CHESSINGTON EQUESTRIAN CENTRE CONSTRUCTION

Foresite ID Ltd
15 Bullen Street
London
SE1 7SJ
t: +44 (0) 207 924 3491
f: +44 (0) 207 788 3444
CHESSINGTON EQUESTRIAN CENTRE
CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT PLAN
For the importation of waste for the construction of paddocks and training grounds
Chessington CEMP v2
1
Chessington CEMP v2
Contents
1
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 3
2
Report Objectives .................................................................................................................................. 3
3
The Site ................................................................................................................................................... 4
4
Construction Proposals ......................................................................................................................... 4
5
Construction Methodology ................................................................................................................... 4
6
5.1
Plant ............................................................................................................................. 5
5.2
Construction Traffic ..................................................................................................... 5
Environmental Controls ........................................................................................................................ 6
6.1
Waste Importation Procedure..................................................................................... 6
6.1.1
Waste Carriers Licence ................................................................................................ 6
6.1.2
Acceptable Wastes – EWCs ......................................................................................... 6
6.1.3
Assessment of Waste Characteristics .......................................................................... 7
6.1.4
Assessment of Potentially Contaminated Wastes....................................................... 8
6.1.5
Onsite Waste Compliance Assessment ..................................................................... 10
6.2
Document and Record Keeping ................................................................................. 11
6.3
Environmental Training and Technical Competence................................................. 11
6.4
Dust / Mud on Roads ................................................................................................. 12
6.5
Surface Water Run-Off .............................................................................................. 13
6.6
Noise .......................................................................................................................... 13
6.7
Environmental Monitoring ........................................................................................ 13
6.8
Environmental Incident Response ............................................................................. 13
APPENDIX A – FIGURES
APPENDIX B – SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT
2
Chessington CEMP v2
1 INTRODUCTION
Foresite was commissioned to complete a Construction Environmental Management Plan
(CEMP) on behalf of B.L Penwarden Haulage Ltd, to provide an environmental control and
management procedural document during the raising of land levels, re-engineering of drainage
and construction of wetland surface water attenuation at Chessington Equestrian Centre,
Clayton Rd, Chessington, KT9 1NN. The scheme is designed to address surface water flooding
issues at the site, which make the land unsuitable for grazing.
2 REPORT OBJECTIVES
The CEMP provides details of the control measures and procedures which Penwarden propose
to implement to avoid, minimise and mitigate the construction impacts on the environment at
the development site and surrounding areas.
The CEMP sets out the construction methodology including the control of the soil importation
process, the construction process, site operations including traffic management and the
environmental control measures which will be undertaken during construction.
The primary objectives to guide the implementation of effective environmental management
during the construction of the new sports facilities at Chessington Equestrian Centre are:

To comply with relevant environmental legislation, duties and obligations, together
with planning conditions and avoid prosecutions for the contravention of
environmental law and regulations;

To maintain and raise the awareness of all contractors of their environmental
responsibilities throughout the construction phase. This will be by means of frequent
awareness briefings and training sessions and construction ‘tool box’ talks;

To achieve zero environmental pollution incidents during the construction phase (i.e.
noise and public nuisance, emergency spills, uncontrolled discharges of contaminated
runoff, leakages, etc); and

To effectively integrate environmental considerations into all aspects of decisionmaking during the construction phase.
3
Chessington CEMP v2
3 THE SITE
The site comprises three fields with a total area of 9.88Ha. The site is currently used for grazing
horses from the Chessington Equestrian Centre. The site is bordered to the north by the Hook
slip road off the A3, to the east by allotments, playing fields to the southeast and south and
buildings associated with the Chessington Equestrian Centre to the west, beyond which is the
A3. The site is located at National Grid Reference TQ 17611 65186.
A site location and boundary plan is contained in Appendix A.
4 CONSTRUCTION PROPOSALS
This CEMP is being prepared in support of a Planning Application to Kingston Borough Council.
The development plan includes the raising of ground levels within the fields, re-engineering
drainage to provide paddocks which can be used for drainage. The proposals also include the
construction of a training area and wetland area for surface water attenuation.
Construction will be carried out with 100,000 tonnes of recovered inert waste soils imported
under an Environmental Permit.
Appendix A contains a figure detailing construction proposals.
5 CONSTRUCTION METHODOLOGY
Construction will be undertaken by Penwarden and will broadly follow the sequence detailed
below:

Site set up, including site office, welfare and site signage;

Setting out and erection of tree protection and construction of root protection zones;

Topsoil strip and stockpile for re use using tracked dozer;

Construction of haul roads consisting of 600mm thick hardcore on geotextile mating;

Importation spread level and compact inert fill materials to correct levels with a
tracked bulldozer;
4
Chessington CEMP v2

Fill material will be delivered on 8 wheel tipper lorries, they will report to the site
Gateman who will inspect the load and associated paperwork to check that all is in
order before directing the lorry on to site to tip as instructed. The Gateman will also
act as traffic marshal to ensure the smooth and safe access and egress of the site via
the school main entrance;

Replace topsoil and lightly compact using tracked dozer;

Stone bury, cultivate and final grade of topsoil using tractor mounted stone burier,
cultivator, and laser grader;

Seeding using tractor mounted broadcast seeder;

Planting of the wetland area;

Remove tree protection and clear from site; and

Clean and clear all plant, machinery, and surplus materials.
5.1 Plant
The following plant will be used during the construction:

Caterpillar D6 or similar tracked bulldozer;

Hitachi EX130 or similar 360 degree tracked excavator;

9t dumper;

Massey Ferguson 135 or similar tractor with low ground impact tyres; and

Tractor mounted – Stone burier, Cultivator and a Laser grader.
All plant will be subject to maintenance checks before operation each day. Spill kits will be kept
on site for potential fuel leaks. Drip trays will be used for every non-manned piece of diesel
plant.
5.2 Construction Traffic
All vehicles will enter and exit via an entrance on the Clayton Lane. They will proceed north
along a track where they will stop and report to the site office at the lorry holding area for the
load to be inspected. Once the load has been inspected and approved it will be directed by the
site traffic marshal as to where to tip on site via one of the site temporary haul roads. Having
tipped the load the lorry will then return to the holding area to be given permission to leave site
5
Chessington CEMP v2
by the traffic marshal. Vehicles will leave the site using the same track way to exit on to Clayton
Lane. All site vehicles will park in the proposed compound area.
6 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS
The following environmental controls have been developed based on a Site Specific
Environmental Risk Assessment in Appendix B.
6.1 Waste Importation Procedure
The construction material will be potentially from multiple sources, both as dug from greenfield
sites, from other construction projects. In each case the waste must be classified as inert in
accordance with the planning permission.
To determine a waste’s acceptability for use at the site the Operator will apply this protocol
ensuring that both the waste’s properties are fully assessed and that the importers of the
material are suitably licensed.
6.1.1 Waste Carriers Licence
The Waste Carriers Licence will be required by the Operator prior to importation. The certificate
will be checked to ensure that it is valid. If there is any doubt as to the Certificates validity then
the Operator will restrict access to the site whilst clarification is provided regarding the
certificates validity.
6.1.2 Acceptable Wastes – EWCs
Table 1, overleaf, details the waste types have been selected from the Environment Agency’s
guidance document titled RGN13 Defining Waste Recovery and for construction at the site:
6
Chessington CEMP v2
Table 1 – Acceptable Wastes
EWC
Description
01 04 08
waste gravel and crushed rocks other than those mentioned in 01 04 07
01 04 09
waste sand and clays
02 02 02
shellfish shells from which the soft tissue or flesh has been removed only
02 04 01
soil from cleaning and washing beet
10 01 02
pulverised fuel ash only
10 12 08
waste ceramics, bricks, tiles and construction products (after thermal processing)
17 01 01
concrete
17 01 02
bricks
17 01 03
tiles and ceramics
17 01 07
mixtures of concrete, bricks, tiles and ceramics other than those mentioned in 17
01 06
17 05 04
soil and stones including chalk other than those mentioned 17 05 03
17 05 06
dredging spoil other than those mentioned in 17 05 05
17 05 08
track ballast, soil and stones other than those mentioned in 17 05 07
19 08 99
stone filter media (if cleaned to remove sewage contamination) only
19 12 09
minerals (for example sand, stones)
19 12 12
soil substitutes other than that containing dangerous substances
19 13 02
solid wastes from soil remediation other than those mentioned in 19 13 01
20 02 02
soil and stones
6.1.3 Assessment of Waste Characteristics
Before importation of any waste the Operator will evaluate the source of the material to be
imported. The Operator will employ a Waste Information Form that will be used to document
the evaluation process for each waste stream deposited at the site. The Form will identify the
waste type, quantity, its source and its environmental characteristics. The Waste Information
Form along with any supporting information will be maintained at the Operators Offices. Each
Waste Information Form will have a unique reference.
Only after the Waste Information Form has been completed, and waste characteristic
assessment following the Waste Acceptance Procedure flow diagram in Fig.1 will the waste be
accepted at the site.
7
Chessington CEMP v2
If the waste is suspected of having elevated contamination concentrations, the material will be
subject to further assessment. This procedure is set out in section 6.1.4.
SOURCE
MATERIAL
Determine waste material
Identify EWC
WIF Completion
Inert material by
definition
Wastes suspected of having elevated
contaminant concentrations
MATERIAL
ACCEPTED
Contamination
assessment
Does not comply with inert Waste
Acceptance Critieria
Complies with inert Waste
Acceptance Criteria
NOT ACCEPTED
MATERIAL ACCEPTED
Figure 1 – Waste Acceptance Procedure
6.1.4 Assessment of Potentially Contaminated Wastes
The majority of waste disposal enquiries will be for waste from construction sites and therefore
will have further information in the form of chemical analyses and Site Investigation Reports.
The assessment of whether the waste may contain contamination will be based on (but not
limited to) a review of the following aspects:

Desk study information, specifically historic and current potentially contaminative site
use;

The possibility of fuel or chemical storage; and

The presence of significant Made Ground.
8
Chessington CEMP v2
Where no suspicion of contamination has been detected the waste will be suitable for disposal
without further WAC testing.
When soil chemical analyses data is available a hazardous waste assessment will be made. No
hazardous waste will be accepted for recovery at the site.
Should the waste have a suspicion of organic contamination a review of the soil analyses will be
carried out against the determinands in Table 3. Waste exceeding organic WAC will not be
accepted at the site.
Should inorganic contamination be suspected WAC analysis in accordance with Table 2 will be
requested, if it is not present. No waste exceeding the WAC will be accepted at the site.
Should waste acceptance testing be required the analysis and limits required for acceptance are
detailed in tables 2 and 3 will be used.
Table 2 - Leachability Acceptance Criteria - BSEN 12457-2 or 3 test
Determinand
Concentration at L/S = 10l/kg Expressed as mg/kg
Arsenic
0.5
Barium
20.0
Cadmium
0.04
Chromium (Total)
0.5
Copper
2.0
Lead
0.5
Mercury
0.01
Molybdenum
0.5
Nickel
0.4
Antimony
0.06
Selenium
0.1
Zinc
4.0
Chloride*
800
Fluoride
10
Sulphate#
1,000
Phenol Index
1.0
9
Chessington CEMP v2
Dissolved Organic Carbon
500
Total Dissolved Solids*
4,000
* The value for TDS may be used in place of values for sulphate and chloride
# Can be increased to 6,000mg/kg provided the value of the first eluate at L/S = 0.1l/kg <
1,500mg/kg

If >500mg/kg at natural pH, can be re-tested at pH between 7.5 and 8.0 and will be considered
acceptable if results of re-test <500mg/kg
Table 3 - Total Acceptance Criteria
Parameter
Value (mg/kg)
Total Organic Carbon
30,000 (3%)
PCBs
1
Mineral Oil (C10 to C40)
500
BTEX
6
Total PAH
100
Tests must be carried out at a UKAS accredited laboratory and at a minimum requirement 1
sample per 1,000m3.
If the waste conforms to the above assessment the WIF will be completed by the Site Manager
and sent back to the Waste Producer. The Waste Producer will then complete a waste transfer
note with a copy of the approved WIF attached. This documentation will accompany the waste
when it is delivered to site.
The Site Manager will double-check paperwork against
approvals/rejections list. If the documentation is in order, the waste will be accepted into the
site.
6.1.5 Onsite Waste Compliance Assessment
Once a fill material has been accepted for importation on the site then it will be subject to
further checks, including the following:
 An operative will be aware at the start of every day the types of waste to be imported;
 Each load arriving at site will be visually inspected; and
 Visual inspections will be made during placement.
10
Chessington CEMP v2
If there are any concerns regarding the material then the importation will cease immediately
and will only recommence once any discrepancies have been fully resolved.
Non-compliant waste will be rejected from site and returned to its original source.
6.2 Document and Record Keeping
An up to date copy of the following documents will be kept on site:
 Chessington Construction Environmental Management Plan v1;
 A copy of the Environment Permit;
 Waste Transfer Notes; and a
 Log of imported waste.
Waste transfer documentation will be retained for a minimum of 2 years. In accordance with
the Environmental Permit, quarterly waste returns will be completed for the duration of the
project (likely to be only a single quarter) and a Completion Report for the Environmental Permit
surrender will be prepared and submitted to the Environment Agency.
6.3 Environmental Training and Technical Competence
In accordance with the Environmental Permitting Regulations, a Technically Competent Person
will be responsible for site operations to be carried out in accordance with the Permit. The
technically competent person must have the requisite qualifications and be present on site for a
minimum of 20% of operations.
All staff, contractors and visitors will undergo a site induction, environmental and ecology
awareness training, initially as part of the induction process and through regular tool-box talks,
in order to be made aware of their environmental roles and responsibilities, procedures to be
followed and to ensure competency.
Prior to the commencement of the construction phase, all construction personnel (temporary or
permanent) will be required to undergo induction training outlining all aspects of the CEMP.
11
Chessington CEMP v2
6.4 Dust / Mud on Roads
During the waste importation dust may become airborne from areas of fill and during periods of
haulage and formation. The risk of fugitive dust increases during summer months when the fill
material can become friable. The fugitive dust could cause nuisance to surrounding land users.
In addition if deposition occurs in watercourses and on terrestrial habitats then there can be a
reduction in habitat value.
Dust will be controlled through the following means:

provision of surfaced internal haulage routes: good internal haulage roads will be
established and will also be maintained to ensure dust does no arise.

road sweepers and manual sweeping: will be operated on both the internal and
external haulage roads. These will remove loose soil deposits and dampen any
remaining soil particles reducing the risk of them becoming airborne.

use of bowsers: in areas that are observed to have the potential for dust to occur, a
bowser will be operated to dampen down ‘loose’ soil particles stopping them becoming
airborne.

cessation of importation and earthwork activities: in the event of dust becoming
airborne and migrating over the site boundaries then works in the area will immediately
cease until controls have been established.
To mitigate the risk of mud on roads, the following controls will be employed:

high specification wheel wash: will be operated during all site activities.

road sweepers and manual sweeping: will be operated on both the internal and
external haulage roads as determined necessary. These will remove loose soil deposits.

cessation of importation and earthwork activities: in the event of mud on the road
occurring then works will immediately cease until controls have been established.
12
Chessington CEMP v2
6.5 Surface Water Run-Off
Given the importation of loose soils, there is the potential for silty surface run-off to enter
drainage ditches to the east of the site. To control the risk of this, soils will be placed and
compacted immediately and seeded as soon as reasonably practical. Prior to works a vegetated
buffer zone between the works and the site boundary will also be established. Additionally,
control measures such as temporary earth mounds, ditches, swales and settlement ponds in
accordance with Pollution Prevention Guidelines PPG1 and PPG6 will be employed.
6.6 Noise
Construction working hours will be limited between 7.30am and 5.30pm weekdays and 7.30am
and 1pm on Saturday. All European Union CE regulations will be adhered to with regard to
maintenance equipment. The generator for the compound will be super silenced.
6.7 Environmental Monitoring
Environmental monitoring is an integral part of environmental management for the construction
phase of the development. A daily qualitative monitoring programme will be undertaken each
morning to evaluate the integrity effectiveness of environmental measures detailed within the
CEMP. Continual environmental monitoring will be carried out throughout the works. Should
any aspect of environmental control measures not be effective, corrective action will be taken
immediately.
6.8 Environmental Incident Response
In the event of an environmental incident, works will be ceased and the Site Manager and
Technically Competent Person will be informed. Corrective action will be taken as soon as is
reasonably practical. Should operations result in a significant incident the Environment Agency
will be consulted.
13
Chessington CEMP v2
APPENDIX A - FIGURES
Site Boundary
Project Name: Chessington Equestrian Centre
Drawing Name: Application Boundary Plan
Drawn By: SR
Checked By:DW
Client: BL Penwarden Haulage Contractors Ltd
Project No: 1316
Drawing No: 1316.02
Scale: 1:2500 @ A2
Date: 3rd May 2013
Revision No:
Weller Designs Ltd
Bishops Mead House, Bishops Mead,
West St. Farnham, Surrey, GU9 7DU
Tel/Fax: 01252 712127
Email: [email protected]
Web Site: www.wellerdesigns.co.uk
ne
dB
uffe
r Zo
tlan
We
We
tlan
dB
uffe
r Zo
ne
Training / Teaching Area
Key:
Proposed Paddock
Proposed Training
Area/Menage
Proposed Wetland Grassland /
Attenuation Basin
Proposed Woodland Planting - 14,910 sq.m
Proposed Carr Woodland Planting - 3,330 sq.m
Species planted as bare root transplants in species groups of 11-17 at
2m centres. Plants to be supported with stakes and protected with rabbit
guards.
Species planted as bare root transplants in species groups of 11-17 at 1.5m
centres. Plants to be supported with stakes and protected with rabbit guards.
Tree Species
Acer campsetre
Alnus glutinosa
Fraxinus excelsior
Prunus avium
Quercus robur
Sorbus aucuparia
Sorbus torminalis
Existing Ditch
Existing Drain
Retained Post and Wire Fence
Proposed Post and Wire Fence
Proposed Metal 5-bar Gate
Existing Tree and Shrub Vegetation
Shrub Species
Cornus sanguinea
Corylus avellana
Crataegus monogyna
Ilex aquifolium
Prunus spinosa
Salix caprea
Existing Large Tree (some with TPO's)
Proposed Woodland Planting
Proposed Carr Woodland Planting
Proposed Hedgerow Planting
Field Maple
Alder
Common Ash
Wild Cherry
Pedunculate Oak
Rowan
Wild Service Tree
% Mix
5%
5%
5%
5%
10%
5%
5%
No.
186
186
186
186
373
186
186
Dogwood
Hazel
Hawthorn
Holly
Blackthorn
Goat Willow
% Mix
10%
10%
15%
5%
10%
10%
No.
373
373
559
186
373
373
Proposed Wildflower Grassland
Proposed Hedgerow - 1,200 lin.m
Proposed Wildflower Grassland - 9,193 sq.m
Emorsgate EM1 - Basic General Purpose Meadow Mixture
Sown at 4g/sq.m
Wildflowers
Achillea millefolium
Yarrow
Centaurea nigra
Common Knapweed
Daucus carota
Wild Carrot
Galium verum
Lady's Bedstraw
Leucanthemum vulgare
Oxeye Daisy
Poterium sanguisorba
Sald Burnet
Prunella vulgaris
Selfheal
Ranunculus acris
Meadow Buttercup
Rumex acetosa
Common Sorrel
Silene dioica
Red Campion
Silene vulgaris
Bladder Campion
Grasses
Agrostis capillaris
Cynosurus cristatus
Festuca rubra
Phleum bertolonii
Common Bent
Crested Dogstail
Slender creeping-red Fescue
Smaller Cat's-tail
Project Name: Chessington Equestrian Centre
Drawing Name: Landscaping Plan
Drawn By: SR
Checked By:DW
Client: BL Penwarden Haulage Contractors Ltd
Species planted as bare root transplants in species groups of 11-17 at 5
plants per metre. Plants to be supported with stakes and protected with
rabbit guards.
0.5%
0.5%
1%
2%
2%
3%
2.5%
3.5%
0.5%
2.5%
2%
20%
Tree Species
Acer campsetre
Fraxinus excelsior
Quercus robur
Sorbus torminalis
Shrub Species
Corylus avellana
Crataegus monogyna
Ilex aquifolium
Prunus spinosa
Viburnum lantana
Viburnum opulus
8%
40%
28%
4%
80%
Project No: 1316
Drawing No: 1316.04
Scale: 1:1000 @ A1
Date: 3rd May 2013
Field Maple
Common Ash
Pedunculate Oak
Wild Service Tree
% Mix
5%
5%
5%
5%
No.
300
300
300
300
Hazel
Hawthorn
Holly
Blackthorn
Wayfaring Tree
Guelder Rose
% Mix
15%
30%
10%
15%
5%
5%
No.
373
559
186
373
300
300
Tree Species
Alnus glutinosa
Betula pendula
Salix cinerea
Shrub Species
Rosa canina
Viburnum opulus
Cornus sanguinea
Alder
Silver Birch
Sallow
% Mix
30%
15%
30%
No.
444
222
370
Dog Rose
Guelder Rose
Dogwood
% Mix
10%
10%
5%
No.
148
148
74
Proposed Wetland Grassland - 2,980 sq.m
Emorsgate EM8 - Meadow Mixture for Wetlands
Sown at 4g/sq.m
Wildflowers
Achillea millefolium
Yarrow
Betonica officinalis
Betony
Centaurea nigra
Common Knapweed
Filipendula ulmaria
Meadowsweet
Galium verum
Lady's Bedstraw
Leucanthemum vulgare
Oxeye Daisy
Lotus pedunculatus
Greater Birdsfoot Trefoil
Plantago lanceolata
Ribwort Plantain
Primula veris
Cowslip
Prunella vulgaris
Selfheal
Ranunculus acris
Meadow Buttercup
Rhinanthus minor
Yellow Rattle
Rumex acetosa
Common Sorrel
Silaum silaus
Pepper saxifrage
Silene flos-cuculi
Ragged Robin
Succisa pratensis
Devil's-bit Scabious
Vicia cracca
Tufted Vetch
Grasses
Agrostis capillaris
Alopecurus pratensis
Anthoxanthum odoratum
Cynosurus cristatus
Deschampsia cespitosa
Festuca rubra
0.5%
0.5%
1%
1%
1.6%
1.5%
0.3%
1%
1%
2%
3%
1.6%
1.2%
1.5%
0.3%
0.2%
1.8%
20%
Common Bent
Meadow Foxtail
Sweet Vernal Grass
Crested Dogstail
Tufted Hair-grass
Slender creeping-red Fescue
12%
5%
1%
36%
1%
25%
80%
Revision No:
Weller Designs Ltd
Bishops Mead House, Bishops Mead,
West St. Farnham, Surrey, GU9 7DU
Tel/Fax: 01252 712127
Email: [email protected]
Web Site: www.wellerdesigns.co.uk
APPENDIX B – SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT
POLLUTION RISK ASSESSMENT CHESSINGTON
1.0 Site Specific Pollution Risk Assessment
1.1
Introduction
This document sets out the Site Specific Pollution Risk Assessment and the associated controls
that will mitigate these potential environmental for the proposed development at Chessington
Equestrian Centre.
An analysis has been carried out of the potential sources of pollution from the activities
associated with the waste recovery activity. The risk assessment was undertaken against each
potential hazard source, pathway and receptor. The risks and associated controls relating to
each pollution linkage are set out in section 1.4.
1.2
Risk assessment methodology
A series of potential receptors have been identified, together with linking pathways and
suspected hazard sources from the importation activities. The potential consequence of a
hazard to a receptor is shown in Table 1. The risk assessment examines this consequence of a
hazard to a receptor against the likelihood of its occurrence.
The likelihood is rated
accordingly:
Certain:
Likely:
Possible:
Unlikely:
Negligible:
> 90% of hazard receptor linkage
60-90% of hazard receptor linkage
40-60% of hazard receptor linkage
10-40% of hazard receptor linkage
<10% of hazard receptor linkage
Using the information a risk classification is then attached to each of the potential hazard
sources in accordance with Table 2.
Table 1:
Potential consequence of hazard linkage
Classification
Human Health
Controlled water
Severe
Irreversible
damage to human
health
Significant
pollution to a
sensitive or
important
controlled water
Moderate
Reversible longterm damage to
human health
Pollution to a nonsensitive
controlled water
Mild
Reversible but
short-term
damage to human
health
Minor pollution to
a non-sensitive
controlled water
Negligible
No discernible
damage to human
health
No discernible
pollution likely to
a non-sensitive
controlled water
1
Built
Environment
Damage to a
building or
structure that
would require
repair or remedial
measures in excess
of £20,000.
Ecosystems
Damage to a
building or
structure that
would require
repair or remedial
measures below
£20,000.
Repairable damage
to building or
structures which
would not require
excessive cost
Insubstantial
damage not
requiring repair
Will impair the development of an
existing species, ecosystem or
habitat.
Irreversible change to an existing
ecological species, habitat or
ecosystem.
Prohibit proposed growth of
species, ecosystem or habitat
Permit limited growth of a
proposed species, ecosystem or
habitat
Minor change or effects of
development on species or habitat
but does create long term effects
on ecosystem.
No significant effects on existing or
proposed species, habitats or
ecosystems.
Table 2:
Risk Classification
Likelihood
of hazard
receptor
linkage
Potential consequence of hazard linkage
Certain
Likely
Possible
Unlikely
Negligib
le
Severe
High
High
High
Medium
Low
Moderate
High
High
Medium
Low
Negligible
Mild
Medium
Low
Low
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
Low
Low
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
The risk classification definitions are:
High:
Medium:
Low:
Negligible:
1.3
it is likely that the hazard source could cause harm to a designated receptor and
harm would be significant.
it is possible that the hazard source could cause harm to a designated receptor,
but it is unlikely that the harm would be significant
it is possible that the hazard source could cause significant harm to a designated
receptor; however it is likely to be mild.
the potential hazard source cannot cause significant harm to the receptor.
Environmental Setting and Local Receptors
The site comprises three fields with a total area of 9.88Ha. The site is currently used for
grazing horses from the Chessington Equestrian Centre. The site is bordered to the north by
the Hook slip road off the A3, to the east by allotments, playing fields to the southeast and
south and buildings associated with the Chessington Equestrian Centre to the west, beyond
which is the A3.
Geology
According to the British Geological Survey 1:50,000 geological map of Britain, the site is
underlain in succession by:

London Clay Formation comprising Clay and Silt
Superficial Head deposits comprising Clay, Silt, Sand and Gravel boarder the site to the east
and impinge slightly in the eastern boundary, however this is considered insignificant. The
Head deposits appear to follow the same north-south route as Surbiton Stream to the east of
the site.
No historical mineral or ground workings are located on site.
Hydrogeology
London Clay is classified as an Unproductive Strata and not a sensitive groundwater resource.
The site not located in or within 500m of a groundwater Source Protection Zone as defined by
the Environment Agency.
Hydrology
A review of the detailed river network shows that the closest surface watercourse is a land
drain located 5m to the southeast of the site, which feeds into a Secondary River (Surbiton
Stream) running north to south. No river quality data is available of this watercourse.
Ecology
Records maintained by DEFRA indicate that the site is not located within 500m of any site with
the following designations:

SSSI – Sites of Special Scientific Interest
2






SPA – Special Protected Areas
LNR – Local Nature Reserves
SAC – Special Area of Conservation
RAMSAR sites
SAM – Scheduled Ancient Monuments
Ancient Woodland
A Local Wildlife Site has been identified 10m to the northwest of the site, associated with
Kelvin Grove Allotments.
As part of the planning application the site has been subject to a Phase 1 Habitat Survey was
completed which concluded that the construction zone was of low ecological value with minimal
potential to support protected, BAP or rare wildlife.
1.4
Risk assessment and controls
Pollution Linkages 1 & 2: Fugitive Dust
During the importation dust may become airborne from areas of fill and during periods of
haulage and formation. The risk of fugitive dust increases during summer months when the fill
material can become friable. The fugitive dust could cause nuisance to surrounding land users.
In addition if deposition occurs in watercourses and on terrestrial habitats then there can be a
reduction in habitat value which is pertinent to the identified Local Wildlife Site (Kelvin Grove
Allotments).
Dust will be controlled through the following means:

provision of surfaced internal haulage routes: the site has good internal haulage
roads and these can be maintained to ensure dust does no arise.

road sweepers and manual sweeping: will be operated on both the internal and
external haulage roads. These will remove loose soil deposits and dampen any remaining
soil particles reducing the risk of them becoming airborne.
use of bowsers: in areas that are observed to have the potential for dust to occur, a
bowser will be operated to dampen down ‘loose’ soil particles stopping them becoming
airborne.
cessation of importation and earthwork activities: in the event of dust becoming
airborne and migrating over the site boundaries then works in the area will immediately
cease until controls have been established.


Pollution linkage 3 & 4: Mud on Road
The site is equipped with a high specification wheel wash facility. With the periodic use of road
sweepers and other measures, as set out in the controls relating to dust, the risks are
considered as negligible.
The following controls will be employed to control the risk to receptors:



high specification wheel wash: will be operated during all site activities.
road sweepers and manual sweeping: will be operated on both the internal and
external haulage roads as determined necessary. These will remove loose soil deposits.
cessation of importation and earthwork activities: in the event of mud on the road
occurring then works will immediately cease until controls have been established.
Pollution linkage 5: ‘Silty’ run-off to watercourses
The site is not in close proximity to a sensitive watercourses, however the adjacent drainage
ditches may provide an ecological habitat and should be protected from surface water run-off.
Surface run-off will be controlled using features such as temporary earth mounds, ditches,
3
swales and settlement ponds in accordance with Pollution Prevention Guidelines PPG1 and
PPG6. Furthermore, works are being phased to limit the areas exposed to rainfall. The
mitigated risk is considered negligible.
Pollution linkage 6: Noise emissions
It has been assessed that there will be no material impact from noise due to the existing A3.
However, no filling or construction works will take place outside the permitted hours (7.30am –
5.30pm Monday to Friday and 7am – 1pm on Saturdays. Furthermore, all European Union CE
regulations will be adhered to with regard to maintenance equipment. The mitigated noise risk
is considered as negligible.
Pollution linkage 7: Groundwater
The site is not situated on or within 500m of a Source Protection Zone and the site is underlain
clay (London Clay), which has a very low permeability and will prevent lateral and vertical
groundwater migration. Furthermore, only inert waste will be used at the site, which will be
controlled by the by the implementation of a detailed waste acceptance procedure. As a
consequence the risk to groundwater resources is considered as negligible.
Pollution linkage 8: Ecological Receptors
As part of the planning application the site has been subject to a Phase 1 Habitat Survey,
which concluded that the construction zone was of low ecological value with minimal potential
to support protected, BAP or rare wildlife. Construction impacts are considered to be negligible
and recommendations to enhance the ecological aspects of development have been made.
4
Table 4:
Hazard
pollutio
n
linkage
no.
1.
Conceptual Pollution Linkages from Activity
Hazard source
(activity)
Pathway
Receptor
Effect
Hazard
Receptor
significance
Likelihood
of Hazard
Receptor
Linkage
Risk
Classification
Fugitive Dust
(Haulage and
earthworks)
Fugitive Dust
Atmospheric
Humans
Nuisance and potential
irritant
Mild
Possible
Low
Atmosphere and
deposition
Loss of habitat value
and harm to species
Mild
Possible
Low
3.
Mud on Road
(Haulage)
On road surface
Ecology (including
Kelvin Grove
Allotments)
Humans
Moderate
Negligible
Negligible
4.
Mud on Road
(Haulage)
Runoff from road into
adjacent ditches
Watercourses
Nuisance to residents
and danger to road
users
Pollution due to
siltation, loss of habitat
and harm to ecological
resources.
Moderate
Unlikely
Low
5.
Silty runoff
(earthworks and
haulage)
Run off into
watercourses
Watercourses and
aquatic ecology.
Pollution due to
siltation, loss of habitat
and harm to ecological
resources.
Moderate
Negligible
Negligible
6.
Atmospheric
Humans (occupiers of
the site).
Nuisance and potential
irritant
Moderate
Unlikely
Low
7.
Noise emissions
(haulage and
earthworks)
Waste soils
Leaching from wastes
Groundwater
Pollution
Moderate
Negligible
Negligible
8.
Noise and vibration
Atmospheric / physical
Ecological receptors
Disturbance/loss of
habits
Moderate
Negligible
Negligible
2.