Shepway District Council officers recommend refusal of aiport plans
permission for both the runway extension and the new terminal be refused largely
as a result of the airport’s failure to demonstrate that the development will
not have an adverse impact on the protected habitats that surround the airport’s
runway – See summary below
Councillors on September 23rd.
adopted by the council, as the competent authority, concluding that the proposals
for a runway extension and new terminal and car park will have significant adverse
effects, including uncertainty about some of the effects, on the integrity of
the European sites having regard to the Wildlife and
Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and Regulation 48 of the Conservation (Natural
Habitats and c) Regulations 1994.
and the new terminal and car park (Y06/1647/SH) on the following grounds:
of the Dungeness Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Dungeness to Pett Level
Special Protection Area (SPA), including uncertainty about some of the effects.
Consequently, the proposals are contrary to Shepway District Local Plan Review
policies CO8 and TR15, South East Plan policy NRM5 and PPS9.
Romney Marsh and Rye Bay Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and Dungeness
National Nature Reserve, contrary to Shepway District Local Plan Review policy
CO9, South East Plan policy NRM5 and PPS9.
and pSPA. The council considers the proposals are likely to result in significant
adverse effects, which is a material planning consideration, being potentially
contrary to Shepway District Local Plan Review policy CO8, South East Plan policy
NRM5 and PPS9.
the airport, and some of these are considered materially significant. Whilst
the effects can be partially mitigated, not all of them can. There will also
be some other limited adverse effects in the area, including the enjoyment of
the Romney Marsh and Dungeness area generally, and the Kent Downs AONB. Consequently
the proposals are considered contrary to Shepway District Local Plan Review policy
SD1, particularly SD1 (k) and to a lesser extent (c) and (d).
prospect, the adverse effects on the SPA, SAC, SSSI, pSPA, pRAMSAR, local community
and other features mean that the planning applications should be refused. Furthermore,
given there is no overriding strategic justification for the proposals the adverse
effects make them
unsustainable in the planning policy context, being contrary to Shepway District
Local Plan Review policy SD1 and South East Plan policy CC1.
and car park (Y06/1647/SH) be refused for the following reason:
Road) and the A259 (Lydd Road), known as “Hammonds Corner’. Natural England and
the council are of the opinion that protected species surveys should be undertaken
prior to any applications for the new terminal and car park being considered.
A planning authority when making a planning decision should be in receipt of a
full set of information to enable it to reach a fully informed decision in accordance
with best practice and national policy (PPS9), taking account of Shepway District
Local Plan Review policies CO9 and CO11 and South East Plan policy
U6, U7, U8, U9, U10, U10a, U15, TR1, TR2, TR5, TR6, TR8, TR11, TR12, TR13, TR15,
CO1, CO3, CO4, CO5, Co8, CO9, CO10, CO11, CO12, CO13, CO14, CO15
The South East Plan – BE6, CC1, CC2, CC4, CC7, PPS9, SP2, T1, T2, T5, T4, T8,
T14, NRM1, NRM4, NRM5, NRM7, NRM9. NRM10, NRM11, NRM12, W2 and M1.