DOCSLIB.ORG

Smart Motorways Programme M20 Junction 3 to 5 Smart Motorway

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Smart Motorways Programme M20 J3-5 Smart Motorways Programme M20 Junction 3 to 5 Smart Motorway: Environmental Study Report February 2017 Notice This document and its contents have been prepared and are intended solely for Highways England’s information and use in relation to the Smart Motorways Programme. in partnership with 1 Smart Motorways Programme M20 J3-5 Table of contents Pages Table of contents 2 Executive summary 5 1. Introduction 8 1.1. Overview of the Proposed Scheme 8 1.2. Purpose of the this Environmental Study Report 8 1.3. Background to the Smart Motorways Programme 9 1.4. The Road Investment Strategy and Highways England Licence 10 1.5. Regulatory Framework 14 1.6. Guidance followed for this report 14 2. The Proposed Scheme 15 2.1. Need for the Proposed Scheme 15 2.2. Description of the Proposed Scheme 15 2.3. Carriageways 16 2.4. Central reserve works 16 2.5. Verge / ALR works 16 2.6. Emergency refuge areas 18 2.7. Signs and gantries 19 2.8. Lighting 20 2.9. Works to Structures 21 2.10. Communication cabling and ducting 21 2.11. Environmental barriers 22 2.12. Site clearance 22 2.13. Construction, operation and long term management 22 2.14. Planned Development and overlapping schemes 23 2.15. Land use setting and land take 23 2.16. Proposed Scheme delivery and implementation 24 2.17. Proposed operation and long term management 24 3. Alternatives considered 25 3.1. Programme level alternatives 25 3.2. Scheme-specific alternatives 25 4. Environmental Impact Assessment Methodology 28 4.1. Screening 28 4.2. Scoping 28 4.3 Stakeholder consultation 30 4.4 Methodology 30 5. Air Quality 35 5.1 Introduction 35 5.2 Study area 35 in partnership with 2 Smart Motorways Programme M20 J3-5 5.3 Methodology 36 5.4 Baseline conditions 43 5.5 Sensitivity of resource 44 5.6 Assumptions and limitations 44 5.7 Design and mitigation measures 45 5.8 Potential operational effects 45 5.9 Residual effects 46 5.10 Summary 46 6 Ecology and Nature Conservation 48 6.1 Introduction 48 6.2 Study area 48 6.3 Methodology 49 6.4 Baseline conditions 53 6.5 Sensitivity of Resource 56 6.6 Assumptions and limitations 58 6.7 Design and mitigation measures 59 6.8 Potential construction effects 61 6.9 Potential operational effects 64 6.10 Enhancement Measures 66 6.11 Residual effects 66 6.12 Summary 66 7 Landscape and Visual Effects 73 7.1 Introduction 73 7.2 Study area 73 7.3 Methodology 74 7.4 Baseline conditions 78 7.5 Sensitivity of resource 81 7.6 Assumptions and limitations 82 7.7 Design and mitigation measures 82 7.8 Potential construction effects 83 7.10 Potential operational effects 85 7.11 Residual effects 88 7.12 Summary 88 8 Noise and Vibration 89 8.1 Introduction 89 8.2 Study area 91 8.3 Methodology 91 8.4 Baseline conditions 98 8.5 Sensitivity of resource 101 8.6 Assumptions and limitations 102 8.7 Design and mitigation measures 106 in partnership with 3 Smart Motorways Programme M20 J3-5 8.8 Potential construction effects 109 8.9 Potential operational effects 114 8.10 Further mitigation 118 8.11 Residual effects 118 8.12 Summary 118 9 Assessment of Cumulative Effects 120 9.1 Introduction 120 9.2 Methodology 120 9.3 Potential effects 123 9.4 Summary 128 10 Environmental Management 129 10.1. Overview 129 11 References 131 12 Abbreviations 133 Figures 136 Appendices 138 Appendix A - DF2 drawings including potential construction compounds 139 Appendix B – Air quality 140 B.1 – Regulatory / Policy Framework 140 B.2 – Baseline and Constraints 144 B.3 – Air Quality Assessment Methodology 163 B.4 – Assessment of Impact 176 Appendix C - Ecology 179 C.1 – Protected Species Report 179 Appendix D – Landscape and visual 199 D.1 – Visual Effects Schedule 199 D.2 – Setting of cultural heritage assets assessment table 201 Appendix E – Noise and vibration 206 E.1 – Regulatory / Policy Framework 206 E.2 – List of Figures 208 E.3 – Basic noise levels in order to define the operational noise study area 209 E.4 – Baseline conditions 210 E.5 – Noise calculation assumptions 225 E.6 – Analysis of noise mitigation, rectification and enhancement measures 230 Appendix F – Assessment of Cumulative Effects 237 F.1 – Relevant Development Proposals for Cumulative Effects Assessment 237 in partnership with 4 Smart Motorways Programme M20 J3-5 Executive summary Introduction Highways England has commissioned the Jacobs Atkins Joint Venture (JAJV) to design and assess a proposed Smart Motorway (SM) All Lane Running (ALR) scheme on the M20 between Junction 3 – Addington Interchange (J3) and Junction 5 – Aylesford Interchange (J5), referred to in this report as the ‘Proposed Scheme’. The Proposed Scheme lies within the county of Kent, and the borough of Tonbridge and Malling (see Figure 1-1 for a location plan). Highways England expects to commence construction of the Proposed Scheme in spring 2018 and is expected to take less than two years to construct, including commissioning. The Proposed ALR Scheme would provide four permanent running lanes, by converting the hard shoulder into lane 1, between Junctions 3 and 5. The ALR will be supported through the installation of technology to monitor conditions and inform drivers. This will include the installation of 27 new overhead gantries (19 existing gantries will be retained and upgraded where possible) fitted with Advanced Motorway Indicators (AMIs), New Message Signs and/or Advanced Directional Signs (ADS), strategic signs (MS3s) and variable Messaging Signs (MS4). These will display variable speed limits based on traffic conditions along with the creation of emergency refuge areas (ERAs) in accordance with the standards as set out in IAN 161/13. Cameras and loop detectors will provide information to support the technology, where through junction running will be introduced. The Proposed Scheme will incorporate the hardening of the central reserve and installation of a rigid concrete barrier between Junction 3 and 5 and will take less than 2 years to construct. A full description of the Proposed Scheme is provided in Section 2. This Environmental Study Report (ESR) presents the findings of the non-statutory environmental assessment undertaken to identify and assess potential environmental impacts that could arise from the Proposed Scheme and proposes mitigation measures to minimise these impacts in order to inform the planning, design and construction process and satisfy legal obligations. Air quality Following implementation of the Proposed Scheme, improvements to the M20 J3-5 would lead to an increase in traffic flows along the M20 and the immediate road network (due to the release of latent demand), with some balancing from improved journey times (congested speed effects). There are 3 AQMA, PCM links, and no designated ecological sites within the air quality study area. 3 For human health, there are no exceedances of the annual mean NO2 UK AQS objective of 40 µg/m in the future year (2019) with or without the Proposed Scheme. Any increases in concentrations are predicted to be ‘imperceptible’, whilst there are two areas of ‘small decreases’ north east of Junction 4 and adjacent to the A21. The maximum concentration would be 35.6 µg/m3 on Station Road, north of the M20 in the Tonbridge and Malling AQMA. For EU compliance, there is not expected to be a compliance risk as there are no Defra PCM links that exceed the EU Limit Value for annual mean NO2 with or without the Proposed Scheme, either in the opening year 2019 or the design year 2034. The regional assessment shows increases in emissions of NOx (5%), PM10 and CO2 (1%) as a result of the Proposed Scheme by the design year 2034. The overall conclusion regarding the effect of the Proposed Scheme on local air quality is that there would be no significant adverse effect on local air quality. Ecology and nature conservation Ecological receptors in the study area include a European designated site (Medway Estuary & Marshes Ramsar / Special Protection Area), a Local Wildlife Site (Leybourne Lakes and Snodland), notable and other habitats, notable and legally protected species such as bats, dormouse and great crested newt. These require avoidance, mitigation, compensation and/or enhancement measures which have been incorporated into the Proposed Scheme. This will ensure impacts are minimised and that there are no residual significant adverse effects on the favourable conservation status of habitats and species. With the in partnership with 5 Smart Motorways Programme M20 J3-5 implementation of mitigation, there would be no significant residual effects as a result of the Proposed Scheme. There would be some small scale, temporary disturbance and loss of woodland habitat for notable species (including hazel dormouse, common breeding birds, bats, reptiles and great crested newts) and risk of pollution from fuel spillage material wash off and dust resulting in loss of quality of retained habitat during the construction phase. There would also be a slight deterioration in air quality and pollution from surface water wash off which would result in a minor loss of habitat quality at Leybourne Lakes and Snodland Local Wildlife Site. There would be an increased risk of mortality of wildlife from vehicle collision due to the additional running lane and the presence of concrete barrier in the central reservation. Overall, the Proposed Scheme would not result in any significant adverse effects on statutory or non- statutory designated sites, habitat, or protected/notable species. Landscape and cultural heritage The highly sensitive Kent Downs AONB abuts the northern edge of the M20 between Junctions 3 and 4.
Recommended publications
  • Operation Stack

    Operation Stack

    House of Commons Transport Committee Operation Stack First Report of Session 2016–17 HC 65 House of Commons Transport Committee Operation Stack First Report of Session 2016–17 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 23 May 2016 HC 65 Published on 1 June 2016 by authority of the House of Commons Transport Committee The Transport Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department for Transport and its associated public bodies. Current membership Mrs Louise Ellman MP (Labour (Co-op), Liverpool, Riverside) (Chair) Robert Flello MP (Labour, Stoke-on-Trent South) Mary Glindon MP (Labour, North Tyneside) Karl McCartney MP (Conservative, Lincoln) Stewart Malcolm McDonald MP (Scottish National Party, Glasgow South) Mark Menzies MP (Conservative, Fylde) Huw Merriman MP (Conservative, Bexhill and Battle) Will Quince MP (Conservative, Colchester) Iain Stewart MP (Conservative, Milton Keynes South) Graham Stringer MP (Labour, Blackley and Broughton) Martin Vickers MP (Conservative, Cleethorpes) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website at www.parliament.uk/transcom and in print by Order of the House. Evidence relating to this report is published on the inquiry publications page of the Committee’s website. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Gordon Clarke (Committee Clerk), Gail Bartlett (Second Clerk), James Clarke (Committee Specialist), Andrew Haylen (Committee Specialist), Adrian Hitchins (Committee Specialist), Daniel Moeller (Senior Committee Assistant), Michelle Owens (Committee Assistant) and Estelle Currie (Media Officer).
  • Infrastructure Delivery Plan

    Infrastructure Delivery Plan

    Tunbridge Wells Borough Council Infrastructure Delivery Plan March 2021 1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Background and Policy Context ..................................................................................... 2 National Policy ...................................................................................................................... 2 Local Policy .......................................................................................................................... 3 Local Plan policy context and strategy for growth ................................................................ 4 Policy STR 1 - The Development Strategy .............................................................................. 6 What is infrastructure? ......................................................................................................... 8 Engagement ....................................................................................................................... 10 Prioritisation of infrastructure .............................................................................................. 11 Identified risks .................................................................................................................... 12 Timing ................................................................................................................................ 12 Costs .................................................................................................................................
  • 15-19 North Street Ashford, Kent, Tn24 8Lf 15-19 North Street, Ashford, Kent, Tn24 8Lf 2

    15-19 North Street Ashford, Kent, Tn24 8Lf 15-19 North Street, Ashford, Kent, Tn24 8Lf 2

    FREEHOLD TOWN CENTRE OFFICE INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITY WITH REDEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL 15-19 NORTH STREET ASHFORD, KENT, TN24 8LF 15-19 NORTH STREET, ASHFORD, KENT, TN24 8LF 2 INVESTMENT SUMMARY Located in Ashford town centre, close to the High Street and within walking distance of Ashford International train station. Three self contained office buildings comprising 9,461 sq ft in total, with 10 car parking spaces Freehold Multi-let to three tenants on three separate leases AWULT of approximately 0.73 years to break options and 3.55 years to lease expiries Barclays in occupation of no. 17 have exercised their break in September 2016, leaving 5,340 sq ft (NIA) vacant and prime for alternative use or re-letting Current rent of £104,415 per annum, equating to an average rent of £11.04 per sq ft Asset Management Initiatives • Explore change of use on vacant space • Let vacant space • Settle dilapidations with Barclays Offers are invited in excess of £800,000 (Eight Hundred Thousand Pounds), reflecting a Capital Value of £85 per sq ft (assuming purchaser’s costs at 5.49%) A10 M1 M50 15-19 NORTH STREET, ASHFORD, KENT, TN24 8LF M40 3 A44 Colchester . Gloucester T S HA RDIN GE H ROA D T KEY R A40 W N E O M1 O Y M5 R W E LOCATION N M11 R L L A IL Oxford B H S D A1(M) S 11 E Chelmsford A T A D L O O R S L A40 E T R Bus route OM ER M25 E SE SET E R The property is located in Ashford, Kent, a historic market town T ER GH ROAD RO N M R A W A12 O O BU D M25 R S DIN W E H approximately 55 miles to the South East of London and 15 T A420 Watford O Knoll LanePARK MALL .
  • The Regional Impact of the Channel Tunnel Throughout the Community

    The Regional Impact of the Channel Tunnel Throughout the Community

    -©fine Channel Tunnel s throughpdrth^Çpmmunity European Commission European Union Regional Policy and Cohesion Regional development studies The regional impact of the Channel Tunnel throughout the Community European Commission Already published in the series Regional development studies 01 — Demographic evolution in European regions (Demeter 2015) 02 — Socioeconomic situation and development of the regions in the neighbouring countries of the Community in Central and Eastern Europe 03 — Les politiques régionales dans l'opinion publique 04 — Urbanization and the functions of cities in the European Community 05 — The economic and social impact of reductions in defence spending and military forces on the regions of the Community 06 — New location factors for mobile investment in Europe 07 — Trade and foreign investment in the Community regions: the impact of economic reform in Central and Eastern Europe 08 — Estudio prospectivo de las regiones atlánticas — Europa 2000 Study of prospects in the Atlantic regions — Europe 2000 Étude prospective des régions atlantiques — Europe 2000 09 — Financial engineering techniques applying to regions eligible under Objectives 1, 2 and 5b 10 — Interregional and cross-border cooperation in Europe 11 — Estudio prospectivo de las regiones del Mediterráneo Oeste Évolution prospective des régions de la Méditerranée - Ouest Evoluzione delle prospettive delle regioni del Mediterraneo occidentale 12 — Valeur ajoutée et ingénierie du développement local 13 — The Nordic countries — what impact on planning and development
  • The Truth Behind Op Stack.Pdf

    The Truth Behind Op Stack.Pdf

    THE TRUTH BEHIND OPERATION STACK 1. What is Operation Stack? Operation Stack is an emergency procedure implemented by Kent Police to ‘stack’ coast-bound cross-Channel freight traffic on parts of the M20 motorway. History Although originally operated on the A2 by Kent Police before the M20 was completed, once the Channel Tunnel was built and the trunk road from the M20 through to Dover was completed, the M20 became the primary route for cross-Channel freight vehicles. A new version of Operation Stack was subsequently devised for the M20, initially comprising of a coast-bound closure between Junction 11 and Junction 13 as Phase 1 and, if required, a closure of the London-bound carriage way for Phase 2. Purpose Stack is activated when there is a significant blockage to the flow of cross-Channel freight traffic beyond the control of the Port that results in demand for space at either the Channel Tunnel or Port of Dover Ferry Terminal outstripping their parking capacity, resulting in traffic backing up onto the surrounding road network. It has been needed during times of stress such as:- Strike action in Calais Extreme weather conditions Channel Tunnel problems (e.g. migrant incursions, line failure etc) 1 2. Stack Today Implementation Operation Stack is activated by Kent Police based on information received from several sources including the Port of Dover and the Channel Tunnel. Good communication with Kent Police is essential in notifying of any problems that may lead to the need for Stack as it takes approximately two hours from the time of notification to actually closing the motorway and takes a considerable amount of police resource.
  • Highway Verge Management

    Highway Verge Management

    HIGHWAY VERGE MANAGEMEN T Planning and Development Note Date 23rd January 2019 Version Number 2 Highway Verge Management Review Date 30th March 2024 Author Geoff Sinclair/Richard Edmonds Highway Verge Management PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT NOTE INTRODUCTION Planning and Development Notes (PDN) aim to review and collate the City Corporation’s (CoL) property management issues for key activities, alongside other management considerations, to give an overview of current practice and outline longer term plans. The information gathered in each report will be used by the CoL to prioritise work and spending, in order to ensure firstly that the COL’s legal obligations are met, and secondly that resources are used in an efficient manner. The PDNs have been developed based on the current resource allocation to each activity. An important part of each PDN is the identification of any potential enhancement projects that require additional support. The information gathered in each report will be used by CoL to prioritise spending as part of the development of the 2019-29 Management Strategy and 2019-2022 Business Plan for Epping Forest. Each PDN will aim to follow the same structure, outlined below though sometimes not all sections will be relevant: Background – a brief description of the activity being covered; Existing Management Program – A summary of the nature and scale of the activity covered; Property Management Issues – a list of identified operational and health and safety risk management issues for the activity; Management Considerations
  • M20 Junction

    M20 Junction

    M20 Junction 10a TR010006 5.1 Consultation Report APFP Regulation 5(2)(q) Revision A Planning Act 2008 Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009 Volume 5 July 2016 M20 Junction 10a TR010006 5.1 Consultation Report Volume 5 This document is issued for the party which commissioned it We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this and for specific purposes connected with the above-captioned document being relied upon by any other party, or being used project only. It should not be relied upon by any other party or for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission used for any other purpose. which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by other parties This document contains confidential information and proprietary intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties without consent from us and from the party which commissioned it. Date: July 2016 M20 Junction 10a Consultation Report TR010006 Foreword Highways England has undertaken a fully managed programme of consultation with the local community and wider stakeholders. The consultation process has facilitated feedback which has been carefully considered throughout the development of the M20 junction 10a Scheme (the 'Scheme'). Pre-application consultation is an important element of any Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project. Highways England has taken careful consideration to relevant legislation, guidance and notes when designing the pre-application strategy. Early consultation addressed the main strategic and audience interaction needs to deliver a meaningful and progressive engagement programme. A number of different model groups were supported throughout the non-statutory engagement period.
  • M20 Junction 10A Scheme Is Identified As a Key Transport Requirement and Is Essential to the Future Development of South Ashford

    M20 Junction 10A Scheme Is Identified As a Key Transport Requirement and Is Essential to the Future Development of South Ashford

    M20 J10A ACCESS TO SOUTH ASHFORD HIGHWAYS AGENCY TECHNICAL APPRAISAL REPORT M20 J10A ACCESS TO SOUTH ASHFORD PUBLIC CONSULTATION REPORT February 2009 Report Number GR053 Revision: Issue 1 M20 J10A – ACCESS TO THE SOUTH OF ASHFORD HIGHWAYS AGENCY PUBLIC CONSULTATION REPORT CONTENTS Page 1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................9 1.1 General............................................................................................................................9 1.2 Purpose of Consultation.................................................................................................9 1.3 Background...................................................................................................................10 2 PROPOSALS PRESENTED FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION............................................11 2.1 The Proposed Option – Junction 10A Gyratory ..........................................................11 2.2 Alternative options .......................................................................................................12 Alternative Option 1 – Further Improvements to Existing Junction 10.................................12 Alternative Option 2 – Junction 10A Single Bridge Interchange...........................................12 3 CONSULTATION ARRANGEMENTS ................................................................................13 3.1 Information issued to Statutory Consultees................................................................13
  • (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Area 3 Planning Committee, 19/11/2020 18:30

    (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Area 3 Planning Committee, 19/11/2020 18:30

    Public Document Pack TONBRIDGE & MALLING BOROUGH COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SERVICES Gibson Building Chief Executive Gibson Drive Julie Beilby BSc (Hons) MBA Kings Hill, West Malling Kent ME19 4LZ West Malling (01732) 844522 NB - This agenda contains proposals, Contact: Democratic Services recommendations and options. These do [email protected] not represent Council policy or decisions 11 November 2020 until they have received proper consideration through the full decision making process. To: MEMBERS OF THE AREA 3 PLANNING COMMITTEE (Copies to all Members of the Council) Dear Sir/Madam Your attendance is requested at a meeting of the Area 3 Planning Committee to be held online via Microsoft Teams on Thursday, 19th November, 2020 commencing at 6.30 pm. Information on how to observe the meeting will be published on the Council’s website. Deposited plans can be viewed online by using Public Access. Please note the earlier start time. Yours faithfully JULIE BEILBY Chief Executive A G E N D A PART 1 - PUBLIC 1. Apologies for Absence 2. Declarations of Interest Members in any doubt about such declarations are advised to contact Legal or Democratic Services in advance of the meeting 3. Minutes 5 - 8 To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of Area 3 Planning Committee held on 1 October 2020 Decisions to be taken by the Committee 4. Development Control 9 - 12 Introduction and Glossary 5. TM/18/02966/0A - Development Site South of Brampton Field 13 - 76 between Bradbourne Lane and Kiln Barn Road, Ditton Outline Application: Development of the site to provide up to 300 dwellings (Use Class C3) and provision of new access off Kiln Barn Road.
  • Development Strategy Topic Paper for Pre-Submission Local Plan

    Development Strategy Topic Paper for Pre-Submission Local Plan

    Tunbridge Wells Borough Council Development Strategy Topic Paper for Pre-Submission Local Plan February 2021 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Settlement pattern ............................................................................................ 2 3.0 Environmental designations ............................................................................. 4 High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty .................................................... 4 Metropolitan Green Belt .......................................................................................... 5 Nature Conservation designations .......................................................................... 6 Heritage designations ............................................................................................. 7 Areas of flood risk ................................................................................................... 7 4.0 Development needs ......................................................................................... 9 Housing .................................................................................................................. 9 Business ................................................................................................................. 9 Retail .....................................................................................................................10 5.0 Development of the strategy through previous
  • Footpath & Cycleway Asset Management Plan

    Footpath & Cycleway Asset Management Plan

    SHIRE OF ESPERANCE Footpath & Cycleway Asset Management Plan Footpaths_Plan_2010_V3_Final - ii - Document Control Document ID: 59_07_070909_nams.plus_amp template v11 Rev No Date Revision Details Author Reviewer Approver V1 August 2010 1st Draft BP SAM Group V2 January 2011 Revised Register Data and text BP SAM Group V3 February 2011 Text update for Final BP © Copyright 2007 – All rights reserved. The Institute of Public Works Engineering Australia. - iii - TABLE OF CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS.................................................................................................................................................................................. iv GLOSSARY ............................................................................................................................................................................................ v 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................................... 1 What the Shire Provides ............................................................................................................................................................ 1 What does it Cost? ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Plans for the Future ..................................................................................................................................................................
  • Landscape Assessment of Kent 2004

    Landscape Assessment of Kent 2004

    CHILHAM: STOUR VALLEY Location map: CHILHAMCHARACTER AREA DESCRIPTION North of Bilting, the Stour Valley becomes increasingly enclosed. The rolling sides of the valley support large arable fields in the east, while sweeps of parkland belonging to Godmersham Park and Chilham Castle cover most of the western slopes. On either side of the valley, dense woodland dominate the skyline and a number of substantial shaws and plantations on the lower slopes reflect the importance of game cover in this area. On the valley bottom, the river is picked out in places by waterside alders and occasional willows. The railway line is obscured for much of its length by trees. STOUR VALLEY Chilham lies within the larger character area of the Stour Valley within the Kent Downs AONB. The Great Stour is the most easterly of the three rivers cutting through the Downs. Like the Darent and the Medway, it too provided an early access route into the heart of Kent and formed an ancient focus for settlement. Today the Stour Valley is highly valued for the quality of its landscape, especially by the considerable numbers of walkers who follow the Stour Valley Walk or the North Downs Way National Trail. Despite its proximity to both Canterbury and Ashford, the Stour Valley retains a strong rural identity. Enclosed by steep scarps on both sides, with dense woodlands on the upper slopes, the valley is dominated by intensively farmed arable fields interspersed by broad sweeps of mature parkland. Unusually, there are no electricity pylons cluttering the views across the valley. North of Bilting, the river flows through a narrow, pastoral floodplain, dotted with trees such as willow and alder and drained by small ditches.