 50 Heavy Duty generated from the minerals 8km from Parkgate Vehicle site will travel on the M20 and Down SAC movements per potentially within 200m of day generated by Folkestone to Etchinghill 8km from Wye and this site Escarpment SAC. It is Crundale Downs SAC estimated by the Council that approximately 40-50 Heavy Duty Vehicle movements per day will be associated with operation of this site on average. This would fall well below the ‘200 HDV movements per day’ threshold that the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges uses to define an ‘affected road’ that would require more detailed transport/air quality

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 36

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) assessment to investigate impacts on designated sites.

Folkestone to Etchinghill Escarpment SAC is currently subject to air quality below the critical load for nitrogen deposition and recent air quality assessments undertaken for the Submission Stage Shepway Core Strategy (which have been accepted by Natural England) identify that the housing and associated development to be delivered in Shepway over the period until 2031 will not result in an exceedence of the Critical Load (even within the context of background population increases). As such that there is no reason to assume that

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 37

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) the small number of additional vehicles linked with operation of this minerals site will result in an exceedence in the critical loads for this site.

Nonetheless, and since the vehicle movements identified above are an early estimate, it is considered that site-specific assessment will be required at the application stage to confirm this. This is discussed in further detail in section 7.1. 105 Borough 561649,158109 6.9km from North Soft Sand Site Extension to Nearest European site is North Green Sand Downs Woodlands existing site Down Woodland SAC Pits SAC approximately 6.9km to the There will be north. approximately 24 Heavy Duty This site and the SCA Vehicle Packaging waste site (Site 61) movements per may both utilise the A229 and

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 38

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) day generated by A249 past North Downs this site Woodlands SAC (although there are numerous alternative routes that could also be utilised). Cumulatively, it is expected that these two sites will lead to approximately 78 additional Heavy Duty Vehicle movements on the road network per day (including both outward and return journeys). Therefore even if all vehicles generated by both sites utilised the A229 and A249 at the same time the total increase in vehicle movements per day would still fall well below the ‘200 additional HDV per day’ Department for Transport definition of an ‘affected road’ that would require more detailed

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 39

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) transport/air quality assessment to investigate impacts on designated sites.

The A249 carries approximately 23,000-28,000 vehicles per day. A further 78 vehicles would be an increase of approximately 0.3%. Even if a significant increase in vehicle movements occurs from development in Maidstone and the Medway Towns the contribution made by the two minerals/waste sites to any ‘in combination’ effect would be trivial. 2 Beltring 567774,148026 12.3km from North Sharp Sand and Proposed Nearest European site is North Green Farm Downs Woodlands Gravel Site extension to Downs Woodlands SAC SAC existing site, Small approximately 12.3km to the north. There is no scope for 11.5km from Peters Pit likely significant effects from

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 40

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) SAC this site and no pathway connecting with any other European sites 17 Moat Farm 564673,146412 15.3km from North Sharp Sand and New site, Medium Nearest European sites are Downs Woodlands Gravel Site North Downs Woodlands SAC SAC and Ashdown approximately 15.3km to the Forest SAC/SPA north and Ashdown Forest SAC/SPA approximately the same distance to the south. There is no scope for likely significant effects from this site and no pathway connecting with any other European sites. 49 Land adjacent 563148,146129 17.2km from North Sharp Sand and Proposed Nearest European sites are to Hammer Downs Woodlands Gravel Site extension to North Downs Woodlands SAC Dyke SAC and Ashdown existing site, Large approximately 17.2km to the Forest SAC/SPA north and Ashdown Forest SAC/SPA approximately the same distance to the south. There is no scope for likely significant effects from this site

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 41

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) and no pathway connecting with any other European sites. 71 Stonecastle 563284,146899 16km from North Sharp Sand and Proposed Nearest European sites are Farm Downs Woodlands Gravel Site extension to North Downs Woodlands SAC SAC existing site, approximately 16km to the Medium north and Ashdown Forest 18km from Ashdown SAC/SPA approximately 18km Forest to the south-west. There is no SAC/SPA/Ramsar site scope for likely significant effects from this site and no pathway connecting with any other European sites 73 Lydd Quarry 603674,120898 Site lies within 200m of Sharp Sand and Proposed Given the location of this site Extensions Dungeness SAC, within Gravel Site extension to and based on the interest 2.5km of Dungeness to existing site, features of the Dungeness Pett Level SPA and Medium complex of sites and immediately adjacent to knowledge of their potential the Dungeness, It is confirmed that vulnerabilities (and work on the Romney Marsh & Rye there will be no same site in adjacent East Bay pSPA/pRamsar change in overall Sussex for their Minerals site Heavy Duty Development Document) the

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 42

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) Vehicle following impacts need further Movements as the investigation before it can be new areas will only concluded that a significant be worked once effect is unlikely: the existing areas are worked out • Potential disturbance of pSPA/pRamsar birds through minerals working of fields immediately adjacent to the ditches and waterbodies they utilise; • Potential direct loss of habitat if the open fields are used by significant numbers of pSPA/pRamsar site birds (a ‘significant’ number would be 1% or more of the pSPA/pRamsar population on a regular

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 43

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) basis); • Potential water quality and flow impacts due to minerals workings immediately adjacent to the ditches for which the pSPA/pRamsar site is designated; • Potential air quality (particularly dust) impacts with regard to minerals workings immediately adjacent to the ditches for which the pSPA/pRamsar site is designated.

Although potential loss of supporting habitat for great crested newts (an SAC interest feature) if any of the farmland to be worked lies within 500m

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 44

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) of great crested newt breeding ponds would be a consideration, it is noted from information supplied by Natural England43 to support the East Sussex Minerals and Waste DPD that the nearest great crested newt pond to Lydd Quarry is south-west of Lydd and well over 500m from the quarry extension. As such this issue can be dismissed.

The fact that there are already existing minerals operations taking place in close-proximity to the pSPA/pRamsar site in this location will need to be taken into account in determining species

43 Email from Jayne Field (Natural England) to Graeme Down (URS) of 20/10/09

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 45

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) tolerance/habituation. This site is discussed further in section 6.2.

The advice that Kent County Council have previously been given by Natural England regarding this site is also of relevance ‘While areas 7, 8, 9 [of the existing quarry] are adjacent to the pSPA and pRamsar it is acknowledged that the pSPA and pRamsar interest features have established in the presence of the extraction activity. In our view it is likely any indirect adverse impacts identified in the review i.e. noise, dust, hydrology can be mitigated by

44 Letter from Sinead McDonnell (Natural England) to Elizabeth Shier (Kent County Council) dated 10/02/10

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 46

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) appropriate working methods and conditions.

For the purposes of the MWDF we are satisfied with the inclusion of the three extension sites and others in the general locality outside of the pSPA, pRamsar and Dungeness Special Area of Conservation (SAC). We would anticipate that with appropriate mitigation it is unlikely that these proposals would adversely impact these protected areas’.44 63 Pinden 559469,169870 9km from North Downs Chalk Site Proposed Nearest European site is North Quarry Woodlands SAC and extension to Downs Woodlands SAC Extensions Thames Estuary & existing site, Small approximately 6km to the Marshes SPA/Ramsar south and Thames Estuary & site It is confirmed that Marshes SPA/Ramsar site there will be no approximately the same

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 47

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) change in overall distance to the north. There is Heavy Duty no scope for likely significant Vehicle effects from this site and no Movements as the pathway connecting with any new areas will only other European sites. be worked once the existing areas are worked out 19 Paradise 584806,164007 1.5km north of Brickearth Site New Site, Large The site may utilise the M2 to Farm Queendown Warren transport minerals given its SAC very close proximity. The M2 immediately west of the site 3.5km south of Medway lies within 200m of Estuary & Marshes Queendown Warren SAC SPA/Ramsar site which due to its calcareous grassland interest feature is sensitive to atmospheric nitrogen deposition associated with vehicle exhaust emissions and is already in exceedence of the critical load for this habitat.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 48

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level)

However, given that this site will only be worked for 6 weeks per year it is considered that it will result in a negligible change in average annual daily traffic flows on the M2 and therefore would not result in an attributable change in nitrogen deposition within the SAC, making a trivial contribution to additional vehicle movements even ‘in combination’. Although one other site in the initial list of sites for consideration (Newington Industrial Estate) may also have utilised this route, that site is not included in the preferred options. It is therefore concluded that no likely significant effects will occur on the SAC.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 49

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level)

No pathways are identified linking to other European sites. 98 Jefferies Site, 594135,161955 3km south of The Brickearth Site New Site, Small Nearest European site is The Teynham Swale SPA/Ramsar site Swale SPA/Ramsar site approximately 3km to the north. There is no scope for likely significant effects from this site and no pathway connecting with any other European sites. 101 Barbary Farm 597763,161314 1km south of The Brickearth Site New Site, Small Given the proximity of this site Swale SPA/Ramsar site to The Swale SPA/Ramsar site it is considered that it cannot be screened out at this stage. However, given that there are no hydraulic pathways linking this site to the SPA and that brickearth extraction is not a noisy form of mineral working it is considered likely that the

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 50

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) only issue that will require further investigation is whether the fields that will be subject to minerals extraction regularly support significant populations of SPA/Ramsar birds (a ‘significant’ population would be defined as 1% or greater of the SPA/Ramsar population). 102 Barrow Green 596192,162334 1.5km south of The Brickearth Site New Site, Small Nearest European site is The Farm Swale SPA/Ramsar site Swale SPA/Ramsar site approximately 1.5km to the north. There is no scope for likely significant effects from this site and no pathway connecting with any other European sites. 60 Norwood 597176,171796 2km from The Swale Clay Site Proposed Nearest European site is The Quarry SPA/Ramsar site extension to Swale SPA/Ramsar site existing site, Small approximately 2km to the south. There is no scope for

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 51

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) It is confirmed that likely significant effects from there will be no this site and no pathway change in overall connecting with any other Heavy Duty European sites. Vehicle Movements as the Vehicles using this site are new area will only very likely to use the A249 (as be worked once this is the only major road off the existing areas the Isle of Sheppey) which lies are worked out within 200m of the Medway Estuary & Marshes SPA/Ramsar site and The Swale SPA/Ramsar site. However, it is understood that there will be no net change in HDV movements as a result of this extension. 21 Conway 551244,173697 16.2km from Thames Secondary and Existing Site, Nearest European site is Rochester Estuary & Marshes Recycled Small Thames Estuary & Marshes Way, Dartford SPA/Ramsar site Aggregate Site SPA/Ramsar site approximately 16km to the east. There is no scope for

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 52

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) likely significant effects from this site and no pathway connecting with any other European sites. 65 Land North of 633358,161659 300m from Secondary and New Site, Small This site has been granted full Stevens and Thanet Coast and Recycled planning permission. Therefore Carlotti Sandwich Bay SPA and Aggregate This site is already it can only be considered in Ramsar Site and Site/Recycling permitted and has terms of how it may contribute Sandwich Bay SAC been subjected to to any ‘in combination’ effect project-level HRA with other sites in the ‘Richborough corridor’: Richborough Hall (Site 64; already permitted) and Richborough Power Station (Site 54), particularly in terms of cumulative transport-related air quality impacts. This is covered in section 6.1 below. 72 Unit 14 621280,161963 Immediately adjacent to Secondary and New Site, Small Given the proximity of this site Canterbury Stodmarsh SAC, SPA Recycled to the Stodmarsh Industrial Park and Ramsar Site Aggregate SAC/SPA/Ramsar site, likely

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 53

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) Site/Recycling significant effects cannot be ruled out at this stage and further investigation will be required as part of any planning application, although there is no reason to conclude that any potential risks cannot be easily resolved. This is likely to focus on issues of air quality, water quality and noise/disturbance. 91 Animal 601146,162980 100m from Swale SPA Secondary and Existing site, Small It is noted that this site is a Products Site and Ramsar Site Recycled currently operational glass Aggregate Site recycling facility and that the proposal is primarily to continue to utilise this site for glass recycling. Given that the proposal would be a continuation of the existing activity it is considered that likely significant effects would not occur. However, it is also

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 54

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = Number European Site screened out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) noted that there is a possibility that this site could be used for the recycling of construction and demolition waste. Some construction and demolition waste recycling can be noisy (e.g. concrete crushing). It is therefore considered that consideration of noise impacts upon The Swale SPA/Ramsar site would be required before such an activity was permitted. 99 Broomway 7km from Thames Secondary and Nearest European site is Ltd, Estuary and Marshes Recycled Thames Estuary & Marshes Swanscombe SPA and Ramsar Site Aggregate Site SPA/Ramsar site approximately 7km distant. There is no scope for likely significant effects from this site and no pathway connecting with any other European sites

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 55

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

5 SCREENING OF PROPOSED WASTE SITES The following table presents the screening assessments for each site that is being considered for inclusion in the Directions consultation document. Several sites were appraised in the first draft of this report but have since been removed from the Directions consultation document for reasons other than European site issues. These are listed for reference in Appendix 2. Green shading in the final column indicates a site option that has been screened out of further consideration due to the absence of any mechanism for an adverse effect on European sites. Orange shading does not necessarily indicate that an adverse effect on a European site will occur, but it does indicate that further investigation will be necessary.

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) 13 Allington 573697,157853 3km from North Energy from Waste/ Existing Given the distances of this facility Waste Downs Recycling/Facilities for Energy from from European sites it is likely that Management Woodlands SAC Household Waste Waste Facility the only potential impact pathway is if Facility a new or expanded Energy from 4km from Peters Waste facility is brought forward. In Pit SAC that case further assessment will be required in accordance with Environment Agency guidance. This is discussed further in section 7.2. 54 Richborough 632949,161532 200m from Energy from Waste N/A Given that this site lies within 200m Power Station Sandwich Bay of Sandwich Bay SAC (the dune SAC and Thanet habitats of which are sensitive to

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 56

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) Coast and atmospheric nitrogen deposition) and Sandwich Bay Thanet Coast & Sandwich Bay SPA and Ramsar SPA/Ramsar site, it is considered site that air quality and noise assessments for the nearby 6km from Thanet SAC/SPA would need to be Coast SAC undertaken before it could be permitted. The noise assessment will 9km from relate to construction noise in Stodmarsh particular since some construction SPA/SAC/Ramsar processes (e.g. impact piling) can site cause disturbing levels of noise and vibration at distances of several hundred metres from the source, which if undertaken during winter/passage could have adverse effects on bird using the SPA.

In addition, since it lies within 10km of four European sites it is considered that an air quality assessment would be required before this Energy from Waste facility

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 57

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) could be permitted in accordance with Environment Agency guidance. This is discussed further in section 7.2.

As such it cannot currently be screened out.

This site is also considered later in the document in terms of how it may contribute to any ‘in combination’ effect with other sites in the ‘Richborough corridor’: Richborough Hall (Site 64; already permitted) and Land North of Stevens & Carlotti (Site 65; already permitted), particularly in terms of cumulative transport-related air quality impacts. This is covered in section 6.1 below. 61 SCA 571396,159748 2.3km from Energy from Waste This site Given the distances of this facility Packaging, Peters Pit SAC would be from European sites it is likely that New Hythe expected to the only potential impact pathway is if

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 58

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) 3.8km from North generate an Energy from Waste facility is Downs approximately brought forward. In that case further Woodlands SAC 54 Heavy assessment will be required in Duty Vehicle accordance with Environment 15km from movements Agency guidance. This is discussed Queendown per day further in section 7.2. Warren SAC This site and the Borough Green Sand Pit minerals site (Site 105) may both utilise the A229 and A249 past North Downs Woodland SAC (although there are numerous alternative routes that could also be utilised). Cumulatively, it is expected that these two sites will lead to approximately 78 additional Heavy Duty Vehicle movements on the road network per day (including both outward and return journeys). Therefore even if all vehicles generated by both sites utilised the A229 and A249 at the same time the total increase in vehicle movements

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 59

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) per day would still fall well below the ‘200 additional HDV per day’ Department for Transport definition of an ‘affected road’ that would require more detailed transport/air quality assessment to investigate impacts on designated sites.

The A249 carries approximately 23,000-28,000 vehicles per day. A further 78 vehicles (which is very much a worst case scenario and is unlikely to ever occur in practice) would be an increase of approximately 0.3%. Even if a significant increase in vehicle movements occurs from development in Maidstone and the Medway Towns the contribution made by these two minerals/waste sites to any ‘in combination’ effect would be trivial.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 60

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) 107 Lower Road, 6km from Swale Energy from Waste N/A Given the distances of this facility Swanscombe SPA and Ramsar from European sites it is likely that Site the only potential impact pathway is if an Energy from Waste facility is brought forward. In that case further assessment will be required in accordance with Environment Agency guidance. This is discussed further in section 7.2. 60 Norwood 597176,171796 2km from The Hazardous Waste Existing Given the distance to the nearest Landfill Swale Landfill hazardous European site and the lack of Extension SPA/Ramsar site waste landfill connecting pathways (since there will be no putrescible waste in this landfill) it is considered that this site can be screened out as being unlikely to lead to significant effects 63 Pinden Quarry 559469,169870 8km from North Hazardous Existing Given the distance to the nearest Extensions Downs Landfill/Recycling hazardous European site and the lack of Woodlands SAC waste connecting pathways (since this will and Thames (asbestos) be no putrescible waste in this Estuary & landfill landfill) it is considered that this site Marshes can be screened out as being

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 61

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) SPA/Ramsar site It is confirmed unlikely to lead to significant effects that there will be no change in overall Heavy Duty Vehicle Movements as the new areas will only be worked once the existing areas are worked out 22 Rushenden 590316,170865 Adjacent to Non-hazardous Existing This is an existing operational site Marshes Medway Estuary Landfill (Dredging dredging and the proposal is to continue that and Marshes SPA Disposal Sites) disposal site operation. and Ramsar Site An Appropriate Assessment has 1.6km from been carried out for a previous Swale SPA and planning application but only covers Ramsar Site half the site. However approximately

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 62

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) 99.9% of the site has already been 3.7km from used for dredgings disposal and this Thames Estuary area is clearly defined on the ground and Marshes by a perimeter bund. A small part of SPA/Ramsar site the landholding and the allocation (in the northwest corner) falls outside this bund and may be virgin ground but is not covered by the Ramsar site. A proviso will be included in the site allocation that any area of original grazing marsh should not be developed. The planning determination for the permitted area covered the one impact on the Ramsar site; the temporary pipe across the shore line. The larger area of the allocated site would still only use one pipe to get the dredgings ashore.

However, a detailed assessment will be required at the planning application stage in order to confirm

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 63

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) the acceptability of the proposal. 23 Blaise Farm 566278,156319 6km from North Composting Current Given the distance to the nearest Down Woodlands anaerobic European site and the lack of SAC digestion connecting pathways it is considered facility that this site can be screened out as 8km from Peters being unlikely to lead to significant Pit SAC effects 27 Otterpool 611206,136611 6km from Composting and This has now This has now received full planning Quarry Folkestone to recycling received permission and no issues with Etchinghill planning European sites were identified. Escarpment SAC permission

7km from Wye and Crundale Downs SAC 51 Ridham 592139,167401 Immediately Composting/Recycling Existing This development is already (Countrystyle) adjacent to The composting permitted and no issues with Swale SPA and facility European sites were identified. Ramsar Site

2km from Medway Estuary

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 64

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) and Marshes SPA and Ramsar Site

8km from Thames Estuary and Marshes SAC

10km from Queensdown Warren SAC 11 Lees Yard and 551098,173713 16km from Recycling Given the distance to the nearest Adjacent Thames Estuary European site and the lack of Land, & Marshes connecting pathways it is considered Rochester SPA/Ramsar site that this site can be screened out as Way, Dartford being unlikely to lead to significant effects 14 Longfield 569769,144063 Site is over 20km Recycling Existing site Given the distance to the nearest Farm, from Ashdown for car European site and the lack of Paddock Forest breaking and connecting pathways it is considered Wood SAC/SPA/Ramsar metal that this site can be screened out as site recycling being unlikely to lead to significant effects

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 65

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) 64 Richborough 633337,160957 200m from Recycling Existing site; This site has been granted full Hall Sandwich Bay already planning permission. Therefore it will SAC and Thanet permitted only be considered in terms of how it Coast and may contribute to any ‘in Sandwich Bay combination’ effect with other sites in SPA and Ramsar the ‘Richborough corridor’: Land Site North of Stevens & Carlotti (Site 65; already permitted) and Richborough 10km form Power Station (Site 54), particularly Stodmarsh SPA in terms of cumulative transport- related air quality impacts. This is covered in section 6.1 below. 65 Land North of 633358,161659 300m from Secondary and New Site, This site has been granted full Stevens and Thanet Coast and Recycled Aggregate Small planning permission. Therefore it can Carlotti Sandwich Bay Site/Recycling/ only be considered in terms of how it SPA and Ramsar Anaerobic digestion This site is may contribute to any ‘in Site and plant already combination’ effect with other sites in Sandwich Bay permitted and the ‘Richborough corridor’: SAC has been Richborough Hall (Site 64; already subjected to permitted) and Richborough Power project-level Station (Site 54), particularly in terms HRA of cumulative transport-related air

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 66

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) quality impacts. This is covered in section 6.1 below. 72 Unit 14 621280,161963 Immediately Waste transfer station New Site, Given the proximity of this site to the Canterbury adjacent to Small Stodmarsh SAC/SPA/Ramsar site, Industrial Park Stodmarsh SAC, likely significant effects cannot be SPA and Ramsar ruled out at this stage and further Site investigation will be required as part of any planning application, although there is no reason to conclude that any potential risks cannot be easily resolved. This is likely to focus on issues of air quality, water quality and noise/disturbance. 88 Sevington 603470,140245 6km from Wye Recycling Current Given the distance to the nearest Recycling and Crundale construction European site and the lack of Depot Ashford Downs SAC and connecting pathways it is considered demolition that this site can be screened out as waste being unlikely to lead to significant recycling effects. facility 37 Cobbs Wood 599634,142720 8km from Wye Facilities for Given the distance to the nearest Industrial and Crundale Household Waste European site and the lack of

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 67

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for further assessment at either plan or project level) Estate Downs SAC connecting pathways it is considered that this site can be screened out as being unlikely to lead to significant effects.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT February 2012 68

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

6 CUMULATIVE AND ‘IN COMBINATION’ In this section, the word ‘cumulative’ is used to refer to more than one waste or mineral site which may exert the same impact on a European site at the same time, while ‘in combination’ is used to refer to consideration of minerals and waste impacts alongside impacts from other plans and projects over the same time period.

6.1 Cumulative assessment Scrutiny of Figure 2 shows two obvious clusters of minerals and waste sites within close proximity (200m) of European sites: • Norwood Quarry (Site 60), Rushenden Marshes Dredgings (Site 22), Ridham Countrystyle (Site 51) and Animal Products Site (Site 91) all lie within (or have obvious nearby access routes that lie within) 200m of Medway Estuary & Marshes SPA/Ramsar site and/or The Swale SPA/Ramsar site. Although not identified in the Minerals or Waste DPD’s Natural England has also identified the Kemsley Sustainable Energy Plant at Sittingbourne, which will generate approximately 360 HDV movements per day. However, it has been confirmed that Sites 60, 22 and 91 are not expected to involve any increase in Heavy Duty Vehicle movements, while Site 51 has already gained planning permission and project-level HRA did not identify any transport-related issues. As such, these sites will not result in an increase in HDV movements within 200m of either SPA/Ramsar site even if they did all receive planning permission; • Richborough Hall (Site 64), Land North of Stevens & Carlotti (Site 65) and Richborough Power Station (Site 54) all lie within, or have obvious nearby access routes that lie within, 200m of Sandwich Bay SAC/Thanet Coast & Sandwich Bay SPA & Ramsar site. Although Sites 64 and 65 have been granted full planning permission, Site 54 does not. According to data supplied by the Council, Site 54 will generate approximately 260 HDV movements per day on average. Coupled with the two permitted developments, these three sites will collectively generate roughly 640 Heavy Duty Vehicle movements per day on average, which is well above the Department for Transport criteria for defining an ‘affected road’ (HDV movements exceeding 200 per day). Due to their geographic position it is reasonable to assume that the majority of these vehicle movements will be along the A256, and that a significant proportion may be within 200m of the aforementioned European sites. For this reason, any planning application for Site 54 will need to undertake a transport and air quality assessment before planning permission is granted, which will need to take into account the traffic to be generated by the two permitted developments (Sites 64 and 65).

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 69

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Although there is also a group of five sites within 15km of each other along the M2 south of the Medway Estuary & Marshes SPA/Ramsar site and The Swale SPA/Ramsar site none of them lie within 200m of either site and therefore will not have any transport-related cumulative effect.

6.2 In Combination Assessment The main potential source for effects ‘in combination’ with other projects and plans relates to either: • Sites that lie across county boundaries – this principally applies to Lydd Quarry and its extensions which partly lie within East Sussex; and • Air quality pathways associated with exhaust emissions.

6.2.1 Cross-boundary development (Lydd Quarry) Lydd Quarry will, in time, extend across the Kent/East Sussex boundary. The potential issues identified in the preceding screening tables were also identified in HRA work for the East Sussex Minerals and Waste DPD as requiring investigation as they relate to the proposed extensions to the quarry into East Sussex. For the proposed quarry extensions in East Sussex the quarry operators commissioned Bioscan to undertake an assessment to determine the disturbance risk of working immediately adjacent to the pSPA/pRamsar site. This identified that the risk was manageable and devised a range of mitigation and monitoring measures that would be deployed when the area was worked to ensure no likely significant effect. This analysis was agreed with Natural England. As such, it is considered that there should be no ‘in combination’ effect with the East Sussex Minerals DPD.

6.2.2 Air quality Plans for housing across Kent as set out in the Core Strategies and Local Plans for the County include the delivery of approximately 90,000 dwellings up to 2026; the population of Kent is expected to increase by approximately 14% (198,000) over the same period45. Residential and commercial development in Shepway, Swale and Dover Districts are most relevant since they contain both European sites and several proposed mineral and waste sites. Shepway District Although Site 73 (Lydd Quarry) is located within Shepway, it has been confirmed that there will be no change in HDV movements. Site 27 (Otterpool Quarry) is also within Shepway but already has full planning permission and no issues were identified.

45 http://www.kent.gov.uk/your_council/kent_facts_and_figures/population_and_census/population_forecasts.aspx

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 70

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

This leaves Site 97 (Shrine Farm). That site has already been considered in combination with the Shepway Core Strategy but for completeness the evaluation is reiterated below. The site is immediately adjacent to the M20. As such it is very likely that traffic generated from the minerals site will travel on the M20 and potentially within 200m of Folkestone to Etchinghill Escarpment SAC. It is estimated by the Council that approximately 40-50 HDV movements per day will be associated with operation of this site on average. This would fall well below the ‘200 HDV movements per day’ threshold that the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges uses to define an ‘affected road’ that would require more detailed transport/air quality assessment to investigate impacts on designated sites. Folkestone to Etchinghill Escarpment SAC is currently subject to air quality below the critical load for nitrogen deposition and recent air quality assessments undertaken for the Submission Stage Shepway Core Strategy (which have been accepted by Natural England) identify that the housing and associated development to be delivered in Shepway over the period until 2031 will not result in an exceedence of the Critical Load (even within the context of background population increases). As such that there is no reason to assume that the small number of additional vehicles linked with operation of this minerals site will result in an exceedence in the critical loads for this site. Nonetheless, and since the vehicle movements identified above are an early estimate, it is considered that site-specific assessment will be required at the application stage to confirm this. Dover District It has already been established that Site 54 (Richborough Power Station), Site 64 (Richborough Hall), Site 65 (Land North of Stevens and Carlotti) will collectively make a material contribution to vehicle movements. The Richborough Power Station project will therefore need to undertake a transport/air quality assessment. Dover District Council plans for 500 new dwellings at Sandwich under their adopted Core Strategy. Given the location of Sandwich it is quite possible that vehicles from the new housing will be utilising the A256 as it passes within 200m of the SAC/SPA and therefore future population increase in the area will need to be taken into account in the modelling. However, population growth in the area over the next twenty years will already be factored into the modelling process utilised for transport prediction in line with Department for Transport guidelines. Swale District The Swale Core Strategy sets out a housing target for Swale of 13,500 dwellings over the period 2006-2031 (approximately 8,550 of these are either already built or have land allocated). Several roads in Swale District (most notably the A249) lie within 200m of either The Swale SPA/Ramsar site or Medway Estuary & Marshes SPA/Ramsar site. Increases in the population of

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 71

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

the district over the Core Strategy period could therefore lead to increased vehicle movements on these roads, the scale of which would depend upon the scale and distribution of growth. Although a large number of proposed waste or minerals sites are located within Swale District (Sites 19, 22, 51, 60, 91, 98, 101 and 102) the preceding site-specific analysis has confirmed that none of these site will introduce transport-related air quality issues for European sites either because they already have full permission, will not result in a net increase in Heavy Duty Vehicle movements or do not lie (or have local access routes that lie) within 200m of a European site. Therefore, there will be no in combination effect. Lydd airport Potential future impacts associated with Lydd airport await the conclusion of the Planning Inspectorate. It would therefore be inappropriate to consider the airport further in this document beyond noting that air quality concerns have been expressed. In any case, the only minerals or waste site within proximity to Lydd airport is Lydd Quarry, which as has already been established, will not involve any change in Heavy Duty Vehicle movements. Port of Dover expansion The Harbour Revision Order associated with expansion of the Port of Dover to include a second ferry terminal was approved by Government in November 2011. It therefore forms part of the background context rather than a plan or project for ‘in combination’ assessment. In any case, there are no minerals or waste site within proximity to the Port of Dover nor have the preceding site- specific assessments identified any link to European sites in that area from minerals and waste development. Kent Local Transport Plan The Kent Local Transport Plan (LTP3) is primarily intended to promote sustainable transport initiatives and safety/congestion reduction initiatives. The principal new vehicular transport initiatives referenced in LTP3 are a potential new bridge crossing over the River Thames and a potential new a Kent International Airport Parkway Station. No details of either project are available within the LTP3 and the plan confines itself to expressing support since the two developments are either outside the control of Kent County Council or cannot be assessed at initial concept stage. Therefore, there will be no ‘in combination’ effects with minerals and waste sites in the preferred options DPDs. Medway Minerals and Waste DPD There are two proposed minerals and waste sites within 1km of the boundary of Medway (Sites 19 and 22). However, there is no reason to expect either of them to travel into Medway district within 200m of the European sites.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 72

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

There are several sites within the Preferred Options for waste that could potentially involve Energy from Waste power generation with associated stack omissions. Due to the fact that emissions and associated deposition are entirely dependent upon design details such as treatment process, stack height, incorporation of filters etc. it is not possible to predict in advance of detailed design what emissions or deposition from individual EfW plants would be. This is therefore not considered further in this section.

7 CONCLUSIONS OF SCREENING

7.1 Minerals sites A total of five proposed minerals sites cannot be screened out as being unlikely to lead to significant effects at this stage.

Site Location HRA Screening (green = screened out, amber = Number screened in for Appropriate Assessment) 97 Shrine Farm The site is immediately adjacent to the M20. As such it is very likely that traffic generated from the minerals site will travel on the M20 and potentially within 200m of Folkestone to Etchinghill Escarpment SAC. It is estimated by the Council that approximately 40-50 HDV movements per day will be associated with operation of this site on average. This would fall well below the ‘200 HDV movements per day’ threshold that the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges uses to define an ‘affected road’ that would require more detailed transport/air quality assessment to investigate impacts on designated sites.

Folkestone to Etchinghill Escarpment SAC is currently subject to air quality below the critical load for nitrogen deposition and recent air quality assessments undertaken for the Submission Stage Shepway Core Strategy (which have been accepted by Natural England) identify that the housing and associated development to be delivered in Shepway over the period until 2031 will not result in an exceedence of the Critical Load (even within the context of background population increases). As such that there is no reason to assume that the small number of additional vehicles linked with operation of this minerals site will result in an exceedence in the critical loads for this site.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 73

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Nonetheless, and since the vehicle movements identified above are an early estimate, it is considered that site-specific assessment will be required at the application stage to confirm this. 73 Lydd Quarry Given the location of this site and based on the Extensions interest features of the Dungeness complex of sites and knowledge of their potential vulnerabilities (and work on the same site in adjacent East Sussex for their Minerals Development Document) the following impacts need further investigation before it can be concluded that a significant effect is unlikely:

• Potential disturbance of pSPA/pRamsar birds through minerals working of fields immediately adjacent to the ditches and waterbodies they utilise; • Potential direct loss of habitat if the open fields are used by significant numbers of pSPA/pRamsar site birds (a ‘significant’ number would be 1% or more of the pSPA/pRamsar population on a regular basis); • Potential water quality and flow impacts due to minerals workings immediately adjacent to the ditches for which the pSPA/pRamsar site is designated; • Potential air quality (particularly dust) impacts with regard to minerals workings immediately adjacent to the ditches for which the pSPA/pRamsar site is designated;

Although potential loss of supporting habitat for great crested newts (an SAC interest feature) if any of the farmland to be worked lies within 500m of great crested newt breeding ponds would be a consideration, it is noted from information supplied by Natural England46 to support the East Sussex Minerals and Waste DPD that the nearest great crested newt pond to Lydd Quarry is south-west of Lydd and well over 500m from the quarry extension. As such this issue can be dismissed.

46 Email from Jayne Field (Natural England) to Graeme Down (URS) of 20/10/09

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 74

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

The fact that there are already existing minerals operations taking place in close-proximity to the pSPA/pRamsar site in this location will need to be taken into account in determining species tolerance/habituation.

The advice that Kent County Council have previously been given by Natural England regarding this site is also of relevance ‘While areas 7, 8, 9 [of the existing quarry] are adjacent to the pSPA and pRamsar it is acknowledged that the pSPA and pRamsar interest features have established in the presence of the extraction activity. In our view it is likely any indirect adverse impacts identified in the review i.e. noise, dust, hydrology can be mitigated by appropriate working methods and conditions.

For the purposes of the MWDF we are satisfied with the inclusion of the three extension sites and others in the general locality outside of the pSPA, pRamsar and Dungeness Special Area of Conservation (SAC). We would anticipate that with appropriate mitigation it is unlikely that these proposals would adversely impact these protected areas’.47 101 Barbary Given the proximity of this site to The Swale Farm SPA/Ramsar site it is considered that it cannot be screened out at this stage. However, given that there are no hydraulic pathways linking this site to the SPA and that brickearth extraction is not a noisy form of mineral working it is considered likely that the only issue that will require further investigation is whether the fields that will be subject to minerals extraction regularly support significant populations of SPA/Ramsar birds (a ‘significant’ population would be defined as 1% or greater of the SPA/Ramsar population). 72 Unit 14 Given the proximity of this site to the Stodmarsh Canterbury SAC/SPA/Ramsar site, likely significant effects Industrial cannot be ruled out at this stage and further Park investigation will be required as part of any planning application, although there is no reason to conclude

47 Letter from Sinead McDonnell (Natural England) to Elizabeth Shier (Kent County Council) dated 10/02/10

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 75

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

that any potential risks cannot be easily resolved. This is likely to focus on issues of air quality, water quality and noise/disturbance. 91 Animal It is noted that this site is a currently operational Products Site glass recycling facility and that the proposal is primarily to continue to utilise this site for glass recycling. Given that the proposal would be a continuation of the existing activity it is considered that likely significant effects would not occur. However, it is also noted that there is a possibility that this site could be used for the recycling of construction and demolition waste. Some construction and demolition waste recycling can be noisy (e.g. concrete crushing). It is therefore considered that consideration of noise impacts upon The Swale SPA/Ramsar site would be required before such an activity was permitted.

The reasons for screening in these sites can be summarised as follows: • Potential air quality impacts (Shrine Farm, Unit 14 Canterbury Industrial Park) - All of these sites are located within 200m of sensitive European sites, or are very likely to utilise access roads that lie within 200m of European sites. It will need to be determined whether any of these sites are likely to result in an increase of more than 200 Heavy Duty Vehicles /day48 on any road that lies within 200m of a European site. If so, It will be necessary for the applicant to demonstrate that either: ƒ The traffic will lead to an increase in nitrogen deposition within all European sites that lie within 200m (i.e. a Process Contribution) that constitutes less than 1% of the critical load for the most sensitive habitat within the site; or ƒ That although the Process Contribution exceeds 1% of the critical load, the Predicted Environmental Concentration (i.e. the total rate of nitrogen deposition when the process contribution is added to the background rates) is less than 70% of the critical load; or ƒ That although the PC will be greater than 1% of the critical load and the PEC greater than 70% of the critical load, the increase in deposition will nonetheless be sufficiently small, or habitats of sufficiently low sensitivity, that no adverse effect on the interest features and integrity of the European site will result.

48 The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1) regarding air quality environmental impact assessment from roads indicates that if the increase in traffic will amount to less than 200 HDV movements per day the development can be scoped out of further assessment. Natural England has advocated the use of this criterion for the East and West Sussex Minerals and Waste DPD’s and it is therefore appropriate to also apply it to Kent.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 76

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

• Potential noise disturbance impacts (Unit 14 Canterbury Industrial Park, Animal Products Site) – Both of these sites lie very close to a European site with sensitive species and may be associated with potentially noisy operations (construction and demolition waste recycling e.g. concrete crushing). It will therefore be necessary for each of these sites to be subject to a noise assessment to confirm that the change in noise levels compared to background is unlikely to disturb species within the European sites. • Potential water quality issues (Unit 14 Canterbury Industrial Park) – Given the high sensitivity of Stodmarsh SAC/SPA/Ramsar site to changes in water quality and the fact that this minerals site is immediately adjacent to the SAC/SPA/Ramsar site it is considered that a specific assessment to confirm that there will be no effects on the European site from surface water runoff will be required for this minerals site. • Potential loss of supporting habitat for birds associated with The Swale SPA/Ramsar site (Barbary Farm) – Given proximity to The Swale the site proponent will need to confirm whether the fields that will be subject to minerals extraction are suitable as foraging/roosting habitat for SPA birds and if so, whether they regularly support significant populations of SPA/Ramsar birds (a ‘significant’ population would be defined as 1% or greater of the SPA/Ramsar population). All of the issues identified for investigation in the list above are theoretically capable of resolution even for sites in close proximity to sensitive wildlife sites. As such, it is not considered that any of these minerals sites would necessarily be undeliverable even if further assessment did identify the need for mitigation/avoidance measures.

7.1.1 Lydd Quarry The extensions to Lydd Quarry raise a range of issues that will require investigation before they can be screened out: • Potential disturbance of pSPA/pRamsar birds through minerals working of fields immediately adjacent to the ditches and waterbodies they utilise; • Potential direct loss of habitat if the open fields are used by significant numbers of pSPA/pRamsar site birds (a ‘significant’ number would be 1% or more of the pSPA/pRamsar population on a regular basis); • Potential water quality and flow impacts due to minerals workings immediately adjacent to the ditches for which the pSPA/pRamsar site is designated; • Potential air quality (particularly dust) impacts with regard to minerals workings immediately adjacent to the ditches for which the pSPA/pRamsar site is designated.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 77

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

These are all potential issues which were also identified in HRA work for the East Sussex Minerals and Waste DPD as requiring investigation as they relate to the proposed extensions to the quarry into East Sussex. For the proposed quarry extensions in East Sussex the quarry operators commissioned Bioscan to undertake an assessment to determine the disturbance risk of working immediately adjacent to the pSPA/pRamsar site49. This identified that the risk was manageable and devised a range of mitigation and monitoring measures that would be deployed when the area was worked to ensure no likely significant effect. This analysis was agreed with Natural England. It is advised that the same process should be undertaken for the quarry extensions in Kent, covering the issues identified in the bullet list above. The fact that there are already existing minerals operations taking place in close-proximity to the pSPA/pRamsar site in this location will need to be taken into account in determining species tolerance/habituation. Since it has been established in East Sussex that it is possible to work new minerals areas adjacent to the pSPA/pRamsar site without an adverse effect it is considered that the proposed extensions to Lydd Quarry could still be deliverable despite the detailed investigations that will be required.

7.2 Waste sites A total of five proposed waste sites cannot be screened out as being unlikely to lead to significant effects at this stage. Site Location HRA Screening (green = screened out, amber = Number screened in for Appropriate Assessment) 13 Allington Given the distances of this facility from European Waste sites it is likely that the only potential impact Management pathway is if a new or expanded Energy from Facility Waste facility is brought forward. In that case further assessment will be required in accordance with Environment Agency guidance. 54 Richborough Given that this site lies within 200m of Sandwich Power Station Bay SAC (the dune habitats of which are sensitive to atmospheric nitrogen deposition) and Thanet Coast & Sandwich Bay SPA/Ramsar site, it is considered that air quality and noise assessments for the nearby SAC/SPA would need to be undertaken before it could be permitted. The noise assessment will relate to construction noise in particular since some construction processes (e.g. impact piling) can cause disturbing levels of noise and vibration at distances of several hundred

49 Bioscan (UK) Ltd (2011). Lydd Quarry – Area 10: Information in Support of an Appropriate Assessment

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 78

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location HRA Screening (green = screened out, amber = Number screened in for Appropriate Assessment) metres from the source, which if undertaken during winter/passage could have adverse effects on bird using the SPA.

For the reasons set out in Section 6.1 above, any planning application for this site will need to undertake a transport and air quality assessment before planning permission is granted in order to confirm that there will be no adverse effects on the Sandwich Bay SPA or Thanet Coast & Marshes SPA/Ramsar site and which will need to take into account the traffic to be generated by the two permitted developments in the same area (Sites 64 and 65).

In addition, since it lies within 10km of four European sites it is considered that an air quality assessment would be required before this Energy from Waste facility could be permitted in accordance with Environment Agency guidance.

As such it cannot currently be screened out. 61 SCA Given the distances of this facility from European Packaging, sites it is likely that the only potential impact New Hythe pathway is if an Energy from Waste facility is brought forward. In that case further assessment will be required in accordance with Environment Agency guidance. 72 Unit 14 Given the proximity of this site to the Stodmarsh Canterbury SAC/SPA/Ramsar site, likely significant effects Industrial Park cannot be ruled out at this stage and further investigation will be required as part of any planning application, although there is no reason to conclude that any potential risks cannot be easily resolved. This is likely to focus on issues of air quality, water quality and noise/disturbance. 107 Lower Road, Given the distances of this facility from European Swanscombe sites it is likely that the only potential impact pathway is if an Energy from Waste facility is brought forward. In that case further assessment will be required in accordance with Environment

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 79

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location HRA Screening (green = screened out, amber = Number screened in for Appropriate Assessment) Agency guidance.

The issues for Site 72 are the same as those already identified for minerals usage of that site and are therefore not covered further below. The reasons for screening in the other sites can be summarised as follows: • Energy from Waste – All Energy from Waste sites situated within 10km of a European site have been screened in for further analysis. This relates to Allington Waste Management Facility, Richborough Power Station, SCA Packaging, New Hythe and Lower Road Swanscombe. In accordance with Environment Agency horizontal guidance H1 (Annex F), April 2010, any proposal for an Energy from Waste plant should undertake an air quality assessment with regard to all European sites within 10km. It will be necessary for the applicant to demonstrate that either: ƒ The facility will lead to an increase in nitrogen deposition, NOx or other pollutants within all European sites that lie within 10km (i.e. a Process Contribution) that constitutes less than 1% of the critical load/level for the most sensitive habitat within the site; or ƒ That although the Process Contribution exceeds 1% of the critical load, the Predicted Environmental Concentration (i.e. the total rate of nitrogen deposition when the process contribution is added to the background rates) is less than 70% of the critical load; or ƒ That although the PC will be greater than 1% of the critical load and the PEC greater than 70% of the critical load, the increase in deposition will nonetheless be sufficiently small, or habitats of sufficiently low sensitivity, that no adverse effect on the interest features and integrity of the European site will result. It should be noted that it is theoretically possible to design Energy from Waste facilities to ensure that concentrations/deposition rates meet the necessary standards even when situated relatively close to sensitive European sites (by altering stack height, making process changes etc.). As such, the mere fact that an EfW facility will be located within 10km of a European site is not a reason to assume it cannot be delivered. However, the likely costs and difficulties in deliverability will increase for those facilities that are situated very close to European sites. • Potential air quality impacts (Richborough Power Station) – It has already been determined that this site is likely to result in an increase of more than 200 Heavy Duty Vehicles /day50 on the A256 within 200m of Sandwich Bay

50 The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (Volume 11, Section 3, Part 1) regarding air quality environmental impact assessment from roads indicates that if the increase in traffic will amount to less than 200 HDV movements per day the

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 80

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

SAC/Thanet Coast & Sandwich Bay SPA/Ramsar site and this increases to over 600 HDV movements per day when considered cumulatively with Sites 64 and 65, which are both already permitted. It will therefore be necessary for the applicant to demonstrate that either: ƒ The traffic will lead to an increase in nitrogen deposition within all European sites that lie within 200m (i.e. a Process Contribution) that constitutes less than 1% of the critical load for the most sensitive habitat within the site; or ƒ That although the Process Contribution exceeds 1% of the critical load, the Predicted Environmental Concentration (i.e. the total rate of nitrogen deposition when the process contribution is added to the background rates) is less than 70% of the critical load; or ƒ That although the PC will be greater than 1% of the critical load and the PEC greater than 70% of the critical load, the increase in deposition will nonetheless be sufficiently small, or habitats of sufficiently low sensitivity, that no adverse effect on the interest features and integrity of the European site will result. • Potential noise disturbance impacts (Richborough Power Station) – This site lies very close to a European site with sensitive species. It will therefore be necessary for each of these sites to be subject to a noise assessment (particularly relating to construction) to confirm that the change in noise levels compared to background is unlikely to disturb species within the European sites. • Pathogens (Westbere) – In other parts of the country (specifically Surrey) it has been identified that proposed In Vitro Composting facilities could potentially handle waste contaminated with a range of fungal and oomycete biopathogens that could adversely effect the plant species for which European sites were designated. The Surrey example was within a few hundred metres of the European site (The Thames Basin Heaths SPA) but it was agreed with Natural England in adjacent counties that composting sites located within 1km of any sensitive European site would need site-specific consideration of this issue. Since the ability of a composting facility to deal with pathogens is associated with its treatment processes and physical design (which are not available until the application stage) it is not possible to undertake a detailed assessment until a planning application is submitted. All of the issues identified for investigation in the list above are theoretically capable of resolution even for sites in close proximity to sensitive wildlife sites. As such, it is not considered that most of these waste sites would necessarily

development can be scoped out of further assessment. Natural England has advocated the use of this criterion for the East and Kent Minerals and Waste DPD’s and it is therefore appropriate to also apply it to Kent.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 81

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

be undeliverable even if further assessment did identify the need for mitigation/avoidance measures.

7.3 Next steps If any further information regarding the issues and minerals/waste sites identified above can be obtained, this assessment can be refined to inform the final selection of sites for submission to the Secretary of State. If such information is not currently available then the recommendations for further study identified in the preceding sections should be used as specific guidance to the site promoters involved in each site. If the guidance in section 6 can be incorporated into the DPD then it is considered that the DPD will have incorporated sufficient safeguards to enable a conclusion that the DPD itself will not lead to Likely Significant Effects on any European sites.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 82

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

APPENDIX 1 - BACKGROUND ON EUROPEAN SITES REFERENCED IN THIS DOCUMENT

Site Area (ha) Qualifying Features Key Environmental Conditions to Support Site Integrity • Avocet (Recurvirostra avosetta) with 6.2% of the breeding population in GB • Little tern (Sterna albifrons) with 1.2% of the breeding population in GB • Minimal disturbance· • Common tern (Sterna hirundo) • Maintenance of grazing / mowing regimes· with 0.6% of the breeding • Sufficient freshwater inputs for birds (feeding, preening, population in GB drinking) • Pintail (Anas acuta) with 1.2% • Sufficient space between the site and development to allow Medway Estuary of the wintering population for managed retreat of intertidal habitats and avoid coastal and Marshes SPA 4684 Shoveler (Anas clypeata) with squeeze;· & Ramsar site • 0.8% of the wintering • Unpolluted water;· population • Absence of nutrient enrichment;· • Teal (Anas crecca) with 1.3% of • Absence of non-native species and control of cord grass the wintering population in encroachment;· Great Britain • Balance of saline and non-saline conditions • Wigeon (Anas penelope) with 1.6% of the wintering population in Great Britain • Turnstone (Arenaria interpres) with 0.9% of the wintering

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 83

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Area (ha) Qualifying Features Key Environmental Conditions to Support Site Integrity population in Great Britain • Brent goose (Branta bernicla bernicla) with 1.1% of the wintering population in Great Britain • Dunlin (Calidris alpina alpina) with 1.9% wintering population in Great Britain • Knot (Calidris canutus) with 0.2% of the wintering population in Great Britain • Ringed plover (Charadrius hiaticula) with 1.6% of the wintering population • Oystercatcher Haematopus ostralegus with 1% of the wintering population in Great Britain • Black-tailed godwit (Limosa limosa islandica) with 12.9% of the wintering population in Great Britain • Curlew (Numenius arquata) with 1.7% of the wintering population in Great Britain

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 84

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Area (ha) Qualifying Features Key Environmental Conditions to Support Site Integrity • Grey plover (Pluvialis squatarola) with 2% of the population • Shelduck (Tadorna tadorna) with 1.5% of the population • Greenshank (Tringa nebularia) with 2.6% of the population in Great Britain • Redshank (Tringa tetanus) with 2.1% of the wintering population • Tundra swan (Cygnus columbianus bewickii) with 0.2% of the wintering population in GB • Avocet (Recurvirostra avosetta) with 24.7% of the wintering population in GB

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 85

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Area (ha) Qualifying Features Key Environmental Conditions to Support Site Integrity

• Dark-bellied Brent goose • Minimal recreational disturbance· (Branta bernicla) with 0.7% of • Maintenance of grazing / mowing regimes· the wintering population of • Sufficient freshwater inputs for bird species (feeding, western Siberia/western preening and drinking) Europe • Sufficient space between the site and development to allow The Swale SPA & • Dunlin (Calidris alpina) with 6515 for managed retreat of intertidal habitats and avoid coastal Ramsar site 2.3% of the wintering squeeze; population of GB • Unpolluted water; • Redshank (Tringa totanus) with Absence of nutrient enrichment; 0.9% of the eastern Atlantic • wintering population • Absence of non-native species; • 65496 waterfowl per winter • Balance of saline and non-saline conditions • Low recreational pressure, especially from vehicles (erosion of shingle vegetation) • Suitable foraging and refuge habitat within 500m of newt breeding ponds • Annual vegetation of drift lines • Maintenance of hydrological regime • Coastal shingle vegetation Dungeness SAC 3223 • Relatively unpolluted water of roughly neutral pH outside the reach of waves • Some ponds deep enough to retain water throughout • Great crested newt February to August at least one year in every three • In a wider context, great crested newts require good connectivity of landscape features (ponds, hedges etc) as they often live as metapopulations in a number of ponds.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 86

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Area (ha) Qualifying Features Key Environmental Conditions to Support Site Integrity • Mediterranean gull (Larus melanocephalus) with 9.1% of • Maintenance of grazing/mowing regimes the breeding population in GB • Freshwater inputs to provide a localised increase in prey • Little tern (Sterna albifrons) with biomass for certain bird species, specific microclimatic 1.5% of the GB breeding conditions and areas for preening and drinking population GB • Sufficient space between the site and development to allow • Common tern (Sterna hirundo) for managed retreat of intertidal habitats and avoid coastal Dungeness to Pett with 2.2% of the breeding squeeze 1474 Level SPA population in GB • Unpolluted water • Tundra swan (Cygnus • Absence of nutrient enrichment columbianus bewickii) with • Absence of non-native species 2.5% of the wintering • Balance of saline and non-saline conditions population in GB • Control of predator numbers (e.g. fox, badger and mink) • Northern shoveler (Anas • Maintenance of suitable grassland on adjacent land for off- clypeata) with 2.5% of the site grazing and roosting. wintering population in GB • The site regularly supports more than 1% of the GB Dungeness, populations of 12 species listed Romney Marsh & in Annex I of the EC Birds Rye Bay SPA and Directive • As for Dungeness to Pett Level SPA Ramsar site • The site regularly supports (proposed) more than 1% of the biogeographical population of one regularly occurring

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 87

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Area (ha) Qualifying Features Key Environmental Conditions to Support Site Integrity migratory species (shoveler Anas clypeata). • The site regularly supports more than 20,000 waterbirds during the non-breeding season. • The site contains representative, rare, or unique examples of natural or near- natural wetland types such as vegetated annual drift lines, perennial vegetated stony banks, natural shingle wetlands, saline lagoons, freshwater pits and basin fens. • The site supports vulnerable, endangered, or critically endangered species or threatened ecological communities associated with wetland habitats. These communities include rich and diverse assemblages of bryophytes, vascular plants and invertebrates that are rare,

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 88

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Area (ha) Qualifying Features Key Environmental Conditions to Support Site Integrity threatened or specially protected.

• Hen harrier (Circus cyaneus) with 1% of the wintering population in GB • Avocet (Recurvirostra avosetta) with 28.3% of the wintering population in GB • Minimal disturbance· • Dunlin (Calidris alpina alpina) • Maintenance of grazing / mowing regimes· with 2.1% of the wintering • Sufficient freshwater inputs for bird species (feeding, population preening and drinking) • Knot (Calidris canutus) with Thames Estuary • Sufficient space between the site and development to allow 1.4% of the wintering and Marshes SPA 4839 for managed retreat of intertidal habitats and avoid coastal population & Ramsar site squeeze;· • Black-tailed godwit (Limosa • Unpolluted water; limosa islandica) with 2.4% of • Absence of nutrient enrichment; the wintering population • Absence of non-native species; • Grey plover (Pluvialis squatarola) with 1.7% of the • Balance of saline and non-saline conditions wintering population • Redshank (Tringa tetanus) with 2.2% of the wintering population • Ringed plover (Charadrius

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 89

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Area (ha) Qualifying Features Key Environmental Conditions to Support Site Integrity hiaticula) with 2.6% of the passage population • 75,019 wintering waterfowl • Sufficient space between the site and development to allow for managed retreat of intertidal habitats and avoid coastal Populations of European squeeze importance of the following • No dredging or land-claim of coastal habitats migratory species: • Unpolluted water Thanet Coast and Sandwich Bay SPA 1870 • Absence of nutrient enrichment • Turnstone (Arenaria interpres) & Ramsar site • Absence of non-native species • Golden Plover (Pluvialis Maintenance of freshwater inputs apricaria) • • Balance of saline and non-saline conditions • Little Tern (Sterna albifrons) • Minimal disturbance • Minimal activities that alter sediment characteristics • No dredging • Unpolluted water • Reefs • Absence of nutrient enrichment Thanet Coast SAC 2804 • Sea caves • Absence of non-native species • Minimal disturbance • Minimal activities that alter sediment characteristics • Shifting dunes • Sufficient space between the site and development to allow • Dune grassland for managed retreat of intertidal habitats and avoid coastal Sandwich Bay SAC 1138 • Dunes with creeping willow - squeeze • Humid dune slacks • No land-claim of coastal habitats

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 90

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Area (ha) Qualifying Features Key Environmental Conditions to Support Site Integrity • Unpolluted water • Absence of nutrient enrichment • Absence of non-native species • Minimal disturbance • Water quality for Desmoulin’s whorl snail • Minimal recreational disturbance • Desmoulin’s whorl snail Stodmarsh SAC 565 • Maintenance of grazing regime (Vertigo moulinsiana) • Maintenance of water supply • Absence of nutrient enrichment • Bittern (Botaurus stellaris), 2 individuals representing at least • Maintenance of sufficient water to support marginal/marsh 2.0% of the wintering vegetation and high Stodmarsh SPA & population in GB • Minimal recreational disturbance 565 Ramsar site • Hen Harrier (Circus cyaneus), 9 • Maintenance of grazing regime individuals representing at least • Maintenance of water supply 1.2% of the wintering • Absence of nutrient enrichment population in GB • Maintenance of grazing is critical to survival of interest • Semi-natural dry grasslands features and scrubland facies: on • Well-drained soils Wye and Crundale 112 calcareous substrates • Minimal air pollution – nitrogen deposition may cause Downs SAC (Festuco-Brometalia) (important reduction in diversity, sulphur deposition can cause orchid sites) acidification • Absence of direct fertilisation

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 91

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Area (ha) Qualifying Features Key Environmental C onditions to Support Site Integrity • Maintenance of grazing· • Minimal recreational trampling· • Dry grasslands and scrublands • Minimal air pollution – nitrogen deposition may cause Queendown 14 on chalk or limestone, including reduction in diversity, sulphur deposition can cause Warren SAC important orchid sites acidification· • Absence of direct fertilisation· • Well-drained soils • Maintenance of grazing; • Minimal air pollution – nitrogen deposition may cause Lydden and • Dry grasslands and scrublands reduction in diversity, sulphur deposition can cause Temple Ewell 62 on chalk or limestone, including acidification; Downs SAC important orchid sites. • Absence of direct fertilisation; and • Well-drained soils. • Maintenance of grazing; • Low levels of trampling; Folkestone to • Dry grasslands and scrublands • Minimal air pollution – nitrogen deposition may cause Etchinghill 182 on chalk or limestone, including reduction in diversity, sulphur deposition can cause Escarpment SAC important orchid sites. acidification; • Absence of direct fertilisation; and • Well-drained soils.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 92

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Area (ha) Qualifying Features Key Environmental C onditions to Support Site Integrity • Low levels of trampling • Maintenance of coppice management Blean Complex 521 • Oak-hornbeam forests • Minimal air pollution SAC • Absence of direct fertilisation and • Well-drained soil • Low nutrient runoff from surrounding land - being steep and narrow, the Hanger woodlands are vulnerable to nutrient run- off leading to eutrophication; • Beech forests on neutral to rich • Maintenance of grazing; soils; North Downs • Minimal trampling of sensitive woodland ground flora; 288 • Yew-dominated woodland; and Woodlands SAC • Minimal air pollution – nitrogen deposition may cause • Dry grasslands and scrublands reduction in diversity, sulphur deposition can cause on chalk and limestone. acidification; • Absence of direct fertilisation; and • Well-drained soils. • Great-crested newt (Triturus • Maintenance of suitable aquatic and marginal habitat for Peter’s Pit SAC 28 cristatus) breeding newts

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 93

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Area (ha) Qualifying Features Key Environmental Conditions to Support Site Integrity • Maintenance of grazing • Low levels of trampling • Minimal air pollution – nitrogen deposition may cause • Calcareous grassland - dry reduction in diversity, sulphur deposition can cause Dover to grasslands and scrublands on acidification Kingsdown Cliffs 184 chalk or limestone including • Adequate undeveloped land behind the cliffs to enable SAC important orchid sites. managed retreat of the SAC in response to erosion and avoid coastal squeeze • Absence of direct fertilisation and • Well-drained soils. • Maintenance of grazing is critical to survival of interest • Semi-natural dry grasslands features and scrubland facies: on • Well-drained soils Parkgate Down 7 calcareous substrates • Minimal air pollution – nitrogen deposition may cause SAC (Festuco-Brometalia) (important reduction in diversity, sulphur deposition can cause orchid sites) acidification • Absence of direct fertilisation

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 94

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

APPENDIX 2 – MINERALS AND WASTE SITES SUBJECT TO SCREENING BUT WHICH WILL NOT NOW BE TAKEN FORWARD

Minerals sites

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = screened out, Number European Site amber = screened in for Appropriate Assessment) 9 Ightham 560221,157926 8km from North Soft Sand Extension Nearest European site is North Downs Sand Pit Down Woodlands to existing Woodland SAC approximately 8km to SAC site, Small north-east. There is no scope for likely significant effects from this site and no pathway connecting with any other European sites 3 Arnolds 567483,149014 12.3km from Sharp Sand and Proposed Nearest European site is North Down Lodge Farm North Downs Gravel Site extension Woodland SAC approximately 12.3km to West Woodlands SAC to existing the north. There is no scope for likely site, Small significant effects from this site and no pathway connecting with any other European sites 4 Woodfalls 568666,148992 11.5km from Sharp Sand and Proposed Nearest European site is North Down Farm North Downs Gravel Site extension Woodland SAC approximately 11.5km to Woodlands SAC to existing the north. There is no scope for likely site, significant effects from this site and no pathway connecting with any other European sites

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 95

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = screened out, Number European Site amber = screened in for Appropriate Assessment) 92 Land at Bax 594270,163687 1km southeast of Brickearth Site New Site, Given the proximity of this site to The Farm The Swale Small Swale SPA/Ramsar site it is considered SPA/Ramsar site that it cannot be screened out at this stage. However, given that there are no hydraulic pathways linking this site to the SPA and that brickearth extraction is not a noisy form of mineral working it is considered likely that the only issue that will require further investigation is whether the fields that will be subject to minerals extraction regularly support significant populations of SPA/Ramsar birds (a ‘significant’ population would be defined as 1% or greater of the SPA/Ramsar population). 8 Chelsfield 549902,161778 17km from North Secondary and New Site, Nearest European site is North Downs Ammunition Downs Recycled Medium Woodlands SAC approximately 17km to Depot Woodlands SAC Aggregate Site the east. There is no scope for likely significant effects from this site and no pathway connecting with any other European sites.

12 Newington 584902,164857 2km from Secondary and An existing The site may utilise the M2 to transport

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 96

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Mineral/Recycling Status HRA Screening (green = screened out, Number European Site amber = screened in for Appropriate Assessment) Industrial Queensdown Recycled industrial minerals given its very close proximity. The Estate Warren SAC Aggregate estate, M2 immediately west of the site lies within Site/Recycling Small 200m of Queendown Warren SAC which 3km from The due to its calcareous grassland interest Swale feature is sensitive to atmospheric nitrogen SPA/Ramsar site deposition associated with vehicle exhaust and Medway emissions and is already in exceedence of Estuary & the critical load for this habitat. Marshes SPA/Ramsar site It is therefore considered that further assessment is necessary

45 Dunbrick 549397,155901 20km from North Secondary and An existing Nearest European site is North Downs Deport Downs Recycled builders Woodlands SAC approximately 20km to Woodlands SAC Aggregate Site yard and the east. There is no scope for likely depot, significant effects from this site and no Small pathway connecting with any other European sites.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 97

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Waste Sites

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for Appropriate Assessment) 46 Ashford Road, 583551,154053 6km from North Energy from Waste N/A Given the distances of this facility from Hollingbourne Downs European sites it is likely that the only Woodlands SAC potential impact pathway is if an Energy from Waste facility is brought 9km from forward. In that case further Queensdown assessment will be required in Warren accordance with Environment Agency guidance. This is discussed further in section 6.3. 47 Rushenden 590961,172043 Immediately Energy from Waste Operational Although this is a currently operational Rd, adjacent to industrial industrial estate it is considered that a Queenborough Medway Estuary estate noise assessment for the adjacent & Marshes SPA would need to be undertaken SPA/Ramsar site before it could be permitted. This relates to construction noise in 2.5km from Swale particular since some construction SPA and Ramsar processes (e.g. impact piling) can Site cause disturbing levels of noise and vibration at distances of several 3km from Thames hundred metres from the source, Estuary and which if undertaken during

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 98

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for Appropriate Assessment) Marshes SAC winter/passage could have adverse effects on bird using the mudflats.

In addition, since it lies within 10km of three European sites it is considered that an air quality assessment would be required before this Energy from Waste facility could be permitted in accordance with Environment Agency guidance. This is discussed further in section 6.3.

As such it cannot currently be screened out. 48 Argent Rd, 591183,170900 250m from Energy from Waste Operational Although this is a currently operational Queenborough Medway Estuary industrial industrial estate it is considered that a and Marshes SPA estate noise assessment for the nearby SPA and Ramsar Site would need to be undertaken before it could be permitted. This relates to 1.2km Swale SPA construction noise in particular since and Ramsar Site some construction processes (e.g. impact piling) can cause disturbing 4km from Thames levels of noise and vibration at

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 99

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for Appropriate Assessment) Estuary and distances of several hundred metres Marshes from the source, which if undertaken SPA/Ramsar site during winter/passage could have adverse effects on bird using the 10km from mudflats. Queendown Warren SAC In addition, since it lies within 10km of four European sites it is considered that an air quality assessment would be required before this Energy from Waste facility could be permitted in accordance with Environment Agency guidance. This is discussed further in section 6.3.

As such it cannot currently be screened out. 103 Pfizer Ltd Adjacent to Energy from Waste N/A Given that this site lies immediately Sandwich Bay adjacent to Sandwich Bay SAC (the SAC and Thanet dune habitats of which are sensitive to Coast and atmospheric nitrogen deposition) and Sandwich Bay Thanet Coast & Sandwich Bay SPA and Ramsar SPA/Ramsar site, it is considered that

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 100

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for Appropriate Assessment) Site air quality and noise assessments for the nearby SAC/SPA would need to 6km from Thanet be undertaken before it could be Coast SAC permitted. The noise assessment will relate to construction noise in 9km from particular since some construction Stodmarsh SPA processes (e.g. impact piling) can cause disturbing levels of noise and vibration at distances of several hundred metres from the source, which if undertaken during winter/passage could have adverse effects on bird using the SPA.

In addition, since it lies within 10km of four European sites it is considered that an air quality assessment would be required before this Energy from Waste facility could be permitted in accordance with Environment Agency guidance. This is discussed further in section 6.3.

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 101

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for Appropriate Assessment) As such it cannot currently be screened out. 82 Milton Manor 611983,155552 9km from the Composting Given the distance to the nearest Farm Swale SPA and European site and the lack of Canterbury Ramsar Site connecting pathways it is considered that this site can be screened out as 8km from being unlikely to lead to significant Stodmarsh SPA effects

4km from Blean Complex SAC

6km from Wye and Crundale Downs SAC 83 Westbere 619081,161446 Within 500m of Composting Given the proximity to Stodmarsh Canterbury Stodmarsh SAC/SPA/Ramsar site it will be SAC/SPA/Ramsar necessary for an assessment of the site pathogen risk to plants for which the SAC/Ramsar site was designated is 2km from Blean undertaken to support a planning Complex SAC application. It should be noted that it

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 102

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for Appropriate Assessment) may be difficult to provide sufficient 7.5km from certainty that there is no risk. Thanet Coast and Sandwich Bay SPA and Ramsar Site 84 Highstead 621087,166867 2km from Thanet Composting Given the distance to the nearest Coast and European site and the lack of Sandwich Bay connecting pathways it is considered SPA and Ramsar that this site can be screened out as Site being unlikely to lead to significant effects 4.5km from Stodmarsh SPA

2.5km from Blean Complex SAC 85 Charing 593706,149175 4.6km from Wye Composting Given the distance to the nearest Quarry & Crundale European site and the lack of Downs SAC connecting pathways it is considered that this site can be screened out as being unlikely to lead to significant

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 103

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for Appropriate Assessment) effects 28 Waterbrook 603249,140252 6km from Wye Recycling/Facilities for Given the distance to the nearest Park, Ashford and Crundale Household Waste European site and the lack of SAC connecting pathways it is considered that this site can be screened out as being unlikely to lead to significant effects 30 Church 591533,165077 1km from the Facilities for Adjacent to Milton Creek is immediately adjacent. Marshes, Swale SPA and Household Waste existing Important supporting habitat for SPA Milton Ramsar Site HWRC birds

4km from Given the limited impact pathways Medway Estuary associated with Household Waste and Marshes SPA Recycling Facilities and that this is and Ramsar Site intended to replace the adjacent existing facility it is considered that 8.5km from significant effects are unlikely. Queensdown Warren SAC Immediately adjacent to a tributary of The Swale so water quality impacts from runoff will need to be avoided; however, there are standard designs

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 104

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for Appropriate Assessment) available to achieve this. 31 Studd Hill 615448,167073 700m from Facilities for Adjacent to Separated from Thanet Coast & Thanet Coast and Household Waste existing Sandwich Bay SPA/Ramsar site by a Sandwich Bay HWRC large amount of urban development SPA and Ramsar and the site itself is very scrubby and Site overgrown such that it will not provide suitable high-tide roost habitat for 5km from the SPA/Ramsar birds. Given this and the Swale SPA and limited impact pathways associated Ramsar Site with Household Waste Recycling Facilities it is considered that 7km from significant effects are unlikely. Stodmarsh SPA

7km from Blean Complex SAC 38 Southwall 636757,152965 700m from Facilities for The habitats on site do not provide Road, Deal Thanet Coast and Household Waste suitable habitat for SPA/Ramsar birds Sandwich Bay (e.g. golden plover). Given this and Ramsar Site the limited impact pathways associated with Household Waste 1.4km from Recycling Facilities and that this is

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 105

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for Appropriate Assessment) Sandwich Bay intended to replace the adjacent SAC and Thanet existing facility it is considered that Coast & significant effects are unlikely. Sandwich Bay SPA

5km from Dover to KIngsdown Cliffs SAC 42 Pedham Place 552963,167585 14.6km from Facilities for Given the distance to the nearest North Downs Household Waste European site and the lack of Woodlands SAC connecting pathways it is considered that this site can be screened out as being unlikely to lead to significant effects. 43 Stoneyard, 591717,174882 1.6km from Facilities for Given the distance to the nearest Sheerness Medway Household Waste European site and the lack of Estuaries and connecting pathways it is considered Marshes SPA and that this site can be screened out as Ramsar Site being unlikely to lead to significant effects. 2km from Thames

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 106

Kent County Council — Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework

Site Location Grid reference Distance from Waste operation Status HRA Screening (green = screened Number European site out, amber = screened in for Appropriate Assessment) Estuary and Marshes SPA/Ramsar site

4km from the Swale SPA and Ramsar Site 59 Shelford 615947,160317 1.6km from Miscellaneous Uncertain since the usage of the site is Waste Stodmarsh (Waste) uncertain. Therefore project-level HRA Management SPA/SAC/Ramsar will be required. Facility, site and Blean Canterbury Complex SAC

HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT May 2012 107