Confidential
Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration
Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
For
SEEDA
Project No:
9859-1
November 2009
Campbell Reith Hill LLP Somerset House 47-49 London Road Redhill Surrey RH1 1LU
Tel: 01737 784500 Fax: 01737 784501 www.campbellreith.com
Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Document History and Status
Revision Date Purpose/Status Author File Ref Check Review
MCmc 9859- D4 11/11/08 For Information MC 1 111108 SLG SLG SEA_SA
MCmc 9859- F1 04/06/09 Final MC 1 030609 SLG SLG SEA_SA F2 03/11/09 Final MC MCmc 9859- SLG SLG 1 031109
This document has been prepared in accordance with the scope of CampbellReith’s appointment with its client and is subject to the terms of the appointment. It is addressed to and for the sole use and reliance of CampbellReith’s client. CampbellReith accepts no liability for any use of this document other than by its client and only for the purposes, stated in the document, for which it was prepared and provided. No person other than the client may copy (in whole or in part) use or rely on the contents of this document, without the prior written permission of the Campbell Reith Hill LLP. Any advise, opinions, or recommendations within this document should be read and relied upon only in the context of the document as a whole. The contents of this document are not to be construed as providing legal, business or tax advice or opinion.
© Campbell Reith Hill LLP 2008
Document Details
Last saved 04/06/2009 12:14 Path MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SAv2.doc Author Marian Cameron Project Partner Stuart Goodchild Project Number 9859-1 Project Name Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 i Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 ii Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Contents
Non-Technical Summary
1.0 Introduction Background Site Location and Description Queenborough and Rushenden Masterplan Aim for Sustainable Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
2.0 Background to Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment Introduction Sustainability Appraisal Strategic Environmental Assessment A Single Appraisal Process Consultation Previous SA and SEA undertaken by Swale Borough Council Link to Other Strategies, Plans and Programmes
3.0 Background to the Masterplan, Supplementary Planning Document and Green Charter The Masterplan Supplementary Planning Documents Development of the Green Charter
4.0 Baseline Information Introduction Baseline Information Site Description Historic Development The Surrounding Environment Baseline Conditions
5.0 Alternatives Considered Introduction Schemes with Planning Permission Land Use Options Marina Options
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 iii Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
6.0 Masterplan Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment Introduction Basis for the SA and SEA SA and SEA Framework Summary
7.0 Secondary, Cumulative and Synergistic Effects Introduction Methodology Secondary, Cumulative and Synergistic Effects Summary
8.0 Recommendations and Monitoring Proposals for the Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Introduction Key Recommendations and Monitoring
9.0 Summary and Conclusions
References
Appendices Appendix A: Identifying other relevant plans and programmes from Swale Borough Council Integrated SEA/SA of the Local Plan First Review Re-deposit Draft July 2005, Final Scoping Report Appendix B Appendix B: Queenborough and Rushenden Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment Consultation Comments and Responses Appendix C: The Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment Matrix
Tables Table 4.1: Household data for Swale Borough Council (2001) Table 4.2: Tenure: percentage of households in 2001 Table 4.3: Indices of deprivation (2004 and 2007) Table 4.4: Educational establishments within Swale Borough Table 4.5: Swale – Ward Crime (April 2007 to March 2008) Table 4.6: Indoor sports facilities within Swale Borough Table 4.7: Distances to key rural services
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 iv Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Table 4.8: Swale Nitrogen Dioxide annual mean diffusion tube data (2002-2007) Table 4.9: Invertebrate species identified within the Masterplan area Table 4.10: Travel to work statistics (2001) Table 4.11: Percentage employment by occupation (2007-2008) Table 4.12: Percentage employment in different sectors (2006) Table 5.1: Schemes that have received planning permission Table 6.1: Summary of the Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment Matrix for Option 1 (Existing Situation) Table 6.2: Summary of the Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Assessment Matrix for Option 2 (Purpose Built Marina Within the Development) Table 6.3: Summary of the Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Assessment Matrix for Option 3 (Impounded Marina within Queenborough Creek) Table 6.4: Summary of the Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Assessment Matrix for Option 4 (Moorings within the West Swale Queenborough Harbour) Table 7.1: Documents consulted for assessing cumulative impacts Table 7.2: Employment sites Table 7.3: Mixed use sites Table 7.4: Housing sites Table 7.5: Transport schemes Table 7.6: Energy schemes Table 7.7: Potential Secondary, Cumulative and Synergistic Effects of each Objective
Figures Figure 1.1: The Masterplan boundary Figure 2.1: Key stages in Strategic Environmental Assessment Figure 4.1: Ecological designations relevant to the Masterplan Figure 4.2: Low Layer Super Output Areas referred to within the baseline assessment Figure 4.3: Heavy metal contaminant distribution in soils Figure 4.4: Hydrocarbon contaminant distribution in soils Figure 4.5: Groundwater contaminant distribution Figure 4.6: Flood risk for the Borough as a whole Figure 4.7: 1 in 200 flood extent and depths (Environment Agency) Figure 4.8: Ornithological survey zones Figure 4.9: Sites and Monuments Records Figure 4.10: Character areas, including historic character Figure 5.1: Marina options considered
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 v Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 vi Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY
N 1 The Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Masterplan has been submitted to Swale Borough Council (SBC) for adoption as a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). This document is provided as support to the Masterplan and follows the guidance provided by the former Office for the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), now the Department of Communities and Local Government. The guidance requires that SPD are subject to Sustainability Appraisal (SA), which should also fulfill the requirements of Directive 2001/42/EC on the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes, commonly referred to as ‘Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)1.
N 2 The ODPM guidance suggests that where the local planning authority, in this case Swale Borough Council, has developed a SA Framework as part of its assessment of Development Plan Documents (formerly the Local Plan), it is appropriate for the SA of SPD to adopt such a framework as the basis for further appraisal.
N 3 The sustainability objectives provided by Swale Borough Council, the scoping process and review of applicable policy has formed the basis for the SEA/SA.
N 4 Baseline information has been collated for the issues identified through the previous Swale Borough Council SA/SEA to provide a context for the appraisal and assessment at two levels. The first level draws upon baseline information presented within the Swale Borough Council SA/SEA for the borough as a whole and the second with information that is specific to the site and its surrounding areas. This second tier of baseline information has been drawn from assessments undertaken by SEEDA and its consultant team as part of the Master Planning process.
N 5 The appraisal and assessment has considered each of the sustainability objectives against the Masterplan objectives and options. All negative influences are considered further and recommendations and mitigation have been made.
Key Findings of the SEA/SA
N 6 The full appraisal matrix of the SEA/SA undertaken is included in Table 7.1.
N.7 In common with all urban development schemes, there would be an increase in population, both residential and employment, with the associated increases in traffic, emissions, energy
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 i Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
and resource use. Section 6.0 identifies the preferred option as the purpose built marina within the development and mitigation for factors such as energy efficiency, waste generation and resource use such that the negative influences can be minimised.
N.8 In conclusion the Masterplan represents a ‘positive’ or ‘strongly positive’ influence on the sustainable development of the Masterplan area. The Green Charter and the Habitats Regulations Assessment which form constituent parts of the Masterplan and SPD provide appropriate mechanisms for integrity of sustainability into the future development of the site.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 ii Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Background
1.1 This report has been prepared on behalf of the South East England Development Agency (SEEDA) by CampbellReith. It represents a combined Sustainability Appraisal (SA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the Queenborough and Rushenden Masterplan1 (here after referred to as the ‘Masterplan’) and its supporting documents for the Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration. The Masterplan is in the process of being adopted by Swale Borough Council (SBC) as a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) which would provide an overarching framework for the future development within the Masterplan area, shown in outline as Figure 1.1.
Site Location and Description
1.2 Queenborough and Rushenden are located on the east coast of the Isle of Sheppey which is situated in North Kent with the Thames Estuary to the north, the River Medway to the west and The Swale separating the island from the mainland to the south and west. The Island is accessed from the south by road on the A249 and by rail from Sittingbourne. The A249 has been upgraded with a new bridge (‘Sheppey Crossing’) and dual carriageway crossing to the Island. This now provides a fast road link between the M2 and the Isle of Sheppey.
1.3 Queenborough and Rushenden present a mixed physical and social picture. Physically the historic centre of Queenborough and the surrounding landscape of marshes and agriculture contributes to a strongly defined character. Existing industry and the historic traces and remnants of a worked landscape contribute to this strong sense of character although in some cases this is negative where there are derelict sites or expanses of cleared brownfield land surrounded by the houses of Rushenden.
Queenborough and Rushenden Masterplan
1.4 Queenborough and Rushenden has suffered over the years from under investment, declining historic employment and restricted access. The Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration project is important for the Isle of Sheppey, as it considers a broad range of issues and proposing solutions. The Masterplan forms a framework for detailed design later, but major issues have been addressed in an integrated way. The area of the Masterplan is shown in Figure 1.1. The proposals aim to improve the environmental
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 1 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
standards throughout the Queenborough and Rushenden area and enhance the valuable SPA/SSSI/Ramsar status of the land outside this initiative for local people and visitors. It also aims to connect Queenborough and Rushenden together by producing a third, new, integrated community so that all three gain socio-economic advantages in the process.
1.5 The area within the Masterplan has been the subject of various development allocations through two local plans and is recognized within the Swale Local Plan (2005)2 as an ‘Area Action Plan’ No 8 and Approved Development Framework - Land at Queenborough/Rushenden SPD 20043.
Aim for Sustainable Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
1.6 The Sustainability Appraisal (SA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) process has been used in conjunction with this Masterplan to highlight issues and concerns outside the normal ‘design’ remit, and allow greater integration and appreciation of the various facets and synergistic effects of the criteria within the sustainability agenda.
1.7 The purpose of this document is to:
x Provide the context of the SA and SEA of the Masterplan; x Describe the approach used in the appraisal and assessment; x Describe the baseline conditions within the Masterplan area and Swale Borough; x Discuss the alternatives layouts of the Marina within the Masterplan; x Appraise and assess the Marina options against sustainability objectives; x Appraise the cumulative and synergistic effects of this and other proposed developments within Swale Borough; and x Provide a series of recommendations and proposals for future development within the Masterplan area and the potential requirements for monitoring.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 2 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Figure 1.1: The Masterplan boundary
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 3 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 4 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
2.0 BACKGROUND TO SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL AND STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Introduction
2.1 This section provides an overview of the legislation and guidance that provides a framework for undertaking the SA and SEA of the Masterplan1. Whilst general guidance on SA and SEA is available, there is no standardised detailed methodology that can be utilised for this appraisal and assessment. The ODPM guidance recognises that SAs and SEAs will need to adopt a flexible approach.
2.2 Selection and evaluation of sustainability criteria has been based on the criteria and methodology developed through the process previously used by Swale Borough Council to assess the whole Borough (Sections 2.0 and 6.0). This enables the appraisal of the Masterplan to be consistent with the issues considered at Borough level.
Sustainability Appraisal
2.3 The purpose of Sustainability Appraisal (SA), mandatory under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 20042, is to promote sustainable development through the integration of social, environmental and economic considerations into the preparation of revisions of Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS) and for new or revised Development Plan Documents (DPD) and Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) (ODPM 2005).3
2.4 Guidance confirms that SA should:
x Take a long-term view of whether and how the area covered by the plan is expected to develop, taking account of the social, environmental and economic effects of the proposed plan; x Provide a mechanism for ensuring that sustainability objectives are translated into sustainable planning policies; x Reflect global, national and regional concerns; x Provide an audit trail of how the plan has been revised to take into account the findings of the SA; x Form an integral part of all stages of the plan preparation; and x Incorporate the requirements of the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive4.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 5 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
2.5 In the majority of cases, the SA of SPDs should draw extensively from the SA for the prevailing Development Plan Document (DPD), where this has been undertaken. There are different forms of SPD and thus the approach to SA needs to be flexible, however the ODPM guidance suggests that the SA for SPD is likely to focus on a more limited range of significant effects than may be the case for the DPD, although it may be appropriate to consider these in more detail. Strategic Environmental Assessment 2.6 European Directive 2001/42/EC (the SEA Directive) ‘on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment’ requires a formal environmental assessment of certain plans and programmes, such as the Queenborough and Rushenden Masterplan, which are likely to have significant effects on the environment. The process will involve preparing a report on the Masterplan’s likely significant environmental effects, consulting environmental authorities and the public; and incorporating the results of the consultation during the preparation process prior to the adoption of the Masterplan. The Responsible Authority must also make information available on the Masterplan as adopted and how the environmental assessment was taken into account. 2.7 Key stages within the SEA process are set out in Figure 2.1.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 6 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Figure 2.1: Key stages in Strategic Environmental Assessment Source: ODPM (2005) A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive5
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 7 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
A Single Appraisal Process 2.8 In the case of the Masterplan, whilst the requirement to carry out a SA and a SEA is distinct, a single appraisal process has been carried out to satisfy both criteria as suggested by the ODPM guidance.
2.9 The findings of the combined SA and SEA will be used to inform the SPD, with recommendations for measures or principles that should be incorporated into the future regeneration of Queenborough and Rushenden as part of the SPD and Green Charter6 in order to ensure that best practice is achieved on the site in relation to sustainable development.
2.10 There will be further, more detailed, consideration of the environmental effects of specific development areas within the Masterplan when these progress to the detailed planning application stage. The majority of the development areas within the Masterplan are likely to require formal Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), with each requiring consideration of the cumulative impacts of that development area in conjunction with other known developments in the Masterplan and the surrounding area.
Consultation
2.11 In November 2007 the statutory and non-statutory consultees were asked to review and comment on the draft SA and SEA. As a result of the consultation process their comments have been incorporated where appropriate into this document as described in Appendix B. The following organizations were consulted:
x SEERA, x Environment Agency; x Natural England; and x Kent Wildlife Trust x Dragon Property Ltd; x Queenborough First School; x Sittingbourne Library; x Aesica Queenborough Lt; x Premier Timber Ltd; x The Foundry;
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 8 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
x Crime Reduction Officer; x Rober Pearson & Comp; x Timbmet; x IJM Timber Engineering; x Action with Communities; x Esso Petroleum Company; x Swale Joint Commission; x Kent Police; x All Tide Landing Board; x Amicus Horizon Group; x Swale Borough Council; x CPRE-Swale; x GOSE; x Queenborough Town Council; x Queenborough Society; x Medway Ports; x RSPB; x Sheppy Ltd; x Kent Wildlife Trust; x Environment Agency; x Kent County Council; x Natural England; x Sport England; x Highways Agency; and x Private Individuals.
Previous SA and SEA Undertaken by Swale Borough Council 2.12 A combined SEA and SA has been undertaken by Swale Borough Council of its Local Plan First Review Re-deposit Draft (July 2005)7. As advocated by the ODPM guidance, the framework prepared for the SEA and SA of the Local Plan has been used in the preparation of the SEA and SA for the Queenborough and Rushenden Masterplan. Key documents referred to in this respect have been provided by Swale Borough Council as follows:
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 9 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
x Entec UK Ltd (2005), Swale Borough Council Integrated SEA/SA of the Local Plan First Review Re-deposit Draft July 2005, Final Scoping Report, 8; x Entec UK Ltd (2005), Swale Borough Council Integrated SEA/SA of the Local Plan First Review Re-deposit Draft July 2005, SEA/SA Report, September 20059; and x Further documentation referred to: Queenborough and Rushenden Development Framework December 2004 SPD10 outlines the Framework to be included in the Queenborough and Rushenden Masterplan. 2.13 The issues, objectives and framework for the SA and SEA are considered to have already been determined through the SA and SEA undertaken by Swale Borough Council, and thus a specific scoping report, which is usually required by good practice, has not prepared for this appraisal. Similarly stages A1, A3, A4 and A5 of the SEA process, as shown in Figure 2.1 have been previously considered by Swale Borough Council and are thus not repeated in this document. Link to Other Strategies, Plans and Programmes
2.14 A list of policies, plans and environmental objectives relevant to the Swale Local Plan were compiled and analysed by Entec as part of the Swale Borough Council Integrated SEA/SA of the Local Plan First Review Re-deposit Draft July 2005, Final Scoping Report (see Appendix A). These were used to determine the SA objectives which were used to appraise the Swale Local Plan and the Queenborough and Rushenden Masterplan.
2.15 The methodology adopted within the Swale Borough Council SEA/SA follows best practice and is based around the development of an SA and SEA Framework including 24 stated objectives, which have built upon earlier work by Swale Borough Council and Kent County Council, and were finalised through a workshop process.
2.16 The sustainability objectives listed below form the basis of the SA and SEA Framework and have been used to appraise the options considered for the Masterplan in Section 7 of this report:
1. To ensure that the opportunity is provided for decent homes to be provided for all the community; 2. To improve human health and well-being; 3. To reduce the gap between the most disadvantaged communities and the rest and to increase prosperity;
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 10 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
4. To raise education levels and develop opportunities for everyone to find the skill needed to find, remain and progress at work; 5. To promote social inclusion and cohesion including creating a safe and secure environment; 6. To encourage development and participation in culture, sport and the arts and enjoyment of the countryside; 7. To sustain and improve vibrant rural communities; 8. To maximise the use of previously developed land for development and to use land efficiently; 9. To improve the quality of land and reduce contamination; 10. To improve the overall air quality of the Borough; 11. To improve water quality; 12. Will it maintain hydrology/coastal processes? 13. Will it reduce or minimise greenhouse gas emissions? 14. To effectively manage the risk of flooding; 15. To conserve and enhance biodiversity; 16. To promote the use of sustainable forms of transport and reduce travel by car/lorry; 17. To protect, enhance and make accessible the historic environment and assets, including landscapes (the quality and character), townscapes and settlement settings; 18. To maintain and enhance geological and geomorphological sites; 19. To ensure the sustainable use and management of natural resources; 20. To reduce generation and disposal of waste, and achieve sustainable management of waste; 21. To enhance quality of, and access to, employment opportunities for everyone; 22. To increase the economic performance of the Borough; 23. To encourage investment in local services and facilities; and 24. To encourage sustainable design and practice.
2.17 Options considered by the SA and SEA matrix are tested against the following criteria:
x Impact of the effect - is the effect positive or negative when viewed against the sustainability objective, or has it no impact? x Significance of the effect - will the effect be marginal or strongly significant? x Spatial extent of the effect - will the effect be felt within Swale Borough (urban and/or rural) and/or will it extend beyond the planning administrative boundary?
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 11 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
x Timing of the effect - will the effect manifest itself within and/or beyond the lifetime of the framework? The temporary, permanent or reversible nature of the effects can be commented upon in the ‘Commentary’ section of the matrix; and x Cumulative effects - there may be scope for some cumulative effects (e.g. on an environmental resource or a geographical area). These impacts could be positive or negative. 2.18 To ensure that the Masterplan for Queenborough and Rushenden is consistent with local policy, the objectives for the Borough Council Local Plan11 and the Area Action Plan Queenborough and Rushenden have been considered throughout this appraisal.
Swale Borough Council Local Plan
2.19 The Local Plan was adopted by the Council on 20th February 2008. The preparation of the Local Plan has been undertaken in accordance with the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), and the Town and Country Planning (Development Plan) (England) Regulations 199911. However, the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, replaces Local Plans with new Local Development Documents (LDDs). The new Act allows Local Plans in preparation to be completed under modified Town and Country Planning (Transitional Arrangements) (England) Regulations 200412.
2.20 Swale Local Plan provides policies and proposals relating to the development and other use of land in the Borough, with the exception of the extraction of minerals and the management of waste. In so doing it seeks to:
x Apply Government land use planning policy at a local level, including its objective of securing sustainable development; x Apply the strategy of the Kent and Medway Structure Plan; x Provide a detailed basis for planning decisions by identifying sites for particular purposes, and criteria based policies against which development proposals will be assessed; x Present local and detailed planning issues to the public, and to foster the community's engagement in the plan making process; and x Provide a basis for decisions on the investment of private and public resources and the management of land.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 12 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Area Action Plan Queenborough and Rushenden Approved Development Framework 2.21 Within the emerging Swale Borough Council Local Development Framework to replace the existing Swale Borough Council Local Plan, an Area Action Plan for Queenborough and Rushenden has been approved. The Framework will allow for better integration of existing communities through the introduction of new residents and businesses. The objectives are wide-ranging and include economic, environmental, social and cultural contributions. They include:
x To recognise and respond positively to the strategic development opportunities identified for this area created by the improved access between the mainland and the Island, by creating an anchor point to retain employment uses on the Island, whilst providing the catalyst for new inward investment: x To facilitate and co-ordinate redevelopment and provide a framework for controlling the process; x To respond positively to development constraints, and to maximise opportunities identified such as topography, flood risk, ecology, archaeology and history, contamination, highway infrastructure/capacity, and railway access. Constraints can also present opportunities, for example combining decontamination, local employment and development potential; x To promote mixed use developments through the comprehensive and co- coordinated introduction of a variety of land uses across the site; x To integrate with and build on existing communities of Queenborough and Rushenden, so that each is strengthened; x To provide a framework to guide effective community and other stakeholder engagement in the regeneration process; x To maximise opportunities to create sustainable development including exploration of opportunities for the use of renewable energy water management, biodiversity enhancement, energy and resource conservation, as well as economic and social sustainability; and x To maximise the opportunities to promote Queenborough as a tourist destination, particularly uses related to yachting / sailing (includes all scale of boating fraternity) which would help retain and augment existing boat building and other related skills.
2.22 Within the Area Action Plan, planning policies and proposals will aim to ensure a coordinated and phased development that maximises benefits to the existing and new
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 13 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
communities through: the removal of unsightly industry and its traffic; and the creation of a healthy living and working environment that improves quality of life. Planning permission will be applied for, in accordance with an approved Local Development Framework and Masterplan, for mixed-use developments including:
1. new housing; 2. new employment development; 3. new and improved community facilities; 4. physical, environmental and economic measures to support and integrate the existing and new communities and improve overall quality of life in the area, including a range of transport initiatives and improvements and possibly a neighbourhood Combine Heat and Power Scheme; and 5. new transport infrastructure, particularly the provision of the Rushenden Link Road.
2.23 To ensure a balanced community with access to jobs, facilities and an adequate transport network, new housing will be phased in accordance with provision of:
a. transport measures, including the Rushenden Link Road, and other infrastructure; b. new or improved community facilities; and c. new employment land locally.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 14 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
3.0 BACKGROUND TO THE MASTERPLAN, SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT AND GREEN CHARTER
The Masterplan
Objectives of the Masterplan
3.1 The Masterplan1 presents significant potential to influence conditions that can assist economic and social regeneration. Within that context, some of the key issues that the Masterplan is intended to influence include:
i. Improved highway access - whilst the A249 improvements will greatly assist access to the Island, the development proposals also seek to deliver the Rushenden Relief Road, which will provide substantial benefits in terms of improved access to local businesses, raising the potential of the area for new business development, and removing traffic from Queenborough; ii. Bringing forward new land for business development - a key part of the overall regeneration scheme is the identification of land at Neatscourt for additional business development. The objective is to diversify the range of employment opportunities created, rather than concentrating simply on a continuation of manufacturing and storage uses; iii. Raising the quality of the urban environment - measures to improve the local environment and reduce the apparent distinction between the adjoining communities of Queenborough and Rushenden will assist with the ‘marketing’ of the area as a place for inward investment; iv. Provision of local services - the provision of a range of leisure, community, health and enhanced education provision brought forward as part of the development scheme should assist ease of access to services; v. Diversification of the population profile - the area is currently characterised by an over-concentration of persons falling within disadvantaged groups. The substantial increase in the number of new homes will inevitably result in the growth of the local population, which will assist in re-balancing the overall profile, and reducing the perception of the area as one with a high degree of deprivation. It has to be clear however that this Masterplan does not seek the replacement of the existing population with incoming residents - its objective is to increase opportunities for prosperity for the existing community, alongside opportunities for new residents.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 15 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Community consultation and development of the Masterplan
3.2 Consideration of current residents and stakeholders has been central to the development of the Masterplan and an extensive process of community consultation has taken place during 2005 and 2006.
3.3 SEEDA established a Community and Skills group for the Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration in September 2005 to act as a focal point for community engagement, with members drawn from within SEEDA, representatives from Town, Borough and County Councils, the Masterplanners and other stakeholder groups. SEEDA has also part-funded a Community Development Project Officer to work with the community and partner agencies. This position sits within Swale Borough Council, acting both as an advisor to project partners and an advocate for the community.
3.4 Funding has been provided by a Swale Borough Council grant to initiate a Planning for Real® (PFR) community consultation exercise. The PFR process has considered the opportunities for both the redevelopment area and the existing residential area and included 25 consultation events held at a variety of local venues to cover all sectors of the community. In total, over 900 people have attended the PFR events, representing approximately one third of the local population. At the heart of the PFR process has been the production of a large scale three dimensional model by the children of Queenborough First School. This model has formed the key consultation tool for the PFR process.
3.5 The PFR process and the resulting information base has provided a cornerstone for developing the regeneration project, with outcomes influencing both the spatial development of the Masterplan and the activities of key partners and service deliverers to seek to enhance quality of life and address some of the endemic issues of decline and social deprivation in the area.
3.6 Detailed coverage of the consultation process and the outputs from the community consultation is provided within The Statement of Community Consultation. The key outputs are also relevant background to the SA and a summary of the most frequent suggestions arising from the consultation process, in descending order of frequency, is given below:
i. Provide a cinema; ii. Increase police presence and foot patrols;
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 16 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
iii. Reduce the numbers of young people “hanging around”; iv. Clean up of the local area; v. Improve the feeling of security, including at night; vi. Provide a marina or all-tide marina; vii. Provide a health centre; viii. Create more job opportunities in addition to housing; ix. Provide a new school; x. Provide a supermarket.
3.7 In addition to the above suggestions, a number of key issues were identified during the consultation process. It was clear that there is a need to provide more activities for young people in the local area. Whilst the new Swale crossing and the proposed Relief Road were seen as resolving some of the traffic problems, the residents of Queenborough remain concerned that the existing problems experienced in the town may continue. There was a keen interest in the new development not becoming a dormitory town, with new residents commuting off the Isle of Sheppey for work. Young people spoke of the difficulties in finding work locally and employers of the difficulty in finding employees with the rights skills locally.
3.8 The need for affordable housing was raised, particularly to help young people onto the property ladder and it was felt important that the existing community spirit was not eroded by the new development, but rather was enhanced. A key message throughout the consultation process was that local residents are keen to take an active role in shaping the future of the Queenborough and Rushenden area.
Supplementary Planning Documents
3.9 The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004)2 introduced Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) to replace Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG). The Swale Borough Council website3 summarises the role of SPDs and the former SPGs:
‘These publications set out, in more detail than is possible in the Local Plan, certain standards and approaches of which developers should normally take account. The Government considers that both SPG and SPD can be taken into account when considering planning applications, and that weight accorded to them will be increased if they have been subject to public consultation’.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 17 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
3.10 The Masterplan is being submitted for adoption by Swale Borough Council as an SPD following consultation with the Council, which advised of its preference for this approach, where all subsequent development would require specific detailed planning applications, as opposed to one overall outline application supported by an environmental impact assessment for the whole of the Masterplan area, with subsequent reserved matters applications for specific development areas within the site.
Development of the Green Charter
3.11 SEEDA formed a Sustainability Group including representatives from Swale Borough Council, Kent County Council, the Environment Agency and Kent Wildlife Trust, with the remit of considering the potential for achieving more sustainable development within the regeneration area. The group meets on a regular basis and considers the theory and practice of implementing a wide range of sustainability initiatives as integral elements of the proposed development. Key outputs from the Sustainability Group included the development of a Sustainability Framework, including targets for the delivery and performance of sustainability initiatives and, most recently, the formalisation of the sustainability framework as a Green Charter4 for the proposed development.
3.12 The key objective of the Green Charter is to assist in the progress towards, and attainment of, central government targets aimed at the development of sustainable communities. The Charter is intended to provide a challenging yet practical approach that any new development within the Queenborough and Rushenden area will have to follow in order that the regeneration will be a living, working example of high quality development, excellent urban design, and, a sustainable model for wide-scale replication.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 18 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
4.0 BASELINE INFORMATION
Introduction
4.1 Baseline information has been collated for the issues identified through the previous Swale Borough Council SA/SEA to provide a context for the SA and SEA. For each objective, the current situation for the Borough is presented, based on the information provided within the Swale Borough Council SEA/SA (Entec UK Ltd (2005), Swale Borough Council Integrated SEA/SA of the Local Plan First Review Re-deposit Draft July 20051. This is followed by baseline information compiled by SEEDA and its consultants specific to the site and surrounding area.
Baseline Information
4.2 There are two levels of baseline information to provide context to the SA and SEA. The first level draws upon baseline information presented within the Swale Borough Council SA/SEA for the borough as a whole and the second relies on information that is specific to the site and its surrounding area.
4.3 This second tier of baseline information has been drawn from assessments undertaken by SEEDA and its consultant team since 2004 as part of the Masterplanning process, baseline assessments prepared for the purposes of environmental impact assessment (EIA), consultations with Swale Borough Council and other relevant consultees and a Community Infrastructure Fund (CIF) application prepared by SEEDA in relation to the proposed Rushenden Relief Road.
Site Description
4.4 The Masterplan area, shown in Figure 1.1, is approximately 160 hectares in extent and comprises a mix of brownfield and greenfield land bounded to the north by the settlement of Queenborough, to the west by the estuary of the West Swale, to the east by a public footpath parallel with the A249 and partially to the south by the settlement of Rushenden. The remainder of the southern boundary of the site is located adjacent to the Medway Estuary and Marshes Ramsar site, Special Protection Area and Site of Special Scientific Interest, and Swale (Ramsar/SPA/SSSI).
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 19 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
4.5 The Masterplan area can be considered in two broad character areas separated by the main railway line serving Queenborough station. Land to the west of the railway is predominantly developed, with a wide range of land uses including industrial, manufacturing, storage, distribution and other commercial uses. Land to the east of the railway is predominately open grazing marsh with a network of drainage ditches, creeks and associated water bodies. There is however a large area of hardstanding on the eastern side of the railway which is used for the temporary storage of imported motor vehicles and the route of the A249 road to Queenborough bypass has also created a corridor across the north-eastern side of the Masterplan area.
4.6 There is little discernible variation in the topography of the development area, with the majority of the site and surrounding area being relatively low-lying, the grazing marsh being liable to seasonal flooding. Site surface levels are 5 metres higher at the eastern extent than at the western extent of the site. Close to the low-lying development area, parts of Queenborough and Rushenden are elevated, including Furze Hill to the north-east of Queenborough and properties on Rushenden Hill to the south-west. There is also a substantial earth bund along the western edge of the site as part of flood defences.
4.7 Whilst the western part of the Masterplan area has a significant industrial character, and hence is of relatively low ecological interest, it is immediately to the east and north-east of the Medway Estuary and Marshes Ramsar/SPA /SSSI site and to the north-west of the Swale Ramsar/SPA/SSSI site, both of which are afforded protection at international, European and national levels. These sites are of particular value for overwintering and breeding birds. There is also a locally designated Site of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI) known as Diggs and Sheppey Court Marshes to the north and north-east of Queenborough. The eastern part of the site, including the majority of the grazing marshes within the Masterplan area is within the North Kent Marshes Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA). Ecological designations relevant to the Masterplan area are shown in Figure 4.1.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 20 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Figure 4.1: Ecological designations relevant to the Masterplan
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 21 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 22 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Historic Development
4.8 Parts of the Masterplan area have been used for commercial or industrial uses for over one hundred years. The land currently occupied by a shipyard on the north-western side of Queenborough Creek is known to have been associated with Copperas production between 1579 and 1887, at which point a glue and chemical works was established on the site. The land on the southern side of Queenborough Creek is shown as being developed since 1896, with uses including glue, chemical and lead works, which closed in the 1960s. The majority of the remainder of the Masterplan area remained as grazing marsh until the 1960s, although a copper works was located adjacent to the railway close to Rushenden from 1906, which subsequently produced glass from approximately 1931. Further information on the historical development of the site and its surrounding areas is provided later in this chapter.
The Surrounding Environment
4.9 Queenborough and Rushenden are located on the western side of the Isle of Sheppey. Beyond the Masterplan area, shown in Figure 1.1, to the south and east, the surrounding environment is predominantly rural in character. Sheppey’s name means ‘Island of Sheep’ and much of the land between the Masterplan area and the River Swale, which separates Sheppey from the mainland, comprises grazing marshes. South-west of Rushenden there is a landfill site, used for the deposition of dredged arisings and a sewage works, operated by Southern Water. The A249 corridor runs north-south across the grazing marshes, leading to Kingsferry Bridge across the River Swale. This crossing point has been in use for centuries, historically as a ferry and currently in the form of a road and rail bridge. Passage for large or masted craft previously required the lifting of the bridge and a new crossing was completed and opened in July 2006.
4.10 To the east of the A249 lies Elmley Nature Reserve, operated by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), north of which, and flanking the A249, lie the Minster Marshes bordered by the B2231, which links the A249 with the east of the Island. North-east of the Masterplan area lie Furze Hill and Barrows Hill, rising up to approximately 42 metres AOD (compared to approximately 3-5 metres AOD for the Neatscourt Marshes). Beyond the hills there is a linear cluster of residential
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 23 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
development at Halfway Houses along the A250, which leads to the substantial settlement of Minster. Sheerness, the principal town on the Island, lies to the north of the Masterplan Area along the A249.
4.11 Sheerness is the fifth largest port in England, and was formerly also a Naval base until 1965. The import and export of motor vehicles is an important element business at Sheerness and the port has over 290 hectares of car storage (some of which is within the Masterplan area), including the substantial expansion at Lappel Bank. Medway Ports report that 435,000 vehicles were handled by the port in 2003.
Baseline Conditions
Objective 1 - To ensure that the opportunity is provided for decent homes for all the community
Borough Baseline Data
4.12 There were 49,257 households in Swale Borough in 2004, of which 79% were owner- occupied, 6% privately rented and 15% owned by Housing Associations2 (Swale Borough Council, March 2004). There will be an anticipated 7,500 homes built by 2016. The average house prices in this area increased over 100% between 2000 and 2005. These increases have excluded a large proportion of first-time buyers from the owner-occupied market. The mean price of all dwellings between January 2006 and December 2006 was £180,259. The ‘house price to income’ ratio for working households in 2005 for Swale Borough (4.36) is higher than the average for the South-East (3.96). The majority of local households would be more likely to achieve mortgage rates below 3 to 1. The average of Council of Mortgage Lenders for First Time Buyers was 2.83 to 1 in 2005. This clearly presents issues with respect to the affordability of homes within Swale Borough.
4.13 The total annual affordable housing need was 975 units in 2005. There is a shortfall of affordable housing within Swale Borough, with approximately 547 additional units required in 2005.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 24 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
4.14 Data for household composition, type and tenure within Swale Borough are shown in Table 4.1. The key future trends predicted from the Swale Borough Council Housing Needs Survey (2003)3 are for an increase in the elderly population (45% between 2001 and 2021) and an increase in single-person households, which is expected to rise at double the rate of household increase.
Table 4.1: Household data for Swale Borough Council (2001)4
Swale England and (%) Wales (%) One-person 26 30 Lone pensioner 13 14 Household Other pensioner 10 9 type With dependent children 32 30 Lone parent with dependent 6 7 children Detached 23 23 Housing type Semi-detached 33 32 Terraced 33 26 Flat 10 19 Owner-occupied 74 69 Rented from Council 1 13 Housing Housing Association/Social 14 6 tenure Landlord Private rented or live rent-free 11 12
Source: Census, 2001
Masterplan area baseline data
4.15 Data from 2006 reported that 6.2% of dwellings within Swale Borough were classed as ‘unfit’. This compares to ‘unfitness’ rates of 4.2% for England as a whole. In addition there were 0.8% of properties that were vacant.
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.16 Data specific to the site area has been drawn from the Office for National Statistics (http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk), which considers Queenborough and Rushenden in terms of two ‘Lower Layer Super Output Areas’ (LSOA), as shown by Figure 4.2. For simplicity, LSOA 005B will be referred to as ‘Queenborough LSOA’, with LSOA 005C being referred to as ‘Rushenden LSOA’.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 25 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
4.17 Census data from 2001 reported that there were 678 households within the Queenborough LSOA and 612 households within the Rushenden LSOA. The average household size within the Queenborough LSOA was the same as the national average of 2.4, whereas the Rushenden LSOA was marginally higher at 2.5 people per household3. The tenure of households shows clear differences between the two areas, as shown in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2: Tenure: percentage of households in 2001
England Queen’ Rush’ South Type of Households Swale and LSOA LSOA East Wales Owner occupied: Owns 30.44 17.16 29.64 31.28 29.46 outright Owner occupied: with 42.94 32.35 43.65 41.9 38.76 mortgage or loan Rented from: Council 1.32 3.59 1.32 7.35 13.24 (LA) Rented from: Housing Association or Registered 9.26 33.17 14.08 6.61 5.95 Social Landlord Rented from: landlord or 12.94 10.13 8.15 8.77 8.72 letting agency Rented from: Other 2.65 3.59 2.7 3.31 3.22
4.18 Data on tenure show that the Queenborough LSOA is comparable to national, regional and Swale Borough for Owner Occupied properties but has a higher than average proportion of rental from landlords or letting agents. The Rushenden LSOA however has lower than average proportions of home ownership and a much higher than average proportion of rental from Housing Association or Registered Social Landlords.
4.19 There is no information available on the house price to income ratio, mortgage rates or affordable housing needs.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 26 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Figure 4.2: Lower Layer Super Output Areas referred to within the baseline assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 27 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 28 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Objective 2 – To improve human health and well-being
Borough Baseline Data
4.20 The Swale Primary Care Trust (PCT) was ranked by the 2004 PCT Deprivation Survey as the third most deprived in Kent and Medway. Health deprivation is reported to be worst in Sheppey, Sheerness and Minster, with Sheerness East ranking as the 9th most deprived area in the Kent and Medway Strategic Health Authority (SHA). 18% of the population has a limiting long-term illness which is average for England and Wales.
4.21 Swale PCT has experienced significantly higher age standardized mortality rates than Kent and Medway SHA as a whole. The mortality rates for females have risen since 1998 whereas in Kent and Medway female death rates have decreased in this period. Census data from 2001 demonstrated that the reported general health of people in Swale Borough was within 1% of the average ratings for England and Wales for the three criteria used:
x ‘Good’ - 68% (Swale Borough) and 67% (England and Wales); x ‘Fairly Good’ - 23% (Swale Borough) and 22% (England and Wales); and x ‘Not Good’ - 8% (Swale Borough) and 9% (England and Wales).
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.22 Results of a review of the perceived health status of residents from the 2001 Census showed comparable responses between residents of the Queenborough and Rushenden LSOAs:
x ‘Good’ - 64.4% (Queenborough LSOA) and 63.4% (Rushenden LSOA); x ‘Fairly Good’ - 26.7% (Queenborough LSOA) and 25% (Rushenden LSOA); and x ‘Not Good’ - 8.9% (Queenborough LSOA) and 9.2% (Rushenden LSOA).
4.23 When compared to the data for England and Wales and Swale Borough, above, the two LSOAs have a lower proportion of residents claiming to be in ‘good’ health and a higher proportion in ‘fairly good’ health. Households within both of the LSOAs were reported to have higher rates of people of working age with a long term illness than the average rates for the Borough, region and England and Wales. The Rushenden LSOA also has a substantially higher proportion of households with more than one person with a limiting long term illness (42%) than the other averaging areas considered, namely Queenborough
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 29 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
LSOA, England, South-East of England and Swale Borough, and, which had a range of 29% to 35%.
4.24 ‘Disability Allowance’ is paid to people who became disabled under the age of 65 and need help with personal care or getting around. ‘Attendance Allowance’ is paid to people over the age of 65 and who are disabled (either physically or mentally) and who need supervision or assistance with personal care over a prolonged period of time. Receipt of these allowances from August 2004 was equivalent to proportions for England and Wales for the Queenborough LSOA and for Disability Allowance in the Rushenden LSOA. Attendance Allowance was paid to was 19% of residents over 65 in the Rushenden LSOA, higher than the respective proportion for England and Wales (15%).
Objective 3 – To reduce the gap between the most disadvantaged communities and the rest and increase prosperity
Borough Baseline Data
4.25 The Office for National Statistics ranks Local Authority area prosperity on the basis of ‘Indices of Deprivation’. Swale Borough is ranked 116 out of the total of 354 local authorities in England on the 2007 index of multiple deprivation (with 1 being the most deprived and 354 the least deprived). Swale is the second most deprived Borough in Kent after Thanet and, within Swale Borough, the Isle of Sheppey has the highest levels of deprivation. This position is expected to improve in future scenarios as Sittingbourne and Sheppey is a priority area for regeneration within Thames Gateway and the Sustainable Communities Fund.
4.26 The proportion of the working age population of Swale Borough who are economically inactive and looking for work was 9.5% in 2007/8, which is higher than the prevailing average for the South-East (4.9%) and Great Britain (5.4%).
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.27 There are 32,482 LSOAs and on the Index of Multiple Deprivation (2004), Queenborough LSOA is ranked 7,665, with Rushenden LSOA ranked 2,780. As above, the most deprived LSOA is ranked 1, with the least deprived ranked 32,482. At LSOA level, there are other constituent indices of deprivation, as shown in Table 4.3.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 30 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Table 4.3: Indices of deprivation (2004 and 2007)
Queenborough Rushenden Index of deprivation LSOA LSOA Income 8,889 2,944 Employment 9,943 5,181 Health 11,432 6,778 Education 409 53 Barriers to Housing and Services 26,919 3,769 Living Environments 12,942 14,760 Crime (2004) 16,339 10,380
4.28 All of the indices suggest that the Rushenden LSOA is more deprived than the Queenborough LSOA but that both LSOAs are relatively deprived for most indices compared in the context of the England as a whole, and particularly with respect to education.
4.29 Pension credit is paid to people aged 60 and over if their state pension and other income sources do not reach certain specified levels. It is also paid if additional financial assistance is required due to housing costs, severe disability or the need to provide care for someone else with a severe disability. Of the populations aged 60 and over, 28% of people in the Queenborough LSOA and 32% in the Rushenden LSOA received pension credit in August 2004. The rate for England and Wales was 22%.
Objective 4 – To raise education levels and develop opportunities for everyone to acquire the skills needed to find, remain and progress at work
Borough Baseline Data
4.30 Census data from 2001 reported that, of the resident population in Swale Borough aged 16 to 74, the proportion with no qualifications was 34%, compared to 29% for England and Wales. Of the same group, there was a lower proportion of residents educated to degree level or higher (12%) when compared to England and Wales (20%). 3.1% of the total resident population are full-time students and schoolchildren aged 16 to 74. 7.7% of post- 19 population are adult learners undertaking Further Education and Work Based Learning Courses. When compared to Kent and Medway, Swale Borough recorded slightly higher proportions of the population with poor literacy and numeracy skills in 2001.
4.31 The proportion of Swale Borough residents with poor literacy was 24% compared to 23% in Kent and Medway, with poor numeracy being 25% in Swale Borough compared to 22.5% for Kent and Medway.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 31 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
4.32 The number of educational establishments recorded within the Swale Borough Council Learning Strategy (2004) is shown in Table 4.4. Schools on the Isle of Sheppey are operated on a three-tier system, whereas the rest of the Swale Borough operates a two-tier system. The three largest providers of learning to Swale adults are Kent Adult Education Service, Canterbury College and Mid Kent College.
Table 4.4: Educational establishments within Swale Borough
Tier of education Number of establishments Primary 50 Middle 3 Secondary 8 Special 2 Adult Education Centres 3 Further Education 1 Source: Swale Borough Council Learning Strategy (2004)5
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.33 Census data from 2001 reported that the proportion of people aged 16 to 74 with no qualifications in the Queenborough LSOA was 45% whereas in the Rushenden LSOA this figure was 54%. Both areas have higher proportions of people with no qualifications compared to England and Wales or Swale Borough. The proportion of people in each area educated to degree level or higher is lower than for England and Wales or Swale Borough, with just over 5% for the Queenborough LSOA and just over 4% for the Rushenden LSOA. The percentage of residents with poor literacy or numeracy is not known within the Masterplan area.
4.34 There are no schools within the Rushenden LSOA. The only school in Queenborough is Queenborough First School, a large mixed first school, which takes children from three to nine years of age. It mainly draws its pupils from Queenborough and Rushenden although a few pupils also come from other settlements on the island.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 32 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Objective 5 – To promote social inclusion and cohesion including creating a safe and secure environment
Borough Baseline Data
4.35 Crime rates for Swale Borough were derived from Office for National Statistics. It was recorded that between April 2007 and March 2008 there were 2,235 counts of violence against a person, 447 counts of burglary in a dwelling and 832 counts of theft from a motor vehicle. There was no contextual data for statistics on antisocial behaviour within the Borough compared to other areas but rising trends were predicted. In 2003 58 youths (0-17 years old) entered the youth justice system for the first time. Similarly there was no comparative data for road safety, but continued improvement was predicted. However 265 vehicles were abandoned and deliberately ignited and the 0.41 per 1000 population were admitted into hospital for three or more days as a result of road traffic accidents.
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.36 Table 4.5 provides a breakdown of the types of crime, disorder and social problems experienced within Swale Borough Wards for the period of April 2007 to March 2008. Queenborough and Halfway is the only ward within the Masterplan area.
4.37 Queenborough and Halfway experiences significant levels of crime when compared to other Wards within Swale Borough.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 33 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Table 4.5: Swale - Ward Crime (April 2007 to March 2008) oods Ward g Burglary Burglary Dwelling Burglary Other Criminal Damage Drugs Fraud Other offences Robbery Sexual offences Shoplifting Vehicle crime Theft of car Theft of bike Theft and handling stolen Vehicle damage Violence All Abbey 12 49 188 9 10 2 2 3 70 193 123 661 Borden 5 11 25 2 5 1 3 20 30 12 114 Boughton and 12 37 68 5 60 1 1 1 29 65 40 319 Courteney Chalkwell 16 50 156 3 11 4 5 5 55 92 104 501 Davington 15 23 110 4 2 1 2 1 39 52 43 292 Priory East Downs 4 15 37 1 3 1 0 7 20 37 27 152 Grove 24 40 111 9 27 3 3 5 56 110 81 469 Hartlip, Newington and 16 23 103 5 10 5 1 2 45 65 44 319 Upchurch Iwade and 8 12 55 1 35 1 0 3 29 44 24 212 Lower Halstow Kemsley 30 19 143 19 12 6 1 4 54 106 84 478 Leysdown and 9 31 119 9 3 7 2 7 35 42 72 336 Warden Milton Regis 44 61 158 11 23 2 8 6 71 205 110 699 Minster Cliffs 25 47 133 7 9 7 1 4 43 136 75 487 Murston 22 74 179 17 12 6 4 6 91 165 124 700 Queenborough 18 37 130 9 10 5 0 13 62 124 117 525 and Halfway Roman 28 24 146 5 2 6 7 6 50 84 94 452 Sheerness East 19 32 262 26 10 12 10 8 91 324 241 1035 Sheerness West28 46 196 20 7 9 6 7 79 171 209 778 Sheppey 19 32 138 33 4 8 2 10 58 109 109 522
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 34 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment oods Ward g Burglary Burglary Dwelling Burglary Other Criminal Damage Drugs Fraud Other offences Robbery Sexual offences Shoplifting Vehicle crime Theft of car Theft of bike Theft and handling stolen Vehicle damage Violence All Central St. Ann’s 26 12 129 15 1 3 0 1 70 49 35 341 St. Michaels 10 37 200 42 23 12 13 12 60 492 270 1171 Teynham and 17 32 104 3 10 4 2 4 53 96 73 398 Lynstead Watling 19 15 107 7 11 1 0 0 63 60 68 351 West Downs 9 7 19 1 1 2 0 2 16 20 11 88 Woodstock 12 12 50 1 4 0 0 2 24 21 24 150 Unknown
Source: Kent Police Business Information Unit6
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 35 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Objective 6 – To encourage development and participation in culture, sport and the arts and enjoyment of the countryside
Borough Baseline Data
4.38 Swale Borough had a relatively low proportion of local authority buildings that were suitable for, and accessible by, disabled people (16%) in 2003/4. The average for comparable authorities was 48% and a target has been set by Swale Borough Council for 85% of its buildings to be accessible and suitable for disabled people by 2007/8. Indoor sports facilities within Swale Borough are summarised in Table 4.6. The only county or regional level facility is Faversham Community Gymnastics Activities Centre.
Table 4.6: Indoor sports facilities within Swale Borough
Type of facility Number of establishments Health and fitness centres 8 Indoor sports halls 7 Leisure centres 3 Public swimming pools 3 Indoor bowls centres 1 Gymnastics activity centres 1 Source: Swale Borough Council Indoor Sports Facilities Strategy (2004)7
4.39 Open space provision has been considered in terms of community playing pitches and public open space. Community playing pitch provision for Swale Borough is 1.3 hectares per 1,000 population (2003). This is below the National Playing Fields Association recommended ‘six-acre’ standard which advocates 2.4 hectares per 1,000 population. Swale Borough Council managed public open space provision is 2.6 hectares per 1,000 population. In addition there are five countryside and picnic sites compared to 93 in Kent and two Blue Flag beaches which are in Sheerness Beach Street and Sheerness Minster Leas.
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.40 There are currently no indoor sports facilities or community playing pitches within Queenborough or Rushenden LSOAs in the Masterplan area, although there are playing fields at Queenborough First School and to the southeast of Rushenden on the edge of the Masterplan area. Formal Public Open Space provision is limited to a small play area at the southern end of Stanley Avenue but there is also informal open space along the estuary frontage, particularly between Queenborough Creek and First Avenue. At the
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 36 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
western extent of North Road there is a small public park. There are no Blue Flag beaches in the area.
Objective 7 – To sustain and improve vibrant rural communities
Borough Baseline Data
4.41 The Agricultural Census (2003)8 revealed that there were 436 farm holdings covering 25,078 hectares. Distances to key services for rural communities within Swale Borough are shown in Table 4.7, and demonstrate that rural communities within Swale Borough are comparatively well located with respect to key services.
Table 4.7: Distances to key rural services
Determinant Swale (%) England and Wales (%) Rural households within 2 km of a 94 91 post office Rural households within 4 km of a 81 76 bank or building society Rural households within 4 km of a 93 86 doctors surgery Source: Swale Borough Council Rural Services Survey (2004)9
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.42 There are no rural communities within the Masterplan area. The Masterplan area only includes the urban areas of Rushenden and Queenborough and the surrounding industrial and business parks.
Objective 8 – To maximize use of previously developed land for development and to use land efficiently
Borough Baseline Data
4.43 The National Land Use Change Database (2003)10 reported that there was 98 hectares of previously developed but unused land available for redevelopment within the Borough including 64 hectares of vacant and derelict land and buildings. Within the Borough, 41% of new homes were built on brownfield land in 2003/4, which is lower than the average for comparable authorities (65%).
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 37 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.44 Within the Masterplan area out of 160 hectares approximately 9.5 hectares are currently unused brownfield land. This represents approximately 9.5% of the total area of the previously developed but unused land within the Borough.
4.45 The ODPM publication Land Use Change in England: Residential Development to 2004 (May 2005)11 reported that the average density of housing built within the Borough for the period 2000 to 2003 was 23 units per hectare. This level is slightly below that of England as a whole, which was 27 dwellings per hectare over the same period. Existing density of housing within Queenborough is between 10 -30 dwellings per hectare in the northern part of the town and between 30 - 70 dwellings per hectare along High Street. Density of residential development in Rushenden is 20 - 40 dwellings per hectare.
Objective 9 – To improve the quality of land and reduce contamination
Borough Baseline Data
4.46 Swale Borough Council currently has no entries on its Contaminated Land Register, however the Council is working through a list of approximately 1000 potentially contaminated sites, the majority of which have already been remediated. There were 22 conditions relating to land contamination placed on planning applications in 2006. There were 11 planning applications with fully discharged conditions relating to land contamination in 2005.
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.47 The Masterplan area can be described in the context of two broad areas, separated by the north-south railway; the ‘developed’ western side and the ‘undeveloped’ eastern side. Parts of the developed western side have a long history of industrial use. On the basis of a desk study undertaken by CampbellReith in October 200512, including a site walkover, there is a potential for a range of contaminants (including asbestos) associated with past and current uses. A specific site investigation was undertaken in March and April 2005 across the Masterplan area in order to determine the prevailing ground and groundwater conditions. Figures 4.3 and 4.4 show the results of the survey.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 38 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
4.48 The monitoring of gas concentrations across the Masterplan area showed concentrations below detectable limits with low flow rates. Although some localised observations of elevated concentrations of ground gas have been recorded, these are typical of natural soils with varying organic content.
4.49 Of the 64 hectares of greenfield land within the Masterplan area, approximately 29 hectares are Grade 3 agricultural land and 35 hectares are Grade 4.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 39 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 40 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Figure 4.3: Heavy metal contaminant distribution in soils
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 41 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 42 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Figure 4.4: Hydrocarbon contaminant distribution in soils
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 43 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 44 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Objective 10 – To improve the overall air quality of the Borough
Borough Baseline Data
4.50 As part of the Government Air Quality Strategy13, Local Authorities have been charged with undertaking a staged review and assessment of the air quality within their jurisdictions, referred to as Local Air Quality Management (LAQM). These assessments have considered the range of potential causes of air pollution within the Local Authority area and the main pollutants that are involved. Air quality objectives are likely to be met for all seven regulated pollutants (carbon monoxide, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, lead, sulphur dioxide,
particles (PM10) and nitrogen dioxide). In 2007 the annual average concentrations for Swale
-3 -3 -3 Sheerness monitoring station were 30gm of PM10, 25gm of NO2 and 2 gm of SO2.
-3 At Swale Ospringe Roadside Monitoring Station there were 24gm of PM10 and NO2 (KentAir, 2008)14. The Swale Borough Council LAQM process has concluded that no Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) need to be declared within the Borough.
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.51 Prevailing air quality in the vicinity of the Masterplan area has been determined using the background pollutant concentrations, which are the general level of pollutants that occur as a result of natural and/or other activities but are not associated with any direct emissions. Often, the background concentrations are associated with transboundary
transportation of aerosols (in the case of PM10) and/or emissions from some distance away (e.g. power stations).
4.52 Swale Borough Council are required under Part IV of the Environment Act 1995 to review and assess the air quality within their area. Emissions associated with road traffic,
predominantly nitrogen dioxide (NOx) and particulates (PM10) are commonly considered to be of greatest concern at local level. Swale Borough Council have three Nitrogen Dioxide Diffusion Tubes around the Queenborough area. SW12 is located at the A249 layby by Neats Corner Queenborough, SW13 is at Main Road Queenborough and SW14 is by
15 Rushenden Road Queenborough . The NO2 concentrations for the three monitoring sites are summarised in Table 4.8 below.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 45 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Table 4.8: Swale Nitrogen Dioxide annual mean diffusion tube data (2002-2007)
Monitoring Station Annual Mean Concentration (g/m3) SW12 30.1
SW13 32.1
SW14 36.7
4.53 The background concentrations shown in Table 4.8 are within the prevailing UK AQS annual mean objectives for nitrogen dioxide which is 40 g/m3. The nearest monitoring station
3 that records PM10 is in Sheerness. The annual mean for PM10 is 30g/m which is below the
3 UK AQS annual mean objective of 40 g/m . However there is an increasing trend in PM10 concentrations at the Sheerness monitoring site, with exceedence days monitored in 2007. There are currently no AQMAs designated for Masterplan area.
Objective 11 – To improve water quality
Borough Baseline Data
4.54 The Environment Agency General Quality Assessment (GQA)16 scheme monitors the water quality at over 7,000 sites, representing about 40,000 km of rivers and canals and 2,800 km of estuaries in England and Wales. The GQA scheme uses a six-point scale (A to F) to grade the biological and chemical quality of river water in England and Wales, with ‘A’ representing the highest quality and ‘F’ the lowest.
4.55 Chemical water quality is surveyed in four river stretches in Swale Borough, two of which are assessed as being of ‘Fair’ quality (classed as potable supply after advanced treatment, other abstractions, fair cyprinid fisheries and impacted ecosystems) and two of which are ‘Poor’ quality (classed as low grade abstraction for industry, fish absent or sporadically present, vulnerable to pollution and impoverished ecosystems). The problems encountered by watercourses with ‘Poor’ grading are often associated with the discharge of organic pollutants.
4.56 No data was available at Borough level for the biological quality of rivers or groundwater quality. Bathing water quality at two sites in Swale Borough (Sheerness Beach Street and Sheerness Minster Leas) was recorded as being ‘good’, with both being Blue Flag beaches.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 46 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.57 Information of the water quality data in accordance with the Environment Agency’s General Quality Assessment of Rivers (GQA) Scheme is not available within the Masterplan area. There are no measurements for bathing water quality within the Masterplan area.
Objective 12 – Will it maintain hydrology/coastal processes?
Borough Baseline Data
4.58 Within Swale Borough, the hydrogeology of the Isle of Sheppey was recorded as a non- aquifer. Beneath the Lower London Tertiaries lie major Chalk Aquifers, with the east and south of the district having large water company abstractions drawing from the Chalk. No information was available at Borough level on coastal hydrological processes.
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.59 Groundwater was encountered during the site investigation in a number of the exploratory positions and infers a groundwater gradient or flow direction in a westerly / north-westerly direction towards the estuary. Poor quality groundwater has been identified within part of the Masterplan area: heavy metals exceed recognised relevant Environmental Quality Standards (EQS). Secondary standards in relation to drinking water quality show area are impacted by ammonium, metals and sulphates at moderate concentrations. Hydrocarbon impaction of groundwater quality has been recorded with elevated concentrations of TPH in localised areas generally to the west of the railway line. Observed levels of contamination are not considered sufficient to warrant further consideration. The distribution of groundwater contamination is shown in Figure 4.5.
4.60 The Isle of Sheppey sits at the confluence of the Medway and Thames Rivers and is formed of alluvial clays in an impervious layer over deep chalk. The Masterplan area is located adjacent to the eastern mouth of The Swale. The Swale is an estuarine environment with large expanses of mudflats and saltmarshes exposed at low tide.
4.61 The coastline within the Masterplan area is undergoing constant change due to large scale impacts of climate change, namely sea level rise, through to the day-to-day effects of waves and tidal currents. Sea level attained a level close to its present position around 5,000 years ago, and the modern hydrodynamic regime has been operating since this time. After sea
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 47 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
level reached its present position, mudflats and saltmarsh began to form around the peripheries of estuary systems. These areas were later reclaimed by man for agricultural and industrial purposes resulting in the coverage of the mudflats and saltmarsh being reduced over the last century. Defra (2002) predicted that sea level rise would increase from the present rate of 2mm/yr to 6mm/yr by 2105 (Medway Estuary and Swale Shoreline Management Plan, May 200717) which would potentially result in the further loss of the valuable intertidal habitat.
4.62 The Medway Estuary and Swale Shoreline Management Plan states that the long term aim in the Masterplan area is to ‘Hold the Line’ which will maintain the existing defence line and protect the urban developments.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 48 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Figure 4.5: Groundwater contaminant distribution
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 49 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 50 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Objective 13 – To limit and reduce the impacts of climate change
Borough Baseline Data
4.63 There is no information available at Borough level for greenhouse gas emissions per capita within Swale Borough. With respect to the climate change issues associated with flooding, the Council reported that in 2003/4 there had been no planning application decisions made contrary to the advice of the Environment Agency on flood risk.
4.64 The coastline is undergoing constant change due to large scale impacts of climate change, namely sea level rise, through to the day-to-day effects of waves and tidal currants. It is the implications of climate change that would determine sustainable shoreline management in the future. Climate change is expected to lead to extreme weather events to include, severe gales and heavy rainfall which may have adverse effects in urban areas. For further information see Medway and Swale Shoreline Management Plan.
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.65 There is no information within the Masterplan area for greenhouse gas emissions per capita. With respect to the climate change issues associated with flooding, there have been no planning application decisions within the Masterplan area made contrary to the advice of the Environment Agency on flood risk.
Objective 14 – To effectively manage risk of flooding
Borough Baseline Data
4.66 Baseline flood risk for Swale Borough is illustrated in Figure 4.6, and demonstrates that large areas of the Borough are susceptible to flood events.
4.67 In 2005 Jacobs Babtie carried out the Swale Borough Local Plan Review Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA)18. The purpose of the SFRA was to identify areas within a development plan that are believed to be at risk to flooding. It identified and detailed the factors relevant to current and future flood risks. The SFRA primarily considered the settlements of Sheerness, Queenborough, Minster, Sittingbourne and Faversham where the main future development in the Borough is likely to take place.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 51 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
4.68 The main conclusions of the SFRA are that there is a significant flood risk to Queenborough and Sheerness in the event of lesser floods than the 1 in 200 year event due to overtopping of both the southern defences and the counter wall between Queenborough and Neatscourt on the A249 Queenborough Road. In addition developments within the low lying area between the south east side of Sheerness and Minster/Halfway Minster should not be considered unless the shingle bank defence from Barton’s Point to Minster is upgraded to the 200 year standard.
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.69 The SFRA for Swale Borough Local Plan Review suggested that the town is probably at greater risk from overtopping of the southern defences than from a breach or overtopping of the western sea wall. A considerable volume of floodwater, estimated to be well in excess of 100,000,000m3 during a 1 in 200 year event, could overtop the lowest of the southern defences, which has a crest level of 4.05 metres. Another section of the southern defences has a crest level of 4.15 metres and would allow a comparable volume of overtopping flow. All other southern defences are predicted to be overtopped during a 1 in 200 year event and hence would contribute to the flooding of the southern area of the Island. However, the calculations showed that the overriding factor would be overtopping of the sea walls having crest levels of 4.05 metres and 4.15 metres. Breaching of this wall due to overtopping would be expected but not necessarily cause flooding problems in Queenborough and Sheerness.
4.70 The presence of a number of counter walls is needed to be taken into account to enable an assessment of the extent of flooding to be made. The counter wall between Neatscourt and Rushenden is critical to the defence of Queenborough and also Sheerness, once major overtopping of the southern defences occurs. The study showed that there could be considerable overtopping of this wall that could lead to flooding of parts of the town.
4.71 Subsequent to the above flood risk assessment the Environment Agency affirmed the findings and advised that their Flood Defence Strategic Planning Section was aware of the low level of defence offered to Sheerness and Queenborough by the southern defences on the Isle of Sheppey. The Environment Agency advised that a number of options have been appraised. The preferred option was to raise the level of the counter wall that extends from Rushenden to Neatscourt on the A249 Queenborough Road to provide protection to the 200-year standard. There were no proposals to upgrade the existing shoreline defences so the southern marshes will remain at risk (see Figure 4.7).
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 52 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Figure 4.6: Flood risk for the Borough as a whole
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 53 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 54 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Figure 4.7: Approximate Extent of Environment Agency Flood Zones
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 55 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 56 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Objective 15 – To conserve and enhance biodiversity
Borough Baseline Data
4.72 The Borough has a rich ecological resource, with approximately 13% of the land within Swale Borough being covered by statutory nature conservation designations, including:
x Two Ramsar sites; x Two Special Protection Areas (SPAs); x Six Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs); x Two National Nature Reserves (NNRs); and x One Local Nature Reserve.
4.73 In addition to the statutory designations, 5% of the Borough is covered by 34 locally designated Sites of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCIs).
4.74 The main types of natural area found in Swale are:
x The Thames Estuary; x North Kent Plain; and x North Downs.
4.75 The Biodiversity Action Plan Steering Group19 has short listed the flowing animals and plants found within these areas:
x Water Vole; x Otter; x Dormouse; x Great Crested Newt; x Freshwater White-clawed Crayfish; x Allis and Twaite Shad (fish); x Pearl-bordered Fritilary, Silver-Spotted Skipper, Heath Fritilary (butterflies); and x Early Gentian (plant).
4.76 The following Biodiversity Action Plan priority habitats that fall within these areas are:
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 57 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
x Orchards (includes the UK BAP priority habitat Traditional Orchards) x Estuary habitats (includes the UK BAP priority habitats, Coastal Saltmarsh, Intertidal Mudflats, Seagrass Beds, Coastal and Floodplain Grazing Marshes and Saline Lagoons) x Woodlands (includes the UK BAP priority habitats Lowland Mixed Deciduous Woodland and Wood-Pasture and Parkland); x Wildflower grassland (includes the UK BAP priority habitats Lowland Calcareous Grassland, Lowland Meadows and Lowland Dry Acid Grasslands); x Farmland (includes the UK BAP priority habitat Arable Field Margins); and x Built up areas and gardens (includes the UK BAP priority habitat Open Mosaic Habitats on Previously Developed Land).
4.77 Swale has a handful of areas that have been continuously covered by woodland since at least 1600. These are primarily restricted to the south and west of the Borough. Overall 16% of the land area within the Borough is woodland with significant areas of Swale woodland of county or national importance. Part of the Church Wood, Blean Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) lies within Swale, and is close to woodland blocks of county importance (designated as Local Wildlife Sites) at South Blean, Blean Woods (West) and Peny Wood. An important complext of smaller woodland Local Wildlife Sites on the dipslope of the North Downs includes Endings Wood, Putt Wood, Oakenpole Wood, Duran Wood and woodland on Belmont Estate.
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.78 The location of the Masterplan area is particularly sensitive in terms of biodiversity. The adjacent areas are highly protected, including the following large areas designated as an international Ramsar Site, a Special Protection Area (SPA) and a national SSSI:
x Medway Estuary and Marshes Ramsar, SPA and SSSI; and x Swale Ramsar, SPA and SSSI.
4.79 These sites are designated for their internationally and nationally important wintering and breeding bird assemblages which use both the estuary and the adjacent grazing marshes. The most recent five year mean peak for the Medway Estuary and Marshes SPA derived from core count data (2002/3 – 2006/7) shows the mean winter peak was 25,351 waterfowl. Interest species of the overwintering assemblage include: Avocet, bewick’s swan, teal, shoveler, pintail, wigeon, dark-bellied brent goose, dunlin, knot, ringed plover,
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 58 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
oystercatcher, black-tailed godwit, curlew, redshank, greenshank, shelduck and turnstone. Part of the reason for this low figure is likely to be due to the incomplete nature of many of these counts during this period.
4.80 The most recent five year mean peak for the Swale SPA/Ramsar derived from core count data (2002/3 – 2006/7) shows the mean winter peak was 76,323 waterfowl. Species of interest on the Swale include: dark-bellied brent goose, dunlin, redshank, shoveler, pintail, knot, grey plover, black-tailed godwit, golden plover, avocet, hen harrier and wigeon.
4.81 The interest features within the Swale and Medway Estuary and Marshes SPA for breeding birds include avocet, common tern, little tern, Mediterranean gull, sandwich tern and marsh harrier.
4.82 The Medway Estuary and Marshes and Swale are also recognized for their assemblage of both aquatic and terrestrial macro-invertebrates including a number of Red Data Book species and their diversity of vegetation. More that 12 British Red Book species of wetland inverts have been recorded within the Medway Estuary and Marshes Ramsar. In addition, several Nationally Scarce plant species have been recorded, including divided sedge and sea clover. Grazing marsh within the Masterplan area is a Kent BAP Priority Habitat and represents approximately 0.3% of the National resource and 0.7% of the Kent resource of this habitat type.
4.83 A wide range of ecological surveys have been undertaken by SEEDAs consultants as part of the assessment of development proposals. The scope of these surveys has been discussed with English Nature and the key findings are summarised in the following paragraphs.
Botany
4.84 Botanical surveys undertaken across the Masterplan area during 2005 identified four nationally scarce species (divided sedge, sea clover, sea barley and soft hornwort). Nine locally scarce species were also identified within the Masterplan area:
x brackish water crowfoot; x common sea lavender; x grass vetchling; x hairy buttercup;
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 59 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
x meadow brome; x sea rush; x spiny restharrow; x strawberry clover; and x wild celery.
Ornithology
4.85 The assessment by English Nature (now Natural England) of the Medway Estuary & Marshes SSSI unit adjacent to the Masterplan area concluded that the unit is in ‘declining’ condition due to loss of floral diversity and roosting areas for birds.
4.86 The Medway Estuary & Marshes SPA has also been highlighted by the British Trust for Ornithology as a site of serious concern due to declines of over 50% in the populations of six wintering bird species (Austin et al, 2005)20. Whilst some species may have moved to adjacent estuaries (e.g. ringed plover, redshank, grey plover and dunlin), it is possible that urban and recreational development within and adjacent to the estuary may also have contributed towards the declines.
4.87 Ornithological surveys within the Masterplan area were undertaken by Rummey Environmental Ltd. in two broad zones, the ‘estuarine portion’, comprising Queenborough Harbour, the West Swale and estuary, and the ‘non-estuarine portion’, comprising grazing marsh habitats and industrial areas. Wintering and breeding birds were surveyed in each zone. The breeding birds survey was undertaken based upon the British Trust for Ornithology’ Common Birds Census method (Marchant 1983)21.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 60 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Figure 4.8: Ornithological survey zones
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 61 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 62 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Summary Results of the Baseline Assessment
4.88 Wintering bird surveys demonstrated the presence of an internationally important wintering waterfowl population associated with the Medway Estuary & Marshes SPA and The Swale SPA adjacent to the development site. Species of particular significance were black-tailed godwit, ringed plover, dunlin and knot.
4.89 The non-estuarine components of the Study Area also supported wintering waterfowl species associated with the Medway Estuary & Marshes SPA and The Swale SPA. These components are functionally linked to the Medway Estuary & Marshes SPA and The Swale SPA by virtue of supporting wintering waterfowl from the adjacent SPAs.
4.90 Of the non-estuarine components of the Study Area, the areas of highest wintering bird conservation importance and of very high sensitivity are Areas C and I. Areas C and I are outside the proposed development zone. Areas A., B, D, G, H and J are all of high sensitivity for wintering birds. Areas B and J are outside the proposed development zone whilst Area A to the north of Rushenden along with areas D, G and H are all within the proposed development zone (see Habitats Regulations Assessment for more details).
4.91 The overall breeding bird population of the non-estuarine components of the Study Area was of national importance with the damp grassland breeding bird assemblage exceeding the threshold score for SSSI selection. The areas of highest sensitivity were Areas B, C and I, none of which are within the proposed development zone.
Invertebrates
4.92 A range of surveys have been undertaken to identify the potential of the site for invertebrates. These surveys have included terrestrial macro invertebrates, dragonfly and aquatic invertebrates, as listed within Table 4.9.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 63 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Table 4.9: Invertebrate species identified within the Masterplan area
Invertebrates Species recorded Terrestrial 2x RDB21 - Cranefly (Erioptera bivittata) macro - Soldierfly (Stratiomys longicornis) invertebrates 2x RDB3 - Rove Beetle (Philonthus punctus) - Ant (Myrmica specioides) 2x RDBK2- Weevil (Lixus scabricollis) - Beetle (Mordellistena pseudoparvula) 1x EN SRP3 - Red tailed carder bee (Bombus ruderarius) 19 x Nationally Scarce species Dragonfly -common darter -ruddy darter -azure damselfly -blue-tailed damselfly -migrant hawker -small red-eyed damselfly -emperor dragonfly -southern hawker -black-tailed skimmer -four-spotted chaser -common blue damselfly -emerald damselfly -brown hawker -large red damselfly -broad-bodied chaser Aquatic macro 13 Nationally scarce species: invertebrates -Soldierfly (Stratiomys singularior) -Water beetle (Rhantus frontalis) -Water beetle (Rhantus suturalis) -Water beetle (Haliplus apicalis) -Water beetle (Peltodytes caesus) -Water beetle (Ochthebius bicolon) -Water beetle (Octhebius marinus) -Water beetle (Ochthebius viridus) -Water beetle (Berosus luridus) -Water beetle (Cercyon sternalis) -Water beetle (Cercyon tristis) -Water beetle (Enochrus bicolour) -Water beetle (Helophorus alternans)
RDB3 species greater silver diving beetle was also recorded during the amphibian survey.
1 RDB - Red Data Book, 2 RDBK - Kent Red Data Book, 3 ENSRP - English Nature Species Recovery Programme
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 64 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Water Voles
4.93 Water voles have been recorded widely across the Masterplan area and occur in all wet, unpoached sections of ditch with the greatest density approaching eight animals per 100 metres recorded during the 2005 surveys. A national key water vole site at Elmley is only approximately 740 metres to the south-east of the Masterplan area at its closest point. A number of water voles were translocated due to the A249 Road Improvement Scheme which may have affected the population size. Some of these voles were reintroduced onto the Chetney Marshes in June 2005. Significant numbers of mink were identified during water vole surveys, which may be influencing the water vole populations due to the predatory effect of the mink.
Bats
4.94 Relatively low levels of bat activity have been recorded across the Masterplan area as it is relatively exposed with limited scrub and/or woodland vegetation. The most significant area identified during the survey for bats was identified around the eastern side of the railway. Species recorded during the activity surveys were:
x 45 kHz pipistrelle; x 55 kHz pipistrelle; x Noctule; x Serotine; x Whiskered/Brandt’s; and x Unidentified Myotis.
Amphibians
4.95 Evidence of five species of amphibian have been recorded on the Masterplan area, including common frog (Rana temporaria), green frog (Rana sp), marsh frog (Rana ridbunda), edible frog (Rana esculenta) and smooth newt (Triturus vulgaris). No great crested newts have been recorded in surveys, which extended at least 500 metres beyond the Masterplan boundary.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 65 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Reptiles
4.96 Three species of reptile have been identified on the Masterplan area, but all three species have only been recorded simultaneously in one area to the east of the tidal pond. Elsewhere, medium populations of common lizard have been recorded in the longer ungrazed grasslands north of the car storage area east of the railway, within the Klondyke headland and along the western sea wall. Small populations of slow worm have been recorded in land east of the tidal pond and along the sea wall, these areas contain the only available scrub type habitats on the Masterplan area. Low numbers of grass snakes have been recorded along the ditch network in the east of the site from the southern boundary up to east of the tidal pond in the north.
Habitat Regulations Assessment
4.97 In addition to the surveys summarized above a Habitat Regulations Assessment has been undertaken by Swale Borough Council, in respect of the Queenborough and Rushenden Masterplan in accordance with the Habitats Directive (Council) Directive 92/43/EEC)23. The assessment established that with the Masterplan as proposed it would not, in some cases, be possible to demonstrate with certainty that adverse impacts would not occur without mitigation to interest features associated with both the effect on interest features associated with both the Medway Estuary and Marshes SPA/Ramsar and the Swale SPA/Ramsar. A series of measures and restrictions have been recommended through consenting conditions or legal agreement, which would avoid adverse effects on the integrity of the site and reduce impacts to a de minimis level. For further information see the Habitat Regulations Assessment for Queenborough and Rushenden Masterplan24.
Objective 16 – To promote the use of more sustainable modes of transport and reduce travel by car/lorry, where options are available
Borough Baseline Data
4.98 Car ownership with one or more vehicles within Swale Borough is broadly comparable to the rest of England and Wales but the proportion of households in Swale Borough with no car is lower than the rest of England and Wales (22% compared to 27%). Census data from 2001 demonstrated that the principle differences in patterns of travel to work between the Borough and the rest of England and Wales were with respect to travel by car and by public transport, as shown in Table 4.10.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 66 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Table 4.10: Travel to work statistics, 2001
% of the Resident Population in Employment Mode using the Mode
Swale England and Wales
Work from home 9 9
Car 66 61 Public transport 9 14
On foot 11 10
By bicycle 3 3 Source: Census, 2001
4.99 The average distance travelled to work by people living in Swale Borough in 2001 was 17 kilometres, compared to an average of 13 kilometres for England and Wales. Congestion issues have been identified on north/south routes between the M2/A2 and M20/A20, in rural communities along the A2 and around Sittingbourne town centre. Kent is predicted to continue to experience traffic growth well above the national average in future years.
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.100 Information on the patterns of travel within Queenborough and Rushenden is based on comparison of data on the Queenborough and Halfway Ward with data for Swale Borough as a whole. The existing situation with respect to public transport and provision for walking and cycling within Queenborough and Rushenden is taken from the Swale Transport and Access Study (Swale Borough Council and Swale Forward, July 2005)25.
4.101 Travel to work data for residents of Queenborough and Halfway suggests slightly higher levels of car usage (either driving or as a passenger) and lower levels of walking than the Borough but comparable rates of cycling and use of public transport.
x Work from home - 7% x Driving or passenger in a car - 70% x Public transport - 8% x On foot - 9% x Cycle - 4%
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 67 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
4.102 The percentage of households in Queenborough and Halfway is slightly higher than for the rest of the Borough, at 23.1% and the higher levels of car usage for travel to work compared to the Borough may be explained by the fact that 8% of the 70% are as passengers rather than drivers.
4.103 Queenborough railway station provides access to rail services to Sheerness and the mainland, although changes need to be made at Sittingbourne for other stations towards London, Chatham and Rochester to the west, and Faversham, Canterbury and Dover to the east. There are approximately two services in each direction per hour from Queenborough Monday to Friday, between one and two services per hour on Saturdays and one service per hour on Sundays. The Booking Office and both platforms have wheelchair access but the station only has temporary ramp access to trains.
4.104 Bus services in Queenborough and Rushenden are relatively limited, with the Arriva 360 and 362 services operating on a similar route from Ferry View in Rushenden and passing through Queenborough, Halfway and Sheerness. Some services also continue on to Minster. During the morning, the Masterplan area is accessible within 30 minutes by public transport from places on the Queenborough to Halfway and Sheerness to Halfway corridors and from those areas that are within walking distance of railway stations on the Sittingbourne to Sheerness line. Current bus stock in use on the Island is generally older double-decker vehicles, which are not designed for easy access and hence can pose difficulties for the elderly or for parents with pushchairs.
4.105 The Swale Borough Council Transport and Access Study identified that there are currently deficiencies in the provision of facilities associated with public transport, including bus stops and crossing facilities which help access to public transport. The only bus shelter available is at Queenborough Station for passengers wishing to travel to Rushenden but this shelter is in poor condition and is not located particularly close to the station. Provision of timetable information at bus stops is also currently poor. The absence of shelters and information may currently present disincentives to the use of public transport in this area.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 68 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Objective 17 – To protect, enhance and make accessible the historic environmental assets including landscape (the quality and character) townscapes and settlement settings
Borough Baseline Data
4.106 Swale Borough has approximately four times the national average number of Listed Buildings (over 1,800), most of which are Grade II. There are 19 Scheduled Ancient Monuments within the Borough and numerous listings on the County Sites and Monuments Record. The Borough contains 23 Historic Parks and Gardens and 49 Conservation Areas, which cover a total of 2.3% of the Swale Borough with 5,000 hectares protected at the highest level from development. Information from the Kent Principal Archaeology Office for 2005 reported that nine significant archaeological sites had been lost and recorded due to development (compared to 73 in Kent).
4.107 There is a range of landscape designations applicable to areas of Swale Borough. Most of the landscape south of the M2 along the southern boundary of the borough forms part of the nationally designated Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). Outside the AONB, the lower dip slope, together with some of the dry valleys, are recognised by Kent County Council as the North Downs Special Landscape Area (SLA). The majority of the marshlands in the north of the mainland and south Sheppey form part of the North Kent Marshes SLA, which continues from the Medway Marshes to the west of the Borough to the Seasalter Marshes to the east. In the east of the Borough is the Blean Woods SLA, ancient woodland, the majority of which extends into neighbouring Canterbury District. The Council has also designated landscapes in its adopted Local Plan (as Local Landscape Areas) and emerging Local Plans (as Areas of High Landscape Value), including an area between Queenborough and Sheerness. Overall there are 23,200 hectares or 62% of Swale Borough designated as local landscape areas.
4.108 The Swale Landscape Character Assessment and Guidelines (2003)26 reported that of the 42 local level landscape character areas within the Borough, 45% were of ‘good’ condition, 36% of ‘moderate’ condition and 19% of ‘poor’ condition.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 69 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
Archaeology, Listed Buildings, Monuments and Conservation Areas
4.109 The Historic Area Appraisal of Queenborough (English Heritage, 2006)27, describes the cultural heritage value of the area and was prepared to inform for new development proposals at Queenborough. The report concludes that:
‘While Queenborough remains a charming, picturesque place to the visitor, it is not a ‘chocolate box’ Kentish town. It still has the low-lying, marshy, mud topography and a gritty industrial past that encapsulates much of its history. In the face of much-needed regeneration, it is essential that something of this sense of place and history that distinguishes Queenborough as a riparian settlement in the Thames Estuary, is retained.’
4.110 The Swale Borough Local Plan (2005)28 (as amended) reflects that the Borough has a rich cultural heritage including naval and maritime history, Roman and medieval legacy and industrial archaeology. Correspondence from Kent County Council has identified that within or close to the development area are important prehistoric, Roman, medieval or later date archaeological remains. The Sites and Monuments Record (SMR) has a significant number of entries within the Masterplan area (Figure 5.9) relating to the industrial development of Queenborough, although it is unclear how much of this industrial heritage survives.
4.111 An archaeological desktop assessment has identified that the Masterplan area has the potential to contain evidence of past human exploitation and settlement dating from early prehistory (500,000 bp) through to the post-medieval period (AD 1066-1550). The Masterplan area also incorporates significant elements of surviving historic marshland and urban landscape in areas where previous development has not occurred, and within the designated Queenborough Conservation Area. Evidence of past human occupation and land use is indicated by a limited number of known recorded sites within the Masterplan area, however, given the nature of the marshland, further presently unknown archaeological features and deposits, including potentially significant palaeo-environmental and waterlogged remains are likely to occur within, and beneath, varying depths of alluvial deposition. Such deposits could include palaeosols (buried relic land surfaces) and/or deposits of peat.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 70 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
4.112 In view of the development history of the western part of the Masterplan area (west of the railway), it is envisaged that some archaeological remains may have been either previously disturbed or destroyed, however depending on the depth at which remains are buried, remains may exist in situ. The potential importance of these remains is at present unknown.
4.113 Despite encroachment onto the marshland from previous development, the Neatscourt Marshes contains an area of surviving landscape that has retained its historic character, which comprises semi-impaired and reclaimed marsh under pasture and arable, as shown in Figure 4.10. The pattern of creek development within the surviving marshland would suggest that it is of ancient character (Note: Areas on Figure 4.10 with no shading are not designated character areas).
4.114 There is a wide range of structures in the vicinity of the western part of the Masterplan area, some of which are relatively new commercial buildings, whilst others are somewhat older, including a large number of Listed Buildings in Queenborough. The buried remains of Queenborough Castle, adjacent to Queenborough Station is a Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM) and the Queenborough Conservation Area straddles the creek.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 71 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 72 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Figure 4.9: Sites and Monuments Records
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 73 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 74 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Figure 4.10: Character areas, including historic character
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 75 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 76 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Landscape
4.115 The Masterplan area is not within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), however the grazing marshes to the north of Queenborough are shown in the Swale Borough Local Plan as an Area of High Landscape Value (AHLV) and the marshes to the south, and eastern extreme, of the Masterplan area are classified as a Special Landscape Area (SLA). The eastern part of the Masterplan is also within the North Kent Marshes Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA), recognising landscape, wildlife or historic interest of national value. The site and its surrounds fall within the Countryside Agency Character Area 81, Great Thames Estuary.
4.116 The site is set within a predominantly flat, open landscape comprising low-lying grazing marshes adjacent to the West Swale Estuary. The landscape of the western part of the Masterplan area and the estuary is influenced by a history of industrial development and the presence of significant structures including the power station on the Isle of Grain and the Istil Steel Mill.
4.117 On the fringes of Queenborough, the marshland is presented as a huge expanse of flat open grazing marshes with a just perceptible rough micro-topography of slight embankments/raised areas and hollows either forming wet lagoons, or dried out dykes/edges. In particular a lagoon partially creates an urban edge to housing/recreation ground and as a setting for rough tracks (footpath) and views south across the marsh. The marshes became less remote and more influenced by the industrial and urban fringe activities of Queenborough. These influences diminish with distance from the source, but the traditional marshland qualities are impaired, even where these man-made elements form only a backdrop. The views are partially enclosed (restricted) to the south by palisade fence and reflections from stored cars; and to the east by the rounded landform of Barrow Hill.
4.118 There are isolated trees and bushes along the railway line, which also provide intermittent containment to the western views of large industrial structures to the west of the railway. The boundary of the car storage areas, particularly defined by isolated cypress trees, emphasises rather than hides a further large structure. In spite of the proximity to cars and industry, the overall area of marshland captures a feeling of remoteness and tranquility.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 77 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
4.119 Landscape character to the east of the marshland is currently subject to encroachment from the construction of the A249 dual carriageway and roundabout, which is situated on a slight embankment. Following opening, the new A249 alignment will be more obvious on account of the movement of traffic.
4.120 Whilst the majority of the Masterplan area is relatively flat, there are a number of areas close to the site that afford elevated views of the Masterplan area. A low horizon and sky- scape are dominant and the crossing of the River Swale is a dominant feature of the skyline in long distance southern views. Close range views are possible from the public footpath on Furze Hill to the north-east and from properties on Rushenden Hill to the south-west whilst longer range views are possible from higher ground, which forms a pronounced landscape feature to the south of the West Swale. There is also a wide range of views within and across the site from the residential areas of Queenborough and Rushenden and from a limited number of public rights of way.
4.121 The Swale Landscape Character Assessment and Guidelines, describes the key characteristics of the Elmley Marshes as follows:
x Flat alluvial marshland with sinuous reed filled ditches. Traditional gates and fences leading into ditches prevent cattle crossing into other fields; x Atmospheric and tranquil landscape with large open and often dramatic skies; x Rough grassland largely used for cattle and sheep grazing; x Important wetland habitats; x Important transport routes A249, railway and link bridges onto Island; x Large-scale landscape with little sense of enclosure; x Boats in the Swale; and x Strong sense of place, remote and isolated.
Objective 18 – To maintain and enhance geological and geomorphological sites.
Borough Baseline Data
4.122 There are no Regionally Important Geological Sites (RIGS) within Swale Borough although the Borough does have a rich and varied geology. The southern area of the Borough is dominated by the upper chalk of the North Downs dip slope. Over the majority of its area, it is overlain by clay-with-flints on the higher ground and head deposits in the valley
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 78 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
bottoms. The fine loamy and silty soils of the clay-with-flints support cereals, permanent grassland and deciduous woodland. In the valley the thinner well-drained calcareous soils generally support grassland.
4.123 To the north of the chalk, is a band of Thanet, Oldhaven and Blackheath beds overlain with a complex mix of brickearths and gravels. The main areas of settlement, including Sittingbourne and Faversham are located within this band, along with the Roman Road of Watling Street. The deep well drained, often stoneless, fine silty soils throughout this area have traditionally supported a variety of crops, most notably apples and other top fruit with some hops.
4.124 London clay forms the geology of the northern and far eastern parts of the Borough, including the Isle of Sheppey. The London clay gives rise to two contrasting landscapes. Where it is low lying it is overlain with alluvial deposits, which form an almost continuous belt of marshland along the north edge of the mainland and across southern Sheppey. London clay also forms the higher ground of northern Sheppey, capped with a small area of Bagshot beds around Minster and the distinctive clay ridge of the Blean in the east.
4.125 On the marshland ditches and pumps drain deep stoneless clayey soils. Traditionally these soils support grazing, although some areas have been sufficiently drained to support cereals. The mudflats and saltmarshes are categorized as unripened gley soils. Some of these soils are flooded at high tide and generally they are conserved as saltmarsh habitas with some summer grazing. (Swale Landscape Character Assessment and Guidelines, March 2005).
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.126 There are no Regionally Important Geological Sites (RIGS) within the Masterplan area. Ground conditions consist of a variable thickness of Made Ground over Alluvium and London Clay. Made Ground was encountered in all investigation positions in the Industrial Areas to the west of the railway line, and in the Port Authority hardstanding to the east of the railway but not on the marshland areas. Visual and/or olfactory indications of potential contaminants were recorded at a number of exploratory positions. Alluvium was generally encountered in all exploratory positions to the west of the railway line and appears to increase in thickness approximately south-west to north-east. Localised peat layers have been described within the Alluvium. The London Clay formation outcrops in the marsh areas to the east and dips towards the west underlying the alluvial deposits.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 79 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Objective 19 – To ensure the sustainable use and management of natural resources
Borough Baseline Data
4.127 Data on energy consumption has not been reported at Borough level but the rating of energy efficiency in housing within Swale Borough was undertaken as part of the Swale Housing Strategy (2001)29 using the Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP). The SAP, revised in April 2006, is used by the Government to determine the energy efficiency of a dwelling. Ratings range from 1 to 100 and the higher the SAP score, the more energy efficient the property. The national average SAP rating is 50.6 whereas the average for the South-East is 50.5. The SAP ratings within Swale Borough were:
x Private rented accommodation - 43; x Housing associations - 58; and x Owner-occupied accommodation - 48.
4.128 There is currently no significant generation of energy from renewable sources within Swale Borough, although parts of the Borough are being explored for the potential to install wind turbines. Current proposals include the London Array Offshore Windfarm, which incorporates the installation of a substation and access road at Cleve Hill and marine and terrestrial cables servicing a series of off-shore turbines. In addition there is a proposal for a windfarm at Sheerness. The Port of Sheerness Windfarm is proposed to consist of four turbines generating approximately 10MW of renewable electricity and will be situated along the sea/river frontage at the Port of Sheerness north of Queenborough (www.sheerness.windfarm.co.uk)30. No data was reported for the use of aggregates or water within the Borough.
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.129 There is no data on energy efficiency of housing at greater levels of detail than the whole Borough. There is no known mineral extraction or provision of energy from renewable sources within the Masterplan area and only one known water abstraction within one kilometre of the Masterplan. The Environment Agency website shows an abstraction borehole (within a small localised inner Source Protection Zone), located to the east of the A249 approximately 350 metres distant from the eastern boundary of the Masterplan area.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 80 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Objective 20 – To reduce generation and disposal of waste, and achieve sustainable management of waste
Borough Baseline Data
4.130 Swale Borough Council is part of the Kent Waste Partnership. The Swale Borough Council’s approach to waste management is reported to be consistent with the principles of the Swale Waste Management Hierarchy (i.e. preferentially minimise, re-use, waste recovery (recycling and composting), incineration with energy recovery and, as a last resort, disposal to landfill). Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPI) for 2007/8 reported that there was an average of 421 kg of household waste collected per head in Swale Borough. The proportion of the Borough household waste recycled and composted was 27.9% in 2007/8.
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.131 The Swale Waste Strategy (2002-2005)31 confirms that there are two recycling facilities within Queenborough and Rushenden, one at Park Road which collects glass products, and the other at Rushenden Road which collects glass, paper, cans and textiles. Queenborough First School is also part of the Schools Paper Recycling Programme within the Borough.
4.132 There is one major waste disposal site close to the Masterplan area, to the west of Rushenden. This landfill receives marine dredgings. The nearest household waste disposal site (tip) is at the Stoneyard in Sheerness. This site, operated by Kent County Council is also the closest Green Waste site to Queenborough and Rushenden.
4.133 The majority of household waste collected on the Island is currently taken to a Waste Transfer Station at Sittingbourne, from where it is transported to landfill, normally near Canterbury. This position changed in 2006, with the majority of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) being sent to a Kent County Council Energy from Waste plant at Allington. The residual waste is still being disposed of via landfill including bulk items .
4.134 In common with many Waste Collection Authorities, Swale Borough Council is promoting and supporting initiatives to minimise the amount of waste disposed, through re-use, recycling and composting. To this end, the Council launched a new system of waste collection within the Borough in May 2007 which essentially provides two wheeled bins, one for recyclables (paper, card, steel, aluminum and plastic at this stage) and one for non- recyclable materials. Collections will alternate on a weekly basis such that each bin will be
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 81 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
collected every two weeks, but there will still be a weekly collection overall. It is the objective of the scheme to achieve a 30% recycling rate by around 2008/9.
4.135 Groundwork and Swale Borough Council have worked in partnership on a number of projects within the Borough, one of which has been the clean-up of Rushenden Beach. The beach suffers from an accumulation of rubbish including boat components, tyres, syringes, pipes, food wrappers and drinks cans. Members of the local community have taken part in the beach clean-ups.
Objective 21 – To enhance quality of and access to employment opportunities for everyone
Borough Baseline Data
4.136 The NOMIS Labour Market Statistics (Mar 2007-Feb 2008)32 report the distribution of employment within Swale Borough, as shown in Table 4.11.
Table 4.11: Percentage employment by occupation (2007-2008)
Occupation Swale (%) South East (%) England (%) Mangers and professionals 36.4 47.6 43 Administrative and skilled 24.4 22.1 22.5 trades Personal service, sales and 15.4 14.6 15.6 customer service Process and machine operative and elementary 23.8 15.5 18.6 occupations
4.137 The Swale Learning Strategy projections for the Borough suggest that employment is expected to fall in primary industries but that there will be significant levels of inward investment, and hence employment growth in the transport and logistics, high tech manufacturing, business and financial services sectors as a result of the Thames Gateway Regeneration.
4.138 In 2006 there were approximately 42,600 people employed in Swale Borough, of which 28.1% were part time workers. There was an average unemployment of 2.3%, which compares well with England’s average of 2.6% and is only marginally higher than the South East’s average of 1.6%. The proportions of the Swale Borough population who are economically inactive and wanting a job (7.6% of men and 11.7% of women) are slightly
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 82 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
above the averages for the UK (4.4% and 6.5% respectively). Average wages within Swale Borough (£479.20 per week in 2007) compared to £480.70 for the South East and £458.60 for England respectively in the same year.
4.139 Data provided by the Office of National Statistics for ‘Occupation Groups’ for all persons aged 16-74 who are currently in employment within the Borough has been used to determine the predominant employment groups within the Borough. The data demonstrates that a number of employment groups are above the average for the South- East and England as a whole:
x Skilled trades occupations; x Personal service occupations; x Sales and customer service; x Process; plant and machine operatives; and x Elementary occupations.
4.140 Those employment groups where the Borough is reported to have lower than average contributions include ‘managers and senior officials’, ‘professional occupations’ and ‘associate professional and technical occupations’.
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.141 Information on unemployment within Queenborough and Rushenden compared to other areas can be gained from review of work-related benefits. Income-based Jobseekers Allowance is payable to people under the pensionable age (16-64) who are available for, and actively seeking, work of at least 40 hours per week. Data from August 2006/7 show that 118 people in the Queenborough and Halfway Ward claimed Jobseekers Allowance compared to 2,036 in Swale Borough as a whole and 81.912 in the South East.
Objective 22 – To increase the economic performance of the Borough
Borough Baseline Data
4.142 Economic performance can be gauged by review of the number of businesses registering for VAT and those de-registering for VAT. Data from the NOMIS Labour Market Statistics for 2006 suggested that the economic performance of Swale Borough in this respect was either comparable or slightly better than the regional and national trends. Swale Borough MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 83 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Council reports that the Borough economy remains over-dependant on manufacturing and ‘added value’ (e.g. food processing) as opposed to the service and technology sectors. Employment breakdown by sector is presented in Table 4.12.
Table 4.12: Percentage employment in different sectors (2006)
Sector Swale (%) South East (%) England (%) Manufacturing 17.6 8.8 10.9 Construction 5.2 4.5 4.8 Distribution, hotels and 24.6 24.6 23.5 restaurants Transport and 6.0 6.0 5.9 communications Finance, IT and other 24.1 24.1 21.2 business activities Public administration, 22.1 25.4 26.9 education and health Other services 4.0 5.2 5.3 Tourism-related 6.9 7.9 8.3
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.143 Swale Borough has a modest local economy ranking 227 out of 408 local authorities in Britain and its economic performance is fundamentally influenced by its industrial structure dominated by manufacture, port and logistics activities. Although the borough is relatively productive (ranked 166 out of 408 local authorities) and dynamic (ranked 84 out of 408 in terms of employment change) the legacy of industrial decline has been manifest in low skills levels (ranked 350 out of 408) and a low proportion of employment in knowledge- driven sectors (ranked 296 out of 408). However Swale Borough has a well-developed enterprise culture (ranked 107 out of 408) and a flexible workforce. In recent years the Borough has accommodated significant growth in life science industries at Kent Science Park and strong demand for commercial space in and around Sittingbourne Eurolink Business Park.
4.144 The pattern of employment within the Queenborough and Halfway Ward is broadly comparable to that of Swale Borough as a whole, shown in Table 5.10. Manufacturing is the dominant source of employment for residents of Queenborough and Halfway (24%), with an additional 16% employed within the motor vehicles industry in 2004.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 84 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Objective 23 – To encourage investment in local services and facilities
Borough Baseline Data
4.145 The most recent Borough data reporting the number of companies relocating into Swale Borough (1998-2000) was 1,200 (Swale Borough Council Economic Development Unit, 200033). The Swale Borough PCT has an average rank of 543 which is on a par with the average rank for Kent and Medway SHA at 525. It is the third least deprived PCT and experiences similar levels of difficulty in issues of access to affordable housing and essential local services than the Health Authority as a whole. The Borough has similar levels of difficulty in the access to affordable housing and essential local services to the Health Authority as a whole.
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.146 There is no known applicable data below Borough level.
Objective 24 – To encourage sustainable design and practice
Borough Baseline Data
4.147 There are currently no standards for sustainable design and construction specifically for Swale Borough, although reference to nationally recognised standards such as the BREEAM or Ecohomes schemes is made where applicable.
Masterplan Area Baseline Data
4.148 Sustainable design and practice is more heavily influenced by future actions than a prevailing baseline, however the previous consideration of housing densities within Queenborough and Rushenden has shown that these are relatively efficient uses of land compared to the prevailing national and regional averages.
4.149 The Framework, discussed in Section 3.0, sets a future baseline for Sustainable Design and Practice within the Masterplan area. The Framework, which is provided in full as a component of the Masterplan reflects current practice, sets performance targets and monitoring arrangements for a range of sustainability topics relevant to the development proposals, including:
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 85 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
x Energy; x Water; x Waste; x Materials; x Transport; x Site infrastructure; x Inclusive community; x Urban design; x Building performance; x Construction impact.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 86 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
5.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Introduction
5.1 The SEA Regulations require that an ‘outline of reasons for selecting the alternatives dealt with’ is provided within the SEA report. This section provides a description of the alternative design layouts that have been considered for the Masterplan and the implications of the design on the environment.
Scheme’s with Planning Permission
5.2 Two Environmental Statements were published in December 20061,2 as part of planning applications which received planning permission and are therefore not considered further in this SA/SEA. These schemes are detailed in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1: Schemes that have received planning permission
Scheme Description Planning Environmental permission Statement Rushenden Dual carriageway Kent County Rushenden Relief Road Relief Road joining A249 to Council; SW/07/01 Environmental Rushenden Statement (2 vols.) Dec. 2006 Addendum to the Environmental Statements: Ecological impacts May 2007 Neatscourt Commercial Swale Borough Neatscourt Phase 1 Phase 1 development east Council Environmental Development of the railway line SW/06/1468 Statement (2 vols) Dec. 2006 Addendum to the Environmental Statements: Ecological impacts May 2007
Land Use Options
5.3 The land uses within the Masterplan area have already been identified and allocated by the Area Action Plan and the review of the Swale Local Plan3. The land use options are therefore not examined within the SA/SEA as they were already fully evaluated.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 87 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Marina Options
5.4 The Area Action Plan and the review of the Swale Local Plan identify the development of the Creek as a prime objective. As part of its proposed development four marina options were considered by SEEDA, and its consultants British Waterways4. The new marina is intended to provide a sustainable platform facilitating a number of wide ranging beneficial outputs including:
x Creation of an environment within which existing and new marine industries can flourish; x Conserve and enhance the relationship between the local people and the Queenborough Creek/Swale; x Support the local cultural identity and encourage tourism; and x Engage the local communities.
5.5 The following options are considered in this appraisal together with the ‘do nothing’ option (the existing situation). These are described below and shown in Figure 5.1
Option 1: Existing Situation
5.6 This option would involve no major development of the water bodies within the Masterplan area. The all-tide landing access is provided via a floating pontoon structure managed by the Queenborough Yacht Club. The jetty is provided primarily for the benefit of Yacht Club members and visiting leisure craft but the jetty is also available as a short stay landing point for small commercial craft and fishing boats wishing to drop off passengers and crew.
Option 2: Purpose Built Marina Within the Development
5.7 The option incorporates the following key elements:
x Approximately 148 waterspace moorings for vessels up to 15 metres in length; x Construction of double sector gates and a lock control building; x Two distinct impounded mooring basins, one for moorings, the other for community related leisure; x Provision of a number of service moorings; x Suggestion of a favourable mix of mooring types within the impounded basin;
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 88 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
x The construction of a boardwalk connecting to new footpaths and cycle routes encouraging integration and improved access between uses and communities; x A swingbridge linking the two impounded basins creating access between basins and producing opportunity for movement interest and flexibility for the mooring/leisure pursuits area; x Two discreet slipways for essential operations and management; x Facilities building; x Hardstanding and boatyard storage facilities; and x Car parking.
5.8 The area under consideration comprises the land locally known as the ‘Twyford Site’ running south from the Klondyke site as far as the northern boundary of Rushenden at First Avenue.
Option 3: Impounded Marina Within Queenborough Creek
5.9 The options incorporates the following key elements into an area bound to the north by the existing quayside and extends southwards to include Klondyke Wharf and Cutters Dock:
x The Inner creek would be impounded to provide a minimum 2.8m depth of water at all states of the tide. The inner cluster of pontoons would be constructed at a shallower depth of 1.8m for shallower drafted vessels. x Two basin areas would be created to achieve sufficient water area for a viable marina. The main basin accessed directly from the tidal gate would provide the majority of the berthing capacity and focus of waterfront interest. A smaller secondary basin is created on the south side of the Inner Creek. Vessels would access the basin by passing beneath a lifting bridge that provides a pedestrian crossing and link from South Street to the new development and marina site to the south of the Queenborough Creek. x It is anticipated that the impoundment arrangement would provide navigable access/egress to the Inner Creek from the Swale over a five hour period each high tide and that the water level within the Inner Creek may or may not fluctuate. This variation in water level would create visual interest and ensure that the Inner Creek is subject of water movement and flushing action.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 89 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
x The Swale mooring arrangements would continue but would be enhanced by the introduction of a dedicated visitor berthing facility within the impounded Creek fronting the new quayside adjacent to South Street. x The new marina has been designed to provide berthing for 151 boats varying in size up to 15m in length. x Marina berth holders would be able to gain direct pedestrian access to Queenborough Town via the new bridge link to South Street. x The marina would be designed to modern standards including water and electric supplies and pump-out facilities. x The section of quayside immediately inside the mouth on the north side identified as number 3 on the plan, of the impounded Inner Creek would be reserved for feature vessels, i.e. Thames barges, or larger visiting craft. It is not envisaged that the quay would be utilized by commercial craft. x The existing fish quay and two quay would be retained and provide ongoing facilities for local fishermen and operators of small commercial working crate. x Located immediately inside the tidal gates to the Inner Creek on the south side, the commercial quay is designed with 70 metres of commercial frontage and good access for mobile crane attendance. It is not anticipated that the quay would be allocated for heavy industrial boat building but as an alongside berth for repair and maintenance works and possibly restoration works on historic or feature vessels. x Onshore storage space would help to support the commercial businesses and attract customers and new business interest to Queenborough.
Option 4: Moorings Within the West Swale Queenborough Harbour
5.10 The option incorporates the following key elements into an area of the Swale immediately to the west of Queenborough Town:
x Provision of pontoon moorings accessible from the main channel at all stages of the tide. x The opportunity also exists to introduce additional permanent moorings to the Swale to meet future demand as Queenborough becomes more established as a leisure boating centre. Subject to the necessary consents, an increase of 184 moorings would be a realistic target to take the total number of permanent moorings to 324.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 90 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
x The new moorings would be located to the north of the Creek entrance on the east side of the Swale. This location would compliment the existing moorings that exist in the channel. x The new moorings would be high quality rise and fall pontoons with all services. The mooring pontoons would be linked to the eastern quay and Queenborough Town by a bridging structure. x To create the necessary depth required for the deepest drafted vessels (2.5m CD) the areas of Queenborough Harbour would have to be dredged to -0.3m CD.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 91 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 92 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Figure 5.1: Marina options considered
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 93 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 94 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
6.0 MASTERPLAN SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL AND STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Introduction
6.1 This section provides the combined Queenborough and Rushenden Masterplan’s SA and SEA. The Masterplan1 is to be assessed against the 24 Sustainability Objectives listed in Section 2.12. This section assesses the four options for the marina described in Section 5.0. It assumes that the location and size of the marina is the only variation between the Options.
Basis for the SA and SEA
6.2 Key elements of the Masterplan that have been used as the basis for the SA and SEA are set out below:
x There would be up to 2000 new dwellings on the site, predominantly located to the west of Rushenden Road on land formerly occupied by the Caradon Works (Twyfords) and the existing Klondyke site adjacent to the inner creek. x Construction of a new Relief Road linking the A249 to Rushenden Road. The western end of the Relief Road, between the railway bridge and Rushenden Road would be calmed to 20 mph. x Provision of up to 180,000m2 of employment development across the central and eastern parts of the site, including offices, distribution and other commercial uses. x Construction of a new marina although details would vary between the four options. x Provision of a new primary school between Queenborough and Rushenden. x The Masterplan would seek to improve vehicular and pedestrian connectivity of the development area and the surroundings. New connection points would be provided into the area and most of the roads are proposed as Home Zones or similarly calmed. x To the east of the railway, the drainage strategy is based around storage of storm water within a network of ditches and sustainable drainage systems (SuDS). Where ditches are lost as a result of development, at least double the length lost would be replaced. An enhanced wetland space is proposed on the northern part of the Neatscourt Marshes. To the east of the railway, storm water would either be
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 95 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
discharged into the estuary, as happens at present or via the proposed water body, which would be used to balance discharges. x The development would seek to improve safety in the area by delivering homes that overlook public spaces protecting private spaces and providing clear views with minimal hidden corners.
SA and SEA Framework
6.3 The SA and SEA framework, presented below, enables each of the objectives to be considered in a common format. The completed matrix is provided as Appendix C. Tables 6.1 to 6.4 provide a summary of the findings for each of the marina options. Whilst for some of the objectives, the conclusions reached would be clearly evident from the appraisal framework, for others, further explanation may be beneficial in understanding the conclusions reached.
6.4 Those objectives for which no further explanation is considered necessary are wholly contained within the appraisal framework. Those for which additional explanation is provided do not have any text within the ‘comments’ column within Appendix C. For these objectives, the further explanation of the conclusions reached is provided in the paragraphs following the framework.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 96 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Table 6.1: Summary of the Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment Matrix for Option 1 (Existing Situation)
Sustainable Development Objectives Geographic Scale Timescale Borough Effects outside Within plan Beyond plan Urban Rural the Borough period period 1. To ensure that the opportunity is provided for 0 0 0 0 0 decent homes to be provided for all the community 2. To improve human health and well-being 0 0 0 0 0 3. To reduce the gap between the most disadvantaged communities and the rest and to 00 0 0 0 increase prosperity 4. To raise education levels and develop opportunities for everyone to find the skill needed to find, remain 00 0 0 0 and progress at work 5. To promote social inclusion and cohesion including 00 0 0 0 creating a safe and secure environment 6. To encourage development and participation in culture, sport and the arts and enjoyment of the 00 0 0 0 countryside 7. To sustain and improve vibrant rural communities 0 0 0 0 0 8. To maximise the use of previously developed land 00 0 0 0 for development and to use land efficiently 9. To improve the quality of land and reduce 00 0 0 0 contamination 10. To improve the overall air quality of the Borough 0 0 0 0 0 11. To improve water quality 0 0 0 0 0 12. Will it maintain hydrology/coastal processes? 0 0 0 0 0 13. Will it reduce or minimize greenhouse gas 00 0 0 0 emissions? 14. To effectively manage the risk of flooding 0 0 0 0 0 15. To conserve and enhance biodiversity 0 0 0 0 0
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 97 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Geographic Scale Timescale Sustainable Development Objectives Borough Effects outside Within plan Beyond plan Urban Rural the Borough period period 16. To promote the use of sustainable forms of 00 0 0 0 transport and reduce travel by car/lorry 17. To protect, enhance and make accessible the historic environment and assets, including 00 0 0 0 landscapes (the quality and character), townscapes and settlement settings 18. To maintain and enhance geological and 00 0 0 0 geomorphological sites 19. To ensure the sustainable use and management 00 0 0 0 of natural resources 20. To reduce generation and disposal of waste, and 00 0 0 0 achieve sustainable management of waste 21. To enhance quality of, and access to, 00 0 0 0 employment opportunities for everyone 22. To increase the economic performance of the 00 0 0 0 Borough 23. To encourage investment in local services and 00 0 0 0 facilities 24. To encourage sustainable design and practice 0 0 0 0 0
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 98 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Table 6.2: Summary of the Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment Matrix for Option 2 (Purpose Built Marina Within the Development)
Geographic Scale Timescale Sustainable Development Objectives Borough Effects outside Within plan Beyond plan Urban Rural the Borough period period 1. To ensure that the opportunity is provided for ++ 0 0 99 decent homes to be provided for all the community 2. To improve human health and well-being + + 0 99 3. To reduce the gap between the most disadvantaged communities and the rest and to ++ + + 99 increase prosperity 4. To raise education levels and develop opportunities for everyone to find the skill needed to find, remain + + ? 99 and progress at work 5. To promote social inclusion and cohesion including ++ ++ 0 99 creating a safe and secure environment 6. To encourage development and participation in culture, sport and the arts and enjoyment of the ++ + 0 99 countryside 7. To sustain and improve vibrant rural communities 0 0 0 0 0 8. To maximise the use of previously developed land + 0 0 99 for development and to use land efficiently 9. To improve the quality of land and reduce + 0 0 99 contamination 10. To improve the overall air quality of the Borough - - - 99 11. To improve water quality + 0 0 99 12. Will it maintain hydrology/coastal processes? + 0 0 99 13. Will it reduce or minimize greenhouse gas + 0 0 99 emissions? 14. To effectively manage the risk of flooding 0 0 0 99 15. To conserve and enhance biodiversity 0 0 0 99
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 99 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Geographic Scale Timescale Sustainable Development Objectives Borough Effects outside Within plan Beyond plan Urban Rural the Borough period period 16. To promote the use of sustainable forms of + + 0 99 transport and reduce travel by car/lorry 17. To protect, enhance and make accessible the historic environment and assets, including landscapes + + 0 99 (the quality and character), townscapes and settlement settings 18. To maintain and enhance geological and 0 0 0 0 0 geomorphological sites 19. To ensure the sustainable use and management + 0 + 99 of natural resources 20. To reduce generation and disposal of waste, and + 0 ? 99 achieve sustainable management of waste 21. To enhance quality of, and access to, + + 0 99 employment opportunities for everyone 22. To increase the economic performance of the ++ + + 99 Borough 23. To encourage investment in local services and + + 0 99 facilities 24. To encourage sustainable design and practice ++ ++ 0 99
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 100 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Table 6.3: Summary of the Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment Matrix for Option 3 (Impounded Marina within Queenborough Creek)
Geographic Scale Timescale Sustainable Development Objectives Borough Effects outside Within plan Beyond plan Urban Rural the Borough period period 1.To ensure that the opportunity is provided for ++ 0 0 99 decent homes to be provided for all the community 2. To improve human health and well-being + + 0 99 3. To reduce the gap between the most disadvantaged communities and the rest and to ++ + + 99 increase prosperity 4. To raise education levels and develop opportunities for everyone to find the skill needed to find, remain + + ? 99 and progress at work 5. To promote social inclusion and cohesion including ++ ++ 0 99 creating a safe and secure environment 6. To encourage development and participation in culture, sport and the arts and enjoyment of the ++ + 0 99 countryside 7. To sustain and improve vibrant rural communities 0 0 0 0 0 8. To maximise the use of previously developed land + 0 0 99 for development and to use land efficiently 9. To improve the quality of land and reduce + 0 0 99 contamination 10. To improve the overall air quality of the Borough - - - 99 11. To improve water quality + 0 0 99 12. Will it maintain hydrology/coastal processes? + 0 0 99 13. Will it reduce or minimize greenhouse gas + 0 0 99 emissions? 14. To effectively manage the risk of flooding 0 0 0 99 15. To conserve and enhance biodiversity - - 0 99
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 101 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Geographic Scale Timescale Sustainable Development Objectives Borough Effects outside Within plan Beyond plan Rural Urban the Borough period period 16. To promote the use of sustainable forms of + + 0 99 transport and reduce travel by car/lorry 17. To protect, enhance and make accessible the historic environment and assets, including - - 0 99 landscapes (the quality and character), townscapes and settlement settings 18. To maintain and enhance geological and 0 0 0 0 0 geomorphological sites 19. To ensure the sustainable use and management + 0 + 99 of natural resources 20. To reduce generation and disposal of waste, and + 0 ? 99 achieve sustainable management of waste 21. To enhance quality of, and access to, + + 0 99 employment opportunities for everyone 22. To increase the economic performance of the ++ + + 99 Borough 23. To encourage investment in local services and + + 0 99 facilities 24. To encourage sustainable design and practice ++ ++ 0 99
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 102 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Table 6.4: Summary of the Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment Matrix for Option 4 (Moorings within the West Swale Queenborough Harbour)
Sustainable Development Objectives Geographic Scale Timescale Borough Effects outside Within plan Beyond plan Urban Rural the Borough period period 1. To ensure that the opportunity is provided for ++ 0 0 99 decent homes to be provided for all the community 2. To improve human health and well-being + + 0 99 3. To reduce the gap between the most disadvantaged communities and the rest and to ++ + + 99 increase prosperity 4. To raise education levels and develop opportunities for everyone to find the skill needed to find, remain + + ? 99 and progress at work 5. To promote social inclusion and cohesion including ++ ++ 0 99 creating a safe and secure environment 6. To encourage development and participation in culture, sport and the arts and enjoyment of the ++ + 0 99 countryside 7. To sustain and improve vibrant rural communities 0 0 0 0 0 8. To maximise the use of previously developed land + 0 0 99 for development and to use land efficiently 9. To improve the quality of land and reduce + 0 0 99 contamination 10. To improve the overall air quality of the Borough - - - 99 11. To improve water quality + 0 0 99 12. Will it maintain hydrology/coastal processes? - - 0 99 13. Will it reduce or minimize greenhouse gas - - - 99 emissions? 14. To effectively manage the risk of flooding 0 0 0 99
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 103 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Sustainable Development Objectives Geographic Scale Timescale Borough Effects outside Within plan Beyond plan Rural Urban the Borough period period 15. To conserve and enhance biodiversity ------99 16. To promote the use of sustainable forms of + + 0 99 transport and reduce travel by car/lorry 17. To protect, enhance and make accessible the historic environment and assets, including - - 0 99 landscapes (the quality and character), townscapes and settlement settings 18. To maintain and enhance geological and 0 0 0 0 0 geomorphological sites 19. To ensure the sustainable use and management + 0 + 99 of natural resources 20. To reduce generation and disposal of waste, and + 0 ? 99 achieve sustainable management of waste 21. To enhance quality of, and access to, + + 0 99 employment opportunities for everyone 22. To increase the economic performance of the ++ + + 99 Borough 23. To encourage investment in local services and + + + 99 facilities 24. To encourage sustainable design and practice ++ ++ 0 99
Key - Negative impact ++ Strongly positive impact -- Strongly negative impact + Positive impact ? Uncertain – impact unknown 0 No impact or relationship 9 Operates at this timescale
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 104 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Summary
6.5 The marina options were appraised and assessed against a range of sustainability objectives including environmental criteria associated with ecological sensitivity, ground conditions and cultural heritage. Overall all the Masterplan options adhere to the sustainability objectives set for Swale Borough during construction and post-construction. Where there is potential for an adverse effect then mitigation measures would be proposed to minimize the impacts. Option 1 would not have any effect on any of the sustainability objectives as it retains the existing situation.
6.6 Options 2, 3 and 4 for the Masterplan would have a strongly positive impact on the socio- economic objectives through the provision of good quality and various types of housing, employment opportunities and health and education facilities. These would help to raise aspirations, improve social conditions and employment potential, undertake physical regeneration of the currently economically deprived area.
6.7 The majority of the Masterplan area is located on brownfield sites or currently developed areas which would maximize the use of previously development land and land use efficiency. The brownfield land identified as being contaminated would be capsulated prior to being redeveloped to prevent contamination. The loss of any greenfield land would be compensated through the enhancement of similar land outside of the Masterplan area.
6.8 Options 2, 3 and 4 would all result in the water environment being improved through the inclusion of SuDS which would: allow the management of environmental impacts at sources, rather than downstream; control water run-off rates, helping to reduce urban impacts on flooding; protect quality of water; and provide improved habitats for local flora and fauna.
6.9 Option 2 of the Masterplan would provide protection and enhancement to the cultural heritage assets by the re-distribution of existing traffic from Rushenden Road and the centre of Queenborough creating a beneficial effect on the setting of sites of cultural and historic interest including Queenborough Castle, Listed Buildings and the Conservation Area. In addition the design and layout of the new development within and adjacent to the Conservation Area would take full account of the need to respect and enhance the character and setting of this part of Queenborough. In contrast Options 3 and 4 would involve the marina being located within or adjacent to the Conservation Area which would adversely impact on the setting and character of the Conservation Area although the
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 105 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
proposals would not directly impact on any historic buildings. In addition a number of archaeological sites also exist within the site for the marina in Option 4.
6.10 There would be a positive impact on the sustainable use and management of natural resources. The effective implementation of the waste hierarchy would lead to the reduction of use of raw materials and also disposal of waste.
6.11 There would be no impact on the rural communities or agricultural land use as the objective criteria is beyond the scope of the development proposals and there are no rural communities within the Masterplan area.
6.12 There would be no impact on biodiversity as a result of the Option 2 of the Masterplan as there would be no direct loss of designated nature conservation site or disturbance to species of interest for which the sites are designated if the measures and restrictions described in the Habitat Regulations Assessment for Queenborough and Rushenden Masterplan are implemented through consenting conditions or legal agreement. The loss of a matrix of grazing marsh, grassland and ditch habitats and disturbance to the Ramsar/SPA/SSSI would be effectively mitigated through the creation of a buffer area 30 and 80 metres wide between the Ramsar/SPA/SSSI boundary and nearest built development; construction of a landscaped bund to screen built development; creation and enhancement of ditches and water bodies within existing grazing marshes and provision of 25 ha of replacement land. The marina in Option 3 would be located adjacent to the Ramsar/SPA/SSSI while 4 would be located within Ramsar/SPA/SSSI. Both the options would potentially cause adverse effects through increased disturbance to the internationally recognized birds populations on the mudflats.
6.13 In addition the Queenborough Waterways Management Board would be created to manage boats, their moorings and movements in the Swale, the Creek and the Marina. This would ensure minimal disturbance on birds using the waterways.
6.14 There would be no impact on geological or geomorphological sites as a result of any of the Masterplan Options as there are no sites in close proximity to the Masterplan area.
6.15 Options 2, 3 and 4 would cause a slightly negative impact on the air quality objectives due to the increased intensification of land use and population and associated increase in traffic. However the UK Air Quality Strategy objectives would not be exceeded and the
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 106 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
effective implementation of mitigation measures such as the increased use of public transport, walking and cycling would minimize this deterioration.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 107 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 108 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
7.0 SECONDARY, CUMULATIVE AND SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS
Introduction
7.1 This Chapter describes the potential secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects that could arise from the interaction between the construction and post-construction of the Masterplan proposals and other major road projects and land development projects in Swale Borough. The guidance within the ODPM Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents1 seeks that, as part of the assessment process, projects should identify the potential for and assess, where present, the beneficial or adverse impact of cumulative effects in the wider context.
Methodology
Study Area
7.2 Secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects could be experienced at a specific location within the Study Area, or may occur on surrounding transport routes. Swale Borough forms the Study Area for both land development projects and transportation projects, taking into the relevance of schemes and likelihood of actual cumulative effects.
7.3 It should be noted that this assessment focuses upon developments that are likely to occur and thus have some form of planning/land use approval or are identified as allocation or opportunity areas by the local planning authority. Speculative developments have not been considered given the uncertainty that they would happen. It is noted that most of the developments referred to herein would require a separate assessment of their environmental effects to be undertaken by the project sponsor.
Data Collection
7.4 This assessment is primarily a desk based qualitative study although consultation has been carried out with Swale Borough Council planning authority. Information relating to the background of the potential projects, their expected timelines and likely impacts has been sourced from a number of planning documents and other relevant council documents. The key documents used to identify the major projects are listed in Table 7.1 below, and supplemented by other sources of information where specified in this section.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 109 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Table 7.1: Documents consulted for assessing cumulative impacts
Authority Relevant Documents RPG9: Regional Planning Guidance for Government Office for the South East the South East (March 2001)2 South East Regional Assembly Draft South East Plan (March 2006)3 Kent and Medway Structure Plan4 Kent County Council Local Transport Plan (LTP) for Kent 5 Swale Borough Council Swale Local Plan6
Assessment of Impacts
7.5 The significance of individual impacts would play a role in the overall significance of the secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects, as an effect is likely to be at least as significant as the most significant contributory individual impact.
7.6 The three main types of cumulative effects that could occur in relation to a development scheme are present below. In each case the impact may arise from the same scheme, or from different schemes in the area.
Types of Effects
7.7 Multiple effects are determined by combining the same type of impacts arising from this and other schemes, which occur at the same or similar time and impact upon the same resource(s) or receptor(s). For example, by combining the air quality impact of the Masterplan proposals with the air quality impacts of other scheme it should be possible to determine the collective air quality impact on a particular resource or receptor. Non- significant individual air quality impacts at different sites may collectively result in an overall significant cumulative air quality impact in a route-wise context.
7.8 Different multiple effects are determined by combining multiple different environmental impacts arising from this and other schemes, which occur at the same or similar time and impact on upon a particular receptor or community. For example, it is considered that combined noise, air quality, ecological and visual impacts form the Scheme and/or a multitude of currently developing schemes would have a greater overall cumulative impact on a receptor or resource than if each impact were assessed individually. This impact could be described as the collective (total) environmental impact upon a receptor and is often defined as a ‘synergistic’ or ‘holistic’ impact.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 110 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
7.9 Incremental effects relate to the impact of multitude of schemes (including maintenance operations) that have developed over a longer period of time. These individual impacts may be insignificant, but when considered together could be significant. For example, a maintenance scheme considered on its own may not have a large adverse impact on the environment. However, the sum of past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions in relation to the continuing development of the town centre can often be considered to have had a large combined (cumulative) impact on the environment.
Potential Developments
7.10 In order to assess the potential for cumulative effects, it is necessary to define the potential location and timing of nearby developments. To identify developments that may contribute to cumulative environmental effects within the Study Area, the relevant local planning authorities and other sources where relevant/possible have been consulted. The sections below define the potential transport infrastructure and land development projects that may occur in the vicinity of the Scheme.
7.11 The Pre-publication draft of the Swale Borough Local Plan 2008 which includes details on the site allocations and the Area Action Plans for the Borough. Tables 7.2 to 7.5 provide details on employment, retail, residential and transport.
Table 7.2: Employment sites
Estimated Floorspace Site Area (Ha) (sq.m) Ridham and Kemsley 135.00 318,000 East Hall Farm, Sittingbourne 10.56 30,907 The Meads, Sittingbourne 6.70 22,237 Eurocentre, Whitstable Road, 7.15 15,064 Faversham (mixed use) Land at Oare Gravel Workings, 6.00 24,000 Favershsam Western Link, Faversham 8.30 23,820 Standard House, Standard Quay, 0.20 665 Faversham Creek Faversham Creek Basin 1.10 500 Land and buildings west of Selling 1.80 6,300 Road, Faversham Land east of Faversham 2.00 7,000 Duke of Kent, Thanet Way, Faversham 1.40 4,900 Land at Graveney Road, Faversham 2.20 7,700 Land at West Minster, East of Brielle 3.70 12,950 Way, Queenborough Whiteway Road, South Westminster, 14.10 49,350
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 111 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Estimated Floorspace Site Area (Ha) (sq.m) Queenborough Land to the north of Sheerness Station, Bridge Road (as part of mixed 0.84 1,600 use development) Milton Creek, Sittingbourne (as part of 3.10 11,000 mixed use development) Iwade (as part of wider housing 0.90 3,000 development) St. Michael’s Road, former Seaboard 0.40 1,295 Yard and offices, Sittingbourne The Bell Centre and adjacent land, Sittingbourne ( as part of mixed use 1.11 400 development)
Table 7.3: Mixed use sites
Site Area (hectare) Eurocentre, Whitstable Road, Faversham 7.15 Land at Graveney Road, Faversham 4.0 Land to the north of Sheerness Station, Bridge 1.0 Road Land Around Milton Creek 75 Iwade 1.0 The Bell Centre and Adjacent Land, 1.1 Sittingbourne
Table 7.4: Housing sites
Sites Number of dwellings % Affordable Sites within the defined built-up area boundaries (listed in Table 7.2, 3,948 / Appendix 4 in Swale Local Plan 2008) East Hall Farm, Sittinbourne 200 20 Thistle Hill, Minster 500 30 Land at Plover Road, Minster 130 30 Iwade 427 28 Land at Stones Farm, Sittingbourne 600 30 Total 5,805 /
Table 7.5: Transport schemes
Scheme Location The road will provide a direct link between the A249, from the Sittingbourne Grovehurst Junction, and the A2, east of Bapchild, around the Northern Relief Road north and east of Bapchild, around the north and east of Sittingbourne. The link road will provide direct access between the existing Rushenden Link Road Queenborough and Rushenden Industrial estate and the re- aligned A249.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 112 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Table 7.6: Energy schemes
Scheme Location Port of Sheerness The four turbines will be situated along the sea/river frontage at Windfarm the Port of Sheerness.
Assessment of Impacts
7.12 The assessment of the secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects can be undertaken principally by taking account of transportation schemes and land developments that would occur at times prior to, during or recently after the construction of the Masterplan proposals.
7.13 Overall effects are anticipated to diminish in the longer tem post-construction as local residents or receptors become accustomed to the post-construction conditions and the impact is actually measurably less significant (for example ecological areas recover after the effects of a multitude of schemes) or is perceived to be less significant (for example the impact of noise, which residents may ultimately become accustomed to).
Construction Specific Effects
7.14 During construction, the locations at most risk from cumulative effects are those in close proximity to construction activities. Cumulative effects arising from construction phase activities are likely to relate to townscape, visual intrusion, dust, noise and vibration, transport and socio-economic impacts.
7.15 The severity of cumulative effects would be dependent upon:
x The type of works being undertaken; x The duration of the works; x The distance between the works and their respective proximity to the receptor; x The sensitivity of the receptor; and x The visible presence of the works.
Secondary, Cumulative and Synergistic
7.16 Table 7.7 considers the potential for cumulative impacts associated to the developments schemes outlined in Tables 7.2 to 7.6.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 113 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 114 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Table 7.7: Potential Secondary, Cumulative and Synergistic Effects of each Objective
Sustainable Development Objectives Summary comments on secondary, cumulative and synergistic impacts The Masterplan proposals for Options 2, 3 and 4 in conjunction with the other housing proposals in 1. To ensure that the opportunity is Table 8.4 would have a positive synergistic effect on the provision of decent homes including provided for decent homes to be affordable housing to be provided within Swale Borough. Option 1 would maintain the existing provided for all the community situation. There would be an overall positive synergistic impact for Options 2, 3, and 4 as development control 2. To improve human health and well- policies would encourage improvements in infrastructure including provision of health facilities and being opportunities for formal or informal recreation. However a cumulative benefit would depend on whether availability encourages a change in activity. Option 1 would maintain the existing situation. There would be overall positive synergistic impacts as the provision of Options 2, 3 and 4 and the 3. To reduce the gap between the most other proposals within Swale Borough Council especially on the Isle of Sheppey aim to redress the disadvantaged communities and the gap between the most disadvantaged communities and the rest and to increase prosperity through rest and to increase prosperity infrastructure, employment opportunities and housing. Option 1 would maintain the existing situation. 4. To raise education levels and develop There would be overall positive synergistic impacts as many of the residential or mixed use opportunities for everyone to find the development are located in close proximity to existing education facilities or would include skill needed to find, remain and proposals to provide additional educational facilities. In addition the increased employment sites progress at work may provide opportunities for integrating skills training. 5. To promote social inclusion and No cumulative impacts are identified and potential for negative cumulative impacts are mitigated by cohesion including creating a safe and development control policies. secure environment 6. To encourage development and No cumulative impacts are identified and potential for negative cumulative impacts are mitigated by participation in culture, sport and the development control policies. arts and enjoyment of the countryside 7. To sustain and improve vibrant rural No cumulative impacts are identified and potential for negative cumulative impacts are mitigated by communities development control policies. There would be an overall positive synergistic impact as development has been prioritized in urban 8. To maximise the use of previously areas or brownfield sites. However it is recognized that some of the allocated sites are located on developed land for development and to greenfield sites. Option 1 would maintain the existing situation. Option 1 would maintain the use land efficiently existing situation with derelict brownfield sites dominating the centre of the area. 9. To improve the quality of land and There would be an overall positive synergistic impact where the development proposed within Swale reduce contamination Borough would occur on brownfield sites which would potentially require remediation prior to
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 115 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Sustainable Development Objectives Summary comments on secondary, cumulative and synergistic impacts redevelopment. Option 1 would not improve the quality of the land. There would be an overall positive synergistic impact as development control policies encourage the 10. To improve the overall air quality of improvement to air quality through the increased use and provision of public transport, walking and the Borough cycling. There would be an overall positive synergistic impact as development control policies seek to protect watercourses and surface and ground waters from potentially polluting developments. In addition 11. To improve water quality the uses of SuDS are encouraged to allow the management of environmental impacts at source rather than downstream and control water run-off rates. Option 1 would not improve water quality. 12. Will it maintain hydrology/coastal There would be no cumulative impacts as development control policies would ensure that drainage processes? features would be maintained and coastal processes would be unaffected. There would be an overall positive synergistic impact even though the emissions of greenhouse gases associated with transportation sources would increase with the intensification of land use and 13. Will it reduce or minimise population. Development control policies would encourage the use of renewable energy systems greenhouse gas emissions? incorporated into the larger development as well as the construction of energy efficient buildings. Option 1 would not reduce or minimise greenhouse gas emissions. There would be an overall positive synergistic impact as development control policies would prevent development where the degree of risk of flooding, either to, or arising from, the development, 14. To effectively manage the risk of would give rise to adverse impacts upon, or increased risk to, human life, ecosystems, habitats and flooding development. Option 1 would maintain the existing situation and continue to allow management of flood risk. There would be an overall positive synergistic impact resulting from Option 2 as development control policies would encourage the conservation and enhancement of biodiversity through: the protection of ecologically sensitive and designated sites; the use of native species in planting 15. To conserve and enhance strategies; and provision of green corridors that would provide links to existing habitats. Options 3 biodiversity and 4 would lead to a negative synergistic impact as the marina would be located adjacent to or in the Ramsar/SPA/SSSI respectively and potentially cause disturbance to the birds using the mudflats. Option 1 would have a neutral synergistic effect. 16. To promote the use of sustainable There would be an overall positive synergistic impact as much of development within Swale has forms of transport and reduce travel by been located in already existing urban areas creating the opportunity for developing alternative car/lorry transportation corridors such as footpaths, cycleways and bus routes. 17. To protect, enhance and make No cumulative impacts are identified, and potential for negative cumulative impacts are mitigated
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 116 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Sustainable Development Objectives Summary comments on secondary, cumulative and synergistic impacts accessible the historic environment and by development control policies. Options 3 and 4 are located within the Conservation Area and assets, including landscapes (the quality would potentially cause adverse effects to the setting of the Conservation Area and historic and character), townscapes and buildings as well as disturbance to archaeological sites. Option 1 would maintain the existing settlement settings situation and Option 2 is located south of the conservation area. 18. To maintain and enhance geological No cumulative impacts are identified for any of the Options, and the potential for negative and geomorphological sites cumulative impacts are mitigated by development control policies. 19. To ensure the sustainable use and No cumulative impacts are identified for any of the Options, and potential for negative cumulative management of natural resources impacts are mitigated by development control policies. The developments would potentially increase waste with the increased intensity of land use and 20. To reduce generation and disposal population. However negative cumulative impacts would be mitigated by development control of waste, and achieve sustainable policies and the effective implementation of the waste hierarchy. Option 1 would maintain the management of waste existing situation. 21. To enhance quality of, and access There would not be any cumulative synergistic benefits resulting from any of the Options, and the to, employment opportunities for impact on employment opportunities depends on what new jobs and businesses can be attracted to everyone Swale Borough. Moreover matching skills to employment depends in part on educational provision. 22. To increase the economic There would not be any cumulative synergistic benefits, and the impact on economic performance performance of the Borough depends on what new jobs and businesses can be attracted to Swale Borough. No cumulative impacts have been identified for any of the Options as there are no other 23. To encourage investment in local developments in close proximity to the Masterplan area that would affect investment in local services and facilities services and facilities. 24. To encourage sustainable design No cumulative impacts have been identified and potential negative impacts would be mitigated by and practice development control policies.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 117 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 118 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Summary
7.17 There would be an overall positive synergistic impacts resulting from the Masterplan proposals for the different marina options in conjunction with the other major development proposals within Swale Borough. Secondary, cumulative and synergistic impacts during construction are difficult to identify as the timescales for the developments within Swale outside of the Masterplan area are currently unknown.
7.18 During post-construction the proposed developments would enhance the housing provision, employment opportunities, health and education facilities. In terms of the environment there would generally be no adverse cumulative impacts. The development control policies would prevent adverse impacts through pollution to land, air and water and disturbance to species and habitats of nature conservation importance.
7.19 Overall Option 2 would be the preferred Option as it is located outside of the Ramsar/SPA/SSSI and the Conservation Area.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 119 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 120 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
8.0 RECOMMENTATIONS AND MONITORING PROPOSALS FOR THE QUEENBOROUGH AND RUSHENDEN REGENERATION
Introduction
8.1 This section provides a summary of the key recommendations that would be incorporated into any projects that would be located within the Masterplan area in order to minimize adverse effects resulting from the construction and post-construction of the Masterplan1 proposals and assist the future sustainable development of the site. In addition the section also provides monitoring proposals used to assess the effects of the Masterplan proposals for the preferred option, Option 2. The Green Charter2, as a constituent of part of the Masterplan and SPD, provides an appropriate mechanism for integration of sustainability into the future development of the site.
Key Recommendations and Monitoring
8.2 Option 2 of the Masterplan (Purpose built Marina within the Development) complies with the majority of the sustainability objectives as shown in Section 6.0 of this report. Where the Masterplan proposals have a positive or neutral effect on the sustainability objective no recommendations have been proposed. This section provides a description of the recommendations and monitoring that would be included into the detailed design of the projects within the Masterplan area to minimize any identified adverse effects associated with adhering to the following sustainability objectives:
8. To maximise the use of previously developed land for development and to use land efficiently 9. To improve the quality of land and reduce contamination 10. To improve the overall air quality of the Borough 13. Will it reduce or minimize greenhouse gas emissions? 15. To conserve and enhance biodiversity 16. To promote the use of sustainable forms of transport and reduce travel by car/lorry.
Objectives 8. To maximise the use of previously developed land for development and to use land efficiently and 9. To improve the quality of land and reduce contamination
8.3 A negative assessment grading was allocated to criteria 8.3 and 9.2 on the basis that the Masterplan proposals would require the loss of approximately 50 hectares of grazing marsh,
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 121 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
grassland and ditch habitat. Whilst the majority of the land is Grade 4, some of it is afforded Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) status and has significant nature conservation interest. This loss would be mitigated through the provision of compensatory habitat, the location and status of which is to be agreed with Swale Borough Council, statutory consultees, RSPB and Kent Wildlife Trust. It is recommended that a programme of monitoring is undertaken once the compensatory habitat is established to ensure that its attributes are compatible with, or exceed those that have been lost as a result of the development proposals. Overall through effective implementation of the mitigation measures there would be a positive impact on Objectives 8 and 9.
Objective 10. To improve the overall air quality of the Borough
8.4 Although the UK Air Quality Strategy objectives would not be exceeded as a result of the Masterplan proposals, it is recognized that the Masterplan proposal would involve an intensification of land use and an increase in population. The use of vehicles within the Masterplan area would therefore inevitably increase, with the associated emission of pollutants locally. The effects would be mitigated through the promotion of alternative means of transport including walking and cycling and the introduction of Travel Plans for employers within the Masterplan area which would assist in the minimization of vehicle movements. The effective implementation of mitigation measures would reduce the impacts to negative.
Objective 13. Will it reduce or minimize greenhouse gas emissions?
8.5 The emissions of greenhouse gases associated with transportation sources would increase with the intensification of land use and population and the associated construction, energy use and travel. The Masterplan and Green Charter have sought to minimize these additional emissions through: effective use of resources used in the construction of the development; the sourcing of energy; and the targets for the design and specification of the built development on site. In addition the introduction of Travel Plans for employers within the Masterplan area would also assist in reducing the effects of road travel.
8.6 It is difficult to predict with great certainty the degree to which initiatives would offset emissions and therefore, it is recommended that periodic audits are undertaken during the construction and use of the site to either calculate or estimate the actual greenhouse gas emissions compared to the aspirations, targets and standards set. The development proposals for the individual projects would need to maintain sufficient flexibility in their design and
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 122 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
implementation such that technological improvements can be incorporated into the Masterplan over its lifespan.
Objective 15. To conserve and enhance biodiversity
8.7 The development of Neatscourt Marshes would initially result in the damage to and loss of existing habitat within the development sites. This habitat loss would be compensated through the following measures in agreement with Natural England:
x The creation of a buffer area 30 to 80 metres wide between the Ramsar/SPA/SSI boundary and the nearest development; x Construction of a landscaped bund to screen built development; x Creation and enhancement of ditches and water bodies within existing grazing marshes; and x Provision of 25 ha of replacement land at Leysdown.
8.8 It is recommended that biodiversity improvements within the Masterplan area are undertaken in consultation with nature conservation organisations and follow the guidance provided by the Kent Design Guide Biodiversity Appendix (2006)3. In order to evaluate the success of the creation and enhancement of habitats 10 years of ecological monitoring is being undertaken on a periodic basis in agreement with the key ecological consultees.
8.9 In addition to the compensation and enhancement measures described above habitats within the Masterplan area would be linked through a network of wildlife corridors, including areas of landscaping and watercourses with reedbeds and attenuation ponds within and between the respective development areas to minimise habitat fragmentation.
8.10 There are also a series of measures and recommendations within the Habitat Regulations Assessment for Queenborough and Rushenden4 that would be implemented through consenting conditions or legal agreement which would avoid adverse effects on the integrity of the sites. The measures and recommendations are:
1. If a period of 6 months or more elapses or new data on recreational boating on the Medway is published, between the adoption of the Masterplan and the submission of a detailed planning application for the marina, a survey of existing levels of boat traffic within the western Swale and the Medway will be undertaken and its findings reviewed to ensure that the conclusions of this Habitat Regulations assessment remain valid. If the outcome of this review
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 123 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
determines there are no or insufficient measures to mitigate any adverse effects and no alternatives can be identified, then this element will need to be removed from the Masterplan
2. Prior to the marina becoming operational a leaflet will be produced detailing those areas of the Medway known to hold important breeding bird colonies and high tide wader roosts. A series of recommendations to avoid disturbance will be included in the leaflet. This information will be displayed at the marina and given to all boats berthed at the marina.
3. A detailed contamination survey of the sediments along the route of the channel and an associated risk assessment will be undertaken in advance of the marina application. If it is found that there are no or insufficient measures to mitigate the adverse effect and no alternatives can be identified, then this element will need to be removed from the Masterplan.
4. Sediments will not be removed from the estuarine system during the creation of the channel unless contaminated. If it is found that there are no or insufficient measures to mitigate any adverse effects and no alternatives can be identified, then this element will need to be removed from the Masterplan. The timing of the flushing to create the new channel will be agreed with Environment Agency and Natural England prior to consenting the application.
5. Full details of the methods of working on the inter-tidal areas will be provided in a Construction Environmental Management Plan. Agreement on the adequacy of this document to prevent impacts on the European site with Natural England will be required prior to consenting the marina application. If it is found that there are no or insufficient measures to mitigate any adverse effects and no alternatives can be identified, then this element will need to be removed from the Masterplan.
6. Work associated with the marina that requires access to the inter-tidal areas will only be carried out between end of April and end of August.
7. If permission for a marina is granted subject to Measure 1, a planning condition will require one year of baseline monitoring (October – March) to be undertaken, assessing wintering bird densities within 400m of the proposed marina lock and channel. A condition will also require monitoring of boat movements in the western Swale and Medway, with further survey work to be undertaken once the permanent berths within the marina are at 40% capacity. This monitoring will be undertaken and reviewed by the instigated Queenborough Waterways Management Board in agreement with Natural England. If there are any adverse impacts
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 124 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
additional appropriate management and control mechanisms will be discussed and implemented in agreement with Natural England.
8. The nature conservation area along Queenborough Creek will be managed to ensure no public access is possible over the high tide period. The mitigation measures will require agreement with Natural England prior to consenting any applications with residential elements. Public access will be monitored and reviewed in agreement with Natural England. If there are any adverse impacts appropriate additional management and control mechanisms will be discussed and implemented in agreement with Natural England.
9. There will be no net change in the volumes of freshwater entering the Swale and Medway as a result of the implementation of the Masterplan. Sustainable drainage systems (SUDS) will be used throughout to control the quality and quantity of surface water discharges from the Masterplan area.
10. A series of measures designed to ensure water quality is maintained are included in section 4.11 of the Neatscourt Appropriate Assessment, including the fitting of outfalls with a stop lock system to isolate the ditch network in the event of a pollution incident. Similar water control systems will be included in the design of all additional drainage schemes required for the Masterplan. No watercourses discharging into the marina will be permitted without such a system. An agreed, full-funded programme of management and maintenance will be required prior to consenting any applications.
11. Each stage of the development will be required to provide details of the drainage strategies to be employed prior to consenting these applications. Run-off rates into the Queenborough Creek will be calculated for each phase of the development, and considered in-combination with existing conditions to ensure no changes in salinity levels occur.
12. Conditions will be agreed prior to consenting subsequent applications to ensure safe storage and handling of possibly contaminated material during excavation and (if required) disposal. Best practice industry guidelines will be followed during groundworks and other construction activities. Full details will be provided in a Construction and Environment Management Plan prior to construction commencing.
13. No waters to be discharged directly into the Medway Estuary and Marshes SPA/Ramsar during the construction of the marina basin.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 125 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
14. Stiles or gates will be installed at the points the footpaths leave the Masterplan area in all directions. These will be of a design that allows access by walkers to the existing footpaths but prevents access by bikes, motor-cycles or other forms of transport. Information boards should also be installed to request walkers remain on the footpath and keep dogs under strict control. The boards should also contain some basic information detailing the interest features of the grazing marsh. These will be in place before the occupation of the first additional dwelling.
15. Until such time that a 12-month study to assess the use of the sea wall, footpaths and mudflats at low tide has been carried out, any detailed applications for residential schemes should be refused. The data from the 12-month study should be used to check the validity of the assumptions made in this Habitat Regulations assessment, and consent should only be granted if a review of the Habitat Regulations assessment against the new survey findings demonstrates that the current conclusions hold. If it is found that there are no or insufficient measures to mitigate any adverse effects and no alternatives can be identified, then this recreational element will need to be removed from the Masterplan.
16. Open space provision (see Plan 3.6 of Masterplan) within the development will be designed to provide suitable areas for exercising dogs (both on and off leads). The existing area of Rushenden Hill and the proposed park will play an important role in providing suitable areas for dog exercise. All subsequent detailed applications will be required to meet the Accessible Natural Greenspace Standards. During each phase of residential development the use of the open space provided by residents will be monitored and compared to the baseline recreational data (see measure 15). The information collected on patterns of use will be used to inform and, if necessary, refine open space provision. Natural England will be consulted on survey findings and any revisions to open space provision required for subsequent phases of residential development.
17. The description of lighting characteristics for construction compounds described in section 4.36 of the Neatscourt Appropriate Assessment will be applied to construction compounds associated with the development of the final area of employment land to the south of the land owned by the Port of Sheerness (see figure 7).
18. The installation of a solid fence of 1.8m height around construction compounds (set out in section 4.37 of the Neatscourt Appropriate Assessment) should be applied to construction compounds associated with the development of the final area of employment land to the south of the land owned by the Port of Sheerness (see figure 7).
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 126 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
19. The creation of the permanent bund along the southern edge of the proposed employment areas will be necessary. The bund described in section 3.12 and shown in figure 5 of the Neatscourt Appropriate Assessment should be progressively extended to the west until it meets with the existing railway line to restrict access to the adjacent SPA/Ramsar from the business developments in this area. This bund will be in place prior to construction work commencing in the relevant area.
20. Post-construction lighting will be subject to detailed design. The recommendations outlined in section 4.47 of the Neatscourt Appropriate Assessment should be applied to the area of employment land to the south of the land owned by the Port of Sheerness (see figure 7).
21. The description of lighting characteristics for construction compounds described in section 4.36 of the Neatscourt Appropriate Assessment will be applied to construction compounds within 75m of any inter-tidal areas within the European site. The installation of a solid fence of 1.8m height around these construction compounds (set out in section 4.37 of the Neatscourt Appropriate Assessment) will also be required.
22. The design of any footpath lighting along the sea wall should be designed in such a way that there is no significant light spill onto the surrounding mudflats as a result of its installation. Any lighting columns used should be as low as practicable and lighting systems with high levels of directionality should be used. Details of the lighting systems will be agreed with Natural England once full details are available. If it is found that there are no or insufficient measures to mitigate any adverse effects and no alternatives can be identified, then this element will need to be removed from the Masterplan.
23. Full details of the impact/effect lighting will be required. It is considered that any lighting that increases ambient levels of light on the mudflats is likely to be unacceptable. If it cannot be demonstrated that this lighting will not increase ambient light levels on the inter-tidal habitats any subsequent detailed applications should be refused and these elements be removed from the Masterplan proposals.
24. The design of buildings fronting onto areas of inter-tidal habitat will include design features to minimise light spill onto adjacent mudflats. Specialist advice from lighting consultants may be required to ensure light spill and reflectivity is minimised.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 127 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
16. To promote the use of sustainable forms of transport and reduce travel by car/lorry
8.11 Whilst there are a range of initiatives within the Masterplan to enhance the potential for sustainable travel use, employment generation is also a key objective and it is inevitable that this would lead to an increase in the movement of goods by road in the local area. In order to reduce the effects SEEDA will work with future occupiers to develop travel plans incorporating delivery movements so that transport of goods by road can be minimized. In addition the transportation strategy includes a redirection of flows, particularly of HGV’s away from the centre of Queenborough, which would reduce congestion and intimidation and would make local minor roads more conducive to walking and cycling.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 128 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
9.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
9.1 This section provides a summary of the review of Queenborough and Rushenden Masterplan in the context of relevant sustainability objectives and the series of recommendations to assist the future development of the scheme to proceed in as sustainable a manner as possible.
9.2 The four marina options were appraised and assessed against each of the sustainability objectives including environmental criteria associated with ecological sensitivity, ground conditions and cultural heritage. Overall all the Masterplan options adhere to the sustainability objectives set for Swale Borough during construction and post-construction. Where there is potential for an adverse effect then mitigation measures would be proposed to minimise the impacts.
9.3 Option 2 (purpose built marina within the development) is the preferred option that has been integrated into the final Masterplan design. The option would have a strongly positive impact on socio-economic objectives through the provision of good quality and various types of house, employment opportunities and health and education facilities. The water environment would also be improved through the inclusion of SuDS. Furthermore Option 2 would provide the opportunity to protect and enhance the cultural heritage assets by the re-distribution of existing traffic from Rushenden Road and the centre of Queenborough creating a beneficial effect on the setting of sites of cultural and heritage interest including Queenborough Castle, Listed Buildings and the Conservation Area.
9.4 The main advantage of implementing Option 2 is that there would be no impact on biodiversity as there would be no direct loss of designated nature conservation site or disturbance to species of interest for which the sites are designated if the measures and restrictions described in the Habitat Regulations Assessment for Queenborough and Rushenden Masterplan are implemented through consenting conditions or legal agreements.
9.5 The Masterplan would result in overall positive synergistic impacts when assessed in conjunction with other major development proposals within Swale Borough. However, during construction the secondary cumulative and synergistic impacts are difficult to identify as the timescales for the development within Swale outside of the Masterplan are currently unknown.
9.6 During post-construction the proposed developments would enhance the housing provision, employment opportunities, health and education facilities. In terms of the environment there
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 129 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
would generally be no adverse cumulative impacts. The development control policies would prevent adverse impacts through pollution to land, air, water and disturbance to species and habitats of nature conservation importance.
9.7 In conclusion the Masterplan represents a ‘positive’ or ‘strongly positive’ influence on sustainable development within the Masterplan area. The Green Charter and the Habitat Regulations Assessment which form constituent parts of the Masterplan and SPD provide appropriate mechanisms for integrity of sustainability into the future development of the site.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 130 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
REFERENCES
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1Rummey Design (November 2007) Queenborough & Rushenden Regeneration Masterplan Consultation Document 2Swale Borough Council (July 2005) Swale Local Plan First Review Re-deposit Draft 3Swale Borough Council (2004) Approved Development Framework – Land at Queenborough/Rushenden SPD
2.0 BACKGROUND TO SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL AND STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
1Rummey Design (November 2007) Queenborough & Rushenden Regeneration Masterplan Consultation Document 2Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 3ODPM (November 2005) Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents Guidance for Regional Planning Bodies and Local Planning Authorities 4European Directive 2001/42/EC ‘on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment’ (SEA Directive) 5ODPM (2005) A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive 6Rummey Design (November 2007) Queenborough & Rushenden Regeneration: The Green Charter for Queenborough and Rushenden Ensuring a Sustainable Future 7Swale Borough Council (July 2005) Swale Local Plan First Review Re-deposit Draft 8 Entec UK Ltd (2005), Swale Borough Council Integrated SEA/SA of the Local Plan First Review Re- deposit Draft July 2005, Final Scoping Report, July 2005 9Entec UK Ltd (2005), Swale Borough Council Integrated SEA/SA of the Local Plan First Review Re- deposit Draft July 2005, SEA/SA Report, September 2005 10Swale Borough Council (2004) Approved Development Framework – Land at Queenborough/Rushenden SPD 10Swale Borough Council (February 2008) Swale Borough Local Plan 11Town and Country Planning (Development Plan) (England) Regulations 1999 12Town and Country Planning (Transitional Arrangements) (England) Regulations 2004
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 131 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
3.0 BACKGROUND TO THE MASTERPLAN, SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT AND GREEN CHARTER
1Rummey Design (November 2007) Queenborough & Rushenden Regeneration Masterplan Consultation Document 2Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 3www.swale.gov.uk 4Rummey Design (November 2007) Queenborough & Rushenden Regeneration: The Green Charter for Queenborough and Rushenden Ensuring a Sustainable Future
4.0 BASELINE INFORMATION
1Entec UK Ltd (2005), Swale Borough Council Integrated SEA/SA of the Local Plan First Review Re- deposit Draft July 2005, Final Scoping Report, July 2005 2Swale Borough Council (March 2004) Housing Strategy 2004-2007 3Swale Borough Council (2003) Housing Needs Survey 4Office for National Statistics http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk 5Swale Borough Council (2004) Learning Strategy 6 Kent Police Business Information Unit 7Swale Borough Council Indoor Sports Facilities Strategy (2004) 8Swale Borough Council (2003) Agricultural Census 9Swale Borough Council (2004) Rural Services Survey 10 National Land Use Change Database (2003) 11ODPM (May 2005) Land Use Change in England: Residential Development to 2004 12CampbellReith (November 2005) Queenborough and Rushenden, Isle of Sheppey Land Quality Statement 13 Defra (2007) Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland 14Kent Air (2008) www.kentair.org.uk 15Swale Borough Council (2008) Annual Progress Report 2007-2008 16Environment Agency (2008) The Environment Agency’s General Quality Assessment scheme (GQA). 17South East Coastal Group (May 2007) Medway Estuary and Swale Shoreline Management Plan Consultation Draft 18Jacobs Babtie (2005) Swale Borough Local Plan Review Strategic Flood Risk Assessment 19Kent County Council (2005) Kent Biodiversity Action Plan 20Austin, G.E et al (2005) Investigating possible movements of waterbirds between the Medway Estuary & Marshes SPA and neighbouring areas of the Thames and Swale Estuaries ISBN 1-904870- 43-0
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 132 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
21Marchant (1983) British Trust for Ornithology’ Common Birds Census method 22Gregory et al 2002 The population status of birds in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man: an analysis of conservation concern 2002–2007. British Birds 95, 410–448. 23Council Directive on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora (42/43/EEC) 24CampbellReith and Terence O’Rourke (2009) Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Masterplan Habitat Regulations Assessment 25Swale Borough Council and Swale Forward (July 2005) Swale Transport and Access Study 26Swale Borough Council (2003) Swale Landscape Character Assessment and Guidelines 27English Heritage (2006) Historic Area Appraisal of Queenborough 28Swale Borough Council (July 2005) Swale Local Plan First Review Re-deposit Draft 29Swale Borough Council (2001) Swale Housing Strategy 30www.sheerness.windfarm.co.uk 31Swale Borough Council (date unknown) Swale Waste Strategy (2002-2005) 32 NOMIS Labour Market Statistics (Mar 2003-Feb 2004) 33Swale Borough Council Economic Development Unit, 2000. www.swale.gov.uk
5.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
1SEEDA (December 2006) Rushenden Relief Road Environmental Statement Report 2SEEDA (December 2006) Neatscourt Phase 1 Environmental Statement Report 3Swale Borough Council (July 2005) Swale Local Plan First Review Re-deposit Draft 4British Waterways London (2006) Queenborough/ Rushenden Regeneration Marina Option Appraisal
6.0 MASTERPLAN SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL AND STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
1 Rummey Design (November 2007) Queenborough & Rushenden Regeneration Masterplan Consultation Document
7.0 SECONDARY, CUMULATIVE AND SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS
1ODPM (November 2005) Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents Guidance for Regional Planning Bodies and Local Planning Authorities 2Government Office for the South East (March 2001) RPG9: Regional Planning Guidance for the South East
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 133 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
3South East Regional Assembly (March 2006) Draft South East Plan 4Kent County Council (July 2006)Kent and Medway Structure Plan (KMSP) 5Kent County Council (2006) Local Transport Plan (LTP) for Kent 6Swale Borough Council (July 2005) Swale Local Plan First Review Re-deposit Draft
8.0 RECOMMENTATIONS AND MONITORING PROPOSALS FOR THE QUEENBOROUGH AND RUSHENDEN REGENERATION
1Rummey Design (November 2007) Queenborough & Rushenden Regeneration Masterplan Consultation Document 2Rummey Design (November 2007) Queenborough & Rushenden Regeneration: The Green Charter for Queenborough and Rushenden Ensuring a Sustainable Future 3Kent County Council (2006) Kent Design Guide Biodiversity Appendix 4CampbellReith and Terence O’Rourke (2008) Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Appropriate Assessment for Queenborough and Rushenden Masterplan
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 134 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
APPENDICES
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 135
Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
APPENDIX A: IDENTIFYING OTHER RELEVANT PLANS AND PROGRAMMES FROM SWALE BOROUGH COUNCIL INTEGRATED SEA/SA OF THE LOCAL PLAN FIRST REVIEW RE-DEPOSIT DRAFT JULY 2005, FINAL SCOPING REPORT APPENDIX B
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 137
Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
APPENDIX B: QUEENBOROUGH AND RUSHENDEN SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL AND STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CONSULTATION COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 139 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
APPENDIX B: QUEENBOROUGH AND RUSHENDEN SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL AND STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSEESSMENT CONSULTATION COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
Topic for Consultee consultation Comments Response to Comments
Although we acknowledge that it is not a requirement, due to the A scoping report for the Masterplan was not produced sensitivity and complexity of this site we believe that it would as the issues to be covered in the SA/SEA for the Miss Michaela have been useful to conduct a scoping report before the SA was Masterplan were already addressed in the Scoping Kennard produced. This would have allowed statutory organisations to Report and Sustainability Appraisal Report produced for Environment contribute to the scoping process and identify specific issues and Swale Local Plan and the Approved Development Agency SA framework objectives applicable to the Masterplan area. Framework SPD for Queenborough and Rushenden. EA was consulted on this document. The EA believes the SA/SEA Report is broadly in line with the requirements of the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive, The comment has been noted. specifically Article 5 annex 1.
Paragraph 2.10 and Appendix A show how the The Report does not show how the environment protection environmental objectives in the Swale Borough Council General objectives established at member state, community or national Integrated SEA/SA of the Local Plan First Review Re- level have been taken into account. deposit Draft July 2005, Final Scoping Report have been integrated into this appraisal and assessment. Section 6.0 and Appendix C provides a detailed it is not entirely clear whether the appraisal within the appraisal and assessment of the individual Marina SA/SEA process has actually informed the decisions made on the Options described in Section 5.0. The options are then alternatives described. It is also not clear if the alternatives compared to provide a preferred option that has been considered have been assessed against the SA/SEA objectives. incorporated into the Masterplan. We are concerned about the conclusions drawn within the The conclusions drawn in Section 6.0 and Appendix C Appraisal matrix. Particularly those for 8.1, 12.2, and 13.2, as well have been supplemented with additional information as those for Objective 15 where no conclusions have been drawn and any mitigation measures or recommendations are at all. described in Section 8.0 of this report. The conclusions are supported by the Appropriate Assessment.
Key Findings We note that results of an Appropriate Assessment are required at An Appropriate Assessment has been undertaken and MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 140 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Topic for Consultee consultation Comments Response to Comments
N.7 this stage to ascertain that the regeneration Masterplan shall not the results, mitigation measures and recommendations adversely affect the integrity of the 2 SPAs immediately adjacent suggested in the Appropriate Assessment have been to the Masterplan area. incorporated into the SA and SEA.
‘Enhancement of positive impacts, including the biodiversity value of new development’ – the actions listed in the Masterplan section do not sufficiently state the level of status of habitat being lost (eg. Priority habitat, Wildlife Site designation), nor is adequate Sections 6.0, 8.0 and Appendix C provide a strategic information provided about the designation / condition of the Table 2.1 level of information regarding the status of the habitat land identified for replacement. lost and how it would be replaced and compensated for. This section does not refer to the potential indirect impact of the Masterplan on international wildlife sites. We cannot support the report without this level of strategic information.
We recommend that the locally designated sites of nature conservation interest – Diggs and Sheppey Court Marshes – and Diggs and Sheppey Court Marshes and North Kent 5.2.1 Site the North Kent Marshes Environmentally Sensitive Area are Marshes ESA have been added to Figure 4.1 as Description included in Fig 5.1 ‘ecological designations relevant to the suggested. Masterplan’.
This paragraph refers to an indicative cross-section of a proposed 7.2.23 bund in a buffer zone between the Masterplan area and the SPA. This reference has been removed from this document. However the drawing is not included in figure 7.1.
It is not sufficient to consider potential implications on Medway An Appropriate Assessment has been undertaken and 7.2.30 Estuary and Marshes SPA at a subsequent stage of planning the results, mitigation measures and recommendations process. An Appropriate Assessment is required. suggested in the Appropriate Assessment have been incorporated into the SA and SEA. Volume 2 - Zone C section makes no reference to being adjacent to the This is not part of the SA and SEA. Project Medway Estuary and Marshes Special Protected Area.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 141 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Topic for Consultee consultation Comments Response to Comments
Delivery - Definition of Strategy Area and Zones (page 11)
The Strategic Environmental Assessment and Sustainability Sue Young Kent Appraisal identifies not only the exceptional ecological value of General This comment has been noted Wildlife Trust the adjacent European Sites but also the considerable ecological value of parts of the development area. Kent Wildlife Trust is extremely concerned about the direct habitat loss of up to 50 ha of grazing marsh. As stated in 7.2.23, we have been involved in consultation with regard to this, but in our Sections 6.0 and 8.0 and Appendix C describe the use of opinion, no satisfactory solution to the loss of this important enhancing the SSSI south of Neatscourt and Rushenden habitat has been reached. Plans for compensation for habitat loss Relief Road Schemes. The compensation land will be a Habitat Loss are so far only dealing with that associated within the relief road larger area than that lost and the enhancement and Neatscourt Phase 1. The buffer zone mentioned in this measures will include creation and enhancement of paragraph is designed to reduce the impacts of disturbance on ditches and water bodies within existing grazing the SPA, not to compensate the extensive habitat loss, and indeed marshes. may involve additional loss of grazing marsh due tot eh construction of the bund. There appears to be an assumption that the impacts on The comment has been noted. An Appropriate biodiversity will be mainly dealt with through compensation. We Assessment has been undertaken and the results, believe that the Masterplan should first seek to avoid impacts of mitigation measures and recommendations suggested biodiversity, by including existing valuable habitat within the in the Appropriate Assessment have been incorporated Biodiversity design. Although 21 ha of open space are proposed, most will be into the SA and SEA. In addition Section 8.0 and for recreation and amenity, with only a fraction having potential Appendix C provide information on measures to avoid for biodiversity management. We feel that greater emphasis and minimize habitat fragmentation and provide should be placed on the potential for greenspace to provide opportunities for new habitat creation and link existing habitat for wildlife. habitats. Compensation Paragraph 7.2.24 highlights the need to provide compensation An Appropriate Assessment has been undertaken and
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 142 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Topic for Consultee consultation Comments Response to Comments
Habitat habitat; we believe that this may be difficult to achieve. To ensure the results, mitigation measures and recommendations that the Masterplan is deliverable, this compensation habitat suggested in the Appropriate Assessment have been needs to be identified and agreed at the outset, and these details incorporated into the SA and SEA. should be provided in support of the Masterplan, before it is adopted. If this information is not provided, the Council cannot In addition the compensation habitat and enhancement demonstrate that the proposals would not have a significant measures have been agreed with Natural England. impact on the adjacent European Sites and on the Borough’s biodiversity interests, therefore the SPD would be in conflict with Local Plan policies E11 and E12. An Appropriate Assessment has been undertaken and Overall, the SEA appears incomplete – it fails to address many of the results, mitigation measures and recommendations the potential impacts of the development and consequently does suggested in the Appropriate Assessment have been not set out mitigation that would avoid an overall loss of incorporated into the SA and SEA. biodiversity. For example it is not clear that the proposal in Paragraph 7.2.28 for the mitigation of negative impacts on General In addition as stated in Paragraph 8.8 10 years of biodiversity by enhancement of existing land will be effective. As monitoring of the replacement and enhancement land identified by the SEA, much of the adjacent land is of very high has been agreed with Natural England. Prior to ecological quality, therefore it seems unlikely that it could be commencing work a baseline survey will be undertaken enhanced sufficiently to mitigate for the scale of habitat loss to ascertain the baseline conditions which will be used proposed. as a comparison with subsequent monitoring results. RSPB has seen the comments made by Natural England, the Alison Giacomelli General Environment Agency and Kent Wildlife Trust and supports these This comment has been noted RSPB submissions. (no comments were provided on the SEA/SA) Natural England welcomes the production of a Sustainability Appraisal for the SPD. However, we have a number of concerns The comment has been noted and the document has about the methodology employed and it is our view that the likely been reviewed against the SEA directive and fulfills all Rebecca Moberley significant effects of the Masterplan on the natural environment the stated requirements. Section 7.0 provides an General Natural England and measures to offset adverse effects have not been sufficiently assessment of the cumulative and synergistic impacts addressed to meet the requirement of the SEA Directive (European resulting from the identified developments within Directive 2991/42/EC). In addition the Sustainability Appraisal Swale. does not consider cumulative and synergistic impacts.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 143 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Topic for Consultee consultation Comments Response to Comments
The Sustainability Appraisal does not appear to include Section 8.0 provides an outline of monitoring that will Monitoring comprehensive monitoring proposals as required by the SEA be undertaken prior to and after the implementation of proposals Directive. the Masterplan. Informing the The Sustainability Appraisal process should be part of the This comment has been noted. SPD development of the SPD and used to inform it. Natural England is surprised that the Sustainability Framework The SA framework was used for the appraisal as developed for the Swale Local Plan Sustainability Appraisal (SA) suggested in the SA report produced for the Swale Local has been used for this appraisal. Whilst we would expect A Plan. Sustainability Framework to be based on that developed for the Local Plan SA, given the scale of the Masterplan proposals, our The Scoping Report and Sustainability Appraisal Report Scoping Repot view is that a more locally specific framework should have been produced for Swale Local Plan and the Approved developed. It is disappointing that we were not consulted on a Development Framework SPD for Queenborough and Scoping Report for the appraisal, so were unable to raise concerns Rushenden were considered to contain enough about the appraisal methodology at this stage. We understand information to produce the sustainability Appraisal that there is a legal requirement under the SEA Directive to Report for the Masterplan. Natural England was consult the consultation bodies at the scoping stage. consulted on the above documents. As far as we are aware, the statements about replacement habitat in Table 2.1 are incorrect. Also, it should b pointed out that the Table 2.1 has been removed and references to the replacement habitat is to mitigate impacts and is not replacement habitat and enhancement measures have Table 2.1 enhancement of the biodiversity value of the site. The issues been rephrased in Section 8.0 and Appendix C to reflect identified in this table appear to relate to the Neatscourt Phase 1 the comment. development, not to the entire Masterplan area. The Sustainability Appraisal should be used to inform the SPD, The recommendations and mitigation measures Informing the rather than incorporated into the future regeneration of suggested in this document will be incorporated into SPD Queenborough and Rushenden as part of the Green Charter as the Green Charter. suggested in Paragraph 4.3.2 5.14 there is no reference to coastal processes at the site. These Baseline Section 4.0 provides a description of the coastal are important in relation to the impacts of proposals including the Information processes. marina and flushing the creek.
5.15 there could be an assessment of likely impacts on the site Section 4.0 provides a description of the coastal resulting from climate change, one source of information being processes and the likely impacts on the site resulting MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 144 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Topic for Consultee consultation Comments Response to Comments
the Shoreline Management Plan. from climate change. 5.17 Biodiversity – we are pleased to see use of survey data The comment has been noted. already collected here. 5.19 Landscape- we welcome consideration of local issues and The comment has been noted. reference to The Swale Landscape Character Study. We are concerned that there is no consideration of a ‘non development’ alternative or alternative sites in 6.1. This section explains how the options were considered, but does not undertake an appraisal of these options, which we would expect Sections 5.0 and 6.0 provide a detailed appraisal and Alternatives to see. There is also a concern under 6.3 in relation to marina assessment of the various marina options including an options, where there is no consideration of the ‘no marina’ explanation to why Option 2 is the preferred option. option. Given the likely environmental impacts of the marina, an assessment of its sustainability and the sustainability of different options would have been useful. An Appropriate Assessment has been undertaken and Explanation of 7.2.21 – It is unclear how the conclusion has been reached that the results, mitigation measures and recommendations the impact the marina will not affect coastal processes and whether this is suggested in the Appropriate Assessment have been and appraisal based on satisfactory evidence. incorporated into the SA and SEA.
7.2.23-7.2.29 – this section appears to focus on the loss of habitat An Appropriate Assessment has been undertaken and resulting from the Neatscourt Phase 1 development. Other areas the results, mitigation measures and recommendations of the site have biodiversity value and we would expect the suggested in the Appropriate Assessment have been impacts of development on these to also be assessed. As incorporated into the SA and SEA. highlighted above, the principle should be to avoid impacts wherever possible, mitigate only where impacts are unavoidable In addition Section 8.0 provides the key and compensate only where mitigation is not sufficient to avoid recommendation and mitigation measures proposed to impacts. It is unclear how this principle is adopted in relation to reduce the impacts on biodiversity. the Masterplan.
7.2.31 – As highlighted above, impacts on the SPA and Ramsar An Appropriate Assessment has been undertaken and Sites should be considered now, not at a later stage in the the results, mitigation measures and recommendations development of proposals suggested in the Appropriate Assessment have been MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 145 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Topic for Consultee consultation Comments Response to Comments
incorporated into the SA and SEA.
An Appropriate Assessment has been undertaken and 7.2.33 – mitigation for bird disturbance from the marina is not the results, mitigation measures and recommendations mentioned in the Masterplan and there is no commitment to suggested in the Appropriate Assessment have been providing such measures. This is a significant concern, given the incorporated into the SA and SEA. potential for impacts on the SPA and Ramsar Site. There is no assessment of the impacts of increased access to the This issue is addressed in the Appropriate Assessment. foreshore and marshes, which is highlighted as a positive effect in The results, mitigation measures and recommendations 7.2.34. The surrounding sites are sensitive to human disturbance suggested in the Appropriate Assessment have been and any access needs to be appropriately managed to ensure the incorporated into the SA and SEA. sites are not adversely affected. An Appropriate Assessment has been undertaken and the results, mitigation measures and recommendations suggested in the Appropriate Assessment have been Table 7.1-13.2- what are the improvements to bird habitat incorporated into the SA and SEA. proposed? In addition Section 8.0 and Appendix C outlines the mitigation measures to be undertaken. Table 8.1 has now been removed and the conclusions Table 8.1- it is unclear how impacts can be ‘positive/negative’ have been revised. It should be noted that impacts to consider under Objective 15 do The impacts considered under Objective 15 have been not just relate to direct habitat loss, also indirect impacts as a revised. result of the proposals. Conclusions of The comment has been noted and the document has appraisal There has been no consideration of the cumulative and in- been reviewed against the SEA directive and fulfills all combination impacts of the Masterplan. Annex 1 of the SEA the stated requirements. Section 7.0 provides an Directive requires that the assessment of effects include assessment of the cumulative and synergistic impacts secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects. resulting from the identified developments within Swale.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 146 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
APPENDIX C: THE SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL AND STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT MATRIX
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 147 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 148 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
APPENDIX C: THE SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL AND STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT MATRIX
Key Strongly No impact Strongly Uncertain Operates Positive Negative ++ positive + 0 or - -- negative ? – Impact 9 at this impacts impact impact relationship impact unknown timescale Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 1. To ensure that the opportunity is provided for decent homes for all the community. (Option 1) Refer to 1.1 Will it encourage more section 5.3 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. access to decent and of the SA affordable housing? text
1.2 Will it provide the Refer to appropriate mix and section 5.3 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. adaptability of housing to of the SA meet residents needs and text aspirations? Refer to 1.3 Will it reduce the section 5.3 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. number of unfit and empty of the SA homes? text Refer to 1.4 Will it build adaptability section 5.3 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. into new housing to meet of the SA changing family needs? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 149 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 1. To ensure that the opportunity is provided for decent homes for all the community. (Option 2) Up to 2000 residential units would be accommodated Refer to within the Masterplan area constructed in accordance 1.1 Will it encourage more section 5.3 ++ 0 0 99with the Governments’ Decent Homes and Ecohomes access to decent and of the SA ‘excellent’ standards. 25% are to be built as affordable affordable housing? text housing with options for shared equity purchase. At least half of the residential units would be houses 1.2 Will it provide the Refer to with the remainder being apartments. Of these only a appropriate mix and section 5.3 relatively small percentage would be one bed. This mix is ++ 0 0 99 adaptability of housing to of the SA intended to accord with recent government guidance meet residents needs and text which requires new residential development proposals to aspirations? provide a good mix of types including family homes. Refer to In working with development partners such as housing 1.3 Will it reduce the section 5.3 associations, it is envisaged that wider improvements ++ 0 0 99 number of unfit and empty of the SA would be made, including to ‘unfit’ and empty existing homes? text housing stock within Queenborough and Rushenden. The residential development would be constructed in Refer to accordance with the Government’s Decent Homes 1.4 Will it build adaptability section 5.3 ++ 0 0 99standard. The mix of properties to be provided would into new housing to meet of the SA continue to reflect the variety of needs within the changing family needs? text community.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 150 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 1. To ensure that the opportunity is provided for decent homes for all the community. (Option 3) Up to 2000 residential units would be accommodated Refer to within the Masterplan area constructed in accordance 1.1 Will it encourage more section 5.3 ++ 0 0 99with the Governments’ Decent Homes and Ecohomes access to decent and of the SA ‘excellent’ standards. 25% are to be built as affordable affordable housing? text housing with options for shared equity purchase. At least half of the residential units would be houses 1.2 Will it provide the Refer to with the remainder being apartments. Of these only a appropriate mix and section 5.3 relatively small percentage would be one bed. This mix is ++ 0 0 99 adaptability of housing to of the SA intended to accord with recent government guidance meet residents needs and text which requires new residential development proposals to aspirations? provide a good mix of types including family homes. Refer to In working with development partners such as housing 1.3 Will it reduce the section 5.3 associations, it is envisaged that wider improvements ++ 0 0 99 number of unfit and empty of the SA would be made, including to ‘unfit’ and empty existing homes? text housing stock within Queenborough and Rushenden. The residential development would be constructed in Refer to accordance with the Government’s Decent Homes 1.4 Will it build adaptability section 5.3 ++ 0 0 99standard. The mix of properties to be provided would into new housing to meet of the SA continue to reflect the variety of needs within the changing family needs? text community.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 151 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 1. To ensure that the opportunity is provided for decent homes for all the community. (Option 4) Up to 2000 residential units would be accommodated Refer to within the Masterplan area constructed in accordance 1.1 Will it encourage more section 5.3 ++ 0 0 99with the Governments’ Decent Homes and Ecohomes access to decent and of the SA ‘excellent’ standards. 25% are to be built as affordable affordable housing? text housing with options for shared equity purchase. At least half of the residential units would be houses 1.2 Will it provide the Refer to with the remainder being apartments. Of these only a appropriate mix and section 5.3 relatively small percentage would be one bed. This mix is ++ 0 0 99 adaptability of housing to of the SA intended to accord with recent government guidance meet residents needs and text which requires new residential development proposals to aspirations? provide a good mix of types including family homes. Refer to In working with development partners such as housing 1.3 Will it reduce the section 5.3 associations, it is envisaged that wider improvements ++ 0 0 99 number of unfit and empty of the SA would be made, including to ‘unfit’ and empty existing homes? text housing stock within Queenborough and Rushenden. The residential development would be constructed in Refer to accordance with the Government’s Decent Homes 1.4 Will it build adaptability section 5.3 ++ 0 0 99standard. The mix of properties to be provided would into new housing to meet of the SA continue to reflect the variety of needs within the changing family needs? text community.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 152 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 2. To improve human health and well-being (Option 1)
2.1 Will it reduce negative Refer to section 5.4 health impacts including in 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. key vulnerable groups and of the SA communities? text Refer to section 5.4 2.2 Will it promote health 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. and well-being? of the SA text Refer to 2.3 Will it provide and section 5.4 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. improve access to health of the SA and social care services? text Refer to 2.4 Will it reduce health section 5.4 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. inequalities among different of the SA groups in the community? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 153 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 2. To improve human health and well-being (Option 2) The Masterplan proposals would reduce noise and air quality impacts on health experienced within Queenborough associated with road traffic by diverting 2.1 Will it reduce negative Refer to traffic especially HGVs away from the town centre. section 5.4 health impacts including in ++0 99A new health care facility is proposed adjacent to of the SA key vulnerable groups and Rushenden Square to replace all existing doctors surgeries in text communities? Queenborough with a state of the art facility including a pharmacy, nurses facilities and support staff.
The Masterplan proposals sets out a range of new opportunities for open space and links these to existing open space with a comprehensive footpath and cycle Refer to network creating alternatives to using the car. There would section 5.4 2.2 Will it promote health ++ + 0 99also be a range of community buildings providing flexible of the SA and well-being? space for sports and other activities. This includes a primary text school with open space which would be available for community use at appropriate times. Locations for play and open space are provided throughout the Masterplan Area.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 154 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
A new health care facility is proposed adjacent to Refer to Rushenden Square. This would replace all existing doctors 2.3 Will it provide and section 5.4 surgeries in Queenborough with a state of the art facility ++0 99 improve access to health of the SA including a pharmacy, nurses facilities and support staff. and social care services? text This facility would be easily accessible from all parts of the surrounding area. Improved community facilities are proposed in the vicinity Refer to of the junction between the new Relief Road and 2.4 Will it reduce health section 5.4 Rushenden Road, in the heart of the Masterplan area. +00 99 inequalities among different of the SA Facilities would thus be central to the new community and groups in the community? text approximately equidistant between existing communities in Queenborough and Rushenden.
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 2. To improve human health and well-being (Option 3) The Masterplan proposals would reduce noise and air quality impacts on health experienced within Queenborough associated with road traffic by diverting 2.1 Will it reduce negative Refer to traffic especially HGVs away from the town centre. section 5.4 health impacts including in ++0 99A new health care facility is proposed adjacent to of the SA key vulnerable groups and Rushenden Square to replace all existing doctors surgeries in text communities? Queenborough with a state of the art facility including a pharmacy, nurses facilities and support staff.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 155 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
The Masterplan proposals sets out a range of new opportunities for open space and links these to existing open space with a comprehensive footpath and cycle Refer to network creating alternatives to using the car. There would section 5.4 2.2 Will it promote health ++ + 0 99also be a range of community buildings providing flexible of the SA and well-being? space for sports and other activities. This includes a primary text school with open space which would be available for community use at appropriate times. Locations for play and open space are provided throughout the Masterplan Area. A new health care facility is proposed adjacent to Refer to Rushenden Square. This would replace all existing doctors 2.3 Will it provide and section 5.4 surgeries in Queenborough with a state of the art facility ++0 99 improve access to health of the SA including a pharmacy, nurses facilities and support staff. and social care services? text This facility would be easily accessible from all parts of the surrounding area. Improved community facilities are proposed in the vicinity of Refer to the junction between the new Relief Road and Rushenden 2.4 Will it reduce health section 5.4 Road, in the heart of the Masterplan area. Facilities would +00 99 inequalities among different of the SA thus be central to the new community and approximately groups in the community? text equidistant between existing communities in Queenborough and Rushenden.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 156 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 2. To improve human health and well-being. (Option 4) The Masterplan proposals would reduce noise and air quality impacts on health experienced within Queenborough associated with road traffic by diverting 2.1 Will it reduce negative Refer to traffic especially HGVs away from the town centre. section 5.4 health impacts including in ++0 99A new health care facility is proposed adjacent to of the SA key vulnerable groups and Rushenden Square to replace all existing doctors surgeries in text communities? Queenborough with a state of the art facility including a pharmacy, nurses facilities and support staff.
The Masterplan proposals sets out a range of new opportunities for open space and links these to existing open space with a comprehensive footpath and cycle Refer to network creating alternatives to using the car. There would section 5.4 2.2 Will it promote health ++ + 0 99also be a range of community buildings providing flexible of the SA and well-being? space for sports and other activities. This includes a primary text school with open space which would be available for community use at appropriate times. Locations for play and open space are provided throughout the Masterplan Area.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 157 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
A new health care facility is proposed adjacent to Refer to Rushenden Square. This would replace all existing doctors 2.3 Will it provide and section 5.4 surgeries in Queenborough with a state of the art facility ++0 99 improve access to health of the SA including a pharmacy, nurses facilities and support staff. and social care services? text This facility would be easily accessible from all parts of the surrounding area. Improved community facilities are proposed in the vicinity of Refer to the junction between the new Relief Road and Rushenden 2.4 Will it reduce health section 5.4 Road, in the heart of the Masterplan area. Facilities would +00 99 inequalities among different of the SA thus be central to the new community and approximately groups in the community? text equidistant between existing communities in Queenborough and Rushenden.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 158 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 3. To reduce the gap between the most disadvantaged communities and the rest and increase prosperity (Option 1)
3.1 Will it improve Refer to section 5.5 economic, social and 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. environmental conditions in of the SA the most deprived areas? text Refer to section 5.5 3.2 Will it lower dependence 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. on welfare benefits? of the SA text
3.3 Will it increase Refer to section 5.5 employment opportunities 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. for those deprived of the SA communities? text Refer to 3.4 Will it support section 5.5 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. community led of the SA regeneration? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 159 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 3. To reduce the gap between the most disadvantaged communities and the rest and increase prosperity (Option 2) The Masterplan would provide and encourage community facilities while providing a mix of houses and flats, a school, employment, watercourses and 3.1 Will it improve Refer to attenuation ponds, open space and a quality public section 5.5 economic, social and ++ 0 0 99realm. In addition Rushenden would become physically environmental conditions in of the SA linked to old Queenborough. the most deprived areas? text The proposals would improve the environmental standards and protect the valuable Ramsar/SSSI/SPA status of the land outside Masterplan area. Refer to The Masterplan proposals would provide a range of section 5.5 employment opportunities while retaining existing jobs 3.2 Will it lower dependence +++ 99 on welfare benefits? of the SA creating opportunities for people currently on Welfare text Benefits. There would be significant employment opportunities in 3.3 Will it increase Refer to the Neatscourt area and within mixed use schemes in section 5.5 the housing areas. A range of employment types are employment opportunities +++ 99 for those deprived of the SA anticipated including office, large scale distribution, communities? text hotel and retail. It is anticipated that the marina would bring employment opportunities.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 160 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Community engagement and involvement has resulted in tangible change and activity in advance of Refer to development. Activities and initiatives have resulted in 3.4 Will it support section 5.5 the creation of place and community before any ++ 0 0 99 community led of the SA significant development has commenced. The regeneration? text community would continue to be actively involved and would play a key part in the proposals as they develop into detailed planning applications.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 161 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 3. To reduce the gap between the most disadvantaged communities and the rest and increase prosperity (Option 3) The Masterplan would provide and encourage community facilities while providing a mix of houses and flats, a school, employment, watercourses and 3.1 Will it improve Refer to attenuation ponds, open space and a quality public section 5.5 economic, social and -00 99realm. In addition Rushenden would become physically environmental conditions in of the SA linked to old Queenborough. the most deprived areas? text The proposals would not improve the environmental standards and or protect the valuable Ramsar/SSSI/SPA status of the land outside Masterplan area. Refer to The Masterplan proposals would provide a range of section 5.5 employment opportunities while retaining existing jobs 3.2 Will it lower dependence +++ 99 on welfare benefits? of the SA creating opportunities for people currently on Welfare text Benefits. There would be significant employment opportunities in 3.3 Will it increase Refer to the Neatscourt area and within mixed use schemes in section 5.5 the housing areas. A range of employment types are employment opportunities +++ 99 for those deprived of the SA anticipated including office, large scale distribution, communities? text hotel and retail. It is anticipated that the marina would bring employment opportunities.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 162 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Community engagement and involvement has resulted in tangible change and activity in advance of Refer to development. Activities and initiatives have resulted in 3.4 Will it support section 5.5 the creation of place and community before any ++ 0 0 99 community led of the SA significant development has commenced. The regeneration? text community would continue to be actively involved and would play a key part in the proposals as they develop into detailed planning applications.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 163 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 3. To reduce the gap between the most disadvantaged communities and the rest and increase prosperity (Option 4) The Masterplan would provide and encourage community facilities while providing a mix of houses and flats, a school, employment, watercourses and 3.1 Will it improve Refer to attenuation ponds, open space and a quality public section 5.5 economic, social and ++ 0 0 99realm. In addition Rushenden would become physically environmental conditions in of the SA linked to old Queenborough. the most deprived areas? text The proposals would not improve the environmental standards and or protect the valuable Ramsar/SSSI/SPA status of the land outside Masterplan area. Refer to The Masterplan proposals would provide a range of section 5.5 employment opportunities while retaining existing jobs 3.2 Will it lower dependence +++ 99 on welfare benefits? of the SA creating opportunities for people currently on Welfare text Benefits. There would be significant employment opportunities in 3.3 Will it increase Refer to the Neatscourt area and within mixed use schemes in section 5.5 the housing areas. A range of employment types are employment opportunities +++ 99 for those deprived of the SA anticipated including office, large scale distribution, communities? text hotel and retail. It is anticipated that the marina would bring employment opportunities.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 164 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Community engagement and involvement has resulted in tangible change and activity in advance of Refer to development. Activities and initiatives have resulted in 3.4 Will it support section 5.5 the creation of place and community before any ++ 0 0 99 community led of the SA significant development has commenced. The regeneration? text community would continue to be actively involved and would play a key part in the proposals as they develop into detailed planning applications.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 165 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline info and Borough Effects Commentary Sustainable Development target outside Objectives and Criteria (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 4. To raise education levels and develop opportunities for everyone to acquire the skills needed to find, remain and progress at work (Option 1) Refer to 4.1 Will it improve the section 5.6 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. number and level of of the SA qualifications achieved? text Refer to 4.2 Will it improve access to section 5.6 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. skills and training for raising of the SA employment potential? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 166 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline info and Borough Effects Commentary Sustainable Development target outside Objectives and Criteria (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 4. To raise education levels and develop opportunities for everyone to acquire the skills needed to find, remain and progress at work (Option 2) The Masterplan proposals include the regeneration of the old Jewsons building into its current use for skills training Refer to and community use. The library would also be incorporated 4.1 Will it improve the section 5.6 ++? 99into the complex. There is a proposed primary school that number and level of of the SA would incorporate certain facilities available for community qualifications achieved? text use.
There would be a drive to integrate skills training into the employment opportunities. Refer to During the construction phase of the development, 4.2 Will it improve access to section 5.6 minimum targets exist for the use of locally sourced labour, skills and training for raising ++? 99 of the SA as a proportion of the total labour force. This would both employment potential? text help develop the skills base in the area, encourage access to further on-the-job training and employment over the 12-15 year building period.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 167 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline info and Borough Effects Commentary Sustainable Development target outside Objectives and Criteria (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 4. To raise education levels and develop opportunities for everyone to acquire the skills needed to find, remain and progress at work (Option 3) The Masterplan proposals include the regeneration of the old Jewsons building into its current use for skills training Refer to and community use. The library would also be incorporated 4.1 Will it improve the section 5.6 ++? 99into the complex. There is a proposed primary school that number and level of of the SA would incorporate certain facilities available for community qualifications achieved? text use.
There would be a drive to integrate skills training into the employment opportunities. Refer to During the construction phase of the development, 4.2 Will it improve access to section 5.6 minimum targets exist for the use of locally sourced labour, skills and training for raising ++? 99 of the SA as a proportion of the total labour force. This would both employment potential? text help develop the skills base in the area, encourage access to further on-the-job training and employment over the 12-15 year building period.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 168 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline info and Borough Effects Commentary Sustainable Development target outside Objectives and Criteria (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 4. To raise education levels and develop opportunities for everyone to acquire the skills needed to find, remain and progress at work (Option 4) The Masterplan proposals include the regeneration of the old Jewsons building into its current use for skills training Refer to and community use. The library would also be incorporated 4.1 Will it improve the section 5.6 ++? 99into the complex. There is a proposed primary school that number and level of of the SA would incorporate certain facilities available for community qualifications achieved? text use.
There would be a drive to integrate skills training into the employment opportunities. Refer to During the construction phase of the development, 4.2 Will it improve access to section 5.6 minimum targets exist for the use of locally sourced labour, skills and training for raising ++? 99 of the SA as a proportion of the total labour force. This would both employment potential? text help develop the skills base in the area, encourage access to further on-the-job training and employment over the 12-15 year building period.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 169 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 5. To promote social inclusion and cohesion including creating a safe and secure environment (Option 1) Refer to section 5.7 5.1Will it reduce actual levels 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. of crime? of the SA text Refer to section 5.7 5.2 Will it reduce the fear of 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. crime? of the SA text
5.3 Will it promote design that Refer to section 5.7 discourages crime and 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. antisocial behaviour (including of the SA vandalism)? text Refer to section 5.7 5.4 Will it promote design that 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. improves road safety? of the SA text Refer to section 5.7 5.5 Will it promote social 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. cohesion? of the SA text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 170 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outsid (where e the available) Urban Rural Boroug
h Within plan period Beyond plan period
5. To promote social inclusion and cohesion including creating a safe and secure environment (Option 2) Refer to Crime in the Masterplan area would be reduced through section 5.7 combating poverty with increased employment, improved 5.1 Will it reduce actual levels ++ ++ + 99 of crime? of the SA social programmes, raised aspirations, and an improved built text environment. Refer to The proposed mixed-use layout of the Masterplan area would section 5.7 provide a physical link between the two settlements and the 5.2 Will it reduce the fear of ++ ++ 0 99 crime? of the SA network of internal roads, footpaths and cycleways would text facilitate safe penetration into all parts of the site. A public presence would be ensured in most areas at all times of the day and the majority of public spaces would be overlooked by residential development to provide a feeling of security. The 5.3 Will it promote design that Refer to holistic design recognises that environmental improvements discourages crime and section 5.7 ++ ++ 0 99must be coupled with social and economic improvements. antisocial behaviour (including of the SA Raising aspirations and expectations along with education vandalism)? text and skills is part of quality design, leading to an overall long term reduction in crime and antisocial behaviour.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 171 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
A key element of the Masterplan proposals is the diversion of existing high traffic flows (particularly HGVs) from Rushenden Road and Queenborough via the new Relief Road, thus improving road safety. Internal roads within the residential Refer to area and the final link of the Relief Road would be limited to section 5.7 5.4 Will it promote design that ++ + 0 9920 mph to improve road safety. Traffic calming is not simply of the SA improves road safety? a matter of installing chicanes and road humps, but rather text must also include consideration of parking rationalisation, incorporation of SUDS, planting strategies, and the creation of home zones. The masterplan would take a holistic view of the subject and make significant recommendations. Extensive consultation and community programmes have Refer to already demonstrably improved social cohesion, and it is a section 5.7 5.5 Will it promote social ++ + 0 99primary goal of design for sustainable communities, the of the SA cohesion? principles of which are the foundation for this masterplanning text exercise.
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the period Urban Rural period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 5. To promote social inclusion and cohesion including creating a safe and secure environment (Option 3) Refer to Crime in the Masterplan area would be reduced through section 5.7 combating poverty with increased employment, improved 5.1 Will it reduce actual levels ++ ++ + 99 of crime? of the SA social programmes, raised aspirations, and an improved built text environment.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 172 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Refer to The proposed mixed-use layout of the Masterplan area would section 5.7 provide a physical link between the two settlements and the 5.2 Will it reduce the fear of ++ ++ 0 99 crime? of the SA network of internal roads, footpaths and cycleways would text facilitate safe penetration into all parts of the site. A public presence would be ensured in most areas at all times of the day and the majority of public spaces would be overlooked by residential development to provide a feeling of security. The 5.3 Will it promote design that Refer to holistic design recognises that environmental improvements discourages crime and section 5.7 ++ ++ 0 99must be coupled with social and economic improvements. antisocial behaviour (including of the SA Raising aspirations and expectations along with education vandalism)? text and skills is part of quality design, leading to an overall long term reduction in crime and antisocial behaviour. A key element of the Masterplan proposals is the diversion of existing high traffic flows (particularly HGVs) from Rushenden Road and Queenborough via the new Relief Road, thus improving road safety. Internal roads within the residential Refer to area and the final link of the Relief Road would be limited to section 5.7 5.4 Will it promote design that ++ + 0 9920 mph to improve road safety. Traffic calming is not simply of the SA improves road safety? a matter of installing chicanes and road humps, but rather text must also include consideration of parking rationalisation, incorporation of SUDS, planting strategies, and the creation of home zones. The Masterplan would take a holistic view of the subject and make significant recommendations. Extensive consultation and community programmes have Refer to already demonstrably improved social cohesion, and it is a section 5.7 5.5 Will it promote social ++ + 0 99primary goal of design for sustainable communities, the of the SA cohesion? principles of which are the foundation for this masterplanning text exercise.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 173 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 5. To promote social inclusion and cohesion including creating a safe and secure environment (Option 4) Refer to Crime in the Masterplan area would be reduced through section 5.7 combating poverty with increased employment, improved 5.1 Will it reduce actual levels ++ ++ + 99 of crime? of the SA social programmes, raised aspirations, and an improved built text environment. Refer to The proposed mixed-use layout of the Masterplan area would section 5.7 provide a physical link between the two settlements and the 5.2 Will it reduce the fear of ++ ++ 0 99 crime? of the SA network of internal roads, footpaths and cycleways would text facilitate safe penetration into all parts of the site. A public presence would be ensured in most areas at all times of the day and the majority of public spaces would be overlooked by residential development to provide a feeling of security. The 5.3 Will it promote design that Refer to holistic design recognises that environmental improvements discourages crime and section 5.7 ++ ++ 0 99must be coupled with social and economic improvements. antisocial behaviour (including of the SA Raising aspirations and expectations along with education vandalism)? text and skills is part of quality design, leading to an overall long term reduction in crime and antisocial behaviour.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 174 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
A key element of the Masterplan proposals is the diversion of existing high traffic flows (particularly HGVs) from Rushenden Road and Queenborough via the new Relief Road, thus improving road safety. Internal roads within the residential Refer to area and the final link of the Relief Road would be limited to section 5.7 5.4 Will it promote design that ++ + 0 9920 mph to improve road safety. Traffic calming is not simply of the SA improves road safety? a matter of installing chicanes and road humps, but rather text must also include consideration of parking rationalisation, incorporation of SUDS, planting strategies, and the creation of home zones. The Masterplan would take a holistic view of the subject and make significant recommendations. Extensive consultation and community programmes have Refer to already demonstrably improved social cohesion, and it is a section 5.7 5.5 Will it promote social ++ + 0 99primary goal of design for sustainable communities, the of the SA cohesion? principles of which are the foundation for this masterplanning text exercise.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 175 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 6. To encourage development and participation in culture, sport and the arts and enjoyment of the countryside (Option 1)
6.1 Will it help to provide Refer to section 5.8 more equal access to 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. opportunities, services and of the SA facilities? text
6.2 Will it increase the Refer to section 5.8 appropriate provision of a 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. diverse range of of the SA opportunities? text Refer to 6.3 Will it help to provide section 5.8 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. more equal access to the of the SA countryside? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 176 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 6. To encourage development and participation in culture, sport and the arts and enjoyment of the countryside (Option 2) The Masterplan has a range of community facilities built into the design. The location of the community facilities is adjacent Refer to 6.1 Will it help to provide to main access and communication routes with a ‘split’ section 5.8 more equal access to ++ + 0 99between Queenborough and Rushenden. The proposed urban of the SA opportunities, services and space of Rushenden Square would become the hub for a range text facilities? of community activities and help to redress the current imbalance. The proposed facilities are intended to be flexible and multi- Refer to 6.2 Will it increase the use therefore allowing a range of activities from a digital section 5.8 appropriate provision of a ++ + 0 99cinema to yoga classes. A sports hall and open space are to be of the SA diverse range of co-located with the proposed primary school to provide text opportunities? flexible space for sports, clubs and other activities. Refer to The public open space strategy sets out a range of new 6.3 Will it help to provide section 5.8 opportunities which would link to existing open space with a 000 99 more equal access to the of the SA comprehensive footpath and cycle network which would countryside? text enable good access to the wider area.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 177 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 6. To encourage development and participation in culture, sport and the arts and enjoyment of the countryside (Option 3) The Masterplan has a range of community facilities built into the design. The location of the community facilities is adjacent Refer to 6.1 Will it help to provide to main access and communication routes with a ‘split’ section 5.8 more equal access to ++ + 0 99between Queenborough and Rushenden. The proposed urban of the SA opportunities, services and space of Rushenden Square would become the hub for a range text facilities? of community activities and help to redress the current imbalance. The proposed facilities are intended to be flexible and multi- Refer to 6.2 Will it increase the use therefore allowing a range of activities from a digital section 5.8 appropriate provision of a ++ + 0 99cinema to yoga classes. A sports hall and open space are to be of the SA diverse range of co-located with the proposed primary school to provide text opportunities? flexible space for sports, clubs and other activities. Refer to The public open space strategy sets out a range of new 6.3 Will it help to provide section 5.8 opportunities which would link to existing open space with a 000 99 more equal access to the of the SA comprehensive footpath and cycle network which would countryside? text enable good access to the wider area.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 178 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 6. To encourage development and participation in culture, sport and the arts and enjoyment of the countryside (Option 4) The Masterplan has a range of community facilities built into the design. The location of the community facilities is adjacent Refer to 6.1 Will it help to provide to main access and communication routes with a ‘split’ section 5.8 more equal access to ++ + 0 99between Queenborough and Rushenden. The proposed urban of the SA opportunities, services and space of Rushenden Square would become the hub for a range text facilities? of community activities and help to redress the current imbalance. The proposed facilities are intended to be flexible and multi- Refer to 6.2 Will it increase the use therefore allowing a range of activities from a digital section 5.8 appropriate provision of a ++ + 0 99cinema to yoga classes. A sports hall and open space are to be of the SA diverse range of co-located with the proposed primary school to provide text opportunities? flexible space for sports, clubs and other activities. Refer to The public open space strategy sets out a range of new 6.3 Will it help to provide section 5.8 opportunities which would link to existing open space with a 000 99 more equal access to the of the SA comprehensive footpath and cycle network which would countryside? text enable good access to the wider area.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 179 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 7. To sustain and improve vibrant rural communities (Option 1) Refer to 7.1 Will it assist the section 5.9 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. diversification of the rural of the SA economy? text
7.2 Will it support and Refer to section 5.9 encourage the growth of rural 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. businesses which respect rural of the SA character? text Refer to section 5.9 7.3 Will it retain and improve 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. village services and facilities? of the SA text Refer to section 5.9 7.4 Will it increase access to 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. rural facilities? of the SA text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 180 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 7. To sustain and improve vibrant rural communities (Option 2) Refer to 7.1 Will it assist the section 5.9 There may be indirect additional demand for supply and 0+ + 99 diversification of the rural of the SA services generated by the development proposals economy? text
7.2 Will it support and Refer to section 5.9 encourage the growth of rural 0 0 0 0 0 This criteria is beyond the scope of the development proposals businesses which respect rural of the SA character? text Refer to section 5.9 7.3 Will it retain and improve 0 0 0 0 0 Not applicable to the development proposals village services and facilities? of the SA text Refer to section 5.9 7.4 Will it increase access to 0 0 0 0 0 Not applicable to the development proposals rural facilities? of the SA text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 181 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 7. To sustain and improve vibrant rural communities (Option 3) Refer to 7.1 Will it assist the section 5.9 There may be indirect additional demand for supply and 0+ + 99 diversification of the rural of the SA services generated by the development proposals economy? text
7.2 Will it support and Refer to section 5.9 encourage the growth of rural 0 0 0 0 0 This criteria is beyond the scope of the development proposals businesses which respect rural of the SA character? text Refer to section 5.9 7.3 Will it retain and improve 0 0 0 0 0 Not applicable to the development proposals village services and facilities? of the SA text Refer to section 5.9 7.4 Will it increase access to 0 0 0 0 0 Not applicable to the development proposals rural facilities? of the SA text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 182 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 7. To sustain and improve vibrant rural communities (Option 4) Refer to 7.1 Will it assist the section 5.9 There may be indirect additional demand for supply and 0+ + 99 diversification of the rural of the SA services generated by the development proposals economy? text
7.2 Will it support and Refer to section 5.9 encourage the growth of rural 0 0 0 0 0 This criteria is beyond the scope of the development proposals businesses which respect rural of the SA character? text Refer to section 5.9 7.3 Will it retain and improve 0 0 0 0 0 Not applicable to the development proposals village services and facilities? of the SA text Refer to section 5.9 7.4 Will it increase access to 0 0 0 0 0 Not applicable to the development proposals rural facilities? of the SA text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 183 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 8. To maximise use of previously developed land for development and to use land efficiently (Option 1)
8.1 Will it encourage development of brownfield Refer to land in preference to section 5.10 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. greenfield sites, whilst of the SA recognising that brownfield text land can have many positive benefits? Refer to 8.2 Will it promote the wise section 5.10 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. use of land at appropriate of the SA densities? text
8.3 Will it ensure a high Refer to section 5.10 quality of agricultural land, 0 - 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. and minimise adverse impacts of the SA on the soil. text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 184 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 8. To maximise use of previously developed land for development and to use land efficiently (Option 2)
8.1 Will it encourage The Masterplan seeks to make the most efficient use of the development of brownfield Refer to land within the Area Action Plan 8 boundary. All brownfield land in preference to section 5.10 +0 0 99land within this area would be developed but there would also greenfield sites, whilst of the SA be a requirement to develop greenfield land in order to recognising that brownfield text land can have many positive provide both the Relief Road and employment opportunities. benefits? The development would comprise a range of densities, including relatively high, in order to make efficient use of the Refer to land available without adversely compromising the quality of 8.2 Will it promote the wise section 5.10 ++ 0 0 99development or the character of the surrounding residential use of land at appropriate of the SA areas. The integrated, mixed use of the development would densities? text assist in providing complimentary land uses in close proximity, thereby resulting in lower demand for transportation.
8.3 Will it ensure a high Refer to The development proposals would involve the loss of up to 50 section 5.10 hectares of grazing marshes. These are currently classified as quality of agricultural land, 0- 0 99 and minimise adverse impacts of the SA Grade ‘3’ (western side of the Neatscourt Marshes) and ‘4’ on the soil. text (eastern side of the marshes).
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 185 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 8. To maximise use of previously developed land for development and to use land efficiently (Option 3)
8.1 Will it encourage The Masterplan seeks to make the most efficient use of the development of brownfield Refer to land within the Area Action Plan 8 boundary. All brownfield land in preference to section 5.10 +0 0 99land within this area would be developed but there would also greenfield sites, whilst of the SA be a requirement to develop greenfield land in order to recognising that brownfield text land can have many positive provide both the Relief Road and employment opportunities. benefits? The development would comprise a range of densities, including relatively high, in order to make efficient use of the Refer to land available without adversely compromising the quality of 8.2 Will it promote the wise section 5.10 ++ 0 0 99development or the character of the surrounding residential use of land at appropriate of the SA areas. The integrated, mixed use of the development would densities? text assist in providing complimentary land uses in close proximity, thereby resulting in lower demand for transportation.
8.3 Will it ensure a high Refer to The development proposals would involve the loss of up to 50 section 5.10 hectares of grazing marshes. These are currently classified as quality of agricultural land, 0- 0 99 and minimise adverse impacts of the SA Grade ‘3’ (western side of the Neatscourt Marshes) and ‘4’ on the soil. text (eastern side of the marshes).
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 186 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 8. To maximise use of previously developed land for development and to use land efficiently (Option 4)
8.1 Will it encourage The Masterplan seeks to make the most efficient use of the development of brownfield Refer to land within the Area Action Plan 8 boundary. All brownfield land in preference to section 5.10 +0 0 99land within this area would be developed but there would also greenfield sites, whilst of the SA be a requirement to develop greenfield land in order to recognising that brownfield text land can have many positive provide both the Relief Road and employment opportunities. benefits? The development would comprise a range of densities, including relatively high, in order to make efficient use of the Refer to land available without adversely compromising the quality of 8.2 Will it promote the wise section 5.10 ++ 0 0 99development or the character of the surrounding residential use of land at appropriate of the SA areas. The integrated, mixed use of the development would densities? text assist in providing complimentary land uses in close proximity, thereby resulting in lower demand for transportation.
8.3 Will it ensure a high Refer to The development proposals would involve the loss of up to 50 section 5.10 hectares of grazing marshes. These are currently classified as quality of agricultural land, 0- 0 99 and minimise adverse impacts of the SA Grade ‘3’ (western side of the Neatscourt Marshes) and ‘4’ on the soil. text (eastern side of the marshes).
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 187 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 9. To improve the quality of land and reduce contamination (Option 1) Refer to 9.1 Will it reduce the amount section 5.11 0 0 0 0 0 of derelict, degraded and of the SA There would be no change to the existing situation. underused land? text Refer to section 5.11 9.2 Will it improve the quality 0 0 0 0 0 of agricultural land and soil? of the SA There would be no change to the existing situation. text
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the period Urban Rural period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 9. To improve the quality of land and reduce contamination (Option 2) Refer to The development proposals would bring back into use large 9.1 Will it reduce the amount section 5.11 areas of currently derelict, degrade and underused land to the ++ 0 0 99 of derelict, degraded and of the SA west of Rushenden Road and would intensify the scale of use underused land? text on other areas within the Masterplan area.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 188 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Refer to section 5.11 The proposed development would result in the loss of 9.2 Will it improve the quality --0 99 of agricultural land and soil? of the SA agricultural land and soil. text
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 9. To improve the quality of land and reduce contamination (Option 3) Refer to The development proposals would bring back into use large 9.1 Will it reduce the amount section 5.11 areas of currently derelict, degrade and underused land to the ++ 0 0 99 of derelict, degraded and of the SA west of Rushenden Road and would intensify the scale of use underused land? text on other areas within the Masterplan area. Refer to section 5.11 The proposed development would result in the loss of 9.2 Will it improve the quality --0 99 of agricultural land and soil? of the SA agricultural land and soil. text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 189 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 9. To improve the quality of land and reduce contamination (Option 4) Refer to The development proposals would bring back into use large 9.1 Will it reduce the amount section 5.11 areas of currently derelict, degrade and underused land to the ++ 0 0 99 of derelict, degraded and of the SA west of Rushenden Road and would intensify the scale of use underused land? text on other areas within the Masterplan area. Refer to section 5.11 The proposed development would result in the loss of 9.2 Will it improve the quality --0 99 of agricultural land and soil? of the SA agricultural land and soil. text
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the period Urban Rural period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 10. To improve the overall air quality of the Borough (Option 1) Refer to section 5.12 10.1 Will it maintain and 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. improve local air quality? of the SA text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 190 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 10. To improve the overall air quality of the Borough (Option 2) The UK Air Quality Strategy objectives would not be exceeded as a result of the development proposals. The Masterplan Refer to proposal would involve an intensification of land use and an section 5.12 10.1 Will it maintain and --- 99increase in population. The use of vehicles would therefore of the SA improve local air quality? inevitably increase, with the associated emission of pollutants text locally. The effects would be minimized through the increased use of public transport, walking and cycling.
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the period Urban Rural period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 10. To improve the overall air quality of the Borough (Option 3) The UK Air Quality Strategy objectives would not be exceeded as a result of the development proposals. The Masterplan Refer to proposal would involve an intensification of land use and an section 5.12 10.1 Will it maintain and --- 99increase in population. The use of vehicles would therefore of the SA improve local air quality? inevitably increase, with the associated emission of pollutants text locally. The effects would be minimized through the increased use of public transport, walking and cycling.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 191 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 10. To improve the overall air quality of the Borough (Option 4) The UK Air Quality Strategy objectives would not be exceeded as a result of the development proposals. The Masterplan Refer to proposal would involve an intensification of land use and an section 5.12 10.1 Will it maintain and --- 99increase in population. The use of vehicles would therefore of the SA improve local air quality? inevitably increase, with the associated emission of pollutants text locally. The effects would be minimized through the increased use of public transport, walking and cycling.
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the period Urban Rural period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 11. To improve water quality (Option 1) There would be no change to the existing situation Refer to assuming a full site investigation is under taken for each 11.1 Will it minimise the section 5.13 0 0 0 0 0 phase of the development considering a global or strategic adverse effects on ground of the SA perspective and planning long term sustainable remediation and/or surface water quality? text options were appropriate.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 192 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 11. To improve water quality (Option 2) SuDS principles would be used throughout the Masterplan area to allow the management of environmental impacts at source, rather than downstream. The drainage system would be a separate network for areas likely to be subject to pollution, and would only be discharged into a receiving watercourse after it has been attenuated and remediated.
Refer to There is currently evidence that leachable contaminants are 11.1 Will it minimise the section 5.13 entering the Creek from the Klondyke site, adjacent to the +0 0 99 adverse effects on ground of the SA south of the Creek, and the remediation strategy for this and/or surface water quality? text part of the site would focus on the control of this process. There would be no direct discharge to groundwater which is controlled water. A full site investigation would be undertaken for each phase of the development considering a global or strategic perspective and planning long term sustainable remediation options were appropriate.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 193 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 11. To improve water quality (Option 3) SuDS principles would be used throughout the Masterplan area to allow the management of environmental impacts at source, rather than downstream. The drainage system would be a separate network for areas likely to be subject to pollution, and would only be discharged into a receiving watercourse after it has been attenuated and remediated.
Refer to There is currently evidence that leachable contaminants are 11.1 Will it minimise the section 5.13 entering the Creek from the Klondyke site, adjacent to the +0 0 99 adverse effects on ground of the SA south of the Creek, and the remediation strategy for this and/or surface water quality? text part of the site would focus on the control of this process. There would be no direct discharge to groundwater which is controlled water. A full site investigation would be undertaken for each phase of the development considering a global or strategic perspective and planning long term sustainable remediation options were appropriate.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 194 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 11. To improve water quality (Option 4) SuDS principles would be used throughout the Masterplan area to allow the management of environmental impacts at source, rather than downstream. The drainage system would be a separate network for areas likely to be subject to pollution, and would only be discharged into a receiving watercourse after it has been attenuated and remediated.
Refer to There is currently evidence that leachable contaminants are 11.1 Will it minimise the section 5.13 entering the Creek from the Klondyke site, adjacent to the +0 0 99 adverse effects on ground of the SA south of the Creek, and the remediation strategy for this and/or surface water quality? text part of the site would focus on the control of this process. There would be no direct discharge to groundwater which is controlled water. A full site investigation would be undertaken for each phase of the development considering a global or strategic perspective and planning long term sustainable remediation options were appropriate.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 195 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 12. Will it maintain hydrology/coastal processes? (Option 1)
12.1 Will it ensure that water Refer to section 5.14 extraction, run-off and 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. recharge are not of the SA compromised? text Refer to There would be no change to the existing situation assuming 12.2 Will it maintain and section 5.14 0 0 0 0 0 mitigation measures are provided to minimize impacts on local restore natural hydrological of the SA water supplies. and coastal processes? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 196 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 12. Will it maintain hydrology/coastal processes? (Option 2) SuDS principles would be used throughout the Masterplan area to control water run-off rates helping to reduce urban impacts on flooding. The drainage strategy would ensure that there is no net loss of surface water features across the site and that the rates of 12.1 Will it ensure that water Refer to discharge of surface water are no greater than the existing section 5.14 greenfield runoff rates. extraction, run-off and + 0 0 99 of the SA recharge are not Any drainage features that would be lost as part of the text compromised? Masterplan would be replaced. New surface water features created would aim to replicate: the character; function; and scale of the existing surface water features so that patterns of recharge are maintained. Water levels on the adjacent SSSI would be maintained at their existing levels by the development.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 197 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
SuDS principles would be used throughout the Masterplan area to: allow the management of environmental impacts at source, rather than downstream; control water run-off rates helping to reduce urban impacts on flooding; protect the quality of water; and to provide improved habitats for local flora and fauna.
Refer to There are no marina structures proposed as part of the 12.2 Will it maintain and section 5.14 Masterplan that would adversely affect coastal processes. A 0 0 0 0 0 restore natural hydrological of the SA full EIA and Appropriate Assessment would be required to and coastal processes? text assess the impacts of the proposal. Access from the Swale into the proposed marina would be via a lock gate arrangement which would only be operated during high tide periods minimising the potential to affect the nature of the existing intertidal area through the exchange of water. The existing boat channel across the intertidal foreshore would continue to be maintained by the passage of craft accessing and leaving the inner creek rather than by maintenance dredging.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 198 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 12. Will it maintain hydrology/coastal processes? (Option 3) SuDS principles would be used throughout the Masterplan area to control water run-off rates helping to reduce urban impacts on flooding. The drainage strategy would ensure that there is no net loss of surface water features across the site and that the rates of 12.1 Will it ensure that water Refer to discharge of surface water are no greater than the existing section 5.14 greenfield runoff rates. extraction, run-off and + 0 0 99 of the SA recharge are not Any drainage features that would be lost as part of the text compromised? Masterplan would be replaced. New surface water features created would aim to replicate: the character; function; and scale of the existing surface water features so that patterns of recharge are maintained. Water levels on the adjacent SSSI would be maintained at their existing levels by the development.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 199 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
SuDS principles would be used throughout the Masterplan area to: allow the management of environmental impacts at source, rather than downstream; control water run-off rates helping to reduce urban impacts on flooding; protect the quality of water; and to provide improved habitats for local flora and fauna.
Refer to There are no marina structures proposed as part of the 12.2 Will it maintain and section 5.14 Masterplan that would adversely affect coastal processes. A 0 0 0 0 0 restore natural hydrological of the SA full EIA and Appropriate Assessment would be required to and coastal processes? text assess the impacts of the proposal. Access from the Swale into the proposed marina would be via a lock gate arrangement which would only be operated during high tide periods minimising the potential to affect the nature of the existing intertidal area through the exchange of water. The existing boat channel across the intertidal foreshore would continue to be maintained by the passage of craft accessing and leaving the inner creek rather than by maintenance dredging.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 200 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 12. Will it maintain hydrology/coastal processes? (Option 4) SuDS principles would be used throughout the Masterplan area to control water run-off rates helping to reduce urban impacts on flooding. The drainage strategy would ensure that there is no net loss of surface water features across the site and that the rates of 12.1 Will it ensure that water Refer to discharge of surface water are no greater than the existing section 5.14 greenfield runoff rates. extraction, run-off and + 0 0 99 of the SA recharge are not Any drainage features that would be lost as part of the text compromised? Masterplan would be replaced. New surface water features created would aim to replicate: the character; function; and scale of the existing surface water features so that patterns of recharge are maintained. Water levels on the adjacent SSSI would be maintained at their existing levels by the development.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 201 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
SuDS principles would be used throughout the Masterplan area to: allow the management of environmental impacts at source, rather than downstream; control water run-off rates helping to reduce urban impacts on flooding; protect the Refer to quality of water; and to provide improved habitats for local 12.2 Will it maintain and section 5.14 -- -- 0 0 0 flora and fauna. restore natural hydrological of the SA and coastal processes? text The provision of pontoon mooring accessible from the main channel at all stages of the tide would potentially require dredging which may cause changes in bed erosion and accretion. A full EIA and Appropriate Assessment would be required to assess the impacts of the proposal.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 202 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 13. Will it reduce or minimize greenhouse gas emissions? (Option 1) Refer to section 5.15 13.1 Will it reduce or minimise 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. greenhouse gas emissions? of the SA text Refer to 13.2 Does it provide section 5.15 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. opportunities for habitats to of the SA adapt to climate change? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 203 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 13. Will it reduce or minimize greenhouse gas emissions? (Option 2) The emissions of greenhouse gases associated with transportation sources would increase with the intensification of land use and population. The Rushenden Relief Road scheme results in the least emissions of carbon dioxide. The Refer to proposed development would be designed to the highest section 5.15 13.1 Will it reduce or minimise 0- - 99Ecohomes and BREEAM standards in order to minimise the of the SA greenhouse gas emissions? environmental ‘footprint’ of the regeneration. Keeping text employment local would minimise car travel. The planned use of renewable energy systems, coupled with highly energy efficient buildings would provide substantial improvements in greenhouse emissions over other comparable developments. The design seeks to maximise habitat ‘edges’, increase Refer to biodiversity, and provide wildlife corridors. These measures 13.2 Does it provide section 5.15 would aid in the connectivity and complexity of the habitats. + + + 99 opportunities for habitats to of the SA This is currently the only available strategy to prepare habitats adapt to climate change? text for climate change. In particular, improving bird habitat would have a positive effect internationally.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 204 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 13. Will it reduce or minimize greenhouse gas emissions? (Option 3) The emissions of greenhouse gases associated with transportation sources would increase with the intensification of land use and population. The Rushenden Relief Road scheme results in the least emissions of carbon dioxide. The Refer to proposed development would be designed to the highest section 5.15 13.1 Will it reduce or minimise 0- - 99Ecohomes and BREEAM standards in order to minimise the of the SA greenhouse gas emissions? environmental ‘footprint’ of the regeneration. Keeping text employment local would minimise car travel. The planned use of renewable energy systems, coupled with highly energy efficient buildings would provide substantial improvements in greenhouse emissions over other comparable developments. The design seeks to maximise habitat ‘edges’, increase Refer to biodiversity, and provide wildlife corridors. These measures 13.2 Does it provide section 5.15 would aid in the connectivity and complexity of the habitats. + + + 99 opportunities for habitats to of the SA This is currently the only available strategy to prepare habitats adapt to climate change? text for climate change. In particular, improving bird habitat would have a positive effect internationally.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 205 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 13. Will it reduce or minimize greenhouse gas emissions? (Option 4) The emissions of greenhouse gases associated with transportation sources would increase with the intensification of land use and population. The Rushenden Relief Road scheme results in the least emissions of carbon dioxide. The Refer to proposed development would be designed to the highest section 5.15 13.1 Will it reduce or minimise 0- - 99Ecohomes and BREEAM standards in order to minimise the of the SA greenhouse gas emissions? environmental ‘footprint’ of the regeneration. Keeping text employment local would minimise car travel. The planned use of renewable energy systems, coupled with highly energy efficient buildings would provide substantial improvements in greenhouse emissions over other comparable developments. The design seeks to maximise habitat ‘edges’, increase biodiversity, and provide wildlife corridors. These measures Refer to would aid in the connectivity and complexity of the habitats. 13.2 Does it provide section 5.15 - - - 99This is currently the only available strategy to prepare habitats opportunities for habitats to of the SA for climate change. However the dredging in the Swale would adapt to climate change? text potentially cause disturbance to habitat internationally important for birds.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 206 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 14. To effectively manage risk of flooding (Option 1) Refer to 14.1 Will it reduce the risk of section 5.16 flooding? 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. of the SA text Refer to 14.2 Will it protect the section 5.16 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. floodplain from inappropriate of the SA development? text
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the period Urban Rural period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 14. To effectively manage risk of flooding (Option 2) Environment Agency have been consulted in respect to flood Refer to 14.1 Will it reduce the risk of protection. The drainage strategy has been designed such that section 5.16 flooding? 000 99surface water run-off would be controlled through SuDS to of the SA prevent an increased risk of flooding as a result of the increase text in impermeable surfaces within the Masterplan area.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 207 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Recent advice from the Environment Agency confirms that Refer to there would be no part of the Masterplan area within the 14.2 Will it protect the section 5.16 floodplain. The open space and the new development 0 0 0 0 0 floodplain from inappropriate of the SA alongside the river frontage provides an improvement in the development? text reliability of flood defences in this area by having stepped flood defences and a retreated flood defence line.
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the period Urban Rural period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 14. To effectively manage risk of flooding (Option 3) Environment Agency have been consulted in respect to flood Refer to 14.1 Will it reduce the risk of protection. The drainage strategy has been designed such that section 5.16 flooding? 000 99surface water run-off would be controlled through SuDS to of the SA prevent an increased risk of flooding as a result of the increase text in impermeable surfaces within the Masterplan area. Recent advice from the Environment Agency confirms that Refer to there would be no part of the Masterplan area within the 14.2 Will it protect the section 5.16 floodplain. The open space and the new development 0 0 0 0 0 floodplain from inappropriate of the SA alongside the river frontage provides an improvement in the development? text reliability of flood defences in this area by having stepped flood defences and a retreated flood defence line.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 208 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 14. To effectively manage risk of flooding (Option 4) Environment Agency have been consulted in respect to flood Refer to 14.1 Will it reduce the risk of protection. The drainage strategy has been designed such that section 5.16 flooding? 000 99surface water run-off would be controlled through SuDS to of the SA prevent an increased risk of flooding as a result of the increase text in impermeable surfaces within the Masterplan area. Recent advice from the Environment Agency confirms that Refer to there would be no part of the Masterplan area within the 14.2 Will it protect the section 5.16 floodplain. The open space and the new development 0 0 0 0 0 floodplain from inappropriate of the SA alongside the river frontage provides an improvement in the development? text reliability of flood defences in this area by having stepped flood defences and a retreated flood defence line.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 209 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 15. To conserve and enhance biodiversity (Option 1) Refer to 15.1 Will it avoid damage to section 5.17 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. and enhance existing wildlife of the SA sites (e.g. SSSIs, LNRs, etc.)? text
15.2 Will it minimise damage Refer to to and enhance species, section 5.17 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. habitats and sites? of the SA text
15.3 Will it avoid and minimise habitat fragmentation and Refer to provide opportunities for new section 5.17 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. habitat creation and link of the SA existing habitats? text
Refer to 15.4 Will it ensure the section 5.17 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. sustainable management of of the SA woodlands? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 210 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 15. To conserve and enhance biodiversity (Option 2) A Habitat Regulations Assessment undertaken for the Masterplan confirms that there would be no direct loss of designated nature conservation sites or disturbance to species of interest for which the sites are designated as a result of the marina if the measures and recommendations are effectively implemented through consenting conditions or legal Refer to agreements. 15.1 Will it avoid damage to section 5.17 000 99 and enhance existing wildlife of the SA The loss of a matrix of grazing marsh, grassland and ditch sites (e.g. SSSIs, LNRs, etc.)? text habitats and disturbance to the Ramsar/SPA/SSSI has been mitigated through: the creation of a buffer area 30 and 80 metres wide between the Ramsar/SPA/SSSI boundary and nearest built development; construction of a landscaped bund to screen built development; creation and enhancement of ditches and water bodies within existing grazing marshes; and provision of 25ha of replacement land Existing and new habitats would be linked by a network of wildlife corridors, including areas of landscaping and 15.2 Will it minimise damage Refer to watercourses. Native species of local genetic provenance would to and enhance species, section 5.17 000 99be used in re-population/ planting. Living and green roofs and habitats and sites? of the SA soft landscaping would be incorporated into building designs. text Access to the foreshore and marshes would be managed to minimize disturbance to birds and their associated habitats.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 211 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Habitat lost on site would be either reprovided within the Masterplan area or through provision of 25 ha replacement and enhancement habitat off-site. The area of compensatory habitat provided would be larger than that lost and would be provided in one area to reduce the adverse effects of fragmentation. The compensatory habitat would be sufficiently close to the habitats lost to provide utility value to potentially displaced species and would be of low ecological interest initially so that its ecological status can be improved. 15.3 Will it avoid and minimise Replacement watercourses would be at least double the length habitat fragmentation and Refer to of the watercourses lost. The drainage strategy would ensure provide opportunities for new section 5.17 000 99that the end points of replacement watercourses are the same habitat creation and link of the SA as that lost, so that the existing wildlife corridors provided by existing habitats? text these watercourses are maintained. Sediment, flora and fauna from sections of watercourse to be lost would be translocated into the new watercourses to enable rapid establishment of the new habitat and retention of as many species of invertebrates as possible. Habitats would be linked through a network of wildlife corridors, including areas of landscaping and watercourses including reedbeds and attenuation ponds within and between the respective development areas to reduce habitat fragmentation. Refer to Substantial tree and native shrub planting to the north of 15.4 Will it ensure the section 5.17 0 + 0 0 0 Neatscourt would potentially grown coppice for the potential sustainable management of of the SA CHP plant. woodlands? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 212 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 15. To conserve and enhance biodiversity (Option 3) The loss of a matrix of grazing marsh, grassland and ditch habitats and disturbance to the Ramsar/SPA/SSSI has been mitigated through: the creation of a buffer area 30 and 80 Refer to metres wide between the Ramsar/SPA/SSSI boundary and 15.1 Will it avoid damage to section 5.17 nearest built development; construction of a landscaped bund --0 99 and enhance existing wildlife of the SA to screen built development; creation and enhancement of sites (e.g. SSSIs, LNRs, etc.)? text ditches and water bodies within existing grazing marshes; and provision of 25ha of replacement land. However there is potential for localized increased disturbance to the internationally recognized bird populations on the mudflats. Existing and new habitats would be linked by a network of wildlife corridors, including areas of landscaping and 15.2 Will it minimise damage Refer to watercourses. Native species of local genetic provenance would to and enhance species, section 5.17 --0 99be used in re-population/ planting. Living and green roofs and habitats and sites? of the SA soft landscaping would be incorporated into building designs. text Access to the foreshore and marshes would be managed to minimize disturbance to birds and their associated habitats.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 213 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Habitat lost on site would be either reprovided within the Masterplan area or through provision of 25 ha replacement and enhancement habitat off-site. The area of compensatory habitat provided would be larger than that lost and would be provided in one area to reduce the adverse effects of fragmentation. The compensatory habitat would be sufficiently close to the habitats lost to provide utility value to potentially displaced species and would be of low ecological interest initially so that its ecological status can be improved. 15.3 Will it avoid and minimise Replacement watercourses would be at least double the length habitat fragmentation and Refer to of the watercourses lost. The drainage strategy would ensure provide opportunities for new section 5.17 000 99that the end points of replacement watercourses are the same habitat creation and link of the SA as that lost, so that the existing wildlife corridors provided by existing habitats? text these watercourses are maintained. Sediment, flora and fauna from sections of watercourse to be lost would be translocated into the new watercourses to enable rapid establishment of the new habitat and retention of as many species of invertebrates as possible. Habitats would be linked through a network of wildlife corridors, including areas of landscaping and watercourses including reedbeds and attenuation ponds within and between the respective development areas to reduce habitat fragmentation. Refer to Substantial tree and native shrub planting to the north of 15.4 Will it ensure the section 5.17 0 + 0 0 0 Neatscourt would potentially grown coppice for the potential sustainable management of of the SA CHP plant. woodlands? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 214 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 15. To conserve and enhance biodiversity (Option 4) There would be a direct loss of designated nature conservation sites or disturbance to species of interest for which the sites are designated as a result of the marina being located within the Medway Estuary and Marshes SSSI. Refer to The loss of a matrix of grazing marsh, grassland and ditch 15.1 Will it avoid damage to section 5.17 habitats and disturbance to the Ramsar/SPA/SSSI has been and enhance existing wildlife ------99 of the SA mitigated through: the creation of a buffer area 30 and 80 sites (e.g. SSSIs, LNRs, etc.)? text metres wide between the Ramsar/SPA/SSSI boundary and nearest built development; construction of a landscaped bund to screen built development; creation and enhancement of ditches and water bodies within existing grazing marshes; and provision of 25 ha of replacement land. Existing and new habitats would be linked by a network of wildlife corridors, including areas of landscaping and 15.2 Will it minimise damage Refer to watercourses. Native species of local genetic provenance would to and enhance species, section 5.17 ------99be used in re-population/ planting. Living and green roofs and habitats and sites? of the SA soft landscaping would be incorporated into building designs. text Access to the foreshore and marshes would cause disturbance to birds and their associated habitats.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 215 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Habitat lost on site would be either reprovided within the Masterplan area or through provision of 25 ha replacement and enhancement habitat off-site. The area of compensatory habitat provided would be larger than that lost and would be provided in one area to reduce the adverse effects of fragmentation. The compensatory habitat would be sufficiently close to the habitats lost to provide utility value to potentially displaced species and would be of low ecological interest initially so that its ecological status can be improved. 15.3 Will it avoid and minimise Replacement watercourses would be at least double the length habitat fragmentation and Refer to of the watercourses lost. The drainage strategy would ensure provide opportunities for new section 5.17 --- 99that the end points of replacement watercourses are the same habitat creation and link of the SA as that lost, so that the existing wildlife corridors provided by existing habitats? text these watercourses are maintained. Sediment, flora and fauna from sections of watercourse to be lost would be translocated into the new watercourses to enable rapid establishment of the new habitat and retention of as many species of invertebrates as possible. Habitats would be linked through a network of wildlife corridors, including areas of landscaping and watercourses including reedbeds and attenuation ponds within and between the respective development areas to reduce habitat fragmentation. Refer to Substantial tree and native shrub planting to the north of 15.4 Will it ensure the section 5.17 0 + 0 0 0 Neatscourt would potentially grown coppice for the potential sustainable management of of the SA CHP plant. woodlands? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 216 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 16. To promote the use of more sustainable modes of transport and reduce travel by car/lorry, where options are available (Option 1) Refer to section 5.18 16.1 Will it reduce the 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. movement of goods by road? of the SA text Refer to 16.2 Will it encourage walking, section 5.18 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. cycling and the use of public of the SA transport? text Refer to section 5.18 16.3 Will it reduce time taken 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. to travel to work? of the SA text Refer to section 5.18 16.4 Will it help to reduce 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. traffic congestion? of the SA text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 217 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 16. To promote the use of more sustainable modes of transport and reduce travel by car/lorry, where options are available (Option 2) Refer to The scale of new employment generation would result in an section 5.18 16.1 Will it reduce the --- 99increase in the movement of goods by the main road network of the SA movement of goods by road? away from the centre of Queenborough and Rushenden. text
The Masterplan is designed to facilitate access to services Refer to without the need to use a car wherever possible. Public 16.2 Will it encourage section 5.18 transport services (predominantly buses) would be enhanced ++0 99 walking, cycling and the use of the SA within Queenborough and Rushenden as levels of patronage of public transport? text would increase. An overarching travel plan would be implemented to formalise and implement these proposals. Refer to It is envisaged that a substantial proportion of the new section 5.18 16.3 Will it reduce time taken ++0 99employment would be resourced locally, thus enabling travel of the SA to travel to work? times to be reduced. text The transportation strategy however includes a redirection of Refer to flows, particularly of HGVs away from the centre of section 5.18 16.4 Will it help to reduce +0 0 99Queenborough, which reduce congestion and intimidation and of the SA traffic congestion? would make local minor roads more conducive to walking and text cycling
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 218 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 16. To promote the use of more sustainable modes of transport and reduce travel by car/lorry, where options are available (Option 3) Refer to The scale of new employment generation would result in an section 5.18 16.1 Will it reduce the --- 99increase in the movement of goods by the main road network of the SA movement of goods by road? away from the centre of Queenborough and Rushenden. text The Masterplan is designed to facilitate access to services Refer to without the need to use a car wherever possible. Public 16.2 Will it encourage walking, section 5.18 transport services (predominantly buses) would be enhanced ++0 99 cycling and the use of public of the SA within Queenborough and Rushenden as levels of patronage transport? text would increase. An overarching travel plan would be implemented to formalise and implement these proposals. Refer to It is envisaged that a substantial proportion of the new section 5.18 16.3 Will it reduce time taken ++0 99employment would be resourced locally, thus enabling travel of the SA to travel to work? times to be reduced. text The transportation strategy however includes a redirection of Refer to flows, particularly of HGVs away from the centre of section 5.18 16.4 Will it help to reduce +0 0 99Queenborough, which reduce congestion and intimidation and of the SA traffic congestion? would make local minor roads more conducive to walking and text cycling
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 219 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 16. To promote the use of more sustainable modes of transport and reduce travel by car/lorry, where options are available (Option 4) Refer to The scale of new employment generation would result in an section 5.18 16.1 Will it reduce the --- 99increase in the movement of goods by the main road network of the SA movement of goods by road? away from the centre of Queenborough and Rushenden. text The Masterplan is designed to facilitate access to services Refer to without the need to use a car wherever possible. Public 16.2 Will it encourage walking, section 5.18 transport services (predominantly buses) would be enhanced ++0 99 cycling and the use of public of the SA within Queenborough and Rushenden as levels of patronage transport? text would increase. An overarching travel plan would be implemented to formalise and implement these proposals. Refer to It is envisaged that a substantial proportion of the new section 5.18 16.3 Will it reduce time taken ++0 99employment would be resourced locally, thus enabling travel of the SA to travel to work? times to be reduced. text The transportation strategy however includes a redirection of Refer to flows, particularly of HGVs away from the centre of section 5.18 16.4 Will it help to reduce +0 0 99Queenborough, which reduce congestion and intimidation and of the SA traffic congestion? would make local minor roads more conducive to walking and text cycling
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 220 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 17. To protect, enhance and make accessible the historic environmental and assets including landscapes (the quality and character) townscapes and settlement settings (Option 1)
17.1 Will it help to protect and Refer to enhance sites, areas and section 5.19 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation features of historic, cultural, of the SA archaeological and text architectural interest?
17.2 Will it help to conserve Refer to section 5.19 historic buildings, places and 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation spaces that enhance local of the SA distinctiveness? text Refer to 17.3 Will it improve access to section 5.19 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation buildings and landscapes of of the SA historical/cultural value? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 221 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline info and Borough Effects Commentary Sustainable Development target outside Objectives and Criteria (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 17. To protect, enhance and make accessible the historic environmental and assets including landscapes (the quality and character) townscapes and settlement settings (Option 2) The re-distribution of existing traffic from Rushenden Road and the centre of Queenborough would be a beneficial effect on the setting of sites of cultural and historic interest including Queenborough Castle, Listed Buildings and the 17.1 Will it help to protect and Refer to Conservation Area. The setting of these features would still enhance sites, areas and section 5.19 be influenced by road traffic. Any sites of archaeological ++0 99 features of historic, cultural, of the SA interest encountered during the development proposals archaeological and text would be considered in the context of the significance of the architectural interest? find, through consultation with the County Archaeologist, with appropriate mitigation implemented, for example ‘preservation by record’ to improve interpretation of the archaeological resource. No historic buildings would be directly affected by the Refer to 17.2 Will it help to conserve Masterplan proposals but the design and layout of the new section 5.19 historic buildings, places and ++0 99development within and adjacent to the Conservation Area of the SA spaces that enhance local would take full account of the need to respect and enhance text distinctiveness? the character and setting of this part of Queenborough. The Masterplan includes careful consideration of all the Refer to historical and archaeological sites of value within both 17.3 Will it improve access to section 5.19 Queenborough and the larger area. Strategies within the ++ ++ 0 99 buildings and landscapes of of the SA Masterplan that take advantage of these resources include historical/cultural value? text plans for footpaths, the water’s edge, the 14th Century church, and the castle site.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 222 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 17. To protect, enhance and make accessible the historic environmental and assets including landscapes (the quality and character) townscapes and settlement settings (Option 3) The marina would be located within the Conservation Area. The re-distribution of existing traffic from Rushenden Road and the centre of Queenborough would be a beneficial effect on the setting of sites of cultural and historic interest including Queenborough Castle, Listed Buildings and the 17.1 Will it help to protect and Refer to Conservation Area. The setting of these features would still enhance sites, areas and section 5.19 --0 99be influenced by road traffic. Any sites of archaeological features of historic, cultural, of the SA interest encountered during the development proposals archaeological and text architectural interest? would be considered in the context of the significance of the find, through consultation with the County Archaeologist, with appropriate mitigation implemented, for example ‘preservation by record’ to improve interpretation of the archaeological resource. The marina would be located within the Conservation Area. 17.2 Will it help to conserve Refer to No historic buildings would be directly affected by the section 5.19 Masterplan proposals but the design and layout of the new historic buildings, places and --0 99 spaces that enhance local of the SA development within and adjacent to the Conservation Area distinctiveness? text would take full account of the need to respect and enhance the character and setting of this part of Queenborough.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 223 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
The Masterplan includes careful consideration of all the Refer to historical and archaeological sites of value within both 17.3 Will it improve access to section 5.19 Queenborough and the larger area. Strategies within the ++ ++ 0 99 buildings and landscapes of of the SA Masterplan that take advantage of these resources include historical/cultural value? text plans for footpaths, the water’s edge, the 14th Century church, and the castle site.
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the period Urban Rural period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 17. To protect, enhance and make accessible the historic environmental and assets including landscapes (the quality and character) townscapes and settlement settings (Option 4) The site for the marina is known to contain a number of archaeological sites and would be located within the Conservation Area. The re-distribution of existing traffic from Rushenden Road and the centre of Queenborough would be a beneficial effect on the setting of sites of 17.1 Will it help to protect and Refer to cultural and historic interest including Queenborough Castle, enhance sites, areas and section 5.19 Listed Buildings and the Conservation Area. The setting of - - 0 99 features of historic, cultural, of the SA these features would still be influenced by road traffic. Any archaeological and text sites of archaeological interest encountered during the architectural interest? development proposals would be considered in the context of the significance of the find, through consultation with the County Archaeologist, with appropriate mitigation implemented, for example ‘preservation by record’ to improve interpretation of the archaeological resource.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 224 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
The site for the marina is known to contain a number of archaeological sites and would be located within the 17.2 Will it help to conserve Refer to Conservation Area. No historic buildings would be directly section 5.19 affected by the Masterplan proposals but the design and historic buildings, places and --0 99 spaces that enhance local of the SA layout of the new development within and adjacent to the distinctiveness? text Conservation Area would take full account of the need to respect and enhance the character and setting of this part of Queenborough. The Masterplan includes careful consideration of all the Refer to historical and archaeological sites of value within both 17.3 Will it improve access to section 5.19 Queenborough and the larger area. Strategies within the ++ ++ 0 99 buildings and landscapes of of the SA Masterplan that take advantage of these resources include historical/cultural value? text plans for footpaths, the water’s edge, the 14th Century church, and the castle site.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 225 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 18. To maintain and enhance geological and geomorphological sites? (Option 1) Refer to 18.1 Will it help to protect and section 5.20 There are no known significant geological sites (e.g. geological enhance geological and 0 0 0 0 0 of the SA SSSI) that would be affected by the Masterplan proposals. geomorphological sites? text
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the period Urban Rural period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 18. To maintain and enhance geological and geomorphological sites? (Option 2) Refer to 18.1 Will it help to protect and section 5.20 There are no known significant geological sites (e.g. geological enhance geological and 0 0 0 0 0 of the SA SSSI) that would be affected by the Masterplan proposals. geomorphological sites? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 226 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 18. To maintain and enhance geological and geomorphological sites? (Option 3) Refer to 18.1 Will it help to protect and section 5.20 There are no known significant geological sites (e.g. geological enhance geological and 0 0 0 0 0 of the SA SSSI) that would be affected by the Masterplan proposals. geomorphological sites? text
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the period Urban Rural period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 18. To maintain and enhance geological and geomorphological sites? (Option 4) Refer to 18.1 Will it help to protect and section 5.20 There are no known significant geological sites (e.g. geological enhance geological and 0 0 0 0 0 of the SA SSSI) that would be affected by the Masterplan proposals. geomorphological sites? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 227 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 19. To ensure the sustainable use and management of natural resources (Option 1) Refer to section 5.21 19.1 Will it minimise the need 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation for energy? of the SA text Refer to section 5.21 19.2 Will it increase efficiency 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation in energy use? of the SA text Refer to 19.3 Will it increase the share section 5.21 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation of energy generated from of the SA renewable resources? text Refer to section 5.21 19.4 Will it minimise the need 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation for raw materials? of the SA text Refer to section 5.21 19.5 Will it reduce minerals 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation extracted and imported? of the SA text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 228 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
The increase in population would lead to the total use of water increasing. The efficiency with which water is used would be Refer to optimized through a target of a 30% reduction in water section 5.21 19.6 Will it minimise the use of + + + 99consumption on a daily basis for residential areas. This would of the SA water? be achieved through water saving measures throughout the text development, including rainwater recycling, low flush WCs, aerated taps etc.
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the period Urban Rural period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 19. To ensure the sustainable use and management of natural resources (Option 2) Refer to The Masterplan would seek to minimize the use of energy, section 5.21 both through the use of recycled or recovered materials in the 19.1 Will it minimise the need + 0 + 99 for energy? of the SA construction process and through design and specification of text the built development. Refer to The buildings would be constructed to Ecohomes ‘excellent’ section 5.21 19.2 Will it increase efficiency + 0 + 99standards. The houses would be orientated to facilitate the of the SA in energy use? use of solar water heating and passive insulation. text Refer to The Masterplan includes a proposal for Combined Heat and 19.3 Will it increase the share section 5.21 ++ 0 + 99Power plants to provide district heating and electricity with the of energy generated from of the SA potential to use biomass to fuel these. renewable resources? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 229 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Any new development within the Masterplan area would Refer to adhere to waste hierarchy principles: reduce, reuse, section 5.21 19.4 Will it minimise the need + 0 + 99recycle/compost, recover energy and finally dispose of the SA for raw materials? appropriately if necessary. This hierarchy would underpin the text minimization of raw material use. Refer to The adherence to the waste hierarchy principles would section 5.21 19.5 Will it reduce minerals + 0 + 99encourage the use of locally sourced recycled materials where of the SA extracted and imported? possible and the minimization of raw material use. text The increase in population would lead to the total use of water increasing. The efficiency with which water is used would be Refer to optimized through a target of a 30% reduction in water section 5.21 19.6 Will it minimise the use of + + + 99consumption on a daily basis for residential areas. This would of the SA water? be achieved through water saving measures throughout the text development, including rainwater recycling, low flush WCs, aerated taps etc.
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the period Urban Rural period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 19. To ensure the sustainable use and management of natural resources (Option 3) Refer to The Masterplan would seek to minimize the use of energy, section 5.21 both through the use of recycled or recovered materials in the 19.1 Will it minimise the need + 0 + 99 for energy? of the SA construction process and through design and specification of text the built development.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 230 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Refer to The buildings would be constructed to Ecohomes ‘excellent’ section 5.21 19.2 Will it increase efficiency + 0 + 99standards. The houses would be orientated to facilitate the of the SA in energy use? use of solar water heating and passive insulation. text Refer to The Masterplan includes a proposal for Combined Heat and 19.3 Will it increase the share section 5.21 ++ 0 + 99Power plants to provide district heating and electricity with the of energy generated from of the SA potential to use biomass to fuel these. renewable resources? text Any new development within the Masterplan area would Refer to adhere to waste hierarchy principles: reduce, reuse, section 5.21 19.4 Will it minimise the need + 0 + 99recycle/compost, recover energy and finally dispose of the SA for raw materials? appropriately if necessary. This hierarchy would underpin the text minimization of raw material use. Refer to The adherence to the waste hierarchy principles would section 5.21 19.5 Will it reduce minerals + 0 + 99encourage the use of locally sourced recycled materials where of the SA extracted and imported? possible and the minimization of raw material use. text The increase in population would lead to the total use of water increasing. The efficiency with which water is used would be Refer to optimized through a target of a 30% reduction in water section 5.21 19.6 Will it minimise the use of + + + 99consumption on a daily basis for residential areas. This would of the SA water? be achieved through water saving measures throughout the text development, including rainwater recycling, low flush WCs, aerated taps etc.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 231 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the
Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 19. To ensure the sustainable use and management of natural resources (Option 4) Refer to The Masterplan would seek to minimize the use of energy, section 5.21 both through the use of recycled or recovered materials in the 19.1 Will it minimise the need + 0 + 99 for energy? of the SA construction process and through design and specification of text the built development. Refer to The buildings would be constructed to Ecohomes ‘excellent’ section 5.21 19.2 Will it increase efficiency + 0 + 99standards. The houses would be orientated to facilitate the of the SA in energy use? use of solar water heating and passive insulation. text Refer to The Masterplan includes a proposal for Combined Heat and 19.3 Will it increase the share section 5.21 ++ 0 + 99Power plants to provide district heating and electricity with the of energy generated from of the SA potential to use biomass to fuel these. renewable resources? text Any new development within the Masterplan area would Refer to adhere to waste hierarchy principles: reduce, reuse, section 5.21 19.4 Will it minimise the need + 0 + 99recycle/compost, recover energy and finally dispose of the SA for raw materials? appropriately if necessary. This hierarchy would underpin the text minimization of raw material use. Refer to The adherence to the waste hierarchy principles would section 5.21 19.5 Will it reduce minerals + 0 + 99encourage the use of locally sourced recycled materials where of the SA extracted and imported? possible and the minimization of raw material use. text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 232 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
The increase in population would lead to the total use of water increasing. The efficiency with which water is used would be Refer to optimized through a target of a 30% reduction in water section 5.21 19.6 Will it minimise the use of + + + 99consumption on a daily basis for residential areas. This would of the SA water? be achieved through water saving measures throughout the text development, including rainwater recycling, low flush WCs, aerated taps etc.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 233 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 20. To reduce generation and disposal of waste, and achieve sustainable management of waste (Option 1) Refer to section 5.22 20.1 Will it reduce the amount 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation of waste generated? of the SA text Refer to section 5.22 20.2 Will it encourage the 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation recycling of waste? of the SA text Refer to 20.3 Will it increase the section 5.22 demand for recycled 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation of the SA materials? text 20.4 Will it ensure the Refer to management of wastes section 5.22 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation. consistent with the waste of the SA management hierarchy? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 234 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 20. To reduce generation and disposal of waste, and achieve sustainable management of waste (Option 2) A comprehensive materials management plan would be produced by developers to cover the storage and use of Refer to materials during construction, to minimise the spoilage of section 5.22 materials. Any new development within the Masterplan area 20.1 Will it reduce the amount + 0 ? 99 of waste generated? of the SA would adhere to waste hierarchy principles: reduce, reuse, text recycle/compost, recover energy and finally dispose appropriately if necessary. This hierarchy would underpin the minimization of waste generated. Developers and architects would ensures that either storage Refer to space for segregated waste within dwellings or convenient section 5.22 20.2 Will it encourage the + 0 ? 99neighborhood collection facilities and recycling facilities (or of the SA recycling of waste? both) would be designed into the site. It is intended that more text that 70% of domestic waste would be recycled as a result. Refer to 20.3 Will it increase the The adherence to the waste hierarchy principles would section 5.22 demand for recycled + 0 ? 99encourage the use of locally sourced recycled materials where of the SA materials? possible. text 20.4 Will it ensure the Refer to Any new development within the Masterplan area would management of wastes section 5.22 adhere to waste hierarchy principles: reduce, reuse, + 0 ? 99 consistent with the waste of the SA recycle/compost, recover energy and finally dispose management hierarchy? text appropriately if necessary.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 235 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 20. To reduce generation and disposal of waste, and achieve sustainable management of waste (Option 3) A comprehensive materials management plan would be produced by developers to cover the storage and use of Refer to materials during construction, to minimise the spoilage of section 5.22 materials. Any new development within the Masterplan area 20.1 Will it reduce the amount + 0 ? 99 of waste generated? of the SA would adhere to waste hierarchy principles: reduce, reuse, text recycle/compost, recover energy and finally dispose appropriately if necessary. This hierarchy would underpin the minimization of waste generated. Developers and architects would ensures that either storage Refer to space for segregated waste within dwellings or convenient section 5.22 20.2 Will it encourage the + 0 ? 99neighborhood collection facilities and recycling facilities (or of the SA recycling of waste? both) would be designed into the site. It is intended that more text that 70% of domestic waste would be recycled as a result. Refer to 20.3 Will it increase the The adherence to the waste hierarchy principles would section 5.22 demand for recycled + 0 ? 99encourage the use of locally sourced recycled materials where of the SA materials? possible. text 20.4 Will it ensure the Refer to Any new development within the Masterplan area would management of wastes section 5.22 adhere to waste hierarchy principles: reduce, reuse, + 0 ? 99 consistent with the waste of the SA recycle/compost, recover energy and finally dispose management hierarchy? text appropriately if necessary.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 236 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 20. To reduce generation and disposal of waste, and achieve sustainable management of waste (Option 4) A comprehensive materials management plan would be produced by developers to cover the storage and use of Refer to materials during construction, to minimise the spoilage of section 5.22 materials. Any new development within the Masterplan area 20.1 Will it reduce the amount + 0 ? 99 of waste generated? of the SA would adhere to waste hierarchy principles: reduce, reuse, text recycle/compost, recover energy and finally dispose appropriately if necessary. This hierarchy would underpin the minimization of waste generated. Developers and architects would ensure that either storage Refer to space for segregated waste within dwellings or convenient section 5.22 20.2 Will it encourage the + 0 ? 99neighborhood collection facilities and recycling facilities (or of the SA recycling of waste? both) would be designed into the site. It is intended that more text that 70% of domestic waste would be recycled as a result. Refer to 20.3 Will it increase the The adherence to the waste hierarchy principles would section 5.22 demand for recycled + 0 ? 99encourage the use of locally sourced recycled materials where of the SA materials? possible. text 20.4 Will it ensure the Refer to Any new development within the Masterplan area would management of wastes section 5.22 adhere to waste hierarchy principles: reduce, reuse, + 0 ? 99 consistent with the waste of the SA recycle/compost, recover energy and finally dispose management hierarchy? text appropriately if necessary.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 237 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 21. To enhance quality of and access to employment opportunities for everyone (Option 1) Refer to 21.1 Will it improve the range section 5.23 of local employment 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation of the SA opportunities? text Refer to 21.2 Will it meet the section 5.23 employment needs of local 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation of the SA people? text Refer to 21.3 Will it reduce the level of section 5.23 unemployment and 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation of the SA worklessness? text 21.4 Will it improve physical Refer to access to jobs through section 5.23 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation improved location of sites and of the SA proximity to transport links? text Refer to 21.5 Will it lead to an increase section 5.23 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation in local wages? of the SA text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 238 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 21. To enhance quality of and access to employment opportunities for everyone (Option 2) The creation of around 180,000 sqm of employment opportunities is a key remit of the Masterplan. A range of Refer to employment types is anticipated including office, large scale 21.1 Will it improve the range section 5.23 distribution, hotel and retail. It is anticipated that the marina of local employment ++ ++ + 99 of the SA would also bring employment opportunities. opportunities? text During the construction phase of the development, minimum targets exist for the use of locally sourced labour, as a proportion of the total labour force. It is envisaged that the scale and nature of new employment Refer to 21.2 Will it meet the opportunities would be compatible with the existing skills base section 5.23 employment needs of local + + 0 99of the local economy. In addition during construction on-the- of the SA people? job training opportunities in the construction industry would text be available over the 12-15 year building period. It is envisaged that the scale and nature of new employment Refer to 21.3 Will it reduce the level of opportunities would be compatible with the existing skills base section 5.23 unemployment and ++0 99of the local economy and thus would provide very good of the SA worklessness? potential to reduce the level of unemployment and text worklessness.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 239 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
The proposed Relief Road would facilitate good access to the new employment opportunities in neighbouring areas (e.g. Sheerness).
21.4 Will it improve physical Refer to The employment areas would be integrated within the mixed access to jobs through section 5.23 use development as well as in Neatscourt. Access would be ++0 99 improved location of sites and of the SA improved through the implementation of a transportation proximity to transport links? text strategy which would include a redirection of flows, particularly of HGVs away from the centre of Queenborough, enhancement of public transport services (predominantly buses) and improved connectivity via footpaths and cycle routes. The commitment by SEEDA/Government to the area and the construction of the new bridge and supporting roads Refer to infrastructure has already raised awareness of the employment 21.5 Will it lead to an increase section 5.23 potential of Sheppey evidenced by increased property values ? ? ? ? ? in local wages? of the SA and emerging increases in demand. The nature of new and text varied employment opportunities would also lead to a decrease of unemployment and the potential increase in local wages.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 240 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 21. To enhance quality of and access to employment opportunities for everyone (Option 3) The creation of around 180,000 sqm of employment opportunities is a key remit of the Masterplan. A range of Refer to employment types is anticipated including office, large scale 21.1 Will it improve the range section 5.23 distribution, hotel and retail. It is anticipated that the marina of local employment ++ ++ + 99 of the SA would also bring employment opportunities. opportunities? text During the construction phase of the development, minimum targets exist for the use of locally sourced labour, as a proportion of the total labour force. It is envisaged that the scale and nature of new employment Refer to 21.2 Will it meet the opportunities would be compatible with the existing skills base section 5.23 employment needs of local + + 0 99of the local economy. In addition during construction on-the- of the SA people? job training opportunities in the construction industry would text be available over the 12-15 year building period. It is envisaged that the scale and nature of new employment Refer to 21.3 Will it reduce the level of opportunities would be compatible with the existing skills base section 5.23 unemployment and ++0 99of the local economy and thus would provide very good of the SA worklessness? potential to reduce the level of unemployment and text worklessness.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 241 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
The proposed Relief Road would facilitate good access to the new employment opportunities in neighbouring areas (e.g. Sheerness).
21.4 Will it improve physical Refer to The employment areas would be integrated within the mixed access to jobs through section 5.23 use development as well as in Neatscourt. Access would be ++0 99 improved location of sites and of the SA improved through the implementation of a transportation proximity to transport links? text strategy which would include a redirection of flows, particularly of HGVs away from the centre of Queenborough, enhancement of public transport services (predominantly buses) and improved connectivity via footpaths and cycle routes. The commitment by SEEDA/Government to the area and the construction of the new bridge and supporting roads Refer to infrastructure has already raised awareness of the employment 21.5 Will it lead to an increase section 5.23 potential of Sheppey evidenced by increased property values ? ? ? ? ? in local wages? of the SA and emerging increases in demand. The nature of new and text varied employment opportunities would also lead to a decrease of unemployment and the potential increase in local wages.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 242 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 21. To enhance quality of and access to employment opportunities for everyone (Option 4) The creation of around 180,000 sqm of employment opportunities is a key remit of the Masterplan. A range of Refer to employment types is anticipated including office, large scale 21.1 Will it improve the range section 5.23 distribution, hotel and retail. It is anticipated that the marina of local employment ++ ++ + 99 of the SA would also bring employment opportunities. opportunities? text During the construction phase of the development, minimum targets exist for the use of locally sourced labour, as a proportion of the total labour force. It is envisaged that the scale and nature of new employment Refer to 21.2 Will it meet the opportunities would be compatible with the existing skills base section 5.23 employment needs of local + + 0 99of the local economy. In addition during construction on-the- of the SA people? job training opportunities in the construction industry would text be available over the 12-15 year building period. It is envisaged that the scale and nature of new employment Refer to 21.3 Will it reduce the level of opportunities would be compatible with the existing skills base section 5.23 unemployment and ++0 99of the local economy and thus would provide very good of the SA worklessness? potential to reduce the level of unemployment and text worklessness.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 243 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
The proposed Relief Road would facilitate good access to the new employment opportunities in neighbouring areas (e.g. Sheerness).
21.4 Will it improve physical Refer to The employment areas would be integrated within the mixed access to jobs through section 5.23 use development as well as in Neatscourt. Access would be ++0 99 improved location of sites and of the SA improved through the implementation of a transportation proximity to transport links? text strategy which would include a redirection of flows, particularly of HGVs away from the centre of Queenborough, enhancement of public transport services (predominantly buses) and improved connectivity via footpaths and cycle routes. The commitment by SEEDA/Government to the area and the construction of the new bridge and supporting roads Refer to infrastructure has already raised awareness of the employment 21.5 Will it lead to an increase section 5.23 potential of Sheppey evidenced by increased property values ? ? ? ? ? in local wages? of the SA and emerging increases in demand. The nature of new and text varied employment opportunities would also lead to a decrease of unemployment and the potential increase in local wages.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 244 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 22. To increase the economic performance of the Borough (Option 1) 22.1 Will it improve efficiency, Refer to competitiveness, vitality and section 5.24 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation adaptability of the local of the SA economy? text Refer to 22.2 Will it help diversify the section 5.24 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation economy? of the SA text 22.3 Will it encourage Refer to investment in businesses, section 5.24 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation people and infrastructure in of the SA the long term? text Refer to 22.4 Will it support the section 5.24 development of knowledge 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation of the SA based economic activity? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 245 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 22. To increase the economic performance of the Borough (Option 2) 22.1 Will it improve efficiency, Refer to By bringing forward employment space at Neatscourt and competitiveness, vitality and section 5.24 establishing the Rushenden Relief Road the Masterplan would ++ + + 99 adaptability of the local of the SA establish Neatscourt as a prime business location for Swale and economy? text as a gateway to the Isle of Sheppey. Refer to In addition to the existing employment opportunities within 22.2 Will it help diversify the section 5.24 the Masterplan area there would be a wide range of new ++ + + 99 economy? of the SA employment opportunities provided including office, large text scale distribution, hotel and retail. By making provision for well-serviced, flexible development space and giving due regard to ensure a mixed offer for large 22.3 Will it encourage Refer to investors, SMEs and micro businesses, it is anticipated that investment in businesses, section 5.24 ++ + + 99Neatscourt would accommodate indigenous growth and people and infrastructure in of the SA generate further investment in activities which are less-land the long term? text intensive and more knowledge-intensive than the present economic base. Refer to In the medium to long-term provision of high quality, well- 22.4 Will it support the section 5.24 serviced sites together with enhancement of the local development of knowledge ++ + + 99 of the SA vocational skills base through partner initiatives is expected to based economic activity? text draw more knowledge intensive activities into the area.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 246 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 22. To increase the economic performance of the Borough (Option 3) 22.1 Will it improve efficiency, Refer to By bringing forward employment space at Neatscourt and competitiveness, vitality and section 5.24 establishing the Rushenden Relief Road the Masterplan would ++ + + 99 adaptability of the local of the SA establish Neatscourt as a prime business location for Swale and economy? text as a gateway to the Isle of Sheppey. Refer to In addition to the existing employment opportunities within 22.2 Will it help diversify the section 5.24 the Masterplan area there would be a wide range of new ++ + + 99 economy? of the SA employment opportunities provided including office, large text scale distribution, hotel and retail. By making provision for well-serviced, flexible development space and giving due regard to ensure a mixed offer for large 22.3 Will it encourage Refer to investors, SMEs and micro businesses, it is anticipated that investment in businesses, section 5.24 ++ + + 99Neatscourt would accommodate indigenous growth and people and infrastructure in of the SA generate further investment in activities which are less-land the long term? text intensive and more knowledge-intensive than the present economic base. Refer to In the medium to long-term provision of high quality, well- 22.4 Will it support the section 5.24 serviced sites together with enhancement of the local development of knowledge ++ + + 99 of the SA vocational skills base through partner initiatives is expected to based economic activity? text draw more knowledge intensive activities into the area.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 247 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 22. To increase the economic performance of the Borough (Option 4) 22.1 Will it improve efficiency, Refer to By bringing forward employment space at Neatscourt and competitiveness, vitality and section 5.24 establishing the Rushenden Relief Road the Masterplan would ++ + + 99 adaptability of the local of the SA establish Neatscourt as a prime business location for Swale and economy? text as a gateway to the Isle of Sheppey. Refer to In addition to the existing employment opportunities within 22.2 Will it help diversify the section 5.24 the Masterplan area there would be a wide range of new ++ + + 99 economy? of the SA employment opportunities provided including office, large text scale distribution, hotel and retail. By making provision for well-serviced, flexible development space and giving due regard to ensure a mixed offer for large 22.3 Will it encourage Refer to investors, SMEs and micro businesses, it is anticipated that investment in businesses, section 5.24 ++ + + 99Neatscourt would accommodate indigenous growth and people and infrastructure in of the SA generate further investment in activities which are less-land the long term? text intensive and more knowledge-intensive than the present economic base. Refer to In the medium to long-term provision of high quality, well- 22.4 Will it support the section 5.24 serviced sites together with enhancement of the local development of knowledge ++ + + 99 of the SA vocational skills base through partner initiatives is expected to based economic activity? text draw more knowledge intensive activities into the area.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 248 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 23. To encourage investment in local services and facilities (Option 1) Refer to There would be no change to the existing situation 23.1 Will it promote inward section 5.25 0 0 0 0 0 investment? of the SA text Refer to There would be no change to the existing situation 23.2 Will it help to provide section 5.25 access to services and 0 0 0 0 0 of the SA facilities? text
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 249 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 23. To encourage investment in local services and facilities (Option 2)
The development proposals have already generated significant Refer to investment from public and community sector partners in 23.1 Will it promote inward section 5.25 + + + 99support of local services and facilities. This support is likely to investment? of the SA increase and catalyze additional private sector investment as text the development generates momentum and new facilities are developed in the allocated community hub areas. The Masterplan includes improved transport links, one element of which is the Relief Road, and greater provision of services and facilities, all of which are key elements of the Masterplan to help improve access to services and facilities. Refer to 23.2 Will it help to provide section 5.25 The community hubs would form the focus for new local access to services and ++0 99 of the SA services and facilities to meet existing and future demand. The facilities? text two community hubs have been designed as integral features of the development with walkways and cycle routes to maximize accessibility. This provision would enhance the opportunities and capacity for the local community to benefit from services delivered locally.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 250 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 23. To encourage investment in local services and facilities (Option 3)
The development proposals have already generated significant Refer to investment from public and community sector partners in 23.1 Will it promote inward section 5.25 + + + 99support of local services and facilities. This support is likely to investment? of the SA increase and catalyze additional private sector investment as text the development generates momentum and new facilities are developed in the allocated community hub areas. The Masterplan includes improved transport links, one element of which is the Relief Road, and greater provision of services and facilities, all of which are key elements of the Masterplan to help improve access to services and facilities. Refer to 23.2 Will it help to provide section 5.25 The community hubs would form the focus for new local access to services and ++0 99 of the SA services and facilities to meet existing and future demand. The facilities? text two community hubs have been designed as integral features of the development with walkways and cycle routes to maximize accessibility. This provision would enhance the opportunities and capacity for the local community to benefit from services delivered locally.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 251 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 23. To encourage investment in local services and facilities (Option 4)
The development proposals have already generated significant Refer to investment from public and community sector partners in 23.1 Will it promote inward section 5.25 + + + 99support of local services and facilities. This support is likely to investment? of the SA increase and catalyze additional private sector investment as text the development generates momentum and new facilities are developed in the allocated community hub areas. The Masterplan includes improved transport links, one element of which is the Relief Road, and greater provision of services and facilities, all of which are key elements of the Masterplan to help improve access to services and facilities. Refer to 23.2 will it help to provide section 5.25 The community hubs would form the focus for new local access to services and ++0 99 of the SA services and facilities to meet existing and future demand. The facilities? text two community hubs have been designed as integral features of the development with walkways and cycle routes to maximize accessibility. This provision would enhance the opportunities and capacity for the local community to benefit from services delivered locally.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 252 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 24. To encourage sustainable design and practice (Option 1) 24.1 Will it use architectural Refer to design to enhance the local section 5.26 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation character and ‘sense of place’ of the SA of development? text 24.2 Will it improve the Refer to quality of the built section 5.26 environment through high 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation of the SA standards of sustainable text design and construction? 24.3 Will it promote design SEEDA that respects and enhances Design Brief 0 0 0 0 0 There would be no change to the existing situation townscapes, streetscapes and and landscapes? Masterplan
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 253 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 24. To encourage sustainable design and practice (Option 2) The Masterplan would strike a careful balance between the existing character and the clean lines and new materials of 24.1 Will it use architectural Refer to contemporary design. The intent is to create a development design to enhance the local section 5.26 that fits with its surroundings without being under pressure to ++ ++ 0 99 character and ‘sense of place’ of the SA provide faux finishes or a historicist quality. The Masterplan of development? text would clearly elaborate appropriate styles and materials, with special attention to the residential development on the Klondyke in the context of the Queenborough Character Area. The key objectives for the proposed development would be to 24.2 Will it improve the deliver residential development that meets the Excellent Refer to quality of the built Ecohomes standard and Excellent BREEAM standard, where section 5.26 environment through high ++ ++ 0 99possible, for commercial development on the site. The of the SA standards of sustainable Masterplan would combine a sensitive footprint with text design and construction? information and incentives to developers to ensure the highest overall quality design. The Masterplan would contain design coding and 24.3 Will it promote design SEEDA recommendations based upon area typologies and desirable that respects and enhances Design Brief ++ ++ 0 99development strategies. The creation and enhancement of townscapes, streetscapes and and quality townscapes, landscapes and streetscapes is landscapes? Masterplan fundamental to this work.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 254 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 24. To encourage sustainable design and practice (Option 3) The Masterplan would strike a careful balance between the existing character and the clean lines and new materials of 24.1 Will it use architectural Refer to contemporary design. The intent is to create a development design to enhance the local section 5.26 that fits with its surroundings without being under pressure to ++ ++ 0 99 character and ‘sense of place’ of the SA provide faux finishes or a historicist quality. The Masterplan of development? text would clearly elaborate appropriate styles and materials, with special attention to the residential development on the Klondyke in the context of the Queenborough Character Area. The key objectives for the proposed development would be to 24.2 Will it improve the deliver residential development that meets the Excellent Refer to quality of the built Ecohomes standard and Excellent BREEAM standard, where section 5.26 environment through high ++ ++ 0 99possible, for commercial development on the site. The of the SA standards of sustainable Masterplan would combine a sensitive footprint with text design and construction? information and incentives to developers to ensure the highest overall quality design. The Masterplan would contain design coding and 24.3 Will it promote design SEEDA recommendations based upon area typologies and desirable that respects and enhances Design Brief ++ ++ 0 99development strategies. The creation and enhancement of townscapes, streetscapes and and quality townscapes, landscapes and streetscapes is landscapes? Masterplan fundamental to this work.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 255 Queenborough and Rushenden Regeneration Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment
Key Geographic Scale Timescale baseline Sustainable Development info and Borough Effects Commentary Objectives and Criteria target outside (where the Urban Rural period period available) Borough Within plan Beyond plan 24. To encourage sustainable design and practice (Option 4) The Masterplan would strike a careful balance between the existing character and the clean lines and new materials of 24.1 Will it use architectural Refer to contemporary design. The intent is to create a development design to enhance the local section 5.26 that fits with its surroundings without being under pressure to ++ ++ 0 99 character and ‘sense of place’ of the SA provide faux finishes or a historicist quality. The Masterplan of development? text would clearly elaborate appropriate styles and materials, with special attention to the residential development on the Klondyke in the context of the Queenborough Character Area. The key objectives for the proposed development would be to 24.2 Will it improve the deliver residential development that meets the Excellent Refer to quality of the built Ecohomes standard and Excellent BREEAM standard, where section 5.26 environment through high ++ ++ 0 99possible, for commercial development on the site. The of the SA standards of sustainable Masterplan would combine a sensitive footprint with text design and construction? information and incentives to developers to ensure the highest overall quality design. The Masterplan would contain design coding and 24.3 Will it promote design SEEDA recommendations based upon area typologies and desirable that respects and enhances Design Brief ++ ++ 0 99development strategies. The creation and enhancement of townscapes, streetscapes and and quality townscapes, landscapes and streetscapes is landscapes? Masterplan fundamental to this work.
MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SA November 2009 F2 256 www.campbellreith.com Structural + Civil + Environmental + Geotechnical + Traffic and Transportation
Artillery House Somerset House The Lexicon 11-19 Artillery Row 47-49 London Road 10-12 Mount Street Victoria Redhill Manchester London Surrey M2 5NT SW1P 1RT RH1 1LU Telephone: +44(0)161 819 3060 Telephone: +44(0)20 7340 1700 Telephone: +44(0)1737 784 500 Facsimile: +44(0)161 819 3090 Facsimile: +44(0)20 7340 1777 Facsimile: +44(0)1737 784 501 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]
2440 The Quadrant Chantry House Aztec West High Street Almondsbury Coleshill Bristol Birmingham BS32 4AQ B46 3BP Telephone: +44(0)1454 877 654 Telephone: +44(0)1675 467 484 Facsimile: +44(0)1454 878 788 Facsimile: +44(0)1675 467 502 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] MCmc 9859-1 031109 SEA_SAv2.doc