SHP2016 - Statement of Community Involvement

8/15/2019 SHP2016 - Statement of Community Involvement

1/102

STONE HILLPARK LIVE WORK PLAYSHP1-11

Statement of Community

Involvement

A brighter future for

Thanet and East Kent


2/102

Contents

Introduction Page 3The background 1.1 - 4.2

Our proposals 4.3 - 5.1

The purpose of consultation 5.2 - 5.5

Thanet District Council Statement of Community Involvement 5.6 - 5.7

The Consultation Programme Page 8

Overview 5.8- 6.2

Pre-application meetings 6.3 - 7.3

Stage One consultation 7.4 - 8.8

Stage Two consultation 8.9 - 9.8

Stage Three consultation 9.9 - 10.9

Communication channels 11.0 - 11.4

Consultation Results Page 14

Overview 11.5 - 11.8

Stage One consultation feedback 11.9 - 16.4

Stage Two consultation feedback 16.5 - 20.3

Stage Three consultation feedback 20.4 - 23.8

Conclusions Page 50

Appendices Page 53


3/102

Statement of Community Involvement ...................................................................................................... Page 3

IntroductionThe background

Manston Airport

1.1 The former Manston Airport site has a complex history. It rst began being used for aviationpurposes in 1915, and eventually closed on 15 May 2014 after being used for military, civilian

and cargo purposes.

1.2 The Loss of Existing Use Statement (ref: SHP1-4.1), submitted as an appendix to the PlanningStatement, provides a complete overview of the site’s history, from its early days as a temporary grassrunway used for military operations in WWI to the present day.

1.3 As this report states, the use of Manston for civilian passenger trafc began as far back as the 1960s.In 1999 the RAF withdrew all military operations and vacated Manston, resulting in the site becoming

a purely commercial enterprise.

1.4 In its 15 years as a commercial airport, Manston Airport consistently failed to operate as asuccessful and viable operation and never made a prot.

1.5 This was despite substantial investment in both road and rail infrastructure to improve access to

Manston and East Kent. It is understood that during the time the airport remained open, it receivedmore than £1m in nancial assistance from Kent County Council.


4/102

Page 4 ...................................................................................................... Statement of Community Involvement

Commercial airport owners

1.6 Since 1998 three companies have tried (and failed) to run Manston as a viable business:

• The Wiggins Group, with its start-up low cost carrier EUJet launched scheduled ights to

numerous European destinations in 2004, but collapsed into administration in Summer 2005.

• Infratil Ltd, which bought Manston from the administrators in 2005 with the intention to achieve

passenger numbers of more than a million per annum by 2015. In fact, the highest passenger

numbers achieved was 48,450 in 2011. Plans to grow freight trafc to a protable scale also failed.

• Manston Skyport Ltd, a company owned by Stagecoach owner, Mrs Ann Gloag, bought Manston

for £1 in November 2014. It is understood that over the rst four months of ownership, the airport

made revenue losses of around £100,000 per week, plus signicant capital losses.

• Mrs Gloag’s decision to sell the airport was based on an assessment that these losses could not be

sustained. This view was compounded by a lack of interest in the site from potential airport

and airline operators.

The new owners

1.7 Mr Trevor Cartner and Mr Chris Musgrave acquired 80 per cent of Lothian Shelf (417) Ltdin October 2014 with the previous owner retaining a 20 per cent nancial stake.

1.8 The pair have a strong track record in taking over large, difcult sites following the demise of earlieruses and regenerating then to create jobs and bring economic benets to the wider area.

1.9 At Wynyard Park in Billingham, formerly owned by the electronics giant Samsung,over 2,000 jobs have been created, with the site attracting over £200m of private investment.

2.0 In 2012, they acquired Discovery Park in Sandwich from Pzer after the global pharmaceuticalcompany, announced it was closing down all operations and demolishing buildings at the site –

with the potential loss of 2,200 jobs.

2.1 Four years on, there are 2,400 people employed at the site – with 700 staff retained by Pzer,which switched from owner of the site to Discovery Park’s largest tenant. Discovery Park remains

on track to attract more than 3,000 jobs as the site’s development continues.

Reaction to closure

2.2 The closure of the airport has divided the Thanet community, between those who want to seecommercial aviation restored at the Manston site and those who believe it is time to move on.

2.3 Those who want to see Manston Airport re-opened do so for a number of reasons. Much ofit has to do with the heritage of the site and the belief that despite the lack of past success from

a commercial point of a view, with the right plan in place, it could succeed.

2.4 This explains to some extent the continued faith put by those supporting the campaign, withsome political backing, in attempts to secure the site from the present owners through a compulsory

purchase order (CPO) or development consent order (DCO) process.


5/102


2.5 The rest of this section sets out some of the context with more detail on how Stone Hill Park Ltdhas sought to engage with, and respond to, those opposed to any non-aviation use of the site

included throughout this report.

The Save Manston Airport campaign

2.6 Following the closure of the airport in May 2014, a campaign began with the aim of restoringaviation use to the site resulting, within a few months, in the emergence of two main groups –

Save Manston Airport (SMA) and the Supporters of Manston Airport (SuMA).

2.7 Both have ran an effective campaign and claim signicant support, not least on social media, where,as of April 2016, the SMA Facebook page had attracted over 10,000 followers and SuMA nearly 1,800.

2.8 Those who welcome a new start for the site have questioned the true level of support,claiming many of those listed are not from Thanet and would not be affected by the number of ights,

scale of development or hours of operation needed for the site to be potentially viable as a

commercial enterprise.

2.9 Whether or not there is majority public support for the re-opening of Manston Airport, or a vocaland highly organised minority, it would be wrong to suggest there isn’t signicant opposition to what

Stone Hill Park Ltd are proposing to deliver. The analysis of results during the consultation process

(see pages 14 to 49) for our plans show that clearly.

3.0 The prole of the campaign has been further boosted thanks to a hostile political environment withTDC’s present UKIP administration putting the restoration of Manston Airport front and centre as a

pre-election pledge.

3.1 The backing of Thanet North MP Sir Roger Gale, and since his success at the general election in

May 2015, Thanet South MP Craig Mackinlay, have helped to give campaigners continued hope,despite all the evidence of the site’s past failure as a commercial airport.

3.2 Visits to Thanet by leading Westminster political gures during the run up to the local and generalelections last year, furthered the impression of a David and Goliath scenario of greedy property

developers going against the wishes of the local population and their elected representatives.

3.3 Such conspiracy fears have been fuelled by much political scaremongering, not least from the area’s two MPs, with attempts to cast doubt on the ability of the owners to deliver on their promises –

despite their success in turning around similar sites elsewhere.

Response to campaign34 Stone Hill Park Ltd has sought to positively respond to the pro-airport campaign throughout theconsultation process, and has been open and transparent from the start about its proposals for the site.

3.5 The company, while ruling out the return of commercial aviation, has sought to positively engagewith pro-airport groups about how it can best reect the site’s aviation past within the nal scheme.

3.6 This approach has included inviting pro-airport supporters to consultation events and discussingwith them at length their concerns or holding direct meetings, where appropriate, to share,

listen and explain.


6/102


3.7 At the same time, Stone Hill Park has adopted a robust media strategy to correct misconceptions,and to set out how and why the scheme it proposes will deliver the greatest benets for Thanet.

3.8 Part of that work has meant drawing attention to the alternatives, and arguing Stone Hill Park Ltd’scase/rationale for its approach of a mixed-use re-development for the site.

3.9 Stone Hill Park Ltd has sought to slowly build trust, following the example of neighbouringDiscovery Park, in getting involved in, or supporting community projects, particularly those linked to

employment and education opportunities.

4.0 The company’s social media outlets have also been used to explain, myth bust and to answerquestions, wherever possible, with newsletters sent out to homes across Thanet to update the silent

majority of people yet to make up their minds.

4.1 Stone Hill Park Ltd’s approach has been to start with a blank canvas, albeit with key elements – jobs,homes, leisure and heritage – sketched out and then to call on Thanet residents, regardless of their

position, to have their say.

4.2 The aim has been to show people they do have a voice, that while the airport is no more, they canand have played a part in a scheme that will recognise the past, but look to the future.

Our proposals

4.3 Stone Hill Park Ltd is submitting a hybrid planning application for the sustainable redevelopmentof the former Manston airport site to Thanet District Council (TDC).

4.4 The site is located approximately 3km west of the centre of Ramsgate, close to the existing villagesof Minster, Manston and Cliffsend – the latter includes homes less than 200 metres from the side

of the main runway.

4.5 The application follows an extensive pre-application consultation period, in line with TDC’sStatement of Community Involvement and the Localism Act 2011.

4.6 Stone Hill Park Ltd considers that the site can contribute signicantly towards the regenerationof the area, not least in terms of employment opportunities, and was keen to ensure all sections

of the community had every opportunity to play a full part in the development of the nal proposals.

4.7 The applicant is proposing a mixed use scheme with a business park focused on advancedmanufacturing; 2,500 new homes to meet Thanet’s housing needs; national quality sports and leisure

facilities with approximately a third of the site reserved for parkland and open space.

4.8 The closure of Manston Airport resulted in the loss of 144 jobs. The project team has calculated the employment area of Stone Hill Park, as outlined in the planning application, will deliver around

2,000 direct jobs over the next 10-15 years. This gure does not include construction, leisure or retail

opportunities.

4.9 A number of heritage features will be retained to respect and celebrate the history of the area,including the former main runway, which will become a new recreational space. The proposals will

open up much of the site to public access for the rst time.


7/102


5.0 As part of preparatory work the project team researched the development of other formerairports, including Berlin’s Templehof Airport, to consider how best to re-develop the

Manston Airport site.

5.1 The project team also looked at the potential for commercial aviation uses, in light of the SaveManston campaign and ideas put forward by US company RiverOak for the site as a freight focused

facility, but concluded it would not be commercially viable.

The Purpose of consultation

5.2 Stone Hill Park Ltd recognised the impact development has on local communities and believes that local people should be involved in helping shape the developments that affect the environment

in which they live.

5.3 This view closely reects government policy on the role of communities in the planning process.The latest government policy is to ensure full and thorough local engagement in the planning process

and this is enshrined in the Localism Act 2011.

5.4 The views of local people have always been a key part of the planning process and Stone Hill ParkLtd has done everything possible to ensure those views have been heard, for a number of reasons:

• Involvement leads to outcomes that better reect the views and meet the needs

of the wider, diversied community;

• Public involvement is paramount in an open and participatory democracy;

• Involvement can only improve the quality and efciency of decisions by drawing on local

knowledge and minimizing unnecessary conict.

• Involvement helps to promote social cohesion; by making real connections with communitiesand offering them a tangible stake in decision making.

5.5 Effective community involvement should ensure that people have access to information; can putforward their own ideas and feel condent there is a process for considering these ideas; can take an

active part in developing proposals and options; can comment on formal proposals; get feedback and

be informed about progress and outcomes.

Thanet District Council Statement of Community Involvement

5.6 TDC adopted its Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) in 2007. The document explains

how TDC seeks to involve the community in dealing with planning applications.

5.7 The consultation programme outlined in this report was developed to reect this local guidance,as well as national principles and best practice in pre-application consultation.


8/102


The Consultation ProgrammeOverview

5.8 Stone Hill Park Ltd has undertaken a thorough consultation programme, spanning nine months and three stages. At each stage the applicant has analysed the feedback and reviewed its proposals.

The results of this analysis and how it has inuenced the nal scheme are shared from page 15.

5.9 The three stage process provided the local community and stakeholders with the opportunity toshape proposals for Stone Hill Park over the course of the consultation. This has allowed the applicant

to identify and address any issues or concerns raised by the local community in line with local andnational guidance.

6.0 Throughout the process Stone Hill Park Ltd has made every effort to be open and transparentabout its proposals for the site, a fact that has been recognised by TDC, following meetings held as

part of the pre-application process.

6.1 From the start Stone Hill Park Ltd have sought to engage, with the whole community, includinghard-to-reach groups and those opposed to any non-aviation related proposals for the site, including

local politicians and campaign groups.

6.2 An engagement strategy was adopted with the decision taken to focus on the front line villages of

Manston, Minster and Cliffsend as well as individual meetings with individual groups and organisationsrepresenting as wide a range of Thanet’s population as possible.


9/102


Pre-application meetings

6.3 Formal pre-application meetings with planning ofcers at TDC took place to discuss theopportunities and constraints presented by the site with additional meetings with various statutory

consultees. See Appendix A on page 51 for details of these meetings.

6.4 These meetings with TDC sought to keep the planning authority aware of what was proposedand to take account of any concerns related to the emerging masterplan for the site.

6.5 Throughout the course of developing the planning application, Stone Hill Park Ltd also sought tomeet or engage with key local stakeholders and political representatives, including groups campaigning

for the site’s return to commercial aviation use.

6.6 The purpose of this part of the engagement process was to inform people about their plans and to seek their input while proposals were still being formulated. For a full list of these meetings turn to

Appendix B on page 54.

6.7 Not all groups or organisations approached were willing to meet or offer feedback. A number of

those who did engage did so on the grounds of anonymity, or on the proviso that their commentsremained anonymous.

6.8 Other than a visit to Discovery Park by South Thanet MP, Craig Mackinlay there has been no otherengagement by the area’s two Westminster representatives, despite invitations sent by Stone Hill Park

to attend consultation events at each stage of the process.

6.9 At those meetings that did take place with stakeholders or groups, representatives from Stone HillPark Ltd were able to discuss the emerging masterplan for the site and nal proposals outlined in

this application.

7.0 All parish councils surrounding the airport were offered the opportunity of a meeting to discuss the proposals for Stone Hill Park, with Manston and Minster taking up the opportunity. A number

of phone conversations were held with Cliffsend Parish Council.

7.1 Five meetings were held with Minster Parish Council, including a tour of the village in which parishcouncilors and members of the public were able to point out potential concerns related to the

proposed development at the former airport site. Three meetings were held with Manston Parish

Council, including a public meeting.

7.2 As the table in Appendix B shows Stone Hill Park Ltd has consulted a wide range of communitygroups, not only to share updates but to reach out to as broad a spectrum of Thanet’s population

as possible. This work has helped to capture views on a range of issues from housing and

employment needs to environmental concerns.

7.3 For the most part direct consultation with pro-airport campaign groups has been at theconsultation events or through social media. There has also been support for events or initiatives

linked to the site’s two museums including Manston’s centenary event in May 2016.


10/102

Page 10 .................................................................................................... Statement of Community Involvement

Stage One Public Consultation

Notication

7.4 The Stage One consultation programme was centred on public exhibitions, which were held on

1 and 2 July 2015. To inform the local community about the exhibitions, leaets with the details of theexhibition times and location were sent to 3,000 homes in the immediate vicinity of the former

airport – including post codes covering Minster, Monkton, Cliffsend and Manston.

7.5 In addition adverts were placed in the two main newspapers serving Thanet – the KM Group’sfreely distributed Thanet Extra (circulation – 40,431) and the paid for title, Isle of Thanet Gazette

(circulation – 9,988). These were placed in 17 June 2015.

7.6 Prior to the rst exhibition opening to the public a special preview launching the proposed schemewas held on 16 June for select stakeholders – with invitations sent to representatives of pro-airport

campaign groups and the area’s two MPs in addition to representatives from the site’s two museums.

Both pro-campaign groups alerted members to the consultation events and advised them to come

along and ask questions of the project team.

7.7 Local print and broadcast media (BBC South East and ITV Meridian) were also invited to the event.A Q&A session followed the presentation by Stone Hill Park Ltd, leading to extensive coverage –

in print, on air and online.

7.8 All KCC and TDC councilors plus senior TDC ofcers also received a direct invitation by e-mail and phone to attend an early preview of information being shared with the public ahead of the

rst consultation event at Pegwell Bay Hotel, Ramsgate.

7.9 A copy of this invitation can be seen in Appendix F. A copy of the press release sent prior to consultations taking place can be found at Appendix C on page 58 and coverage in the local press

at Appendix D from page 61.

8.0 A micro-website (www.stonehillpark.co.uk ) and social media channels (@StoneHillPark_ on Twitter and a Stone Hill Park Facebook page) were set up to further disseminate information

regarding the consultation events and to offer feedback or signpost visitors.

Public exhibition

8.1 The public exhibitions were held on 1 July at Pegwell Bay in Ramsgate and 2 July at Margate FootballClub. Both events took place from 3pm to 7.30pm.

8.2 The different venues were chosen for their size, availability and ease of access for people living indifferent parts of Thanet, promoting the widest participation in the consultation.

8.3 Stakeholders were also invited to attend a preview ahead of the start of the rst public consultationevent at Pegwell Bay at 3pm on 1 July.

8.4 The public exhibition consisted of eight display boards presenting information about the applicationsite and the emerging proposals and explaining how attendees could leave their feedback.

The display boards can be found in Appendix I on page 82.


11/102

Statement of Community Involvement ................................................................................................... Page 11

8.5 Members of the project team including masterplanners, transport consultants and planningconsultants were on hand to discuss the scheme with attendees and answer any queries they had.

8.6 A feedback form was provided at the exhibition and attendees were encouraged to complete the form before they left or directed to the Stone Hill Park website, where they would be able to

complete the form online.

8.7 The feedback form consisted of a series of multiple choice questions as well as a section for generalcomments. A copy of the feedback form is attached in Appendix G on page 72.

8.8 Overall, the Stage One exhibition was viewed by 220 people, stakeholders and businesses with 136 forms submitted at the exhibition. The feedback for forms completed at the event will be

analysed from page 15.

Stage Two Consultation

Notication8.9 Stage Two of the consultation was also centred on a public consultation, held on 3 and 4 December2015. As before, leaets carrying details of the exhibition venues were delivered to around 3,000

addresses in villages surrounding the site. The leaet can be found in Appendix E on page 65.

9.0 Stakeholders, groups and individuals who had expressed an interest in the scheme or hadcompleted an online feedback form were also informed by direct email. This included leading

members of groups campaigning for the return of commercial aviation to the site. Again both SMA

and SuMA made members aware of the consultations events as did pro-development groups such

as No Night Flights.

9.1 Further to the invitation leaet, half page advertisements were placed in the Isle of Thanet Gazette(circulation – 40,431) and Thanet Extra (circulation – 9,988) on 27 November 2015. A copy of thisadvert can be found in Appendix E on page 68.

9.2 A media event held on 26 November attended by local print and broadcast media, including theKM Group, Isle of Thanet Gazette, BBC South East and ITV Meridian, also resulted in coverage for the

consultation events. The press update for this event can be found in Appendix C on page 59

and press coverage in Appendix D from page 62.

9.3 The micro-website (www.stonehillpark.co.uk ) and social media channels (@StoneHillPark_ on Twitter and a Stone Hill Park Facebook page) were used to further disseminate information

regarding the consultation events.

Public exhibition

9.4 The public exhibition was held on 3 and 4 December 2015, with the Holiday Inn Express, Minsterbooked this time along with the Pegwell Bay Hotel in Ramsgate. Both venues were chosen due to their

location, good car parking and access by public transpor t. The Holiday Inn Express was chosen over

Margate Football Club due to its close proximity to the proposed development site.


12/102


9.5 The public exhibition consisted of 11 display boards, presenting information on how the proposalshad been reviewed in the light of feedback from Stage One and explaining how attendees could leave

their feedback. Copies of the boards can be found in Apprendix C.

9.6 As at the rst exhibition, members of the project team including masterplanners, transportconsultants and planning consultants were on hand to discuss the scheme with attendees and answer

any questions they had.

9.7 Feedback forms were provided at the exhibition and attendees were encouraged to complete aform before they left. They were also able to complete the form online in their own time up until 24

December 2015. The feedback form can be found at Appendix G.

9.8 The exhibition was attended by around 235 people with 129 feedback forms completed at theevents. We have analysed completed feedback forms from this stage of consultation on page 27.

Stage Three Consultation

Notication

9.9 Stage Three of the consultation was also centred on a public consultation, held on 15 and 16 March2016. This time, two newsletters were delivered by Royal Mail on 19 January and 29 February to

84,000 homes across Thanet and neighbouring postcodes in Herne Bay.

10.0 The rst of these newsletters shared feedback from the second set of consultations, while thesecond had details of the third set of public consultation events, including times, dates and venues.

A copy of these newsletters can be found in Appendix E.

10.1 Stakeholders, groups and individuals who had expressed an interest in the scheme or had

completed an online form were also informed by direct email. This included leading members ofgroups campaigning for the return of commercial aviation to the site. A copy of this direct email can

be found in Appendix F.

10.2 Further to the invitation leaet, half page advertisements were placed in the Isle of Thanet Gazetteand Thanet Extra (circulation – 9,988) a week before the events took place in March 2016. In addition

a digital package was taken out with the KM Group with mobile and website ads created. Copies of

these adverts can be found in Appendix E.

10.3 A media release advertising the nal set of consultations was shared with local print and broadcastmedia, including the KM Group, Isle of Thanet Gazette (circulation – 40,431), BBC South East and ITV

Meridian. These resulted in coverage for the consultation events, including an appearance for Stone Hill

Park on BBC Radio Kent’s Sunday Politics Show, which include a live Q&A with members of the public.

The media release from Stone Hill Park Ltd for this event can be found in Appendix C

and press coverage in Appendix D.

10.4 The micro-website (www.stonehillpark.co.uk ) and social media channels (@StoneHillPark_ on Twitter and a Stone Hill Park Facebook page) were used to further disseminate information

regarding the consultation events.


13/102


Public exhibition

10.5 The public exhibition was held on 15 and 16 March 2016, with the Holiday Inn Express, Minsterand Pegwell Bay Hotel in Ramsgate again selected. Both venues were chosen due to their location,

good car parking and access by public transport.

10.6 The public exhibition consisted of seven display boards, presenting information on how theproposals had been reviewed in the light of feedback from Stage One and explaining how attendees

could leave their feedback. Copies of the boards can be found in Appendix I on page 92.

10.7 As at the rst exhibition, members of the project team including masterplanners, transportconsultants and planning consultants were on hand to discuss the scheme with attendees and

answer any questions they had.

10.8 Feedback forms were provided at the exhibition and attendees were encouraged to completea form before they left. They were also able to complete the form online, which remained on the

website until Friday, 29 April 2016. The feedback form can be found at Appendix G from page 80.

10.9 The exhibition was attended by around 380 people with 184 feedback forms completed at theevents. We have carried out an analysis of those forms completed at the event on pages 38 to 49.

Communication channels

11.0 Throughout the consultation programme, various communication channels were made availablefor people to ask questions of the project team and submit feedback.

11.1 A dedicated consultation website - www.stonehillpark.co.uk - was set up and launched shortlybefore the rst exhibitions in July 2015. It included information on the proposals and the consultation,

news updates, a comment box and contact details.

11.2 Online versions of feedback forms were also posted during each stage of the consultation processwith a comment box available throughout and monitored regularly.

11.3 Two social media channels were set up - @StoneHillPark_ on Twitter and Stone Hill Park onFacebook - to share updates, promote consultations, signpost visitors to website information and

answer questions.

11.4 These communication channels will remain open and available throughout the planningprocess should any interested parties have questions, queries or comments in the future.


14/102


Consultation ResultsOverview

11.5 All attendees at the public exhibitions were encouraged to leave any comments, views orsuggestions with the project team. Feedback forms were used to collect views, and people were

invited to leave comments via social media or use the project website if they so wished.

11.6 At each exhibition the feedback form consisted of a number of optional questions allowing people to rank the importance of different elements of the proposals as they saw t. If people felt that the

closed questions on key components of the scheme were not relevant to them, or felt they did notwant to answer them, an option for open comments was also provided. Different forms were used

each stage of the consultation process.

11.7 Through this approach Stone Hill Park Ltd sought to understand what people thought wasimportant in relation to the scheme that was on display, as well as the broader issues and concerns

people had, including opposition and support for the proposals.

11.8 For each stage of the consultation process, both sections of the feedback form have been analysed to give a clear overview of the results. The results are set out over the next 36 pages and copies of all

three feedback forms are attached in the appendices.


15/102


Stage One Consultation feedback

Public exhibition - questionnaire feedback

11.9 The rst section of the feedback form presented a series of questions on the main elements of

the scheme. Respondents were asked to circle the answer which best represented their view, rangingfrom Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree. An option was provided for those without an opinion on

a particular question..

Do you agree with the vision of the site?

56%24%

6%

1%

13%

120 responses

12.0 Vision

Q1. The rst question asked responders toshare their level of agreement to the following

statement:

Strongly agree Agree No opinion Disagree Strongly disagree

12.1 The vision for Stone Hill Park is to transform the site into something new and

exciting that is commercially viable and brings

real economic, social and environmental

benets to the local community and East Kent.

12.2 The question sought to assess the level ofsupport for change and to assess how strong

respondents felt towards a fresh start for the

site when presented with potential benets it

could bring to the area.

12.3 The overall majority of respondents whocompleted the printed form supported the

vision presented to them. 80% said they either

‘strongly agreed’(56%) with or ‘agreed’ (24%)

with the vision. 19% of respondents circled‘strongly disagreed’ (13%) or ‘disagreed’ (6%)

with 1% expressing no opinion.


16/102


12.4 Employment

This section of the questionnaire asked responders for their reaction to a series of statements

connected to the potential for job creation within the scheme and the importance attached

to this element of the proposals.

73%

23%2%

2%

118 responses

80%

19%

1%

117 responses

1%

1%

77%

21%

122 responses

Q3. It is important that jobs are in longterm,viable business sectors

Q4. It is important to increase the trainingand education in the area, particularly gearedtowards these industry sectors

Q5. It is important that jobs are createdin a range of sectors to give maximumopportunities to local people.

72%

25%

2%

1%

120 responses

Q2. It is important to increase the number of job opportunities in Thanetand East Kent.


17/102


12.5 Of those who responded to Q2 virtually all (99%) agreed it was important to increase thenumber of job opportunities in Thanet and East Kent with just over three quarters (77%) strongly

agreeing these jobs should be in long term, viable business sectors (Q3). 21% circled ‘agreed’.

12.6 A large proportion of respondents (96%) strongly agreed (73%) or agreed (23%) with thestatement in Q4 recognising the importance of increased training and education in the area,

geared to the business sectors identied in Q4. 2% disagreed.

12.7 The last statement in this section (Q5) sought opinion on the importance given by respondents to maximising opportunities through job creation in a range of sectors. Virtually all (97%) of those

who responded backed this premise with 72% ‘strongly agreeing’ and 25% circling ‘agree.’

12.8 Housing

12.9 The following three questions sought the view of respondents to help the project team start togauge opinion of the kind of housing the scheme might accommodate when deciding the nal scheme

and to seek views on Greeneld versus Browneld development.

Q7. It is important that housing is providedwithin easy reach of new employment areas

Q6. It is important that people of all ages andincome in Thanet have access to good qualityhousing.

59%

38%

2%

1%

121 responses

2%

48%

40%

7%

3%

122 responses



18/102


13.0 The majority of respondents (97%) agreed(25%) or strongly agreed (72%) that people

of all ages and income in Thanet should have

access to good quality housing (Q6) with

3% against.

13.1 With regards to providing housing withineasy reach of employment areas (Q7)there was

a strong majority in favour with 48% indicating

strong agreement and a further 40% circling

‘agree’. 5% ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’

with 7% suggesting ‘no opinion’.

13.2 90% of respondents agreed (25%) orstrongly agreed (65%) that browneld sites are

developed rather than Greeneld sites (Q8)

with 6% disagreeing or strongly disagreeing.

4% indicated no opinion.

13.4 The responses to this statement weredesigned to establish the strength of feeling with

regard to ensuring the site’s importance during two world wars is recognised or not.

13.5 Three quarters of respondents (79%)either agreed (31%) or strongly agreed (48%)

that it was important with 16% suggesting they

had no opinion and 5% circling disagree (4%)

or strongly disagree (1%).

65%

25%

4%

3%

3%

121 responses

Q8. It is important that browneld (previously

used sites) are developedrather than Greeneld sites.

13.3 Heritage

Q9. It is important to reect the history

of Manston in the World War conicts

48%

31%

16%

4%

1%

126 responses


19/102



13.6 Sport and Leisure

13.7 This next section sought the strength of opinion among respondents about quality sportsand leisure provision and the impact of such facilities on boosting local tourism.

Q11. It is important that the facilities aredesigned to also help attract more visitorsto the area.

Q10. It is important to develop more highquality sports and leisure facilities forlocal people.

13.8 More than half of respondents (51%) indicated strong support for the development of morehigh quality sports and leisure facilities for local people (Q10) with a further 37% selecting ‘agree’.

7% indicated no opinion with 5% disagreeing with the premise (4% disagree, 1 % strongly disagree).

13.9 A slightly higher percentage (57%) strongly agreed with the premise (Q11) that it was importantfacilities referred to in Q10 were designed to also help attract more visitors to the area;

32% agreed it was important, 9% had no opinion, 1% disagreed, 1% strongly disagreed.

51%

37%

7%4%

1%

122 responses

57%32%

9%

1%

1%

119 responses


20/102


14.1 This question (Q12) sought to seek thestrength of opinion about creating parkland and

open space to help the project team gauge the

importance of this element within the mixed

use plan for the site.

14.2 Most respondents either strongly agreed(60%) or agreed (29%) creating more areas

of parkland and open space for recreational

purposes was important with 5% disagreeing

and 1% strongly disagreeing with 5% having

no opinion.

14.0 Green Space

Q12. It is important to create more areasof parkland and open space for recreationpurposes.

60%

29%

5%5%

1%

123 responses

14.3 Stone Hill Park

14.4 This nal section of the rst stage questionnaire dealt deals specically with the informationdisplayed at the exhibition, related to employment, housing, heritage, sports and leisure and open space.

14.5 This time the purpose was to establish how respondents felt the outline proposals produced for the proposed Stone Hill Park development met or addressed the issues or needs highlightedelsewhere in the survey.

Q14. Stone Hill Park is a good housing sitewhen compared to Greeneld locations.

Q13. The outline proposals produced forStone Hill Park address the need to attractmore employers into the area and helpexisting ones to grow.

48%

29%

5%

6%

12%

126 responses

57%29%

5%

10%8%

127 responses


21/102


22/102


Conclusions

15.0 The questions at this stage of the consultation focused on several key aspects of the proposals.The creation of new areas of open space were rated the most supported element of the proposals

(87%) closely followed by support for heritage, sports and leisure facilities indicated in the outline plans

(83%); 77% agreed Stone Hill Park was a good housing site when compared to greeneld locations;

77% also agreed the proposals presented at the exhibition addressed the need to attract more

employers into the area and help existing ones to grow. 80% of people agreed with Stone Hill Park’s

vision for the site outlined in Q1 on page 15.

15.1 In no question did a majority of respondents disagree (strongly or otherwise) with an aspect of the plans, suggesting a general understanding for the need to create the blend of elements proposed.

15.2 In terms of engagement with pro-airport groups, most recognised the importance of increasing job opportunities in Thanet and ensuring that Manston’s heritage is recognised. Of those who

completed a feedback form 26.47% stated the site should remain an airport.

Open-ended comments section

15.3 The feedback form also provided an open ended comment section. This allowed people toexpress any views or comments that were not covered in the multiple-choice questions.

15.4 The comments from this section of the feedback form have been qualitatively assessed to give aproper understanding of the most frequently raised issues. Table 17 below shows the result of this.

Qualitative Assessment of most frequent comments

Comment Number of times noted

Transport/Infrastructure 45

Keep as airport 36

Employment and Education 32

Environment/Sustainability 31

Tourism and Leisure 27

Community 20

Heritage 18

Housing 18

Business and Economy 10

Sustainability 9


23/102


24/102


Comment sample

16.3 This sample of comments reects the range of views held:

“Manston Airport has tried every combination of freight,freight/passenger and passenger only, Nothing has worked.”

“It should be an airport.”

“The outline proposals are a good mix of business use,

housing leisure, heritage and sports. It will be very good for Thanet.”

“This idea is never going to happen in Thanet.”

“Excellent plans and ideas; let’s bring regeneration into Thanet.”

“Our main concern is that we do not want Thanet to be a dumping

ground for low life from London councils.”

“The proposals and consultation offer Thanet a wonderful chance

to become a major player, something we have never had before.”

Responses

16.4 The feedback received during the rst stage of the consultation programme has been fullyconsidered by the project team and Table 18 below highlights Stone Hill Park Ltd’s responses

to the key issues raised.


25/102


Comment / Topic Response

Transport and

Infrastructure

Stone Hill Park Ltd recognises the need to address any issues

around existing road junctions and public transport networks.To avoid the construction of unnecessary infrastructure Stone Hill

Park Ltd will utilise and enhance existing accesses and roads

around the site where possible.

During the rst round of exhibitions Stone Hill Park Ltd explained

it would continue to look at ways to mitigate any impact on

surrounding villages and measures to improve access, including

new pedestrian/cycling provision.

Leisure/Tourism Stone Hill Park Ltd’s vision is for a thriving community and the

provision of complementary leisure facilities will help to achieve that.

A leisure offer at Stone Hill Park will bring more visitors to

Thanet and more customers for local traders.

The outline planning application establishes the general principle

of development on the site and layout. There is exibility for which

facilities could be included at Stone Hill Park. Stone Hill Park Ltd

will continue to engage to learn which facilities would serve local

people best.

Environment/

Sustainability

Stone Hill Park Ltd recognises the need to address concerns

connected to any development of the site, including protection of

the site’s aquifer and clearing any issues connected to its previousaviation use. An Environmental Impact Assessment has been

commissioned as part of the outline planning application for the

site. These studies have informed what measures will be taken to

mitigate impact from the proposals on areas of environmental

importance. Throughout the pre-application process discussions

will be held with statutory bodies to ensure that any environmental

issues are addressed.

Employment/Education Stone Hill Park has the potential to create 4,000 new direct jobs

in addition to indirect jobs off-site and apprenticeship/training

opportunities.

The focus on advanced manufacturing will ensure the creation of

highly skilled, well paid jobs. Links with education providers will help

to offer opportunities for young people and contribute to lifting the

area’s skills base and boosting the local economy.

During the initial stages of the planning process, the project team

undertook research into market requirements and business park

best practice to establish the environmental and physical constraints

and opportunities of the site.

Throughout the pre-application period Stone Hill Park Ltd will

work closely with TDC and business groups in Kent to optimise theemployment potential of the site.

Stone Hill Park response to Stage One key issues


26/102


Community Central to the goal of creating a thriving community at Stone Hill

Park will be the delivery of complementary community facilities.

The outline planning application establishes the general principle of

development on the site and layout and there is exibility for which

community facilities could be included.

Heritage Stone Hill Park Ltd has from the start recognised the historical

contribution the former aireld has made to the UK, particularly its

role in World War II. Stone Hill Park has shown its commitment in

that regard by giving the Spitre and Hurricane Memorial Museum

the freehold of its site with a pledge to do the same for the RAF

Museum once decisions on new junction alignments outside the

museum site are decided.

Stone Hill Park is working closely with the museums about ways

to further add to their appeal including the provision of a heritage

runway for occasional vintage ights.The outline planning application establishes the general principle

of development on the site and layout, including incorporating

any historic features within the scheme. Stone Hill Park Ltd will

continue to engage to ensure the site’s heritage is fully recognised.

Housing The majority of comments were supportive of the principle of

developing housing on a previously developed site to ease pressure

on Greeneld sites in Thanet. Some queried the precise mix

available.

Achieving the right blend of uses at Stone Hill Park is vital to the success of the site. Stone Hill Park’s vision is for a thriving

community and the provision of complementary housing is a key

part of this vision.

Loss of airport Stone Hill Park Ltd recognises the attachment many people feel to

the site’s long history of aviation use and has sought to ensure that

is noted and acted upon within its emerging master plan.

The outline planning application establishes the general principle of

development on the site and layout, incorporating many features

linked to its past.

The application sets out rules that will ensure any future development

is both sympathetic and sustainable, with a third of the site retained as

open space, allowing full public access for the rst time.

Stone Hill Park Ltd will continue to engage to ensure that the site’s

former use is recognised throughout the scheme, including a review

of both the overall name and individual identity of the various

elements that make up the development.


27/102


Stage 2 consultation feedback


16.5 As before, the rst section of the feedback form presented a series of statements on the main

elements of the scheme. Respondents were asked to rate these different components on a sliding scaleof importance related to the question. An option was provided for those who did not know their view

on a particular question.

16.6 The questions asked built and developed on those asked in the previous stage in terms of drillingdown further into opinion on the emerging proposals for the site. The project team were able to

analyse and compare feedback over the course of the consultation and determine which issues

were most important to the community.

16.7 Vision

Q1. Our vision is for Stone Hill Park to be anew settlement that will evolve through thetransformation of the former Manston Airportinto a collection of new exciting, sustainablecommunities at the heart of Thanet... a newplace to live, work and play.

16.8 This question further unpacked the visionfor the site outlined in the Stage 1 questionnaire

asked respondents how they felt about a mixed

use approach to developing the former airport.More than half (57%) agreed (19%) or strongly

agreed (38%). A third of respondents (33%)

disagreed (8%) or strongly disagreed (25%).

10% stated a neutral position on the issue.

Do you agree with this vision?

25%

8%

10%

19%

38%

129 responses

Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree


28/102


16.9 Vision - The right name?

Q2. Stone Hill Park is named after‘Mannestone’, the original name for theneighbouring village of Manston which means‘farm on the top of a hill.’ We recognise thatheritage is important and chose a name forthe site that captures the original name andlooks to the future.

17.0 Results for this question showedan concern at the chosen name of the

development with 40% of respondents

expressing their dislike (13%) or strong dislike

(27%) compared to 26% who liked (13%) or

strongly liked (13%) the name. Around a third

(34%) stated they were neutral on the issue.

What do you think of the name?

128 responses

27%

13%

34%

13%

13%

0

20

40

60

80

100

Heri tage/Cultural

119 responses

Leisure

111 responses

Parkland

116 responses

Shop/Serv ices

110 responses

GP Surgeries

114 responses

Schools

112 responses

Employment

116 responses

Homes

111 responses

Very important Important Neutral Somewhat important Not important

17.1 Guiding Principles - Land Uses

Q3. The emerging masterplan proposes a new mixed use community

set within 100ha of public parkland/greenspace.

How important do you think each of the following land uses are?



29/102


17.2 This question asked respondents to rate: homes, employment, schools, GP surgeries, shops/services, parkland, leisure, and heritage/cultural on a scale ranging from not important to very important.

17.3 The purpose of this question was to discover the priorities of those who completed the

feedback form in terms of potential uses for the site within a mixed use scheme.

17.4 Results for this questions indicated employment as being the land use respondents felt were mostimportant (85) followed by parkland (80) heritage/cultural (70), and leisure (60). Schools and homes

were rated very important by around 40% of respondents and Shops/Services by around a third of

those who responded.

17.5 Around half of respondents said GP surgeries were very important Heritage/Culture was themost rated land use, with 119 responses. The rest ranged from 111 responses for leisure and homes

to 116 responses for employment and parkland.

17.6 Guiding Principles -Environmental Considerations

Q4. The emerging masterplan aims tocontribute to sustainable developmentthrough protecting and enhancing the naturalbuilt and historic environment associated withthis site and will aim to improve bio-diversity,

use natural resources prudently, minimisewaste and pollution, and mitigate and adaptto climate change and deliver a low carboneconomy whereever possible.

17.7 A clear majority of respondents indicatedstrong support for the premise of this question

with 56% indicating they strongly agreed with

the statement and 21% agreeing compared

to 15% against (14% strongly disagree 1%

disagree). 8% of respondents said they felt

neutral on the issue.

Do you agree?

131 responses

14%

8%

21%

56%

1%



30/102


17.8 Guiding Principles -Heritage

Q5. The emerging masterplan includes a‘heritage hub’ focused on the site’s two

museums. The former runway will becomea publicly accessible recreation space withbuildings such as the control tower kept togive the new communities a unique identify.

17.9 Two thirds of respondents (64%)supported the creation of a heritage hub and

retention of other key features linked to the

site’s past with 35% indicating strong agreement

and 29% indicating they agreed. 16% disagreed

with the proposal with 13% stating they strongly

disagreed. 20% were neutral on the issue.

18.0 Guiding Principles -Landscape and Character

Q6. The emerging masterplan directs newbuildings away from the most visible parts of

the site (the ridgeline) and incorporates ‘greenwedges’ to enable strategic views through andto provide gaps between existing settlements.

18.1 This question sought to establishrespondents’ views on the layout of the site

and steps taken to mitigate the visual impact of

any development. 78% of respondents agreed

with the stated proposals of which almost half

(49%) indicated strong agreement and 29%

ticking agree. 11% strongly disagreed and 2%

disagreed with 9% stating they were neutralon the issue.

Do you agree?

Do you agree?

117 responses

13%

20%

29%

30%

3%

2%11%

9%

29%

49% 117 responses


31/102


12%

4%

8%

34%

42%120

responses

18.2 Guiding Principles -Access and movement

Q7. The emerging masterplan proposes neweast-west and north-south road linkages

through the site, plus high quality pedestrianand cycle routes (including connections to theplanned Thanet Parkway station).

18.3 This question aimed to get a steer fromrespondents about emerging proposals for

access and movement across the site. 76% of

respondents strongly agreed (42%) or agreed

(34%) with the proposals stated. 16% took the

opposite view, with 12% strongly disagreeing

and 4% disagreeing. 8% indicated they were


18.4 Guiding Principles -Parkland

Q8. The emerging masterplan proposesaround 100ha of publicly accessible parkland

spread throughout the site, which will providea range of outdoor recreation opportunities,including the unique ‘runway park.’

18.5 Over three quarters of respondents(79%) indicated strong agreement (57%)

or agreement (22%) to this proposal with

14% taking the opposite view (12% strongly

disagree, 2% disagree). 7% stated they


Do you agree?

Do you agree?

2%

118 responses

12%

7%

22%57%



32/102


18.6 Masterplan Options

Q9. We have presented 3 different Masterplanoptions that respond to the guiding principles.

18.7 This question asked respondents to

consider the three options displayed on boardsat the exhibition event – which presented

different ways the site could be laid out. Of the

three options Central Parkland received

47% support from respondents, 35% Parkland

Edge and 18% Development Hear t. The

favoured option included a green space

separating the proposed housing areas from

surrounding existing communities.

Do you have a preference?

Parkland Edge Central Parkland Development Heart

18%

47%

35%

71 responses

Conclusions

18.8 Questions at this stage included a number of more detailed questions where more preciseproposals had emerged. Optimising the employment potential of Stone Hill Park was viewed as the

most important land use consideration with emerging proposals for open space (parkland) (57%)

and environmental considerations (56%) receiving the strongest approval by respondents.

18.9 This backed the ndings of the rst stage of consultations which indicated strong support for openspace provision as well as potential heritage, sports and leisure uses for the site. These elements again

scored highly with a majority agreeing or strongly agreeing with emerging proposals for heritage

(64%) for example.

19.0 On the specic question of the overall vision for the site there was a smaller majority in

agreement (57%) compared to 80% in the rst stage of consultation. However this gure increasedwhen asked about more detailed proposals on emerging proposals for specic elements of the vision.

The following are the combined percentage totals for those respondents stating they agree or strongly

agree: Environmental considerations 77%; Heritage Hub 64%; Landscape and Character 78%;

Access and Movement 76%; and Parkland 79%.

19.1 The only issue where those disagreeing with the premise of the question were in the majoritywas Q2, which related to the use of Stone Hill Park as the overall name for the site, 40% indicated

a dislike or strong dislike. A further third of respondents said they were neutral on the issue.

19.2 Of those who completed a feedback form 20.15% indicated they supported nothing

but an airport.


33/102





Transport/Infrastructure 35

Community 33

Housing 28

Keep as airport 26

Leisure and Tourism 11

Heritage 10

Open-ended questions

19.3 The feedback form for the second stage of consultation also provided open ended commentssection, allowing people to express general views, concerns and suggestions as well as additional

comments to specic questions.

19.4 The comments from these sections of the form have been qualitatively assessed to give properunderstanding for the most frequent raised issues. Table 28 below shows the results of this.

Qualitative analysis of comments - Stage 2

19.5 As can be seen from the table above, the majority of comments in the open comment sectionsrelated to environmental, employment/education transport/infrastructure and community. Comments

about environment concerns and the need for the scheme to follow a sustainable approach rose

signicantly compared to the rst stage.

Environment

19.6 Comments about the environmentfocused generally on the importance of

enhancing the environmental setting of thesite, including creation of new wildlife habitats

and a sustainable approach to any future

development, including building materials.

Transport/Infrastructure

19.7 Comments regarding transport at thisstage of consultation were more specic than at

the previous stage of consultation. The majority

of comments regarded access to and from the

site and the impact of trafc on surrounding

roads and communities. Smaller number of

comments regarded the off site future opening

of Thanet Parkway station, public transport and the need to ensure safe cycle routes.

Community

19.8 Comments in this section were broadlyconcerned with a desire for improved

education and healthcare facilities. Individual

comments included a desire to incorporate

more cultural facilities within the scheme.


34/102


Housing

19.8 Comments about housing were mixed, aswith the rst stage of consultation. Whilst some

residents expressed concern over the scale of

housing proposed, a similar amount of people

emphasised a need for affordable homes andhomes for all ages as well as a preference for

browneld over greeneld development. This

implies a general acceptance of the principle

of housing on the site, and a need to carefully

consider the scale and mix proposed.

Employment and Education

19.9 Many comments related to employmentwith a high proportion welcoming the positive

effect that the proposals will have in terms of jobs

and investment. Some emphasised the need for

jobs to be accessible for local people. Individual

comments included a view that it was critical to

get employer/business interest rather than build

industrial units speculatively with a perception

among some that a surplus of industrial space

exists in Thanet.

Leisure and Tourism

20.0 This category included a broad range ofcomments, with respondents indicating the range

of facilities they would like to see on the site from

a Kent version of the Eden Project and a new

country park to swimming pool, skatepark, ice-rink,bike trails and picnic areas.

Heritage

20.1 Comments about heritage included a largenumber about the proposed name of the site and

the need to ensure that the site’s aviation past

was recognised. Others felt there needed to be a

clear break with a name and identity distinct from

neighbouring Manston village. The proposals for a

heritage hub focused on the site’s two museums,

and including a heritage runway, were widely

supported.


35/102


Comment samples

20.2 This sample of comments reects the range of views held:

“The development provides immense opportunity for Thanet.”

“Let’s move on. Parkland, businesses, housing, leisure, NOT cargo planes.”

“Should be a beacon in green, sustainable development,

a showcase for 21st Century green development.”

“Agree (with the vision) but hopefully with a strong note of heritage of the site’s

WW2 history and the existing museums.”

“An attraction to draw visitors to the area would be far more benecial and create jobs.”

“I’d like to see it as a self-contained area - not simply a continuation of the Westwood

Cross sprawl.”

“The needs of Thanet must be at the heart of this, it needs to be as green

as possible and avoid over-development of housing.”

“This is not a good place to bring more people to. There are no jobs and people

don’t have the money to buy a house with.”

“The name Manston should be incorporated in someway or some other reference to

the site’s history.”

“Understand need for housing mix. However, Thanet needs employment

and high end incomes to improve our economic position.”


36/102


Responses

20.3 The responses received during the rst stage of the consultation programme has been fullyconsidered by the project team and the table below highlights Stone Hill Park Ltd’s responses to

the key issues raised.

Stone Hill Park Ltd responses to comments Stage 2

Comment / Topic Response

Environment /

Sustainability

The emerging masterplan aims to contribute to sustainable

development through protecting and enhancing the natural, built

and historic environment and will aim to improve bio-diversity, use

natural resources prudently, minimise waste and pollution and the

site’s carbon footprint, whereever possible.

To this end, discussions are underway with statutory stakeholders –including Natural England, Southern Water, KCC and TDC to make

this happen, including action to deal with drainage and protection

for the aquifer on site. A number of surveys will be taking place

during the course of the pre-application period. An Environmental

Statement will be submitted as part of the application, detailing

mitigation measures to protect areas of environmental importance.

Employment and

Education

Stone Hill Park intends to create a business park focused on

advanced manufacturing that will create a range of job opportunities

over the next 10-15 years with a further boost for the local

economy in terms of construction and supply jobs. Research

carried out by the project team indicate 4,000 direct jobs will be

created. The new business park will ensure jobs stay in East Kent

and offer the next step for science companies looking to start the

manufacturing stage of their business.

The emphasis on advanced manufacturing means there are

additional opportunities for education, training and apprenticeships

for local young people. Stone Hill Park Ltd will work with local

educational authority and education providers to foster

partnerships at the new employment area.

Transport/Infrastructure Stone Hill Park Ltd recognises the need to address any issues

around existing road junctions, road access and impact on local

roads through neighbouring communities. Stone Hill Park has

been working closely with stakeholders to model the impact the

development would have and to ensure this is mitigated in any

nal proposals.


37/102


38/102


Yes 58%

No 32%

Undecided

11%

Stage 3 consultation feedback


20.4 This third feedback form once again presented a series of questions on the main elements of

the scheme. In the rst section respondents were asked four multiple choice questions regarding the proposals. This was followed by a list of features, which respondents were asked to rate from not

important to very important with an addition option for those undecided.

20.5 The nal series of questions were more open ended, giving respondents greater freedom to share their views on specic elements of the nal set of proposals shown at the third stage of consultation.

20.6 Some of the questions were similar to those asked in previous stage of the consultation process.This allowed the project team to analyse and compare feedback over the course of the consultation

and determine which issues were most important to the community.

20.7 Our Proposals

Q1. Do you agree with our overall approachfor the master plan?

20.8 This question asked respondents to givea straight yes, no or undecided answer to

whether Stone Hill Park has followed the right

approach for the master plan. 45% said they

agreed compared to 44% against and

11% undecided.

20.9 However many respondents, who hadotherwise indicated support for the scheme,

completed the open part of this question.

When these are added the total gure agreeing

with Stone Hill Park’s approach increases to

58% for and 32% against with 10% undecided.

This compared with the 57% with backed the

question related to the masterplan vision set

out in the previous stage of consultation.


39/102


40/102


41/102


42/102


Type Responses Suggestion Examples

Improved sports facilities 95 All weather sports pitches, skate park,

swimming pool, ice-rink, playing elds,

tennis courts, Wave garden, lawn bowls,

outdoor gym, running track, bike trails,

outdoor gym, ice rink, dry ski-slope.

Recreation space 62 Woodland, meadows, unstructured ‘room

to roam, wildlife habitats, sports pitches,

allotments, outdoor performance, sculpture

trail, dog friendly areas, picnic areas, family

orientated areas, ponds, lake.

Walking/Cycling 53 Cycle trails, links to existing cycling routes,

woodland trails, new footpaths, art trails.

Facilities for younger people 44 Skatepark, Adventure Playground,

Children’s Play areas, Climbing wall,

youth club or centre.

Return to aviation use 22 No interest in any other use bar an airport.

21.6 As can be seen from the table above the largest number of comments related to improvedsports facilities with the idea of a swimming pool (23 mentions) or skatepark (13 mentions) among the

most popular suggested after requests for improved walking and cycling provision. There was support

for enhancing support for local wildlife with the creation of ponds and other measures to encourage

habitat creation.

21.7 The need to ensure facilities for younger people was also popular. Smaller number of commentswere received regarding other ideas, including a café or crazy golf area. Support is already being given

by Stone Hill Park Ltd to the museums but some respondents felt more could be done to recognise

the area’s heritage, including a stand-alone Thanet archaeological museum. For the existing museums,

there was backing for upgrading existing buildings or improving facilities to help attract more visitors.

21.8 A large number (45) of respondents did not complete the question. Of those who gave a reason,a number noted their support for the return of commercial aviation to the site with others stating they

felt proposals presented at the exhibition were sufcient.

Q5. What types of facilities or recreation opportunities would you liketo see in the leisure area and parkland?

21.5 This was the rst of four open questions allowing respondents to comment unprompted on what they would like to see in those areas of the site set aside for leisure and recreation. The comments

from these sections of the form have been qualitatively assessed to give proper understanding of the

suggestions made.


43/102


Type Responses Suggestion

Medical 69 GP surgery, minor injuries unit,

dentist, pharmacy,

Community 59 Community Centre, Schools, Library,

Leisure Centre, Childcare.

Retail 54 Small supermarket or a number of smallershops, independent traders preferred to

larger multiples, an IKEA story, post

ofce, bank, market area.

Social/Entertainment 27 Pub/restaurant, cinema, theatre.

22.0 As can be seen from the table above the largest number of responses related to medical facilities,followed by community, retail and social/entertainment.

22.1 A community centre received the highest response for community facilities with 24 mentions;35 respondents called for a selection of shops with the remainder asking for specic services as

listed above. A pub/restaurant was selected by 23 respondents, the highest for that category.

Other suggestions for the village centre included bus links, cycle routes, a retirement home,

voluntary opportunities and a windmill.

Q6. What types of facilities would you like to see in the Village Centre?

21.9 This was the second of four open questions asking respondents specically what they wouldlike to see included within the proposed hear t of the new community. As before, the comments

from these sections of the form have been qualitatively assessed to give proper understanding of

the suggestions made. Table 36 shows the results.


44/102


Q7. Do you think that our plans haveimproved through consultation?

Q7. In what way have our plans improvedthrough consultation?

22.2 The rst part of this question received129 responses. Of these 64 answered yes, 34

replied No and 31 were undecided. Of the

responses from those who indicated the plans

had improved Table 38 Illustrates the main

reason for taking that view. Many respondents

saying they felt plans were more detailed and

that the project team has listened to previous

feedback and taken account of the heritage

of the site.

Conclusions

22.3 Questions in this third and nal stage of consultations were broadly similar to those asked at therst stage of consultation, but with more detailed questions that drilled down further into aspects of

the master plan and what respondents wanted to see emerge in the nal scheme.

22.4 With the caveat that not all answered the question, the number of respondents who have reactedpositively to the master plan has remained constant throughout with more respondents indicating theyare in favour of what is being proposed.

22.5 16.3% of those who completed a feedback form indicated they supported nothing but an airport.

22.6 Transport and access issues, community infrastructure such as schools and GP surgeries andapprenticeships, jobs, training and employment opportunities were identied as being the most

important with requests for improved sports facilities dominating suggestions from respondents.

No26%

Yes50%

Undecided

129 responses

47%

6%14%

33%

Plans are more detailedGood balance

Incorporated heritageListened to feedback

64 responses

24%


45/102



Community 66

Transport and Infrastructure 39

Leisure and Tourism 37


Keep as airport 30

Housing 20

Heritage 18


Open-ended questions

22.7 Question 8 (Q8) of the feedback form for the third stage of consultation provided an openended comment section, allowing people to express any general views or concerns in addition to

more space to allow more comment on questions four to seven of the survey.

22.8 The comments from this section of the form have been qualitatively assessed to give a properunderstanding for the most frequently raised issues. The comments were grouped and the table

below shows the results of this.

Qualitative analysis of comments

22.9 As can be seen from the table, the majority of unprompted comments related to community, transport and infrastructure, leisure and tourism and environment/sustainability.

Community

23.0 The comments for this section werebroadly concerned with a desire for improved

education and health care facilities. Individual

suggestions included a minor injury unit toreduce pressure on the NHS locally.

Transport and Infrastructure

23.1 Comments regarding transport at thisstage of consultation were more specic than

at previous stages of consultation. A need for

measures to mitigate any impact causes by

increased road trafc – including improvements

to public transport and encouraging cycling

and walking were also raised by a number ofrespondents.

Leisure and Tourism

23.2 This category included a range ofcomments, with respondents indicating the

range of facilities they would like to see on site.

This included a swimming pool, using part of the former runway as a skate park and

multi-sports facilities within housing areas

following a model used in France.

Environment/Sustainability

23.3 Comments focused on what Stone HillPark would be doing to deal with pollution

and other issues linked to its previous use as

a commercial airport and RAF base. Some

respondents sought reassurance about theimpact of any development on Thanet’s water


46/102


table and drainage. Specic requests including

ensuring thought was given to height of

buildings to reduce the visual impact of any

development and encouraging bio-diversity

through use of wildlife corridors.

Housing

23.4 Comments about housing were againmixed, as with the previous two stages of

consultation. As last time many respondents

asked for a mix of tenures following an all ages

approach – and to ensure the mix included

affordable, starter and retirement properties.

There were comments on density and the

need for quality design and layout in a variety

of styles. While some respondents againexpressed concern over the scale of the houses,

others saw it as an opportunity for developing

a green-focused, sustainable development.

Heritage

23.5 These comments emphasised a need to reect the historic nature of the former

Manston Aireld, with respondents asking for

a name that better reected this, not only

for the name of the overall development but

in street names and other elements of the

site. A number of respondents welcomed the

retention of features linked to the site’s history

with suggestion of potential re-use – including

a new museum to display archaeology found

on site. There was also support expressed forretention of a small area of the site for

heritage ights.

Employment and Education

23.6 A relatively large number of commentswere related to employment with many

welcoming the positive effect that the proposals

will have on employment prospects. Others

questioned where the jobs would come from

and the amount of disused or unused industrialsites in Thanet. Some emphasised the need

for jobs to be accessible for local people and

that apprenticeships and training opportunities

would be essential.


47/102


Comment Samples

23.7 The sample of comments below reected the range of views held:

“Disappointed at rst, coming around to the idea. Hates the name.As 80 year old totally supportive, if you get it right.”

“The project is a very good plan for the regeneration of Thanet.

I believe it will attract investment, jobs and wealth to the area.”

“The prospect of 4,000 new jobs is much better than trying to maintain

the handful of jobs that Manston provided.”

“It will be outsiders – business and residents – who will be the only

ones who really benet from this development.”

“Can we make it as green as possible with cycle paths and walking access all over?”

“Housing is needed in Thanet. There are many browneld sites which could be usedand should be used instead of open spaces which are the lungs of our environment.”

“Stone Hill Park has produce a detailed plan which will do much to re-develop an area

of historical and emotional importance – great sensitivity has been shown in the way

in which the presentation has been put together.”

“Employment is a key necessity to enhance and promote the future ofThanet and its generation of younger people.”

“The site is a huge, at peaceful area of much grassland, but the public actually

have very little access to this lovely open space.”


48/102


Responses

23.8 The feedback received during t

Date post:	05-Jul-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	nonightflights
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times

SHP2016 - Statement of Community Involvement

Documents