DOCSLIB.ORG

Southern Staffordshire Outline Water Cycle Study Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

INSERT YOUR PICTURE(S) IN THIS CELL Southern Staffordshire Outline Water Cycle Study Final Report Stafford Borough, Lichfield District, Tamworth Borough, South Staffordshire District and Cannock Chase District Councils July 2010 Final Report 9V5955 CONTENTS Page 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 General Overview 1 1.2 Scope 1 1.3 Objectives of the Water Cycle Study 2 2 DATA COLLECTION AND METHODOLOGY 3 2.1 Overview 3 2.2 Data Collection and Guidance on the use of this Study 3 2.3 Housing Growth and Employment Trajectories 4 2.4 Flood Risk 5 2.5 Water Resources and Supply 6 2.6 Wastewater Collection and Treatment 7 2.7 Water Quality and Environmental Issues 7 2.8 Development Area Actions 8 2.9 Data Limitations 8 3 STRATEGIC ASSESSMENTS 9 3.1 Water Supply and Resources 9 3.1.1 Water Resources 9 3.1.2 Severn Trent Water Limited 12 3.1.3 South Staffordshire Water 20 3.1.4 Environment Agency 24 3.1.5 Non Residential Water Use 32 3.1.6 Canal Network 32 3.1.7 Conclusions 33 3.2 Wastewater Collection and Treatment 34 3.2.1 Introduction 34 3.2.2 Wastewater Infrastructure 35 3.2.3 STWL Generic WCS Response 36 3.2.4 Wastewater Treatment 38 3.3 Water Quality and Environmental Issues 44 3.3.1 Introduction 44 3.3.2 Directives 44 3.3.3 River Quality 45 3.3.4 Effect of Development upon Water Quality 46 3.3.5 Designated Sites 47 3.3.6 Effect of WwTWs on Water Quality 47 3.3.7 Effect of Agricultural Practices on Water Quality 47 3.4 Flood Risk 50 3.4.1 Introduction 50 3.4.2 Environment Agency Flood Maps 51 3.4.3 SFRAs 52 3.4.4 Regional Flood Risk Appraisal (RFRA) 53 3.4.5 SWMP 53 Southern Staffordshire WCS 9V5955/R00004/303671/Soli Final Report -i- July 2010 4 DEMAND MANAGEMENT 55 4.1 General 55 4.2 Water Usage 55 4.2.1 Metering 55 4.2.2 Leakage Control 56 4.2.3 Sustainable Housing 58 4.3 Sustainable Drainage Systems 61 4.3.1 SUDS Selection 63 4.4 Developer Contributions 71 4.4.1 Introduction 71 4.4.2 National Policy Framework 71 4.4.3 Planning Obligations and Circular 5/05 72 4.4.4 Community Infrastructure Levy 73 4.4.5 The relationship between the CIL and Planning Obligations 75 4.4.6 The Local Planning Authority 76 5 STAFFORD BOROUGH DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC RESULTS 77 5.1 Introduction 77 5.2 Growth and Development 77 5.2.1 Scenarios for Growth 77 5.2.2 Potential Development Sites 78 5.3 Water Resources and Water Supply 79 5.3.1 Water Resources 79 5.3.2 Water Supply 83 5.3.3 Summary 83 5.4 Wastewater Treatment and Collection 85 5.4.1 Wastewater Treatment 85 5.4.2 Wastewater Collection 90 5.4.3 Summary 90 5.5 Water Quality and Environmental Issues 92 5.5.1 Water Quality 93 5.5.2 Environmental Issues 97 5.5.3 Summary 103 5.6 Flood Risk 105 5.6.1 Fluvial Flood Risk 105 5.6.2 Surface Water Flooding 105 5.6.3 Groundwater 106 5.6.4 Canals 106 5.6.5 Reservoirs 106 5.6.6 Summary 107 5.7 Demand Management 111 5.7.1 Summary 115 5.8 Constraints Matrix 116 5.9 Recommendations 117 5.9.1 LDF Policies and Development Control Policies 117 6 LICHFIELD DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC RESULTS 119 6.1 Introduction 119 6.2 Growth and Development 119 9V5955/R00004/303671/Soli Southern Staffordshire WCS July 2010 -ii- Final Report 6.2.1 Scenarios for Growth 119 6.2.2 Potential Development Sites 119 6.3 Water Resources and Water Supply 121 6.3.1 Water Resources 121 6.3.2 Water Supply 124 6.3.3 Summary 125 6.4 Wastewater Treatment and Collection 127 6.4.1 Wastewater Treatment 127 6.4.2 Wastewater Collection 131 6.4.3 Summary 131 6.5 Water Quality and Environmental Issues 133 6.5.1 Water Quality 134 6.5.2 Environmental Issues 138 6.5.3 Summary 139 6.6 Flood Risk 142 6.6.1 Fluvial Flood Risk 142 6.6.2 Surface Water Flooding 143 6.6.3 Groundwater 143 6.6.4 Canals 143 6.6.5 Reservoirs 143 6.6.6 Summary 144 6.7 Demand Management 148 6.7.1 Summary 150 6.8 Constraints Matrix 150 6.9 Recommendations 151 6.9.1 LDF Policies and Development Control Policies 151 7 TAMWORTH BOROUGH DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC RESULTS 155 7.1 Introduction 155 7.2 Growth and Development 155 7.2.1 Scenarios for Growth 155 7.2.2 Potential Development Sites 155 7.3 Water Resources and Water Supply 157 7.3.1 Water Resources 157 7.3.2 Water Supply 159 7.3.3 Summary 161 7.4 Wastewater Treatment and Collection 163 7.4.1 Wastewater Treatment 163 7.4.2 Wastewater Collection 164 7.5 Water Quality and Environmental Issues 166 7.5.1 Water Quality 166 7.5.2 Environmental Issues 167 7.5.3 Summary 168 7.6 Flood Risk 169 7.6.1 Fluvial Flood Risk 169 7.6.2 Surface Water Flooding 170 7.6.3 Groundwater 170 7.6.4 Canals 171 7.6.5 Reservoirs 171 Southern Staffordshire WCS 9V5955/R00004/303671/Soli Final Report -iii- July 2010 7.6.6 Summary 171 7.7 Demand Management 174 7.7.1 Summary 175 7.8 Constraints Matrix 176 7.9 Recommendations 177 7.9.1 LDF Policies and Development Control Policies 177 8 SOUTH STAFFORDSHIRE DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC RESULTS 179 8.1 Introduction 179 8.2 Growth and Development 179 8.2.1 Scenarios for Growth 179 8.2.2 Potential Development Sites 179 8.3 Water Resources and Water Supply 181 8.3.1 Water Resources 181 8.3.2 Water Supply 185 8.3.3 Summary 187 8.4 Wastewater Treatment and Collection 189 8.4.1 Wastewater Treatment 189 8.4.2 Wastewater Collection 193 8.5 Water Quality and Environmental Issues 195 8.5.1 Water Quality 195 8.5.2 Environmental Issues 199 8.5.3 Summary 202 8.6 Flood Risk 204 8.6.1 Fluvial Flood Risk 204 8.6.2 Surface Water Flooding 205 8.6.3 Groundwater 205 8.6.4 Canals 205 8.6.5 Reservoirs 205 8.6.6 Summary 206 8.7 Demand Management 210 8.7.1 Summary 212 8.8 Constraints Matrix 212 8.9 Recommendations 213 8.9.1 LDF Policies and Development Control Policies 213 9 CANNOCK CHASE DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC RESULTS 215 9.1 Introduction 215 9.2 Growth and Development 215 9.2.1 Scenarios for Growth 215 9.2.2 Potential Development Sites 215 9.3 Water Resources and Water Supply 217 9.3.1 Water Supply 219 9.3.2 Summary 221 9.4 Wastewater Treatment and Collection 223 9.4.1 Wastewater Treatment 223 9.4.2 Wastewater Collection 225 9.5 Water Quality and Environmental Issues 227 9.5.1 Water Quality 227 9V5955/R00004/303671/Soli Southern Staffordshire WCS July 2010 -iv- Final Report 9.5.2 Environmental Issues 229 9.5.3 Summary 231 9.6 Flood Risk 232 9.6.1 Fluvial Flood Risk 232 9.6.2 Surface Water Flooding 233 9.6.3 Groundwater 233 9.6.4 Canals 234 9.6.5 Reservoirs 234 9.6.6 Summary 235 9.7 Demand Management 237 9.7.1 Summary 239 9.8 Constraints Matrix 240 9.9 Recommendations 240 9.9.1 LDF Policies and Development Control Policies 240 10 CONCLUSIONS 243 10.1 Recommendations 243 APPENDICES Appendix A - Figures Appendix B - Data Register Appendix C - CAMS Summary Appendix D - STWL Generic Response to WCSs Appendix E - SUDS Guidance Appendix F - STWL Site Specific Wastewater Treatment Analysis Appendix G - STWL Site Specific Wastewater Infrastructure Analysis Appendix H - Constraints Matrix Appendix I - Comments on Draft WCS Report and Responses Southern Staffordshire WCS 9V5955/R00004/303671/Soli Final Report -v- July 2010 9V5955/R00004/303671/Soli Southern Staffordshire WCS July 2010 -vi- Final Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Study Objectives This report has followed the requirements of the Environment Agency’s Water Cycle Study (WCS) guidance and the requirements of the Brief to produce an Outline WCS for the Local Authority areas of Stafford Borough, Lichfield District, Tamworth Borough, South Staffordshire District and Cannock Chase District. As such, it assesses the constraints and requirements that will arise from the scale of the proposed growth on the water infrastructure of southern Staffordshire. The Councils are in the process of preparing their Local Development Frameworks (LDFs), as required by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. To assist with the identification of the potential development sites and settlements most suitable for development, this WCS, through consultation with the Councils, the Environment Agency, Severn Trent Water Limited (STWL) and South Staffordshire Water (SSW) has identified the potential constraints to development within the region. It considers the following issues, addressing the constraints that they may pose to future development and discusses the improvements necessary to achieve the required level of development: • Water Resources; • Water Quality and Environmental Issues; • Water Supply; • Flood Risk; and • Wastewater Collection; • Demand Management • Wastewater Treatment; In addition to assisting the Councils, the WCS process also provides a benefit to the water companies by providing them with a more detailed indication of the potential development within the area.
Recommended publications
  • The History of Blithfield Reservoir the History of Blithfield Reservoir

    The History of Blithfield Reservoir the History of Blithfield Reservoir

    The History of Blithfield Reservoir The History of Blithfield Reservoir The land before Blithfield Reservoir Prior to the development of Blithfield Reservoir, the landscape consisted largely of fields with small areas of woodland, and was formed in the shape of a wide flat valley with a floor of alluvial sand and gravel; the land was used mainly by farmers for growing crops and grazing their animals. The River Blithe meandered for three miles through these woods and fields, with the small Kitty Fisher Brook winding alongside. The Tad Brook, slightly larger than the Kitty Fisher Brook, flowed into the north eastern part of the area. There were two buildings within the area that would eventually be flooded. In Yeatsall Hollow, at the foot of the valley, there was a small thatched cottage called Blithmoor Lodge. This was demolished to make way for the causeway that now allows vehicles to cross the Reservoir. The second building was an old mill called Blithfield Mill, positioned on the western bank of the River Blithe, and having an adjacent millpond; the mill’s water wheel was driven by the flowing water of the River Blithe. Although some maps show the mill as having been demolished, the foundation stones and the brick wall around the millpond remain. At times when the level of the Reservoir becomes low enough these remains become visible. During the 1930s and 1940s, The South Staffordshire Waterworks Company, as it was then known, purchased 952 hectares, (2,350 acres) of land, of which 642 hectares, (1,585 acres) was purchased from Lord Bagot.
  • Your Village News Hamstall Ridware Parish Magazine June

    Your Village News Hamstall Ridware Parish Magazine June

    Your Village News Hamstall Ridware Parish Magazine And further History of Hamstall Team Teddy competing in the Easter Egg hunt. Photo, with permissison, Wendy Mepsted June - July 2021 http://www2.lichfielddc.gov.uk/hamstallridware/ www.hrpc.btck.co.uk https://www.achurchnearyou.com/church/4451/ https://www.facebook.com/groups/hamstallridware Contact Information Rector Revd Jeremy Brading 01543 472565 The Rectory, Savey Lane, Yoxall, DE13 8PD. [email protected] Reader Mrs Kate Beechey 01543 493556 Churchwardens Mr John Ferguson 01889 504430 Mr Michael Elsom 07949 126640 PCC Secretary Mrs Jean Mead 01889 504332 Parish Magazine Editor Dr Paul Carter 01889 504347 [email protected] Other PCC members Liz Carter Chris Smart Doug Cook David Rudge Sarah Elsom Jude Preston Safeguarding of children and vulnerable adults. If you have any concerns please speak in complete confidence to the Parish Safeguarding Officer Dr Paul Carter (01889 504 347) or the Diocesan Safeguarding Adviser Mr Neil Spiring 01543 306030 UNITED BENEFICE OF KINGS BROMLEY, THE RIDWARES and YOXALL Usual Services Rota: Everyone welcome at any of our services All as permitted by current Covid regulations Hamstall Kings Bromley Mavesyn Yoxall Ridware All Saints Ridware St Peter St Michael and St Nicholas All Angels 1st Sunday 10.30am 10.00 in Month Holy Holy Communion Communion 2nd Sunday 10.00am 10.00am in Month Holy Holy Communion Communion 3rd Sunday 10.30pm 10.00am in Month Holy Morning Service Communion 4th Sunday 10.00am 10.00am in Month Holy Holy Communion Communion
  • Response from Cheslyn Hay Parish Council to the Site Allocations

    Response from Cheslyn Hay Parish Council to the Site Allocations

    Response from Cheslyn Hay Parish Council to the Site Allocations Preferred Options and Gypsy and Traveller Pitches Closing date noon Monday 27th February 2017 Agenda item 8 at Cheslyn Hay Parish Council meeting – Wednesday 15th February 2017 Site 119 – Saredon Road – Cheslyn Hay 1. Introduction 1.1 Housing in the village is a contentious issue. Most residents do not believe that the village can accommodate or sustain a large development, this is evidenced by the turn out at the public meeting protesting against the Landywood Lane proposals in 2012/13 and the attendance at the planning meeting in Codsall. There are already several campaigns against the current proposals for both the recent Landywood Lane proposals (now Site 136) and the Site 119 release for Saredon Road. 1.2 Cheslyn Hay is one of the 8 major villages in South Staffordshire and is adjacent to Great Wyrley. In many places, there is no visible boundary or gap between the two villages. The Landywood Lane application to build in the green belt, for example, would close one of the gaps between the two. In many cases, residents of Great Wyrley use Cheslyn Hay infrastructures because it is closer and more accessible than the centre of Great Wyrley. For example, the residents of the recent Great Wyrley development at the rear of what was the Robin Hood Public House, Walsall Road, could drive through Cheslyn Hay to travel to the railway station, the health centre or the Quinton shopping precinct. (Houses which although closer to Cheslyn Hay centre have reduced the housing allocation for Great Wyrley whilst mostly affecting the residents of Cheslyn Hay).
  • Sow and Penk Internal Drainage Board (IDB) BAP Area Monitoring

    Sow and Penk Internal Drainage Board (IDB) BAP Area Monitoring

    Sow and Penk Internal Drainage Board (IDB) BAP area monitoring River Sow floodplain ©Matt Jones Baseline monitoring February 2016 Introduction The IDB has a direct capacity to exercise control over a number of watercourses within the Sow and Penk area (see Map 1), it is therefore of principal importance to suitably monitor the effect of work carried out on IDB maintained watercourses to assess its impact on the biodiversity of the wider riparian environment. To effectively monitor ecological systems in order to develop and deliver beneficial policies and practices, baseline data must be gathered to provide a benchmark to measure fluctuations in habitats or species populations over time (OECD, 2001), particularly in relation to appropriate habitat management and reducing biodiversity loss. Staffordshire Wildlife Trust has been commissioned to monitor the extent of Water vole Arvicola amphibious and Flowering-rush Butomus umbellatus to help the IDB fulfil its duty conserve biodiversity. Current baseline data A desktop study was carried out using Staffordshire Ecological Records (SER) ecological records database to output all existing records of Flowering-rush B. umbellatus and European Water Vole A. amphibious within the Sow and Penk IDB Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) area. The current available data originates from a number of sources and surveys, notably records from structured surveys and monitoring including, but not limited to Staffordshire Mammal Group surveys, structured surveys carried out by Staffordshire Wildlife Trust and surveys undertaken as part of the data collection for the Flora of Staffordshire (Hawksford, et al., 2011). This data will form a primary baseline from which data collected through future surveys can be compared to monitor populations of A.
  • ·Ct7ttlestonb .Btl.NDBED • • .PENKR.IDGE UNIQN Comprises the '21 P'lll"Ishes .Ood Townships Of

    ·Ct7ttlestonb .Btl.NDBED • • .PENKR.IDGE UNIQN Comprises the '21 P'lll"Ishes .Ood Townships Of

    ·Ct7TTLESTONB .Btl.NDBED • • .PENKR.IDGE UNIQN comprises the '21 p'lll"ishes .ood townships of ..:Actou-with-Bednall, 81-ewood, Bashbury3 Cannock, Cheslyn-Hay.. Churok­ Eaton, OoppenhaU, DuD.StQn, Essington, Featherstone, Hatherton, Hilto~ HQJltington, Kinv.aston, Lapley, Norton-Canes, Penkridge, Sar.edon, Shares­ hill, Stretton, and Great Wyrley. Its registm!Uu. ailltricl ~omprises also the ~xtra-paroohhll place i.lalk>d Teddesley Hay, and in 1841 contained 1-6.07 -i iwhabUants, of whom t:l228 were males and 7846 females, living in :3!42 hot.tse.$, besides which the;re were 131 uninhabited houses, aoo ten building, when the census was taken in that year. The Union W01·klwuse is an old building at BBEWOOD, but x~eeived. such additions between 1838 and 1842 as have rendered it capable of accommodating 200 inmates. It has • well-propo;rtiQned ooard-room, and very comfortable hospital wards. The Guardians meet on alternate Thursdays, at 11 o'clock. The manage­ ment of the Union is celebrated for its admirable blending of economy and liberality ; and in 1850, the Poor Law Inspector of the district informed the Guardians that out of 38 Unions under his inspection, Penkridge had the smallest amount of taxation per acre, and gave the largest average amount cl relief to individual paupers. The cost of relieving the poor was £3719 in 1846; £!363 in 18-18; and £3956 iu 1850. The Union embraces an 11rea of 94 square miles, and the gross annual value .of its rateable property is about £110,000, so that its poor rates have averaged less than 9d.
  • Yoxall to the National Memorial Arboretum

    Yoxall to the National Memorial Arboretum

    This leaflet can be used in conjunction with The National Forest Way OS Explorer 245 (The National Forest) The National Forest Way takes walkers on a 75-mile journey through a transforming Stage 12: landscape, from the National Memorial Arboretum in Staffordshire to Beacon Hill Country Park in Leicestershire. Yoxall to the On the way, you will discover the area’s evolution from a rural landscape, through Start National Memorial industrialisation and its decline, to the modern-day creation of a new forest, where 21st-century life is threaded through a mosaic End Arboretum of green spaces and settlements. Length: 5 miles / 8 kilometres The trail leads through young and ancient woodlands, market towns and the industrial heritage of this changing landscape. Burton upon Trent About this stage Swadlincote Start: Yoxall (DE13 8NQ) Ashby End: National Memorial Arboretum (DE13 7AR) de la Zouch Coalville On this stage, the route is never far from the River Swarbourn. You will enjoy views over the Trent Valley towards Lichfield with its prominent cathedral, passing through young woodlands and open river meadows. Visit the villages of Yoxall and Alrewas and the National Memorial Arboretum, a place of reflection and The National Forest Way was created by a remembrance. partnership of the National Forest Company, Derbyshire County Council, Leicestershire County Council and Staffordshire County The National Forest Company Council, with the generous Bath Yard, Moira, Swadlincote, support of Fisher German. Derbyshire DE12 6BA Telephone: 01283 551211 Enquiries: www.nationalforestway.co.uk/contact Website: www.nationalforest.org To find out more, visit: Photos: Jacqui Rock, Christopher Beech and www.nationalforestway.co.uk Martin Vaughan Maps reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO.
  • Hatherton Parish Council Brewood Parish Council Featherstone Parish Council Cheslyn Hay Parish Council Great Wyrley Parish

    Hatherton Parish Council Brewood Parish Council Featherstone Parish Council Cheslyn Hay Parish Council Great Wyrley Parish

    HATHERTON PARISH COUNCIL BREWOOD PARISH COUNCIL FEATHERSTONE PARISH COUNCIL CHESLYN HAY PARISH COUNCIL GREAT WYRLEY PARISH COUNCIL ESSINGTON PARISH COUNCIL LAPLEY, STRETTON AND WHEATON ASTON PARISH COUNCIL PENKRIDGE PARISH COUNCIL SHARESHILL PARISH COUNCIL SAREDON PARISH COUNCIL HILTON PARISH COUNCIL HUNTINGTON PARISH COUNCIL DUNSTON WITH COPPENHALL PARISH COUNCIL The Collective of Parish Councils 6th August 2019 1 THE COLLECTIVE OF PARISH COUNCILS AGAINST THE WEST MIDLANDS INTERCHANGE (WMI) TR050005 POST HEARING SUBMISSIONS – OUR REFERENCE 20015248 Scale : Compelling Need and VSC The applicant asserts at Item 2.1(a) that one of the most striking gaps in the national network is the 120km gap between the SRFI at Birch Coppice/Hams Hall and Widnes/Port Salford. The applicant has not taken into account db symmetry’s proposals which are coming forward for the Hinckley National Rail Freight Interchange (HNRFI) at junction 2 of the M69. This scheme is considered to be a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP). It should be noted that this proposal is located within 5 miles of Nuneaton which is in the West Midlands. On this basis the Hinckley proposal is perfectly positioned to absorb a percentage of the capacity deemed to be essential at Four Ashes to service the Arc of the West Midlands. Accordingly, the scale of the West Midlands Interchange could be decreased. Paragraph 2.1 (b) states that the need for a SRFI development in this quadrant of the West Midlands has been identified since, at least, 2004. Identified by the Strategic Rail Authority 2004, the Strategic Rail Authority, West Midlands Regional Logistics Study; and successive drafts of the West Midlands Regional Spatial strategy which included conclusions of the appointed Examining Panel.
  • Surface Water Management Plan Phase 1

    Surface Water Management Plan Phase 1

    Southern Staffordshire Surface Water Management Plan Phase 1 Stafford Borough, Lichfield District, Tamworth Borough, South Staffordshire District and Cannock Chase District Councils July 2010 Final Report 9V5955 CONTENTS Page 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 General Overview 1 1.2 Objectives of the SWMP 1 1.3 Scope of the SWMP 3 1.3.1 Phase 1 - Preparation 5 1.3.2 Phase 2 - Risk Assessment 5 2 ESTABLISHING A PARTNERSHIP 7 2.1 Identification of Partners 7 2.2 Roles and Responsibilities 9 2.3 Engagement Plan 10 2.4 Objectives 10 3 COLLATE AND MAP INFORMATION 11 3.1 Data Collection and Quality 11 3.1.1 Historic Flood Event Data 12 3.1.2 Future Flood Risk Data 15 3.2 Mapping and GIS 18 3.2.1 Surface Water Flooding 18 3.2.2 Flood Risk Assets 19 3.2.3 SUDS Map 19 3.2.4 Summary Sheets 20 4 STAFFORD BOROUGH 23 4.1 Surface Water Flood Risk 23 4.2 Surface Water Management 24 4.3 Recommendations 25 5 LICHFIELD DISTRICT 27 5.1 Surface Water Flood Risk 27 5.2 Surface Water Management 28 5.2.1 Canal Restoration 29 5.3 Recommendations 31 6 TAMWORTH BOROUGH 33 6.1 Surface Water Flood Risk 33 6.2 Surface Water Management 34 6.3 Recommendations 35 7 SOUTH STAFFORDSHIRE DISTRICT 37 7.1 Surface Water Flood Risk 37 7.2 Surface Water Management 38 7.2.1 Canal Restoration 39 7.3 Recommendations 41 Southern Staffordshire SWMP Phase 1 9V5955/R00003/303671/Soli Final Report -i- July 2010 8 CANNOCK CHASE DISTRICT 43 8.1 Surface Water Flood Risk 43 8.2 Surface Water Management 44 8.2.1 Canal Restoration 45 8.3 Recommendations 47 9 SELECTION OF AN APPROACH FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS
  • St Stephen's Hill Farm, Rugeley Flood Risk Assessment

    St Stephen's Hill Farm, Rugeley Flood Risk Assessment

    WWW.RABCONSULTANTS.CO.UK [email protected] P/2016/01267 Received 12 Sept 2016 St Stephen’s Hill Farm, Rugeley Flood Risk Assessment 24/03/2016 Version 1.0 RAB: 1291L Second Floor, Cathedral House, Unit 13, St Stephens Court, Willington, Kingsbrook House, 7 Kingsway, Beacon Street, Lichfield WS13 7AA Crook, County Durham DL15 0BF Bedford, Bedfordshire MK42 9BA T. 01543 547 303 T. 01388 748 366 T. 01234 363 582 Registered Office: Langard Lifford Hall, Lifford Hall, Lifford Lane, Kings Norton, Birmingham B30 3JN. Registered in England. Company No 5799647. VAT registration No. 884 0481 08 1291L St Stephen’s Hill Farm March 2016 Version 1.0 Revision History Version Date Amendments Issued to 1.0 24/03/16 M. Pope Quality Control Action Signature Date Prepared P. Batty 07/03/16 Checked G. Wilson 17/03/16 Approved R. Burton 23/03/16 Disclaimer This document has been prepared solely as a Flood Risk Assessment for Mr P. Brown. RAB Consultants accepts no responsibility or liability for any use that is made of this document other than by the client for the purpose for which it was originally commissioned and prepared. No person other than the client may copy (in whole or in part) use or rely on the contents of this document, without the prior written permission of the Managing Director of RAB Consultants Ltd. Any advice, opinions, or recommendations within this document should be read and relied upon only in the context of the document as a whole. RAB Office Lichfield Office Second Floor Cathedral House Beacon Street Lichfield WS13 7AA i | P a g e 1291L St Stephen’s Hill Farm March 2016 Version 1.0 This page intentionally left blank ii | P a g e 1291L St Stephen’s Hill Farm March 2016 Version 1.0 Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................
  • About Broughton & Croxton December 2015 to February 2016

    About Broughton & Croxton December 2015 to February 2016

    About Broughton & Croxton December 2015 to February 2016 The Parish Magazine of Broughton and Croxton 1 The Parish Magazine of Broughton and Croxton Editor: Sara Humphries, 12 Martin Dale, Loggerheads, TF9 4DH Tel: 01630 673740 [email protected] Rector: Rev Jonathan Eades, 'The Rectory', Ashley, Market Drayton, Shropshire, TF9 4LQ. Tel: 01630 672210, [email protected] Curate: Rev Doug Heming, Tel: 01630 672430 [email protected] Methodist Minister: Rev John Day, The Old Police House, Croxton Tel: 01630 620671 [email protected] Patrons of the Benefice: The Bishop of Lichfield The Vicar of Eccleshall Mr T. A. J. Hall Parish Links for Contributions: Croxton Church – Mrs Beryl Roe (01630 620248) Broughton Church – Mrs Jean Beasley (01785 850306) Croxton Chapel – Mrs Kath Bridgwood (01630 620601) Your Magazine – Your Community A colour issue of the magazine is now available on the Broughton Church website at www.broughtonchurch.com. Dear Readers I hope you will enjoy this latest edition of ABC and a big thank you to everyone who has contributed to it, from letter and article writers, to advertisers and the people who print it and those who distribute it. This season of peace and goodwill is tinged with sadness because of the ongoing refugee crisis; perhaps you could spare a moment in your busy schedules to spare a thought for those less fortunate and for the plight of so many ordinary and innocent people who have been displaced from their homes and lives. On behalf of the ABC Committee we wish you all a very Happy Christmas and hope that the New Year brings everything you could wish for.
  • Lichfield City Conservation Area Appraisal

    Lichfield City Conservation Area Appraisal

    1 Introduction 3 2 Executive Summary 5 3 Location & Context 7 4 Topography & Landscape 9 5 History & Archaeology 10 6 City Landmarks 16 7 Building Materials 17 8 Building Types 18 9 Building Pattern 23 10 Public Realm 24 11 Policies & Guidelines 31 12 Opportunities & Constraints 37 13 Introduction to Character Areas 38 14 Cultural Spaces 41 Character Area 1: Stowe Pool 41 Character Area 2: Museum Gardens & Minster Pool 46 Character Area 3: Cathedral Close 53 Character Area 4: Friary & Festival Gardens 61 15 Residential Outskirts 69 Character Area 5: Stowe 69 Character Area 6: Beacon Street (north) 76 Character Area 7: Gaia Lane 83 Character Area 8: Gaia Lane Extension 89 16 Commercial Core 97 Character Area 9: Bird Street & Sandford Street 97 October 2008 Lichfield City Conservation Area Appraisal Character Area 10: St. John Street 104 Character Area 11: City Core 109 Character Area 12: Tamworth Street & Lombard Street 117 Character Area 13: Birmingham Road 127 Character Area 14: Beacon Street (south) 136 October 2008 1 Introduction 1.1 The Lichfield City Centre Conservation Area was first designated on 3rd March 1970 to cover the centre of the historic city. It was extended on 6th October 1999 to include further areas of Gaia Lane and St Chad’s Road. In June 1998 the Lichfield Gateway Conservation Area was designated covering the area around Beacon Street. For the purposes of this appraisal these two conservation areas will be integrated and will be known as the Lichfield City Conservation Area. The conservation area covers a total of 88.2 hectares and includes over 200 listed buildings.
  • Gnosall and Return from Gailey | UK Canal Boating

    Gnosall and Return from Gailey | UK Canal Boating

    UK Canal Boating Telephone : 01395 443545 UK Canal Boating Email : [email protected] Escape with a canal boating holiday! Booking Office : PO Box 57, Budleigh Salterton. Devon. EX9 7ZN. England. Gnosall and return from Gailey Cruise this route from : Gailey View the latest version of this pdf Gnosall-and-return-from-Gailey-Cruising-Route.html Cruising Days : 5.00 to 0.00 Cruising Time : 20.00 Total Distance : 49.00 Number of Locks : 4 Number of Tunnels : 2 Number of Aqueducts : 0 Cruise through beautiful countryside passing through deep wooded cuttings and embankments that give views for miles. In some sections you will only pass though a handful of hamlets, but they all seem to have convenient pubs if you are in need of a break! It is so rural and remote that you can get lost in the peace, disturbed only by a nosy herd of cows as you cruise by!! Cruising Notes Day 1 There is an attractive round Toll-keepers watch tower just above the lock, with a small canal shop on the ground floor. The canal is very twisting through the countryside passing a very busy marina at Hatherton , the Fox & Anchor Inn is canalside at bridge 71 and as it is 2 hours cruising to here it might be a good place to moor up for the night. 2 Hours cruising to here Day 2 Continue south to Autherley Junction, the M54 makes a brief intrusion but you soon pass under & away from from the rumble of traffic. The Shropshire Union canal, or The Shroppie, starts the journey at Autherley Junction (turn sharp right) in the outskirts of Wolverhampton, known to the working boatmen as “Cut End” due to it being where the Shroppie met the much older Staffordshire and Worcestershire Canal,Autherley Junction was once a busy place with workshops, a toll office and stables, today Autherley has a boatyard with a hire fleet and a club house.