From:                              Kate Cole

Sent:                               23 March 2018 14:34

To:                                   Jeremy Patterson

Subject:                          RE: Newhaven - LW/799/CM (EIA)


Hi Jeremy


·         The potential impacts of air quality on the SNCI have not been considered within the RPS report. An increase in fine particulates within the shingle beach could influence the species composition found there. It is understood that the EA are considering AQ impacts, and it is hoped that any permits will satisfactorily address impacts on the SNCI.

·         Cumulative effects can result from individually insignificant but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time or concentrated in a location. Cumulative effects are particularly important as many ecological features are already exposed to background levels of threat or pressure and may be close to critical thresholds where further impact could cause irreversible decline. Effects can also make habitats and species more vulnerable or sensitive to change. Different types of actions can cause cumulative impacts and effects: additive/incremental (multiple activities/projects, each with potentially insignificant effects, added together to give rise to a significant effect due to their proximity in time and space) and associated/connected (e.g. where a development activity enables another development, e.g. phased development as part of separate planning applications. Associated developments may include different aspects of a project which may be authorised under different consent processes. It is important to assess impacts of the 'project' as a whole and not ignore impacts that fall under a separate consent process.).

·         The enhancement measures referred to in 7.2 of the EcIA are those that have been agreed for the Port permission. The current applicant should also seek opportunities to enhance biodiversity. If no enhancements can be provided on site, improvements could be made to the wider SNCI e.g. through enhancement of Mill Creek. Removal of litter and the maintenance and/or improvement of water quality within the creek would have significant benefits for birds, fish and invertebrates using the creek. There is also the potential to make a contribution to the Sussex Local Wildlife Site initiative.


Kind regards




Dr Kate Cole MCIEEM

County Ecologist

Environment Team

01273 481621 | 07786 171465



From: Jeremy Patterson
Sent: 14 March 2018 12:49
To: Development Control (DMW)
Cc: Kate Cole
Subject: FW: Newhaven - LW/799/CM (EIA)




Please can you process this onto Mgov and the website?


Kate – could I have any comments from you by the end of next week?




Jeremy Patterson

Principal Planning Officer

Planning Policy and Development Management

01273 481626



Please note that we have now introduced charges for pre-application advice, the details of which are available on our website.



From: Mike Davies []
Sent: 13 March 2018 16:06
To: Jeremy Patterson
Cc: Richard Ford; Gregor Mutch; Oliver Brown; Sam Watson; Dominic Woodfield; Kathryn Barker
Subject: Newhaven - LW/799/CM (EIA)




Although you have not asked me for comments on the County Ecologist’s response to consultation which was posted on the application website, I passed the document to both Brett’s ecological and air quality consultants.


The  ecological consultant, Bioscan has prepared a joint response by way of a letter addressed to me and, on behalf of Brett, I hereby formally submit it as part of the application papers.


Kind regards



Mike Davies
Davies Planning

21 The Fairway
Herne Bay
Tel 01 227 364951
Mobile 07802 289333